Abydos Temple Hieroglyphics

Originally posted by Nygdan

Most interestingly, i have seen this described as preists, in ceremonial garb, conducting 'pollinization' experiments, on their plants, or at least being a godly representation of that.

Interesting example.

But all the ancient people that I know about (which isn't ALL, admittedly) had such a respect for art that they would draw a representation and then write meaningful text next to it.

These images seldom exist as a picture in the middle of nothing. I'd be interested to know what else was around and with that picutre.

For those that say that "there is no text next to them", I would say that there is no text that says the carvings represent vehicles, but again there is no other text whatsoever. If there was supposed to be some text near the carvings to make them real, it isn't.

For those that say that the carvings are a result of superimposing one set of carvings over another, I would say that it is not possible that has happened. Any attempt to carve anything over a set of previous carvings would force the artists to destroy the set of previous carvings.

Finally, no matter how one approaches it, there can be no physical process that can randomly create 5 perfect carvings that look like modern vehicles, all at the same place. The probability of that happening is astronomically small.

And to those that say that ancient Egyptians could not have made those carvings because they did not have such vehicles, I would say that there is not problem with the hypothesis that the Egyptians did not have those vehicles: there could have been other civilizations, now gone, that visited the ancient Egyptians with those vehicles.

Great arguement.......

I think they dreamt all the images after a night of pot an pizza.

They are not vehicals. Get it into your head that the Egyptians were never exposed to technology much greater than the wheel and pullies until they came into contace with the Greeks, quite a while later, and even then you can count the number of ancient Greek helicopters on the thumbs of a blind butcher.

What is wrong with the answer provided? It makes total sense.

And just to tempt fate, who exposed the Egyptians to such technology? Why are there no other records of this event? Why are there no remnants of such things anywhere else on this whole damn planet?

Or better yet was it Aliens? Time travellers who just happen not to have visited any other time and exposed some of their tech?

'Get it into your head that the Egyptians were never exposed to technology much greater than the wheel and pullies until they came into contace with the Greeks, quite a while later, '
uncle joe
From all the evidence I have seen, and according to most of the ancient Greek great minds own words, the knowledge was learned by Greeks from Egyptians. Many of them spent years studying in Egypt, and brought what they learned back to Greece with them. Popular thinking that points to Greece as the birthplace of civilization, philosophy, science, etc. ignores the words of those Greeks themselves, many of whom credit Egypt as the source of their education.

Ive not read that before Blackguard, do you have any links or books you could recomend please?

I was under the impression that the only place where any real Greek/Egyptian synthesis took place was on and around Crete.

But that doesnt change the fact that the Hieroglyphs do not show any advanced tech.

I don't know what those symbols were meant to be, but they are not nearly as impressive an example of advanced technology as the great pyramid of Giza, which I feel is hard to beat. The more one studies it, the more impossible it appears to replicate even with modern tech.
One book that covers quite a bit of the Egyptian influence on ancient Greece is 'Black spark, white fire.' I will have to look up the authors name. Otherwise, reading the works of Plato, Socrates, Pythagoras, Herodotus, etc. to find their opinions on the subject would help.
Aristotle is one exception, if I recall, who did not study in Egypt.

I was aware that many Greeks travelled in Egypt, and learnt from the records kept there, but i was under the impression that they simply learnt from what was written down rather than were taught by the Egyptians themselves.

And on a totally unrelated matter would you mind telling me what makes the pyramids at Giza so special when compared to the Aztec pyramids at Technohitlan? And forgive the fact that I cannot spell that?

It has taken me years of reading to decide my views as to the extreme feat of precision, engineering, and logistical expertise that is the Giza pyramid. I could go on forever, but instead, I will paste a previous note I saved.
Nobody has produced a viable way to replicate the pyramid, even with the use of unlimited labour. The logistics, accuracy, and complexity of design are beyond our best minds......as far as I can determine anyway. The 200 ton granite block that is over 200 feet up inside it is one real nightmare, and the different sizes of tiers, and different widths of blocks is another logistical monster. The subtle design features, and perfect accuracy of placement and angles is also many times beyond modern day work, it is a mystery why they made it so precise, when to the naked eye it is invisible, and it makes the reproduction many, many times more difficult. It is almost like dropping the gauntlet. They made a statement. "There! Top That!", maybe as a means of proving their advanced level. It may have been known well in advance that an unstoppable celestial object was very likely to wipe them out, and they just wanted to say hi..... thats what I think.

Fair enough, thankyou for answering my question.

I would argue with you, but i get the impression you know just a tad more than me.

There is no need. If you do a search online, and scan the various sites that list the specs of the Giza pyramid, you can quite quickly learn much of what I spent years reading about. Once you get an idea of the precision and design, then you can try to find a plausible detailed plan of how we would duplicate it. If we wish to exactly copy it, we will have a challenge that no one has as yet successfully outlined. In every case, the plans are found to be unworkable, so far. If you find an unchallenged and credible looking one, please let me know.

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
They are not vehicals. Get it into your head that the Egyptians were never exposed to technology much greater than the wheel and pullies

And you can prove that ...how?

What is wrong with the answer provided? It makes total sense.

No, it does not make any sense at all, for the reasons I already outlined.

And just to tempt fate, who exposed the Egyptians to such technology? Why are there no other records of this event? Why are there no remnants of such things anywhere else on this whole damn planet?

Because the carvings are drawings on myths passed orally from generation to generation.

The Hindus had the vimanas.

The Greeks had the various chariots that Gods travelled in.

There are many ancient drawings of people driving vehicles, flying aircraft, spacecraft and many others.

All civilizations have ancient myths about flying vehicles.

Homer mentions lots of them in the Iliad/Odyssey.

wow, you people are prolific. And since I read all of the posts I don’t have much time to reply (right now) However, I Did manage to find an “original” image from the temple of Huy on this site:

www.osirisnet.net...

(middle of the page, North Wall, view 19.)

If you want to download the image and try to photoshop it, the direct link is:

www.osirisnet.net...

This is not the best of photos… it is at a slight angle, the lighting isn’t alla that great, and, as you can see, the image is horribly deteriorated. However, I Know I’ve seen a better full color picture of this, about 20 to 30 years ago, in a National Geographic or similar type publication… (so whenever I saw a line drawing of this I never thought much of it, knowing I’d seen it before…)

This is not the best of images to base Any type of argument on (and I’m not) Basically I did this to help prove to myself that I haven’t lost my mind completely… (reminder—my daughter is a year and a half old, my wife is the bread winner in the family, I’m a stay at home dad, I’m old, and I’m going on a year and a half of some Serious sleep deprivation—who needs drugs when you have a kid? *Laughs*)

Originally posted by masterp
Because the carvings are drawings on myths passed orally from generation to generation.

The Hindus had the vimanas.

The Greeks had the various chariots that Gods travelled in.

There are many ancient drawings of people driving vehicles, flying aircraft, spacecraft and many others.

All civilizations have ancient myths about flying vehicles.

Homer mentions lots of them in the Iliad/Odyssey.

My turn to say 'proof please'

Why would the Greeks and others wexposed to this high tech stuff not write it down? The greeks wrote everything down. Myths and legends alone do not count as legends, just look at the works of Velikovsky.

Why are many ancient civilisations Gods in chariots?

Because the chariot was the vehical of choice for many an ancient king, ergo the Gods would use the same things. Not much of a mystery.

I've read the Ilyad and the Odyssey. Dint see any helicopters, spaceships, tanks, guns. But i will admit that your version sounds alot more fun.

The reasons you outlined seemd to revolve around your inability to translate hieroglyphs. I can not do so either, but have seen that several people on this forum can, and have for the sake of this arguement, leaving us with the explanation to this little dilemma.

Your points do not add up. Sorry.

Mod edit: Big Quote

[edit on 13-10-2005 by parrhesia]

Okay, a couple of quickies before my daughter wakes up:

As I said earlier, I’ll buy into the palimpsest theory for the Abydos images. Apparently the re-carving of ancient tombs was a common practice. My own experience and research leads me to believe that this is true and I don’t have any problems with that. Kings would carve over old kings names, conquerors would carve over the conquered, and descendents would take over their predecessors’ tombs and make them their own. The ancients seem to be a carve happy lot. They would carve on and over Everything.

Okay, fine, I don’t have a problem with that.

My question then becomes (and it’s one I’ve never had adequately answered) why is the Great Pyramid lacking in such carvings? Not only is it lacking in artwork from the original builders, but also artwork from subsequent generations…

Again, these people were carve happy, why is The Greatest Tomb every built devoid of artwork?


Gods in chariots. The ancients were writing about things using the language they possessed, just like you and I are doing now. If you don’t possess the words then you have to make up a new word, or try to describe it using the words you have… “like a whirlwind”, “like a pillar of fire”, “like brimstone”

Sure sure, some legends come straight out and say “it Was a chariot pulled by horses” but others say “it was Like a chariot pulled by horses”

Like a chariot is not a chariot.

We’re going through the same thing now with the ufo religion… the people who claim to see these things don’t possess the vocabulary to describe them, it “looked like a saucer”, “it was cigar shaped’, they are not talking about the saucer I set my teacup on, or the stogie I burn after dinner, but something else…

Originally posted by torbjon
My question then becomes (and it’s one I’ve never had adequately answered) why is the Great Pyramid lacking in such carvings? Not only is it lacking in artwork from the original builders, but also artwork from subsequent generations…

A good question and not one that's easily answered. The pyramid was sealed for many generations and this is why it wasn't recarved. By the time it was opened (by thieves) the culture had changed and nobody was interested in carving things down in a hot and dusty pyramid where there was no need or reason to carve them.

There are workman's marks on several stones (sort of "The Red Team was here") and there is a lot of information in the temples that surround the pyramid. Why none inside? We don't know. Any number of reasons could be the cause, including that it was built for one pharoah who died before it was finished and a second one finished it but died and the third one hated it and didn't want it.

Or... any other number of ideas.

Well, I Do appreciate the fact that you took the time and energy to reply to me, Byrd, but did you even read what you wrote?

So the greatest tomb ever built has a little graffiti by some of the work men, but no artwork or carvings by the guy who (allegedly) had it built because he died before it was finished.

Okay.

So the next guy finishes it, then dies, but doesn’t use it and still no artwork or carvings… hmmmm. So where is His tomb and why didn’t he use the one he finished?

The next guy hated it and didn’t want to use it… biggest pile o’ rocks in the history of the world and he didn’t want to use it. *shrugs* To each his own… maybe he didn’t like the color.

So, who sealed the tomb? The third guy? Why? What (or who) was sealed inside?

What about the Next guy? Why doesn’t he use it? Or the next guy…(or the next, or the next…)

Why didn’t whoever had it sealed scratch a little something on the wall sayin’ “I’m the dude that sealed this big ol’ pile of rocks up, ain’t I cool!”

If thieves could break into it at a later date why didn’t a pharaoh have a couple thousand workman break into it and then claim it as his own?

Why did it remain so untouchable when virtually every other bit of rock in the area was carved and re-carved?

Again, I’m thrilled that you took the time to reply, but I can’t buy into your answer… it just raises more questions.

There’s something fishy about that pile of rocks and I have yet to hear an adequate explanation as to the who what where when and whys of it…

Originally posted by Byrd
I'd be interested to know what else was around and with that picutre.

I've only ever seen them as parts of a wall painting.

masterp
I would say that it is not possible that has happened.

Its not a carving, its a palimpset. One set of gylphs. Then a plastering over, then a new set, the plaster has worn away. The helicopter and space ships can be made out of superimposed glyphs.

The probability of that happening is astronomically small

The shapes are made out of known glyphs superimposed over one another.

Homer mentions lots of them in the Iliad/Odyssey.

All of these things are either regular chariots and armour that are tweaked out, or things from the gods. In ther hindu vedas, there's even a fraudulent passage that has been going around for a long time that is presented as having advanced tech. But lets stick to the basics here, abydos. Yes, for the purposes of discussion, lets say its possible that there could've been helicopters flying around. This changes nothing. The shapes seen on the abydos palimpset are composed of known glyphs, and the block of text is known to be a palimpset, not a single construction. If the egyptians did see helicopters and the glider from star wars, they didn't record it at abydos.

torbjon
Sure sure, some legends come straight out and say “it Was a chariot pulled by horses” but others say “it was Like a chariot pulled by horses”

I'd say that parsimony should apply here,if not to prevent one from taking certain avenues of research, then at aleastfrom making conclusions. If it sorta says chariot, and we know that they had chariots, then lets just keep an open mind but conclude that its most logical that the guy was describing chariots.
Also, wrt the Odyssey and Iliad, these were works composed long after the events they proport to describe, ie not even close to eyewitness events, indeed, pretending that homer was a person, his generation was in a completely different culture than that of the heros of the trojan war, and this shows in the text. He has them using iron spears, when the event occured in the bronze age, for example, and he has them riding these magnificent chariots into battle, then hoping off and fighting on foot, which is what people in homers time were used to, whereas actual chariot warfare is stunningly different. If nothing else, this means that the descriptions and explanations have been altered, sometimes dramatically, and have become unreliable. If they have outside corroboration, then we can say that they wer accurate for those specific things. For example, schliemann was able to find that hissarlik hill in turkey was the site of 'troy', so homer certainly got some stuff right. But there were no colossal palaces and temples and all the rest of that. Or even in a basic aspect, the people of troy speak greek in the iliad, in reality, they spoke something like Luwian, a different language unintelligble to the greeks. So these texts are all very iffy on a lot of things.

with text. I was reading something earlier, I think it was actually a paper by arthur evans infact (so it isn't all that new as I thought) that stated that the devices they are holding are the cones of the plant, and thats how they spread the pollen.

The carrying page for that photo has a line drawing of a similar one, with old Fish-Man god doing something similar with a stick.

This one is neat

No text, but its 'one of the first' time the tree of life is presented, they seem to be tending it, and behind the woman is our old friend the serpent.

[edit on 13-10-2005 by Nygdan]

(nod) That's the problem with these pictures... they are focused on the central artwork. If you took four big steps backward and didn't zoom the lens and THEN photographed it... what shows up? What's the context? What else is around it?

Unlike Mount Rushmore, I'd bet this panel wasn't carved out in the middle of nowhere. That means that whatever's around the panel has some relationship to what's on the panel.

So... any idea of the context?

The thing I find striking is, regardless of their authenticity, they have "unique" drawings that cannot be identified immediately.