As a follow-up to the Biblical thread, a question for the Languish historians: who is the person who lived the longest time ago, for whom there is good evidence that they actually existed (as opposed to purely legendary or mythological characters) - for whom we can actually put a (contemporary) name?
My own suggestion is Egyptian King Narmer (aprox. 32nd century BC):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narmer
Is there anyone who lived yet longer ago, whom we can name?
Xenu
Quote from: Malthus on March 02, 2010, 07:19:52 PM
As a follow-up to the Biblical thread, a question for the Languish historians: who is the person who lived the longest time ago, for whom there is good evidence that they actually existed (as opposed to purely legendary or mythological characters) - for whom we can actually put a (contemporary) name?
My own suggestion is Egyptian King Narmer (aprox. 32nd century BC):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narmer
Is there anyone who lived yet longer ago, whom we can name?
Namor of the Atlantean Empire!
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fthumb%2Ff%2Ff7%2FNAMOR1cover-CMYKcrop.jpg%2F395px-NAMOR1cover-CMYKcrop.jpg&hash=739423805df1083282a3b87b7fb3d290381b2fe0)
I was going to say Narmer, Malthus.
oog and his sister ooga.
just read up on Narmer. i like that his name can translate roughly to fish staber.
Grumbler.
I hate Tim.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 02, 2010, 07:32:50 PM
Namor of the Atlantean Empire!
Namor is hardly over 100. What's wrong with you?
Enmebaragesi - the earliest king on ther Sumerian Kings list for whom there is independant archeological evidence he actually existed. Althought it sounds like Narmer was earlier.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enmebaragesi
edit: and according to the article perhaps Gilgamesh himself...
The wizard SHAZAM!
Quote from: crazy canuck on March 02, 2010, 09:12:11 PM
Enmebaragesi - the earliest king on ther Sumerian Kings list for whom there is independant archeological evidence he actually existed. Althought it sounds like Narmer was earlier.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enmebaragesi
edit: and according to the article perhaps Gilgamesh himself...
A curious position for you to take considering the ones you took in the previous thread.
Quote from: Malthus on March 02, 2010, 07:19:52 PM
As a follow-up to the Biblical thread, a question for the Languish historians: who is the person who lived the longest time ago, for whom there is good evidence that they actually existed (as opposed to purely legendary or mythological characters) - for whom we can actually put a (contemporary) name?
My own suggestion is Egyptian King Narmer (aprox. 32nd century BC):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narmer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narmer)
Is there anyone who lived yet longer ago, whom we can name?
That's easy: Adam.
Quote from: Siege on March 02, 2010, 10:21:09 PM
That's easy: Adam.
There's no historical evidence for him.
Don't think there is anyone in Chinese history older than that. The most ancient named Chinese rulers were mostly mythical beings, and there is no credible evidence to support their existance. The oldest "believable" existance of a named Chinese ruler is around 1,000 BC.
Quote from: Malthus on March 02, 2010, 07:19:52 PM
As a follow-up to the Biblical thread, a question for the Languish historians: who is the person who lived the longest time ago, for whom there is good evidence that they actually existed (as opposed to purely legendary or mythological characters) - for whom we can actually put a (contemporary) name?
My own suggestion is Egyptian King Narmer (aprox. 32nd century BC):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narmer
Is there anyone who lived yet longer ago, whom we can name?
Serious answer, King Scorpion, or alternately if that's just an alias of Narmer, than his mother Shesh I.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Scorpion
Or the predynatistic Ka?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ka_%28pharaoh%29
Quote
Ka ruled over Abydos in the late 32nd or early 31st century BCE and was buried at Umm el-Qa'ab. He most likely was the immediate successor to Iry-Hor and was succeeded by Narmer[2]. He is the earliest known Egyptian king with a serekh, inscribed on a number of artefacts [3].
grumbler is going to waltz in here and declare this thread invalid pretty soon if someone doesn't start citing better sources than wikipedia. :yuk:
Quote from: Jaron on March 02, 2010, 10:39:27 PM
grumbler is going to waltz in here and declare this thread invalid pretty soon if someone doesn't start citing better sources than wikipedia. :yuk:
I don't think anyone mistakes this thread for a scientifically accurate survey of early dynastic figures.
Quote from: Siege on March 02, 2010, 10:21:09 PM
That's easy: Adam.
If "because I read it in a book" won't fly for any other argument, what makes you think it'll work for this one?
PDH does.
I think PDH has a repressed crush on Tim and will end up murdering him one day.
Think I remember this right. An Egyptologist who led a trip I went on was into alternative comparative chronology. Through applying new carbon dating techniques and matching Biblical to Egyptian chronologies, he reckoned Shishaq was in fact Ramses II (the great), backed up by the name in Hebrew closely matching one of his titles in Egyptian. There's evidence he lived to 90 or 91, which would put him in contention.
Applying the same techniques, the Egyptologist reckoned he'd found the tomb of pharaoh-botherer Joseph, and showed us a tablet of an adviser interpreting a pharaoh's dream of skinny and fat cattle.
Quote from: Monoriu on March 02, 2010, 10:22:40 PM
Don't think there is anyone in Chinese history older than that. The most ancient named Chinese rulers were mostly mythical beings, and there is no credible evidence to support their existance. The oldest "believable" existance of a named Chinese ruler is around 1,000 BC.
Its the Chinese' own fault for going all 1984 on their pre-unification history <_<
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 03, 2010, 03:06:30 AM
I think PDH has a repressed crush on Tim and will end up murdering him one day.
It IS a love-hate relationship. I love to hate him.
Quote from: PDH on March 03, 2010, 08:40:45 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 03, 2010, 03:06:30 AM
I think PDH has a repressed crush on Tim and will end up murdering him one day.
It IS a love-hate relationship. I love to hate him.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fscrapetv.com%2FNews%2FNews%2520Pages%2FEntertainment%2FImages%2Fricardo-montalban-khan-star-trek-2.jpg&hash=4820a9cd4a450b3cc85f630202f8951ee101be17)
He tasks me. He tasks me and I shall have him! I'll chase him 'round the moons of Nibia and 'round the Antares Maelstrom and 'round Perdition's flames before I give him up!
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fangelinafauxlie.files.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F01%2Fkhan.jpg&hash=d9afe9c99ad7d754d8b997486a72253338b2243d)
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on March 02, 2010, 09:19:14 PM
The wizard SHAZAM!
Vandal fucking Savage.
Or the Phantom Stranger, if I remember one of his origins correctly.
Quote from: Ideologue on March 03, 2010, 11:51:57 PM
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on March 02, 2010, 09:19:14 PM
The wizard SHAZAM!
Vandal fucking Savage.
Or the Phantom Stranger, if I remember one of his origins correctly.
True. Savage would probably be it. Or maybe Apocalypse.
Was the Stranger even human?
Quote from: Tyr on March 03, 2010, 06:04:02 AM
Its the Chinese' own fault for going all 1984 on their pre-unification history <_<
They've held regular book-burnings since the beginning of time. The Empire, once divided, must unite. Once united, must divide.
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on March 04, 2010, 10:59:51 AM
True. Savage would probably be it. Or maybe Apocalypse.
Was the Stranger even human?
Apocalypse is much younger than Savage.
Hector Savage pwns.
Narmer and Menes may be legendary; a conversative approach might eschew the early dynastic period for this purpose. Which would make Djoser the first securely indentifiable Egyptian. Enmebaragesi is around the same time period, depending on how the dating is done.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on March 05, 2010, 11:13:27 AM
Narmer and Menes may be legendary; a conversative approach might eschew the early dynastic period for this purpose. Which would make Djoser the first securely indentifiable Egyptian. Enmebaragesi is around the same time period, depending on how the dating is done.
:huh: Why do you think Narmer might be legendary.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 05, 2010, 12:38:30 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on March 05, 2010, 11:13:27 AM
Narmer and Menes may be legendary; a conversative approach might eschew the early dynastic period for this purpose. Which would make Djoser the first securely indentifiable Egyptian. Enmebaragesi is around the same time period, depending on how the dating is done.
:huh: Why do you think Narmer might be legendary.
There is some debate about whether the Narmer palette is supposed to represent contemporaneous events or legendary events that happened before the time it was created.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on March 05, 2010, 01:41:54 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 05, 2010, 12:38:30 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on March 05, 2010, 11:13:27 AM
Narmer and Menes may be legendary; a conversative approach might eschew the early dynastic period for this purpose. Which would make Djoser the first securely indentifiable Egyptian. Enmebaragesi is around the same time period, depending on how the dating is done.
:huh: Why do you think Narmer might be legendary.
There is some debate about whether the Narmer palette is supposed to represent contemporaneous events or legendary events that happened before the time it was created.
You may find this interesting:
http://www.anthro.ucsd.edu/~tlevy/Archaeology_in_the_Levant/Nahal_Tillah_Publications.html
QuoteThe New Narmer Serekh for the Halif Terrace
From the Chalcolithic through the beginning of the Early Bronze Age, in southern Canaan there is evidence for a slow but steady increase in trade and exchange with Egypt (e.g., Joffee 1993; Stager 1992). This process crystallizes in the late EB I with evidence of royal trade and exchange based mostly on the presence of Egyptian style clay cylinder seal impressions (bullae) and incised serekh signs. To date there are ca. 18 incised serekh-signs which have been found in Israel, only three of which could be positively identified with Narmer (cf. Amiran 1974; Brandl 1992:447; van den Brink, in press, in prep). In fact, two of the ìnamelessî or anonymous serekhs come from the Halif Terrace (cf. Gophna 1972; Seger et al 1990:5, fig. 4; van den Brink, in prep; ). Thus, the serekh present here is not a surprise per se . However, a combination of factors make the Silo Site serekh of special interest. Firstly, most of the known serekhs from Israel are either in too fragmentary a state of preservation or contain anonymous signs. The Silo Site example can be unambiguously attributed to a known king - Horus Narmer. Secondly, unlike most of the other serekh-signs, the sample presented here comes from a stratigraphically controlled context.
That does seem pretty solid.
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 03, 2010, 08:48:51 AM
Quote from: PDH on March 03, 2010, 08:40:45 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 03, 2010, 03:06:30 AM
I think PDH has a repressed crush on Tim and will end up murdering him one day.
It IS a love-hate relationship. I love to hate him.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fscrapetv.com%2FNews%2FNews%2520Pages%2FEntertainment%2FImages%2Fricardo-montalban-khan-star-trek-2.jpg&hash=4820a9cd4a450b3cc85f630202f8951ee101be17)
He tasks me. He tasks me and I shall have him! I'll chase him 'round the moons of Nibia and 'round the Antares Maelstrom and 'round Perdition's flames before I give him up!
Wow, Linda Evans really didn't age well.
Quote from: Brazen on March 03, 2010, 04:22:47 AM
Think I remember this right. An Egyptologist who led a trip I went on was into alternative comparative chronology. Through applying new carbon dating techniques and matching Biblical to Egyptian chronologies, he reckoned Shishaq was in fact Ramses II (the great), backed up by the name in Hebrew closely matching one of his titles in Egyptian.
That would date the post-Solomonic kingdoms to the height of New Kingdom Egypt (ie 13th century BCE or so).
Alternative is a one way to characterize that hypothesis. Other words would be "idiosyncratic" or simply "wacky".
For that chronology to work, either New Kingdom Egypt has to be moved forward several centuries, or a bunch of Israelite monarchs would have had Methluslan life spans or we would have to be missing a whole bunch of kings.
A more common claim is to tie Ramses II or a near contemporary pharoah to the exodus story.
Spellus hasn't posted in this thread yet? :huh:
Isn't the most ancient named person on Earth our very own Tricky Dick?
Kevin
What about Ka? There are artifacts with his serekh on it.
Quote from: Caliga on March 05, 2010, 06:26:35 PM
Spellus hasn't posted in this thread yet? :huh:
I was in Cappadocia. Little-no internet.
Quote from: Queequeg on March 08, 2010, 06:18:18 AM
Quote from: Caliga on March 05, 2010, 06:26:35 PM
Spellus hasn't posted in this thread yet? :huh:
I was in Cappadocia. Little-no internet.
Entirely appropriate and in-character excuse. :cool:
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 06, 2010, 11:37:18 PM
What about Ka? There are artifacts with his serekh on it.
Butt serekhs?
Quote from: Caliga on March 08, 2010, 07:08:17 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 06, 2010, 11:37:18 PM
What about Ka? There are artifacts with his serekh on it.
Butt serekhs?
The position of choice for Pharoh Butt. :D