User talk:Iry-Hor/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Iry-Hor. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Hey, thanks for uploading all these pictures (especially from objects of the Second Intermediate Perioda period people are normally not that interessted). best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 10:40, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you ! I hope to have more soon. Iry-Hor (talk) 12:36, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

May I make a wish? ;)) Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 16:56, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure I will try to find the picture you want. I already know that I will have one you should like. You will see... Iry-Hor (talk) 17:51, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

My wish concerns photographs of following kings: Weneg-Nebty, Wadjesen, Raneb, Nubnefer and the sinai relief of Sekhemkhet. Oh, and Sneferka.^^ Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 18:34, 30 May 2013 (UTC)PS: Look at this. ;-)

Ok as soon as I see something related to these kings I will get it to commons. In the mean time, here is a new photo I quite enjoy Iry-Hor (talk) 21:12, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh mgod, what a surprise!!! Wow!!! It's the shoulder of the high official Hotepdjef. It shows the rare depiction of the deity Djebaut. The inscription says: "To Djebaut, the kings Hor-Hetepsekhemwy, Hor-Raneb and Hor-Nynetjer." It is thought that Hotepdjef was a priest of Djebaut and the mortuary priest of the three kings. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 21:36, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Je te remercie pour les précisions que tu as menées à l'article de Pepi II. Je n'ai pas sous la main l'encyclopédie de Darell Baker, saurais-tu vérifier que la date que tu as ajoutée pour la fin du règne est bien 2194 av. J.-C. et non pas 2184 av. J.-C.? J'ai vu sur ta page d'utilisateur que tu es en mesure d'interpréter l'écriture hiéroglyphique. M'intéressant également à la langue et à l'écriture égyptienne, je me demandais si tu serais en mesure de me donner quelques conseils quant à la façon de m'y apprêter efficacement. Amicalement, Nicolas Perrault III (talk) 14:29, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Salut, pardon j'ai fait une erreur c'est bien sur 2184 BC et non 2194 BC (j'ai corrige). En fait c'est surtout l'accord entre la liste de Turin et Manethon pour Pepi II qui est remarquable et plutot rare (regarde ICI columne 5 ligne 5, il y a 9 "u" inverses, chaque u inverse represente 10 ans, donc la liste de turin indique 90 + x annees, le x etant dans la lacune). Cela peux signifier deux choses: Pepi II a bien regne aussi longtemps ou Manethon et la liste de Turin utilise une meme source plus ancienne qui contient une erreur (mais dans ce cas pourquoi Manethon et l'auteur de la liste de Turin donnent ils des longeurs de regne differentes pour d'autres rois ?). Ceci fait pencher les egyptologues en faveur d'un regne tres long de 94 ans, et l'accession au trone a 6 ans pourrais aller dans ce sens. L'hypothese d'une duree de regne plus courte repose sur le fait que l'on ne trouve pas d'objets de l'epoque de Pepi II au dela de sa 62e annee de regne. Mais comme le remarque Darell Baker, cela n'indique rien pour deux raisons: le Signor–Lipps effect et la desintegration de l'authorite royale vers la fin du regne de Pepi II. Dans tout les cas, que ce soit 64 ou 94 ans, Pepi II a bien regne fort longtemps. J'aimerais avoir acces au Lexikon des Pharaonen pour voir ce que les allemands en disent.

Pour les hieroglyphes, si tu veux apprendre il existe des livres fantastique en anglais. Le meilleur pour commencer est le "How to read Egyptian Hieroglyphs" de Collier. Ce livre est d'une facilite deconcertante et a la fin tu pourra comprendre beaucoup d'inscriptions standards, lire et comprendre les noms des rois, et reconnaitre tout les signes. En suite, pour comprendre tout les textes, il te faudra lire soit le Gardiner (qui bien qu'ancien et tres bien ecrit) soit pour une etude vraiment poussee, le Middle Egyptian: An Introduction to the Language and Culture of Hieroglyphs de Allen. Perso je te conseil : "How to read Egyptian Hieroglyphs" puis apres tu pourras decider si tu veux aller plus loin. Tu verras que c'est tres agreable d'aller dans les musees et de lire les monuments directement ! Iry-Hor (talk) 16:52, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi! My, look at the article of Peribsen, I have found baffling new stuff about the theory of a divided realm under Peribsen!!! Look and be amazed!!! Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 21:17, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Nice ! Very interesting stuff. The article on Peribsen is quite detailed now. Iry-Hor (talk) 16:22, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, and now it has finally reached its end. That's all. The oldest, the changing and the newest views are now presented and perfectly referenced. Even a teeny-tiny bit better than the German version! :-D Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 16:45, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I have expanded this article. Hope you enjoy. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 11:56, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes nice, thanks for the precisions ! I modified the sentences a bit, so as to have a more English-sounding phrasing. Do you know of any picture (e.g. of the stela of Seret) we could add to the article ? Iry-Hor (talk) 12:50, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, I know just the right person to ask for a picture scan. ;-) I gonna draw the stela then. Unfortunately, there is no up-to-date photograph of that artifact, but a very detailed drawing made by Grajetzki. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 16:42, 15 July 2013 (UTC) PS: I have also enlarged the article of queen Penebui.

Hallo...???? --Nephiliskos (talk) 23:03, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I haven't had time to do any wikipedia lately (VERY busy life these days for me !) I will get some edits done and see all the new stuff when I am on vacations, hopefully soon enough ! Iry-Hor (talk) 17:13, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Aah, sorry then. I just got worried, when no response followed. Don't work too hard - no boss really deserves that. ;D Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 18:13, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

I reviewed your DYK nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/Imyremeshaw. It looks nearly ready, but there's one minor sourcing issue that I'd like to see taken care of, and I suggested a slight adjustment to the hook. Please reply there. A. Parrot (talk) 01:18, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Replied ! Thank you for the review. Iry-Hor (talk) 11:40, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. I have translated the inscription of the dark vessel fragment in section "Rulers of Lower- and Upper Egypt". Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 21:36, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Nice ! Thanks for the addition ! Is this the same store of provisions as in ? Iry-Hor (talk) 11:38, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

??? I actually meant this very inscription...--Nephiliskos (talk) 16:20, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry I got messed up with the pictures. I meant this one: where you mentioned a "house of copper" ? Iry-Hor (talk) 18:23, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Aaahhh!^^ Thx, now I see clear. Now, thou must know, that Egypt at the Early dynasties fostered several -not to say, countless- "stores of provisions of the king XY". Every nome of that time had its own provision store. These stores could be entitles as "house of...", "cellar of..." or "domain 'XXX' of...". The notation Is djefa'h

simply means "provision" or "supplies". The notation Inj

simply means "tribute". Every 'house', 'cellar' or 'domain' had its own, individual name. Let's take an example: On one vessel of Sekhemib it says:

, which reads: "Tribute of the foreigners to the house of the king and the house of farm field economy". Thus, the (nameless and undefined!) tribute was handed over to the royal household as well as to the "house of field farm economy". ;-) In thine case the name of the (royal) institution is lost, so it's highly speculative, that both inscriptions mean the same state storage. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 20:04, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the clarification ! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

On 28 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Imyremeshaw, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the two colossal statues of Imyremeshaw were usurped by Aqenenre Apepi and Ramses II? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Imyremeshaw. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Alex Shih^Talk 00:03, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Intef I, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abydos (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that's true. My main point in that edit summary was that there is no certainty that the remains in the Step Pyramid are of Djoser, so it's wrong to imply that there is certainty. One website I looked at, perhaps not an RS but well-informed, says that the probability that those remains are Djoser's is "near to zero". Anyway, when I qualified the statement with "identified", I meant that even if we have mummies of earlier pharaohs, we don't know they're mummies of pharaohs. An RS I was reading recently said that Seqenenre Tao is the oldest one whose identification scholars feel confident of. A. Parrot (talk) 18:09, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

That's certainly true, though it is worth mentioning in the article on the step pyramid that a mummified knee was discovered by Lauer in Djoser's sarcophagus and that this knee may or may not be that of Djoser. The only RS I have on the subject is a book of interviews of JP Lauer (a king of biography) where he relates the discovery of the knee. He think to remember from the book that he refers to it casually as "the knee of Djoser", but I can't say if he really thought it was indeed Djoser's. Also, about the site you refer to, I would think it is RS but this opinion is not shared by other editors: when I nominated Horus Sa for wikipedia DYK, I was told references to it should be removed as Francesco Raffaele is not a professional archeologist and does not have peer-reviewd publication to back 99% of his analyses. To me he remains a thoroughly knowledgeable amateur. Iry-Hor (talk) 18:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Have you seen? In the German version I have put a self-drawn picture of an ivory tag showing queen Penebui. ;-) Regards;

You drew it ?? Wow ! Isn't there an image of this item of wiki commons ? Also, could you upload your drawing on commons, so we can use it in the English wiki ? Iry-Hor (talk) 16:17, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes. I drew it. :-)) I will ask one of my befriended admins, if he could transfer the pic into commons. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 20:37, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

here is the reference for erathostenes http://martin-wagenschein.de/en/K-Kohl/Eratosth/Eratosth.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthoab (talk • contribs) 17:25, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for editing Wikipedia ! However, the source you use as a reference for your edit on Erathostenes is not a reliable source as per Wikipedia guidelines, see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. If we use random websites as references, we can pretty much claim anything about everything. Iry-Hor (talk) 18:31, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Eratosthenes and the Mystery of the Stades - Introduction Author(s): Newlyn Walkup

Editor's Note: This article was the winning article in the 2005 competition for best history of mathematics article by a student, sponsored by the History of Mathematics SIGMAA of the Mathematical Association of America. http://www.maa.org/publications/periodicals/convergence/eratosthenes-and-the-mystery-of-the-stades-introduction#sthash.d8uNLAWn.dpuf

The 185 meter stade, as claimed by Rawlins earlier, is the most commonly accepted value for the length of the stade used by Eratosthenes in his measurements of the Earth. This is so because a great number of authors from the first century CE onward make reference to the fact that 1 Roman mile is equal to 8 stades. History tells us that the Roman mile is equal to 5000 Roman feet, each of which is just short of the familiar English foot. The exact difference between the Roman foot and the English foot is uncertain, but if 1 Roman foot is taken to be approximately 11.65 English inches, then one Roman mile is approximately equal to 1479 meters. Taking 1/8 of this Roman mile gives the length of 1 stade as approximately 184.8 meters. Again, this length corresponds to one of Lehmann-Haupt’s six stades. He refers to this most frequently accepted stade as the “Italian” stade [2, pp.42-44 ].

Astronomer and historian Dennis Rawlins makes the following claim. That 1 stade = 185 meters (almost exactly 1/10 nautical mile) is well established. Nonetheless, some scholars are unwilling to believe that Eratosthenes' CE [approximation of the Earth’s circumference] could be so far in error as 17% […] [18, p.211 ]. http://www.maa.org/publications/periodicals/convergence/eratosthenes-and-the-mystery-of-the-stades-how-long-is-a-stade

The simplicity and elegance of Eratosthenes’ measurement of the circumference of the Earth is an excellent example of ancient Greek ingenuity. Eratosthenes makes five assumptions which he will use as hypotheses in his argument [11, p. 109 ]. 1. That Alexandria and Syene lie on the same meridian. 2. That light rays from the Sun which strike the Earth are parallel. 3. That the distance between Alexandria and Syene is 5000 stades. 4. That the angle formed by the shadow and the staff in Alexandria at the

           summer solstice is equal to 1/50 th of a circle.

5. That the Earth is a sphere.

http://www.maa.org/publications/periodicals/convergence/eratosthenes-and-the-mystery-of-the-stades-the-basic-problem#sthash.yt6BervL.dpuf

By today’s standards, these error percentages may seem high. However, for the ancient Greeks, the approximation is remarkably close. While it is true that ancient scientists lacked the sophisticated scientific equipment necessary to make precise measurements, it is also necessary to realize that they did not place the same emphasis on precision that we do today. Therefore, assuming that a figure given by an ancient scientist is the most accurate measurement available at that time is not a safe assumption. Nor is it safe to assume that the ancient scientist holds in mind the same rigorously scientific ideals that scientists do today. Scholar of ancient astronomy D.R. Dicks comments on the futility of trying to determine the accuracy of ancient scientific works. The Greek mentality cannot be judged correctly from the standpoint of the modern scientist, and any attempt to force a spurious accuracy on to ancient measurements and translate them into mathematically exact modern equivalents is bound to have misleading results [2, pp.43-45 ]. http://www.maa.org/publications/periodicals/convergence/eratosthenes-and-the-mystery-of-the-stades-conclusions#sthash.iaqfiYXC.dpuf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthoab (talk • contribs) 20:53, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Fascinating ! Thank you for the effort you put into explaning these things ! I believe that the link you provide THIS ONE is indeed a reliable source as per wikipedia's guidelines (contrary to the first one you provided, i.e. that one). Please don't hesitate to edit the Erathostenes article now, using the MAA source as a reference. Be careful however to cite the source properly so that future editors see this that is indeed a reliable source. I am certain the Erathostenes article will be grealty improved thanks to these additions. Try to keep a section discussing alternate and reliably sourced opinions on the subject so as to keep the article neutral and reflect the diversity of hypotheses that currently exist.

Also, you could check if there are other wikipedia articles concerning the measurement of the Earth by Erathostenes which would benefit from these additions (e.g. an article on the Stades). One way to see if there are such articles and which one they are, is to look in the toolbox on the left hand-side of the page, and click the link "What links here". It will give you the list of all articles refering to Erathostenes. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:42, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Can you help with the Baka entry? I'm not sure how to fix this but we do have Bikheris which clarifies it. I recently added some text clarifying Hudjefa with a link to our article on it. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:20, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Ok I will look into that, I am surprised though that Baka is mentionned on the Turin canon. I will see if I can find what Kim Ryholt has to say about this. Iry-Hor (talk) 11:22, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Bikheris is mentioned at List of pharaohs. Conventional Egyptian chronology gives Bikheris as a later version of Bakhare. This source gives Bakare. Take a look at what The Cambridge Early History says:[1]. Baka shows up at Egyptian Fourth Dynasty family tree but not Fourth Dynasty of Egypt. A bit of a mess. Dougweller (talk) 12:57, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that in fact Baka does not show up in the Turin canon: there is only a lacuna there, meaning that the author of the canon thought or knew that a king reigned between Kafre and Menkaure but the name of this king is irremediably lost. Thus it is essentially conjectural to attribute the lacuna to a king named Baka. At the opposite, the Baka that shows up in Egyptian Fourth Dynasty family tree is an historically attested prince of the Fourth Dynasty, but he is attested only as prince ! This is probably why Baka is not included in the article on the fourth dynasty. I propose that the mention of Baka in the article on the Turin canon be removed since the name is completely lost and putting Baka there is only an hypothesis. In the article on the fourth dynasty, the problem of Baka can be briefly discussed with a reference to Bikheris for a more complete overview of the debate on Baka's identity and name. Iry-Hor (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

King Bikheris is today thought to be either a misinterpretation of ramesside kinglists or simply fictitious. It looks like between Khufu and Djedefrê a king was expected to rule (see the Baka-Pyramid at Sawjet El-Arjan), but he died and the shaft was left half-used. But this king should have been namend "Seth-Ka", because the crownprince of Khufu was already named Setka. Another possible "flash-ruler" might have been occurred between Khafrê and Menkaurâ: A son of Djedefrê was named Ba-Ka (ram + ka) and he might have ruled for a extremely short time. The main problem is: Baka's name appears in several inscriptions, but always guided by a title of a crownprince, never as a king. Therefore it is highly disputed up to this day, whose tomb had been begun at Sawjet El-Arjan. My personal view is that it was planned as the tomb of Setka, which would explain Djedefrê's odd decision to move his funeral to Sawjet El-Arjan: he followed his elder brother to a place known as a local cult-center for the deities Seth and Rê. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 13:28, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks all. Iry-Hor has fixed it now, much appreciated. Dougweller (talk) 15:41, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I have extended the article using good sources. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 23:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Man these articles are getting better and better ! Soon wikipedia will be more knowledgeable on pharaohs than most books ! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:35, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I have also expanded the section "Monuments". Some sentences about the possible cult pyramids will follow. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 12:10, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Done. ;) Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 12:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Alright, I will take a look tonight. However, I strongly support the presence of BC dates, these are essential elements about a pharaohs. Since I understand that authors have come up with many different dates, I believe these should all be given on the page of the pharaohs. Iry-Hor (talk) 12:53, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

How about a lil' section extra for those historical evaluations? I could imagine that interested readers really wish to know more about scholar's evals... ;-) Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 13:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Mille Passus.jpg

A mille passus, meaning a thousand paces or milliare, is a division of a degree of the earth's great circle. It is also sometimes called a milion, milliare, myle or mile depending upon who is doing the measuring and when. The Roman milliare of 5000 pes and 5000 passus was itself derived from the Greek mia chilioi or milion of 4800 pous and from it was derived the English myle of c 49 BC—1593 AD.

Another characteristic of the mille passus is the milestone. On every road built by the Romans throughout Europe a milestone, was erected every mile to announce the distance to Rome. Many mile units based on or similar to this standard of measure that have been used historically have milestones or landmarks.

A degree may also be divided into stadia and both stadia and mille passus or mile may be divided into feet, remen, cubits, great cubits, nibw or ellen, paces, yards, fathoms, rods, cords, plethrons and chains according to what is being measured. A mille passus and its derivitives are typically divided into 8 stadions, stadiums, furlongs of 185 m.

Other classically related divisions and multiples of the Mille Passus include the schoenus, parasang and mia chilioi (thousand). Miles and stadia have been intended to be unit divisions of a degree of the Earth's great circle circumference since they were first defined as standards of measure by the rope stretchers of Mesopotamia and Egypt. The most interesting thing about the Mille passus is that it is classically alleged to have been composed of 8 stadia such that the Mille Passus and its subdivisions of stadium, passus and pes were geo-commensurate with a degree of the Earths great circle.

http://www.vkrp.org/studies/historical/roman-forts/ Roman forts in Arabia]] There is a trading road through the mountains along the east coast of the Red Sea that runs from ancient Punt (Modern Yemen) where Frankincense and Myrrh had been procured since the time of the Tale of the shipwrecked Sailor in return for Egyptian nub or gold. The Egyptians had traded along this route and established way stations about a days march apart which the Greeks mention in their Periplus of the Erythrian sea. In Roman times forts were built in the Arabah to protect the route. "Numerous watchtowers have also been identified along the Arabian frontier. The Romans reused existing Iron Age and Nabataean structures and built some new ones. They were built on top of hills and ridges where they could be seen from other towers or military posts. One of the best-known examples is Qasr Abu Rukba. Some speculate that these watchtowers could pass signals by means of smoke during the day and by means of torches at night." watchtowers

Egyptian rope stretchers laid out benchmarks as as an aid to reestablishing the bounds of their fields after the annual flood or innundation. These were laid out along a baseline so that from any one the others could be measured out and reestablished. The baseline was laid out with merkhert and bey the Egyptian sighting instruments that preceded the Greek Dioptra and Roman Groma. At intervals of an itrw or 1/10 degree an omphalos or geodetic marker was placed and perpendiculars were run using 3 - 4 - 5 triangles.

• If the question is asked which was defined first, the Mille passus, stadia or degree and when did this occur, the earliest evidence is for stadia measure in Egypt before c 2600 BC. The Mille passus is derived from various Ptolomaic measures of the degree c 300 BC and later.

Egyptian surveyors

• 1 Roman Mille passus = 1/75 Degree of the Earths Great Circle
• 1 stadia = 1/600 Degree of the Earths Great Circle
• 1 passus = 1/75,000 Degree of the Earths Great Circle
• 1 pes = 1/375,000 Degree of the Earths Great Circle

75 Roman miles equals a degree Nile map legend 1775

• 1 Roman degree = 75 milliare = 111 km
• 7.5 milliare = 1 schoenus = 1 kapsu = 60 stadiums of 185 m
• 60 stadiums = 60 furlongs = 11.1 km = 1/10 degree

The degree of Aristotle

• "In the second half of the eighteenth century A.D. a number of French scholars came to the conclusion that ancient linear units of measure were related to the length of the arc of meridian from the equator to the pole. They concluded that all Greek statements about the size of the earth provide the same datum, except that different stadia were employed. Several ancient authors used different figures and different stadia to say what Aristotle says in De Coelo (298B), namely, that the circumference is 400,000 stadia. The scholars of the French Enlightenment were hampered by the lack of modern exact data about the size of the earth. "

• 1 Degree = 1/360 of 400,000 stadia = 1111.1 stadia = 111 km
• 10 stadions = 1 km
• 1 stadion = 100 m = 300 pous of 333.3 mm
• 111 km divided into 600 stadions of 600 pous of 308.4 mm = 185 m

The Degree of Posidonius

• Eratosthenes and Posidonius considered that several inhabited worlds must exist on the Earth's spherical surface, separated by uncrossable oceans and by a torrid, uninhabitable belt. Marinus took the liberty of extending the inhabited world to 225º longitude and reached latitude 24º S, leaving no room for other inhabited worlds. In the east, his world ended in a country called Thina or ‘Land of the Chinese'. Marinus seemed to believe that the Land of the Chinese might extend another 45º to the east of the capital (supposedly in the centre of the country), which would give us an inhabited world of 270º in longitude, starting from the Canaries Meridian zero. This arrangement leaves only 90º between these islands and the east coast of China, which is about halfway between Martin Behaim's geographical calculations and those of Christopher Columbus.

• 1 Degree = 1/360 of 216,000 stadia
• 1 Degree = 600 stadions = 111 km
• 111 km divided into 600 stadions of 600 pous of 308.4 mm = 185 m

• "Marinus's only work of which we have direct reference is Diorosis tou geographikon pinokos, to which Ptolemy dedicates fifteen chapters. There were numerous editions, and his basic theories have their roots in Eratosthenes, Hipparchus, and Posidonius in particular. The title of his work literally means ‘Corrections in the map of the world' or ‘Corrections in the map of the inhabited world', which goes to show that Marinus of Tyre wanted to improve and revise one or several works of earlier mapmakers. He appears to wish to amend Posidonius, and that he intended to do so, using Hipparchus's astronomical work and the accounts of several recent voyages.

• Marinus made use of the measurement of the Earth made by Posidonius, who lived from 135 to 50 BC. While Strabo, who lived between 58 BC and 24 AD, kept Eratosthenes' measurements of 252 thousand stadia for the circumference of the Earth, that is 700 stadia per degree, Marino uses Posidonius's calculations of 180 thousand stadia, with a degree of 500 stadia (Antonio Ballesteros Beretta: Génesis del descubrimiento, vol 3, Barcelona, Salvat 1947). A stadium is an old Greek measurement of length, the equivalent of 600 old Greek feet (192.27m) or 125 paces, which was the exact distance separating the columns in the great amphitheatre of Olympia. The question is as to why Marinus and Posidonius himself adopted Posidonius's measurements instead of those of Eratosthenes. Posidonius's map, which was drawn around 60 BC, was passed on to us by Dionysius Perigetes in about 125 AD. On Posidonius's map the Earth forms a single continent and there is no trace of the Dragon's Tail.

• The work of Marinus of Tyre, which Ptolemy had at his disposal, did not seem to include any actual map. There were only some general instructions on how to make a map of the world and tables of geographical coordinates."

• "Marinus made use of the measurement of the Earth made by Posidonius, who lived from 135 to 50 BC. While Strabo, who lived between 58 BC and 24 AD, kept Eratosthenes' measurements of 252 thousand stadia for the circumference of the Earth, that is 700 stadia per degree, Marino uses Posidonius's calculations of 180 thousand stadia, with a degree of 500 stadia (Antonio Ballesteros Beretta:"

• 1 degree = 1/360 of 180,000 stadia
• 1 Ptolomaic Degree = 500 stadions = 111 km
• 111 km divided into 500 stadions of 600 remen of 14.7" = 222m

The degree of Ptolemy

• "Ptolemy's other main work is his Geography. This too is a compilation, of what was known about the world's (Study of the earth's surface; includes people's responses to topography and climate and soil and vegetation) geography in the Roman empire at his time. He relied mainly on the work of an earlier geographer, Marinos of Tyre, and on gazetteers of the Roman and ancient Persian empire, but most of his sources beyond the perimeter of the Empire were unreliable."

• "The first part of the Geography is a discussion of the data and of the methods he used. Like with the model of the solar system in the Almagest, Ptolemy put all this information into a grand scheme. He assigned coordinates to all the places and geographic features he knew, in a grid that spanned the globe. Latitude was measured from the equator, as it is today, but Ptolemy preferred to express it in the length of the longest day rather than degrees of arc (the length of the midsummer day increases from 12h to 24h as you go from the equator to the polar circle). He put the meridian of 0 longitude at the most western land he knew, the Canary Islands."

• "Ptolemy also devised and provided instructions on how to create maps both of the whole inhabited world (oikoumenè) and of the Roman provinces. In the second part of the Geography he provided the necessary topographic lists, and captions for the maps. His oikoumenè spanned 180 degrees of longitude from the Canary islands in the Atlantic Ocean to China, and about 80 degrees of latitude from the Arctic to the East-indies and deep into Africa; Ptolemy was well aware that he knew about only a quarter of the globe."

• "The maps in surviving manuscripts of Ptolemy's Geography however, date only from about 1300, after the text was rediscovered by Maximus Planudes."

• "Maps based on scientific principles had been made since the time of Eratosthenes in the 3rd century BC, but Ptolemy invented improved projections. It is known that a world map based on the Geography was on display in Autun, France in late Roman times. In the 15th century Ptolemy's Geographia began to be printed with engraved maps; an edition printed at Ulm in 1482 was the first one printed north of the Alps. The maps look distorted as compared to modern maps, because Ptolemy's data were inaccurate."

• "Eratosthenes found 276-194 BC used 700 stadia for a degree on the globe, in the Geographia Ptolemy uses 500 stadia."

• "It is not certain if these geographers used the same stadion, but if we assume that they both stuck to the traditional Attic stadion of about 185 meters, then the older estimate is 1/6 too large, and Ptolemy's value is 1/6 too small."

• "Because Ptolemy derived most of his topographic coordinates by converting measured distances to angles, his maps get distorted. So his values for the latitude were in error by up to 2 degrees. For longitude this was even worse, because there was no reliable method to determine geographic longitude; Ptolemy was well aware of this. It remained a problem in geography until the invention of chronometers at the end of the 18th century AD. It must be added that his original topographic list cannot be reconstructed: the long tables with numbers were transmitted to posterity through copies containing many scribal errors, and people have always been adding or improving the topographic data: this is a testimony of the persistent popularity of this influential work."

• 1 degree = 1/360 of 180,000 stadia
• 1 Ptolomaic Degree = 500 stadions = 111km
• 111 km divided into 500 stadions of 600 remen of 14.7" = 222m

The Ptolomaic stadia is divided into remen instead of pous because in Egypt Remen had always been used for land surveys.

The degree of Eratosthenes

• "For topographic/geographic purposes the size of the Earth is of utmost importance in modern

time as well as for Eratosthenes facing the task to draw a map of the "oikumene". His determination of the radius of the Earth resulted in 252000 stadia."

• " If he has used a stadion definition of 1 stadion = 158,7m = 300 Egyptian royal cubits = 600 Gudea units (length of the yardstick at the statue of Gudea (2300 b c) in the Louvre/Paris), he has already observed the meridian arc length to 252000 ⋅ 0,1587 = 40000 km. How could Eratosthenes obtain in ancient times already such an accurate result?"

• "Ptolemaios describes in his "Geographike hyphegesis" a method used by the "elder" to

determine the size of the Earth; this ancient method to measure the meridian arc length between the latitude circles of two cities (e.g. Alexandria/Syene, Syene/Meroe) is based on a traversing technique, as will be shown."

• "Geographical latitudes could be measured using a "Skiotheron" (shadow seizer). An

according to ancient information reconstructed instrument will be shown and explained; the accuracy of sun observations with such a kind of instrument is comparable with those of a modern sextant."

• "A recovery of the two systems of ancient geographical stadia (Alexandrian and Greek) is

presented. It is presently used for a rectification of the digitalised maps given in Ptolemy's "Geographike hyphegesis". The stadion definition Eratosthenes has used (1 meridian degree = 700 stadia) was applied also in northern and western Europe and in Asia east of the Tigris river; using it as a scale factor we got very good results for the rectification."

• 1 Degree = 1/360 of 252,000 stadia
• 1 Persian degree = 700 stadia = 111 km
• 10 Egyptian schoeni = 20 Persian parasangs = 600 furlongs
• 1 Persian stadia = 157 m = 3 Egyptian st3t

The Egyptian degree

• "Since Egypt lies north of the equator, shadow lengths are greatest there during the time of winter solstice, when the noon sun is at its most southern yearly position in the sky. The winter solstice therefore affords the most advantageous opportunity to make comparative shadow measurements. It was likely known by the time of the building of the Great Pyramid that on the day of the summer solstice, (i.e., when the sun was highest in the sky), the noon sun was directly overhead (casting no shadow) at a point along the Nile near what is now Aswan (called Syene by the Greeks). This concurrence was used by Eratosthenes (ca. 250 B.C.) in the first recorded attempt to measure the size of the Earth. From Syene, it would have been fairly straightforward to have determined that the sun's noon winter solstice position was very nearly 48 (2/15ths of a full rotation) lower in the sky than its noon summer solstice position. It could then have been logically inferred that Syene must lie 24 (1/15th of a full rotation) north of the mid-point of the sun's yearly north/south travel, and hence 24 north of the Earth's north/south mid-point (equator).30 By accurately measuring shadow lengths cast by tall objects of known height, one could then determine, through the use of trigonometry, one's angular separation from the Earth's mid-point. "

• 1 Degree = 1/360 of 2,520,000 itrw
• 1 Egyptian degree = 10 itrw = 700 stadia = 210,000 royal cubits
• 1 itrw = 21,000 royal cubits = 70 stadia of 3 st3t
• 3 st3t of 100 royal cubits = 157 m

• 700 × 157 = 10.99 km
• 1 itrw is 1 hours river journey
• 1 atur is 1 hour of March
• 1 Egyptian Minute of March is 350 royal cubits of 525 mm = 183 m

• 1 Greek degree = 75 milions = 111 km
• 7.5 milions = 1 schoenus = 1 kapsu = 60 stadions of 185 m
• 60 stadions = 60 furlongs = 11.1 km = 1/10 degree

A stadia is a division of a degree into a fraction of a mile.

• The ordinary Mesopotamian sos or side at 6 iku and 180 meters was the basis for the Egyptian minute of march
• the Egyptian minute of march at 183 m and 350 royal cubits was the basis for the stadion of the Greek Milos or milion
• The stadion of the Greek Milos at 6 plethrons or 100 orguia and 600 Atic pous of 308.4 mm at 185 m was the basis for the stadium of the Roman milliare
• The stadium of the Roman Milliare at 625 pes of 296 mm was also 185 m and at 1000 passus of 5 pes was the basis for the furlong of 625 fote of the English Myle

A league is a division of a degree into a multiple of a mile.

• 3 Milion or mia chilioi of 4800 pous = 24 stadions = 14,400 pous
• 1 league of a Milion = 4440 m
• 3 Milliare of 5000 pes = 24 stadiums = 15,000 pes
• 1 leauge of a Milliare = 4440 m
• 3 Myles of 5000 fote = 24 furlongs = 15,000 fote = 9375 English cubits
• 1 League of a Myle = 4440 m
• 3 Miles of 5280 feet = 24 furlongs = 15,840 feet = 9900 English cubits
• 1 Leauge of a Mile = 4828 m

12.187.94.103 (talk) 23:57, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. Actually an article about Pedubast III do exist on en.wiki, titled with his greek name. It's a good article (I translated and merged it in the italian equivalent some times ago), considering that this pharaoh is almost completely unknown. It lacks the "Infobox pharaoh", however. --Khruner (talk) 21:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

I can add the pharaoh infobox no problem. However, could you help me locate this ruler (as well as Pedubast II) in the dynasties ? I understand he may not really belong to any dynasty but we must somehow find one where he fits: I noticed that neither Pedubast II nor Pedubast III are mentioned in the List of pharaohs where they should appear and we need to place them here in the right chronological position. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:24, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Of course they are not mentioned: both were self-proclamed pharaohs and, technically, both were non-dinastic:

• Seheruibre Pedubast (III) was a Delta ruler from Sais, who rose against Persians in the weak period between the death of Cambyses II (522 BCE circa) and the restoration of the status quo under Dareios the Great (around 521-520 BCE). He could be heterodoxly assigned to XXVII dynasty, between those two official rulers, although he obviously was not an Achaemenid (same talk for the slightly later Psammethicus IV and, possibly, for the later Inarus);

• Sehetepibenre Pedubast (II) was a prince of Tanis who assumed pharaonic titles (one of the many in this period) around 680 to 665 BCE circa. He was member of a mini-dynasty of ruler of Tanis, coeval to the end of XXV dynasty. However, adding Sehetepibenre to this list would entail the addition of all kinglets of the third intermediate period: Hermopolis rulers, Athribis rulers, proto-Saites... It would be convenient to have two separate lists, like the German wiki: [2] plus [3] --Khruner (talk) 22:45, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes but I still think all of these petty rulers should be listed somewhere. Look at the situation during the first and second intermediate periods: there are litterally tons of rulers who where pharaohs only by claim: yet they were classified (by Manetho) in dynasties and are listed on wikipedia's list of pharaohs (at least we endeavour to list them all). I believe we must find a way to put Pedubast II and III in the list. Iry-Hor (talk) 08:55, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

I think it's a bit different. If I remember correctly, Manetho created the dynasties VII to XI and XIII to XVII without giving any name of those rulers (except for XV), so, these were gradually, approximately and conveniently filled thanks to the progress of archeology. However, Manetho created the dynasties XXI to XXV putting in all the mayor (and truly dynastic) pharaohs, but not mentioning at all the bunch of kinglets early cited. So, in my opinion the only way to cite them is to adopt the german method I cited above. That's a problem regarding Sehetepibenre, since Seheruibre could virtually be inserted in XXVII dynasty without problems.

PS you should reply in my talk page, since I can't be notified if you reply me on yours :) --Khruner (talk) 10:12, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

measures of length and of area are not given in the proper order or with the proper value to agree with Gardiner values.

the finger has been changed to the wrong value by a round off error

the hiero for hand and fist have been removed

the wrong manuel de codage is used so that glyphs which should be above one another are in line

"ta" which is a generic word for land has been given a non existent value

a claim has been made on the talk page that Iry-Hor has Gardiner and Faulkner, but that Gardiner section 266 cannot be used as a reference 12.187.94.103 (talk) 22:38, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Gillings This shows that the value for ten khet rather than one khet is 100,000 sq. cubits.12.187.94.103 (talk) 23:09, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Strabo declarations on Eratosthenes

Herodotus on the schoenus, an Egyptian measure "The length of Egypt along the sea-coast is sixty schoeni, as we reckon it to extend from the Plinthm^ic Bay to Lake Serbonis, near which Mount Casius stretches: from this point then the length is sixty schoeni. Now, all men who are short of land measure their territory by fathoms ; but those who are less short of land, by stades; and those who have much, by parasangs; and such as have a very great extent, by schoeni. Now, a parasang is equal to thirty stades, and each schoenus, which is an Eg^tian measure, is equal to sixty stades. So the whole coast of Egypt is three thousand six hundred stades in length. "12.187.94.103 (talk) 00:34, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

What you just stated makes absolutely no sense. Proof ? There were no text by 3000 BC. There were certainly signs already in use, but the first texts date from much later. Don't invent stuff or check your sources please, this makes me wonder about the rest of the edits ! Iry-Hor (talk) 20:11, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

First its from a published reference "Ancient Egyptian Construction and Architecture" which I referenced. Here it is as a Google Book. "Ancient Egyptian Construction and Architecture" Here is the referenced graphic Architects Curve What you see there was already referenced on the page as an artifact from Saqarra, but without the graphic. Its Fig. 53 p. 52. Figure 54 p. 53 is a scale drawing of it. The Graphic I referenced is in Wikipedia commons and is used in two other articles which have the text I copied to the talk page. As to your comment that it makes absolutely no sense, I paraphrased the caption "The algorithm suggests working with coordinates and numerical analysis to define a curve". Thats just basic math, so I gave an example of how Pascals triangle may be used to generate PI with a series formed by the third diagonal; 1,3,6,10.

As to your comment "there was no text c 3000 BC. Its a measured drawing of a curve entitled "An architects drawing defining a curve by co-ordinates. Probably 3rd dynasty. Saqarra. (from Annals du Service, xxv, p.197)" The measurements look similar to those on the Turin cubit with 5 vertical columns of dimensions under the curve given p.52 as follows

1 1 cubit, 3 palms, 1 digit (41 digits)

2 2 cubits, 3 palms (68 digits)

3 3 cubits (84 digits)

4 3 cubits, 2 palms, 3 digits (95 digits)

5 3 cubits, 3 palms, 2 digits (98 digits)

As to your instruction "Don't invent stuff or check your sources please, this makes me wonder about the rest of the edits" Apparently you just aren't very familiar with measured third dynasty drawings, and don't read pre dynastic palettes...page 51 gives three other examples.

12.187.95.149 (talk) 01:00, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Another Google Book reference to it that lets you scroll through it page by page page by page12.187.95.149 (talk) 01:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Again you have serious problems with the chronology. 3000 BC is mid-first dynasty and I continue to say that there were no extend texts at the time. There were years labels for examples, but no extend text. The thrid dynasty is much later from c. 2670 BC until 2610 BC and the fifth starts around 2490 BC !! The books you cite, date the inscriptions from the 3rd or 5th dynasties NOT the 1st. Furthermore, it would be difficult to do an entire book about architecture during the 1st dynasty given the paucity of architectural remains from this period. This shows that you don't simply cite sources, but also that you (perhaps not deliberately) interpret them to the point of actually modifying what they say !! P.S: Predynastic palettes are rarely inscribed with signs: only those from Naqada III have recognizable signs and none have an extend text. Even Narmer's palette does not have a text. Iry-Hor (talk) 09:21, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I mentioned an ostracon with measured labels. you replied there were no extended texts at the time. It wasn't my point to claim that there were. Technically surviving extended texts tend to date to several centuries later, however since you raise it as an issue, it is thought that there were extended texts at the time. Anthony Loprieno "Ancient Egyptian" p5 dates Old Egyptian, the language of the Old Kingdom and the first intermediate period (3000-2000 BC)citing the pyramid texts and a sizable number of so called autobiographies which are accounts of individual achievements inscribed on the external walls of the rock tombs of the administrative elite." (at Saqarra)

Quibbling about that shouldn't be really important to either of us. Lets just agree that the Saqarra ostricon I referenced, provides one of the earliest valid examples of an architects dimensioned construction documents and has a valid place in the article.

Your second point that "it would be difficult to do an entire book about architecture during the 1st dynasty given the paucity of architectural remains from this period" is true in that its difficult. Its not impossible. Another Google Book for you. History of Architecture Arc 112 This book covers architecture from periods which are Prehistoric, late Mesolithic and Neolithic.

Its true that most architecture done in wood and reeds before the pyramid age is preserved only in its influence on later stone architecture and thus most architectural books begin with mastabah tombs and tomb inscriptions and artifacts. Most artifacts that survive and are cataloged by archaeologists are things which were buried in the ground. These include foundations.

The earliest foundations I personally have explored date to c 8,000 BC on the crystal plateau of Saudi Arabia and along the eastern shore of the Red Sea between Yemen and Mecca and at Bahrain. I can email you some photos if you want to see them. The biggest single developments of an architectural nature would probably consist of post holes and masonry coursing and the fact that by c 4000 BC there are corbled arches in tombs in Ireland and Scotland.

The pyramid texts are thought to have been composed at Saqarra circa 3000 BC. "The Pyramid Texts were funerary inscriptions that were written on the walls of the early Ancient Egyptian pyramids at Sakkara. These date back to the fifth and sixth dynasties, approximately the years 2350-2175 B.C.E. However, because of extensive internal evidence, it is believed that they were composed much earlier, circa 3000 B.C.E. The Pyramid Texts are, therefore, essentially the oldest sacred texts known." The constructions at Saqarra are quite large by that date and would definitely have required written plans and construction documents to include dimensioned plans to administer.

Papyrii texts also date to c 3000 BC Many or most of the earliest constructions were mastabah type tombs rather than pyramids.Inside some of them are writings.Ancient Egyptian medicine says" The resultant interest in Egyptology in the 19th century led to the discovery of several sets of extensive ancient medical documents, including the Ebers papyrus, the Edwin Smith Papyrus, the Hearst Papyrus, the London Medical Papyrus and others dating back as far as 3000 BC. The Edwin Smith Papyrus is a textbook on surgery and details anatomical observations and the "examination, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis" of numerous ailments.[1] It was probably written around 1600 BC, but is regarded as a copy of several earlier texts. Medical information in it dates from as early as 3000 BC.[2] Imhotep in the 3rd dynasty is credited as the original author of the papyrus text, and founder of ancient Egyptian medicine. The earliest known surgery was performed in Egypt around 2750 BC.12.187.95.149 (talk) 15:39, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

You say "P.S: Predynastic palettes are rarely inscribed with signs: only those from Naqada III have recognizable signs and none have an extend text. Even Narmer's palette does not have a text. Iry-Hor (talk) 09:21, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I expect you don't consider Narmer's palette a text because it lacks the necessary sentence structure and word order to be evaluated grammatically. If that's the case you may find this article in Archaeology interesting. "Will the present date of 3200 B.C. for phonetic writing in Egypt be confirmed by subsequent work?" 12.187.95.149 (talk) 00:11, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I am very well aware of the labels from tomb U-j and yes they show that the rebus-principle was already used by c,3200 BC but they do not constitute a text (also note, they are labels not palettes, the overwhelming majority of which are uninscribed). The longest thing you can read from them is Baset (that is Buto). I don't doubt that by 3200 BC phonetic writing was in use, but there is a big gap between this and extend texts. As for your preceding statements about papyrii texts: they are conjectural. The odest surviving papyrus dates back to c. 2950 BC but it is blank (from Hemaka's tomb). Like you I suspect that the construction of mastabas and other big structures may have required more advanced forms of writing than just a few blocks of signs, but this is by no means proven, and examples of large structures predating the apparition of writing (like Gobekli Tepe) show that this is just a conjecture. Same thing about surgery: we know of trepanation dating from the Neolithic, that is a long time before the apparition of writing. So why would surgical operations suppose the existence of texts ? About the papyrri you mention, none is dated to earlier than the Old-Kingdom, none is dated to 3000 BC. You may fantasize that they are copies of much older documents but again this is conjectural, with not tangible proof in support. Similarly, even though the pyramid texts might date from the 4th dynasty, their earliest surviving copy is in Unas' pyramid, end of the fifth. In no case, do we have surviving texts from 3000 BC, no case. Supposing that the texts we have date from this period is only a conjecture. Iry-Hor (talk) 07:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, you two. In fact, slate palettes (also called 'ointment palettes') contain no text in linguistic senses. They depict mythological, religious and/or political contributed events. They can be seen as transportable reliefs, honoring their owner for their special deeds. The ivory tags from early tombs also show no real text. Similar to the slate palettes, they depict events and/or list titles of officials and the names of estates, from where the labelled gravegoods came from. Sometimes they mention the name of the product, to which the ivory tag belonged. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 11:15, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello Nephi, thanks for the confirmation ! Iry-Hor (talk) 12:22, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

With pleasure. ;-) Linguists cooperating with Egyptology, such as Alan Hendrix Gardiner, Ludwig David Morenz, Beatrix Midant-Reynes and Hermann Ranke point out, that the hieroglyphic writing was just "born" at the time of dynasty 0 and the developement increased slowly. Obviously, it was more important for the early Egyptians to standardize their hieroglyphic signs than introducing new signs. This developement and phenomenon can be observed on the slate palettes over the pot marks up to the ivory tags (quasi the writing technique's follower of the palettes). This also explains, why some of these palettes show city- and domain names only (these are extremely difficult to read, though). That lots of figurely scenes are more based on mythology, can be best observed on the famous Two-dogs-palette. On the front site we see an actual, reality-based event (a royal hunt), on the backsite we see quasi the allegoric mirror image of the same event: the chasing dogs are replaced by serpopards and a winged chimaera, between the chaotic hunt a humanoid figure with the head of a aardvark or donkey is playing a flute (In my personal opinion it's a depiction of a shaman with the head of the deity Seth). The palette relief reveals the cosmological believes and thoughts of the peoples.

When king Dewen ruled, the first bigger jump forward in hieroglyphic writing can be observed. The next step occurred under the kings Qa'a and Hotepsekhemwy. A third step can be found on clay seals of king Peribsen, where the first full sentences in hieroglyphs appear. Under king Huni hieroglyphic writing reaches its first heyday, the impressive tomb inscriptions of the high officials Khabausokar, Metjen and A'a-akhty are surpreme proofs.

Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 16:14, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

The Palermo Stone is a king list which places Narmer (c 3100 BC) on the second register of a list of kings which would seem to meet the criteria of an extended text.

There is no evidence that earlier rulers are mythical and Egypt not a unified state prior to the Scorpion king, Iry Hor or Narmer. Indeed there is a consistent predynastic corpus which calls upon ancestors as having built and united cities.

In order for this Palermo Stone document to have the names of rulers comprising five dynasties of early kings somebody had to keep and update a written history, even if all we have for evidence of their existence is a name in a register under Narmers feet.

The so called Narmer stance is often taken as a king striking enemies when all it actually portrays is a king controlling someone or something; in this case Aker(3kr)the deity symbolizing the power of the land to provide sustenance, named by two glyphs S38, the tool of the Ka priest used for the ritual of the opening of the ways wielded by Horus who assists the king in opening N39, (st3t)the measure of the setat or field symbolized as the garden pool, breaking the dikes to inundate the land at the Heb sed festival and thus controlling the land by controlling the water that irrigates it. Thats a lot of information to convey with just a few glyphs. It has the Word order VSO "opening (Verb) the garden pool (setat)(Noun)giving sustenance (life breath in the Ka ritual)to us (object). In the bottom register we have Narmer standing over not two dead enemies (who wouldn't be named) but two named ancestors O36 "inb" who founded the walled city and furnished it V17 Z3 Protection.

Indeed even for the symbols to be used consistently, someone had to record their meaning and use. Even the ritual and myth underlying the Heb Sed festival can be recorded in a text, but in general standardized texts pertaining to medical procedures, architectural and engineering techniques, the key to extended texts is whether its just a label and can be whatever the user wants it to be, or it follows a format and has a particular set of things that have to be present to fill out the form. Does a text have grammar and syntaxt, does it have word order, Is the verb always before the subject and object. Does each glyph convey an agreed upon alphabetic phoenetic value?12.187.94.51 (talk) 22:36, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't know where you got your bizarre interpretations from, but they are like so gone horribly wrong. And the website ancient-egypt.org says nothing about a "Narmer controlling s.o."...

Both Scorpion and Narmer show Aker as a personified field with Horus sitting atop him opening his ways. Below that Narmer controls the earth god who is labled S38 N39. Go look them up for yourself in Gardiner. You don't kill a field, its not your enemy. You control it by irrigating it and by controlling the water you control the land.

According to high ranked Egyptologists such as Toby H. Wilkinson, Wolfgang Helck, Ludwig David Morenz, Beatrix Midant-Reynes and Hermann Ranke the reliefs on the famous Narmer palette simply honour king Narmer after his successful inthronization by showing what exactly he had done and how he celebrated his victory: the front shows Narmer with the white crown clubing a foe to death. As the guiding notation at the right upper site claims, the battle took place in the delta region, the foe was named Wash ("he from the harpoon-river"). The most lower register shows fleeing enemies, and actually they ARE called by their names (ALL egyptian enemies had an individual name!). Behind the king we see a priest and sandal bearer, his title is Hem-nebi, meaning "priest of the golden king" (the gold rosette is seen as the forerunner of the later gold name of kings). Above the priest we see the crest of a domain named Hwt-djeba ("house of the rafts"), possibly a royal harbor.

The backsite of the palette shows king Narmer now with the red crown, visiting the battlefield after his victory, in attempt to inspect the war booties and carcasses of the enemies. He is proceeded by a priest named Tjatj and a palacial procession of heraldic flag bearers. These are called Shemses-Hor ("followers of Horus"). Above the enemie's carcasses we see a representative depiction of a hostile battleship (her-wash tawy; "ship of the falcon harpoons"), obviously part of the war booty. Below this scene we see two serpopards, embracing each other and beeing paraded by two men. The serpopard was named Sedja ("irrepressible") or Bedjet-Wer ("keeping in motion" or "always moving") and seen as a celestial guardian of the deities Seth and Rê. On the palette they rather represent Lower- and Upper Egypt, their embracing symbolizes the holy unification. In the lowest scene we see the king in shape of a aggressive bull trampling a foe to death and smashing the hostile bastion.

How often do you see dead enemies labeled city and protection? Have a look at Budge or Horning for the Books of the Afterlife from the Pyramid texts. The decapitations take place in the cavern of Aker. Modern interpretation takes them as ritual analogies to the rebirth and renewal of the fields after the decapitation of the stalks of grain in the harvest. Beheaded people in the Pyramid texts referenced to Narmer and Aker.12.187.94.51 (talk) 01:53, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't know where you see a deity named "Aker"... If you mean the cow faces, they depict the goddess Bat. --Nephiliskos (talk) 00:06, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Look at the personified field Horus is portrayed as opening the ways of using the tool of the Ka priest. Below that Narmer controls the field which is labled S38 N39.

Refer to Gardiner Aker p 550.Dnasty 3 st3t aroura, irrigated field."p6 Faulkner "Middle Egyptian 3kr n, div earth god Aker pyr 796 Urk V, 205, 17 the earth itself pyr 325; pl earth gods, pyr 393 det. G7 2202, TY 59,3,det. I14 hf3w det. king hm majesty" The determinative shows Horus on a standard over 3 dots.

The Narmer Palette is not technically "predynastic", but most of the other palettes are from this predynastic phase immediately before him. I think the Narmer Palette is also the first use of literals, but the predynastic palettes like the Tehenu palette have some logographs. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 00:22, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Til. Right, at the Tjehenw-palette and the Narmer palette we can observe first uses of hieroglyphs to name places and peoples. In fact, Morenz, Midant-Reynes and Wilkinson point out that the hieroglyphic sign groups are a mixture of logographs, determinatives and literals, which makes it difficult to read and interprete the signs correctly. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 00:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Most of the articles on Aker focus on him as the double headed lion symbolising the circuit of the Earth from dawn up to the zenith then down through the twilight into the underworld and back again to the dawn. The early focus is much more on the earth as irrigated field (literally the mud and "sht" of the innundation)The personified field with Horus is on the left side of the bottom register of Djer I but you won't recognize it till you look at Narmer Abydos label B16.2. Look at the man with the plants growing out of his head through the register line in the center. That's Aker. To his right is Horus perched on the House of Narmer as if it were a serekh. (See Gardiner M20)

Hi, Til. Right, at the Tjehenw-palette and the Narmer palette we can observe first uses of hieroglyphs to name places and peoples. In fact, Morenz, Midant-Reynes and Wilkinson point out that the hieroglyphic sign groups are a mixture of logographs, determinatives and literals, which makes it difficult to read and interprete the signs correctly. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 00:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I forgot, the Memnon Coptos Colossi also have some predynastic glyphs for names of some chiefs during the phase just before Narmer... Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 00:45, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

But we all agree there were no extend texts at the time ! Iry-Hor (talk) 05:56, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

No "known" ones... they may have had extended texts at this time that nobody ever found! Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 18:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes yes that's what I mean, none has been found to this day and thus no wikipedia article can claim that there were extend texts. At most you can say that "there may have been" with a source supporting this a reference. Certainly the blank papyrus from Hemaka's tomb is highly suggestive. Iry-Hor (talk) 18:49, 28 September 2013 (UTC)