Martin Stower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> cladking Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I don't do semantics. . . .
>
> Evidently.
>
> > I call the Egyptologist who founded archaeology
> to
> > be at least the founder of Egyptology to the
> > degree it's a subset of archaeology.
>
> It’s not getting any better.
>
> Allow me to remind you of what you quoted from
> [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flinders_Petrie
> ]Wikipedia[/url]:
>
> “Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie, FRS (3
> June 1853 – 28 July 1942), commonly known as
> Flinders Petrie, was an English Egyptologist and a
> pioneer of systematic methodology in archaeology
> and preservation of artefacts . . . .”
>
> Again, how does “a pioneer of” become “the
> founder of” and how does “systematic
> methodology in archaeology and preservation of
> artefacts” become “archaeology” tout court?
>
> A pioneer: one among many:
>
> [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology#Dev
> elopment_of_archaeological_method]https://en.wikip
> edia.org/wiki/Archaeology#Development_of_archaeolo
> gical_method[/url]
>
> —but Wikipedia descends into incoherence with
> this: “William Flinders Petrie is another man
> who may legitimately be called the Father of
> Archaeology.”
>
> Those of use who do semantics will note that more
> than one legitimate father is no legitimate
> father. I twigged long since that all of this
> “father of” talk is silly, a metaphor
> overworked far beyond the bounds of its
> usefulness. Similar goes for “founder of”:
> it’s often inadequate to how things really
> happen. Again it’s me (and not the fringe)
> questions and rejects cliché and predigested
> thinking.
>
> As for Egyptology being a subset of archaeology:
>
> [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptology]http
> s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptology[/url]
>
> “. . . In Europe, particularly on the Continent,
> Egyptology is primarily regarded as being a
> philological discipline, while in North America it
> is often regarded as a branch of archaeology.”
>
> I’m not in North America.
>
> Returning to Petrie, Wikipedia states that he
> “held the first chair of Egyptology in the
> United Kingdom” and in this it follows current
> sources, but we may note that the official title
> of the chair is “Edwards Professor of Egyptian
> Archaeology and Philology”. The emphasis is on
> Egyptian Archaeology and this was something of a
> departure. It is reflected in UCL currently
> offering
> [url=http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/studying/und
> ergraduate/degrees/ba_egyptian_archaeology]BA in
> Egyptian Archaeology[/url] (not Egyptology), while
> the
> [url=http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/studying/mas
> ters/degrees/ma_egyptian]MA in Egyptian
> Archaeology[/url] has been replaced by
> [url=http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/studying/mas
> ters/degrees/ma_egypt_near_east]MA in Archaeology
> of Egypt and the Near East[/url].
>
> M.

The Appellation 'father of pots' refers not to his field of study but to the Methodology that he introduced to Archaeology in general.

Ironically it is this very methodology that established the predynastic timeline that the LC adherents question . Yet his work at Giza is Their Bible.

Warwick