The obelisk installed in Tahrir Square now has the Pharaonic obelisk written on it and it was said in the first line that it is the product of the ancient Egyptian civilization, as the controversy increased during the past few days about Pharaoh who he is and whether he is Egyptian even between the former Mufti of the Republic and one of the archaeologists.
1- The ancient Egyptian civilization, including the obelisk, is the product of the work and effort of the Egyptian worker who cut it, carved it, engraved it, moved it and built it.
2_ The king in ancient Egypt had five basic royal titles, the most important of which was the name of birth and coronation, not including the title of Pharaoh.
3- If we assume that Pharaoh is a name, it is clear that the name is not Egyptian because it is not in the context of the Egyptian royal names, which were keen on the king’s affiliation to one of the sacred images of Egyptian deities, such as the name (Ra Masse, Sitt, Amnhotep, Meri An Ptah) by preventing it from being attributed to an idol such as Abdul Fattah Abdullah Abdul Ghafoor
4- There are those who claim that the title (Pharaoh) is a secondary title distorted from the word (Barraa), as they want to be attached to our great Egyptian civilization, and they say that it appeared in families 18 and 19, and it is known that these two families are among the greatest ruling families in Egypt and most of the eternal effects remain of these The era and the military glory of Egypt was also in that era, and I think that this was intended to distort the history of the ancestors, especially since archaeologists did not find any material evidence saying that our ancient Egyptian ancestors used this notorious title.
5- The name of Pharaoh was mentioned in the Holy Quran 74 times in 27 surahs in the form of the singular (Pharaoh) and often after the names of Qarun and Haman, so it is natural that it is a name for a person and not a title for all rulers
6_ It is believed that the Ptolemies were the first to carry the title (Barraa), which was translated to become (Pharaoh), as the Judea region in Palestine was annexed to Egypt during the Ptolemaic era, as it is attributed to them that 120,000 Jews were brought captive to work as servants and feasts in royal palaces and in arduous work. The Jewish historian (Josephus Flavius) said, and it is known historically that the Ptolemies were non-Egyptian invaders, and that they were conquered later, but the Egyptians hated them, as evidenced by the many revolutions that were against them
7- Finally, if we accept the correctness of the title of Pharaoh, and with the assumption that (Pharaoh) is one of the titles or the name of an Egyptian king (and this is not true of course), is it possible that a civilization the size of the ancient Egyptian civilization should be attributed to the title of secondary to one of its kings or to the name of a king and not attributed to its great makers who are the Egyptians
Why was the Roman civilization not called the Caesarean civilization after Caesar, who was a name for a person, and then all Persian kings and civilization became called the Kassrai civilization, attributing it to Kisra ..
The time has come for us to correct the concepts, bring back the Egyptian civilization to the Egyptians, delete the notorious foreign misleading term (Pharaoh), and write in all curricula and flags (the ancient Egyptian civilization).
Comments
Post a Comment