...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
The interesting...Kemet
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Doug M: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Super car: [b] Well, where is this pictographic form you are actually speaking of, not to mention architecture? Let's get to the bottom of this.[/b][/QUOTE] Here is a quote from an archeologist that sums up the view of the establishment on certain things they feel represent some sort of contact between Egypt and Mesopotamia/Sumer: Quote: Some iconographic motives recurring in the predynastic Egyptian 'art' since the Naqada IIc period are assumed to have been introduced through various kinds of contacts with Near Eastern contemporary cultures. The Master of the Beasts, an hero depicted frontally while grasping with his hands two rampant lions beside him, surely had a precise symbolical meaning. Certainly the Egyptians were initially inspired by the iconography of late Uruk and Elamite glyptic - cylinder seals, which they knew through long distance commercial contacts; but they re-elaborated and manipulated these visual metaphors according to their own ideology: later in Naqada III another similar motif, that of the two 'serpopards' with their long necks held with ropes, recurs in the central register of the Narmer palette obverse. It has been advanced that this would have the same value as the later fusion of the Upper and Lower Egyptian heraldic plants which symbolized the Union of the two Lands. EndQuote: Now, do not be CONFUSED, just because I am quoting this does not mean I AGREE with it. The point is that many archaeologists have come to the same conclusion when they are given the evidence. Some examples of the pictographic style in question: (actually this is the most famous and most often referred to example suggesting such influence) [IMG]http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/knife_of_gebel_el_arak/gebel_el_arak_knife_handle_reverse_side-jb.jpg[/IMG] As well as another image and a more full explanation of the images and their significance: [URL=http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/knife_of_gebel_el_arak/]http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/knife_of_gebel_el_arak/[/URL] This site takes a different slant on the same evidence: [URL=http://www.nemo.nu/ibisportal/0egyptintro/2egypt/2bildsidor/turban.htm]http://www.nemo.nu/ibisportal/0egyptintro/2egypt/2bildsidor/turban.htm[/URL] Here are more views from the same site of supposed influence from Mesopotamia to Egypt in the early dynastic: [URL=http://www.nemo.nu/ibisportal/0egyptintro/2aegypt/index.htm]http://www.nemo.nu/ibisportal/0egyptintro/2aegypt/index.htm[/URL] Half way down the page you will see the early dynastic mastabas that supposedly show Mesopotamian influence. Here are examples of Mesopotamian architecture that they think predate these mastabas: [URL=http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Arts/Architec/AncientArchitectural/Mesopotamian/AssyrianEmpire/AssyrianArchitecturePhotos/AssyrianArchitecturePhotos.htm]http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Arts/Architec/AncientArchitectural/Mesopotamian/AssyrianEmpire/AssyrianArchitecturePhotos/AssyrianArchitecturePhotos.htm[/URL] Here is a more detailed explanation about the issue of serekhs (early inscriptions indicating kingship in Egypt) and how they relate to the possible influence of Mesopotamia on early Egyptian writing: [URL=http://xoomer.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/Dyn0serekhs.htm]http://xoomer.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/Dyn0serekhs.htm[/URL] And more predynastic iconography: [URL=http://xoomer.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/palettes.htm]http://xoomer.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/palettes.htm[/URL] [URL=http://xoomer.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/tagcorpus.htm]http://xoomer.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/tagcorpus.htm[/URL] [URL=http://xoomer.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/aufgefasse.htm]http://xoomer.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/aufgefasse.htm[/URL] If you read these pages, you will notice that the author stresses that there are issues of chronology that must be worked out concerning the ideas of influence. He also makes the point that while there may be some influence, that these objects are distinctly African in character. I would go even farther than that. The problem with the whole Mesopotamia/Egypt influence question is that most early archaeologists seemed to focus SOLELY to the Tigris and Euphrates cultures when looking for contemporaries to the predynastic Egyptian cultures. Because of this, any similarities between the two were automatically assumed to be from the former to the latter. More recent research is changing this view, especially in light of the societies and cultures of the ancient Sahara who are well known for their rock carvings. If anyone had an influence on the iconography in predynastic Egypt, it would have been the descendants of those from the Saharan civilizations who would most likely have migrated to the Nile valley as the Sahara dried up. Ultimately, this iconographic style featuring people, animals, boats and plants eventually became more mainstream and was developed further into a true pictographic language that spread FROM North Africa to the Tigiris and Euphrates. Unfortunately, the latest findings in the Sahara will take a long time to change the ideas of the archaeological establishment, who seem content to only focus on the two river valley societies when studying the development of civilization, as opposed to looking at the developments in other areas that are also just as important. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3