Saturday, July 25, 2009




Know this: When any one writes any information about events that took place in ancient Egypt,

* If they can't site the source and location, they are just mimicking the words of some one else.

* If they can site the source and location (and can not read that language), they are trusting some author, that is what that ancient text says.

* If you can contact an Egyptologist (that can read the ancient language) and even they can not give the source and location of that information is written, odds are that information is little more than a myth of some one's imagination. Once any such myth is accepted and repeated, it snow balls and becomes another "FACT" about ancient Egypt.


Before we can consider the validity of any translation, I suppose we should see if that information is a translation of some actual text or if the translation is nothing more than the imagination of the translators.


It does not matter if you are talking about Latin, Hindu, Islamic books, the bible/torah or other books of times past, odds are the original text was not divided into paragraphs, had no punctuation or other references.

Many people are unaware, but those who put what is called the bible together, had an array of text to chose from to select which would go into their composite.. the bible.

In web pages we can read such information as "The Hyksos capital was located at Avaris (modern Tell ad-Dab'a)"

* Those authors would know this because they found artifacts that they can prove were made by the Hyksos (good luck)

* Those authors know this because they are puppeting some thing they got from some one else.

* Those authors know this because they actually know an ancient source where this information is written.

References are added to large amounts of text to make things easy to find. In the majority cases of all hieroglyphic text, there are very few sources that would compose 20 pages of type written text.

The validity of any information in any religious text is a moot point here. The point is IF ANY INFORMATION IS IN AN ANCIENT TEXT, and an author is aware of it, they can cite the exact location of that information.


a) "The Hyksos capital was located at Avaris (modern Tell ad-Dab'a)"

b) "The city of David and Jerusalem are the same city"

Some one author about accounts would write something like this

2 Samuel 5:6 "The city of David and Jerusalem are the same city"

Source, specific location in that source. Information given

Tomb of Tut, wall on the west side, 2nd hieroglyph down ... Information given

Turin King's list, 7th line down, The Hyksos capital was located at Avaris

IF any actual information exists about the Hyksos or any other topic in ancient hieroglyphs, the author who writes that information can identify the source and the specific location in that source where that information is given.

A great series of text books based on facts would be one that took specific sources.. a specific stone, wall, papyrus, then took the original text line for line and placed the equivalent words below each line of hieroglyphs kind of an official bible of hieroglyphic text.

Other Egyptologist who wrote on topics, could then give the actual reference to which source and location of that information.



If people in multiple locations were to create references to any text, there would be many reference systems.

To make the study of Egyptology a universal media where all would be looking at the same thing, talking about the same thing, there would have to be a standardized reference system

I would give such an honor to a college in Egypt. All universities around the world would coordinate their ideas and research with the hub.

The object would be to create one standardized reference encyclopedia of hieroglyphic text.

There would be many considerations in the creation of a standardized encyclopedia.