Talk:Pi-Ramesses

Pronunciation

As Pi-Ramesses does not have it's own page it might be appropriate to include it's pronunciation here considering how it is pronounced doesn't even resemble how it looks like it should be. I have no idea how to do IPA so could someone else do it? It is pronounced Peer-a-mess. Wayne (talk) 04:24, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

According to whom? Cush (talk) 07:31, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Although the original Egyptian pronunciation is unknown it's the pronunciation used by Egyptologists. I've heard it used by many including Bietak and have never heard any other pronunciation. If I remember correctly the heiroglyph for Pi-Ramesses is Pr-ra-ms-s which could explain why this pronunciation is used. Wayne (talk) 16:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Peer-a-mess may well be the American chewing gum version of the name, but I doubt that it is any kind of proper pronunciation. · CUSH · 15:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually the "American chewing gum version" as you call it is Pi-Ramses (Pi as in the Greek letter, or PIE). The previous poster is correct. European egyptologists (and maybe American ones as well) do indeed pronounce it Pyramess (Pyr being pronounced like pyramid) as above. You can hear the pronunciation in Part one of "Lost Cities of the Ancients," which is available here; part one being "The Vanished City Of The Pharaoh," which is the story of the discovery of Pi-Ramses. Please note this is a BBC series, with British and French Egyptologists speaking. I don't think there are even Americans in it, but there might be. The pronunciation is uniform throughout this documentary. Rifter0x0000 (talk) 17:50, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

@Cush, Rifter0x0000, and WLRoss: Why is it pronounced peer-a-mess when it has another syllable after the mess? I would think it would be Peer-a-mess-eez. User:Rifter0x0000, the documentary you mention is no longer available (and I'd have to buy it). Can you check? Another thing I don't understand is why it's call'd Pi-Ramesses instead of Per-Ramesses.

Kitchen

This article dwells entirely on references to Kitchen, who is a Pentecostalist who seeks to make biblical history true at all cost. However, his chronologies just don't add up. Simple arithmetic. Can we please move this article back to its proper place in the Avaris context? · CUSH · 21:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

That's not necessary, and the problem would remain wherever it was, moving it to another article doesn't fix it, WP:SOFIXIT. Dougweller (talk) 05:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

In the Avaris article the Pi-Ramesse section was not as extensive and it did not contain all the speculation that only derives from biblical stuff anyways and not from honest archaeology and Egyptology. Without Kitchen nobody places the possible Exodus in the reign of any Ramesses, so the connection with biblical Ramses is not as prominent, and the anachronistic use of "Ramses" in the bible would not be so exploited to pin the Exodus tale on the 19th Dynasty kings in whose reigns simply no archaeological or historical space exists for the Exodus. · CUSH · 06:23, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I copied over the Pi-Ramesses section to this article, and also the biblical stuff. I'm not sure what your complaint is, is it that now that the biblical stuff is here it stands out more? In any case, we need reliable sources. I don't agree with Kitchen but we can't just reject him, and as you know, right or wrong, by our criteria he can be included as a reliable source. It's still something that can be fixed. Dougweller (talk) 06:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Um, the Pi-Ramesse section was a lot shorter than this article is now, was it not? So I guess it has been expanded with all the Kitchen stuff.

You know, a truly reliable source would be the folks of Manfred Bietak's team who actually excavate the whole place. All that Kitchen ever does is force the bible into history. From his desk. · CUSH · 06:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

No, Cush, the Pi-Ramesses section, which is still in the Avaris article and needs to be shortened, is more or less identical to this article now. It was not a lot shorter. I have lots of better sources but the time I would spend adding them I'm spending discussing with you. Bard was what initiated this, Redford, etc, all mentioning Bietak. Dougweller (talk) 07:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Biblical stuff

Putting it here to work on. Dougweller (talk) 06:37, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

it really only makes sense if the hyksos exodus and the Hebrew exodus are the same and ramesses ii and thutmose iii are contemporary. That would explain all the campaign overlap between the two kings. the hebrew scripture unambiguosly puts the exodus in 1443 BC, in the reign of thutmose iii which is when manetho says, via josephus, the hyksos exodus happend. unless the city preceeded ramesses ii, ramesses ii is contemporary to thutmose iii.

also the chronicles of jerahmeel tells us that the two treasure cities were at opposite extremities of Egypt. So if pi ramesses is in lower Egypt, the other is in upper Egypt.

i am not sure but it seems that i read that the 19th dynasty is fixed by am astronomical observation. 1292 being the best fit. I cant find much info about it right now, but if whatever data fits the 19th dynasty to 1292 could also fit it to the 105 years before 1443, that would be conclusive that ramesses ii was contemporary to thutmose iii. 96.72.151.221 (talk) 23:29, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Biblical Ramses

The place name Ramses (Hebrew: רַעְמְסֵס, Tiberian: [ʁaʕəmses]), sometimes Raamses or Ra'amses, occurs five times in the Tanakh: Genesis 47:11; Exodus 1:11, 12:37 and Numbers 33:3,5. The Septuagint equates this name with the Egyptian name Ramessu, hellenizing it as Hramessê (Greek: ραμεσση, [hramɛsːe]), whence Latin Ramesses, whence traditional English.

The location is synonymous with Goshen (Gesem in the Septuagint, Egyptian Pa-Kes, Greek Phacusa, modern Faqus), the land where Joseph and his descendants settled. According to the biblical account, the Israelites departed from Ramses in their exodus from Egypt (Exodus 12:37).

Archeologists have not yet pinpointed the time or place of both major cities in the Exodus namely Pithom and Raamses, and some dispute its historicity. The Biblical Raamses is acknowledged to almost certainly be Ramesses II's vast capital city of Pi-Ramesses, located today at the sites of Tell el-Dab´a and Qantir respectively, whereas the Biblical Pithom or Pi(r)-(A)tum, (literally domain or house of the god Atum) is possibly located at Tell er-Retaba—as Kenneth Kitchen argues—rather than Tell el-Maskhuta as some writers previously thought.<ref>Kitchen, pp.258-259</ref> These two sites, at Qantir and Tell er-Retaba, are 15 to 17 miles (27 km) apart.<ref>Kitchen, p.258</ref>

Biblical Ramses ?

@Dougweller, why did you remove the section? · CUSH · 09:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I thought you didn't like it, so I moved it here to be worked on until there is consensus about it. If you think it is ok as it is, put it back. Dougweller (talk) 09:46, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah, that explains it. I had thought you removed it because *you* didn't like it.

I do certainly think it should be worked on. · CUSH · 10:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)