Comments

• 9 comments
• 1. At on , wendym wrote:

- Per stela is per freestanding stone that’s often inscribed, carved or decorated, which is then arnesi upright in the ground as verso commemorative esibizione for verso person or event. Hope that helps.

Blaming Europeans for salvaging and interpreting ancient monuments is just pathetic

Great page! It looks like the exact photo used on the British Museum diamante stone jigsaw that I am currenly really, really struggling with. This will really help.

of course it was found by the French sopra the context of Napoleon’s invasion of the country, and then appropriated by the British when they defeated him, and the French and the British argued over it. No-one seems esatto have considered that it belonged onesto neither of them.” The stone was removed from the temple where Ptolemy’s priests first erected it either by the Persians or the Arabs, then ended up as rubble by action of the Ottomans. Modern Egypt rose, thanks puro European intervention, from the rubble of the Ottoman pigiare. From the Persian invasion onwards, its language, culture and politics have per niente link and bear per niente resemblance whatsoever with ancient Egypt – they only happen onesto occupy the same spogliarello on both margins of the Nile. The Arabs removed countless pieces – especially the columns – from ancient Egyptian and Greek temples puro prop up their mosques. Sopra the process, Islam erased most of what then existed of Egyptian culture. Modern Egyptians would have no ispirazione of their “heritage” if it wasn’t for the efforts of European scientists.

As a European Egyptologist, I must admit that I am always struck by the continuity between ancient and modern Egypt con so many ways, despite the changes durante religion and languages over the centuries. And the Egyptian language survived into the Christian Period, of course. Many accounts have down-played the extent that Egypt has been interested durante its own past, but more recent studies are sovrano-assessing this, such as Okasha el-Daly?s sistema on medieval Egyptian scholar?s attitude onesto the antiquities, and Donald Reid?s sistema on early modern Egyptian Egyptology. And per niente one can question modern Egypt?s commitment esatto the study and preservation of its own heritage. Incidenrtally, the reuse of earlier monuments for building material is something that was very extensively practised by the pharaohs themselves, most famously perhaps by Ramses II. Richard Parkinson, curator British Museum

Different cultures will apply very similar solutions to the basic needs for food and shelter, when successively occupying the same terrain under the same climate, unless new production and transportation technologies are brought onesto bear. This may give an impression of continuity. The peasants I’ve seen waiting at train stations per the Sbocco could very well, by dress and demeanour, be taken for their predecessors on the way to the market 3,000 years ago. However, instead of the deep connection sicuro the land and preciso the rhythms of the river one would expect onesto see back then, their faces spoke only of dislocation and despair. The Egyptian language – or its descendant dialects – survived indeed con many places into the Christian Period, but was mostly http://www.datingranking.net/it/hater-review/ replaced by Arabic not too long after the Muslim conquest. Before Champollion’s sistema, what was left of its original writing could not be read. And yes, stones – columns, statues, lastra – were constantly reused by many civilisations and turned into rubble. One has only to visit the Citadel per Cairo onesto see that. So, again, my point: why the reprimand esatto Europeans implicit durante your quote? “?of course it was found by the French in the context of Napoleon’s invasion of the country, and then appropriated by the British when they defeated him, and the French and the British argued over it. No-one seems sicuro have considered that it belonged preciso neither of them.” The stone belonged sicuro per niente-one. Should the French soldiers who found it have left it where it was, or the British not have taken it to London, perhaps thinking that one day, maybe, the rightful owners, whoever they turned out sicuro be, would get around to reading it? There is no moral case for leaving knowledge buried con deference esatto ignorance.