posted                         

quote:

---

The reason for this unfortunate state of affairs is that the Tassili-n-Ajjer, more than any other Saharan region, has been subject to an appalling record of personal ambition, greed, looting, fraud, fakery and just about everything else that can give archaeology, or any other discipline for that matter, a bad name. All of this was documented in the original and subsequent versions of The Lesser Gods, which was a long-overdue intellectual and character assassination of Henri Lhote,6 the self-proclaimed discoverer of the Tassili frescoes.7 I will therefore not repeat what I have already written, other than to summarise Lhote’s main contributions to this disgraceful record. Lhote did not discover the Tassili frescoes as most of his writing and self-publicity
would have us believe. Most of the sites recorded by Lhote had already been seen by an extraordinary Frenchman, Lieutenant Brenans, much of whose work was plagiarised by Lhote and many of whose original notebooks and sketches were deliberately destroyed by Lhote. Earlier exploratory work had also been undertaken by Leo Frobenius (1937) and Yolande Tschudi (1955a, 1955b). Both Brenans and Lhote were indebted to the famous Tuareg guide Jebrine ag Mohammed, to whom the Tassili park is now commemorated and who would no doubt have brought the paintings to the world’s attention through his own writing
if he had been able to write. Lhote also set out to destroy the record (and life-work) of Yolande Tschudi (1955a, 19955b), the first person actually to record the Tassili paintings in colour and to try dating them. He largely succeeded. Tschudi is still alive and living near Zurich.


Particularly serious from the archaeological perspective is that many of the paintings
that Lhote recorded are ones that he faked. At least eight of them, (and possibly as many as 12), have been identified and recorded. However, long discussions with Lhote’s copying team during the course of making the film The Lesser Gods revealed that there are “dozens of fakes”. The word dozens should be treated with caution. From carefully interviewing surviving members of Lhote’s team, my own team of researchers were led to believe that at least a dozen well-known recorded paintings are fakes. To the dozen that we have confirmed, it appears that the reference to dozens (plural) refers to the copiers’ practice of making many paintings, often merely to amuse themselves and pass the time of day, which were quickly destroyed or removed. However, even though
these ‘fakes’ may no longer exist on the rock faces, we do not know if they have 120 Journal of Contemporary African Studies been perpetuated in Lhote’s notes and other records. The key point about this new information is not that the number of fakes is greater than hitherto supposed, but that Lhote actually knew that they were fakes. The copiers stated that many of the ‘more important’ fakes (that is, those published by Lhote) were done, in the words of one of the copyists, “to take the mickey” out of Lhote as he was so unpopular with his team. Some even described their feelings as “hatred”. The copiers claim that in all cases they told Lhote that they had painted the fakes.8 Indeed, in most cases it was self-evident, yet Lhote insisted on publishing them as real. Most of the copiers to whom my research team spoke could not understand his motivation. I believe that in part it was to prove his ‘Egyptian thesis’ (that the origin of Tassilian art was the Nile).9 Beyond that, the reason seems to lie in his extraordinary arrogance and psychological make-up. As shown in the film, even when challenged, by Malika Hachid, the former director of the Tassili National
Park, to remove the ‘Egyptian Goddesses’, which had already been proven to be a fake, from later editions of his book, Lhote refused to do so. For the last 30 years or so of his life he refused to admit that his team had painted fakes.


Moreover, Lhote not only washed and publicly encouraged the washing of the paintings, thus accelerating their destruction, but also reportedly looted surface and other artefacts in huge quantities from an unknown number of sites. It has been said by people who worked with him that what he did not take for the Musée de l’Homme in Paris and the Bardo Museum in Algiers went into his private collection, and that his private collection surpassed those of both museums.11 Indeed, Lhote undertook perhaps as many as a hundred excavations from which he is said to have removed (looted) artefacts without making any public record of them. Lhote also used his influence to stop other academics and scientists visiting the region, thus preventing further research (and, of course, the discovery of his misdeeds). In short, Lhote was the major contributor to the near sterilisation of the archaeological record of one of the world’s most important archaeological sites and the main cause of much of the subsequent damage to the remaining art through actions such as washing.

---

Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by L':
Like so?

. . . .

Is the above what you wanted? Not sure if you can post Google Book pages in HTML... Unless you want to type them yourself lol

---

Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

In classifying the peoples of North Africa, Procopius offered the fewest categories, Libyans and Maures, friend and foe. He served as court historian for Emperor Justinian in the sixth century and wrote political and military history, not ethnography. While his division has some basis in location, it is essentially a political one.( n33) On the other extreme are Ptolemy and Ibn Khaldun, both of whom refer to scores of people. One of the most curious systems of categorization comes from Ibn Hawqal, who wrote in the late tenth century. A native of Baghdad, he traveled extensively in the western regions of Islam, where his curiosity led him to gather much information about the Sahara. At one point in his work, he suddenly announces that his readers may become confused by the many Berber clans and tribes he mentions, so to help matters he divides them into the "pure Sanhaja" and the "Banu Tanamak," the difference being that the latter "were originally Sudan [black] whose skin and complexion became white because they live close to the North."( n34) He lists nineteen names under the pure Sanhaja and twenty-two under the Banu Tanamak without indicating whether these are political, cultural, geographic, social, or linguistic in nature. Nor does he specify the difference between the Sanhaja and other Berbers.

---

Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
MoM718 used to post the actual GOOGLE url image pages themselves

---

Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Use Mozilla Firefox for that.

---

Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by L':

quote:

---

Use Mozilla Firefox for that.

---

How do you do it? Lol, I tried to test it and post the URL, but it won't work for me (am using Firefox)

---

Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
Frankly I don't see how Lohte could have been fooled by the "bird goddesses".

---

Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
[QB] In 1966 Basil Davidson wrote the following caption
for the quartet of figures posted on ES AE&E as "The
Tassili Ladies, 3000 BC Algeria."


We now know why the clothes and 'dos evoke anachronism.

---

Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

^I didn't know about the male warriors from Jabbaren, thanks. Has it indeed been argued that the figures above are depicted accurately in their hue? I simply see transparent chalk, but maybe these scholars have more going for them in discerning non-African cultural leanings.

When are those pieces dated? The Tassili ladies again, are said to date around 1,000 BC, which may still evoke feelings of anachronism but there were other paintings that were pretty much the same as far as the level of detail, depicting people with pretty much the same standards of attire. Such is included within the overall "Bovidian style", which Roset (2004) actually attributes to the proto-Fulani. Indeed, paintings similar to the "Tassili ladies" show elaborately dressed brown-skinned men, one who is also riding oxen.

This one came to mind when I made the above statement (mind you, this is from the same period as the Tassili ladies [2nd-1rst millenium BC]):




"Perhaps a scene of jurisdiction. A man in the centre, possibly accused of some crime, is led off by an official in striped coat. Group of robed justices (?) on lower left. Fresco of Tassili N'Ajjer, Henri Lhote Collection"

quote:

---

BTW Malika Hachid is a she.

---

Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
An example of how the fakes influenced historical anthropology.


Jabbaren: 'Antinea': Post-Bovidian Period with Egyptian Influence

Other than touch ups to the breast, thigh, and buttocks
the above reworking is the same as in Lhote's book.


Lhote's commentary:
This magnificent female figure was found in the so-called
'Aard-Vark' shelter at Jabbaren where it is situated in the least
accessible part of the grotto and screened from outside by a
huge rock. The shelter had been occupied (previously to the
execution of the paintings) by Bovidians, who left here remains
of their repasts and a number of artifacts. The great picture
covers, to the extreme right, a little round-headed figure, while
a Bovidian personage in red ochre seems to have been em-
bodied in the head-dress of 'Antinea'. The profile is typically
'European' -- Greek one might almost say. It is in marked
contrast with the coarse faces of the 'magistrates' (No. 30)
and of the women of the Upper Jabbaren (List of Styles No. 1)
which, nevertheless, belong to the same art-phase and are all
executed in similar colors. The head-dress seems to indicate
an important personage. Here, once more, we see the head-
band or high cap which is characteristic of this school of
painting, but the upper part of the head-dress is different and
appears to contain an attribute whose form is not unlike that
of the Egyptian pshent. The hand seems to be covered by a frill
or finge.

---

I hate to keep playing conspiracy theorist but...
anachronistic is understating things.



I hope this is supposed to be a rendition of the original painting.


From 1880



Karl Lagereld in the house... of Chanel that is.


Some thing's never change I guess - including European depictions of themselves.


BTW - the poncho is ancient South American fashion statement not an Iberian one. They started wearing them in Europe during World War I about the time colonialists were venturing into the Sahara engaging in their rock artistry so to speak.


Not to nitpick but, for this reason I thus still have questions and reservations about the antiquity and age of this specific artwork where females appear to be wearing poncho-like articles of clothing.

Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by dana marniche:

I hope this is supposed to be a rendition of the original painting.

---

Left is photo of the Lhote facsimile. Right is repro as in Davidsons' African Kingdoms.
Book credits say it's the same as left, photo by Lessing taken at the Musee de l'Homme.

Another fraud tipoff, one woman is blonde, one redhead, one brunette, and one ravenette.

Perpatrators of Mission Lhote fakeries admit to adding their own touches alongside the
authentic pre-historic artwork as well as to rendering outright phony fabrications.

What we have above is a case where they inserted women of the four European hair colors
nearly in four cardinal angle positioning into the probably original scene of a cattle herd.



The above looks like part of a panorama with the below, also having embedded fakeries.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dana marniche:

I hope this is supposed to be a rendition of the original painting.

---

Left is photo of the Lhote facsimile. Right is repro as in Davidsons' African Kingdoms.
Book credits say it's the same as left, photo by Lessing taken at the Musee de l'Homme.

Another fraud tipoff, one woman is blonde, one redhead, one brunette, and one ravenette.

---

On top of the women's heads looks more like a turban or similar headgear, you commomly see that when people are riding animals and have robe like garments. Look at the figure in the lower left corner, the shape of what's on her head does not look like hair



It could be a fake vut what was the intention? If it is fake was it just a joke or were they trying to show that there were white people in ancient Libya for some political purpose? These Europeans don't seem concerned enough about ancient Libya to try to do that

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Don't know why I'm bothering replying since you
always seek refuge in irrationality after being
refuted.

Quite the contrary, I have never assessed skin
colour in adjudging the Oxen Riders as fakes.
You are the one using skin colour as a crutch.

In fact I've questioned the authenticity of the
so-called Filles Peuhl and they are quite dark.

My stance on pale island and north Mediterranean
females in North Africa in prehistory is well known
as in my view they partially account for the lighter
skin tone of some North Africans. You are the one
using light skin colour as a crutch not me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

The Saharan woman you posted her headwrap looks
absolutely nothing like any of the hairstyles in the
art. It could never be mistaken for styled hair
whether bushy, brushed, or exquisitely coiffured.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

If you really knew anything about the region, the
time period, and the people you would know that
object atop the central figure's head you cannot
identify is an ostrich egg.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Please post examples of female turban wear dating
to ~1500 BCE in the Sahara.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

As you know from earlier
posts on this topic the blonde sports a well known
hairstyle of last century sahel/savannah women and
is particularly a Fulani adornment. Where in the art
or literature of the ancient Egyptians or Graeco-Latins
is there any indication of North African female turban wear?

---

what you theorize does not make sense. All the women have a similar situation on top of their heads. If their hair was in this particular style Fulani style you show, you could not carry an object, what ever it is, in it as the person in the rock art is able to do:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Another point of fakery regarding the ravenette. You can see the facsimile
artist's attempt at mascara or eyelash makeup in the line jutting the forehead.

---

that interpretation is a real stretch, the image is poor quality and enlarged/pixilated and it doesn't show on the other version this little line which you think represents false eyelashes but yet an authentic Fulani hair style

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

The intent of the artists making fakes, and they did
make fakes as some confessed their misdeeds, was
chalked up to boredom and pulling one over on the
boss.

It is the boss, Henri Lhote, who's to blame for any
falsifying of anthropology and history as he's the
one who made such glowing disinforming writeups
like the one on Antinea fully quoted in an above
post.

Hachid, who published some of the fakes in her work,
implies Lhote was aware of fraud but lent the fakes
authenticity in support of his own personal theories
on which, of course, his art crew heard him speak.

---

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness:
above dana also seems to see these as hats or some kind of headgear. The woman in the center is also carrying an object on top of her head.

If the painting was an attept to look like European hair this is the closest hairstyle, yet unlike in the painting the hair is not covering the ear. It doesn't look the same to me, the painting looks like some sort of turban type thing




but obviously if you were trying to pull a scam you wouldn't try to imply a hairstyle from the 1900s unless joking.
To me the women are simply wearing headgear and garments typical of NA.
The main issue people are having is the lack of skin darkness.If they were dark no one would be talking about what's on top of their heads.

---

Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by dana marniche:
BTW - a Charles Finch contacted me on the Africa resource forum and said he went to see the authentic portrayal of Libyan depicted in Lepsius canon. He said it was nothing like the original.

So what you have been trying to spread around the web is lies Lyin_ss.


Dr. Finch wrote -
"Lepsius falsified the color of the Tamehou figure. I only know this because I actually went into the tomb of Rames III in 1995 – one of the few times it was open to the public – specifically to look at that Panel of Races. As is known, there are 4 racial types as depicted by Lepsius, but what is not known is that the Panel is reproduced 4 times with the same figures. I don’t know why. But that is not the issue; what is the issue is that the figure of the Tamehou in the tomb of Rameses III is NOT white, but a deep reddish brown, looking FOR ALL THE WORLD LIKE MASAI IN COLORING. One would ONLY know this by looking at the Panel ‘face-to-face’ inside the tomb. Again, Lepsius (c. 1844) – it must have been deliberate – depicted the Tamehou in the wrong color! To my disappointment, it was impossible to take a picture of this remarkable Panel. Cheikh Anta Diop obviously had never actually been inside the tomb of Rameses III, as so many have not, so took Lepsius’s depiction as authentic. I might add the Aamu, representing the Asiatics were ALSO depicted as a deep, reddish brown rather than the beige color represented by Lepsius. Lepsius’s version of the Panel is printed in color as a frontispiece to Van Sertima’s EGYPT REVISTED (1989/1991)." UNQUOTE!

Why am I astonished but not surprised?! Because I keep trying to give early European intelligensia the benefit of the doubt.

BUT ITS NOT WORKING! And I've been as brainwashed as everyone else because I can still hardly believe it!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

The Tjemehhu were Africans, some of whom were very
heavily intermixed with north Mediterraneans ranging
from the Tyrrhenian to the Ionian to the Aegean.

_______________________________________

Lepsius' condensation (Denkmaeler Supplement plate 48 is indeed
accurate and authentic. In it you can see another condensation of
the same scene but from a different tomb in the upper right. That
condensation is from KV8 (Merenptah's tomb).

Paintings from the Book of Gates the Gate of Teka Hra vignette 30
from tombs of the 19th and 20th dynasties:

1) KV8 Merenptah (one the many ignored ones
2) KV11 Rameses III (the controversial one
3) KV17f Seti I (the most commonly shown one

BG 4:5 scene 30 as in KV8 tomb of Merneptah



BG 4:5 s30 as in KV11 tomb of Rameses III
Denkmaeler supplement plate 48 condensations



________________________________________________________________________^^^^Libyan Temehu (Tjemehhu)

---

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Dana

I wouldn't be concerned with the Lying Ass as their
Phuckuptions are well known and readily apparent as
in their 2 Feb 10th posts. I leave the astute reader to
see through their non-sequitors in reply to my last post.

Some confusion over Book of Gates scene 30 in Ramesses III
tomb may be due to confusion between its representation in
two separate chambers, one in chamber F and one in chamber
J if I'm not mistaken.

It may be true that in some cases Lepsius' artists
veered from the exact colors on the wall though off
hand I can't recall an instance now. In Plate 48 the
2nd and 4th groups are light, the 2nd slightly lighter
than the 4th. Photos seem to vouch for Lepsius' accuracy,
but then again on close inspection there does appear to be
some touchup in the photo or wash done on the tomb wall.




But this matter really belongs in one of the Ampim vs
Yurco or KV11 BG s.30 threads so as not to detract from
this thread's theme of uncovering Mission Lhote fakes
other than those already attested in the literature.

Thanks in advance to all for staying on topic and
discussing Ramesses III's KV11 BG s.30 elsewhere.

---

OK it will be ended here then as long as people realize that this picture below is the same as the above man top on the left apparently photoshopped by somebody into something 8xs lighter.


Real Lepsius rendition?

I will also be asking Dr. Finch if these are the Libyans he is talking about.

Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness:
^^^^ dana you have a photo that says "real Lepsius rendition"

That is a photo not a Lepsius rendition. Lepsius did the illustration version not the photo.
Above are photos. Below the source, Hornung's photo


^^^ this photo is a yellowed version with the wall background color appears a yellowish sand looking color not quite accurate to the wall color. The wall behind the figures is painted white as is shown more accurately below, same figures:

---

This was sent to me this year by Dr. Finch who visited the same tombs Lepsius saw.


"Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2012 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Libyans of Lepsius depictions - photo attached

'... in the tomb of Rameses III the generic Temehou branch of the Libyans is depicted as deep, dark reddish-brown in color, rather like the Masai. This is the Egyptians giving visual testimony of this branch of African neighbors. I would challenge the rebutters to go into the tomb of Rameses III and see for themselves. Only wish someone had taken a clear, brilliant picture once upon a time because now, of course, you can't. We depend too much on the decolorized version presented to the world by Lepsius.'"

THUS until I see some photos of Masaai colored Libyans from the tomb that Lepsius depicted your picture spam ARGUMENT IS NULL AND VOID!

Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by dana marniche:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness:
^^^^ dana you have a photo that says "real Lepsius rendition"

That is a photo not a Lepsius rendition. Lepsius did the illustration version not the photo.
Above are photos. Below the source, Hornung's photo


^^^ this photo is a yellowed version with the wall background color appears a yellowish sand looking color not quite accurate to the wall color. The wall behind the figures is painted white as is shown more accurately below, same figures:

---

This was sent to me this year by Dr. Finch who visited the same tombs Lepsius saw.


"Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2012 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Libyans of Lepsius depictions - photo attached

'... in the tomb of Rameses III the generic Temehou branch of the Libyans is depicted as deep, dark reddish-brown in color, rather like the Masai. This is the Egyptians giving visual testimony of this branch of African neighbors. I would challenge the rebutters to go into the tomb of Rameses III and see for themselves. Only wish someone had taken a clear, brilliant picture once upon a time because now, of course, you can't. We depend too much on the decolorized version presented to the world by Lepsius.'"

THUS until I see some photos of Masaai colored Libyans from the tomb that Lepsius depicted your picture spam ARGUMENT IS NULL AND VOID!

---

.

After all these years har tis oh my tAmenukalt, w/apologies.



Hornung knew he was perpetrating fraud

--------------------
I'm just another point of view. What's yours? Unpublished work © 2004 - 2023 YYT al~Takruri
Authentic Africana over race-serving ethnocentricisms, Afro, Euro, or whatever.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB] Not this mess again nothings wrong w/t glyphs.
Gone over that w/u 10 years now and will only go
over again for a Newbie as everyone else is tired
of it.

One may validly posit 'wrong image'.
Only seen one case of aberrant text
and that instance has out of order/
/pastiche image(s) too.

THE ORDER OF THE TEXT NEVER VARIES
ANY MORE THAN THE ORDER OF SUNRISE
NOON AND SUNSET EVER VARY.

Just look at text order in your own graphic.
The four major ethnies in top & bottom panels
line up perfectly given Lepsius' omission of
Tjemehu text in top panel.

---

Yes, I have updated here:



Book of Gates Seti I , Merenptah , Ramesses III
Fourth division , Fith Hour

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged |