Ancient and ArchaeologyÌý permalink
The ANKH - An Ancient Sat-Nav?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Ìý
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Friday, 21st November 2008
Clock? Eye of a needle? Mystical Eye? Camels? Its all just pure fantasy!
First of all forgive me; I shouldn't really be here as I'm well out of my depth knowing next to nothing about Archaeology (or Astrology). My intersts are Photography, Sailing & my local Mendip Hills: an eclectic mix that has led me to the fantasy.
We all like history, so I'll give you a bit of mine, very recent & very small! Whilst enjoying NASA's totally unbelievable photos of the moon I tried to identify a star pattern; 1 of the Ursaes.Thus I was introduced to Draco, the Dragon that runs between them. I just loved the way it moved nightly & precessionally. I then read that Thuban in Draco was often seen in Egyptian iconography in association with an Ankh. I didn't know what an Ankh was, so I looked it up. I still had a picture of the stellar north pole on my screen & within seconds of seeing the Ankh the sailor in me said I could navigate by that.
How? I'm not certain - we don't get many clear nights in November to test it! So this is how I envisage it: If you hold the Ankh up at arms length & align the inside top of the loop with the current pole star (Polaris now, Thuban 3000 years ago) then you pull the Ankh back until all the other main polar stars (Vega, Polaris, Thuban, Ursa Beta, etc) form a ring around the inside of the Ankh. You now have True North dead centre of the loop. If you now lower the Ankh vertically & lie it horizontally you'd be able to use the handle & arms of the Ankh as your Cardinal compass points for bearings & headings. Even a novice would be able to use it over a short distance in the desert at night (the best time to travel) & an experienced user could navigate great distances especially if it possible to use other stars in the loop as a clock. Some Ankhs have a set of small vertical lines on the handle that might be part of the time keeping function. (Also some have irregular in size & space markings around the loop - I believe this was an aid to make sure the right stars ere in the right part of the loop & may aid dating the Ankh).
So that may have been it practicle use, and exceedingly useful it would have been if it works. But there also appears to be an important spiritual side to the Ankh as well. I'd like to ignore it but it can't be so. I suggest & this is pure guesswork, I don't want to upset anyone, that the True North space in the centre of the Ankh is the mystical Third eye (Sun, Moon & ....) The all-seeing, ever-lasting invible eye. The Dark eye. It never sets or wanes day or night. Its just a bizarre thought nothing more except that I believe that NASA may think that was the direction of the Big Bang if it has a direction.
Just one further thought, again I don't want to upset anyone especially as I find it quite funny; if you think of the Ankh as a needle & remember that the ancient Arabs thought Draco to be a camel herd then it would be very easy to fit a camel through the eye of a needle!
I expect my theory will get shot to piecies, so please shoot away. My only defence is it can't as implausable as a sandal strap! If I have wasted your time or offended you or your beliefs I sincerely apologise. -
Message 2
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Saturday, 22nd November 2008
You do not have to excuse yourself for saying your opinion. And despite sometimes the seemingly sharp exchanges (myself preferring a more extravagant-style for discussion as it adds more interest!), here all positions are discussed on the basis of what sounds to us more logical.
Honestly, the claim that the Ankh was a shape used to navigate by the pole star in combination with other stars is something that sounds logical to me. For the rest of details, while I am an engineer I am no astronomer to make accurate calculations to prove anything. In the desert, on a ship when using some primitive map the Ankh could be a simple tool for transposing stars on the horizontal level to compare with the map or whatever other geographical notes. However, let me note that in general once you are told how to use the north start you can do it by bare eye or for a bit more accuracy with any other object. For higher accuracy a traditional Ankh would be insufficient unless indeed the Ankh is just a simple form or merely a stylised representation of a more advanced tool. -
Message 3
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Saturday, 22nd November 2008
However - and not speaking so much as an engineer but as a logical person, as I have no special knowledge of outer space, you are absolutely right in making side-comments for NASA lunar photos.
I have always been OK with NASA been to the moon not because I was convinced but because I have never cared to be occupied with space - being more interested in history "field of knowledge". However, having taken a deep dive in history and understood well that besides the natural disagreements between countries/states/cultures on details of the various recent or more ancient historical events, there are out there even things accepted universally (what is that anyway if not the view of the winner?) as basic that are also blatantly wrong to the extend that I now accept history only as a "field of propaganda", nothing close to science. I have talked in the past with "professionals" of this field (PhD guys etc.) only to find out that despite their respectable knowledge they are too often lost in meaningless details losing the whole picture - and when they come to that, they have also to think their "chairs" (otherwise they may as well go work as translators/tourist guides)... you know what I mean.
That attitude of mine I have extended it naturally in more recent and modern events hence I am of the last people to believe what they spoon-feed us on major events like communism in Russia or the 9/11 where we were given an amasingly unbelievable explanation that we had either to accept to align with the US or to deny and be called direct enemies of the US (no other position tolerated!).
And yes, seeing in real-time how US state (not referring to all American citizens!) can lie so blatantly for something so obvious, I started wondering "what about other events", like the lunar landings?
It is interesting to note here that while in the case of 9/11 the believers/non-believers percentages (speaking generally) are 80%/20% in US, in the rest of the world are as little as 10%/90% or even less (in my native Greece if you say you are in the 0,1% that believes the US governement explanation against a 99,9% that does not believe it you are considered either retarded or psychologically-troubled or obviously a politian that anyway cannot say otherwise not to dismay our "friends" Americans!). However the Apollo-programme lunar landings of the period 1969-1974 are generally accepted by people around the world on the basis that "we have seen photos, we have seen the lunar rocks and at the end even the Russians were accepting the fact that Americans went on the moon". In fact the percentage of Americans not believing these lunar human landings is higher than elsewhere in the world!
I have never been occupied with this issue till recently. I have read many pro/against human lunar landings views and their arguments. And to tell you the truth I was amazed to find out that the most solid argument for those that believe US human landings on the moon are the Russian silent acceptation of this story! All other features could be easily bent to as-if prove a lunar landing.
However, I know Russians are also masters of propagandist lies especially back then under the communist regime but then still also today! So, despite the fact that Russians continued to be in direct competition with the US increasingly the last 10 years, what did Russians say, and what do they continue to say up to today about 9/11? They totally agree and they do not miss a chance to underline that it was "internationalised muslim terrorism" that hit the US. Why do they abide with the US lie? Cos it fits them well! Afterall if you think deeper without Russian aid Americans would never invade Afganistan. And without American indirect aid by means of their current politics, Russians would have never have re-filled their empty banks! Russians know that Americans are not their only competitors and vice versa! Thus, their relations are not 100% of direct competition but a mix of direct competition - indirect collaboration. For the case of 9/11 the Russians had all the interest to pretend to buy the US story - them being willing to "fight terrorists" (i.e. whoever they will name terrorist in future!)... just like any other country now names terrorists their enemies.
So could it be that Russians back in the 1960s knew very well that Americans lied but somehow it suited their own politics, most probably their inner politics? Could it be that they were using it to mobilise their own scientific/industrial engine to continue doing more? Afterall the fact that Russians had sent people to space was the motive behind all that US mobilisation in the 1960s isn't it? Or could it be afterall that them also had lied on parts of their own space programme so staring a history of "you lied here - no you lied there" was to no-one's benefit! And if the Sovietic government said so do not believe that many Russian scientists would go out to tell te truth. It is obvious though that underneath all that European, Chinese, Indian, Japanese efforts to space also could possibly show an immense distrust between the various actors...
The truth is that we people always remain with little basis to know the truth. Hence we stick to our common sense: Had Americans passed the Earth's periphery to go out approach the moon's periphery and from there on to land people on the moon they would had certainly continued their effort and not said "ok, we went 5 times, now we change scope", and certainly Russians (in general, always a bit more progressed in space than Americans) would never have stopped trying to go to the moon and not said "well if Americans went there first, we have nothing to do anymore!!!". Moon is a land also, just imagine the English saying "well it was the spanish that went first, there is no interest in going there anymore since we will be the second ones!".
The truth is that Americans, Russians, Europeans, Chinese, Indians and Japanese are not at all able to send a man on the moon in year 2009. They have no technology and no means to do such a feature while the most optimistic predictions say that manned flights with alive peopel inside them (very important! hehe!) may land on the moon in 20-30 years time!!! Hence, despite I have not yet the full scientific arguments, only by the mere presentation of some undeniable realities I can understand that the Lunar Landings were most possibly a lie that Russians had also pretended to buy such as they did with the 9/11.
No need for conspiracies. It is just the way human race's politics went always. By the lie and propaganda. It was never any different! The opposite would be quite new actually! Hence, dear MendipTim no need to apologise! Just go on and say you opinion and whoever likes it or not! -
Message 4
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Sunday, 23rd November 2008
How do you account for the artifacts left behind by the Apollo missions? For example the Laser Ranging Retroreflector:
Do you think that unmanned missions were sent to the moon in order to plant evidence and cover up a hoax? -
Message 5
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Sunday, 23rd November 2008
Good argument. As I said I am not any specialist in space physics or astronomy and then till recently I was not occupied with the subject. What I said above is that I was astonished to find out that for such a cosmo-historic event and the greatest human achievement ever, USA can provide no better argument than "The Russians never said anything".
The rest details can all be trafficked:
1) Reflectors can be placed by unmanned missions. Technology existed even back in the 1960s
2) Lunar stones are found in earth (but contaminated). They can also be retrieved directly from the moon by unmanned missions (in small quantities obviously).
3) It is well known and not even refused by NASA that training involved also a lot of filming of astronauts in a recreated lunar landscape... just to have something to show... just in case... It is funny but some years back an ex-NASA higher official did a party showing small parts of such tapes and asking then guests if they then they still believed human moonwalks... Do not get surprised. Even 1960s videos could represent somehow a landscape that has never been seen by a human eye! Russians back then had nothing more than a couple of bad quality photos and 1-2 lunar stones they received some time later (which does not consist of a proof).
Now that is my preferred one!...:
3) The whole human space flight lunar Apollo- mission's telemetry data could be tape-recorded using a satellite sent say, 1 year earlier to crash-land on the moon, then re-used for the actual flight. You may proceed in the following way:
You have 50,000 NASA employees and some 500,000 sub-contractors employees working hard for the billion dollars project and really believing that 3 men are going to be sent to the moon. You have to take into consideration that 99,99% of them have no knowledge further than their own restricted area of intervention plus the fact that even the most prominent cosmo-physics specialists were still in the start of their learning curve hence views on what was feasible, somehow risky, extremely risky or not possible at all were not very clear even among the best of specialists. Therefore you could easily fool most of the participants in the projects, let alone the unsuspecting world by doing the following: You place the astronauts in the rocket, you fire the rocket, the rocket arrives at earth orbit and the astronauts re-enter the atmosphere in their capsule to fall on the meeting point in the right date. Meanwhile a tape plays all the telemetry data of the previous unamanned mission slightly altered perhaps in case people remember the ancient or more simply you have already placed new controllers that were not in the previous mission. From the landing point, the Hollywood takes place, they use the pre-recorded movies to transmit them via space satellites and then back as if they come from the moon so as the world can watch "live" the feature. Then as astronauts land on the calculated return date they are given heros' welcomes. Russians on the other side remain silent and sceptic, they have no means of knowing what is the truth (them already on the moon by with robotic means, not being able to reach with manned flights the moon) exactly for the same reasons they were not able to know what Americans were going with the "Star Wars" programme (that in the end was proved a fake, though an absolute political victory as USSR fell), they saw the retroflectors, they saw 1-2 lunar stones - now were they convinced? Or was it more convenient for them to say they were convinced (in the same sense today Russian government accepts the 9/11 lie to serve its own interests?). Who knows? Anyway the truth is that back in the 1960s and after some years of having studied the moon with unmanned missions, taken lunar rocks, placed devices on the moon and above all taken 1000s of photos and millions of telemetry data you could fake it. It is not easy but trust me all you needed is no more than 1000 people knowing it out of the 1 million working for it, a group of 100-200 Hollywood men and some 1% of the billions spent on this programme. I think the costs are ridiculous, the number of people reasonably low to achieve full control (assasination was not ruled out as too many astronauts died in jets rather than space applications - the example of Apollo 1 and Gus Grissom who ridiculed too often the technical incapacity of NASA even for relatively more simple tasks followed by his famous statement in 1968 "you may see people on the moon not next year but at least after 10 years!), finally puting his lemon (sign of a crap vehicle) with him on his space rocket that killed him.
I am not here to tell you this or that. I do not know. I am not convinced for the "never been on the moon" theory just because of murder allegations in the case of Grissom and his partners or those funny discrepancies on photos and videos or the particle rays of Van Hallen belts posing life risks (I am not specialist to measure this).
However as an engineer I can measure this:
Here are Russian missions to space:
Did you notice the numbers of efforts? The failures before even having a success. Now that seems quite a normal project to my layman's eyes. I could not find easily (and I will not spend more time) searching the equivalent American (joint Gemini-Apollo projects) but I think it looks much more dubious if taking account that firs man on earth's orbit for the Apollo project was in 1968, 1 year earlier than the moon landing, the same year Grissom was declaring that "guys, do not expect moon next year, we will be lucky to be able to go in 10 years". Well the truth is that in 10 years time not any American or Russian or anyone else seemed to have the will to go to the moon!!!!!!!!!! The will????? Or the means?????????
Wait a minute! Do you think that it matters who went there first? Or perhaps it mattered more who gained controll of the moon? I think the latter. Here however we have the rare event where Russians say "if americans landed there first, we are not interested anymore, we will do something else". R i d i c u l o u s explanation. The problem is that to my eyes, most probably Russians could never go to the moon with manned missions and if they could never go to the moon with manned missions then most probably Americans that were rather behind compared to Russians could not do it either. If Americans did it so easily back then we would certainly have already Russians there, Chinese and Indians, perhaps some Europeans also... That is what geopolitics say and there is nothing to refute that. If Russians seemed to play the game back then, they are seen to play the game with the other lie of 9/11 - there are complex interests out there and it is not always preferrable to go out and ridicule the one or the other...
Therefore, unless I have solid proof of human presence on the moon I will remain sceptical on the position "I really do not know, most possibly they have not landed on the moon". Till now there is not any solid proof, proof that is undeniable. Russians accepting it is the best argument so far (not solid) and reflectors on the moon the second (not solid, they can be placed by robotic missions) and the moon rocks the third (not solid, they can be taken by robotic missions). Telemetry data and trasmissions can be arranged rather easily also so that the 99% of NASA stuff can be fooled. The rest of photos and videos are for Hollywood specialists.... -
Message 6
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Sunday, 23rd November 2008
Note this:
The only nation with manned flights on moon is USA and that only in period 1969-1972. After that, silence. Nowadays, USA, Russia, EU, China, India and Japan have all plans for the moon and the best they hope to do is to send a man on the moon in 20-30 years time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am sorry but that is a pain! I was not even born when the last man drove his buggy-car on the moon and the next one will hope (hope!) to go there when I will be retired??????????????
Enormous!
(guys, especially you in US, why don't you copy the Appollo technology then? It would be cheaper and with extremely high success rates!!!!). -
Message 7
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Sunday, 23rd November 2008
Thank (or Th-Ankh) you for your comments E_Nikolaos_E especially as they are generally supportive of my idea. I was quite sure I was going to be instantly humiliated & made to look a right fool! I'm sure it will still come; but it is some comfort that at least 1 person doesn't think it totally insane.
I'll navigate away from the Ankh for a moment & repond to a couple of other points you make. Firstly on 9/11 I wish to make no comment: You can guess my views & you will be right. As to the moon landings I regretfully brought the subject up so I'll have to make some comments; but I'd really like it if this thread doesn't get sidetracked with Apollo. As a photographer & darkroom technician for nearly 30 years I know those rolls of film never went to the moon; however I do love the pictures. A couple of thinking points: 1) The top rocket scientists on both sides were ex-German mates. 2) If Yuri Gigarin (?) wasn't actually in that Sputnik? Oh! & I fogot Niel Armstrong's true profession - flight simulator designer for high orbit /low space vehicles. Finally I'd like you ponder awhile on the thought "What would have happened physically & politically if they had failed?" Think carefully, weigh it up, do some research. In the midst of the Vietnam fiasco Nixon would not of wanted another. I like to pretend that they really did go & just the photos are fake because I saw it as a young kid & it was great - surely far too great to be a hoax.
Lets drift back to far pleasanter dreams of Ankhs. I made my opening gambit quite bold & controversal to try get some interest in the thread. The spiritual side I suggested is completly random mind-wanderings. I don't really have a spiritual side - I'm quite happy not knowing! So I don't believe in what I wrote. However in my early photography days I spend a lot of time in the Himalayas & Asia surrounded by their wonderful religions' histories going back, supposedly to the dawn of time. In all the old beliefs there are references to mystical eyes, good & bad. Many of these eyes are pictures inside a shape similar to the loop of an Ankh; the gap between thumb & 1st finger, An egg, Another eye, & if you think of the nose as the handle of the Ankh, the eyebrows as the crossbar, then the forehead is the centre of the Ankh!
Even we in the "west" talk about an eye begining with "E" - I will not name it as I don't believe it deserves that title; its never done me any harm. I'm led to believe that virtually all the old cultures of the Americas feature the eye very heavily. So what? There's a mythical eye in the sky! - we all knew that!
Can I prove its in that blank void between all the main stars that circle the north pole precessionally? No & At present I've no intention of trying - I wouldn't have a clue how to do it & it doesn't worry me if its there or not. I'll leave it to those to whom it may concern. However if the eye is in the Ankh (I know I've only given 1 tenuous example with the forehead) & the Ankh is a North Pole instrument then that may well be where it is especially as in the top 60% of the world the polar stars are always out even during the day (on very clear days & solar eclipses). But I'm sure the Orionites & Sirisians of other worlds will stake their claim. But I got here first so I'm going plant my flagon of cyder at the stellar North Pole. But first it would help if you could find the same picture of an Ankh that I have in front of me - its a blue Ankh on a blue backgound with gold bands on the loop; if you Google Ankh images its currently on page 3 (AHH! it must be a Sun God! - sorry UK only joke).
Hold any Ankh up to the North Pole region and you can get the 5 main Precessional stars to align around the inside edge of the Ankh. This should be true for everyday forwards & back a million years, some millenia it probably works better than other, but it should always work. If you look at the Blue Ankh the gold bands mark the spot where each star should line up to Ankh with the big band being Vega (the brightest) Polaris at bottom, Thuban & Ursa Beta on the lower sides, & name forgotton up the top next to Vega. So we can actually date the time this Ankh is marking. & Yes, You've probably quessed it - 10,500BC. Oh! dear! That's going to re-stir an old can. But it may not be that old - this Ankh looks ceremonial so it may be marking a moment in time when the Dragon or Snake is poised to strike (Draco's head). I don't think that the Blue Ankh will fit any other star pattern as accuratly as the Polar circle but it should be checked against ancient star charts that I don't have. So no proof but I've staked my claim.
Finally I can get on to something I do know about - navigation. It seems strange to refer to sailing as more solid ground & maybe that indicates the strengh of my previous assertions. It is totally true you don't need the Ankh to find North & you can sail by the Stars just on line of sight. All night sailors have done that. Choose a new Star each hour & follow that - it stops you loosing your night vision by looking at a compass (& nearly every sailor has taken avoiding action when mistaking a rising planet to be another boat getting closer on a collision course!). Whilst its true that the N.Pole stars are always in the North it doesn't always appear so, in Northern lattitudes the Stars often seem to be directly overhead, making the quick detection of other directions far less clear. Any tool that could do that instantly would be as useful today in magnetic anomolies as in pre-compass days.
It may come as a surprise to some just how primitive navigation has been right up to the last few years. Before Radar (often wrong) in the 60's & GPS (brilliant) in the 90's navigation was simply guesswork based on Angle, Time & Speed, then adjusted with any tidal flow & leeway guesstimates. These were then verified wherever possible by Sextant readings & compass bearings of known objects. When plotted on a chart none of the readings would ever match any of the others so you always end up with a triangle (from 3 readings) which hopefully was small & you were somewhere in it. At night you don't often get the benefit of the Bearings & trying to take a sextant reading of 1 particular star whilst being tossed like a salad followed by 1hr of maths to decipher it means that bascally you are back to your original guess. The only advances in navigation over several millenia has been in the accuracy of this guess work: compass, clock, speed-guessing machines, & Charts. The question comes down to how much more accurate?
Charts - lets just agree that modern charts are far better than ancient ones; it doesn't really matter as you can navigate with a plain piece of paper or nothing; a chart is just useful info & a record. A good skipper should have it all in his head.
Speed estimating machines are obviously a lot easier to use than chucking something over the front of the boat & timing it going passed the back; but the maths is the same & the result was always speed through the water not over the seabed.
The compass was a brilliant invention 99% accurate over 98% of the world (guess) day or night it could tell you which direction you are going & in what direction everything around you is; & its incredibly easy to use. But was it more accurate than the Ankh & is it easier to use? If you align the Ankh as I have suggested to the North Stars you now have absolute true north almost dead centre of the Ankh whilst the compass is pointing to a wandering magnetic north that isn't true north. So which is the most accurate? Taking bearings has always been a bit of a line of sight visualisation technique until prismatic hand bearing compasses were invented. The technique was no different with Ankh. Once you had brought the Ankh straight down & into the horizontal plane you'd have all the cardinal points correctly oriented; the top to the North, handle to South, & the crossbar to East & West. Notice on the Blue Ankh that the end of the crossbar are flanged with degree-like markings to aid the estimation of other angles or even accuratly in a slide rule type fashion. Ultimately the compass probably wins on accuracy but only just. Ease of use: The Ankh has it. A good compass was big & heavy whist the Ankh is extremely portable & stowable & in use would encourage a nice steady grip. But all is not well because their is a huge gaping hole in my argument - Daylight! Before anyone could realistically accept the Ankh as a compass I think it would need to be shown that either it also works in daylight or there was a similar tool for daylight. I can't do either at present.
Of all the navigational variants Time is the most important without a knowledge of it you can't navigate. Reliable clocks & GMT were the base of the British Empire. GPS only works because of precise atomic clocks. We know that the Egyptians had an excellent knowledge of time & seem to have loved measuring it. In daylight I suppose they could use a Sundial (unless they came to the UK). At night they would have to use the stars & as the North stars are always in the sky they are the obvious choice for a clock. If we look at the Blue Ankh again on the bow-tie bit of the crossbar (which corresponds to the maximum width of the loop) there are a series of grooved notches at about 1/12th intervals; could these be hourly markings of a star passing across the loop of the Ankh or near the crossbar? If this so the efficency of this device is remarkable. If on a bleak night the clouds around the Polar stars clear for an instance you can get your direction & the time: If you know where you were before & you know your speed - then you know where you are. And that is Navigation.
So was this the Egyptian version of GPS? I don't know; it would be great to find a way for it to work in daylight - that would really make it the Swiss Army Knive of the ancient world. A lot of what I've said seems to fit; but a lot of things can fit & still be wrong. I haven't given 1 true fact & yet I hope people might believe me (I should go into Politics); at least enough to do some proper research. I've enjoyed these mind games; its taken me to places I havn't been before & in the process made me feel a more complete person. So right or wrong I have no regrets. Thank you for bearing with me. -
Message 8
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Sunday, 23rd November 2008
Those reflectors are really thosands of little pyramids built by the ancient Gondoiolians before they used the Ankh to come to earth!
Please stick to the subject matter. -
Message 9
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Monday, 24th November 2008
Hieru-and-his-Slant,
Sorry about my tongue in cheek answer to your question about the reflectors. The beams must have been pointed at me because I reflected & realised the question not as off-topic as I first thought (& the history of the Godoloiolians isn't to be revealed until 14500AD!).
The Lunar Laser Ranging Retroreflectors (great name for a bit of crumpled tin foil) are really no different from the reflectors on the back of a bicycle or a road "cats-eye".They are a bit bigger but still really small. The whole sheet was approx 3x2ft (1x0.6m). Loking in a haystack for a needle may be difficult but looking for a small table in Africa from 250,000 miles away must beat it. NASA still can't give the exact co-ordinates of where Apollo 11 landed, so they obviously never found their reflector (maybe the solar wind blew it away!); I think they claim the reflector that they currently use is from Apollo 17. But they don't need the reflectors. Over 30 space vehicles have landed or crashed into the moon everyone of them bigger than the reflectors; if any tiny bit of one of those is shiny & faces back to earth it will reflect the beams. I reckon they just fire the laser at the moon & wait till the get a reflection off anything. The results will be the same.
But lets not totally dismiss the LLRRs, they are interesting in their shape - lots of tiny inverse pyramids designed to capture the light & sent it back the way it came. Back in Giza we have almost exactly the same effect on a monumental scale only this time it was designed to capture the light & then scatter the beams. We know that the Great Pyramid was covered with highly polished white limestone & apparently aerial photography has recently shown that the sides were all slightly concave. This would have the effect of slightly concentrating the light before reflecting it & would work especially well if the sides were wet. I have seen that effect on the Taj Mahal at sunrise & it was trully awe-inspiring. I'm reminded of an old sailing trick to increase your boat's visability to others on moonlit nights of wetting the sail.
Water, or rather the lack of it in Egyptian skies, is a problem but water would only enhance the effect. Whenever I see the Kings Chamber I get the strange notion that there should be the slow constant drip of water like a grandfather clock in the corner: this can only be a result of hearing so many Mendip caves slowly drip the beat of time through their limestone ceilings.
Where were these beams of light going? Probably just over the surrounding deserts & out into the Med.; but a gold top would have a similar effect. So maybe they were intended for far greater distances. I'm guessing that from some of the planets it will be easier to see the moon than the Earth as it fairly reflective & has no atmosphere whilst we are blue & do have an atmosphere. We must look pretty weird in their skies flashing on & off every 28 days. If somehow the Egyptians worked it out or sunk in to the same void as my brain they may have designed the pyramid as a beacon to show the Universe where we really are. Or were they using the Lunar orbit to create a huge eye in the sky themselves?
All guesswork. The only point worth making from all this is that scientists are quite happy to accept the Lunar Rangefinders yet totally dismiss the idea of the Pyramids being beacons to the Universe because they were designed by scientists. I suppose if you're the Top-Dog Scientist of today it would be quite gruelling to admit that some peasant farmers 5,000 years ago knew more than you do. -
Message 10
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Monday, 24th November 2008
Hmmm it gets really complicated when we leave points, facts and strong hypothesis and enter the field of suppositions. While I am generally a supporter of pre-cataclysmic civilisations (pre-12.000 B.C.) I will not easily jump to talk about space-travel back then (while everything is possible!). We have indeed references to "advanced" civilisations before the cataclysm but then nothing more specific than that. Had pyramids been serving that purpose we would have next to it many more details related to space flight, or even traditional flight. Unless their space-vehicles were really very simplistic devices that could be built by 100 technicians in a workshop!!! It would be quite less possible; today it takes 100,000s of people to produce even a simple traditional aircraft, let alone a space-craft. Hence, without particular proof we should not talk of this or that.
Also talking about aliens and especially anthropomorphic ones one has to take into account the whole path of life on earth - I doubt it would be the same not only in a planet of far distant solar system but even in our neighbouring Mars. Aliens could be an intelligent type of jelly flying by-itself through space riding on solar rays or something!!! I mean the possibilities of aliens coming to our solar system are so small and them being anthropomorphic even smaller. -
Message 11
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Monday, 24th November 2008
sorry!
What spacecraft?
What Aliens?
Where did they com from?
I'm no where near thoughts or suggestions of that type. -
Message 12
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Tuesday, 25th November 2008
Sorry about my tongue in cheek answer to your question about the reflectors.Ìý
No problem: you were quite right to try and keep the thread on topic.
I could have gone to great lengths in debunking the moon landing conspiracy, but this isn't the time or the place.
As far as your sat-nav theory goes, I think that it does have some merit. Unfortunately it needs to be backed up by solid evidence.
For instance:
1. Are there any historical accounts of the ancient Egyptians using some kind of device for navigation?
2. Whilst I have seen Egyptian art featuring figures holding the ankh up to the sky, I can't recall any that are accompanied with depictions of stars or constellations. It would be interesting if there are any examples of Egyptian art that show a clear link between the ankh and the night sky.
In addition, any evidence to support your theory will have to be more compelling than those favoured by archaeologists:
-
Message 13
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Tuesday, 25th November 2008
hehe... I am sorry! I misunderstood one phrase of yours and jumped too early on conclusions!
Though I will indeed repeat my belief in more progressed pre-cataclysmic civilisations - if anything when talking about astronomy, ancient people like Egyptians knew what they were talking about, therefore the most certainly had used tools to study better the sky - therefore your suggestion of the ANKG seems very plausible to my eyes. From there on I would inquiry if the ANKH was a major tool or a simplified "handy" version of a more complex tool. I am asking this because one for very accurate readings he would have to use a bigger tool while for casual readings he could as well trust his eyes and hands (myself know vaguely how to navigate by the northern star). Sometimes our testing experience aids us in better understading past tools, them humans us humans you know how it goes... -
Message 14
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Wednesday, 26th November 2008
Hieru-and-his-Slant & E_Nikolaos_E
Thank you both for your continuing moral support. I apologise to both of you for bullying you back on to the topic. It was worth the effort as you have both come back with a good set of questions & comments.
Forgive me if I don't respond for the moment. First of all it may be helpful if you see what I saw. It must be hard to understand what I'm babbling on about especially as I don't know anything about the subject matter; also what I saw is very pictorial & words can't describe pictures. It will not take long & just spinning the Precession picture is fun.
Navigate (with or without the Ankh!) to:
Save that picture to your computer & then open it with any image viewer that allows you to rotate the image. Rotate it 180 degrees (in clocwise steps if possible). Then go to:
& look for the Blue Lapis Lazuli Ankh. Try to put the 2 pictures side by side. Do see anything? Is it remotely possible or shall we start discussing the merits of the Sandle-strap theory?
It was total Chaos Theory in action that brought those 2 pitures on to my screen at the same time. Something just clicked & instead of just moving on & fogetting the idea in a few days I felt that it might just be important & I should mention it to someone (& if I told my mates they'd just think I'd been on the Mendip Mushrooms again!). If I hadn't been vaguely thinking about star navigation at the time I'm sure I'd never have had the idea. Remember I started with a NASA moon photo & ended up in Ancient Egypt - who said time travel doesn't exist!
I'd love to look up details of the Ankh & see the sandal-strap theory & say "Why?! Of course! They've got it sussed; what a powerful practicle & spiritual tool, that must have been an inspiration to all Egyptians!" Even though I like sandals I can't quite see it really working especially as the feet were in many traditions the dirtiest part of the body. Surely there must be another answer. The weird thing is that for such an important object that Gods gave to Kings their seem to be so few alternative theories (eg bottle opener!) - the sex lesson idea works with more modern Ankhs, but not really with Ancient ones. It must have had a very important spiritual side to mean Life & yet be so closely related to Death: A key to navigate to the Afterlife in the stars. But why would the Gods give a death map to a young King? Could you navigate through life with it as well?
I will now try to guess some answers to your questions. Whilst I've been talking about navigation at sea because thats what I know the same applies equally to the desert - it is just a dry sea. If you were carrying anything heavier than a $1 note in the desert you'd choose to do it at night. The desert was Egypt's defence; it was their friend & ally. They were the Masters of the Desert. We know they traded & to trade they either had to cross sea or desert. They would either have to have sign posts every 1Km or they would have to navigate. You could just look at the stars & guess but that oasis 100Km away is very small & as the North Star is not actually North you'll just be a collection of bones. So whether there are records or not they must have had some form of direction detection that was portable; & what better record than the Ankh itself.
As for constellations in Egyptian art I'm led to believe they are many examples, the Duat especially, but to be honest I havn't seen any but then I havn't really looked. (I have looked to see any refernces to polar stars or Ankhs in ancient Hindu art but couldn't find any; the Third Eye/Forehead/Ankh art appears to be post-Egyptian.) I know my introduction to the Ankh was via a reference to the Ankh often being in association with Draco, but I don't know if they meant text or art. However the Blue Ankh looks like a fairly solid link in it's own right.
A more accurate Ankh? yes I'm sure there probably was for Architecture & anything requiring precise angles of alignment. I guess it would look like a large disc with the Ankh loop shape cut out & the top of the loop hole would be at the centre of the disc. The edges of the disc would be notched at their equivalent of degrees. The whole disc may be gimbled in East/West axis so to give a smooth rotation from vertical to horizontal. However it may not exist because you may never need that accuracy at night & I havn't thought a way to get the Ankh to work in dalight (although the Wiki article might have given me a clue). If anyone has seen anything that looks like it could be a more exact Ankh I would be very interested ( also are there any Inverse Pyramids?). I also think that with practice a user should be able to get exactly the same accuracy as a sailor steering & looking at a compass - its the same line-of-sight technique.
"them humans us humans you know how it goes..." I love that; but would add that humans are animals, part of nature. Suvival & then growth. It takes a lot just to survive in the desert, so it must have a been a very special bit of nature to grow & flourish there. -
Message 15
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Wednesday, 26th November 2008
MendipTim,
Is this the sort of thing that you have in mind?
To be honest, I don't actually understand which stars are supposed to align with the inner hoop of the ankh.
Unfortunately the lack of any obvious alignment doesn't help your theory. -
Message 16
Posted by WarsawPact (U1831709) on Wednesday, 26th November 2008
Tim, you seem to have gone ito an awful lot of detail for some idle musing (or should that be a lot of awful detail?).
Are you saying that all ankhs were made to a uniform size - as a precision instrument? In order to fit a particular group of stars within the 'circle', you'd have to make a seperate ankh to fit each navigator - or only employ navigators whose arms were the same length.
The true explanation of the ankh is that it was a Celestial/Ancient Egyptian bottle opener - technology handed to us by aliens from Sirius B - as I shall exclusively reveal in my forthcoming book, "Barmen Of The Gods" - available from Amazon in time for Christmas, priced £20. -
Message 17
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Wednesday, 26th November 2008
Hieru-and-his-Slant
Exactly! Where did you find that picture? Are there any words to go with it?
Look at the markings on the Ankh & look at the position & size of the stars. Notice True North is almost dead centre! The Alignment is just about perfect.
YIPPEE! I'm not totally mad! or at least no madder than someone else - I can stop taking those pills now! Zippy-Dippy-Do-DA!!!!
Thank you. -
Message 18
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Wednesday, 26th November 2008
Just realised that you probbably did this yourself, & as you admit you don't exactly know what you are trying to achieve, you've done an incredibly good job.
However I think it needs a tiny bit of tweaking to really work. I think the Ankh would need to be pulled back slightly so that Vega (the big star) was inside the Ankh & a very slight rotation of the Ankh clockwise.
To those who say True North isn't dead centre, you're right, but you are a lot closer than any of the North Stars are (& your bones will remain covered for another day!).
Warsaw Pact
I will enjoy that book when I find it in my stocking, I just hope there will be a nice bottle of something to go with it! (But please Santa, no sandle-straps.)
I think the only practicle purpose of the Ankh was to detect True North for navigation. The Stars & the shape of the Ankh are just aids to pinpoint that direction. There doesn't need to be any accurate design of the Ankh, if you know the efect you could achieve the same result looking between tour thumb & forefinger.
Yes, I'm crazy, but the world would be very boring without crazy people. -
Message 19
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Wednesday, 26th November 2008
Just realised that you probably did this yourself........Ìý
That's right. I followed your instructions and created a montage.
I think the Ankh would need to be pulled back slightly so that Vega (the big star) was inside the Ankh & a very slight rotation of the Ankh clockwise.Ìý
Like this?
I don't think that the alignment looks as good. Why couldn't Vega align with the outside of the ankh? Wouldn't it be more accurate if you had to line the stars up to points on the inside and the outside of the ankh?
Something that might support this is the way that the thickness of the ankh hoop (in my first montage) is almost identical to the gap between Draco and Cepheus (bottom right of the hoop).
Of course this is undermined by the wide variation in ankh shapes and designs.
The big problem is that the alignment between the stars and the gold decoration/binding isn't good enough.
I would expect Vega (along with the other significant stars) to match precisely with some kind of distinct markings on the ankh.
If I have the time, I will see if I can create an illustration to show you what I mean. -
Message 20
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Wednesday, 26th November 2008
MendipTim,
I would expect any markings on the ankh to look like this:
Using the markings on the ankh to line up with stars inside and outside the hoop, you would get a more accurate fixing.
From the perspective of a designer, I think that the shape of the ankh (which I manipulated for the above drawing) still isn't a good match.
If I was designing a navigation tool from scratch, I would choose a shape that more accurately fits with the star positions.
Then again, I'm not taking into account any additional cultural significance that the ankh shape may have. -
Message 21
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Wednesday, 26th November 2008
After giving it some more thought, it would make more sense to use the ankh to align with Polaris and the brightest star in Draco:
Of course, you could do this by eye. -
Message 22
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Thursday, 27th November 2008
I wrote this last night but by the time I posted it the Board had just closed. The thoughts are still valid so I will include it now :
"May I start by by offering my deepest condolences to the people of Mumbai & India. It is a country I love & I have the deepest respect for all it's peoples.
I find it hard to think of the Ankh whilst such barbaric events are ongoing, so all I'd like to do at present is thank Hieru-and-his-Slant from the bottom of my heart for his astonishing work he has done in the last 24 hrs. I am totally indebted to him & astounded that someone has been willing to spend so much time putting my crazy idea into pictures.
I know the progrssion of his images & comments are good but my head isn't clear at the moment so I ask him to forgive me if I save any comment till later.
Thank you again. May Peace & Good Wishes come to all the people in this world."
I eventually cleared my head to look closely at all the lmages, they all had their merits & their contradictions. Incidently I think the Blue Ankh was a ceremonial Ankh marking a star pattern of the past & may not be totally acurate. (i just want to keep that date off-topic for now). I soon realised that we were going to end up in a perpetual argument over the Perfect Shape Ankh & the Perfect Star Alignment to point it at to get the Perfect True North. Should the stars be inside or out: should we adjust our star map to an Egyptian latitude; etc?
So I looked at them again & realised that they were ALL right! I saw the true beauty & simplicity of the Ankh. However you hold it up & however you align it you get a nearly perfect True North. Not Perfect, but far more accuratly than using the then current North Star; & infinitly more accurate than a compass whose North is probably wandering over Canada.
Point it at the right stars & everyone can have their own particular alignment; as long as they always stick with their alignment they will always get their own North. Which would be navigatable by. It would also be very close to everyone else's North so direction information could be shared. The Ankh is just a lens that focuses you on one spot.
As always these are just thoughts, please feel free to destroy them. I think we might be getting somewhere & that is nearly always fatal! -
Message 23
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Thursday, 27th November 2008
Has anyone bothered to point out that Polaris wasn't the Pole Star at the time the pyramids were thought to have been built? Thuban was. In a few thousand years, Vega will be. There's a cycle of (from memory) about 23,000 years.
-
Message 24
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Thursday, 27th November 2008
No, problem. I can make the ankh fit that alignment as well:
I can't say that I'm surprised. I imagine that I could make the ankh fit any number of different constellations and alignments.
I suspect that all we are dealing with is the common human tendency to look for patterns........even if they aren't intentional. -
Message 25
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Friday, 28th November 2008
.... & there you have it - The Camel in the Eye of the Needle.
In the Northern Hemisphere there is only 1 constellation you would use as that is the only 1 visible all night every night of the every year.
As to the shape of the Ankh & the alignment it doesn't matter. As long as the same Ankh is always aligned the same way you'll always end up with the same North.
For example: you could coose to align your Ankh with Polaris in the middle of the Ankh, the result of that would be same as navigating by today's North Star, & as many contributors have pointed out you can do that with or without the Ankh especially over short distances. If you change your alignment so that Polaris & Vega are both opposite each other around the Ankh you have increased your degree of accuracy to True North considerably allowing successful navigation over greater distances. If you aligned your Ankh with Orion I doubt you'd be alive to tell the results, it probably started the night in the S.East & finished in the N.West and next month it may not be visable at all.
Now the chap next to you may have chosen Thuban & Ursa Beta as his Ankh alignment so his North is not the same as yours. The 2 Norths are in fact mythical fixed points in space, billions of miles from Earth, & his point may be a million miles from yours but due to the huge distances involved when this is brougt back to Earth's perspective it is only a fraction of a degree - its just simple Geometry.
Take a look at all of Hieru's great montages. Each has a different alignment; yet each place the centre of the Ankh relatively close to each other well within the Precessional Circle of North Stars. If there is a mathematician reading this they could probably work out the angle of variation between them & I'm sure it would be tiny. -
Message 26
Posted by cladking (U6255252) on Friday, 28th November 2008
It's an interesting theory but there are a few details that would seem to be contraindicating.
The biggest is that the Gods are usually shown to be "using" the device rather than men. They almost always are depicted holding it by the loop and hanging from their sides.
The picture of wise men traveling the desert while sighting on the north star with an ankh is appealing but might not be accurate.
The ankh is also depicted in the top of a djed pillar sometimes. While this doesn't suggest your interpretation must be wrong it isn't supportive either.
My bet is that the cross bar is the horizon. and the loop is the business end of what's below the horizon. -
Message 27
Posted by Plato's Atlantis (U13721555) on Sunday, 30th November 2008
DEAR,
ANK may not be a sign of a sandall shoestring,
my contention is that it represents an Elephants head
The vertical Stem is a trunk, the horizontal bar seems a tusk-pair the Oval must be the broad forehead.
Elephant pictures or Icons are virtually non existant in Egyptian icons. HOW COME ?
Around 855 bc the Assyrian king Salmanaaser-3
demonised the Elephant meaning that to depict one meant sdeath by a CENSOR
Around 877 bc king Asurnasirpal-2 was able to extract tribute from Egypt's king Amenhotep-3
So the taboo verdict or Edict of Salmanasser-3 may have had a lawfull- vslidstion for egyptians to eradicate any existing Elephant-Pictures.
However since the Elephant was escrined in Egyptian religion another outlet had to be found
the artisans duely changed the Eleophant pictures into a winged water-Snake and renamed
the Elephant ANKH into a Sandalshoestring ANKH
The socalled Dungbeatle-bal representing the rising Sun was supposedly from a CAMEL( not oxen.)
But my contention is that it represented the Dung-ball of any(Holi-white )Elephant.
It is strange that the Elephant has no appearent
pictures in Egyptial funeral wall decoration.
This can only mean two things.
Eihter the animal was abundant in Egypt but already taboo for Icons,
Or it became taboo from 855 bc onwards.
Elephants had their" Natural- Habitat the SEA- waterfront) stolen from them by hungry seamen from 855 bc on.
Originally the aquatious- Elephant raomed the
rivermouths/delta's and Seashores of EAST- AFRICA together with crocodilles Hippopothamesses and Camels.
All the above waterloving Animals were depicted in Egypt except the Elephant.
WQas the Taboo ediction of Grand-God-King Salmanasser-3 so strong that tghe life and freight/transport empoloyment of Elephants in Egypt became invisible and we only got a renamed ANKH symbol to remember Her by ? ?
Sincerely,' Plato's Atlantis. (TU- Delft, Holland.) -
Message 28
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Sunday, 30th November 2008
Thank you Cladking for your comments. All your points are valid & require a better answer than the cheeky one of asking how the current Sandal-strap theory works any better.
I don't know the answers, & as I freely admit I don't know much about the subject, I probably don't understand the questions. I started this thread so I will try to defend it for as long as possible.
I note that you use the word contraindicating rather than contradicting & I thank you for that. Its so much nicer to be told that there may be other things that prove me wrong than to be told I'm talking out of my a---! Many readers will think both are true.
Well its nearly Christmas so I'll give them some more of my thoughts to keep them happy. I've been lucky so far to keep this Egyptian subject away from Egypt. This is where I get stuck in the quicksand; my ignorance is complete. The lack of the common man using the Ankh in Eygptian Art is I suggest down to the absence of the common man in Egyptian Art. The majority of the surviving Art of that period is spiritual (in tombs, temples, palaces etc). In nearly all ancient cultures the Art (pictorial & Architectural) is in praise of the Gods & the completion of that Art (in effort & complexity) is the boast of Man. You are never going to get a man offering a God an Ankh as it would look like the man was claiming to be an equal or was rejecting the gift. There are lots of pictures of Gods presenting the Ankh to men in various different ways but always it seems that it is a very, very special piece of knowledge that they are passing on. As you rightly imply the Gods are often seen alone with an Ankh attached, so this bit of useful info for man must also have been very useful for the Gods in the Stars (or at least man thought so). What would be just as important on Earth as in the Stars?
The wisest of men wouldn't be travelling the desert; they'd get someone to do it for them whilst they stayed at home & drank mint tea. The wise experienced traveler wouldn't actually need an Ankh; if they knew the principle & could visualise the Ankh in the sky they'd always know where True North was. It wouldn't surprise me if some Nomadic Tribes don't use the technique subconciously today.
I don't know what a Djed Pillar is (does anyone?). My first thoughts are of the Eastern Himalayas - something between the multi roofed Pagodas of Nepal & Indo-China and the very basic Spirit Gates of the Hill Tribes of that region. My second thought is of a European Long Barrow turned upright & that leads to thoughts of the Vedic Horoscope. It could be the Bow of a boat or the Peleton of a camel-train for energy saving. The only thing I'm fairly certain about is that it would have had a practicle purpose as well as a spiritual one; and the practicle side must be very basic & simple but of extreme importance - life altering imporance for man & useful for the Gods.
Maybe the Djed is a glorified Sundial in its 3D form & is the dalight navigation tool I'm looking for. I think I understand the theory of how it might work but until I see the sun I can't test it. However I think that I may be wrong as I am increasingly believing that the Ankh can do both day & night navigation. I think you are right by betting that the cross-bar is the horizon (but you may be upside down). In some Hieroglyphs the Ankh is shown next to what looks like the horizon of sea or sand with the sun below it: this looks remarkably similar to the effects of a Sextant. The basic principle of a Sextant is that you measure the angle of the sun from the horizon both horizontally & vertically (Longitude & Latitude). A Sextant does that by using a split mirror to bring the sun down to the horizon. With the Sun at the top of the Ankh & the Cross-bar either aligned or parralel with the horizon you;d be able to achieve the same effect of making a point on the horizon on which you could make your measurements. I don't like the Maths that would be involved for total accuracy, but it is the same Maths with both instruments. If it was only being used for general direction finding or time keeping the maths may not be necessary. A lot more thought & practical tests would be needed to find out if this idea would really work.
Plato's Atlantis
I don't know enough about elephants in Egypt to comment; I do know they were very important in ancient Vedic cultures so I can quite easily accept that they would be equally important to Egyptians if they inhabited the Nile delta. My only problem with your theory is the lack of any obvious practical use for your elephant head & I am convinced that the Ankh must have been a very important practicle tool (for men & Gods) as well as a highly symbolic spiritual emblem.
Personally I'm only interested in the practicle side. I'm not frightened of the spiritual side of Egyptian life; it looks fascinating & would love to know the truth. However Ankh imagery or Ankh derived imagery permeates through virtually all cultures of the world (Stars, Crucifixes, Eyes etc), & who can predict what the effect of unlocking the secret would have. There may well be doors that are best kept shut, at least until the world is a more harmonious place. -
Message 29
Posted by PlatosAtlantis (U13723894) on Tuesday, 2nd December 2008
DEAR MENDIP TIM,
Egyptian Iconology is a bit far away to understand it is the same as with like the inflections in greek Language:
If you put a different ending at the same word it means someting quite different Like MESO & MEiZON which were the words PLATO used when describing that Atlantis was MID-inbetween Araby & Egypt.
Historians all got it wrong when they assumed that Asia was not Araby and Lybia was inNW- Africa. But I am digressing I am sorry.
You explained your ignorange about the Archaeology of the forming of the Ankh-Symbol
One could call it a godly-PEACE Symbol because
we were all made in the Spiritual likeness of GOD
The Darwinists were telling a joke as if we were apelike in spiritual as well as in Physical origin !
I experienced your reply as a oneliner comment:
Somehow our ancestors were impressed by the tranquillity and serenity of any ELEPHANT and promoted this innocent (if voracious -aquatiuos- Animal) to the first God of Men.
However he was demonized and tabooed by a very jeallous assyrian emperor('GOD-King') Salmanasser-3 in: 855 bc
Salmanasser even entered( interloped) the Bible scene in Book Genesis 3-14 where he disguised as 'God the Father'(= Praja- Pati.')
God- almighty, orders the Elephant to walk without legs as a snake on the dust-floor
for wanting to be" equal" to him (=the great Salmanasser !)
In order to murder all remaining wihite arabian Elephants he even promoted himself to the rank of a Hindu-(=Veda-)God replacing the Good- Elephant god RUDRA
With the " Bad- Elephant God" and professed ElephantKiller Lord SHIVA the' EarthQuake-Dancer'!
HIS elephant-Kill EDICT went so far as to make the WHITE HOLI ELEPHANT to become RED- DEVIL- DEAMON in Hell.
The Phrase/ Fable goes that
When Lord SHIVA was'annoyed' by " Flying"( means the HIGH- Holi-) Elephants,
He cutt their wings( meaning hedemolished their holiness as Gods of Punt.)and when they fell
they became the Himalay Mountains.
The Hindus had given White Holi Elephant names to certain Mou ntain-Peaks of the Himalay region which tradition, King Salmanasser-3 with all his might could not eradicate
The King Salmanasser-3 is depicted in 855 bc in assyrian platesware/& mural- Tiles as a -doubble-winged(!) Elephant-hunter standing on a slain White Elephant, whithin an arch topped by Lotusbutts.
Later ( indian-)Iconologists in the Gandhara style changed the in Fully millitary Dress clothed emperor into a scanty Clad-Cosmic-Dancer
with an Arch topped with flames and a dwarf underfoot.
Only professional Iconologists know this, the Layman cannot "understand" this transition of Salmanasser-Shiva connection!
CONSEQUENTLY
every nation that had tradeconnectionswith ASSUR
was required to sign a document abhorring the use of Elephant Symbols in daily life on punnishmednt of exclusion
( today we would call that discrimination !)
Anyway the Greeks had white Elephants in Greece
they were re- Named Bulls(=" White holi Elephant Bulls of Helios")and by order of Salmanaser-3
they were now" allowed" to be Killed( by Heracles
Forinstance who killed 10 Roaming ancient-Elephant-Bulls in his 12 labours in the guise of different names for that animal in different lands
In theBible the Land of HIRAM the GREAT was Elephant country because he had 1.000 White Elephant Bulls called " PILLARS"(= Loka Palas") in Hindi.
But why am I telling you this ? as a Layman you'd only profess your ignorance about ancient Iconology by your commenting with another meaningless One-Liner ?
Sorry for that last remark I became sarcastic by experiance !
or could you humor me ?
Sincerely," Plato's Atlantis" dd Dec.2008( from TU-Delft, Holland.) -
Message 30
Posted by PlatosAtlantis (U13723894) on Tuesday, 2nd December 2008
NO NO,
You are Wrong,
NOT TUBAN but DRACO in the constellation of the Little BEAR.
This Star is also called ALDEBARAN If memory serves correctly.
The RIVER" TUBAN" flows through the Port of Ras- Aden.(= anciently POSEIDONIS- Polis.) on WEST Yemen in S-Araby.) -
Message 31
Posted by cladking (U6255252) on Friday, 5th December 2008
[quote]
I've been lucky so far to keep this Egyptian subject away from Egypt. This is where I get stuck in the quicksand; my ignorance is complete. The lack of the common man using the Ankh in Eygptian Art is I suggest down to the absence of the common man in Egyptian Art. The majority of the surviving Art of that period is spiritual (in tombs, temples, palaces etc). In nearly all ancient cultures the Art (pictorial & Architectural) is in praise of the Gods & the completion of that Art (in effort & complexity) is the boast of Man. You are never going to get a man offering a God an Ankh as it would look like the man was claiming to be an equal or was rejecting the gift. There are lots of pictures of Gods presenting the Ankh to men in various different ways but always it seems that it is a very, very special piece of knowledge that they are passing on. As you rightly imply the Gods are often seen alone with an Ankh attached, so this bit of useful info for man must also have been very useful for the Gods in the Stars (or at least man thought so). What would be just as important on Earth as in the Stars?
[/quote]
I didn't mean to be discouraging. It seems egyptology is so busy trying to prove 19th century assumptions and look for Rosetta Stones which state exactly what things like the ankh represent to put much thought into the evidence.
Djed means "stable" and "enduring".
I'm curious about the reference to sandal straps as I believe these are directly related to the djed. -
Message 32
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Sunday, 7th December 2008
Hi Cladking,
I'm sorry to say - you've only encouraged me! By the way I hear that Egyptologists are planning to patent the word Egypt so that only people they like can use it!
If Djed means Stable & Enduring then what is stable & enduring? In our universe there are only 2 tiny points that fit the critera - True Stellar North & South Poles. Everything else moves.
I'm interested in the Djed as in Old Egypt it appears as a 3D object & by later times it had been reduced to a 2D object that is almost entirly symbolic. In this the Ankh maybe similar. I think that if it existed in 3D form it must have had a practicle use.
To me it looks like a very elaborate Sundial that could tell you the time of day & tell you your Latitude. The clock bit works like every other Sundial. The Latitude part works like this: On the Equator (or tropics) at Mid-day the shadows would run down the layers equally in all directions. If you did the same thing at the North Pole 1 side would be shadow & 1 side lit by the sun. Anywhere in between could be calculated by the way the shadows fall on the layers below.
I think that you could use it to find true North during the day, tell the time & seasons. give you your Latitude & with an experienced user your Longitude could be deduced.
The more I think of the Ankh as a daytime sextant the more I don't like it. For a start it means looking directly at the Sun & that is never good. For night time it would be the perfect tool. So maybe the Djed was the daytime Ankh. -
Message 33
Posted by cladking (U6255252) on Monday, 8th December 2008
Good. They'll probably copyright "ancient" as well.
Over the long term nothing is stable. Even the north star hes changed since the ancient Egyptians were mapping them. -
Message 34
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Monday, 8th December 2008
The North Stars change, But True North doesn't.
-
Message 35
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Monday, 8th December 2008
True north changes with polarity shifts and, as any student of geography might tell you, declination shifts all readings considerably in any case.
This is a really silly thread - at least so far. A lot of people thinking they understand astronomy and geography who really just want to introduce a "wow" into Egyptology. -
Message 36
Posted by cladking (U6255252) on Tuesday, 9th December 2008
I bet ALL the rest of us know the difference between true north and magnetic north. While the Egyptians were probably familiar with this differece as well, it's improbable that they employed a compass for navigation in the era that an ankh was first "invented".
A lot of people can just look at the ancient Egyptians and say "wow". After all these thousands of years we can't even answer basic questions like how they built the pyramids or what the meaning is of the tiny scraps of written material they left us.
I just don't feel up to the task of introducing any more excitement into the ancients. With all that spinning in the mastabas that should be going on it's a wonder more of the excitement hasn't come down to the present day. -
Message 37
Posted by glen berro (U8860283) on Wednesday, 10th December 2008
Wed, 10 Dec 2008 17:44 GMT, in reply to Hieru-and-his-Slant in message 24
I suspect that all we are dealing with is the common human tendency to look for patterns........even if they aren't intentional.Ìý
i think you've got it right there. People look for patterns in what is meaningless. And (surprise,surprise) find them every time.
glen -
Message 38
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Thursday, 11th December 2008
I agree.
However.
In the Northern Hemisphere there is ONLY one small group of stars that are in the sky ALL Night, EVERY night.
In the centre of those stars is True North.
True North is hundreds of times more accurate than Pole Star North or Magnetic North.
Point the Ankh anywhere else & you wont survive. -
Message 39
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Thursday, 11th December 2008
Hi Nordmann
Ignorant & wrong it may prove to be; but there is nothing silly about trying to understand how the Ancient people of the World navigated over deserts & seas.
Virtually every great nation's power is built on a foundation of good communications (navigation). Egypt was 1 such powerful nation & we know it traded. So it must have had a system of navigation.
Only a total pillock would walk out into the desert & just hope to reach somewhere.
As far as I can tell Archeologists havn't even thought of looking for ancient navigational tools.
True Astronmical North will shift slighly - over billions of years. -
Message 40
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Thursday, 11th December 2008
True Astronmical North will shift slighly - over billions of years.
Ìý
North and south? Never switched in billions of years?
The rocks say otherwise. -
Message 41
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Thursday, 11th December 2008
Its still North - just the Earth poles have shifted not the astronomic North Pole.
I'm sorry if you are a flat Earther. -
Message 42
Posted by cladking (U6255252) on Friday, 12th December 2008
Magnetic "north" has really nothing whatsoever to do with real north. Early people were familiar with lodestone and manetic iron and quickly noticed that when placed in such a way that it could turn (floating or hanging for instance) that it would always turn to face the same direction in any given place and this was generally north. They also knew that the magnet had two "poles" so it just became common practice to call these poles north and south. But they could have just as easily called these poles by any other name. Scientifically "plus" and "minus" would be more accurate. No matter what they are called by you can (usually) determine north with them if you know your general location.
Magnetic north is probably the sum vector total of all the current produced by the movement of magnetic materials in the planet's core and mantle. As the currents which carry these materials change over geologic time the location of the resultant poles change as well. Not only are these poles always in movement but they do switch polarity as well; north becomes south and south becomes north.
True north is defined by the line through the center of the Earth about which the planet spins. This line passes through the center of gravity of the planet and exits at the north and south pole. Observers watching the stars are actually seeing the spin of the earth and those which are most directly north will appear not to move. The closest bright star to the center of the spin is called the north star.
There's normally little change in the center of gravity of the planet or the spin even over very long periods of time so there is little variation in true north over even long periods of time. -
Message 43
Posted by King Atur-tii (U7470590) on Sunday, 11th January 2009
The Ankh is indeed a mystery, and one worth musing over. It is definatly not a sandal strap, as egyptologists would have you believe, they just don't like admitting they don't know.
I dont think that it was used for the identification/alignment of stars as it's just not precise enough. The Egyptians were very clever people and to use such an instrument with minimal percision is just not in their character.
However, I must agree that I currently have NO idea what it is myself, so please keep your ideas coming as it will help me eventually try and work out what it represents.
Also, a quick note to the original message, the big bang theory has been disproved using the doppler shift, as the Andromeda Galaxy is actually coming towards us and the Big Bang theory requires every galaxy to be heading away from us.
Any way, give me your ideas on the Ankh... -
Message 44
Posted by englishvote (U5473482) on Sunday, 11th January 2009
Hi King Atur-tii
The Big Bang theory has certainly not been disproved, the theory does not require all galaxies to be receding from each other.
The Andromeda galaxy and our Milky Way galaxy are moving towards each other due to gravity, and so are many other galaxies.
This is probably out of place on the history boards but the Big Bang is certainly in the past and spiritual mumbo jumbo is permitted so why not a bit of science as well. -
Message 45
Posted by TerryG*09* (U13753139) on Monday, 12th January 2009
Very true. not EVERY galaxy has to move away from another. on one hand you have those which are and on the other those which are moving away, it all depends on the consistancy of the space around it,
its either gravity or dark matter. -
Message 46
Posted by MendipTim (U13707598) on Monday, 12th January 2009
Hi everyone
Thanks for you interests. I don't know much about the BBT & I'm not sure how it fits into this thread; but its interesting so please carry on.
King Atur-tii
Horray! I've finally got a supporter - at least in my anti-sandal-strap campaign!
Most people belief a modern compass is accurate as it is for most of our simple needs. The lack of precision is only in its design, Any Ankh aligned to the same north stars in the same way will always be far more accurate than a compass or using the prevailing North Star, you are taking about tiny frctions of a degree of accuracy, not the 3+ degrees with a compass.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Ìýto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Ö÷²¥´óÐã iD
Ö÷²¥´óÐã navigation
Ö÷²¥´óÐã links
Ö÷²¥´óÐã © 2014 The Ö÷²¥´óÐã is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.