This is topic Mission Henri Lhote facsimile fakes in forum Deshret at EgyptSearch Forums.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=004397

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Can someone who can copy complete GOOGLE BOOKS pages please post
pp.206-213 and pp.216-217 from Keenan's The lesser gods of the Sahara.

Some frauds attested to there are reproduced in
Lhote's (1959) The Search for the Tassili Frescoes

They are

#26. Jabbaren: Scene of Offerings. Egyptian Influence

#33. Jabbaren: 'Antinea': Post-Bovidian Period with Egyptian Influence

I. Jabbaren. The Bird-HeadedGoddesses. Egyptian Influence.

#48. Ti-n-Tazarift: The Dancers: Post-Bovidian Period with Egyptian Influence


In examining them one gets clues besides one's
common artistic sense in discerning technique,
style, and subject matter of the fakers.

Of course by studying the non-fraudulent pieces
one learns the techniques, styles, and subject
matters of the authentic neolithic and ancient
Saharan artists.

Lhote's commentary on the above admitted fakes
describing their characteristics and themes also
give pointers to other similar works that may too
be highly suspected of fraud.

Tourists have snapped many Tassili rock art pieces.
When there are no in situ photos of a Mission Henri
Lhote facsimile reproduction what is one to conclude?

Since certified frauds were confessed by guilty
members of Lhote's team I've become leary of
meticulously executed "Saharan rock art" that's
unverified by photo.
 

---

Posted by L' (Member # 18238) on :
 
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
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
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.
 

---

Posted by L' (Member # 18238) on :
 
Guess I'll repost this:

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

quote:

---

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

---

Use Mozilla Firefox for that.
 

---

Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
 
Pages 209 and 210 are omitted from the Google book review.
















 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
Thank you, I'm not one for having more than one
browser on my PC at a time or switching back and
forth between browsers. I guess I could use some
other 'chine and transfer the URLs though in the
future to save you the effort.
 

---

Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
 
^You're welcome. Its pretty simple though took less than five minutes. *shrugs shoulders* Btw, I read the pages and noted what you were reffering towards about the Lhote fakes and further criticism. Good reading, so, thank you in return.
 

---

Posted by L' (Member # 18238) on :
 

quote:

---

Use Mozilla Firefox for that.

---

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)

---

It's a secret, lol nah you have to go to "tools" then "page info" then "media" and viola....
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
Frankly I don't see how Lohte could have been fooled by the "bird goddesses".



^ The overall style and shapes are clearly unlike any of the other paintings.

The three mounted ladies look more realistic.



But still the unpainted bodies and them being mounted on cattle along with their hairdos that are contemporary with modern Fulani should raise eyebrows.
 

---

Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
 

quote:

---

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

---

He wasn't fooled he just stuck by the lie he wanted them to be real, so don't you be fooled.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
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."

WOMEN RIDERS mounted on horned oxen wear
capes and hairdos astonishingly modern in
style. They are part of a scene which shows
a whole community moving to another camp.

Underscoring and bolding by me.

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




Women mounted on horned oxen. An entire community moves to a new region.
Frescoes of Tassili N'Ajjer, Algeria. 2nd mill. BCE.
Location :Musee de l'Homme, Paris, France
Photo Credit : Erich Lessing / Art Resource, NY
Image Reference : ART112955
 

---

Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
 

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.

---

According to 'the Lessing archive', the piece only dates back to the 2nd-1rst Millenium BCE, hence is much later than the purported date of 3,000 BC and more comfortably matches what we know historically with the emergence of the sea peoples in North Africa.

How far does Hanchid go back with his dating? I know Frigi et al (2010) cites him to argue for the admixture of Berbers being rooted partially in interactions with Saharan immigrants. That we only see females with such phenotype may also evince the sex-biased gene-flow that is usually discussed. This is assuming that it isn't fake, and by amateurishly eye-balling I can actually see the stylistic similarity between the "Tassili ladies" and the other paintings displayed next to it in the above source.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
There are Saharan rock art pieces showing men who
are warriors but the style is very crude and with no
anachronisms amounting to fakery. Fakers would
mimic the style of the large herd, the women stand
afar from the herd which interestingly lacks any herders.

Compare this scene of pastoralist women and a moving
cow. Notice they walk and have no 1960's style Parisien
capes. Nor do they have a Fulani type hairstyle like the
blonde in the fake.




In the questionable piece the women are "acculturated"
while the warrior men retain non-African accutrements
per the analysis of some historian interpreters iirc. One
says the way they wear their short swords is the same
as the "Sea People." Women are never shown in the
warrior paintings nor are the warriors ever in scenes
of day to day living experiences.

BTW Malika Hachid is a she.


 

---

Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
 
^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.

---

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.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

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.


 

---

Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
 

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
 

---

Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
 
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.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
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.


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.

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.

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




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.




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.


 

---

Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
 

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.

---

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.

---

Al Takruri said "Another fraud tipoff, one woman is blonde, one redhead, one brunette, and one ravenette.'

This is a great point and something I had not known or noticed before because of the apparently not very similar rendition.

A good way to say "Look we Europeans were all represented as the hamites."lol!


The African woman you've shown here is a Tuareg as I remember, and they don't typically wear turbans on their heads. To me neither the Fulani women with turned up noses shown in Takruri's posting, nor the painted women riding oxen on this rock art look very authentic.
I don't know what the people who depicted this art was trying to depict on these women's heads or if they are just hairstyles all that I know is when I first saw them they struck me as looking like something from an early Parisien French fashion studio, and that is even before I knew Lhote had taken part in supposedly redoing them.

And, what kind of traditional Berber garments look cape0like ponchos lyin_ss.

The Berber form of poncho is called the Djelaba and looks nothing like the Euro-fad Mexican ones depicted here.

There are still women that ride oxen in the Sahel area, but they are called the Kanuri. The Garamantes traditionally rode oxen, but the Garamantes were considered Ethiopians.

Isidore 6th c. said “there are three tribes of Ethiopians: Hesperians, Garamantes and Indians” (See IX ii 128.in The Etymologies of Isidore of Seville, Stephen A. Barney, 2006, p. 199).
 

---

Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
 
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!
 

---

Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
 
dana marniche

Great Find Dana.

So until they allow public access to this tomb, people will still make mistakes about just what color the Tamehou and the Aamu were.

I will always believe in Blacks, Euros etc, but this lie could easily be debunked if the public was allowed to take pics of the original.

Sadly though, people like Hawass are pushing the non black Egypt so thats reason to hide the TRUTH from the People.

BUT

As we see with the links to Africa in the DNA TRIBE study, you can only hold down truth for an short time, in the end Truth will trump lies. We just gotta be patient.

Peace
 

---

Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
 

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)

---

____________Photo of Tomb Wall Ramesses III, Eric Hornung 1982
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
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.
 

---

Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
 

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.
 

---

Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
 
^^^^ 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:

 

---

Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
 

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!
 

---

Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
 
Temehou should not be confused with Tehenou
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
^

In response to the Henn thread on Egyptology
where suspected of fraud because white.



Pick up Muzzolini's Sahariens and Hachid's Berberes
before crying fake. Hachid let on "Antinea" was fake.

Again, until a quantatative review of Tin Anneuin
and Iheren-Tahilahi Final Bovidian to first Horse
period art is undertaken, crying fake is biased
chauvinism against white/near white admixed NAs.

None of the above are Lhote facsimiles.
Two of them are obviously photographs.

The Lhote fakes are limited. At the actual site
they are faded away barely traces left. Just
because you don't like what an authentic
painting (Kel guide can locate it; it
appears in tourist/non-professional
photo albums) is little reason to
declare a fake.

There were black fakes too btw.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
'Prof' Marniche vindicated!! Gimme some hot sauce wimme order o crow wings, pls.

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
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

this is a detail from the previous post, clarity not too good photo.
differences here depend on the lighting conditions when the photos was taken



A detail of a wall in the tomb of Ramses III painted with scenes from the Book of Gates.
Photographer: Werner Forman Archive/E. Strouhal/Heritage Images

https://www.alamy.com/a-detail-of-a-wall-in-the-tomb-of-ramses-iii-painted-with-scenes-from-image60321630.html
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
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.


=-=-=


In "Dana's pic" only the flesh is brown.
Nothing next to its outlines display brown.

Dana said there was a brown Tjemehu photo of
this scene and here it is just as she said.
Unevenness of tint head to toe is evident.

Tjemehu, as a class including all to Egypt's
west, vary in complexion since the brown
Tjehenu of the OK to the beige 'Meshwesh'
of the NK who ruled several LP dynasties.

In keeping with the Afterdeath theme of
this funerary book, knowing AEs considered
the west as 'land of the dead', paler beige
rather than warmer brown is the Libyan
complexion norm in all painted scenes I've
seen of this sacred to AEs chapter and verse.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

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
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Guy on Pinterest plagiarized me Seti I condensation.
Gave no link
Never replied when confronted
Didn't correct his fuchsups


https://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/post/21613/thread


Having severe No internet, secured
problem I just can't lick after
using Edge and Bing for the
1st time yesterday.

In tandem their search returns
do a lot of detective work for you
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
It took me a while to put that together but the resolution is not that great on some of it. I kept the typical names for laymen's sake.
So to make everything consistent and lined up there is the glyph to the right of each figure.
I noticed in Seti I that on the full version with 4 figures each apparently G43, quail chick or one of the birds is in both Nehesy and Libyan figures sets
so this runs through both sets of four figures.
(not sure if the bottom in Libyan is different or not)
Thus the key distinguishing glyph of the compound glyphs is the first glyph, the top glyph to the right of the first figure. Thus Asiatic = throw stick T14 is the key glyph
Libyan = chord V13
For instance looking at the photo that has three of the Libyans the first figure is not shown. That would have the chord V13

the chord V13 is also the second glyph for Egyptian, however the distinguishing first glyph is
Egyptian = mouth D21 (missing at Merenptah)

and then the first glyph
Nehesy = Vulture G1

These single glyphs at the top are incomplete but I choose to leave the glyph position at Seti I as it is on the original illustration, not condensed, as it is on the wall, broken up > but the first figure's glyph the key identifying one in these Book of Gates scenes, the reason not necessary that it is most important but that top glyph is different for every nation in this situation while the other glyphs can be in more than one nation

It seems a good idea to first show the full set of glyphs in order by themselves, to let that set the tone of interpretation rather than the eye jumping to the figures first because these glyphs are maintaining consistency not the figures
and then at the various tombs and lined up on a consistent way, to make it easier to just look at compare visually
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
The terminal quail chick serves the same purpose of 's' in English. It turns a singular into a plural.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Wouldn't place much on the throwstick.

Its ubiquitous and used to rep 'foreigner as belligerent enemy'.

Often enough by itself it does = 'Libyan'
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Modern labels for three of the stocks will vary
from writer to writer. Of course I prefer mine
but plagiarizer Mark Stern simply got it all
wrong despite my clear labeling in the ESR
Herd Of Ra thread.

Go ahead and cop my Seti I condensation with
full spelling right next to the subject stock
if you wanna. I know making a redux is tedious
and since you're not distorting anything I don't
mind.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
what is the link to the Stern version?
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
You do know the subject glyphs are all
'alphabet' letters so any one of them
showing up in various names is insignificant.


Still can't connect wimme PC or I'd break
the spelling down for you letter by letter.


=-=-=


Forgot to post the above in the short flurry.
There is no Stern version unless you count
tacking incorrect names to the figures.

Still on mobile device. No luck finding that
Pinterest. Limited to thumbs and a mini-pointer.
Too lazy to xfer stuff from PC to phone.


Have tweaked what last posted to ESR as in
the earlier link. It's oversize and I want
it bucked around the net hopefully to
replace that out of sequence pizz poor
cartoon caricature the world at large
loves so much.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB] Modern labels for three of the stocks will vary
from writer to writer. Of course I prefer mine
but plagiarizer Mark Stern simply got it all
wrong despite my clear labeling in the ESR
Herd Of Ra thread.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
what is the link to the Stern version?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
what is the link to the Stern version?

---

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/581175526903191913/

Click on more and click on comment

---

quote:

---

Racial variety of the Egyptian world, from a mural in the Tomb of Seti I. From left to right, the god Horus, an Egyptian, a Libyan Greek, an African, and a Syrian. In the venerable tradition of creating gods in our own image, Horus has the skin color of the Egyptian, detectably different from that of the African. This image is edited from Lepsius's Denkmäler, which shows 4 identical examples of each human race.

---

Ok, racist crap here. I assume the image is unchanged. The problem is the explanation here
He also says "Libyan Greek". Have you ever heard that before, adding Greek to it?
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
chil' u woond bleev all I 'herd'


Other Pinners are doing similarly
but lost the urls to show you but
not as bad as saying Hor's skin is
only unmatched by the Sudani.
Obvious anti-black bias since Hor
& Egy are the only 2 of same colour.


Libyan Greek just means Greek, like
Ionian Greek just means Greek. Ol'
boy Herodotus has it Libya had
4 stocks. Two indigenous. Two
foreign. He says Greeks were
one of the stocks foreign to
what we call the African
continent.
 

---

Posted by L'Atlante (Member # 23711) on :
 
End of an endless debate : answer from Jean-Loïc Le Quellec https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Lo%C3%AFc_Le_Quellec , "anthropologist and prehistorian, specialist in the rock art of the Sahara, collecting paintings and rock engravings dated for most of the Neolithic period" ; "graduated from the École Pratique des Hautes Etudes (Quaternary paleoecology) and doctorated in anthropology, ethnology and prehistory in 1992, with a thesis entitled The Symbolism of Ancient Rock Art in the Central Sahara" ; "Emeritus Research Director at the CNRS" and author of "numerous books on the rock art of the Sahara , particularly in Libya, two of which set out to renew the approach to rock art" ; having "carried out several expert missions in the Sahara on behalf of UNESCO" and "since 2003, chairman of the Association of Friends of Saharan Rock Art (AAARS)" ; also known for having severely criticized Lhote's job for "colonial biase" (so no white chauvinist at all) :

"Hello,
These oxen-riding women are fully authentic and painted in the style of Iheren.
There is not the slightest doubt about it.
If it's not an indiscretion, I'd like a link to the discussion you're talking about.
In any case, rest assured that these paintings are not fakes. These do exist, but they are rare and well known.
Very cordially,
JLLQ"



Friendly,
 

---

Posted by L'Atlante (Member # 23711) on :
 
I actually fail to see where the problem is

We're not facing an hypothesis but a fact : North African people are light skinned. And this comes from ELSEWHERE, as normally Africa is integrally peopled by haplogroup E people who are brown to black (prehistoric Mechtoids from Morocco have been recently reconstructed as quite dark skinned Moroccans...).

We just know now when (around 3500-3000 BC, as Le Quellec dated it undoubtly thanks to neighbouring funerary monuments), and actually, GENETICALLY we also know WHERE from : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b#cite_ref-D'Atanasio2018_77-0 : "Marcus et al. (2020)provide strong evidence for this proposed model of North to South trans-saharan movement: The earliest basal R1b-V88 haplogroups (now found in some 23% of Siwa Berbers in Egypt, but above all 40% of Haussa males, 54% of Fulanis and up to 90% of Lake Chad region's Kirdis) are found in several Eastern European Hunter Gatherers close to 10 000 years ago. The haplogroup then seemingly further spread with the Neolithic Cardial Ware expansion, which established agriculture in the Western Mediterranean around 7500 BP (5500 BC): R1b-V88 haplogroups were identified in ancient Neolithic individuals in central Italy, Iberia and, at a particularly high frequency, in Sardinia.A part of the branch leading to present-day African haplogroups (V2197) is already derived in some of these ancient Neolithic European individuals, providing further support for a North to South trans-saharan movement." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7039977

Southwestern Mediterranean Europe = what's been mythologically called "Atlantis", aka the Neolithic Megalithic civilization of Western Europe & Mediterranean, with probably its epicenter then un southern Iberia ; and which was said (by Plato) "reigning on Libya up to Egypt" = northern half of Africa up to Nile Valley.

Diodorus of Sicily having a different version, telling about a matriarchal society probably originating from these "Atlanteans" but not them and even at war on them sometimes, established in an island of a great lake inside then Green Sahara, probably the huge Lake Adrar. Society which wasn't "Ethiopian" = black, as it is explicitly told they took the country from such people.

Neither it is said (nowhere) they "civilized" Africa (for the more Diodorus can be racist in some of his paragraphs...), even if they fought Gorgonas who really seem to be another matriarchal but Black African population ; neither Egypt, where they just pass by and "Queen Myrina" is said to have good relationships with "King Horus" (generic name for any pre-Narmer Egyptian ruler).
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'Atlante:
[QB] I actually fail to see where the problem is

We're not facing an hypothesis but a fact : North African people are light skinned. And this comes from ELSEWHERE, as normally Africa is integrally peopled by haplogroup E people who are brown to black (prehistoric Mechtoids from Morocco have been recently reconstructed as quite dark skinned Moroccans...).

---

quote:

---

The Tassil-n-Ajjer mountain range is well known for its phenomenal richness in rock-shelters and cave paintings. Generations of researchers have surveyed, mapped, drafted and discussed different facets of these Tassili paintings. The diversity and versatility of the paintings traditions of the Tassili make difficult any attempt at straightforward generalization, whether stylistic or thematic. Each painting’s station appears to be unique and conveys its own suggestions that have to be studied extensively and systematically. In the approach outlined in this paper -the iconographic approach-, paintings are viewed as complex sets of ‘artifacts’ arranged by the creative minds of the actual artists. How did these artists practice their crafts? What iconic elements did they choose to represent and why? How and why are these selected elements arranged and combined? These are some of the questions addressed in this paper. The new readings of the Uan Derbuaen paintings allow to suggest a staging and grand representation of matrimonial arrangements, the final travel of the brides.

---