Dennis wrote
> John,
> I'm not familiar with M.Montet's work, but I'm sceptical of any
pre-WWII
> European's generalisations about Egyptians' thought processes and
concepts.
> They tend to provide a better insight into their own prejudices
than
an
> objective evaluation of the evidence.
Pierre Montet's work is definitely post war
Montet, Pierre: Eternal Egypt. ; 1964, "Middle east", An Nal-World
Book Published by the new Aerican Library, 338 p.,
Montet, Pierre: Isis--Or The Search For Egypt's Buried Past ; Friends
ofHistory edition, Editions Ferni, English version, Geneva, 1977,
MONTET, PIERRE.: History Of Civilisation. Eternal Egypt. ; 8vo; pp.
xxi, 338; 4 maps, 64 pages b/w plates, 58 figures within text, notes,
bibliography, index,
Montet, Pierre: Everyday Life in Egypt in the Days of Ramesses the
Great; Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1981. PB, VG, Faded
spine. index. rear., Illus,
Montet, Pierre: Egypt and the Bible: People, Places and Customs.
;Philadelphia:: Fortress Press,, (1968).
> It is known from modern archaeology, analysis of lead isotopes etc.
that
> Egypt, even in late pre-Dynastic times, was part of a wide-ranging
trading
> network that extended from Spain in the west, to Afghanistan in the
east,
> and from the Danube area (Transylvania, Hungary) in the north to
tropical
> Africa in the south.
Recent finds have confirmed that Egypt used tobacco in preparing the
Mummies, and evidence of silk fibres has been found in Mummy
wrappings. A search is on at the moment to see if there is a now
extinct form of tobacco known to the Egyptians.... if not the trade
network would have extended from the Americas to China. There is a
very good documentary on the subject that has just been released
(about the conspiracy of silence suffered by the woman whose analysis
showed these results. The trading network may have been even bigger
than imagined.
> Even if Egyptians were not directly involved, although there is no
reason to
> doubt that they were not, there is every reason to assume that their
> knowledge of Europe was not that hazy, and that they were aware of
a
great
> river in the north, i.e. the Danube.
Evidence Dennis? Trade Routes joined Australia to Papua New
Guinea and Indonesia and thence to Europe from Roman times. This
does
not mean that Romans knew of Australia, or that Romans traded baler
shells and beche la mer from the Australian northern coasts....
> And of course, they were right about Crete being an island.
Yes there is evidence that Keftiu - the name given to Crete
originally
meant "Pillar". As a Pillar of Smoke would have been seen from Thera
from a long way away, this could be an explanation. It also explains
the confusion with Plato's confused explanation about Atlantis being
beyond the Pillars (of Hercules - i.e. Gibraltar).
Regards
John Croft