> Scott, You think there are rules that apply to
> writing dates as opposed to numbers iirc?
I am sure there are rules for writing dates AND numbers, Greg. Both Moeller and Goedicke present extensive lists of BOTH and how both evolved and changed over time. Neither Moeller or Goedicke show a '10' in their list of numbers ever being rotated sideways. They do show that with dates where the 'n' sign is rotated - just as we see in Merer's Logbook. I am relying on supposed experts (Moeller & Goedicke) for guidance with regards the orientation of hieratic numbers and dates. Neither of them present a 'n' (10) on its side that is not a date. That's the evidence as I have investigated it, Greg - what more do you expect me to say about it? What do you think compelled Birch to turn the 'u' sign upright to an 'n' sign, Greg?
> you know there are not different rules for writing
> stone placement information? Or "rules " for
> quarry marks?. Or no rules for quarry marks
> because of their rough and ready nature?. Or
> different rules for log books? Or rules for
> lengths and heights as opposed to number of items?
I don't know and I don't claim to know. All I am claiming is to have considered the evidence of number and date signs over a long period of time (from Moeller & Goedicke) and neither of them have recorded a cardinal 'n' on its side in their number lists. Yes, they record it in their list of date signs.
> One thing for sure we have very few examples to
> consider. The paucity of hieratic inscriptions
> indicates that establishing any hard rules at all
> is intellectually suspect.
Yes, admittedly there is a paucity of evidence - I agree with that. But of that which DOES exist - and I have trawled through countless books and papers (over and above Moeller & Goedicke) and have come across not a single instance of 'n' (that is not a date) being rotated sideways in the manner some here suggest this number is to be read. They may well be right, Greg but the evidence, such as it is, suggests to me we will NEVER find such an instance outside of Campbell's Chamber and until such time as such an instance IS found (that is sideways 'n' and is not a date), we don't simply make up the rules because it suits us to do so. That is what the mainstreamers here are trying to insist that we do. Well I say No - let's find some proper evidence FIRST BEFORE we begin making assertions that these non-date numeral signs are to be read sideways.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 15-Feb-18 20:59 by Scott Creighton.