Egyptian Archaeologists Discovered Abydos A 7,000-Year-Old City/Beginning of Egyptian History?

a reply to: Harte

Don't people around here know not to argue with Harte and Byrd by now? Come on now...

Anyways, awesome find, the mythos behind Abydos has always intrigued me. A city where one may commune with the dead, and vice versa in a festival of sorts. Coolness.

a reply to: jephers0n
in reference to the sphinx, we do this over and over again.
midway through the "pre pyramid plateau" thread, i tried to get some real proof or equivalent objection
if you refer to that thread try out my old replies, maybe byrd and harte have new information,
but i doubt it
not that it will make any difference

originally posted by: jephers0n
a reply to: Harte

Don't people around here know not to argue with Harte and Byrd by now? Come on now...

LOL

You'd think, right?
We've both been here for quite a while I guess.
But I'm the one that's more fun to argue with. Byrd is just too timid.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: jephers0n
a reply to: Harte

Don't people around here know not to argue with Harte and Byrd by now? Come on now...

LOL

You'd think, right?
We've both been here for quite a while I guess.
But I'm the one that's more fun to argue with. Byrd is just too timid.

Harte

I am a shy, retiring prairie flower... with a bunch of homework.

a reply to: username74
well there ya have it, sports fans!
so case in point , really.
as the two preceding posts would seem to indicate.
at this point i would like to point out our fellow contributers here
one thinks he is fun and the other thinks she is shy (and she is not confrontational)
well experience is a tricky horse to ride in public.
its a good horse when it knows the task, but improvisation is anathema to most horses, its not their bag.
so if you ask a question it cannot provide an answer to is it going to bang its hoof yes or no ,or just ignore you like a dog watching a card trick?
well, lets see!

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: username74
well there ya have it, sports fans!
so case in point , really.
as the two preceding posts would seem to indicate.
at this point i would like to point out our fellow contributers here
one thinks he is fun and the other thinks she is shy (and she is not confrontational)
well experience is a tricky horse to ride in public.
its a good horse when it knows the task, but improvisation is anathema to most horses, its not their bag.
so if you ask a question it cannot provide an answer to is it going to bang its hoof yes or no ,or just ignore you like a dog watching a card trick?
well, lets see!

I don't think either of us have claimed to be your answer man.
There are a very large number of questions you could ask me that I would have no answer for.

Both Byrd and I (and many others in this section) have tried to present what is actually known, and in many cases show why what is known contradicts the claims of the fringe.

I appreciate you posting in this section, by the way. It's the only one I visit on a daily basis and usually there's no new posts at all.

But maybe you could examine some of the facts brought forward here with an open mind. Realize that there is a sheetload of information out there about the ancient world and you ain't holding any of it.
There are people here trying to hand it to you.
Try some.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

"I don't think either of us have claimed to be your answer man."
well thats fair enough and thats not what is expected. it would be an unreasonable expectation.
but you draw fire because you cant give all the answers. which is fair enough (that you cant have all the answers, i mean.)
but you reinforce negations of valid enquiry in your assertations of what is known because of the predudices of beliefs based on much more prosaic evidence.
and yet the evidential body after a certain antiquity is very one dimensional.
deeply problematic in these days of fantasy, i quite agree.
and then theres the working conception of such vast chasms of time!
well there isnt one, in my limited temporal experience and i dont know anyone old enough to espouse this view...
so its all very well to press the facts
the problem arises when its tied to the philology and the presentation of the two perspectives becomes symbiotic
its good for a current overview of evidence but it doesnt hold to sustained enquiry in certain level of antiquity
so in europe we dont define philology as a science
( and yet we have economists but life can be fickle and cruel!
we sent lawyers after your descendants, to wipe them out)
but i appreciate your candour
as you say its not a busy forum, and also the only one i frequent

a reply to: Byrd

and i know you are a flower byrd and i am confrontational, i am sure you dont take it to heart.
no pun intended!

You spelled it wrong anyway.

Harte

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: Byrd

and i know you are a flower byrd and i am confrontational, i am sure you dont take it to heart.
no pun intended!

I don't.

However, I will only answer ONE point at a time. Trying to address six or seven things leads to confusion.

a reply to: Harte

well its more that i favoured the initial sentiment.
schroedinger can fill ya in there
and puns cannot be asymetrical outside of their syntax
oh and by the by our usual conflicts are grounded around" argumentum ex silentio"
slippery as a greased pig , that rascal!
this is some of the reason towards the seperation of european / u.s standpoints on a philosophical assessment vis a vis philology and its status as primary evidence.

a reply to: Byrd

well even if i dont always think you are entirely correct, byrd, you are not normally far off your mark!
wise words!

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: Harte

well its more that i favoured the initial sentiment.
schroedinger can fill ya in there
and puns cannot be asymetrical outside of their syntax
oh and by the by our usual conflicts are grounded around" argumentum ex silentio"
slippery as a greased pig , that rascal!
this is some of the reason towards the seperation of european / u.s standpoints on a philosophical assessment vis a vis philology and its status as primary evidence.

You gotta admit that when it comes to the Old Kingdom, argumentum ex silentio is often the only argument that can be made since all we have in some cases from that era is silentio.

That doesn't preclude examining the evidence and maintaining theories that actually fit what we see though.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte
You gotta admit that when it comes to the Old Kingdom, argumentum ex silentio is often the only argument that can be made since all we have in some cases from that era is silentio.

Actually, there's bunches of evidenced (writing, etc, etc, etc,e etc) out there - but a lot of it involves looking through museum records (now coming online) and reading many old papers (thankfully, Morena is uploading a whopping cartload of them on Academia.edu, thankfully.)

But for most, Egypt starts and ends with the three pyramids and the Sphinx at Giza (and not even the mortuary temples and queens pyramids and walls and other things there, which are all part of the evidence.)

a reply to: Byrd

Off topic: Do you have calanders for harvest and stuff in ancient Egypt ?

originally posted by: tikbalang
a reply to: Byrd

Off topic: Do you have calanders for harvest and stuff in ancient Egypt ?

Not sure what you mean by that.

They divided the year into 3 seasons of 4 months (with 5 epagomenal days added.)
See LaVia for additional information including translations and approximate dates

Some Excel spreadsheets (this link)

This is one of the web resources recommended by my professors

And today, as I write this, is the Day of Thoth's Oath

a reply to: Byrd

thank you!

a reply to: Byrd

Do you also have an old egyptian starchart?

Edit: Did the calendar stretch over years? or just a single year?

The La via link, is it verified? I found disreprencies

originally posted by: tikbalang
a reply to: Byrd

Do you also have an old egyptian starchart?

Edit: Did the calendar stretch over years? or just a single year?

The La via link, is it verified? I found disreprencies

No star charts exist... or rather, none that you could make sense of. They weren't particularly good astronomers and it's often difficult to decide which group of stars they meant. Here is one from an astronomer's coffin - as you see, it's a list of the decans mostly

Another well-known star chart from the tomb of Seti

18th Dynasty star chart

The famous Dendera Zodiac is from the time of Cleopatra, after 200 years of the Ptolemys trying to turn Egypt into Greece

I didn't check La via fully, but the basic info was correct when I eyeballed it and I knew some of the festival dates were a match for other lists I have (what I didn't say was that festivals were usually local, so the Feast of Thoth's Oath may only have been in Heliopolis or Hermopolis or Memphis and was not nation wide.) What discrepancies did you find? (it's being translated so there may be some issues; the original language is Italian.)

They counted the year date by the reign of the king. There's a "Sothic Cycle" which is not widely accepted and is still unproven.

a reply to: Byrd

When did they get the first StarChart?

The faults i came across are that the priest cast should have had a starchart, and the people have a symbol..
The mythology confirms a starchart, but where?