Page 83 of 122
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 10:36 pm
by Beagle
I knew you were going to have a problem with that one!
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 10:43 pm
by Minimalist
Beagle wrote:I knew you were going to have a problem with that one!
Do you remember the Ahmose Stele that they made such a big deal about?
Here is a translation:
An English version of Vandersleyen's translation, beginning with the description of the storm, is offered here for the convenient of Aegean specialists. This version is not intended to substitute for Vandersleyen's two publications, which provide the essential information: the physical description of the stele and an authoritative philological discussion of the text and its interpretation. Many of the specific elements of the Egyptian text are unique or rare, and Aegean specialists who wish to cite it must consult Vandersleyen's extensive critical notes.
(7) ... the gods expressed
(8 ) their discontent ... The gods (made?) the sky come with a tempest of (rain?); it caused darkness in the Western region; the sky was
(9) unleashed, without ... ... more than the roar of the crowd; ... was powerful... on the mountains more than the turbulence of the
(10) cataract which is at Elephantine. Each house, ... each shelter (or each covered place) that they reached...
(11) ... were floating in the water like the barks of papyrus (on the outside?) of the royal residence for ... day(s),
(12) with no one able to light the torch anywhere. Then His Majesty said 'How these (events) surpass the power of the great god and the wills of the divinities!' And His Majesty descended
(13) in his boat, his council following him. The (people were?) at the east and the west, silent, for they had no more clothes (?) on them
(14) after the power of the god was manifested. Then His Majesty arrived in Thebes ... this statue; it received what it had desired.
(15) His Majesty set about to strengthen the two lands, to cause the water to evacuate without (the aid of) his (men?), to provide them with silver,
(16) with gold, with copper, with oil, with clothing, with all the products they desired; after which His Majesty rested in the palace - life, health, strength.
(17) It was then that His Majesty was informed that the funerary concessions had been invaded (by the water), that the sepulchral chambers had been damaged, that the structures of funerary enclosures had been undermined, that the pyramids had collapsed?
(18 ) all that existed had been annihilated. His Majesty then ordered the repair of the chapels which had fallen in ruins in all the country, restoration of the
(19) monuments of the gods, the re-erection of their precincts, the replacement of the sacred objects in the room of appearances, the re-closing of the secret place, the re-introduction
(20) into their naoi of the statues which were lying on the ground, the re-erection of the fire altars, the replacement of the offering tables back on their feet, to assure them the provision of offerings,
(21) the augmentation of the revenues of the personnel, the restoration of the country to its former state. They carried out everything, as the king had ordered it.
There was a flood. If only FEMA had performed as well in New Orleans as Ahmose's people had in Thebes!
Jacobovici's misrepresentation of the stele comes very, very close to outright lying.
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 10:52 pm
by Beagle
I've not seen this translation before, but it's not a surprise. There were a number of wild assertions that were made on the show.
I'd like to examine that map again - the one from Minoa(?) that they said showed the Isrealites sailing to Greece.
Sometimes I seriously worry about the History channel.
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 10:59 pm
by Minimalist
LOL.
My notes when Jacobovici was talking about the Mycenaen stelae read"
"Old Simcha is smoking some funny cigarettes."
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 11:01 pm
by Beagle
Also, on the serious side, it is perfectly fine for us to discuss things and speculate about them in an internet forum.
It really does get to be another thing to produce a television show like this one.
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 11:10 pm
by Minimalist
Yes...but it's a free country. He's under no obligation to present other evidence and he did say at the beginning that no scholars fully support his findings.....
BUT.
He put Davies and Whitelam on in the very beginning and stuck in a short comment from Dever later on.
After that, he pretended as if everything he said was god's own truth.
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 11:31 pm
by Beagle
I couldn't agree more Min, with the fact that the authors have every right to say or present whatever they want.
I was talking about the History channel though. Lately they have been airing UFO shows and "search for Atlantis".
There are plenty of cable channels for those things but I wish the History channel would feel that they have a responsibility to actually present history.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:17 am
by Guest
alright--not fair. i haven't seen it and this is like listening to some private jokes as an outsider.
I'd like to examine that map again - the one from Minoa(?) that they said showed the Isrealites sailing to Greece.
i have a book on old holy land maps and not one of them mentions or depicts the israelites going to greece. now i need to see that show just to see the map.
I'd like to examine that map again - the one from Minoa(?) that they said showed the Isrealites sailing to Greece.
There are plenty of cable channels for those things but I wish the History channel would feel that they have a responsibility to actually present history.
i say the same thing about the discovery channel here as their shows are suspect also. i imagine they need to make the changes to gather more ratings, same with the history channel.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:31 am
by Minimalist
I'm making the disc right now. It should be done in the morning when I get up. I'll get a mailer and send it out tomorrow.
After that,.....it's up to the US and Korean post offices.
God (if there is a god!) help you.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:34 am
by Beagle
I don't intend to dampen any future discusion that you and Min will have, but it wasn't a very good show as far as I am concerned.
That's all I'll say about it and you guys can talk about it later.
Way too late for me to be awake, I'm gone.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:43 am
by Guest
Way too late for me to be awake, I'm gone.
i was just going to ask if it was past your guy's bedtime.
After that,.....it's up to the US and Korean post offices
the korean post is usually pretty good and thanks for doing that.
well at least now i can look more critically at it. from the corresspondence i read i thought there might be problems but the director gave good answers to shank's criticisms.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:45 am
by Minimalist
I'll wait until you see it before commenting further.
That thing probably deserves its own thread.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:57 am
by Guest
That thing probably deserves its own thread.
i will let you or beagle start it when it is time.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 1:36 am
by Minimalist
You'll have to tell us when you've seen the film.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 2:56 am
by Guest
no worries. it usually takes about 10 days for mail to get here, depending on how you send it.
while we are all waiting, i thought we would go back to the Qumran discovery as i came across an interview conducted by Shanks with 4 archaeologists and how they came to their conclusions about the site.
the link is posted below:
http://www.bib-arch.org/Retrospective/b ... ticleID=6&
I take it we would all agree that it’s a Jewish settlement, is that right?
All: Yes.
Shanks: How do we know it’s a Jewish settlement?
Eshel: Because of the ritual baths [in Hebrew, mikva’ot].
Patrich: And because of the Hebrew ostraca [inscribed potsherds] found at the site with Jewish names written on them.
what do you think in comparison?