Re: English IV and Egyptian goose

The "group" wrote;

"She remembers a professor who had taught her that no less than 67 Egyptian words have ever been correctly understood."

Indeed! If she is correct, and I have no way to argue with her about it, then there sure has been a lot of history written and presented as "fact" that has been taken from the Egyptian picto-language that we today refer to as hieroglyphs.

It (Egyptian) is, I assume, much like Hebrew in its original form, also void of periods or other marks that would delineate sentences.

If that is true, then the translation of this language would depend upon the eye of the beholder. This has led to some very differing Biblical translations, whereby, a word, that is commonly placed today at the beginning of a sentence is moved back to the end of the preceeding sentence. You must understand that the Hebrew we see today is full of diacritic marks, and other aids to understanding, such as the addition of the vowels, that did not exist in its original form.

From we find this;

"The Massoretic Text
During the early part of the tenth century (916 A.D.), there was a group of Jews called the Massoretes. These Jews were meticulous in their copying. The texts they had were all in capital letters, and there was no punctuation or paragraphs. The Massoretes would copy Isaiah, for example, and when they were through, they would total up the number of letters. Then they would find the middle letter of the book. If it was not the same, they made a new copy."

Now, I did not quote from the above site because it agrees with my attitude or ideas, since that site uses the Massorite works as proof that the Bible seen today is almost exactly like the Bible of 1,000 years before them! I tend to think that the dating of the Massorites is incorrect, as well as the dating of the "dead sea scrolls", etc.

From Wikipedia;

"The Hebrew word masorah ("tradition") occurs in many forms. The term is taken from Ezekiel 20:37 and means originally "fetter". The fixation of the text was considered to be in the nature of a fetter upon its exposition. When, in the course of time, the Masorah had become a traditional discipline, the term became connected with the verb ( = "to hand down"), and was given the meaning of "tradition.""

It seems that by using a term that is translated as "fetter", which means "to bind" or "place in chains", etc., the Massorites / Masoretes felt compelled to tie down a translation of the Hebrew Bible. This action had to have had a reason, and the reason may well have been that anyone left to his / her own devices, with hundreds of thousands of consonants, with no seperations or devices to indicate the correct vowell to place between them and no marks to indicate the beginning or ending of a sentence or thought, were able to come to some very differing conclusions as to what the text really said! But, there exists some speculation that the process had gone on for so many years without any "offical" version, that the original message had been mostly forgotten. As such, all the Masorete's did was to come to their own conclusions, and make it "law!"

Thus, in regards to Egyptian, we may have come to that same stage today! Certainly Egyptologists have argued for over 90 years about the correct translations of the hieroglyphs. And, without some force like the Massorites, these differing translations continue today, although as differing persons ascend to the highest positions in the field, their opinions take on positions of expertise, and therefor correctness!

But, again, if your teacher was / is correct, I would defy anyone to translate Shakespeare knowing only that one could be sure of only 67 of the words used! But, I can assert that such a translation would not much resemble his (Shakespear's) ideas!

So, if I am correct in the above assumptions, then what we are told today are the most correct translations of the Egyptian language, then we have to admit that it is really just the translation or translations that the current ruling elite of the specialty of Egyptology have "assumed" as correct, or translations that most of the specialists have come to assert as the most agreeable translation of the hieroglyphs.

But, we cannot think that it is a "correct" translation! And, in some cases, it seems that some of the hieroglyphs were cut into the stone by persons who did not understand it at the time! It may have simply looked good to the eye!

You guys also wrote;

"She has also reminded us that the world revolves around Your Model and that if per chance we hit upon Pay Dirt you will, in your words Kick us out. (at least until such a time as I get on my high horse and kick you out).

She has suggested that by such braggart statements, you have reduced yourself to the level of those you curse the most. How can this be?"

Certainly, in the revised model of history as presented by Mr. Pope, he is the "only" expert! It is his theory, and he has spent thousands of hours honing it to razor sharpness, and as such, I really doubt that you and your crew could really say anything that would blow him or his theory out of the water, since nothing important about Egyptian history is based upon anything really factual. It is today as it was 100 years ago, based only upon "educated assumptions", "guess work", and "best available thought!", nothing more nor less.

So, unless you get involved in personal attacks, or try to present what are only present another "theory", that you will use to deride or belittle Mr. Pope's "theory", then he has every right to kick you out! It is his page, his theory, and he has a much right to it as do all the "experts" in the world do to their's!

We are basically at a stage that the only way anyone can be 100% sure that their intrepretation is correct, would be to take the nearest time machine back to the age of their choice, and ask those in charge, at that time, what things they considered as truth!

Please excuse me if I have interferred with your response Mr. Pope!

Elwood P.

Responses To This Message

Write Like an Egyptian