I read I few pages but will have to defer to alTakruri's expertise on this matter
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
What are you waiting for alTakruri to teach you? Hit me with it, I may be able to help.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Energy: What are you waiting for alTakruri to teach you? Hit me with it, I may be able to help.
what is the proof that the identity of African slaves brought to America were of descent from geographic Israel in the Middle East apart from your interpretation of the bible? Do you have any other sources?
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
Did you read the sample pages? The answer to your question is in there.
The first pages talks about the identity of the African slaves as to who they were before their new identity as black Americans and Caribbean.
The latter pages talks about the identity of the Africans from whom the slaves were taken. The name of these Africans is what translates in English as Hebrew.
Thus the answer to your question is addressed by the sample pages.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
You say that slaves were taken from Ghana, Togo Dahomey aka Benin and Nigeria. That is non controversial, the mainstream history does not say slaves were taken soley from Ghana. Your samples skip to a section called Lifting the Veil in which you say you explained a reverse exodus. That explanation is not in the sample
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
LOL! the Lioness, sample pages mean just that; sample pages which skips a lot of other pages in a book. Unless you want me to reproduce all the pages of the book.
With regard to the reverse exodus, the information is readily available in the Bible books of Jeremiah, the book of Chronicles and the book of Kings. Therefore, if you are conversant with the Bible, you may have come across the accounts of how it transpired.
What was missing from the Biblical account is what happened to the millions of Hebrews that fled to ancient Egypt following the Babylonian invasion. That answer is what the book addresses beautifully and does so by locating the Hebrews in sub-Sahara Africa by their name, their language, their oral history as well as by their culture and traditions.
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
So there's an ethnic group in Africa whose ethnonym sounds coincidentally like an old word for "Hebrew", thus making West Africans the descendents of ancient Hebrews?
Yes, some Africans may claim descent from Israelites, but then so do some Europeans. That doesn't make either of them right, because people love to fantasize about having religiously significant ancestors. You'll have to come up some more persuasive evidence.
Where are the genetic studies showing that West Africans are descended to a significant degree from Middle Easterners? Where are the bio-anthropological studies showing that post-Natufian Middle Easterners even physically resembled West Africans? Oh, wait---there are none!
If Bronze Age Middle Easterners like the Hebrews ever resembled West Africans, why don't they have the latter's tropical limb proportions? How does this fit into your "West Africans are Israelites" story?
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
Why would any West African living today want to claim the Hebrews as their ancestors anyway? If a culture's worth is to be judged by how civilized it is, then West Africans have the Hebrews beat. West Africans were erecting stone and mudbrick buildings and managing complex societies as far back as 2000 BC, the same time the ancestors of the Hebrews were living in goat-hair tents in the desert. The Hebrews only became civilized after exposure to the more advanced cultures of the Nile Valley and Mesopotamia. And yet the West Africans think they need a Hebrew heritage to feel good about themselves?
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
Truthcentric, do you have evidence that pre iron age Israel was populated by Hebrews, if you're going to use Neolithic era skeletal material?
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: So there's an ethnic group in Africa whose ethnonym sounds coincidentally like an old word for "Hebrew", thus making West Africans the descendents of ancient Hebrews?
Cut the hypocrisy. I am sure you are not going to quickly dismiss the same if it was a group of Africans whose ancestral name was kemet.
I know you have not read the book to understand, apart from their name, their language and culture is the same as that of the ancient Israelites. Thus I will excuse this shallow reasoning of yours which if it was applied to your beloved ancient Egyptians you will be up in arms.
You might take that approach to defend AE being blacks because you know ancient Egypt was in Africa thus it is not far fetched if Africans carry the name Kemet. Well guess what? Ancient Israel was also part of the African continent. Until the construction of the Suez canal ancient Israel was part of the African landmass. Thus if we are talking about ancient Israelites, we are talking about Africans, period. Thus Africans being called Hebrew is nothing strange.
quote: Yes, some Africans may claim descent from Israelites, but then so do some Europeans. That doesn't make either of them right, because people love to fantasize about having religiously significant ancestors. You'll have to come up some more persuasive evidence.
Maybe you are not reading well. These people do not claim to be Israelites. That is the difference here. They are simply called the Hebrews. Notice the difference well. There is an ocean of difference between claiming to be something as opposed to your name, language and culture says this is who you are.
In addition to that there is the Biblical evidence of their IDOLATRY when they fled into AE. Also in evidence are the prophecies about their suffering and dispersion around the world. Can you name any group of people on this planet who are also called Hebrews and fulfil everything the Bible says about the Hebrews to a T. No you can't. And that is a fact.
At least with these people, you would see everything about the degradation the Bible says would be the lot of the Hebrews until their restoration. What Europeans do you know that suffer from the curse God put on the Hebrews. None is the answer.
quote: Where are the genetic studies showing that West Africans are descended to a significant degree from Middle Easterners? Where are the bio-anthropological studies showing that post-Natufian Middle Easterners even physically resembled West Africans? Oh, wait---there are none!
Very asinine question. Your question would be valid if you have the DNA of Moses and the other Patriarchs to compare them with. But since you haven't; I see this question is designed to fool the less intelligent and thus to mislead. Until you have the DNA of the patriarchs like Abraham, Isaac or Jacob to do any DNA comparison, you have no business asking black people in Africa to provide DNA samples as proof of their identity. Maybe you should ask the lying Europeans masquerading as Jews to show their DNA links to the patriarchs.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: Why would any West African living today want to claim the Hebrews as their ancestors anyway? If a culture's worth is to be judged by how civilized it is, then West Africans have the Hebrews beat. West Africans were erecting stone and mudbrick buildings and managing complex societies as far back as 2000 BC, the same time the ancestors of the Hebrews were living in goat-hair tents in the desert. The Hebrews only became civilized after exposure to the more advanced cultures of the Nile Valley and Mesopotamia. And yet the West Africans think they need a Hebrew heritage to feel good about themselves?
Why do people for hundred of years feel comfortable to say blacks carry the curse of Noah when it suited their agenda? But the same people are up in arms and want proof that blacks are the Hebrews?
I will tell you why. Because it changes EVERYTHING.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: Why would any West African living today want to claim the Hebrews as their ancestors anyway? If a culture's worth is to be judged by how civilized it is, then West Africans have the Hebrews beat. West Africans were erecting stone and mudbrick buildings and managing complex societies as far back as 2000 BC, the same time the ancestors of the Hebrews were living in goat-hair tents in the desert. The Hebrews only became civilized after exposure to the more advanced cultures of the Nile Valley and Mesopotamia. And yet the West Africans think they need a Hebrew heritage to feel good about themselves?
I think you underestimeate the contribution of the Hebrews to the Western culture you live in. Although the Hebrews may have not invented monotheism they were able to establish it as a permanent religious philosophy. It seems to have lead to more political unity later on which seems might have bee a necessary step toward so called "advanced civilization". At any rate it paired down the superstitious beliefs to fewer. The Hebrews instilled the concept of a Covenant, and therefore of constitutions and contracts the foundations of ethical codes and law. This is essential to modern civilization perhaps moreso than the ability to build huge useless tombs and monuments for a king. It's in the writing.
The idea that all men are created equal by virtue of their having been made in the image of God, as well as the concept of government under law and the concept of representative government, social justice. Of course the atheist can point out all the religious oppression in history. However secular law which is intrinsic to modern society and government was borne out of this religious tradition.
"Seek justice, liberate the captive, judge the fatherless with righteousness, and plead the case of the widow." Isaiah 1:17
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ This s an over exaggeration. First off the idea that Monotheism led to advanced civilization is absurd to say the least. So absurd I don't even need to comment on it, study general history.
Second a Constitution is nothing but a set of Laws plain and simple. The First Coded laws come from Mesopotamia and Egypt who had fully developed legal systems before Israel existed. Further the Legal System of the Hebrews(The Levitical laws) was opressive, superstitious, and based on the minds of desert bedouins who thought eating shrimp was an abomination. The development of Modern Law has nothing to do with Judaism but with the ideas of the Enlightenment. No where in the Bible/Torah does God say he created all men Equal..LOL, As a matter of fact Christians and Orthodox Jews BASH the Enlightenment due to its secular background and the fact that alot of the advocates of the Enlightenment rejected Xtanity and the Bible and the Idea the God created the Universe etc.
Third the idea of being made in the image of God was well known in places like Greece and Rome who's Gods were in the form of Humans. As a matter of fact the Greeks considered the Body and its porportions to be almost Divine and perfect which is why based their measurements System off the porportions of the Human Body(I.E "Feet" etc).
Also in your attempt to knock down the Egyptians tomb Building, The Egyptians did more than just build tombs. They laid the foundation of Building advanced structures in Stone. This had a direct impact on the Greeks who took it from just Temples and Tombs to the City or the "Polis" applying it to Civic and Administration buildings.
The organization and expertise it took to build the Pyramids and tombs of Egypt can not even be duplicated today using computers and machines. while on the other hand the only signifigant peice of stone structure left by Hebrews is a Wall built by the Romans. So it speaks to the advanced organization and leadership of the Nile Valley Africans.
Please know what you are talking about before you speak.
To be fair not to knock down the Jews, The Hebrews had an impact on Western Civilization but it was due to Christianity. Without Christianity the Jews would remain exclusive bigots and no one would even care about them(Like it was for thousands of years until the 1st Century). Also the Jews were active in translating Works from Latin to Arabic and so forth.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
the enlightenment happened in the mid 1700s. Prior to that Medieval Europe and later Renaissance period Europe were precursors to the modern civilization where we have these computer, trains, planes, cars, central heating, electrical machines etc. Europe prior to the mid 1700s was still relatively much further advanced than many other places in the world at the time although China had some significant advances before they went into a period of stagnation. The enlightenment furthered this development. This comes of a society built on the Judeo- Christian tradition. It's true that the Jews had a "chosen" exclusive tradition. But in terms of oppressing other people it was the Christians by far taking the prize in killing millions of people in Crusades, Inquisitions and colonizations.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Lioness lets not derail this thread off topic..
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Lioness lets not derail this thread off topic..
well then read energy's book samples if you haven't already??
Posted by AGÜEYBANÁ(Mind718) (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: Yes, some Africans may claim descent from Israelites, but then so do some Europeans.
Yet it seems those European wanna be Israelites are in control though huh?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
BHI says being a Hebrew is not a religion it's ancestry
I guess there's no need for the bible then
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
I read it, like always just just taylored to make people feel better. I doubt the book give the full history of slavery, detailing the the Irish and Scottish Europeans who enslaved at the same time as Blacks, and who were shipped to the Carribean. Nor do I expect any genetic or biological studies of remains.
But that is my belief, people are entitled to believe what they want.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Lioness lets not derail this thread off topic..
well then read energy's book samples if you haven't already??
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
feel better about what?
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ this supposed curse we under..
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
^^^^ No need to worry yourself over it Jari. Those of us blacks who feel the pain of our humiliation and suffering on this planet will use the information to uplift the black race.
Do you recall the story of the Prodigal son? He was doomed for a wretched and miserable end to his life. He only managed to save himself from his suffering when he became aware of his past glory.
Likewise, the down trodden black race rediscovering our real identity as the Hebrews is our salvation. This knowledge of self opens the door to the solution of our problems. We know exactly what to do now, to uplift ourselves and end the degradation and suffering of black people around the world.
In the future, when you experience all these blessings and curses I have listed for you, and when you are living among the nations to which the Lord your God has exiled you, take to heart all these instructions. If at that time you and your children return to the Lord your God, and if you obey with all your heart and all your soul all the commands I have given you today, then the Lord your God will restore your fortunes. He will have mercy on you and gather you back from all the nations where he has scattered you. Even though you are banished to the ends of the earth, the Lord your God will gather you from there and bring you back again. The Lord your God will return you to the land that belonged to your ancestors, and you will possess that land again. Then he will make you even more prosperous and numerous than your ancestors!
Deuteronomy 30: 1 - 5 Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
If God cursed us for not following him why would he choose us and not some other people and why would he make sweeping generalizations over a whole people instead of considering each individual?
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
^^ The Lioness, listen to the following reading. Focus on the section about the Sabbath. It answers all your questions.
Not only were the ancient Hebrews not blacks, but the ancient authors of many books of the Old Testament didn't even know blacks existed. Because of the ANE limited ethnographic content they had never countered them before.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Not only were the ancient Hebrews not blacks, but the ancient authors of many books of the Old Testament didn't even know blacks existed. Because of the ANE limited ethnographic content they had never countered them before.
Ooh what a revelation. I am so impressed.
Tell me Einstein; the Hebrews were in Africa for 430 years before Moses led them to the promised land. I hope you know how long 430 years is. To give you a clue; that is as old as the good old USA.
Are you saying, even though they were in Africa for that long and INTERBREEDING with the Africans, they NEVER encountered a single African?
What is your opinion of this statement by an eyewitness.
The majority of people say the “Judeans” were those “ETHIOPIANS” whom fear and hatred obliged to change their habitations, in the reign of king Cepheus. Roman Historian, Tacitus
Hint: ETHIOPIAN was the name for sub-Sahara Africans before the name Africa came into vogue. Question is, how did those Judeans come to look like Sub-Saharan Africans if according to you; they never knew blacks existed?
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''Tell me Einstein; the Hebrews were in Africa'' =========
Egypt, not Sub-Sahara Africa.
========
Hint: ETHIOPIAN was the name for sub-Sahara Africans before the name Africa came into vogue ==========
Wrong again.
The 'ethiopia' in most classical greek and roman writings refers to a country in ASIA. Herodotus wrote they were straight haired, certianly not negroid.
Blacks are not in the Bible. The Bible is not your heritage.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
^^ Which Greek and Roman writings are you referring to? Please name them.
Also, where did you read Herodotus say what you alleged? According to the Herodotus that I read, he called the Ethiopians "Wisemen occupying the Upper Nile, men of long life, whose manners and customs pertain to the Golden Age."
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
William Smith in his Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1849):
‘‘(Eastern "Aithiopia") and sub-saharan Africa (Western "Aithiopia"), two realms which were believed to lie in the farthest south along the shore of the Ocean-stream.’’
From Homer and Strabo (Od, 1. 22; Geo, 1. 1. 6) we are also informed there were two lands called Ethiopia, one east, and one west. Both had distinct racial populations according to Herodotus.
Thucydides (2. 48):
‘‘...in the parts of Ethiopia above Egypt…’’
Note above Egypt, not to the south. The ethiopia most ancient greeks knew sat in asia.
Homer’s ‘‘Blameless Ethiopians’’ were not dark skinned, note what the classicist James S. Romm details :
‘‘…Homer takes no notice of the one feature of the Ethiopians that otherwise occasioned the most surprise, their dark skin…’’ - The Edges of the Earth in Ancient Thought, James S. Romm, 1994, p. 50.
- The 'blameless ethiopians' were therefore the light skinned straight haired ethiopians of Asia (Asiatics) who were not negroes.
Herodotus Book 7: chapter [70]
''Of the Ethiopians above Egypt and of the Arabians the commander, I say, was Arsames; but the Ethiopians from the direction of the sunrising (for the Ethiopians were in two bodies) had been appointed to serve with the Indians, being in no way different from the other Ethiopians, but in their language and in the nature of their hair only; for the Ethiopians from the East are straight-haired, but those of Libya have hair more thick and woolly than that of any other men''
--- Two different races.
The afrocentrics though never accept this fact.
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
Arabs and Europeans were not the only folks to reach deep into Africa (past Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt). It is false to say that Egypt is as far as they reached when both Egyptians and Hebrews (don't know about how sizeable got at least to the Sahel.
I don't take the blood thing that seriously though and don't think Hebrews did either.
I mean to say: cool if they did, oh well if it didn't. Why I say they didn't is becuase of the fact according to their book Genesis they entered into Egypt like 66 people and left 2 million that tells you something. Also I'm confused about something and would like alTakruri to clear things up: wasn't Judah, Yisrael and Hebrew three different things, as in a Nation, a people, and a language?
Actually, by Pharaonic times Western Asia had received a large influx from Africa likely do to the end of the Ogolian period and emergence of the Sahara.
Natufians are way prior to when Jacob's descendants got there, and all of this is irrelevant to the question though.
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
quote:The afrocentrics though never accept this fact.
Yo what the f**k r you talking about? It's a well known one.
I (not claiming to be 'fro centric) even know of the leucoderm (white) aethiopes of Libya. Libya was described as light skinned melanoderm (black) but some of them were seen as leucoderm by the Greeks.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: William Smith in his Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1849):
‘‘(Eastern "Aithiopia") and sub-saharan Africa (Western "Aithiopia"), two realms which were believed to lie in the farthest south along the shore of the Ocean-stream.’’
I am looking at the book "William Smith in his Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology," which is a free download from google books.
There is NOTHING like what you are saying about "Aithiopia" as you allege. Maybe if you can supply the page number, I can look it up.
quote: From Homer and Strabo (Od, 1. 22; Geo, 1. 1. 6) we are also informed there were two lands called Ethiopia, one east, and one west.
In which books did Strabo and Homer say that? Also WHERE did they place these two lands? Are you sure you are not misquoting them when they spoke of two ethnic groups in Africa because your next quote of Herodotus does indicate that?
''Of the Ethiopians above Egypt and of the Arabians the commander, I say, was Arsames; but the Ethiopians from the direction of the sunrising (for the Ethiopians were in two bodies) had been appointed to serve with the Indians, being in no way different from the other Ethiopians, but in their language and in the nature of their hair only; for the Ethiopians from the East are straight-haired, but those of Libya have hair more thick and woolly than that of any other men'' Herodotus Book 7: chapter [70]
The above speaks of Ethiopians being in Africa and not elsewhere as you indicate. Africa is made up of different ethnic groups with various skin variations. Thus we have light skin Ethiopians and darker skin ones. The main thing is, they are all of the African mainland.
With regard to Thucydes he contradicts your claims. He put Ethiopia squarely in Africa. The following is what he wrote at 2. 48
(48) The disease is said to have begun south of Egypt in Aethiopia; thence it descended into Egypt and Libya, and after spreading over the greater part of the Persian empire, suddenly fell upon Athens. It first attacked the inhabitants of the Piraeus, and it was supposed that the Peloponnesians had poisoned the cisterns, no conduits having as yet been made there. It afterwards reached the upper city, and then the mortality became far greater. As to its probable origin or the causes which might or could have produced such a disturbance of nature, every man, whether a physician or not, will give his own opinion. But I shall describe its actual course, and the symptoms by which any one who knows them beforehand may recognise the disorder should it ever reappear. For I was myself attacked, and witnessed the sufferings of others.
Again all you have given me speaks of Ethiopians belonging to Africa and nowhere else as you allege. Nowhere in anything you are posting so far indicate that there were people outside of Africa called Ethiopians.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: The enlightenment furthered this development. This comes of a society built on the Judeo- Christian tradition.
The Enlightenment was a rejection of the Judeo-Christian tradition i.e the church and religion in general.
quote:It's true that the Jews had a "chosen" exclusive tradition.
Which undermines your attempt at tracing modern notions of equality and social justice and the contract tradition (!) to them. This judeophilia is very popular in some Political Science courses but its a myth, like the holocau$t.
quote: But in terms of oppressing other people it was the Christians by far taking the prize in killing millions of people in Crusades, Inquisitions and colonizations.
Jews disproportionate role in Slavery and imperialism has been well established and documented. But you go off feelings not facts. Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Whatbox: Also I'm confused about something and would like alTakruri to clear things up: wasn't Judah, Yisrael and Hebrew three different things, as in a Nation, a people, and a language?
Hebrew is the designation of the people, that is their main Identity as a nation. The Hebrew nation identity is made up of 12 tribes of of which Judah is one tribe. Thus Judah is also Hebrew. The same applies to other tribes like Levite are Hebrew. The other twelve tribes, for example, Benjamites, Dan, Naphtali etc. they are all Hebrew.
With regard to Yisrael this is a name that started with the Patriarch Jacob. God changed his name from Jacob to Yisrael. Jacob had twelve sons and these are the twelve tribes tribes of Yisrael. Each son is the head or progenitor of each tribe. Thus twelve tribes.
Jacob's (Yisrael) father and his grandfather Abraham were all Hebrew. Abraham was the first to be called Hebrew in the Bible and thus all his descendants are all known as Hebrews.
The Hebrew nation became divided into two after the death of king Solomon. One half retained the name Israel and consisted of ten tribes. This was the northern Kingdom.
The other half was made up of Judah and Benjamin along with the Levites that joined later. Because the tribe of Judah was the ruling house and thus dominant, this other half was known as Judahites later to be called Jews in modern times. The word Jew does not appear anywhere in the Bible.
The language they all spoke is called HEBREW.
That in a nutshell is the answer to your question. I hope it helped.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Jews disproportionate role in Slavery and imperialism has been well established and documented. But you go off feelings not facts. [/QB]
If someone were to have the opinion that Jews had a disproportionate role in Slavery and imperialism over the whole of history that is greatly offset by the fact that they a very small population compared to the rest of whites. I think it's about 2% in the U.S. currently. There have been no Jewish presidents. Whites as whole are about 74% of the U.S. population. If this small percentage of white, the Jewish ones are in control of all the other whites it requires one to believe they have magical powers or that non-Jewish whites in comparison are mentally retarded.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
They did have a disproportionate role in Slavery and imperialism, no opinion there. The fact that they are a "very small population compared to the rest of whites" is why the word disproportionate is used dufus.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
^^ I hope you guys can differentiate between Jews and Hebrews. They are not the same.
Hebrews is a race of people. Jews are not.
Modern Jews are also not necessarily Hebrews either. Modern Jews are more of a religious movement of which ANYONE of any race can become a member and be called a Jew. Thus not everyone calling himself a Jew is a Hebrew. Please remember this and try to differentiate between the two.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''Thus we have light skin Ethiopians and darker skin ones.'' ====
What a troll.
Black africans have straight hair and light skin?
You must be another self-hating black you can't agree with what your race looks like.
Show me then a picture of a straight long haired light skinned black african...
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
^^ How do you understand the following?
'Of the Ethiopians above Egypt and of the Arabians the commander, I say, was Arsames; but the Ethiopians from the direction of the sunrising (for the Ethiopians were in two bodies) had been appointed to serve with the Indians, being in no way different from the other Ethiopians, but in their language and in the nature of their hair only; for the Ethiopians from the East are straight-haired, but those of Libya have hair more thick and woolly than that of any other men'' Herodotus Book 7: chapter [70]
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Aethiopia sat outside of africa -
''Various Greek myths make reference to the kingdom of "Aethiopia" said to be somewhere in Asia. This kingdom in the myth of Andromeda was placed at Joppa in Phoenicia. Stephanus of Byzantium (c. AD 500) asserted that the name of Joppa (Yoppa) itself was a contraction of "Aethiopia", and that in antiquity its rule had extended eastward as far as Babylonia.
Cepheus and Cassiopeia, the parents of Andromeda, are presented as the king and queen of Joppa. Pliny the Elder observed a tradition that associated a rock off the coast of Joppa with the mythical rock where Andromeda had been chained.''
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
Are you going to answer the question?
How do you understand the following which YOU brought into the discussion earlier.
'Of the Ethiopians above Egypt and of the Arabians the commander, I say, was Arsames; but the Ethiopians from the direction of the sunrising (for the Ethiopians were in two bodies) had been appointed to serve with the Indians, being in no way different from the other Ethiopians, but in their language and in the nature of their hair only; for the Ethiopians from the East are straight-haired, but those of Libya have hair more thick and woolly than that of any other men'' Herodotus Book 7: chapter [70]
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Threads go nowhere when people are in denial of their racial features.
Blacks don't have natural straight hair.
Do white people claim to have afros?
Please get in reality...
Herodotus' ethnographic distinction is a reference to the straight haired inhabitants of ethiopia in ASIA, while the wooly haired ethiopians were the black african ones.
Both were two different races. Blacks are not straight haired.
The ethiopians of the Bible are the non-black inhabitants of the ethiopia in Asia.
Sub-Saharan ethiopians are not in the Bible. Like i said the authors didn't even know black people existed. This is basic Biblical ethnography.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
^^ Look here! You started this nonsense by claiming the Hebrews were not BLACK people. When I showed you a statement by Roman Historian, Tacitus, which said they were ETHIOPIAN aka black people you disagreed and quoted Herodotus.
All I am asking is for you to tell me how YOU understand Herodotus statement which you quoted. Is that too much to ask?
Is Herodotus also agreeing ETHIOPIAN means a person with black skin or not?
ANSWER THE QUESTION
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^^ You are a F-king dunce, who Tiharka the King of Ethiopia..If not the Kushite King of the 25th Dynasty.
2 Kings 19:9
9And when he heard say of Tirhakah king of Ethiopia, Behold, he is come out to fight against thee: he sent messengers again unto Hezekiah, saying,
Isaiah 37:9
And he heard say concerning Tirhakah king of Ethiopia, He is come forth to make war with thee. And when he heard [it], he sent messengers to Hezekiah, saying, Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
Never mind
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: ^^^^^ You are a F-king dunce, who Tiharka the King of Ethiopia..If not the Kushite King of the 25th Dynasty.
2 Kings 19:9
9And when he heard say of Tirhakah king of Ethiopia, Behold, he is come out to fight against thee: he sent messengers again unto Hezekiah, saying,
Isaiah 37:9
And he heard say concerning Tirhakah king of Ethiopia, He is come forth to make war with thee. And when he heard [it], he sent messengers to Hezekiah, saying,
How am I the dunce when what you have just said agrees with what I have been saying to Anglo_Pyramidologist all along? Explain how what you have said now is different from what I have been saying so far.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''^Pyramidget, You're lying your ass off and you know it.'' ===========
I'm lying?
According to Energy blacks have straight hair and light skin.
LOL.
I've also answered his question twice but he ignores. I'm guessing his account is another parody/not serious.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
I did not mean to post to you...It was mean for Anlgo Pyramid...
I was responding to the Tinman and you finished your post before I did..
So my ^^^^^ is under your post not Tinman's
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ''^Pyramidget, You're lying your ass off and you know it.'' ===========
I'm lying?
According to Energy blacks have straight hair and light skin.
LOL.
I've also answered his question twice but he ignores. I'm guessing his account is another parody/not serious.
Did I say that? LOL! You must be hallucinating my friend. Cut and paste where I said blacks have straight hair and light skin.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
This is a Strawman Fallacy, No one said a thing about lightskin...Here is the source once again...
'Of the Ethiopians above Egypt and of the Arabians the commander, I say, was Arsames; but the Ethiopians from the direction of the sunrising (for the Ethiopians were in two bodies) had been appointed to serve with the Indians, being in no way different from the other Ethiopians, but in their language and in the nature of their hair only; for the Ethiopians from the East are straight-haired, but those of Libya have hair more thick and woolly than that of any other men'' Herodotus Book 7: chapter [70]
The Ethiopians of the East were the Dravidians who are just as Dark in skin as the Kushite Ethiopians.
Once again I asked you who was the King of Ethiopian called "Tiharka" if not Taraqo of the 25th Kushite Dynasty??
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ''^Pyramidget, You're lying your ass off and you know it.'' ===========
I'm lying?
According to Energy blacks have straight hair and light skin.
LOL.
I've also answered his question twice but he ignores. I'm guessing his account is another parody/not serious.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Here is the Anglo Pyramid on the Dravidians(Eastern Ethiopians) when he was of a different mindset...
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides:
Basically ancient Indian civilization was founded by Aryan and related Indo-European white tribes, the Dravidians were primitives.
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: THE RIG VEDA DESCRIBES RACIAL CONFLICT
Quotes from the Rig Veda, the original Holy Book of the Aryan conquerors of India (which has now been corrupted but is still to this day in use as the main Hindu religious text) contains a great many references to the race of the conquerors and the conquered.
According to the Rig Veda, the leader of the Aryan invasion was one Indra, and his role in “slaying the Dasyus” (the Dravidians in India) is prominent in the Rig Veda:
"Thou, Indra, art the destroyer of all the cities, the slayer of the Dasyus, the prosperer of man, the lord of the sky." - RgV. VIII 87.6
The Rig Veda goes on to use the word “black” in a number of instances to describe the Dasyu:
"Indra, the slayer of Vrittra, the destroyer of cities, has scattered the Dasyu (hosts) sprang from a black womb." RgV. II 20.6
THE “ARYAN COLOR” – THE RIG VEDA
The Rig Veda praises the god who "destroyed the Dasyans and protected the Aryan colour." - Rg.V. III 34.9
It then goes on to thank the god who "bestowed on his white friends the fields, bestowed the sun, bestowed the waters." - Rg.V. I 100.18
Black skin is repeatedly referred to with abhorrence in the Rig Veda: starting with a description of the "black skin" (`Krishnam Vacham') in RgV. IX 41.1, Sam. V I.491 and II.242.
For example in RgV. IX 73 it is said that “stormy gods who rush on like furious bulls and scatter the black skin", and it claims that “the black skin, the hated of Indra" will be swept out of heaven - RgV. IX 73.5
Rg.V. I 130.8 tells of how the “black skin” was conquered:[i]
"Indra protected in battle the Aryan worshipper, he subdued the lawless for Manu, he conquered the black skin."
The Rig Veda thanks god for [i]"scattering the slave bands of black descent", and for stamping out "the vile Dasyan colour." - Rg.V. II.20.7, II 12.4
It also contains this choice remark which sums up the Aryan’s opinion of their non-White subjects: "Black skin is impious" (‘Dasam varnam adharam’) -Sans., Rg.V. II.12.4
Other extracts from the Rig Veda further illustrate the sharp racial divisions in this time:
Indra - 1.130.8 - "Indra in battles help his Aryan worshipper, he who hath hundred helps at hand in every fray, in frays that win the light of heaven. Plaguing the lawless he gave up to Manu's seed the dusky skin; Blazing, 'twere, he burns each covetous man away, he burns, the tyrannous away."
Indra - 4.16.13 - "Thou to the son of Vidathin, Rjisvan, gavest up mighty Mrgaya and Pipru. Thou smotest down the swarthy fifty thousand, and rentest forts as age consumes a garment."
Indra - 5.29.10 - "One car-wheel of the Sun thou rolledst forward, and one thou settest free to move for Kutsa. Thou slewest noseless Dasyus with thy weapon, and in their home o'erthrewest hostile speakers." ("Noseless Dasyus" would suggest a reference to flat nosed Negroid types)
Soma Pavamana - 9.41.1 - "ACTIVE and bright have they come forth, impetuous in speed like bulls, driving the black skin far away."
Soma Pavamana - 9.73.5 - "O'er Sire and Mother they have roared in unison bright with the verse of praise, burning up riteless men, Blowing away with supernatural might from earth and from the heavens the swarthy skin which Indra hates."
RIG VEDA DESCRIBES ARYAN GODS AS BLONDS
Indra - 10.23.4 - "With him too is this rain of his that comes like herds: Indra throws drops of moisture on his yellow beard. When the sweet juice is shed he seeks the pleasant place, and stirs the worshipper as wind disturbs the wood."
Indra - 10.96.8 - "At the swift draught the Soma-drinker waxed in might, the Iron One with yellow beard and yellow hair. He, Lord of Tawny Coursers, Lord of fleet-foot Mares, will bear his Bay Steeds safely over all distress."
Indra - 1.9.3 - "O Lord of all men, fair of cheek, rejoice thee in the gladdening lauds, Present at these drink-offerings."
I guess Anglo Pyramid forgot his own knowledge about Black Kushite Dravidians...I.E the Easter Ethiopians.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Here is what Anglo-Pyramid posted about the Ethiopians recently in another thread..
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Usually racially reflecting the Black Sub-Saharan Africans or ethiopians (who because of their ugliness were percieved as demons, monsters and evil).
^^^^^
Seems he changes his evidence and opinions when the situation suits him.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
- The Eastern Ethiopians were not Dravidians.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Two many retards in this thread. Its not hard to understand.
There were two ETHIOPIAS in classical antiquity.
One (eastern ethiopia) was not sub-saharan africa. It sat in Asia and its inhabitants were straight haired.
The other ethiopia was sub-sahara africa.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
You just got an Anglo beatdown.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
The only Retard is you. This is what we have been saying Dunce. There were Two Ethiopias, Named for their Dark Skin the only difference was their hair and Language according to Greeks.
Kush was the name of the Land of the Southern Nile Valley by Hebrew Writers, and Greeks translated it to Ethiopia, which is why "Tiharka" of Isaiah and the O.T was Taharqo of the Kushite 25th Dynasty.
No where is Easrtern Ethiopia associated with light skin hence the name "Ethiopia" and the association with Dravidians.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Two many retards in this thread. Its not hard to understand.
There were two ETHIOPIAS in classical antiquity.
One (eastern ethiopia) was not sub-saharan africa. It sat in Asia and its inhabitants were straight haired.
The other ethiopia was sub-sahara africa.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Two many retards in this thread. Its not hard to understand.
There were two ETHIOPIAS in classical antiquity.
One (eastern ethiopia) was not sub-saharan africa. It sat in Asia and its inhabitants were straight haired.
The other ethiopia was sub-sahara africa.
You are still missing the point. What we are asking you is to tell us how you understood what the ancient historians meant by ETHIOPIAN. I explained to you that meant a black person. Thus Tacitus and other eyewitnesses were saying the Hebrews were black people.
You disagreed. Thus the ball is in your court. Can you tell us your understanding of what was meant by ETHIOPIAN in ancient times. That's all. Stop the smoke and mirror stuff about which lands ETHIOPIANS supposedly come from.That is not necessary. What we wanna know is if ETHIOPIAN meant a black person or not.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
By the Way to the Dumb Simple Minded failure Anglo Pyramid, There was a Jewish Colony in the Nile Valley as far South as Elephantine Island, in so called Nubia AKA "Kush" AKA Ethiopia.
Hoe can the Jews not know about blacks if they had Communities in the Nile Valley as far south as Elephantine??
What a Dunce...
A Jewish garrison community that was already settled in the island by the fifth century B.C., played an essential role in the interaction between Nubia and Egypt for a period of, more than, three hundred years. Some historians and archeologists directed attention and research towards this Jewish community for it provides a wide range of evidence for the earliest Diaspora Jewish settlement.
Then it will happen on that day that the Lord Will again recover the second time with His hand The remnant of His people, who will remain, From Assyria, Egypt, Pathros, Cush, Elam, Shinar, Hamath,And from the islands of the sea.
Notice the Hebrews list the Nile Valley from North to South..."Egypt"(the Delta) "Pathros"(Upper Egypt") "Cush"(Nubia)
Anglo Pyramid you are a F-king moron, please take basic World History 1301 at your local University and educate yourself, please!! Your Insolence grows worse daily.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Anglo_Pyramidiot
quote:Thucydides (2. 48): ‘‘...in the parts of Ethiopia above Egypt…’’ Note above Egypt, not to the south. The ethiopia most ancient greeks knew sat in asia.
First off Blacks/Africans/Kemetians/Kushities were in the area for like forever going back to at-least the Natufian era the 1st polity we know of on the Nile that of Ta-Seti had contacts going back before Kemet was a united Kingdom as a matter they had direct contact as the grave goods shows, later Kemites under kings like pepy sent troops From Yam,Wawat,and other polities from the south Weni who lived during the 6th dynasty wrote When his majesty took action against the Asiatic sand-dwellers, his majesty made an army of many tens of thousands from all of Upper Egypt: ...; from Lower Egypt: ...; and from Irtjet-Nubians, Medja-Nubians, Yam-Nubians, Wawat-Nubians, Kaau-Nubians; and from Tjemeh-land." Some of these gentlemen would settle those lands for good becoming the ruling class and merchant class in any case the top layers of society with enough time and wealth their descendant would become kings in their own right.
Upper Egypt AKA Kemet is situated to the south so from ones perspective the countries above Kemet is to the south sailing down river is actually sailing to the north at-least that how the ancient Kemites oriented themselves.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Irtjet-Nubians, Medja-Nubians, Yam-Nubians, Wawat-Nubians, Kaau-Nubians; and from Tjemeh-land."
Note the term Nubian should be replaced by Nahesi not Nubian.. just so you know.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''No where is Easrtern Ethiopia associated with light skin hence'' ====
Andromeda the Ethiopian princess is described as fair or white skinned by the ancient greek poets.
Welcome to reality...
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Notice the Hebrews list the Nile Valley from North to South..."Egypt"(the Delta) "Pathros"(Upper Egypt") "Cush"(Nubia) '' =============
Yes, maybe a few centuries BC.
Not when Genesis or most of the books of the Old Testament however were written. The authors then had never encountered a black sub-saharan african.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''What we wanna know is if ETHIOPIAN meant a black person or not'' =========
Does this look like a 'black person'?
ETHIOPIAN princess Andromeda:
removed
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ''No where is Easrtern Ethiopia associated with light skin hence'' ====
Andromeda the Ethiopian princess is described as fair or white skinned by the ancient greek poets.
You dumbass This is done with many ''Aethiopian'' characters, ie they are depicted different depending on the author, and the time period. See Memnon, described as ''dark as ebony'' by Homer, yet elsewhere, in later times, he is sometimes depicted as white:
You can't just randomly post artworks and generalise about what the Greeks as a whole thought about peoples ethnic origins, you dunce.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
This has nothing to do with this debate, we are talking about "Kush" translated to Ethiopia in Torah and Tenakh not Greek Mythology.
A Real Ethiopia existed to the Greeks and they identified this Ethiopia with Kush of the Hebrews. Further East and West Ethiopians were known for their Dark Skin, but were seperated by Hair and language. You fail once again in your desperate attempt at a Red Herring argument.
Once again provide primary evidence that Eastern Ethiopia, not some Mytholocial figures, was described as having light skin.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
This is a bunch of laughable psycho-babbling of a nut intent on his fringe beliefs. The Passages come from the Book of Isaiah and others. Well within the range of Biblical History. You mean to tell me Isaiah was so stupid he was not familiar with who his forefathers called the Sons of Kush and who they were, we are supposed to believe some Tin Isle quack ove an Authentic Hebrew Prophet and author of a Biblical Book. If Kush he was identifying was different than the Kush son of Ham mentioned in Genesis, Isaiah would not have identified it as such, as his prophecy and his status as a prophet depended on a rigid knowledge of Torah including Ham's progenity Kush translated as Ethiopia which he mentions(A Root of Hebrews will be gathered) in the Prophecy.
Kush=Nubia/Ethiopia south of Egypt.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Notice the Hebrews list the Nile Valley from North to South..."Egypt"(the Delta) "Pathros"(Upper Egypt") "Cush"(Nubia) '' =============
Yes, maybe a few centuries BC.
Not when Genesis or most of the books of the Old Testament however were written. The authors then had never encountered a black sub-saharan african.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Pyramididiot wanna adjust that over sized pic or is it your intention to thrash the tread cause you getting ur azz handed to you..man up son adjust that baby.. Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''Well within the range of Biblical History'' ====
Isaiah was written between the 7th and 6th century BC. By that time the authors of the OT knew of Sub-Saharan Africans. The authors of most other earlier books of the OT however had no such knowledge.
The Kush of Genesis is Mesopotamian and the Kushites are the Kassites (who were not black).
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Also of Note
Isaiah Prophecies that..
Then it will happen on that day that the Lord Will again recover the second time with His hand The remnant of His people, who will remain, From Assyria, Egypt, Pathros, Cush, Elam, Shinar, Hamath,And from the islands of the sea.
In the end times a Root of Jesse(Israel) will be gatherd from Assyria(Armenia), Egypt(Delta) Pathros(Upper Egypt) Kush(Nubia/Northern Sudan), Elam(Iraq/Persia) Shinar(Mesopotamia) Hamath(Syria) and the Island of the Sea are probably Greeks??
Blows a hole into the doctrine of anyone trying to racialize the Hebrews, seems you all are gonna have a Multi-racial society in the New Jerusalem..LOL.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Once again another babble rant that can not be proven by facts.
Isaiah as all prophets of the bible studied Torah daily and rigidly. Isaiah knew more about the writings and minds of his forefathers than you did. Isaiah mentions "Kush" in his prophecy no where does he say or imply that this Kush is different than the Kush the Jews were taught of when they read of Ham proginity.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ''Well within the range of Biblical History'' ====
Isaiah was written between the 7th and 6th century BC. By that time the authors of the OT knew of Sub-Saharan Africans. The authors of most other earlier books of the OT however had no such knowledge.
The Kush of Genesis is Mesopotamian and the Kushites are the Kassites (who were not black).
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: By the Way to the Dumb Simple Minded failure Anglo Pyramid, There was a Jewish Colony in the Nile Valley as far South as Elephantine Island, in so called Nubia AKA "Kush" AKA Ethiopia.
Hoe can the Jews not know about blacks if they had Communities in the Nile Valley as far south as Elephantine??
What a Dunce...
A Jewish garrison community that was already settled in the island by the fifth century B.C., played an essential role in the interaction between Nubia and Egypt for a period of, more than, three hundred years. Some historians and archeologists directed attention and research towards this Jewish community for it provides a wide range of evidence for the earliest Diaspora Jewish settlement.
Then it will happen on that day that the Lord Will again recover the second time with His hand The remnant of His people, who will remain, From Assyria, Egypt, Pathros, Cush, Elam, Shinar, Hamath,And from the islands of the sea.
Notice the Hebrews list the Nile Valley from North to South..."Egypt"(the Delta) "Pathros"(Upper Egypt") "Cush"(Nubia)
Anglo Pyramid you are a F-king moron, please take basic World History 1301 at your local University and educate yourself, please!! Your Insolence grows worse daily.
Great post Pyramidget is a lair.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
LOL @ The Hebrews weren't black! ) PAHAHAHAHAHAHA, LMAO...WAHAHAHAHAH. SIGH.
Energy! They know the Israelites were negroes. They know this my friend!
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''Isaiah Prophecies that..
Then it will happen on that day that the Lord Will again recover the second time with His hand The remnant of His people, who will remain, From Assyria, Egypt, Pathros, Cush, Elam, Shinar, Hamath,And from the islands of the sea.'' ========
This prophecy does not concern those geographic locations but the nations (people) of those locations. Many have migrated from their origin place of origin.
^^^^ Sure, Sure go find more ways to duck and dodge and twist the words of scripture. Like all Biblical quacks when you find a verse that does not uphold your agenda ignore it or twist it. Isaiah saw Arabs and Negros being gathered from their lands. No where is Migration mentioned. Gonna be Multi-Cultural all up in the New Jerusalem..LOL. Its gonna be London part 2. I wonder if the White Jews will blame white Liberals in the future as well..LMAO..
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Lemba Jews Of Southern Africa said to be the most pristine of Jews genetic wise anywhere.
And sometimes facts is stranger than fiction while I do not believe all Africans and their descendants are Jews/Hebrews..Jews/Hebrews have been living in Africa for quite sometime and if one can accept the fact of Christians and Muslims as longtime residents in all parts of Africa what then is the big deal over Jews/Hebrews? is it because some of us bought into the Stereotype of what a Jew/Hebrew supposed to look like.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
- You need to study Biblical enthography and ethnology.
Sub-Saharan black africans have absolutely nothing to do with the Bible. They are not descended from Adam, Noah, Shem, Japheth, Ham etc.
The idea Noah had three sons of different races is a medieval fabrication with no Biblical basis.
Adam's descendants looked like this -
Blue eyed Caucasoid Sumerians.
Indeed you can even find Adam's name in Sumerian literature as Adamu or Adapa.
The Adamic race was Caucasoid.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:The idea Noah had three sons
Biblical fabrication.
quote: The Adamic race was Caucasoid
White trash fabrication.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Where is Caucasoid/Caucasian/Caucasia mentioned anywhere in the Bible??
But I can tell you that Niger is mentioned also Ham Ethiopian and Kush etc.. Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
^That is what the original Mesopotamians looked like, hence, the bible's description of Cushites building the first cities there. Like I said earlier, Pyramidget is a phucking fraud and a liar.
^Another image of an Ancient Middle Easterner (left), accompanied by native Egyptians, who would have undoubtedly been called a Cushite by contemporary Hebrews and Aethiopian by contemporary Greeks.
The original artifact (props to Jari for locating it):
Ancient Syrian:
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Retard above. Your photos are from the 1st millenium BC.
The Sumerian Busts i showed are from the early 3rd millenium BC.
The blue eyed Caucasoid Sumerians predated the elamites by over 3,000 years.
Posted by Neferet (Member # 17109) on :
Ethiopia
Ethiopia as a geographical area had very different meanings depending on the period in which it was used. Frank Joseph stated[102] that until the 1st century BC. Ethiopia referred to the Atlantic coast of North Africa.
The map above dating from 1650 and published in a book[292] by J.A. Rogers shows the South Atlantic as ‘The Ethiopic Ocean’, while the entire central Africa is named Ethiopia.
It might be worth noting that in Greek mythology, Poseidon was given two Ethiopias, one in the east and the other in the west.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Retard above. Your photos are from the 1st millenium BC.
The Sumerian Busts i showed are from the early 3rd millenium BC.
The blue eyed Caucasoid Sumerians predated the elamites by over 3,000 years.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Retard above. Your photos are from the 1st millenium BC.
The Sumerian Busts i showed are from the early 3rd millenium BC.
The blue eyed Caucasoid Sumerians predated the elamites by over 3,000 years.
Of course not, Pyramidget. Anyone who is even remotely familiar with their skeletal record knows that Sumerians - and their predecessors, the Ubaidans - had skeletal affinities with other long time residents of the tropics, ie India, Africa etc. Your statuettes aren't even colored, so they're useless. Blue eyes are nowhere to be seen in colored fresco's of Mesopotamians. This one is dated 1800bc, now what?
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
Blacks come in all shades of brown! YOU HEAR ME all shades of brown.
Bishop William Montgomery Brown: "For the first two or three thousand years of civilization, there was not a civilized white man on the earth. Civilization was founded and developed by the swarthy races of Mesopotamia, Syria and Egypt, and the white race remained so barbaric that in those days an Egyptian or a Babylonian priest would have said that the riffraff of white tribes a few hundred miles to the north of their civilization were hopelessly incapable of acquiring the knowledge requisite to progress. It was southern colored peoples everywhere, in China, in Central America, in India, Mesopotamia, Syria, Egypt and Crete who gave the northern white peoples civilization." (The Bankruptcy of Christian Supernaturalism, Vol., p. 192.)
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ What is this in response to exactly?? Of course blacks are shades of Brown. Also please don't try to white wash history, it was so called "White Peoples" such as the Greeks and Persians who contributed greatly to civilization, although there were Dark skinned folks in their civilizations as well.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
^^^What about the black washing of history? The first Greeks and Persians were negroes as well.
All to well we know now, that the Whites were the Barbarians who blotted out all the light, who also cause the so called dark-ages. I may also add it was these Barbarians that sent the world back a thousand years. Hmm? Am I wrong? Are not your people descendents of the:
All to well we know now how they came in an assumed the identity of the ancient nations.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
^^^ What are you talking about, Im African American. Any white European influence is on my Dad's side of the family which I believe is French probably "Creole" but Im not sure nor do I really care, I consider myself black as both of my parents are Black.
Anyway the Greeks were not Negros, Mixed race or influenced by "Negros" maybe. Layoff the B.H.I propaganda and take a General World History class, educate yourself.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
Photos posted above are not Sumerians. They are Elamites. Both were distinct ethnic groups. The Sumerians predated the Elamites and had their origins in southern Mesopotamia at Eridu (c. 5300 BC). The Elamites in contrast came from eastern mesopotamia c. 3000 BC.
Too many simpletons here...
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''Please watch video!'' ====
Its a parody video uploaded by a parody account, uploaded to make the afrocentric movement look even more stupid.
No one can now tell the difference between a parody afrocentric & a legit one.
Btw, various afrocentrics on this forum and elswhwere claim the anglo-saxons were black, but according to you they were white.
What is up with the contradictions in afrocentrism? Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ Stop Side Stepping, Post your evidence that Eastern Ethiopia was associated with lightskin outside of your "Mythological Ethiopia" red herring...
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Mike111 an afrocentric on this forum also claims the celts were black (but according to you they were white).
Afrocentrism has no consistency whatsoever.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
^^^^ Can you provide a description/Association of the said people last I checked there exists none, thus any attempts to do so such as the Wikipedia article is pure conjecture. and further still the said population existed in Lybia/Western Saharah not where Eastern Ethiopia is.
I will ask again: Show your evidence that Eastern Ethiopia was associated with lightskin..
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Photos posted above are not Sumerians. They are Elamites. Both were distinct ethnic groups. The Sumerians predated the Elamites and had their origins in southern Mesopotamia at Eridu (c. 5300 BC). The Elamites in contrast came from eastern mesopotamia c. 3000 BC.
Too many simpletons here...
Blablabla
Mari, where that fresco comes from, is not in Iran you dufus. I await your next angst driven lie in response to the earlier posted pic:
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''Show your evidence that Eastern Ethiopia was associated with lightskin..'' ======
Already have. However you refuse ancient greek literature. Furthermore the Herodotus quote which describes the eastern ethiopians as straight haired has already been cited.
Negroids don't have straight hair.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
'' I await your next angst driven lie in response to the earlier posted pic:'' =====
Blue eyed, straight haired, thin nosed etc (typical Caucasoids).
The facts must frustrate you. Back to your cuckoo fairytale land... Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Already have.
No you have not. Stop playing games. You cite Wikipedia with no source, and further what you did post describes a population from West Africa not on the East.
PHny, Mela and Ptolemy all refer to the Leucaethiopes, but they give no description of the people thus designated. Pliny in his Lib. v. cap. 8, Hist. Natur. writes : Interiori autem ambitu Africae ad meridiem versus superque Gaetulos, inter- venientibus desertis, primi omnium Libyaegyptii, deinde Leucaethiopes habitant.
Pomponius Mela, Be situ orbis, Lib. i. cap. 4, is somewhat more explicit : At super ea quae Libyco mari abluuntur, Libyes Aegypti sunt, et Leucoaethiopes, et natio frequens multiplexque Gaetuli. For Mela the Leucaethiopes appear to be between the Troglodytes and the Nile, scarcely in Western Africa.
Agathemenos retires again behind those convenient intervening deserts, and merely says that west of Egypt are situated among other nations the Aeu/cat^toTj-es. De geographia, Lib. ii. cap. 5[/i]
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: However you refuse ancient greek literature.
Im not refusing anything as it has nothing to do with this conversation. I mean seriously did your dumbass say that the Hebrews did not know about SSA now all of a sudden to save face you claim that the Eastern Ethiopians are some obscure population located West of Egypt Below the Sahara.
Your desperation is clear, you are a fraud. Here I will make it easy procide a quote saying that the Ethiopians of the East are Leukoethiopians.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Furthermore the Herodotus quote which describes the eastern ethiopians as straight haired has already been cited.
Negroids don't have straight hair.
^^^^ The Eastern Ethiopians...
^^^^ Western Ethiopians
Hence Herdotus saying...
'Of the Ethiopians above Egypt and of the Arabians the commander, I say, was Arsames; but the Ethiopians from the direction of the sunrising (for the Ethiopians were in two bodies) had been appointed to serve with the Indians, being in no way different from the other Ethiopians, but in their language and in the nature of their hair only; for the Ethiopians from the East are straight-haired, but those of Libya have hair more thick and woolly than that of any other men'' Herodotus Book 7: chapter [70]
Greek Literature you refuse to accept.
Posted by Neferet (Member # 17109) on :
Posted by Neferet (Member # 17109) on :
Posted by Neferet (Member # 17109) on :
Here on the map (Herodotus), it shows India being Aeithiopes.
THE MAKROBOI (or Macrobi), the "Long Lived Ones" (in "Africa").
Also, note that Arabia is also a part of "Africa".
Double post
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: [qb] These are amorites. Or prisoners to the amorites. The Sumerians looked like this - Blue eyed, straight haired, thin nosed etc (typical Caucasoids). The facts must frustrate you.
Of course what you're saying doesn't frustrate me, since what you're doing would be like saying black figures on Greek pottery were real blacks. You're using uncolored artifacts, meaning, nothing suggests that any of the colors used were lifelike, from the white colored raw material to the blue inlaid eyes. You're the one who is frustrated by the facts, since you're flip flopping all over the place. What happened, the painting from Mari was supposed to be from Iran, wasn't it? Now they're Amorites? Like I said earlier, total liar.
^I accept that Sumerians were blue eyed, if you apply some consistency and concede that Greeks were black per the ubiquitous black figures on Greek vases.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Notice the Hebrews list the Nile Valley from North to South..."Egypt"(the Delta) "Pathros"(Upper Egypt") "Cush"(Nubia) '' =============
Yes, maybe a few centuries BC.
Not when Genesis or most of the books of the Old Testament however were written. The authors then had never encountered a black sub-saharan african.
LOL! HAHAHAHAH Is this guy serious? As if their are people on the earth who actually have black skin. HAHAHAHAH
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
These people are Gutians or Hill people.
.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Neferet: Here on the map (Herodotus), it shows India being Aeithiopes.
THE MAKROBOI (or Macrobi), the "Long Lived Ones" (in "Africa").
Also, note that Arabia is also a part of "Africa".
Wow I hadn't realized Herodotus viewed the Macrobians as being near the coast of the Erythraean Sea and the Ethiopians so close to the Kerman or Carman people but above or west of the Indus. This all makes sense now, and answers a few questions.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ''Show your evidence that Eastern Ethiopia was associated with lightskin..'' ======
Already have. However you refuse ancient greek literature. Furthermore the Herodotus quote which describes the eastern ethiopians as straight haired has already been cited.
Negroids don't have straight hair.
Herodotus says the straight haired Eastern Ethiopians were identical in culture to Ethiopians of Western Ethiopians.
Nuff said! Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: These are amorites. Or prisoners to the amorites. The Sumerians looked like this - Blue eyed, straight haired, thin nosed etc (typical Caucasoids). The facts must frustrate you.
Of course what you're saying doesn't frustrate me, since what you're doing would be like saying black figures on Greek pottery were real blacks. You're using uncolored artifacts, meaning, nothing suggests that any of the colors used were lifelike, from the white colored raw material to the blue inlaid eyes. You're the one who is frustrated by the facts, since you're flip flopping all over the place. What happened, the painting from Mari was supposed to be from Iran, wasn't it? Now they're Amorites? Like I said earlier, total liar.
^I accept that Sumerians were blue eyed, if you apply some consistency and concede that Greeks were black per the ubiquitous black figures on Greek vases.
lol.... Indeed. Even, steven...
---------------------------------------------- PS- Jari, what is the detail on your images below- like time period? They jibe somewhat with Hanihara's study showing early West Asians clustering with tropical Africans..
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^That is what the original Mesopotamians looked like, hence, the bible's description of Cushites building the first cities there. Like I said earlier, Pyramidget is a phucking fraud and a liar.
^Another image of an Ancient Middle Easterner (left), accompanied by native Egyptians, who would have undoubtedly been called a Cushite by contemporary Hebrews and Aethiopian by contemporary Greeks.
The original artifact (props to Jari for locating it):
Ancient Syrian:
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
.
Black Greeks:
Black Sumerian, unpainted sculpture
lionesscentricity
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
those from Amud, Kebara, Tabun, and Shanidar (Iraq) have more European-like, or cold-adapted, proportions.
--Trenton Holliday (2000) Evolution at the Crossroads: Modern Human Emergence in Western Asia. American Anthropologist. New Series, Vol. 102, No. 1, 54-68
What we can say, however, is that in the Holocene, humans from southwest Asia do not exhibit tropically adapted body shape
-- (Crognier 1981; Eveleth and Tanner 1976; Schreider 1975)...]
Faience tiles from the royal palace at Medinet Habu.
__________________________________________
All of these items are from the tomb of Ramesses. As we can see from the group above, figure #4 is Shasu Bedouin. His hair is pulled back with a head band. Now look at the Syrian, figure #3 his hair is not pulled back. In addition he is wearing a hat and a band of cloth at the base of that hat hangs down. This is typical of Syrians in Ramesses III. Both of the individual figures above I haved marked Syrian have hats and this hanging down cloth. Obviously the head at the top of this post is different. It matches the Shasu Bedouin #4
Other Shasu
SHASU BEDOUIN
another Syrian:
SYRIAN
^^^again, the hat and cloth hanging down from it
SYRIAN lioness productions
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
[QUOTE]O
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^That is what the original Mesopotamians looked like, hence, the bible's description of Cushites building the first cities there. Like I said earlier, Pyramidget is a phucking fraud and a liar.
^Another image of an Ancient Middle Easterner (left), accompanied by native Egyptians, who would have undoubtedly been called a Cushite by contemporary Hebrews and Aethiopian by contemporary Greeks.
The original artifact (props to Jari for locating it):
Ancient Syrian:
The last two are probably Syro Canaanite peoples whom the Greeks called black Syrians or Phoenicians.
The physical type of the early Mesopotamians was divided between the long headed brown Eastern African or hamitic type and the less numerous white Armenoid types often shown in textbooks which appears to have played some small part in Mesopotamian civilization of the Sumerians and Akkadians,
If we are to believe the skeletal evidence from Jemdet Nasr Uruk Ur etc. these people were not the major portion of the Sumerians and originated not in Magan of the Sumerians, but in the Diyala region near the Zagros.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
Yep, the so called Negroes in the Americas are the real Israelites!
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bishop: Yep, the so called Negroes in the Americas are the real Israelites!
Why should all Negroes be israelites. Are all Africans Israelites? That must have been one crowded place.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
No, not all negroes are Israelites. The so called negores that went into slavery are. The other people's of Africa are Africans aka Hamites. Europeans want us to believe that all the dark skin races come from the third son of Noah called Ham but that's a lie. Shem, Ham, and Japheth were black.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^That is what the original Mesopotamians looked like, hence, the bible's description of Cushites building the first cities there. Like I said earlier, Pyramidget is a phucking fraud and a liar.
^Another image of an Ancient Middle Easterner (left), accompanied by native Egyptians, who would have undoubtedly been called a Cushite by contemporary Hebrews and Aethiopian by contemporary Greeks.
The original artifact (props to Jari for locating it):
Ancient Syrian:
The last two are probably Syro Canaanite peoples whom the Greeks called black Syrians or Phoenicians.
The physical type of the early Mesopotamians was divided between the long headed brown Eastern African or hamitic type and the less numerous white Armenoid types often shown in textbooks which appears to have played some small part in Mesopotamian civilization of the Sumerians and Akkadians,
If we are to believe the skeletal evidence from Jemdet Nasr Uruk Ur etc. these people were not the major portion of the Sumerians and originated not in Magan of the Sumerians, but in the Diyala region near the Zagros.
I lend no credence to attempts to segregate and organize normal healthy phenotypical variation into seperate unrelated types, unless proper methods are employed. Most of those observations (i.e., ''Armenoid'' elements in Sumerian material) were made when statistical analysis had not yet become standardized in Physical Anthropology, and eyeballing was the norm.
Considering that we're living in 2012, don't you think it's time to let go of ''this black dolichocephalic type'' and ''that white brachycephalic type''?
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bishop: No, not all negroes are Israelites. The so called negores that went into slavery are. The other people's of Africa are Africans aka Hamites. Europeans want us to believe that all the dark skin races come from the third son of Noah called Ham but that's a lie. Shem, Ham, and Japheth were black.
LOL! No argument there about Shem, Ham and Japhet. But I still haven't figured out why only black slaves in America were the true Israelites.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^That is what the original Mesopotamians looked like, hence, the bible's description of Cushites building the first cities there. Like I said earlier, Pyramidget is a phucking fraud and a liar.
^Another image of an Ancient Middle Easterner (left), accompanied by native Egyptians, who would have undoubtedly been called a Cushite by contemporary Hebrews and Aethiopian by contemporary Greeks.
The original artifact (props to Jari for locating it):
Ancient Syrian:
The last two are probably Syro Canaanite peoples whom the Greeks called black Syrians or Phoenicians.
The physical type of the early Mesopotamians was divided between the long headed brown Eastern African or hamitic type and the less numerous white Armenoid types often shown in textbooks which appears to have played some small part in Mesopotamian civilization of the Sumerians and Akkadians,
If we are to believe the skeletal evidence from Jemdet Nasr Uruk Ur etc. these people were not the major portion of the Sumerians and originated not in Magan of the Sumerians, but in the Diyala region near the Zagros.
I lend no credence to attempts to segregate and organize normal healthy phenotypical variation into seperate unrelated types, unless proper methods are employed. Most of those observations (i.e., ''Armenoid'' elements in Sumerian material) were made when statistical analysis had not yet become standardized in Physical Anthropology, and eyeballing was the norm.
Considering that we're living in 2012, don't you think it's time to let go of ''this black dolichocephalic type'' and ''that white brachycephalic type''?
No, because certain people are still trying to make these black dolichocephalics who built most of the worlds neolithic civilizations and early historic ones in Europe and the Middle East into ancestral Europeans or Aryans on Euronazi sites although Europeans for the most part aren't and never have been long narrow headed people - dolichocephals if you will.
Similar to when Brace said to Europeans the folk idea "Cro-Magnon's are us" is false - some things just don't go together.
The fact remains, whether we use the old term armenoid, dinaric or what have you, or don't, the people around the modern Mediterranean and in modern Mesapotamia and early Mesopotamia that are predominantly brachycephalic in Sumer were unrelated to the ancient Egyptians and black, long and narrow headed "Mediterranean race" type of early anthropologists in Sumer, Europe etc .
So for the Euronuts out there and on this blog again - they were two completely different people whom you will never merge into one. Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
Maybe but brachycephaly is within the range of some African variation, and dolichacephaly is found in Sumer and Mesopotamia.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Maybe but brachycephaly is within the range of some African variation, and dolichacephaly is found in Sumer and Mesopotamia.
yes there are African brachycephalic and mesocranic people unrelated to Europeans or Eurasiatics ancient and modern of course. Mostly located in the southern parts of sudan and Central Africa.
The earliest anthropological analyses by krogman, Hrozny and others also claimed the earliest Jemdet Nasr and Uruk cultures in Mesopotamia after the Ubaid people were also of dolichocephalic hamitic black or "Afro-Mediterranean" type similar to peoples of the horn and predynastic early dynastic Egypt. These groups extended into Iran and India in the south and Anau in Turkestan in the North.
Posted by Men Kheper Ra (Member # 4547) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: '' I await your next angst driven lie in response to the earlier posted pic:'' =====
Blue eyed, straight haired, thin nosed etc (typical Caucasoids).
The facts must frustrate you. Back to your cuckoo fairytale land...
I can't believe that I'm joining in this conversation but why haven't anyone corrected pyramid on those pictures he keep using to reference the ancient Sumerians. Here's the problem, those pictures are not of the ancient Sumerian but of the Gutian who came and conquered ancient Sumerians.
I've heard references of the bible being used but the supposed timeline of the fictitious character Abraham leaving Ur of Sumer was in the same time frame the Gutian people were actually invading Sumer/Mesopotamia which just so happen to be the same people who's pictures you keep posting.
These Gutian are not indigenous to Mesopotamia
Posted by Men Kheper Ra (Member # 4547) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
These people are Gutians or Hill people.
.
I didn't see this post before I wrote what I wrote:
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
) PAHAHAHAHAHAHA, LMAO...WAHAHAHAHAH. SIGH. 
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
