Personification in Greek Myth

[Mr Greene]

So it's...

[Pat Mustard]

From his book listings on amazon, Poe seems to be a combination of far-right conspiracy theorist (he's written at least two books proclaiming Hilary Clinton a seekrit-naarzi) and self-help get rich quick scammer. What he most emphatically is not is a historian.

Given the tenor of his other books, and this review by an actual expert in the field, I would suggest that the book Huggy is quoting from is a mass of bullshit, plain and simple.

Actually I was quoting a magazine article, and that article used Poe as a source, and even then he is only talking about the sea faring capabilities of the ancient Egyptians, NOT mythology.

http://philipcoppens.com/egyptgreece.html

Richard Poe in “Black Spark, White Fire” argues that the assumption that the ancient Egyptians did not sail across the Mediterranean Sea is a carefully constructed scientific myth.

I see how you ignored the Wiki links I also included.

So your desperate attempt to attack the source really has no merit. I should also add that I'm the ONLY one who posted a source...
 


Just so we're clear, are you saying that the Greeks came up with their own mythology independent of any outside influences?

Huggy you were qouting a bullshit book. Just because you were qouting it via a bullshit conspiracy theorist's lying blog doesn't help you any; in fact it makes it worse.

The Egypt created western civilisation strain of pseudohistory is an especially stupid one.

[Huggy Bear]

Actually I was quoting a magazine article, and that article used Poe as a source, and even then he is only talking about the sea faring capabilities of the ancient Egyptians, NOT mythology.

http://philipcoppens.com/egyptgreece.html


I see how you ignored the Wiki links I also included.

So your desperate attempt to attack the source really has no merit. I should also add that I'm the ONLY one who posted a source...
 


Just so we're clear, are you saying that the Greeks came up with their own mythology independent of any outside influences?

Huggy you were qouting a bullshit book. Just because you were qouting it via a bullshit conspiracy theorist's lying blog doesn't help you any; in fact it makes it worse.

The Egypt created western civilisation strain of pseudohistory is an especially stupid one.

So you're just going to ignore the wiki links I posted alongside that information? Also a clear yes or no answer to my question will suffice.

I don't want any excuses after you start getting that work.

[The Grand Nudger]

Fun aside, Thor Heyerdahl actually built a second, less famous but infinitely more capable boat, Ra (and Ra2)......based on his interpretation of a type of craft seen regularly in heiroglyphs.  A very large bundled reed ship.  He noted that the ship appeared to have a dagger board and basic lateen rig.  These two things, and the size of the ship (all explained as artistic flourishes for the longest time) made no sense, to his mind, in the case of a small river barge.  

So he put together a team to build and sail it.  Seven people, limited experience.  They made it across the atlantic, from morocco to Barbados. They even used period appropriate storage on deck, clay amphora and whatnot.  I think he should have tried to sail one back the other direction, but at least it showed the general seaworthiness of the vessel.  The book he wrote about it is good.  Particularly a passage wherein they describe the (then) growing pollution in the atlantic currents.  A river of trash, he called it, lol. Made it easy to sail the canary current, though.  Floatsam and jetsom presented themselves as a viable navigational aid (and would have at any time, though less pronounced than tons of garbage floating). 

Now, he thought that the egyptians used these to sail to the americas, and from the americas to the pacific islands - thus the explanation for those civilizations.  Turns out he was completely and emphatically wrong about that.  He was right about it being a boat built for the sea, and not a river..though.  They most likely never made it (or made it back) from some offcourse jaunt into the deep blue.....these boats could have navigated the Med with relative ease.  Particularly island hopping, as the only major flaw of the boat was that long periods of being submerged could waterlog the reeds. A day or two pulled ashore every few days would have solved that.  Long enough to unload, make arrangements for goods on a return leg, re-provision, wait for tides and wind....and then you're out again.

Thing I love about Heyerdahl, is that his ability to be painfully but admirably wrong was deliciously informative. He tried a bit of reverse syncretism himself, as the author of the book in question seems to have done. Grist for the mill, if only they could all do it like Heyerdahl did it, it would at least be entertaining.

[Minimalist]

Heyerdahl gets credit for being an experimental archaeologist/historian and for putting his own ass on the line to pursue his theories.  All that said, we have plenty of excavations of underwater shipwrecks in the Med which gives a pretty solid view of the types of commercial ships in use.  The oldest site identified so far, at Dokos off the Greek coast, dates from 2200 BC towards the end of the Early Bronze Age.  The site was covered in amphorae ( ceramic jars used for transport and storage ) as well as stone anchors and other assorted items which survived the ravages of time.  8 centuries later the Uluburun wreck was found off the Turkish coast and the same amphorae laden cargo was noted but this time there were parts of the ship's hull which did survive.  Uluburun dates to roughly 1,400 BC or the Late Bronze Age and curiously contains copper ingots which would have been amazingly valuable at the time.  (Someone lost a fortune when that ship went down - I hope it was a bastard like Trump!)  Nonetheless, the same style of cargo ship was in usage in the Med. for millennia. 

BTW, the Uluburun ship, as well as the Khufu Solar Barque from the Old Kingdom and the "jesus boat" from first century BC Israel all used the same mortise and tenon style of planked construction which was clearly a successful model and the ancients saw no need to change it.

But I doubt you would get the same carrying capacity in a reed boat.

This marine archeologist built a replica of an Egyptian craft. 

https://phys.org/news/2009-03-maritime-a...urney.html

Ancient Egyptians may be best known for building pyramids, but internationally renowned maritime archaeologist Cheryl Ward wants the world to know that they were pretty good sailors, too.
She ought to know. Ward, an associate professor of anthropology at The Florida State University, and an international team of archaeologists, shipwrights and sailors recently built a full-scale replica of a 3,800-year-old ship and sailed it on the Red Sea to re-create a voyage to a place the ancient Egyptians called God’s Land, or Punt. Their expedition was financed and filmed as part of a French documentary that will air internationally and on an upcoming episode of “Nova.”
“This project has demonstrated the extraordinary capability of the Egyptians at sea,” Ward said. “Many people, including my fellow archaeologists, think of the Egyptians as tied to the Nile River and lacking in the ability to go to sea. For 25 years, my research has been dedicated to showing the scope of their ability and now, to proving their independently invented approach to ship construction worked magnificently at sea.”

I doubt that it would have looked out of place in harbors of Piraeus, Rhodes, or Tyre over a span of 4,000 years.

[Huggy Bear]

Heyerdahl gets credit for being an experimental archaeologist/historian and for putting his own ass on the line to pursue his theories.  All that said, we have plenty of excavations of underwater shipwrecks in the Med which gives a pretty solid view of the types of commercial ships in use.  The oldest site identified so far, at Dokos off the Greek coast, dates from 2200 BC towards the end of the Early Bronze Age.  The site was covered in amphorae ( ceramic jars used for transport and storage ) as well as stone anchors and other assorted items which survived the ravages of time.  8 centuries later the Uluburun wreck was found off the Turkish coast and the same amphorae laden cargo was noted but this time there were parts of the ship's hull which did survive.  Uluburun dates to roughly 1,400 BC or the Late Bronze Age and curiously contains copper ingots which would have been amazingly valuable at the time.  (Someone lost a fortune when that ship went down - I hope it was a bastard like Trump!)  Nonetheless, the same style of cargo ship was in usage in the Med. for millennia. 

BTW, the Uluburun ship, as well as the Khufu Solar Barque from the Old Kingdom and the "jesus boat" from first century BC Israel all used the same mortise and tenon style of planked construction which was clearly a successful model and the ancients saw no need to change it.

But I doubt you would get the same carrying capacity in a reed boat.

This marine archeologist built a replica of an Egyptian craft. 

https://phys.org/news/2009-03-maritime-a...urney.html

Ancient Egyptians may be best known for building pyramids, but internationally renowned maritime archaeologist Cheryl Ward wants the world to know that they were pretty good sailors, too.
She ought to know. Ward, an associate professor of anthropology at The Florida State University, and an international team of archaeologists, shipwrights and sailors recently built a full-scale replica of a 3,800-year-old ship and sailed it on the Red Sea to re-create a voyage to a place the ancient Egyptians called God’s Land, or Punt. Their expedition was financed and filmed as part of a French documentary that will air internationally and on an upcoming episode of “Nova.”
“This project has demonstrated the extraordinary capability of the Egyptians at sea,” Ward said. “Many people, including my fellow archaeologists, think of the Egyptians as tied to the Nile River and lacking in the ability to go to sea. For 25 years, my research has been dedicated to showing the scope of their ability and now, to proving their independently invented approach to ship construction worked magnificently at sea.”

---

---

I doubt that it would have looked out of place in harbors of Piraeus, Rhodes, or Tyre over a span of 4,000 years.

This is too rich. You stated:

I don't know where this guy Poe (great name, btw) gets the idea that scholars said the Egyptians did not sail.

From the article you posted:

https://phys.org/news/2009-03-maritime-a...urney.html

“This project has demonstrated the extraordinary capability of the Egyptians at sea,” Ward said. “Many people, including my fellow archaeologists, think of the Egyptians as tied to the Nile River and lacking in the ability to go to sea.

The project grew out of the 2006 discovery of the oldest remains of seafaring ships in the world in manmade caves at Wadi Gawasis, on the edge of the Egyptian desert.

Some had thought the ancient Egyptians did not have the naval technology to travel long distances by sea, but the findings at Wadi Gawasis confirmed that Egyptians sailed a 2,000-mile round trip voyage to Punt, located in what is today Ethiopia or Yemen, Ward said.

*emphasis mine*

You do realize that Poe's book was published in 1999 right? The above discovery wasn't made until 2006, which means Poe was not only ahead of his time, but he was clearly correct.

The Article I referred to was also from 1999

http://philipcoppens.com/egyptgreece.html

Richard Poe in “Black Spark, White Fire” argues that the assumption that the ancient Egyptians did not sail across the Mediterranean Sea is a carefully constructed scientific myth. Evidence that the ancient Egyptians did just that is similar to the volume of evidence that the Phoenicians and Minoans sailed that sea. Scientists willingly accept those cultures’ seafaring capability, yet illogically limit the ancient Egyptians’ capability to do the same.
Still, there is powerful evidence to show that the Egyptians did venture beyond the Nile. It is also known that they possessed a large fleet. And Thor Heyerdahl showed that even their “primitive boats” were able to master the currents of the oceans – thus very well equipped to master the much calmer waters of the Mediterranean Sea.

*emphasis mine*

From YOUR OWN article It it clear that prior to 2006 scholars definitely thought that Egypt had no seafaring capability.

To quote the ignorant buffoon Tazzycorn.

From his book listings on amazon, Poe seems to be a combination of far-right conspiracy theorist (he's written at least two books proclaiming Hilary Clinton a seekrit-naarzi) and self-help get rich quick scammer. What he most emphatically is not is a historian.

Given the tenor of his other books, and this review by an actual expert in the field, I would suggest that the book Huggy is quoting from is a mass of bullshit, plain and simple.

*emphasis mine*
We'll see if he ever gets around to admitting he was wrong, I won't hold my breath...

[Minimalist]

The Dokos shipwreck was discovered in 1975, dummy.  Do try to keep up when the adults are talking.

You got caught quoting from a book written by a conspiracy loving asswipe.  Admit your mistake and try to regain some fucking dignity.

[Mr Greene]

Given that Napoleon visited the site of the original Suez Canal built by the Pharaoh Senuset II with a view to digging it out would tend to suggest that scholars were well aware of Egyptian naval capabilities somewhat prior to your proposed date.

[Huggy Bear]

The Dokos shipwreck was discovered in 1975, dummy.  Do try to keep up when the adults are talking.

You got caught quoting from a book written by a conspiracy loving asswipe.  Admit your mistake and try to regain some fucking dignity.

Trying to move the goalposts are we?

The Dokos shipwreck was Greek, we're talking about Egyptian seafaring capabilities...

The Dokos shipwreck was clearly never mentioned in your article, and why would it? It has nothing to do with Egypt, so why exactly are you bringing it up?

---

Given that Napoleon visited the site of the original Suez Canal built by the Pharaoh Senuset II with a view to digging it out would tend to suggest that scholars were well aware of Egyptian naval capabilities somewhat prior to your proposed date.

Look I'm just using minimalist own source that states:

https://phys.org/news/2009-03-maritime-a...urney.html

“Many people, including my fellow archaeologists, think of the Egyptians as tied to the Nile River and lacking in the ability to go to sea."

[Drich]

Hey all, it's been a while but I'm studying philosophy and mythology again so I figured it would be a good time to come back.

So I'm reading up on Greek mythology and what I'm having a hard time comprehending is what exactly  ancient Greeks were picturing when they imagined their many different gods, particularly those gods that are personifications of the aspects of the natural world? Take Helios, the sun god, for instance. Helios is described as this dude with a flaming chariot drawn by four flying horses. But obviously if you look at the sun you won't see this. You'll just see a glowing orb. So did they think that Helios and his chariot was invisible, with only the flames being visable?

Or take Gaia, aka Mother Earth. She's described as having a humanoid form and does things that humans do like speak, procreate, etc. But at this same time she's supposed to be the actual earth that we all inhabit. How were these two seemingly incompatible things compatable in the minds of the Greeks?

Was it meant literally? Or was it all just metaphorical language? Or did these beings actually exist in humanoid form in some other plane of existence with the natural world being some very imperfect representation of them? What were Greeks thinking?

From a biblical perspective I tend to filter Greek gods through the lens of the bible. And in the bible there was a time described in Genesis that would allow greek and nornordic or even egyptian mythology to kinda unfold. That was the time of wickedness just before the flood. Where the ill titled 'gods' were the fallen angels, and the demi gods the "titans" the bible mentions.

Demons are often time described as being specialized in certain elements or powers. If you can get you mind around Christianity being true and the ark and so fourth, it is very possible that a version of those 'gods' did indeed once live.

---

welcome back!