🚀 go-pugleaf

On Apr 30, 6:12 pm, kangarooistan <kangarooist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is no evidence that  the Turin Papyrus " gold mine " was  in
> Egypt , not a single tiny piece of evidence exists to prove the  GOLD
> mine described in the Turin Papyrus fragments A ,B ,C or D ,
> describes  a mine in Egypt
>
> the fragments after that DO have heaps of evidence that clearly exists
> and can be found in Egypt , but there is nothing that points to the
> site at Bir Umm Fawakhir in the fragments A B C or D  , and NOTHING on
> the ground in Egypt , or in any museum  anywhere that cab tie the
> Turin Papyrus "gold mine '  to any where ,  except the site in south
> Australia  where EVERY natural and every man made feature in the map
> fits and can be seen with the naked eye  even without digging , after
> 3160 years  even today without leaving your car seat  you can
> recognize the features exactly as marked in the Turin map
>
> While EVERY  natural feature  and the remains of every man made
> feature on the map , on the Turin Papyrus " gold mine " map  , can be
> seen with the naked eye ,  in SOUTH AUSTRALIA , experts accept the
> Egyptian site with NIL evidence at  Bir Umm Fawakkir
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The map even describes the mine as being a very very very long way
> from the bekhen-stone quarries in the Wadi Hammamat ,  in fragments E
> onward of the Turin Papyrus clearly is in EGYPT and can be SEEN to be
> so
>
> As the details in South Australia equally can CLEARLY be identified as
> matching the Turin Papyrus CLEARLY
>
> SBS TV or Aljazeera  may like to cover the topic as news , and show
> both site for all to see what I mean , I wont deal with other news
>
>   It appears somebody removed the number of Khat  to the gold
> mine ,  , but it was repeated 3 times ,  indicating it was a very very
> very long way ,  IMHO , and to hide this " problem"  somebody though
> to remove the number of khet ,  so as  more easily to tie it into the
> local area and perhaps ? , to  make it ' fit "  in with the the other
> fragments presented as one scroll  ??
>
> note  17 in pro Harrell research  says
> .-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 17          distance from the gold-working settlement to the mountain
> of bekheny,…khet
>
> [this text is repeated three times, apparently for emphasis; the
> distance in units of khet is missing]3,4http://www.eeescience.utoledo.edu/Faculty/Harrell/Egypt/Turin%20Papyr...
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> We dont know how many khat = 100 cubits the distance was  , but seems
> it was very very very  many , and the site  claimed by  the main
> stream is  very close  , even though there is no evidence in the
> scroll or on the ground that  says its in Egypt, and the highly
> respected  eye witness author of the scroll ,and a well respected
> learned man who made the map would have known every town and the
> distance ,  he does not name a single thing that ties the map to
> anything in his native Egypt in the said map
>
> Absence of evidence may not be evidence ,  but its very surprising ,
> the scholarly maps maker  did not include a single thing that places
> the " gold mine ' in shown in the beautiful Papyrus  in  Egypt
>
> In this case it may in fact be evidence  ,  that it may indeed be a
> mine that is NOT in Egypt , as at the time Phonetician sailors and
> traders sailed the globe in search of gold , and there are references
> of Hapshepsuts " green gold of / from Emu " , from that era , and EMU
> is a word of Arabic origins  meaning big bird   , STILL  according to
> dictionaries  , and the map says they mine a mix of gold and silver
> that is " green gold "
>
> Why do we doubt the " Green gold from Emu " was not a direct reference
> to this mine , that was in that ear , mining green gold, = 25%to 50%
> silver as per the Turin maphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ag-Au-Cu-colours.png
>
> Arabic origin of the word Emu seem to add weighthttp://translate.reference.com/browse/emu?olang=all&
>
> The ancient tool that helped unlock the secret was found at the site
> marked as a refinery of goldhttp://mail.google.com/mail/h/j34ur7rwpv3m/?view=att&th=120e0fd6c757d...
>
> This site covers the Turin papyrus very well and I can not  see any
> reason to exclude the South Australian site
>
> OR to even consider the site presently thought to be the mine site in
> Egypt , nothing said in this scholarly site actually claims any real
> evidence atall for the site presently accepted ,NIL evidence to
> support the present Egypt site exists ANYWHEREhttp://www.eeescience.utoledo.edu/Faculty/Harrell/Egypt/Turin%20Papyr...http://www.google.com.au/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen...
>
> kanga
> =====
> WHERE is the evidence from 3160 years ago ??
>
> No systematic archaeological survey or excavations had been carried
> out at Bir Umm Fawakhir prior to 1992, but the site is mentioned in
> quite a few travelers' accounts.
>
>  Most of them note the gold mines, wells, hundreds of "Roman" huts,
> and parts of the site now lost, such as the Ptolemaic temple. One of
> the early visitors was Arthur E. P. Weigall, who published an
> excellent account in Travels in the Upper Egyptian Deserts (1909). He
> left the most complete description of the Ptolemaic temple as well as
> the only known copy of its inscriptions. Couyat (1910) called Bir Umm
> Fawakhir "une véritable ville," but his most interesting contribution
> was a report of a papyrus, now lost, and two statues found in the
> quarries. Battered, headless, and almost armless, they are nonetheless
> in a classical style and were identified by Couyat as a nude Apollo
> and a semi-draped Venus
>
> . In the wake of renewed mining activity in 1940 and 1941, Guéraud
> published sixty or so ostraca found in the mining debris along with
> ancient grinding stones, pottery vessels, lamps, beads, and a few
> coins. Paleographically dated to the late first and second centuries
> A.D., seven ostraca have Latin writing and the rest Greek. Almost all
> of them have to do with military personnel in the Eastern Desert, and
> usually with provisions sent or desired. Zitterkopf and Sidebotham
> (1989) in their detailed survey of the Coptos to Quseir route were the
> first, however, to publish a Byzantine date for the sherds and ancient
> settlement at Bir Umm Fawakhir.
>
> The published accounts of the site are fragmentary and sometimes
> conflicting, and without good maps either of the region or of the site
> itself it is difficult to resolve the problems. Some parts of the site
> have been destroyed, such as the Ptolemaic temple, and others remain
> unpublished, such as the artifacts found at the same time as the
> ostraca. Perhaps most seriously, the main body of ruins was mistakenly
> called Roman for at least 150 years.
>
> The misidentification may have been due partly to the difficulty of
> visiting the site, and partly to the long-held belief that the
> Byzantine presence in the desert was minimal or non-existent.
> Alexandria indeed dominated Egypt politically, economically,
> culturally, and religiously, but there are scattered references to
> Clysma (Suez), Antinoopolis, and Myos Hormos (north of Bir Umm
> Fawakhir), and the ancient port at Berenice to the south. In light of
> new evidence from sites such as Abu Sha'ar, Wadi Nakheil, Bir Umm
> Fawakhir, and what can be gleaned from old accounts concerning
> Berenice, the idea of Byzantine neglect of the Eastern Desert needs to
> be re-examined.
>
> As part of the initial work, the project carried out a brief study of
> the local geology, which explains a great deal about the layout of Bir
> Umm Fawakhir and about its reasons for existence. The only resources
> are mineral; the site lies in the middle of a hyperarid desert where
> nothing larger than camel thorn grows. The Fawakhir granite to the
> east is the aquifer; the water is carried in fine cracks in the rock
> until it meets the dense ultramafic rocks at the western end of the
> area, and the wells are in fact dug near the contact zone. The pinkish
> granite was quarried at one time, probably in the Roman period.
> Extensively worked gold mines follow the quartz veins in the Fawakhir
> granite. The main group of ruins lies in a narrow wadi eroded in the
> granite; the steep sides serve as a boundary and almost as a town
> wall. The site's southeastern end is defined by a high dike of tough
> felsite rock with a natural gate in it.
>
> Pre-Byzantine remains at Bir Umm Fawakhir are limited.
>
>  From the pharaonic period we have, perhaps, a few sherds and above
> all, the Turin Papyrus.
>
>  The latter may be read as a map drawn up in the Twentieth Dynasty to
> show the bekhen-stone quarries in the Wadi Hammamat and the gold mines
> a little farther to the east at Bir Umm Fawakhir.
>
>  Evidence for a Ptolemaic presence is limited to the now lost temple
> Ptolemy III Euergetes, though we have many travelers' descriptions of
> it. Our attempts to locate the site of the temple or any surviving
> blocks have not yet succeeded.http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/pubs/ar/91-92/fawakhir.html
>
> Mal Fabian
>
> Mount Barker
> South Australia
> No interviews except by
>  SBS or Aljazeera

Very many? The ancient Egyptian units of measure are as follows: 1
khet = 100 cubits; 1 cubit (the standardized distance from the elbow
to the tip of the longest finger) = 7 palms (palm widths) = 28 fingers
(finger widths); 1 cubit = 52.31 cm, 1 palm = 7.47 cm, 1 finger = 1.87
cm.

many many many khet is 520 cm, ie 5 meters times many many many ie
about 1500 meters, ie roughly a mile.