...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Motion Picture: Goddess of the Sun
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Doug M: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Maahes: [qb] Oh boy. I don't mean to be flippant here. I assumed that smart people like yourselves would be able to put these issues together for yourselves. Horn Africans were the root of two important, cattle cultures. One of which is none other than that of the Proto-Egyptians- the second of which is that of the Proto-Indians. Austronesians and Pygmoids already present in both regions prior to the cattle cultures already had established trade and cultivation between their respective populations in Southern Western Asia and Africa- Pleistocene era trade routes. Because they already had a banana utilized primarily for fiber and had cultivated it towards that end before leaving the African continent, subsequent populations of Austronesians and Pygmoids that were to reach South Western Asia, recognized the wild banana plants growing in their new homelands. THey would quickly exploit the new wild bananas - this one was edible and grew much like their familair African species that was used only for fiber- stone age cultures need fiber and they also need food- fiber used to tie things together and food to feed oneselfe obviously-and through cultivation select breed the new wild bananas into fruit bearing cultivars that would be brought back to the continent of Africa and grown there-major food staples I might add not jsut sweet banans-. Cocurrently, the Jackal-Wolves (Canis simensis)that the Austronesians and Pygmnoids had domesticated during the Pleistocene. i.e., Basenji dogs were introduced to South Western Asia and New Guinea where they would become the progenitors of the Indian Pariah dog, the New Guinea Singing Dog and the Australian Dingo Dog. Trade between these Pleistocene populations of our human family would insure that the genetic affinity between curly tailed barkless dogs descended of Canis simensis would remain for all intensive purposes, contiguous. In other words, these dogs are one anothers closest relatives. Following the genetic trail of domesticated plants and animals helps us learn a great deal about human biodiversity and their routes of migration. These Austronesian/Pygmoid cultures were dominated or assimilated by subsequent populations of Neolithic Horn Africans that migrated along similar trajectories and became the founders of a new population diaspora- one based on cattle. The point being once again for the rhinoceri amongst you- the history of ethnicity and culture of Saharan Africa precedes that which concerns the Eurocentric/Afrocentric. The paper you have problems with on Cattle Domestication is nonetheless a peer reviewed paper which is largely on point and substantive. It could be argued and actually a number of you here have made it clear through your marginalization of said topics, (" its either domesticated or not period...") that your comprhension of animal and plant domestication is not your focus of interest. It is absolutely integral to the comprehension of said topic. MArginalizing it or selective reading of objective anaylsis of said topic to directionally bolster your refutation of my position- knowing full well the majority of readers on this forum are not going to actually bother to read the papers Ive posted links to- they will accept your refutation on grounds of your dedication to your own intractable position-regardless- marginalizing the significance of the history of animal and plant cultivation by ancient cultures- from the Pleistocene onwards is evidence in my book that you are a directional thinker. If it takes place in Asia it is not African and thus not in your field of interest. I brought up these points to help some of you recognize hwo flawed the mentality is- the mentality that is based on learning from books and coloured maps- that is based on the significance of history as it relates to the Old Testament- whatever the expert is most educated in becomes their imprint. They will not accept evidence that points to anything that does not agree with their view point - In this case, the argument I am making could be perceived as Afrocentric. I'm making the case that Horn Africans and before them the progenitors of the Austronesian/Pygmoid/Negrito population- were responsible for the southern western Asian cultural wellsprings- but because you are of the opinion that I am biased against black Africa -some of you here read that to mean that I beleive that Asiatics are responsible for the accomplishments of African civilizations. But then the point of discussing bananas, dogs and cattle is to elucidate the different strata of time and space here- another point that appears to be lost. If you really have decided to embrace Egyptian culture into your own, perhaps you had better begin to open your minds a bit? A more objective mindset might have brought up the similarities of food staples and plant cultivars that the Horn of Africa and Western Southern Asia share. They might have discussed the methods of breadmaking and the uses of specific medicinal herbs and spices that are Asian in origin but that came to be used in Eastern Africa. Are you familar with the moringa- the clove, cinnamon, turmeric, pepper, chrysanthenums- of course you are but perhaps you are taking for granted how important these materials were in ancient dynastic Egypt? How did they come to be in Egypt when they were produced in Southern Western Asia? Why is important to me or my position? What is my position? Again, the historical diffusion between Southern Western Asia and Eastern Africa predates any contact between Europe and North Africa. This constant trade between respective cultures is more significant than that which transpired between the Greeks or Romans and Egypt. Compare and contrast the length of time and the great antiquity of the connections in direct comparison. Each and every paper that I have posted a link to here are on the required reading lists of anthropology professors from Columbia and Harvard who I have known for decades as mentors and friends. No one pretends to know all. It is important however to have an open mind and one that can recognize that bias blinds one to evidence that refutes popular theory. My position is that Africa is the womb from which all human kind progressed. The first and earliest branches that would migrate into the nursery of Southern Western Asia blazed trails for subsequent migrations of different ethnic/racial stock. Civilization grew from the expansion of the human psyche and from exploitation of new learned skills including cultivation of novel species and from trade between isolated populations. This is a humanist view and one that places emphasis on humanity above racial definition. Egypt was not a land of white and blacks. Egypt was a land of Nilotic peoples. Different phases in development within Egyptian history might be categorized by ecological challenges and by the presence and or absence of specific ethnic groups. Near Eastern/Western Asian civilization was another sibling of the Horn African diaspora. Oversimplification of the history or culture of any peoples within the region is disrespectful and a digression from the topic. [/qb][/QUOTE]Maahes, you are downright funny. Why is it you keep on insisting that this is a black/white or Eurocentric/Afrocentric issue? Surely you are the only one who seems to feel that black and white are not accurate descriptions for the appearance of a great many populations on this planet. Is there any evidence that the original Nilotic people from 5 to 6,000 years ago were anything but black? Are not the majority of Nilotic people in the Nile Valley today called black? And are the Egyptians called Nilotic people today? Why not? Calling ancient Nilotic populations black is no more limiting or close minded than calling ancient Celtic or Germanic tribes white. It is an accurate description of the appearance of the people of the time and not a description of culture, language or anything else. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3