posted
Ok- we certainly are indigenous and we are without a doubt, African. We are however, not - wait - my specific tribal clan- there are eighteen original tribes within that clan are not and have never been of the black rock- that is hewn from black rock as our ancestors believed the truly BLACK skinned peoples were. This is hard for Americans to comprehend but what they term as BLACK is not what Africans consider BLACK. Denzell Washington in Africa would not be considered BLACK. He would be recognized as African but a BROWN ethnicity. In USA Denzell Washington is certainly embraced as a BLACK person but that is because alot of Eurocentric/Afrocentric people are missing the bus on ethnic diversity. They believe that people that are not white must be black. When in fact, there are so many different kinds of people in the world. Why limit yourself to such anectdated parameters? The old bigoted Victorians couldn't distinguish between a Saite and a so called Nubian. They couldnt tell the difference between a sharp eared Saharan Lion and a round eared Subsaharan Lion- they didn't distinguish between ethnicites of so called Nubians- the Wawat - the Yam, the Irthet the Dinka the MAzoi- these were all termed Negroes by Early Egyptologists. By own grand uncle Ziko Gonneim an indigenous Egyptian could distinguish them but because of his ethnicity and nationality the European Egyptologists marginalized his contributions. They failed to see the significance of his assertions. They saw a subsaharn Africa and an Egypt. We Western Desert peoples are purely African. There is a percentage of peoples from Libya originally who have lived in the Western Desert of Egypt since the most recent slave trade from Senegal to Kharga. They escaped their Arab kidnappers and vanished into the desert-they were accepted with empathy by indigenous Western Desert Peoples who already knew these noble people - we used their baskets to transport our food. We used their ceramics to hold our oil. Now they are naturalized in the Western Desert. During predynastic days the native peoples were largely Pygmoid very similar to the Kung! Bushmen of South Africa. They remain in Siwa- a good percentage of them are still there. The next group like our family originated in the region between Kharga and Dahkhla- we later migrated north to Bahiriya and Karnak- and a few centuries later we chased from Bahiriya into Abysinnia and Siwa by Assyrian enabled Ramesides. Herihor brought matrilinear Egypt back to the mother land.Perhaps we were more thoroughly Ethiopianized if that is a word at that point but this is rather doubtful given the matrilinear laws of our tribal marriages. Yes we have wooly hair and broad noses. We have dark skin and broad shoulders. We are however not the beautiful black skinned Dinka nor are we the Fur who almost look purple in the distance. We adore them but we are not them. We are siblings and cousins. Our mother is Africa but the desert has separated us very early on.
-------------------- The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground. Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tambay Obenson, "Calling For Autonomous Black Owned Film Companies".NPR "News & Notes" 10/25/07
Those on this forum that are interested should check this out! You can access thru internet. Posts: 135 | From: Bay Area | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground. Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
We are all African. We are each and every one us indigenous Egyptians. I hope that you can open your heart and your mind enough to let us in. Please don't make the mistakes of the Victorian era and paint us with too broad a brush stroke. We are diverse and our history is ancient. All of Africa is ancient- so ancient we do it no justice lumping it all together. Each region and i mean eco-geological region is distinctive and has its own ethnic makeup. This is how it has always been. I doubt anyone made much of it until colonialization began to perceive us Africans as infinately inferior. They needed a pecking order to line us up social Darwin style.
-------------------- The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground. Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey Maahes, nobody is trying to you us out. I am certainly not. Africans have never been raving racists running around the world in the name of black skin and black power.
The point I was making is that the Libyan Sahara is diverse. That says it all and is about as open as you can get. This diversity is part of the history of the region, as well as much of the world, where various cultures and people have met, traded, clashed, mixed and mingled for many thousands of years. However, ethnic conflicts and struggles have taken place in the Sahara, Nile Valley and elsewhere involving many different groups and there is no doubt that black Africans have indeed been on the losing end of many of these struggles in the last 500 years or so. Even with that, I doubt any black Africans of any complexion is trying to erase any diversity in parts of Africa, purely because of skin color (however in terms of religion and phony ethnic ideologies that is a different issue). Africans aren't racists. That is nonsense. The point was and still is that diversity means just that, diversity and that black Africans do not need to feel ashamed that they have inhabited Africa for upwards of 200,000 years and no one on earth can claim to have beat black Africans to Africa. I am against using these ideas of "diversity" in features and culture to pretend that somehow black Africans aren't part of the original populations of these areas, going back tens of thousands of years, which is undeniable. Black Africans have been in the Western Sahara since before there was an Arab on this planet and the existence of blacks in these regions predates any sort of slavery and those regions have always been diverse because black Africans are diverse all over Africa from short to tall, skinny to fat. It is an oversimplification to say that "one" group of Africans is the epitome of a black African, while others aren't. That is a form of color gradient bias which is as bad an heinous in trying to create distinct identities for each gradient of brown skin as the idea of black and white and is certainly ridiculous considering that such diverse features are INHERENT in blacks in the first place. Black Africans are diverse and that diversity includes various shades and shapes and sizes. And on top of that Africa is diverse, with many different various ethnic groups identities and features adding to an already diverse population, due to the history if migrations and interactions in some parts of Africa.
And do be clear, black means person who is of darker complexion, particularly those from Africa and includes many shades of brown. It is not a term unique to America and the history of racism in America does not invalidate the term. Black in America is a way of identifying people by ancestry and separating those of primarily African ancestry, who were supposed to be the bottom rung of society, from those who were of primarily British European ancestry, who were supposed to be the top of the ladder. Skin color was but one of the most visible forms of identifying African ancestry for the purposes of maintaining this hierarchy.
Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why do you need to ask? They are all members of my family.
-------------------- The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground. Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
..and as such purely African- northern eastern Africans- different from other northern eastern Africans that are equally African.
-------------------- The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground. Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: It's a quarter to eight time to get it straight. I joked that if Iman played Nefertiti then either Eddie Murphy or David Bowie would be her Pharaoh.
It was Rasol who camped out on Billy Bob (what a name).
Anyway, it was all good fun, son! Thanks for the smiles.
quote:Originally posted by Willing Thinker {What Box}: Maahes, also, please ignore my previous suggestion of Billy Bob Thornton as a possible actor, it's just that I thought it was funny that it was even suggested before( it was suggested by alTakruri on the Nile Valley Forum lol).
quote:Originally posted by Maahes: ..and as such purely African- northern eastern Africans- different from other northern eastern Africans that are equally African.
But why is it necessary to state the obvious? All African ethnic groups are distinct and equally African.
Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Our mother is Africa but the desert has separated us very early on.
If you are referring to the Sahara desert, which is the only one that is in the north portion of Africa, it exists as a figment only in the minds of anti-black personalities as some sort of an African 'Berlin Wall' between north coastal areas and others actually on and below the Sahara. Of course, fact says otherwise: Crossing the Sahara
Can't think of Africa's history when people were not able to go north from south or vice versa; can you?
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even funnier is the fact that human populations, black populations inhabited the Sahara when it was once lush, 7,000 years ago and that is but the last wet phase of the Sahara. There were other wet phases during the 200,000 years black Africans have been in Africa. Nothing is static in African history and populations have been migrating throughout Africa for hundreds of thousands of years. The earliest populations of the Sahara were the ancestors of the modern dinka, nuer and other "black" sub-saharan Africans and the culture and lifestyle of these early saharans was not much different than those groups and other black African groups across Africa. Such nonsense talk is indicative of a shallow concept of history which is ultimately has no basis in historical fact. Even the Egyptians acknowledged the south as their ancestral homeland. Only more recent arrivals to North Africa in the last few thousand years or so have such absurd ideas.
Face facts, the earliest populations of the Sahara, Nile Valley and North Africa were black Africans and the history of these people goes back many thousands of years. The sahara has been a major reason for the movements of populations in and across Africa, if not the world and the populations today in their present geographical distribution is not the same as it was 7,000 years ago. Therefore, the idea that blacks were "stuck" South of the Sahara separate from some "other" type of Africans is NON-SENSE. It only reflects people whose history in Africa does not go back 7,000 years and have any connection to the BLACK African populations that lived there prior to being forced to migrate North, East, South and West due to the drying of the Sahara.
quote: "Lake Malawi, one of the deepest lakes in the world, acts as a rain gauge," said lead scientist Andrew S. Cohen of The University of Arizona in Tucson. "The lake level dropped at least 600 meters (1,968 feet) -- an extraordinary amount of water lost from the lake. This tells us that it was much drier at that time."
He added, "Archaeological evidence shows relatively few signs of human occupation in tropical Africa during the megadrought period."
The new finding provides an ecological explanation for the Out-of-Africa theory that suggests all humans descended from just a few people living in Africa sometime between 150,000 and 70,000 years ago.
"We've got an explanation for why that might have occurred -- tropical Africa was extraordinarily dry about 100,000 years ago," said Cohen, a UA professor of geosciences. "Maybe human populations just crashed."
Other researchers have documented droughts in individual regions of Africa at that time, such as the Kalahari desert expanding north and the Sahel expanding south, he said. "But no one had put it together that those droughts were part of a bigger picture."
Tropical Africa's climate became wetter by 70,000 years ago, a time for which there is evidence of more people in the region and of people moving north. As the population rebounded, people left Africa, Cohen said.
The newly discovered drastic drought also suggests the famous cichlid fishes of Lake Malawi evolved four to eight times slower than previously thought, altering scientists' view of fish evolution in the African Great Lakes.
Tropical Africa was not always tropical and "Sub Saharan" Africa was not always lush, meaning that black Africans have been all over the continent in the 200,000 years since homo sapien sapiens evolved in Africa.
Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hum, Maahes you sound like some "brainwashed" Tutsi who believe they different than the Hutu. You even also sound like a humanist white folk who say "We are different thant the black but we are all human".
I feel very strange to hear you say you not "black", because nobody really "black" but rather, a variety of brown.
When I look you, you look "black" to me or "mixte". In my country, specialy in the north Cameroon, some people look more "white" than you but they not mixe at all. It's the reason I think, for me and the people of my country, we see people like you just "black" like everyone of us because we see people like you everyday among us. We just call them "brown" but still, we consider them "black".
My own sisters they "brown" like you, one even more "white" than you. I'm the only boy and the most darker too. This kind of diversity among the same family is really not rare to find in all africa.
and you still dont answer my question about Halle Berry project...
Posts: 32 | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Boy oh boy. Where to start here? One forum member asked 'why state the obvious'? I'll ask you to re-read the long thread in its entirety.
I don't think some of you are embracing what I am going about here. You have a directional bias in my opinion. You only see white and black. I attempted, I thought successfuly based on the posts of other forum members, to help you comprehend the genetic and ethnic/cultural diversity within the Western Desert of Egypt where my family has lived for countless centuries. I will not be insulted by your comments because they read as if you might have been harboring complexes of inferiority.
This thread is about the cultural and ethnic foundations of 18th Dynasty Egypt as it relates to casting of the film franchise "i". Some writers who we can only assume are very young, made some very insensitive comments about some of the cast. The term Mulatto was used without so much as sigh from anyone but myself. I took umbrage with the term and explained why. The term mulatto is based upon the word mule a sterile hybrid between two species of equids.
Someone wrote in that they thought a "light-skinned" person aught not be playing Amenhotep III. That "light-skinned" person (me) is one hundred percent African. My family has lived in the same valley for centuries and we are African. So you can see it is a bit stupid to ask me why I must explain the obvious. Members of this board demanded I do so.
To move on to the last forum writer's comments, our comrade from Cameroon- what should I say? These are your thoughts and I cannot be responsible for them.
Quotes from another forum were posted here out of context- in these quotes I am record discussing the problems I have with the term "black pharaoh".
Inspite of the fact that I have repeatedly attempted to describe to you what an actual BLACK person looks like it is not reaching you. My comments were an attempt to help elucidate the issue of ethnicity within the continent of Africa. We are diverse ethnically and culturally. To describe us either white or black is pointless and Eurocentric/Afrocentric. My own family suffers from a number of blood disorders and share certain blood types and haplotypes with peoples from Southern Eastern Sudan, Sri Lanka, West India, Eritrea and within certain regions of Ethiopia and Libya.
It could be argued that we ( the above mentioned minorities ) are one anothers closest living relatives. Obviously, everyone originated in Africa but as we can clearly see, the worlds people are diverse in appearance and to a more limited degree genetically. Peoples closely related to us spread out from Africa and populated Western India and eventually Sri Lanka- these sibling lineages of our ancestors also peopled Libya. Our original ancestors came from Dahkhla/Khargha. Before then- who knows? But judging from the pictographs and rock art, the DNA and haplotypey of our tribal clans we have been in our homeland for at least six thousand years.
Are the peoples of Sri Lanka and Western India also "black"? You are utilizing an antiquated terminology that is chock full of presuppositional biases. The first inhabitants of the Sahara were Paleolithic hunters related most closely to the South African Kung! Bushmen, the Central African Pygmies, the Andammen Island Pygmies, THe New guinea Pygmies, The Tasmanian Pygmies- the Orang Asli of Malaysia. They form one clade. Not only are they not " Black" they form the genetic foundation of all races. The so called- Mongoloid Asiatics descend directly from them as do the so-called Negroes. Proto-Australoids are the Adam in direct relation to the Pygmoid Eve- So your assumptions about "Black" Africa are willfully ignorant. You are generating false parameters that cannot be born out with hard science.
You follow the obnoxious assumption of Eurocentrics that assume " Black" Africans live only south of the Sahara. You then argue that because the Sahara was a lush rainforest a few thousand years ago, that everyone that lived in Norhtern Africa was thusly a "Black African" before the advent of the aridification cycles that created the great deserts.
The first human populations to live in Northern Africa were Pygmoid. From these Pygmoids evolved Round Headed Negroes that populated Western Africa and from this same diaspora the Round Headed Asiatics also evolved and at about the same time.
Meanwhile, the pygmies are still their own unique clade of evolutionary novelty. They are not greater than or lesser than any other African but they are the matrilinear ancestors of All Africans and ninety percent of all humans that live on the globe. Proto-Australoids share Nuclear DNA with a great percentage of the extent human population and about ten percent of the world's mitochondrial DNA (human).
Recombinations between these two ancient human genetic clades resulted in each and every one of our surviving "races" of human kind.
You are talking about the races as the Victorians perceived them. I am a molecular biologist, an anthropologist, an ecosystematist and a writer.
I am not burdened with anectdated precepts of race and culture. You needn't be either.
Getting back to Egypt now, each dynasty had a slightly different ethnic makeup but the majority of the peoples were exclusively Northern or Eastern Afrian with limited migrations from the Near East (Semites/Babylonians) and India (Sahdu/Sahure). If you really care about the topic read up on the Cattle of East Africa and study their genetics. You will be fascinated I assure you. Bananas and Cattle arrived from South East Asia thousands and thousands of years ago. Sesame and Millet was carried East along the same routes. But the Nilotic Africans are quite distinctive as are the Hamitic, Saite and other indigenous East African groups. We cannot lump them into the "Black African" category because to do so over simplifies their evolutionary novelty, their haplotypey and blood groups, their osteology and most significantly, their languages and cultures.
Don't equate my reluctance to describe Egyptians or Ethiopians as "Black" as some sort of apologist inner-hatred. We are nighbors to Black people and have been for countless Millenium. But they have their own cultural identities and histories. We are all Africans after all. Skin colour is not a litmus test for being from the continent. This is an affectation we are inheriting from a blatantly racist past.
To close, I identify myself as a Black American while in America. I am Black in America because in America I am not white so I must be black. This if fine by me. I love Black music, Black girls, Soul food, and American Black Culture(s).
Regardless, my embrace of everything "Black" confuses my Egyptian/ Eritrean relatives when I am in Africa. They beg to know why I must adopt the superficial vapidity of the westerners. Why must I dumb down and refuse to akcnowledge my ancestry? Why must I dishonour my own ancestors by omitting my true ethnicity? I say to them as I say to you:
I am what I am not what others paint upon me.
That said, I have written and am producing a biopic film trilogy that has American, European, Arabic,Persian,Indian, American Indian and African actors as leads. I helped cast it because I wrote it for these actors. I have no problem with American Black or SubSaharan Africans portraying Egyptians and why should I? Our community was a diverse one and we embraced it. THis film presents an opportunity for people that have been nurtered in a stifling and opressive world view- the world view of the reductionists that conquered the world and raped it of its resources- enslaving its endemic communities- We are providing a beautiful, moving motion picture - actually if the heavens are smiling- three motion pictures back to back that actually celebrate the great diversity of Egyptian society.
But let us not parse words here. In our film and in ancient history, very specific ethnic peoples contributed to the Egyptian civilization.
Whole dynasti3es were founded by Somalian ethnics (Irthet and Puntite) and the Egyptians considered their origins to be in Somalia and beyond (think India here this is a trade route after all).
We have for example, In our story, the kingdom of Itjay ( in Fayoum) populated by Sub-Saharan expatriats -themselves descended of an earlier greater pre-hyksos dynasty- attempting to usurp the apparently doomed Thotmosides. The Sobeks of Itjay are round faced, brown people- Sam Jackson and Forest Whitaker, Tina Turner and Beverly Johnson are the write in cast for the House of Sobek. These actors are clearly not Nilotic- they do not exhibit Iman's long face or Anwar Sadat's profile- in fact they are just about the opposite. IT doesnt matter. It's a story.They are the Sobeks and they control the treasure and the armies of Egypt. they want the empire for themselves as it once was in their glorious past.
Regardless, the objective is to present clearly respective facial features and skin tones to represent different competing HOUSES all struggling to claim the throne for themselves as Amenhotep lies dying. The army is made up of different allied vassal kingdoms and there is so much room for artistic expression here provided it is borne out by hard science and academic stewardship.
The problem I have is with the term BLACK. It does not describe a single people. It lumps them altogether as a single population.
Europeans are Anglo-Saxon, Nordic, Italian, Spanish, French, Basque etc. Why are Africans just Black? Its a stupid obsession really and it is really starting to tick me off. Get off the skin hue and get onto humanity. We are one people. We share one consciousness and one earth. Who you are in that world is sometimes determined by how much you are worth. When you are brown or black or red, yellow or dingy white- you have a lot more difficult time getting ahead sometimes. And as I have said before, sometimes its people of our own ethnicity- people that identify themselves as the same "colour" that do all they can to drag us down. Don't we have enough issues and problems with the dominating culture- the one that can't distinguish an East Indian from India from a Cherokee from the eastern seaboard? The people that couldn't distinguish between an Australian Aboriginal and a west African Bantu?
-------------------- The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground. Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Maahes: Boy oh boy. Where to start here? One forum member asked 'why state the obvious'? I'll ask you to re-read the long thread in its entirety.
I don't think some of you are embracing what I am going about here. You have a directional bias in my opinion. You only see white and black. I attempted, I thought successfuly based on the posts of other forum members, to help you comprehend the genetic and ethnic/cultural diversity within the Western Desert of Egypt where my family has lived for countless centuries. I will not be insulted by your comments because they read as if you might have been harboring complexes of inferiority.
This thread is about the cultural and ethnic foundations of 18th Dynasty Egypt as it relates to casting of the film franchise "i". Some writers who we can only assume are very young, made some very insensitive comments about some of the cast. The term Mulatto was used without so much as sigh from anyone but myself. I took umbrage with the term and explained why. The term mulatto is based upon the word mule a sterile hybrid between two species of equids.
Someone wrote in that they thought a "light-skinned" person aught not be playing Amenhotep III. That "light-skinned" person (me) is one hundred percent African. My family has lived in the same valley for centuries and we are African. So you can see it is a bit stupid to ask me why I must explain the obvious. Members of this board demanded I do so.
To move on to the last forum writer's comments, our comrade from Cameroon- what should I say? These are your thoughts and I cannot be responsible for them.
Quotes from another forum were posted here out of context- in these quotes I am record discussing the problems I have with the term "black pharaoh".
Inspite of the fact that I have repeatedly attempted to describe to you what an actual BLACK person looks like it is not reaching you. My comments were an attempt to help elucidate the issue of ethnicity within the continent of Africa. We are diverse ethnically and culturally. To describe us either white or black is pointless and Eurocentric/Afrocentric. My own family suffers from a number of blood disorders and share certain blood types and haplotypes with peoples from Southern Eastern Sudan, Sri Lanka, West India, Eritrea and within certain regions of Ethiopia and Libya.
It could be argued that we ( the above mentioned minorities ) are one anothers closest living relatives. Obviously, everyone originated in Africa but as we can clearly see, the worlds people are diverse in appearance and to a more limited degree genetically. Peoples closely related to us spread out from Africa and populated Western India and eventually Sri Lanka- these sibling lineages of our ancestors also peopled Libya. Our original ancestors came from Dahkhla/Khargha. Before then- who knows? But judging from the pictographs and rock art, the DNA and haplotypey of our tribal clans we have been in our homeland for at least six thousand years.
Are the peoples of Sri Lanka and Western India also "black"? You are utilizing an antiquated terminology that is chock full of presuppositional biases. The first inhabitants of the Sahara were Paleolithic hunters related most closely to the South African Kung! Bushmen, the Central African Pygmies, the Andammen Island Pygmies, THe New guinea Pygmies, The Tasmanian Pygmies- the Orang Asli of Malaysia. They form one clade. Not only are they not " Black" they form the genetic foundation of all races. The so called- Mongoloid Asiatics descend directly from them as do the so-called Negroes. Proto-Australoids are the Adam in direct relation to the Pygmoid Eve- So your assumptions about "Black" Africa are willfully ignorant. You are generating false parameters that cannot be born out with hard science.
You follow the obnoxious assumption of Eurocentrics that assume " Black" Africans live only south of the Sahara. You then argue that because the Sahara was a lush rainforest a few thousand years ago, that everyone that lived in Norhtern Africa was thusly a "Black African" before the advent of the aridification cycles that created the great deserts.
The first human populations to live in Northern Africa were Pygmoid. From these Pygmoids evolved Round Headed Negroes that populated Western Africa and from this same diaspora the Round Headed Asiatics also evolved and at about the same time.
Meanwhile, the pygmies are still their own unique clade of evolutionary novelty. They are not greater than or lesser than any other African but they are the matrilinear ancestors of All Africans and ninety percent of all humans that live on the globe. Proto-Australoids share Nuclear DNA with a great percentage of the extent human population and about ten percent of the world's mitochondrial DNA (human).
Recombinations between these two ancient human genetic clades resulted in each and every one of our surviving "races" of human kind.
You are talking about the races as the Victorians perceived them. I am a molecular biologist, an anthropologist, an ecosystematist and a writer.
I am not burdened with anectdated precepts of race and culture. You needn't be either.
Getting back to Egypt now, each dynasty had a slightly different ethnic makeup but the majority of the peoples were exclusively Northern or Eastern Afrian with limited migrations from the Near East (Semites/Babylonians) and India (Sahdu/Sahure). If you really care about the topic read up on the Cattle of East Africa and study their genetics. You will be fascinated I assure you. Bananas and Cattle arrived from South East Asia thousands and thousands of years ago. Sesame and Millet was carried East along the same routes. But the Nilotic Africans are quite distinctive as are the Hamitic, Saite and other indigenous East African groups. We cannot lump them into the "Black African" category because to do so over simplifies their evolutionary novelty, their haplotypey and blood groups, their osteology and most significantly, their languages and cultures.
Don't equate my reluctance to describe Egyptians or Ethiopians as "Black" as some sort of apologist inner-hatred. We are nighbors to Black people and have been for countless Millenium. But they have their own cultural identities and histories. We are all Africans after all. Skin colour is not a litmus test for being from the continent. This is an affectation we are inheriting from a blatantly racist past.
To close, I identify myself as a Black American while in America. I am Black in America because in America I am not white so I must be black. This if fine by me. I love Black music, Black girls, Soul food, and American Black Culture(s).
Regardless, my embrace of everything "Black" confuses my Egyptian/ Eritrean relatives when I am in Africa. They beg to know why I must adopt the superficial vapidity of the westerners. Why must I dumb down and refuse to akcnowledge my ancestry? Why must I dishonour my own ancestors by omitting my true ethnicity? I say to them as I say to you:
I am what I am not what others paint upon me.
That said, I have written and am producing a biopic film trilogy that has American, European, Arabic,Persian,Indian, American Indian and African actors as leads. I helped cast it because I wrote it for these actors. I have no problem with American Black or SubSaharan Africans portraying Egyptians and why should I? Our community was a diverse one and we embraced it. THis film presents an opportunity for people that have been nurtered in a stifling and opressive world view- the world view of the reductionists that conquered the world and raped it of its resources- enslaving its endemic communities- We are providing a beautiful, moving motion picture - actually if the heavens are smiling- three motion pictures back to back that actually celebrate the great diversity of Egyptian society.
But let us not parse words here. In our film and in ancient history, very specific ethnic peoples contributed to the Egyptian civilization.
Whole dynasti3es were founded by Somalian ethnics (Irthet and Puntite) and the Egyptians considered their origins to be in Somalia and beyond (think India here this is a trade route after all).
We have for example, In our story, the kingdom of Itjay ( in Fayoum) populated by Sub-Saharan expatriats -themselves descended of an earlier greater pre-hyksos dynasty- attempting to usurp the apparently doomed Thotmosides. The Sobeks of Itjay are round faced, brown people- Sam Jackson and Forest Whitaker, Tina Turner and Beverly Johnson are the write in cast for the House of Sobek. These actors are clearly not Nilotic- they do not exhibit Iman's long face or Anwar Sadat's profile- in fact they are just about the opposite. IT doesnt matter. It's a story.They are the Sobeks and they control the treasure and the armies of Egypt. they want the empire for themselves as it once was in their glorious past.
Regardless, the objective is to present clearly respective facial features and skin tones to represent different competing HOUSES all struggling to claim the throne for themselves as Amenhotep lies dying. The army is made up of different allied vassal kingdoms and there is so much room for artistic expression here provided it is borne out by hard science and academic stewardship.
The problem I have is with the term BLACK. It does not describe a single people. It lumps them altogether as a single population.
Europeans are Anglo-Saxon, Nordic, Italian, Spanish, French, Basque etc. Why are Africans just Black? Its a stupid obsession really and it is really starting to tick me off. Get off the skin hue and get onto humanity. We are one people. We share one consciousness and one earth. Who you are in that world is sometimes determined by how much you are worth. When you are brown or black or red, yellow or dingy white- you have a lot more difficult time getting ahead sometimes. And as I have said before, sometimes its people of our own ethnicity- people that identify themselves as the same "colour" that do all they can to drag us down. Don't we have enough issues and problems with the dominating culture- the one that can't distinguish an East Indian from India from a Cherokee from the eastern seaboard? The people that couldn't distinguish between an Australian Aboriginal and a west African Bantu?
Maahes, you aren't making sense.
Black is not a statement of ethnicity, nationality, culture, religion, geography or genetics. It is simply a description of skin color. When we say black, or rather, when I say black, I mean person who is a shade of brown, from light to dark, which can describe many people from Africa, to the Pacific to the Americas. It is not a statement of common culture, ethnicity, identity, nationality, language or history. That is false. You are confusing skin color with ethnicity, because nobody claimed that the groups in the Western Sahara were Dinka peoples! We said that they are black, meaning that the variation or diversity in skin complexion found among populations in the Western Sahara is not UNIQUE and is part of the diversity found all over Africa among black people. There is no one shade of black, just as there is no one black nationality or one black religion or one black population or one black language. Nobody said any of that except you.
What you are doing is contradicting yourself, because you keep claiming that the Western Sahara is diverse, then turn right around and try and exclude certain Africans from that diversity, no matter how you put it or try and say it, you are pretending that VERY DARK Africans are a separate "species" of African tied to a certain genetic trait. WRONG. Very dark Africans are ALL OVER AFRICA, including the Western Sahara, because THEY ARE part of the diversity and biological ancestry OF AFRICA. All this trying to separate Africans based on skin color IS NONSENSE. You are making up nonsense, arbitrary ways of categorizing Africans based on absurd biological statements that have no validity in FACT. Africans vary in features ALL OVER AFRICA and that variation includes MANY shades of brown including VERY DARK and CUTS ACROSS many different genetic markers, languages, cultures and ethnicities. The reason we are saying you are brainwashed is because you seem to be trying to base identity on skin color, then claim that you are embracing diversity. How can you be embracing diversity while trying to separate out dark brown Africans as some SEPARATE "species" that is unrelated to other Africans? Your statements only belie a absolutely convoluted logic that cloaks an ANTI-BLACK sentiment with a whole bunch of good sounding rhetoric that fails to hide the absurdity of your claims.
Bottom line, I am against any attempt to try and pretend that very dark Africans are ONE ethnic group, ONE culture or ONE language or ONE population SEPARATE from other Africans. There is NO biological validity in such a statement. ALL black Africans are diverse and VERY DARK Africans are in every population of Africans in Africa and have ALWAYS been part of the diversity of Africa, all parts of Africa, from the very beginning. Any other sort of claim otherwise is purely nonsense.
Almost all of these people are black by any definition of the word, even though some of them are not. But even with that, people looking like this are found all over Africa among populations normally called black.
And finally, before you try and invent meanings for the word, why don't you look them up in the dictionary:
quote: of or relating to any of various population groups having dark pigmentation of the skin
quote: a. Of or belonging to a racial group having brown to black skin, especially one of African origin: the Black population of South Africa. b. Of or belonging to an American ethnic group descended from African peoples having dark skin; African-American.
Just because America historically stripped African Slaves of their ethnic, linguistic and cultural ties to Africa as part of the process of slavery and then lumped them all together by skin color does not mean that black is an invalid term for Africans all over Africa. What it means is that it is an inaccurate way of describing the culture, ethnicity and languages of people sharing the same skin complexion all over the world. There is no one white culture, even though there are many white people all over the world. But all whites are not European. The problem in America is that after 300 years of slavery, the culture and identity of the various African ethnic groups in America was lost and replaced by words denoting skin color, because the RACISTS in America believed in RACE as being based on SKIN COLOR. Therefore, instead of the Africans in America being identified by their ethnicity or nationality, they were all just negroes or blacks. And because of this, the culture and identity of those descended from African slaves in America is commonly labeled as black. But that is a situation totally different from Africa proper. Black people in Africa have not been stripped of their culture an ethnicity like those in America and therefore they identify themselves based on ethnic, cultural or national differences. But that does not mean that all these people who come in various shades of brown are NOT BLACK.
When I say that people are running away from the word black and black people as a form of self hate, I am talking about people who do NOT want to identify with something that has been identified as INFERIOR and used as an excuse to PERSECUTE, EXPLOIT and OPPRESS Africans for the last 500 years or more. This desire to SEPARATE oneself from being black is not an AFFIRMATION of diversity, it is a DENIAL of one's history and identity, that seeks to ESCAPE the oppression and DESTRUCTION that has visited Africans JUST BECAUSE of their skin color. You cannot hide from what you are and DENIAL is a form of self hate that only SPEEDS UP the destruction of African people and culture. The only way to STOP the destruction is to ACKNOWLEDGE the fact that SKIN color is the basis of RACISM and OPPRESSION in much of the world and STOPPING this destruction means STANDING UP and ACKNOWLEDGING the truth instead of trying to HIDE from it.
Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Maahes: ..and as such purely African- northern eastern Africans- different from other northern eastern Africans that are equally African.
First of all, are you saying all those Egyptians whose pics you posted are suppose to be similar in appearance, because there are obvious differences in features and complexion from all those individuals??
Also, are you saying all those Egyptians are 'pure' African with no foreign-admixture because many of them look no different from 'Arab' Egyptians from cities like Cairo??
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh my - You guys are really lame. My family members are all Africans. There are many different ethnicities of Africans. You are deluded if you believe that all Africans are Black. But then I doubt that any of you know what Black people even look like. American Blacks are not the Dinka, they are not the Irthet and certainly not the Yam or MAzoi. But why am I even attempting to have this dialogue with you. Have you ever been to Africa? Have you ever lived in the Sahara? Obviously you haven't because you are confusing colour with ethnicity and culture. It's not your fault that you come from a racist country. But I logged on here because someone working on the film told me I aught to. I almost regret that now. A few people have completely derailed the intellectual conversation and turned it into a stupidity fest. What is your objective? You want to tell an Egyptian that she or he is Black? Go ahead. I wrote a film that places American Blacks in major parts as Egyptians. This should speak to my acceptance of Egypt as an African country. In America you can fence off other countries and keep unwanted ethnic types from mixing into your population. In Egypt we have no such fences and never have. The only barrier is the desert and the river. Sorry to leave off this way but I know longer see any need to waste my time here. I am an academic and spend months at a time in the refugee camps of Chad, Somalia, Ethiopia and Eritrea. I don't have the time or the interest in enabling the sort of willful ignorance that Eurocentrics/Afrocentrics tend to perpetuate.
The continent of Africa is vast. There are indigenous peoples of the continent with blonde hair and light eyes. There are indigenous people with yellow skin and diminutive stature with mongoloid folds around the eyes. There are indiginous people with blue black skin whgose average height is well over 5'10". There are indiginous Africans with reddish brown skin whose average height is under six feet. I could go on and on here. But I can't because I'm very very busy. Good Luck.
-------------------- The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground. Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGK8-mUC2ig (note the parasols, umbrellas, masks and floats: origin of the Mummer's parade and other traditions in the U.S. which mocked these processions in black face. Also part of the basis for the carnivals and processions in the Carribean and south America)
Note the similarities in dress between the Tuaregs and Hausa. In fact many of the indigo robes and other accoutrements come from Nigeria via trade. The connections between the two are undeniable.
quote:Originally posted by Maahes: Oh my - You guys are really lame. My family members are all Africans. There are many different ethnicities of Africans. You are deluded if you believe that all Africans are Black. But then I doubt that any of you know what Black people even look like. American Blacks are not the Dinka, they are not the Irthet and certainly not the Yam or MAzoi. But why am I even attempting to have this dialogue with you. Have you ever been to Africa? Have you ever lived in the Sahara? Obviously you haven't because you are confusing colour with ethnicity and culture. It's not your fault that you come from a racist country. But I logged on here because someone working on the film told me I aught to. I almost regret that now. A few people have completely derailed the intellectual conversation and turned it into a stupidity fest. What is your objective? You want to tell an Egyptian that she or he is Black? Go ahead. I wrote a film that places American Blacks in major parts as Egyptians. This should speak to my acceptance of Egypt as an African country. In America you can fence off other countries and keep unwanted ethnic types from mixing into your population. In Egypt we have no such fences and never have. The only barrier is the desert and the river. Sorry to leave off this way but I know longer see any need to waste my time here. I am an academic and spend months at a time in the refugee camps of Chad, Somalia, Ethiopia and Eritrea. I don't have the time or the interest in enabling the sort of willful ignorance that Eurocentrics/Afrocentrics tend to perpetuate.
The continent of Africa is vast. There are indigenous peoples of the continent with blonde hair and light eyes. There are indigenous people with yellow skin and diminutive stature with mongoloid folds around the eyes. There are indiginous people with blue black skin whgose average height is well over 5'10". There are indiginous Africans with reddish brown skin whose average height is under six feet. I could go on and on here. But I can't because I'm very very busy. Good Luck.
But you aren't talking to us. The problem with you is you lump all people in Africa together as if they all are have the same ancestry when they don't. Africa is indeed diverse and that diversity includes diversity of features and culture purely WITHIN black African groups, as well as diversity that is the result of African interaction with NON Africans. Nobody is denying this. Therefore, whatever you are saying it does not apply because we don't deny the diversity in Africa. But don't talk about diversity then try and omit blacks from that diversity IN ALL PARTS of Africa, as if they aren't descended from THE ABORIGINAL populations of the continent, which includes the Sahara, North Africa and the Nile Valley.
Good luck on your travels.
Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
And while we are on diversity, watch this short pygmy Mauritanian black African do some awesome dance moves (clip titled best dancer in Mauretania):
You must understand that when people like Denzel Washington come to Africa they are described as "Black American" or "African American". Simple! There counterparts from Britain are just called "Black British". In general, people in Africa first refer to someone not in terms of colour but in terms of ethnicity then in terms of nationality. It's only when there's a specific question about the individual's colour that an answer in terms of colour is forthcoming. It's only people of obvious European background that are described strictly in terms of colour--especially when their nationality is not known.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Caucasian actresses pop up every year and garner covers and instant recognition fame. But great talents like Tantoo Cardinal and Cicely Tyson are overlooked all too often. Stacey Dash is another actor that know one seems to know what to do with as is Halle Berry. Halle can make mountains move because she is smart, dedicated and blessed with an almost supernatural beauty. But we can all readily appreciate how some of the projects she stars in don't really suit her. The reason?
I should have know you had/have some issues when you stated that Halle Berry is blessed with an almost supernatural beauty (she's had as they say "help/work done" in attaining some of that so called naturalness) nonetheless she's cute. (I'll now pull my back my claws ) Much success with your film!
Posts: 67 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have been reading these very interesting post,that stem from the discussion about a most wonderful sounding film project, "Goddess of The Sun", which I would love see come into fruition. I believe to view such a film will be a quantum leap for all who see's such a iconoclast production.It will take much hard work perseverance, & much finances, to bring such a project to the screen, & i wish Maahes nothing but best in his efforts.
But I have to say, the discussion about color/ race,who is Black, who is African etc. is really saddening me; to read all this back & forth.I'm no academic, but it seems that you all have some very salient points about the issue . I have to say, by Maahes actually being from the continent ( Africa)he should know what the realities are on the ground, so to speak. Maybe, if all concerned would just be very open to learn what the realities are for each group around Blackness, Africaness, without judgement it could be a win, win for all!
Could it be that the word "Black" has a "political" dimension for us in the states that does not translate in other parts of the diaspora including Africa, for a lots of the reasons Maahes outlined in his post ?Just a thought! Posts: 135 | From: Bay Area | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Nebsen: Could it be that the word "Black" has a "political" dimension for us in the states that does not translate in other parts of the diaspora including Africa, for a lots of the reasons Maahes outlined in his post ?Just a thought!
Yes that's exactly how it is, if you don't count in south africa or Zimbabwe who had similar racial system as in the U.S.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Doug M Wrote: But you aren't talking to us. The problem with you is you lump all people in Africa together as if they all are have the same ancestry when they don't.
I get the impression that he's doing the exact opposite, describing the different ethnicities that exists and celebrating the diversity in africa. It's YOU who is lumping together almost all people of that continent under the banner of "black", as if that had any meaning in their reality.
Lets get some few facts straight Doug M. 1)To start with there has never been an amalgation of people called "black" , 2) There is no such thing as a "black" culture, 3) no where have i heard of a language called "black", lastly but not least 4)there is NO such thing as a "black" people, never existed and never will. However there are people called Igbo, Ashanti, Yoruba, Tigre, Beja, Fula etc. Now if you identify as black then good for you but you have to respect that most people who you consider "black" don't identify as such, now get that through your thick skull for once and stop projecting your recent identity on others. And also i don't think Maahes said that "blacks" (a you see it never existed in northrn africa, it's you who is chasing ghost and interpreting others thoughts differently as usual, you little racially minded you.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
When indigenous African people begin thinking in racialist terms, they will finally begin to take control of their own continent and history. Intellectually I am aware races do not exist, but for those who would harm Africans, it does. Until Black peoples stop trying to join in solidarity with those who see them as OTHER, they as percentage will remain on bottom of the economic strata.
We have black people native Africans in the Diaspora doing everything to scramble away from other black people by claiming themselves BROWN or Native African Caucasoid and Asiatics.
Some posters here do everything to separate from other African ethnics. Its as though they are screaming, “I’m one of the good blacks…I will cooperate, I won’t rock the boat, I’ll go along, I’ll even help in belittling other blacks, just watch me. I’m not with them N*****S. I’m a good one, the model minority.”
They behave as such fools. Separation will never build strength. Yet, there are posters who seem to hate the idea of inclusion with other native Africans under label Black.
Entire Africa will end up like Somalia, with every ethnic group clamoring to establish themselves as some superior, separate clan or race.
Conflicts within Africa will continue as outsiders look on and take advantage of our self-imposed divisions.
I believe those who accentuate differences among Africans are collaborators and traitors. I can only pray that at some point they become enlightened individuals or disappear.
Only Unity will change things. If that unity must come under identifier of Black, why not use it to change things that have gone wrong over last few millennia?
Anyone who would divide us into separate shades and pontificate on ethnic differences is exactly reason why Native Africans have been targets of wandering and violent peoples who are united in their agreement that natives of Africa are the 'Black Other' to be abused for profit, used as cheap labor and humiliated for ever.
The French, British, Swedish, Romanian, Albanian, all understand they are White and Europeans when among outsiders who clearly are not. Why must some Africans insist in thinking so small minded by promoting ethnic chauvinisms when they should present African Unity under representation of color Black?
It was good enough for ancient Egyptians, so why do we have their supposed ancestors and certain East African ethnics, clinging to their not so accomplished ethnic clans as sole identifiers.
I think most religious texts warn against displaying foolish pride, wish these overly prideful Africans would learn.
An observer.
Posts: 96 | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dough M great video links man. Maahes really needs to view those video links you posted, I think he'll learn a thing or two from them. I do like some of the things the guy was saying though.
Posts: 213 | From: New York City, USA | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Isn't ironic how all of a sudden more people, especially those calling themselves "Africans", claim to be tired of Afrocentrism and Eurocentrism, but when White specialists were ever busy pummeling down and destroying Black history with impunity, some of these same people did absolutely nothing to challenge such barbaric behaviors. When Black Africans take the necessary intellectual steps of wrestling back their history from people who only and to wrestle when we’re sleeping, these self-style humanist start mumbling.
Inevitably, that Black Africans will take the control of managing, defining and presenting their history. In turn, it will be easier to defend other indigenous Africans who may not have the experience of handling the shock, let alone addressing the mass web of Euro-trick bags awaiting them.
Posts: 213 | From: New York City, USA | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry for my little blow up there. I'm not going to let you subjugate this dialogue with emotional sabbotage. Let's stay on topic. First, I'll answer to some of the Afrocentric whining:
quote:Originally posted by SaddenedAfrican: When indigenous African people begin thinking in racialist terms, they will finally begin to take control of their own continent and history. Intellectually I am aware races do not exist, but for those who would harm Africans, it does. Until Black peoples stop trying to join in solidarity with those who see them as OTHER, they as percentage will remain on bottom of the economic strata.
We have black people native Africans in the Diaspora doing everything to scramble away from other black people by claiming themselves BROWN or Native African Caucasoid and Asiatics.
Some posters here do everything to separate from other African ethnics. Its as though they are screaming, “I’m one of the good blacks…I will cooperate, I won’t rock the boat, I’ll go along, I’ll even help in belittling other blacks, just watch me. I’m not with them N*****S. I’m a good one, the model minority.”
They behave as such fools. Separation will never build strength. Yet, there are posters who seem to hate the idea of inclusion with other native Africans under label Black.
Entire Africa will end up like Somalia, with every ethnic group clamoring to establish themselves as some superior, separate clan or race.
Conflicts within Africa will continue as outsiders look on and take advantage of our self-imposed divisions.
I believe those who accentuate differences among Africans are collaborators and traitors. I can only pray that at some point they become enlightened individuals or disappear.
Only Unity will change things. If that unity must come under identifier of Black, why not use it to change things that have gone wrong over last few millennia?
Anyone who would divide us into separate shades and pontificate on ethnic differences is exactly reason why Native Africans have been targets of wandering and violent peoples who are united in their agreement that natives of Africa are the 'Black Other' to be abused for profit, used as cheap labor and humiliated for ever.
The French, British, Swedish, Romanian, Albanian, all understand they are White and Europeans when among outsiders who clearly are not. Why must some Africans insist in thinking so small minded by promoting ethnic chauvinisms when they should present African Unity under representation of color Black?
It was good enough for ancient Egyptians, so why do we have their supposed ancestors and certain East African ethnics, clinging to their not so accomplished ethnic clans as sole identifiers.
I think most religious texts warn against displaying foolish pride, wish these overly prideful Africans would learn.
An observer.
I would agree with you but unfortunately your writing is very naive. If Indigenous Africans start dumbing themselves down and accepting racialist terms they will be swallowing the willful ignorance of the west. I can assure you, we, meaning my families tribal clan have been very much in control of their tiny parcel of scorched earth for more centuries than history has memory of. We have always controled our lands and we have always been stewards of our lands. We have managed to survive all this time, thank you very much.
I do believe that since you can write you can read. I don't believe you are actually reading with entirety what I am writing. Thus, your comments are off mark. We've had a few centuries of academics in my family. We are a minority within the great nation of Egypt. Do you suppose we have ever felt discrimination or persecution by the dominating cultures? Not only has this generation experienced them- we felt more of the same from the Ptolemies, the Persians and the Romans. I say to you, come to Africa and live there. Embrace community and self-sacrifice. Let go of your ideals forged in the kiln of the insatiable west. I say to thee stop eating altogether and live off the grains you find at the roadside for weeks and months. I say to thee turn your head and swallow the enmity growing in your stomach as you see the women in your tribe disprespected by a powerful majority. I say to thee great American brown man, sacrifice a few months pay and travel to Chad and dedicate yourself to the cause of serving those that have been displaced by wars within Africa, waged by Africans, displacing Africans. You may learn there that tens of thousands of Africans are experiencing a sad reality. To rise up against your neighbor is to cause more war, more destruction more misery more starvation.
You haven't any idea what the experience of a Saharan African is. I do. I've encapsulated in a historical fiction epic about the 18th Dynasty. I hope you will come and see the motion picture and I hope that you will appreciate the casting of Cicely Tyson as the Queen Mother and Stacey Dash as the Princess Dowager. I hope that you will appreciate the performances of Shohreh Aghdashloo as Queen Gilukhepha and Amr Waked as Hereditary Prince and High Priest of the Great Bull,Nakht; Sami Bouijilla as Akhenaten, Said Taghmaoui as Hani the messenger and Khaled El Nabaoui as Chariotry Captain Ranefer. Sir Ben Kingsley as the Divine Prophet Aanen, James Earl Jones as Ringbearer Lord Ptahmose, Wanakee Pugh as the Warrior Queen Sitamun, Nona Gaye as Queen Isis, and finally my favorite character : Madam Mem as Princess Henuttaneb, Steward of the Oracle. "One of the king's daughters was born with albinism. Aanen is obsessed with her "imperfection". Princess Henuttaneb has been raised in the Mansion of the Oracle where her identity and condition are carefully guarded secrets."
teanaste'lle'n
Climb out of that box. I command you!
Ancient Proverbs transliterated. (used with frequency to this day amongst SaHidic Arabic speaking Upper Egyptians and Amharic/ Tamazight speaking Western Desert Tribespeoples)
<makedroush 3al Homar kedrom 3al barda3a>
Literal transalation: They couldn't beat the donkey so they beat the saddle! Hidden meaning: Be fair. Blame the source of the problem. Applicability: Inability to see the real problem and the real evil. <'Elle fat kadimoh tah>
Literal translation: Lost is the person who forgets his/her past. Hidden meaning: Remember what you were before bragging about what you became... Applicability: Criticizing those who want to be disassociated from their roots.
<Labbes 'el bousa tebka 3arousa>
Literal translation: Dress-up a stick and you get a doll. Hidden meaning: Make up (cosmetics) can make the ugly quite pretty. Applicability: Don't be fooled by appearances...
<Elzann 3ala elwedaan amarr min el-seHr>
Literal translation: Humming in one's ear is more (effective) than magic Hidden meaning: Incessant meaningless complaints do eventually work! Applicability: Advice to avoid listening to somebody who keeps on pushing a foolish argument
The best and shortest road towards knowledge of truth is Nature.
f one tries to navigate unknown waters one runs the risk of shipwreck. - Leave him in error who loves his error. - Every man is rich in excuses to safeguard his prejudices, his instincts, and his opinions. - To know means to record in one's memory; but to understand means to blend with the thing and to assimilate it oneself. - There are two kinds of error: blind credulity and piecemeal criticism. Never believe a word without putting its truth to the test; discernment does not grow in laziness; and this faculty of discernment is indispensable to the Seeker. Sound skepticism is the necessary condition for good discernment; but piecemeal criticism is an error.
You speak of a black Africa of a common objective. This is clear evidence that tribalism is completly alien to you. Egyptologists with Eurocentric leanings have marginalized the tribal origins of Ancient Egyptian culture. We remedy that with this film. The Great Houses are competing for power... Corrupt remainders of every skin tone and ethnicity are grappling for the scepter. But it is the tribal roots of the history - the entitlements of matrilinear heiresses that trump all-
To truly comprehend ancient Egyptian history one has to have some knowledge and understanding of North and East African Tribal Customs and ideology. Cattle Cultures, Ancestral Worship Cultures- so many different ideologies working simultaneously at different stable Sepat nomarchies. Do you know what a sepat is? Do you know what a sepat nomarch is?
Afrocentrics are not interested in tribal cultures at least not at this late date. Their naivette on African racial/ethnic origins makes that much clear. Not to worry. There is alot to learn and an open mind will meet the challenges provided by nature and evolve and adapt to find knowledge.
You may enjoy the project that follows this one, a film trilogy about the Trail of Tears and the role of the Buffalo Soldiers in claiming Indian lands for European descended settlers. Its called Treatise for Boometowne and no one ethnicity gets off being the victim or the bad guy. Plenty of blame to pass around. No clear cut bad guys there and certainly no good guys- its not a white and black paridigm you see. And neither is Goddess of the Sun.
Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Maahes: Sorry for my little blow up there. I'm not going to let you subjugate this dialogue with emotional sabbotage. Let's stay on topic. First, I'll answer to some of the Afrocentric whining:
The more and more that I read your responses, the more and more you strike me as a hypocritical fraud. As of yet, you've been the only one unable to accept variability in view points (similar to how you can't accept variability in Africa) or heed responsibility for your own emotional break-down, yet you still find a way to reverse the logic and attribute your own flaws to another's supposed ideology (afrocentrism). You have been reduced to petty conspiracy accusations to compensate for your lack of coherency. Funny..
quote:Originally posted by SaddenedAfrican: When indigenous African people begin thinking in racialist terms, they will finally begin to take control of their own continent and history. Intellectually I am aware races do not exist, but for those who would harm Africans, it does. Until Black peoples stop trying to join in solidarity with those who see them as OTHER, they as percentage will remain on bottom of the economic strata.
We have black people native Africans in the Diaspora doing everything to scramble away from other black people by claiming themselves BROWN or Native African Caucasoid and Asiatics.
Some posters here do everything to separate from other African ethnics. Its as though they are screaming, “I’m one of the good blacks…I will cooperate, I won’t rock the boat, I’ll go along, I’ll even help in belittling other blacks, just watch me. I’m not with them N*****S. I’m a good one, the model minority.”
They behave as such fools. Separation will never build strength. Yet, there are posters who seem to hate the idea of inclusion with other native Africans under label Black.
Entire Africa will end up like Somalia, with every ethnic group clamoring to establish themselves as some superior, separate clan or race.
Conflicts within Africa will continue as outsiders look on and take advantage of our self-imposed divisions.
I believe those who accentuate differences among Africans are collaborators and traitors. I can only pray that at some point they become enlightened individuals or disappear.
Only Unity will change things. If that unity must come under identifier of Black, why not use it to change things that have gone wrong over last few millennia?
Anyone who would divide us into separate shades and pontificate on ethnic differences is exactly reason why Native Africans have been targets of wandering and violent peoples who are united in their agreement that natives of Africa are the 'Black Other' to be abused for profit, used as cheap labor and humiliated for ever.
The French, British, Swedish, Romanian, Albanian, all understand they are White and Europeans when among outsiders who clearly are not. Why must some Africans insist in thinking so small minded by promoting ethnic chauvinisms when they should present African Unity under representation of color Black?
It was good enough for ancient Egyptians, so why do we have their supposed ancestors and certain East African ethnics, clinging to their not so accomplished ethnic clans as sole identifiers.
I think most religious texts warn against displaying foolish pride, wish these overly prideful Africans would learn.
An observer.
quote:I would agree with you but unfortunately your writing is very naive. If Indigenous Africans start dumbing themselves down and accepting racialist terms they will be swallowing the willful ignorance of the west. I can assure you, we, meaning my families tribal clan have been very much in control of their tiny parcel of scorched earth for more centuries than history has memory of. We have always controled our lands and we have always been stewards of our lands. We have managed to survive all this time, thank you very much.
"Your" clan and claim to identity has little to do with concepts external to your own little world so scrutinizing those who adhere to such worldly concepts that affect millions just doesn't make any sense. You claim to have an intimate knowledge of your clan's history, claiming that they've been in place for centuries, isolated from mingling and who have no origin other than the western desert, as far back as you can trace them. You also assert that they're not black and never were.
Simply put then, since as a hypocrite, you deny the existence of race and pigeon holding people into categories, yet apply a false dichotomy when you state such things like: The Dinka are true blacks, but the Egyptians never had one black pharaoh, is just nonsense and has more to do with your own brainwashed, anti-African concepts of 'race' than anyone's supposed Afrocentrism, which seeks to bury such nonsense.
You write:
To my knowledge there was never a single Black King that ruled in Egypt.
A credible Education Development Center, at Nubianet writes:
While it is clear that many Egyptians and many of the early Egyptian kings were very dark-skinned (we would say "black"), it would be a mistake to assume that every statue painted pure black was intended to indicate that the owner's skin was literally "black." - Source
^So it is only painfully obvious that you're worse than the Eurocentrics and conservatives in that you'd even deny this, based on your subjective opinion, while being a hypocrite and hiding behind euphemisms like "black" as a term for "true extremely dark-skinned Negroid" and your moans and whining about how much you despise afrocentrists, yet not addressing posters..
quote: I do believe that since you can write you can read.
I do believe that snide and sarcastic comments will get you no where and only makes you look bitter. Saddened African has some excellent points, which is more than I can say for you. There is nothing to suggest that he/she lacks in this department, concerning literacy.
quote:I don't believe you are actually reading with entirety what I am writing. Thus, your comments are off mark. We've had a few centuries of academics in my family. We are a minority within the great nation of Egypt. Do you suppose we have ever felt discrimination or persecution by the dominating cultures? Not only has this generation experienced them- we felt more of the same from the Ptolemies, the Persians and the Romans. I say to you, come to Africa and live there. Embrace community and self-sacrifice. Let go of your ideals forged in the kiln of the insatiable west. I say to thee stop eating altogether and live off the grains you find at the roadside for weeks and months.
I say to you that what you say is entirely too cliche to contain relevance to your initial misguided statements, which is the object of his/her post.
quote:I say to thee turn your head and swallow the enmity growing in your stomach as you see the women in your tribe disprespected by a powerful majority.
What tribes do you see in America and why are you forcing these tribal concepts onto Americans who embrace their "black" identity and have to live in the REAL world?
quote:I say to thee great American brown man
So now we're "brown", when a second ago we were all "blacks" and afrocentrists who have never had "a single king rule over Egypt"?
quote:, sacrifice a few months pay and travel to Chad and dedicate yourself to the cause of serving those that have been displaced by wars within Africa, waged by Africans, displacing Africans.
Were they displaced by the super-Negroid (truly black) Africans, the Hamites, the Pygmoids, the Reds, the Caucasoids, or the Khoisan Africans? It seems that you're familiar with all of these supposed groups and it seems relevant to ask since it might explain the hostility; maybe it was racial?
quote:You may learn there that tens of thousands of Africans are experiencing a sad reality. To rise up against your neighbor is to cause more war, more destruction more misery more starvation.
Still talking over the fact that you're a separatist.
quote: You haven't any idea what the experience of a Saharan African is. I do. I've encapsulated in a historical fiction epic about the 18th Dynasty. I hope you will come and see the motion picture and I hope that you will appreciate the casting of Cicely Tyson as the Queen Mother and Stacey Dash as the Princess Dowager.
I'd love to see such a movie for entertainment value, but knowing those behind the film, their motives and distorted racial views on Africa and its history, I must say that all intellectual interest has gone out of the window. I wouldn't be surprised if aliens showed up somewhere in the film, building pyramids. I really wouldn't.
quote:Climb out of that box. I command you!
Ancient Proverbs transliterated. (used with frequency to this day amongst SaHidic Arabic speaking Upper Egyptians and Amharic/ Tamazight speaking Western Desert Tribespeoples)
<makedroush 3al Homar kedrom 3al barda3a>
Literal transalation: They couldn't beat the donkey so they beat the saddle! Hidden meaning: Be fair. Blame the source of the problem. Applicability: Inability to see the real problem and the real evil. <'Elle fat kadimoh tah>
Speak for yourself..
Quote: Nor were there many Negroes ( Round Headed) even present in Dynastic Egypt until fairly late in history."
^According to this, you ARE the real problem, source of the problem, and real evil.
quote:You speak of a black Africa of a common objective. This is clear evidence that tribalism is completly alien to you. Egyptologists with Eurocentric leanings have marginalized the tribal origins of Ancient Egyptian culture. We remedy that with this film. The Great Houses are competing for power... Corrupt remainders of every skin tone and ethnicity are grappling for the scepter. But it is the tribal roots of the history - the entitlements of matrilinear heiresses that trump all-
I could have sworn firstly, that Ancient Egyptians were more nationalistic than tribal oriented - ret na romé.. Also, the origins of ancient egyptian culture are to be found in the very south to which you attribute exclusively to "true blacks". They spoke a language that flowed the same direction of the nile (from south to north). All of this 'tribal" identity in which you try and latch onto only goes back so far and it is completely separate from any concepts of "black (true black that is) or white", nor does it have any relevance to appearance, even though you try to use it to distance yourself and Egyptian history from "true blacks".
quote:To truly comprehend ancient Egyptian history one has to have some knowledge and understanding of North and East African Tribal Customs and ideology. Cattle Cultures, Ancestral Worship Cultures- so many different ideologies working simultaneously at different stable Sepat nomarchies. Do you know what a sepat is? Do you know what a sepat nomarch is?
All of this in fact, can be traced back to the black south, as well as language, as has been pointed out. The "true blacks" in question all share these characteristics with ancient Egypt.
quote:Afrocentrics are not interested in tribal cultures at least not at this late date. Their naivette on African racial/ethnic origins makes that much clear. Not to worry. There is alot to learn and an open mind will meet the challenges provided by nature and evolve and adapt to find knowledge.
Why are we discussing afrocentrists. This is not a place for venting but for discussing and exchanging ideas. Please address who you are speaking to.
quote:You may enjoy the project that follows this one, a film trilogy about the Trail of Tears and the role of the Buffalo Soldiers in claiming Indian lands for European descended settlers. Its called Treatise for Boometowne and no one ethnicity gets off being the victim or the bad guy. Plenty of blame to pass around. No clear cut bad guys there and certainly no good guys- its not a white and black paridigm you see. And neither is Goddess of the Sun.
Well, hopefully we won't have to be bothered with seeing too much of 'your clan" in this film, as that seems to be your main emphasis, and not objectivity or common sense.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Doug M Wrote: But you aren't talking to us. The problem with you is you lump all people in Africa together as if they all are have the same ancestry when they don't.
I get the impression that he's doing the exact opposite, describing the different ethnicities that exists and celebrating the diversity in africa. It's YOU who is lumping together almost all people of that continent under the banner of "black", as if that had any meaning in their reality.
Lets get some few facts straight Doug M. 1)To start with there has never been an amalgation of people called "black" , 2) There is no such thing as a "black" culture, 3) no where have i heard of a language called "black", lastly but not least 4)there is NO such thing as a "black" people, never existed and never will. However there are people called Igbo, Ashanti, Yoruba, Tigre, Beja, Fula etc. Now if you identify as black then good for you but you have to respect that most people who you consider "black" don't identify as such, now get that through your thick skull for once and stop projecting your recent identity on others. And also i don't think Maahes said that "blacks" (a you see it never existed in northrn africa, it's you who is chasing ghost and interpreting others thoughts differently as usual, you little racially minded you.
Yonis, you are again talking nonsense. Black does not mean ethnicity, culture, nationality or "race". It only means skin color. You and others keep running around claiming someone is distorting the facts, but the only facts being distorted is the FACT that medium to dark brown BLACK AFRICANS are the ORIGINAL POPULATIONS of the NILE and SAHARA including the Nile Valley. NOBODY disagrees that OTHER populations have come along since that time, but YOU and OTHERS are trying to CREATE a FANTASY that BLACK people and I mean BLACK never existed as the ORIGINAL populations in the Nile from the Delta to across the Sahara. Such an idea is NOT based on biology, is NOT based on science, but BASED ON FLAWED LOGIC. Ancient Egypt was the result of THOUSANDS of years of development among BLACK AFRICANS in the Sahara and along the Nile to the SOUTH of Egypt. There WAS NO OTHER TYPE of African in that time. The ABSURD basis of your argument is that the ONLY people of ANY significance along the Nile or in the Sahara 5,000 years ago were VERY PALE people, who were "racially" different than the "rest" of Africa, which was populated by medium to dark brown people. It is ABSURD because MOST Africans along the Nile 5,000 years ago WERE medium to dark brown and that INCLUDED the Egyptians themselves and their Saharan forebearers. Medium to dark brown skin was a FACT of the biological evolution of humans in Africa. Some people just literally HATE people of medium to dark brown skin complexion and LOVE to WORSHIP white skin as some sort of MARK OF SUPERIORITY and THAT is why they deny the OBVIOUS. Only someone with a SICK and DISTORTED sense of reality would PRETEND that medium to dark brown skinned people were NOT being depicted by the Egyptians when they painted themselves and MAKE ALL SORTS of NONSENSE claims as to WHY this could not actually be reality. Likewise, only such a SICK MIND would claim that people of medium to dark brown skin have a belief in BROWN SKIN superiority, after HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of years of PALE SKINNED people KILLING, MAIMING and DESTROYING people of dark complexions PURELY because of a belief of their NATURAL SUPERIORITY as lighter skinned and WHITE. THAT is another reason why some are so DESPARATE to HIDE the truth because it EXPOSES their RACE FRAUD and 'PROGRESS' as just that FRAUD.
The point is that the only ones preaching NONSENSE are those who try and claim that VERY LIGHT skinned populations are the ORIGINAL inhabitants of Africa North of the Sahara. That the Nile was somehow populated in ancient times by people FROM the Sahara and Upper Nile, but NO PHYSICAL SIMILARITIES or CONNECTION to them and that this group who developed Egyptian civilization was some sort of ALIEN group detached from the rest of Africa but IN Africa just the same. That WHOLE IDEOLOGY is based on the fact that THOSE who preach it KNOW that they are supporting a MODERN SYSTEM run LARGELY by people of MOSTLY FOREIGN ancestry with LITTLE connection to ancient populations along the Nile and who want to SOLIDIFY their control over the TRUE descendants of the Nile Valley by putting THEMSELVES into the shoes of the ANCIENT populations along the Nile. It is almost like modern European Americans claiming that the ORIGINAL populations of the Americas were somehow EUROPEANS..... and it is for the EXACT same reason, to cover up, distort and hide the fact that THEY have DESTROYED the ancient cultures of the regions they now control and so lets pretend that they never existed instead of admitting the TRUTH.
Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
I'm very confused by your views. I agree that one doesn't have to be black to be African, but what determines blackness? You said you don't consider yourself black in Africa, but you identify yourself as such in the U.S. By whose standards do you go by in Africa, Egyptian ones? If so, do you consider yourself coloured in South Africa, parda in Brazil, etc.?
Why don't Ethiopians and other inhabitants of the Horn of Africa qualify as black to you? Are we not fully African and possessing dark skin?
P.S. Though the word mulatto is considered by some to be derogatory, many don't see it as such. I have a half black half white friend who doesn't like it for instance, but there are whole websites designed around the term as an "ethnonym" for half black half white people. Take mulatto.org, mulattonation.com, etc. You can, of course, disagree with their usage of the term, not use it yourself, and explain why you don't like it when other people use it, but you shouldn't imply that anyone who uses it is automatically belittling them.
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
With the world geo-socio-political landscape being ever more driven by capitalism and consumerism more and more geopolitical regions are going to be "forced" into geopolitical units or blocks. Europe understands this hence they now have the Euro, the Caribbean has recently understand this hence we have the CARICOM (Caribbean Single Market and Economy), Latin America, north America and the Caribbean understands this so we have the FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas). African has to unify in some form or another or else continue to fall off the geopolitical world sphere. My guess is Africa will unite with the western Asia (Middle East) to form their amalgam of geopolitical and economic influence and force. But I agree with saddenedAfrican that Africa proper must come to an understanding that they must look out for one another because of the wolves out there that are looking to consume and destroy people who are not them in order to fortify their own. This is a must otherwise Africa will continue to fail its people and allow itself to be controlled and dominated my outsiders.
quote:Originally posted by Maahes: Sorry for my little blow up there. I'm not going to let you subjugate this dialogue with emotional sabbotage. Let's stay on topic. First, I'll answer to some of the Afrocentric whining:
quote:Originally posted by SaddenedAfrican: When indigenous African people begin thinking in racialist terms, they will finally begin to take control of their own continent and history. Intellectually I am aware races do not exist, but for those who would harm Africans, it does. Until Black peoples stop trying to join in solidarity with those who see them as OTHER, they as percentage will remain on bottom of the economic strata.
We have black people native Africans in the Diaspora doing everything to scramble away from other black people by claiming themselves BROWN or Native African Caucasoid and Asiatics.
Some posters here do everything to separate from other African ethnics. Its as though they are screaming, “I’m one of the good blacks…I will cooperate, I won’t rock the boat, I’ll go along, I’ll even help in belittling other blacks, just watch me. I’m not with them N*****S. I’m a good one, the model minority.”
They behave as such fools. Separation will never build strength. Yet, there are posters who seem to hate the idea of inclusion with other native Africans under label Black.
Entire Africa will end up like Somalia, with every ethnic group clamoring to establish themselves as some superior, separate clan or race.
Conflicts within Africa will continue as outsiders look on and take advantage of our self-imposed divisions.
I believe those who accentuate differences among Africans are collaborators and traitors. I can only pray that at some point they become enlightened individuals or disappear.
Only Unity will change things. If that unity must come under identifier of Black, why not use it to change things that have gone wrong over last few millennia?
Anyone who would divide us into separate shades and pontificate on ethnic differences is exactly reason why Native Africans have been targets of wandering and violent peoples who are united in their agreement that natives of Africa are the 'Black Other' to be abused for profit, used as cheap labor and humiliated for ever.
The French, British, Swedish, Romanian, Albanian, all understand they are White and Europeans when among outsiders who clearly are not. Why must some Africans insist in thinking so small minded by promoting ethnic chauvinisms when they should present African Unity under representation of color Black?
It was good enough for ancient Egyptians, so why do we have their supposed ancestors and certain East African ethnics, clinging to their not so accomplished ethnic clans as sole identifiers.
I think most religious texts warn against displaying foolish pride, wish these overly prideful Africans would learn.
An observer.
I would agree with you but unfortunately your writing is very naive. If Indigenous Africans start dumbing themselves down and accepting racialist terms they will be swallowing the willful ignorance of the west. I can assure you, we, meaning my families tribal clan have been very much in control of their tiny parcel of scorched earth for more centuries than history has memory of. We have always controled our lands and we have always been stewards of our lands. We have managed to survive all this time, thank you very much.
I do believe that since you can write you can read. I don't believe you are actually reading with entirety what I am writing. Thus, your comments are off mark. We've had a few centuries of academics in my family. We are a minority within the great nation of Egypt. Do you suppose we have ever felt discrimination or persecution by the dominating cultures? Not only has this generation experienced them- we felt more of the same from the Ptolemies, the Persians and the Romans. I say to you, come to Africa and live there. Embrace community and self-sacrifice. Let go of your ideals forged in the kiln of the insatiable west. I say to thee stop eating altogether and live off the grains you find at the roadside for weeks and months. I say to thee turn your head and swallow the enmity growing in your stomach as you see the women in your tribe disprespected by a powerful majority. I say to thee great American brown man, sacrifice a few months pay and travel to Chad and dedicate yourself to the cause of serving those that have been displaced by wars within Africa, waged by Africans, displacing Africans. You may learn there that tens of thousands of Africans are experiencing a sad reality. To rise up against your neighbor is to cause more war, more destruction more misery more starvation.
You haven't any idea what the experience of a Saharan African is. I do. I've encapsulated in a historical fiction epic about the 18th Dynasty. I hope you will come and see the motion picture and I hope that you will appreciate the casting of Cicely Tyson as the Queen Mother and Stacey Dash as the Princess Dowager. I hope that you will appreciate the performances of Shohreh Aghdashloo as Queen Gilukhepha and Amr Waked as Hereditary Prince and High Priest of the Great Bull,Nakht; Sami Bouijilla as Akhenaten, Said Taghmaoui as Hani the messenger and Khaled El Nabaoui as Chariotry Captain Ranefer. Sir Ben Kingsley as the Divine Prophet Aanen, James Earl Jones as Ringbearer Lord Ptahmose, Wanakee Pugh as the Warrior Queen Sitamun, Nona Gaye as Queen Isis, and finally my favorite character : Madam Mem as Princess Henuttaneb, Steward of the Oracle. "One of the king's daughters was born with albinism. Aanen is obsessed with her "imperfection". Princess Henuttaneb has been raised in the Mansion of the Oracle where her identity and condition are carefully guarded secrets."
teanaste'lle'n
Climb out of that box. I command you!
Ancient Proverbs transliterated. (used with frequency to this day amongst SaHidic Arabic speaking Upper Egyptians and Amharic/ Tamazight speaking Western Desert Tribespeoples)
<makedroush 3al Homar kedrom 3al barda3a>
Literal transalation: They couldn't beat the donkey so they beat the saddle! Hidden meaning: Be fair. Blame the source of the problem. Applicability: Inability to see the real problem and the real evil. <'Elle fat kadimoh tah>
Literal translation: Lost is the person who forgets his/her past. Hidden meaning: Remember what you were before bragging about what you became... Applicability: Criticizing those who want to be disassociated from their roots.
<Labbes 'el bousa tebka 3arousa>
Literal translation: Dress-up a stick and you get a doll. Hidden meaning: Make up (cosmetics) can make the ugly quite pretty. Applicability: Don't be fooled by appearances...
<Elzann 3ala elwedaan amarr min el-seHr>
Literal translation: Humming in one's ear is more (effective) than magic Hidden meaning: Incessant meaningless complaints do eventually work! Applicability: Advice to avoid listening to somebody who keeps on pushing a foolish argument
The best and shortest road towards knowledge of truth is Nature.
f one tries to navigate unknown waters one runs the risk of shipwreck. - Leave him in error who loves his error. - Every man is rich in excuses to safeguard his prejudices, his instincts, and his opinions. - To know means to record in one's memory; but to understand means to blend with the thing and to assimilate it oneself. - There are two kinds of error: blind credulity and piecemeal criticism. Never believe a word without putting its truth to the test; discernment does not grow in laziness; and this faculty of discernment is indispensable to the Seeker. Sound skepticism is the necessary condition for good discernment; but piecemeal criticism is an error.
You speak of a black Africa of a common objective. This is clear evidence that tribalism is completly alien to you. Egyptologists with Eurocentric leanings have marginalized the tribal origins of Ancient Egyptian culture. We remedy that with this film. The Great Houses are competing for power... Corrupt remainders of every skin tone and ethnicity are grappling for the scepter. But it is the tribal roots of the history - the entitlements of matrilinear heiresses that trump all-
To truly comprehend ancient Egyptian history one has to have some knowledge and understanding of North and East African Tribal Customs and ideology. Cattle Cultures, Ancestral Worship Cultures- so many different ideologies working simultaneously at different stable Sepat nomarchies. Do you know what a sepat is? Do you know what a sepat nomarch is?
Afrocentrics are not interested in tribal cultures at least not at this late date. Their naivette on African racial/ethnic origins makes that much clear. Not to worry. There is alot to learn and an open mind will meet the challenges provided by nature and evolve and adapt to find knowledge.
You may enjoy the project that follows this one, a film trilogy about the Trail of Tears and the role of the Buffalo Soldiers in claiming Indian lands for European descended settlers. Its called Treatise for Boometowne and no one ethnicity gets off being the victim or the bad guy. Plenty of blame to pass around. No clear cut bad guys there and certainly no good guys- its not a white and black paridigm you see. And neither is Goddess of the Sun.
Posts: 318 | From: PA. USA | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
Wow. More emotional bloodletting. What I said was to my knowledge no Dinka, Irthet or Mazoi were ever hereditary chiefs of Egypt e.g. Pharaoh. And you should know that the term pharaoh e.g. the Great House is not a person- it is a governmental body presided over by the Kenbet, the matriarchate council, the House of Amen or another religious party depending on the dynasty- the royal family including the king figurehead and all those administrators who are hereditary nobles of various sepats.
If a foreign entity were to take over the Egyptian Governmental body and usurp all those generations of hereditary chiefs and cheiftanesses- than that individual might demand that he be called Pharaoh. But generally speaking and this is from a Sahidic (Saite) perspective, just about anyone that would call themselves a pharaoh would be calling themselves an illegitimate leader. Scribes went out of their way to have fun at the "Pharaoh"'s expense cursing the name of the self-styled king. But that is a digression.
The term Black Pharaoh to describe Herihor is thusly an insult to Herihor and his descendants. Herihor came from a tribe of people whose banner the Oryx is indigenous to Eastern Africa. He did not lead any sort of culturally imperialistic revolt over Egypt- he restored order to chaotic Egypt that had lost its way -a tree toppled over for the weight of its roots and branches. While we are using similar terminology here were are certainly not utilizing the same nomenclature.
Herihor who I was speaking about was not a Black Pharaoh. Were there dark-skinned what some might term " Sub-Saharan" dynasty heads and hereditary chiefs/chieftanesses? Absolutely! Anyone that would argue against that is willfuly ignorant. There are whole generations of some of Egypt's most important generational/dynastic founders who are most assuredly derived of southern roots- they probably had very dark skin- darker than your average Brown American and probably about average with your general Somalian populace- a bit dark for some Ethiopians but very typical for most of East Africa in general- if these individuals walked into Bank of America and asked for a loan they would be categorically turned down. They would be described as " Dark-Skinned" by American city kids on the subway if asked to describe who just passed by. But were they Black? No. They were not peoples of the Black Rock. They were not descendants of the Black Rock. Now- were members of their family members of the Black Rock? One sterling individual a Mazoi or Yam comes to mind. His name escapes me at this moment but he was much beloved of Hatshepsut and was buried with full honours in Valley of the Kings if memory serves me correctly. I'll look him up
Anyway- Hereditary Chiefs and Chieftanesses are just that, hereditary. The tribal clans of Egypt were not as far as I know from the Dinka, the Irthet, the Fur, the Mazoi or the Yam. These are the tribes of the venerable Black Rock. We have been trading partners and cultural neighbors for as long as Africa has existed. Why is this so controversial to some of you? What is the issue?
Because I come from Africa and live there half the year, because i dedicate my life to displaced Africans, I force myself to learn about the respective histories of the peoples. My peoples.
Some biased person took some quotation of mine out of context and twisted that writing to say something that I never said. Now writers are reacting to the statement that is taken out of context.
When I wrote that piece over at the Egyptian Dreams forum and one that I was banned from that site for by the way- for being an Afrocentric racist if memory serves me right- I was/am speaking of the people of the Black Rock - whose unique cultural history and great antiquity in the Sahara is not open to debate. They have very distinctive pottery, art and basket weaving- very unique skeletans and burial customs I might add. They have always lived in the Sahara just as pale eyed, pale haired Tjemehu have always lived in the Sahara. Neither is any more or less African than the other.
The writer who makes the assumption that white is better than black is perpetuating that regretful reaction to Eruocentric pandering that I define as Afrocentricism. Africa is a continent. On this great continent the vast majority of diversity of plants and animals that would come to populate both Asia and Europe are rooted.
What I have been asserting time and again is that Africa has a diverse population of human beings. They come in many different colours. The osteological data, the HARD SCIENCE of anthropology of predynastic and dynastic Egypt present a very clear picture.
Language, culture and bones, haploptypes and DNA these are not refutable evidence.
East Africa and West Asia are as related to one another as the Black Maned Saharan Lion is to the Asiatic Lion. They are related as closely as Andammen Island Pygmoid Indigene and the Central African Pygmoid Indigene.
Can't you comprehend that the earth's history is not capable of containment? You can't shelf off life because of your justifiable pride of your ancestral origins.
Skin colour is only the superficial issue here obviously.
Let's have a look at Africa for a moment. Try to open your minds and not be so emotionally attached to inferiority complexes. I don't have one and you shouldn't either.
This is where my family comes from: Its a place in Africa. Here is where the bodies of our ancestors lay.
Again, in Africa.
This is a hunting panther or Cheetah. They only exist in Africa and Western Asia.
These three men are all Ma'ahes Chiefs Two are of Ibex clan. They wear Indigo cloth and are dark brown skinned. The third man whose name is Tzi is an indigenous Saharan of Aoudad Clan. He has dark tawny ochre skin and Mongoloid folds around his eyes. The Ibex clan tend have dark brown skin and long hair that spirals in long tendrils. The Auodad have pepper corn hair and speak in a click dialect. Tzi's ancestors were the original inhabitants of the Sahara before anyone else existed there. His ancestors generated pictographs across the desert. The Ibex people generated others. The Ibex's original home included parts of Libya, Niger, Western Egypt and Sudan. The Tuareg and Woodabe share similar words and burial customs. Neither of these people would consider themselves peoples of the Black Rock. The Black Rock is a plateau that stretches from Darfur to Niger. It is black rock and its peoples are very tall, very black and very noble. We love and respect them. They are not considered inferior by any means. Their baskets and pottery , their cattle and bead work were and are to a lesser extent today- greatly admired and valued by us- the northern neighbors.
This is a troupe of Sebkhet Mummy birds in Khargha. Their nearest relatives are another wild population of Nasal Bristled Guineafowl - in Somalia. In other words the original range of this unique species of terrestrial birds- limited in flight capacity dependent upon water and shelter alot like human beings- once extended from Northern central Somalia all the way to Siwa. The aridification of the Holocene drastically reduced its range. Not incidentally, the heiroglyphic of the guineafowl symbolizes eternity. It was a sacred bird of our ancestors. Eurocentric Egyptologists made assumptions that the bird was introduced during Greek times which is of course nonsense. The prejudice against any connection between "sub-Saharan" Africa and Egypt is well known to me and my Great Grand Uncle Ziko Gonneim- another indigenous Egyptian.
Who unearthed this beautiful funerary piece from a woman whose iconography suggests she is of Ibex ancestry.
-------------------- The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground. Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now just to open the box a little further have a look at some people you aught to know about:
This woman is Oryx ( Red Rock) Clan:
While this man is Dinka ( Black Rock) Clan:
This woman is Auodad from Tunisia
This man is Kung! From South Africa. His ancestors once peopled the entire Sahara and all of Southern Asia.
While we might think we see a "Black" person when we see a Kung! or Khoisan person, their genetic and osteological traits clade together with some very endangered peoples that live in Southern Asia: Here is another unique peoples that left Africa before recorded history and peopled Southern Asia:
So- can't even remember what I was writing about - but basically - diversity the topic the issue- it doesn't belong to dogmatic barkers or prejudicial whiners. It belongs to the peoples of Earth.
-------------------- The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground. Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"42 Declarations of Innocence" "42 Admonitions of Ma'at" "42 Negative Confessions"
I have not done iniquity. I have not robbed with violence. I have not stolen. I have done no murder, I have done no harm. I have not defrauded offerings. I have not diminished obligations. I have not plundered the Netcher. I have not spoken lies. I have not snatched away food. I have not caused pain. I have not committed fornication. I have not caused shedding of tears. I have not dealt deceitfully. I have not transgressed. I have not acted guilefully. I have not laid waste the ploughed land. I have not been an eavesdropper. I have not set my lips in motion (against any man). **I have not been angry and wrathful except for a just cause. I have not defiled the wife of any man. I have not defiled the wife of any man. (repeated twice) I have not polluted myself. I have not cause terror. I have not transgressed. (repeated twice) I have not burned with rage. **I have not stopped my ears against the words of Right and Truth (Ma'at). I have not worked grief. **I have not acted with insolence. **I have not stirred up a strife. ***I have not judged hastily.*** I have not been an eavesdropper. (repeated twice) I have not multiplied words exceedingly. I have not done neither harm nor ill. I have never cursed the King. I have never fouled the water. ***I have not spoken scornfully.*** I have never cursed the Netcher. I have not stolen. I have not defrauded the offerings of the Netcher. I have not plundered the offerings to the blessed dead. I have not filched the food of the infant, neither have I sinned against the Netcher of my native town. I have not slaughtered with evil intent the cattle of the Netcher.
You display hubris, Maahes.
I am a man, aware, are you? Implication: I am aware when I speak wrongful. I make corrections and humble myself for no other reason than it pleases me.
Good Luck with the movie.
I am also currently involved in a difficult endeavor(novel)to complete.
I know how it is, and truly wish you successes, always.
Posts: 96 | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Were they displaced by the super-Negroid (truly black) Africans, the Hamites, the Pygmoids, the Reds, the Caucasoids, or the Khoisan Africans? It seems that you're familiar with all of these supposed groups and it seems relevant to ask since it might explain the hostility; maybe it was racial?" Are you mad? You can't blame the problems Africans are experiencing at the hands of other Africans on anyone but the people that make the mental decision to make their neighbors suffer. You can't blame the the problems Sunni Iraqi are experiencing on the Americans. The Shiite militia is to blame.
The Tutsi and the Hutu killed one another. Some might try and blame the Europeans. But it wasn't the Europeans brandishing machetes at innocent women and children much less the larger percentage of the educated adult men.
So where are you going with this presuppositional bias- this tirade of yours? I'm no fraud. I'm a humanist and an African. I don't agree with some of your racist ideology. That doesn't make me a hippocrite. It makes me an objective thinker.
The next time you bother to contribute your opinion, perhaps you should do your homework.
The people of the Black Rock are not "super-Negroid". What is your problem with these so-called "Negroes"? You do realize that there are more different kinds of Africans than Negro and non Negro correct? None is better than any other.
I wouldn't suggest that any but the Bantu speakers are what you are suggesting here and again, they are not of the Black ROCK. THEY ARE BANTU.
In the creation myth of the Saharan Africans, the belief that all human kind was forged on a kiln from different colours of clay was paramount. The Ochre coloured clay was first-the Khoisan and related desert pictograph painters. The Black Rock clay - sprung to life as the imposingly surreal Fur and related peoples- the peoples of the Black Rock- the peoples that merged their cattle culture to ours and introduced the technologies of basket weaving and bead making to Egyptian predynastic cultures. Thirdly, the peoples of the Red Rock- the red clay- the Saite- were born and it goes on and on for there are many different beautiful colours of rock and clay in the great Sahara. Every hue of man was known by all. We didn't know the Bantu speakers until the late dynastic period. How could we? They were very hostile enemies with the Fur. They fought over the rights of certain resources and cattle. The Black Rock people acted as barriers between the Bantu speakers and the Sahara until the Bantu slave trade poured past Niger ~1500 years ago. I dont think it ever reached the Horn of Africa or Somalia. Y haplogroup E3b1 in Somali males posted by Dienekes on Friday, March 11, 2005
A new study quantifies the extent of Eurasian (15%) and Sub-Saharan African (5%) paternal admixture in Somalis, a population which appears to be predominantly East African paternally. The authors also explain why the Somalis have low Sub-Saharan African admixture:
The time of the eastbound Bantu expansion was estimated to be 3400�1100 years ago.24 Bantu populations have high frequencies of E3a haplogroups.4 We have observed only a few individuals with the E3a haplogroup in our Somali population, thus, supporting the view that the Bantu migration did not reach Somalia.42 It has been suggested that a barrier against gene flow exist in the region.43 The barrier seems to be the Cushitic languages and cultures to which Somalis belongs. The Cushitic languages belong to the Afro-Asiatic languages that are spoken in Northern and Eastern Africa. The Cushitic languages and cultures are mainly found in the Somalis and the Oromos, one of the two main groups inhabiting Ethiopia.44, 45, 46. The Somali and Oromo languages have a high degree of similarity and the two populations share many cultural characteristics. The Somali and Oromo people live in clans with special patterns of marriage and the Somali and Oromo people have complex, interwoven pedigrees.44, 45
European Journal of Human Genetics (advance online publication)
High frequencies of Y chromosome lineages characterized by E3b1, DYS19-11, DYS392-12 in Somali males
Juan J Sanchez et al.
We genotyped 45 biallelic markers and 11 STR systems on the Y chromosome in 201 male Somalis. In addition, 65 sub-Saharan Western Africans, 59 Turks and 64 Iraqis were typed for the biallelic Y chromosome markers. In Somalis, 14 Y chromosome haplogroups were identified including E3b1 (77.6%) and K2 (10.4%). The haplogroup E3b1 with the rare DYS19-11 allele (also called the E3b1 cluster γ) was found in 75.1% of male Somalis, and 70.6% of Somali Y chromosomes were E3b1, DYS19-11, DYS392-12, DYS437-14, DYS438-11 and DYS393-13. The haplotype diversity of eight Y-STRs ('minimal haplotype') was 0.9575 compared to an average of 0.9974 and 0.9996 in European and Asian populations. In sub-Saharan Western Africans, only four haplogroups were identified. The West African clade E3a was found in 89.2% of the samples and the haplogroup E3b1 was not observed. In Turks, 12 haplogroups were found including J2*(xJ2f2) (27.1%), R1b3*(xR1b3d, R1b3f) (20.3%), E3b3 and R1a1*(xR1a1b) (both 11.9%). In Iraqis, 12 haplogroups were identified including J2*(xJ2f2) (29.7%) and J*(xJ2) (26.6%). The data suggest that the male Somali population is a branch of the East African population - closely related to the Oromos in Ethiopia and North Kenya - with predominant E3b1 cluster γ lineages that were introduced into the Somali population 4000-5000 years ago, and that the Somali male population has approximately 15% Y chromosomes from Eurasia and approximately 5% from sub-Saharan Africa.
That said, I have a real problem with the term Eurasian and Caucasoid. I may have said we do not consider ourselves peoples of the black rock. We are however peoples of the red rock. We are thusly not Caucasoid nor are we Eurasian. These terms are misleading at best and speak to the original directional evolutionists of the social Darwin age. It would be a presupposition on your part and an error to equate an indigenous Egyptian's refusal to be described as black -within the context of African perspective- with enmity or loathing for the people of the Black Rock. We enjoy being Africans and fully comprehend the great diversity of Africa. How boring it would be if all the beads were of one colour, one shape and one clay?
-------------------- The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground. Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maahes.. Your endless diatribes consists of no more than repetitive rants. I fail to see what selectively random pictures of coastal vs. inner Africans does by way of substantiating your original point of contention. It is as if you present these as some type of irrefutable proof that there was a dichotomy between what you perceive to be "black" or "true negroid", as opposed to what this indigenous black African diversity truly consists of.
Courtesy of Djehuti:
Fulani (West African)
Somali (East African)
Egyptian (North African)
Tutsi (Central African)
quote:Wow. More emotional bloodletting.
Speak for yourself with your all pictures and rhetoric, but no facts/evidence approach.
quote:What I said was to my knowledge no Dinka, Irthet or Mazoi were ever hereditary chiefs of Egypt e.g. Pharaoh.
What you said was this:
"To my knowledge there was never a single Black ( as in Dinka, Fur or Nyala peoples of Niger, Sudan and Libya) King that ruled in Egypt.
Nor were there many Negroes ( Round Headed) even present in Dynastic Egypt until fairly late in history."
^Which is redundant. The people who ruled Egypt whom this label is to be applied, were "black Egyptians", not "Black Dinka, Fur or Nyala peoples". What you are implying here is that there were no "black Egyptian kings", even though black Africans are, and always have been the aboriginal population of the Nile valley, so that begs to question who might these non-black African foreigners be who were ruling Egypt? Obviously they weren't the Dinka, Fur or Nyala, because those people are blacks.
Your subtlety only exposes your dishonesty.
As for "Negroes":
Negro - A member of the Negroid race. Not in scientific use.
^So this is again, redundant since we're discussing the non-existence of a non-existent people in ancient Egypt. A concept very foreign in ancient Egypt its self and non-applicable to ancient populations as a whole. If you'd meant to say that these peoples were not related to and continuous with other more southernly African populations, then of course you just don't know what you're talking about:
quote:The nature of the body plan was also investigated by comparing the intermembral, brachial, and crural indices for these samples with values obtained from the literature. No significant differences were found in either index through time for either sex. The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the “super-Negroid” body plan described by Robins (1983).
- Sonia Zakrzewski (2003)
quote:"The southern affinities with the series are striking given the commonly held or stated classical "racial" views of the Egyptians predict a notable distinction from"Africans". Thus any scheme to label Nubians or all Egyptians as a "Caucasian" monotypic entity is a hypothesis which is easily falsified. Metric analysis clearly suggest in fact that at least southern Egyptian groups were part of indigenous holocene Saharo-Tropical African variation."
- Keita, S. (1993)
Though of course you've been so mind-raped that evidence doesn't concern you, which is why you're forced to leave science and history while focusing more on your own racial dogma and pre-selected photo gallery.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
No, but I see that you've missed the sarcasm. Also, what does that Y-Chromosome study on male Somali tell us other than the fact that they are completely indigenous and have even less non-African admixture than the average African American male? "Black rock" vs "red Rock" is a type of distorted mindless concept that only belongs in whatever modern clan conceived of such baseless separatism. Surely this is not how Kemetians saw themselves, or were described by others who saw them, so surely your modern racialist views don't apply to them.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
Once this interesting discussion has been thoroughly examined, I have a good feeling whose position on the issue(s) will turn out to be more credible/scholarly/factual.
Posts: 391 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Something else that comes to mind here. One of the problems that some Afrocentrics and their parents the Eurocentrics suffer from is a limited vantage point. Something that has always bothered me about Eurocentrics is that they assume Egypt is a Caucasian utopia. They get off the plane and stare open mouthed in awe at all the dark people walking freely about the place. They say things like " You don't look Egyptian." and the taxi driver retorts " that's funny you don't look Canadian either." Anyway, the ironic thing here is the subcontinent, that is India, is the other focal point in this human biodiversity puzzle. A Eurocentric tends to think of the Sahara as a melting pot between Arabs and Africans or between Caucasoid Africans and Europe. A more open-minded person will recognize that before any real civilizations were booming in the Near East, populations of Humans were moving along the coasts from India and beyond, across the Yemen bridge to the Horn of Africa. The Semitic language was born from necessity because of this diaspora - this need for India to Speak a Trade Language with Ethiopia and visa versa. Their descendants migrated into the Near East and founded "Arabia". The Saudi Arabian the Saite African- the peoples of Kush Sudan the peoples of the Hindu Kush. I hope that one day everyone will appreciate how the layers of history are deep. One must comprehend how peoples migrated and how they kept their trade routes going long before any civilizations grew from them.
The ancient Egyptians were nearly as closely related ethnically speaking to the Somalians and Ethiopians as they were to the peoples of Western India. This is tens of centuries before the first Persians, the first Zorastrians the first Arabians. The peoples of the Subcontinent of India were of a slightly different ethnic makeup in those days. But we don't consider Southern Indians ( the genetic reservoir) to be white. Indeed the paler skinned " Aryans" have been an oppressive reality on the dark skinned indigenous Indians. Old Egyptians were Africans whose closest relatives lived in Western India and Eastern Africa. Subsequently, so called Aryans arrived and formed a permanent barrier between the ancient cultures.
It could be argued that the peoples of the Black Rock- the Dinka/Irthet formed a wedge between the ancestors of the Bantu speakers and other branches of their family tree that were left behind in the Nile Valley- In other words, just as Aryans ended the relationship between Ethiopia and India for a time so too could the Black Rock peoples have interupted any ongoing ties between the peoples of West Africa the Bantu speakers and East African lineages descended of the same ancestors. Who knows? One thing is for certain, culture knows boundaries. Languages act as barriers and so do specific cultural dictates. The desert itself makes incursion by non-indigenous peoples unnecessarily risky. The indigenous inhabitants of the desert be the black, red, brown or ochre yellow-made it highly dangerous.
-------------------- The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground. Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Maahes: [QB] Something else that comes to mind here. One of the problems that some Afrocentrics and their parents the Eurocentrics suffer from is a limited vantage point. Something that has always bothered me about Eurocentrics is that they assume Egypt is a Caucasian utopia. They get off the plane and stare open mouthed in awe at all the dark people walking freely about the place. They say things like " You don't look Egyptian." and the taxi driver retorts " that's funny you don't look Canadian either." Anyway, the ironic thing here is the subcontinent, that is India, is the other focal point in this human biodiversity puzzle. A Eurocentric tends to think of the Sahara as a melting pot between Arabs and Africans or between Caucasoid Africans and Europe. A more open-minded person will recognize that before any real civilizations were booming in the Near East, populations of Humans were moving along the coasts from India and beyond, across the Yemen bridge to the Horn of Africa. The Semitic language was born from necessity because of this diaspora - this need for India to Speak a Trade Language with Ethiopia and visa versa. Their descendants migrated into the Near East and founded "Arabia". The Saudi Arabian the Saite African- the peoples of Kush Sudan the peoples of the Hindu Kush. I hope that one day everyone will appreciate how the layers of history are deep. One must comprehend how peoples migrated and how they kept their trade routes going long before any civilizations grew from them.
Enough with the pseudo-history please. Ethiopians speak Semitic for the simple fact that proto-Semitic has its origins there and the native Semitic tongue, Geez, has no known non-African predecessors. The entire language phylum to which it belongs, has its roots in the horn; no hypothetical foreign invaders necessary. Indians by and large don't speak Semitic, but rather Dravic and Indo-European. This is how distorted your view of history actually is, leading into question what it is you actually do know?
quote:Near Eastern languages came from Africa 10,000 years ago Investigator: Ene Metspalu by Laura Spinney
Analysis of thousands of mitochondrial DNA samples has led Estonian archeogeneticists to the origins of Arabic. Ene Metspalu of the Department of Evolutionary Biology at Tartu University and the Estonian Biocentre in Tartu, claims to have evidence that the Arab-Berber languages of the Near and Middle East came out of East Africa around 10,000 years ago. She has found evidence for what may have been the last sizeable migration out of Africa before the slave trade. Genetic markers transmitted through either the maternal or paternal line have been used to trace the great human migrations since Homo sapiens emerged in Africa. But attempts to trace the evolution of languages have met with less success, partly because of the impact on languages of untraceable political and economic upheavals. Metspalu and colleagues analyzed inherited variations in a huge number of samples - almost 3000 - of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) taken from natives of the Near East, Middle East and Central Asia, as well as North and East Africa. mtDNA is inherited through the maternal line, and by comparing their data with existing data on European, Indian, Siberian and other Central Asian populations, the researchers were able to create a comprehensive phylogenetic map of maternal lineages diverging from Africa and spreading towards Europe and Asia. Working in collaboration with language specialists, they found that this movement 10,000 years ago, which was probably centred on Ethiopia, could well have been responsible for seeding the Afro-Asiatic language from which all modern Arab-Berber languages are descended. "This language was spoken in Africa 10,000 or 12,000 years ago, "Metspalu told BioMedNet News. "We think it was around that time that carriers brought these Afro-Asiatic languages to the Near East." The language, or its derivatives, later spread much further afield. What could have triggered the movement she can only speculate. One possibility is that increasing desertification was causing famine in Africa and driving hunters further afield in search of animals. Interestingly, the lineages they traced through this 10,000-year-old migration didn't seem to get much further north than modern-day Syria or east of modern-day Iraq. There is no evidence of the lineages in the mtDNA of people from Turkey or Iran, says Metspalu. "We can't understand why this boundary [to the Arab-Berber speaking world] is so sharp," she said. "They came out of Africa, and when they reached Turkey they just stopped." She believes some kind of physical boundary, now vanished, must have impeded them. The same genetic detective work has confirmed archeological evidence that the biggest movement out of Africa occurred around 50,000 years ago - which is when Africans first settled in other continents - and that it originated in a small East African population.
The rest of what you're saying is just semantical blabber along with venting.
quote:The ancient Egyptians were nearly as closely related ethnically speaking to the Somalians and Ethiopians as they were to the peoples of Western India.
That's a lie.. Western India is extremely far away while Ethiopia and Eritrea straddle the Nile valley, along with Egypt. MtDNA studies show ties with Ethiopia and Eritrea, and so does language, culture, and the afromentioned geography. You've pulled west India right out the invisible sky as part of your liberal nonsense.
quote:This is tens of centuries before the first Persians, the first Zorastrians the first Arabians. The peoples of the Subcontinent of India were of a slightly different ethnic makeup in those days. But we don't consider Southern Indians ( the genetic reservoir) to be white. Indeed the paler skinned " Aryans" have been an oppressive reality on the dark skinned indigenous Indians. Old Egyptians were Africans whose closest relatives lived in Western India and Eastern Africa. Subsequently, so called Aryans arrived and formed a permanent barrier between the ancient cultures.
Terrible. Again, why would the Old Egyptians' closest relatives be foreigners who lived thousands of miles away and spoke an entirely different language, when they have people indigenous to the Nile and horn who aren't but a hop,skip, and jump away, and speak very similar languages and with similar cultures, along with exhibiting similar body and facial types? All of this, according to you is just a coincidence at the expense of Indians? Talk about self-hating "Africans".
Since it seems that you like to cite Keita, it should be particularly interesting that he refutes you:
quote:An understanding of this concept shows us clearly that ‘there is no evidence that the region was empty and primarily colonised by non-African outsiders, who had differentiated outside and then returned to Africa’ (emphasis in original). Keita’s summary position is that ‘It is not a question of “African” “influence”; ancient Egypt was organically African. Studying early Egypt in its African context is not “Afrocentric,” but simply correct’
quote:It could be argued that the peoples of the Black Rock- the Dinka/Irthet formed a wedge between the ancestors of the Bantu speakers and other branches of their family tree that were left behind in the Nile Valley- In other words, just as Aryans ended the relationship between Ethiopia and India for a time so too could the Black Rock peoples have interupted any ongoing ties between the peoples of West Africa the Bantu speakers and East African lineages descended of the same ancestors.
Or it can be argued that this cooky pseudoscience of yours shouldn't even be entertained. Or that if challenged, you'd never be able to find me a reference in mdu ntr, referring to any of the southern peoples as "Black Rocks".
quote:Who knows?
Certainly not you..
quote:One thing is for certain, culture knows boundaries. Languages act as barriers and so do specific cultural dictates. The desert itself makes incursion by non-indigenous peoples unnecessarily risky.
The desert never hindered migration along the Nile valley, and with that said, desertification is relatively recent and black Africans have occupied Egypt and the surrounding area, including the Sahara and rest of the Nile valley since time immemorable.
35,000-30,000 years ago: "Oldest human skeleton found in Egypt". Nazlet Khater man was the earliest modern human skeleton found near Luxor, in 1980. The remains was dated from between 35,000 and 30,000 years ago. The report regarding the racial affinity of this skeleton concludes: "Strong alveolar prognathism combined with fossa praenasalis in an African skull is suggestive of Negroid morphology - Thoma A., Morphology and Affinities of the Nazlet Khater Man; Journal of Human Evolution, vol. 13, 1984.
quote:Nabta Playa is an internally drained basin that served as an important ceremonial center for nomadic tribes during the early part of 9560 BC. Located 62 miles west of Abu Simbel some 60 miles west of the Nile near the Egyptian-Sudanese border. Nabta contains a number of standing and toppled megaliths........Analysis of human remains suggest migration from sub-Saharan Africa
Male Badarian crania were analyzed using the generalized distance of Mahalanobis in a comparative analysis with other African and European series from the Howells’s database. The study was carried out to examine the affinities of the Badarians to evaluate, in preliminary fashion, a demic diffusion hypothesis that postulates that horticulture and the Afro-Asiatic language family were brought ultimately from southern Europe. (The assumption was made that the southern Europeans would be more similar to the central and northern Europeans than to any indigenous African populations.) The Badarians show a greater affinity to indigenous Africans while not being identical. This suggests that the Badarians were more affiliated with local and an indigenous African population than with Europeans. It is more likely that Near Eastern/southern European domesticated animals and plants were adopted by indigenous Nile Valley people without a major immigration of non-Africans. There was more of cultural transfer. - Keita, S. "Early Nile Valley Farmers From El-Badari" (2005)
quote:Previous concepts about the origin of the First Dynasty Egyptians as being somehow external to the Nile Valley or less “native” are not supported by archeology. In summary, the Abydos First Dynasty royal tomb contents reveal a notable craniometric heterogeneity. Southerners predominate. The suggestion of previous work, namely that crania with southern and coastal northern patterns might be present in these tombs, has been demonstrated and explained by historical and archaeological data
- S. Keita (1992)
quote:The indigenous inhabitants of the desert be the black, red, brown or ochre yellow-made it highly dangerous.
What is even more dangerous is to suggest that they were more closely related to distant Indian populations than with fellow indigenees. As a matter of fact, such diffusionist ideas are border line loony, as demonstrated above.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
You know, it really is your insistence on binding race to geography that is dragging your psueoscience under the sand. There are a diversity of ethnic types in the regions of Egypt, Libya, Sudan and so on. Some and not all of these people are what are referred to by other North-East Africans as People of the Black Rock.
They ( peoples of the Black Rock) are generally speaking, nomadic, cattle cultures. While they are very dark, and very tall-their language group/culture is far-removed and most distinctive from Bantu language/ culture. Most American and many Europeans of African descent are derived of the Bantu speakers. But the Bantu slave economy was based upon ethnic cleansing and the capture of whole tribes within their ever increasing territories. This started some two thousand years ago and long before the first West European slave trader set foot on the continent of Africa. For this reason, American and European "Blacks" may share genes with any number of different people of vastly different language groups and ethnicities. We refer to Africans in the western countries as Blacks. It is an oversimplification. We call people of Poland Poles or at least Eastern Europeans. We call people from southern Europe, French, Italian, Spanish or at least Mediterranean. But we don't often describe them as white- that is except in America where diversity is something you kill with lysol and bad television. This does not change the fact that Cushitic speaking peoples of the Black Rock were well known to dynastic Egyptians. We knew them well enough to have names for each and every one of their kingdoms. They knew us well enough to bring their cattle and gold , their ivory and giraffes to Egypt. But let's be clear about something, Nomadic cattle cultures were generally speaking not particularly interested in the pastorilist lifestyle of the Bantu speakers nor of the Nile River inhabitants. An analogy might be the Sioux - Plains Indians - they probably didnt want to rule over the Iroquois Confederacy. The Sioux identified themselves with their freedom and their intimate relationship with the ever changing landscape while the Iroquois were in the habit of altering their habitat to keep comfortable in the face of climatic adversity. One was not more or less civilized than the other. They traded with one another and occasionally fought over territories. We can be certain that they at least occasionally respected one another as human beings cut from the same cloth.
Similarly to the Sioux/Iroquois, we should accept that the Cushites were strictly speaking, a trading culture whose borders were Egypt. They traded with one another. Mind you, the borders are incredibly foreboding- enormous mountains - plateaus in the desert- sand seas- its not like there is a border fence.
Other African ethnicities indigenous to Eastern Africa that are not peoples of the Black Rock but rather Peoples of the Oryx and any one of a dozen other East African ethnicites- described in some literature as long headed peoples- or Nihilotic peoples were and are very dark skinned-they include the Somalians, the Yemenites, the Ethiopian Highlanders and many but not all of the Sudanese. These people live(d) along the coast of Eastern Africa and they were bordered on the west by the Peoples of the Black Rock and to the North by the Peoples of the Red Rock. To be certain, the Nile Valley to the north was more hospitable to human habitation and whole commnities of diverse ethnic backgrounds were founded and maintained over millenia. The Western Desert on the other hand was/is surrounded by a natural barrier the Great Sand Sea and its endemic tribes are highly protective of incursions into their territories. Where they were often trading partners with the Peoples of the Black Rock, they were not so fond of the Oryx. There are whole populations of blue black skinned ethnics living as far north as Siwa to this very day. They do not mix with other ethnicities as a rule but this has to do with ancient marriage/land laws and nothing to do with racism, prejudice or anything like that. None of the ethnic tribes are going to mix for the most part. It just isnt feasible. Land is passed down on the mother's side as are water rights. A woman with property and or water is generally going to be a steward of that property. She must pass that land/water on to close kin descended of the same matrlinear ancestress. Marriages between tribes are becoming more and more common but marriages between different tribal clans are almost unheard of- though a woman without land or water rights might marry into a tribal family- she is then viewed as married into the tribe. The territories will not be handed down to her peoples.
Getting back to the issue here- The East Africans that migrate up and down the Nile Valley and back forth from Somalia to India and back- they are a differnt language family and cultural/ethnic group from the peoples of the Black Rock. You might consider them black but that would be an oversimplification of the great antiquity of each respective groups cultural origins. Dark Brown long headed people that are largely pastorilist cattle cultures competing for resources along some territorial boundaries- trading in others with round headed nomadic cattle cultures on one side and with square headed red brown people on another side- this is what has been going on like it or not forever. This is not to say that the ancient Egyptians were Caucasian and that they are a mixture between East African and European. That is not what I am saying at all. I am not saying that the Black Rock peoples were not present in ancient Egypt either. I am not claiming that the peoples of the Oryx, or the Peoples of the Hare were not present in Egypt- they were all most certainly present. But the tribal clan mothers of most dynasties were indigenous Egyptians. The dynasty fathers that arrived from further south often legitmized their ascendency by marriage with sepat heiresses - endemic to Egypt. Why? Because the land was passed down from mother to daughter. But some dynasties were largely peopled by Oryx or Hare- to my knowledge no Nyala, fur, Irthet or Dinka ever ruled as sovereigns over Egypt. I don't think they were even slightly interested in such stifling company. Most of the desert tribes also passed on the cluster **** of over populated cities.
These people certainly have known one another for a very long while. Strict cultural marriage laws have a way of keeping different peoples distinct. This is not a hard and fast rule. Obviously there is genetic introgression along all lines. I stand by my assertion that no hereditary rulers of the Black Rock ever ruled as soveriegns over the Great House in Egypt. People nearly as dark as them most certainly did. But then I've been repeating myself time and again with that statement. The emotional attachment some have for the assumption of racial prejudice on my part is impressive if not a little disheartening. What you describe as black is not what I describe as black which is what the original posting on the Egyptian dreams forum was focused on.
While you are an American Black and take umbrage on my position, I am an indigenous Saharan. In my opinion, and this is strictly speaking from my personal perspective, your position is as domineering and misplaced as any Eurocentric's. If Im reading this correctly you are claiming that the indigenous peoples of Egypt are all of the Black Rock or better yet- some mythical race of Bantu speakers that lived in Egypt before everyone else??? In your view everyone else in Egypt entombed or otherwise is admixtured or of recent import? You are also I think- assuming that Negroe should equate with black. The choice of photos I left off with last included endangered indigenous cultures of South East Asia that are clearly blacker than your average African. They are truly Black. I also included Khung! and Orang Asli -one anothers closest genetic relatives yet one is rndemic to Africa and the other Malaysia. Both have tawny ochre skin. Both these ancient morphotypes have unique and respective genotypes. Molecular biologists have been able to follow these fascinating peoples trail as they migrated from Africa into southern Asia- tens of thousands of years before Europeans were even on the scene- The so called pygmoids are the ancestors of all- I bring attention to this compelling fact- yet you define my position as basically apologistic of European brainwashing and some sort of hatred for Africans or eexclusion of black peoples?>?
I have a mynah bird that likes to suddenly emote song and limric alot of it distasteful. An elderly woman that owned a bookstore gave him to me when she fell ill. The mynah went from eloquating Frost and bits of the Old Testament to curse words. The other day the guy that shoes my horses cursed at a roan for backing into him- now the Mynah is greeting the day with the term Terd Burglar. It can't help but make a stern man smile but one has to wonder what his intentions are.
-------------------- The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground. Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Terrible. Again, why would the Old Egyptians' closest relatives be foreigners who lived thousands of miles away and spoke an entirely different language, when they have people indigenous to the Nile and horn who aren't but a hop,skip, and jump away, and speak very similar languages and with similar cultures, along with exhibiting similar body and facial types? All of this, according to you is just a coincidence at the expense of Indians? Talk about self-hating "Africans".
You really are Eurocentric. India is Africa's sister and there is absolutely no doubt about it. The reason I wrote that digression was to read your predictable reaction. But then you've never been to Yemen nor Somalia nor have you been to Sudan or Egypt. You don't speak our languages. You don't eat our foods. You don't share bread with us. Ethnozoology ever heard of it? Yup- the origins of domestic animals and plants...Great subject matter. For example, myrhh and frankincense came from the Horn of Africa. But where my friend do spices like cinnamon, fennel, and clove derive? Where did the domesticated horse or better yet the genetic strain of domestic horses in Mittani come from? Where did the Ethiopians get bananas? Where did all those cattle come from anyway? The truth may be surprising to you. But anyone shocked that India, Egypt, Ethiopia, Yemen and Somalia are part of one of the worlds most ancient trade routes is a willful ignorant. Do you know how many words old Egyptian and Tamazight share with Southern Indian dialects?
The Semetic Language was born in Ethiopia and came to fruition in Yemen. You really need to have a look at a map. Yemen bridges India to East Africa. The Indo-Aryan dialects of the semetic language originate there. Abraham i.e. Ibrahim, i.e., Avrham- in Old Egyptian that means of Brahman. Son of Brahman that lived in Ur. But I did no intend for that post to derail the more significant issue.
Earlier I posted a photo of an indiginous Northern Saharan with tawny ochre skin and mongoloid folds around his eyes-pepper corn hair. He and his people are responsible for the majority of the oldest pictographs around the Sahara. I also posted a photo of a Khoisan/Kung! Ethnic from South Africa, also with tawny ochre skin and pepper corn hair- + mongoloid folds around the eyes. I then posted a photo of a group of Orang Asli- endemic to the Malaysian Isthmus of Kra and one of the world's most endangered peoples.
They share haplotypey and even speak similar click dialects even though they are living on two different continents.
I also posted photos of very dark skinned- truly Black skinned people that are endemic to the Andammen Islands and the Nicobar Islands all in South East Asia in the Indian Ocean. They are not in Africa and yet their nearest relatives are in both New Guinea and Africa.
Some people are subconsciously prejudice so Afrocentric they can't help but exclude peoples that don't live in Africa from the so-called Black Race. In one breath this writer is taking my credibility to task because I point out the ancient relationship between India and Egypt. But that writer skipped over the academic scholarship of the few papers I've provided as references and the photos I've posted as reference. The objective of this dialogue on my part is to open the parameters to include the actual human populations in discussion. The evolving academic will acknowledge that the first inhabitants of the Sahara migrated well before the Holocene into Southern Asia to become the ancestors of Orang Asli as well as Mongoloids.
We should also aknowledge that there are Black skinned peoples native to Asia, New Guinea and even Tasmania that are not Africans. Yet one would be hard-pressed to distinguish them from "blacks". Is it or is it not an over-simplification to lump these peoples together with Africans? It it or is not an over-simplification to split these peoples away from their near relatives in Africa? Or will you acknowledge that Eurocentric geographic boundaries are just that- reflections of obessions of empire and conquest? √ Rhinos live where? Elephants live where? Lions live where? Cheetahs? Leopards? Bovid Antelopes? Greater Apes? Peacocks? Water Buffalo?
The issue is evolutionary history, geography and ecological barriers. All of that precludes the later major issues of language families and cultures.
When I think about human biodiversity I am thinking on a timeline that includes our earliest hominid ancestors. I can visualize the sequence of events from the volcanism of the Miocene to the flooding/desertification of the Holocene.
Human beings are like other vertebrates dependent upon food, water and shelter to reproduce. Viable populations of humans leave their phsyical remains and signs of their presence in the form of art and handiworks, weapons and pictographs. As the landscape transforms in time, so too do the viable populations of humans.
Ancient Egypt was a very different place in predynastic days than it was during the dynastic period and that period was far removed from the realities of the present day obviously.
A non-indigenous Egyptian when asked where he came from will likely quote the Q'uran.
A predynastic Egyptian would probably quote pictographs.
Which one is more relevent? I think it's all relative. Don't you?
Posts: 152 | From: Boston MA USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually Melanesian people of New Guinea are closer related to Taiwanese people than African.
The Negritoes left Africa a long time ago and as a result are not closely related to Africans as much as Greek people are.
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
(she's had as they say "help/work done" in attaining some of that so called naturalness) nonetheless she's cute. (I'll now pull my back my claws ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
) 
"Terrible. Again, why would the Old Egyptians' closest relatives be foreigners who lived thousands of miles away and spoke an entirely different language, when they have people indigenous to the Nile and horn who aren't but a hop,skip, and jump away, and speak very similar languages and with similar cultures, along with exhibiting similar body and facial types? All of this, according to you is just a coincidence at the expense of Indians? Talk about self-hating "Africans".
Printer-friendly view of this topic