quote:

---

What we like to think of as "philosophic thought" first appears in Greece in a poem,
Theogony , written by Hesiod about 725 B.C.; the Theogony retells the myths of the
gods and speculates in part about the origins of things and the order of the universe.
What we generally call "Greek philosophy" was almost certainly derived by the Greeks
from Egyptian culture, particularly natural science (physics and math) which preoccupied
Greek thought up to the time of Plato. The Greeks seem also to have derived much
of their philosophical theology from the Egyptians as well. These are not modern
interpretations of Greek philosophy; the ancient Greeks themselves claim without
dissension that their philosophy comes from Egypt. Whether the Greeks travelled
to Egypt or whether the Egyptians colonized or visited Greece at some point (which
is what the ancient Greeks thought) is a difficult question to answer.

. . . .

Pythagoreanism began towards the end of the 6th century in the Greek cities in
southern Italy; this school sought an intellectual foundation for a certain religious
way of life, and was more abstract and mathematical than the Milesians (and much
more heavily influenced by Egyptian thought). Much of their thought remains completely
obscure and impenetrable. They principally sought to purify the soul by strict rules of
life; they believed in metempsychosis (the transmigration of souls to animals and
even plants); and they found the essential unity of things to lie not in a physical
substrate but in number and numerical relations. For the Pythagoreans, the one
thing that formed the substrate of all the infinite things in the universe was number .

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GREECE/PRESOC.HTM
©1996, Richard Hooker

---

quote:

---

Heraclitus

Heraclitus, along with Parmenides, is probably the most significant philosopher of ancient Greece until Socrates and Plato; in fact, Heraclitus's philosophy is perhaps even more fundamental in the formation of the European mind than any other thinker in European history, including Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Why? Heraclitus, like Parmenides, postulated a model of nature and the universe which created the foundation for all other speculation on physics and metaphysics. The ideas that the universe is in constant change and that there is an underlying order or reason to this change—the Logos—form the essential foundation of the European world view. Everytime you walk into a science, economics, or political science course, to some extent everything you do in that class originates with Heraclitus's speculations on change and the Logos.

Despite all this, and despite the fact that the ancient Greeks considered Heraclitus one of their principal philosophers, precious little remains of his writings. All we have are a few fragments, quoted willy-nilly in other Greek writers, that give us only a small taste of his arguments. These passages are tremendously difficult to read, not merely because they are quoted out of context, but because Heraclitus deliberately cultivated an obscure writing style—so obscure, in fact, that the Greeks nicknamed him the "Riddler."

In reading these passages, you should be able to piece together the central components of Heraclitus's thought. What, precisely, is the Logos? Can it be comprehended or defined by human beings? What does it mean to claim that the Logos consists of all the paired opposites in the universe? What is the nature of the Logos as the composite of all paired opposites? How does the Logos explain change? Finally, how would you compare Heraclitus's Logos to its later incarnations: in the Divided Line in Plato, in foundational and early Christianity? How would you relate Heraclitus's cryptic statements to those of Lao Tzu?
http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GREECE/HERAC.HTM

---

quote:

---

I would today like to explore the question of what might be learned if
we place Plato in the context of Egypt. Thus from the outset, I admit
that I want to defy the tone of scholarship that is set by the title of
Mary Lefkowitz's recent book, Not Out of Africa. I understand that in
her more careful formulations, Lefkowitz is willing to admit of Egyptian
influence upon Greek culture; nevertheless, the title of her book, and the
general mood of her rhetoric, sets a tone which I find most discouraging,
and I am here to seek, in the presence of specialists, an avenue toward
fruitful reflection which may entertain within one universe the things we
might learn if we spoke of Plato and Egypt together.

... I will advance three of Diop's propositions:
- 1) that Plato is an optimist after the fashion of the Heliopolitan theology,
- 2) that the heritage of Egyptian civilization deserves greater attention as a Western heritage, and
- 3) that there are elements in the heritage of Egyptian education which tend to suppress the advancement of science.

In sum, I will argue that Plato's increasing fascination with Egyptian form
invites us to follow Diop's suggestion that by acknowledging and investigating
our Egyptian heritage, we shall be in a much better position to assess who
we are today and where we should be heading.

. . . .

According to my own reading of Nicolas Grimal's History of Ancient Egypt, the
age of the Seven Wise Men in Greece happens to coincide with a Saitic revival
in Northern Egypt that drew the Greeks into vigorous contact. Another such
revival was also underway during Plato's lifetime as Northern Egyptians undertook
to build a renaissance upon the models of their own ancient history. How closely
these historical connections may tie the two cultures is surely a delicate question,
but I find it difficult to suppose with Lefkowitz and Jenkyns that there is simply no
story to tell. In the classroom, I think the most reasonable position to teach is that our
cultural connections with Egyptian heritage should be further invstigated, not dismissed.

. . . .

In the three dialogues under investigation, Plato seems to operate from a worldview
pervaded by the presence of Egypt. In the Republic, Plato's references to Egypt are
sparse and offhanded. But in the Timaeus and Laws, we find Plato increasingly
preoccupied with the relationship between Greece and Egypt and we find Egyptian
forms taken more and more seriously. After brief exploration of these passages, I
would like to revive the suggestion made by James McEvoy that the Platonic worldview
may have been modeled after the Pharonic (McEvoy 1984).

. . . .

Twice Socrates swears, "by the dog of Egypt." Between these passages, Socrates refers
to the Egyptians and Phoenicians as lovers of money. There is not much to say about
these brief uses, except that they suggest a few layers of irony. By "the dog of Egypt,"
Socrates is presumably referring to Anubis, the jackal-like god of judgment and
discernment who makes the finest distinctions among things in the world--and who is
a prominent figure in the Book of the Dead. To swear by the dog of Egypt is a dramatic
way of affirming the truth of a proposition. Already we see how Plato's view of Egypt
assumes something about the Egyptian legacy of thought. The dog of Egypt is a
symbol of precise, reasoned judgment.

In the first usage, the image of Anubis affirms the discernment with which Socrates has just
purged his ideal republic of corrupting influences. "And so, by the dog of Egypt, we have
been unconsciously purging the State, which not long ago we termed luxurious," says
Socrates. "And we have done wisely," replies Glaucon.

. . . .


Greg Moses
Copyright 1996
Presented at SUNY-Binghamton
Oct., 1996

---

quote:

---

In addition, in Prologue to Prodlus’s Commentaries on Euclid’s Elements,
a disciple of Aristotle named Eudemus, who lived in the forth century B.C.,
confirms: “we shall say, following the general tradition, that the Egyptians
were the first to have invented Geometry, (that) Thales, the first Greek to
have been in Egypt, brought this theory thereof to Greece” (Obenga, p. 48).

. . . .

Plato studied at the Temple of Waset for 11 years;
Aristotle was there for 11-13 years;
Socrates 15 years
Euclid stayed for 10-11 years;
Pythegoras for 22 yeasrs;
Hypocrates studies for 20 years;
and the other Greeks who matriculated at Waset included Diodorus, Solon,
Thales, Archimides, and Euripides. Indeed, the Greek, St. Clement of Alexandria,
once said that if you were to write a book of 1,000 pages, you would not
be able to put down the names of all the Greeks who went to Kemet to be
educated and even those who did not surreptitiously claim they went because
it was prestigious.

The fact of the matter is that it took 40 years to graduate/matriculate
from Waset; this then means that none of the Greeks graduated.

. . . .

significant Kemet-Greece linkage:

I Thales (624-547 B.C.) was the first (protos) Greek student to receive
his training from Egyptian priests in the Nile Valley.

II Plato (428-347 B.C.) records that Thales was educated in Egypt under the priests.

III Proclus (Neoplationist, 420-485 A.D.) Reports that Thales introduced
science, philosophy and mathematics/geometry to Greece.

IV Greek intellectual life started with the Egyptian-trained student, Thales.
He was the founder of the first Greek school of philosophy and science.

V Thales strongly recommended that Pythagoras travel to Egypt to receive his
basic education and to converse as often as possible with the priests of Memphis
and Thebes.

. . . .

... Education in ancient Egypt was religious at its base.” At age seven,
the brightest boys in Egypt were selected for training in the priesthood.
This was the highest honor that could be possibly bestowed on a family
- the selection of a son for admission into a caste of brilliant thinkers,
the “guardians of the state” whom Plato so greatly admired and wrote
about. When the boys (Neophytes) entered the Temple/schools (or
Grand Lodge) they had to study for 40 years - ...

The Neophyte was vigorously trained in how to:

1. Control his thoughts

2. Control his actions

3. Have devotion of purpose

4. Have faith in the ability of his master to teach him the truth

5. Have faith in himself to assimilate the truth

6. Have faith in himself to wield the truth

7. Be free from resentment under the experience of persecution

8. Be free from resentment under experience of wrong

9. Cultivate the ability to distinguish between the real and the unreal
(i.e., he must have a sense of values)

10. Cultivate the ability to distinguish between right and wrong

Plato, who greatly admired the Egyptian education system and actually recommended
that it be introduced into Greece, copied/imitated/derived his three “cardinal virtues”
from these ten goals the neophyte had to attain in the Nile Valley.

“Control of thoughts and action,” Plato called the “virtue of wisdom;”

“freedom of resentment under persecution” Plato called the “virtue of fortitude;”

“the ability to distinguish between right and wrong and between the real and unreal,”
Plato called the “virtues of justice and temperance.”


Dr Kwame Nantambu
is an Associate Professor in the Dept. of Pan-African Studies at Kent State University

---

quote:

---

prior to the reign of a king named Ergamenes, ... it had been the custom
for the high priests, probably at Napata, to send a message to the king,
supposedly from the great god himself, advising him that the time of his
rule on earth was finished and that he must die. Traditionally the kings
had obeyed the divine orders and had taken their own lives. Ergamenes,
however, "who had received instruction in Greek philosophy, was the first
to disdain this command. With the determination worthy of a king he came
with an armed force to the forbidden place where the golden temple of the
Aithiopians was situated and slaughtered all the priests, abolished this
tradition, and instituted practices at his own discretion". It was about this
time that the first royal tomb was built at Meroe: of a king named "Arkamani"
(=Ergamanes). Soon thereafter, Kushite art and architecture began to develop
individualistic styles. The royal family appeared much more "African" in their
images and in their standards of beauty. The royal costumes and crowns
were unique. A lion god, unknown in the Egyptian pantheon, became pre-eminent
in the southern part of the kingdom. And Egyptian language and writing were largely
abandoned for official monuments and were replaced by the native Nubian language
(called "Meroitic"), which was for the first time written down in newly devised hieroglyphic
and cursive alphabets.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

Duality: The fact that all of the Egyptian Neters come in pairs of Male and Female ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:
The way Egypt influenced Greek thought can be seen in many areas:

Duality: The fact that all of the Egyptian Neters come in pairs of Male and Female, represents duality in the universe.

Worship of Nature: The Egyptian worship of nature as the embodiment and reflection of universal creation and wisdom is self explanatory.

Nature of the Mind and Thought: Old as Ptah

Mathematical basis of the Universe(nature): Observed in Egyptian architecture with all forms having natural shape and based on the dimensions of the human body.


And so on and so on...

---

quote:

---

What we like to think of as "philosophic thought" first appears in Greece in a poem,
Theogony , written by Hesiod about 725 B.C.; the Theogony retells the myths of the
gods and speculates in part about the origins of things and the order of the universe...

---

quote:

---

What we generally call "Greek philosophy" was almost certainly derived by the Greeks
from Egyptian culture, particularly natural science (physics and math) which preoccupied
Greek thought up to the time of Plato. The Greeks seem also to have derived much
of their philosophical theology from the Egyptians as well. These are not modern
interpretations of Greek philosophy; the ancient Greeks themselves claim without
dissension that their philosophy comes from Egypt.

---

quote:

---

Whether the Greeks travelled
to Egypt or whether the Egyptians colonized or visited Greece at some point (which
is what the ancient Greeks thought) is a difficult question to answer.

---

quote:

---

Pythagoreanism began towards the end of the 6th century in the Greek cities in
southern Italy; this school sought an intellectual foundation for a certain religious
way of life, and was more abstract and mathematical than the Milesians (and much
more heavily influenced by Egyptian thought). Much of their thought remains completely
obscure and impenetrable. They principally sought to purify the soul by strict rules of
life; they believed in metempsychosis (the transmigration of souls to animals and
even plants); and they found the essential unity of things to lie not in a physical
substrate but in number and numerical relations. For the Pythagoreans, the one
thing that formed the substrate of all the infinite things in the universe was number.

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GREECE/PRESOC.HTM
©1996, Richard Hooker

---

quote:

---

The humble man flourishes, and he who deals uprightly is praised. The innermost chamber is opened to the man of silence. Wide is the seat of the man cautious of speech, but the knife is sharp against the one who forces a path, that he advance not, save in due season.
If you sit with a company of people, desire not the food, even if you want it; it takes only a brief moment to restrain the heart, and it is disgraceful to be greedy. A handful of water quenches the thirst, and a mouthful of melon supports the heart. A good thing takes the place of what is good, and just a little takes the place of much.
..........
If you sit with a glutton, eat when he is finished; if you sit with a drunkard accept a drink, and his heart will be satisfied. Rage not against the meat in the presence of a glutton; take what he gives you and refuse it not, thinking it will be a courteous thing.

---

quote:

---

According to history, Pythagoras after receiving his training in Egypt, returned to his native island, Samos, where he established his order for a short time, after which he migrated to Croton (540 BC) in Southern Italy, where his order grew to enormous proportions, until his final expulsion from that country. We are also told that Thales (640 BC) who had also received his education in EGYPT and his associates: Anaximander and Anaximenes, were natives of Ionia in ASIA MINOR, which was a stronghold of the Egyptian Mystery schools, which they carried on... Similarly we are told that Xenophanes (576 BC) Paramenides, Zeno and Melissus were also natives of Ionia and that they migrated to Elea in Italy and established themselves and spread the teachings of the Mysteries.

In like manner, we are informed that Heraclitus (530 BC) Empedocles, Anaxagoras and Democritus were also native of Ionia who were interested in Physics. Hence in tracing the course of the so-called Greek philosophy, we find that Ionian students after obtaining their education from the Egyptian priests returned to their native land, while some of them migrated to different parts of Italy, where they established themselves.

Consequently, history makes it CLEAR that the surrounding neighbours of Egypt had all become familiar with the teachings of Egyptians many centuries BEFORE the Athenians, who is 399 BC sentenced Socrates to DEATH (Zeller's Hist of Phil., p.112; 127; 170-172) and subsequently caused Plato and Aristotle to FLEE for their lives from Athens because PHILOSOPHY was something FOREIGN and UNKNOWN to them. For the same reason, we would expect either Ionians or the Italians to exert their prior claim to philosophy, since it made contact with them long before it did with the Athenians, who were ALWAYS its greatest enemies, until Alexander's conquest of Egypt, which provided for Aristotle FREE ACCESS to the Library of Alexandria.

The Ionian and Italians made no attempt to claim the authorship of philosophy, because they were well aware that the Egyptians WERE the true authors. On the other hand, after the DEATH of Aristotle, his Athenian pupils without the authority of the state, undertook to compile a history of philosophy recognized at the time as Sophia or Wisdom of the Egyptians, which had become current and traditional in the ancient world, which compilation, because it was produced by pupils who belonged to Aristotle's school, later history has erroneously called Greek philosophy, in spite of the fact that the Greeks were the greatest enemies and persecutors and had persistently treated it as a foreign innovation. For this reason, the so-called Greek philosophy is STOLEN Egyptian philosophy, which first spread to Ionia, thence to Italy and thence to Italy and thence to Athens. And it must remembered that at this remote period of Greek history i.e. Thales to Aristotle 640-BC - 322 BC the Ionians WERE NOT Greek citizens BUT! at first....Egytians subjects and later Persians subjects...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

Yes GREEK philosophy developed in Greece. But PHILOSOPHY in general did not...

---

This was my point exactly!
 

---

Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
 
By the time the Greeks actually entered Egypt in force the Egyptians could not STOP them from gaining access to their "secret" lore, whatever that was. Many early Greeks went to Egypt during the time of the Persians and many other would have gone in during the time of the late 3rd intermediate period when Egypt is known to have used Greek mercenaries. So in the time period we are talking about, it is VERY LIKELY that they would have been able to have this knowledge imparted by the Egyptians. But it goes without saying that MOST of it came into Greek hands AFTER the conquest of Egypt by Alexander, along with much of the knowledge of the other lands he conquered.
 

---

Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
 
"Accurate or faulty? Why or why not?" Wow, even with rare spoon feeding moment from great sage, notice again that Mary the flying nun (just as she did here with Nay-Sayer) still refuses to answer simple questions.
Notice too she still has not refuted James' book (i.e. merits of the word "stolen", accusations of a "cultural theft" etc) that she casually dismissed without reading - in typical racist fashion. Only flip flopping from one position to another: agrees that "there are Egyptian and Asian roots to [sic] Greece's philosophic and other origin[sic]" while at the same time maintaining that "GREEK philosophy developed in Greece" Notice he never engages the book and pin points exactly where James is wrong in saying that classical Greek philosophy is Egyptian.This is because – like Lefkowitz - she is going off pure prejudice not research.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ LOL So Eva finally chooses to address the actual topic of his first claim here.

No need for useless ad-hominem attacks. Sorry but I did not flip-flop anything. My position still stands and it is still valid.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

Yes GREEK philosophy developed in Greece. But PHILOSOPHY in general did not. They are two different things. THAT is what many Eurocentric historians are constantly trying to push down peoples throats. THAT is why they are so "against" Greek philosophy being derived from anywhere else, because they want it (thinking) to be a UNIQUE event in human history and something PARTICULAR to Europeans. People did not just suddenly start asking deep questions about the origin of the universe or why we are here or posing theoretical answers to those questions when the Greeks came along. It has been going on since the beginning of mankind. And a lot of the earliest Greek "philosophy" is quite rudimentary "duh" stuff to begin with, but some treat the WAY it is written as "special". And, given that the GREEK WORLD was primarily centered in THE EAST and Africa, it is blatantly obvious that they would have received influence from there. In fact, almost ALL conquests of the Greek empire lay in the what the Greeks considered the ANCIENT WORLD, which again was the EAST and Africa. And one of the BIGGEST MYTHS of all about Greek philosophy was that it was purely rational. SORRY, but ancient Greeks were just as mystical (superstitious) as any other ancient culture.

---

Each time important political guests came to visit, Hitler banished Eva to her room. He was heard to say "that a highly intelligent man should always choose a primitive and stupid woman," and this said in front of Eva!

Ouch!
 

---

Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
 
Instead of tagging the observations of another poster you were required to address specific issues raised "Accurate or faulty? Why or why not?" It's a rare moment when great sage spoon feeds, so he must really want you to try and defend your stance against James book! But it seems you are indeed a f**king troll as you still flee from your responsibilities. Have you no shame? LOL

- still has not refuted James' book (i.e. merits of the word "stolen", accusations of a "cultural theft"
- never engages the book and pin points exactly where James is wrong in saying that classical Greek philosophy is Egyptian.
 

---

Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
 
Don't drag me into this nonsense.

Anyone who understands ancient Greece's rise to empire would understand that much of that rise was due to absorbing knowledge and treasure from the ancient cultures of Egypt, Babylon, Persia and India. It is blatantly obvious to anyone who knows anything about history.

However, whenever Europeans tell the story, Greeks are always listed as "the father of..." this or "the first to do" that, which totally and absolutely goes against all the facts. In NO HISTORY BOOK is Greece considered among the FIRST countries to be civilized with writing, math and science, yet CONSISTENTLY they are listed as the FIRST to practice these things and this point is STRESSED, not just as being part of a "Western" legacy, but as a WORLDWIDE history. Which is nothing but PURE ABSOLUTE propaganda. The issue is not whether they BUILT ON existing knowledge, which is BLATANTLY OBVIOUS, but whether they were the FIRST to pursue knowledge for knowledge sake or the first to understand the value of knowledge, which is blatantly false.

Look at the time lines. Look at the names and dates of the various thinkers. Look at the size of the empire as it spread. It is NO COINCIDENCE that the greatest scholars of Greece happened to exist AFTER Greece spanned 3 continents.... Prior to that most of the Great thinkers are only known about due to second and third hand references with little or NO direct evidence of their writings in existence. Pythagoras is an example of this as well as Socrates and others. The actual written documents of ACTUAL Greek thinkers that has been passed down to us comes MAINLY from the period when Greece controlled much of the East and was MOSTLY written OUTSIDE of Greece to begin with. That should tell you something. Compare the knowledge and accomplishments of the EARLY Greek thinkers, prior to the expansion of the Empire to that of the Greek scholars AFTER the rise of the Empire and you will see to VASTLY DIFFERENT bodies of work both quantitatively and qualitatively. Now why is that? Add to that the fact that Alexander employed armies of scribes and scholars to go over all the written material of the cultures that they conquered and it becomes IMPOSSIBLE to claim the Greeks did everything SOLELY on their own ingenuity. That is stupid. As James points out, Aristotle is considered the originator of "natural philosophy", but Ausar, Heru and Auset ARE "natural philosophy" from thousands of years earlier, tying together agriculture, reproduction, male and female sexuality and the origin of humans into a symbolic tale with powerful hidden truths. The origin stories of all the ancient Egyptian theologies ALL were "natural philosophy", concerning the origin of man, plants, animals, the stars, the universe and the planet and the forces at work in nature that made these things happen. The credit that the Greeks deserve is in writing down their insights in such a way that others could understand it without having to 'decode' the knowledge embedded in the symbolic manner of ancient Egypt. But that does not mean that Egyptians did not have "rational" thinkers of their own or treat knowledge in a rational manner. In fact, you couldn't have developed such a SOPHISTICATED level of cosmological symbolism WITHOUT a rational understanding of the workings of nature. The problem is that MOST of the Egyptian culture that survives are of structures that were of a symbolic nature, whereas their writings and teachings have mostly perished. Conversely, with ancient Greece the opposite is true, most of their physical symbolic structures have perished, while their writings predominantly survived.

Ancient Greece is the result of the combination of influences from the cultures of the Levant and Egypt. If you want to the the precursors to Greek architecture, look at Beni Hassan, Dier el Bahri and elsewhere. If you want to see influences in dress and custom look at Babylon and Persia along with Egypt. The big curly beards are EXACTLY like the ancient portraits found in Sumer and Elam. The side view portraits in two or three colors are found all over Egypt and ancient Mesopotamia prior to Greece. The stylistic freezes and borders around depictions of every day life, battles and myths is again straight out of Egypt and Mesopotamia. It ain't brand new stuff unique to Greece. And these cultures made many a life like sculpture long before Greece was thought about, even if most were not lifelike, as earlier cultures were into mass production of imagery covering almost every surface of major temples, tombs and other major constructions.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
An example of what ImageMaster (and James) are
saying is Archimedes Screw. Screw Archimedes!
Egyptians were pumping water uphill with that
device before there was a Helas.

STOLEN LEGACY - when an Egyptian engineering
marvel is named for a post-Iskander "Greek."
Whoever named it Archimedes Screw is the thief
and deserves a good Greek style screwing with
that device.

INDITEMENT - Diodorus Siculus for stealing that
of Egyptian legacy and claiming it for a "Magna
Greek".

quote:

---

. . and what is the most surprising thing of all, they [Roman slaves] draw out the water of the streams they encounter [in Spanish mines] by means of what is called by men the Egyptian screw, which was invented by Archimedes of Syracuse at the time of his visit to Egypt;


Diodorus Siculus
Library of History, Book V, 37.3

---

quote:

---

But now that we have examined these matters we must enumerate what Greeks, who have won fame for their wisdom and learning, visited Egypt in ancient times in order to become acquainted with its customs and learning. For the priests of Egypt recount from the records of their sacred books that they were visited in early times by Orpheus, Musaeus, Melampus, and Daedalus, also by the poet Homer and Lycurgus of Sparta, later by Solon of Athens and the philosopher Plato, and that there came also Pythagoras of Samos and the mathematician Eudoxus, as well as Democritus of Abdera and Oenopides of Chios. As evidence for the visits of all these men they point in some cases to their statues and in others to places or buildings which bear their names, and they offer proofs from the branch of learning which each one of these men pursued, arguing that all the things for which they were admired among the Greeks were borrowed from Egypt.

Orpheus, for instance, brought from Egypt most of his mystic ceremonies, the orgiastic rites that accompanied his wanderings, and his fabulous account of his experiences in Hades. For the rite of Osiris is the same as that of Dionysus, and that of Isis very similar to that of Demeter, the names alone having been interchanged; and the punishments in Hades of the unrighteous, the Fields of the Righteous, and the fantastic conceptions, current among the many, which are figments of the imagination — all these were introduced by Orpheus in imitation of Egyptian funeral customs.

And as proof of the presence of Homer they adduce various pieces of evidence , and especially the healing drink which brings forgetfulness of all past evils, which was given by Helen to Telemachus in the home of Menelaus [in Book Four of the Odyssey] ... for, they allege, even to this day the women of this city [Thebes in Egypt] use this powerful remedy.

Lycurgus also and Plato and Solon, they say, incorporated many Egyptian customs into their own legislation. And Pythagoras learned from Egyptians his teachings about the gods, his geometrical propositions and theory of numbers, as well as the transmigration of souls into every living thing.


Diodorus Siculus
Library of History, Book I, 96-98

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ And again, I agree with some things that James says-- that there are Egyptian and Asian roots to Greece's philosophic and other origins-- but question other things.

Like for example these mystery schools. Again that I doubt the possibility but where exactly is the historical evidence that the Egyptians trained foreigners in their sacred lore?

---

 

---

Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
 
Interesting how this Djehuti character gets beatdown by his senior pack members. In this case Doug and alTakruri, then submissively and passively retreats back under the house like a scared puppy. LOL : )
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ And how was I beaten down?? I merely asked a question which was answered! Come on now, Argay there's no need to describe what happens to you in real life (beaten down) to me or any other forum member. LOL And I'm sure that is what happens to a leaking milky way who love getting violated over and over again by other males.
 

---

Posted by Obatala's Revenge (Member # 11484) on :
 
^ LOL . Take it easy on agile. He's going through a rough patch in his life right now.



 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
Tarkuri, You guys are off in moonbeam land on this Greek stuff. I have never, in all of my life, heard such ignorant babble.
Greek philosophy, art, science drama etc was all home grown.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Thank you for your unlearned opinion.
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
well, every classical scholar who has ever lived agrees with my unlearned opinion. You guys make up a list of rascist mumbo jumbo and pass it off as history. the sad part is there might be a young guy or two who is infected with this nonsense and ends up educationally crippled for years.
 

---

Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ And how was I beaten down??

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
well, every classical scholar who has ever lived agrees with my unlearned opinion. You guys make up a list of rascist mumbo jumbo and pass it off as history. the sad part is there might be a young guy or two who is infected with this nonsense and ends up educationally crippled for years.

---

Greek art is modeled on the art of Egypt, Babylon and Persia. There is nothing new about it or homegrown.







OLD kingdom pottery





Greek musical instruments were modeled on those from Egypt, Babylon and Persia. Again nothing new or homegrown about it.

Greek math was modeled on that from Egypt, Babylon, Persia and India. Nothing new or homegrown about it again.

Your claims that Greek this and that are homegrown is simply a lie. Greece did not invent math, writing, arithmetic, architecture, philosophy or science PURELY as a homegrown event. Almost all historians acknowledge these influences on ancient Greek culture and civilization so again you claiming otherwise proves YOU to be the one who doesn't agree with the scholars. Yes of course ancient Greece had its own homegrown style of art and pottery, but that style STILL had tremendous influence from elsewhere and does not represent a SEPARATE or INDEPENDENT invention apart from the traditions and trends that predated it by thousands of years.
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
Oh now we are art experts here. Only a moron claims that every classical scholar is a liar doug. Nobody is going to buy your crap doug.
 

---

Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
Oh now we are art experts here. Only a moron claims that every classical scholar is a liar doug. Nobody is going to buy your crap doug.

---

quote:

---

A striking change appears in Greek art of the seventh century B.C., the beginning of the Archaic period. The abstract geometric patterning that was dominant between about 1050 and 700 B.C. is supplanted in the seventh century by a more naturalistic style reflecting significant influence from the Near East and Egypt. Trading stations in the Levant and the Nile Delta, continuing Greek colonization in the east and west, as well as contact with eastern craftsmen, notably on Crete and Cyprus, inspired Greek artists to work in techniques as diverse as gem cutting, ivory carving, jewelry making, and metalworking (1989.281.49-.50). Eastern pictorial motifs were introduced—palmette and lotus compositions, animal hunts, and such composite beasts as griffins (part bird, part lion), sphinxes (part woman, part winged lion), and sirens (part woman, part bird). Greek artists rapidly assimilated foreign styles and motifs into new portrayals of their own myths and customs, thereby forging the foundations of Archaic and Classical Greek art art.

---

quote:

---

From its very beginnings, Ionic art has shown a strong stylistic tendency towards a more "oriental," Near Eastern, or Egyptian appearance, evident in relief design persisting even through the Classical Period, in comparison to the art of the Greek mainland. When Ionic temple architecture began to bloom in the early Archaic Period (late 7th-early 6th centuries BCE), it took an even more drastic path of innovative, non Doric form than contemporary reliefwork and sculpture. The origin and development of the Ionic Order of architecture, along with the Ionian people, is a very different story from that of its Doric cousin on the Greek mainland. William B. Dinsmoor writes:

We have traced the story of the foundation of the Ionian colonies by the fleeing remnants of the Mycenaean populations [36ff], of their early contacts with the native peoples of Phrygia, Mysia, Lydia, and Lycia, and of the colonies which they in turn, as they increased in power, sent off to other parts of the Greek world. The result of this dispersion is that our knowledge of the Ionic style has to be gathered, not only from the great cities of Asia Minor, but also from the trading colonies such as Naucratis in Egypt, and from outposts established to receive surplus populations, such as Rhegium (Reggio) in southern Italy and Masilia (Marseilles) in France.1

In light of the dispersion of the Ionian peoples across the Mediterranean World, it becomes imperative to look not only at the architecture of the Ionic coast, but also that of the Ionian colonies in foreign nations to formulate a realistic understanding of the Ionic Order and to reconstruct its stylistic elements and visions. Of likely influence on the developing Ionic Order of the early Archaic Period is the architecture of Ancient Egypt, because of strong precedent for artistic influence and a historical and cultural context ideal for the transmission of artistic and architectural notions. As a result, it is sensible to consider the Egyptianizing peculiarities in Egyptian Ionic architecture when trying to understand the origin, development, and meaning of Archaic Ionic architecture.

This paper seeks to help us further understand some of the many possible and simultaneous influences contributing to the Ionic Order and to give us a greater understanding of what the Ionians had hoped to express through their innovative temple architecture in light of their Egyptian allies. Relying heavily on ancient testimony and modern scholarship, we begin with an analysis of the Egyptian influence on Greek sculpture contemporary to early Archaic architecture in order to establish sufficient precedent for the transmission of artistic style and technique between the Egyptians and Greeks. Having established a precedent for the Greek importation of Egyptian artistic ideas, we then move on to examine the cultural, historic, and economic situation in the Egyptian Delta region of the Saite Period, during which time the Ionian are invited to found a colony of increasing significance and prosperity in the Mediterranean World. This exploration is an effort to exposed a social climate, in which the transference of artistic and architectural ideas, along with cultural wares and trade goods, not only had strong precedent, but was even greatly encouraged by the political climate of the Egyptian and Ionian nations. Once the scene is properly set, we are ready to discuss specific examples of Egyptian architecture, which may have had a profound impact on the development of the Archaic Ionic architectural style. We will also look at specific works of Ionic architecture, which are exemplary of such Egyptian influences in their experiential, formal, and stylistic elements.

The Egyptian Presence in Archaic Greek Statuary

It has been observed that, as far as Herodotus and his contemporaries are concerned, no Greek sculpture of significance was created before the 7th century2, until Near Eastern, especially Egyptian, influence began a period of emulation in Greece commonly referred to as the Orientalizing Period, or Proto-Archaic Period (c. 7th century BCE). Along those lines, many ancient sources wrote of an Egyptian likeness in Archaic Greek statuary. Diodorus Siculus (active c. 60-30 BCE) states in his Library of History that Egypt's ancient statuary is "identical in form (rhythmos) to those later wrought by Daedalos amongst the Greeks."3 Along those lines, Diodorus also relates the story of Theodorus4 and Telekles, the sons of Rhoikos and "most renowned of the ancient sculptors," who are said to have spent time in Egypt.

They carved the wooden statue of Pythian Apollo for the Samians, of which it is reported that half of the image was fabricated by Telekles in Samos, and the other half was completed by his brother Theodoros at Ephesus. But when the parts were brought together, they dovetailed with each other so well that the entire work seemed to have been accomplished by one man. ... Thus, in conformity with the ingenuity of the Egyptians, the wooden statue in Samos is cleft in two and the figure divided down the middle from the crown of the head to the genitals, each side being identical to the other. For the most part, they say, it resembles the statues of the Egyptians, in that its hands are held straight and the legs are parted in stride.5

While this account should not be taken as literal truth, the point remains that early Archaic Greek sculptors are thought by the Greeks to have been influence by Egyptian artistic style. Murphy further maintains that Theodoros and Telekles "probably owed something of their technique to Egyptian influence, especially the reformed Saite cannon of art, which divided the human figure by twenty-one horizontal grids."6 Likewise, Pausanias tells us that the "image of Apollo called the 'Pythian' and the Dekatephoros [in the ancient temple of Apollo at Megara] is very much like Egyptian carved images" (1.42.5) and that the ancient image from the temple of Athena at Priene "is not like those called Aeginetan, nor is it like most ancient images of Attica, but rather, if anything, it is distinctly Egyptian" (7.5.5).7 Therefore, while Archaic Greek sculpture of a distinctly Egyptian form may have stood out amongst its Aeginetan and Attic contemporaries, this Egyptian stylistic influence was far from scarce.8 In Greek Sculpture: the Archaic Period, John Boardman further emphasizes the likelihood of an Egyptian influence in the development of Archaic Greek sculpture:

In Egypt [during the reign of Psammetichus I (664-610)] the Greeks saw lifesize statuary, and larger, in hard stone, for standing and seated figures, superficially not unlike their own less ambiguous statues and statuettes, with some features already familiar to them from the egyptianizing arts of the near east. It would not have required many visits by craftsmen, being Greeks and imbued with characteristic Greek curiosity and aptitude to learn, for these novel (to them) concepts in statuary and the means of their execution to be introduced to Greece itself. ... it is impossible not to associate this new era in Greek sculpture with the influence from Egypt.9

In agreement with Classical authors, modern scholars generally support likely role Egyptian sculptural form and technique played in the development of Archaic Greek sculpture. This evidence for an Egyptian influence establishes a significant precedent for further cultural and artistic transmission between Egypt and Greece of the early Archaic Period and we will now see that the Egyptian influence on Archaic Greece did not end solely with sculpture.

Greco-Egyptian Cultural Transmission

The Archaic Period saw the blossoming of trade relations between Greece and Egypt for the first time since the Bronze Age. During this period of renewed commerce, many cultural goods were exchanged along with colonists, mercenaries, and artisans. Herodotus states that the 26th Dynasty King Psammetichus (Psamtik I, 664-610 BCE) gave to the Ionian and Carian mercenaries, who helped him gain the Egyptian throne, "two pieces of land, opposite one another on each side of the Nile, ... [and] went so far as to put some Egyptian boys into their charge to be taught Greek; and their learning of the language was the origin of the class of Egyptian interpreters."10 Psammetichus campaigned between 664 and 657 throughout Lower Egypt for reunification of Egypt and was the first Egyptian ruler to employ Greek and Carian mercenaries, establishing a standard in Near Eastern and Mediterranean conflict for centuries to come.11 James Henry Breasted notes in his History of Egypt that Psammetichus was probably also the first Egyptian ruler to favor Greek colonies in Egypt.12 Before long, Egypt was filled with Greek merchants and their manufacturing settlements, especially in the western Delta region near Sais, the royal capital of the Saite period. The ancient capital of Memphis now had Greek and Carian quarters, and other large Egyptian cities likely apportioned similar areas for Greek and additional foreign expatriates. Continuous communication between Greek states and Egypt soon established direct and sometimes intimate relations between the two nations. The Greek military also recruited many mercenaries returning home after their terms of employment in the campaigns of Psammetichus and Greek merchants assuredly returned home with numerous tales, artifacts, and ideas borrowed from the Egyptian world they frequented.13 A few generations later, Amasis (Ahmose II, 570-526 BCE) "subsequently turned them [the Greek mercenaries] out and brought them to Memphis, to protect him from his own people. They were the first foreigners to live in Egypt, and after their original settlement there, the Greeks began regular intercourse with the Egyptians."14 Amasis further reorganized trade relations with Greece and designated the Nile Delta port city of Naukratis as the commercial headquarters for foreign settlers in Egypt, where the Greeks were given a definitive monopoly on all seaborne trade.15 Land was also granted to the Greek settlers at Naukratis, whereupon they built not only houses, but also temples and altars to their own gods and goddesses.16

The far-reaching influence of Amasis was equally apparent in Greece. Herodotus states he gave one thousand talents in alum for the rebuilding of the temple at Delphi, after its accidental destruction by fire, when it was to cost no more than three hundred talents, and to the Greeks, who had settled in Egypt, he gave twenty minae.17 Amasis gave further gifts as dedications to various temples throughout Greece. "To Cyrene he sent a gold-plated statue of Athena and a painting of himself; to the temple of Athena at Lindos, two statues in stone and a remarkable linen corselet; and to the goddess Hera at Samos two likenesses of himself, in wood, which until my own time stood behind the doors in the great temple."18 If Herodotus' account of Amasis were to be believed, that would place actual works of Egyptian art directly in Archaic Ionic temples.

Simultaneous with the blossoming of trade relations between Greece (particularly Ionia) and Egypt, to the increasing Ionian colonization of the Delta region, and to the Egyptian influence in Archaic Greek sculpture, the Ionians began constructing colossal works of temple architecture of an unprecedented scale and form.19 Significant innovations in Ionian temple architecture of this period greatly resemble long established and commonly implemented elements of the Egyptian colossal architectural tradition. It has been shown above that early Greek sculptural form and style heavily borrowed from Egyptian tradition and that the Greeks may have housed Egyptian works within their temples. Why, then, can one not suppose that the Greek peoples so closely in contact with Egyptian civilization might have similarly incorporated Egyptian architectural form or technique into the evolving Archaic Greek temple? This theory, in fact, is supported by ample evidence in the way of ancient testimony on Egyptian influence on Greek architecture and a comparative analysis of Greek and Egyptian archaeological remains and reconstructions. An analysis of the artistic situation in the Egyptian Delta region during the Archaic period may first prove helpful in discovering an atmosphere, in which transmission of artistic and architectural form, style, and ideas may have been likely, if not encouraged.

With the blossoming trade relations between the Greeks and Egyptians, the cultural and political setting of the Mediterranean in the late 7th to 6th centuries was, in fact, perfect for the transference of artistic and architectural notions between the Egyptians and Greeks. This period in Egypt was a time of great artistic and architectural revival, a renaissance after the decline of the former Ethiopian and Assyrian dynasties, with the repair of the pyramids of the ancient Memphite kings and the restoration of their mortuary cults, and with significant additions by many of the Saite rulers to the temples at Sais and Memphis. Monumental constructions throughout Egypt of this period included colossal statuary, obelisks, propylaea, colonnaded courts, and further elements of traditional Egyptian architectural design. With architectural construction being so vigorous during this period, particularly in the Delta region around Sais and Naukratis, it is almost inconceivable that Greek settlers and travelers in Egypt did not witness the erection of colossal additions to Egyptian temples. If contemporary examples of an Egyptian influence on Greek statuary are indicative of a Greek reception of Egyptian artistic ideas, it also becomes unlikely that the Greeks in Egypt did not adopt Egyptian architectural elements for their developing canon.

Egyptian Influence on Ionic Architecture

An examination of the architectural remains of the Archaic Greeks in Egypt may reveal features or stylistic elements suggestive of an Egyptian influence on their design. During the reign of Amasis, Herodotus tells us that the Greek settlers of Naukratis constructed numerous temples to their own gods and goddesses. He writes:

[Amasis] made grants of land upon which Greek traders, who did not want to live permanently in Egypt, might erect altars and temples. Of these latter the best known and most used--and also the largest--is the Hellenium; it was built by the joint efforts of the Ionians of Chios, Teos, Phocaea, and Clazomenae, of the Dorians of Rhodes, Cnidos, Halicarnassus, and Phaselis, and of the Aeolians of Mytilene. ... the Aeginetans, however, did build a temple of Zeus separately, the Samians one in honor of Hera, and the Milesians another in honor of Apollo.

Very little evidence of the Greek temples survives or has been excavated at Naukratis, but their temenos foundations and occasional temple foundations have been discovered. Perhaps the most significant find of Archaic Greek architecture at Naukratis is a capital from the colossal Ionic Temple of Apollo (c. 566 BCE). This capital marks the point of transformation from the Proto-Ionic examples, with their volutes springing vertically from the shafts, to the capitals of the Ionic order, where the volutes "now lie horizontally, and are connected by the cushion, and below them the girdle of hanging leaves has become the egg-and-dart, the ovolo or echinus" (figs. 10 and 11). Just below the astragal (the small rounded moulding just beneath the volute), on the uppermost part of the column shaft is a necking decorated with the Egyptian lotus flower and bud, which may have been the prototype of the anthemion, a continuous pattern of alternating palmette (a Mesopotamian floral decoration) and stylized lotus popular to Ionic columns of later periods. The absence of the palmette on the Naukratis capital emphasizes the purely Egyptian influence. From the scanty remains at Naukratis and Sais, the two most significant cities to the Saite Dynasty and the Archaic Greek presence in the Delta region, minor evidence suggests an Egyptian influence on the development of Archaic Ionic architecture. An examination of specific Egyptian architectural feats visible and accessible to the Archaic Greeks and a close look at general Egyptian architectural traditions may provide further evidence suggesting an Egyptian influence on Greek architecture, if not the colossal Archaic Ionic temple, itself.

The Egyptian Labyrinth

One monument of Ancient Egypt that may have had significant impact on the development of the stylistic and formal elements of Greek architecture has little connection with the Saite Dynasty, but is known to have been a popular attraction for Greek and Roman travelers. The 12th Dynasty mortuary temple of the pyramid complex of Amenemhet III (1855-1808 BCE) at Hawara, the royal necropolis in the southeastern Fayum region came to be known by Classical authors and travelers as the Egyptian Labyrinth, most certainly due to the supposed twisting, maze-like characteristics of its inner chambers. The Egyptian Labyrinth occupies the attention of many Classical authors, who never hesitate to mention the tremendous impact it is said to have had on Greek and Aegean architecture. Many ancient authors maintain that Daedalus fashioned his legendary Labyrinth of Minos after "the first [labyrinth] ever to be constructed," the so-called Egyptian Labyrinth near Lake Moeris. Diodorus Siculus writes, "Daedalus, they say, reconstructed in Crete the tangled paths of the Egyptian Labyrinth, which still exists down to the present time and which was built many years prior to the reign of Minos." Likewise, in Pliny's account of civilization's famous labyrinths, he asserts that "there is no doubt that Daedalus adopted it [the Egyptian Labyrinth] as the model for the labyrinth built by him in Crete, but that he reproduced only a hundredth part of it containing passages that wind, advance and retreat in a bewilderingly intricate manner." While these accounts of King Minos and Daedalus may have their basis in myth rather than fact, it remains that Classical authors firmly believed that Egyptian architecture had influenced Aegean architecture in some way.

There is little evidence proving that the Egyptian Labyrinth directly influenced additional works of Greek architecture, but Pliny does include the 6th century colossal Ionic temple of Hera on the island of Samos in his account of famous labyrinths. While Pliny does not detail the influence the Egyptian Labyrinth may have had on the design of the temple of Hera, the so-called Rhoikos temple, the inclusion of this colossal Ionic temple in his account of labyrinths clearly associates it with the Egyptian marvel. The question then arises why Pliny and his contemporaries (his source at the very least) were prompted to consider the Rhoikos temple a labyrinth comparable to the famed Labyrinth of Egypt. To gain an accurate understanding of why the Rhoikos temple was considered a labyrinth, we must isolate the characteristic elements of a traditional labyrinth and examine the Rhoikos temple in this context. The isolation of characteristic elements of a labyrinth may further lead us to the recognition of features in common with both the Egyptian Labyrinth and the Rhoikos temple. Once labyrinthine similarities between the Egyptian and Samian Labyrinths have been isolated, we can look for further stylistic and formal similarities between the two structures. We can then attempt to determine whether or not these similarities are the result of an Egyptian influence on the Rhoikos temple and, possibly, Archaic colossal Ionic architecture as a whole.

The Meaning of the Name

An isolation of characteristic elements of the labyrinth, in its generic form, would best begin with an examination of the meaning of the word "labyrinth," or the Greek laburinqoV. Liddell and Scott's Intermediate Lexicon defines laburinqoV as a "maze, a building consisting of halls connected by tortuous passages," consistent with the Classical and modern usage of the word. Sir Arthur Evans, however, offers us a colorful etymology of the word in maintaining the "labyrinth" is derived from labrys, the Lydian (or Carian) name for the Greek double-edged axe. The suffix "-nth" is believed to belong to a group of pre-Hellenic words surviving in place names, like Corinth (Korinthos) and Zakynthos. Thus "labyrinth" is thought to denote originally the "place of the double axe," which is likely a reference to the palace of Knossos, where the double axe featured prominently among ornamentation and iconography. The Classical and modern usage of labyrinth, however, seems to have lost all connection with its original meaning and to have adopted a meaning describing either the visitor's experience of the ruins of Knossos or the description of King Minos' Labyrinth of Classical myth.

The Egyptian Labyrinth gets its Classical name, of course, from its characteristic hallways and chambers, "which are long and numerous and have winding passages communicating with one another, so that no stranger can find his way either into any court or out of it without a guide." One can almost get lost in Herodotus' appropriately convoluted description of the Labyrinth:

The upper rooms, on the contrary, I did actually see, and it is hard to believe that they are the work of men; the baffling and intricate passages from room to room and from court to court were an endless wonder to me, as we passed from a courtyard into rooms, from rooms into galleries, from galleries into more rooms, and thence into yet more courtyards.

In his Natural History, Pliny also comments on how "doors are let into the walls at frequent intervals to suggest deceptively the way ahead and to force the visitors to go back upon the very same tracks that he has already followed in his wanderings." Diodorus further sums up the Classical traveler's experience of the Egyptian Labyrinth in calling it "a work remarkable not so much for its size as for its unrivaled cleverness of construction: for it is hard for anyone venturing inside to find his way out again, unless he has obtained a guide of fully proven experience." In no lengthy account of the Egyptian Labyrinth do Classical authors fail to comment on its baffling, confusing, maze-like characteristics. Similar characteristics are also ascribed to all other labyrinths of history. In the introduction to his account of the world's famous labyrinths, Pliny labels them "quite the most abnormal (portentosissimum) achievement on which man has spent his resources." In his description of the Cretan Labyrinth, supposedly based largely on the Egyptian Labyrinth, he speaks of "passages that wind, advance and retreat in a bewilderingly intricate manner." Pliny then borrows a description of the Italian, or Etruscan, Labyrinth from the 1st century BCE Roman scholar Marcus Varro, in which he says "... there is a tangled labyrinth, which no one must enter without a ball of thread if he is to find his way out."

One labyrinth in Pliny's account, however, is not given the characteristic appellation of housing a bewildering maze of passages. What Pliny calls the Lemnian Labyrinth (Lemnius) is described as being similar to the Cretan Labyrinth, but in what respect we are not told. Pliny considers it more noteworthy than the Cretan "only in virtue of its 150 columns, the drums of which were so well balanced as they hung in the workshop that a child was able to turn them on the lathe." Pliny is now generally considered to have been describing the early Archaic Temple of Hera at Samos, the above-mentioned Rhoikos temple. Evidence in favor of this structure being the Rhoikos temple at Samos is found in Pliny's description of the use of a lathe to form the column drums. The column bases of the Rhoikos temple show clear traces of having been turned out by lathes. Pliny further cites Zmilis, Rhoecus, and Theodorus as the architects of this labyrinth and all as natives of Lemnos, when, in fact, Rhoecus (Rhoikos) and Theodorus were the architects of the temple of Hera at Samos and were natives of Samos. Additionally, Pliny already places the Greek labyrinth on Samos in an earlier book of his work when he writes: "Theodorus, who constructed the Labyrinth at Samos, cast a statue of himself in bronze." Lastly Pliny's misplacement of the Samian Labyrinth in Lemnos is possibly the result of a misinterpretation of Greek term en limnais, meaning "in the marshes," which designates the location of the temple of Hera at Samos.

The Samian Labyrinth

Why does Pliny include the Rhoikos temple among the famous labyrinths of history? What elements of the Rhoikos temple prompt Pliny to consider it a labyrinth? As we have seen above, Classical authors ascribe to all labyrinths characteristics such as "tangled paths," "passages that wind, advance and retreat in a bewilderingly intricate manner," "winding passages communicating with one another," "baffling and intricate passages," deceptive suggestions, the wanderings of a visitor, the need for a guide or a ball of thread to find the way out again, and many other similar descriptions on the notable maze-like features of a labyrinth. In light of the abundance of similar descriptions of labyrinths among Classical authors over the ages and in light of the lack of generosity on the part of any one Classical author to put forth a specific definition of what constitutes a labyrinth, it seems reasonably safe to conclude that a labyrinth may be defined as a structure possessing stylistic and formal elements similar those mentioned above. As such, to be considered a labyrinth, the colossal Ionic temple of Hera at Samos must have possessed features suggestive to an ancient visitor of baffling, winding, intricate passages, or the like.

In addition to the unprecedented colossal size, a remarkable innovation to Greek temple architecture in the Ionic temples of the 6th century is the vastly increased number of columns within the temple peristyle and interior. The peristyle, in fact, consisted of a depth of two columns about the temple perimeter, referred to as dipteral, and columns of the same colossal dimensions then continued into the pronaos and sometimes the naos of the cella building. It is thought by some that the effect upon a visitor's experience of these temples induced by the number of colossal columns might lead to the perception of a certain labyrinthine quality. On the labyrinthine effect of the Rhoikos temple, Dinsmoor writes:

The earliest of these [colossal dipteral Ionic temples] was designed for the sanctuary of Hera at Samos by Rhoecus and Theodorus of that island, inspired by the great columned halls of Egyptian temples such as the so-called Labyrinth near Lake Moeris described by Herodotus and Strabo; the Samian temple was likewise on that account called the Labyrinth.

Dinsmoor directly compares the Rhoikos temple to the Egyptian Labyrinth, designating the latter as exemplary of the Egyptian architectural characteristics, which influenced the design of the Rhoikos temple. The key architectural characteristic that influenced the Rhoikos temple, according to Dinsmoor, is the "columned halls," or the colonnaded courts and hypostyle halls found in nearly every traditional Egyptian temple. On account of the great columned halls of Egyptian temples such as the Labyrinth, and on account of the vast expanse of densely gathered columns in the peristyle and cella of the Rhoikos temple, these structures were considered labyrinthine. When discussing the Samian Labyrinth, Pliny further supports the significance of the columns and discusses no other features that may have been cause for its labyrinthine quality.

One must wonder then what it is about a vast expanse of columns that makes a structure seem labyrinthine, or maze-like. Within an Egyptian hypostyle hall, it is somewhat easy to perceive the labyrinthine effect in that one's vision is entirely obscured beyond the horizontal and vertical axes by the densely compacted grid of towering columns (fig. 1). One's narrow line of sight is further terminated by a pylon or wall stretching from floor to ceiling. In effect, the visitor is completely surrounded by a network of towering walls, whether physical or virtually created by the columnar effect. The labyrinthine effect induced through the columns of the Rhoikos temple may have been quite similar. As with the Egyptian hypostyle hall, the visitor's field of vision is tightly constrained when standing within the cella building of the Ionic temple or even alongside the cella's external wall. The surrounding, densely populated, grid-like forest of columns in the peristyle similarly restricts the field of vision to the horizontal and vertical axes of the temple with occasional opportunity to glimpse along a tangential path (figs. 6, 7, and 9).

The Labyrinths are not the sole source of architectural features indicative of an Egyptian influence in the Archaic Ionic temple. Many formal, stylistic, and experiential elements in traditional Egyptian temple design strongly resemble characteristics of the Ionic temple.

Egyptian Elements in Ionic Colossal Temples

The peristyle of the Rhoikos temple and other colossal Ionic temples of the Archaic period is likely to have developed as a result of an Egyptian influence on Greek temple architectural design. As mentioned above, the colossal Ionic temple was given a peristyle of unprecedented size and innovative form in its dipteral colonnade, which Dinsmoor clearly describes in his treatment of the dipteral peristyle as having been inspired by Egyptian temple design. Colossal architecture and the dipteral colonnade were certainly anything but unprecedented in Egypt during the Greek Archaic period (late 7th through 6th centuries BCE). Colossal temple architecture can be seen as far back as the early Old Kingdom of Egypt with the splendid valley and mortuary temples of the Pyramid Age (2551-2472 BCE). Furthermore, the dipteral colonnade becomes a common addition to the traditional Egyptian temple certainly by the New Kingdom (1550-1070 BCE, figs. 2 and 3).

In addition to the strong precedent and a chronological context permitting an Egyptian influence on the development of the dipteral Ionic peristyle, many stylistic similarities can also be drawn between the Egyptian colonnade and the colossal Ionic peristyle. One similarity is observed in the widened central intercolumniation of both the Ionic peristyle and the Egyptian colonnade and hypostyle hall, the difference being that the central columns of the Egyptian hypostyle hall are far more massive than the columns on either side (compare figs. 3 and 8). On the possible Egyptian origin for the widened central intercolumniation of colossal Ionic temples, A. W. Lawrence writes in his Greek Architecture:

At the front of each temple stood two rows of eight columns--an unprecedented number, though soon to be surpassed. Their spacing was graduated to emphasize the entrance by a wider intercolumniation; the Egyptians habitually designed the halls of temples in that manner, and the idea of massing great numbers of columns may also have been inspired by knowledge of Egypt.

The experiential effect of this widened central intercolumniation of both the Egyptian and Ionic temple is one of strong emphasis on the entrance or entranceway of the structure along the central vertical axis.

The continuation of columns no less significant in scale than those of the peristyle into the pronaos of the Ionic temple could also be seen as mimicking of the Egyptian hypostyle hall and processional colonnade (see figs. 2 and 3). Dinsmoor observes that the Rhoikos temple had one hundred two columns in the exterior peristyle, "besides two rows of five each in the deep pronaos, which seems to have been inspired by the central aisles of the Egyptian hypostyle hall" (figs. 7 and 8). In addition to the preservation of column scale, continuity between the Ionic peristyle and temple interior is established by preserving the widened central intercolumniation of the peristyle among the interior columns. This continuity designates a clear path or channel, down which the visitor is encouraged to advance into the temple interior, not unlike the strong processional aspect of the Egyptian temple. The processional quality of the Egyptian temple is clearly seen throughout its many parts, from the long avenue of sphinxes or roadway lined with trees during the temple approach, to the series of massive pylons with proportionally narrow, yet towering, entranceways, and to the series of courts, hallways, and chambers of progressively increasing elevation and smaller dimensions. During this long and elaborate procession, however, the pathway is never unclear, for, from the very first outer pylon to the doorway of the deepest, smallest, holiest naos, the processional aisle running down the central vertical axis of the temple remains perfectly straight and its width constant. In the temple's conceptual design, this permits the observer to peer from the very front of the temple or even the approaching causeway into the far-off most sacred naos and upon the icon of the god (fig. 4).

The Egyptian and colossal Ionic temples exhibit further similarity in the conceptual continuity between the structure and the landscape. As expressed above, the dense collection of numerous columns in the Ionic temple peristyle and cella building produce a sort of "forest of columns" effect. In addition to the labyrinthine experiential effect, the "forest of columns" could have also served to associate the temple structure with the surrounding landscape as a metaphorical or sometimes literal reflection of a surrounding sacred grove. The forest of columns in the Egyptian temple similarly reflects the landscape, not necessarily of the immediate surroundings, but of the mythical "marshland vegetation, which sprang up around the primeval mound of creation--symbolized by the temple's inner shrine." The great variety of column types representing different domestic plant life at different stages of development in the Egyptian temple further emphasizes the diversity of the natural environment on the banks of the Nile. The continuity between landscape and structure in the Ionic temple could be further reflective of the processional quality of the temple complex. During the processional approach to the temple along the "sacred way" (much like the Egyptian "avenue of sphinxes"), the distinction between the temple and landscape is blurred to the point that a clear boundary between exterior and interior cannot be drawn. Similarly, the open-air courtyards and clerestory lighting give the interior of the Egyptian temple a somewhat exterior feel. As the visitor or priest processes through the Egyptian temple along the central aisle into the progressively smaller darker chambers, the point at which one is within the structural interior and no longer out in the open air is substantially blurred.

Through a close examination of the colossal Ionic temple of the early Archaic period, we have discovered many experiential, formal, and stylistic elements strongly evocative of traditional Egyptian temple design. From an analysis of contemporary Greek sculpture with its Egyptian influence, we have also discovered strong precedent for the Greek importation of Egyptian artistic ideas. Our examination of the Greco-Egyptian cultural and economic relations of this period, further, exposed a social climate perfectly suitable to Greek accessibility to Egyptian architecture, and a climate, in which the transference of artistic and architectural ideas, along with cultural wares and further items of trade, was even encouraged by the highest social, political, and religious leaders of the Egyptian and Ionian nations. The purpose of this discussion was not to defeat theories on the origins and development of Ionic architecture, but to help us further understand one of the many possible influences contributing to the Ionic Order. These discoveries may also help give us a greater understanding of cultural relations in the Archaic Period and an understanding of what the Ionians had hoped to express through their innovative temple architecture in light of their Egyptian allies.

With the exception of a brief comment on the multiple possible origins for the Ionic volute, this paper does not address some of the likely Near Eastern or Aegean Bronze Age sources for the seemingly innovative features of the colossal Archaic Ionic temples. As for Near Eastern influences on Ionic architecture, it may be said that further Oriental elements in Greek art often found emerged after having undergone "sundry modifications" on their way from Egypt through the Near East and into Ionia or the Greek mainland, along the same pathways that many Egyptian art objects and cultural goods found their way to Greece during the Archaic period. Similarly, one could say of possible Aegean traces in Greek architecture that they too might have had their origins in the works of Ancient Egypt. A further significant possible Egyptian influence on Greek architecture not addressed in this paper is the introduction of the peristyle to the Greek temple. While evidence above has demonstrated that the many architectural elements of the colossal Archaic Ionic temple, including the innovative dipteral peristyle, likely emerged as a result of an Egyptian influence, the idea of the Greek temple peristyle, itself, may have similarly made way to Greece along a similar path. To address these issues sufficiently, however, would be to exceed the scope of this paper, yet may also likely be the next course of action demanded by this research topic.

Appendix

Origin and Function of the Egyptian Labyrinth

Classical authors are less certain of the origin or purpose of the Egyptian Labyrinth than they are of its influence on Greek architecture. Located at Hawara, the royal necropolis in the southeastern Fayum region, the Labyrinth is now known to be the site of the mortuary temple of the pyramid complex of the 12th Dynasty Pharaoh Amenemhet III (1855-1808 BCE). Herodotus claims that the Labyrinth was supposedly built as a common memorial for the reigns of twelve regional monarchs to strengthen the bond between them. Diodorus gives us several different accounts of the Labyrinth's origin and purpose, beginning with King Mendes, "whom some call Marrus. This king performed no martial deeds whatever, but he did build himself a palace of burial known as the Labyrinth." He later describes the Labyrinth as a tomb to the twelve kings mentioned in Herodotus' account. Diodorus then tells the story of how King Menas crossed Lake Moeris with the aid of a crocodile. As a gesture of thanks and homage to the crocodile god Sobek, he founded the city named after the crocodiles and instructed the inhabitants to worship the crocodiles as gods. He also built his tomb here, "raising a four sided pyramid nearby, and he constructed the Labyrinth, which many admire."

Despite the many accounts of the origin of the Egyptian Labyrinth, most Classical authors recognize a religious function to this structure. Diodorus' account of the Labyrinth in the context of the story of King Menas' pyramid tomb and the institution of a crocodile cult agrees with the modern assertion that the Labyrinth originally functioned in part as a mortuary installation for the king's pyramid and in part to serve the cults of various gods, likely those of Fayum area, "whose worship was carried on in association with that of the dead king." A more pronounced mixture of Pharaonic mortuary cult with local religion is found in Herodotus' observation of the Labyrinth's present function: "I was taken through the rooms in the upper storey, so what I shall say of them is from my own observation, but the underground ones I can speak of only from report, because the Egyptians in charge refused to let me see them, as they contain the tombs of the kings who built the labyrinth, and also the tombs of the sacred crocodiles."

---

From: http://www.artic.edu/~llivin/research/ionic_architecture/paper.html

So much for your classical scholars and the "western" tradition.
 

---

Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
 
There is an exhibit that is on tour around the world showing how ancient Greek sculpture and art was originally painted:

http://thephoenix.com/Boston/Arts/52391-Whitewash/


http://gregcookland.com/journal/2007_12_09_archive.html



From: http://thephoenix.com/COMMUNITY/photos/arts/picture40815.aspx



Temple of Aphaia on Aegina Island:



Beni Hasan tomb:



From: http://www.flickr.com/photos/norashalaby/2428030849/
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
Doug, I hjave heard some really stupid comments in a lifetime of teaching but some of you guys win the prize. You guys nit pick and scratch around here there and everywhere to try to find some thread with which you can prop up these absurd views you hold. Just study classical greece, that is all you have to do. Study without the object of in mind of looking for pieces of straw to support an already established view you have.
There is no substitute for an education Doug. It is never too late.
When you buy into this political afrocentric garbage you guys promote you are simply wasting your life as nothing can ever come of it.
Thousands of teachers every day day are teaching students that Greece is the foundation of western civilization. Today, thousands of teachers are teaching students that the genius of greece was home grown.
That Doug and Djehuti think otherwise is of no account.
 

---

Posted by Obatala's Revenge (Member # 11484) on :
 
Could it be there are 2 truths in this world?

Could it be that AmericanP's truth is on the tail end of the coin?

The Illogical vs. The Logical?

Could there be a "stupid truth" ordained for humanity?

Yin and Yang?

Just my 2 cents.
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
I think there is always only one truth though you may have many perceptions. We live in an age of radical politics. Thirty years ago these radical fringe ideas did not have the internet to peddle their stupidity.
Most of the problems here stem from the lack of knowledge in how to process historical data.
Most of these guys do not think like historians. They START with a conclusion and then try to build a case around it, no historian would ever do that.
 

---

Posted by Obatala's Revenge (Member # 11484) on :
 
^ I think you're projecting.
 

---

Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
 
LOL, this dude is even in denial on the top down creation of racial inferiority.
Continuing anything other then laughs with this dunce is a complete waste of time.
I have yet to see one credible source he's referenced and I'd bet 10:1 odds you never will because they are all on Stormfront.
 

---

Posted by Serpent Wizdom (Member # 7652) on :
 
"If art did not originate in Greece and people have been sculpting figures for cosmological and political purposes since thousands of years before the Greeks, then how can art in Greece be HOME GROWN?"

europeans have a strange habit of making such claims. just look at the lie that is taught in the american public fool system that says columbus "discovered" america? and they had the nerve to create a national holiday with his name attached to it to honor this unholy lie.

how can you discover a continent already inhabited by millions of people?

then again, how did elvis presley create rock n roll when chuck berry and others were doing this form of music before him?.... etc. etc...

culture banditry must run in the eruopeans blood...
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
No historian teaches that Columbus "discovered america" in the sense that he was the first European to come here. The importance of Columbus is that that it was his voyages that kicked off the conquest of the western hemisphere by Europeans. That conquest was one of the most important events in the history of the human race that had a massive impact on the world to this day. For that reason the voyages of Columbus were very important events.
 

---

Posted by Serpent Wizdom (Member # 7652) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
No historian teaches that Columbus "discovered america" in the sense that he was the first European to come here. The importance of Columbus is that that it was his voyages that kicked off the conquest of the western hemisphere by Europeans. That conquest was one of the most important events in the history of the human race that had a massive impact on the world to this day. For that reason the voyages of Columbus were very important events.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by akoben:

You jackass you denied a stolen legacy and claimed Greek classical philosophy was "home grown". Having been beaten down on both counts you have yet to reply, "I doubt you've studied James. Until you start citing him in your refutations I'm not bothering to respond after this post."

and we all know you will never reply; like patriot you can only curse but nothing more.

---

quote:

---

TheAmericanPatriot wrote:

Doug, I have heard some really stupid comments in a lifetime of teaching but some of you guys win the prize. You guys nit pick and scratch around here there and everywhere to try to find some thread with which you can prop up these absurd views you hold. Just study classical greece, that is all you have to do. Study without the object of in mind of looking for pieces of straw to support an already established view you have.
There is no substitute for an education Doug. It is never too late.
When you buy into this political afrocentric garbage you guys promote you are simply wasting your life as nothing can ever come of it.
Thousands of teachers every day day are teaching students that Greece is the foundation of western civilization. Today, thousands of teachers are teaching students that the genius of greece was home grown. That Doug and Djehuti think otherwise is of no account.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
Doug, I hjave heard some really stupid comments in a lifetime of teaching but some of you guys win the prize. You guys nit pick and scratch around here there and everywhere to try to find some thread with which you can prop up these absurd views you hold. Just study classical greece, that is all you have to do. Study without the object of in mind of looking for pieces of straw to support an already established view you have.
There is no substitute for an education Doug. It is never too late.
When you buy into this political afrocentric garbage you guys promote you are simply wasting your life as nothing can ever come of it.
Thousands of teachers every day day are teaching students that Greece is the foundation of western civilization. Today, thousands of teachers are teaching students that the genius of greece was home grown.
That Doug and Djehuti think otherwise is of no account.

---

quote:

---

But now that we have examined these matters we must enumerate what Greeks, who have won fame for their wisdom and learning, visited Egypt in ancient times in order to become acquainted with its customs and learning. For the priests of Egypt recount from the records of their sacred books that they were visited in early times by Orpheus, Musaeus, Melampus, and Daedalus, also by the poet Homer and Lycurgus of Sparta, later by Solon of Athens and the philosopher Plato, and that there came also Pythagoras of Samos and the mathematician Eudoxus, as well as Democritus of Abdera and Oenopides of Chios. As evidence for the visits of all these men they point in some cases to their statues and in others to places or buildings which bear their names, and they offer proofs from the branch of learning which each one of these men pursued, arguing that all the things for which they were admired among the Greeks were borrowed from Egypt.

Orpheus, for instance, brought from Egypt most of his mystic ceremonies, the orgiastic rites that accompanied his wanderings, and his fabulous account of his experiences in Hades. For the rite of Osiris is the same as that of Dionysus, and that of Isis very similar to that of Demeter, the names alone having been interchanged; and the punishments in Hades of the unrighteous, the Fields of the Righteous, and the fantastic conceptions, current among the many, which are figments of the imagination — all these were introduced by Orpheus in imitation of Egyptian funeral customs.

And as proof of the presence of Homer they adduce various pieces of evidence , and especially the healing drink which brings forgetfulness of all past evils, which was given by Helen to Telemachus in the home of Menelaus [in Book Four of the Odyssey] ... for, they allege, even to this day the women of this city [Thebes in Egypt] use this powerful remedy.

Lycurgus also and Plato and Solon, they say, incorporated many Egyptian customs into their own legislation. And Pythagoras learned from Egyptians his teachings about the gods, his geometrical propositions and theory of numbers, as well as the transmigration of souls into every living thing.


Diodorus Siculus
Library of History, Book I, 96-98

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
well, every classical scholar who has ever lived agrees with my unlearned opinion. You guys make up a list of rascist mumbo jumbo and pass it off as history. the sad part is there might be a young guy or two who is infected with this nonsense and ends up educationally crippled for years.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
wizdom, I have never taught that Columbus was the first to set foot here nor do I know anyone who has. Your last to lines sounded bizare.

---

 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Well perhaps, as another poster mentioned, he taught a woodshop class! LMAO
 

---

Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
 
More on the stoics and the roots of stoic thought in Egyptian cosmology:

quote:

---

An examination of Stoic ontology might profitably begin with a passage from Plato's Sophist. There (247d-e), Plato asks for a mark or indication of what is real or what has being. One answer which is mooted is that the capacity to act or be acted upon is the distinctive mark of real existence or ‘that which is.’ The Stoics accept this criterion and add the rider that only bodies can act or be acted upon. Thus, only bodies exist. However, they allow that there are other ways of being part of nature than by virtue of existing. Incorporeal things like time, place or sayables (lekta, see below) are ‘subsistent’ (huphestos, Galen 27G)—as are imaginary things like centaurs. Moreover, all existent things are particular. The Stoics call universals ‘figments of the mind’ and seem to offer a conceptualist treatment akin to Locke's, treating an apparent predication like "man is a rational, mortal animal" as the disguised conditional, "if something is a man, then it is a rational mortal animal" (Sextus Empiricus, 30I).

In accord with this ontology, the Stoics, like the Epicureans, make God material. But while the Epicureans think the gods are too busy being blessed and happy to be bothered with the governance of the universe (Epicurus, Letter to Menoeceus 123–4), the Stoic God is immanent throughout the whole of creation and directs its development down to the smallest detail. God is identical with one of the two ungenerated and indestructible first principles (archai) of the universe. One principle is matter which they regard as utterly unqualified and inert. It is that which is acted upon. God is identified with an eternal reason (logos, Diog. Laert. 44B ) or intelligent designing fire (Aetius, 46A) which structures matter in accordance with Its plan. This plan is enacted time and time again, beginning from a state in which all is fire, through the generation of the elements, to the creation of the world we are familiar with, and eventually back to fire in a cycle of endless recurrence. The designing fire of the conflagration is likened to a sperm which contains the principles or stories of all the things which will subsequently develop (Aristocles in Eusebius, 46G). Under this guise, God is also called ‘fate.’ It is important to realise that the Stoic God does not craft its world in accordance with its plan from the outside, as the demiurge in Plato's Timaeus is described as doing. Rather, the history of the universe is determined by God's activity internal to it, shaping it with its differentiated characteristics. The biological conception of God as a kind of living heat or seed from which things grow seems to be fully intended. The further identification of God with pneuma or breath may have its origins in medical theories of the Hellenistic period. See Baltzly (2003).

The first thing to develop from the conflagration are the elements. Of the four elements, the Stoics identify two as active (fire and air) and two as passive (water and earth). The active elements, or at least the principles of hot and cold, combine to form breath or pneuma. Pneuma, in turn, is the ‘sustaining cause’ (causa continens, synektikon aition) of all existing bodies and guides the growth and development of animate bodies. What is a sustaining cause? The Stoics think that the universe is a plenum. Like Aristotle, they reject the existence of empty space or void (except that the universe as a whole is surrounded by it). Thus, one might reasonably ask, ‘What marks any one object off from others surrounding it?’ or, ‘What keeps an object from constantly falling apart as it rubs elbows with other things in the crowd?’ The answer is: pneuma. Pneuma, by its nature, has a simultaneous movement inward and outward which constitutes its inherent ‘tensility.’ (Perhaps this was suggested by the expansion and contraction associated with heat and cold.) Pneuma passes through all (other) bodies; in its outward motion it gives them the qualities that they have, and in its inward motion makes them unified objects (Nemesius, 47J). In this respect, pneuma plays something of the role of substantial form in Aristotle for this too makes the thing of which it is the form both ‘some this,’ i.e. an individual, and ‘what it is’ (Metaph. VII, 17). Because pneuma acts, it must be a body and it appears that the Stoics stressed the fact that its blending with matter is ‘through and through’ (Galen 47H, Alex. Aph. 48C). Perhaps as a result of this, they developed a theory of mixture which allowed for two bodies to be in the same place at the same time. It should be noted, however, that some scholars (e.g. Richard Sorabji) think that the claim that pneuma is blended through the totality of matter is a conclusion that the Stoics' critics adversely drew about what some of their statements committed them to. Perhaps instead they proposed merely that pneuma is the matter of a body at a different level of description.

Pneuma comes in gradations and endows the bodies which it pervades with different qualities as a result. The pneuma which sustains an inanimate object is called (LS) a ‘tenor’ (hexis, lit. a holding). Pneuma in plants is, in addition, (LS) physique (phusis, lit. ‘nature’). In animals, pneuma gets called also soul (psychê) and in rational animals pneuma is, besides, the commanding faculty (hêgemonikon) (Diog. Laert. 47O, Philo 47P)—that responsible for thinking, planning, deciding. The Stoics assign to ‘physique’ or ‘nature’ all the purely physiological life functions of a human animal (such as digestion, breathing, growth etc.)—self-movement from place to place is due to soul. Their account of the human soul (mind) is strongly monistic. Though they speak of the soul's faculties, these are parts of the commanding faculty associated with the physical sense organs (Aetius, 53H). Unlike the Platonic tri-partite soul, all impulses or desires are direct functions of the rational, commanding faculty. This strongly monistic conception of the human soul has serious implications for Stoic epistemology and ethics. In the first case, our impressions of sense are affections of the commanding faculty. In mature rational animals, these impressions are thoughts, or representations with propositional content. Though a person may have no choice about whether she has a particular rational impression, there is another power of the commanding faculty which the Stoics call ‘assent’ and whether one assents to a rational impression is a matter of volition. To assent to an impression is to take its content as true. To withhold assent is to suspend judgement about whether it is true. Because both impression and assent are part of one and the same commanding faculty, there can be no conflict between separate and distinct rational and nonrational elements within oneself—a fight which reason might lose. Compare this situation with Plato's description of the conflict between the inferior soul within us which is taken in by sensory illusions and the calculating part which is not (Rep. X, 602e). There is no reason to think that the calculating part can always win the epistemological civil war which Plato imagines to take place within us. But because the impression and assent are both aspects of one and the same commanding faculty according to the Stoics, they think that we can always avoid falling into error if only our reason is sufficiently disciplined. In a similar fashion, impulses or desires are movements of the soul toward something. In a rational creature, these are exercises of the rational faculty which do not arise without assent. Thus, a movement of the soul toward X is not automatically consequent upon the impression that X is desirable. This is what the Stoics' opponents, the Academic Skeptics, argue against them is possible (Plutarch, 69A.) The Stoics, however, claim that there will be no impulse toward X—much less an action—unless one assents to the impression (Plutarch, 53S). The upshot of this is that all desires are not only (at least potentially) under the control of reason, they are acts of reason. Thus there could be no gap between forming the decisive judgement that one ought to do X and an effective impulse to do X.

Since pneuma is a body, there is a sense in which the Stoics have a materialist theory of mind. The pneuma which is a person's soul is subject to generation and destruction (Plutarch 53 C, Eusebius 53W). Unlike for the Epicureans, however, it does not follow from this that my soul will be destroyed at the time at which my body dies. Chrysippus alleged that the souls of the wise would not perish until the next conflagration (Diog. Laert. 7.157=SVF 2.811, not in LS). Is this simply a failure of nerve on the part of an otherwise thorough-going materialist? Recall that the distinctive movement of pneuma is its simultaneous inward and outward motion. It is this which makes it tensile and capable of preserving, organising and, in some cases, animating the bodies which it interpenetrates. The Stoics equate virtue with wisdom and both with a kind of firmness or tensile strength within the commanding faculty of the soul (Arius Didymus 41H, Plutarch 61B, Galen 65T). Perhaps the thought was that the souls of the wise had a sufficient tensile strength that they could subsist as a distinct body on their own. Later Stoics like Panaetius (2nd c. BCE) and Posidonius (first half 1st c. BCE) may have abandoned this view of Chrysippus'.

---

quote:

---

I am Pure. I am pure. I am pure. I am pure. My purity is the purity of this great Phoenix that is in Heracleopolis, because I am indeed the nose of the Lord of Wind who made all men live on that day of completing the Sacred Eye in Heliopolis in the 2nd month of winter last day, in the presence of the lord of this land. I am he who saw the completion of the Sacred Eye in Heliopolis, and nothing evil shall come into being against me in this land in this Hall of Justice, because I know the names of these gods who are in it.

---

quote:

---

NEKHT, THE CAPTAIN OF SOLDIERS, THE ROYAL SCRIBE, SINGETH A HYMN OF PRAISE TO RA, and saith:- Homage to thee, O thou glorious Being, thou who art dowered [with all sovereignty]. O Tem-Heru-Khuti (Tem- Harmakhis), when thou risest in the horizon of heaven a cry of joy goeth forth to thee from all people. O thou beautiful Being, thou dost renew thyself in thy season in the form of the Disk, within thy mother Hathor. Therefore in every place every heart swelleth with joy at thy rising for ever. The regions of the South and the North come to thee with homage, and send forth acclamations at thy rising on the horizon of heaven, and thou illuminest the Two Lands with rays of turquoise-[coloured] light. O Ra, who art Heru-Khuti, the divine man-child, the heir of eternity, self-begotten and self-born, king of the earth, prince of the Tuat (the Other World), governor of Aukert, thou didst come from the Water-god, thou didst spring from the Sky-god Nu, who doth cherish thee and order thy members. O thou god of life, thou lord of love, all men live when thou shinest; thou art crowned king of the gods. The goddess Nut embraceth thee, and the goddess Mut enfoldeth thee at all seasons. Those who are in thy following sing unto thee with joy, and they bow down their foreheads to the earth when they meet thee, the lord of heaven, the lord of the earth, the King of Truth, the lord of eternity, the prince of everlastingness, thou sovereign of all the gods, thou god of life, thou creator of eternity, thou maker of heaven wherin thou art firmly stablished.

The Company of the Gods rejoice at thy rising, the earth is glad when it beholdeth thy rays; the people who have been long dead come forth with cries of joy to behold thy beauties every day. Thou goest forth each day over heaven and earth, and thou art made strong each day be thy mother Nut. Thou passest over the heights of heaven, thy heart swelleth with joy; and the Lake of Testes (the Great Oasis) is content thereat. The Serpent-fiend hath fallen, his arms are hewn off, the Knife hath severed his joints. Ra liveth by Maat (Law), the beautiful! The Sektet Boat advanceth and cometh into port. The South and the North, and the West and East, turn to praise thee. O thou First, Great God (PAUTA), who didst come into being of thine own accord, Isis and Nephthys salute thee, they sing unto thee songs of joy at thy rising in the boat, they stretch out their hands unto thee. The Souls of the East follow thee, and the Souls of the West praise thee. Thou art the Ruler of all the gods. Thou in thy shrine hast joy, for the Serpent-fiend Nak hath been judged by the fire, and thy heart shall rejoice for ever. Thy mother Nut is esteemed by thy father Nu.

---

quote:

---

Lycurgus also and Plato and Solon, they say, incorporated many Egyptian customs into their own legislation. And Pythagoras learned from Egyptians his teachings about the gods, his geometrical propositions and theory of numbers, as well as the transmigration of souls into every living thing.

Diodorus Siculus
Library of History, Book I, 96-98

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
You have not outed anything Takruri. If you had a way to really check you would choke on your chicken. Your problem is you understand zippo about hitorical method. All you have managed to do is post garbage on this board year after year.

---

quote:

---

Aristotle himself described his subject matter in a variety of ways: as ‘first philosophy’, or ‘the study of being qua being’, or ‘wisdom’, or ‘theology’. A comment on these descriptions will help to clarify Aristotle's topic.

In Metaphysics A.1, Aristotle says that "all men suppose what is called wisdom (sophia) to deal with the first causes (aitia) and the principles (archai) of things" (981b28), and it is these causes and principles that he proposes to study in this work. It is his customary practice to begin an inquiry by reviewing the opinions previously held by others, and that is what he does here, as Book A continues with a history of the thought of his predecessors about causes and principles.

These causes and principles are clearly the subject matter of what he calls ‘first philosophy’. But this does not mean the branch of philosophy that should be studied first. Rather, it concerns issues that are in some sense the most fundamental or at the highest level of generality. Aristotle distinguished between things that are "better known to us" and things that are "better known in themselves,"[1] and maintained that we should begin our study of a given topic with things better known to us and arrive ultimately at an understanding of things better known in themselves. The principles studied by ‘first philosophy’ may seem very general and abstract, but they are, according to Aristotle, better known in themselves, however remote they may seem from the world of ordinary experience. Still, since they are to be studied only by one who has already studied nature (which is the subject matter of the Physics), they are quite appropriately described as coming "after the Physics."

---

quote:

---

The role of form in this hylomorphic context is the topic of ?.7-9. (Although these chapters were almost certainly not originally included in Book ? " there is no reference to them, for example, in the summary of ? given in ?.1, which skips directly from ?.6 to ?.10 " they provide a link between substance and form and thus fill what would otherwise be a gap in the argument.) Since individual substances are seen as hylomorphic compounds, the role of matter and form in their generation must be accounted for. Whether we are thinking of natural objects, such as plants and animals, or artifacts, such as houses, the requirements for generation are the same. We do not produce the matter (to suppose that we do leads to an infinite regress) nor do we produce the form (what could we make it out of?); rather, we put the form into the matter, and produce the compound (Z.8, 1033a30-b9). Both the matter and the form must pre-exist (Z.9, 1034b12). But the source of motion in both cases what Aristotle calls the "moving cause" of the coming to be is the form.

In artistic production, the form is found in the soul of the artisan, for "the art of building is the form of the house" (1034a24) and "the form is in the soul" (1032b23) of the artisan. For example, the builder has in mind the plan or design for a house and he knows how to build; he then "enmatters" that plan or design by putting it into the materials out of which he builds the house. In natural production, the form is found in the parent, where "the begetter is the same in kind as the begotten, not one in number but one in form for man begets man" (1033b30-2). But in either case, the form pre-exists and is not produced (1033b18).

As for what is produced in such hylomorphic productions, it is correctly described by the name of its form, not by that of its matter. What is produced is a house or a man, not bricks or flesh. Of course, what is made of gold may still be described in terms of its material components, but we should call it not "gold" but "golden" (1033a7). For if gold is the matter out of which a statue is made, there was gold present at the start, and so it was not gold that came into being. It was a statue that came into being, and although the statue is golden " i.e., made of gold " it cannot be identified with the gold of which it was made.

The essence of such a hylomorphic compound is evidently its form, not its matter. As Aristotle says "by form I mean the essence of each thing, and its primary substance" (1032b1), and "when I speak of substance without matter I mean the essence" (1032b14). It is the form of a substance that makes it the kind of thing that it is, and hence it is form that satisfies the condition initially required for being the substance of something. The substance of a thing is its form.

---

quote:

---

The problem of logic:

Some people have looked to theories about the ancient mind here which I find essentially unacceptable, for instance, The Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, by Jaymes. The thesis of this work is essentially that the reason why the ancient Hebrews and other early religions claimed to hear the word of God or the gods, was that their brains were fundamentally different. Some people strangely believe that the ancients lived in a pre-logical state of being. However, bear in mind that the Egyptians built the pyramids and ran

a most efficient bureaucratic state. The Greeks, those very "logical" people did not remark on the Egyptians as being illogical or idiotic - just different, with odd customs they preferred, and stubbornly so. They may have not understood the Egyptians, but they certainly did not find them to be fools - read Herodotos, for instance. We might should stress here the obvious fact that the Greeks were the contemporaries of the Egyptians.

One of the most important statements about Eg. religion in Hornung’s book: "Any application of a two-valued logic, which is based on an a/not-a distinctions and on the law of the excluded middle, to Egyptian philosophical and theological thought leads at once to insoluble contradictions. We cannot avoid this fact, and common sense is no help here. We must choose between two alternatives. Either we equate truly logical thought with two-valued logic, in which case Egyptian thought is undeniably illogical or prelogical; or we admit the possibility of a different type of logic which is not self-contradictory, which can only be a many valued logic."

I would like to point out that our view of logic in ancient Egypt has been excessively colored by the mortuary literature, The Book of the Dead, and similar works. I think that people often overlook two important points here. First, Egyptian mortuary literature represents a compilation of many sources, all of which are part of a multifaceted polytheism/religious writing was not informed by the desire to pursue and promote and single viewpoint to the exclusion of all others. Secondly, the Egyptian afterlife was conceived as a preeminently irrational place. For logic and order to exist in this world, Maat must prevail, but, by contrast, the next world was a place in which disorder was the prevalent condition. Even the gods had to fight against Apophis during Re’s night journey. Sometimes, strikingly enough, the god Seth had a preeminent role as the protector of Re fighting fire with fire, so to speak.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
Classic scholars dismiss all of that Doug.

Takruri, I would be glad to do all that if I could get you guys past 10th grade World history. I have given you two excellent books to read. My guess is that none of you have bothered to read them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
Classic scholars dismiss all of that Doug.

Takruri, I would be glad to do all that if I could get you guys past 10th grade World history. I have given you two excellent books to read. My guess is that none of you have bothered to read them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mmmkay:
Why do you keep appealing to (mistaken) authority?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
Mmmkay, that is like asking someone to prove the world is not flat. If you do not even have a high school education in history then the burden to read needs to be on you. This is all basic stuff.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
I have given you the sources. ANY history text book will do.

---

quote:

---

Why do you keep appealing to (mistaken) authority? Stop making blanket claims and properly prove the following:

1) That the ancient Egyptians had little to no influence on Greek philosophy and knowledge

2) That Greek philosophy and knowledge was "homegrown"

3) That "every scholar that ever lived" agrees with the above (chuckle).

Do so, or simply "shut up". Simple enough. No more of this nonsense about high school history books.

^ Though I realize its probably asking too much of you. We'll see if you can.

---

quote:

---

* Era 1: The Beginnings of Human Society
* Era 2: Early Civilizations and the Emergence of Pastoral Peoples, 4000-1000 BCE
* Era 3 Classical Traditions, Major Religions, and Giant Empires, 1000 BCE-300 CE
* Era 4: Expanding Zones of Exchange and Encounter, 300-1000 CE
* Era 5: Intensified Hemispheric Interactions, 1000-1500 CE
* Era 6: The Emergence of the First Global Age, 1450-1770
* Era 7: An Age of Revolutions, 1750-1914
* Era 8: A Half-Century of Crisis and Achievement, 1900-1945
* Era 9: The 20th Century Since 1945: Promises and Paradoxes
* World History Across the Eras

---

quote:

---

In the past you [Mary] have commented in a thread like this implying that similar diffusionist ideas were without good merit - Aliveboy

---

quote:

---

But for sure if Aristotle put his name on books already
written by Egyptians, then it is a Stolen Legacy that
Aristotle bequeathed us. – great sage

---

quote:

---

James explains why stolen and who's the thief….Accurate or faulty? Why or why not? – great sage

---

quote:

---

^ "Accurate or faulty? Why or why not?" Wow, even with rare spoon feeding moment from great sage, notice again that Mary the flying nun (just as she did here with Nay-Sayer) still refuses to answer simple questions.
Notice too she still has not refuted James' book (i.e. merits of the word "stolen", accusations of a "cultural theft" etc) that she casually dismissed without reading - in typical racist fashion. Only flip flopping from one position to another: agrees that "there are Egyptian and Asian roots to [sic] Greece's philosophic and other origin[sic]" while at the same time maintaining that "GREEK philosophy developed in Greece" Notice he never engages the book and pin points exactly where James is wrong in saying that classical Greek philosophy is Egyptian.This is because – like Lefkowitz - she is going off pure prejudice not research.

---

quote:

---

Instead of tagging the observations of another poster you were required to address specific issues raised "Accurate or faulty? Why or why not?" It's a rare moment when great sage spoon feeds, so he must really want you to try and defend your stance against James book! But it seems you are indeed a f**king troll as you still flee from your responsibilities. Have you no shame? LOL

- still has not refuted James' book (i.e. merits of the word "stolen", accusations of a "cultural theft")
- never engages the book and pin points exactly where James is wrong in saying that classical Greek philosophy is Egyptian.

---

quote:

---

Is it clear yet that there is a STOLEN LEGACY and
it is perfectly valid, legal, moral and dutiful to
declare, "**** stinks." – great sage

---

quote:

---

I doubt you've studied James. Until you start citing
him in your refutations I'm not bothering to respond
after this post. – great sage

---

quote:

---

Stop making blanket claims and properly prove the following: 2) That Greek philosophy and knowledge was "homegrown" Do so, or simply "shut up".

---

quote:

---

Even the forum Show Girl mmmkay demands:
Stop making blanket claims and properly prove the following: 2) That Greek philosophy and knowledge was "homegrown" Do so, or simply "shut up".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by AmericanFluffer:
Basically I'm all bluff lacking any stuff.

---

quote:

---

Our western philosophical tradition began in ancient Greece in the 6th century BCE. The first philosophers are called "Presocratics" which designates that they came before Socrates. The Presocratics were from either the eastern or western regions of the Greek world. Athens -- home of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle -- is in the central Greek region and was late in joining the philosophical game. The Presocratic's most distinguishing feature is emphasis on questions of physics; indeed, Aristotle refers to them as "Investigators of Nature". Their scientific interests included mathematics, astronomy, and biology. As the first philosophers, though, they emphasized the rational unity of things, and rejected mythological explanations of the world. Only fragments of the original writings of the presocratics survive, in some cases merely a single sentence. The knowledge we have of them derives from accounts of early philosophers, such as Aristotle's Physics and Metaphysics, The Opinions of the Physicists by Aristotle's pupil Theophratus, and Simplicius, a Neoplatonist who compiled existing quotes.

The first group of Presocratic philosophers were from Ionia. [b]The Ionian philosophers sought the material principle (archê) of things, and the mode of their origin and disappearance. Thales of Miletus (about 640 BCE) is reputed the father of Greek philosophy. He declared water to be the basis of all things. Next came Anaximander of Miletus (about 611-547 BCE), the first writer on philosophy. He assumed as the first principle an undefined, unlimited substance (to apeiron) itself without qualities, out of which the primary opposites, hot and cold, moist and dry, became differentiated. His countryman and younger contemporary, Anaximenes, took for his principle air, conceiving it as modified, by thickening and thinning, into fire, wind, clouds, water, and earth. Heraclitus of Ephesus (about 535-475 BCE) assumed as the principle of substance aetherial fire. From fire all things originate, and return to it again by a never-resting process of development. All things, therefore, are in a perpetual flux. However, this perpetual flux is structured by logos-- which most basically means 'word,' but can also designate 'argument,' 'logic,' or 'reason' more generally. The logos which structures the human soul mirrors the logos which structures the ever-changing processes of the universe.[b]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
You are as nutty as a christmas cake Doug. History books all show that western civilization started in ancient greece.
What civilization flowed out of africa? Do you thing there is only one civilization in the world?

there must be a computer lab in a mental institution spewing all of this nonsense out.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718:

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
I'm not going to play that game Mmmkay, you know full well what an african negroid is.

---

This is the continuous ignorant racialist thinking of the likes of ol Carleton Coon


The Story of Man

Carleton Coon

p 196-197

Borzoi Books, 1965

quote:

---

Few skeletons have been found in the Sahara, and these are hard to date because of soil erosion. In Arabia prehistoric archaeology has barely been started. Yet we can be reasonably confident, until other evidence upsets the theory, that these deserts were the home of the slender variety of Caucasoid man. In East Africa this type has survived among the slender, narrow-faced Watusi and other cattle people.

---

Tutsis have ~80% E3a according to published data. Can you explain why you still adhere to Coon? Can you explain his idiocy from his above quote, which your posts also obviously stem from?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
You are as nutty as a christmas cake Doug. History books all show that western civilization started in ancient greece.
What civilization flowed out of africa? Do you thing there is only one civilization in the world?

there must be a computer lab in a mental institution spewing all of this nonsense out.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
I do not disregard Egyptian philosophy Doug, it just had nothing to do with the greeks and western civilization.
I am sure there was philosophy going on at some level with the cave man so you are correct, the Greeks did not invent philosophy. They did however invent their philosophy and we live by it in the west to this very day to a great extent.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mmmkay:

quote:

---

Even the forum Show Girl mmmkay demands:
Stop making blanket claims and properly prove the following: 2) That Greek philosophy and knowledge was "homegrown" Do so, or simply "shut up".

---

^ Don't use any of my quotes for your idiotic purposes and/or agendas.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by akoben:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mmmkay:

quote:

---

Even the forum Show Girl mmmkay demands:
Stop making blanket claims and properly prove the following: 2) That Greek philosophy and knowledge was "homegrown" Do so, or simply "shut up".

---

^ Don't use any of my quotes for your idiotic purposes and/or agendas.

---

Ok then, but can I cum in your mouth when you blow me show girl? lol

---

^ Keep your homosexual fantasies to yourself you pathetic low-life.

After all, you would'nt want to make your mother jealous.
 

---

Posted by Explorateur (Member # 14778) on :
 
Pray tell, if the ancient Greeks did not appeal to gods to ultimately explain nature, why then did they appeal to that famous pantheon headed by Zeus?
 

---

Posted by unfinished thought (Member # 15848) on :
 
Greek philosophy focused on the role of both reason and inquiry in the world around them. Although philosophers and scientists before the Greeks may have also relied on reason and inquiry, the Greeks pushed the envelope further by abandoning popular dogmatic principles, and instead relied on rational debates among one another to come up with a consensus, often not invoking the notion of God...something unheard of in previous societies.

Certainly great thinkers and writers existed in the elder civilizations, such as the ancient Egyptians and Babylonians, however, the early Greek thinkers add at least one element which differentiates their thought from all those who came before them. For the first time in history, we discover in their writings something more than dogmatic assertions about the ordering of the world - we find reasoned arguments for various beliefs about the world.

It is now believed that decision making through oral debate in the polis would have developed rational thought to carefully construct arguments for and against an action, and these debates would have required calling on abstract principles such as justice, without invoking the notion of a god.

As it turns out, nearly all of the various cosmologies proposed by the early Greek philosophers are profoundly and demonstrably false, and this was often due to their speculations running far ahead of what their senses could cope with, but this does not diminish their importance. For even if later philosophers summarily rejected the answers they provided, they could not escape their questions:

* What is life?
* From where does everything come?
* Of what does it really consist?
* How do we explain the plurality of things found in nature?
* And why can we describe them with a singular mathematics?

And the method the Greek philosophers followed in forming and transmitting their answers became just as important as the questions they asked. The pre-Socratic philosophers rejected traditional mythological explanations for the phenomena they saw around them in favor of more rational explanations. In other words they depended on reason and observation to illuminate the true nature of the world around them, and they used rational argument to advance their views to others. And though philosophers have argued at length about the relative weights that reason and observation should have, for two and a half millennia they have basically united in the use of the very method first used by the pre-Socratics.

This type of thinking heavily influenced the expanding Roman culture of the time, as the Romans adopted much of the Greek culture as their own while the expanded their global empire. This type of philosophical thinking would end with the Roman adoption of Christianity which eventually lead to Medieval thinking, and the Dark Ages.

Much of modern philosophy, and modern scientific thought, reflect the basic principles of ancient philosophy. If you look into the Greek philosophic movement of Pythagoreanism, you can see the foundation for mathematics still used today. If you look into the Socratic Method, you can see the roots of moral philosophy & ethics still used today in Western civilization, and if you look into Platonic Realism, you can see the beginnings of metaphysical thought, which has heavily influenced Western philiosophy and religion.
 

---

Posted by Explorateur (Member # 14778) on :
 
That question about the Greek Pantheon remains unanswered. The so-called Pythogorean theorem, as an example, is hardly something original to ancient Greece. The mere fact that mathematics doesn't begin with ancient Greece, tells us that the idea of trying to examine the workings of forces of nature -- that is, short of directly appealing to supernatural authority isn't something that is hardly distinctively Greek either. The Greeks learned much of "modern Medicine" from their ancient Egyptian mentors for crying out loud.
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
Did anyone say Math began in Greece. Geometry did but obviously people could count long before the Greeks came along.
 

---

Posted by Explorateur (Member # 14778) on :
 
Did you read the rest of the post? If geometry started in ancient Greece, what do you suppose visible outward manifestations of say, the Giza Pyramids, were all about?
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
We have no evidence that the Egyptians used geometry as we know it today.
 

---

Posted by Explorateur (Member # 14778) on :
 
Who is "we"; since when did your ignorance encompass that of humanity's? This is an example of why you should be reading ancient Egypt 101, rather than attempting to argue with your intellectual superiors.
 

---

Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
 
Wow, I can't believe you said something that dumb.
I take that back.
Yes, I can.
 

---

Posted by Obatala's Revenge (Member # 11484) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mmmkay:

quote:

---

Originally posted by akoben:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mmmkay:

quote:

---

Even the forum Show Girl mmmkay demands:
Stop making blanket claims and properly prove the following: 2) That Greek philosophy and knowledge was "homegrown" Do so, or simply "shut up".

---

^ Don't use any of my quotes for your idiotic purposes and/or agendas.

---

Ok then, but can I cum in your mouth when you blow me show girl? lol

---

^ Keep your homosexual fantasies to yourself you pathetic low-life.

After all, you would'nt want to make your mother jealous.

---

How could his mother ever be jealous ?

She has no teeth. There is no competition!



Every boy in the neighbourhood knows ako's mum for her 15 minute "wet & wild" to-completion action.
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
"we" means all of us.
 

---

Posted by Explorateur (Member # 14778) on :
 
Re - meninarmer: Wow, I can't believe you said something that dumb.
I take that back.
Yes, I can.

To borrow US presidential-elect's line, let's second that with: "Yes, we can"! Lol.
 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
Explorateur, A little logic on your part would be helpful. First, you refer to "the so called Pythogorean Theorem." It is not so called, it is the Pythogorean Theorem, period. It was not developed in Egypt, Chile or on Mars, it was developed in Greece. For some reason that is accepted in math departments around the world not withstanding the views of poorly educated afronuts.
 

---

Posted by Explorateur (Member # 14778) on :
 
I wished logic were contagious and rubbed off onto you; you are the very definition of what is "intelligence-retardant". Here's a hint: Pythagorus was conceivably the last person in antiquity to get in on his so-called "Pythagorean Theorem". Why does your so-called western history start with ancient Egypt, anyway, as you yourself have admitted elsewhere here before...or are you going to take that back now?
 

---

Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by unfinished thought:
Greek philosophy focused on the role of both reason and inquiry in the world around them. Although philosophers and scientists before the Greeks may have also relied on reason and inquiry, the Greeks pushed the envelope further by abandoning popular dogmatic principles, and [binstead relied on rational debates among one another to come up with a consensus, often not invoking the notion of God...something unheard of in previous societies.

Certainly great thinkers and writers existed in the elder civilizations, such as the ancient Egyptians and Babylonians, however, the early Greek thinkers add at least one element which differentiates their thought from all those who came before them. For the first time in history, we discover in their writings something more than dogmatic assertions about the ordering of the world - we find reasoned arguments for various beliefs about the world.

It is now believed that decision making through oral debate in the polis would have developed rational thought to carefully construct arguments for and against an action, and these debates would have required calling on abstract principles such as justice, without invoking the notion of a god.

As it turns out, nearly all of the various cosmologies proposed by the early Greek philosophers are profoundly and demonstrably false, and this was often due to their speculations running far ahead of what their senses could cope with, but this does not diminish their importance. For even if later philosophers summarily rejected the answers they provided, they could not escape their questions:

* What is life?
* From where does everything come?
* Of what does it really consist?
* How do we explain the plurality of things found in nature?
* And why can we describe them with a singular mathematics?

And the method the Greek philosophers followed in forming and transmitting their answers became just as important as the questions they asked. The pre-Socratic philosophers rejected traditional mythological explanations for the phenomena they saw around them in favor of more rational explanations. In other words they depended on reason and observation to illuminate the true nature of the world around them, and they used rational argument to advance their views to others. And though philosophers have argued at length about the relative weights that reason and observation should have, for two and a half millennia they have basically united in the use of the very method first used by the pre-Socratics.

This type of thinking heavily influenced the expanding Roman culture of the time, as the Romans adopted much of the Greek culture as their own while the expanded their global empire. This type of philosophical thinking would end with the Roman adoption of Christianity which eventually lead to Medieval thinking, and the Dark Ages.

Much of modern philosophy, and modern scientific thought, reflect the basic principles of ancient philosophy. If you look into the Greek philosophic movement of Pythagoreanism, you can see the foundation for mathematics still used today. If you look into the Socratic Method, you can see the roots of moral philosophy & ethics still used today in Western civilization, and if you look into Platonic Realism, you can see the beginnings of metaphysical thought, which has heavily influenced Western philiosophy and religion.

---

quote:

---

Aristotle on Non-contradiction
First published Fri Feb 2, 2007

According to Aristotle, first philosophy, or metaphysics, deals with ontology and first principles, of which the principle (or law) of non-contradiction is the firmest. Aristotle says that without the principle of non-contradiction we could not know anything that we do know. Presumably, we could not demarcate the subject matter of any of the special sciences, for example, biology or mathematics, and we would not be able to distinguish between what something is, for example a human being or a rabbit, and what it is like, for example pale or white. Aristotle's own distinction between essence and accident would be impossible to draw, and the inability to draw distinctions in general would make rational discussion impossible. According to Aristotle, the principle of non-contradiction is a principle of scientific inquiry, reasoning and communication that we cannot do without.

Aristotle's main and most famous discussion of the principle of non-contradiction occurs in Metaphysics IV (Gamma) 3–6, especially 4. There are also snippets of discussion about the principle of non-contradiction early in the corpus, for example in De Interpretatione, and there is the obscure chapter 11 of Posterior Analytics I, but none of these rival Aristotle's treatment of the principle of non-contradiction in Metaphysics IV. Below is a summary of the main interpretative and philosophical issues that arise from reading Metaphysics IV 3–6.

Aristotle's discussion of the principle of non-contradiction also raises thorny issues in many areas of modern philosophy, for example, questions about what we are committed to by our beliefs, the relationship between language, thought and the world, and the status of transcendental arguments. Arguments from conflicting appearances have proved remarkably long-lived, and debates about skepticism, realism and anti-realism continue to this day.

---

quote:

---

Ma'at, Goddess of Truth, Balance, Order...

Ma'at, unlike Hathor and Nephthys, seemed to be more of a concept than an actual goddess. Her name, literally, meant 'truth' in Egyptian. She was truth, order, balance and justice personified. She was harmony, she was what was right, she was what things should be. It was thought that if Ma'at didn't exist, the universe would become chaos, once again!

For the Egyptian believed that the universe was above everything else an ordered and rational place. It functioned with predictability and regularity; the cycles of the universe always remained constant; in the moral sphere, purity was rewarded and sin was punished. Both morally and physically, the universe was in perfect balance.

Because of Ma'at, the Egyptians knew that the universe, that everything in the universe, worked on a pattern, just as, later on, the Greeks called the underlying order of the universe logos (meaning, order, pattern).

"In the beginning was the logos*, and the logos* was with God and the logos* was God." - John 1:1

* Logos was the 'Word', another name for Jesus.

Egypt, then, was seen to be nothing without Ma'at.

Ma'at was reality, the solid grounding of reality that made the Sun rise, the stars shine, the river flood and mankind think. The universe itself, all the world around them, was sacred in the ancient view. "Ethics" is an issue of human will and human permission. It is a function of the human world of duality. What is "ethical" for one group is sin for another. But Ma'at, the reality that made all groups what they are is transcendent of ethics, just as a rock or a flower is amoral, a-ethical, without "truth or falsehood." How can a flower be "false" or "ethical." It just is. How can the universe be "ethical or moral, right or wrong"? It simply is. That is Ma'at.

Despite being a winged goddess (like Nephthys), she was judge at the Egyptian underworld at the Halls of Ma'ati or Halls of the Double Ma'at.

The dead person's heart was placed on a scale, balanced by Ma'at herself, or by the Feather of Ma'at (her symbol that she wore on her head was an ostrich feather).

Thoth (god of writing and scribes) weighed the heart... if the deceased had been found to not have followed the concept of ma'at during his life (if he had lied or cheated or killed or done anything against ma'at) his heart was devoured by a demon (she was called Ammut - Devouress of the Dead) and he died the final death. If the heart weighed the same as Ma'at, the deceased was allowed to go on to the afterlife.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
We are glad Doug that you guys have filled us in on all of these Egyptian contributions to Greece. It is ashame that the body of the academic community has missed your point. Classical scholars disagree with you at every turn, you know that. It is exactly why you never quote them in this rubble you promote.
This negroid political-history is about as valid as assorted UFO theories floating around.

---

quote:

---

Why do you keep appealing to (mistaken) authority? Stop making blanket claims and properly prove the following:

1) That the ancient Egyptians had little to no influence on Greek philosophy and knowledge

2) That Greek philosophy and knowledge was "homegrown"

3) That "every scholar that ever lived" agrees with the above (chuckle).

Do so, or simply "shut up". Simple enough. No more of this nonsense about high school history books.

^ Though I realize its probably asking too much of you. We'll see if you can.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unfinished thought:
Besides, how do you steal ideas and thought?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

Are you kidding me? Why do you suppose there's Intellectual Property Law?

quote:

---

Originally posted by unfinished thought:
Besides, how do you steal ideas and thought?

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

Are you kidding me? Why do you suppose there's Intellectual Property Law?

quote:

---

Originally posted by unfinished thought:
Besides, how do you steal ideas and thought?

---

---

The point is nothing was "stolen" from Egypt by the Greeks, as they were quite clear where the roots of many important cultural facets come from.

The problem however was when modern (racist) Western society began to deny such credit, and today the problem only persist with well.. racist folks like 'patriot'.

---

Point is, you babble on and on like the closet racist you are, about there not being a stolen legacy but dare not reply to great sage's post re said stolen legacy fearing this



 

---

Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
 
No serious Greek scholar has ever believed or supported the idea of a 'Stolen Legacy'
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Because this keeps resurfacing in irrelevant threads
let's bring it to the front and recap it again here.

Per Diodorus, the Egyptians themselves were the first
to mention the Stolen Legacy.

quote:

---

... the priests of Egypt recount ... that
all the things for which they were admired
[] the Greeks [] borrowed from Egypt.

---

quote:

---

But now that we have examined these matters we must enumerate what Greeks, who have won fame for their wisdom and learning, visited Egypt in ancient times in order to become acquainted with its customs and learning. For the priests of Egypt recount from the records of their sacred books that they were visited in early times by Orpheus, Musaeus, Melampus, and Daedalus, also by the poet Homer and Lycurgus of Sparta, later by Solon of Athens and the philosopher Plato, and that there came also Pythagoras of Samos and the mathematician Eudoxus, as well as Democritus of Abdera and Oenopides of Chios. As evidence for the visits of all these men they point in some cases to their statues and in others to places or buildings which bear their names, and they offer proofs from the branch of learning which each one of these men pursued, arguing that all the things for which they were admired among the Greeks were borrowed from Egypt.

Orpheus, for instance, brought from Egypt most of his mystic ceremonies, the orgiastic rites that accompanied his wanderings, and his fabulous account of his experiences in Hades. For the rite of Osiris is the same as that of Dionysus, and that of Isis very similar to that of Demeter, the names alone having been interchanged; and the punishments in Hades of the unrighteous, the Fields of the Righteous, and the fantastic conceptions, current among the many, which are figments of the imagination — all these were introduced by Orpheus in imitation of Egyptian funeral customs.

And as proof of the presence of Homer they adduce various pieces of evidence , and especially the healing drink which brings forgetfulness of all past evils, which was given by Helen to Telemachus in the home of Menelaus [in Book Four of the Odyssey] ... for, they allege, even to this day the women of this city [Thebes in Egypt] use this powerful remedy.

Lycurgus also and Plato and Solon, they say, incorporated many Egyptian customs into their own legislation. And Pythagoras learned from Egyptians his teachings about the gods, his geometrical propositions and theory of numbers, as well as the transmigration of souls into every living thing.


Diodorus Siculus
Library of History, Book I, 96-98

---

When the Egyptian Screw is renamed Archimedes Screw
we have a stolen legacy.

When the Square of the Hypotenuse is called Pythagorean
Theorem millenia after the erection of the Great Pyramid
we have a stolen legacy.

When books from the old temple library at Ra Kedet transfer
to the new library at adjacent Alexandria, and take on false
authorship, we have a stolen legacy.

When structural pillars are labeled Doric, Ionic and Corinthian
ages since their Egyptian predecessor models -- Papyrus,
Hathor and Palm -- we have a stolen legacy.

As long as Asclepius and Hippocrates retain household fame
as medicine men instead of multi-genius Imhotep's name
on every tongue as first in the field we abet the stolen legacy.

It's very clear that there is a STOLEN LEGACY and it is
perfectly valid, legal, moral and dutiful for the rightful
heirs of that legacy to declare, "**** stinks."
 

---

Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
 
According to Prof. James, what happened in Egypt as it concerned the ancient Greeks and Egyptian philosophy, it was more than just cultural borrowing but all out theft.
 

---

Posted by mentu (Member # 14537) on :
 
GREEKS EVEN BORROWED THEIR NUMBERS FROM EGYPT

The astronomers, physicists and mathematicians of ancient Greece were true innovators.

Ancient Greeks used letters and extra symbols to represent digits
But one thing it seems the ancient Greeks did not invent was the counting system on which many of their greatest thinkers based their pioneering calculations.

New research suggests the Greeks borrowed their system known as alphabetic numerals from the Egyptians, and did not develop it themselves as was long believed.

Greek alphabetic numerals were favoured by the mathematician and physicist Archimedes, the scientific philosopher Aristotle and the mathematician Euclid, amongst others.

Trade explosion

An analysis by Dr Stephen Chrisomalis of McGill University in Montreal, Canada, showed striking similarities between Greek alphabetic numerals and Egyptian demotic numerals, used in Egypt from the late 8th Century BC until around AD 450.

Both systems use nine signs in each "base" so that individual units are counted 1-9, tens are counted 10-90 and so on. Both systems also lack a symbol for zero.

Dr Chrisomalis proposes that an explosion in trade between Greece and Egypt after 600 BC led to the system being adopted by the Greeks.

Greek merchants may have seen the demotic system in use in Egypt and adapted it for their own purposes.

"We know there was an enormous amount of contact between the Greeks and Egyptians at this time," Dr Chrisomalis told BBC News Online.

'Plausible' theory

Professor David Joyce, a mathematician at Clark University in Worcester, US, said he had not examined Dr Chrisomalis' research, but thought the link was plausible.

"Egyptians used hieratic and, later, demotic script where the multiple symbols looked more like single symbols," said Professor Joyce.

"Instead of seven vertical strokes, a particular squiggle was used. That's the same scheme used in the Greek alphabetic numerals."

Traditionally, the system is thought to have been developed by Greeks in western Asia Minor, in modern day Turkey.

Between 475 BC and 325 BC, alphabetic numerals fell out of use in favour of a system of written numbers known as acrophonic numerals.

But from the late 4th Century BC onwards, alphabetic numerals became the preferred system throughout the Greek-speaking world.

They were used until the fall of the Byzantine Empire in the 15th Century.

The research is to be published in the journal Antiquity
 

---

Posted by The Gaul (Member # 16198) on :
 
Since this thread was brought back up. Just thought I'd post this since apparently some don't know of these written proofs (papyrus) of Egyptian mathematics, especially of trigonometry and geometry as if the pyramids and temples were simply made from eye-balling ...

"Rhind" papyrus concerning fractions, multiplication and division, and some trigonomic problems.



"Moscow" papyrus dealing with the surface of a hemisphere, volume of a frustrum, volume of a truncated pyramid.



Also, from UCLA's website, we have this:

"The Pythagorean theorem was first known in ancient Babylon and Egypt (beginning about 1900 B.C.). The relationship was shown on a 4000 year old Babylonian tablet now known as Plimpton 322. However, the relationship was not widely publicized until Pythagoras stated it explicitly."

http://www.cs.ucla.edu/~klinger/dorene/math1.htm

The 3-4-5 right triangle and it's properties had been known and been in WIDE use thousands of years before Pythagoras.
 

---

Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
 
Egyptian decorative art on vases influenced the decorative art on vases of the Greeks. And also the kouroi even the Greeks came up with even though they are slightly different.


http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/edwards/pharaohs/pharaohs-5.html
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Speaking of influences on pottery...

http://www.suppressedhistories.net/Gallery/libyanconnection.html

The Libyan Connection in Archaic Greece ... Max Dashu

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
Because this keeps resurfacing in irrelevant threads
let's bring it to the front and recap it again here.

Per Diodorus, the Egyptians themselves were the first
to mention the Stolen Legacy.

quote:

---

... the priests of Egypt recount ... that
all the things for which they were admired
[] the Greeks [] borrowed from Egypt.

---

Stolen Legacy is a less euphemistic term for cultural
borrowing, something all nations not in isolation have
done.

In the case of Africa, because her name is so besmirched,
stolen legacy seems more apropo than cultural borrowing.

---

^ Sorry Assopen...
 

---

Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
 
Yeh, sorry Mary.

quote:

---

"Egypt was the centre of the body of ancient wisdom, and knowledge, religious, philosophical and scientific spread to other lands through student Initiates. Such teachings remained for generations and centuries in the form of tradition, until the conquest of Egypt by Alexander the Great, and the movement of Aristotle and his school to compile Egyptian teaching **and claim it as Greek Philosophy.** (Ancient Mysteries by C. H. Vail p. 16.)

---

Go ahead, call Prof. James' book "silly" and not real evidence, you know you want to...
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
^
 

---

Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
 
We all know about the Greek/Doric columns and Kouros statues..what would be intresting to find out if they performed any riturals before embarking on making a statue or a building that resembles the Kemetic way of doing things..for example saying a prayer to Ptah or something like that.

I would also like to persue Bes in AG and his relationship to Pan... a true globe trotter he was.
 

---

Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
 
Daidalos,Kothor,Ptah. what did these figures had in common?..answer they were all divine craft men...but did they have a common origin? lets take a look.

Diadalos:

In Greek mythology, Daedalus (Latin, also Hellenized Latin Daedalos, Greek Daidalos (Δαίδαλος) meaning "cunning worker", and Etruscan Taitle) was a most skillful architect, or artificer, or craftsman, so skillful that he was said to have invented images that seemed to move about.[1] Daedalus had two sons: Icarus and Iapyx, along with a nephew, whose name varies. He is first mentioned by Homer as the creator of a wide dancing-ground for Ariadne [2]. The Labyrinth on Crete in which the Minotaur (part man, part bull) was kept, was also created by the artificer Daedalus. The story of the labyrinth is told where Theseus is challenged to kill the Minotaur, finding his way with the help of Ariadne's thread.

Kothar:

Kothar
Semitic deity
also called Kothar-wa-Khasis (“skill-and-cunning”)
(West Semitic: “skill”) Main
ancient West Semitic god of crafts, equivalent of the Greek god Hephaestus. Kothar was responsible for supplying the gods with weapons and for building and furnishing their palaces. During the earlier part of the 2nd millennium bc, Kothar’s forge was believed to be on the biblical Caphtor (probably Crete), though later, during the period of Egyptian domination of Syria and Palestine, he was identified with the Egyptian god Ptah, patron of craftsmen, and his forge was thus located at Memphis in Egypt. According to Phoenician tradition, Kothar was also the patron of magic and inventor of magical incantations; in addition, he was believed to have been the first poet.
www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/322848/Kothar


Ptah:

Home :: the Gods :: Ptah Ptah
Symbols: Architect's transit, level, plumb-line, bricks, djed
Cult Center: Memphis

Ptah was the chief god of the ancient city of Memphis. He was a creator god who brought all things to being by thinking of them with his mind and saying their names with his tongue. He was unique amongst Egyptian creation gods in that his methods were intellectual, rather than physical. According to the priests of Memphis, everything is the work of Ptah's heart and tongue: gods are born, towns are founded, and order is maintained.

Ptah was also the patron god of skilled craftsmen and architects. This may be due to the excellent sources of limestone near his temple in in Memphis. As a craftsman, Ptah was said to have carved the divine bodies of the royalty. In Dynasty XIX, he was shown fashioning the body of Rameses II out of electrum.


Now those who yell and scream that there is absolutely no connection the above was taken from three different sources pointing to the same direction>Kemet and when you consider that Bes shows up all over the med.in one form or another then there is no question that they the greeks got a major part of their Philosophy from Kemet.an ancient African nation.

Greek pyramid

The Pyramids in the Peloponnesus
Exerpt One:

The three pyramids located in the Peloponnesus have recently been the center of a great deal of attention. This sudden interest is being shown not only by archaeologists and historians, but by the general public as well, both Greek and foreign. This is entirely justified because they concern the distant past of humanity as a whole. The astonishment one naturally experiences when seeing the pyramids of Egypt for the first time, is akin to the reaction of those who are told that their prototypes are most likely to be found in an obscure village near Argos in the Peloponnesus. This assertion -- which contradicts the misguided belief held by many that civilization proceeded from the East -- is bolstered by the concurrence that exists between the chronological assessment of these pyramids made by the prestigious Athens Academy, the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, and the historical information available to us from ancient sources: All of which have to do with when these structures were constructed, whether this architectural know-how was transferred to Egypt from Greece, and, if so, how. - Source
www.thelivingmoon.com/.../Pyramids_World.html

Kouros statues



Remember Diadalos was said to have made the statues that seems to walk...notice the same manner as Kemetic statues.

notice the clenched fist and one foot placed infront of the other in a walking motion.
 

---

Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
 
About the above section on Greek pyramids..notice all of a sudden the technology is transfered from Greece to Kemet and ignoring other obviously Kemetic Imports such as this.


Hypostyle Hall

Philae Temple


The Acropolis Athens

All of this borrowing of technology came with a philosophy along with it.

From Sais,wrote Diodoros,Egyptian colonists sailed forth to found Athens-or atleast,so claimed the Egyptian priests. "In-deed,"Diodoros continues,"the Egyptians say that their ancestors sent forth numerous colonies to many parts of the inhabited world, by reason of the pre-eminence of their kings and the excessive population.

Were some of those colonist sent to Crete? and did they bring the cults of Ptah,Neith and other Egyptian gods along with them?

Sir Arthur Evans,the discoverer of Knossos,beleived that Egyptian influence had been decisive in Minoan history. noting the large number of Egyptian artifacts found at early Minoan sites.Evans observed that "the determining cause of this brilliant developement of early civilization is ....traceable to the opening of comminications with the Nile Valley across the Libyan sea.

When civilization finally arrived in Crete,it struct all at once.Around 2000 B.C,the Islanders suddendly began rearing magnificent "Palaces",like those of Knossos,where before they had only built small towns and villages.Most experts agree that the change was too sudden and dramatic to have evolved from internal forces alone.
Some inspiration clearly sparked this explosion of palace building.

Perhaps it was the memory of such foreign influence that gave rise to the legend,recounted by Diodoros,that Diadalos copied the design for his Certan Labyrinth from an Egyptian original.
Diodoros wrote:

[The Egyptian king]Mendes...did built himself a tomb known as the Labyrinith,which..was impossible to imitate in respect of its ingenious design;for a man who enters it cannot easly find his way out,unless he gets a guide who is thoroughly acquainted with the structure. And some say that Diadalos,visiting Egypt and admireing the skill shown inthe building,also constructed one for Minos, the King of Crete, a Labyrinth like the one in Egypt.(Black Sparks White Fire. Richard Poe)
 

---

Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
 
Brada, This Egypt-Greece stuff has been debuked by every classical scholar to come down the pike. The entire concept is simple ignorance. As long as you keep pushing these nutty theories nobody is going to take you seriously, just more racisal politics.
 

---

Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
 
What nutty theories,A.P Hammer..some of the above findings was from non other than Sir.Arthur Evans himself.the discoverer of Knossos..and now where in the above is race mentioned.
 

---

Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
 
Race is behind everything you do Brada. Egypt had a thriving trade relationship with the Minoans, they had that relationship with many peoples in the area. You cannot just look at that fact and start drawing assumptions. Greece had much more influence on Egypt than the other way around. In fact Greco-Roman civilization took the damn place over and dominated it for nearly a thousand years.
 

---

Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
 
Hammer you are going to stand there and tell me from the above that sculptures,the divine craft-man,the fluted columns..all had nothing to do with Egypt and the concepts behind them?.
 

---

Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
 
It is hard to prove a philosophical connection between the Greeks and Egyptians. It's
s hard to prove that there were mystery schools. It's hard to prove that even though Greeks said that they studied in Egypt that they did study in Egypt.
Architecture is s separate issue and should be treated as such. The Greeks were obviously heavily influenced by Egyptian architecture.
 

---

Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
 
Lioness ancient peoples didn't just put up building and sculptures willy nilly especially religious ones and just like a Mosque,most Churches and Synagogues today there is a philosophy behind them if they were being influenced by Kemetic art and architecture then they were being influenced by Kemetic philosophic tradition because they would have to have learnt those arts from a Kemitic master builder who also a priest.
 

---

Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hammer:
Race is behind everything you do Brada. Egypt had a thriving trade relationship with the Minoans, they had that relationship with many peoples in the area. You cannot just look at that fact and start drawing assumptions. whine...whine...whine...whinnneee.

---

Awwww.., stop whining like a bytch!
 

---

Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hammer:
Brada, This Egypt-Greece stuff has been debuked by every classical scholar to come down the pike. The entire concept is simple ignorance. As long as you keep pushing these nutty theories nobody is going to take you seriously, just more racisal politics.

---