posted
The three examples I cited use the people determinative (seated man & seated woman) and the plural sign (three short upright strokes).
Thus any and every translation for the glyphs
charcoal
seated man seated woman
three short upright strokes
that does not include the following word and concepts
black
people
plural
is an inaccurate interpretation informed by something other than what appears in the primary AEL document.
"People of the black" is a nonsense phrase because for the given set of glyphs it violates the rules of Pharaonic Egyptic grammar.
"Black Land" is equally preposterous because it is in the singular whereas the three short upright strokes denotes plurality or multiple in number. Nor can seated man & seated woman ever mean land.
Is this not obvious to anyone with eyes to see and a good brain to comprehend?
quote:Originally posted by Jaime:
For the claimants of the Black (with a people determinative)'to mean Black people instead of People of the Black. They would have to show text that describes Egyptians as considering themselves black or even dark in color. Same with the Red. alTakrury purportedly provides this evidence, but he does not reference exact glyphs, nor does he give transliterations and translations to verify.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You may well be sure, but you are surely wrong. The Hebrews, clear until the time the Roman Empire sacked their nation Y*hudah and renamed it Palestina, did in fact regard Nordics/Germans/'-SH-K-N-Z-Y-M as lepers.
As most idiots, whether black white or mixed, will do, Jaime has made the wrong conclusion that biblical leprosy equals vitiligo which it does not.
In the Mishnah on biblical leprosy laws, the intelligentsia of Roman era Judea classed the Germans as head to foot clean lepers.
In order to remove them from that status, the biblical laws were reinterpreted and rewritten with leniency in mind when applying it to Germans who otherwise qualified for naturalizing as Judean (i.e., converting to be Jewish) and marrying Judaeans.
So cheer up Jamie. Though in the biblical era you'd've been regarded as a congenital leper, by mishnaic times your appearance would've been excused!
quote:Originally posted by Jamie:
quote:from al~Takruri: ... the priest shall look on the plague; and, behold, if the appearance thereof be deeper than the skin, and there be in it yellow thin hair, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a scall, it is leprosy of the head or of the beard.
And, less some fool think a blond haired, white skinned or reddish white skinned leper was something beautiful in Hebrew eyes:
quote: when the cloud was removed from over the Tent, behold, Miriam was leprous, as white as snow; and Aaron looked upon Miriam; and, behold, she was leprous.
And Aaron said unto Moses: ...Let her not, I pray, be as one dead, of whom the flesh is half consumed when he cometh out of his mother's womb.'
Numbers 12:10-12
The appearance of a blond white person to ancient Hebrews was as if they were a miscarriage or a stillbirth and was frightening.
quote:Hardly. I am sure they could tell the difference of a Nordic European and a person who had a skin disease or was an albino for example. Most Europeans were not as light and had light golden complexions. And the healthy flaxen hair does not look like unhealthy yellowish hair. Nice try.
Very different from:
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
And it does seem the Nile Valley folk considered themselves the last word as to who was human.
quote:Originally posted by Obelisk_18: ... the Egyptians called themselves "the black people" ... because they considered themselves the highest of men? Many people in East Africa today like the Oromo call their god and themsleves black, and they call things that are evil red. a connection perhaps?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
No one's really bothering to read, in an attempt to understand, BG 4:5 s30 where quite clearly KM.t[nwt] refers to both RT RMT yw (Egyptians/"Nubians") and NHHSW ("Nubians"/Sudanese) or questions like the one below would never get asked.
And no there's no reference to soil. Please show us any primary AEL document where KM is followed by any determinative for soil/dirt/silt/ground/etc.
We've shown both Pharaonic Egyptic texts with the people determinative and a Coptic Egyptian biblical translation where KM describes skin colour.
Why has no one but no one shown KM with their soil interpretation. Surely some example exists somewhere?
quote:Originally posted by Obelisk_18: Okay asspipe, why didn't they call Nubians, who were racially the same as them, Kemenou? And don't you know only lower egpyt was called the "Black land" because of the soil there?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:I honestly have never heard of the word /dhs/ meaning 'red.'
I have no idea of what this is response to?
probably a typo on my part. we were talking about this:
quote:Originally posted by Mustafino: dsh -> red, adjective.
quote:Indeed, I've already explaind that Seth is likely the origin of the Christian demon Satan. He should add that Seth began as and inner African deity, and later became associated wtih asiatics. For example the Asiatic Hyksos adopted Seth.
I doubt it. Satan wasn't evil in the first place. Just an angel that served as an advocate in a debate.
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: Mustafino's proxy says he understands that the specific term for desert is "smy.t", and yet dismisses it and says it is actually 'dsr.t' that means 'desert'. In order for dsr.t to be referencing land, it has to be followed by a determinative connoting 'land' or what have you. E.g. "Red people", the "the Reds", the 'Red ones" would be equivalent to dsr.tyw
Hardly, he states that dr.t is used much more commonly than smy.t. Furthermore, he never said it didn't have a land determinative or that it did. You are just assuming he said it didn't. Finally, where is your source for "the red ones"?
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: No this is a contradiction. Eurocentrics ACCEPT that the Egyptians depicted the so-called "Nubians" as black and used it as a racial distinction. Which is ok for the Eurocentrics because they can then use it as an affirmation of their OWN racial dialectecs.
Nice strawman. So because Eurocentrics are idiots in gives you permission to be an idiot right along side them. Gotcha.
quote:The PROBLEM comes when their fantasies of the justaposition of black "Nubians" versus white Egyptians is exposed as a LIE and the fact that, just as the Egyptians were able to identify and label the skin colors of those around them, the blacks in the south and the whites (reds) in the North, they ALSO were able to identify themselves as blacks. Which causes the Eurocentric no small amount of consternation.
The fact is current studies have shown that the area was very diverse. There were no White people. But there were no Black people either. That causes consternation to both Eurocentrics and Afrocentrics. The skin tones ranged from light browns to dark browns.
quote:So the issue is NOT whether the Egyptians recognized skin color, as any idiot can see that they recognized different populations as having different overall features in their own artwork. The ISSUE is whether they acknowledged THEMSELVES as being black, meaning medium to dark brown.
You are making the ASSUMPTION that they qualified medium to dark brown as Black. You have shown no evidence of this.
quote: Yes, they did and it is seen in their artwork and the language. This is clear as day, the only people who QUESTION this are those whites from thousands of miles away in the white lands of Europe who want to IMPOSE their own images into the identity of the ancient Egyptians.
No it's not and much more than Europeans question the claims of Afrocentrics, including Egyptians themselves. Afrocentrics are just like Eurocentrics.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: The three examples I cited use the people determinative (seated man & seated woman) and the plural sign (three short upright strokes).
Sources for your three examples (actual text, not dictionary)
quote:"People of the black" is a nonsense phrase because for the given set of glyphs it violates the rules of Pharaonic Egyptic grammar.
Which specific rule?
quote:"Black Land" is equally preposterous because it is in the singular whereas the three short upright strokes denotes plurality or multiple in number. Nor can seated man & seated woman ever mean land.
Make it plural then. Black Lands. Nitpicking. And people of the Black (lands) works just fine.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: [QB] You may well be sure, but you are surely wrong. The Hebrews, clear until the time the Roman Empire sacked their nation Y*hudah and renamed it Palestina, did in fact regard Nordics/Germans/'-SH-K-N-Z-Y-M as lepers.
You have yet to present any evidence of this.
quote:As most idiots, whether black white or mixed, will do, Jaime has made the wrong conclusion that biblical leprosy equals vitiligo which it does not.
As AlEscroto usually does he speaks in falsehoods. leprosy in Hebrew was a generic reference for skin diseases.
quote:In the Mishnah on biblical leprosy laws, the intelligentsia of Roman era Judea classed the Germans as head to foot clean lepers.
Of course, no source for this claim.
And yes I have no shame in my picture. I am not some anonymous wannabe like you punheteiro.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: No one's really bothering to read, in an attempt to understand, BG 4:5 s30 where quite clearly KM.t[nwt] refers to both RT RMT yw (Egyptians/"Nubians") and NHHSW ("Nubians"/Sudanese) or questions like the one below would never get asked.
You have yet to show that.
quote:And no there's no reference to soil. Please show us any primary AEL document where KM is followed by any determinative for soil/dirt/silt/ground/etc.
Land as stated by Odgen: The earliest appearances of the word kmt, in fact, do not use the "city" sign O49, but various "land" signs, such as N20, N21 and N23 instead. A few examples exist without any determinative.
quote:We've shown both Pharaonic Egyptic texts with the people determinative and a Coptic Egyptian biblical translation where KM describes skin colour.
Of individuals, not people.
quote:So you can see the association of Seth with red, and red with evil. We have also shown the association of this term with Asiatics.
I have yet to see your direct quotation of a text with anything like evil red Asiatics.
The rest of that post was a typical strawman.
Let's continue
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Therefore he should have *no problem* understanding the following: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Wally: From the Worterbuch volume 5 page 127 - we have primary textual evidence -> Km.t translated as 'the nories', the blacks, literally the negroes. rasol, this is an excellent example of one of the self-descriptive words used by the Ancient Egyptians; so let us look at it in detail... a) The first letter is "Charcoal" and is the strongest biliteral word in the language for "Black"; the 'Owl' is the letter "M" and is used to 'complete' the word - the first word is then, simply, "Black" b) The second word is "Rom -ou" or simply, "people"; this is often translated in it's "shorthand" version as "Ret -ou" but the entire word is "Kem_Rom_ou" and was probably pronounced "Kemou (Kemw)." This word is explicit in its meaning: "The Negroes, the Blacks, Le Noires, etc. And there will be no rebuttle to this reading, as there is none.
Again, evidence of this writing in an actual text.
Posts: 354 | From: Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Obelisk_18: And don't you know only lower egpyt was called the "Black land" because of the soil there?
^ No we don't know this, and judging by your inability to document this, neither do you, so why did you say it?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: No one's really bothering to read, in an attempt to understand, BG 4:5 s30 where quite clearly KM.t[nwt] refers to both RT RMT ywEgyptians/"Nubians") and NHHSW ("Nubians"/Sudanese) or questions like the one below would never get asked.
^ That is exactly why I won't supply redundant information on demand - as posters like MM, Yonis and others have come to find out the hard way.
I consider repeating a quesion already clearly answered, while not addressing the answer,a form of trolling. And I will, without mercy, give such trolling the back of my hand [the black hand side ] and send it whimpering into the corner, which is where it belongs.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Altakruri writes: We've shown both Pharaonic Egyptic texts with the people determinative and a Coptic Egyptian biblical translation where KM describes skin colour.
quote:Mustafini writes: Of individuals not people.
Both...., and inasmuch as what you are trying and failing to dispute is the 'meaning of the word', it would be the same in either case.
posted
These new trolls kinda remind me of good 'ol Horemhab; never offering any constructive discourse but only going in circles, asking the same silly questions over and over again, as if they didn't understand the original answers...
posted
Anok Ang ouKame.t, ni Anok ouDeshre.t! "I am a Black person, I am not a Red person!"
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: The fact is current studies have shown that the area was very diverse. There were no White people. But there were no Black people either. That causes consternation to both Eurocentrics and Afrocentrics. The skin tones ranged from light browns to dark browns.
Nice Spin
King Shabaka
Note: to whomever responsible, please stop messing with the Graphic Art software sliders don't know what program is used (Photoshop?) but this is lame
washed out image of Nefertiti and Akhenaten
This is much better notice the improved foreground and background quality (more detail)
Nefertiti and Akhenaten
Anyway they are still Africans
Posts: 567 | From: USA | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Irrelevant to the discussion as she is an individual. and it is ironic that You guys claim her name means Negro woman. Not Lady is Black. An individual name. Nice try.
As usual, it is you who lack evidence.
Cute girl.
quote:Originally posted by Wally: Anok Ang ouKame.t, ni Anok ouDeshre.t! "I am a Black person, I am not a Red person!"
Now show me somewhere where Egyptians actually said something like that.
quote:Originally posted by Masonic Rebel: Nice Spin Anyway they are still Africans
Not sure what your point was. Never said they weren't.
Posts: 354 | From: Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
Why is it that we do not see Km.t used before the 10th Dynasty? If you know of an earlier time, post a source. Why is it that the first instances were with the determinative sign N23 which means cultivated land? If you are correct in your usage, did they just figure out they were Black in the XI Dynasty?
Posts: 354 | From: Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Mustafano writes: You didn't provide jack ****.
Frustrated foul mouthed rantings are 1 part of your problem, illiteracy being the other part. Both are caused by chronic stupidity, which in your case is likley incurable.
quote:Mustafano Wrong. That is Rmt Kmt.
^ That's the point, eactly as AlTakruri correctly denoted -> Kmt with the people determinative., which you never have addressed and never will because you're and idiot and can't.
You're just not smart enough to engage in this discussion Mustafano, which requires at least normal intelligence, which you lack. That's why you never get anywhere, and can't understand anything [as evidenced by Dr. Nina Jablonski's noble but fruitless attempts to educate you]
Sorry, no one can help you. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wally: These new trolls kinda remind me of good 'ol Horemhab; never offering any constructive discourse
For the same reason - they're just defeated dunces who can't provide evidence or address any point of substance.
They can't think, they can't refute and they can't debate, all they can do is argue by obtuseness, which only requires them to be dumbstruck, at which they are ever expert. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mustafino: Simple questions.
Why is it that we do not see Km.t used before the 10th Dynasty? If you know of an earlier time, post a source. Why is it that the first instances were with the determinative sign N23 which means cultivated land? If you are correct in your usage, did they just figure out they were Black in the XI Dynasty?
Again dodging I see.
Posts: 354 | From: Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ "I see", said the blind frustrated fool...with his usual dumbstrck non-response in the face of painful facts that he cannot refute....
quote:Originally posted by Wally:
I apologize to the veterans on this forum for posting information that they're already familiar with, but I feel it's necessary for the newbies who come here frequently and with confused or distorted notions regarding the Ancient Egyptians, and who come with the following delusions:
Self-delusion A recent post started out with "Some claim that Kemet means black people". The key word in this first statement is "claim" which is a synonym for "believe", which seeks to place a human language in the same category as religion. You can believe in or not believe in God, that's one thing; but you don't believe that "veni" in Latin means "I came"; you either KNOW or you don't. However, this delusion leads to one that has been fabricated by the distorters of Egyptology.
Assisted delusion "The Egyptians called their country "Kmt" or "Kemet" which means "Black" after the color of the soil." This is simply an absolute lie. There is nothing in the grammar, even if one were to use an electron microscope to search for an example that the soil or earth had any connection with the use of this word. The only references to the soil in the names of Ancient Egypt were the names "TaMeri and TaMere"; "Ta" meaning "earth, land, etc." This mantra is almost always repeated to "inform" the reader of why the word "Black" for Egypt and Egyptians was used, and probably using the age old philosophy that if you repeat a lie often enough, and long enough, it soon becomes accepted as the truth. NOT if one knows better...
KEMET
A comprehensive list of the structure and usages of perhaps the most significant word in the Ancient Egyptian language. ***All of these words can be found in "An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary" by E. A. Wallis Budge, Dover, NY***
Used as an adjective
kem;kemem;kemom - black kemu - black (m) keme.t - black (f) hime.t keme.t - "black woman" (woman of Black) himu.t keme.t - "black women" (women of Black)
Used as a noun
keme.t - any black person, place, or thing
A determinative is then used to be more specific:
keme.t (woman) - "the Black woman"; ie, 'divine woman' keme.t (cow) - "a Black cow" - ie, a 'sacred cow' Keme.t (nation) - "the Black nation"
kem - a black one (m) keme.t - a black one (f) kemu - black ones (m) kemu.t - black ones (f) kemeti - two black ones
Used for Nationality
Sa Kemet - a man of Black (an Egyptian male) Sa.t Kemet - a woman of Black (an Egyptian female) Rome.t Kemet - the people of Black (Egyptians) Kemetou - Blacks (ie, 'citizens') Kememou - Black people (of the Black nation)
Other usages
Sa Kem - "Black man", a god, and son of Sa.t Kem.t - "Black woman", a goddess (page 589b) kem (papyrus) - to end, complete kem.t (papyrus) - the end, completion kemi - finished products kem khet (stick) - jet black ... kemwer - any Egyptian person, place or thing ('to be black' + 'to be great')
Kemwer - "The Great Black" - a title of Osiris - the Ancestor of the race
Kemwer (body of water) - "the Great Black sea" - the Red sea Kemwer (body of water + river bank) - a lake in the Duat (the OtherWorld) Kemwer Nteri - "the sacred great Black bulls" kemwer (fortress) - a fort or town Kemwer (water) - the god of the great Black lake
Kem Amut - a black animal goddess Kemi.t-Weri.t - "the great Black woman", a goddess Kem-Neb-Mesen.t - a lion god Kem ho - "black face", a title of the crocodile Rerek kem; kemu (shield) - buckler, shield kem (wood) - black wood kem.t (stone) - black stone or powder kem.tt (plant) - a plant kemu (seed) - seeds or fruit of the kem plant kemti - "black image", sacred image or statue
Using the causative "S"
S_kemi - white haired, grey-headed man (ie, to have lost blackness) S_kemkem - to destroy, overthrow, annihilate S_kemem - to blacken, to defile
Antonyms
S_desher - to redden, make ruddy S_desheru - red things, bloody wounds
Some interesting Homonyms (pages 770 > )
qem - to behave in a seemly manner Qemi - the south, Upper Egypt qem.t - reed, papyrus qemaa - to throw a boomerang qem_au - to overthrow qemam.t - mother, parent qemamu - workers (in metal, wood) qemqem - tambourines qemd - to weep qemati - statue, image - same as kemti qema - to create qemaiu - created beings Qemau;Qemamu - The Creator
Deshret - the opposite of Kemet
deshr.t - any red (ie, non-Black) person, place, or thing ... deshr.t (woman) - "the Red woman"; ie, 'evil woman' deshr.t (cow) - "a Red cow" - ie, the 'devil's cow' deshr - a red one (m) deshr.t - a red one (f) deshru - red ones (m) deshru.t - red ones (f) -- White or light-skinned people; devils deshreti - two red one
Still no answers from you or your proxies, and why is that?
Could this be the case...
quote:rasol writes: They can't think, they can't refute and they can't debate, all they can do is argue by obtuseness, which only requires them to be dumbstruck, at which they are ever expert.
quote:Mustafano mutters: There were no white people, but there were no Black people either. That causes consternation to both Eurocentrics and Afrocentrics.
translation: of course there were Black people - as shown and named in the primary text...
But sadly there were no white people....this causes consternation to Eurocentrics who are reduced to desparately attempting to re-write the primary text, in order to reconcile history to white supremacy. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
And that whole long as post shows no evidence or references to when and where those terms were used.
Simple questions.
Why is it that we do not see Km.t used before the 10th Dynasty? If you know of an earlier time, post a source. Why is it that the first instances were with the determinative sign N23 which means cultivated land? If you are correct in your usage, did they just figure out they were Black in the XI Dynasty?
quote:Originally posted by Masonic Rebel: My point is that you lost this debate before it even started You can't prove Kmt or Kemet means soil. Anicent Kemet = Black = African
Earliest determinative found used with Km.t cultuvated land. N23. Nice try.Posts: 354 | From: Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
KM.t[nwt] goes back to the Old Kingdom per. Erman & Grapow Woerterbuch der Ægyptischen Sprache Berlin: 1931 Vol.5 p.126
which uses the above as it's main entry. However further notations do in fact say N21 is Old usage whereas nwt-O49 only goes to the Middle Kingdom.
I need a contextual reading with N21 to verify if in fact a country/nation/polity is being spoken of, or just the ground.
quote:Originally posted by Jaime: Simple questions.
Why is it that we do not see Km.t used before the 10th Dynasty? If you know of an earlier time, post a source. Why is it that the first instances were with the determinative sign N23 which means cultivated land? If you are correct in your usage, did they just figure out they were Black in the XI Dynasty?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Mustafino's proxy says he understands that the specific term for desert is "smy.t", and yet dismisses it and says it is actually 'dsr.t' that means 'desert'. In order for dsr.t to be referencing land, it has to be followed by a determinative connoting 'land' or what have you. E.g. "Red people", the "the Reds", the 'Red ones" would be equivalent to dsr.tyw
Hardly, he states that dr.t is used much more commonly than smy.t.
Well, that is obviously a dismissal of the fact that a 'specific' term for 'desert' exists, and hence, that term cannot be 'deshret', red. Saying that 'deshret', i.e. red, is more commonly used and therefore the actual meaning of desert, is ludicrous, as your proxy is trying to justify that baseless claim by saying the specific term for 'desert', which again was 'smy.t', was used relatively less commonly than 'deshret'. That is a way of dismissing the fact that 'smy.t' is the specific term for 'desert', and not 'deshret', which is a specific term to connote 'red'.
quote:Mustafino:
Finally, where is your source for "the red ones"?
Champollion. Where is your specific reconstruction and source for the term 'deshret', without a determinative, that says it means 'desert', as opposed to 'red'?
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Mustafo by... Dr. Jablonski,... and everyone else with intelligence on this thread
Pathetic and immature. Why don't you email that one to Jablonski instead of a brown nose email trying to get her to agree with you? LMAO Wnat to surf for more pictures of me? Oh Yeah, you have a life.
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: Well, that is obviously a dismissal of the fact that a 'specific' term for 'desert' exists, and hence, that term cannot be 'deshret', red. Saying that 'deshret', i.e. red, is more commonly used and therefore the actual meaning of 'deshret', is ludicrous, as your proxy is trying to justify that baseless claim by saying the specific term for 'desert', which again was 'smy.t', was used relatively less commonly than 'deshret'. That is a way of dismissing the fact that 'smy.t' is the specific term for 'desert', and not 'deshret', which is a specific term to connote 'red'.
You are talking out the wrong end. He stated that both mean the same thing in usage and that one is more commonly used. Do you have evidence to the contrary?
quote:
quote:Mustafino: Finally, where is your source for "the red ones"?
Champollion. Where is your specific reconstruction and source for the term 'deshret', without a determinative, that says it means 'desert', as opposed to 'red'? [/QB]
Sorry, bub. Champollion is a secondary source. Please reference to an actual Egyptian text.
Posts: 354 | From: Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: Well, that is obviously a dismissal of the fact that a 'specific' term for 'desert' exists, and hence, that term cannot be 'deshret', red. Saying that 'deshret', i.e. red, is more commonly used and therefore the actual meaning of desert, is ludicrous, as your proxy is trying to justify that baseless claim by saying the specific term for 'desert', which again was 'smy.t', was used relatively less commonly than 'deshret'. That is a way of dismissing the fact that 'smy.t' is the specific term for 'desert', and not 'deshret', which is a specific term to connote 'red'.
You are talking out the wrong end. He stated that both mean the same thing in usage and that one is more commonly used. Do you have evidence to the contrary?
Well, of course to you, I'd be talking out of the wrong end, that is my mouth on my head like everyone else, while your's is you know where. This also means you are looking and reading from the 'wrong end'. Your proxy wrote:
Dear Ms. Pretell,
At first I thought that I would like to contribute to the discussion, but judging from the abusive tone of the arguments (on all sides!), I don't think that I would like to get into this. After all, if one cannot accept the simple proposition that the most common word for 'desert' is dSrt, which is in turn derived from the equally common adjective dSr 'red,' then I'd just be wasting my time. Interestingly enough, it sometimes will have a flamingo as a determinative…
"The word smyt also means 'desert,' but is far less common in that respect-- I'd say that there is a one to ten ratio at least there. smyt, furthermore, has a strong tendency to be used as a synonym for 'necropolis.'
...which vindicates what I posted about his rationalization. And yes, I have evidence to the contrary of that intellectually bankrupt claim: I posted several threads back - i.e. 'deshret' means 'red' not desert - refer to those threads herein.
quote: Mustafino:
quote:Champollion. Where is your specific reconstruction and source for the term 'deshret', without a determinative, that says it means 'desert', as opposed to 'red'?
Sorry, bub. Champollion is a secondary source. Please reference to an actual Egyptian text.
Sorry, bub, Champollion did first-hand fieldwork on translating primary texts and pointed out these terms. Please reference your alternative 'primary' source that reconstructs the language for the term 'deshret' to the contrary of that of Champollion.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mustafino: Pathetic and immature.
But not as pathetic and immature as YOU for denying simple facts and instead reverting to silly picture spamming and obfuscation.
quote:Why don't you email that one to Jablonski instead of a brown nose email trying to get her to agree with you? LMAO
LMAO is right! Your claims are rather hilarious. Not once in my mail did I try to "brown nose" her (not even the shade of brown you prefer ) but I simply asked a question to which she gave a straightforward reply.
quote:Wnat to surf for more pictures of me? Oh Yeah, you have a life.
LMAO I did not "surf" for that picture, YOU posted it! Or perhaps your memory span is as short as your IQ. Posts: 26249 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aside from all the bickering over the term red and whether the symbols for red by themselves actually mean desert, it is true that in the papyrus posted the symbols translated as "the red land" do refer to land and therefore THAT part of the translation is probably accurate. What is NOT accurate is to take that and use it as an excuse to translate km.t-> the black people/the blacks as the black land.
It is important to remember that the Egyptians did not always write heiroglyphics the same way all the time. A good exercise would be to find as many original Egyptian inscriptions as possible, where they refer to themselves and their country to see how they wrote it.
As for the case of red land and desert, I would suggest that we use a DIFFERENT text for which to provide evidence of red referring to people.
We should not limit ourselves to one piece of Egyptian literature as there are hundreds if not thousands of inscriptions that exist on temples, in tombs and elsewhere that can be examined, from different time periods.
Posts: 8893 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
While it is black and white, the features on the Egyptians do seem very distinct.
Here is some text on how the Europeans described these various Africans:
quote: AFRICA, like Europe and America, evidences a commingling of different stocks: the blacks are not all black, nor all woolly-haired; the Africans pass through all shades, from that of a light Berber, no darker than the Spaniard, to the deep black of the Iolofs, between Senegal and Gambia.
The traces of red men or copper-colored races are found in many parts of the continent. Prichard divides the true negroes into four classes; his second class is thus described:
"2. Other tribes have forms and features like the European; their complexion is black, or a deep olive, or a copper color approaching to black, while their hair, though often crisp and frizzled, is not in the least woolly. Such are the Bishari and Danekil and Hazorta, and the darkest of the Abyssinians.
"The complexion and hair of the Abyssinians vary very much, their complexion ranging from almost white to dark brown or black, and their hair from straight to crisp, frizzled, and almost woolly." (Nott and Gliddon, "Types of Mankind," p. 194.)
"Some of the Nubians are copper-colored or black, with a tinge of red." (Ibid., p. 198.)
Speaking of the Barbary States, these authors further say (Ibid., p. 204):
"On the northern coast of Africa, between the Mediterranean and the Great Desert, including Morocco, Algiers, Tunis, Tripoli, and Benzazi, there is a continuous system of highlands, which have been included under the general term Atlas--anciently Atlantis, now the Barbary States. . . . Throughout
posted
^That old European text is an example of how Europeans at that time attributed African phenotypic diversity to "admixture". While in some cases they may be right, we all know the vast majority of Africans do not get their looks from "mixing" (despite what some trolls say).
The so-called "red" or coppery colored look is found in East Africa among some Ethiopians as well as in West Africa among some Fulani. Such complexions have little or nothing to do with 'admixture'.
Posts: 26249 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ It's clear that Africa has always had a full range of melanodermic [black] skin tone, and that these were also the skin tones of the original non African populice.
It's equally clear that leucoderma [white skin] is a recent adaptation to high latitude low UV condiations in Eurasia.
Back to the subject of mdw ntr.
I'm disappointed with the "copping out" and failure to response appropriately to reasonable requests by Katherine, Professor Ogden, et. all.
We asked for alternative transliterations... they provided none, but rather only rheotrical grandstanding, and dissembling.
My last questions for them are:
Is that all you have?
Is that the best you can do?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wally: KEMET A comprehensive list of the structure and usages of perhaps the most significant word in the Ancient Egyptian language. All of these words can be found in "An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary" by E. A. Wallis Budge, Dover, NY Used as an adjective kem;kemem;kemom - black kemu - black (m) keme.t - black (f) hime.t keme.t - "black woman" (woman of Black) himu.t keme.t - "black women" (women of Black) Used as a noun keme.t - any black person, place, or thing A determinative is then used to be more specific: keme.t (woman) - "the Black woman"; ie, 'divine woman' keme.t (cow) - "a Black cow" - ie, a 'sacred cow' Keme.t (nation) - "the Black nation" kem - a black one (m) keme.t - a black one (f) kemu - black ones (m) kemu.t - black ones (f) kemeti - two black ones Used for Nationality Sa Kemet - a man of Black (an Egyptian male) Sa.t Kemet - a woman of Black (an Egyptian female) Rome.t Kemet - the people of Black (Egyptians) Kemetou - Blacks (ie, 'citizens') Kememou - Black people (of the Black nation) Other usages Sa Kem - "Black man", a god, and son of Sa.t Kem.t - "Black woman", a goddess (page 589b) kem (papyrus) - to end, complete kem.t (papyrus) - the end, completion kemi - finished products kem khet (stick) - jet black kemwer - any Egyptian person, place or thing ('to be black' + 'to be great') Kemwer - "The Great Black" - a title of Osiris - the Ancestor of the race Kemwer (body of water) - "the Great Black sea" - the Red sea Kemwer (body of water + river bank) - a lake in the Duat (the OtherWorld) Kemwer Nteri - "the sacred great Black bulls" kemwer (fortress) - a fort or town Kemwer (water) - the god of the great Black lake Kem Amut - a black animal goddess Kemi.t-Weri.t - "the great Black woman", a goddess Kem-Neb-Mesen.t - a lion god Kem ho - "black face", a title of the crocodile Rerek kem; kemu (shield) - buckler, shield kem (wood) - black wood kem.t (stone) - black stone or powder kem.tt (plant) - a plant kemu (seed) - seeds or fruit of the kem plant kemti - "black image", sacred image or statue Using the causative "S" S_kemi - white haired, grey-headed man (ie, to have lost blackness) S_kemkem - to destroy, overthrow, annihilate S_kemem - to blacken, to defile Antonyms S_desher - to redden, make ruddy S_desheru - red things, bloody wounds Some interesting Homonyms (pages 770 > ) qem - to behave in a seemly manner Qemi - the south, Upper Egypt qem.t - reed, papyrus qemaa - to throw a boomerang qem_au - to overthrow qemam.t - mother, parent qemamu - workers (in metal, wood) qemqem - tambourines qemd - to weep qemati - statue, image - same as kemti qema - to create qemaiu - created beings Qemau;Qemamu - The Creator Deshret - the opposite of Kemet deshr.t - any red (ie, non-Black) person, place, or thing deshr.t (woman) - "the Red woman"; ie, 'evil woman' deshr.t (cow) - "a Red cow" - ie, the 'devil's cow' deshr - a red one (m) deshr.t - a red one (f) deshru - red ones (m) deshru.t - red ones (f) -- White or light-skinned people; devils deshreti - two red ones
I can't find the White or light skinned devils, the Black people, etc. But I did find the red sand, the red land and the black land.
Posts: 88 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Because you apparently didn't bother to carefully read the pieces; nonetheless, you can find 'black people' , and 'red land' in the Kahun papyrus. The 'black people' [using the charcoal symbol instead of that wok-like symbol] has already been pointed out to you to no avail, while red land is attested to on plate III, line 3.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mystery Solver: ^Because you apparently didn't bother to carefully read the base; nonetheless, you can find 'black people' , and 'red land' in the Kahun papyrus. The 'black people' [using the charcoal symbol instead of that wok-like symbol] has already been pointed out to you to no avail, while red land is attested to on plate III, line 3.
^The determinatives as shown in the symbols, are meant to be literal. Where is the determinative of 'land', in the symbol with the 'charcoal' sign and a small semi circular figure followed by determinative of a male, in turn followed by a female, with the three dotted-figures [sign of plurality]? Please point it out, and tell us why a determinative for people should be not read as "people", but as "land".
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wally: From the Worterbuch volume 5 page 127 - we have primary textual evidence -> Km.t translated as 'the nories', the blacks, literally the negroes.
rasol, this is an excellent example of one of the self-descriptive words used by the Ancient Egyptians; so let us look at it in detail...
a) The first letter is "Charcoal" and is the strongest biliteral word in the language for "Black"; the 'Owl' is the letter "M" and is used to 'complete' the word - the first word is then, simply, "Black"
b) The second word is "Rom -ou" or simply, "people"; this is often translated in it's "shorthand" version as "Ret -ou" but the entire word is "Kem_Rom_ou" and was probably pronounced "Kemou (Kemw)." This word is explicit in its meaning: "The Negroes, the Blacks, Le Noires, etc. And there will be no rebuttle to this reading, as there is none.
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Kmt.[rmt] -Black people.
Kmt.[miw] -Black cat.
You can't replace the determinative in these words with other determinatives -> that would be re-writing.
Falsification is not transliteration, they have failed to transliterate the terms provided from the primary text.
Then ask them this: [b]Why? Are they afraid to?
once again, please provide a transliteration instead of a circular argument, in which you repeat your argument 'black land', like a mantra.
^The determinatives as shown in the symbols, are meant to be literal. Where is the determinative of 'land', in the symbol with the 'charcoal' sign and a small semi circular figure followed by determinative of a male, in turn followed by a female, with the three dotted-figures [sign of plurality]? Please point it out, and tell us why a determinative for people should be not read as "people", but as "land".
^ Of course, this is exactly why the Worterbuch translates this as the single word Blacks, Nories, Negroes, as opposed to the two word - black people.
This is also exactly as Wally stated.
So in what way can legolas dispute either of them?
The difference between legolas and Worterbuch is that *legolas insist* on fabricating the word 'land', where it in fact does not exit.
That is falsification not transliteration.
legolas: I don't see your point. Please explain?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: dsh is the same as dshr.t, the one is and adjective for red the .t makes and adjective into a noun....that is all. desh -> red adjective nub -> gold adjective hedj -> white adjective kem -> black adjective deshr.t -> red noun nub.t -> gold noun Hedj.t -> white noun Kem.t -> black noun
quote:Originally posted by rasol: dsh is the same as dshr.t, the one is and adjective for red the .t makes and adjective into a noun....that is all. desh -> red adjective nub -> gold adjective hedj -> white adjective kem -> black adjective deshr.t -> red noun nub.t -> gold noun Hedj.t -> white noun Kem.t -> black noun
quote:legolas writes: obviously something made up or without knowing "egyptian" grammar.
Then you should have no problem correcting each and every transliteration above.
Please do so....., thanks in advance.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
This is what is referenced from the worterbuch page 127 volume 5, as shown above...
I simply did not have link to and icon for the glyph without the bi-literal [the owl], but that is what is being referenced obviously, and equally obviously...not being addressed.
As for it being "much contested", well...yes *you are contesting it much*, but not very *well* because you still have not informed as as to *why* the Worterbuch is incorrect.
Your post is more of a fanfare than a disconfirmation, of anything.
quote:legolas wrote: Diop wrote in French
So did Champollion who is the original french source - *not* German.
Not the Wörterbuch. That is Diop's book claiming reference to the Wörterbuch. Go look up the Wörterbuch.
Posts: 88 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Re-read your own post, which obviously you did not write...it admits the kmt[rm.t] as noirs from page 127 volume 5, Blacks, Noirs *as shown*, is correct, ie - is indeed from the Worterbuch.
Hence....
quote:There *is* the much contested km.t rm.t
.
^ Your post only throws up a strawman distraction by way of my link to a glyph that includes the biliteral, and the spelling of noirs.
Straw-fires aside:
Where are your counter-transliterations?
It still appears that you don't have any.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: dsh is the same as dshr.t, the one is and adjective for red the .t makes and adjective into a noun....that is all. desh -> red adjective nub -> gold adjective hedj -> white adjective kem -> black adjective deshr.t -> red noun nub.t -> gold noun Hedj.t -> white noun Kem.t -> black noun
quote:legolas writes: obviously something made up or without knowing "egyptian" grammar.
quote: Then you should have no problem correcting each and every transliteration above.
Please do so....., thanks in advance.
^ What's taking so long?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: The three examples I cited use the people determinative (seated man & seated woman) and the plural sign (three short upright strokes).
Thus any and every translation for the glyphs
charcoal
seated man seated woman
three short upright strokes
that does not include the following word and concepts
black
people
plural
is an inaccurate interpretation informed by something other than what appears in the primary AEL document.
"People of the black" is a nonsense phrase because for the given set of glyphs it violates the rules of Pharaonic Egyptic grammar.
"Black Land" is equally preposterous because it is in the singular whereas the three short upright strokes denotes plurality or multiple in number. Nor can seated man & seated woman ever mean land.
Is this not obvious to anyone with eyes to see and a good brain to comprehend?
Hope you can now see the difference in determinatives, that do make a difference and are meant to be literal. Note that the other ensemble of symbols in your citation, shows the charcoal symbol [ideogram from "kem", i.e. black [in default musculine singular]] again with the semi circle-like figure again, followed by the owl, that is to invoke/emphasize the "m" in Kem [although in most cases the charcoal symbol is sufficient by itself and hence, doesn't necessitate the owl symbol], and then the semi-circle for the "t", to convert Kem in musculine singular adjective to feminine singular adjective, with the end term being Km.t. The semi circle symbol is in turn accompanied by the circle with a cross inside it, to denote 'city', 'town', or 'nation'. Thus the ensemble just described, has a determinative for a 'city'/'town', whereby the literal meaning of the term now is "the black nation". This clearly contrasts Km.t followed by the determinative of a male, then a female, to be accompanied by three dotted figures [of plurality], an ensemble connoting people, described by the feminine singular adjective of 'black', i.e. "km.t". The end term for the entire ensemble of "km.t", male, female and three dotted figures, is therefore "black people" or "the blacks", whereby 'black' in the latter is now turned into noun plural - there is no determinative here for 'land', nor is there an 'imaginary' land invoked in the ensemble.
Btw, what you [perhaps your proxy] are trying to refer to, when 'ds' or 'desh' was mentioned in the citation above, is "dSr" or "desher", meaning "red". That too is also understood by the ideogram of a flamingo(?) [unless of course, one wants to spell it out using the hand symbol, the bar, and the eye-outline-like symbol], as "Km" is understood by the ideogram of the "charcoal" symbol. Like "Km", "dSr"/"deshr" is the musculine singular adjective condition of the term, and when the "t" [semi-circle symbol] is added, is converted into the feminine singular adjective state, and read as "dshr.t"/"deshret".
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
] and send it whimpering into the corner, which is where it belongs.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic