Hi Ritva,
Sorry if I seem to be dense, but I'm really trying hard to understand what you have offered in this discussion, which in the beginning was about a connection between Osiris and Orion and the association of the face (the front of the head) with the south. Now why would Robert combine Osiris, Orion and facing south in a single thread topic? More on that later.
Ritva posted,
>You look at sAH as being an asterism seen
>in 2D, which it by no means was to the AEs.
In response to this I asked you if you could provide any evidence that the AEs thought of stars being in a 3D relationship to each other. Maybe you are either unable, unwilling, or perhaps pressed for time to do so. Please recall that this is in the context of Dave L's objection to my simple graphic.
My illustration (linked to on this thread topic) consists of a tracing of the Orion star group at the eastern and western horizon c. 2500 BC based on computer images kindly provided to me by Chris Tedder a few years ago with the additional layer of a Sah personificaion figure and some text. Bauval and Egyptologists such as R. A. Wells have used similar images to make their points, and I don't recall either you or Dave L complaining about this style of illustration to explain their work.
You also posted,
> Robert's theory does not need
>sAH to be mentioned in the southern sky.
But in another post you wrote,
>You need to imagine sAH standing in the
>southern sky... facing south, not north.
>His "up" would be south.
What ho? Bauval's contentions concerning Orion are primarily based on an observer looking at the southern sky. According to your posts, on one hand, I'm supposed to imagine Sah standing in the southern sky but on the other hand 'Robert's theory' (the OCT?) does not need Sah to be mentioned in the southern sky. This seems to me to be an exercise in imagination and not sound Egyptology.
Bauval wrote on this thread,
>Btw, this thread which I started was
>not to re-open this truly waste-of-time
>non-debate that Krupp launched, but to
>highlight that J. Gwyn Griffiths is
>very much open to a pre-5th Dynasty
>Osiris, and both he and Lehner saw Orion
>as central to the Duat, which can
>only be seen when facing south.
The simple fact that the head of a Sah personification figure is oriented toward the north at the eastern and western horizons -- which is what the Old Kingdom texts primarily connect Sah with -- is independent from Krupp's modern-day, astronomically based argument. The injection of the Krupp objection into this thread is a strawman.
Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for Robert to 'splain why the Duat can only be seen when facing south.
Ken
PS: I'm also still waiting to see all those ancient Egyptian maps that show south to be up.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/06/2007 06:25PM by Ken B.
