| Author | Message | ||
     b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Go here and look at the one called "shem" http://members.aol.com/egyptart/symlst.html#ca | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
oh oh, I made a mistake! it is called SHEN  | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
I don't think I am using my brain today! Please excuse! Go here and look at "Sema" http://members.aol.com/egyptart/symlst.html#ca one very embarrased betty | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
I genuinely don't want to start another war. But I think this lung and windpipes "proposal" is about the dumbest think that I've ever heard of in Egyptology. All the "sima" symbols I've seen don't look anymore like a pair of lungs and windpipe than my dog looks like Darth Vader with a light saber. I have no idea what it is but I think we can safely discard the "lung and windpipe" nonsense. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.30) |
Rick, I hope they sell earplugs in California, so that you can sleep despite the breathing sounds of your dog ! JD | ||
| Maxim Lebedev (194.87.64.254) |
Rick, Although your dog doesn't look like Darth Vader, I believe, the sema sign is seemed to be nothing, but two lungs attached to the trachea. Don't forget that it is a very old symbol. Best wishes, Maxim | ||
| Alan Jaworski (170.142.235.21) |
To Rick, Gonna pick up my nefer an' play y'all a song, 'bout some lungs and wind pipe an' how they got it all wrong, yeah i'll pick up my nefer, i'll play it all night long, like they do down in Nashville, which is near Memphis, which has a sister city in Egypt, that's the end of this song. | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Rick Sorry, but I had never heard of this sign called "sema" before this site. Is it the same sign as "nefer" or is it another sign? If so, why did they have two signs meaning the same thing, but with different names? PS: I also lean toward the version that although started out meaning lungs/heart and trachea, later in time it became to mean the instruments. JD Be nice  Alan Your song is great. | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Great Song Alan: B.J. they're completely different symbols. One more time Gardiner, AFAIK provides absolutely no reference, nor does any other expert provide any justification for the sima symbol being a lungs and trachea. Why a pair of gods would have their foot on a deflated lung and tie a chord around a trachear to symbolize the unity of Egypt escapes me entirely. But like I said it's not that important. If there's a whole school that believes it's a lung and trachea be my guest. As far as my dog goes she agrees with me that I'm 100% right. | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Rick: "Why a pair of gods would have their foot on a deflated lung and tie a chord around a trachear to symbolize the unity of Egypt escapes me entirely." I am afraid that I agree with you entirely. To me it makes no sense at all why this should be what the sign represents. I wonder what it did mean to them (the AEs, that is). Has anyone else tried to find out what the symbol means? I mean no disrespect to you in asking these questions. I think you are onto something with your theory, but will respect your wishes and not willingly bring this up again. I am just so darn curious about it. | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Look what I found! Can someone tell me just what this strange symbol is? http://members.xoom.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/new/Coptoscolossi.jpg | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.29) |
Rick & b.j., Ancient writings seem to have originated in administrative-commercial records. Writing "Sheep, 25" or "Oil jars, 200" is easy : you just draw a sheep or a typical oil jar and add a number (usually strokes for units, fatter strokes or dots etc. for higher units). This is the ideographical use of signs. But if you want to extend the system to express more complex or abstract ideas, then you have a problem. How would one go about writing "to love" ? The solution chosen was to introduce a second system, not ideographic, but phonographic. You would look for an object the name of which sounded like that of the abstract word you wanted to write. For "to love" (mrj) you would depict a hoe (mr), or later a canal (mr). Now about the zmA sign : if the trachea was called zmA, and if "to unite" was pronounced zmA, then the trachea could be used to write this abstract notion, even if the trachea had nothing to do with uniting per se. The use here would be phonographic, not ideographic (a hoe has nothing to do with love either). But in the present case the name of the trachea could be linked with the notion of uniting, as it "unites" the lungs : its name could mean "uniter (of the lungs)". I don't think we should imagine that the kings would bind plant stems around a real trachea : this was just a way of writing things. As to the identification of the sign (ÄZ 42, 80), we have the ribbed trachea and the collapsed lungs, with the lobes indicated. In PT § 410 the king eats the zmA.w (lungs ?) and hearts. zmA.w means "lungs" in the medical papyrus Ebers 99, 13 (GARDINER, Grammar, p. 465). So unless a better identification is proposed, we better keep this one ! Rick's scepticism seems to extend to several if not all butchery pieces. Our disgust for these and the fact that as modern city dwellers we aren’t confronted with them (so that they remain unfamiliar) doesn’t mean that we should automatically exclude them when studying a world which was completely different from ours. And we should certainly keep in mind the two basic uses of hieroglyphs : ideographic and phonographic ! JD PS : Betty, your last link doesn't work for me (or is Francesco's site not accessible once more ?). | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
JD Thank you again for your information. I realize I have a mind set (so to speak) in the 21st century that is hard to overcome when dealing with something as old as hieroglyphs. I try to keep that in mind, but it is sometimes a bit hard. So, I needed some one to get it into my mind better and I believe this graffiti will show a definite proof of the lung/trachea symbol. At least, that is what I think it is, but need educated eyes to look at it for me. Try this link again and if it still doesn't work, I will tell you how I got there. OK? Thanks~~~ b.j. Graffiti on the Koptos Colssi in Oxford and Cairo http://members.xoom.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/new/Coptoscolossi.jpg ps: I still think it's symbolic meaning changed over time. Talk about a mind set!!! | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
This is the main site, just in case the URL doesn't work. They are both working now, but that doesn't mean a thing. 1. go here http://members.xoom.it/francescoraf/ 2. scroll down to and click: EARLY DYNASTIC KINGS 3. click on: Dynasty 00 4. click on underlined blue word: graffiti 5. tell me all about it ( ) | ||
| jd degreef (80.236.134.212) |
b.j., Found the plate ! And your wish is my command :-), so (from left to right) : 1. the cut-off head of an antelope or some herbivore, on a pole or with tongue sticking out ; two Pteroceras shells (from the Red Sea). 2. two Min symbols on standards, with a sacred feather on top ; two sawfish saws ; two Pteroceras shells ; small graffito of a recumbent lion. 3. same objects but graffito of a long-necked bird. 4. elephant on mountain sign (?), top right = ? ; lion preparing to attack bovid in the mountainous country. I have an article on these graffiti if you like. I also interpreted some of the signs as allusions to constellations culminating after sunset at the moment of some AE festivals (Khoiak = bird = Ursa minor; Epiphi = bull or cut antelope head = Ursa major ; New Year in June Gregorian = lion = compound constellation involving Corona borealis). The desert animals and Red Sea shells and saws delineate Min’s domain, which was already established during the pre-dynastic ! I prefer the classical interpretation of the saws, rather than that as trees. As to Min’s symbol, here it’s so stylized that it’s hard to make out what it was originally. It has been interpreted as to fossil Belemnites head to head. From better representations I rather think it was a shell, of the Mitra family, or possibly even a Triton (sacred shell of Poseidon ; Triton in sacred deposit of early Bronze Age –if I remember well- temple on Cyprus). JD | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
JD, you are fabulous! Well, so much for any ideas about me trying to interpret glyphs! Not what I thought it was at all, but now that you tell me what it is, I can see it. I did not recognize triton shells, but can see that they could be shells for sure. I really thought they were lungs! Seeing what I wanted to, I suppose. In the future, I will know where to go for info, as usual. Rick Sorry, but I really thought I was onto something with this one. I don't trust myself anymore after this! | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
PS Yes, I would like to read the article. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.93) |
b.j., The article scans are more than 5 MB. How much can your mailbox handle ? JD | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
However when we look at the three dimensional sima sign that is was found in tut's tomb it clearly is not a heart and lungs. Let us not forget the AE's were masters at depicting anything they wanted too and I find it impossible to believe that they would have gotten the proportions for lungs and windpipes so ludicrously wrong. In addition to that every sima symbol I've seen has a horizontal bar at the top that is almost as wide as the sima symbol is high. I'm having a real hard time figuring what that is. Did the person swallow a three foot long two by four? That's about all I can figure out. I don't have any problem per se with body parts being used as symbols. After all the heart is symbolic of "love" in most languages. What I do have a problem with is this slavish insistence that Gardiner et. al. must be right when any look at the heiroglyphs shows that they must be wrong. And instead of admitting they're wrong and finding out what the right answer is, we prop up these mistakes with more and more convoluted answers and logic that does nothing for the field except keeping it mired in the mindset of the 19th century. The problem is that they were pushing their 19th century world view on an ancient culture, and our 20th 21st century attitudes won't let us question them because they were "trailblazing" pioneers. | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
JD: No, My mailbox only holds 2 MG. Sorry about that. I would have liked to have read it, but maybe some other time. Thanks for your trouble. | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Rick: I think you are right about the "mind-set" of the 19th century "Egyptologist". I believe it is a fact that they couldn't handle the phallic symbols and either covered them or removed them from many statutes and wall paintings. They didn't "like" to offend the senses. The Ancients on the other hand, based their very God on having self-reproduce himself and that means the terrible and forbidden "M" word. Surely this same reserve found its way into many aspects of this new field of exploration of that time. We now regard them as "absolute" and really should be looking into newer ideas as our knowledge increases. I have found very little changes made to the glyphs or translations in our enlightened era. But, goodness knows, I'm no expert! | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
B.J. You're absolutely right about the 19th century prudishness and it was highly cultural. Budge describes the "ithyphallic" osiris, but virtually ever drawing has Osiris sans phallus ithyphallic or otherwise. The French on the other hand show it in microscopic detail. As far as the glyphs go I try to find the original glyphs in color on walls etc. They usually look absolutely nothing like the objects that the 19th century egyptologists described them as. | ||
| andi (212.116.174.121) |
j.d. if you send the article to me i can put it up on my server and betty can download it using html. n.b. just don't send it to my old e-mail address which is being inundated by virus carrying e-mails (20 to 40 megabytes per day). my new address | ||
| jd degreef (80.236.134.64) |
Hi Andi ! That's nice ! I'm sending it right away. I was planning on sending it per 1 MB packages, but then Betty needs to acknowledge each download so that I can send the next one... Your system will be easier. JD | ||
| andi (212.116.174.115) |
kemp's article i'll remove the files by the end of this month | ||
| ken b (12.228.204.229) |
Rick, I agree that the sema sign does not depict lungs and a windpipe. Ever since I first layed eyes on this sign I thought that the lower "lungs" part represented the pelvic girdle. The symbolism of the ritual gesture of semtaui relates to the unification of the two extremes of Seth and Horus -- disorder and order -- and geographically to the regions of Lower Egypt and Upper Egypt. In this case, both Seth and Horus place their feet on the pelvic bones as a display of bringing Upper and Lower Egypt under their combined control. To control something doesn't mean to shut off its power of effectivness, but to command its resources. These resources were transmitted via the "windpipe" part of the sema sign to connect with the horizontal cross bar on the top of the sign. This cross bar (IMO) refers to Nome 1 at Memphis. As JD seems to mention, the windpipe reference may not necessarily need be taken literally but as a sort of metaphor, in this case for flowing or transmission of polarized -- contrasting -- influences. It is easy to visualize the role of the Nile itself in the geographical context, and the trachea (or spinal column?) in a physiological sense. ken b | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Ken I'm more inclined to agree with the pelvic girdle too. And the striated pole is the spine, then where is the rib cage? If there was ever a more symmetrical part of the body than the rib cage that clearly unify's the body I don't know what it is. So on that basis, I find that interpretation difficult to accept. I find the "lung windpipe" as metaphor even more far fetched. As far as the horizontal bar representing the first nomme of Egypt, that's interesting, but how did you arrive at that conclusion? | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
JD-Andi: Thanks for the reading. I will be back after I get all these pages read. Wonderful stuff! one Happy Betty | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.96) |
Ken, How do you explain the lobes indicated on the "pelvic girdle" ? And Unas eating a pelvic girdle and heart ??? (lungs were traditionally given to cats to eat in Belgium and France, so they're edible). And zmA, "united (to the other lung)" is a plausible interpretation of the origin of the name of the lung, whereas for a pelvis plus spine ??? JD | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
J.D. how do you explain the 2x4 at the top of the zma sign? He didn't say it was a pelvic girdle, he said it looks like a pelvic girdle. Which IMO is a lot closer to the truth than the lung and windpipe. However I don't think it's either a pelvic girdle or a lung and windpipe, but I'm pretty sure we won't find out until we dump these absurd interpretations and start with a fresh view. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.128) |
Rick, What's a 2x4 ? If you mean the crossbar : the zmA is part of an animal which the AEs were used to butchering, i.e. most probably a bovine. As is still the case in Kosher and islamic slaugherhouses, and as is represented countless times in AE reliefs, the animal's throat is slit. I feel (but it isn't more than a feeling) that the crossbar is linked with this gash (as I also posted for the nfr's "tuning pegs"). Is the crossbar part of the skin around the gash ? Is it the hyoid bone ? Is it the larynx ? During the nfr discussion I tried to find representations of a cow's trachea etc. on the Internet, but was unable to trace any. Nor do I spend much time in slaughterhouses. So this is all I can tell right now. JD | ||
| ken b (12.228.202.67) |
JD, The "lobes" are IMO the crests of the innominate bones. These, along with the sacrum and coccyx, make up the pelvic girdle. It may be instructive to note that on detailed representations of the lower ("lungs" part) of the sema sign the two symmetrical parts (of what IMO are the innominate bones) are each divided vertically into three parts. Is this just a coincidence? Or, are we seeing the keen awareness of the AE -- who were undoubtedly expert anatomists -- and their expression of the fusing of the ilium, ischium and pubis that make up the innominate bones in adulthood? This may be of interest, since "uniting" (fusion) is one essential theme of the sema sign. Rick, In terms of identifying the role/purpose of the cross bar (or "2x4") at the top of the sema sign: this entails venturing into the (perhaps shark infested) murky waters of interpreting the nome system and its (possible) symbolic content. Since this is a complicated, problematic and possibly "fringe" subject matter I'll just make a few short hypothetical-type comments. The crest of the innominate bones may correspond to the location of the 1st cataract. The base of the pelvic girdle may correspond to Abu Simbel. The cross bar at the top of the sema sign -- which in some examples is depicted as a "pet" i.e. sky sign -- may represent the border between lower and upper Egypt. JD, zmA marks the correct point to cut the throat -- or make radical act of division -- and is IMO exactly what the cross bar on of the sema sign refers to. This is, maybe, the dividing point between lower and upper Egypt and in a hypothetical anatomic model corresponds to the seperation of the head from the rest of the body. The nefer sign's (usual) two cross bars at the top may refer to the vocal cords. The connection here IMO is rather straightforward: comparing the tuning pegs of a stringed musical instrument to the tightening or loosening (frequency modulation) of the vocal chords to express the beauty felt by the heart (the lower part of the sign) through voice (singing, chanting, etc). Ken | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
J.D. a 2x4 is piece of wood that's 2 inches wide by 4 inches high the length is indeterminate. However a 2x4 is the standard size of wood used in construction in the US, Ken I find your explanation interesting but I think it needs a lot of work. To close to the fringe for me. Now returning to the zima symbol itself. I actually don't think it's a body part at all. If we look at the only 3D representation of the zema symbol that I know of, the one in Tut's tomb it looks even less like a trachea and lungs. In fact my own feeling is that, once again, we're getting fooled by Egyptian perspective. What we're looking at is a cross section through the zema symbol "The lobes" or "pelvis" is actually more like a giant dougnut with a hole in the middle through which a rod is held with the two by four, that refering to Tut's unguent jar once again, is actually a flat circle that sits on top of it like a table top. I get the feeling that the "doughnut" is actually very similar to the mace heads of Narmer (I believe they had a hole through the center.) The striations might have been grooves cut in the wooden pole itself. For what reason I have no idea. | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
I was surfing the web and found a site that addressed the habit of the AEs in preserving the umbilical cord, especially of high-born such as kings (wish I had earmaked that URL!) I know how I scoffed at the idea of one sign representing a placenta one on Namer's palette), but now I'm not so sure they didn't use preserved other body parts as well as the umbilical cord. Animal heads on poles were also widely used, so now I think maybe other human body parts used would not be out of character for this era. One has to remember the use of a living calf's leg in one ceremony (that one reeeealy bugs me). It will really be something when we finally find out just what these odd symbols really did mean, and I believe that with people like this board has working on it, that will be done. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.237) |
b.j., I hope you don't think that the kings walked around with a dried placenta / umbilical chord on their head ! If the Red Crown represents a placenta, amniotic pouch, umbilical chord, then it's only a model, as the serpent on the king's brow is no real cobra, the king's standards don't feature two real falcons, a real wolf etc. JD | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
JD Oh, no, I didn't mean to suggest they walked around with that on their heads! (It is a funny sight to imagine, tho!) I only said they preserved the umbilical cord (how I do not know) and for what I do not know. And I really do hope those snakes weren't real! Although I am sure they did at times use real animal heads on the poles. They did not have our point of view about those kind things, that is for certain! Have no fear--- I haven't taken leave of my senses | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Having just purchased a new book on Tut's tomb, I was pleased that I was able to look at three, three dimensionasl sema symbols in the book. All three were originally used for "perfume" or "unguents" all three vary slightly from each other but they all follow the sema format. A circular platform on top a thick neck and then a bulbous body, joined together by the two uniting vines. Whatever it is I think it's safe to rule out the lungs and windpipe proposal. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.125) |
Rick, 1. You have to take into account the fact that the crossbar in (quasi) two-dimensional representations of the zmA-sign is much narrower in the oldest representations : -alabaster and granite vases of Khasekhem from Hierakonpolis (Cairo) (late 2d dyn.) : just a slight triangular widening of the upper end of the trachea (if that's what it is). -side of throne of Khafre statue (Cairo CG 15) (4th dyn.) : a rectangle which is shorter than in later versions. -base of throne of Niuserre in a relief from his funerary temple (Berlin, I think) (5th dyn.) : triangular widening not unlike the capitol of a palmiform column. I also remember having seen a similar disposition with a short crossbar (like an abacus) on top. So what you've observed with the Tutankhamen bottles is a later adaptation of the zmA shape, and for a specific purpose. Some of the later forms of the zmA have a very broad, table-like crossbar at the top, often because a king or a god or a pair of cartouches was placed there. 2. on the bulbous body : two collapsed lungs attached to a trachea would be bulbous (not flat !), wouldn't they ? JD | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
1.No two collapsed lungs would look like a deflated football if they looked like anything IMHO. 2. All of the sima vases in tut's tomb go completely around the central shaft. They are not divided in half the way you would assume that a pair of lungs would be. 3. The "cross bar" at the top is a circle. Like a plate on the top of a pole. 4. On Khafre's statue the sima sign is defintely different. None of them are identical to each other. In addition there are sima symbols on Tut's little throne where the central pole is four or five time longer than the "bulb" at the bottom. Conclusion so far: The "sima" sign came in a large variety of forms and sizes but they all fall within a certain recognizable range. None of them even look remotely like a collapsed lung and trachea. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.78) |
Rick, If you look at an anatomical plate showing the lungs inflated, the inside surface of each is concave, molded on the heart ; the lower surface is concave too, molded on the diaphragm (muscular dome separating the thoracic cavity from the abdomen) ; the upper surface, front, sides, back of the lungs are convex. So a geometrical approximation of a lung is a half sphere (i.e. a sphere halved vertically), with a piece cut away at the base. That is one lung. If you take the two lungs, you get a whole sphere, with a vertical cleft, and a bit cut off at the base. If you deflate the lungs, you more or less retain this shape : a sphere with a vertical cleft (inside which one would find the separation of the trachea into bronchi), and a straighter base. From the zmA sign, it seems that the tips of the lungs stick out a bit. The objects you use from Tutankhamen's tomb are atypical, crosses between the shape of a vase and that of the zmA sign. There are plenty of zmA representations with the vertical cleft, and no need to focus on just the atypical examples. Same remark concerning the variation in trachea lengths (in the case of the nfr this didn't bother you and owned us a number of car pics ! nfr rerpresentations with a bulging front surface -that of lutes is generally flat- didn't bother you either). None of these zmA hieroglyphs are strict anatomical representations. That the crossbar at the top of a zmA was a disk-like structure seen from the side is entirely possible (but not certain) ; in any case it was rather smaller than in later versions, as shown by the older representations. JD | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
J.D. I think like the Nfr. symbol and all the other heiroglyphs that we've discussed we'll just simply have to agree to disagree on this one. We're running around in circles now like we did on the NFR symbol refining our arguments but bringing nothing new to the discussion. Ken suggested that it could have been a pelvic girdle. Something that looks a lot more probable to me. But then how about a pair of kidneys attached to the spinal chord? I'm joking BTW. Once again we run into the problem of Gardiner proposing something and then providing virtually no evidence to support it. But he left us an exit, in his own Grammar he admitted that he hadn't done much research on what heiroglyphs "meant" or their origin etc. and that this was a field that needed to be explored. Amazingly the whole field has been stuck on this handful of signs and definitions as if they were handed down to him by God on Mt. Sinai. It's time to acknowledge Gardiner's greatness but not be blind to his flaws and to admit that his work on the significance of heirglyphs was largely 'best guesses' and conjectures. Like just about everything else in Egyptology it's time to admit that maybe Gardiner got some things wrong and correct him. If we don't the field will stagnate and become irrelevant. | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Rick; Amen. b.j. | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Hapi ties together Upper and Lower Egypt. Scroll down to the insert. http://www.philae.nu/akhet/NetjeruH.html What does this really mean? The sema signed being tied together as upper and lower Egypt? Then what could the sema represent in this context? | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
and yet another twist: Centuries later this act of unifying opposing forces was furthered when the King Senworset I (c.1971-1928B.C.) had Horus and Seth carved together on his throne base. Facing each other, their attention was centered on the hieroglyph for unification, sema, which is a pair of lungs with a tall trachea (Moorey 14-15). Each god raises one foot to balance on one lung each, and tie the long stems of the plants of Upper and Lower Egypt around the trachea column. Seth grasped the lotus, Horus the papyrus. These ancient foes were reconciled in the active binding together of the Two Lands, such was the potency of the Union of Egypt. Go here to read all about it! http://www.philae.nu/akhet/NetjeruH.html | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the Book of Breathings. Or the so often mentioned breath of life given by gods. Or the ankh sign shown pointing at the nose i.e. towards the respiratory system. It's a well known fact, that by controling the breathing, one controls the whole body. The AEs must have known this. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.170) |
Ritva, An example of the use of this expression can be found in Thutmosis III's "Poetic Stela". Amon is talking to the king, telling him what he does for him and against his enemies : gAq.n=j fnD.w=sn m TAw n anx "I deprive their noses of the breath of life". I suppose that if ankh already meant "breath of life", this would be a pleonasm, and the text would have read gAq.n=j fnD.w=sn m anx. >It's a well known fact, that by controlling the breathing, one controls the whole body.< AFAIK this is something which has recently become known in Western countries, from the Far East, Yoga etc. To say that the Egyptians knew this, one would need textual proof. The fact that the ankh is presented in front of the nose indicates the close association of the notions of “life” and of “breathing”, which is fairly obvious (in several W European languages “his last breath” means “the last moment of his life”). So this type of representations doesn’t carry much information about the nature of the ankh object. Whereas its association with the feet in “object friezes” and some funeral scenes isn’t obvious and may carry some information as to what an ankh object is. What’s the link between this knotted tie and the notion of life ? -is the link purely phonetic : there was a knotted ribbon called anx, and the word for life also sounded like anx ? -or does the ribbon’s name mean “the life-object”, “the life-tool” etc. ? JD | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
JD, we are in the shema string here. I was not proposing that ankh would be the breath of life, but trying to say, that maybe the shema after all could be lungs & windpipe, since breath/breathing was seemingly so important to the AEs. | ||
| Alan Jaworski (170.142.235.21) |
To Ritva, The glyph for the nose may be transliterated as 'the beholder of truth'. This comes from the AE Naming of the body parts. Ankh is Life is the thought of the soul. The action being performed magically is: the thought of the soul being moved to the chamber of the beholding of truth. The nose is an eye (perception) that distinguishes particular qualities such as the essence of food. Is the food good or bad?? It also seems to root out intention. The smell of death will never be forgotten. The Naming of the Body to the AE, is a critical analysis of how the body, mind and soul work in conjunction. The textual proof is rampant in the AE works. The AE constructed their glyphs in such a way that those whose soul has been enabled will be able to easily ascertain that which is needed for their soul journey. The AE knew that which happened to souls that attempted to control other lives. The AE drew those resolutions quite proficiently. We perceive that which we will in the AE works because of who we are, and we are who we are because of how we structure our perception. good journies,nefer-ka | ||
| ken b (12.228.203.202) |
b.j., If the vertical column of the sema sign is the trachea, then the mutually opposing, pulling forces of Set and Horus -- traditionally represented in a "thief's knot" in the gesture of "sma-tawy" -- would surely result in asphixia! Tie one of these knots for yourself and pull on it to see the result. The harder you pull, the tighter the knot becomes. This, IMO, should completely dispel the silly notion that the sema sign is linked to an anatomical equivalent of lungs and trachea. (Unless, the point was to induce a near death experience? I don't think so.) Ken | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
Ken, maybe the tying of the knot means uniting the breath of life with the body i.e. through the windpipe and lungs? (Although I would suggest the breath of life does mean the Spirit, but since it cannot be seen, why not use AIR as a symbol) | ||
| ken b (12.228.203.202) |
Ritva et al, The sema sign is known to have dealt with the uniting of lower and upper Egypt under a single king. The sign is found, in its most simple form, early on in the text of the Shabaka stone specifically in regard to this reference. The historic connection between the sema sign and ancient Egyptian geography is thus unambiguous. Before venturing into conjectural anatomical modeling, it may be well to first consider the geographical aspects of sema, since this seems to be one of the fundamental operatives working within the subtlty of this sign. Ken | ||
| Alan Jaworski (170.142.235.21) |
To Ken, You mention conjectural anatomical modeling. When you look long enough, you will have to notice all the body parts, which are glyphs, which are named, saturating the AE works. Some are human. All have pertinent meanings. Look at your world that surrounds you. How do you see it, and how do you perceive it. The AE didn't just build in stone, there is a mind behind the creations in stone, and there is soul in the beauty of the creations. You say they named their territories and i say their territories are greater than the land that is called Egypt. You may seek the AE physical places, but there is much more, even into the minds of this BB. We necessarily are programmed to look at the ancient dead and there accutraments, i say look for the vision of the ancient dead and create your own beauty. good journies,nefer-ka | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
The ancients seemed to know about body functions, even those of the lungs being connected to the trachea. This sign of the lungs united with the trachea means "to unite" according to what I have read. That really does make sense when you stop to think bout it. Breathing is not too possible without the trachea (producing sound is a by-product of the organ) and that of course, feeds air to the lungs. I don't really think they were so into self-enlightenment during that period of time. Any journeys they would make most likely would be under the orders of their "god" - the King. The African people weren't into self-enlightenment even in the 18th or 19th century. Does anyone remember King Farouk of Egypt? And he didn't even think he was a god, just the King! I is hard for most of us to accept that kind of authority or rule, but it has always been that way in Africa. The King is absolute. Well, European kings felt the very same way, but had the Church to keep them some what in line. Recall "Off with their heads"? Has some basis in history. | ||
| Alan Jaworski (170.142.235.21) |
To BJ, You feel the beliefs of the AE involve only that which the pharoah intended? Why censor Akhenaten?, and attempt to erase memory of him?? What is the memory of Akenaten, that he only believed in one god; the sun?? You also know that the AE were not into self-enlightenment?, because.. What is the concept of a god?, and what type of mind will create that concept? The AE studied Life, as they attempted to understand that which surrounded them, and also that which was internal support. You call it self-enlightenment, the AE did not. The AE were well beyond understanding themselves, 'that' they found was an incredible trap, in likeness to the boxes that Osiris was contained in. There is enlightenment beyond human experience, and the AE found that path. All Life is not human. It was the understanding of the body parts that allowed Isis the magic to pull Osiris back together. You compare the AE with later self absorbed individuals and determine that the AE did not have great enough minds to escape the vanity of that self-absorbtion, but they had great enough minds to produce beauty for thousands of years. We who are so advanced, now kill each other by the thousands, for our state or our religion. What is our self-enlightenment? good journies,nefer-ka | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.65) |
Ritva, Yes, the zmA string indeed : sorry for the confusion ! b.j., >I don't really think they [the AEs] were so into self-enlightenment during that period of time.< The voice of wisdom ! ken b., You propose to change the anatomical identification of the zmA sign from a trachea & lungs to a spine & pelvic girdle : -even taking into account the degree of schematisation to which we're accustomed in AE hieroglyphs, the zmA looks less like a spine and hip bones than as a trachea & lungs. The divisions on the vertical part are much more like the cartilages of a windpipe than like vertebrae and disks. One would expect the sacrum to be represented. The upper part of the pelvic girdle may look somewhat like the top of the lower portion of the zmA, but the lower parts are completely different (and I went to look at a skeleton to be certain of what I was writing). -Unas eats the zmA.w and heart : it’s easier to imagine him eating lungs than bones ! And if zmA.w are lungs, then we have him eating two adjacent, thoracic organs. -the name of the zmA.w “lungs” seems to mean something like “the united (ones)”, an apt name or these organs. See also zmA.tj, “testicles (of donkey / Seth)” (Wb. III, 451). The name somehow isn’t as fitting for the pelvic girdle. You seem to center your explanation on the use of the zmA sign in the group symbolizing the Union of Upper- and Lower Egypt. But zmA has many more uses, it forms the root of a number of words, almost all of which involve the idea of uniting (with somebody, reaching a place, etc.). Nothing indicates a “geographic aspect” for the term zmA in itself, when it occurs isolated from the mention zmA-tA.wj. As to the nuances of the zmA-tA.wj, sema-tawi, “Union of the Two Lands” : in some representations (e.g. Kom Ombo) the “Lily” and Papyrus are attached to the zmA, but also a number of enemies. This gives us a supplementary meaning of the heraldic composition : the king’s subjects are bound together for him, whether it be the Two Lands (Egypt) or foreign countries under his rule. Peoples are united under his rule. But there is a violent aspect of domination to this being united. As to the link of the zmA sign with breathing, I don’t think that there was such a link, at least not a direct one : -I’ve been unable to find a word related with “breathing” and based on the root zmA. -the zmA sign shows a trachea and collapsed lungs, i.e. the respiratory system of a dead animal, of an animal in the process of being butchered. What counted, IMHO, was the "united" aspect of the lungs. JD | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Actually the zma symbol doesn't look the least bit like a lung and trachea. And a quick look at the zma symbols/vases in Tut's tomb show that beyond a shadow of a doubt. " J.D. you wrote "the zmA sign shows a trachea and collapsed lungs, i.e. the respiratory system of a dead animal," Why the collapsed lungs? Why not the inflated lungs? You also wrote "What counted, IMHO, was the "united" aspect of the lungs." Really? What's so special about the lungs, why not the right and left hemisphere of the brain? Why not the kidneys? They're all united too. Why not the rib cage, the left and right ribs are indisputably more linked together, more solid, than the lungs could ever hope to be. How about the large and small intestine? They're united too. The pelvic girdle makes perfect sense, after all it unites the top half of the body with the bottom half of the body and holds both legs together. What greater symbol of unity is there than the pelvic girdle. Now having considered all the facts dispassionatly it's clear that the zma symbol is a pelvic girdle. NOT! The slice and dice chop shop school of heiroglyphs in this case is wrong. | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Alan: Akhenaten was not even close to being in my mind when I referred to "pharaoh" or king. He's another story all together! The religion or ideology of the Ancient Egyptian when hieroglyphs were coming into being was strictly for the king only. (They were not even called pharaoh until some time later in their history. I posted this on another string called King to Pharaoh) and yes, I believe the kings thought the people were put there to be to rule by him, not the other way around. Why should a "god" concern himself with a mere mortal person. They ruled supreme, IMHO. Know that I also wish life were butterflies and beauty. Rick I only want to say that an inflated lung would have to be found in a living being (as you well know). I am thinking that when they looked at the lungs, they were deflated by death, but still able to produce a noise if air was forced through the larynx via the trachea. (Anyone dressing a dead duck can vouch for that!)And I also think by the time this sign reached Tut's era, it had evolved into what we see in his tomb, but what was it pre-dynastic (is there such a word?)era when these signs were getting written down for probably the first time. JD You said: "the zmA looks less like a spine and hip bones than as a trachea & lungs. The divisions on the vertical part are much more like the cartilages of a windpipe than like vertebrae and disks. One would expect the sacrum to be represented. The upper part of the pelvic girdle may look somewhat like the top of the lower portion of the zmA, but the lower parts are completely different (and I went to look at a skeleton to be certain of what I was writing)." My good gracious !! You are nothing, if not thorough!!! I also think these signs were made by people we would get a lot of headaches from trying to get our heads into theirs. You do seem to be doing it very well, I must admit. I still think we have a long way to go to really understand the hieroglyphs, but let's keep making headway! To All~~ Thanks for all the trouble you guys go to here on this board. I do appreciate it. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.65) |
Rick, >a quick look at the zma symbols/vases in Tut's tomb show that beyond a shadow of a doubt< As I've said and repeated and repeated again, you base everything on the most atypical examples you could find. Using the same method, I can prove that the ankh is a squatting man, his arms held almost horizontally. Don't believe me ? There's a mirror case in Tutankhamen's tomb, showing the Heh god in this position, with a typical ankh loop above his head. >Why the collapsed lungs? Why not the inflated lungs?< In the body, the lungs aren't attached to the ribcage. They remain in contact with it because the air pressure in the cavity surrounding the lungs, the pleural cavity, is maintained at a lower level than atmospheric pressure, so that the cavity is virtual. When you puncture the thorax or when metabolism stops at death, the pressure increases, and the lung(s) collapse because of their strong elasticity (which is the motor of expiration). So when you slaughter an animal and cut open the chest, as so often shown in AE representations, what you’ll see is not two lungs as in an anatomical plate, but the trachea and two small retracted stumps, the strongly collapsed lungs, i.e. the zmA sign exactly (taking into account the schematisation which we know so well in AE art). >Now having considered all the facts dispassionately it's clear that the zma symbol is a pelvic girdle. NOT! The slice and dice chop shop school of heiroglyphs in this case is wrong.< Well, good appetite when eating a pelvic girdle ! And what about the striations on the vertical shaft looking much more like the narrow cartilage rings on the trachea than like vertebrae ? and what about the absence of sacrum ? and what about the lower half of the pelvic girdle looking completely different from anything seen in the zmA sign ? Is this “considering all the facts” ? And, BTW, what about your repeated and erroneous writing heiroglyphs instead of hieroglyphs, from hieros, “sacred” ? >"What counted, IMHO, was the "united" aspect of the lungs." Really? What's so special about the lungs, why not the right and left hemisphere of the brain? Why not the kidneys? They're all united too. Why not the rib cage, the left and right ribs are indisputably more linked together, more solid, than the lungs could ever hope to be. How about the large and small intestine?< The two lung stumps stand out, united by the bifurcations of the trachea. The brains are united too, and could have been used, as would the testicles. The kidneys aren’t as obviously united : the ureters descend quite some distance to the bladder, which “unites” the system if you want. But the ureters aren’t very obvious (except on anatomical plates, where they’re dissected out). The ribcage is a global structure (formed of two halves, but aren’t we all ?), not two distinct objects as the lungs are. The same can be said about the pelvic girdle. Besides, I don’t see the advantage of replacing one anatomical part with another, which looks much less like the zmA hieroglyph ! In both cases one is dealing with anatomical parts, with the “dice chop shop school” as you say. JD | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
JD, you wrote: Unas eats the zmA.w and heart : it’s easier to imagine him eating lungs than bones ! And if zmA.w are lungs, then we have him eating two adjacent, thoracic organs Hmmmm, Unas dies, goes to the gods and eats his heart and lungs? How does that fit together with the fact that Unas has been mummyfied and has left his body behind in his tomb? Why not for a second consider, that maybe the Egyptians were not half as idiots as some like to believe. They were well aware of spirit trancending materia and life after death, and said so, by using hieroglyphs. As Alan writes, the AEs lived their belief and knowledge. They did not have a separate religion as we do, their beliefs were incorporated in all areas of life. All. The Egyptian writing was called hieroglyphs by the Greeks. Sacred writing. In other words writing capable of describing, not only every day occupations, but sacred things. Sacred things? Our word religion, as you no doubt know, comes from religare which means reunite. Reunite to what? Now, tell me my friend, what was the translation of the word shema again? Could there be a possibility, that shema works on several levels? That in political descriptions it would mean uniting the Two Lands, but in spiritual matters it would point towards uniting spirit with materia? If yes, then once again, how do you unite "air" with the body? What is the Book of Breathings? A description of respiratory organs, or exercizes to succesful breathing? I wote for windpipe and lungs. And not inflated lungs, but ones functioning very well! | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.219) |
Ritva, >Hmmmm, Unas dies, goes to the gods and eats his heart and lungs? How does that fit together with the fact that Unas has been mummified and has left his body behind in his tomb?< He doesn't eat his own heart ! Here's the excerpt : § 409: Unas has appeared again in heaven. He is crowned with the Upper Egyptian Crown (sbn) as lord of the Horizon. He has reckoned up the dorsal vertebrae, he has seized the hearts of the gods, § 410: he has eaten the Red One, he has swallowed the Green One. Unas feeds on the lungs (zmA.w) of the wise. His pleasure is to live on hearts and on their charms (HkA.w). You'll notice that I highlighted a reference to dorsal vertebrae, but these aren't eaten ! >Why not for a second consider, that maybe the Egyptians were not half as idiots as some like to believe. They were well aware of spirit transcending materia and life after death, and said so, by using hieroglyphs. As Alan writes, the AEs lived their belief and knowledge. They did not have a separate religion as we do, their beliefs were incorporated in all areas of life. All.< One isn't an idiot because one doesn't adhere to New Age beliefs ! If you look for ethereal and esoteric allusions, you'll find them in any text where you think they're present. I can't but stress enough what you state in your last sentence above : "They did not have a separate religion as we do, their beliefs were incorporated in all areas of life". But their religion was their religion, not a modern ratatouille of beliefs put together and coming from all parts of the world. I'll accept "uniting spirit with materia" if you give me clues or proof. "What is the Book of Breathings?" Well, breathing is a sign that one's alive, and giving life (or at least a form of it) back was the base of AE ritual. But, I insist, we're dealing with dead lungs here ! They're clearly deflated and in no position to work. And they may even be bovine lungs, from their place in GARDINER's classification. All I've ever seen is human tracheae and lungs. Maybe the windpipe is longer in bovines than in humans, so that the zmA (not : shema) could look even more like a trachea and collapsed lungs than it does with its human counterpart. Now we have the Unas allusion to the "zmA.w of the Wise". Is this a clue as to a "spiritual" dimension of the lungs ? Actually the king eats men and deities to acquire their magic. The quotation above continues : "411: Unas is disgusted when his tongue touches the emetic (parts) which are in the Red One. He is pleased when their magic is in his belly. The dignity (saHw) of Unas shall not be taken from him (for) he has swallowed the wisdom (sjA) of every god." Do the lungs have a specific link with magic, as the heart certainly has ? Very possible, but whether it is through the ability to breathe and to live, or through that of creating what we'd call the air pressure to be able to speak, and to pronounce spells, I don't know. JD | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
J.D. you wrote "As I've said and repeated and repeated again, you base everything on the most atypical examples you could find." As I've repeated over and over again I base my observations on the physical facts when I can find them. They zema symbols in Tut's tomb's were 3D representations of the zema symbol. They possess NONE, I repeat NONE of the qualities of a lung and windpipe. On the other hand you presuppose that Gardiner is right, then carefully shape all of your arguments to prove that he is right, going into microscopic detail, that the AE's didn't possess and using a line of reasoning that would have been as foriegn to them as the space shuttle would have been to a 14th century eskimo. Sorrry I don't have time to address everybody elses comments, it's 4 AM here. | ||
| ken b (168.191.230.92) |
JD, The reliance on lexicology to make a case in a discusion of AE signs is informative but it can possibly be misleading due to lack of a 100% certainty that the translations used are accurate. Also, there is the issue of double entendres, puns, poetic license and possible clerical errors on the part of the scribes. This is why IMO it is important to SEE the sign in the overall context of its various applications, and not slice 'n dice the sign to death in a purely lexical approach. The beauty of AE symbol text is the way that the various signs are linked together to form a picture in the mind, a sort of "thought-gram". An important attribute of the sema sign used in context is that of bearing weight. The sema is depicted on thrones, most often on the lower, rear corner, and thus plays a role in providing a rigid base to support the royal behind. It is also seen time after time on the bases of chairs, seats, footrests and footboards of beds, all load bearing devices. It is hard for me to imagine that a trachea serves as a load bearing member, although the vertebral column does just such a job. Ken | ||
| ken b (12.228.203.202) |
For visualization purposes, I made a page with some sema pics and pics of hips and lungs. You can see this at the sema sign. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.100) |
Rick, If we imagine for a moment that the zmA had the shape we see in Tutankhamen's bottles, then obviously its (very numerous) two-dimensional representations wouldn't have looked as they do. This shows that the zmA didn't look like the bottles, and that these are mixed compositions, as in the example I gave where the theme of the ankh has been mixed with that of the Heh god. To quote Ken, "the beauty of AE symbol text is the way that the various signs are linked together to form a picture in the mind, a sort of 'thought-gram'." Ken, Using this kind of reasoning (the sign is often represented underneath other signs or figures) Rick thought he proved that the nb sign (gold) doesn't represent a gold collar, but a stool... Now if you care to look at the gold sign on Dewen's label, here : http://members.xoom.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/labels/xxden44.htm then anyone can see its a necklace (look at the "legs of the stool" !). Besides, Unas eats zmA.w, the zmA does look like a trachea + collapsed lungs, much more than as a spine and hip bones, etc. JD | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
JD: PT~"Unas has appeared again in heaven. He is crowned with the Upper Egyptian Crown (sbn) as lord of the Horizon. He has reckoned up the dorsal vertebrae, he has seized the hearts of the gods" Just what do you think this last sentence really means? He has reckoned up the dorsal vertebrae? That of course would be refering to the spine, wouldn't it? Did they really call it "dorsal vertebrae" or is that translated? You are such a wonder of knowledge. | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
JD, Reference given by you quote: § 409: Unas has appeared again in heaven. He is crowned with the Upper Egyptian Crown (sbn) as lord of the Horizon. He has reckoned up the dorsal vertebrae, he has seized the hearts of the gods, § 410: he has eaten the Red One, he has swallowed the Green One. Unas feeds on the lungs (zmA.w) of the wise. His pleasure is to live on hearts and on their charms (HkA.w) unquote Your comment: You'll notice that I highlighted a reference to dorsal vertebrae, but these aren't eaten ! Oh yes, I can see that the dorsal vertebrae are not eaten, but what does Unas feeds on the lungs of the wise mean? Btw, since when Shinto, Buddhist and Hindu (for example) beliefs were classed New Age? | ||
| Alan Jaworski (170.142.235.21) |
To All, Why has it been determined that body parts needed to be bound together? Is it possible that the glyph shows the action of splitting?, and what is being split? If instead of the word sema being transliterated, each sound of that word was transliterated, what is the determination? The fact that AE have gods, indicates that they are enlightened, at least to the extent that they would perceive beyond their own needs. The king was not the only soul that benefitted by the texts of the AE. The 'thought gram' concept is an excellent perception, thank you Ken. That term gives credance to the fabulous minds of the AE. It is not New Age technology that is being expounded, but Old Age technology instead. The AE show by their consciousness of their surroundings and internal structures, that they indeed were interested in more than empire. They needed the 'ONE' that would promote the vision, that is the king or pharoah. This person was instructed by the leaders of the 7 different classes; (knowledges); sacred cows. The king was the bull or reproducing strength that would regenerate their culture. The king was not a god, the king was like a treasured jewel (as in the Jewel of the Nile). The AE were very selective. They needed special markings and signs from the forces of Nature. The forces of Nature if anything, were their gods. good journies,nefer-ka | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Ken you're absolutely right J.D. builds giant theories on the slimmest of evidence. In this case out of the entire corpus of Egyptian literature he takes one line from one text of thousands of verses and "proves" that the sima symbol is a lung and trachea. I agree with you a trachea is not a load supporting structure but the spinal column is. I'd love to go to the site that you mentioned. But I'm not to concerned I'm sure that whatever it looks like it doesn't look anything like a necklace, but is in fact a stand. Like all the other neb signs that I've seen. Usually placed solidly on the ground and never around a persons neck. You really ought to give up these obsolete ideas J.D. The zma isn't a heart and lungs, the neb isn't a necklace, the nefer isn't a heart and lungs. Once you do that you can appreciate what Ken means by "thought grams" | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Oh yeah and the Akhet sign isn't a mountain range it's a forge, the Ntr. sign isn't a flag on a pole it's an axe, and as we're discovering the zma isn't a collapsed lung and windpipe, but looks more and more like the pelvic girdle and spinal column (Though again I have reservations, call it "The Case of the Missing Rib Cage"). Finally we're clearing away some of the dead wood, and can begin to make a clearer analysis of AE heiroglyphs. | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
I went looking for images of lungs and this is what I found: http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF8&q=lungs&sa=N&tab=wi a history: http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=www.stanford.edu/class/history13/earlysciencelab/body/lungspages/davlungsicon.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.stanford.edu/class/history13/earlysciencelab/body/lungspages/lung.html&h=184&w=141&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlungs%26start%3D540%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF8%26sa%3DN a spritual site: PTID5339%257CCHID14%257CCIID220257%2C00.html&h=190&w=170&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlungs%26start%3D460%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF8%26sa%3DN,http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=www.christianity.com/CC/Images/107271/107271.JPG&imgrefurl=http://www.christianity.com/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID5339%257CCHID14%257CCIID220257,00.html&h=190&w=170&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlungs%26start%3D460%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF8%26sa%3DN another spritual site "breathing with both lungs": http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=stmichaelruscath.org/byzgospel.jpg&imgrefurl=http://stmichaelruscath.org/byzspirit.htm&h=259&w=195&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlungs%26start%3D440%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF8%26sa%3DN | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
this one didn't load right: PTID5339%257CCHID14%257CCIID220257%2C00.html&h=190&w=170&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlungs%26start%3D460%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF8%26sa%3DN,http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=www.christianity.com/CC/Images/107271/107271.JPG&imgrefurl=http://www.christianity.com/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID5339%257CCHID14%257CCIID220257,00.html&h=190&w=170&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlungs%26start%3D460%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF8%26sa%3DN | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Sorry about that, can't get it to load, but it is a site about Christainity using the lungs as uniting the world. The photo is entitled "two lungs" and this is the caption~ "The Catholic Church Embraces the Whole World With Both Diversity and Unity." I found that a very interesting use of the word lungs. Is it a carry-over you think? | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
PS (one more time!) go to this url and click where it says: Actual size. See image alone. That will show the picture but not the text. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.37) |
b.j., IMHO « reckoning the dorsal vertebrae » means that Unas can count them because he’s cutting up the person or deity he’s going to eat. Unfortunately none of the images I saw shows the lungs deflated. The term for the phenomenon when air enters the pleural cavity and the lungs deflate is “pneumothorax”. Maybe this can help find suitable pictures ? Ritva, >what does Unas feeds on the lungs of the wise mean?< I addressed this in the last paragraph of the posting. There are links between Hindu religion and AE, so features of Hindu religion could throw some light on AE. Pranayama may be one of them, but you have to prove your point with clues and AE textual references. But I don’t see links with Far Eastern religions and philosophies, or the New Age ratatouille. Rick, Your post is up to your usual standards : many words, no Egyptological data. Whereas I usually discuss point after point of other people’s postings, you just mention general principles. Come to think of it, in the years since I’ve been posting here, I don’t think I remember you having ever conceded to be wrong. Says it all. See, I can write postings without Egyptological data too ! JD | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
Alan, Once again, thank you for your wise words. b.j., Thanks, where would we be without your energetic search engine... Rick, I mostly agree with you. Mostly, because in the case of shema, I'm convinced that it is lungs. The pelvic girdle does make sense, but before you control your pelvic area, you have to control your breathing. Besides uniting by symbols of breathing works better on several levels. Ever heard of "Breathing the same air as...? (As fas as the neb symbolism goes. Try turning the equation around: imagine the necklaces representing neb!) JD, I'm saddened to see that spiritual matters elude you completely. Saddened, because if ever there was a civilization that was based on spirituality, then AE it was! Of course one can intrepret all the texts literally, but that only leads to being blind to the real beauty of the ancient Egyptian society. A great pity. Beacuse, and I know I'm repeating myself, their whole society was based on spiritual beliefs. Totally and completely. Ignoring the spiritual components in their philosophy of life, is like having an instrument and not knowing how to make sweet music with it. In other words, the most important is missing. Of course, I have seen that you rely on your quotes, and never give your own opinion, but those quotes are based on archaeological finds, and you can prove just so much with those. You cannot have references and evidence for everything. How do you prove love or fear? Oh, you certainly can prove the consequences of those, but not the source! As to your repeated comments of New Age concerning my postings, well, if you really were familiar with the New Age phenomena, you certainly would realise, that I'm as far from that kind of thinking as the ancient Egypt is from the Moon! | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
J.D. You said I've never admitted to being wrong. Well in this case I have to thank our good friend Ritva, for gently over the years, pointing out that I was wrong. For decades I thought of the BOD as nothing more than a travel guide to get the dead from this side to that side of life. I was wrong. It came slowly through trying to understand what the "mindgrams" (god that's a beautiful phrase, I wish I'd thought of it.)of the heiroglyphs were saying to us. WWell to make a long story short Ritva hit me over the head once Peter's board True Origins she said (I think) "There are rules to the spiritual world water is wet and rosex are red.". Now armed with this new knowledge I'm trying to find out what the rules are. No I haven't become fringe, new age, or shaving my head and joinging some cult that celebrates the return of Isis. The purpose is to find out what the rules are....Wow I did it again no Egytpological data! But no endless quotes from obsolete sources propping up irrelevant concepts either. | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
JD & Rick: You both have opposing views to things and that is what makes reading your posts to each other so interesting. One can get a fully rounded approach to any idea you two are discussing and that really helps some one like myself better understand things of Ancient Egypt. I hope you both will continue posting you very own viewpoints. It is only when you grow annoyed and began make snide remarks at each other that the fire-works goes off! I worry when you start getting upset with each other. Count to 10 and come out swinging, but not fighting!!! OK? b.j. | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Ok 12345678910 POW!!!!! I win! | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Rick: hahahahahahahhahahahah bj | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.135) |
Don’t cry for me, ArgentRitva ! >I'm saddened to see that spiritual matters elude you completely. Saddened, because if ever there was a civilization that was based on spirituality, then AE it was !< Religions and, I suppose, “spirituality”, evolve. Ancient Egypt was a long time ago, and its own religious / “spiritual” history spans thousands of years. I never saw much “spirituality” in the Pyramid Texts, the oldest religious texts we have (for Egypt, possibly for the world) : the main god being threatened by the deceased king in case he refuses to relinquish his seat to him ; deities insulted to decrease their magical power, in case they’d want to seize the king’s pyramid for their own purposes... The situation may have been different during the New Kingdom, and my vision may be colored by my interest focusing mainly on the more ancient periods. If you think you have valid clues to show this “spirituality” during these older periods (when the hieroglyphic system was being elaborated), then I’d certainly be interested hearing about them. And even clues for the New Kingdom. The Late Period is less convincing, because then the Greek philosophers had added their little grain of salt ! >Of course one can interpret all the texts literally, but that only leads to being blind to the real beauty of the ancient Egyptian society.< The real beauty, or an imaginary one, which you need as a kind of overlay on archaeological reality, in order for you to be able to like Egypt ? Whereas I already like things as they appear, or as they are ? See, I too can play this game of attributing emotions and motivations to others. >I have seen that you rely on your quotes, and never give your own opinion, but those quotes are based on archaeological finds< I beg to disagree ! I give my own opinion all the time, but I also add quotes and material elements based on archaeological finds. Isn’t that what science is about ? You and Rick seem to believe that having a feeling about something is sufficient. >Now, tell me my friend, what was the translation of the word shema again? Could there be a possibility, that shema works on several levels? That in political descriptions it would mean uniting the Two Lands, but in spiritual matters it would point towards uniting spirit with materia ? If yes, then once again, how do you unite "air" with the body?< Could be, but since you present the idea, it’s up to you to present clues. And also please note that if I did know clues supporting your idea, I’d bring them forward myself. In all these discussions, I’m not trying to prove my point at the expense of others. I’m trying to gather overall clues and evidence, as you may have noticed in recent discussions with Vincent, for example. The purpose IMHO is to learn, not to appear to be right. For example I posted the broader PT quotation containing the allusion to zmA.w (NB : not “shema” !), even though I thus provided a mention of vertebrae that could be used by Ken, and one to “the Wise” that could be used by you. And when I’m shown to be wrong, as happens regularly, I recognize the fact and even apologize if need be (see my wrong opinion, recently, that the Djed was but mentioned once in the PTs). But the fact that Rick for example is never wrong (well, except the thing about the BoD ...) is something I find disquieting : is the motivation of somebody like that to learn and to share knowledge, or to appear to “win” an argument ? And can one have discussions in good faith with him ? Ken, We posted together on Tuesday, and it’s only now that I see the page of zmA signs which you’ve kindly provided. Two remarks : 1. you show the trachea & lungs in a classical anatomical representation. This of course doesn’t look much like a zmA sign. But as I’ve pointed out, if you open a thorax (of any mammal), this isn’t what you’ll see. The lungs will have collapsed to fist sized blobs (in the case of human lungs) at the base of the trachea. And then we’re a lot closer to the zmA. 2. I still think the zmA looks more like a trachea & lungs than like a spine, for reasons already stated (striation of shaft, absence of sacrum & lower structures of pelvic girdle ; the Ramesses II example you provide even shows the pulmonary lobes, neglecting, however, the fact that the left lung only has two lobes, at least in humans...). And the textual evidence which I put forward stating that Unas eats the zmA.w and the heart makes it more probable that the lungs are meant. And the fact that the lungs are twin organs makes them a better candidate for representing a root zmA, “to join” than the hipbone, which is one structure (even if it has bilateral symmetry, as do some other parts of the body, and even if it may still appear subdivided in infants)... Rick, >Ken you're absolutely right J.D. builds giant theories on the slimmest of evidence. In this case out of the entire corpus of Egyptian literature he takes one line from one text of thousands of verses and "proves" that the sima symbol is a lung and trachea.< I don’t build giant theories, it’s just that for the nth time the (sparse) clues I find are in favor of the classical theory. I only quoted one spell because it’s the only mention of zmA.w in the PTs. But the spell is there and is one of the clues to be taken into account. As happened for the nfr discussion, you start with an idea which springs up completely formed in your mind (based on feelings rather than clues), which becomes conscious through an aha! experience, and which you’ll then defend to the death, whatever clues are brought forward. If you have textual evidence showing that zmA doesn’t mean “lung”, then, bring it forward. Are the lungs not mentioned in the BoD ? I'd love to go to the site that you mentioned. But I'm not to concerned I'm sure that whatever it looks like it doesn't look anything like a necklace, but is in fact a stand. What, without even looking ? This shows that in the best of cases the whole thing is a belief which you have, not the result of a conclusion reached after scientific research ; and in the worst case lack of good faith. In the meantime you haven’t answered this objection of mine : >If we imagine for a moment that the zmA had the shape we see in Tutankhamen's bottles, then obviously its (very numerous) two-dimensional representations wouldn't have looked as they do. This shows that the zmA didn't look like the bottles, and that these are mixed compositions< To which I could add that if the original zmA looked like your bottles, then it couldn’t be a pelvic girdle and spine either ! >the Akhet sign isn't a mountain range it's a forge< I wonder what links a sausage-shaped sign (GARDINER N 18) to a forge ? b.j., Thank you for your good humour and shining mood ! JD | ||
| Graham Oaten (210.49.169.191) |
As far as I can tell the art of breathing is natural. The mystic Control of the breath called Pranayama however (as JD mentioned) is a form of Yoga. It cannot be traced any further back than the second century before Christ. Whether or not Aristotle believed in breath control is debatable but he did believe that the principal function of breathing was to cool the body: `The nature of animals requires cooling owing to the fiery nature of the soul which exists in the heart. It achieves this cooling by breathing'. Aristotle, On Breathing, XVI, Loeb, 467. Did Aristotle gain his knowledge from Egypt or somewhere further East ? Breathing through the lungs (the lungs don't actually breath by themselves) is primarily associated with just one thing, living. Stop breathing and you are dead. So what did the ankh to the nose of the AE King symbolise ... breath on or breath deep or just breath forever, long live the King" ? It seems to me that the lungs were important to the AE. The collapsed lungs of men and animals. Well that's how they would have been distinguished. Maybe JD is correct. | ||
| ken b (12.228.203.202) |
JD, The 4th dynasty representation of the sema on the base of Khafre's throne does not have any striations. Furthermore, the so-called striations that you seem to think indicate that the vertical stem of the sema is a trachae are not depicted on many later examples of this sign. What is to found are alternating blocks of decorative elements, the very same in design and color as that which is used in the banding around the edges of the throne, etc. There is also the question of the horizontal cross bar, which also has "striations" on it. From the purely artistic/aesthetic point of view, these seem also to be more decorative elements. Your theory that the base part of the sema sign represents deflated lungs is surely novel. Since the royal title enclosed in a cartouche is often shown directly above (notice how I didn't say "supported by") the sema sign, I can't help but wonder what the role/purpose of deflated lungs are in this context? Ken | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
JD, Religions and, I suppose, “spirituality”, evolve. Ancient Egypt was a long time ago, and its own religious / “spiritual” history spans thousands of years. This is where we'll never agree. Religion and spirituality do not enter the same equation. Spirituality is something that comes from inside, a way of thinking and acting commanded by the inner voice, that you'd probably call conscience. It affects all areas of ones existence and it's precence can be seen in everything from the jewellery one wears to how one treats one's neighbour. Spirituality is based on trust. Trust on life itself. Trust on the divine justice. The Ma'at! You do see how important that was to the Egyptians? Their outer symbol for Ma'at reigning was the king, the shepherd of the nation. And who was the king, if not the link between spirit (you'd call it gods!) and human. The Egyptians had a childlike turst (ring a bell?) in the whole universum, as long as thins link functioned. Religion on the other hand is something external. Imposed on the person. (Akhenaten's Aten cult was a typical religion). Even in cases, where religion is taken "to the heart" by the person, it never enters all fields of existence as a natural ingredient. In other words, where religion may evolve, spirituality either is there or isn't. In ancient Egypt's case spirituality was slowly replaced by religion, which evolved. I never saw much “spirituality” in the Pyramid Texts, the oldest religious texts we have (for Egypt, possibly for the world) : the main god being threatened by the deceased king in case he refuses to relinquish his seat to him ; deities insulted to decrease their magical power, in case they’d want to seize the king’s pyramid for their own purposes... That's funny. Pyramid Texts are part of the funerary equipment of the deceased kings. IMO, in ancient Egypt dying and transversing to the afterlife were taken very seriously. In your opinion, if ever there was a time to get spiritual, wouldn't it be when you died, or more like it, when you prepared for the "house of eternity" for your body? How can the Pyramid Texts not be spiritual? This goes towards all common sense! These are important texts, the deceased is entirely at the mercy of gods and his future in afterlife depends on those same gods. And yet, as you say, we find them threatening the gods, eating the lungs of the wise and feeding on the hearts of gods. Shouldn't this be a serious pointer, not to take these texts literally? That they must be symbolic? The situation may have been different during the New Kingdom, and my vision may be colored by my interest focusing mainly on the more ancient periods. If you think you have valid clues to show this “spirituality” during these older periods (when the hieroglyphic system was being elaborated), then I’d certainly be interested hearing about them. And even clues for the New Kingdom. The Late Period is less convincing, because then the Greek philosophers had added their little grain of salt ! New Kingdom is no different. Apart from Akhenaten's Aten religion, the spirituality was there. Full time. The Book of Dead (coming to light!), the Book of Gates. Tutankhaumn's tomb is no coincidence or a heap of leftovers! I absolutely agree about the Late Period, only I think the Greeks added more than their grain of salt, and not to promote spirituality. Horus in Roman uniform says it all! >Of course one can interpret all the texts literally, but that only leads to being blind to the real beauty of the ancient Egyptian society.< The real beauty, or an imaginary one, which you need as a kind of overlay on archaeological reality, in order for you to be able to like Egypt ? Whereas I already like things as they appear, or as they are ? See, I too can play this game of attributing emotions and motivations to others. No you can't! Even here you paralell me with foggy New Agers. The mere fact, that they have temples for Isis, Thoth, Re and whatnot, shows clearly that they haven't understood Egypt at all. And that happens when you do things in wrong order. It was the study of ancient Egypt that evoked my spirituality. But the spirituality is a funny thing, as it leads to a thirst of knowledge. Of more Egypt, of the Eastern philosophies, the Celts, the Vikings, the Ainu, the Native Indians. And everywhere I see the same pattern. A coincidence? So no, Egypt isn't beautiful because of the spirituality, but even more beautiful because of it. For the rest, I guess we have to agree to disagree, huh? Btw, heheh, don't worry about my crying. With me you always have to count with the possibility of thears of a..... crocodile. | ||
| Alan Jaworski (170.142.235.21) |
To All, Upon renewed inspection of the Glyphs previously mentioned, i noticed a couple things. This looks like a drill!! The crossbar at the top to twist or rotate, in the simple glyph. And in the complex glyph the drillers use a rope to spin the shaft which is weighted with rocks for downward thrust. What do ya think?? That is something that i perceive from having carved stone. good journies,nefer-ka | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
Sorry, couldn't resist the temptation! | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
Heheh, got punished right away! OK, go here and choose chapter 59. | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
Allright, allright, I should have resisted, but here's the link. Seems you have to cut and paste: http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch59.html Can't see why it did not work... | ||
| Alan Jaworski (170.142.235.21) |
To Ritva, i imagine that you speak from your heart. The AE held the heart in high esteem. So how does your heart weigh out on the scales?? How does your heart balance against truth?? Are you feeling the Paths that the AE drew for us? Yes you are. Your words speak your perception. We live by our words. J.D. is on the same journey, only seeing a different vision of the same picture. good journies,nefer-ka | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
Alan, thank you. Andrew, what's wrong with this board, eh? I'm absolutely, positively sure, that I posted the right URL (twise), but error 404 pops up. Then using the clip and paste method, I get the link plastered on my posting. And now, when you look at "view messages" => "Last Day", you can see Alan's posting after my two, but here, on the actual board it's after my three! Spooky! | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Allan-I've had the same thought myself. But I'm not sure now that I've studied the zima symbols in Tut's tomb. Whatever the zima symbol was it certainly wasn't, contrary to J.D.'s one verse song from the pyramid texts, a collapsed lung and windpipe. | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
Hmmmm, after having read the chapter 59 of the Ani Papyrus, I must say I agree with JD (sometimes I surprise myself, even!). This chapter seems to confirm my view of the lung symbolising the organ that unites body (human) and air (spirit). In all evidence, the Egyptian symbolism will have the "earthly lung" collapsed i.e. not in full capacity of receiving. Nut does give "air" to Ani, and thereby restores the lung. | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
What page in Budge's book are you looking at Ritav? | ||
| ken b (12.228.203.202) |
Budge's translation of Chapter LIX (59, p. 458) reads: The chapter of snuffing* the air, and of having power over the water in Khert-Neter**. The Osiris Ani saith: -- Hail, thou Sycamore tree of the goddess Nut! Give me of the [water and of the] air which is in thee. I embrace that throne which is in Unu***, and I keep guard over the Egg of Nekek-ur****. It flourisheth, and I flourish; it liveth and I live; it snuffeth the air, and I snuff the air, I the Osiris Ani, whose word is truth, in [peace]. * Snuff means to draw in through the nose. ** The passages of the underworld *** Hermopolis -- On **** The Earth god Geb | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
"But the fact that Rick for example is never wrong (well, except the thing about the BoD ...) is something I find disquieting : is the motivation of somebody like that to learn and to share knowledge, or to appear to “win” an argument ? And can one have discussions in good faith with him ?" Perhaps it's just that we have very opposing world views (even though I'm reluctant to use that term.). You seem to be solidly wedded to the orthodox, I on the other hand revere the greats but realize that they were all too human. From what I can see there's been no new work done in the "meaning" of heirgolyphs since Gardiner published his grammar. The "description" of virtually ever every glyph is a verbatim republication of Gardiner's list. Now I truly don't understand this. I wrote to one Egyptologist suggesting that Gardiner's sign list was wrong starting with the Ankh being a symbol of the sandal strap, and that perhaps we should revise it and upgrade it. She wrote me a very nice letter that, in so many words, that there was nothing wrong with Gardiner's sign list including the Ankh being a sandal strap. Gardiner's sign list and its interpretations are clearly woven into the fabric of egyptology. But so many of them clearly are wrong, and long convoluted exlanations will not make them right. The sema symbol simply is not a collapsed lung and windpipe. Tut's "jars" as you called them prove this beyond a shadow of a doubt IMHO. Now turning to the linguistic evidence. I looked up "breathing" "breath" and "lungs" in Budge's dictionary and couldn't find a single sima symbol in ANY of the words. A sail with wind blowing against it appears to be the odds on favorite for words that have to do with breathing etc, along with noses. Not a sima symbol in sight. In addition from what I've read of the PT's different translators can come up with wildly different translations of the PT's. There were scribal errors in them (Not to be underestimated seeing how these men were probably working in the dark by lamlight. Unless they carved the texts on the walls first and then installed those block in afterwards. But that seems like a long shot.) that could have confused the issue even more. Just look how many "body part" expressions there are in english. "I'll keep an eye out for you.", "I've got a splitting headache.", "she/he/they have a broken heart","eat your heart out.", "if brains were dynamite he wouldn't have enough to blow his nose.", "He blew his brains out and they cleaned the mess up with a kleenex" etc. etc. I'm sure you can see the wildly ludicrous explanations that scholars 3.5k years from now might dream up to intepret them ("For the Expression "eat your heart out" to make any sense it's obvious that the envious Americans must first have had a fully functional artificial heart implanted in their chest, after this the american would then consume his heart in a ritual fashion to demonstrate....blah, blah, blah.) I think it's reasonable to assume that the AE's also had similar expressions using "body parts" and our lack of understanding of these glyphs leads us to wildly wrong conclusions. | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Ken-Thanks, the passage that I thought it was. But I just wanted to be certain. Ritva-I don't see what this has to do with the sema symbol. Could you expand on this? | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
to all: Until recently ancient pottery of the Mayans showed terrible portrayals of scenes thought to be poetic license of the artist and not of real events. Now they have uncovered the evidence that these thing really did happen. It could be the same story here. There is a lot of evidence showing people to be quite blood-thirsty at this early period. Fear is a great factor for ruling (still used today) . The lungs are refered to as "unite" or "to unite", why that is so, I for one do not know, but seems to have been used that way by the AEs. We must try to keep an open mind here, even if it is about something we would not want our beloved Ancients to have done. It is very possible that they did the ritual cannibalism thing.(yuck!) I think this writing-style went out when the ordinary people began to have the privilege of being mummified also. Or am I wrong? (Lord I hope not again!) | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.34) |
Ken, I checked the older representations of the zmA sign, and they usually have a striated shaft. The much more recent examples with a decorative design are just that, IMHO. They may also indicate that zmA-shaped objects or models (as opposed to a real trachea + lungs) were used in ceremonies, which would be an interesting finding. >Your theory that the base part of the sema sign represents deflated lungs is surely novel.< I don’t know whether Egyptologists knew or know this or not, whether it’s novel or not : I’ve known it for 30 years. Here you can see two chest X-Rays with the deflation condition called “pneumothorax” : http://www.vh.org/Providers/TeachingFiles/PulmonaryCoreCurric/Pneumothorax/CXRB.html http://www.vh.org/Providers/TeachingFiles/M3M4TeachingModules/Mullan/6Pneumothorax/PneumothoraxImage.html >Since the royal title enclosed in a cartouche is often shown directly above (notice how I didn't say "supported by") the sema sign, I can't help but wonder what the role/purpose of deflated lungs are in this context?< Well, dear Ken, I think you could have written “supported by”. While checking the various zmA instances on Old Kingdom monuments, I noticed that the “palmiform column”-capitol I noticed on a Khafre statue is also present on a Niuserre representation, and thus isn’t due to the decorator’s whimsy, to a desire for embellishment. So in the zmA-tA.wj (“Union of the Two Lands”, sema-tawi) group, the zmA seems indeed to be used as a supporting structure. But supporting what ? In Osorkon II’s Heb Sed Jubilee representations (Tanis, 22d dyn.), the king is shown having ascended a podium. The text recited by the priests states : “To unite heaven to earth” (zmA p.t r tA) and “Horus rises / shines, he rests upon his southern throne, becoming / coming into being” (xaj Hrw, Htp Hr s.t=f rsj, xpr.tj). I’m sending participants to this discussion a scan of the scene (the text is the left vertical column at lower right). So it may be that the zmA-tA.wj symbolism involves more than the binding together under the king’s rule of Upper- and Lower Egypt and foreign countries. It may also contain an ascension symbolism, of the king who possesses a divine nature, and who, when ascending his festival podium, is compared with the sun ascending the sky (xaj !). See also the meaning “hill of the sunrise” (P 542) given for xa by GARDINER, Grammar, sign N 28, p. 489. Hence xa-snfr-w(j), Kha-Snefru, “Snefru’s Sunrise Hill”, each of Snefru’s pyramids at Dahchur. The uniting link between the two sets of meanings (binding countries & ascension) is once more provided by the seasonal tent / hut / naos, representing the newly created universe. Its central pole unites the sky (roof) and earth (floor) and represents the Creator deity lifting the sky. This act of creation is accompanied by the god’s victory over Chaos (see countries bound to zmA !). The general atmosphere of the new year booth rituals thus matches that of the zmA-tA.wj composition. Another important aspect of the ceremonies in the hut is that of providing energy through a meal. Now as early as Khafre the zmA-tA.wj scene is linked with the kA-bringer par excellence : Hapy, the annual Inundation, again at the New Year ! He is shown several times binding the heraldic plants (Khafre, Niuserre, Pepy II). Your quotation from BUDGE fits in rather nicely here : >Chapter LIX (59, p. 458) : The chapter of snuffing* the air, and of having power over the water in Khert-Neter(necropolis). The Osiris Ani saith: Hail, thou Sycamore tree of the goddess Nut ! (compared with a column lifting the sky ?) Give me of the [water and of the] air which is in thee. I embrace that throne which is in Unu (= Hermopolis, site of a famous Primeval Hill and home of the most famous Primeval Deities, the Ogdoad), and I keep guard over the Egg of Nekek-ur (Great Cackler? = Geb as a goose, who lays an egg which opens and becomes the world, a symbolism also present in India, and obviously linked with the New Year, when Creation was commemorated or thought to re-happen on a smaller scale). It flourisheth, and I flourish; it liveth and I live; it snuffeth the air, and I snuff the air, I the Osiris Ani, whose word is truth, in [peace]. The same link between breathing and life, as also present in Ritva’s BoD quotation. Now the way Egyptian thinking and symbolism works, this doesn’t mean that the original object depicted by the zmA sign was a strong, supporting structure. Ankh-signs also “support” a box or a corpse sometimes, and the ankh, all humor cast aside, is clearly a knotted strip of something (cloth ? leather ? leaf ?), not the most likely object to support things. The same for the nb collar. The choice of the zmA sign in the zmA-tA.wj group could be the result of : 1. the fact that one wished to express the notion of zmA, “uniting”, and that the trachea + lungs were read zmA (purely phonetic use) ? 2. the notion of breathing was a part of what the zmA-tA.wj composition expresses. From the BoD 59 quotation, possible. 3. all of the above. Possible too. Ritva, What you’re saying is “Egyptians had spirituality because I can’t imagine that they hadn’t”. But what are your clues ? Because how can one have a discussion, how can one settle differences, if it isn’t using clues ? Alan, There already exists a drill sign (U 24, 25..). Rick, You again accuse me of sticking to traditional explanations. This simply isn’t true. It isn’t because you feel like playing the prophet who’s going to reform Egyptology that you’re right. You’re very welcome to present different views (that’s what this BB is for, and its informal character even allows one to present very speculative and uncertain ideas without fear of being ridiculed). But I for one will always demand clues. >Now turning to the linguistic evidence. I looked up "breathing" "breath" and "lungs" in Budge's dictionary and couldn't find a single sima symbol in ANY of the words.< This is something I said a few days ago. BTW, it’s zmA, zema, sema, not sima. As to the PT quotation it’s there, it fits in nicely with the classical explanation, you just can’t call it corrupt because it contradicts your interpretation ! Unless you have other evidence showing it to be corrupt. But your Tutankhamen bottles just aren’t this evidence, and you still haven’t answered my objection : >If we imagine for a moment that the zmA had the shape we see in Tutankhamen's bottles, then obviously its (very numerous) two-dimensional representations wouldn't have looked as they do. This shows that the zmA didn't look like the bottles, and that these are mixed compositions< JD | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.34) |
b.j., You know the Cannibal Hymn from Unas' PT's. In the revised version of the PTs, introduced by Pepy I and used by his successors, this hymn has vanished. This would tend to show that it had become something of an embarassment, and that cannibalism wasn't a current custom anymore. JD | ||
| Graham Oaten (210.49.169.191) |
All - I wonder if cattle, more precisely cattle counts might have anything to do with our zma, Sema, sign. From Raffaele's site I obtained this concerning the annals of PEPI 11 found on both side of a basalt sarcophagus lid belonging to Ankhesenpepi : "The recognizable events are expeditions (military, commercial), products income (honey), statues' erection, King's offerings to temples (lapis-lazuli) or to other Kings, various rituals, ceremonies (Sma Tawy), cattle (and other animals and objects) counts" There is mention of a "Sma Tawy ceremony" and also the "Year of the Union of the Two Lands, Cattle count" Also from MERENRA of whom I have no knowledge : rnpt zmA-TAwy Tnwt-jH (Year of the Union of the Two Lands, Cattle Count) | ||
| JohnE (195.93.50.153) |
To all. I think it is a ceremonial garden fork, the stock is wrapped in hemp rope that was soaked to add weight, mmmm.. and the handle for twisting it could also double as a seat. It would have been used to start the season and also to return life and breath to the soil. Just the thing to take to the bottom of the garden. Ritva the sun is further than the moon but AE adored them both.JD If Osiris became Khufu, where was Isis what did she become? I have a very modern idea as to just how, and to what effect, the bull pole was employed. YYYY Also, is it just possible that modern Hamatic is spoken in Z’Ham-bia and across the Z’Ham-bezi in Z’H’m-babwe, where there is also a “great house”, with a built granite lingam? Could this be an Isis temple, it would seem to fit the part. There are many megalithic follies there. I cannot help being New Age, the Pyramids are the Light to the moth of my mind. BJ I go to everyone one of them. Please ignore this posting. JohnE. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.50) |
Graham, There were many counts during a reign, in theory every two years. When there was such a census the year of the king's coronation, then you'd obtain a mention such as the one you quote : rnpt zmA-TAwy, Tnwt-jH "Year of the Union of the Two Lands, Cattle count". Other years would have zp-n.nw Tnw.t, "nth occasion of the Count". This doesn't seem to indicate a specific link between the zmA-tA.wj and the count, although such a religious link would be easy to explain : gathering cattle to be slaughtered instead of enemies ; kA.w bulls (etc.) slaughtered to provide kA energy... JD | ||
| Graham Oaten (210.49.169.191) |
No interest in cattle then, that's OK, I just had visions of the scribe "marking down" his tally and wondered how he would do this and on what ? What about a testimony to the importance of shipbuilding in the Old Kingdom ? This is provided by a private sculpture of the Third Dynasty, a granite statue of Ankhwa now in the British Museum. It shows him holding a carpenter's adze over his shoulder. An inscription carved on the figure's kilt terms Ankhwa "carpenter of SEMA-ships" and notes his title "who is responsible for the things of the King." If this is our zma then maybe there is a reference here to the oar like appearance of the sema sign. Sorry no photo. Then there is the alabaster statue of the Seated Scribe, Sema-tawy-tefnakht, from the Late Period, Dynasty XXVI, a favourite of Pharaoh. Why name him after a festival ? | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.50) |
Graham, smA (not zmA) ships are "wild bull-ships" belonging to deities (Wb. IV, 126) or even to the king (I think one is mentioned on 2d dyn. stone vases found underneath the Step Pyramid). Building sacred boats certainly was an important job, as was "builder of lioness-shrines" (see Hezy-Re, Hem-Iunu and others). Names of courtiers were often wishes towards the king : Khufu-seneb "May Khufu be in good health", Ramesses-asha-hebu-sed "May Ramses (celebrate) many Jubilees". So "May Tefnakht unite the Double Country" isn't astonishing. JD | ||
| Graham Oaten (210.49.169.191) |
Tricky stuff heiroglyphs. I'm all out of ideas JD so it's back to uniting the two lands and the inundation, fertility, etc. 'Hapi-Meht' or 'Hapi Reset' I haven't seen the "seasonal tent" mentioned yet. Somehow you always manage to include it in the various discussions we have on symbolism | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.66) |
Yes, it's my baby ! :-) JD | ||
| Graham Oaten (210.49.169.191) |
JD recently made this photo available. The important text is arrowed. http://members.optushome.com.au/dingdell/jd/zma1.html | ||
| ken b (12.228.203.202) |
JD, The X-rays of collasped lungs depict a shape that is rounded on the bottom and very narrow at the top. The whole lung, in this condition, is only supported at the top by the left and right bronchi. Still, the shape of the punctured lung does not match the base part of the sema sign and is, rather, an inverse image of same. Now, if you consider, for whatever reason, that the collapsed lungs were depicted upside down at the base of the sema, I can see where the shape bears a resemblance. I realize that Budge's translations are a bit out of date, but...in his BOD book, in the chapter dealing The Doctrine of Eternal Life, he makes a comment on text from the pyramid of Teti. The hymns deal with comparing the body of Teti to various gods and locations in the duat. Budge writes, "...his eyes are the great ones among the souls of Anu, his nose is Thoth, his mouth is the great lake, his tongue belongs to the boat of right and truth, his teeth are the spirits of Uno, his chin is Khert-khent-Sekhem, his backbone is Sema...". Numerous 5th-dynasty references are made to the ladder that the kings (Pepi I, Unas, etc.) ascend to reach "heaven", or the circumpolar region of the eternally living ones. This ladder is set upright, just as the djed is set upright. This makes me tend to think that the vertical column of the sema sign has a link with the principles/symbolism of the djed pillar, which is well known to be associated with vertebral column (backbone). This leads us back to the idea of Unas ascending the spinal column and eating various body parts along the way: >§ 409: Unas has appeared again in heaven. He is crowned with the Upper Egyptian Crown (sbn) as lord of the Horizon. He has reckoned up the dorsal vertebrae... Unas feeds on the lungs (zmA.w) of the wise.< When the king finally makes it to the top of the ladder, so to speak, he eats the eye of Horus and by virtue of this walks among the eternally alive ones, i.e. fully effective akhs (or "souls"). The act of eating the body parts probably should not be taken literally: the idea was, more likely, to generate imagery dealing with a proccess of uniting with -- assimilating -- the different symbolic aspects of the various body organs. Also, I got your GIF and posted on my sema page: www.creatures-kbc.com/sema.htm. Ken | ||
| jd degreef (80.236.134.57) |
Ken, I posted the X-Rays to show the phenomenon of pulmonary retraction, but not expecting to show anything exactly like the zmA sign. But even as it is, we're closer to the zmA shape than with the classical anatomical plates showing inflated lungs ! What we'd need is the testimony of somebody who has slaughtered cattle... On "his backbone is Sema" : did you check how "Sema" is written in Egyptian ? Isn't it smA (s + sickle) = Wild Bull, instead of our zmA-sign ? There could indeed be a link between the zmA and other pillar-like objects, such as the djed or the was, as I posted this morning. The shaft of the sign was naturally used as a pillar-like object itself, but this doesn't mean that it wasn't a trachea. It could just be a playful writing of a notion. As with the ankh and the nb-collar, non-rigid elements that appear to support other items. JD | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Could Unas be eating his way up to heaven using the Apis Bull as the "god" he eats? Will go take a look at cattle lungs (I hope) | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Well, it is an interesting search. I love this BB. Always giving me new things to look into and this is what I have found to date: http://www.animalmummies.com/learningfiles/sacredbulls.html | ||
| ken b (12.228.203.202) |
JD, >"his backbone is Sema" : did you check how "Sema" is written in Egyptian? Isn't it smA (s + sickle) = Wild Bull, instead of our zmA-sign?< Yes, Sema in this case probably refers to the s + sickle. In the p Ani, in the chapter of drinking water in Khert-Neter, Sma is written as the s + sickle: "...Thoth-Hapy, the lord of the horizon, who is known as cleaver of the earth, has opened to me the Celestial Waters [the sky]... I am Sma..." The s sign used in this case, ---00--- , is thought to have been pronounced as z in early times. Although this is a digression, it is interesting to note that this version of s looks like two maces placed head to head, and the sickle symbolism speaks for itself. This reminds me of what I think Alan made a reference to earlier: you can't unite something unless it is divided in the first place. In the civil war in the USA, tremendous efforts were spent (by the Yankees) on uniting the north and the south with a complete fusion of regions as the only acceptable outcome. In AE, it seems as though the division between north and south (earth and sky?) was something that was not only acceptable -- as long as the throne ruled both parts -- but was also a fundmental in the psyche of AE. Please provide your translation of the text on the lower right corner of the wall relief(?) sketch you found. It looks to me like references are made to a priest reciting a "cleansing" formula. On the right register: the becoming (glimmerings) of a light from the south passes through the seat of power (the royal domain/temple precincts) and ascends through the exhalations of horus. (Oh no!, a lung reference.) The central panel: the priest stands under a sign for unity. (Can't tell what's in his hands). The left register: sunlight is the link between the heavens (the sky) and the Earth. This is a mystery (a sealed scroll) related to union. Ken | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
JD, Thanks for the pic. Ahem... you wouldn't know of a site where I could get the complete "Cannibal Hymn"? Sorry, just running through, no time for more comments. | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
J.D. Thanks for the pic. Plus a couple of comments. The dancers arms and legs both form a "heart" glyph, this seems to be a "subtext" (See Wilkinson's reading Ancient Egyptian Art) The zma sign looks exactly like the zma sign that Budge uses to describe words using "strength", "unity" etc. It looks even less like a collapsed lung and windpipe now. And the fact that we both agree that it isn't used in words describing respiratory funcitons tightens the argument in opinion. Gotta go. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.112) |
Ken, Here’s the translation -Each of the steps : « to tread the S / N / W / E stairs » -Names of deities, from right to left : [Seth], Tatenen, Atum, [Shu ?], Khepri, Geb, Nephtys, Isis. -Above seats : “(to crown ?) 4 times on the S / N / W / E” -Top register to the right : “Amon-Re lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, [...], his love ???” ; “Amon-Re, lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, [... king’s wife] Karoam, alive like Re” ; “daughter of the king” (3 times). -Lower register to the right : Second carrier : “Atum” Third carrier : “chamberlain” (jmj-Xnt) Left vertical line : “To unite Heaven with Earth, 4 times” (= 4 stairs) Official : “in charge of the Union” (jrj-zmA) Right vertical line : “Apparition / rising of Horus, to rest upon his southern throne, coming into being (xpr.tj)”. JD | ||
| ken b (12.228.203.202) |
I found another example of the sema. This one may be a bit controversial, but it clears up what the upper, horizontal cross bar relates to, at least in this case. The image is at http://www.creatures-kbc.com/sema.htm#black cubit. Ken | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Ken-I think you've cleared up the mystery of the horizontal bar. I think it is indeed a cubit stick! | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
Hi, I have some more thoughts. Looking closely at the representations, the sema seems more like one object (on the ground) cut in two halves by an other. The piercing object could possibly be the waset staff, but what about the rounded object? The interesting detail is, that be it Hapy and Hapy, or Seth and Horus performing the "uniting" by binding, they always place their knots around the cutting object. In other words, by piercing one unites? | ||
| b.j.barnes (68.7.67.13) |
Well, the more I look at it, the more confusing it becomes. In one picture it looks like lungs and in another the pelvic cradle (from which all life springs, BTW, and from there is drawn the first breath of life). I am also thinking the "bar" could possibly be part of the rib-cage where it connects to the spine? By the way, these are the very best illustrations I have seen and thanks for the interpretations! | ||
| Graham Oaten (210.49.169.191) |
Ken - I have looked at your images and seen the diversity of the "lung like" bases of the sema. This is what we discovered with the nefer, that the basic shape changes with time, almost to a point where there is no resemblence to the original version whatsoever. Extremely difficult situation. So what do we conclude .. that the original meaning was lost to later Egyptians or that they just discovered alternate ways to represent an idea that was firmly embraced in their minds. | ||
| Beth (63.184.17.57) |
Hi Ritva, I couldn't find a site that had the complete "Cannibal Hymn", so here it is (from Faulkner's The Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts) - all typo's mine: Utt 273-4 The sky is overcast, The stars are darkened, The celestial expanses quiver, The bones of the earth-gods tremble, The planets (?) are stilled, For they have seen the King appearing in power As a god who lives on his fathers And feeds on his mothers; The King is a master of wisdom Whose mother knows not his name. The glory of the King is in the sky, His power is in the horizon Like his father Atum who begot him. He begot the King, And the King is mightier than he. The King's powers are about him, His hmwst are under his feet, His gods are upon him, His uraei are on the crown of his head, The King's guiding-serpent is on his brow, Even that which sees the soul, Efficient for burning (?), The King's neck is on his trunk. The king is the Bull of the sky, Who conquers (?) at will, Who lives on the being of every god, Who eats their entrails (?), Even of those who come with their bodies full of magic From the Island of Fire. The King is one equipped, Who assembles his spirits; The King has appeared as this Great One, A possessor of helpers; He sits with his back to Geb, For it is the King who will give judgement In company with Him whose name is hidden On that day of slaying the Oldest Ones. The King is a possessor of offerings who knots the cord And who himself prepares his meal; The King is one who eats men and lives on the gods, A possessor of porters who dispatches messages; It is Grasper-of-topknots who is (?) Kehau Who lassoes them for the King; It is the Serpent with raised head Who guards them for him And restrains them for him; It is He who is over the reddening (?) Who binds them for him; It is Khons who slew the lords Who strangles them for the King And extracts for him what is in their bodies, For he is the messenger whom the King sends to restrain. It is Shezmu who cuts them up for the King And who cooks for him a portion of them On his evening hearth-stones; It is the King who eats their magic And gulps down their spirits; Their big ones are for his morning meal, Their middle-sized ones are for his evening meal, Their little ones are for his night meal, Their old men and their old women are for his incense-burning; It is the Great Ones in the north of the sky Who set the fire for him To the cauldrons containing them With the thighs of their oldest ones. Those who are in the sky serve the King, And the hearth-stones are wiped over for him With the feet of their women. He has travelled around the whole of the two skies, He has circumambulated the Two Banks For the King is a great Power Who has power over the Powers; The King is a sacred image, The most sacred of the sacred images of the Great One, And whomsoever he finds in his way, Him he devours piecemeal (?). The King's place is at the head Of all the august ones who are in the horizon, For the King is a god, Older than the oldest. Thousands serve him, Hundreds offer to him, There is given to him a warrant as Great Power By Orion, father of the gods. The King has appeared again in the sky, He is crowned as Lord of the horizon; He has broken the back-bones And has taken the hearts of the gods; He has eaten the Red Crown, He has swallowed the Green One. The King feeds on the lungs of the Wise Ones, And is satisfied with living on hearts and their magic; The King revolts against licking the sbsw Which are in the Red Crown. He enjoys himself when their magic is in his belly; The King's dignities shall not be taken away from him, For he has swallowed the intelligence of every god. The King's lifetime is eternity, His limit is everlastingness In this his dignity of; 'If he wishes, he does; If he dislikes, he does not', Even he who is at the limits of the horizon for ever and ever. Lo, their souls are in the King's belly, Their spirits are in the King's possession As the surplus of his meal out of (?) the gods Which is cooked for the King out of their bones. Lo, their souls are in the King's possession, Their shades are (removed) from their owners, While the King is this one who ever appears and endures, And the doers of (ill) deeds have no power to destroy The favourite place of the King among those who live in this land For ever and ever. | ||
| ken b (12.228.203.202) |
Just to make things more interesting, consider "Sema and the plumb bob theory" at http://www.creatures-kbc.com/sema.htm#plumbbobtheory. Graham, It's definately a challenge for us moderns, with our rigid reliance on spell checkers, dictionaries, etc. to fully go retro and appreciate what I would describe as the "fluid" mentality of the AE. Another aspect of AE that is difficult for us to fully grasp is that its symbolic language stretched out over thousands of years, with an inevitable accumulation/evolution of content. Its a given that the appearance and symbolic associations of the neb, nefer and sema signs (just to name three) changed over time. However, it appears that the temple schools were able -- actually, charged with the responsibility -- to retain an understanding of the ancestral meanings of the signs. In this sense, I don't think that the original intent behind the signs was lost over time, but embellished. This makes things complicated for us today in our efforts to clearly see the messages assembled in the multi-layered iconography of the important signs. IMO AE hieroglyphs are not "words" with a static definition, they are more like ancestral stories, passed down through the generations and preserved by the temple schools. Ken | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
Beth, thank you. :-) Actually, JD sent me a version of the Cannibal Hymn (thanks JD!!!), but your seems to be different. Very interesting. Ken, thanks for your pictoral synopsis! Hmmmm, could the lower part of sema be the origin of our modern heart symbol? | ||
| ken b (12.228.203.202) |
Ritva, The shape of our modern heart symbol probably has origins based on the spiral geometry (fibanacci series) of a plant leaf. There does, however, seem to be a link between the ieb symbol and the base of both the nefer and sema sign. Considering the characteristic markings on the ieb and lower part of the nefer signs: there is an arc on top and a tear-drop shape under that. If the arc is considered in reference to the use of a plumb bob, it represents a segment of a circle used to mark off divisions of the circumference (such as degrees, or in astronomical terms, decans.) The inverted tear drop (that is, with the pointed end down) may represent the plumb bob itself. In AE the heart of the deceased was weighed against the feather of Maat. Again, we are looking at symbolism dealing with balance and making sure that things line up just right, a sort of "survey of the soul". Ken | ||
| Graham Oaten (210.49.169.191) |
Ken - You have my interest with the plumb bob. There is some concern for it being pictured split in two but let's see where it might lead. Give me a break so I can think about it. | ||
| Graham Oaten (210.49.169.191) |
All - Of those images posted by Ken I thought the basalt rod might have given us our best insight but on reflection I have abandoned this idea and returned to the text supplied by JD. "To unite Heaven with Earth, four times" When I read this I immediately thought of the Hebsed festivals or rituals where one of the activities performed by the King was a circumambulation of the court space four times. I don't remember having seen this referenced in any way to the act of "uniting" but I imagine it could .. in the sense of the four cardinal points. What were those markers that guided the King? The striations of the Sema which are often seen from top to bottom and which, in many instances, split the bulbuous base in two, suggests a ceremonial marker of some sort that has been thrust into a rock like base. The top of the marker is splayed as if to support a weight and in ken's images of the chariot I had visions of Atlas holding the world on his shoulders. To stop us wandering too far I think we must return to the text "To unite Heaven with Earth, four times" and proceed from there. Ken - I notice under the bottom black cubit the heiroglyph for 2/3rds (unless it is the Amenta sign) | ||
| Graham Oaten (210.49.169.191) |
I'll endulge in the hebsed a little more and then I will shut up I promise. Let us view the Sema sign during the reign of Adjib, mid 1st dynasty. Unfortunately just the bottom part is discernable and it's weird to say the least. What are the extra parts to the top of the base? Are they weights like those we see to the top of a drill? illustration 33, Raffaele's site. http://members.xoom.virgilio.it/_XOOM/francescoraf/hesyra/adjibsvi.jpg Here's another illustration from Adjib's reign only this time its the top of the Sema sign. The tell tale Striations are obvious but there is no cross bar on top to be seen and it doesn't appear to be splayed either ??? illustration 21.4 top center. http://members.xoom.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/adjibsvi2.jpg I've saved the best untill last and the only reason I draw attention to it is for its association with the Hebsed and 4 steps or 4 times around the markers etc, etc. So what is the Sem priest holding (just behind the princess). I know it is vague but it has the right kind of shaft and also a base which is familiar to out inquiry. Could this be the earliest representation of the Sema sign ? Again from Raffiele's site : http://members.xoom.virgilio.it/francescoraf/hesyra/hemaka.htm | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.116) |
Graham, As confirmed here, the older representations are usually more realistic and less stylized. I find that the examples from Adjib's reign are very close to what the trachea + lungs look like in reality : a striated windpipe, somewhat broader than in the classical representation (and let me remind you that Old Kingdom zmA-tA.wj signs don't have the very broad crossbar at the top, only a short abacus-like rectangle) ; the lower part looks like a deflated balloon, no doubt the collapsed pulmonary lobes. Not like a bob, not like a pelvis, not like a bottle, not even like a vase borer upside down, but like lungs ! Thank you for posting these excellent plates (although the links don't work for me). JD | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Nope-They don't look a thing like lungs or a windpipe or an abacus on top, or any other body part (with the possible exception of the pelvic girdle and spinal column, but then we have those missing ribs to account for!) part human or otherwise. What we have is lot's more circular reasoning, (it must be a lung and windpipe because that's the only thing that it looks in fact the it looks a lot like the fuzzy wuzzy collapsed lung and wndpipe in a chest x-ray taken over 5,000 years later...kind of logic...Jeez talk about reaching.) Next apparently out of the entire corpus of Egyptian literature we have only one very, very, very, tenuous reference that might refer to the "lungs" in the pyramid texts. (Again indicative of absolutely nothing.). And then of course disregard any evidence that clearly shows that the sima symbol wasn't a windpipe and lungs. (the three zema bottles in Tut's tomb that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it isn't a trachea and collapesed lungs.) So far a beautiful job of propping up a ludicrous interpretation with next to nothing. There still is no compelling evidence to show us what the sema symbol "really" was. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.114) |
Rick, If the Adjib representations don’t look like lungs, then I don’t know what you need ! I only gave one textual allusion to lungs (?), which is still one quotation more than what you provided. Besides, the quotation is there, it exists, so shouldn’t we take it into account ? You just can’t brush it away because it doesn’t suit your (vague) ideas, unless you have other texts contradicting it, in which case we’d have a dilemma. But you have hitherto failed to present such evidence, or to show how or why the PT spell is corrupt. The lungs as twin organs are also good candidates to be used in a notion such as “to unite”, and I have brought forward a clue to confirm this, namely that other notoriously paired organs, testicles, were designated with a similar name (zmA.tj). As the discussion strings here show, you refused the windpipe + lungs identification from the onset (possibly because like others here you didn’t know about the fact that lungs collapse when the thorax is opened ; if I hadn’t known this, I wouldn’t have believed in the abovementioned identification either, for the zmA doesn’t look like inflated lungs, that’s for sure). Then you found the Tutankhamen bottles to support your allegation. But you have still failed to respond to the following argument : >If we imagine for a moment that the zmA had the shape we see in Tutankhamen's bottles, then obviously its (very numerous) two-dimensional representations wouldn't have looked as they do. This shows that the zmA didn't look like the bottles, and that these are mixed compositions< Nor do you seem to acknowledge another feature of AE art : the existence of mixed, fused representations, such as human bodies with animal heads. I provided an example from Tutankhamen’s tomb : a mirror case representing a Heh god, but with a loop on top suggesting an ankh (this doesn’t prove that the ankh was not a knotted strip of something). Another example are the three large beds from the anteroom, with mixed features of beds and of goddesses (lioness, cow, hippo) : are you going to say that they don’t represent animals, because of the flat upper surface of a |
