It's kind of annoying...
Jun. 8th, 2005 05:31 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
azuriteHm, you know there's always one debate or another going around about fandoms... and one in Yu-Gi-Oh that seems perpetual is the whole "Was it 3000 or 5000 years ago?" It's my personal belief that 5000 makes more sense. Think about this:
Yu-Gi-Oh finished airing in 2004. The manga series finished just a bit before the last episode aired.
2004 - 3000 = 1004 B.C.
In 1004 B.C., there were several dynasties: the 21st to the 25th, to be precise. It's called the "Third Intermediate Period," and lasted until 656 B.C. It wasn't too long after that that the Romans invaded, occupied, and ruled Egypt. I hardly think the Pharaoh we've come to know is:
a) a mixed Egyptian/Roman ruler OR
b) a figurehead Pharaoh, with no real ruling power
Meanwhile, 2004-5000 = 2996 BC (I think). That would place the storyline of the Pharaoh back when Egypt was young, during the 1st-3rd Dynasties-- predating Tutkanhamun himself. Personally I think this makes more sense, and would "explain" the reason why history forgot Atemu as Pharaoh, and why Duel Monsters/the Dark Games were never "covered" in history- because they were archaic, old, and "lost to the ages!"
...Hm, time to go to Borders. I'll make another post about the freaky people and my freaky adventures later.
Of note:
(1)![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
mklutz, not this entry, the one before this!
(2) I posted another 30 kisses! I really oughta get working on my pairing, ne? And posting them, too...
Yu-Gi-Oh finished airing in 2004. The manga series finished just a bit before the last episode aired.
2004 - 3000 = 1004 B.C.
In 1004 B.C., there were several dynasties: the 21st to the 25th, to be precise. It's called the "Third Intermediate Period," and lasted until 656 B.C. It wasn't too long after that that the Romans invaded, occupied, and ruled Egypt. I hardly think the Pharaoh we've come to know is:
a) a mixed Egyptian/Roman ruler OR
b) a figurehead Pharaoh, with no real ruling power
Meanwhile, 2004-5000 = 2996 BC (I think). That would place the storyline of the Pharaoh back when Egypt was young, during the 1st-3rd Dynasties-- predating Tutkanhamun himself. Personally I think this makes more sense, and would "explain" the reason why history forgot Atemu as Pharaoh, and why Duel Monsters/the Dark Games were never "covered" in history- because they were archaic, old, and "lost to the ages!"
...Hm, time to go to Borders. I'll make another post about the freaky people and my freaky adventures later.
Of note:
(1)
mklutz, not this entry, the one before this!(2) I posted another 30 kisses! I really oughta get working on my pairing, ne? And posting them, too...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Damn history
Date: 2005-06-09 01:23 am (UTC)5000 years ago would entail a nation just beginning. We're talking very primitive with extremely limited concrete records. Egypt wasn't even unified until around 3100-3050 BCE. And we're not really sure whodunnit. There's still the whole debate of whether it was Menes or Aha (due to the different succession lists). Bottom line, the Egyptians were not yet the wealthy, relatively powerful state we've come to associate them with.
Of course, I would be interested in seeing someone try to make Atem the nameless Scorpion King from Dynasty 0 (predynastic times) who may have had a hand in it just cuz of his nameless quality XD
As for 3000 years ago, by 1150 BCE Egypt had already pretty much collapsed internally. It was, internationally, a mere shadow of its former self. So, ya know, I wouldn't buy that Atem was some great ruler if it was a fic dated within or after that time period. Of course, granted, the recipe for disaster had been written long before that time, and it was a relatively slow decline but still. By the time Ramesses XI died (around 1070 BCE), Egypt (that is Upper Egypt) was ruled by a foreigner, a Libyan and Egypy was pretty much a nonentity thereafter.
Thing is -- and what most fic authors don't pay attention to (including myself) when writing from a historical perspective, 'specially in this fandom -- it wasn't just the Egyptians that declined. Whole civilizations dropped out of existance within months of each other. Some historians blame the mysterious "Sea Peoples" whom we still don't know who the hell they were (though we do know some where almost certainly Philistines and Lycians). Others blame geographical (famines, natural catastrophes such as drought) and social problems (systems collapse; there was also a lot of internal revolting like the Nubians). One expert blames changes in the warfare was carried out.
The Mycenaean Kingdoms were pretty much destroyed/razed/abandoned by the time 1150 BCE rolled around. To give you an idea of how many people were killed, only 25% of the total Greek population can be traced. Mass migrations took place, and a sort of Dark Age occurred.
The Hittite Empire also collapsed around that time (just after 1200 BCE). In the emperor's last letters (the last written around 1212 BCE), he mentiones famine and an attacking fleet. We still don't know who was attacking them, and we really have no records after that . . . at all. Again, there was mass migrations so even if the countries were no longer existing, the culture still lived on in far off places.
Similarly, Assyria and Babylon declined due to the continued pressure (read attacks) of Aramaean peoples. So that by 1100 BCE. All the great powers of the ancient world were pretty much gone and all of the populations had shifted or mixed to the point of amalgamation.
In short (hah, I have a point?), neither one really works, strictly speaking. I happen to think, it happened during one of the earlier intermediate periods . . . probably the first (2180-2040 BCE) due to the prominence of tomb raiding, growing disrespect for the pharaoh and the changed status of the gods. Also, there were other things - low Nile floods resulting in famine, there were also a few epidemics that ravaged the population. It was generally a bad time. It disturbed the Egyptians' faith in ma'at (balance), the pharaoh's ability to retain ma'at, and sort of gave them a dose of reality. Before they thought of their homeland as Paradise on earth. So, there was a sort of turn to pessimistic feeling and thought (reflected in the literature). Coming as it did after a relatively long period of peace and prosperity . . . there's really no wonder.
And I'll shut up now (even though I could go on and on and on) XD
no subject
Date: 2005-06-09 02:13 am (UTC)Even during the Roman Republic's expansion East, they didn't take control of Egypt . . . unless you count by proxy. They certainly put up who they wanted to rule but it was always an Egyptian -- they kept Alexander's system going. The Ptolemies ruled, hence Cleopatra during the 50s/40s BCE.
It wasn't until Cleo and Antony hooked up and started all kinds of political upheaval that Octavian (soon to be Augustus) invaded Egypt as a political formality (he has already won the war at the Battle of Actium) and made Egypt part of the (new ) Roman Empire (no longer a Republic, though it would take a bit of work to make Octavian truly emporer). That was in 30 BCE.
Wasn't Alexander either. He was Macedonian -- but he wasn't annoint pharaoh till 332 BCE. when he liberated the Egyptians from Persian rule. The Assyrians would be closer but they didn't get very far in their push. There was the Babylonian Exile which saw the EGYPTIANS invading Judah, making it a vassal to Egypt in 609 BCE . . . Probably you were talking about the Persians? They took Egypt around 525 BCE . . . by Cambysses II -- he was, by Egyptian accounts, widely accepted.
Sorry, long-winded again XD
=D
Date: 2005-06-09 04:27 am (UTC)What I find amusing is that they switch from 5000 to 3000 in the ORIGINAL JAPANESE ANIME. And I'm not talking about a mistake of the subbers-- it was actually SPOKEN. Sugoroku/Grandpa says the Millennium Items and games date back 5000 years (he was a former game master and archaeologist; why shouldn't he be right?) while Shadi (oh yes, we all trust Shadi) says they're 3000 years old. Both of them could be rounding off, but still...
Re: =D
Date: 2005-06-09 04:35 am (UTC)O.O; They switch in the original >-< CRIPES and it's like a huge discrepancy!!!!! I mean, I could understand like . . . 50 to 30 but . . . 5000 to 3000 XD WHOA! Even archaeologists aren't that bad at dating things . . . unless you're talking universal theory then it's all up in the air. Even rounding off that's . . . damn that's just ridiculous XD