Erman's "Wörterbuch"    (6 Dec. 1998)

A friend of mine needs a copy of Erman and Grapow's "Wörterbuch" at a reasonable price and he asked me to post this in case there are any positive responses.

If so, please reply indicating where and approximate price for the whole set. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.

Jimmy (jimmyspa@my-dejanews.com)

FREE ANCIENT FONTS    (15 Dec. 1998)

I would like to share with you some of the results of my search in Internet for free ancient and non-Roman fonts (Egyptian hieroglyphs, Cuneiform, Maya glyphs, Linear B, Sanskrit, Meroitic, Coptic, Chinese characters, Eskimo, etc., etc.) and all sorts of other modern fonts such as Assyrian, Armenian, Korean, etc. etc. which are available free of charge as zip files which can be unzipped and installed into your computer (Windows 3.1 or 95). For the purpose you may visit the following sites (which I hope are still in operation):

http://sil.org.computing/fonts/nrf.htm

http://geocities.datacellar.net/Athens/9145/

http://hopi.dtcc.edu/~berlin/fonts.html

http://www.imultimedia/museuvirtpress/ing/alfa.html

http://www.fontpool.com

http://195.38.142.236/user/will/ousia/Palaeographer.html

http://babel.uoregon.edu/yamada/altfonts.html

http://www.osirisweb.com/egypt/download.htm

http://copan.bioz.unibas.ch/meso.html

http://www.cgrl.cs.mcgill.ca/~luc/freefonts.html

http://www.worldlanguage.com/

If you want more, you can use the SEARCH option in Yahoo and Altavista writing "free + fonts" or "free + ancient + fonts" and with patience, you will find more than you bargained for !

Good luck and I hope this information turns out to be useful to you all.

J. J. Castillos (juancast@yahoo.com)

The many forms of the god Horus (18 Dec. 1998)

Many Egyptian gods had different aspects, perhaps the result of the evolution of ancient Egyptian religious thought that brought together different deities as one single god (Amun-Ra, Osiris-Andjty, etc.) or that distinguished among different aspects of one single god.

In the case of Horus I could get together quite a number of forms, such as:

Egyptian....................English ...........................Greek

-Hr s3 Ast...........Horus, son of his mother .....Harsiese

-Hr s3 Wsir.........Horus, son of Osiris

-Hr s3 Ast

......s3 Wsir.........Horus son of Isis & Osiris

-Hr p3 Hrd..........Horus the Child...............Harpochrates

-Hr Wr.................Horus the Great

-Hr mhnty irty=.... Horus with Eyes on

-Hr mrty.................his Forehead

-Hr mhnty n irty....Horus without Eyes

...............................on his Forehead

-Hr Hr(w)..............Horus of the Horuses

-Hr sm3 t3wy........Horus who unites..............Harsomtus

...............................the two lands

-Hr hknw...............Horus the hekenw

-Hr s3ty.................Horus of s3ty

-Hr bhdty..............Horus of behedt

-Hr hnty................Horus presiding at Letopolis

-Hr htp..................Horus at peace

-Hr nht..................Horus victorious

-Hr smsw..............Horus the first born

-Hr ndty it.f...........Horus saviour of his father

-Hr imy snwt.........Horus on the shrine

-Hr hnty ht............Horus presiding over the body

I'd like to hear comments on this list, perhaps there are more I overlooked or any other useful feedback. I'm trying to study the origin and evolution of this important god that most likely goes back well into prehistory (Hierakonpolis, etc.).

Serbino (serbino@my-dejanews.com)

Smenkare  (22 Dec. 1998)

What is the latest thinking on Smenkare? Some while ago, it was noted that he did not actually exist, but was a misinterpretation of one of Nefertiti's titles. What is the latest thinking?

saraswati patel (saraswat@vossnet.co.uk)

 Re: smenkare (or rather Smenkhkare)  (3 January 1999)

The latest bibliography I got hold of still recognizes a king Smenkhkare, corregent of Akhenaten and who probably survived him briefly before Tutankhamun, who was probably a cousin or nephew of Akhenaten, others say his son by another wife (Kiya), apparently it all depends on how long was the corregency between Amenophis III and Akhenaten. His was most likely the body found in KV 55 with that of queen Teye and when studied, presented great resemblance with Tutankhamun's indicating probable close genetic links. You can consult among the latest books for instance Nicolas Grimal, "A History of Ancient Egypt" (1995) or Angela Thomas, "Akhenaten's Egypt" (1996).

I hope nevertheless that these comments help.

Duart (duart@my-dejanews.com)

Pyramid Texts - Up-to-date bibliography  (11 Jan. 1999)

To whoever can answer this,

I'm currently working on a study of late occurrences of Pyramid Texts and besides the already rather old book by Allen, I think, on the subject, I know of no other recent study. Does anyone know and can refer me to more recent bibliography, I will appreciate any tip you can give me.

Bye now,

Alfredo Garcia (alfie5198@my-dejanews.com)

THE CONSTRUCTION AT GIZEH (15 Jan. 1999)

I have been studying the building aspect of the engineering work at Pharaoh Kheops’ pyramid. After an in-depth study of the building itself, taking a special interest to the time limitation and the current scientific thought about it, I have developed a thesis on the subject.

I am a Uruguayan, a professional engineer and I work for the Uruguayan government. I have published an article on the subject in the Journal of the Uruguayan Society of Egyptology (RSUE 11, 1994, pages 14-18).

I agree with the idea that ramps were used for the construction of the pyramids and it is logical to think that the straight ramp developed into more convenient shapes which made it possible to reach higher positions and reduce the amount of accumulated material. There is no evidence whether these ramps were used to build the whole pyramid.

Since the matter has not been clarified yet, in my opinion, the study of alternative solutions should not be discarded. The method I am considering is applicable to the last stretch of Pharao Kheops' pyramid, where the use of ramps became more difficult. This procedure does not replace the use of ramps, it confirms their use but only to a certain height.

The construction techniques applied for carrying out this work and the explanation for the unique inner layout of this pyramid are both vast and debatable matters. In this study I refer to two issues that attracted the attention of archaeologists since Borchardt's time to our own day, namely:

a) the method used for lifting the stone blocks

b) the purpose of the Grand Gallery

Traditionally, the two questions have been analyzed separately without ever gathering enough evidence to convincingly answer any of them. My approach is different and its uniqueness is based on the fact that the two are assumed to be related. The demonstration of my thesis requires some field research in Egypt in which archaeologists working there might help. It is impossible for me to explain the whole point here, but if you are interested, you can read the whole article in the following site:

http://www.egiptologia.com/metodo/metodo.html

If you don't read Spanish, you can email me your request at:

dgerardo@my-dejanews.com   or   danielgerardo@hotmail.com

and I will email you a copy of the English version of this article. I will appreciate any comments from egyptologists so as to exchange opinions on the subject. This hospitable International Egyptology Forum could be the ideal vehicle for such a dialogue.

Daniel Gerardo (danielgerardo@hotmail.com)

Re: THE CONSTRUCTION AT GIZEH: rather unlikely, I'd say... (20 Jan. 1999)

I think your theory resembles so many others by engineers, architects and other scientists who claim to have found ingenious methods the ancient Egyptians used to solve certain technological problems, but unfortunately they all fail to provide convincing proof that not only it was a FEASIBLE method but also that the ancient Egyptians actually USED IT. It seems thus to be a 4,500 year too late ingenuity which often ignores the practical aspect of ancient Egyptian mentality which avoided unnecessarily complex solutions to their problems. For instance we find in many books and newspaper articles that the stone blocks were moved by means of wooden rollers instead of the actual sleds used, probably because it's such a neat way to move heavy things... but they never inquire before holding their pens (or keyboards), did the Egyptians use this?

Besides, if your solution to the main purpose of the Great Gallery in Kheops' pyramid is correct, why didn't the architects working in nearby Khefren's pyramid, of approximately the same size, use the same method? When a practical solution to a big problem is found, you expect it to be used afterwards, but this is not the case, as you know.

In 1988 at the Fifth International Cairo Egyptology Congress, some speakers who managed to be admitted said (and thought that they could prove) that the ancient Egyptians had used concrete instead of stone to make the blocks for the pyramids (Davidovits) or that in ancient Egypt complex pigments which could only be made using advanced chemistry procedures, were known (el-Goresy), which in my opinion, implies that they thought that on such flimsy evidence we should change our whole view of ancient technology ! That unrealistic posture is not science to me but rather amateurish speculation.

In your case your views seem to me more rational and realistic than many of those others, but too elaborate and on the whole, unconvincing. I feel there are other fields of archaeological research where your skills could be put to better use.

Liz Archer (archer44@my-dejanews.com)

Re: Construction at Gizeh (rather unlikely, I'd say...) (26 Jan. 1999)

>I think your theory resembles so many others by engineers, architects and

>other scientists who claim to have found ingenious methods the ancient

>Egyptians used to solve certain technological problems, but unfortunately

>they all fail to provide convincing proof that not only it was a FEASIBLE

>method but also that the ancient Egyptians actually USED IT.

I think that over this subject have discussed many and demonstrated little. By this motive I am presenting this theory, because it has the peculiarity of being demonstrated. It WAS TRIED by means of experience, that utilizing this method it is possible to elevate the blocks until you reach the height of this pyramid. Also explained in the same article is the investigation that there is to carry out to verify if this method was UTILIZED OR NOT.

Do you know another theory that satisfies these conditions ?

>It seems thus to be a 4,500 year too late ingenuity which often ignores the practical aspect

>of ancient Egyptian mentality which avoided unnecessarily complex solutions

>to their problems.

I utilized elements that were known by ancient egyptians, according to the archaeologists. The employment of counterweights, has been suggested by prestigious archaeologists, to facilitate the elevation of the heavy blocks . For example, in Congress realized in Cairo in 1988 ( that you make reference ), J F Lauer, proposed the employment of counterweight loaded hampers of sand, that lowering over the north face of the pyramid, permits to rise on ramps the blocks that form the roof of the King Chamber.

I thought that to construct the work of engineering so important in antiquity much ingenuity was required. Inside of it rational, I would not underestimate the ingenuity of ancient egyptians, without which these works would not have been possible.

You thought that the proposed method by me is a solution unnecessarily complex for the problems that presented this construction.

Do you know which were those problems, and which is the simple solution to the same?

In my opinion unnecessary is to construct ramps of 147 meters of height. If there is something we could affirm, because archaeological evidence exists, is that the brick and earth ramps were utilized in these constructions. Nevertheless, the quantity of material to accumulate in the ramp increases exponentially with the height, to elevate a quantity every time minor of blocks. With the height also increases the falling down by the inconsistency of the materials.

Is it possible to construct a ramp of brick and earth until reached the height in this pyramid ?

In this time different opinions exist, but when ancient egyptians planned to construct a pyramid so high, they were not knowing the response.

If the only method known to elevate the blocks was the ramps, it was risky to increase so the height ( 44 meters ) respect to the pyramid formerly was constructing, without knowing if they could achieve it?

Seems but logical to think that they developed a complementary method, what prevents you to realize that increment in the height, that has not precedent?

A method that could be put to the test before, that guarantees you that carries out the work, and which avoids the work and the uncertainty of constructing ramps so high?

I thought that the employment of a complementary method, was necessary and indispensable for the planning and carrying out of this work.

>For instance we find in many books and newspaper articles

>that the stone blocks were moved by means of wooden rollers instead of the

>actual sleds used, probably because it's such a neat way to move heavy

>things... but they never inquire before holding their pens (or keyboards),

>did the Egyptians use this?

In the last century, when they had to move the head of a statue of Ramesses II that weighed many tons to be embarked to the British Museum, they had to refer to an amateur as Batiste Belzoni to do the work. Belzoni, moved the head, skidded over gnawing, which gave origin to the theory to that you refer.

>Besides, if your solution to the main purpose of the Great Gallery in Kheops'

>pyramid is correct, why didn't the architects working in nearby Khefren's

>pyramid, of approximately the same size, use the same method? When a

>practical solution to a big problem is found, you expect it to be used

>afterwards, but this is not the case, as you know.

I try also this subject in the article. You affirm that there is nothing more to discover in the pyramid of Kefren ?

If we know about the Great Gallery in the pyramid of Keops, it is due to the fact that when they could not find the entrance, they made a perforation that carried to the rising corridor, and from there to the Great Gallery. If they might have entered by the entrance, today only we would know the underground chamber, something similar to what we know in the pyramid of Kefren.

In the last century, the specialists were thinking that the pyramid of Kefren was solid, until Batiste Belzoni discovers the entrance and the only chambers that we know of now.

Using your reasoning, if the prior pyramids have chambers in the building, it is logical to think that this also, and if the method of construction that we proposed was utilized, would have to have a gallery also.

>In 1988 at the Fifth International Cairo Egyptology Congress, some speakers

>who managed to be admitted said (and thought that they could prove) that the

>ancient Egyptians had used concrete instead of stone to make the blocks for

>the pyramids (Davidovits) or that in ancient Egypt complex pigments which

>could only be made using advanced chemistry procedures, were known

>(el-Goresy), which in my opinion, implies that they thought that on such

>flimsy evidence we should change our whole view of ancient technology ! That

>unrealistic posture is not science to me but rather amateurish speculation.

>In your case your views seem to me more rational and realistic than many of

>those others, but too elaborate and on the whole, unconvincing. I feel there

>are other fields of archaeological research where your skills could be put to

>better use.

The speculations that lack scientific rigour, as controversies between the specialists, are as ancient as egyptology.

Also it is certain that many valuable ideas arrived from outside egyptology.

This situation will be resolved as new discoveries are made.

I perceive also that some egyptologists have much skepticism toward those who have another training.

They seem to ignore that it is a thematic multidiciplinary science and that the formation of egyptologists by itself alone is not sufficient to issue opinions with confidence over these subjects.

D. Gerardo (danielgerardo@hotmail.com)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mummy assemblages (13 Feb. 1999)

 

 

There is an Egyptian mummy in Montevideo museum that was dated on epigraphic and typological grounds to 26th to 30th Dynasty (RdE 42, 1976). Nevertheless, some of us here suspect that the objects associated to that mummy are not necessarily contemporary, mainly because the mask resembles Ptolemaic ones, something that incidentally, J. R. Ogdon also pointed out some time ago.It could be an example of a package made for the tourists of the XIX Century in which different items were possibly assembled to make the whole more attractive. In order to verify this, we would like to hear from anyone who can provide more examples, if any, of this kind of procedure in Egypt many years ago, when those objects could freely leave the country. This mummy was bought in Cairo around 1890 although it came originally from Akhmim, as the inscriptions revealed. We are aware that all sorts of tricks were performed by the ancient embalmers, but we do not have references on the frequency of this particular one by their modern descendants. Any information will be appreciated.

 

Luis (luis-suarez@bigfoot.com)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FREE AND EQUAL OR RELEGATED AND SUBMISSIVE ?

(19 Feb. 1999)

 

In many books on ancient Egypt the authors speak of ancient Egyptian women as relatively liberated, entitled to many rights which other Near Eastern, Greek and Roman women would have envied, to the point of being even accepted as queens on their own right, legitimately ruling the land alone, without a male partner, already from the First Dynasty. But the question that comes naturally is, was this situation the same at all times in ancient Egypt and in all parts of the country and for all sorts of women?

Here is where some words of caution would come handy. It is beyond dispute that ancient Egyptian women as an average enjoyed a better position than in other contemporary societies but whenever the political situation deteriorated, during the periods of anarchy and social strife, those rights suffered and were cut down and women became more dependant and submissive. During periods of splendour and strong centralized rule, the situation of women improved and approached what is currently considered as their typical status in the country.

I believe that in everything, and especially in history, we should be very cautious and avoid undue generalizations which will be more often than not, clearly mistaken. Given that ancient Egypt treated women better for rather obscure reasons which nobody has identified yet, the ancient Egyptians were in contact with other peoples and were not immune to some of the situations and realities that drove other women elsewhere to be in quite a different situation.

Of course that ancient Egyptian women come very handy to modern feminists as an example of how things should be even many thousands of years ago, but because a bad example can be more harmful than good, it's advisable to look more closely at the matter before passing judgement.

 

 

Liz (archer44@my-dejanews.com)

 

 

 

    Trade or gift exchange?    (22 Feb. 1999)

 

I'm interested in trade patterns in the ancient world. In the case of Egypt and its neighbors, we have many examples of exchange of goods among rulers which was masked for political reasons as 'tribute' or 'gift exchange' and the Amarna Letters I think are a good example of this. I think that it was trade of luxury items among rulers that was presented in a different light in order to enhance the prestige and power of each individual king, highly complex, it's true and which is read in a different way by others, but as I said, the balance of the evidence seems to the best of my knowledge, point to trade, leaving the other considerations as marginal or side-effects of the primary intention which was procuring special goods by whatever means necessary. I don't get much feedback around me and I wonder if any of you there has any ideas on this that you would like to share.

 

Ramtis2 (ramtis2@my-dejanews.com)

 

 

 

 

CLICK HERE TO GO TO OUR MAIN PAGE

HAGA CLICK AQUÍ PARA IR A PÁGINA PRINCIPAL

 

 

THANK YOU ! COME AGAIN...

¡ GRACIAS ! VUELVA CUANDO QUIERA...

 

 

THIS SITE HAS ALREADY HAD     VISITORS. COME AGAIN !