Talk:List of unsolved problems in Egyptology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Portal:Egyptology
 Egyptology Portal
This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Egyptological subjects. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information).
List This article has been rated as list-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Votes for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on May 27, 2005. The result of the discussion was keep (no consensus).

Mindspillage (spill yours?) 14:27, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 14 October 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

But most importantly, who cares?

Contents

[edit] Egyptian use of Blue Lotus question.

In the section on entheogens in Africa there is a reference to the blue lotus in Egyptian history... "A famous entheogen of ancient Egypt is the Blue Lotus (Nymphaea caerulea)." Was the Blue Lotus use commonly known amonst egyptologists and historians or is this a recent 'rediscovery' of its use as an entheogen?

Mike Logghe 16:12, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion

Okay, to whomever's constantly re-entering deleted items in the article: There's nothing wrong with disagreement, but do ya think you'd be willing to explain why you're doing it? I'll listen to your argument, honestly, I will. --Funkmistress 03:06, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

It hasn't been archived yet, and as far as I know there is no 5 day rule. One reason I doubt the rule is exists is that Pandeism vfd stretched for a month. Falphin 18:14, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I was under the impression that it was 5 days (see this link). I think the most would be 7 days. Some thought that it should be 4 days. - Anon (Read: Time lag [Wikipedia:Votes for deletion - five days] and When the Lag Time runs out in the Deletion policy!)
As far as I can tell no consensus was reached.(Total votes don't matter unless heavily weighed in one direction.) The VFD page itselft lists 7 days so no change was made. VFD's usually go on for longer without consensus like I said before.Falphin 19:53, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
To the anonymous user: STOP REMOVING THE VFD TAG! This repeated edit despited reversals and explanations why you must wait is starting to border on vandalism. Anonymous users may not close VfD discussions. That is a responsibility of administrators. (Signed-in non-administrators may close non-controversial "keep" or "merge" votes. This situation fails because a) it is not a clear "keep" or "merge" and b) you are not a logged in user.) The 5 day period is a minimum. After 5 days, the discussion is moved to the VfD/Old page where it sits until some administrator works through the backlog and closes out the discussion. The backlog typically floats between 4 and 10 days but has been much longer at times. Be patient. Rossami (talk) 21:25, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Falphin, the Pandeism vfd didn't last a month, it only felt like it!  ;-) Really it was about 10 days. -- BD2412 talk 14:07, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

This article is of very poor quality in general and much of it needs to be seriously reworked. I have deleted the following: "Persona: Was Cleopatra a Greek or Egyptian? Was she black? Was Cleopatra pretty? How exactly did Cleopatra die?". This is not an 'unresolved problem' - Cleopatra was Greek; no serious scholar would dispute this.

Indeed, and Egyptologists don't spend their time arguing over whether Cleopatra was good-looking or not, that being largely a matter of personal opinion. As to her death, the earliest extant account, which is Plutarch's, says she killed herself—though even he admits some uncertainty on the details.

I removed a few others:

  • Customs : Did the Pharaohs marry their sisters?
    Some did, some didn't. See incest#Ancient Egypt
  • . . .What curse was on Tutankhamun's tomb (if there was one)?
    This might be better placed in Egypt in the European imagination; serious Egyptologists don't waste their time with this nonsense.
  • Tomb : Who took away by force, and without consent, the treasures in the Valley of the Kings? Why are there empty sepulchers?
    Why does anyone rob tombs? Money. We're not likely to discover the names of the robbers or anything like that.
  • Event : Did Egyptian Pharaohs rule over Palestine?
    Yes, parts of it at least. See Canaan for some information on this.
  • Literature : Did Egyptians invent writing?
    They invented a form of writing, yes; other forms of writing arose independently, as far as we know.
  • History : What did Herodotus witness in Egypt? Who did Herodotus exchange ideas and have conversations with?
    Books 2 and 3 of his Histories contain what he chose to write down about his travels in Egypt; beyond that we have no way of knowing.
  • (added 3 July 2005 00:50 (UTC)) Art : Are there concealed symbols of sex in Egyptian art?
    There's plenty of overt sexuality in Egyptian art; see Min (god) for just one example. Who postulates a concealed sexual symbolism and why?

—Charles P. (Mirv) 3 July 2005 00:38 (UTC)

  • History : Who was Solon and why did he visit Egypt?
    We know quite well who Solon was (the author linked directly to Wikipedia's biography of Solon, thus answering his own question) and besides, the question is outside the realm of Egyptology. As for the second half of the question, why does anyone travel? Tourism has existed for a lot longer than people seem to think. [Added 16.8.05] Now that I think about it, the whole Atlantis question really doesn't belong in Egyptology. I'll leave it for the time being, if anyone wants to make an argument for it.
  • History : Why were there Minoan painting in Avaris? What was the relationship between Minoan civilization and Egyptian civilization?
    The Minoans were big-time traders; Avaris was an economic hub during the same time period. A little logic goes a long way.

--Funkmistress 05:30, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Is that the view of academia, or just yours? Remember, no original research. Oh, you also changed the spelling of "Miscellaneous" to "Miscelleanous", which is incorrect. ~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 09:19, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

As for your first question, my view is also the academic consensus. There's nothing mysterious about cultural overlaps when the civilizations involved were known trading partners, though I suppose the popular habit of connecting anything involving the Minoans with mystery and the paranormal is alive and well. As to the spelling of "miscellaneous," the incorrect spelling was in place when I edited the article; I corrected it, but now it seems some smart person has "re-incorrected" it. I'll go fix it (again) now.

--Funkmistress 18:06, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

If it is the academic consensus, then would you provide sufficient sources to demonstrate that it is? ~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 10:24, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't entirely understand why you need persuading; the Minoans had a magnificent culture and the means the spread it (their thassalocracy, how I love that word). Where's the mystery here? Perhaps alien-human hybrids from Atlantis used their mind-control powers to hypnotize the Hyskos into replicating Minoan culture? Nevertheless, here's some stuff:

Cretan culture had expanded widely overseas by [1700 BC], even so far as Egypt and Palestine, where increasing evidence for the handiwork of Cretan craftsmen, wall painters in particular, has been found in recent years at sites such as Avaris, the Hyksos capital, in the Nile Delta. Closer to home in the islands of the Aegean, settlements flourished that undeniably borrowed much of their material culture from Crete and, in some instances at least, may have been actual Minoan settlements. - http://classics.uc.edu/prmainland/Lectures/JackDavis/Origins05.html

The 16th century BC or Late Minoan IA period is the acme for almost all aspects of Minoan culture. On the broad Mediterranean level, this is the phase of maximum Minoan influence and presence abroad exemplified by the magnificently Minoanized site of Akrotiri on the volcanic island of Thera (Santorini) and hinted at in the tomb wall-paintings of "Keftiu" in Egypt, and the Minoan-related frescoes at Tell el Dab'a the Hyskos capital of Avaris. - http://www.bsa.gla.ac.uk/knossos/historymain.html

If you want a much deeper look at Avaris and the Minoans, you can check out any of a number of publications by Manfrek Biatek, the leader of the expedition who first dug through Avaris. It's an interesting city, lots of historical and possible Biblical (it's at the same site as Pi-Ramsses) entanglments.

There's an interesting article here suggesting that the Hyskos (who ruled Egypt during this time) were the descendents of Cretan settlers. I wouldn't put too much stock in it; the guy whose page this is doesn't have what I would call stellar academic credentials, but it's worth a look. --Funkmistress 22:11, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

The one problem with that is that who the Hyksos were is a matter of absolutely HUGE debate, and also that the majority (though by no-means even close to 100%) accept that the Hyksos were (in some non-agreed upon manner) asiatic. This includes asia-minor, which is the theory with most support, and there is a large suspicion that they have some connection to the Hebrews or Habiru (who may be the same thing).

With regard to sea-faring nations, Egypt was the victim of raids by the Sea People. Thus the question of why anything minoan would be at Avaris ties in with both the puzzle of who the Sea People were, and that of who the Hyksos were. Therefore, as neither of these questions have been solved, nor can that of the frescoes at Avaris. ~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 14:23, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

It seems you and I are seeing the question differently. You're interpreting it the way Manley probably was using it in his book, as an opening question delving into a larger discussion of the Hyskos and the Sea Peoples, (I don't know this, I'm just extrapolating from Llyrwch's description below) whereas I'm taking it at face value. I still propose that the Avaris question be removed because it is not an unsolved mystery in and of itself and the question of who the Hyskos and Sea People were can be addressed more directly. In fact, "Who were the Hyskos?" is already in the article, and "Who were the Sea Peoples?" could easily be added. --Funkmistress 15:10, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, I've never read Manley, so I don't really know if I'm interpreting it the same way. The Avaris question is not "why are there minoan paintings" with the answer "because some minoans did it", but "what are the circumstances that meant that minoans or at least minoan culture, was present in avaris, significantly". I therefore propose the Avaris question should stay. ~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 10:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Llyrwch's comment

The moment I started reading this article, I had to check it's References section to see if this article was inspired by a specific book ... & sure enough, Bill Manley's The Seventy Great Mysteries of Ancient Egypt was at the top of the list. Which in a way explains the major flaw of this article.

I don't want to sound as if I'm criticizing Manley's work: I've read it, the list of contributors include the names of a number of highly qualified Egyptologists, & there's a lot of good information there. Yet the book appears to have been conceived around the idea that of playing to the common conception that Egypt is unique in having a number of mysteries surrounding its culture & history, some of which have occult/metaphysical connections -- but using that conception to explain some of the problems & issues that Egyptologists today are wrestling with -- although there is the occasional nod towards the popular folklore surrounding Egypt (e.g., alleged supernatural associations of the Great Pyramid, the cure on king Tut's tomb, etc.). All disciplines of study have their mysteries & their unsolved problems; but with Egyptology too often the implication is that they are unsolved because "the experts" refuse to accept a supernatural explanation for the mystery.

Sadly, in writing this article it is clear that someone has started with the chapter headings from the table of contents to Manley's book -- & ended there. There is no analysis of the material in the various chapters & a reformulation of their contents into what should properly be considered "Unsolved problems" & their explanation. The various problems are presented exactly as they are stated in the chapter headings with no explanation of why they are a problem. For example, consider the item, "Where did the Egyptians come from? What did the Egyptians know of their own history?" The point of the original chapter in Manley's collection is to explain that, based on our current knowledge, Egyptian civilization appears to spring into existence, fully developed, practically overnight; there is no clear sign of earlier cultures in the region that could be said to be "proto-Egyptian", as can be demonstrated for Greece, Mesopotamis, the Mayans, & other ancient civilizations.

There is a good idea buried under this inept presentation -- a survey of the issues & unresolved problems of Egyptology currently under attack. It needs someone with the time & energy to disinter this idea, & make what we have now into a worthy survey article. -- llywrch 17:34, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ex-unsolved problems

Like can be read in the article:
"It was once widely believed that the Story of Wenamun was an actual historical account, written by Wenamun as a report regarding his travels. However, literary analysis conducted by Egyptologists since the 1980s (Helck 1986) indicates that it is a work of historical fiction, a view now generally accepted by most professionals working on the text."
--surueña 09:00:47, 2005-07-29 (UTC)
I beg to differ. The Egyptology page would be wayyyyy too long. Just keep seperate articles.mikey 23:08, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Oops, wrong section! HAHAHAHA.mikey 23:08, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I think that is a good quote ... and the question is a "mostly" solved (unless there is a there is a recent reference that conflicts with Helck 1986) ... JDR 22:39, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

This question is arguably now answered in the entries for Narmer and Menes (Written by Captmondo in the history log). --surueña 08:21:52, 2005-07-30 (UTC)

Arguably now answered? I'm not sure about that ... The Narmer article states "Traditionally, Menes is credited with that unification, and he is listed as being the first pharaoh in Manetho's list of kings, so this find has caused some controversy. Some Egyptologists hold that Menes and Narmer are in fact the same person; some hold that Menes inherited an already-unified Egypt from Narmer; others hold that Narmer began the process of unification but either did not succeed or succeeded only partially, leaving it to Menes to complete. Another equally plausible theory is that Narmer was an immediate successor to the king who did manage to unify Egypt (perhaps the King Scorpion who name was found on a macehead also discovered in Hierakonpolis), and adopted symbols of unification that had already been in use perhaps for a generation. It should be noted that while there is extensive physical evidence of there being a pharaoh named Narmer, so far there is no evidence other than Manetho's list and from legend for a pharaoh called Menes. Sincerely, JDR 22:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Pyramids: Are the Pyramids of Giza sequenced in straight lines with stars?

I thought it was pretty clear that the Pyramids are not deliberately lined up with the stars. The location has everything to do with the soil they were built on.


Shouldn't Bauval's book be removed from the "Further reading and other publications"? After all, nearly all of his arguments have been conclusively disproven.

It should be left because it is significant, and noteworthy, even if not factual. --Victim of signature fascism 20:28, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] merge?

couldn't this just be merged with Egyptology? The concept of "list of unsolved problems in X" stands out like a sore thumb. It oozes a cheap TV-documentary essence of "mysterious ancient curse of the mummies". Egyptology is a stub. There is no reason not to discuss certain unsolved problems on the Egyptology article itself. The same would hold with most of the articles linked from List of unsolved problems I suppose. dab (ᛏ) 09:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the above poster. -Interested2 23:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree. Someone needs to be WP:BOLD and merge all "unsolved problems" articles into their respective fields. wikipediatrix 19:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I beg to differ. The Egyptology page would be wayyyyy too long. Just keep seperate articles.mikey 23:08, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Egyptology is a paragraph long, if that. -Interested2 18:05, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] tag

I tagged this article "noncompliant" because it is not only not sourced, but the act of asking questions and making leaps of inference from them is Original Research and POV at its worst. wikipediatrix 19:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removals

The following have been removed:


  • History: What was the origin of the Hyksos? Who were their first leaders?
    • Reason: not an unsolved problem; the Hyksos are well documented both textually and archaeologically as being Semitic speakers from the Levant.
  • Persona: Who was Labaya? Was he a biblical figure (such as Saul)?
    • Reason: unrelated to Egypt
  • Persona: Was King Khufu (Cheops) a good ruler or a tyrant, as later tradition described him?
    • Reason: no way to answer this very POV question short of time travel
  • What kind of reign was Pharaoh Smendes I's rule?
    • Reason: POV
  • Pyramids: Does Abydos contain the last royal pyramids? Why was it built? Why does it have a pyramid?
    • Reason: no pyramid located at Abydos
There is a pyramid at Abydos, it beloned to Ahmose I. However, the rest is foolishness. We know clearly that besides the 25th dynasty, Ahmose's is the last royal pyramid, and it was built there becuase he didn't own any farther north than Abydos at the beginning of his reign.Thanatosimii 22:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Pyramids: What were the origins of the Egyptian pyramids? When and where was the concept of pyramids conceived? What were the pyramids used for? How were the pyramids built? When and why did the era of pyramid building end?
  • Methods: How did the Egyptians shape, form, and work granite?
    • Reason: not unsolved. Also, why is granite so special? Why not limestone, quartzite, etc.?
  • Knowledge: What was the Saqqara Bird? Did Egyptians have some form of understanding of aerodynamics
    • Reason: well-docmented to be a masthead; not an unsolved mystery
  • Did Egyptians have kites or gliders?
    • Reason: no. Nor did they have knowledge of rocketry or antimatter.
  • Knowledge: Did Egyptians have some form of understanding of electricity? Did the Egyptians use batteries? What is the relief at Dendera?
    • Reason: no batteries. Dendera "lightbulbs" are fanciful intentional misunderstandings by pseudoarchaeologists.
  • Event: Did Ramesses III defend Egypt against the Sea People because they were invading or were they people fleeing to Egypt in the middle of a war?
    • Reason: same thing; not unsolved problem
  • Customs: Was the Pharaoh really seen as a god or the position he held just viewed as divine?
    • Reason: varied by period; not unsolved problem

Flembles 15:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

More removals

  • Customs: Where are the Apis bull burials?
    • Reason: the Serapeum; not unsolved problem
  • Customs: Why did the Egyptians mummify the deceased? When did the process of mummification originate? How was the "Myth of Osiris" tied to mummification?
    • Reason: see the mummy article; not unsolved problem
  • Tomb: Who are the individuals that are buried at Qurneh?
    • Reason: not unsolved problem; why not ask same pointless question of Giza, Saqqarah, Abydos or any other necropolis?
  • Tomb: Where are the Third Intermediate Dynasty tombs at Tanis?
    • Reason: in the Royal Necropolis; not unsolved problem
  • Literature: Why were hieroglyphs forgotten?
    • Reason: not a mystery; other writing systems adopted, no need to use them anymore

Flembles 19:38, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Even more Removals: Based on the fact that this page say, "Unsovled problems in Egyptology, I am removing things about which no Egyptoligists have even the slightest qualms.

  • Did Aten have a connection with Adonai, Yahweh, or Elohim?
    • No egyptologist bothers with Osman, except redford, who eats him for dinner.
  • Was Akhenaten killed or exiled?
    • No. Problem solved.
  • Is there a connection between Moses and Akhenaten (see Osarseph)? Could Akhenaten have been Moses himself, or perhaps Yehoshua?
    • When are people going to learn that Osman isn't an egyptologist?
  • Was King Solomon involved in Egyptian religious practices, such as Atenism?
    • From 400 years after the fact? No. This is not a problem.

Those are the big ones up there. Some of the rest are questionable, but can stand for now.Thanatosimii 23:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I at first agreed with your removal of some of these removals (but certainly not all), especially the Osman removals. However, I did discover Osman is a true Egyptologist (though with only a Master's Degree). I added many of the removed topics because many are truly not fully solved. 72.65.28.204 01:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Nope. What was returned is either fully, entierly solved, or foolishness. And Osman isn't an egyptologist, his degree is in law. Thanatosimii 01:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
On the other hand, while I personally do not at all believe that the Egyptians had electricity, the true purpose of the "Dendera light" is still unsolved. Also, why add the problem about Sneferu? Bob Brier showed that the reason he built so many pyramids was because his first two failed. I think the origin of the idea of the pyramid is most certainly more of an unsolved problem. Also, the source which states Osman's credentials says that the law degree and the Egyptology degree are two different degrees. 72.65.28.204 02:18, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
I re-added just some of the problems you removed, and I do not think you will have too much of a problem with them this time. 72.65.28.204 02:27, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
A bonafide egyptology degree? One wonders why he doesn't use it then. However, I still have a problem with two. If there is to be a page that says unsolved problems in Egyptology, I expect that the material will be legitimate unsolved problems in egyptology. Osman does not produce legitimate egyptological work and his material is patantly flawed. Thanatosimii 03:03, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Oops, I meant to remove the statement about the Egyptians having electricity but leave the Dendera light question. I will re-add the Dendera light question but leave out the question of if they had electricity. 72.65.28.204 03:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


I think that the "speculation" on the origin of pyramids, and their use, is completely unwarranted; I am under the impression that it is well-established that pyramids were conceived as tombs and originated from the idea of placing mastabas of decreasing size , one above the other (as in the Step Pyramid of Djoser in Saqqara). The architect Imhotep is credited for its invention. Unless anyone objects, I am removing it. Piotr (Venezuela) 03:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I removed "were Egyptian hieroglyphs the first written language?", since cuneiform writing precedes it. Piotr (Venezuela) 10:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Chronology: Thera eruption

The problem of when Thera erupted remains a serious one in Egyptology. Strong radiocarbon dating contradicts strong (albeit "rubbery") Egyptian chronology. The discrepancy of about 80 years has serious implications for the accuracy of the early 18D chronology or for the accuracy of radiocarbon dating itself. (Or both.) The problem must be solved to secure the sequence of contemporary events across the Mediterranean, especially those events whose dates rely primarily on C-14 dates.

C-14 says Thera erupted around 1613 BCE. However, according to Egyptian chronology, the seriation of Egyptian pottery around Santorini/Thera suggests that the eruption occurred around 1530 BCE during the reign of Ahmose I, and this date is corroborated by the importation of Thera pumice in Avaris around 1500 BCE.

Thanatosimii, if you wish to summarize why most Egyptologists dont believe that Ahmose's Tempest Stele refers to weather changes due to the Thera eruption, you are welcome to do so because it would help clarify the nature of this serious chronological snafu. --70.171.38.69 22:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll grab a line from the thera eruption article that I already contributed which explains this position rather well, however the thera eruption simply has to be not stressed so much in this article. This is about unsolved problems in Egyptology – an academic discipline, not just things relating to Egypt. No egyptologist has ever to my knowledge adapted his chronology to accept this data, and certainly no major encyclopedia or history textbook consider the thera eruption chronologically useful. It is simply put downright impossible to move Ahmose I up by 80 years. Comparative chronologies do not permit this drastic of a change, period. It's difficult enough to argue for a 1570 acession due to the comparative chronologies, let alone a 1630! This is a fringe thesis which shouldn't belong in this page, since Egyptology thinks it's ridiculous. Thanatosimii 00:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/i/s/Talk%7EList_of_unsolved_problems_in_Egyptology_ab4e.html"