When it comes to Egyptology, there are two

kinds of knowledge: knowledge of Hieroglyphs as filtered through western eyes, and knowledge based in truths.

The former is the kind we call knowledge by

acquaintance. For nearly all of our acquaintance of Egypt and its civilization, involve names and/or terms like Horus, Isis, Osiris, pyramids, sphinx, Hieroglyphs. These literary artifacts, are depicted as if they were born from an Aegean world, rather than their actual origin in Egypt.

It is not an exaggeration to say that most of

our understanding of ancient Egyptian civilization has been conditioned by what we have been taught as the gospel truth

from ancient Greece. Hence, the entire field of Egyptology is filled with improperly named things and interpretations which had nothing to do with Egypt. These assumptions often lead to frequent misinterpretations. As a result, we end up living in a world of illusion and learning fantasies as a substitute for truth.

Take for example the following convoluted

distortions:

Such as in the case of Arabic and other

Semitic languages, vowels in ancient Egyptian were not written. Therefore, we have no idea as to the exact pronunciation of Ancient Egyptian words. However, despite this obvious handicap, in order to accommodate western readers, Egyptologists today use a simplified pronunciation in which a short arbitrary vowel is inserted where needed to make a word pronounceable. Even though, this was obviously not the way ancient Egyptians pronounced words.

By contrast, original ancient Egyptian

names and terms mirrored the world they meant to describe. Without any doubt, they accurately reflected the mental mind of our ancestors. When we misname them, we fail to consider their true meaning. As a result, we end up dealing with them as if they were something other than what they really were.

This was only the first step on the road of

further lexical distortions which was compounded by the practice of inappropriate transliteration.

A far more serious controversy is the

Western approach of adopting the left to right method which runs opposite to the direction of the Ancient Egyptian writing from right to left.

Traditionally hieroglyphs were written from

right to left (with the birds, mammals, and people facing to the right - see quadrant 2b below). The signs that represent persons, animals, and birds, as well as other signs that have fronts and backs, almost always face the beginning of the inscription in which they occur, so that the direction in which this is to be read is but rarely in doubt.

DIRECTION OF WRITING ON GROUNDS OF PRACTICAL CONVENIENCE!

Nowadays, hieroglyphic texts in Western

works are all written from left to right so that they can be more readily translated into English (or some other Western language), and so they can fit appropriately into any western context. See Sir Alan Hendersen Gardiner's* quote below:

"Hieroglyphic inscriptions consist of rows of

miniature pictures arranged in vertical columns or horizontal lines. These columns or lines, as well as the individual signs within them, read usually from right to left, but more seldom, and then only for special reasons, from left to right. In spite of the

preference shown by the Egyptians for the direction from right to left, that from left to right has been adopted in modern printed books on grounds of practical convenience."

To emphasize this dilemma in a more

palatable way for modern Egyptians who speak Arabic and are accustomed to writing from right to left, the following is meant to illustrate how westerners applying the "left to right" script direction would distort the Arabic script, to make it more readable to a western speaking audience. An example of this distortion would look like quadrant 1A (left) below, instead of the correct way as seen in 1B quadrant (right).

The equivalent of this distortion would be if

2A Shows the name of Ptolemy as it appears on the Rosetta stone. 2B quadrant shows how, by adopting this approach in depicting the ancient Egyptianscript, an Arab speaking would write the word Ptolemy. Written from right to left, it would appear in reverse 3A quadrant depicts the way western dictionaries of ancient Egyptian look today. The script is from left to right running the opposite direction of the ancient Egyptian script, while 3B quadrant- Points to the correct direction of an ancient Egyptian script, as it would appear on a monument or in a document.

Arabic speakers were to write English words from right to left. See

The consequences of Westerners adopting

the left to right direction "on grounds of practical convenience," versus the Ancient Egyptian way has had controversial results which have never been contemplated nor properly investigated by the scientific community.

It is well agreed that deciphering Ancient

Egyptian language is arrived at by inference. It should also be remembered that the Coptic language is the primary source in this process, seconded only by the Classical Arabic and other Semiticlanguages considered to be as sister languages as well. However, despite these considerations, the following examples are "make believe" terms born from the confusing and convoluted Western method of reversing the direction of A.E. writing . The term "shem" is thought by Westerners to be, the A.E. word for "march, walk,and go". This has been arrived at by inference through the Coptic word "sher" with the same range of meanings. Unfortunately, shem is not a Coptic word which refers to walking and could therefore be the basis for a sound inference. Also, the Copticword "sher" is none other than the cognate term for the Arabic "sayr". In reality, the actual Coptic word for walking is meshor mooshe, which is a cognate to the Arabic msha. By inference, the Ancient Egyptian word for walking is msha, exactly like the Arabic. Clearly this is a situation in which the placement of the letters of the word were reversed to conform to the Western style of left to right (see the diagram below).

An identical situation is found in the controversial term for "weep" which has being wrongly identified as "aakb". Actually the correct term is literaly the reversed form"bkaa", cf. Arabic "bka" to weep. In the light of this discovery the inference to the Coptic "okm" is no more valid.

With these samples of gross distortions one

can only begin to guess the magnitude of similar false interpertations which abound in Egyptology.

Next:

What the Ancient Egyptians

called "their" writing, mistakenly identified by the West under the misnomer "Hieroglyphs."

*An early enthusiast of ancient Egyptian history and language, he came under the influence of

Wallis Budge (Keeper of the Dept. of Egyptian and Assyrian antiquities, British Museum) at the age of 15. He went on to study under Gaston Maspero in the Sorbonne, and then went to Oxford. He had published several articles before the age of 20, and later was one of the founding scholars of the Journal of Egyptian Archaeology (JEA). His steady stream of publications brought recognition from Germany, and he was invited to be a sub-editor of the Worterbuch, where he met Erman and K. Sethe. He was appointed as Reader in Egyptology at Manchester University (1914-18) but did not like teaching, and never again took up a teaching post. He was able to continue his academic pursuits (at his home in Holland Park) because he was fortunate to come from a wealthy family. From his home, he gave weekly classes in egyptian to those whom he thought would benefit (R.O. Faulkner was one such student). Later, as editor of the JEA, he took Battiscombe Gunn as his assistant. Gunn was a brilliant young scholar and their discussions spurred them on to produce some of the most important works in modern egyptology: Gardiner his "Egyptian Grammar" and Gunn his "Studies in Egyptian Syntax". Unfortunately Gunn devoted his later years to teaching and published relatively little. Gardiner maintained a busy schedule and went on to publish numerous papers, acted in most capacities of the EES (Chairman,

Vice-President, President), and helped many aspiring egyptologists. His most important monument is his 'Egyptian Grammar' and remains famous amongst egyptologists throughout the english-speaking world. He died from a stroke in his 85th year, but had been sick for some time before this. The picture above was taken when he was 70, and still in good health. At that time (1949) he had the following distinctions, offices and affiliations.

Ancient Egypt always had at least two scripts in operation, one

formal (Hieroglyphicscript), and one for more day-to-day purposes (cursive scripts, first Hieratic, laterDemotic).

The earliest inscriptions go back as far as the First Dynasty,

around 3000 B.C., while some authorities favor a date many hundreds of years earlier.

The same script lived on far into the Christian era; the

latest Hieroglyphs known are found at Philae and dated to A.D. 394. Thus, the use of the earliest form of Egyptian writing, though confined to a narrow circle of calligraphers, artists and engravers, covered a period of three or even four thousand years.

According to Sir Alan Gardiner, the foremost authority on

Egyptian grammar, there were different stages of the language: Bearing in mind the fact that the written language reflects the spoken language of the different periods only to a limited extent, and that monumental records on stone are always more conservative than business documents and letters on potsherds and papyrus. He roughly distinguished five different linguistic stages (quoted verbatim below in the footnotes section).

*1-OLD EGYPTIAN: The language of Dynasties IVIII, about 3180 to 2240 B.C.

*2- MIDDLE EGYPTIAN: The vernacular

of Dynasties IX-XI, about2240 - I990 B.C.

*3- LATE EGYPTIAN: The vernacular of Dynasties

XVIII-XXIV, about1573 to 715 B.C.

*4- DEMOTIC: The vernacular written in the script

known as Demotic, from Dynasties XXV to late Roman times (7I5 B.C. to A.D. 470)

*5- COPTIC: The old Egyptian language in its latest

developments, as written in the Greek alphabet supplemented by seven special characters, from about the third century A.D.

The word hieroglyph, which the ancient Greeks

calledhieroglyphika, comes from the Greek hieros (sacred) plus glypho (inscriptions) and was first used byClement of Alexandria (Titus Flavius Clemens, in the second century A.D. Unfortunately, the circumstances surrounding these faulty identifications which were filtered through Greek terminologies relate a sad chapter of Egypt's history which deserves to be told. Clement of Alexandria was renown for the thoroughness of his native Greek education. However, the tendency displayed by his constant quotation of the Greek poets and philosophers impeded his knowledge and grasp of many aspects of Egyptian culture. Other circumstances peculiar to the 2nd century A.D. also contributed to his misnomers.

By the 2nd century A.D. Hieroglyphic andDemotic were in

their last throes and were used only in connection with the temples and priesthoods of an ancient religion increasingly under siege. The last major Roman temple constructed in the traditional pharaonic style dated from the reign of the Roman emperorAntoninus Pius (138 to 161 A.D.)

Historical accounts related that Antoninus came in person

to Egypt and Syria to put down a revolt ofArab Nabatean tribes along the Red Sea region. Taking advantage of his presence in Egypt, he ordered the renovation of the port of Alexandria, and the extensive restoration of Qasr `ayn alZayyan in the Khargah oasis where he added a pylon gate built in a pharaonic style.

This gesture would be the last concession made by a foreign

ruler toward native Egyptian Pharaonic traditions. The decades that followed sadly saw the systematic demise of ancient Egyptian religion, its language and native scripts.

An ominous old prophecy (attributed to Hermes Trismegistus)

circulated among the broken spirits of native Egyptians: "A time will come when it will seem that the Egyptians in the piety of their hearts, have honored their gods in vain, with a devoted cult.... The gods on leaving the earth, will return to heaven; they will abandon Egypt.... That holy earth, land of sanctuaries and temples, will be completely covered with coffins and corpses. O Egypt, Egypt nothing will remain of your religion but fables, and later, your children will not even believe them! ... the people abandoned, will all die, and then with neither gods nor men, Egypt will be nothing but a desert. It is to you that I speak, holy river, it is to you I announce the things to come: torrents of blood will swell your waters to their banks ... and there will be more dead than living ; as for those who survive, it is only by their language that they will be recognized as Egyptian: in their manners

they will seem to be men of another race."

As Ancient Egyptian traditions retreated, Hellenistic traditions

peaked in Alexandria where Greek was the language of administration as well as the lingua franca of the elite colony of Greek ancestry. The rest of the native population spoke a popular Egyptian vernacular, a precursor of the would be Coptic in subsequent centuries.

In the course of so many centuries, grammar and vocabulary

were bound to change very considerably, and in point of fact the Egyptian spoken under the Roman occupation bore little resemblance to that which was current under the oldest dynasties.

Therefore, there would have been at least three levels: those It was under these disturbing circumstances that Clement's

trained in hieroglyphs, those trained in cursive writing, and those without training.

description of Ancient Egyptian script came into being. His views were heavily influenced by his Hellenistic heritage. In an attempt to describe Egyptian writings, he subdivided the script into three categories: (a) Hieroglyphic (used mainly for religious texts), (b) Hieratic (used mainly by priests) (c) epistolographic or demotic (used for everyday purposes).

To this day, Clement's terminologies, considered gospel truth,

stuck and have never been questioned. From his erroneous perception, fables about the so called "sacred glyphs" were spun, each embellished to sustain this misnomer. Under this spell, some Egyptologists, convinced themselves that Egyptians called their hieroglyphicscript: "mdw-ntr" (god's words).

However, any correct translation of this term would point out

that "mdw"in Ancient Egyptian refers only to "words" and therefore to language, not to "writing".

As such, "mdw" could express religious texts, as well as secular

literature or language. The term happens to be a cognate to the Arabic "madah" pl. "mawad" (for the correct definitions see below).

As Christianity spread throughout Egypt, the knowledge of the

old native scripts and lore, long since the jealously warded secret of a dwindling priestly caste of the Old Religon, fell into oblivion.

In the second century, candidates for the priesthood still had to

show a knowledge of demotic and hieratic.

In the third century, demotic was no longer used for documents,

though there are demotic inscriptions at Philae dating as late as 452 A.D., i. e. some sixty years after the final disappearance of the so-called Hieroglyphs. After this, there remains only the tradition of the classical writers and the early Fathers, whose confused and mutually contradictory statements, if they point anywhere, point in a direction diametrically opposed to the truth.

So what did our Ancient Egyptian ancestors call "their" writing,

mistakenly identified by the West under the misnomer "Hieroglyphs"?

They simply called it Khti! (cf. Arabic al-Khatti)

Because of its pictorial form, these painstakingly drawn symbols

were wonderful for decorating the walls of temples, but A.E. "khti" was also difficult to write and therefore was used primarily for monumental inscriptions. The prime material used in"Khti" was stone or Haqar in Ancient Egyptian (cf. Arabic Hagar).

Hitherto, until the writing of this essay, the connection between

the term Khti *(6)for the earliest system of writing in ancient Egypt (c. 3400 B.C.) and the Arabic term"khtt" has never been established or even alluded to.

From Jean Franois Champollion to all of the famous

Egyptologists who wrote dictionaries of Ancient Egyptian, among them: Sir Alan Gardiner, Raymond O. Faulkner, Wallis Budge and Co., NONE of them ever mentioned this crucial connection. This despite of the customary habit of comparing A.E. to Semitic words (Arabic, Hebrew etc.) whenever this occurs.

In view of the subsequent flourishing art of Calligraphy (known

by the same name,Khatt) the most venerated form of Islamic Art, one wonders the reason behind this grave omission. This, despite the pivotal role played by Egypt in the development of the art of Khatt (both monumental and cursive types) under Islam to an unsurpassed high level of sophistication (a position only held in the history of the world civilizations along with the Chinese Calligraphy).

The discovery of this unexpected connection is bound to revolutionize not only our perception of the Ancient Egyptian art of writing, but equally in bettering our knowledge of the history of Islamic calligraphy and its mysterious beginnings as well.

Ishinan
(This story continues)

Next, once the threshold of this important discovery has been

crossed, suddenly a myriad of other related mysteries begins to unravel, divulging more secrets about the art of Khatt which have survived without a break to this very day.

Ishinan 2005-6

*1-Old Egyptian: the language of Dynasties I-VIII, about 3180 to 2240 B.C. This may be taken to include the language of the Pyramid Texts which, however, displays certain peculiarities of its own and is written in a special orthography. Otherwise the surviving documents of this stage are mainly official or otherwise formal funerary formulae and tomb-inscriptions, including some biographical texts. Old Egyptian passes with but little modification into.

*2-Middle Egyptian, possibly the vernacular of Dynasties IX-XI,

about 2240 - I990 B.C., later contaminated with new popular elements. In the later form it survived for some monumental and literary purposes right down to Graeco-Roman times, while the earlier form was retained as the religious language. *3-Late Egyptian: The vernacular of Dynasties XVIII-XXIV, about 1573 to 715 B.C., exhibited chiefly in business documents and letters, but also in stories and other literary compositions, and to some extent also in the official monuments from Dyn. XIX onwards. There are but few texts, however, wherein the vernacular shows itself unmixed with the classical idiom of Middle Egyptian. Various foreign words make their appearance. *4-Demotic: This term is loosely applied to the language used in the books and documents written in the script known as Demotic, from Dyn. XXV to late Roman times (7I5 B.C. to A.D. 470). Here again the old classical idiom is blended with later, vernacular elements, often inextricably. *5-Coptic: The old Egyptian language in its latest developments, as written in the Coptic script, from about the third century A. D. onwards; so called because it was spoken by the Copts, the Christian descendants of the ancient Egyptians, in whose churches it is read, though not understood, even at the present day. After the Arab conquest (A. D. 640) Coptic was gradually superseded by Arabic, and became extinct as a spoken tongue in the sixteenth century. Coptic was written in the Greek alphabet supplemented by seven special characters derived ultimately from the Hieroglyphs. Up to the coming of the Arabs in 640 A.D., several dialects of Coptic were distinguished, of which the following were the most important: 1. Akhmimie (Akhmiymiy) : The old dialect of Upper Egypt, which early gave place to Sa`idic. 2. Sa`idie ( from Arabic: Sa`iydiy or Upper Egypt) : The dialect of Thebes, later used for literary purposes throughout the whole of Upper Egypt. 3. Bohairie : (from Arabic: Bahariy or the Delta) doubtless originally the dialect of the Western Delta.

*(6)

http://www.theegyptianchronicles.com/ANE/KHATT.html