Sheshonq I: the beginnig of a Berber dynasty

EgyptSearch Forums

Ancient Egypt and Egyptology

Sheshonq I: the beginnig of a Berber dynasty (Page 1)

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 2 pages long: 1 2

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Sheshonq I: the beginnig of a Berber dynasty
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 09:40 AM Sheshonq I founded the 22nd dynasty in Egypt, and it is known as the libyan/berber/amazigh dynasty. He was the chief of the libyan tribe "meshwesh". "Sheshonq I was known as a strong ruler who once again brought together a divided Egypt..." http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/sheshonq1.htm IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 09:45 AM the title had to be:" Sheshonq I: the beginning of a Berber dynasty". sorry for the mistakes. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 09:57 AM those berbers ruled egypt for about two centuries. the 22nd, 23th and 24th dynasties were berber dynasties. they were followed by egyptianized rulers (berbers/libyans and etheopians). [i read this in a book of mohamed chafiq]. [This message has been edited by Mazigh (edited 10 September 2005).] IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 4701 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 10 September 2005 02:06 PM Well, Libyans had been coming to Egypt since at least the New Kingdom. Many settled around the Delta and intermarried with local Egyptian women. Many rose up through the ranks through mercenaries in the armies of the ancient Egyptians. Rameses III had battles with the Libyans often bringing captives and settling them around the Delta region. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 07:04 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: Well, Libyans had been coming to Egypt since at least the New Kingdom. Many settled around the Delta and intermarried with local Egyptian women. Many rose up through the ranks through mercenaries in the armies of the ancient Egyptians. Rameses III had battles with the Libyans often bringing captives and settling them around the Delta region. the libyans served in the egyptian army and therethrough they could achieve sensible functions. the egyptians pharaos didn't brought them to the nile delta, but they couldn't stop the immigration of the libyans into the nile delta. although the pharaoes tried to forbid their immigration into the nile delta they couldn't stop it suffeciently. those immigrants sons could get important functions in the egyptian socio-politic ranks and that was their way to the egyptian throne, i read. [This message has been edited by Mazigh (edited 10 September 2005).] IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 4701 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 10 September 2005 08:22 PM quote: the egyptians pharaos didn't brought them to the nile delta, but they couldn't stop the immigration of the libyans into the nile delta. although the pharaoes tried to forbid their immigration into the nile delta they couldn't stop it suffeciently. those immigrants sons could get important functions in the egyptian socio-politic ranks and that was their way to the egyptian throne, i read. During the Ramesside period[19-22nd dyansties] there were many wars with the Libyans. Also with people from the Northern Mediterranean called the Sea People. The port of Marsa Metruh was a region that had long functioned as trade between the Delta inhabitants and Delta Egyptians. One of the strategies that the pharaohs used was to combat the Libyans was taking certain Libyans and placing them around the eastern Delta as a means of buffer. All this is mentioned on the Mereptah stela. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 08:22 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: Well, Libyans had been coming to Egypt since at least the New Kingdom. i read that the new kingdom is situated in the period between 1550-1070. and i know that the oldest apparently (because of the egyptian inscriptions) libyan immigration into the nile delta was in 3000 b.C.. thus, something is wrong concening the estimation. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 08:25 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: One of the strategies that the pharaohs used was to combat the Libyans was taking certain Libyans and placing them around the eastern Delta as a means of buffer. All this is mentioned on the Mereptah stela. i read that the pharaohs also used the libyan warriors against the priests of the thebes's amon who provoked their followers against the rulers, if i remember well. IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 4701 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 10 September 2005 08:37 PM quote: i read that the new kingdom is situated in the period between 1550-1070. and i know that the oldest apparently (because of the egyptian inscriptions) libyan immigration into the nile delta was in 3000 b.C.. thus, something is wrong concening the estimation What inscription might this be? IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 4701 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 10 September 2005 08:44 PM quote: i read that the pharaohs also used the libyan warriors against the priests of the thebes's amon who provoked their followers against the rulers, if i remember well. I have not read about this. I do know that around the Late Ramesside period that priest Amun from Waset[Thebes] split and delcared the high priest of Amun a pharaoh. Here is a recent book on the interactions between the Libyans and ancient Egyptians: Leahy 1990. Anthony Leahy. Libya and Egypt. c1300-750 BC. London Leahy 2000. 'Libya', The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt 2. Edited by Donald B. Redford. New York.Oxford. 290-293 IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 08:46 PM it is known as "the board of the tehunu". the tuhunu were called in that board, and it dates back to the period between: 3200-3450 b.C., i read. the tehenu were a libyan tribe. in given age, the name was to refer to all the libyans/berbers, i read. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 08:49 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: I have not read about this. I do know that around the Late Ramesside period that priest Amun from Waset[Thebes] split and delcared the high priest of Amun a pharaoh. Here is a recent book on the interactions between the Libyans and ancient Egyptians: Leahy 1990. Anthony Leahy. Libya and Egypt. c1300-750 BC. London Leahy 2000. 'Libya', The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt 2. Edited by Donald B. Redford. New York.Oxford. 290-293 i will later give more specific sentences concerning this topic. thanks for the tips, however, i'm not able to read them , maybe later. IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 4701 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 10 September 2005 08:52 PM quote: it is known as "the board of the tehunu". the tuhunu were called in that board, and it dates back to the period between: 3200-3450 b.C., i read. the tehenu were a libyan tribe. in given age, the name was to refer to all the libyans/berbers, i read Do you have pictures of this artifact entitled ''board of the tehenu''? IP: Logged
Super car Member Posts: 1688 Registered: Jan 2005	posted 10 September 2005 08:59 PM This topic was initiated with a very shaky premises; what specific Berber language did Sheshonq I speak? IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 09:09 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: Do you have pictures of this artifact entitled ''board of the tehenu''? firstly, i'm sorry, i had to say: "the board of the unification" [the board of the tehenu exist, too. it is more important concerning the libyans, but i don't how old it is] secondly, i don't have the picture, i just read it (the author is archeologist, and he referred to his source, if you want that source) on the other hand it is known that ancient refferings to the libyans/berber dates back to 3000 b.C. you even wrote that in a topic in this forum, i will sek it. there is another one that dates back to the period 2900-2800. i think you are confusing the libou with the libyans. those names aren't the same: libou was a tribe, whereas libyan refers to all the libyan/ancient berber tribes including the libou/ribou. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 09:15 PM quote: Originally posted by Super car: This topic was initiated with a very shaky premises; what specific Berber language did Sheshonq I speak? we have some words of the extinct guanche-berber language, and despite of this we can't decide to wich branch it belongs. so, how can we know wich language precisely he spoke ?! his tongue -as a berber- was related to the berber languge, but we aren't able to decide to wich group his language belonged. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 09:23 PM quote: Originally posted by Super car: This topic was initiated with a very shaky premises; what specific Berber language did Sheshonq I speak? did you dislike the name "berber", probably ?! IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 09:32 PM quote: on the other hand it is known that ancient refferings to the libyans/berber dates back to 3000 b.C. you even wrote that in a topic in this forum, i will sek it. i was mistaken, you spoke about the tehunu and the berbers, but you didn't spoke about the oldest referings to the berbers. http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/000422.html IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 10 September 2005 09:39 PM "The name of the Libyans is registred in the oldest documents of - Egyptian historie , towards 3.000 before J.C, perhaps even before this date and the Libyans, today Imazighen, have an old history of more than five thousand years." more: http://www.emazighen.com/article.php3?id_article=69 ------------------ i said: "the board of the tehenu" and "the board of the unification". i translated the terms from arabic, it may have another indication in english. once i translated the equivalent of the lettre "j/g" in arabic to english as "j/G", whereas i had to translate it as "c". the arab-speakings count like as follows: a- b- j/g -d ... whereas it is in english: a- b- c- d-... IP: Logged
Super car Member Posts: 1688 Registered: Jan 2005	posted 10 September 2005 10:23 PM quote: Originally posted by Mazigh: did you dislike the name "berber", probably ?! Nope. Just realize that your premises is a shaky one, since "Berbers" doesn't denote a homogenous group/entity, ethnicity, or nationality like say, the ancient Egyptians, or the ancient Ghanaians, Aksumites, and so forth, which I presume was the basis of your comfort in using the term here. It is just a language group. It is like a feeble attempt to lay claim on ancient Egyptian culture, by calling them Afrasans. Bottom line is that, using "Berbers" will not help you in applying diffusionist models to ancient Nile Valley complex cultures. [This message has been edited by Super car (edited 10 September 2005).] IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 11 September 2005 05:29 AM quote: Originally posted by Super car: [B] Nope. Just realize that your premises is a shaky one, since "Berbers" doesn't denote a homogenous group/entity, ethnicity, or nationality like say, the ancient Egyptians, or the ancient Ghanaians, Aksumites, and so forth, which I presume was the basis of your comfort in using the term here. It is just a language group. It is like a feeble attempt to lay claim on ancient Egyptian culture, by calling them Afrasans. Bottom line is that, using "Berbers" will not help you in applying diffusionist models to ancient Nile Valley complex cultures. ya ya, it is just a language... they aren't a homogenous ethnicity... africaans... afrasans... even if this is probably the first time you hear of this word "berber", i guess. but, i'm friendly (you see), and i give you the opportunity to make it understandable, i do that with questions, since the questions are the easiest reactions : how about "libyan" ? How about "amazigh" ? is it not clear enough that they are one ethnicity when they speak one language ? how are they a heterogenous ethnicity ? how do you mean with "it is just a language" ? ought it to be anything others ? all the languages are just languages. why would i use "afrasan" ? they are north africans even if you like or you dislike that. what does make the berbers else others than the egyptians and the rest of the folks ? i expect readable answers ! [This message has been edited by Mazigh (edited 11 September 2005).] IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 11 September 2005 06:05 AM quote: Originally posted by Super car: Nope. Just realize that your premises is a shaky one, since "Berbers" doesn't denote a homogenous group/entity, ethnicity, ... what is this ? IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 11 September 2005 06:18 AM ausar, i found this page: the chronology of the berber. translation: [...] -3000 b.c.: the refering to the batlle between the the pharaonic and the libyan armies (tehunu) in the egyptian documents. the beginning of the thirteenth century b.c., ramsis II using the libyans in the war againsts hittites. about 1189 b.c.: ramsis II settle the libyan s near of "memphis", the libyan conqurence on the middle egypte. 1000 b.c.: phoenician settling along the maghribian coasts. about 950 b.C.:the libyan (berber) king shehsonq I founds the 22nd dynasty in egypt. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 11 September 2005 06:30 AM quote: Originally posted by ausar: [B] I have not read about this. I do know that around the Late Ramesside period that priest Amun from Waset[Thebes] split and delcared the high priest of Amun a pharaoh. i was mistaken, the pharaohs didn't use the libyans against the priests of thebes. the chaos was caused by the priests of the tebes amon who tried to get the power in egypt. more in arabic according to this given source, the oldest refering to the libyans by the ancient egyptians dated back to about 4000 b.C. that is also true, but those referings weren't written, but as gravings. [This message has been edited by Mazigh (edited 11 September 2005).] IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 4701 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 11 September 2005 12:13 PM quote: according to this given source, the oldest refering to the libyans by the ancient egyptians dated back to about 4000 b.C. that is also true, but those referings weren't written, but as gravings How do we know these engraving are reffering to the ancient Libyans? During 4000 B.C. would have been the pre-dyanstic culture. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 11 September 2005 03:40 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: How do we know these engraving are reffering to the ancient Libyans? During 4000 B.C. would have been the pre-dyanstic culture. the source above knows that it dates back to the pre-dynastyc period, too. and on that basis he said it dated 4000 b.c.. he seems to refer to the pallet of king scorpion. i also found this: quote: The presence of Libyco-Berber populations from the Sahara desert to the Maghreb in the West and to the Delta and the Fayum Lake in the East are documented as far as 4,500 B.C., with pottery, agriculture, and domestication of cattle present from the regions of the Fezzan to the banks of the Nile. http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/002532.html i believe that are speaking about one document. i just guess that. *i don't know how they distinguish the libyans, but, they undoubtly would be able to do that. why do you doubt that ? IP: Logged
Super car Member Posts: 1688 Registered: Jan 2005	posted 11 September 2005 05:08 PM quote: Originally posted by Mazigh: ya ya, it is just a language... they aren't a homogenous ethnicity... africaans... afrasans... even if this is probably the first time you hear of this word "berber", i guess. but, i'm friendly (you see), and i give you the opportunity to make it understandable, i do that with questions, since the questions are the easiest reactions : how about "libyan" ? How about "amazigh" ? is it not clear enough that they are one ethnicity when they speak one language ? how are they a heterogenous ethnicity ? how do you mean with "it is just a language" ? ought it to be anything others ? all the languages are just languages. why would i use "afrasan" ? they are north africans even if you like or you dislike that. what does make the berbers else others than the egyptians and the rest of the folks ? i expect readable answers ! Mazigh, you are truly attempting to be funny, aren't you? Well, the point of my comment has obviously eluded you, so I will try to say this as basically as possible; and of course, having the ability to read it, entirely depends on your intellectual capacity to recorgnize letters & words. Was "Libyans" used in ancient times? I am certain that the people who lived in that region were known by another name, not "Libyans". And what about the "Amazighs", as you put it? Do you have evidence that the Tehenu or Temehu were specifically simply the "Amazighs"? "Berbers" is in reference to a various ethnic groups, mostly north-western Africans, who speak closely related languages, not nationality as in the Kemetians. So when you use "Berbers", which ethnic Berber-speaking group are you including in your reference, and which ones are you excluding? Why would you use "Afrasan"? Well, the point was that "Berbers" isn't some sort of cohesive entity like a nationality, but in reference to folks who speak "Berber" languages. Your usage of the term, by applying it to ancient folks, seems to be an attempt to portray "Berbers" as some kind of a national entity. I suspect you use it in that manner, to fabricate a cradle of civilization which you can relate to. There is nothing to dislike or like about Berber speaking groups being in coastal northwest Africa and the Sahara/sub-Saharan Africa, if you consider Mali and Niger as such. It is just a poorly thought out red herring of yours. [This message has been edited by Super car (edited 11 September 2005).] IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 4701 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 11 September 2005 06:03 PM quote: The presence of Libyco-Berber populations from the Sahara desert to the Maghreb in the West and to the Delta and the Fayum Lake in the East are documented as far as 4,500 B.C., with pottery, agriculture, and domestication of cattle present from the regions of the Fezzan to the banks of the Nile. Its misleading to attach Libyco-Berber to early populations of the Fayoum. We don't know for sure if these populations were aligned to the later Libyco-Berber populations. Some of the remains in the Fayoum are Metchanoids;while others are tropical Africans. The pottery tradition at Fayoum actually shows resemblence to the Khartoum-Neolithic in the Sudan. The populations of Fayoum were sedentary farmers. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 11 September 2005 06:34 PM super car, however you can perfectly post nonsense, i will reply that. the berbers are the indegenous people of north africa from the downhistory, they inhabited north africa from the canaray islands to the western borders of the ancient egypt, and from the southern mideterranean to niger, mali and chade. they speak the berber language, wich is a part of the afro-asiatic language. this language is called "tamazight" in the language of the berbers. because of the distance between the berbers the berber language changed to several berber dialects, like as: the germanic language. the berbers call themselves "imazighen" in the berber languages/tamazight. the name amazigh is probably derived from the name of the ancient berber/libyan tribe "maxyans". those maxyans were called by herodotus, and also by other ancient writes with simple differences. some scholars believe that the maxyans of herodotus are the same meshwesh of the egyptians. by the way, sheshonq I belongs to the meshwesh tribe. the berbers inhabited north africa from more thatn 5000 b.c. their ancestors are mainly the capsians and the ibero-maurisians. thus, they doesn't have a homogenous race, like as all the ethnicities of the world. but they are one ethnicity, all the berbers call themselves "imazighen". they were known to the ancient egyptians as "tehenu", "temhu", "libou/ribou" , "meshwesh" "kahak" and other unimportant tribes. they were known generally known as "the libyans" to the greeks. the name "libyans" didn't mean the modern country libya like as you think, but it refered to all the country of the berbers/imazighen/libyans, thus from morocco to the nile valley. the name libyan is derived from the name of the libyan tribe "libou/ribou". the name libou is evetually a berber name according to the historian mostapha bazma. the romans refered to the berbers as africans, moors, numidians. the arabs called them "barbar" from wich the modern name "berber" is derived. the arabs and the berbers/imazighen believe that berber is the son "mazigh" the son of "ham" (the ketting is variable). after the islamic invasion, the arab ideology became dominant, and that led to the arabization of the berbers/imazighen, and their tongue survived in isolated regions like as the desert or the mountains. today, many of them are fighting for the amazigh identity: the guaches [derivied from the berber word "wan chinet"= that is from tenerife] in the canary islands [named after a berber/amazigh tribe : canarii], the riffains [named after the rif mountains], the shluh in the atlas [named after the berber/libyan/amazigh god atlas], the souss-berbers who are named after the sous region in the south of morocco [it is derived from the name of the moroccan city morrakesh, and it was founded by a berber dynasty: almoraviedn, morrakesh means "the country of god" in the berber language/tamazight], the kabyles [called in arabic, it means "tribes"] the shawiya in the aures, the mzab, and the tuared in algeria too. in tunesia they are surviving in matamata and djerba.... they are forming one ethnicity, one several sub-names, but the most berbers/imazighen are calling themselves "imazighen". therefor, you have to adjust you nonsense that you use as data, to get correct conlusions. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 11 September 2005 06:41 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: Its misleading to attach Libyco-Berber to early populations of the Fayoum. We don't know for sure if these populations were aligned to the later Libyco-Berber populations. Some of the remains in the Fayoum are Metchanoids;while others are tropical Africans. The pottery tradition at Fayoum actually shows resemblence to the Khartoum-Neolithic in the Sudan. The populations of Fayoum were sedentary farmers. i don't think so, the fayum was once inhabited by the tehunu, according to ahmed fakhri. IP: Logged
Super car Member Posts: 1688 Registered: Jan 2005	posted 11 September 2005 06:50 PM quote: Originally posted by Mazigh: super car, however you can perfectly post nonsense, i will reply that. Like I said, you needed brains to understand letters and words. Sorry, I can't help you with that. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 11 September 2005 06:53 PM quote: Originally posted by Super car: Like I said, you needed brains to understand letters and words. Sorry, I can't help you with that. ok, thanks in advance, just stay away. IP: Logged
Super car Member Posts: 1688 Registered: Jan 2005	posted 11 September 2005 06:55 PM quote: Originally posted by Mazigh: ok, thanks in advance, just stay away. Stay away from what?...from allowing you to humiliate yourself further?! IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 11 September 2005 07:00 PM quote: Originally posted by Super car: Stay away from what?...from allowing you to humiliate yourself further?! to avoid some irrelevant nonsense. IP: Logged
Super car Member Posts: 1688 Registered: Jan 2005	posted 11 September 2005 07:05 PM quote: Originally posted by Mazigh: to avoid some irrelevant nonsense. ...like the one you spew about "Berbers". IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 11 September 2005 07:21 PM quote: Originally posted by Super car: ...like the one you spew about "Berbers". did you read this topic ? http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/002499.html IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 11 September 2005 07:29 PM if the berbers aren't a ethnicity [i couldn't know how they would be considered according to you] what is so painful ? IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 4701 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 11 September 2005 07:29 PM quote: i don't think so, the fayum was once inhabited by the tehunu, according to ahmed fakhri In later periods there was a Libyan pressence. But I question wheather the Neolithic culture in Fayoum around 4,500 B.C. can be attributed to Libyco-Berbers. This seems to vague to asign cultural labels such as the following to a pre-dyanstic Neolithic culture. However, Khasekhemwy,during the 2nd dyansty, does mention the name of a Libyan group around the area of Fayoum. IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 4701 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 11 September 2005 07:37 PM Supercar, I think you are being alittle rude to mazigh. Did he insult you or make rude remarks to you? Mazigh's first language is not english so English is probably not his best language. We are having a nice civl discussion related to ancient Egypt. Just relax both Mazigh and Supercar and let's engage in dialogue. No need to insult each other. IP: Logged
Super car Member Posts: 1688 Registered: Jan 2005	posted 11 September 2005 07:38 PM quote: Originally posted by Mazigh: did you read this topic ? http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/002499.html Have you read: http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/002479.html , including the links provided within. and http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001783-7.html "Berber" is a language group, there is no feelings to be attached to this. It is you, who has difficulty in grasping this. This is just a fact. Berber groups weren't, nor are they today, some cohesive national or political entity. Do you have evidence to suggest otherwise! IP: Logged
Super car Member Posts: 1688 Registered: Jan 2005	posted 11 September 2005 07:46 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: Supercar, I think you are being alittle rude to mazigh. Did he insult you or make rude remarks to you? I suppose calling my comments "nonesense" or something "unreadable", is a sign of politeness. quote: ausar: Mazigh's first language is not english so English is probably not his best language. We are having a nice civl discussion related to ancient Egypt. And you know for sure that English is my first language, right? quote: ausar: Just relax both Mazigh and Supercar and let's engage in dialogue. No need to insult each other. Cuts both ways! IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 11 September 2005 07:58 PM quote: Originally posted by Super car: Have you read: http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/002479.html , including the links provided within. and http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001783-7.html "Berber" is a language group, there is no feelings to be attached to this. It is you, who has difficulty in grasping this. This is just a fact. Berber groups weren't, nor are they today, some cohesive national or political entity. Do you have evidence to suggest otherwise! you are confusing the race, the ethnicity and the politic. and i guess you start from incorrect data [i couldn't conclude them]. the egyptians wern't less mixed than the berbers as far as their race is concerned. they are speaking the egyptian lianguage like as the berbers are speaking berber language. both of those languages belong traditionally to the hamitic languages, and the hamitic language to the afro-asian languages. so, why would the egyptian be an ethnicity whereas the berbers wouldn't be an ethnicity ? the case of the berbers is the same case of the kurds who live in several countries. both of them are fighting for their identity, and this the same case of the berbers. sheshonq i is called the libyan, in the most source, and we know that the name libyan refered to the modern berbers, and i simply changed the word libyan in berber. i can provide the source that the name is a general word for the berbers who call themselves imazighen. as i can provide the source that the meshweh were a libyan tribe, were a berber tribe, spoke the berber language. [i mean just believeable sources no original sources] not now, but tomorrow, because it is too late here at me. IP: Logged
Super car Member Posts: 1688 Registered: Jan 2005	posted 11 September 2005 08:13 PM quote: Originally posted by Mazigh: you are confusing the race, the ethnicity and the politic. and i guess you start from incorrect data [i couldn't conclude them]. I am not confusing anything, but I am not sure you aren't. I simply stated that "Berber" is in reference to a language group, and not some national or unified entity. Kemet was a national or unified political entity. I hope this helps! IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 12 September 2005 09:08 AM quote: Originally posted by Super car: I am not confusing anything, but I am not sure you aren't. I simply stated that "Berber" is in reference to a language group, and not some national or unified entity. Kemet was a national or unified political entity. I hope this helps! i'm berbe, and i know them through personal and historical knowledge. they aren't political unified, but that has notihing to do with the ethnicity. like as the kurds. you are right the berbers speaking a language that is known as the berber language or tamazight. the ancient egyptians were aboslutely not from one race, even it is supposed that they are berber descendents. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 13 September 2005 07:29 AM quote: Originally posted by ausar: In later periods there was a Libyan pressence. But I question wheather the Neolithic culture in Fayoum around 4,500 B.C. can be attributed to Libyco-Berbers. This seems to vague to asign cultural labels such as the following to a pre-dyanstic Neolithic culture. i found this: "The Fayum proper is an oasis in the Libyan Desert" http://48.1911encyclopedia.org/F/FA/FAYUM.htm and this: "he Libyans enter �Egypte historie like enemies, like invaders. This is perhaps not exact with regard to the province of Fayoum which seems always Libyan before being integrated into the kingdom of -Egypte under S�sostris II (towards 1897-1878 before J.C). To strike the country of Tehenou was an act whose several kings glorified themselves. Indeed, the Libyans of the small oases could not measure themselves with the Egyptians, by far higher in number. If Sahour� brings back a rich booty from the country of Tehenou, it� s- certainly from Fayoum, oasis in which was a lake, today Birkat Q�roun, which still had the name: shet Temeh "lake of Libyans" under the 12th dynasty(HOLSCHER 1937: p. 49)." http://www.emazighen.com/article.php3?id_article=69 and this: "The Transition to the Faiyum Neolithic/Faiyumian (formerly Faiyum A)" http://www.faiyum.historians.co.uk/html/neolithic_transition.html and this map: Orange: Caridial and Impressoceramics Brown: Neolithic in Capsian tradition light green: Sahara-Sudan cultures (Khartoum culture, Shaheinab culture) red: Neolithic of the Niger purple: Levant - Old Neolithic (Fayum Neolithic, Merimde) green: Upper Egyptian Neolithic (Badari) http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/fayum/neolitafric.html IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 13 September 2005 08:30 AM according to some scholars, the tehunu were probably the early inhabitants of the nile delta, before they would immigrate to the western desert. the scholars couldn't distinguish the the tehenu from the ancient egyptians by any mentions but the skin's color, because the tehenu were less brown that the ancient egyptians. maybe, the ancient egyptians didn't consider the tehenu as foreingers, but as egyptians. (mohamed moustapha bazma, libya: this name in the history). some shclars believe that the ancient egyptians and the tehenu (libyans) were of one origin who would originate from the central sahara. the tehenu have been depicted by ancient egyptians from the pre-dynastic age (about 4000 b.c or older). IP: Logged
Horemheb Member Posts: 2498 Registered: Jan 2004	posted 13 September 2005 10:24 AM I'm sure mazigh that since Egyptians were North African caucasians the two groups were related in some way. IP: Logged
Mazigh Member Posts: 187 Registered: Aug 2005	posted 13 September 2005 02:22 PM quote: Originally posted by Horemheb: I'm sure mazigh that since Egyptians were North African caucasians the two groups were related in some way. the egyptians and the berbers aren't caucasians. because their languages don't belong to the caucasian languages. the caucasians are named after "Caucasus", because they are believed to be originated from that region. de modern caucasian language are the indo-european languages who spread in europa in the period of 5000 b.C.. this would mean that the caucasian race would originate from the Caucasus in asia. but the egyptian and the berber languages aren't indo-europeans (caucasians), but afro-asiatic languages [hamo-semitic language]. those languages are believed to be originated from africa maybe, from the modern region of etheopia. but some regions are not affiliated with any language, like as the basque language wich is sometime affiliated with the berber language. and therefor, it is broadly affiliated with the idero-caucasian language [i have no enough knowledge]. the berber language is also not very clear, how ever it belongs to the afro-asiatic language. probably, it changed through the lang period in north africa and the influences of other non-berber speakings. the berber language is believed to be appeared with the capsian [named after the tunisian city "gafsa"] people [about 7000 b.C, if i'm not mistaken], but north africa was already inhabited by the ibero-maurisains in the northern coastal regions of north africa, those idero-maurisians [combination of the two names: iberina peninsula + the maures (widerspread berber tribe in the period of the romans)] who are also know as "oranians" [named after the algerian city: "oran"] inhabited the northern coasts of north africa in the period about "20000 b.C" and they were influenced by the capsian culture, and it goes without saying that the ibero-maurisian language would influence the capsian language... thus, there is no reason to say the egyptians are caucasians. [i just try to analyze, and the correction are welcom] IP: Logged
Horemheb Member Posts: 2498 Registered: Jan 2004	posted 13 September 2005 03:00 PM As a point of information both groups are caucasian. Lets stay inside the boundries of accepted modern scholarship and not stray off into wonderland. IP: Logged
rasol Member Posts: 4188 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 13 September 2005 03:04 PM quote: the egyptians and the berbers aren't caucasians. because their languages don't belong to the caucasian languages. the caucasians are named after "Caucasus", because they are believed to be originated from that region. de modern caucasian language are the indo-european languages who spread in europa in the period of 5000 b.C.. this would mean that the caucasian race would originate from the Caucasus in asia. but the egyptian and the berber languages aren't indo-europeans (caucasians), but afro-asiatic languages. This is correct. IP: Logged

This topic is 2 pages long: 1 2 All times are GMT (+2)	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Contact Us | EgyptSearch!