The first instance of heliacal rising and celestial grids

[insane_alien]

that has nothing to do with maize. which you keep claiming they had in ancient egypt. they did not and could not have had maize.

[gentleman-farmer]

OFF CELESTIAL GRID TOPIC FOR A MOMENT

 

Cap'n you once asked me about a solar orbital forces project that I'd been involved with. It was a fascinating study and answers a lot of questions that are otherwise ignored

 

If we can open a thread and keep the subject focused I think you'd enjoy the experience

[Sisyphus]

sisyphus

 

gf) Dr. R. O. Faulkner was the leading modern British authority

 

 

Yes, exactly. He didn't mean maize. Please consult a dictionary. The Egyptians didn't have a word for maize, because there wasn't any in Egypt. That is a far more basic fact than any dispute over translation.

[JohnB]

gf) Bad guess JohnB -- Reap simply means to harvest -- I farmed corn and hay for over 20 years - and we reaped corn that whole time

Neither a guess nor wrong. It was a very clear demonstration of how words need to be used carefully. Just because you "reap" "corn" doesn't mean that the rest of the world does. They might "harvest" "maize" instead.

 

Corn, as in "corn on the cob" was unknown in ancient Egypt, it was brought to Erope and Africa after Columbus. If you have any proof to the contrary, then please present it. This should be rather easy, all you need is a glyph that translates to "maize" as "corn" can be a generic term with multiple meanings.

 

I do accept that there are some problems with Isolationist theory as the recent autopsy of Ramses II has shown, but there is as yet insufficient evidence to state categorically that corn aka maize was grown in Dynastic Egypt.

 

Bad guess JohnB And please observe the tool in the reapers hand in this image

What guess?

My own

reaping hook is almost identical the third one in the picture and for that matter very similar to the one in drawing. To remind you of what I really said;

The particular tool used for reaping grain is one of the earliest known, the "Reaping Hook".

Your own picture shows that I speak the truth on this.

 

Also,if you had read your own link more carefully you would have noticed that the author swaps easily from "corn" to "wheat" when referring to harvested crops. As has been pointed out by others and as your own link shows "corn" can mean "wheat" rather than "maize".

 

Now what do you suppose these things might be called? NO! Not a reaper please no! Oh My

Again you fail to read and understand your own links. The McCormick Reaper and others in the article were harvesting oats and wheat. The machinery for harvesting corn aka maize was called the "Corn Binder".

 

Your rather poor attempts to show unusual meanings in a translation of a very old language are not enhanced by your often demonstrated inability to read and comprehend english.

 

Not true - and there was no confusion with other cereal crops -- corn is mentioned five (5) times in the Book of the Dead, twice in the Pyramid Texts and the cereal crops emmer (a form of wheat; 12 times), barley (20 times), are all mentioned specifically -

 

Unless you post the relevent passages this is nothing more than unsupported rubbish. I asked you twice in my last post to do this, but you have failed. However, if you wish to be viewed as nothing more than an under educated, over opinionated tosser then please continue on your current course and we can all ignore your bleatings that much sooner.

 

This might be the Speculations sub forum but we still have standards. You are continually ignoring requests for references. You are mis quoting the meanings of others. You are simply repeating yourself rather than providing proof to back your assertions. Frankly I think that you are well on the way to suspension or banning. (as I suspect has happened to you on a number of forums before)

 

Repeating unfounded and unproven assertions does not impress us, providing proof and references does. I suggest you learn this with speed.

 

On a more general note. Your reliance on one version of an ancient text is worrying. There really isn't a "definitive" translation for most of the texts and if the translator makes the translation "more accessable" as Faulkner does, then he must perforce sacrifice accuracy. I didn't set out to learn heiroglyphics because I wanted to get a degree or to make others think I'm smart. I did it becuse I understood that since there are multiple translations of a given passage it was better to learn the language for myself than to rely on what others told me. The Royal Society has the motto "Take No Mans Word", I follow that principle. Where you and I differ is that I take no mans word where you have decided that one man (Faulkner) is the definitive word and all that disagree must be wrong. This is akin to religious fundamentalism where it is not only decided that the Bible must be the only written truth, but only a particular version of the Bible contains the "Truth".

 

There are undecyphered glyphs and passages in many texts that are not clear. There are many untranslated texts. There are still mysteries left. I will be quite happy to converse with you on any of these topics but you have to come to the party too. Learn the language and learn to reference. What you are currently doing is like somebody who cannot read Chinese trying to argue the inner thoughts of Confucious.

[gentleman-farmer]

Sisypus

Yes, exactly. He didn't mean maize.

 

gf) Sisypus, have you ever read the book, or are you guessing?

 

Dr R. O. Faulkner clearly makes the distinction between corn and grain (barley is written 17 times, and emmer, a wheat is written 13 times ) - and I don't have to guess to say so

 

they give to him barley, emmer, bread, and beer

 

And this mural clearly shows a corn field

 

 

gf

/

Edited August 1, 2010 by gentleman-farmer

[insane_alien]

looks like it could be a wheat or barley field to me.

 

and justy bcause Faulkner uses emmer and barley a few times in his book, doesn't mean he means maize when he says corn. he could just mean 'generic cereal crop' which is what corn can(and often only) mean if you're not a citizen of Canada, Austrailia or the US.

[Sisyphus]

Sisypus

 

gf) Sisypus, have you ever read the book, or are you guessing?

 

No I haven't read the book. I just speak English, and know that there was no maize in the Eastern Hemisphere pre-Columbus.

 

Main Entry: 1corn

Pronunciation: \ˈkȯrn\

Function: noun

Usage: often attributive

Etymology: Middle English, from Old English; akin to Old High German & Old Norse korn grain, Latin granum

Date: before 12th century

 

1 chiefly dialect : a small hard particle : grain

2 : a small hard seed

3 a : the seeds of a cereal grass and especially of the important cereal crop of a particular region (as wheat in Britain, oats in Scotland and Ireland, and Indian corn in the New World and Australia) b : the kernels of sweet corn served as a vegetable while still soft and milky

4 : a plant that produces corn; especially : Indian corn 1

5 : corn whiskey

6 a : something (as writing, music, or acting) that is corny b : the quality or state of being corny : corniness

7 : corn snow

 

You can't just decide that a word means something else. Enough already.

 

And this mural clearly shows a corn field

 

That looks like wheat to me.

[DJBruce]

 

And this mural clearly shows a corn field

 

 

gf

/

 

Based on the fact that the person on the left appears to have a reaping hook in his hand. I would guess the field is a grain like wheat not corn. Also corn fields are green not yellowish, which is how that field is depicted, that along with the fact that the ancient Egyptians did not have corn makes me believe the field is more the likely wheat or a similar grain, but definitely not corn.

[gentleman-farmer]

DJBruce

the fact that the ancient Egyptians did not have corn makes me believe the field is more the likely wheat or a similar grain, but definitely not corn.

 

 

gf) The CAPTION reads

In Upper Egypt donkeys were sometimes used to transport the corn to the threshing floor, but mostly it was carried by two men in a sack, fastened to a wooden frame and connected to five metre long carrying poles.

 

[Klaynos]

This has been said to you many times, corn is a generic term!

[gentleman-farmer]

Klaynos

This has been said to you many times, corn is a generic term!

 

gf) Only to those who read the Internet and not the book the Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts- wherein Dr. R. O. Faulkner is very clear and differentiates between corn and other grains

 

1.) they give to him barley, emmer, (a wheat), bread, and beer

2.) the Imperishable Stars in the north of the sky, who rule over offerings and protect the reaped corn

3.) (from the Book of the Dead) I will eat it under the branches of the tree of Hathor my mistress, who made offering of bread, beer and corn

 

gf

/

[insane_alien]

that doesn't make it clear at all.

 

especially since you haven't proven that maize existed in ancient egypt. if it did then why did it disappear and nobody mentioned it until its supposed reintroduction?

 

having maize in dynastic egypt raizes far more questions than not having it which makes sense.

 

i also find it hilarious how you think that just because its a book it uses language in exactly the same way as you despite being written by an author who lived in a different region from you and would likely have been using his own linguistical quirks which means that he could well have been using corn as reffering to a generic cereal crop.