XPost: sci.archaeology, alt.archaeology
From: dweller@ramtops.removethis.co.uk
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:06:58 +1300, in sci.archaeology, Eric Stevens
wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 19:27:47 GMT, Doug Weller
> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 21:42:16 +1300, in sci.archaeology, Eric Stevens
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 05:44:36 GMT, Doug Weller
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 12 Nov 2006 08:48:52 -0800, in sci.archaeology, sag_giganospam@yahoo.de
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I am more into the theory of a meteore which destroyed old
>>>>>civilisations at 3200 BC and made major climate changes.
>>>>
>>>>Egypt's civilization wasn't destroyed.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Certainly it wasn't destroyed but it seems to have made a fresh start
>>>about that time. In fact it made several fresh starts.
>>
>>You are obviously reading different books than I am. What evidence do you
>>have that something went so wrong that a 'fresh start' was required? The
>>evidence that I know about shows a natural, gradual development into a
>>united Egypt.
>
>I'm not talking about a fresh start from nothing. Nor am I an
>Egyptologist, but there seem to have been a number of discontinuities.
>Lets see:
>
>c3000BC was the end of the Late Predynastic period and the beginning
>of the Dynastic.
What makes that a discontinuity rather than a continuity? The unification
of upper and lower Britain took place because Elizabeth I died without any
children and James VI of Scotland became James I of Great Britain. There
is no archaeological evidence to suggest that the unification of Upper and
Lower Egypt was any different or that it wasn't the culmination of a
gradual, almost unavoidable process. The evidence is that rather than a
military conquest it was the outcome of trade which developed into
economic and cultural unification and then political, over a period of
perhaps a century.
>c2600BC was the end of the Predynastic period and the beginning of the
>Old Kingdom
You mean the end of the Early Dynastic phase and the beginning of the Old
Kingdom. The 2nd Dynasty may have ended in disorder, certainly the kings
of the first 2 dynasties didn't have an easy time of it. We don't know a
lot about this period, but it was a period of consolidation and probably
of beating off any external enemies.
>
>2135-2040BC there was a hiccup with First Intermediate Period
Yes. You can't ignore that the last King of Egypt, Pepy II had perhaps
the longest reign of any king anywhere (over 90 years). But it does seem
likely that a sudden cooling and drop in rainfall causing a reduction of
the Nile floods over 2 or 3 decades also played a role -- perhaps by
strengthening the power of local governors (nomarchs) who would have had
varying success in protecting their nomes against the lower floods,
against a weakening central government during Pepy's long rule.
>
>2040 BC is the beginning of the Middle Kingdom
which begins with a strengthening of unification under Mentuhotep I and
not a discontinuity.
>
>1550 BC is the New Kingdom ... and so on.
Egypt reunified and the foreign invaders (the Hyksos) kicked out.
>
>Its possible to explain all these changes in terms of the normal wear
>and tear of history but many of these dates seem to line up with
>evidence for what may have been major catastrophes. That's why I think
>the very old priest may not be a work of fiction.
Well, one of them does, I grant you that. But not the gradual change from
Predynastic to Dynastic Egypt.
Doug
>>
>>>
>>> "And a very old priest said to him, 'Oh Solon, Solon, you Greeks are
>>> all children, and there's no such thing as an old Greek.'
>>>
>>> 'What do you mean by that?' inquired Solon.
>>> 'You are all young in mind,' came the reply: 'you have no belief
>>> rooted in old tradition and no knowledge hoary with age. And the
>>> reason is this. There have been and will be many different
>>> calamities to destroy mankind, the greatest of them by fire and
>>> water, lesser ones by countless other means [22c]. Your own story
>>> of how Phaethon, child of the sun, harnessed his father's chariot,
>>> but was unable to guide it along his lather's course and so burnt
>>> up things on the earth and was himself destroyed by a thunderbolt,
>>> is a mythical version of the truth that there is at long intervals
>>> a variation in the course of the heavenly bodies and a consequent
>>> widespread destruction by lire of things on the earth [22d]. On
>>> such occasions those who live in the mountains or in high and dry
>>> places suffer more than those living by rivers or by the sea; as
>>> for us, the Nile, our own regular saviour, is freed* to preserve
>>> us in this emergency. When on the other hand the gods purge the
>>> earth with a deluge, the herdsmen and shepherds in the mountains
>>> escape, but those living in the cities in your part of the world
>>> are swept into the sea by the rivers; here water never falls on
>>> the land from above either then or at any other time, but rises up
>>> naturally from below [22eJ. This is the reason why our traditions
>>> here are the oldest preserved; ... "
>>>
>>>
>>>Naah - it's all myth, it's all bullshit. Those old guys weren't in
>>>touch with reality. Besides, its fiction. I'nt it?
>>>
>>
>>I wouldn't know. I'm writing from sci.archaeology, not alt.mythology.
>>
>>Doug
>
>
>
>Eric Stevens
--
Doug Weller --
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Amun - co-owner/co-moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Amun/
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
