A mountain of historical and other factual evidence is thrown out of the window, when it comes to these proponents. Yet when asked about a Great European civilization (since the culprits here are mostly of European descent), that is considered the cradle of Civilization paralleling Ancient Egypt, these proponents interestingly become mute on the subject. Cradles of civilization have popped up in Africa and the near East, but Europe missed out. What happened here? I mean, these are lands of people who aren’t supposed to be capable. Why didn’t the European stock not bother taking care of their own backyard, but were rather busy being overly generous about creating complex civilizations elsewhere?
Greece had the earliest civilization that can be attributed to Europe, and yet Greece isn’t the most well off nation in Europe. The territory formerly known as Mesopotamia, was known for its great civilization of antiquity, yet in contemporary times, are not the most well of nations. Does this in anyway suggest that the indigenous people of these regions weren’t the creators of their indigenous heritage? The same can be asked of the ancient Americans.
Ancient Egypt was already at its height when Ancient Greek civilization came about, and it is the ancient Greeks, as opposed to Europeans of 19th century mentality, who attribute various aspects of their knowledge to ancient Egyptians. The people who actually lived these era of antiquity are now called liars by these present day 19th century-inspired people. Of course there is evidence laying around to corroborate the assertions of these people of antiquity, but that doesn’t mean anything to the aforementioned proponents. So I ask these proponents, where is your great Cradle of Civilization that predates that of Africa and the Near East?
The original people who inhabited Europe were the Basque people. I believe the Basques might be related to the original Iberian people that lived in Europe. Not overly certain.
I don't know what living population are desendants of the Sumerians,but I know the closest people still living like the Sumerians is the Marsh Arabs living in the Marshlands in Iraq.
Not everybody in Iraq are direct desendants of the original forebearers that brought that civlization. Even in the Sumerian times there was invasions from Semetic speaking people such as the Akkadians and other groups called the Gutians. Some groups like the Kassites were Indo-European people.
In later times you had movements of Arameans,Armenians,and other groups.
The Chaldeans and Assyrians claim they are direct desendants of these two ancient people in Mesopotamia. Assyrians are Christians in northern Iraq.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
The only thing that pre-dates Sumeria/Egypt in Europe is the Cerny culture. You have various megaliths like New Grange,Malta,and Orkney Islands. I am not certain if this consitutes as a civlization,but they definately existed.
I wouldn't call that a civilization. Nevertheless, if that were the case, complex culture in Africa doesn't begin with the Ancient Egyptian nation. The Nile valley culture yet predates the Egyptian nation.
The earliest food producing centers in Egypt are the Faiyum and Merimede-Salama. An even older center is Khartoum Mesolithic-Neolithic in Sudan.
quote:
The only thing that pre-dates Sumeria/Egypt in Europe is the Cerny culture. You have various megaliths like New Grange,Malta,and Orkney Islands. I am not certain if this consitutes as a civlization,but they definately existed.
The Maltese were Semetic speakers, a language that originated in Ethiopia. There is a huge chance that the people were akin to the Africans or West Asians.
quote:
"The original people who inhabited Europe were the Basque people. I believe the Basques might be related to the original Iberian people that lived in Europe. Not overly certain.
There are also the Mongoloid groups that can be found in Russia, and even as West as Finland. It is said that such groups were present all around Northern Europe.
quote:
I don't know what living population are desendants of the Sumerians,but I know the closest people still living like the Sumerians is the Marsh Arabs living in the Marshlands in Iraq.
The Sumerians are said to be related to the Elamites. The Elamites are related to the people of Indus Valley Civilization (or the Dravidians). This can explain the similar appearance between Dravidians, Marsh Arabs, and Southern Arabs. The original West Asian population were phenotypically similar to the Dravidian. This is why such people can be found even in Iran or Central Asia.
[This message has been edited by Roy_2k5 (edited 25 February 2005).]
quote:Good point.
I wouldn't call that a civilization. Nevertheless, if that were the case, complex culture in Africa doesn't begin with the Ancient Egyptian nation. The Nile valley culture yet predates the Egyptian nation.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Super car...when you have to go back to the 'stone age' to find something for Africa you are in trouble. Drop it and joing western civilization and acomplish something for yourself and your family.
In terms of holding up Africa as anything of merit there is an old saying, its a little crude but it makes the point: 'The more you polish a turd the worse you smell."
The proponents I was referring to obviously includes you. You make wild claims on a daily basis about African civilizations or their heritage and people you haven't the slightest clue about. So indeed, if it weren't indigenous Africans who created the African cradle, where is the earlier civilization of Europe that suggests that their kind indeed came to Africa, to create the great Nile Valley culture? Needless to add that, you will need to corroborate your logic with up-to-date peer-reviewed studies. Mind you, resorting to half-baked geopolitics and ethnic insult all day long doesn't answer this question. Good luck.
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 25 February 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
who cares what happened in Africa 150,000 years ago. Modern civilization started with the Greeks and has progressed through western civilization to what we have today. This is not rocket science super car, its pretty basic stuff. Global capitalism offers tremendous opportunities for you and everyone else who wants a better life for their family. Why waste your life beating your head up aganist a brick wall that will NEVER come down?
You may not care, but it appears that the ancient Greeks, who felt gratitude for the Kemetians, cared about the contributions of the latter. 
quote:
Originally posted by Super car:
You may not care, but it appears that the ancient Greeks, who felt gratitude for the Kemetians, cared about the contributions of the latter.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
super Car....nobody is listening to that stuff, you guys make complete fools out of yourselves when you promote this Greece/Africa idea. Let me tell you what it really does. When people hear that it REINFORCES every negative sterotype they ever had about blacks and Africans.
The study of ancient greece is very complicated and very technical. My view is that most of you lack the background to even understand what you are reading. Most of the people I see promoting this idea are NOT classical scholars. Is it not noteworthy that every classical scholar who comments on the subject thinks it is downright silly. Stop wasting the only life you have on a useless political philosophy that can never prevail. You are worth more than that.
Do you have evidence that Greek confessions of Kemet's important influence, is something that they lied about? Your comment seems to suggest this, because they are the ones, who left records showing this. Forget modern scholars, and focus on their view of Kemet. In the meantime, I am still waiting for an up-to-date corroborated answer to the question I posed to you earlier.
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 25 February 2005).]
quote:
the study of ancient greece is very complicated and very technical.
You wouldn't know, as you can't even write the term 'classicism' correctly, much less understand the underlying concept.
Just save us all time and go back to ranting about American geopolitics - a subject requiring no intelligence and hence well suited to you. 
quote:
Do you have evidence that Greek confessions of Kemet's important influence, is something that they lied about? Your comment seems to suggest this, because they are the ones, who left records showing this.
Of course to answer this question he would have to have some passing [at least] knowledge about Ancient Greece.
Of course he has none.
Of course Professor Horemheb will soon be forced to retreat into off-topic mindless poltical rantings.
Let the countdown begin. 
quote:
Every Greek scholar I have read disagrees with your assertions
We doubt you have ever read a "Greek" scholar.
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 25 February 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Super car...you can't forget modern scholars. Every Greek scholar I have read disagrees with your assertions. I'm not saying there isn't one out there somewhere but if there is they are in a vast minority. My question is why you feel the 'need' to build this case come hell or high water? Even if everything you contend were correct it would not change the position of Africa or black people in the modern world.
This desire to grab at 'every straw, every possibility' to build some sort of historical case is simply irrational.
Like I said, sloppy geopolitics about contemporary Africa, doesn't answer the parent topic question posed to you. I am still waiting. Well, if you won't believe modern scholars who simply reassert what the "Greeks" had to say about their Kemetian mentors, then the least you can do, is take the "ancient Greeks" for their word...unless you don't agree with them either.
quote:
by rasol:
We doubt you have ever read a "Greek" scholar.
I concur with this, given the nature of his thus far uncorroborated answers, which obviously fly in the face of scientific reality.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Modern classical scholars do not agree with you super car and you know that. I am not going to get into a point by point debate with an Afrocentric. It is like debating someone who believes in UFO's on specific points, you end up going down roads that lead nowhere. I asked you a specific question, why is this important to you? what are you trying to acomplish?
I'll let Thought2's earlier comment address this remark, because it does it so well:
quote:
Thought Writes:Attempting to label ones adversary is a tactic often utilized when one cannot stand on the facts alone.
You discredit any modern Scholar who simply reasserts the information the ancient Greeks have passed on, as left wing radicals. Bernal, Diop, Herodotus and other classical historians, Richard Poe (ironically a conservative republican) are on this list.
good post as usual
horemheb euro evil and abaza are strangely silent about the topic
horemheb,euro, and abaza
any replys on the question???
what did geece have what egypt didnt, and how did they use these things???
your great alexander seemed to admire egypt more then greece.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
You dodged my question again super car, what are you trying to acomplish, what do you want to get out of all this? Bernal, Diop and poe are not Classical scholars.
Your question is irrelevant to the parent topic. We are talking history here, not crackpot geopolitics.
But if I must answer your question, what I want to accomplish here, is for people like you to answer the questions put forth in the parent topic.
Diop, Bernal and others, are modern scholars with various backgrounds. However, Herodotus is a classical writer, whom you also discredit. How about classical writers and thinkers like Aristotle, Euclid, Plato, Thales amongst many who confess tribute to ancient Egypt for their contributions to philosophy. Are all these folks left wing radicals?
How about this author, Robert Hah. He must be a radical for recognizing the obvious when he writes a book titled:
Anaximander and the Architects: The Contributions of Egyptian and Greek Architectural Technologies to the Origins of Greek Philosophy (Suny Series in Ancient Greek Philosophy (Paper))
You ought to read it.
Horemheb, which source states that Ancient Greek is the Cradle of Civilization? It will be interesting to see evidence for this.
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 25 February 2005).]
exactly, thats my point why would they be translating information after the greek golden age if they were superior to egyptian knowledge??
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
super car...every 10th grade world history student learns that ancient Greece is the cradle of civilization. That diop and the others have an education is not the point, they are NOT, I repeat NOT specialist in ancient Greece.
This is your evidence for a wild statement?
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Super car...the reason you dismissed my question asking what you hope to acomplish is the same reason that almost all of you avoided my previous question: would you still come to this board if race could not be discussed. You have to avoid these questions because they cut at the heart of just who you guys really are . You could care less about history, you are a black radical politican...you know this and so do I. There is not one ounce of interest in the culture of scholarship involved here.
Super car, I know exactly what kind of person we are dealing with, nobody is being fooled here. the truth is YOU KNOW AS WELL.
Since we all know the truth why don't you just stand up and admit why you are really doing this.
Remember the Thought2 remark, it is still relevant here.
What do you think reference to notable Greek thinkers and historians is? From your remark, I take it that you aren't aware that these people are part of history. I am asking you to refute their confessions; they are the ones responsible for their comments, not me or any "modern" scholar for that matter. If you have some beef with them, take it with them. One problem; they are no longer alive to listen to gibberish.
If reasserting confessions of Greeks is radicalism, then that would make ancient Greeks the most radical people on the planet.
I answered your question, but like everything else, it is dismissed when it doesn't fit your agenda. This doesn't mean that you are off the hook; the parent topic question still stands. Answer it with up-to-date corroboration, or your non answer will be taken as you not having a clue.
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 25 February 2005).]
quote:
Super car...the reason you dismissed my question
...is because
* you have not read any of the books in question.
* are unfamiliar with classicism.
* have little to no knowledge of 'any' sholarship relevant to the issue.
You are quite specifically ignorant of every facet of this issue that is prerequisite for intelligent conversation.
That is why everyone dismisses you.
Honestly Professor, but for the laughs you provide by frankly being so relentlessly stupid, all conversation with you really wastes everyones time.
Hope this helps.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
You don't have enough knowledge of classical Greek culture to even make an evaluation super car. Admit that you are really interested in politics and hate the west.
This gibberish isn't a substitute for the questions put forth. They still stand for those who can actually answer simple questions. Thanx.
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 25 February 2005).]
Well Supercar after 39 posts, with no answer to the Topic question, I think we can safely say.....there isn't one.
quote:
Originally posted by fromashes_rise:
horemheb what kind of information do you think the greeks were translating from the egyptians in the library of alexandria?
You mean it wasn't Shawarma?!?!
Sam W.
quote:
by rasol:Where is your Great European civilization that predates the African cradle
Well Supercar after 39 posts, with no answer to the Topic question, I think we can safely say.....there isn't one.
I say cheers to that one.
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 25 February 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:avoided the question again. Why do you hate the west Super Car?
Since when did truth telling become anti-Western?
I know that truth telling is like adding salt to a fresh wound, to those sections at which the main topic elementary questions were targeted, but with regards to honest people around the globe (including well-meaning Westerners), the truth is taken for what it is...the truth!
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 25 February 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by ABAZA:
There is no such thing as an "African Cradle" of civilization.The correct term is the "Mediterranean Cradle of Civilization".
Well Abaza, here is one simple question for you, that is, if you can handle it:
Do Egyptians live in the Mediterranean sea, or do they actually live on a landmass called Africa?
I know that the word "Mediterranean" is a nice tool for distortion amateurs like you, but it doesn't in anyway negate the Nile Valley being African.My 2c to you.
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 25 February 2005).]
quote:
Where is your Great European civilization that predates the African cradle?
46 replies and counting, lol. what a hapless lot of trolls.
http://library.thinkquest.org/C002739/AfricaSite/1Main.shtm
Nile Valley is in the Mediterranean? When was the region called 'Nubia' a part of the Mediterranean? Is Ancient Abyssinia also a part of the Mediterranean? You really need to learn some basic geography.
quote:
Abaza:
The answer is quite simple.
The Egyptians have always been living in the Buffer Zone, between Black Africa (Sub-Saharan) and the Asian/Mediterranean Areas.
Abaza, you know very well that answer will get you an "F" for a grade. In fact, if there was any letter that determines an even lower grade, it will apply to your answer. Needless to say, your remark doesn't answer those elementary school questions.
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
46 replies and counting, lol. what a hapless lot of trolls.
You can say that again. I actually made the main topic questions so simple, thinking that even a troll cannot fail to answer them. I was wrong.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Fromashes, Greece is the cradle of civilization
LOL
quote:
Originally posted by ABAZA:Appendix 5. Country profiles for the north african Mediterranean countries
Well, as usual, your answers always end up defeating their purpose. Reality can be cruel sometimes.
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 25 February 2005).]
quote:
super car purposely igonore the fact that Egypt is a Mediterranean Country and highlights the word African
Because that is the word you protested silly.
You tend to lose track of the illogical premises inherent in your own foolish arguments?
This is usually accompanied by a tell-tale tendancy to edit your scribble multiple times, and even then it makes no sense. lol.
But here is the thing:
Can you fulfill a simple request such as, answering the questions provided in the parent text or is that too much of a burden on you?
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 25 February 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by ABAZA:[b]There is no such thing as an African Cradle of Civilization!!
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
What you have to understand is that what develops a civlization is mainly a agritcultural base. This is the school of thought that comes from V. Gordon Childe. Of course, there are exaceptions like Papua New Guinea which independently developed agritculture but never developed into a civlization.The earliest food producing centers in Egypt are the Faiyum and Merimede-Salama. An even older center is Khartoum Mesolithic-Neolithic in Sudan.
Thought Writes:
The term "civilization" like the term "negroid" is a throwback to a a different era. A more appropriate term and hence philosophy is "cultural complexity". Many societies in Africa do not fit into the "Agricultural Revolution" model espoused by Childe. Yet these same societies exhibited cultural complexity in the form of increased sedentism, pottery, water craft, ground stone tools, grindstones, floral storage facilities, animal management, exotic trade goods, advanced aquatic procurement technology etc. These economies are known as delayed-return subsistence systems. Agriculture proper is marked by domestication. Domestication is differentiated from cultivation on the basis of the morphological change in the plant or animal. Africans were some of the earliest cultivators in the world. In addition, the lithic technology (microliths) that facilitated the Near Eastern model of cultural complexity as introduced from Africa via the Nile Valley. Microburin's are the waste product of microlithic production. The earliest microburins are found in southern Egypt and northern Sudan. A archaeological unit known as the Mushabian was the first culture to introduce the microburin technique into the Levant during the early Holocene. Sickle's used to gather grain are microliths. This technique was later a fundemental part of the Natufian culture.
African Archaeology
Edited by Ann Stahl
2005
Holocene Occupations of the Forest and Savana
Joanna Casey
"Microliths appear very much earlier in Africa than they do in Europe and Asia."
Egypt In Africa
Edited by Theodore Celenko
1996
Africa Prehistory and Human Evolution
kathy Schick and Nicholas Toth
"Thus, the Stone Age in Africa laid critical foundations both biologically and behaviorally for major cultural developments that ensued there and elsewhere in the next 10,000 years. The critical transition to the production of food (a period sometimes called the "nelithic" or "New Stone Age", as stone tools such as sickles and arrow points continued to be used) then laid the groundwork for the ultimate emregence of complex societies, metallurgy, and sophisticated art forms in many parts of Africa."
[This message has been edited by Thought2 (edited 25 February 2005).]
Bernal might seem to be on stronger ground when he argues that Greek philosophy was "borrowed" from Egypt, because ancient writers state that famous Greeks such as Plato, the mathematician-astronomer Eudoxus, and the legendary Pythagoras studied there. Bernal and the Afrocentrists suggest that modern scholars because of their anti-African prejudices have not acknowledged fully the importance of this Egyptian "connection." That is of course possible, but there is a better explanation. Ancient historians have not taken seriously the ancient evidence about Greeks studying in Egypt because we have reason to believe that it is not literally accurate. Before the conquest of Egypt by Alexander in 323 BC, very few Greeks could travel there, since the country was under the control of their enemies, the Persians. No contemporary of Plato mentions his studying in Egypt; the legend that he did developed only centuries after his death. The ancient writers who claim that Plato and other famous Greek philosophers studied in Egypt do so in order to show their respect for Egypt and the antiquity of its civilization, but they had no direct evidence that these men ever spent time there. In effect, they created a connection because they wanted such a connection to exist -- we would now call the result myth rather than history."
Some of you will remember from my article "Ethnocentric History from Aristobulus to Bernal" (Academic Questions Spring 1993) that this type of historical myth-making was common in antiquity, particularly among subject peoples. The Jews in Hellenistic Alexandria said that Plato had studied with Moses! In making this claim, they did not concern themselves with the question of language or problems of chronology. Rather, their aim was to establish that their civilization was more ancient than that of the Greeks. For the same reason, when Egypt was under Greek domination, Egyptian priests were eager to point out to Greek tourists the houses and the names of the teachers with whom the famous Greek philosophers were supposed to have studied. This type of "reconstruction" of the past was common in antiquity, and can be found even in the authors who created the notion of serious historical writing, such as Herodotus and Thucydides. It is not hard to see why they did so. Ancient writers were often compelled to rely on guesswork or imagination. They did not have an accurate system of dating, the resources of archaeology, or libraries to turn to. Even when they had access to books, it was difficult for them to find exact references because the books were in the form of papyrus rolls.
-- Mary R. Lefkowitz. "Willful distortions of history", Vol. 8, Academic Questions, 06-01-1995, pp 28.
quote:Interesting, the Tigris-Euphrates is a cradle of civilisation but the Nile Valley is not? Truly EuroDisney's idiocy knows no bounds.
There is no "African cradle" of civilization. The cradle of civilization is the Tigris-Euphrates valley in West Asia.
Super writes:
quote:
Where is your Great European civilization that predates the African cradle
Edited by David O'Connor and Andrew Reid
2004
"First, insofar as ancient Egyptian civilization is African to a significant degree, and had a SUBSTANTIAL influence on Greek culture, then Africa can be said to have played a part (as yet, not fully defined) in the development of European civilization in general."
[This message has been edited by Thought2 (edited 27 February 2005).]
What Lefkowitz’s argument basically amounts to, is that ancient Greek thinkers and historians were not in their right minds when they were making their documentation. In other words, these people didn't have the ability to think critically. Aside from the fact that this an insult to these notable personalities, it provides no evidence to contrary that invalidates the unanimous sense of gratitude felt towards ancient Egypt by these early Greek thinkers and historians. This almost unanimous stance in the tribute to Ancient Egypt, flies in the face of Lefkowitz’s rational. Common sense invokes that these folks would be a far better witness to their era than Lefkowitz.
Aristotle from his “Metaphysics”:
“At first he who invented any art whatever that went beyond the common perceptions of man was naturally admired by men, not only because there was something useful in the inventions, but because he was thought wise and superior to the rest. But as more arts were invented, and some were directed to the necessities of life, others to recreation, the inventors of the latter were naturally always regarded as wiser than the inventors of the former, because their branches of knowledge did not aim at utility. Hence when all such inventions were already established, the sciences which do not aim at giving pleasure or at the necessities of life were discovered, and first in the places where men first began to have leisure. This is why the mathematical arts were founded in Egypt; for there the priestly caste was allowed to be at leisure.”
Like Euclid, or Pythagoras, or the many Greeks who studied in Thebes and Alexandria, and others who took advantage of what Egypt had to offer in the field of science and philosophy, it appears that Aristotle doesn’t see eye to eye with Lefkowitz.
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 27 February 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
Interesting, the Tigris-Euphrates is a cradle of civilisation but the Nile Valley is not?
The Tigris-Euphrates valley is the cradle of all civilization. Greece is the cradle of Western civilization. The Nile Valley yielded nothing but Nile Valley civilization -- not much of a cradle. But it really doesn't matter anyway, because Egyptians and Nubians were unrelated to your West African, slave-descended, black ass.
The Greeks never saw themselves as related to the "people of Europe" as Aristotle described the people who livedto the North and West of Greece. I believe there's a passage in his
writings where he described them as "spirited" but "lacking in intelligence"(sic).
More recently the genetic connection between the ancient and modern inhabitants of Greece has been vigorously discussed on this site.
An objective historical analysis will show that African Americans(the majority but not all) were held captive in t he U.S. for 246 years while European Americans were held captive for approximately 1,000 years in Europe. The slaves and serfs(colloquial for "slave" from the Latin "servus" meaning slave) of Europe were freed at the end of the European "Renaissance" and they immediately flocked to the towns and cities in search of work from the growing class of burgher capitalists.
The last serfs were freed in 1865 in Russia when Peter the Great was czar. The writings of Dostoyevsky offer insights into the abject brutality with with which the serfs were ruled. Note that the standard phrase used by European historians to describe this phenomenon is the "freeing of the serfs". The enslaved status of the non-feudal classes of Europe until the "freeing of the serfs" over a period of 1,000 years should also include the populations of the Slavic lands of Eastern Europe who were enslaved also but were exported or kidnapped to West Asia--especially Turkey.
But brutal work conditions and massive exploitation of adults and children in the coal mines and factories(see Dickens's novels)--which led to the writings on socialism and the critique of capitalism by St.Simon, Proudhon, Babeuf, Marx, etc.-- forced many of them to flee to "freedom" across the Atlantic to the Americas and across the Pacific to Australasia(see Samir Amin's "Eurocentrism").
quote:
Evil Euro:The Tigris-Euphrates valley is the cradle of all civilization. Greece is the cradle of Western civilization. The Nile Valley yielded nothing but Nile Valley civilization -- not much of a cradle
Apparently, ancient southern Europeans, not to mention the notable ancient Greek thinkers and writers, all seem to disagree with you on all points. On the contrary, they openly expressed gratitude for the Nile Valley civilization, because they unlike some contemporaries, didn't harbor the kind of prejudice that clouds minds today.
Whether or not the ancient Greeks had exaggerated the Kemetian influence (as Lefkowitz would rather have us believe), that is besides the point. What matters is that, these ancient southern European thinkers felt gratitude, because they felt that they had learnt much from their Nile Valley mentors.
On the other hand, they thought that the Europeans to their north were savages. Don't hate the messenger, it is their choice of words, not mine.
You are 'writing' today. Guess what recent discoveries tell us about the earliest writing? [Hint: Europe can be excluded from this guess ]
Oh what the hell; it was found in the Nile Valley, which had archeologists going back to the drawing board. If this doesn't exemplify a cradle, I don't know what does.
Enjoy ...
oldest alphabet found in Egypt
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 28 February 2005).]
But why was the "oldest alphabet" quickly labeled "semitic" even when it was claimed that it antedated the presence of "Semitic" speakers in ancient Egypt? The article could easily have said early Egyptian script. It didn't.
quote:The Greeks never saw themselves as related to the "people of Europe" as Aristotle described the people who livedto the North and West of Greece. I believe there's a passage in his
writings where he described them as "spirited" but "lacking in intelligence"(sic).
Barbarians:
The term "Barbarian" is Greek in origin. The Greeks originally levied it at any races who were not of Greek extraction; especially those who threatened Greek civilization and culture. Originally applied to the Persian invaders under Artaxerxes and Darius, the Greeks later referred to the invading peoples of Northern Europe as "barbarians." To the Greeks, the harsh barking sound of the newcomers' speech sounded to them like "bar-bar-bar."
Herodotus views on Northern European:
"Barbarians can neither think nor act rationally, theological controversies are Greek to them...Under the assault of their horrible songs the classic meter of the ancient poet goes to pieces...Barbarians are driven by evil spirits; "possessed by demons", who force them to commit the most terrible acts...incapable of living according to written laws and only reluctantly tolerating kings...Their lust for gold is immense, their love of drink boundless. Barbarians are without restraint... they are given to gross personal hygiene...They run dirty and barefoot, even in the winter...They grease their blond hair with butter and care not that it smells rancid...Their reproductive energy is inexhaustible; the Northern climate of their native land, with its long winter nights favors their fantastic urge to procreate...If a barbarian people is driven back or destroyed, another already emerges from the marshes and forests of Germany...Indeed, there are no new barbarian peoples--descendents of the same tribes keep appearing."
(Herwig Wolfram, The History of the Goths, p. 6-7).
quote:
To SupercarBut why was the "oldest alphabet" quickly labeled "semitic" even when it was claimed that it antedated the presence of "Semitic" speakers in ancient Egypt? The article could easily have said early Egyptian script. It didn't.
The article suggests that the language could be deciphered at least well enough to determine it's "Semitic" orientation, but you're right the article isn't clear on that point.
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 28 February 2005).]
quote:
An objective historical analysis will show that African Americans(the majority but not all) were held captive in t he U.S. for 246 years while European Americans were held captive for approximately 1,000 years in Europe.
The Extraordinary Story of Thomas Pellow and North Africa’s One Million European Slaves lives up to its claim of extraordinariness; reading it, you can only wonder why this story has been so thoroughly forgotten in the West. In the 17th and 18th centuries, Europe’s ships and coastal villages were at the mercy of pirates from North Africa looking for slaves. Whole villages were kidnapped, from as far afield as Iceland—no seafaring Christians were safe.
Milton focusses on an English boy who became slave to Moulay Ismail, the ruler who united Morocco by being more fierce and brutal than the competition. Ismail acquired thousands of slaves to build an enormous palace complex in the city of Meknes, grander than any in Europe—and succeeded, although the work was undone by earthquakes after his death. Meanwhile, generations of slaves lived and died in awful conditions, while the governments of Europe sent various emissaries to plead for or buy their release. http://speedysnail.com/2004/11/moors_and_moore.html
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 28 February 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Euro:
The Tigris-Euphrates valley is the cradle of all civilization. Greece is the cradle of Western civilization. The Nile Valley yielded nothing but Nile Valley civilization -- not much of a cradle. But it really doesn't matter anyway, because Egyptians and Nubians were unrelated to your West African, slave-descended, black ass.
AAAHHHHHH-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
60 replies, and still no answers. Not answering qustions seems to be a EuroDisney speciality.
You can't really give an answer to something that doesn't have one...lol. Which is why certain white people have been slaving so hard to take and keep Egypt out of Africa...but the truth is quickly unfolding.
EDIT: As well as Ethiopians too.
[This message has been edited by King_Scorpion (edited 28 February 2005).]
A new study suggests that a million or more European Christians were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 – a far greater number than had ever been estimated before.
Enslavement was a very real possibility for anyone who traveled in the Mediterranean, or who lived along the shores in places like Italy, France, Spain and Portugal, and even as far north as England and Iceland http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/whtslav.htm
quote:
Originally posted by lamin:
To SupercarBut why was the "oldest alphabet" quickly labeled "semitic" even when it was claimed that it antedated the presence of "Semitic" speakers in ancient Egypt? The article could easily have said early Egyptian script. It didn't.
That is because the link was a proceeding from an earlier posting on the subject matter. For details of this earlier posting, go here:
Were Egyptians the first scribes?
Another finding seems to have added to the puzzle of writing, but its the conclusion that is worth noting:
"It probably suggests that writing developed independently in at least three places - Egypt, Mesopotamia and Harappa between 3500 BC and 3100 BC."
No mention of any European region amongst these groups, and again if this statement doesn't exemplify the Nile Valley as cradle of civilization, I don't know what else will.
quote:
Originally posted by Super car:
That is because the link was a proceeding from an earlier posting on the subject matter. For details of this earlier posting, go here:Were Egyptians the first scribes?
Another finding seems to have added to the puzzle of writing, but its the conclusion that is worth noting:
"It probably suggests that writing developed independently in at least three places - Egypt, Mesopotamia and Harappa between 3500 BC and 3100 BC."
No mention of any European region amongst these groups, and again if this statement doesn't exemplify the Nile Valley as cradle of civilization, I don't know what else will.
One thing to keep in mind about this "Mespopotamia vs. the Nile Valley" (and it should be the Nile Valley not Egypt) is that we tend to leave out China, India, etc..
They are also cradles of Civilisation in their own right and, like the Nile Valley, they precede Europe.
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Euro:
The Tigris-Euphrates valley is the cradle of all civilization. Greece is the cradle of Western civilization. The Nile Valley yielded nothing but Nile Valley civilization -- not much of a cradle. But it really doesn't matter anyway, because Egyptians and Nubians were unrelated to your West African, slave-descended, black ass.
quote:
Originally posted by ABAZA:
Appendix 5. Country profiles for the north [b]african Mediterranean countries
1. Morocco
2. Algeria
3. Tunisia
4. The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
5. Egypt[/B]
quote:
Originally posted by King_Scorpion:
AAAHHHHHH-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!60 replies, and still no answers. Not answering qustions seems to be a EuroDisney speciality.
I have a question for you: Where is your Great West African civilization that predates the European cradle (Greece)?
quote:
Originally posted by ABAZA:
True, but Nubia is not a country!!
it was a nation in the past and a region past and present,but most of it is in the sudan.
In strictly logical terms your question should have been:
"Where is the great West African civilisation that predates the WEST/NORTH European cradle of civilisation(Stonehenge?)?"
Of course, you will bear in mind that the peopling of West Africa is a relatively recent event--following East-West migratory patterns.
quote:
To Evil EuropeIn strictly logical terms your question should have been:
"Where is the great West African civilisation that predates the WEST/NORTH European cradle of civilisation(Stonehenge?)?"
quote:
Originally posted by lamin:
To Evil EuropeIn strictly logical terms your question should have been:
"Where is the great West African civilisation that predates the WEST/NORTH European cradle of civilisation(Stonehenge?)?"
Of course, you will bear in mind that the peopling of West Africa is a relatively recent event--following East-West migratory patterns.
His commentary underlies his lack of insight on the peopling of Africa, as you have just pointed out.
It is irrelevant to fact that indigenous Africans built up complex cultures and a nation state thousands of years before Europeans, and hence Evil's lack of response to the main question of the topic.
quote:
Originally posted by lamin:
In strictly logical terms your question should have been:"Where is the great West African civilisation that predates the WEST/NORTH European cradle of civilisation(Stonehenge?)?"
Stonehenge is a megalithic monument, not a civilization. And megalithic sites are found throughout Europe.
Obviously, Greece and Rome are the cradles of European civilization.
quote:
Originally posted by Super car:
indigenous Africans built up complex cultures and a nation state thousands of years before Europeans
NORTH Africans and Middle Easterners built advanced civilizations before Europeans. Sub-Saharan Africans did not. They still haven't.
I guess the ironical meaning of Stonehenge was missed. It was only cited in jest.
But again some logic:
Nubia and Axum are sub-Saharan(all of Africa except North Africa) so the basic premiss is false.
More accurately the idea of "advanced civilisations of North Africa" applies only to Ancient Egypt.
The "civilisations" of Europe are to be restricted only to South East Europe thereby warranting the claim--made by others, ironically among them the racialist, Comte de Gobineau-- that the Northern and Alpine region Europeans were singularly not responsible for any original attempts at civilisation.
quote:
But again some logic:Nubia and Axum are sub-Saharan(all of Africa except North Africa) so the basic premiss is false.
More accurately the idea of "advanced civilisations of North Africa" applies only to Ancient Egypt.
The "civilisations" of Europe are to be restricted only to South East Europe thereby warranting the claim--made by others, ironically among them the racialist, Comte de Gobineau-- that the Northern and Alpine region Europeans were singularly not responsible for any original attempts at civilisation.
Nicely done.
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Euro:
NORTH Africans and Middle Easterners built advanced civilizations before Europeans. Sub-Saharan Africans did not. They still haven't.
Thought Writes:
Please define your terms; what do you mean when you say "civilization"? What cultural traits seperate a civilization from non-civilized societies and cultures?
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Euro:
NORTH Africans and Middle Easterners built advanced civilizations before Europeans. Sub-Saharan Africans did not. They still haven't.
Thought Writes:
North Africa and the Middle East are NOT Europe. At any rate, the people who now occupy "Sub-Saharan" Africa migrated FROM North Africa at the end of the neolithic period.
quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:North Africa and the Middle East are NOT Europe. At any rate, the people who now occupy "Sub-Saharan" Africa migrated FROM North Africa at the end of the neolithic period.
Judging from his comments in other discussions, I am not sure that Evil has fully grasped historic intra-African migratory patterns. I am fully aware that distortion (not such much as denial) has much to do with his tactics, but genuine ignorance seems to be in the mix. Somehow, he feels that segregating Africans into West and North, is yet another effective way of making up for lack of an answer to the main question at hand.
quote:
I am fully aware that distortion (not such much as denial) has much to do with his tactics, but genuine ignorance seems to be in the mix.
A con man is a kind of criminal.
Bias and ignorance are partners in crime.
It does not matter what the con man truly believes...what matters is what he can make others believe.
That is EuroDisney's intended purpose on this forum.
quote:
Originally posted by lamin:
Nubia and Axum are sub-Saharan(all of Africa except North Africa) so the basic premiss is false.
Nubia:
"Starting from the Late Neolithic...similarities between the Nubians and the populations of Northeast Africa...and Asia...became even more distinct, which may prove the existence of strong ties derived probably from influx of the Caucasoids from the regions of Levant, Mesopotamia, and India. They were coming to Nubia through the Sinai Peninsula, but probably also through the south Saudi Arabia. The Kerma series from Upper Nubia shows particular similarities to the present-day Indian series.
"From the Neolithic on, or possibly even earlier, the strategic location of Nubia, promoting contacts between various populations, started to bring about effects in the form of the civilizational development of this region. Finally, these two factors led to the Hamitisation process, whereby superimposition of the Caucasoids on the Negroids took place."
[Aleksandra Pudlo, Population of Nubia up to the 16th Century BC. Anthropological Review, 1999]
Aksum:
"...an ancient tongue spoken in this region fissured into the modern languages of the Afro-Asiatic (formerly Hamito-Semitic) family. This family includes the Cushitic and Semitic languages now spoken in Ethiopia.... During the 2nd millennium BC...a people speaking Ge'ez (a Semitic language) came to dominate the rich northern highlands of Tigray. There, in the 7th century BC, they established the kingdom of Da'amat.... Aksum's culture comprised Ge'ez, written in a modified South Arabian alphabet, sculpture and architecture based on South Arabian prototypes, and an amalgam of local and Middle Eastern deities. Thus, evidence exists of a close cultural exchange between Aksum and the Arabian peninsula...."
["History of Ethiopia," Encyclopaedia Britannica]
References to crackpot drivel doesn't change the position we are in, i.e., from the start of the thread till now, in terms of there being none so far to speak of. If there is one, where is it, and what was called?
Earlier, there was an interesting question on your definitions, which must not go forgotten or avoided. Thanks.
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 03 March 2005).]
In fact the haplotypedata doesn't show that all. If modern humans had begun outside of the tropical and subtropical environments of Africa then the "filtering in" hypothesis would acquire some plausibility--but in the final analysis it would still have to be tested empirically.
But here are some facts that seem get missed in ongoing analyses:
1)There is nothing special about Africa except that it is the largest landmass in the world that is maximally in the tropics and subtropics--yet that doesn't mitigate the fact that there are elevated areas in Africa--especially Kenya, Ethiopia, and to a lesser extent the Congo plateau areas where the climate is almost similar to that of extra-tropical/sub-tropical areas.
It is relatively easy to trek from Northern Africa to Europe and from East Africa to Asia Minor and Asia proper. So Africa has never been an isolated area despite its vast size.
Now given the fact that the East Asian phenotype,gross morphology and genotype are easily distinguishable from those of Eurasia then there's no necessity that the so-called "caucasoid" traits that many please great stock in need some specific environment in terms of climate or ecology from which to evolve.
The reason is that it is assumed that both Eurasians and East Asians acquired their phenotypical and genotypical characteristics in the same environment of Central Eurasia. Yet both groups differ radically in skeletal structures, prognathism, head shape, rhinal structures, hair type, facial configurations, ABO types, etc.
So, therefore, there are no logical and empirical reasons for all the traits found among Eurasians and East Asians not to have evolved in Africa too--except for that single one that seems most affected by climate--level of pigmentation. Even, the curled hair that seems specific to homo sapiens Africanus may not have been a climatic adaptation. The reason is that the hair forms of all the animals indigenous to Africa are in no way curled--including those maximally subjected to the greatest heat from the sun.
So the burden of proof is on those who argue that so-called "caucasoid" traits found among the clinal populations of Africa to demonstrate that such traits could not have evolved in the tropical and sub-tropical environments of Africa.
And conversely it must also be shown that the traits found among populations outside of Africa could nothave originated there. In fact the only way this could happen is if one assumes a multi-regional model along the lines of a Wolpoff. But the problem is that model has already been falsified.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Supercar...to be a 'cradle' implies the civilization has to lead somewhere. we can say that Greece is the 'cradle' of western civilization because it leads to us today. What can we say of some African civilization? Where does it lead? Egyptian civilization did not 'lead' Africa anywhere. What is your point?
How about ancient Egypt having led to Geek development, as the so many ancient Greeks themselves have confessed?
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
The Greeks didn't make that claim. You won't find classical scholars who agree with that. In fact, quite the opposite.
You wanna bet?
The term "cradle of civilisation" is mere metaphorical talk. In fact a "cradle" doesn't have to lead anywhere. Mesopotamia antedated Greece and is a West Asian civilisation yet it has not led to anything in West Asia--e.g. Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, etc.
All "cradle" means is "origins" nothing else. Similarly one can say that the "cradle" of humankind is East and Southern Africa. That's all.
The thing about Europe proper is that it is a relatively small area(smaller than the Congo for instance)--a penisula really--that is bottlenecked at its extremities--hence the influence of the Greeks--by way of Rome--was bound to be diffused to areas where there was nothing comparable in place.
But in fact when references are made to the cradle of civilisation in othodox Western circles it is not Greece that is meant but Mesopotamia. Of course, "ideological correctness" sees to it that Ancient Egypt is excised. Hence the extreme discomfort even to the point of apoplexy when books with provocative titles such as "African Origin of Civilisation" and "Black Athena" are published.
quote:
In fact the haplotypedata doesn't show that all.
It's also irrelevant to the question in the topic thread.
It's made too easy sometimes on Egyptsearch for cornered trolls to change the subject.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
I don't have to bet Super car. the classical scholars that I have read claim that Afrocentris lack the knowledge to correctly interpret what the greeks have said. Find me a classical scholar who agrees with you and I will find 25 who do not. You are riding a dead horse on this issue.
How about classical ancient Greek writers themselves like Aristotle, Proclus, Democritus, Euclid amongst others?
You are right, but note that for those who subscribe to the "received ideological wisdom" the idea of "cradle of civilisation" with reference to Africa is a definite non-starter. To accept otherwise would be to paradigm bust whole traditional schools of thought.
So the normal way to ensure the status quo and keep those fingers in the dyke leak would be to show that the very evident civilisations(in the orthodox sense) of Egypt/Nubia though in Africa are not ofAfrica.
That was the point of the digression.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
again, they write that it is a complicated issue and that you do not have the skills to understand what you are reading. You may be aware that modern scholarship is based on the 'specialist'. Example: there are scholars who spend their lives studying the McKinley administration. Their understanding of McKinley is light years ahead of the average American historian because that one segment is their field.
Classical scholars will have the last word on that issue because that is their field....they do not agree with you.
Why rely on modern scholars, who live thousands of generations later, when you can get the words right from the horse's mouth?
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 03 March 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by lamin:
To RasolYou are right, but note that for those who subscribe to the "received ideological wisdom" the idea of "cradle of civilisation" with reference to Africa is a definite non-starter. To accept otherwise would be to paradigm bust whole traditional schools of thought.
So the normal way to ensure the status quo and keep those fingers in the dyke leak would be to show that the very evident civilisations(in the orthodox sense) of Egypt/Nubia though [b]in Africa are not ofAfrica.
That was the point of the digression.[/B]
Gotcha.
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 03 March 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:Super car...you have to rely on the modern scholars to understand what is being said, context etc. The afrocentric position is refuted ACROSS THE BOARD by classical scholars.
Here's the thing:
You dismiss just about everyone, who simply translates the works of classical ancient Greek thinkers and writters, as "left wing radicals". In the event that I provide names of various modern scholars who see the obvious, again, these will be callously dismissed as "left wing radicals". This is why I am more inclined to quote those ancient Greek "left wing radicals", who made claims that highlight gratitude towards their Nile Valley mentors.
Name some books you've read by classical scholars and then cite their opinions on ancient Greece.
I'm calling you out, and saying you haven't read, well...anything.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
They won't be dismissed supercar IF they are classical scholars. If the body of knowledge is heading in that direction then obviously we would all accept it.
here is the problem, if modern scholars were on your side you know as well as I that we would here it on this board all day.
How about this guy:
Robert Hah. He must be a radical for recognizing the obvious when he writes a book titled:
Anaximander and the Architects: The Contributions of Egyptian and Greek Architectural Technologies to the Origins of Greek Philosophy (Suny Series in Ancient Greek Philosophy (Paper))
or this guy: http://www.math.tamu.edu/~don.allen/history/greekorg/greekorg.html
What about these folks:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/235724.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/521235.stm
How are you going to dismiss them?
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 03 March 2005).]
The kuros statues in Greece are taken exactly from Egyptian models in art. As does the Doric column.
What historians contest is that all Greek philosophy was stolen from ancient Egypt. This is not the case,but for western historians to deny that ancient Egyptians had no vestiages of philosophy like Leftowitz did in her bookNot Out of Africa is an error itself.
Many insitutions in Greece were completely foreign to the Egyptians. Try to find democracy in ancient Egypt,and you will be hell bent to find it.
The theory that ancient Egyptians established the city of Athens needs more archaeological proof. This might have been fact reported that the 12th dyansty pharaoh Senworset I colonized the Aegean,but no such evidence has turned up.
Eric Cline, the leading Aegean archaeologist, believes that there might have been a small trading city in the Aegean of Egyptian origin,but he does not conted that Egyptians founded Athens.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
ausar...They deny that greek civilization grew out of AE philosophy. that is what Super car and others are trying to maintain. It damages the credibility of those who want to make other points. When people hear that kind of material they simply dismiss the person as a nut and disregard everything else they say.
Nonesense. Nobody here is advocating that each and everything that the ancient Greeks accomplished is of foreign origin, but the impact of foreign influence cannot be downplayed.
Horemheb, how did Ancient Greek civilization start out?
We have the precusors of ancient Egyptian culture within the African continent, and the same is true for Sumerian, Babylonian, Indus and Chinese complex cultures in their respective regions. In that respect, Give us a run down of the precursors to their culture in Europe. This is perhaps an opportunity for you to start making some sense!
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
Many insitutions in Greece were completely foreign to the Egyptians. Try to find democracy in ancient Egypt,and you will be hell bent to find it.
Thought Writes:
Ausar, how are you defining "democracy"? Do you envision "Greek Democracy" as being the same thing as the democracy we practice in the USA today? If not, does that not suggest that "democracy" is a process instead of an event?
quote:
Thought Writes:Ausar, how are you defining "democracy"? Do you envision "Greek Democracy" as being the same thing as the democracy we practice in the USA today? If not, does that not suggest that "democracy" is a process instead of an event?
No, the modern democracy is not a ''true'' democracy in the same sense that Athenian democracy. Many cultures developed an independent form of democracy.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:No, the modern democracy is not a ''true'' democracy in the same sense that Athenian democracy. Many cultures developed an independent form of democracy.
What was the Athenian sense of democracy?
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:
No, the modern democracy is not a ''true'' democracy in the same sense that Athenian democracy. Many cultures developed an independent form of democracy.
Thought Writes:
If there are diverse forms of "democracy' what is it in your opinion that justifies a common label and hence philosophical origin?
Slavery played a major role in ancient Greek civilization. . There may have been as many, if not more, slaves than free people in ancient Greece. It is difficult for historians to determine exactly how many slaves there were during these times, because many did not appear any different from the poorer Greek citizens. They were always supervised by the woman of the house who was responsible for making sure that all the slaves were kept busy and didn't get out of line. This could be quite a task as most wealthy Greek households had as many as 10-20 slaves. http://www.crystalinks.com/greekslavery.html
SO YOU WANT A WHITE CIVILIZATION THAT CAME BEFORE WHITE EGYPT?
SUMERIA.
AND THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT THE ORIGINAL EGYPTIANS HAD MANY THINGS PASSED DOWN TO THEM FROM THE SUMERIAMS AND IN FACT THE PHARHOAHS WERE OF THE SAME BLOODLINE AS THE PRE DYNASTIC LUGALS OF UR.
SO WHAT NOW GUYS?
quote:
Nonesense. Nobody here is advocating that each and everything that the ancient Greeks accomplished is of foreign origin, but the impact of foreign influence cannot be downplayed.Horemheb, how did Ancient Greek civilization start out?
We have the precusors of ancient Egyptian culture within the African continent, and the same is true for Sumerian, Babylonian, Indus and Chinese complex cultures in their respective regions. In that respect, Give us a run down of the precursors to their culture in Europe.
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 05 March 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by AKOBADAGETH:
"Where is your Great European civilization that predates the African cradle? "SO YOU WANT A WHITE CIVILIZATION THAT CAME BEFORE WHITE EGYPT?
SUMERIA.
AND THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT THE ORIGINAL EGYPTIANS HAD MANY THINGS PASSED DOWN TO THEM FROM THE SUMERIAMS AND IN FACT THE PHARHOAHS WERE OF THE SAME BLOODLINE AS THE PRE DYNASTIC LUGALS OF UR.
SO WHAT NOW GUYS?
Uhh, Sumeria wasn't white...and neither was Egypt. These are pictures from a Babylonian temple of what Sumerians looked like.
[This message has been edited by King_Scorpion (edited 05 March 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by AKOBADAGETH:
"Where is your Great European civilization that predates the African cradle? "SO YOU WANT A WHITE CIVILIZATION THAT CAME BEFORE WHITE EGYPT?
SUMERIA.
AND THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT THE ORIGINAL EGYPTIANS HAD MANY THINGS PASSED DOWN TO THEM FROM THE SUMERIAMS AND IN FACT THE PHARHOAHS WERE OF THE SAME BLOODLINE AS THE PRE DYNASTIC LUGALS OF UR.
SO WHAT NOW GUYS?
Who are u?
quote:
Originally posted by AKOBADAGETH:
"Where is your Great European civilization that predates the African cradle? "SO YOU WANT A WHITE CIVILIZATION THAT CAME BEFORE WHITE EGYPT?
SUMERIA.
AND THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT THE ORIGINAL EGYPTIANS HAD MANY THINGS PASSED DOWN TO THEM FROM THE SUMERIAMS AND IN FACT THE PHARHOAHS WERE OF THE SAME BLOODLINE AS THE PRE DYNASTIC LUGALS OF UR.
SO WHAT NOW GUYS?
that's funny but you are wrong again.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Super car, The way you framed the question there is no way to answer it. What African cradle are you talking about?
Nile Valley and the Sahara!
quote:
For the nile Valley and the desert to be a cradle of an African civilization ...where is that in Africa?
[This message has been edited by kenndo (edited 08 March 2005).]
THE PReKERMA civilization started in b.c.5000 but nubian civilization really started around 8000 b.c. but nubian culture is older than that but nubian.the a-group nubian civilization started in 3800 b.c.,so that makes in still older than egypt or sumer.this is clear.egypt and nubian scholars have made it clear today that nubian culture at those times above was advanced enough to be called a civilization.this is not a debate anymore on that,besides this is what happens when the media does not report on africa in a correct light,so folks will still yap at the mouth without any updated info or reading any up to date info on africa,past or present.ghana started out in 200 a.d. and axum was older that that.
[This message has been edited by kenndo (edited 08 March 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:For the nile Valley and the desert to be a cradle of an African civilization ...where is that in Africa? The cultures that existed in north Africa were wiped out by the spread of Islam in the early middle ages. In other parts of africa Ghana emerged as a trading state in the 5th and 6th century. They were defeated by Sundita in the 13th century. Zimbabwe, Mali and Songhai all emerged between the 12th and 16th centuries. These were far too late to be the cradle you are looking for.
Still doesn't answer the question posted!
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
There is no answer to your question Super car.
You are right. You don't have an answer to the simple question.
You seem to be at that time of the day/month, when you get frustrated and begin shouting and acting foolish professor.
Perhaps you should step away from the computer and take a nap, instead of throwing a temper tantrum over what is after all, nothing more than your own inability to answer a simple question.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
For the nile Valley and the desert to be a cradle of an African civilization ...where is that in Africa?
quote:
Originally posted by HERU:I could've swore the Sahara was once fertile.
Yeah, but how would distortion crackpots know about that?
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
There was no civilization anywhere when the desert was fertile. You guys don't even understand what a 'civilization' is. No wonder we can't make any progress.
You still have no answer, eh. Perhaps an 8 year old buddy should give you a hand!
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
There was no civilization anywhere when the desert was fertile. You guys don't even understand what a 'civilization' is. No wonder we can't make any progress.
quote:
But people who do world history usually begin with the origins of agriculture. There are at least seven or eight maybe eleven to thirteen world regions which independently invented agriculture. None in Europe, by the way.
- Christopher Ehret
[This message has been edited by HERU (edited 08 March 2005).]
As far as this Horemheb guy, he actually states that there's no such thing as "Eurocentrics"!! LOL
The fact is there are plenty of books, even textbooks that classify Egypt as being part of the Near-East, but that does not change the fact that it is African both culturally as well as geographically!!
quote:
Originally posted by Djehuti:
The fact is there are plenty of books, even textbooks that classify Egypt as being part of the Near-East, but that does not change the fact that it is African both culturally as well as geographically!!
I have shown the guy the numerous colleges that study Egypt as African studies. If it is included in the Near East, it is simply because Egypt had contacts in the Near East as well. It had bases in the near East. This in no way negates its African base, which is what distortion crackpots fail to realize!
quote:
Originally posted by Djehuti:
The main point is that if someone actually starts to debate a simple term such 'indigenous,' then you know there is no arguing with such a person!
...which is why, you don't want to feed these folks any further, by replying their pointless or reactionary threads!
quote:
Originally posted by Super car:
...which is why, you don't want to feed these folks any further, by replying their pointless or reactionary threads!
Excuse me for doing so before, but I did not know what type of illogical person Abaza is until now!
In the meantime...
quote:
Horemheb:You guys don't even understand what a 'civilization' is. No wonder we can't make any progress.
What do you define as 'civilization'?
NOW THE FIRST CIVILIZATION WAS NO EARLIER THAN 10,000 YEARS AGO AND THAT WAS AFTER
THE WHITE RACE EXISTED.
SO THAT MEANS THAT THE NEGROID RACE WAS ALREADY AROUND FOR AT LEAST 30,000 YEARS BEFORE THE WHITE MAN EXISTED AND IN ALL
THAT TIME THEY NEVER DEVELOPED ANY CIVILIZATION .IT WASNT UNTIL AFTER THE WHITE MAN SHOWED UP THAT CIVILIZATIONS APPEARED.
DONT THAT SEEM A LITTLE STRANGE TO YOU?
"civ·i·li·za·tion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (sv-l-zshn)
n.
An advanced state of intellectual, cultural, and material development in human society, marked by progress in the arts and sciences, the extensive use of record-keeping, including writing, and the appearance of complex political and social institutions."
THE BLACK/NEGROID RACE NEVER HAD ONE,NOT UNTIL THE WHITE MAN BESTWOED CIVILIZATION UPON THEM!
quote:
we have people here that do not understand the difference between a neolithic culture and a civilization.
...like you.
ILL TAKE THAT AS YOUR ADMITION OF DEFEAT.
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
'kay...now you can go empty those bedpans.
Yeah, he gets his false sense of 'empowerment' and pride from feeling that somehow he as added something special to this world when he's very disposable and futile. So he relies not on his parents, not on his siblings, not on his extended family, but his "race" to prove that he is important and has accomplished something meaningful in this life.
He should feel embarrassed that he belongs to the majority of this country's population(hence does not have to face prejudice and other biased obstacles that can hinder his development and progress) and still has not amounted to a hill of beans.
The face of america has changed and is changing even faster now. America is getting many of its doctors, scientist, engineers from India, Africa, the middle east, and even the Caribbean and evidently these people are non-white. Europe cannot support this supply and demand of extremely educated and skilled market solely because of sheer numbers. Just look around your hospital bozo!
So to my white supremist "friends" on this board prepare and be ready to adjust to life as the minority. But don't worry we haven't been brainwashed and influenced to hate like some our western counterparts.
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
keins...what a bunch of racist jibberish. My guess is that there is not a white person in America who is as racist as you. Minorities have a solid place is the global economy Europe and America have created. they don't care if you are black, green or pink if you can make them money. Unfortunately, most of these afrocentrics are to hung up on being black to do anything at all with the opportunities they have.
Oh so now I'm racist. I'm stating facts and obvious trends. I do not believe that any one race is superior. I do not hate any one race. I do not use racist words when refering to others outside my race. You on the other hand do all of the above yet you have the tenacity to call me racist?! LMAO
get a life professor!