(Edit: This video has seen been removed by Sibson. I have saved a transcript from YouTube.)
This video was posted Dec 13 2018 by its creator, Mr Sibson, proprietor of the YouTube channel "Ancient Architects". Given the title you can imagine my interest, but quickly into the video, however, it became readily apparent that the bulk of the commentary was taken directly from my writing on GHMB, often verbatim including photos, from my 2015 thread:
Mesopotamian Origin of the Egyptian Serekh Palace Facade Building
Beginning on 1:35 of Sibson's video he says:
Since at least Dynasty 0, the palace facade is often pictured with the Horus falcon above it and is associated with kingship.
Since at least Dynasty 0, this building(s), in conjunction with the Horus falcon often sitting above it, as a rule were associated with kingship and was an integral component of the ruler's crest.
It [the serekh] began as a crude depiction and evolved into a more detailed representation.
As with writing in Egypt in general, the serekh was first a crude depiction which quickly evolved into a more detailed representation:
Before falling out of vogue in the 3rd Dynasty, from this point on it becomes relegated to the interiors of tombs.
The Mesopotamian palace facade motif was not limited to the serekh, but was part and parcel of many AE structures as can be seen throughout early Dynastic history up until the 3rd Dynasty which beyond this period falls out of vogue for unknown reasons as the favored stylistic construction meme. After this time, it becomes relegated almost exclusively to the interiors of tombs as a symbolic homage of reliefs and/or paintings.
From 3,500BC onwards, Upper Egypt shows signs of rapid transformation and advancement, not just culturally but technologically, and it results in the Naqada II culture led by the famous Horus kings of Egypt who conquered the north unifying the country and forming Dynastic Egypt.
Me in another post in reply to Manu:
From this point forward this transformation rapidly accelerates, not just culturally but technologically, eventually leading to the formation of Dynastic Egypt.
Sibson's added commentary is taken from the OP in general.
Its too much to transcribe, but from 5:06-7:15, nearly 2 minutes of content, all is taken directly from the OP (and other subsequent posts), mostly verbatim including swiping the photos (which is ok as they are not mine, but still...), which speaks of the Tell Billa cylinder seal, the Ubaid, ect. This leads to the Ziggurat of Uruk and the White Temple which he takes and extrapolates on further.
There is a transcribe function I found that has allowed me to do this much faster.
Sibson beginning at 5:04:
Looking in Mesopotamia here we see an impression of a cylinder found at Tell Billah in northern Mesopotamia which dates back to around 3400 to 3100 BC.
Above [which Sibson uses this picture in his video] is a modern impression of a cylinder seal found at Tell Billa in Northern Mesopotamia which the cylinder is dated to the late Uruk Period c. 3,400-3,100BC.
We see a Mesopotamian style boat coming into port next to a palace façade building but tell Billa had no port or evidence of large buildings.
It depicts a Mesopotamian style ship coming into port where the prominent feature is a Mesopotamian palace facade building. Though this was found in northern Mesopotamia, there is a similar seal that was found at Uruk which is more likely where this scene is depicting. Tell Billa has no port or evidence of large buildings.
At the time Uruk was the largest urban centre situated in a major River artery. Ur another city at the time was also a major seaport. One of these cities could be where the seal is referring to and due to the age of the seal this was before the arrival of the Sumerians.
Though this was found in northern Mesopotamia, there is a similar seal that was found at Uruk which is more likely where this scene is depicting. Tell Billa has no port or evidence of large buildings. Uruk was the largest urban center of the period which was situated at a major river artery. If not Uruk then possibly Ur which at the time was a sea port. Both cities it should be noted date to the Ubaid period before the arrival of the Sumerians.
Unfortunately even when plagiarizing me Sibson can't get it right as I do not say the seals date to before the Sumerians, but rather the cities.
You can see clear Egyptian similarities in this image with two djed like pillars flanking each side. Note the pillars on the palace facade and the triangular stick figures above them which are possibly tied lotus flowers. Exactly what we see on this 4th dynasty Egyptian sarcophagus. We also see an array of vertical lines above the tied lotus flowers and these are seen in both Egyptian and Mesopotamian art. The important thing to note here though is that it first appears in Mesopotamia and not Egypt, with one clearly inspiring the other.
Regardless, while obviously not a direct representation of what is seen in Egypt, there are two key features which should leave little doubt of the connection between the two:
[photo of cylinder seal, also taken from the OP by Sibson]
As you can see above the two center panels, as in the Egyptian representations, we see the "stick figures" (crossed axes or sometimes depicted as a "looped" object) and the vertical line border at the top of the building. (As an aside note the "djed pillar" type spires flanking each side). Compare again:
[photo of 4th Dynasty sarcophagus, also taken from the OP by Sibson
The "stick figures" (crossed-axes) are in nearly all the Egyptian representations of this building and the vertical line border is seen in one form or another in many as well. Use the zoom feature from this link to see both the "stick-figures" (crossed-axes) and vertical line border in detail:
4th Dynasty Limestone Sarcophagus
(Update:The "crossed axes" I have later positively identified as being tied lotus flowers).
Most experts agree the Mesopotamia is the origin of the palace facade imagery, but this would be pre-sumerian. Most of the famous Sumerian cities like Uruk. Ur, and Eridu have their foundations with the Ubaid culture which settled in the region as early as 5500 BC. And archaeological evidence shows that they built their mud brick walls with a palace facade style often with stepped platforms.
Most of the Sumerian cities like Uruk, Ur, Eridu ect, all have their foundations with the Ubaid culture which settled Mesopotamia and the Levant as early as 5,500BC; a foundation which would not too long after include mud brick walls built in the palace facade style and stepped platforms.
The famous structure of ancient Uruk was the central ziggurat built between 3,200 and 3,000, but with foundation going to back to at least 4,000BC.
The ziggurat of Uruk c. 3,200-3,000BC has a large foundation which dates to the Ubaid period at least 4,000BC.
When the ziggurat was completed it was topped with a massive structure with the palace facade known as the White Temple.
When the ziggurat was completed it was topped with a massive structure known as the "White Temple".
I would note that after seeing this video on Dec 18th 2018 I made the point to put my name at the bottom in which I am only getting to this publicly now.
Unfortunately, this was not the first time Sibson did this as I am now learning. Posted June 24, 2018:
The Pyramid of Meidum and the Origins of the Pyramids
(Edit: This video has seen been removed by Sibson. I have saved a transcript from YouTube.)
Much of this video is again a transcribed repackaging of my article from 2013, point by point often verbatim:
Pyramid at Meidum- A New Perspective
The pyramid is said to have followed the construction of the stepped pyramid at Saqqara. And we are told this is the first attempt to build a true pyramid.
Meidum is believed to have have followed the stepped pyramid at Saqqara as the first attempt at building a "true" pyramid",...
...which we are told ultimately ended in dismal failure, possibly never finished, subsequently collapsing sometime during, shortly after, or most likely several hundred years later leaving only it's "exposed core" rising above the rubble of its former self. But is this really what happened?
Which Sibson then asks:
But what then really did happen to this structure?
We have all seen the countless pictures of the pyramid of Meidum and rarely do we question the idea that the tower structure that we see is the core of a collapsed pyramid, but maybe this is only part of the story. And what is seen today is not the core at all, but rather the remains of the true original completed structure
We have all seen countless pictures of the Pyramid at Meidum and never questioned the idea what we see today must be the "core" of a collapsed pyramid. While figuratively this may be the case, I would suggest that this is only part of the story and what is seen today is not a "core" at all, but rather the original structure as it was initially intended.
A moment later Sibson asks the question:
But why do I think it is was originally a stepped pyramid?
Are you f-ing kidding me? He then goes on to give the point by point cliff notes of the next few paragraphs where I go into detail about why I think this, namely regarding the finished outer masonry.
What I propose is that if anything Sneferu simply tried to convert the ancient step pyramid into one with smooth sides.
Me, and the whole point of my article:
This is clearly not a "core structure" of a master plan, it is the ORIGINAL structure that a pyramid was later poorly retro-fitted on top of just like at Saqqara and G3 and as I would suggest the rest of the Great Pyramids as well. I propose that what we see at Meidum today is a finished stand-alone construction clearly evidenced by the dressed blocks and rough banding motif which is particularly evident when you look at the bottom 1/3 compared to the rest of the structure. If this were not the case there would be no point in dressing and banding the stones of the core this way then finishing it out as a pyramid never to be seen again. This design serves no structural purpose, if only the opposite, as it was obviously devastating for the structural integrity of the outer pyramid. The reason why the pyramid conversion failed is because the additional "true" pyramid layers were built on sand and never meant to be there. The sand settled, the stones shifted, and whenever it happened the result was eventually disastrous and the pyramid "sheathe" slid right off exposing the original structure that we see today.
He takes this commentary, and more from my article, and incorporates it throughout.
Sibson continues with his plagiarism at 5:34:
We all know that the long inclined passageway in the Great Pyramid, known as the Grand Gallery, has a seemingly unique corbel vaulted ceiling. But many do not know that this design is also seen in the chambers of the Red and Bent pyramids of Dashur. Although cruder in its appearance, the Meidum pyramid chamber also shares this design feature.
The Great Pyramid at Giza incorporates a long passage known as the Grand Gallery most notable for its unique corbel vaulted ceiling.
What is not popularly acknowledged, however, is that this corbel vaulted design is also found at the Red and Bent Pyramids at Dashur.
And as luck would have it the pyramid at Meidum shares this corbel feature as well:
In my opinion [rather my opinion he has taken from me as his own] this specific architectural feature connects the four pyramids to one specific era of history. And I am sure that they are original features.
Though G2 and G3 by association with G1 are undoubtedly connected to the same master plan and construction era regardless of not having a corbel ceiling, I believe it is this unique design shared with G1 that also binds the Bent, Red, and Meidum pyramids to this time as well. Obviously this corbel ceiling was part of the original Meidum pre-pyramid structure, long before it was converted, therefore it stands to reason if this is how Meidum once was then so were the other Great Pyramids as well.
Sibson has the gall to cite Schoch and West for their opinion on minor points, yet he is producing videos taken directly from my writings and original research, verbatim, stealing my ideas and calling them his own, yet there is no mention of me anywhere.
I have written much on Wikipedia in which I have been copy and pasted many times including several prominent alternative authors. This is public domain and there is no credit due other than to Wikipedia. In the case of your videos, however, and these are the only 2 I have looked at for now, you are flat out belligerently plagiarizing me, the noted author, and fraudulently passing it off as your own opinions and research. Not to mention profiting off my work by way of YouTube ads. I have posted comments to you under both of these videos. I sincerely recommend you comply and do it swiftly. And never do it again. You can PM me here about what we are going to do about this.
Edited 12 time(s). Last edit at 09-May-19 10:33 by lukehancock.