3 ms·

I suspect, that in the context of "reputable academically sound Egyptologist" the number "6" is a bumper crop of Egyptologists. The set of reputable academics i

I suspect, that in the context of "reputable academically sound Egyptologist" the number "6" is a bumper crop of Egyptologists. The set of reputable academics in these fields is always a lot smaller than you'd like. I think that's why there's so many cranks.

Luc 1y ago
There appears to be 300 to 500 practicing academic Egyptologists. So from 1% to 2% can read the secret messages.
- tough 1y ago
  do they share notes? how do the 6 know their interpretation of the secret meaning is correct.
permo-w 1y ago
I struggle with Egyptology as a whole. you watch even mainstream, reputable documentaries on Ancient Egypt and there is a lot of what and little why, and it makes you wonder how much of it is actual science and how much of it is just the most exciting available interpretation of the facts to please the Egyptians/draw in viewers. the Egyptian authorities want tourists, and control archaeology licenses tightly, and "we found a scroll that mentions moving some building materials near the great pyramid" sells far less plane tickets than "we found a scroll written by the architect of The Great Pyramid!!!!"
- betterThanTexas 1y ago
  > and it makes you wonder how much of it is actual science I don't wonder. You can look up egyptian texts with translations and pronunciation guides. We have literally hundreds of thousands of discarded papyri and plenty of papers detailing the archaeological processes of their excavations and interpretations. It's a gold-mine of explicit documentation about their practices and beliefs and logistics over millennia. We know about their diets, their genetics, how their ruling class changed over time, how they interpreted life and death, to the extent where we can draw likely religious transmission among stories with other near-east religions. The extent of evidence we have demonstrating actual knowledge is better than anything else in the ancient world. Granted, interpretation isn't science, but it's still expected to be presented rationally. The linguistics that yielded the translation itself proved empirically very reliable. There are many cranks into Egyptian history with many different agendas, though, and I'm sure many of them call themselves egyptologists.
- creer 1y ago
  This is a strange viewpoint, do you care to elaborate? I mean, for ancient Egypt, understanding the writing has its origin in a very clear, well understood event and a very specific researcher's career (Rosetta Stone and Champollion), after which there is a sea of research papers which anyone can go and (spend an education and career) judging for themselves. The documentaries easily skip all that but it's not a big mystery that "all that" is there? It would be nice if someone created a video similar to the "distance ladder" video but for hieroglyphs. Beyond Champollion and into the progress to now. That would be fascinating. It may exist already.

Luc 1y ago

There appears to be 300 to 500 practicing academic Egyptologists. So from 1% to 2% can read the secret messages.

tough 1y ago
do they share notes? how do the 6 know their interpretation of the secret meaning is correct.

permo-w 1y ago

I struggle with Egyptology as a whole. you watch even mainstream, reputable documentaries on Ancient Egypt and there is a lot of what and little why, and it makes you wonder how much of it is actual science and how much of it is just the most exciting available interpretation of the facts to please the Egyptians/draw in viewers. the Egyptian authorities want tourists, and control archaeology licenses tightly, and "we found a scroll that mentions moving some building materials near the great pyramid" sells far less plane tickets than "we found a scroll written by the architect of The Great Pyramid!!!!"

betterThanTexas 1y ago
> and it makes you wonder how much of it is actual science I don't wonder. You can look up egyptian texts with translations and pronunciation guides. We have literally hundreds of thousands of discarded papyri and plenty of papers detailing the archaeological processes of their excavations and interpretations. It's a gold-mine of explicit documentation about their practices and beliefs and logistics over millennia. We know about their diets, their genetics, how their ruling class changed over time, how they interpreted life and death, to the extent where we can draw likely religious transmission among stories with other near-east religions. The extent of evidence we have demonstrating actual knowledge is better than anything else in the ancient world. Granted, interpretation isn't science, but it's still expected to be presented rationally. The linguistics that yielded the translation itself proved empirically very reliable. There are many cranks into Egyptian history with many different agendas, though, and I'm sure many of them call themselves egyptologists.
creer 1y ago
This is a strange viewpoint, do you care to elaborate? I mean, for ancient Egypt, understanding the writing has its origin in a very clear, well understood event and a very specific researcher's career (Rosetta Stone and Champollion), after which there is a sea of research papers which anyone can go and (spend an education and career) judging for themselves. The documentaries easily skip all that but it's not a big mystery that "all that" is there? It would be nice if someone created a video similar to the "distance ladder" video but for hieroglyphs. Beyond Champollion and into the progress to now. That would be fascinating. It may exist already.