posted

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Red,White, and Blue + Christian:
Since Ausar is going or gone. It's time to give him aknowledgement visually.





Traditional Nubian House in Aswan


An Aswan Door

---

How is this giving him acknowledgement?

What we need to acknowledge is that these houses and traditions are Egyptian not "Nubian". These houses with the arches and white washed exteriors should be acknowledged as the last of an ancient tradition along the Nile and EXACTLY the same as those of ancient Egypt and not a separate "Nubian" tradition.

So called "Nubian" house:


Egyptian architecture:




We need to acknowledge that "Nubians" ARE Egyptians and that "Nubian" traditions are an extension of ancient Egyptian traditions and stop pretending that Egypt stops at Aswan, because it doesn't.

But of course, those who allow themselves to be BRAINWASHED will say "but ancient Egypt had no arches" or "but these Nubians got this from the Arabs...."

Well duh....
 

posted

---

I guess the point I am making is that in all reality they are just Egyptians, historically, ethnically and culturally. The term "Nubian" is really more of a distraction that only serves to separate them from their place in history. I mean after all the region between Luxor and south of Aswan is where dynastic Egyptian culture originated. This area is still WITHIN Egypt proper and ALWAYS HAS BEEN and the SAME PEOPLES have ALWAYS BEEN THERE. Therefore THEY ARE EGYPTIANS FIRST AND FOREMOST.

Likewise, the architectural traditions of Egypt, which is maintained in the South, should ALSO be acknowledged for the fact of their influence on world architecture. Yes indeed these arches, domes and other features are part of world architectural history that is not often acknowledged. And if you doubt it, go and look for yourself, domes there are ancient as they were used as silos and arched rooms were often used a storehouses. In a sense, these arches are almost like the Mcdonalds golden arches, meaning millions of people served food and grain from the storehouse.



From: http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/timelines/topics/harvesting_grain.htm

quote:

---

Behind the house there were typically granaries, storerooms, a chariot room and stables, servants' quarters and kitchens. The granaries were in the form of a truncated silo on a circular plan, covered with cupolas (dome). These silos were paired, with a stairway winding up to the aperture through which grain was poured. There was a square doorway at the bottom to disperse the grain. The storerooms were deep rectangular contiguous rooms.

---

posted

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marc Washington:

Doug M. You're probably right. The divide and conquer thing. Egyptian and Nubian, in pre and for a long time, post-invasion-white incursion days, were one-in-the-same. Until the European came, Africa, in fact, had no nations. Nations were formed there, in the Americas, the Indian sub-continent, and elsewhere when white countries claimed territories. Before whites entered Europe largely after the time of Christ, there were no nations, per se. And Africans lived throughout the continent there. I think all these things are ramifications of divide-and-conquer just as you point out that for the times we're concerned with, Egypt and Nubia are virtually one-in-the-same.

---

Marc, what are you talking about? Of course there were nations in Africa!-- There were various nations, states, and kingdoms founded by native populations, it just so happened that they were eradicated and displaced by European colonial nations. Also, Egypt and Nubia are not one-in-the-same, since in actuality there was no state or kingdom called "Nubia". 'Nubia' was the name the Romans gave to the region south of Egypt, even though there were various peoples and states that existed in that region. These various peoples were distinguished from the Egyptians themselves so I think it would be incorrect to say they were the same.

quote:

---

It's like two non-African people who often post here who will remain unnamed who like claim that Africans can be defined only within the boundaries of Africa and their look-alikes worldwide and throughout time outside the boundaries of Africa aren't African. It's that terror of Africans feeling oneness, feeling international brotherhood that drives such people beserk. Their ancestors would supply neighboring Africans in India, Melanesia, Africa, black neighborhoods in the states weapons to kill themselves inciting one against another. Here at this site, the descendents of such people try to do the same thing in divisive words and ideas. Just part of their historic tricks that have worked so well.

---

^ I take it one of those folks you are referring to is me. Well, let me just say that there are two folks in the forum who I will name--[Clyde and YOU (Marc)] , who repeat the myth and lie that all black populations in the globe including those in India to Southeast Asia, and the Pacific are "African". Such populations are no more African than the non-black Asians and Europeans! This has been proven anthropologically and verified through genetics. It is not our fault you are too stubborn and/or senile to not accept this fact.
 

posted

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ Yes you are, in that Fellahin and Nubians are two different peoples. Fellahin are the direct descendants of the ancient Egyptians whereas the Nubians are well... the direct descendants of ancient 'Nubians' or rather peoples south of Egypt. But as Ausar pointed out, you are correct that both peoples share similar traditions as both are native Nile Valley Africans.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marc Washington:

Doug M. You're probably right. The divide and conquer thing. Egyptian and Nubian, in pre and for a long time, post-invasion-white incursion days, were one-in-the-same. Until the European came, Africa, in fact, had no nations. Nations were formed there, in the Americas, the Indian sub-continent, and elsewhere when white countries claimed territories. Before whites entered Europe largely after the time of Christ, there were no nations, per se. And Africans lived throughout the continent there. I think all these things are ramifications of divide-and-conquer just as you point out that for the times we're concerned with, Egypt and Nubia are virtually one-in-the-same.

---

Marc, what are you talking about? Of course there were nations in Africa!-- There were various nations, states, and kingdoms founded by native populations, it just so happened that they were eradicated and displaced by European colonial nations. Also, Egypt and Nubia are not one-in-the-same, since in actuality there was no state or kingdom called "Nubia". 'Nubia' was the name the Romans gave to the region south of Egypt, even though there were various peoples and states that existed in that region. These various peoples were distinguished from the Egyptians themselves so I think it would be incorrect to say they were the same.

quote:

---

It's like two non-African people who often post here who will remain unnamed who like claim that Africans can be defined only within the boundaries of Africa and their look-alikes worldwide and throughout time outside the boundaries of Africa aren't African. It's that terror of Africans feeling oneness, feeling international brotherhood that drives such people beserk. Their ancestors would supply neighboring Africans in India, Melanesia, Africa, black neighborhoods in the states weapons to kill themselves inciting one against another. Here at this site, the descendents of such people try to do the same thing in divisive words and ideas. Just part of their historic tricks that have worked so well.

---

^ I take it one of those folks you are referring to is me. Well, let me just say that there are two folks in the forum who I will name--[Clyde and YOU (Marc)] , who repeat the myth and lie that all black populations in the globe including those in India to Southeast Asia, and the Pacific are "African". Such populations are no more African than the non-black Asians and Europeans! This has been proven anthropologically and verified through genetics. It is not our fault you are too stubborn and/or senile to not accept this fact.

---

Marc seems to be doing the Chancellor Williams thing, in thinking that Africa was all jolly and utopian until the white man came along lol....
 

posted

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by kenndo:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti:

[QB] ^ Yes you are, in that Fellahin and Nubians are two different peoples. Fellahin are the direct descendants of the ancient Egyptians whereas the Nubians are well... the direct descendants of ancient 'Nubians' or rather peoples south of Egypt. But as Ausar pointed out, you are correct that both peoples share similar traditions as both are native Nile Valley Africans.


----------------------------

I agree and they are located around aswan or southern egypt too.

---

Well some people say that Nubians are the closest resemblance to the Ancient Egyptians... even more than the fellahin. how bout dem apples, eh?
 

posted

---

Doug

quote:

---

But of course, those who allow themselves to be BRAINWASHED will say "but ancient Egypt had no arches" or "but these Nubians got this from the Arabs...."

---

Whoa Doug I'm Surprise by this Photo I thought Muslims orginated the Arch in fact there was a video on Egyptsearch the Religion Forum I believe about how Islam influnced Western Civilization, one was the use of the Arch in Architecture well These Photos put that idea to rest. I learned something new thanks