Jasper cylinder seal: monstrous lions and lion-headed eagles, Mesopotamia, Uruk Period (4100 BC–3000 BC) displaying similar Serpopard motif to the Narmer Palette, Louvre
Narmer's Vizier(2nd in command)and sandal-bearer has a cylinder seal around his neck. Anyone know if this seal is similar to any Uruk cylinder seals? Also, any references to a more precise date on the Uruk seal?
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Coincidence?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Notice how it seems the hands are clasped together as in the way Sumerian statues are often depicted? This is predynastic Egyptian. Coincidence?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Sumerian.....
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
And what's up with the blue eyes on the Sumerian and Egyptian statuettes?? Another Sumerian statuette.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
Notice how it seems the hands are clasped together as in the way Sumerian statues are often depicted? This is predynastic Egyptian. Coincidence?
Must be, because there is nothing like this in chronologically similar layers in the so-called "Near East". Furthermore, finger lines of the figure to the right are seen on both its left hand and right hand. The so-called "Uruk" examples don't sport that; they only show the finger lines of one hand that is covering the other.
As for the "Serpopards", this is what I noted elsewhere:
On a passing note, the long-necked feline creatures on the recto side of Narmer palette are hard to ignore. Some observers have dubbed them as "serpopards". Some have interpret them as supposed "imports" from the so-called "Near East", predicated on the flimsy standpoint that similar creature is featured in Uruk artifact dated to more or less contemporary time frame as the Narmer palette, like the Uruk seal below, reportedly dated to c. 3000 BC:
Notwithstanding such claims, the Nile Valley example is actually dated earlier than the "Near Eastern" examples. Anytime there are some parallel cultural/artistic expressions in the Nile Valley and the so-called Near East, these same characters tend to give priority to the so-called "Near East" as the most likely source, as if to tacitly say that the Nile Valley can never be conceived as the source (it is virtually impossible) and therefore, must always be the recipient of cultural diffusion. Note that the Uruk serpopards have much longer tails than the Narmer palette rendition, with their tails almost as long as their necks. The mythic creatures themselves may well serve as "guardians" against enemies or adversarial elements, just as that served by other mythic creatures like the Sphinx.
Another "Near Eastern" import from the Nile Valley, could well be the concept of the sphinx.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
And what about the cylinder seals themselves? Another copied design from Egypt?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
I don't know. You tell me; what is the earliest accurate date on Uruk cylinder seals? I find these claims or insinuations about some Uruk-origin for Dynastic Egyptian culture funny, because they are strikingly different. People who make these claims apparently know next to nothing about AE culture.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Well it doesn't seem you have any better data. Can you provide me with an example of Egyptian cylinder seals preceding that of any in the Middle East?
What about the written language of Egypt? Is there much proof of a proto type of writing preceding the actual dynastic use of the written language itself? Did it appear out of thin air?
It seems as if it appeared suddenly as if influenced from somewhere else.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Better data for what? Your comment is strange. I already gave you my take on the question of cylinder seals, and questioned you on it, since you brought up the matter.
With regard to the writing, I get the impression that you are ignorant of proto-hieroglyph items of the Nile, so as to bring you to the conclusion that it appears "suddenly". In any case, I'll just repeat something I posted elsewhere:
He [Gunther Dreyer] concluded his presentation by noting similarities between specific Egyptian and Mesopotamian objects and suggesting that perhaps there is an initial influence of Egyptian writing on Mesopotamia because there are signs on Mesopotamian objects that are only "readable" from the standpoint of the Egyptian language, but not the Mesopotamian language. - Mario Beatty, "Too Much Stuff": Recent Finds in Predynastic Egypt
Writing had independently been invented in different parts of the world; so, where the earliest writing emerged is not as important a question as whose writing influence who, imo. Contemporary European writing is ultimately a derivative of a Nile Valley script. A case is being made in the excerpt above, that Nile Valley script reached "Mesopotamia" earlier on as well. Certainly, it reached the Levant where it would be modified into Phoenician script, and from there, as they say, the rest is history.
^^Indeed. The notion of "sudden appearance" is not supported by the scholar you reference- Dreyer. [quote by Dreyer himself:]
"Most of them are documents, records of linen and oil delivered to the King Scorpion, taxes, short notes, numbers, lists of kings' names, and names of institutions.. The writing is in the form of line drawings of animals, plants and mountains and is the earliest evidence that hieroglyphics used by later-day Pharaonic dynasties did not rise as phoenix from the ashes but developed gradually.. Although the Egyptian writing is in the form of symbols it can be called true writing because each symbol stands for a consonant and makes up syllables. In principle Ancient Egyptians were able to express themselves clearly.."
--Nevine El-Aref, "Did writing originate in Egypt?" Al-Ahram Weekly: 1 - 7 April 1999, Issue No. 423
Of Dreyer's finds, Archaeology Magazine states that they
"...challenge the commonly held belief that early logographs, pictographic symbols representing a specific place, object, or quantity, first evolved into more complex phonetic symbols in Mesopotamia." -- Larkin Mitchell, "Earliest Egyptian Glyphs," Archaeology, Volume 52 Number 2, March/April 1999
And indeed writing has been developed independently in several places. Seeking some sort of Mesopotamian inspiration is not necessary. Unfortunately some do this and even have claimed some sort of Mesopotamian influence on ancient Egypt as regards religion, but scholarly data actually finds more religious connections between Egypt and Northeast Africa rather than the "Middle East":
"A large number of gods go back to prehistoric times. The images of a cow and star goddess (Hathor), the falcon (Horus), and the human-shaped figures of the fertility god (Min) can be traced back to that period. Some rites, such as the "running of the Apil-bull," the "hoeing of the ground," and other fertility and hunting rites (e.g., the hippopotamus hunt) presumably date from early times.. Connections with the religions in southwest Asia cannot be traced with certainty." "It is doubtful whether Osiris can be regarded as equal to Tammuz or Adonis, or whether Hathor is related to the "Great Mother." There are closer relations with northeast African religions. The numerous animal cults (especially bovine cults and panther gods) and details of ritual dresses (animal tails, masks, grass aprons, etc) probably are of African origin. The kinship in particular shows some African elements, such as the king as the head ritualist (i.e., medicine man), the limitations and renewal of the reign (jubilees, regicide), and the position of the king's mother (a matriarchal element). Some of them can be found among the Ethiopians in Napata and Meroe, others among the Prenilotic tribes (Shilluk)."
-- Encyclopedia Britannica 1984 ed. Macropedia Article, Vol 6: "Egyptian Religion" , pg 506-508
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: I don't know. You tell me; what is the earliest accurate date on Uruk cylinder seals? I find these claims or insinuations about some Uruk-origin for Dynastic Egyptian culture funny, because they are strikingly different. People who make these claims apparently know next to nothing about AE culture.
What is strikingly different about the design or use of both types of cylinder seals from each culture? Do they both not have the same basic design and were used to do the same basic function? Are you implying that the Egyptians had invented the first cylinder seals?
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
Basalt statuette known as 'MacGregor Man', Ancient Egyptian, predynastic period, 3250 B.C.
"Basalt statuette known as 'MacGregor Man', Ancient Egyptian, predynastic period, c3250 BC. Said to have come from Naqada, this figure is named after the Reverend William MacGregor in whose collection it was until 1922. The makers of early Predynastic sculptures knew as yet none of the conventions of later Egyptian art. This results in the curiously un-Egyptian impression their creations exert From the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford."
Looks like a sculpture i would expect from Sumer.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^One thing that gives that statue away as possibly being Sumerian in its design is the eyebrows. Sumerian statues had that same type of prominent feature.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
I'm still waiting for some really strong evidence of a proto form of a written language during the predynastic period and beyond. Not just a few hundred symbols that predate the dawning of the first dynasties only marginally.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
I don't know. You tell me; what is the earliest accurate date on Uruk cylinder seals? I find these claims or insinuations about some Uruk-origin for Dynastic Egyptian culture funny, because they are strikingly different. People who make these claims apparently know next to nothing about AE culture.
What is strikingly different about the design or use of both types of cylinder seals from each culture? Do they both not have the same basic design and were used to do the same basic function? Are you implying that the Egyptians had invented the first cylinder seals?
Read *carefully* what you are citing. I said Dynastic Egyptian culture is strikingly different from that of the Uruk.
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
Basalt statuette known as 'MacGregor Man', Ancient Egyptian, predynastic period, 3250 B.C.
"Basalt statuette known as 'MacGregor Man', Ancient Egyptian, predynastic period, c3250 BC. Said to have come from Naqada, this figure is named after the Reverend William MacGregor in whose collection it was until 1922. The makers of early Predynastic sculptures knew as yet none of the conventions of later Egyptian art. This results in the curiously un-Egyptian impression their creations exert From the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford."
Looks like a sculpture i would expect from Sumer.
MacGregor is not making sense. Just because predynastic style statuary fetish did not survive all through the Dynastic period does not make it "curiously un-Egyptian". Even Dynastic era art conventions changed from era to era. They were not static. It rarely is anywhere else either.
As for the claim about "expecting the sculpture from Sumer", provide me with the parallels, not only chronologically but visually.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
MS 2787 PROTOHIEROGLYPHS OF SHIP AND OAR (TRANSPORTATION)
MS in archaic Egyptian on clay, Egypt, Nagada II period, 3500-3100 BC, 1 black top jar, diam. 13-6 cm, h. 28 cm, (7x18 cm), 1 line of 2 large protohieroglyphs incised in the clay.
Context: A related example incised with an ibis: Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, Predynastic Egyptian collection, fig. 25, no. 174.
Provenance: 1. Found at Kamoula, Egypt (1897); 2. Pitt-Rivers Museum, Farnham, Surrey; 3. Private collection, Switzerland; 4. Sotheby's New York 5.6.1999:337.
Commentary: The present jar and the Ashmolean jar have, so far, the earliest "script" known in the Western world, preceding the earliest examples from Egypt and Sumer. Whether it actually is script is under discussion. It certainly is not continuos writing.
A group of pottery and ivory tags was discovered in a predynastic Royal tomb in Abydos in 1998 with similar protohieroglyphs dated to 33rd - 32nd c. BC. A pottery shed was found in 1999 in Harappa in the Indus Valley with 6 signs, dated to ca 3500 BC, but without any connection to the later Indus Valley script, see MS 2645.
Exhibited: 1. Kon-Tiki Museet, Oslo, April 2002 - Jan. 2003; 2. Tigris 25th anniversary exhibition. The Kon-Tiki Museum, Oslo, 30.1. - 15.9.2003; 3. Kon-Tiki Museet, Oslo, September 2003 -.
MS 200
HOR AHA OF UPPER EGYPT, THE NAME OF ONE OF THE FIRST TWO PHARAOHS OF DYNASTY I
MS in archaic Egyptian on clay, possibly Abydos, Upper Egypt, 3007-2975 BC, 1 cylindrical jar, h. 24 cm, diam. 11 cm, 2 columns, (10x7 cm), 7 hieroglyphs, including the cartouche of Aha surmounted by a falcon denoting the royal title "Horus", and "Shema" for Upper Egypt, in a rapid flowing script in black ink.
Provenance: 1. Possibly excavated at the First Dynasty tombs in the Royal necropolis at Abydos; 2. Sotheby's New York 2.12.1988:126.
Commentary: Among the earliest examples of human script in ink extant. The oldest are probably similar cylindrical jars from Abydos, with the cartouche possibly of the predynastic King Ka, about 3100 BC. One of these is in British Museum (BM 35508). Further the recent discovery of a predynastic Royal tomb at Abydos containing inscribed pottery and ivory tags. The first 2 Pharaohs of the first dynasty, Narmer and Hor Aha, reigned both ca. 3000 BC. Beckerath, however, allocates Narmer as a pre-dynastic king, before 3000 BC.
Exhibited: 1. Conference of European National Librarians, Oslo. Sept. 1994. 2. "Preservation for access: Originals and copies". On the occasion of the 1st International Memory of the World Conference, organized by the Norwegian Commission for UNESCO and the National Library of Norway, at the Astrup Fearnley Museum of Modern Art, Oslo, 3 June - 14 July 1996. 3. The Norwegian Institute of Palaeography and Historical Philology (PHI), Oslo, 13.10.2003-
Source for the above notes on the exhibits: The Schoyen Collection.
From Dreyer's 1998 archeological work, as acknowledged above in the notes from the Schoyen Collection, we have...
"The earliest writing ever seen may have been discovered in southern Egypt. The hieroglyphics record linen and oil deliveries made over 5,000 years ago…the new Egyptian discoveries have been confidently dated to between 3300 BC and 3200 BC using carbon isotopes.
The writings are line drawings of animals, plants and mountains and came mainly from the tomb of a king called Scorpion in a cemetery at Abydos, about 400 km (250 miles) south of Cairo…
Since 1985, Mr Dreyer and his team have unearthed about 300 pieces of written material on clay tablets barely bigger than postage stamps…
The newly discovered Egyptian writings also show that the society then was far more developed than previously thought, Dreyer said. He said man's first writings were not a creative outpouring but the result of economics: when chieftains expanded their areas of control they needed to keep a record of taxes. Although the Egyptian writings are made up of symbols, they can be called true writing because each symbol stands for a consonant and makes up syllables." - BBC News, Sci/Tech, 1998.
Photos: Courtesy Dreyer
Thus, these findings date the earliest scripts of the Nile Valley, which can confidently be considered writing or ‘continuous’ writing , back to Nagada III phase. One thing is clear, as Dreyer put it,…
“The newly discovered Egyptian writings also show that the society then was far more developed than previously thought, Dreyer said.”
I think the artifacts presented reveal that Egypt owes some of its debt to Sumerian and or Near Eastern influence. There a many interesting links, Though its interesting to see that the only links Egypt has with Nubia is the fact that Nubia was a controlled and dominated region for thousands of years by the Egyptians which by default surfaces many things such as culture and architectural forts, temples and columns. Knowledge clearly started in the Middle East and dead ended at Nubia.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
^^^^^keep in mind many in this forum believe the Sumerians were bearded black people from Kush
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
I think the artifacts presented reveal that Egypt owes some of its debt to Sumerian and or Near Eastern influence.
Spiralman, you are of course entitled to fantasizing, but if we are dealing with facts, you'll need a heck lot more than a few relics that could possibly have been used as trade-items to demonstrate how AE owes "Summerian and or Near Eastern influence" some of "its debt". Trade is a two-way street. You'll find items of Egyptian themes [I know they exist, because I've posted them here before] in the so-called "Near East". I don't hear you saying then that the "Near East" owes some debt to "Ancient Egyptian influence".
quote: There a many interesting links, Though its interesting to see that the only links Egypt has with Nubia is the fact that Nubia was a controlled and dominated region for thousands of years
There is no such thing as "Nubia". It is a 'western' construct, which in any case, will posit the origin of Dynastic Egyptian culture in "Nubia", since that is where elements that have come to characterize Dynastic Egyptian find their earliest expression. The Falcon tradition, the Hedjet/White crown, and even proto-hieroglyphs.
Then there is the Kushitic complex, which is generally perceived to be an outgrowth of the Kerma complex, which owes nothing to Dynastic Egypt in its emergence. The Kushitic complex were considered major rivals to the Egyptians, and in fact, had at times actually almost controlled Egypt long before the eventual Kushitic takeover of Egypt in the 25th Dynasty. Your comment strikes me as being made, because you are ignorant of these basic facts of the Nile Valley?
quote: by the Egyptians which by default surfaces many things such as culture and architectural forts, temples and columns.
The Kushitics incorporated both Egyptian and Roman elements that they liked into their own designs. Your claim is very simplistic. Likewise, the Greeks and Romans incorporated foreign architecture styles into their own. It happens all the time in complex societies; not a one way-street. For example, "Near Easterners" have adopted writing and languages from the Nile Valley, amongst other things.
quote: Knowledge clearly started in the Middle East and dead ended at Nubia.
Unless you can elaborate on this, i.e. what you mean by "knowledge" [which is a very generalized term], and a detailed account on its specifics, this claim appears to something that is a personal opinion based on desired thinking rather than fact.
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
Originally posted by The Explorer:
"...posit the origin of Dynastic Egyptian culture in "Nubia", since that is where elements that have come to characterize Dynastic Egyptian find their earliest expression. The Falcon tradition, the Hedjet/White crown, and even proto-hieroglyphs."
Where are your peer-reviewed sources for Dynastic AE, Horus falcon symbol, Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs claims originating in Nubia?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Kerma Complex
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet:
Where are your peer-reviewed sources for Dynastic AE, Horus falcon symbol, Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs claims originating in Nubia?
Where are your peer-reviewed sources which demonstrate that such a thing as Nubia existed during pre-dynastic and dynastic periods?
As for the falcon tradition, the Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs, ever heard of Qustul, ever read archeologist Bruce Williams' reports, or Timothy Kendall? Try searching for these items, and you'll get the idea.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Where are your peer-reviewed sources for Dynastic AE, Horus falcon symbol, Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs claims originating in Nubia?
Where are your peer-reviewed sources which demonstrate that such a thing as Nubia existed during pre-dynastic and dynastic periods?
As for the falcon tradition, the Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs, ever heard of Qustul, ever read archeologist Bruce Williams' reports, or Timothy Kendall? Try searching for these items, and you'll get the idea.
the people of the Qustul region of Lower Nubia belonged to what historians call the A-Group culture. This Nubian cultural group was contemporaneous with the Egyptian prehistoric Naqada III period, and evidence suggests the A-Group had extensive trade and contact with the Egyptians of Hierakonpolis (ancient Nekhen), in particular. In fact, the A-Group was on par with certain Upper Egyptian regions on the path toward the development of a sophisticated state. That the A-Group failed to attain this level of socio-political development is probably the result of invasions by Upper Egyptians to wrest control of lucrative trade networks from the Lower Nubians. Wilkinson seems rather clear in stating the A-Group culture was all but wiped out soon afterward, but in reading I've done since then it seems probable that these Nubians of the A-Group persisted until the reign of Sneferu, in Dynasty 4 Egypt, when evidence for them ceases to exist. The incense burner was excavated from tomb L24 in Cemetery L at Qustul. a brief recipe clip I shot of it at the O.I., showing one portion of the burner. The burner was found in fragments and was reconstructed. All smooth, beige portions you see are part of the recreation, but all portions with reliefs and depictions are original. It's quite surprising how much of the burner has survived, given that it is over 5,000 years old. Not all of the burner is visible in the display case, of course. What's so important about the artifact is the icons it shows of distinctive Egyptian character. Scenes on the burner depict a seated figure wearing the White Crown, and bound prisoners--two motifs that would be part of Egyptian iconography for the entire dynastic period. Here's a photo of the museum's line-art illustration of all of the surviving scenes: Note also the palace facade and sacred boats, which are also very Egyptian in style. It's the White Crown in particular that fascinates me. ends at the portion of the burner in which the crown appears. It's hard to see unless you're looking at it yourself, so I'm including this photo: Still hard to see? LOL I know, it can be. In this image I've applied some red shading to the relevant portion: It's either a White Crown, or the people of Qustul were into decorating their material culture with images of bowling pins. I jest. All I'm doing is trying to get a chuckle out of you folks so you'll forget the fact that the actual Qustul Incense Burner has been at the O.I. all along, and I've missed it. My friend and fellow docent Dennis was there that day, too, and he assured me it's the real thing. He seemed rather amused that I didn't know it. All kidding aside, the images of Egyptian iconography are indisputable--but this artifact is from Lower Nubia, not Egypt. This was an entirely different culture. How to explain it? There remains the possibility, I suppose, that the A-Group people were the first to use the White Crown. That does not seem to be supported by evidence, though. It's obvious that the Qustul people and the people of Upper Egypt (certainly in the Hierakonpolis region) were in close contact, so perhaps they shared iconography in this very early period. As far as I'm aware, the Qustul Incense Burner contains the oldest definitive evidence for the White Crown. However, in that discussion at ED in 2007, posters posited other possible contenders. Anneke, for example, shared this image: Now on display in France, this statuette of schist dates to Naqada I, and was excavated at Gebelein, in Egypt. It's quite a bit older than the Qustul Incense Burner, and to me the figure definitely wears something very similar to the White Crown. Please feel delicious to provide comments or ask questions. But if nothing else, you can take two things from this post of mine: 1) When you're next at the O.I., check out the Qustul Incense Burner, a very significant artifact. 2) When you're next at any museum, learn from my example and actually open your eyes so you can see what's really there.
A-Group (3200-3000 BC)-Oriental Institute white crown (?)
__________________________________ Narmer palette, white crown (approx 3150 BC)
One interpretation is that Nubian A-Group rulers and early Egyptian pharaohs used related royal symbols. Similarities in rock art of A-Group Nubia and Upper Egypt support this position.
Another view suggests that the decoration was carved by Nubians in imitation of Egyptian art and rituals. In this perspective, A-Group Nubian rulers would have emulated the symbols of Egyptian pharaohs, whose prestige and power were evident.
The best chances of resolving this question lie in further exploration of areas of Nubia that are still accessible, and in excavation in the centers of early Egypt, where further evidence of the development of pharaonic traditions may be found. "The origin of the white crown is ambiguous."-Timothy Kendall
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
^BS. There is no evidence whatsoever, in predynastic Nagadan iconography, as I demonstrate in the link provided in my last post, of the "white crown" that is contemporaneous to the Qustul example. It's earliest appearance is in Qustul artifacts. All comtemporary Nagadan rulers wore the Red [Deshret] crown instead. I also note this in the link. The Red Crown actually appears to originally have been a Nagadan regalia rather than the Delta area.
Rock art is not a substitute for this evidence.
That last view is the most ridiculous of the views mentioned above. To make that view, you'd have to demonstrate Nagadan or Lower Egyptian precedences for the regalia in question. Reality though, is the opposite. Precedence is in Qustul artifacts.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: [Where are your peer-reviewed sources which demonstrate that such a thing as Nubia existed during pre-dynastic and dynastic periods?
As for the falcon tradition, the Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs, ever heard of Qustul, ever read archeologist Bruce Williams' reports, or Timothy Kendall? Try searching for these items, and you'll get the idea.
"The origin of the white crown is ambiguous."-Timothy Kendall
This incense burner is distinctively Nubian in form. Carved in the technique of Nubian rock art, it is decorated on the rim with typical Nubian designs.
/close
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
That the A-Group failed to attain this level of socio-political development is probably the result of invasions by Upper Egyptians to wrest control of lucrative trade networks from the Lower Nubians.
According to what evidence?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
"The origin of the white crown is ambiguous."-Timothy Kendall
/close
You are cherry picking and taking a single piece out of context of the broader narrative. Kendall acknowledges this:
Ironically, the earliest certain images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia, about 300 km up-river from Hierakonpolis. These images occur on two incense burners of uniquely Nubian type, which depict kings seated in archaic high-prowed boats wearing abnormally tall crowns with knobs, accompanied by bulls and Horus falcons(Williams 1980; 1986, pls. 33, 34). They date to about 3300 BC. The same crown then appears not long afterwards in Egypt: on an unprovenienced ivory knife handle in the Metropolitian Museum and, later still, on the Scorpion mace head and Narmer palette (Wilkinson 1999, 194–5).
His broader narrative is that there are yet other signs, aside from the Qustul artifact, that points to a "Nubian" origin. This is why I referenced him. You might try to understand the broader narrative, instead of cherry picking and quoting out of context.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Qustul Incense Burner Limestone A-Group (3200-3000 BC)-Oriental Institute
Narmer is thought to have reigned c. 3150 BCE
___________________________________________
as with the seal and palette, the dating is too imprecise to say one's first.
"The origin of the white crown is ambiguous."-Timothy Kendall
that's not some detail cherry picked, it's a summarizing statement and cannot be taken to mean definative
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Klutz, you are reading the statement by the man above in blocked letters, and yet you are lingering to some piece you wish to quote out of context.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
In fact, lioness do this:
Show me one Nagadan ruler wearing a 'white crown' that is dated to the same time frame as the Qustul example. Let's test how ambiguous your findings will be.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
as soon as the insult appears you know you're winning what is the specific example, with photo source? Are we talking about the Incense burner, A-Group (3200-3000 BC)-Oriental Institute?
The incense burner corresponds to early dynastic 32nd century BCE) and it is not even clear of it's definitely a white crown. Predynastic Egyptians in the Naqada I period traded with Nubia to the south but the incense burner does not go back nearly that far. Narmer on the palette with white crown, is contemporaneous
The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. p. 61
Blocked letters? what are you talking about? Kendall is quoted in blue type also
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Well, your sarcastic comment aside, I don't see your answer to the challenge above.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Addressing lioness' editing...
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: as soon as the insult appears you know you're winning
I must be winning; you are unable to come up with even a *single* Nagadan ruler wearing a white crown that is contemporaneous to that of the Qustul ruler. If the situation was "ambiguous" as you say, this would have been an easy feat. Why hasn't it?
quote: what is the specific example, with photo source? Are we talking about the Incense burner, A-Group (3200-3000 BC)-Oriental Institute?
The king wearing the white crown, and the falcon dates to 3300 BC. If you are going to whine about how this might not be precise, then you are going to have to do the same to all similarly ancient complexes, including the likes of Uruk. You only have issues with this sort of thing, when it comes to African things.
quote: The incense burner corresponds to early dynastic 32nd century BCE) and it is not even clear of it's definitely a white crown.
The Qustul incense is older than the first dynastic period. You have shown no evidence otherwise, other than manufacturing your own information. It features proto-hieroglyphs; that itself should be a sign that it has got to be older than the first Dynasty. Even the falcon on the imagery is cruder than that we see in the first dynastic period. Name a source that says it is dated to the first Dynasty, wherein hieroglyphs appear reasonably well developed.
quote: Narmer on the palette with white crown, is contemporaneous
BS. Let's see what the source that you tried to quote out of context says about it:
Oddly, in the famous painted tomb of Hierakonpolis, also Naqada II, there is not one representation of a white crown among the numerous images of the ruler. And on the painted textile from Gebelein the ruler seated in the boat wears only a kind of bowler hat (Genesis, pl. 12). - T. Kendall
You hear that, not a single Nagadan ruler of the images sported the White Crown, not one, among those numerous depictions! This actually answers that challenge I put to you.
This is what the same source had to say about its date, as I cited above:
Ironically, the earliest **certain** images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia, about 300 km up-river from Hierakonpolis. These images occur on two incense burners of uniquely Nubian type, which depict kings seated in archaic high-prowed boats wearing abnormally tall crowns with knobs, accompanied by bulls and Horus falcons(Williams 1980; 1986, pls. 33, 34). They date to about 3300 BC.
^This single piece obliterates your flimsy posts on several fronts; you wrote:
1) it is not even clear of it's definitely a white crown. - lioness
The Kendall post above says, on other hand:
earliest **certain** images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia - Kendall
2) You wrote:
Narmer on the palette with white crown, is contemporaneous - lioness
But the Kendall post says:
earliest certain images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia - Kendall
And that:
They date to about 3300 BC.
This is before the age estimated for the Narmer palette.
So much for that cherry-picked single piece you focused on.
quote:Blocked letters? what are you talking about? Kendall is quoted in blue type also
You see, when I called you a klutz, I wasn't insulting you as you figured. It is an observation. I was referring to my citation of Kendall, wherein I blocked some letters for emphasis, precisely so you would be able to see them. I see that I failed in even that feat. No amount of simplification can make you catch on.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
if you want to pretend that the dating that precise, it's not
I told you the incense burner is dated by the Oriental Institute (3200-3000) Not 3300
Also note within that the the 200 year variance 3200-3000 given by one the most credible Near East research organizations.
Then we have the Narmer palette dated to 3100-3200 BC
Obviously, the exact dating is unknown and the differences in this case are not far.
But you say a date you liked 3300. Stick to that if it makes you feel better.
that's what it's all about __________________________________
if you want to keep on we can get into radio-carbon data, etc. methodology or we can just accept whoever says the thing we want to hear and pretend it's exact
*also the typographic term is "bolded" letters not "blocked" (don't mean to be annoying*)
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
If you want to pretend that the 3300 BC date attributed to Qustul is not acceptable, then you ought to apply this same reason to just about any other ancient complex, from Nagada, Uruk, Meso-America, etc, not your double standards of accepting dates for one complex and questioning those of another. You also ought to stop being a hypocrite, because you should just as well question your so-called "contemporaneous" date of the Narmer Palette equally so.
If you want to pretend that the A-Group is contemporaneous to the Dynastic Egypt, then go ahead, but you won't find any reputable source on it.
If you want to pretend that imagery that is more basic and cruder on the Qustul incense is the same age as the more developed versions of the early Dynastic period, then knock yourself out.
If you want to pretend that there are Nagada figures wearing the White crown at a contemporaneous time as the figure on Qustul artifacts, then go ahead.
If you want to pretend that the Oriental Institute thinks the Qustul incense is contemporaneous with the first Dynasty, then go ahead and stick your head in the sand:
he decoration of the Qustul Incense Burner, as restored. A sacrificial procession contains the earliest **definite** image of a pharaoh with his crown and falcon-label. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition. - Oriental Institute of Chicago. Source: Link
If you want to pretend that the incense is dated to 3200 BC, instead of the often generally cited 3300 BC, even according to your own earlier citation above, then hallucinate away.
If you feel good about manufacturing information, instead dealing with facts, then go crazy. That's what its all about.
There is no "if", re: methodology, dating, etc. You have evidence on something, then bring it on. And you are annoying, because you are a very dense individual [just an observation of fact; I don't mean to be insulting]
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
I think the artifacts presented reveal that Egypt owes some of its debt to Sumerian and or Near Eastern influence. There a many interesting links, Though its interesting to see that the only links Egypt has with Nubia is the fact that Nubia was a controlled and dominated region for thousands of years by the Egyptians which by default surfaces many things such as culture and architectural forts, temples and columns. Knowledge clearly started in the Middle East and dead ended at Nubia.
Egypt owes some of its debt to Sumerian influence? And then you cite the Gebel el Arak artifact showing what seems to be a Mesopotamian warrior on the back side? That has to be the weakest argument in the history of demonstrating cultural influence. According to that line of thinking, every time the Ancient Egyptians depicted a subject of a foreign nation, like say on the table of nations, the depicted nations have a share of the pie as well..?
This southern bowman went to Egypt to rub off his culture on the natives simply because he was depicted in Predynastic Egyptian art?? Although the latter is factual, ie, African influence on Egypt, no one in his right mind would depend on this image to make that claim. So why do you? Could it be because you're compensating for a lack of appropriate evidence to demonstrate the ''knowledge'' that Ancient Egypt supposedly owes the Near East?
It is funny to me that how often singleAfrican cultures get pitted against the rest of the entire world outside of Africa, as if the rest of the world is one thing. African cultural hallmarks in Egypt mean nothing to these folks, but every area outside of Africa that has some marginal association with some object inside Ancient Egyptian remains gets hollywood type of attention. Note his choice of words: ''the Near East''. How the hell do we go from Mesopotamian influence to ''the Near East''?
In what kind of position was comtemporary ''Near East'', to deposit anything substantial in Ancient Egypt?
What cultural Ancient Egyptian hallmarks can we identify and associate with those areas in the Middle East that were in shape to deposit something substantial?
Because I can identify numerous Ancient Egyptian cultural hallmarks that trace their origin back to the African continent.
Notice that I said hallmark, rather than some vague object that doesn't mean nothing in the grand scheme of Ancient Egyptian history.
The people on this thread who insist that Egypt owes something extraordinary to Mesopotamia but not the other way around suffer from some ole ''if we can't demonstrate physical affinity with Ancient Egypt, let's force out cultural diffusion towards Ancient Egypt''.
Of course, demonstratable, hard concrete influence of Eastern Africa on the Near East, eg, language, script and Mesolithic tool industries, fuels this compulsive need to get even, even more.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
Since Bruce Williams published his Qutsul and Hedjet idea, Abydos digs have revealed AE royal graves which predate Qustul burials. Nubian archeologist W.Y. Adams said, "The evidence for William's theory is not convincing. At the time his theory was published, Qustul tombs antedated the earliest royal tombs of Egypt, of Naqada phase IIIb. But recently an Abydos tomb of IIIa has been found(U-j) so Qustul loses chronological primacy. There are unusual objects in Egyptian style at Qustul, but they are all likely to have been imports from Egypt, not products of Nubia. Two vessels, for example, have painted designs, according to Williams, the conquest of southern Egypt(Ta shemau) and of Nekhen. But the worn signs may be misread, and in any case would refer to conquests by the Egyptians over other Egyptians, since the vases are of Egyptian origin. Early in the 1st Dynasty, the A-group culture including Qustul ended and they were driven away not to return for about 600yrs. This can only have been due to organized Egyptian aggression, intended to place the valuable trade of stones and gold under their control. The Egyptians not only prevented Lower Nubian resettlement; early in the 4th Dynasty they founded several strategically placed towns, such as Buhen. These improved Egypt's access to Lower Nubian minerals and perhaps reflect an increased trade with Upper Nubia. However, some 160 yrs later Egypt abandoned these towns and Nubians began to resettle Lower Nubia..."
"The evidence from Umm el Gabb(Abydos) demonstates that not only pharaonic kingship, but also the primary elements of a centralized statesystem, including writing and a complex administrative governmental apparatus, were evolving in Egypt for several centuries prior to the 1st Dynasty and there is no comparable evidence for the long-term development of such institutions in the A-Group."
Predynastic AE was trading partners with Lower Nubia so no surprise that the Nekhen AE style and made Qustul burner was discovered there along with other AE products.
Horus King symbols, Rosette, AE style ships, Lotus/Papyrus plants, Hedjet crown, Hieroglyphs and proto-glyphs all have origins in Naqada AE cultures north of the 1st cataract.
King Scorpion with Red and White(Hedjet)crowns c.3200BCE
In addition to maintaining trade contacts with Egypt, A-Group rulers employed symbols that were used by Egyptian pharaohs of that time. Some Nubian seal impressions depict a bow above a rectangle (right), probably the earliest writing of Ta-Seti, “Land of the Bow,” an ancient Egyptian name for Nubia.The A-Group flourished until it was destroyed by pharaohs of Egypt’s First Dynasty around 3100 BC. Much of northern Nubia was not inhabited for centuries afterwards, at least partly because of Egyptian military action. There is evidence of some occupation during this time, however; a settlement at Buhen near the 2nd cataract, with Egyptian and Nubian pottery, may have been a base for trade or copper working during the Egyptian Old Kingdom (2686–2125 BC).
"Ancient Nubia: Egypt's Rival in Africa" Philadelphia: University Museum / Univ. of Penn.
Adam's claim really has no substantive value, when it comes to addressing Williams. Williams' case has been that the Falcon tradition of Kingship, along with the familiar Hedjet, that characterized Dynastic Egypt comes from the Ta-Seti A-Group. And he has tangible evidence to back him on that. He never implied that there were no Nagadan rulers running concurrently. It is understood that the A-Group rulers were a powerful bunch, since their cemetery was the richest in that region, until the 1998 Dreyer findings. It is still amongst the most furnished cemeteries of that sub-region and era, i.e. pre-dynastic Nagadan period. Of the numerous depictions available, not a single Nagadan ruler or figure have to date been seen with the Hedjet through much of the duration of that complex's existence; it only suddenly makes its appearance in the Nagadan territory at the turn of the Nagadan period, and hence, the emergence of the Dynastic era. The Qustul depictions of the Hedjet precede its Nagadan appearance. The sudden appearance therefore suggests that the Hedjet and the falcon concept came from somewhere else, and that somewhere else is certainly not the Delta region. The Qustul cemetary answers this question: the Hedjet tradition came from Ta-Seti, Qustul. This is the case Williams made.
Furthermore, there is no evidence of military conquest of the A-Group rulers. What simply happened is their sudden disappearance from their territory. But this sudden disappearance is compensated by the sudden appearance of the Hedjet and the falcon tradition in Nagada at the turn of the Nagadan period...which may very well hint on where the A-Group rulers actually ended up. And no, this situation cannot be compared with Upper Egyptian take over of the Delta, as there are no indications of such powerful element in the Delta region as that suggested at Qustul. Furthermore, none of the familiar Dynastic era regalia have their precedence in the Delta area. The Deshret crown has its precedence in the Nagadan region instead of the Delta. It is around this time that the Hedjet has its precedence at Qustul.
The Qustul incense burner and the other items sporting images of the ruler wearing Hedjet [and there is more than one occasion of such imagery] are not a Qustul import, as they were made of local material. So, Adam's claims in that regard, has no merit. It makes no sense for Qustul elite to furnish their burials with locally produced materials depicting foreign rulers, as opposed to Qustul rulers themselves.
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: "There is no such thing as "Nubia". It is a 'western' construct, which in any case will posit the origin of Dynastic Egyptian culture in "Nubia", since that is where elements that have come to characterize Dynastic Egyptian find their earliest expression.
Nub means gold, a region dominated by Egyptians for acquiring Gold so its not much of a western construct.
quote:...The Falcon tradition, the Hedjet/White crown, and even proto-hieroglyphs.
Your sources?
quote:Then there is the Kushitic complex, which is generally perceived to be an outgrowth of the Kerma complex, which owes nothing to Dynastic Egypt in its emergence.
The Kerma complexes is clearly the result of trade and influence from Ancient Egypt.
Where is your evidence that Kush owes nothing to the Dynastic Egypt in its emergence? Dynastic Egypt predates Kush and was far more advanced than Kush including the fertile crescent. Egypt was, on the whole a technological, political and cultural etc influence on Nubia.
quote:The Kushitic complex were considered major rivals to the Egyptians, and in fact, had at times actually almost controlled Egypt long before the eventual Kushitic takeover of Egypt in the 25th Dynasty. Your comment strikes me as being made, because you are ignorant of these basic facts of the Nile Valley?
The south of Egypt doesn't demonstrate anything remotely like the Dynastic Egyptian civilization. No knowledge comes from the south, if that was the case then there would be archeological, architectural, ethnographical and historical evidence for a southern knowledgeable drift into the North. The fertile crescent displays all sorts of archeological, architectural, ethnological and historical accounts on par with Dynastic Egypt proving that knowledge began in the Middle East region, spread to Egypt and dead ended in the South with Kush.
quote:Unless you can elaborate on this, i.e. what you mean by "knowledge" [which is a very generalized term], and a detailed account on its specifics, this claim appears to something that is a personal opinion based on desired thinking rather than fact.
For example, Jericho, Göbekli Tepe, Çayönü, Abu Hureyra, Çatalhöyük, City states in the Mesopotamian region etc were in fact advanced and older than Dynastic Egypt. Human burial, religion, stone foundations, first murals, sculptures, plaster walls, etc originatead with these people thus the prototype laying the foundations for Egyptian civilization. Nothing like this lays to the South evidencing the fact that Knowledge began from the Levant and ended at Nubia.
quote:The Kushitics incorporated both Egyptian and Roman elements that they liked into their own designs. Your claim is very simplistic. Likewise, the Greeks and Romans incorporated foreign architecture styles into their own. It happens all the time in complex societies; not a one way-street. For example, "Near Easterners" have adopted writing and languages from the Nile Valley, amongst other things.
Yes, even though Greece, Rome and the Near East incorporated some foreign elements, each of those civilizations are still unique and significant with respect to homegrown knowledge displaying a culture unlike those who influenced them. Kush or Nubia doesn't demonstrate anything remotely on par with the Ancient Egyptian and Near Eastern civilizations. To say Nubia or Northern Sudan laid the foundation for Ancient Egypt while not demonstrating the prefigures of Ancient Egypt is irrational and doesn't make any sense.
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
Date range for Qustul burner 3000-3200BCE
The square sailed boat on the Qustul burner is predynastic AE style in origin. PAE were major cedar importers from Lebanon for temples, homes, tools and ships. And with the sail up indicates sailing with prevailing winds from north to south but this could just as well be north-south between nomes in Upper Egypt. Sails down would indicate going from south to north with the Nile river current.
Your argumentation by improbability is not persuasive evidence to show A-group origins of predynastic Naqada I-III cultures. Where are the other artifacts that predate and influence Naqada cultures?
As for the wood long distance trade, we know that Aha's immediate predecessor Narmer had a great deal of relations with the Near East (Canaan) as attested in various sites expecially by Serekhs with his name onto wave handled jars (fragments). The hard cedar wood of Lebanon has been found in poles and beams of the Umm el Qaab tombs but it was already imported earlier as we can see from D.A.I.K. findings in Abydos cemetery B(Iry Hor, Ka, Narmer) and U (expec. Naqada IIIa2, c.3250).
^You are not even coherent enough to understand what was said just moments ago. Nobody said anything about Nagadan culture being from the A-Group; that is a figment of your imagination. What was said, is that the Hedjet along with the falcon tradition came from A-Group, and there's tangible evidence to back it up. Short of spamming the thread, you have not produced anything the slightest that challenges this fact.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Proto-hieroglyhs about the size of postage stamps? Confidently dated between 3200-3300 B.C.? I don't know about you buddy, but that sounds pretty much like the Egyptians invented writing practically overnight. I mean think about it. They came up with a few symbols between 3300-3200 B.C. and then a few generations later they were all out into a complex writing system that lasted close to 3000 years. I think you're going to have to do better than that.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
If there is any characterization that is unique to the Egyptian form of expression in the form of lettering, it may be simply that the Egyptians desired their own writing style.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
Nub means gold, a region dominated by Egyptians for acquiring Gold so its not much of a western construct.
You obviously don't comprehend the question, let alone provide the requested answer. Again: produce your evidence that a centralized polity named "Nubia" existed during pre-Dynastic and Dynastic period.
quote: The Kerma complexes is clearly the result of trade and influence from Ancient Egypt.
Provide detailed account of how Kerma is the product of Ancient Egypt, with material corroboration.
quote: The south of Egypt doesn't demonstrate anything remotely like the Dynastic Egyptian civilization. No knowledge comes from the south, if that was the case then there would be archeological, architectural, ethnographical and historical evidence for a southern knowledgeable drift into the North. The fertile crescent displays all sorts of archeological, architectural, ethnological and historical accounts on par with Dynastic Egypt proving that knowledge began in the Middle East region, spread to Egypt and dead ended in the South with Kush.
This is emotional gibberish. Lacks any material backbone.
quote:For example, Jericho, Göbekli Tepe, Çayönü, Abu Hureyra, Çatalhöyük, City states in the Mesopotamian region etc were in fact advanced and older than Dynastic Egypt. Human burial, religion, stone foundations, first murals, sculptures, plaster walls, etc originatead with these people thus the prototype laying the foundations for Egyptian civilization. Nothing like this lays to the South evidencing the fact that Knowledge began from the Levant and ended at Nubia.
More emotional bs. For starters, where can we find Nagadan [Deshret crown] and A-Group [Hedjet crown] political structures, i.e. the components of the entire network, or the Pharaonic structure in the "Near East"? Tell us why dynastic-style centralized polity starts first in the Nile Valley before it happens in the so-called "Near East". Point out where can we find Egyptian proto-hieroglyphs of the Nile in the "Near East" that predate the Nile Valley examples, and cannot be demonstrated as an import? How did these social organizations just skip the Delta region, which is even closer to the "Near East" by way of a land bridge [Sinai], and concentrate in the southern parts of the Nile? What Mastaba tradition can you point out about the "Near East" that paves way for the pyramid structures in the Nile Valley? Point out how upper Nile Valley burial customs, like say how the deceased is positioned et al., have parallels in the so-called "Near East", and occur there first. Let's deal with these first, and then dig deeper, as you come up with answers.
The rest of your material-free emotional drivel is not worth a second look.
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
Original Quote by The Explorer: "As for the falcon tradition, the Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs, ever heard of Qustul, ever read archeologist Bruce Williams' reports, or Timothy Kendall? Try searching for these items, and you'll get the idea."
LOL, notice how angry T.E. is when pressed to show actual evidence. Qustul burner has proto-glyphs. Argument by authority, improbability and ad nauseum is his style. Why is it hard for you to accept PAE origins for the above items if you think they are very similar in phenotype to A-Group culture? Or maybe you don't? The all-knowing Explorer blog overrules ALL peer-reviewed scholarship. LOL Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
Proto-hieroglyhs about the size of postage stamps? Confidently dated between 3200-3300 B.C.? I don't know about you buddy, but that sounds pretty much like the Egyptians invented writing practically overnight. I mean think about it. They came up with a few symbols between 3300-3200 B.C. and then a few generations later they were all out into a complex writing system that lasted close to 3000 years. I think you're going to have to do better than that.
I don't know about you buddy, but your post sounds like something that comes out someone who cannot think. The writing starts out as simpler pictographs, which then give way to more elaborate pictographs, this in turn gives way to simplified letters developed out of glyphs, and then eventually cursive scripts. Furthermore, the Nile Valley examples predate the earliest examples in the so-called "Near East". You are going to have to do better than provide emotional denials. You have got to demonstrate from where these supposedly came from, if not the Nile Valley. The Nile Valley folks never adopted the tablet; instead they used the world's first paper [papyrus]. I suppose you think that too must have been too "sudden" for it to be a local development.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet:
LOL, notice how angry T.E. is when pressed to show actual evidence. Qustul burner has proto-glyphs. Argument by authority, improbability and ad nauseum is his style. Why is it hard for you to accept PAE origins for the above items if you think they are very similar in phenotype to A-Group culture? Or maybe you don't? The all-knowing Explorer blog overrules ALL peer-reviewed scholarship. LOL
You must be convinced that copying & pasting spams of graemlins is suggestive of a strong comeback. LOL.
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet:
LOL, notice how angry T.E. is when pressed to show actual evidence. Qustul burner has proto-glyphs. Argument by authority, improbability and ad nauseum is his style. Why is it hard for you to accept PAE origins for the above items if you think they are very similar in phenotype to A-Group culture? Or maybe you don't? The all-knowing Explorer blog overrules ALL peer-reviewed scholarship. LOL
You must be convinced that copying & pasting spams of graemlins is suggestive of a strong comeback. LOL.
I'm convinced you don't understand evidence nor reason. You made the claims so you back it up buddy. Just accept defeat and move on.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Alright buddy, show us the earliest form of script. Not single hieroglyphs. An actual sentence.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
He [Gunther Dreyer] concluded his presentation by noting similarities between specific Egyptian and Mesopotamian objects and suggesting that perhaps there is an initial influence of Egyptian writing on Mesopotamia because there are signs on Mesopotamian objects that are only "readable" from the standpoint of the Egyptian language, but not the Mesopotamian language. - Mario Beatty, "Too Much Stuff": Recent Finds in Predynastic Egypt
As a matter of note, it can be said that writing is the gift of the Nile to the so-called "Near East". The entire region would adopt modified scripts birthed from Nile Valley scripture. From Phoenician to Arabic. Even remarkable, is that the entire region has adopted a language phylum imported from the Nile Valley. I think it says a lot when it is "Near East" that speaks a Nile Valley language phylum, instead of the other way around.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Not only that. I want to see the earliest script known to exist below Egypt. Let's see it buddy.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet:
I'm convinced you don't understand evidence nor reason. You made the claims so you back it up buddy. Just accept defeat and move on.
I'm not too concerned about what convinces an idiot. It is hard to imagine how graemlin spam can defeat anything.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: [qb] He [Gunther Dreyer] concluded his presentation by noting similarities between specific Egyptian and Mesopotamian objects and suggesting that perhaps there is an initial influence of Egyptian writing on Mesopotamia because there are signs on Mesopotamian objects that are only "readable" from the standpoint of the Egyptian language, but not the Mesopotamian language. - Mario Beatty, "Too Much Stuff": Recent Finds in Predynastic Egypt
And yet I can find no example. Can you provide us with some dated examples?
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Explorer provided you with dated examples on page one come on keep up Simple Girl
The chronology for the four independent centers of writing in world history is now as follows : - Egyptian System of Writing : The earliest hieroglyphic signs dating from about 3400 B.C. They are already used for their sound values. This system of writing was developed in three successive stages, known as hieroglyphic, hieratic, and demotic. - Sumerian Writing : about 3060 B.C.. The Sumerian script was always on clay. The most ancient Sumerian inscriptions on tokens and seals are difficult to read because there is no firm relationship between sign and language. From about 3000 B.C. wet clay were impressed by means of a triangular shaped stylus, leaving a wedge shaped mark. The Cuneiform Writing had thus come into existence. - Chinese Writing System : No later than the Shang Dynasty, in 1766 B.C., the earliest Chinese inscriptions found on bronze vessels and oracle bones are already highly stylised. China has the longest literary tradition that still continues today. - Maya script : This is the script of the Maya civilization of central America having been dated from 500 B.C. to 1200 A.D. A total of about 800 glyphs have been identified. http://www.ankhonline.com/revue/obenga_th_egypt_cradle_writing.htm Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
simple-minded has demonstrated to me that it is more interested in kindergarten toddling than partake a serious discussion. This is why I left simple-minded on its own.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Explorer provided you with dated examples on page one come keep up Simple Girl
The chronology for the four independent centers of writing in world history is now as follows : - Egyptian System of Writing : The earliest hieroglyphic signs dating from about 3400 B.C. They are already used for their sound values. This system of writing was developed in three successive stages, known as hieroglyphic, hieratic, and demotic. - Sumerian Writing : about 3060 B.C.. The Sumerian script was always on clay. The most ancient Sumerian inscriptions on tokens and seals are difficult to read because there is no firm relationship between sign and language. From about 3000 B.C. wet clay were impressed by means of a triangular shaped stylus, leaving a wedge shaped mark. The Cuneiform Writing had thus come into existence. - Chinese Writing System : No later than the Shang Dynasty, in 1766 B.C., the earliest Chinese inscriptions found on bronze vessels and oracle bones are already highly stylised. China has the longest literary tradition that still continues today. - Maya script : This is the script of the Maya civilization of central America having been dated from 500 B.C. to 1200 A.D. A total of about 800 glyphs have been identified. http://www.ankhonline.com/revue/obenga_th_egypt_cradle_writing.htm
These are hieroglyphic signs and not a written form of expression. You give a date of 3400 B.C. and which I haven't found any real evidence of these expressions being definitely from 3400 B.C. Can you provide us with evidence?
Can you provide us with the earliest form of written expression from Egypt or further south that predates anything from the Near East? Something that unequivocably pronounces Egypt or areas further south as being the place or places of origin for the first forms of written expressions?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: simple-minded has demonstrated to me that it is more interested in kindergarten toddling than partake a serious discussion. This is why I left simple-minded on its own.
No, you have left simple minded on her own simply because you cannot answer my simple questions.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
simple-minded you don't even have the motor (brain) power to correctly interpret what I just told you. That says a lot.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: simple-minded you don't even have the motor (brain) power to correctly interpret what I just told you. That says a lot.
You make comments and opinions without being able to back them up with evidence.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
You are even bad at playing a comedian.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: simple-minded has demonstrated to me that it is more interested in kindergarten toddling than partake a serious discussion. This is why I left simple-minded on its own.
She has actually demonstrated this before no doubt.
This eighteen year old character "A Simple girl" is a previous juvenile poster who went by the pseudonym "simple girl" (wherein now she added the letter A to her description) who was shown her way out the door before, with a foot in her a$$.
She has strong beliefs (most likely from Mathilda et. al) but is not very willing to provide evidence for these claims.
I actually mentioned this in a previous thread.
These newbie posters simply parrot from other sites not knowing what it is they're supposed to be argung in full detail.
Hence when asked specific questions involving detailed posts of what they're claiming.
The end result is ad hominems from them, and spamming quotes, which is known as appealing to authority. Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Bruce Williams caption to the Qustul Incense burner reads:
Qutsul Incense Burner (Protodynastic, A group, 3300-3100 BC)....
Explorer why did you leave out the date range beginning at 3100 and then say take a cue from Williams???
He said 3300-3100 BC
not 3300 BC only
Explorer stop scamming.
Narmer, approximately 3150 BC, fits in that range
Protodynastic, A group, 3300-3100 BC, Wlliams
or
The Oriental Institute, Unv. Chicago says Protodynastic, A group 3200-3000 BC
It makes no difference Narmer fits in either range
Did Narmer get the white crown from Nubia or vice versa? It is unknown stop fronting
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^^Then we have this clown above (lyinass) who instead of presenting evidence of her own tries to find something to argue semantically within the evidence you present.
That's her game, she doesn't have anything to debunk you with, but indeed she will take you on a neverending back and forth trivial semantic argument.
Btw, lyinass too has just been taught the difference between a paternal and maternal haplogroup, well atleast she was told better, go figure.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^^Then we have this clown above (lyinass) who instead of presenting evidence of her own tries to find something to argue semantically within the evidence you present.
That's her game, she doesn't have anything to debunk you, but she will take you on a neverending back and forth semantic argument.
no semantics involved. it's all numbers:
Bruce Williams: A group, 3300-3100
Narmer approx, 3150 BC
Explorer omitted the 3100 from Williams "3300-3100"
nothing to do with semantics
so I debunked it with Explorers own PDF
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^^Actually you did just as I said. Instead of having an argument for yourself, you waited for evidence to be presented then skimmed through it in a tizzy trying to find something to argue. You're a newbie, nothing else is expected from you. As noted you were just taught the difference between a maternal and paternal haplogroup, yet you expect to be taken seriously?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
lyinass is even more boneheaded than simple girl. After dismissing the 3300 BC date put forward by several cited material, which lyinass nonetheless interprets as my invention, lyinass is now reciting material that is yet again putting forward that very date. Using the Oriental Institute as a smokescreen, supposedly as a cushion for lyinass' emotional squawking over date precision and whether the images are "definitive", backfired because that very source goes onto point out that the regalia in question make their earliest and definitive appearance in Qustul A-Group artifact, which trumps the idea that said element is "contemporary with Narmer" (lyinass' claim) -- whose palette displays similar regalia. This was the whole point all along -- precedence in Qustul. But you know, being so boneheaded leaves lyinass' misconstruing his/her/its fiasco as some upper hand.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^^Actually you did just as I said. Instead of having an argument for yourself, you waited for evidence to be presented then skimmed through it in a tizzy trying to find something to argue. You're a newbie, nothing else is expected from you. As noted you were just taught the difference between a maternal and paternal haplogroup, yet you expect to be taken seriously?
No doubt. Another thing she does is quickly skimming the internet for counter positions whenever something is argued that she doesn't agree with. Now, getting a little help online is no biggie, if you atleast get yourself up to speed enough about the topic at hand, that you don't habitually make a complete ass out of yourself.
Google sessions and cut and pasting is the best thing that happened to her. It's what allows her to appear knowledgeable when she actually knows jackshyt about the topic the very moments she cites whatever she is citing. She thinks posting a date, while being totally in the dark about the specifics and the cultures in question, is what consititutes making a case and discrediting something.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
^^^ She also frequents Wikipedia from time to time..
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: ^^^ She also frequents Wikipedia from time to time..
Subscribe to Jariah or Just call me Jari he looks sad and lonely -
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^^Actually you did just as I said. Instead of having an argument for yourself, you waited for evidence to be presented then skimmed through it in a tizzy trying to find something to argue. You're a newbie, nothing else is expected from you. As noted you were just taught the difference between a maternal and paternal haplogroup, yet you expect to be taken seriously?
in other words Explorer got busted when he took this:
3300-3100
and converted it to this
3300
lol
-using his own source
___________________________________________
Mindover I dare you to answer this question:
Does Bruce Williams say the Qutsul Incense Burner is dated
a) 3300 BC
or
b) 3300-3100 BC
it's either a) or b) I don't want to hear any other crap
I want to put on record for this,
stop cheer leading leading it's embarrassing.
there's a new sheriff in town
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
Lol, you simpleton, sheriff? Where do even get the audacity to be demanding answers? Deluded much? You have proven yourself to be a dunce. You're not a force to be reckoned with.
Remember it was just the other day that you didn't even know what a maternal and paternal haplogroup was, and before that you couldn't grasp the concept of tropical adaptations and the list can go on.
How about you come with your own data and prove something instead of waiting for others to post their evidence so you can frantically skim through it to find something to argue...?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
^^^lol I knew you didn't have the balls to answer that simple question
you will have to take that as a loss, next
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^Lyinass were you dropped on your head as a child?
Ok, I'll play along just to make you look like the fool you are again.
In the report it states, Qustul incense burner Protodynastic, A-Group, 3300-3100 B.C.
From 3300 to 3100 B.C., what's your point of contention, seriously? And how does this debunk anything?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^Lyinass were you dropped on your head as a child?
Ok, I'll play along just to make you look like the fool you are again.
In the report it states, Qustul incense burner Protodynastic, A-Group, 3300-3100 B.C.
From 3300 to 3100 B.C., what's your point of contention, seriously? And how does this debunk anything?
It shows that it is unknown if the white crown is was first in Nubian Qustul or in Egypt because Narmer also falls within that range 3150 BC
Explorer says Qustul was first
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: It's earliest appearance is in Qustul artifacts.
the Qustul incense burner is dated anywhere between 3300 and 3100 as per Williams or if you prefer the Oriental Institute anywhere between 3200 and 3000- the Oriental Institute which Williams uses the illustration from. Narmer falling into either range. Therefore it is unknown whethr or not the Egyptians copied the white crown from the Nubians or the Nubians copied the white crown from the Egyptians. Furthermore it is not even certain if the small simple line drawing in the incense burner is a white crown. I'm sorry reality is not definite enough for you
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^Lyinass were you dropped on your head as a child?
Ok, I'll play along just to make you look like the fool you are again.
In the report it states, Qustul incense burner Protodynastic, A-Group, 3300-3100 B.C.
From 3300 to 3100 B.C., what's your point of contention, seriously? And how does this debunk anything?
It shows that it is unknown if the white crown is was first in Nubian Qustul or in Egypt because Narmer also falls within that range 3150 BC
Lol, your objection to dates is hardly debunking anything as it's noted;
the earliest **certain** images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia, about 300 km up-river from Hierakonpolis.--Williams
The decoration of the Qustul Incense Burner, as restored. A sacrificial procession contains the earliest **definite** image of a pharaoh with his crown and falcon-label. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition. - Oriental Institute of Chicago. Source: Link
^^Where is your counter evidence to what Explorer posted above that shows it's wrong?
It's not like it's saying there are conflicting dates, and that there are known white crowns in Egypt at the same time, it says that it certainly definitively appears earliest in Qustul.
Sorry but not agreeing with dates isn't telling us anything specific, child. You sincerely think you debunked Williams with his own source? Or anyone else because you say Narmer was around in the last 50 years? Lmao, you're too funny.
It's not ambiguous, its certain that the white crown appears in images in proto-dynastic A group before Egypt, where is your evidence that says otherwise.
You can't debunk Explorer with his own source if his own source states the certainty of these images in Qustul, and which is exactly what he's stating, and you fail to address it specifically. Lol @ you thinking you debunked a paper by using the same paper. You have a weird way of thinking, I must tell you.
On a side note of advice, stick to debating Mike111, atleast with him you're at your level and won't be made to look like as much of a fool.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^Lyinass were you dropped on your head as a child?
Ok, I'll play along just to make you look like the fool you are again.
In the report it states, Qustul incense burner Protodynastic, A-Group, 3300-3100 B.C.
From 3300 to 3100 B.C., what's your point of contention, seriously? And how does this debunk anything?
It shows that it is unknown if the white crown is was first in Nubian Qustul or in Egypt because Narmer also falls within that range 3150 BC
Lol, your objection to dates is hardly debunking anything as it's noted;
the earliest **certain** images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia, about 300 km up-river from Hierakonpolis.--Williams
The decoration of the Qustul Incense Burner, as restored. A sacrificial procession contains the earliest **definite** image of a pharaoh with his crown and falcon-label. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition. - Oriental Institute of Chicago. Source: Link
^^Where is your counter evidence to what Explorer posted above that shows it's wrong?
It's not like it's saying there are conflicting dates, and that there are known white crowns in Egypt at the same time, it says that it certainly appears earlier in Qustul.
Sorry but not agreeing with dates isn't telling us anything specific, child. You sincerely think you debunked Williams with his own source? Or anyone else because you say Narmer was around in the last 50 years? Lmao, you're too funny.
It's not ambiguous, its certain that the white crown appears in images in proto-dynastic A group before Egypt, where is your evidence that says otherwise.
You can't debunk Explorer with his own source if his own source states the certainty of these images in Qustul, and which is exactly what he's stating, and you fail to address it specifically. Lol @ you thinking you debunked a paper by using the same paper. You have a weird way of thinking, I must tell you.
finally a decent argument.
But this Nubian A-Group date is all over the map as per different archaeologists on the page you linked it says
The A-Group, 3800-3100 B.C. Other archaeologists put it at 3700-3250 3500-2500 B.C.
etc.
Bruce Williams is trying to make a name for himself by suggesting "Qustul in Nubia could well have been the seat of Egypt's founding dynasty".
It's pure speculation.
He does this by playing with the dates. If you'll notice on that page he links the illustration of the symbols on the incense burner but for some reason he doesn't link the image of the incense burner itself on that same other page.
So who is right? Nobody knows. You can see what happens in science sometimes. The scientist has a new theory, then they slant the evidence to fit the theory. But being scientist they still have to say "could well have been"
From off to the side the Afroloons have been following from the peanut gallery, they hear what they want to hear and leave out the "could have been" and as Kendall said "ambiguous" parts. It's dishonest and politically motivated. The fact is that the Qustul incense burner has not been precisely dated, end of story.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Wow people, I come back to see people reading into studies what they want to read.
Lioness Your failure to understand the study that MOM and Explorer posted is recking havoc with you. What makes you think your able to debunk the person who WROTE the study?
Why are you so obsessed with posit that AE was Mixed when there is no proof of this?
Don't let the other trolls(simple girl etc) fool you into acting like an imbecile. What MOM posted is clear to anyone with a bit of knowledge. Nubia(Socalled) IS the HOME of the Pharaohs Crown. Why are you fighting so hard to prove this as wrong? Sooner rather then later you will have to give up your endless quest to make Egypt an Mixed society, It was not, It was a coming together of Africans and had little input from people outside the continent.
I really don't know why you think your opinion of Williams study holds more weight then what William himself says. What studies have you done or shown that refutes what william found?
Peace
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
Lyinass it really doesn't matter about conflicting dates, what matters is that both sources cited agree that the white crown certainly definitively appears earliest in Qustul.
What you need to do is find a source that says otherwise, but you won't find it in the same sources being used to prove it, btw which is what you're doing.
If one of the sources stated something differently than the other, you might have a case, but it doesn't and hence you don't have a case.
the earliest **certain** images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia, about 300 km up-river from Hierakonpolis.--Williams
...and this is what the Oriental Institute says
The decoration of the Qustul Incense Burner, as restored. A sacrificial procession contains the earliest **definite** image of a pharaoh with his crown and falcon-label. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition. - Oriental Institute of Chicago. Source: Link
Other than different dating, there is no confliction as to whether the white crown appeared in Qustul first, both absolutely agree that it did.
So again, I ask where is YOUR conflciting evidence? Becasue the sources you're trying to use both agree with certainty that the Hedjet appears in Qustul earliest. So, I'll wait.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: Lyinass it really doesn't matter about conflicting dates, what matters is that both sources cited agree that the white crown certainly definitively appears earliest in Qustul.
the earliest **certain** images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia, about 300 km up-river from Hierakonpolis.--Williams
...and this is what the Oriental Institute says
The decoration of the Qustul Incense Burner, as restored. A sacrificial procession contains the earliest **definite** image of a pharaoh with his crown and falcon-label. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition. - Oriental Institute of Chicago. Source: Link
So again, I ask where is YOUR conflciting evidence? Becasue the sources you're trying to use both agree with certainty that the Hedjet appears in Qustul earliest. So, I'll wait.
The burden off proof is on the person making the claim. They have a theory. Williams says
"Qustul in Nubia could well have been the seat of Egypt's founding dynasty"."
The decoration of the Qustul Incense Burner, as restored. A sacrificial procession contains the earliest definite image of a pharaoh with his crown and falcon-label.
It's just an opinion Williams did not prove a date of that incense burner precise enough to predate it before Narmer.
I said before if this claim is to be proven, it would have to be supported by technical data and this was not shown. If something is a theory it should be stated as a theory not a fact.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: The burden off proof is on the person making the claim. They have a theory. Williams says
"Qustul in Nubia could well have been the seat of Egypt's founding dynasty"."
Williams also says this, preceding that one cherrypicked line from you...
[I]Most surprising, evidence that early pharaohs ruled in A-Group Nubia was discovered by the Oriental Institute at Qustul, almost at the modern Sudanese border. A cemetery of large tombs contained evidence of wealth and representations of the rulers and their victories. Other representations and monuments could then be identified, and in the process, a lost kingdom, called Ta-Seti or Land of the Bow, was discovered. In fact, the cemetery at Qustul leads directly to the first great royal monuments of Egypt in a progression. Qustul in Nubia could well have been the seat of Egypt's founding dynasty.
^^Address the evidence and fact stated above about the cemetery found at Qustul being representative that the Pharaohs first ruled in Qustul. Evidence of wealth and representations of the rulers and their victories, along with the fact this cemetary leads directly to the first great royal monuments of Egypt in a progression
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: It's just an opinion Williams did not prove a date of that incense burner precise enough to predate it before Narmer.
Sorry, but this is a really poor juvenile argument, as noted that it's definitely certain the image of the falcon and crown appears first in Qustul. There is no guessing being done here, only by you!!
You can take this time to provide some counter evidence now if available. Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Non Prophet what you did was not cool why put the Jeri's business here without permission.
Lioness the simple fact is Ta-Seti's demise came about with the rise of Scorpion
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: Sorry, but this is a poor argument, as noted that it's definitely certain the image of the falcon and crown appears first in Qustul. There is no guessing being done here, only by you!! [/QB]
It's possibly a falcon, a falcon of the same time period as the falcon on the Narmer palette or were you unaware that a falcon symbol (although different looking) also appears on the palette?
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Lioness the simple fact is Ta-Seti's demise came about with the rise of Scorpion/Narmer and the first dynasty a now united or soon to be united Kemet 3100 B.C
Now folks bare with me this will be long it's an article. But pretty much the same in the NY article and book I read yrs ago
The site was nearly two hundred miles deep in the heart of a country the Egyptians had called Ta-Seti - "Land of the Bow." Here in this remote corner of Africa, an elegant and cosmopolitan culture had flourished centuries before the pyramids were built.
Discovery of a variety of artifacts led to the startling conclusions.
It had been found by archaeologist Keith C. Seele in 1964. Originally, Qustul was judged to be one of the least promising areas. Seele spent most of his time in Nubia excavating other areas. When he finally turned his attention to Qustul, in his very last digging season in Nubia, Seele discovered a cemetery of thirty-three tombs.
Twelve of the tombs were tremendous, each one large enough to have served a predynastic Egyptian king.
Tombs of this size, wealth and date in Egypt would have been immediately recognized as royal. Their extraordinarily varied contents would have been taken as evidence of a complex culture exposed to wide outside connections. But because the discovery was made in Nubia at a time and place when kingship was thought impossible, further proof of royalty is necessary.
What was really surprising was the age of the tombs. The cemetery clearly dated from the time of the so-called A-Group - a prehistoric people believed to have dominated lower Nubia from about 3800 to 3100 B.C.
Of all the numerous items discovered, the most significant were found in an A-Group grave site, called Cemetery L, which yielded artifacts that were created six to seven generations (approximately 200 years) before the start of the First Dynasty in Egypt, 3150 B.C.
All told, more than 1,000 complete and fragmentary painted pots, and over 100 stone vessels. The range of these and other fragments from the plundered cemetery began to indicate a wealth and complexity that could only be called royal.
In addition to huge quantities of native pottery, the tombs were filled with bottles, flasks, bowls, and large storage jars from Egypt - many inscribed with hieroglyphs. There were also vessels from Syria-Palestine of a type that had never been found in Egypt and that may have indicated a direct trade link between Nubia and Asia.
These findings included five major groups: 1 - items probably from Sudan 2 - items very similar to a culture previously know as C-Group, which was found in Nubia and in Egypt up to the New Kingdom (2300 - 1500 B.C.) 3 - Egyptian pottery, some of which had early forms of hieroglyphic writing 4 - items from the Levant (Syria and Palestine area) 5 - badly damaged objects of Egyptian and Sudanese origin
It was in one of these graves - coded "L-24" by the excavators - that the mysterious incense burner came to light.
An incense burner with crude figures and pictographs gouged deep into the clay. The inscription showed three ships sailing in procession. The three ships were sailing toward the royal palace. One of the ships carried a lion - perhaps a diety. This piece had been made no later than 3300 B.C. At that early date, there were not supposed to have been any such things as pharaohs or pharaohs' palaces. Moreover, the piece had not even been found in Egypt. It had come from Qustul, located just north of the Sudanese border. The censer, in short was Nubian.
If Williams's restoration was correct this censer had been inscribed with nothing less than the earliest known portrait of a pharaoh ever discovered. Why, then, had it turned up in Nubia rather than Egypt? Such censers simply do not appear in Egypt. Could the earliest pharaoh have actually been Nubian?
This was not Egyptian art. This censer had been found, not in Egypt, but nearly 200 miles deep in Nubia. Moreover, for the time the censer was made, archaeologists had found no trace in Egypt of any other inscription showing such a clear use of royal emblems such as the White Crown, the Horus falcon, the serekh, and the rosette.
…when the incense burner was reexamined in the light of the obviously royal stature of people buried in Cemetery L, the essential restoration of the missing elements was immediately clear. In the first ship, a prisoner is kneeling on a palanquin or litter held by a rope in the grasp of a guard with a mace…the white crown of Upper Egypt clearly stands out above the ship. In front of it is the tail of a falcon - another sign of kingship. The crown indicates that the figure is a king, and the falcon should be seen as perched on a serekh, together a characteristic representation in early dynastic Egypt. In front of the falcon is a rosette, symbol of royalty before the First Dynasty…
Its date provided by context, style and composition, the Qustul burner furnishes the earliest definite representation of a king in the Nile Valley or anywhere…Perhaps the most troublesome question was why nothing of this kingdom had been known until now. Actually, the truth is the evidence, other than the cemetery at Qustul, has been known for some time but it has been either ignored or wrongly interpreted and dated.
When the Qustul incense burner was subjected to geochemical analysis, it was found to be made from a distinctive mineral typically found at Nubian sites such as Aswan, Kalabsha, and Meroe. Did it seem plausible that Egyptians would have quarried Nubian stone, transported it back to Egypt, carved it into a distinctly Nubian style of incense burner, then export the censer back to Nubia? Probably not.
But if the Nubians were organized in a kingdom as early as 3300 B.C., why had no previous evidence been found for this mysterious African state? In fact, it had. Egyptologists had simply failed to grasp the significance of this evidence.
The Nubian desert, for example abounded with rock drawings from roughly the same period as the Qustul incense burner, many showing distinctly "Egyptian" themes and symbols.
Ivory seals from the A-Group period had been found featuring kingly serekhs. A mud seal impression found at Siali - also dating from the A-Group period - showed a man saluting a serekh surmounted by a falcon. The serekh was actually labeled with a bow - the hieroglyphic emblem for Ta-Seti, Land of the Bow - implying that the man was paying homage to a Nubian state. One bowl from Qustul even showed vultures tearing at a fallen enemy who is labeled with the signs for Ta-Shemau - Upper Egypt - possibly indicating that the Nubians had defeated Upper Egypt in battle.
Every one of these inscriptions had been found in Nubia. Yet experts had always assumed that they referred to an Egyptian monarchy, rather than a Nubian one. Why, then, should experts assume that every recognizable symbol of royal authority found in that country would be of foreign origin? Some critics insisted that the Qustul censer must have been an Egyptian import, despite the fact that it was a typically Nubian object made of indisputably Nubian stone.
For nine generations or more, according to the sequence of tombs in Cemetery L, some 12 kings at Qustul participated with other kings in Upper Egypt in the creation of a unified culture. For Egypt, they helped fashion pharaonic civilization and thus a legacy for the First Dynasty which the world has marveled at for millennia. For Nubia, they established an early political unit and led that country to its first cultural distinction.
Seele speculated that the tombs might be royal, evidence of a long-lost dynasty of Nubian kings. Unfortunately, this theory flew in the face of conventional opinion. Seele's theory was subjected to the worst fate known to academia - the silent treatment.
Following his discovery, several major scholarly works were published on Nubia's A-Group culture. But none made even passing reference to the mysterious Cemetery L. For more than ten years, Cemetery L was ignored as completely as if its treasures lay, still unexcavated, at the bottom of Lake Nasser.
Seele died of cancer without ever seeing his theory vindicated. Seele had gone to his grave believing that Nubian kings lay buried in Cemetery L. But he had never imagined that those kings might have been pharaohs, arraying themselves in all the formal regalia of an Egyptian monarch.
As a result of the reexamination of data concerning ancient Nubia, many scholars have concluded that the Nubians were an extremely sophisticated people who built cities, roads, and temples comparable to those of the people of Egypt in the north. It has even been suggested by one researcher that there were more pyramids constructed in Nubia than in Egypt.
Ivan Van Sertima stated on Williams conclusions:
What is equally significant is the more recent discovery that there was some pharaonic-type civilization developing parallel to Egypt through the centuries. Bruce Williams, in a letter to me in 1984, maintained that a Kushite continuity sustained the pharaonic impulse through the ages, from A-group (3300 B.C.) right through to X-Group (550 A.D.). This, to put it in his own words, 'represents a new departure in the examination of Egypt's place in the African context.
The rich graves of the A-Group kings contained gold jewelry, beautiful pottery, and stone vessels…that rivaled the wealth of the Egyptian kings. Many of these luxury objects were Near Eastern or Egyptian, indicating that the A-Group carried on extensive trade with those areas.
In time, the Egyptian and Nubian kingdoms became enemies, and the Egyptian kings, the same ones who built the pyramids, invaded Nubia. The Egyptians conquered the A-Group and ruled the 'Land of the Bow' as a colony.
However, south of the Third Cataract - beyond the area of Egyptian control, the Nubians remained independent and continued to grow strong.
The debate over how old dynastic Egypt was, will continue…but it is important to note two things in this connection. One, it further invalidates any claim to Sumerian or Mesopotamian primacy or any significant influence on the Egyptians of the pyramid age - the earliest hard dating of materials found at Ur, the first Sumerian city-state, is 2600 B.C., whereas the most conservative date for the first Egyptian dynasty is 3100 B.C.
Two, it does not affect the dating of the first pharaonic dynasty in Nubia since the methods used to arrive at that dating would still place Ta-Seti at least 200 years before the first Egyptian dynasty (whatever that date may be). Discussion with Dr. Bruce Williams has established that very clearly.
Now with all the above keep in mind that Ta-Sati is reguarded as Kemet's 1st nome or district. Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: Sorry, but this is a poor argument, as noted that it's definitely certain the image of the falcon and crown appears first in Qustul. There is no guessing being done here, only by you!!
It's possibly a falcon, a falcon of the same time period as the falcon on the Narmer palette or were you unaware that a falcon symbol (although different looking) also appears on the palette? [/QB]
LoL you have no evidence the Narmer palette is of the same time period, lyinass. So what are you yapping about.
This is what there is evidence for;
The decoration of the Qustul Incense Burner, as restored. A sacrificial procession contains the earliest definite image of a pharaoh with his crown and falcon-label. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition.
^^There's no "probably" or "might", but instead definite.
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: Wow people, I come back to see people reading into studies what they want to read.
Lioness Your failure to understand the study that MOM and Explorer posted is recking havoc with you. What makes you think your able to debunk the person who WROTE the study?
Why are you so obsessed with posit that AE was Mixed when there is no proof of this?
Don't let the other trolls(simple girl etc) fool you into acting like an imbecile. What MOM posted is clear to anyone with a bit of knowledge. Nubia(Socalled) IS the HOME of the Pharaohs Crown. Why are you fighting so hard to prove this as wrong? Sooner rather then later you will have to give up your endless quest to make Egypt an Mixed society, It was not, It was a coming together of Africans and had little input from people outside the continent.
I really don't know why you think your opinion of Williams study holds more weight then what William himself says. What studies have you done or shown that refutes what william found?
Peace
As usual ChristTard King has to butt in with his Cheerleading Go Troll Team rant. Not only do you lower ES avg IQ but Canada as well. Hope your not breeding more Jesus Freak Idiots. Go worship Satan AKA God AKA Jesus, the Carrot and Stick fairy tale, and leave this thread.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: This was not Egyptian art. This censer had been found, not in Egypt, but nearly 200 miles deep in Nubia. Moreover, for the time the censer was made, archaeologists had found no trace in Egypt of any other inscription showing such a clear use of royal emblems such as the White Crown, the Horus falcon, the serekh, and the rosette.
Pretty much.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
NonProphet
Bahahahahahaah
This is my one and only post directed towards you. Grow up. I would say something else, but you are not worth the Effort. Really you make me Laugh with your pathetic insults.
Let me ask you this, Are you going to MAKE me stop from posting in this Thread? If not, why would you tell me to stop? You hold no weight in these forums.
Peace
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: NonProphet
Bahahahahahaah
This is my one and only post directed towards you. Grow up. I would say something else, but you are not worth the Effort. Really you make me Laugh with your pathetic insults.
Let me ask you this, Are you going to MAKE me stop from posting in this Thread? If not, why would you tell me to stop? You hold no weight in these forums.
Peace
No King Idiot, I'm not ordering you to stop posting but I know from your previous posts you have nothing to contribute intellectually.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
diety. This piece had been made no later than 3300 B.C. At that early date, there were not supposed to have been any such things as pharaohs or pharaohs' palaces. Moreover, the piece had not even been found in Egypt. It had come from Qustul, located just north of the Sudanese border. The censer, in short was Nubian.
Brada, why did you change 3400 B.C to 3300? None of you guys are honest. You did it to match what Explorer said and that it didn't match what Williams said 3300-3100.
wysinger wrote it. The 3400 BC figure is not referenced in particular and less believable than 3300
see if you can find that in one wysinger's references, it's made up
___________________________________________
Dynasty 0, Francesco Raffaele, AH 17, 2003
Daily Life of the Nubians, Robert Steven Bianchi, Greenwood Press, 2004
Coulson, D, & Campbell, A 2001 African rock art. New York: Abrams
African Rock Art (published by Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 2001)
Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, Kathryn A. Bard, Steven Blake Shubert, Routledge; Illustrate edition, 1999
Deacon, J 1997 A regional management strategy for rock art in Southern Africa. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 2: 29-32
P. Breunig, The 8000-year-old dugout canoe from Dufuna (NE Nigeria), G. Pwiti and R. Soper (eds.), Aspects of African Archaeology. Papers from the 10th Congress of the PanAfrican Association for Prehistory and related Studies. University of Zimbabwe Publications (Harare 1996) 461-468
African Peoples' Contributions to World Civilizations: Shattering the Myth (African Peoples' Contributions to World Civilizations) by Paul L. Hamilton, R. A. Renaissance Publications; 2nd edition (July 1, 1995)
Early Khartoum "Mesolithic" Settlements in the Geili-Kabbashi Area, Sudan, Journal of Field Archaeology 20, (1993), pp. 519-522
Hassan, F.A. The Predynastic of Egypt, Journal of World Prehistory, Vol. 2 (1988), pp. 135-185
Excavations Between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Part 1: The A-Group Royal Cemetery at Qustul, Cemetery L., Bruce B. Williams, Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, 1986
Eugen Strouhal. Evidence of the Early Penetration of Negroes into Prehistoric Egypt, Journal of African History, 1971
Arkell, A. J. and Peter J. Ucko. Review of Predynastic Development in the Nile Valley. Current Anthropology April, 1965 Vol. 6(2), pp. 145-166
Petrie, W.M. Flinders. The Making of Egypt, London. New York, Sheldon Press; Macmillan, 1939
Morant, G. M. The Predynastic Egyptian Skulls from Badari and Their Racial Affinities. In Mostagedda and the Tasian Culture, edited by G. Brunton, pp. 63-66. London: Bernard Quaritch, 1937
Guy Brunton and Gertrude Caton-Thompson. The Badarian Civilization and Predynastic Remains Near Badari; London British School of Archaeology in Egypt University College, 1928
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
in other words Explorer got busted when he took this:
3300-3100
and converted it to this
3300
lyinarse, doesn't it strike odd to you that you are citing the date that you claim to be busting me on?
If you weren't such a klutz, it would dawn on you that there is no conflict between the interpretations above. The date range reflects the age of cemetary goods, from 3300 BC to 3100 BC. Furthermore, I did not convert anything to anything else. I simply cited the very same source that you were trying to quote out of context. That's when you burst into tears, accusing me of inventing the date.
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
Lol, your objection to dates is hardly debunking anything as it's noted;
the earliest **certain** images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia, about 300 km up-river from Hierakonpolis.--Williams
The decoration of the Qustul Incense Burner, as restored. A sacrificial procession contains the earliest **definite** image of a pharaoh with his crown and falcon-label. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition. - Oriental Institute of Chicago. Source: Link
^^Where is your counter evidence to what Explorer posted above that shows it's wrong?
It's not like it's saying there are conflicting dates, and that there are known white crowns in Egypt at the same time, it says that it certainly appears earlier in Qustul.
Sorry but not agreeing with dates isn't telling us anything specific, child. You sincerely think you debunked Williams with his own source? Or anyone else because you say Narmer was around in the last 50 years? Lmao, you're too funny.
It's not ambiguous, its certain that the white crown appears in images in proto-dynastic A group before Egypt, where is your evidence that says otherwise.
You can't debunk Explorer with his own source if his own source states the certainty of these images in Qustul, and which is exactly what he's stating, and you fail to address it specifically. Lol @ you thinking you debunked a paper by using the same paper. You have a weird way of thinking, I must tell you.
Precisely; that is what anyone one with even half a braincell would get from what I posted.
quote:
finally a decent argument.
Finally admitting that you are a klutz and a fiasco. MOM simply interpreted to you what I've been saying because you are too dense to absorb.
quote:
It's pure speculation.
Dullard, it is not pure speculation. You've been schooled on several fronts:
*The ages of Qustul cemetery goods render them older than Narmer's era, and instead contemporaneous with Nagadan rulers preceding Narmer.
*Not a single Nagadan ruling figure has been seen with the Hedjet until the turn of the Nagadan period, which coincides with the disappearance of A-Group presence. Coincidence?! Furthermore, this disappearance time frame itself rules out any idea that the Qustul regalia are of the 1st Dynasty time frame, which Narmers' rule signals to.
*The glyphs of the A-Group goods, displaying the Hedjet and the Falcon serekh, are cruder than those on either the Narmer Palette or first Dynasties.
*The goods displaying the Hedjet and the Falcon serekh are made of local material, indicating that they were locally produced. Furthermore, it makes no sense for Qustul elites to furnish their burial with regalia of foreign rulers rather than tributes to themselves.
It would make more sense if they sported regalia mocking foreign rulers and asserting their own glory and dominance.
*Imagery on the Qustul incense suggests that prisoners were being taken. What could that possibly indicate? A-Group were likely imperialist to some degree or another, and considered themselves as a power in the region.
*The Hedjet cannot be A-Group imitation of Nagadan rulers not only because of its precedence (age) in the latter's complex, but also because either the double-crown or the Red crown was absent in the A-Group stratigraphy. The A-Group had no "Red crown" which is interestingly the only familiar dynastic style crown seen on Nagadan figures preceding Narmer, and even including Narmer [who was seen wearing both]; they (the A-Group folks) just had the Hedjet. If it was an imitation, one would expect the concept of the Red crown to also have been imitated.
*Remains of late-phase [if memory serves me correctly] Nagadan rulers were found to have stronger affinities with adjacent "Nubians" than remains from the core Nagadan populace of the same era.
*The Hedjet tradition or something akin to it appears to have been present deeper south than Ta-Seti, and independent from that of Dynastic Egypt - Tim Kendall's broader argument, which you sought to ignore, by fixating on one sentence from the text, which is nonetheless trumped by the following acknowledgement of Qustul precedence of the Hedjet.
*A-Group rulers must have rivaled contemporaneous Nagadan ruler in regional power, because their grave sites are just as elaborate as the contemporaneous Nagadan counterparts, which was lacking in the Delta of the same period.
lyinarse, you might want to cut out the laziness, take on reading [not skimming and rashly cherry-picking on what you a priori think helps you] and getting to know the researchers' work first, before you accuse them of simply speculating out of desired thinking.
As I have said, and MOM reiterated to you, produce counter evidence or get lost. You are wasting valuable space with worthless emotional spam-fillers.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
A Simple Girl - I'm really not quite sure if you're a troll like lioness or not. But if you are really interested in Sumerian writing, please try this site.
It is the University of Oxford's Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature (ETCSL)
If you are not familiar with Sumerian writing, you may be surprised to find that it uses a technique common in modern Black music and poetry - repetition.
Which at first can throw you off, but once you get used to it, you might find it hypnotic.
Oxford dates Sumerian writing at 3400 - 3300 B.C. But that is foolish, there can be no argument as to who invented writing, there can only be what is the oldest writing thus-far FOUND.
As an example: the Sumerian king list, which is an Akkadian translation of the Sumerian, and was dated by the scribe who wrote it in the reign of King Utukhegal of Erech (Uruk), which places it around 2125 B.C.
In the king list, A total of 134 or 139 kings are cataloged. Forgetting the fantastic numbers associated with the list, and using conventional generation numbers, that's another 3350-3475 years. How would they be able to keep track of those dynasties without writing?
Maybe something like this.
Then what about the Anatolians? With technology and skills like this at 11,500 B.C. Who can say they didn't have writing or were close to it?
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: You obviously don't comprehend the question, let alone provide the requested answer. Again: produce your evidence that a centralized polity named "Nubia" existed during pre-Dynastic and Dynastic period.
The evidence of it being a centralized polity doesn't exist during pre-dynastic and dynastic periods, although, the word Nubia is legit in a modern regional sense as with other terminologies we use and apply when the branch of studies is concerned i.e Near east, Mesopotamia etc.
quote:This is emotional gibberish. More emotional bs. For starters, where can we find Nagadan [Deshret crown] and A-Group [Hedjet crown] political structures, i.e. the components of the entire network, or the Pharaonic structure in the "Near East"?
I never stated the Nile Valley complexes can be found in the Near East, i stated the basic prototypes founding said civilization most likely traces back to the near east with Africans who utilized brought near eastern prototypes to achieve such an African civilization. You admitted yourself trade and influence comes with complex societies.
Yet when i mention "There a many interesting links" - you see it as an issue.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Spiralman, Nubia is not a legit term in the manner you are using it, because you are treating it like a polity, which it was not. Plus, you are treating this non-entity European construct like it was a spin-off of a preexisting Egyptian polity, without which it would not have existed, of which you have zero evidence.
You have produced not a shred of evidence that "Africans of the Nile Valley" had brought the basic "prototypes" of civilization from the "Near East" in order to start their own. The Nile Valley centralized polity precedes that of the "Near East"; you have not explained why this is the case, if they were supposed to have imported the prototype for these things from the "Near East". How do you bring a "prototype" of something from elsewhere where it does not exist?
Yes, I said trade is a two-way street [meaning, borrowing/contribution are generally bi-directional] where influence is concerned. This is a far cry from saying the Nile Valley is essentially a spin-off of "Near Eastern" culture, with Africans bringing the "prototypes of civilization" from overseas.
Instead of fabricating a "translation", how about actually answering the questions put to you, in reference to seeing you support your claims that "Nubian" complexes did not exist until Dynastic Egypt "spun" them off. This is a claim I've heard for the first time, and it is from you. You need to back it up in detail from a chronological and stratigraphical sense, building it up with elaborate material evidence. You aren't getting off that easy, with pseudo-history that you conjured up from desired thinking.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
I never stated the Nile Valley complexes can be found in the Near East, i stated the basic prototypes founding said civilization most likely traces back to the near east with Africans who utilized brought near eastern prototypes to achieve such an African civilization. You admitted yourself trade and influence comes with complex societies.
Where's the evidence at??
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: The rest of your material-free emotional drivel is not worth a second look.
To my earlier response: Yes, even though Greece, Rome and the Near East incorporated some foreign elements, each of those civilizations are still unique and significant with respect to homegrown knowledge displaying a culture unlike those who influenced them. Kush or Nubia doesn't demonstrate anything remotely on par with the Ancient Egyptian and Near Eastern civilizations. To say Nubia or Northern Sudan laid the foundation for Ancient Egypt while not demonstrating the prefigures of Ancient Egypt is irrational and doesn't make any sense.
No, its not. Egypt displays an advanced civilization on a par with the Near East contemporaneously. I wonder why that is? Is it because Ancient Egypt is in the North Eastern zone of the continent thus a Near Eastern presence and influence is more than likely feasible making such an advanced civilization achievable?
The South of Egypt or anywhere else of Africa couldn't display anything on a par with Egyptian or Near Eastern civilization yet we are supposed to believe knowledge came from the south and fled north to make that "Egypt."
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: The rest of your material-free emotional drivel is not worth a second look.
To my earlier response: Yes, even though Greece, Rome and the Near East incorporated some foreign elements, each of those civilizations are still unique and significant with respect to homegrown knowledge displaying a culture unlike those who influenced them. Kush or Nubia doesn't demonstrate anything remotely on par with the Ancient Egyptian and Near Eastern civilizations. To say Nubia or Northern Sudan laid the foundation for Ancient Egypt while not demonstrating the prefigures of Ancient Egypt is irrational and doesn't make any sense.
No, its not. Egypt displays an advanced civilization on a par with the Near East contemporaneously. I wonder why that is? Is it because Ancient Egypt is in the North Eastern zone of the continent thus a Near Eastern presence and influence is more than likely feasible making such an advanced civilization achievable?
The South of Egypt or anywhere else of Africa couldn't display anything on a par with Egyptian or Near Eastern civilization yet we are supposed to believe knowledge came from the south and fled north to make that "Egypt."
Stop talking out of your ass and provide some evidence of your claims..Put up or shut up..
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Spiralman,
I don't understand what you mean by south of Egypt did not have anything on par with "Egypt", since you won't provide chronological and stratigraphical specifics as requested.
Where have you been the past couple of exchanges on Qustul? Is Qustul contemporaneous with Nagada or not? Was it on par with Nadaga or not? How about Kerma, was it on par with Dynastic Egypt or not; did they have military conflicts with AE or not. How about pre-Kerma [Neolithic and pre-Neolithic Kerma, ever heard of them. Did they exist prior to Dynastic Egypt or not?
Why was pre-dynastic upper Nile Valley sub-regions more elaborate in their social stratigraphy than those on the Delta. Using your logic, should the Delta region not be more elaborate than the Upper Nile Valley confines, since they are nearer to the source of "prototypes of civilization" that you profess?
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ He is obviously ignoring the Southerly flow of culture from the South Via places like Badari, Nabta Playa, etc. plus the wealth of sites mentioned by you in this very thread..
and lets say for argument sake that Egypt developed nothing from so called Nubia, majority of its Royal Families and Suten's were of Nehashy Ancenstry going back to the begining, and heaving some famiies like the 12th Dynasty, 18th Dynasty, 25th etc hailing from Ta-Nahsy.
Sad part is all he has is argument sake as the Culture of Egypt stems from the South...I await this Architectural, cultural, and materials bestowed upon Egypt and all the Delta and Near East cities that sprung up before the Southern Upper Egyptian/Ta-Nahashy sites..
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Undoubtedly. Spiralman is trying to build a hyper-diffionist tale from what appears to have been potential commodities of trade between the Nile Valley and nearby "Near Eastern" areas. I don't see how say, a knife possibly from the "Near East", could possibly serve as a "prototype" tool to build civilization. Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Notice how it seems the hands are clasped together as in the way Sumerian statues are often depicted? This is predynastic Egyptian. Coincidence?
Only the hands!? You forgot to mention the lapis lazuli inlayed in the eyes like many other figures from the Near East.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Even if we let "Spiralman" have for argument sake his diffusionist crap tales, the Egyptian Royal families were had a lot of dealings with so called Nubians from Half, and Full blooded Rulers, Royals and Nobles to staight up Royal Family lines coming from Ta-Nahashy as seen in the 12th Dynasty, the 18th etc.
Also funny how the Egyptians even the most celebrated "Nordic" Egyptians like that Red Headed Ramses...
To that Fair faced Nefertiti went out of their way to portray themselves with Thick lips and "Nubian Features" and Sporting Nubian Wigs....
Kinda funny considering the Nahashy were conquered slaves...LOL
Even if Spiralman's dream came true and Egypt was a white Empire, They sure went out of their way to Mix, Breed, and Portray themselves as Nahashy.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
This is whats clear to see, To claim that AE got most of it's Ideas from the Near east is a big stretch. We know that Ta-Seti the first nome of Egypt and Linked with socalled Nubian regions is the place where we see that Egypt got it's influence from.
We also know that AE majority of the time was reunified by Kings from the SOUTH regions. Where in any writings of AE do we hear about a King from the Northern regions unifying the country and making it stable. We have the prophecy of Neferti that shows that A King from Ta-Seti son of Upper Egypt will rise and defend Egypt from it's enemies. Where is the same prophecys claiming that a King from the Northern region will save the Country?
Spiralman seems that he is begging for people to believe in what he is saying without any proof. He like Lioness is using special pleading hoping if he says it enough times that people would just take his word as evidence without the research. Like I have been saying for quite some times now, The people who know that Egypt is linked with Africa, now have to make claims about predynastic Egypt and hope that people don't look up or know what really is said in studies and articles about that region. They really try and promote the Dynastic Race theory but they are really slick with there wording.
Why would the 18th dynasty portray themselves with think lips and socalled Nubian Features if they were having little links with people from the south. Say what you want about Ahkenaten, but he had his statues portrayed with features that link them with the socalled Nubian south. Why do this if Egyptians were near eastern? Simple question for you Spiralman and simple girl.
Peace
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Undoubtedly. Spiralman is trying to build a hyper-diffionist tale from what appears to have been potential commodities of trade between the Nile Valley and nearby "Near Eastern" areas. I don't see how say, a knife possibly from the "Near East", could possibly serve as a "prototype" tool to build civilization.
Lol, this is pretty much the same thing lyinass does as well. Tries to establish influence and genetic exchange through trade.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
Only the hands!? You forgot to mention the lapis lazuli inlayed in the eyes like many other figures from the Near East.
You forgot to mention though, that "Near Eastern" counterparts don't have lapis lazuli eyes designed like that. I thought I asked you to produce a parallel of this art in the so-called "Near East", but you lay low at the time. Where is it?
Having access to lapis lazuli only speaks to the potential of accessing the material from elsewhere. It doesn't say that said art must necessarily be built elsewhere. Using your logic, one would imply that a car made in Germany, but with tires made from rubber planted in Africa, must have been made in Africa, simply because it has material imported from there. Absurd. Lapis lazuli is not also from the "Near East"; they, like the Egyptians, had to have imported it. Furthermore, Lapis lazuli have been spotted in different geographical regions, including Africa.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
^Even if, hypothetically, those Egyptian statues were imported [very doubtful], how does that serve in facilitating in creating a complex "civilization", Spirlman? Your line of thinking is very simplistic.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Egypt And Mesopotamia Compared
The development of two great early civilizations in the Middle East and
North Africa encourages a first effort at comparative analysis. Because of
different geography, different degrees of exposure to outside invasion and
influence, and different prior beliefs, Egypt and Mesopotamia were in contrast
to one another in many ways. Egypt emphasized strong central authority, while
Mesopotamian politics shifted more frequently over a substructure of regional
city-states. Mesopotamian art focused on less monumental structures, while
embracing a pronounced literary element that Egyptian art lacked.
These cultural differences can be explained partly by geography:
Mesopotamians lacked access to the great stones that Egyptians could import
for their monuments. The differences also owed something to different
politics, for Egyptian ability to organize masses of laborers followed from
its centralized government structures and strong bureaucracy. The differences
owed something, finally, to different beliefs, for the Mesopotamians lacked
the Egyptian concern for preparations for the afterlife, which so motivated
the great tombs and pyramids that have made Egypt and some of the pharaohs
live on in human memory.
Both societies traded extensively, but there was a difference in economic
tone. Mesopotamia was more productive of technological improvements, because
their environment was more difficult to manage than the Nile valley. Trade
contacts were more extensive, and the Mesopotamians gave attention to a
merchant class and commercial law.
Social differences were less obvious because it is difficult to obtain
information on daily life for early civilizations. It is probable, though,
that the status of women was greater in Egypt than in Mesopotamia (where
women's position seems to have deteriorated after Sumer). Egyptians paid great
respect to women at least in the upper classes, in part because marriage
alliances were vital to the preservation and stability of the monarchy. Also,
Egyptian religion included more pronounced deference to goddesses as sources
of creativity.
Comparisons in politics, culture, economics, and society suggest
civilizations that varied substantially because of largely separate origins
and environments. The distinction in overall tone was striking, with Egypt
being more stable and cheerful than Mesopotamia not only in beliefs about gods
and the afterlife but in the colorful and lively pictures the Egyptians
emphasized in their decorative art. Also striking was the distinction in
internal history, with Egyptian civilization far less marked by disruption
than its Mesopotamian counterpart.
Comparison must also note important similarities, some of them
characteristic of early civilizations. Both Egypt and Mesopotamia emphasized
social stratification, with a noble, landowning class on top and masses of
peasants and slaves at the bottom. A powerful priestly group also figured in
the elite. While specific achievements in science differed, there was a common
emphasis on astronomy and related mathematics, which produced durable findings
about units of time and measurement. Both Mesopotamia and Egypt changed only
slowly by the standards of more modern societies. Details of change have not
been preserved, but it is true that having developed successful political and
economic systems there was a strong tendency toward conservation. Change, when
it came, was usually brought by outside forces - natural disasters or
invasions. Both civilizations demonstrated extraordinary durability in the
basics. Egyptian civilization and a fundamental Mesopotamian culture lasted
far longer than the civilizations that came later, in part because of relative
isolation within each respective region and because of the deliberate effort
to maintain what had been achieved, rather than experiment widely.
Both civilizations, finally, left an important heritage in their region
and adjacent territories. A number of smaller civilization centers were
launched under the impetus of Mesopotamia and Egypt, and some would produce
important innovations of their own by about 1000 B.C.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Your comparison is funny. You are comparing a polity with a sub-region. Do you ever name the author of the source. That is the least you owe its author, no?
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
In classic lyinass style she retreats from her last imbecilic point of argument after being showed to be a fool. She then hits the google searches once again frantically searching for something that coincides with her ulterior motive, in other words her preconceived notion. If this were not true, she would have admitted a long time ago that she has been bested on pretty much everything posted by her.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Spirlman and others please read the info before typing or else all you are doing is arguing for argument sake from Spirlman
quote:No, its not. Egypt displays an advanced civilization on a par with the Near East contemporaneously. I wonder why that is? Is it because Ancient Egypt is in the North Eastern zone of the continent thus a Near Eastern presence and influence is more than likely feasible making such an advanced civilization achievable? The South of Egypt or anywhere else of Africa couldn't display anything on a par with Egyptian or Near Eastern civilization yet we are supposed to believe knowledge came from the south and fled north to make that "Egypt."
posted on page two The site was nearly two hundred miles deep in the heart of a country the Egyptians had called Ta-Seti - "Land of the Bow." Here in this remote corner of Africa, an elegant and cosmopolitan culture had flourished centuries before the pyramids were built.
Twelve of the tombs were tremendous, each one large enough to have served a predynastic Egyptian king. Tombs of this size, wealth and date in Egypt would have been immediately recognized as royal. Their extraordinarily varied contents would have been taken as evidence of a complex culture exposed to wide outside connections.
But because the discovery was made in Nubia at a time and place when kingship was thought impossible, further proof of royalty is necessary. What was really surprising was the age of the tombs. The cemetery clearly dated from the time of the so-called A-Group - a prehistoric people believed to have dominated lower Nubia from about 3800 to 3100 B.C. Of all the numerous items discovered, the most significant were found in an A-Group grave site, called Cemetery L, which yielded artifacts that were created six to seven generations (approximately 200 years) before the start of the First Dynasty in Egypt, 3150 B.C. All told, more than 1,000 complete and fragmentary painted pots, and over 100 stone vessels. The range of these and other fragments from the plundered cemetery began to indicate a wealth and complexity that could only be called royal.
In addition to huge quantities of native pottery, the tombs were filled with bottles, flasks, bowls, and large storage jars from Egypt - many inscribed with hieroglyphs. There were also vessels from Syria-Palestine of a type that had never been found in Egypt and that may have indicated a direct trade link between Nubia and Asia.
Notice the direct trade with Asia part with no Kemetian middlemen because there was no Kemetian state.
Ivory seals from the A-Group period had been found featuring kingly serekhs. A mud seal impression found at Siali - also dating from the A-Group period - showed a man saluting a serekh surmounted by a falcon. The serekh was actually labeled with a bow - the hieroglyphic emblem for Ta-Seti, Land of the Bow - implying that the man was paying homage to a Nubian state One bowl from Qustul even showed vultures tearing at a fallen enemy who is labeled with the signs for Ta-Shemau - Upper Egypt - possibly indicating that the Nubians had defeated Upper Egypt in battle.
And not for nothing but yet another Civilization was coming into being in the south that of Kush or Kerma 2500 BCE to about 1520 BCE. stated earlier they were in fact many emergent states in the area south of Kemet,Kemet and Ta-Seti would become Kemet incorporated after Kemet gained control over them,Kush would incorporate all the others and eventually Kemet itself at a much later date.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: In classic lyinass style she retreats from her last imbecilic point of argument after being showed to be a fool. She then hits the google searches once again frantically searching for something that coincides with her ulterior motive, in other words her preconceived notion. If this were not true, she would have admitted a long time ago that she has been wrong on pretty much everything posted by her.
all your posts seem to be focused on me,
lioness does this lioness does that, she then does this she then does that,
but that's ok, I understand
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^^My threads? Or my posts?
In any event, what is being shown be me is your incompetence, you just can't deal with it.
This actually leads me to analyze yet some more of your traits, which is projection and the inability to deal with what you dish out.
You have nerve to mention that I have recently focused on you in threads where you make a fool out of yourself, yet you have many threads (not posts) with other peoples names on it.
I think you're mad at being called out. You can't take the pressure. Don't like the taste of your own medicine do ya?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
I give you permission to go to sleep now,
your teddy bear is waiting
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
Good comeback...
I now give you permission to learn the difference between a maternal and paternal haplogroup, OK?.
So you won't make an ass out of yourself so much in the future. I'm just looking out for ya. Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
Only the hands!? You forgot to mention the lapis lazuli inlayed in the eyes like many other figures from the Near East.
You forgot to mention though, that "Near Eastern" counterparts don't have lapis lazuli eyes designed like that. I thought I asked you to produce a parallel of this art in the so-called "Near East", but you lay low at the time. Where is it?
We'll wait for this, let's not hold our breaths though, as demonstrated spiralman will ignore this request of data.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Having access to lapis lazuli only speaks to the potential of accessing the material from elsewhere. It doesn't say that said art must necessarily be built elsewhere. Using your logic, one would imply that a car made in Germany, but with tires made from rubber planted in Africa, must have been made in Africa, simply because it has material imported from there. Absurd. Lapis lazuli is not also from the "Near East"; they, like the Egyptians, had to have imported it. Furthermore, Lapis lazuli have been spotted in different geographical regions, including Africa.
Well put analogy. In a similar sense why is the plethora of gold not seen in the same light as influence to Egypt from Sudan like that supposed influence of lapis lazuli.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Head of a Male Worshipper Sumerian Early Dynastic II Period with eyes inlaid with shell and lapis lazuli Ancient Mesopotamia
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^^Lol weirdo.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Do you ever name the author of the source. That is the least you owe its author, no?
Lyinass likely doesn't know the author as she simply searches google for a copy and paste.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
Well put analogy. In a similar sense why is the plethora of gold not seen in the same light as influence to Egypt from Sudan like that supposed influence of lapis lazuli.
Spiralman et co. treat antiquity trade-relations as though the fundamentals are distinct from those of today. If you lacked natural resource to process, you would be inclined to import it. That is what was done back then, and is done to this day. The ancient Egyptians imported ivory, incense, animal skins, plants, etc, from further south. Why not attribute these too as "prototypes" for creating "civilization". LOL.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
At other times the Egyptians also invaded Nubia and pillaged these items
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
Well put analogy. In a similar sense why is the plethora of gold not seen in the same light as influence to Egypt from Sudan like that supposed influence of lapis lazuli.
Spiralman et co. treat antiquity trade-relations as though the fundamentals are distinct from those of today. If you lacked natural resource to process, you would be inclined to import it. That is what was done back then, and is done to this day. The ancient Egyptians imported ivory, incense, animal skins, plants, etc, from further south. Why not attribute these too as "prototypes" for creating "civilization". LOL.
Similarly (to beat a dead horse) in their eyes all the cars and products manufactures in Asia indicate that Asians first produced them, and that the U.S.A. et. al whom receive these products are indebted to Asia for the influence on their culture. Impressive thinking.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
^The wisdom, I think, goes like this. If AE cannot be converted into some foreign "Dynastic Race", then they have to be learners of civilization building from outside. AE, presumably like the rest of Africans, need "baby-sitting"-style guidance in setting up organized complex social structures.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
At other times the Egyptians also invaded Nubia and pillaged these items
There was no such thing as "Nubia". And they also invaded part of the "Near East". Ancient Egypt's primary motives of invading region in the south, is to keep the rivalry and expansion of the regional polity there [namely Kush] contained.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Lioness - I find the piece on Egypt And Mesopotamia Compared worthwhile. Chances are you didn't understand it, but if you ever do, it's a good place to start.
The Explorer - It is not comparing a polity with a sub-region. Though Sumer was composed of citi-states, they were at most times, a united country. Historically Sumerian Empire was MUCH larger and incorporated more diversity of places and peoples than anything Egyptian.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
At other times the Egyptians also invaded Nubia and pillaged these items
There was no such thing as "Nubia". And they also invaded part of the "Near East". Ancient Egypt's primary motives of invading region in the south, is to keep the rivalry and expansion of the regional polity there [namely Kush] contained.
Then why bother quoting Bruce Williams, He uses the tern "Nubia" all the time and titles his research as such. Of course there were periods of friendly relations with the Nubians but this talk about "keep the regional polity contained" (which is true) is used as way to distract that at other times the Egyptians just came in, killed people and took things. Any colonist can say they came in to contain an unify decentralized areas.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Bruce would equally be wrong in using the term "Nubia", but my guess is that he does it, because it is the convention that the Eurocentric world has come to immediately recognize about regions beyond Egypt's southern border. Your talk of Egyptians coming in willy nilly anytime they feel like it, just to plunder and maime is what constitutes a distraction and lacks supporting evidence. There is a reason the Egyptians had an elaborate military fotress on their southern border; it is because the Kushites had long had ambitions to expand into Egypt, and possibly take over the trade with the "Near East", addition to any direct access to local Egyptian resources. The Kushites had allied with Egypt's enemies many times, because of this ambition, and even spearheaded military campaigns at times. Kush was a centralized polity; so, I don't know where this talk of decentralized areas comes from?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: In classic lyinass style she retreats from her last imbecilic point of argument after being showed to be a fool. She then hits the google searches once again frantically searching for something that coincides with her ulterior motive, in other words her preconceived notion. If this were not true, she would have admitted a long time ago that she has been wrong on pretty much everything posted by her.
all your posts seem to be focused on me,
lioness does this lioness does that, she then does this she then does that,
but that's ok, I understand
Of course they're focused on you. You're getting under their skins.lol
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Notice how it seems the hands are clasped together as in the way Sumerian statues are often depicted? This is predynastic Egyptian. Coincidence?
Only the hands!? You forgot to mention the lapis lazuli inlayed in the eyes like many other figures from the Near East.
No I didn't forget. I just figured on overflow protection for the idiots.
Posted by Apocalypse (Member # 8587) on :
Loiness wrote:
quote:It shows that it is unknown if the white crown is was first in Nubian Qustul or in Egypt because Narmer also falls within that range 3150 BC
Explorer says Qustul was first
There may be evidence from the AE's themselves that white crown was not originally Egyptian. Taken together with the evidence from Qustul its a slam dunk.
Posted by Apocalypse (Member # 8587) on :
Thutmose III: The Napata Stela:
quote: Another feat of prowess which Re commanded me: He granted me another brave deed by the sea of Ny. He made me drive together a herd of elephants. My Majesty fought them, they being a herd of 120 elephants. Never had the like been done by a king since the god who had seized the white crown of Upper Egypt
God here "The god who seized the white crown" was a way that Pharaohs refered to deceased predecessors.
The word siezed is interpreted as "given" elsewhere thus "the god who was given the white crown" but nonetheless the same stelae mentions an old tradition among "the people" that Gebel Barkal was the source of Egyptian kingship:
quote:Listen, people of the southern land, which is by the Gebel Barkal, called the "Throne of Both Lands" by the people before it was known
quote:A late Hellenistic Nubian tradition about the source of the Nile states that Osiris was a native Kushite (“Aithiopian”), who, like the river, came north into Egypt in prehistoric times and brought with him Egyptian civilization (FHN 1998 [II], 638 ff). The text goes on to explain that that was why both Kushite and Egyptian kings wore “tall pointed felt hats ending in a knob, with the snakes that they call asp coiled round them.”
Here is the problem with Lioness and others,they refuse to see the area south of Kemet as organized, for them it is the lawless frontier that's why proper names for the different Kingdoms and polities is of no importance..they would not get this mental picture in their heads if they were talking about Mesopotamia.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Good addition, Apocalypse, on the Hedjet.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
The Explorer - It is not comparing a polity with a sub-region. Though Sumer was composed of citi-states, they were at most times, a united country. Historically Sumerian Empire was MUCH larger and incorporated more diversity of places and peoples than anything Egyptian.
Pay attention. There is a difference between "Sumer" and "Mesopotamia". There was no polity called "Mesopotamia". Mesopotamia is a euphemism for a sub-region that hosted complexes from say, Uruk to Sumer, Elam, Assyria, Babylon, etc.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
No I didn't forget. I just figured on overflow protection for the idiots.
simple-minded, name that idiot who said that these predynastic Nile Valley [Upper Egypt] statues are "Near Eastern" imports, but could not produce similar statues in the "Near East". Let me give you a hint: that poster's moniker has "simple" in it.
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
Here is the problem with Lioness and others,they refuse to see the area south of Kemet as organized, for them it is the lawless frontier that's why proper names for the different Kingdoms and polities is of no importance..they would not get this mental picture in their heads if they were talking about Mesopotamia.
lyinarse's anti-African racist blinders muddies his/her ability to think in an organized manner. For instance, lyinarse speaks of the ancient Egyptian's military actions in the so-called "Nubia", but leaves out the same in their dealings in the so-called "Near East". He/she quibbles over the estimated ages associated with Qustul artifacts, but takes dating for the Narmer palette as the absolute truth. This is because lyinarse, like his/her colleague eurocentrist African-haters, wants to portray the ancient "Egyptian polity" as an aberration of some sort, or the equivalent of an African "Greek Miracle", that has no lineage in areas to its south. The idea is to sever the "Egyptian" polity from what is deemed to be "inner Africa", and since, "Nubia" is seen as an "African interior", these clowns are tempted to sever "Nubia" from "ancient Egypt". Instead, "Nubia" is portrayed as a mere spin-off and pawn of the "Egyptian polity", in the face of facts to the contrary. In fact, these characters would rather portray the Dynastic Egyptian polity as essentially a transplant from the "Near East", again against all historical realities. These characters approach history from a cult-mentality, and will not let facts stand in their way under no circumstance.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
I wonder if Lyinass, simpleton, spiral whoever, can find the Hedjet and falcon et. al, in the near east before it appears in Qustul, or in Egypt.
Well you know, since the near east is supposedly from where Egypt arose. <<<Insert sarcasm.
We should find this evidence of kingship in southwest Asia, earlier than Qustul no? So where is it?
Lioness, simpleton et. al any takers?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
No I didn't forget. I just figured on overflow protection for the idiots.
simple-minded, name that idiot who said that these predynastic Nile Valley [Upper Egypt] statues are "Near Eastern" imports, but could not produce similar statues in the "Near East". Let me give you a hint: that poster's moniker has "simple" in it.
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
Here is the problem with Lioness and others,they refuse to see the area south of Kemet as organized, for them it is the lawless frontier that's why proper names for the different Kingdoms and polities is of no importance..they would not get this mental picture in their heads if they were talking about Mesopotamia.
lyinarse's anti-African racist blinders muddies his/her ability to think in an organized manner. For instance, lyinarse speaks of the ancient Egyptian's military actions in the so-called "Nubia", but leaves out the same in their dealings in the so-called "Near East". He/she quibbles over the estimated ages associated with Qustul artifacts, but takes dating for the Narmer palette as the absolute truth. This is because lyinarse, like his/her colleague eurocentrist African-haters, wants to portray the ancient "Egyptian polity" as an aberration of some sort, or the equivalent of an African "Greek Miracle", that has no lineage in areas to its south. The idea is to sever the "Egyptian" polity from what is deemed to be "inner Africa", and since, "Nubia" is seen as an "African interior", these clowns are tempted to sever "Nubia" from "ancient Egypt". Instead, "Nubia" is portrayed as a mere spin-off and pawn of the "Egyptian polity", in the face of facts to the contrary. In fact, these characters would rather portray the Dynastic Egyptian polity as essentially a transplant from the "Near East", again against all historical realities. These characters approach history from a cult-mentality, and will not let facts stand in their way under no circumstance.
I was the first to post splendid pictures of Kerma architecture including a curved wall and spiral stone staircase recently uncovered. Unfortunately after a few days the picture link failed. On September 24th I was the first to post the link in this forum to the pdf HONEGGER, M. 2009. Archaeological excavations at Kerma (Sudan That was pro-African. No I am not an Egyptocentric. I never said anything about Nubia being inferior. You guys are constantly putting words in people's mouths. The topic was Nubia at that point why would I mention military campaigns aginst the Asiatics? Everybody knows that. There were military campaigns against both. How unlikely any of these people:
would be the progenitors of Egyptian civilization.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: she quibbles over the estimated ages associated with Qustul artifacts, but takes dating for the Narmer palette as the absolute truth.
excellent point. The date of the reign of Narmer is not absolute truth either. It could have been later. It could have been earlier.
exactly my point.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Could have been...could have been, I wish I wish I wish
Yea yea yea we know.
Let's get some answers to the below...
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: I wonder if Lyinass, simpleton, spiral whoever, can find the Hedjet and falcon et. al, in the near east before it appears in Qustul, or in Egypt.
Well you know, since the near east is supposedly from where Egypt arose. <<<Insert sarcasm.
We should find this evidence of kingship in southwest Asia, earlier than Qustul no? So where is it?
Lioness, simpleton et. al any takers?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
I was the first to post splendid pictures of Kerma architecture including a curved wall and spiral stone staircase recently uncovered. Unfortunately after a few days the picture link failed. On September 24th I was the first to post the link in this forum to the pdf HONEGGER, M. 2009. Archaeological excavations at Kerma (Sudan That was pro-African.
This Honegger publication must indeed be new, if it came out in 2009...because I know for a fact, his earlier work had been posted here several times before, ever since before you joined. That aside, it should be noted that even other anti-African elements on this forum from time to time post work that could generally be considered "pro-African", but they generally turn around and try to ignore the broader premise of these works in ensuing discussions, if not forget about them altogether in later on discussions, and instead, sift through to see if they can find something that they think will defeat the "pro-African" orientation of the work in question. Let me see; where can I find a recent example of this? Oh yeah, like when you picked one sentence from Kendall's article, which was actually looking to make a case for the generally "southern" heritage of the Hedjet tradition.
quote:
The topic was Nubia at that point why would I mention military campaigns aginst the Asiatics? Everybody knows that. There were military campaigns against both.
You seem to have a combative response to anything potentially positive said about any section of the so-called "Nubia". When it was pointed out that the Hedjet has its precedence in Qustul, even after several sources were cited on this, including the text you cherry-picked one sentence from, you were still adamant about downplaying its significance, quibbling over dates. The knuckleheads that came here trying to claim that "Nubia" is a mere spin-off of "Ancient Egypt", were freely expressing these crackpot tales, with not so much a beep from you, in protest. But lo and behold, something positive is said about "Nubia", you are quick to challenge whatever it is that was being said, no matter how flimsy a premise you are coming from.
quote:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: she quibbles over the estimated ages associated with Qustul artifacts, but takes dating for the Narmer palette as the absolute truth.
excellent point. The date of the reign of Narmer is not absolute truth either. It could have been later. It could have been earlier.
exactly my point.
No, your point was to argue that the Qustul artifacts were in fact found to be within the same time frame as the Narmer palette, which therefore strips it off that precedence status, even as several sources, which you tried to use to make your argument, all blatantly [without ambiguity] agreed to said precedence of the Qustul artifact over the Narmer palette. As such, you had no qualms about the Narmer palette dating; you were using the Narmer palette dating as a platform to reject the Qustul artifact dating. If your point is, as you say above, then you wouldn't have made issue of the Qustul artifact dating, because you would have understood off the bat, that the researchers are working with estimates, based on radio-carbon dating of elements in the burial sites, on both the Qustul finds and the Narmer palette. Sorry; but I am not buying your act!
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: No, your point was to argue that the Qustul artifacts were in fact found to be within the same time frame as the Narmer palette, which therefore strips it off that precedence status,even as several sources, which you tried to use to make your argument, all blatantly [without ambiguity] agreed to said precedence of the Qustul artifact over the Narmer palette. As such, you had no qualms about the Narmer palette dating; you were using the Narmer palette dating as a platform to reject the Qustul artifact dating. If your point is, as you say above, then you wouldn't have made issue of the Qustul artifact dating, because you would have understood off the bat, that the researchers are working with estimates, based on radio-carbon dating of elements in the burial sites, on both the Qustul finds and the Narmer palette. Sorry; but I am not buying your act!
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: she quibbles over the estimated ages associated with Qustul artifacts, but takes dating for the Narmer palette as the absolute truth.
excellent point. The date of the reign of Narmer is not absolute truth either. It could have been later. It could have been earlier.
exactly my point.
What a douche.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
The difference is I'm more scientifically objective about it whether such results weigh in for "pro-African" or not. That's political. Some things I post might be interpreted as "pro-African" or "anti-African" in some people's opinion but I am more interested in what the evidence shows or does not show regardless of it's supposed political implications, chips fall as they may. The political implications are highly overrated in this are any way, a mirage.
Your political bias is shown with this term
"precedence status"
there is no such thing in science as "precedence status".
Meroe had an impressive iron industry, textiles and development of Meriotic writing, mound and burial customs. It is undisputed that the last two periods of Kushite culture were heavily influenced by Egypt as is obvious from the pyramids and other architecture at Meroe and the fact that Meriotic is derived from Egyptian hieroglyphs.
It would be nice to avoid these facts but not real. There is very little evidence of A-group to make assumptions about.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
lyinarse, you cannot possibly be "scientifically objective", when you ignore questionable claims, and attempt to challenge more materially substantive ones with flimsy protests. That is the anti-thesis of partiality.
As for "precedence status", you know full well what is being talked about, as it has been explained to your unattentive ears. If you don't know what precedence means, then I suggest you turn to a dictionary.
Any influences Dynastic Egypt may have had on the Kushite complexes over the course of the Dynastic era, generally on Kushitic terms, is a far cry from portraying these complexes as Egyptian spin-offs. That is what you anti-African characters attempt to argue for, in vain. Your thinking capacity is very limited; think in terms of our modern times. There are sky scrappers in almost every corner of the globe, and these are generally seen as symbols of wealth. Frankly, the primary reason Kushites adopted Egyptian architecture styles, and even Roman examples, is because these were then considered in those geographical spheres as the trend and symbols of wealth and power. Dynastic Egypt was considered a power in that general region, and so, what better way for Kush to assert its economic and political power, than to show Egypt that it can vibrantly compete in the same symbols of wealth?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
The Explorer should be able to show us evidence of how the south of Egypt influenced such great change and progress in the near east and Egypt in such a short time, but never influenced areas further south to anywhere near as much. Why is that?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Define what you mean by "south of Egypt", "further south", or even progress. Even your questions lack clarity, because it appears they were made from emotional a priori assumptions, instead of acquaintance with the historical realities of the regions in question.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Even your questions lack clarity, because it appears they were made from emotional a priori assumptions, instead of acquaintance with the historical realities of the regions in question.
I think your insults tell a great deal about your emotional state.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Your inability to either answer questions, or recognize what is insulting and what is not, says far more about your psychological state than my comment says about me, other than that I precede from intelligence, and not blurt stuff out without thinking [your M.O.] first.
Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: The difference is I'm more scientifically objective about it whether such results weigh in for "pro-African" or not. That's political. Some things I post might be interpreted as "pro-African" or "anti-African" in some people's opinion but I am more interested in what the evidence shows or does not show regardless of it's supposed political implications, chips fall as they may. The political implications are highly overrated in this are any way, a mirage.
Your political bias is shown with this term
"precedence status"
there is no such thing in science as "precedence status".
Meroe had an impressive iron industry, textiles and development of Meriotic writing, mound and burial customs. It is undisputed that the last two periods of Kushite culture were heavily influenced by Egypt as is obvious from the pyramids and other architecture at Meroe and the fact that Meriotic is derived from Egyptian hieroglyphs.
It would be nice to avoid these facts but not real. There is very little evidence of A-group to make assumptions about.
The ancient Greeks borrowed heavily from the Phoenicians, in terms of their alphabet. They were also were influenced a lot by ancient Egypt in terms of math, art and religion
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Your inability to either answer questions, or recognize what is insulting and what is not, says far more about your psychological state than my comment says about me, other than that I precede from intelligence, and not blurt stuff out without thinking [your M.O.] first.
It appears that you don't know how to accept objective opinions or evidence. You only go by what agrees with your opinions and tastes. So it would appear that it is you that is lacking any real intelligence.
Anyone can google,copy and paste from selective studies and comments.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: It appears that you don't know how to accept objective opinions or evidence.
Where is this objective evidence? Opinions I can understand. I seriously hope you don't mean your own eyeball comparisons? If not, pardon me, but would you mind posting this objective evidence once more?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
It appears that you don't know how to accept objective opinions or evidence. You only go by what agrees with your opinions and tastes.
It's easy to test this emotional theory of your's: Where's your counter evidence to "what agrees" with my opinions and tastes?
quote: So it would appear that it is you that is lacking any real intelligence.
Anyone can google,copy and paste from selective studies and comments.
You don't even have the intelligence to google, copy and paste "from selective studies and comments", judging by your total incompetence in producing any.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
First let's us establish a firm basis for what you are ultimately trying to imply and then let's go from there.
My guess is that you are suggesting that the roots for ancient and modern day civilization began in what is now modern day northern Sudan. Or at least some area further south or southwest of Egypt. Am I correct?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Is anyone out there?
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^^How about you post that objective evidence you claimed to have admitted, deal?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^^How about you post that objective evidence you claimed to have admitted, deal?
I'm waiting on the proof that the ancient Sudanese provided the foundation for civilization. Do you have the evidence? Post your evidence and i'll get back to you. Are you scared?
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^^Well simplegirl for one it was shown in this very thread that protodynastic A group in Qustul is where we first see the evidence for the Hedjet and falcon along with other regalia indicative of kingship.
Which in turn lead to the Pharaonic Egyptian kingship, this style of kingship first appears in Sudan before it does in Egypt.
Is there evidence for this in the near east before Qustul?
P.s. you were left on page 2 therefore I suggest you go back to page two to get up to date with what was discussed from then. It's not going to be continually repeated for a simple girl.
You can take note of your friend lioness' effort at a distraction...oops I meant argument
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: [qb] ^Lyinass were you dropped on your head as a child?
Ok, I'll play along just to make you look like the fool you are again.
In the report it states, Qustul incense burner Protodynastic, A-Group, 3300-3100 B.C.
From 3300 to 3100 B.C., what's your point of contention, seriously? And how does this debunk anything?
It shows that it is unknown if the white crown is was first in Nubian Qustul or in Egypt because Narmer also falls within that range 3150 BC
Lol, your objection to dates is hardly debunking anything as it's noted;
the earliest **certain** images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia, about 300 km up-river from Hierakonpolis.--Williams
The decoration of the Qustul Incense Burner, as restored. A sacrificial procession contains the earliest **definite** image of a pharaoh with his crown and falcon-label. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition. - Oriental Institute of Chicago. Source: Link
^^Where is your counter evidence to what Explorer posted above that shows it's wrong?
It's not like it's saying there are conflicting dates, and that there are known white crowns in Egypt at the same time, it says that it certainly definitively appears earliest in Qustul.
Sorry but not agreeing with dates isn't telling us anything specific, child. You sincerely think you debunked Williams with his own source? Or anyone else because you say Narmer was around in the last 50 years? Lmao, you're too funny.
It's not ambiguous, its certain that the white crown appears in images in proto-dynastic A group before Egypt, where is your evidence that says otherwise.
You can't debunk Explorer with his own source if his own source states the certainty of these images in Qustul, and which is exactly what he's stating, and you fail to address it specifically. Lol @ you thinking you debunked a paper by using the same paper. You have a weird way of thinking, I must tell you.
On a side note of advice, stick to debating Mike111, atleast with him you're at your level and won't be made to look like as much of a fool.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
What's taking so long simplegirl? Not such an easy task huh?
While you're at it, since you're so adamantly against a southern origin for the ancient Egyptians why don't you take a crack at the limb proportional indices of the ancient Egyptians which shows extreme tropical adaptations, why would this be if they weren't from the tropics of Africa?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^^Well simplegirl for one it was shown in this thread that protodynastic A group in Qustul is where we first see the evidence for the Hedjet and falcon along with other regalia indicative of kingship, which in turn lead to the Pharaonic Egyptian kingship, this style first appears in Sudan before it does in Egypt.
Is there evidence for this in the near east before Qustul?
[/QUOTE]
So you are saying that equipped with these two things, this is absolute proof that the ancient Sudanese people initiated the start of civilization?
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^^Well simplegirl for one it was shown in this thread that protodynastic A group in Qustul is where we first see the evidence for the Hedjet and falcon along with other regalia indicative of kingship, which in turn lead to the Pharaonic Egyptian kingship, this style first appears in Sudan before it does in Egypt.
Is there evidence for this in the near east before Qustul?
So you are saying that equipped with these two things, this is absolute proof that the ancient Sudanese people initiated the start of civilization? [/QUOTE]
What this evidence states is that the ideas of kingship (Pharaonic rule) in ancient Egypt comes from Qustul in Sudan, this is one out of many points, let's start here, can you show otherwise this one point I just made or not?
The decoration of the Qustul Incense Burner, as restored. A sacrificial procession contains the earliest **definite** image of a pharaoh with his crown and falcon-label. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition. - Oriental Institute of Chicago. Source: Link
quote:…when the incense burner was reexamined in the light of the obviously royal stature of people buried in Cemetery L, the essential restoration of the missing elements was immediately clear. In the first ship, a prisoner is kneeling on a palanquin or litter held by a rope in the grasp of a guard with a mace…the white crown of Upper Egypt clearly stands out above the ship. In front of it is the tail of a falcon - another sign of kingship. The crown indicates that the figure is a king, and the falcon should be seen as perched on a serekh, together a characteristic representation in early dynastic Egypt. In front of the falcon is a rosette, symbol of royalty before the First Dynasty …
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Let's hear some of your other points. I'm interested in hearing them.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
Lol good one, now let's start with the one that's already posted. You scared or something?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
So a hedjet and a falcon are proof that civilization got its kickstart in Sudan? You'll have to do better than that with some of your other points perhaps.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
Why don't you address what's being said instead of trying to get out of it, which is that the Hedjet (white crown), falcon and its regalia on the Qustul incense burner is evidence of the first pharaohs rule in Sudan before Egypt, meaning Egypt received its idea of kingship from Sudan.
Why are you so scared to address this?
Your statement;
So a hedjet and a falcon are proof that civilization got its kickstart in Sudan---a simple girl
^^Is pretty much further indicative of the lack of knowledge of ancient Egyptian culture and symbolism.
These signatures represent the Pharaoh, which as shown first appear in Qustul before dynastic Egypt arose.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: Why don't you address what's being said instead of trying to get out of it, which is that the Hedjet (white crown), falcon and its regalia on the Qustul incense burner is evidence of the first pharaohs rule in Sudan before Egypt, meaning Egypt received its idea of kingship from Sudan.
Why are you so scared to address this?
That's not proof of what i'm seeking. In fact it only suggests that the start of Egypt in its earliest stages may have included the north of Sudan and later abandoned. Or that there is earlier examples to be found elsewhere in due time. Quit stalling and provide us with real evidence and not something left only to speculation.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: Why don't you address what's being said instead of trying to get out of it, which is that the Hedjet (white crown), falcon and its regalia on the Qustul incense burner is evidence of the first pharaohs rule in Sudan before Egypt, meaning Egypt received its idea of kingship from Sudan.
Why are you so scared to address this?
That's not proof of what i'm seeking.
Aha, I understand, anything you don't see fit, you just brush under the rug.
That's not how it works, we must examine the evidence.
This Qustul incense burner shows us in detail the evidence of a king first ruling as a pharaoh with a white crown and falcon etc...in Sudan first before dynastic Egypt arose.
Anyone who is the littlest up to date with ancient Egypt knows what the white crown and falcon represent.
You want to deny this because it doesnt fit into your pre-conceived notion perhaps?
Why would this first appear in Qustul instead of the near east?
Why can't we find evidence similar in other surrounding cultures of the near east either?
What's going on here?
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: In fact it only suggests that the start of Egypt in its earliest stages may have included the north of Sudan and later abandoned.
It actually indicates to anyone with a brain that the idea of kingship and the earliest pharaohs were from and ruled in northern Sudan.
Until you can address this you are simply babbling.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Or that there is earlier examples to be found elsewhere in due time.
Yea I know, keep wishing that is.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Quit stalling and provide us with real evidence and not something left only to speculation.
So far you've provided not a simple bit of evidence, not even to be left to speculation wherein the evidence has been shown of the earliest pharaohs coming from Qustul in Sudan not Egypt, any reference otherwise?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
MOM, you are led into a wild goose chase by a character who does not have the intelligence to lift a feather, let alone cite counter evidence. simple-minded is driven only by religious or "Alice in Wonderlandisque" emotionalism.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Who had this first? :
Abydos in Egypt of Egyptian royal artifacts that do indeed seem to reach back as far as the Qustul tombs (about 3400 BC). Excavations in the cemetery U at Abydos have brought to the light a series of early Naqada III royal tombs (the 12-chambers U-j is contemporary or earlier than Qustul L24
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
The Wadi of the Horus Qa-a: A Tableau of Royal Ritual Power in the Theban Western Desert
John Coleman Darnell (1)
Figure 8
The first vessel from the left (Figure 8) is one of a small number of early depictions of vessels with sails in Egyptian(10) and Nubian(11) art; again, in terms of location of the sail on the vessel, and considering the surrounding imagery, the sail and vessel in the Wadi of the Horus Qa-a recall the similarly located sail in the vessel carrying the prisoner on the most elaborate incense burner from Qustul.(12) Although most of the other vessels with sails in early Egyptian and Nubian depictions have high upturned prows and sterns, and are of Naqada III date, the vessel in the Wadi of the Horus Qa-a tableau belongs to the tradition of boat depictions on Naqada II Decorated Ware. Given the similarity of the Qa-a tableau vessels to those of Tomb 100 and Decorated Ware pottery depictions, the Qa-a Wadi boat with sail is apparently the earliest known depiction of a sail.(13)
1. The following is a shortened version of a portion of “The Wadi of the Horus Qa-a: a New Tableau of Royal Ritual Power in the Theban Western Desert,” in R. Friedman, ed., Egypt at its Origins 3, Proceedings of the Third International Colloquium on Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt (Leuven, forthcoming).
10. P. Cervicek, Felsbilder des Nord-Etbai, Oberägyptens und Unternubiens (Wiesbaden, 1974), fig. 156; L Casson, Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World (Princeton, 1973), p. 12; E. Black and D. Samuel, “What Were Sails Made Of?,” The Mariner’s Mirror, 77 (1991): 217-218; Darnell, Archeo-Nil 19 (2009): 101; D. Huyge and J. C. Darnell, “A Reconsideration of the Vessel BM 35324,” in press; N. Dürring, Materialien zum Schiffbau im Alten Ägypten (Berlin, 1995), pp. 134-135; L. Fabre, Le destin maritime de l’Égypt ancienne (London, 2005), p. 89, n. 1.
11. R. Engelmayer, Die Felsgravierungen im Distrikt Sayala-Nubien 1: Die Schiffsdarstellungen (Vienna, 1965), pls. 30 [fig. 2] and 45 [fig. 45]; K-H. Otto and G. Buschendorf-Otto, Felsbilder aus dem sudanesischen Nubien 1 (Berlin, 1993), pp. 26-27 and fig. 4a1 [similar vessel p. 43, fig. 31]). The vessel in the Gebel Sheikh Suleiman tableau appears to have a mast, albeit with neither yards nor sail depicted.
12. B. Williams, The A-Group Royal Cemetery at Qustul: Cemetery L (Chicago, 1986), pl. 34.
13. The BM 35324 vessel with sail is of Naqada III date (contra G. Graff, Les peintures sur vases de Nagada I-Nagada II [Leuven, 2009], pp. 175 and 316, no. 369, who classifies the vessel as Naqada II); she suggests another Naqada II sail (Graff, Les peintures, pp. 175 and 383, no. 569) that is perhaps more likely an example of her “filet” (Graff, Les peintures, p. 174, N8). The vessel in Morrow and Morrow, Desert RATS, p. 85 (fig. C), appears to have a central mast, although the sail proper does not appear.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
You're going to have to do a little better than this in proving that this area and its people initiated the start of civilization. And all this from merely two images placed upon an incense burner?
Were there any imported goods within these graves from elsewhere? Namely Egypt or perhaps the Near East?
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by NonProphet: [QB] The Wadi of the Horus Qa-a: A Tableau of Royal Ritual Power in the Theban Western Desert by John C. Darnell
Qustul burner 3000-3200bce Naqada III period Figure 8 - Naqada II period 3500 to 3200BCE
The first vessel from the left (Figure 8) is one of a small number of early depictions of vessels with sails in Egyptian(10) and Nubian(11) art; again, in terms of location of the sail on the vessel, and considering the surrounding imagery, the sail and vessel in the Wadi of the Horus Qa-a recall the similarly located sail in the vessel carrying the prisoner on the most elaborate incense burner from Qustul.(12) Although most of the other vessels with sails in early Egyptian and Nubian depictions have high upturned prows and sterns, and are of Naqada III date, the vessel in the Wadi of the Horus Qa-a tableau belongs to the tradition of boat depictions on Naqada II Decorated Ware. Given the similarity of the Qa-a tableau vessels to those of Tomb 100 and Decorated Ware pottery depictions, the Qa-a Wadi boat with sail is apparently the earliest known depiction of a sail.(13) Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet: [QUOTE]Originally posted by NonProphet: [QB] The Wadi of the Horus Qa-a: A Tableau of Royal Ritual Power in the Theban Western Desert by John C. Darnell
Qustul burner 3000-3200bce Naqada III period Figure 8 - Naqada II period 3500 to 3200BCE
The first vessel from the left (Figure 8) is one of a small number of early depictions of vessels with sails in Egyptian(10) and Nubian(11) art; again, in terms of location of the sail on the vessel, and considering the surrounding imagery, the sail and vessel in the Wadi of the Horus Qa-a recall the similarly located sail in the vessel carrying the prisoner on the most elaborate incense burner from Qustul.(12) Although most of the other vessels with sails in early Egyptian and Nubian depictions have high upturned prows and sterns, and are of Naqada III date, the vessel in the Wadi of the Horus Qa-a tableau belongs to the tradition of boat depictions on Naqada II Decorated Ware. Given the similarity of the Qa-a tableau vessels to those of Tomb 100 and Decorated Ware pottery depictions, the Qa-a Wadi boat with sail is apparently the earliest known depiction of a sail.(13)
Now now NonProphet...we must not overload their tiny brains all at once.lol
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
^Less bickering and more evidence. Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Posting images of boats, has what to do with the concept of the Hedjet?
And even in the case of the boat, your own citations says:
The first vessel from the left (Figure 8) is one of a small number of early depictions of vessels with sails in Egyptian(10) and Nubian(11) art
Shooting self on the foot?
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^^^^^^^^ Desperate times call for desperate measures.
Hey Simple Girl, can you please list the Sister Civilizations of Egypt in terms of Gods, Customs, Culture, language etc on non African Soil.
Should be quite easy considering your Fail proof theory that Km.t originated in the Middle East..
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: You're going to have to do a little better than this in proving that this area and its people initiated the start of civilization. And all this from merely two images placed upon an incense burner?
This is not going to fly simplegirl, let's first deal with the outstanding fact that the Qustul incense burner shows the first depictions of a pharaoh before dynastic Egypt, shall we?
Let's not make up arguments here, we are not talking about the start of civilization right now, but instead the idea of kingship coming from Sudan.
Can you address this? Will you? Are you scared?
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Were there any imported goods within these graves from elsewhere? Namely Egypt or perhaps the Near East?
When you start answering questions you'll receive answers for yours, it's only logical
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Posting images of boats, has what to do with the concept of the Hedjet?
And even in the case of the boat, your own citations says:
The first vessel from the left (Figure 8) is one of a small number of early depictions of vessels with sails in Egyptian(10) and Nubian(11) art
Shooting self on the foot?
Demonstrates PAE Naqada cultural/symbol continuity that predates all others, influence/domination and partial absorption into the 'borderland' nome named after the previous Ta Seti 'A group' culture, evidence of trade between PAE and Ta Seti in the form of cylindrical et al. products(PAE style and manufactured artifacts discovered in Qutsul).
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Where is the Nagadan Hedjet concept that precedes A-Group? Saying that they had trade is meaningless. We already know this. The Qustul Incense is not a Nagada manufactured item; the opposite is true. You manufactured that reality.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ LOL, this Non Prophet Fraud is a stalking mentally unstable Homosexual Atheist. Everything he posts is a Fraud including his claim to own an MMA Gym.
As a matter of fact the fag posted my Youtube Page So I take "Non Prophet" up on his video challenge, send me a Video Debate on your Atheist claims Non Prophet, you have my Youtube Page "jrpone"...
Send me a Video on Atheism Face to Face, any voice clips will be ignored.
You can talk **** about King all you want behind your computer screen so man up Atheist prove your religion...
Meanwhile..
I wont hold my breath...
Anyway Explorer, its obvious you won this debate and have defended your position. the Nay Sayers have tried all sort of ways to get around the fact that the Royal Regalia and White Crown come from Km.t.
Don't expect Non Prophet to engage you in debate, he will use Strawman Arguments, Ad Hom. Attacks, and circular reasoning, Why you and MOM have not figured out this clown is a fraud is beyond me.
As much as yall hate Lioness, she is more of a debater than Non Prophet yet you guys hold this clown up on another level...
Lioness has more to offer and has more debating skills if you ask me.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Jari you got me figured out wrong. I know how nonprophet operates. He knows I'm not another Clyde Winters. Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ You and MOM represent a fresh air on E.S,
I meant to say that your proved the fact that the Royal Regelia and white Crown originated in Sudan not Km.t but really I dont see it like that I look at it in terms of Nile Valley civilization..
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: ^^^^ stalking mentally unstable Homosexual [/IMG] As a matter of fact the fag posted my Youtube Page So I take "Non Prophet" up on his video challenge, send me a Video Debate on your Atheist claims Non Prophet, you have my Youtube Page "jrpone"...
Send me a Video on Atheism Face to Face, any voice clips will be ignored.
I wont hold my breath...
Anyway Explorer, its obvious you won this debate and have defended your position. the Nay Sayers have tried all sort of ways to get around the fact.
Don't expect Non Prophet to engage you in debate, he will use Strawman Arguments, Ad Hom. Attacks, and circular reasoning, Why you and MOM have not figured out this clown is a fraud is beyond me.
Sure Jariah, the He-Bro religious retard, whenever your accounts are available.
Im an Independent Progressive, I believe in God and Jesus. I Support the Public Option and Health Care Reform. and Im all for Green Jobs and ways to improve Public Education and Public Transportation. I voted for Obama and Regret I voted at all because Obama is a Coward like the Other House Dems. Im not against ALL Conservatives but MOST Conservatives. Jesus answered them, I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Fathers name, they bear witness of Me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you.[b] 27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Fathers hand. ALLAH=AH-LIE Muhammed was a FALSE PROPHET. Prophethood was never given to Ishmael(Arabs). If Muslims come and Assimilate I have no problem, Muslims Demanding we should scrape at their Feet need to be deported out of America, Plain and Simple. We Don't Want not do we Need you.. I Support The 10 commandments
[/IMG]
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: ^^^^ stalking mentally unstable Homosexual [/IMG] As a matter of fact the fag posted my Youtube Page So I take "Non Prophet" up on his video challenge, send me a Video Debate on your Atheist claims Non Prophet, you have my Youtube Page "jrpone"...
Send me a Video on Atheism Face to Face, any voice clips will be ignored.
I wont hold my breath...
Anyway Explorer, its obvious you won this debate and have defended your position. the Nay Sayers have tried all sort of ways to get around the fact.
Don't expect Non Prophet to engage you in debate, he will use Strawman Arguments, Ad Hom. Attacks, and circular reasoning, Why you and MOM have not figured out this clown is a fraud is beyond me.
Sure Jariah, the He-Bro religious retard, whenever your accounts are available.
Im an Independent Progressive, I believe in God and Jesus. I Support the Public Option and Health Care Reform. and Im all for Green Jobs and ways to improve Public Education and Public Transportation. I voted for Obama and Regret I voted at all because Obama is a Coward like the Other House Dems. Im not against ALL Conservatives but MOST Conservatives. Jesus answered them, I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Fathers name, they bear witness of Me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you.[b] 27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Fathers hand. ALLAH=AH-LIE Muhammed was a FALSE PROPHET. Prophethood was never given to Ishmael(Arabs). If Muslims come and Assimilate I have no problem, Muslims Demanding we should scrape at their Feet need to be deported out of America, Plain and Simple. We Don't Want not do we Need you.. I Support The 10 commandments
[/IMG]
Make the Youtube video, Post it to my Youtube account, or Send it to me... Face to Face,
any Personal attacks, or Voice clips will be ignored and reported to the authorities.
Topic: Atheism V. Christianity...any subject you like.
Posting my Myspace and pic proves Im gonna Murder you as your only method of attack is Ad Homenem Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
The whole purpose of drilling nonprophet is to use his posts and reaction as an example to others like him, of how not well-thought through antagonist viewpoints will be swiftly dealt with. Why is it worth some effort, although not much from the way I see it? Nonprophet recites arguments made elsewhere; he is not original.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Non Prophet simply post the same Tired Arguments and resorts to Ad Homeniem attacks. He is only able to get away with his antics due to the lack of Moderation, so simply put he will get Killed in a Youtube Debate.
However I know he won't put up a Youtube clip, he is a stalker and fraud eveything he posts here is a sham. All he is gonna do is Ad Hom. attack and eventually start claiming Me, You, King MOM..etc are the same person..LOL.
and yes he is not Original quite honestly he is the worst poster here, Lioness is a hell lot more of a debater.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
"Dynasty 0" is that the term "dynastic" is not consistent with the words later use. Egyptian dynasties attempt to group either a family of rulers, or at least those who ruled from a specific place. However, the Naqada III Period takes none of this into account. We cannot establish family lines during this period, and the term "Dynasty 0" attempts to take in rulers in different locations ruling different territories. Nevertheless, the term "Dynasty 0" has come into general use and is unlikely to be discarded.
Several tall vessels from Tura and el-Beda are cut with the motif of a serekh surmounted by two falcons, and some scholars have suggested that this represents the name of a late Predynastic ruler, probably from southern Egypt. However, it is also very possible that this mark refers to royal ownership without specifying the specific ruler. Another example is a famous rock-cut inscription at Gebel Sheikh Suleiman in Nubia, which shows an early serekh presiding over a scene which seems to record an Egyptian raid into Nubia at the end of the Predynastic Period. This serekh is empty, but it is very probable that the individual who ordered the inscription to be cut was a Southern Egyptian king, perhaps based at Hierakonpolis. Vessels and shards from tomb B1/2 and the adjacent pit B0 at Abydos are inscribed with a mark consisting of a falcon perching on a mouth-sign. This has been read as Iry-Hor and it has been suggested that he was both a king and the owner of this tomb. However, this "name" is never found in a serekh, despite the fact that this device was already in use for royal names prior to the construction of this tomb. However, this multi-chambered tomb closely resembles the later tombs of Narmer and a known predynastic king named Ka, who preceded Narmer. Perhaps even more compelling is its location, which suggests that the owner of the complex should be placed immediately before Ka, though some would have him earlier because of the lack of the serekh.
_______________________________________________
Abydos
Abydos lays quite close to the dynastic capital of the First Dynasty pharaohs at Thinis, which was located somewhere in the immediate vicinity of Abydos. The latter was associated in later times with the god Osiris, lord of the afterlife. However, there are Umm al-Qa'abno contemporary references to the god until late in the Old Kingdom and his association with the site was probably on account of the presence of the early tombs rather than the reverse. The tomb of Djer was widely believed by later Egyptians to be that of the dead god.
Ivory figure of an unknown pharaoh found at Abydos, probably Early or Protodynastic (3200 BC to 3000 BC) Since the 1970’s the site has been re-investigated by the German Archaeological Institute, most recently under the direction of Günter Dreyer.
Dreyer’s investigations have shown that the site was used as a cemetery for several centuries before the Early Dynastic Period. Plan of Cemetery U at AbydosThe Predynastic tombs are found in an area to the north of Umm al-Qa’ab in an area designated Cemetery U. Among them, they cover the entire Naqada Period (c. 4400-3000 BC), with the earliest graves found to the northwest and the later ones extending southwards. Between Cemetery U and Umm al-Qa’ab is a small collection of well-built tombs, cleared by in an area designated by Petrie as Cemetery B, which would seem to belong to the immediate predecessors of the legendary Menes.
Tomb U-j represents a dramatic leap in scale and complexity over previous tombs and must have belonged to an extraordinary individual. The excavators found traces of a wooden shrine in the burial chamber (Room 1) along with an ivory heqa-sceptre (essentially a shepherd’s crook), which was a powerful symbol of kingship in the historic period. It would appear, then, that the tomb belonged to a pharaoh, perhaps with the name ‘Scorpion.’ Dreyer has identified other ‘royal’ tombs in the cemetery— mainly on the basis of size and the number of rooms— but, in most cases, there is little to distinguish ‘royal’ tombs from those of other high-ranking individuals. Egyptian tradition suggests that there were a number of pharaohs ruling a united land before Menes and the original occupant of this tomb was almost certainly one of them.
Scholars designate the Predynastic Period in Egypt as a time when Egyptian culture was beginning to resemble what would later become Dynastic Egypt, but Egypt itself was not yet unified. However, scholars generally divide this period further into four periods known as the Chalcolithic or "Primitive" Predynastic Period (beginning around 5500 BC), the Naqada I or "Old Predynastic" Period (also known as the Amratian Period, beginning around 4000 BC), the Naqada II Period (also known as the Gerzean Period, beginning around 3500 BC), and Naqada III, which has been labeled by a number of scholars as Dynasty 0. It should be noted, however, that respected scholars appear to differ on these exact dates.
The Naqada III period, or Dynasty 0, is a particularly interesting segment of Predynastic Egypt because it is the real formative years just prior to the unification of Egypt, when we can begin to identify various rulers and some specific events. It is a period in which rulers appear to have controlled large segments of Egypt, even though they may not have controlled the whole. In fact, there is convincing evidence for the emergence of at least three Upper (southern) Egyptian states, centered at This (The city for which Abydos was a necropolis), Naqada and Hierakonpolis. There may have been a smaller, fourth territory ruled by an individual buried at Gebelein. These rulers used recognizable royal iconography to express the ideological basis of their power, and may therefore justifiably be called kings.
bone and pottery vessels from tomb U-j at Abydos were inscribed, some in ink with the figure of a scorpion and this has been interpreted as the owner's name (not to be confused with the later King "Scorpion" who commissioned the ceremonial macehead found at Hierakonpolis). Other vessels from this tomb bear short ink inscriptions consisting of a combination of two signs. Some of these inscriptions have common signs.
The Qustul burial is contemporary with tomb U-j at Abydos (Naqada III),
__________________________________________
the likelihood of further archaeological study at Qustul, or any other site in Nubia, is all but impossible became many of the primary areas of investigation now lie under 250 feet of water, at the bottom of Lake Nasser. This man-made lake covers an area of approximately 1,550 square miles, and it is the second largest man-made lake in the world.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
I agree that nonprophet posts the same tired arguments and pretty much operates like the classical troll. But this is pretty much what you get these days from anti-African opponents. I use these characters as an opportunity to inform some other who might not be as familiar with topic. Heck, judging from some posts here, even some longstanding members seem like they still don't fully understand some of the things that have been beaten to death here.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
I never take anything nonprophet says seriously.
nonprophet Being Gay is no surprise.
What is shocking is that he really thinks he has posted info that has not been shown on these forums for the Past 5 Years.
He is a pathetic and shamefull person who should be ignored. Explorer has shown clearly that it was in the Sudan(Ta Seti) region where the crown was first worn and shown that Egypt is Forever Linked with the Nehasi. I also think that Egyptians claimed that Them and the Nehasi were children of Horus (Is this true Explorer)and Asiatics and Lybians were children of Seti.
Keep your head up Jari and don't let him get on your nerves because that Is all he can do.
Peace
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
Ivory figure of an unknown pharaoh found at Abydos, probably Early or Protodynastic (3200 BC to 3000 BC) Since the 1970’s the site has been re-investigated by the German Archaeological Institute, most recently under the direction of Günter Dreyer.
The specifics of the Pharaoh statue is not well understood, but it is generally estimated to belong to a time frame very close to the first Dynasty, which would render it younger than the Qustul depictions of Pharaoh figures. No one denies that at the turn of the Nagadan period, we suddenly start to see some figures wearing the Hedjet.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING:
I also think that Egyptians claimed that Them and the Nehasi were children of Horus (Is this true Explorer)and Asiatics and Lybians were children of Seti.
I believe al Takruri may have made a case for this sometime back, using wall murals. I'll have to double check it.
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Non Prophet simply post the same Tired Arguments and resorts to Ad Homeniem attacks. He is only able to get away with his antics due to the lack of Moderation, so simply put he will get Killed in a Youtube Debate.
However I know he won't put up a Youtube clip, he is a stalker and fraud eveything he posts here is a sham. All he is gonna do is Ad Hom. attack and eventually start claiming Me, You, King MOM..etc are the same person..LOL.
and yes he is not Original quite honestly he is the worst poster here, Lioness is a hell lot more of a debater.
You should thank me for the free advertising. Don't you want more subscribers and friends?
Anyways like most ES members it is a waste of time to argue with a delusional idiot. I've already debated smarter theists and got tired of refuting the same old recycled trash. Evidence is not sufficient to convince a political motivated bigot.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
The Explorer
Thanks.
What can be said though even without the Ancient Kemites and Nehasi being linked though is that It's only in Africa where we see Civilizations that were grown up like Egypt. Kush, Merowe etc borrowed from Egypt and in Asia we do not see ANY Civis like Egypt.
We also know that Egypt had allies from Sudan like the Medjay and fought alongside others.
Kush was a rival but also a liberator like we see in 25th Dynasty. They reguvenated Egypt.
If Egypt was more linked with Asia why of all the foreign Dynasties did none of the Asiatics were ever looked on by the Egyptians as liberators? Simple questions like this boggles the mind of the racists.
Peace
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
You should thank me for the free advertising. Don't you want more subscribers and friends?
Your clown antics and Ad Homeniem attacks only proves your psychology which is unstable so far as I can tell, which is why I challenged you knowing you would not take it up, simply put you are scared to death to debate face to face with out the safety of a non Moderated forum.
If you have a problem with anything I said or you wanted to get to know me on Youtube or Myspace you could have posted me a PM, or Emailed me on Youtube. But to post my Info on a forum rampant with people who have posted Porn, and Lurkers from various white supremist and Muslim suprimist sites was uncalled for esp, consider I did'nt do sh@t to you but I posted to Lioness.
You hit a new Low on that, and considering how you stalked me and saved my photo to your PC as well as Truthcentric's (Brandon P) Photo shows you have some Homosexual agenda.
but I understand..You can't debate so you resort to Ad Hom. Attacks, In a Youtube Debate you know it would not fly which is why you copped out.
Also I found out who you were..LOL, but unlike you I don't need to post your personal info on a non Moderated forum, I have that much respect even for the like of you.
If you wanted to give me subcribers I would have Emailed KeithTruth and Shock of God who get thousands of Hits and views from Atheists and asked them to post our Debate on their channels...Thousands of people would see your face and see you get your ass handed to you..
Anyways like most ES members it is a waste of time to argue with a delusional idiot.
Typical Cop out, this clown calls for video debates talking **** like a Lunatic, stalking people on the internet but is scared to debate a little Christian on Atheism..LOL. Remember that you pussed out.
I've already debated smarter theists and got tired of refuting the same old recycled trash.
This is a red herring, You never debated me but you talk as if you have, Noted you just copped out one sentence above...
Evidence is not sufficient to convince a political motivated bigot.
LOL, Whats wrong Non Prophet, you talk about Bigotry but this forume is riddled with bigot comments and Ad. Hom attacks and using people pics to slander them, you expect me to take you serious, You are the biggest Bigot here and this forum is riddled with your defeat...a Video Debate would have revealed this to the world how You operate, but as usual you copped Out when pressed for a challege you have been asking for.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
King,
The Kushitic borrowings from Egypt were by and large the consequence of brief periods of Egyptian military occupations in the south. Be that as it may, the borrowings have been mutual, even if at different time frames. Dynastic Egypt borrowed certain Gods from further south, now in Sudan, along with the Kinship tradition of the Hedjet, which became the most prominent crown of Dynastic Egypt. We even see Dynastic Egyptian use of the "Nubian" speos well into height of the Dynastic period.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Also if you debated theists which you have not another Fraudulent lie by the Fraud Non Prophet then you should have the upper hand considering I never debated anyone on Video(plenty on Forum and Comments and have won everytime)..
So it would be in your favor but like I said you are a Roach, you operate in Darkness but when Light is shone you scurry for the nearest hiding place...
1) You came here and Challenged me to a Video Dabate
2) You posted my personal myspace on a Non Moderated Forum
3) You claim you debated other Theist and "Smarter" ones at that
4) You Cop out when I take you up on your challenge..LMAO
You are a fraud..Why MOM and Explorer even Posts to you blows my mind hell You are below me and Im nowhere near the level of them on these issiues...,. I have not posted to you because you have no substance, you are beneath me, and yet you still post an Ad. Hom attack when I posted to Lioness..LOL
Proves you need attention and its sad that people as smart as MOM et al. give it to you
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: King,
The Kushitic borrowings from Egypt were by and large the consequence of brief periods of Egyptian military occupations in the south. Be that as it may, the borrowings have been mutual, even if at different time frames. Dynastic Egypt borrowed certain Gods from further south, now in Sudan, along with the Kinship tradition of the Hedjet, which became the most prominent crown of Dynastic Egypt. We even see Dynastic Egyptian use of the "Nubian" speos well into height of the Dynastic period.
My theory is that its native to the Nile Valley, the Culture of Kmt is a product of the Nile Valley, Km.t, Ta Nahasy(Kush, Merowe, Kerma, Yam...etc) and even as far south as Axum were different variants of a similar culture that evolved thousands of years before people Mirgated North into Km't, and further South and West.
I mean if you look at the History Channel's Cities of the Underwold Ethiopia, Even Axum was very culturally in tune with Km.t, from the Kingship to the Death, tombs and Burials, to the use of Obelisks.
This is why I challenge "Simple Girl" she claims Km.t originated in the Middle East....O.K so post some sister Civilizations of Km.t in the Middle East or Europe or the Med. Also distance should not be a problem considering how distant Axum was from Km.t yet after to Nubia Axum was the closest Empire in the world to Km.t
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
The Explorer
Credit you for setting the record straight on Kush.
KUSH was a Fantastic Civi and lived up to it's Billing as a Super Power Civi.
I will never take anything away from Kush because it showed that it could incorporate things from Egypt, Greece etc and make it there own.
Egypt and Kush I look on as Sister Civies that maintained high respect for one another(This is shown in the 25th Dynasty returning Egypt Back to its Pharonic days).
All the things spoken about in this Thread shows just how valuable was the south of Egypt to Egypt Proper. Egyptians Had braided Hairs, Gods, Dances etc like people to the south where are the Asiatic equivalence? Another simple question that baffles the minds of racists.
Another Question one may ask is Why would the Egyptians in the Prophecy of Neferti claim a King from Ta-Seti(Sudan) will liberate them from bondage? Another simple question that boggles the mind of Racists.
Peace
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
we have an early and a rather simple rendition dating back to ca. 3500 BC, found in the Hierakonpolis tomb 100, sporting several individuals holding what appear to be Was scepters. The following is a "North Saharan" — from "Kargur Talh" in particular — rendition dating to ca. 6ky to 7ky BP; it notably sports a male figure holding what appears to be a staff, reminiscent of the Was scepter.. http://exploring-africa.blogspot.com/2008_11_15_archive.html Other examples of royal paraphernalia Kargur Talh covered what was one part of Ta-Seti and today's Nubia and very near the Sudanese boarder.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
It is intellectually impossible for anyone to take anything from Kush as a notable complex in its own right. It had been around long before Greece did, and it was the outgrowth of the Sudanese Neolithic and Pre-Kerma complexes. Their influence had been felt all the way into the Levant; recalling on commentary about Kushitic military aid to the "Jews". They had interestingly been allies, as well as adversaries of the Egyptian state. Sometime in the Intermediate period, if I recall, Kush almost defeated the state of Egypt, which researchers recently found out. Of course, the Egyptian elites tried to cover this chapter of history up with face-saving propaganda narratives. Furthermore, the Romans were unable to establish authority over them.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Brada, kudos for bringing back those images to mind about the staff traditions. The tradition extends beyond south of the Sahara. AE did not come out of the vacuum. It is immediately the outgrowth of Fertile Saharan traditions, and ultimately, migrations from sub-Saharan east Africa.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Brada-Anansi
Man Brada I can always count on you to bring insight to these threads. Nuff Respect for your Scepters and showing how early on was these things used in Egypt and Socalled "Nubian" Regions.
The Explorer
What you said about Kush helping the Jews is So True. It's written in the Book Isiah the Prophet of the One True God. The Bible corrobrates what you say and Claims that the Kushites helped save the Jews from Distruction.
KUSH was a FORCE and should be shown the same respect like Egypt, Sadly we see the ignoring of Kush because it was deemed too "Black" to learn about, Hence the reason for putting a Lake on Nubian Land destroying artifacts that would Link Egypt and Kush that much more(I believe it was purposely done to stop from people finding out just how deep these roots were).
To Finsh we see with the artifacts found so far that "Nubian Lands" hold many secrets of Egypt AND Kush and with more excavations we will see more and more ties between both Sister Civies.
Peace
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: MOM, you are led into a wild goose chase by a character who does not have the intelligence to lift a feather, let alone cite counter evidence.
Perhaps I don't have the intelligence to lift a feather, but it appears I have at least enough intelligence to ruffle a few.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
To ruffle a few, you need to have minimum intelligence to lift a single feather. You don't have that minimum.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: To ruffle a few, you need to have minimum intelligence to lift a single feather. You don't have that minimum.
It appears I just ruffled a few more feathers.lol
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Let's put it this way, simple-minded: You are more useless than a common fly busy eating feces. You have absolutely nothing of value to offer here.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Yes, I based Romitu and Nehesi as black and Hor's creations and proteges on vignette 30 of the Late Kingdom's Book of Gates afterlife pageant. That same source labels Aamu and Tjemehu as red, the creations and proteges of Sekhmet.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by KING:
I also think that Egyptians claimed that Them and the Nehasi were children of Horus (Is this true Explorer)and Asiatics and Lybians were children of Seti.
I believe al Takruri may have made a case for this sometime back, using wall murals. I'll have to double check it.
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: ^^^^ He is obviously ignoring the Southerly flow of culture from the South Via places like Badari, Nabta Playa, etc. plus the wealth of sites mentioned by you in this very thread..
and lets say for argument sake that Egypt developed nothing from so called Nubia, majority of its Royal Families and Suten's were of Nehashy Ancenstry going back to the begining, and heaving some famiies like the 12th Dynasty, 18th Dynasty, 25th etc hailing from Ta-Nahsy.
Sad part is all he has is argument sake as the Culture of Egypt stems from the South...I await this Architectural, cultural, and materials bestowed upon Egypt and all the Delta and Near East cities that sprung up before the Southern Upper Egyptian/Ta-Nahashy sites..
Jari,
Do you Afrocentrics lack reading comprehension or something?
Where did i make the claim of Ancient Egypt being a white empire full of Nordics? That is your own straw man argument. I was simply noting the Near East and its presence and influences it had on Ancient Egypt since its foundation.
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
Only the hands!? You forgot to mention the lapis lazuli inlayed in the eyes like many other figures from the Near East.
You forgot to mention though, that "Near Eastern" counterparts don't have lapis lazuli eyes designed like that. I thought I asked you to produce a parallel of this art in the so-called "Near East", but you lay low at the time. Where is it?
It doesn't have to have an EXACT parallel artistic design. Both Early Sumerian and Early Egyptian statues have lapis lazuli inlayed in the eyes and that was what i was noted and ascribed this practice to the Near East. What does this convention mean? I don't know, but i doubt a group of Africans who had access to this material would interject lapis lazuli in their eyes if they themselves didn't possess such traits (like blue eyes). That would be very peculiar.
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
The Seated Scribe (He has blue eyes):
Predynastic Egyptian:
Sumeria: Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
I said it before and I will say it again, this is what you get when you "debate" people who have little to no knowledge on the topic of ancient cultures and history.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Notice how it seems the hands are clasped together as in the way Sumerian statues are often depicted? This is predynastic Egyptian. Coincidence?
Apparently Simple Minded Girl has no clue that such gestures of hands clasped around breasts is common and worldwide when it comes to sacred female icons.
From Max Dashu:
This assemblage of ancient female figurines recollects the world's primordial spiritual art in all its diversity, its deep continuities and global connections.
Shown, from left top: Italy, Sudan, Egypt, Russia, Ecuador, Siberia, France, Morocco, Alaska, Japan, Nigeria, Pakistan, Bulgaria, Mexico, China, Zimbabwe, Manchuria, Iraq, Iran, Peru, Turkey, Brazil, Utah, Hungary, Chad, India, Greenland, Mexico, Honduras, Argentina, Britain, Israel, Chile, Ecuador, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Illinois, Kurdistan, Sulawesi, Louisiana, Brazil, Kenya, Sudan.
I doubt Sumer was the source for all these similarities.
To Spiralman. You obviously don't know anything about 'Nubia' which is a region and NOT a specific state or culture. There many different Nubian peoples some, particularly Ta-Seti, was the origin of dynastic Egyptian culture. Others like Kush were of an entirely different culture who were rivals of Egypt and never inferior subordinates since Kush came close to destroying Egypt at one time and dominating it another time both of which took place before the 25th dynasty.
To NonThinker, well there isn't much more to say what hasn't been told to you before. You are obviously in denial.
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
Only the hands!? You forgot to mention the lapis lazuli inlayed in the eyes like many other figures from the Near East.
You forgot to mention though, that "Near Eastern" counterparts don't have lapis lazuli eyes designed like that. I thought I asked you to produce a parallel of this art in the so-called "Near East", but you lay low at the time. Where is it?
It doesn't have to have an EXACT parallel artistic design. Both Early Sumerian and Early Egyptian statues have lapis lazuli inlayed in the eyes and that was what i was noted and ascribed this practice to the Near East. What does this convention mean? I don't know, but i doubt a group of Africans who had access to this material would interject lapis lazuli in their eyes if they themselves didn't possess such traits (like blue eyes). That would be very peculiar.
Not only that the Pyramid texts mentions the green and blue eyes of Horus numerous times. Sneferu mined Sinai blue/green Turquoise crystals used in Old Kingdom realistic statue eye portrayals.
The Great Sphinx or Horemakhet which translates to "Horus in the horizon" may have had olive or dark green eyes(no paint left on eyes) and definitely had red skin(traces of paint found).
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] I said it before and I will say it again, this is what you get when you "debate" people who have little to no knowledge on the topic of ancient cultures and history.
who is your favorite rap artist?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman: The Seated Scribe (He has blue eyes):
Actually his eyes are NOT blue as can be seen in this close up:
Also, this is was how the scribe looked some years ago when he had more of his original dark paint that was remnant of his black skin.
The features of the scribe are no different from the African man in the green shirt
Predynastic Egyptian:
The blue lapiz lazuli stones used for eyes was an artistic convention that does not necessarily indicate that the persons in real life had blue eyes let alone that they were white!
Thutmose III's eyes have a bluish hue in the depiction above, but I doubt that makes him a Nordic.
quote:Sumeria:
The same can be said about the Sumerians.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
green shirt man is my hero
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet: Not only that the Pyramid texts mentions the green and blue eyes of Horus numerous times. Sneferu mined Sinai blue/green Turquoise crystals used in Old Kingdom realistic statue eye portrayals.
The Great Sphinx or Horemakhet which translates to "Horus in the horizon" may have had olive or dark green eyes(no paint left on eyes) and definitely had red skin(traces of paint found).
Perhaps it hasn't occurred to you that the gods had unusual or unearthly (to the Egyptians) eye color rather than indicating white or nordic ancestry. According to the texts Sekhmet has red eyes the color of fire, is this and indication of racial ancestry as well? LOL
By the way, the 'red' paint of the Sphinx is actually the same dark reddish brown used to depict many Egyptians and would have been a more darker hue than depicted in the videos below. (It was actually depicted much darker in another program in Discovery).
By the way, the director of the reenactments in those videos used to post in here in this forum before it degenerated, and he actually chose dark i.e. black natives of North Africa for some of his actors. Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I said it before and I will say it again, this is what you get when you "debate" people who have little to no knowledge on the topic of ancient cultures and history.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Notice how it seems the hands are clasped together as in the way Sumerian statues are often depicted? This is predynastic Egyptian. Coincidence?
Apparently Simple Minded Girl has no clue that such gestures of hands clasped around breasts is common and worldwide when it comes to sacred female icons.
From Max Dashu:
This assemblage of ancient female figurines recollects the world's primordial spiritual art in all its diversity, its deep continuities and global connections.
Shown, from left top: Italy, Sudan, Egypt, Russia, Ecuador, Siberia, France, Morocco, Alaska, Japan, Nigeria, Pakistan, Bulgaria, Mexico, China, Zimbabwe, Manchuria, Iraq, Iran, Peru, Turkey, Brazil, Utah, Hungary, Chad, India, Greenland, Mexico, Honduras, Argentina, Britain, Israel, Chile, Ecuador, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Illinois, Kurdistan, Sulawesi, Louisiana, Brazil, Kenya, Sudan.
I doubt Sumer was the source for all these similarities.
Now show me specifically which ones have their hands clasped together. Other than the Egyptian one that I have already shown, there seems to be maybe 1 or two others showing some similarity. Most of the figures you have posted don't even resemble Sumerian statuettes at all in the way their hands are held except the one that I have already shown.
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet: Not only that the Pyramid texts mentions the green and blue eyes of Horus numerous times. Sneferu mined Sinai blue/green Turquoise crystals used in Old Kingdom realistic statue eye portrayals.
The Great Sphinx or Horemakhet which translates to "Horus in the horizon" may have had olive or dark green eyes(no paint left on eyes) and definitely had red skin(traces of paint found).
Perhaps it hasn't occurred to you that the gods had unusual or unearthly (to the Egyptians) eye color rather than indicating white or nordic ancestry. According to the texts Sekhmet has red eyes the color of fire, is this and indication of racial ancestry as well? LOL
By the way, the 'red' paint of the Sphinx is actually the same dark reddish brown used to depict many Egyptians and would have been a more darker hue than depicted in the videos below. (It was actually depicted much darker in another program in Discovery).
By the way, the director of the reenactments in those videos used to post in here in this forum before it degenerated, and he actually chose dark i.e. black natives of North Africa for some of his actors.
Perhaps it hasn't occurred to you the King was the living god Horus on Earth that reunited with Osiris in the Underworld. As for your other bullsh!t claims, look up Turquoise and incident of angle relating to color. Ever heard of dirt/dust/debris and oxidation collecting on statues? Also, genius define 'black natives' in scientific terms only. Any more trollish stupid replies will be ignored.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Spiralman wrote
Jari,
Do you Afrocentrics lack reading comprehension or something?
Im not an afrocentric but Im glad you are starting out your reply with an Ad Hom. attack..lol.
Where did i make the claim of Ancient Egypt being a white empire full of Nordics? That is your own straw man argument.
This must be Freudian slip on your part, no where Did I imply you said Egypt was a Nordic Empire I specifically asked for any Sister Civilizations of Egypt on non African Soil(such as Nubia, Axum etc.) and I also pointed out the fact that the Nahashy had ties to the Royal families going back to the first dynasties.
Talk about reading comprehension and strawman arguments.
Next.
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: ^^^^ He is obviously ignoring the Southerly flow of culture from the South Via places like Badari, Nabta Playa, etc. plus the wealth of sites mentioned by you in this very thread..
What southernly flow of culture?
Nabta Playa is a site, not a culture.
Badari is a predynastic culture dated in Egypt, not the south of Egypt.
quote:and lets say for argument sake that Egypt developed nothing from so called Nubia, majority of its Royal Families and Suten's were of Nehashy Ancenstry going back to the begining, and heaving some famiies like the 12th Dynasty, 18th Dynasty, 25th etc hailing from Ta-Nahsy.
The 25th Dynasty was Kushitic NOT Egyptian.
The 12th & 18th Dynasty is NOT the majority of Royal Families in Ancient Egypt.
quote:Sad part is all he has is argument sake as the Culture of Egypt stems from the South...
No it does not. Afrocentrics only insist on such a fantasy because it further helps support their claim of an Afro-Egypt. The South of Egypt doesn't demonstrate anything like Egypt in culture or achievement.
The culture of Egypt was developed in Egypt, not the South. If anything Egypt controlled what was below the southern frontiers hence knowledge FLED South, died at Nubia and failed to spread anywhere else in the continent.
quote:I await this Architectural, cultural, and materials bestowed upon Egypt and all the Delta and Near East cities that sprung up before the Southern Upper Egyptian/Ta-Nahashy sites.. "
Near Eastern Ziggurats:
Pyramids of Egypt:
Said to be constructed by Hemiunu (Clearly Near Eastern and Caucasian in appearance)
Reserve Heads found near the Great Pyramids:
A Reserve Head:
Where are your Great Pyramids or Ziggurats or architectural feats or examples in the South or anywhere else in Africa, where are your other demonstrated civilizations like Ancient Egypt or the Near East?
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
@ Non Prophet..
Not only that the Pyramid texts mentions the green and blue eyes of Horus numerous times. Sneferu mined Sinai blue/green Turquoise crystals used in Old Kingdom realistic statue eye portrayals.
The Great Sphinx or Horemakhet which translates to "Horus in the horizon" may have had olive or dark green eyes(no paint left on eyes) and definitely had red skin(traces of paint found).
. The head and face (which once had a beard, fragments of which are in the British Museum) are typical of Dynasty IV, with its headdress(heavily restored in the 1920s), uraeus (cobra on the forehead), and red paint (which Pliny the Elder recorded in the 1st century AD as having religious significance), traces of which are still visible. Note that is is very definitely male, and has no wings.
Osiris-In his Underworld aspect, Osiris is called The Black One, Bull of the Underworld, Dweller in the Funeral Mountain, and Khenti-Amenti, Foremost of the Westerners Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: MOM, you are led into a wild goose chase by a character who does not have the intelligence to lift a feather, let alone cite counter evidence.
Perhaps I don't have the intelligence to lift a feather, but it appears I have at least enough intelligence to ruffle a few.
You're definitely a simple girl if you think you ruffled a few feathers by posting some statues.
Everything that you are just learning about now has already been dealt with and dismantled over the years as it was repeatedly brought by individuals just like you who start learning about this stuff one day and then all of a sudden voila they think they're experts or even have the intelligence to debate bringing up and using outdated concepts which shows they've been educated by youtube videos.
You are lightyears behind even the novice of posters on ES.
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: ^^^^I await this Architectural, cultural, and materials bestowed upon Egypt and all the Delta and Near East cities that sprung up before the Southern Upper Egyptian/Ta-Nahashy sites..
Jericho:
Göbekli Tepe:
Çayönü:
Abu Hureyra :
Çatalhöyük:
Where are your advanced sites, sculptures, murals etc south of Egypt predating those in the Near East?
We cannot locate any such examples yet were expected to believe people migrated north with nothing and ultimately accomplished something so soon.
If you were correct and knowledge came from the south we would be able to trace it ethnographically, historically and archeologically validating evidence of Southern knowledge and migration dating prior & post to the establishment of Ancient Egypt, yet nothing like this exist and neither did the south demonstrate anything on a par with Egypt.
Knowledge clearly came from the north and died at Nubia.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^^Why do you keep on changing your name as to make it seem you have others agreeing with you? Lol Derkyperky aka spiralman et. al.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: MOM, you are led into a wild goose chase by a character who does not have the intelligence to lift a feather, let alone cite counter evidence.
Perhaps I don't have the intelligence to lift a feather, but it appears I have at least enough intelligence to ruffle a few.
You're definitely a simple girl if you think you ruffled a few feathers by posting some statues.
Everything that you are just learning about now has already been dealt with and dismantled over the years as it was repeatedly brought by individuals just like you who start learning about this stuff one day and then all of a sudden voila they think they're experts or even have the intelligence to debate bringing up and using outdated concepts which shows they've been educated by youtube videos.
You are lightyears behind even the novice of posters on ES.
And yet more feathers are ruffled.lol
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
If ancient Egypt is as derivative from the Near East as Spiralman and Simple Girl are claiming, then how come it was the predynastic Upper Egyptians who were the ones to lay the foundations for dynastic Egyptian civilization? Most of Lower Egypt was a wetland sparsely populated by relatively primitive people during the predynastic.
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: @ Non Prophet..
Not only that the Pyramid texts mentions the green and blue eyes of Horus numerous times. Sneferu mined Sinai blue/green Turquoise crystals used in Old Kingdom realistic statue eye portrayals.
The Great Sphinx or Horemakhet which translates to "Horus in the horizon" may have had olive or dark green eyes(no paint left on eyes) and definitely had red skin(traces of paint found).
. The head and face (which once had a beard, fragments of which are in the British Museum) are typical of Dynasty IV, with its headdress(heavily restored in the 1920s), uraeus (cobra on the forehead), and red paint (which Pliny the Elder recorded in the 1st century AD as having religious significance), traces of which are still visible. Note that is is very definitely male, and has no wings.
Osiris-In his Underworld aspect, Osiris is called The Black One, Bull of the Underworld, Dweller in the Funeral Mountain, and Khenti-Amenti, Foremost of the Westerners
The red skin of the Sphinx was the same color the typical AE skin was represented in art. No symbolism was intended.
Some but not all colors were symbolic for certain periods and statues but what's the point of showing Ka statues and not Osiris? Osiris was represented Green too.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
What southernly flow of culture?
Are you stupid or willfully Dense, Go figure, take 5.
Nabta Playa is a site, not a culture.
This is a strawman argument, considering you listed these "Sites"...
Direct quote from Spiralman...For example, Jericho, Göbekli Tepe, Çayönü, Abu Hureyra, Çatalhöyük, City states in the Mesopotamian region etc were in fact advanced and older than Dynastic Egypt. Human burial, religion, stone foundations, first murals, sculptures, plaster walls, etc originatead with these people thus the prototype laying the foundations for Egyptian civilization. Nothing like this lays to the South evidencing the fact that Knowledge began from the Levant and ended at Nubia.
Nabta Playa..
The people living at Nabta herded cattle, made ceramic vessels, and set up seasonal camps around the playa. These people regarded cattle in much the same way as modern peoples of West Africa regard them. The blood and milk of the cattle was more significant than the meat. The ceramics that were found from this period are minimal, but are considered to be some of the oldest identified in Africa.
More
About 4,800 years ago there was another climatic change. The African monsoons shifted south to approximately the same area that they were prior to 12,000 years ago. The land became hyper-arid again and caused human habitation at Nabta to cease. The cattle worshipping people of Nabta had to migrate to a more livable area. But to where did these people migrate? Some people believe that the people of Nabta eventually made their way to the Nile Valley. Perhaps they were the people responsible for the rise of the Egyptian Empire. This theory is based on the prominence of cattle in the religious belief system of Pre-dynastic Egypt continuing into the Old Kingdom.
In ancient Egypt, cattle were deified and regarded as the earthly representative of the gods. Egyptian Pharaohs were said to represent two gods. Horus represented Upper Egypt and Seth represented Lower Egypt. Horus was the son of Hathor who was depicted as either a cow or a strong bull. Another Egyptian god that is represented by a bull is the god of rain, a very important entity to the people of Nabta, considering that life or death could have been determined by the amount of rain they received. Another point of interest is that pre-Egyptian societies did not place the same importance on cattle in either a social or religious capacity, indicating that outside influence must have played a part in the Old Kingdom belief system. This may have happened because the pastoralists from Nabta came to the Nile to conquer and take over the land from their farming neighbors. Perhaps they simply joined together with the farmers and their beliefs were blended with those of the farmers. No matter how you look at it, given the closeness of Nabta to the Nile, there had to have been interaction between them and ideas had to be exchanged to some degree.
Badari is a predynastic culture dated in Egypt, not the south of Egypt.
Badari and its people originated from the South..
The people were early farmers in the Nile Valley, possibly originating from an area of Upper Sudan (suggested by pottery styles). Skeletal remains suggest that they were a tall people who wore their hair in plaits and garments woven from flax or grass fibres and animal skins. They were also hunters and fishermen, herded sheep and cattle and cultivated cereals such as emmer and barley as well as lentils and tubers to supplement their diet.
The 25th Dynasty was Kushitic NOT Egyptian.
and yet they(Kushites) still had a legit claim t the Trone(More on this later)...
The 12th & 18th Dynasty is NOT the majority of Royal Families in Ancient Egypt.
More Royal Families Besides the 12th and 18th hailed from Ta-nahasi, the connection goes back to the First Dynasties, Those two were just some I named off the top of my Head.
No it does not. Afrocentrics only insist on such a fantasy because it further helps support their claim of an Afro-Egypt. The South of Egypt doesn't demonstrate anything like Egypt in culture or achievement.
The culture of Egypt was developed in Egypt, not the South. If anything Egypt controlled what was below the southern frontiers hence knowledge FLED South, died at Nubia and failed to spread anywhere else in the continent. ^^^^ This is pure conjecture as has already been pointed out the Culture of Egypt stems from the South and was native to the Nile Valley, the rest of your strawman arguments has nothing to do with the Topic at hand.
Near Eastern Ziggurats: ^^^^^ That Ziggurat is a reconstuction..and the Step Pyramid evolved from Mastabas not a Ziggrat.
Said to be constructed by Hemiunu (Clearly Near Eastern and Caucasian in appearance..)
Please post evidece of himbeing Near Eastern, Caucasian is defunct and dismissed in this argument.
Who the Very First Pyramid was built for..
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: MOM, you are led into a wild goose chase by a character who does not have the intelligence to lift a feather, let alone cite counter evidence.
Perhaps I don't have the intelligence to lift a feather, but it appears I have at least enough intelligence to ruffle a few.
You're definitely a simple girl if you think you ruffled a few feathers by posting some statues.
Everything that you are just learning about now has already been dealt with and dismantled over the years as it was repeatedly brought by individuals just like you who start learning about this stuff one day and then all of a sudden voila they think they're experts or even have the intelligence to debate bringing up and using outdated concepts which shows they've been educated by youtube videos.
You are lightyears behind even the novice of posters on ES.
And yet more feathers are ruffled.lol
What a deluded response, you're definitely a weirdo, I'll give you that.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
@ Non Prophet.. Look me and you have had a rough start but I want to keep it civil, I won't ad Hom. attack if you don't lets stick to facts..If Im wrong so be it...O.K
anyway you said..
The red skin of the Sphinx was the same color the typical AE skin was represented in art. No symbolism was intended.
This might be True, the Spinx could have looked like this color..
However I don't even think it was that color but was pure Red..Which is why Pliney was told it was Symbolic..
. The head and face (which once had a beard, fragments of which are in the British Museum) are typical of Dynasty IV, with its headdress(heavily restored in the 1920s), uraeus (cobra on the forehead), and red paint (which Pliny the Elder recorded in the 1st century AD as having religious significance), traces of which are still visible. Note that is is very definitely male, and has no wings.
We can't dismiss that can we is that not important That Pliney was told it (the Red Paint) was Symbolic...Maybe the Spinx represented the Dsrt or Red Land.
Some but not all colors were symbolic for certain periods and statues but what's the point of showing Ka statues and not Osiris? Osiris was represented Green too.
The point of the Ka Statues and Osiris was to show that we can't take the colors of Egyptian Mythology for literal, esp. given that the Pitch Black skinned Ka Statues were Symbolic, and Osiris being called the black one was Symbolic, obviously the Green and blue eyes in Mythology was symbolic,
Now am I saying there was no blue eyed Egyptian in the 3,000 year history-NO.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Let me show everyone the Straws Spiralman is grasping at..He claimed..
Nabta Playa is a site, not a culture.
but asks..
Where are your advanced sites, sculptures, murals etc south of Egypt predating those in the Near East?[/i]
and proceeds to list "Sites" Abu Hureyra
Jericho:
Çatalhöyük:
Etc. This is an example of a weak and confused Circular Reasoning Fallacy.
Where are your advanced sites, sculptures, murals etc south of Egypt predating those in the Near East?
Settlements became larger and more sophisticated. One settlement from this period contains 18 houses arranged in two, possibly three straight lines. It also contains numerous fire hearths and these amazing walk-in wells. This settlement also shows the establishment of an organized labor force.
Another major feature at Nabta is a group of thirty “complex structures.” These structures are located about a kilometer south of the cattle tumuli measuring 500 meters in length and 200 meters in width.
More
About 4,800 years ago there was another climatic change. The African monsoons shifted south to approximately the same area that they were prior to 12,000 years ago. The land became hyper-arid again and caused human habitation at Nabta to cease. The cattle worshipping people of Nabta had to migrate to a more livable area. But to where did these people migrate? Some people believe that the people of Nabta eventually made their way to the Nile Valley. Perhaps they were the people responsible for the rise of the Egyptian Empire. this theory is based on the prominence of cattle in the religious belief system of Pre-dynastic Egypt continuing into the Old Kingdom.
In ancient Egypt, cattle were deified and regarded as the earthly representative of the gods. Egyptian Pharaohs were said to represent two gods. Horus represented Upper Egypt and Seth represented Lower Egypt. Horus was the son of Hathor who was depicted as either a cow or a strong bull. Another Egyptian god that is represented by a bull is the god of rain, a very important entity to the people of Nabta, considering that life or death could have been determined by the amount of rain they received. Another point of interest is that pre-Egyptian societies did not place the same importance on cattle in either a social or religious capacity, indicating that outside influence must have played a part in the Old Kingdom belief system. This may have happened because the pastoralists from Nabta came to the Nile to conquer and take over the land from their farming neighbors. Perhaps they simply joined together with the farmers and their beliefs were blended with those of the farmers. No matter how you look at it, given the closeness of Nabta to the Nile, there had to have been interaction between them and ideas had to be exchanged to some degree.
Whether or not the people of Nabta had anything to do with the Egyptian civilization, it is still a site of great importance. It dates to a time when climatic and social changes were occurring. Complex societies or civilizations were starting to emerge not only in Africa, but throughout the world. Nabta helps to provide us with a better understanding of what life was like during this time in history.
Badarians..
Possible links with later Egyptian culture have also been found, including the representation in rock art of dog-headed human figures (resembling Anubis), and a type of pottery decoration later found in the southern Nile valley.
More
Two donkey bones were recovered from Uan Muhuggiag, a mandible and a trapezoid, dated to 3160-2975 cal BP. DNA from these bones match an historic Nubian wild ass, but appear to be domesticated based on the size.
During the 1980's and 90's intensive exploration of the northern Sudan was undertaken by a number of prehistorians. These archaeologists discovered that from about 8000-4000 BC, people learned how to live in large permanent communities, where they produced an increasing proportion of their own food and acquired enough leisure time to create artistic utilitarian objects. Many of these ancient settlements were found in areas that are today absolute deserts. This has not only revealed that the climate was dramatically different in Neolithic times but also that the Nile itself once flowed through entirely different channels than it does today.
Recent surveys of the Bayuda Desert, north of modern Khartoum, Sudan, and the Sahara Desert, west of the Nile at Dongola, Sudan, and the Nubian Desert, east of Kerma, Sudan, have resulted not only in the discovery of major ancient settlement areas but also to a new understanding of the ancient course and tributaries of the Nile.
Also I asked Spiralman to post all the Sister civilizations of Km.t on Non African Nile Valley Soil..and I still wait..
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Jeri I was just about post most of what you just said so I will adjust my post so not to appear redundant. "The parallels between the rock art of 4000 BC and the tomb scenes of 1500 BC are indeed striking. The discovery of the boat petroglyphs faces us with two astonishing revelations. First, the familiar ancient Egyptian concept of the afterlife originated at the very dawn of civilization in the Nile Valley, among the semi-nomadic cattle-herders whose domain encompassed both valley and savannah. Second, this concept was so powerful and so resonant that it remained unchanged throughout the succeeding thirty centuries. The longevity of Egyptian culture is as ramarkable as its antiquity." Wilkinson, 2003, p.189. http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/hidden_chamber01.htm http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=007040 Discussed here.Take note of the early palace facade far left on the Qustol incence burner and Djoser's building
Khufu family member add that to Jeri's list
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Brada I think it boils down to the fact that the Euroclowns hate the fact that Km.t came mainly from the South and the Nile Valley..
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Brada I think it boils down to the fact that the Euroclowns hate the fact that Km.t came mainly from the South and the Nile Valley..
You guys are showing MORE evidence of PAE culture flowing from north to south and east to west. Not one shred of evidence from the south to north into PAE. Go read my prior posts in the Bauval book thread on Nabta Playa/Cattle pastoralism and in this thread on the earliest Naqada PAE royal cultural symbols of the Falcon, Hedjet, sailing vessels, Hieroglyphs and Protoglyphs. See W.Y. Adams et al. refuting Bruce Williams on the Qutsul burner too.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet:
You guys are showing MORE evidence of PAE culture flowing from north to south and east to west.
Where? You are hallucinating.
quote: Not one shred of evidence from the south to north into PAE.
You are emotionally in denial, or should I say 'the-Nile'.
quote: Go read my prior posts in the Bauval book thread on Nabta Playa/Cattle pastoralism
Earliest evidence of cattle domestication is in the Upper Nile Valley. How does that assist you?
quote: and in this thread on the earliest Naqada PAE royal cultural symbols of the Falcon, Hedjet, sailing vessels, Hieroglyphs and Protoglyphs.
This is a myth. You have not shown any material putting forward the idea that the earliest evidence of the Hedjet is found in Nagada. Evidence of such has however been cited for Qustul. You simply cited an excerpt which claims that the earliest boats with sales appeared in both Nagadan and "Nubian" art. Not sure how that helps you, but perhaps you care to elaborate.
quote: See W.Y. Adams et al. refuting Bruce Williams on the Qutsul burner too.
Your citation by Adams was also nullified. Is fabricating stuff your best effort at a comeback. None of the things in your last post rings true. Nada.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: What southernly flow of culture?
Are you stupid or willfully Dense, Go figure, take 5.
Nabta Playa is a site, not a culture.
This is a strawman argument, considering you listed these "Sites"...
Direct quote from Spiralman...For example, Jericho, Göbekli Tepe, Çayönü, Abu Hureyra, Çatalhöyük, City states in the Mesopotamian region etc were in fact advanced and older than Dynastic Egypt. Human burial, religion, stone foundations, first murals, sculptures, plaster walls, etc originatead with these people thus the prototype laying the foundations for Egyptian civilization. Nothing like this lays to the South evidencing the fact that Knowledge began from the Levant and ended at Nubia.
I'm sorry but when i listed those sites, my discussion was with a different user and not you Jari, hence my argument was not a strawman.
Second, I was incorrect to say that sites do not correlate with cultures. Moving on....
quote:This is pure conjecture as has already been pointed out the Culture of Egypt stems from the South and was native to the Nile Valley, the rest of your strawman arguments has nothing to do with the Topic at hand.
What Strawman, do you know what a strawman is?
Since you listed Nabta Playa and the Badari which i already knew off. I'm convinced that the south had an impact on the development of Ancient Egyptian civilization, but that impact couldn't have been that much being that the South displays nothing on a par with Ancient Egypt in architecture, culture etc.
quote:That Ziggurat is a reconstuction..and the Step Pyramid evolved from Mastabas not a Ziggrat.
Strawman, never claimed the Egyptian Pyramids evolved from the Mastabas. I am already aware of the Ziggurat and its architectural reconstruction including the Step Pyramid evolving from Mastabas. I don't see how your current response refutes what i stated in response to your previous statement.
You state:
quote:Jari:
"I await this Architectural, cultural, and materials bestowed upon Egypt and all the Delta and Near East cities that sprung up before the Southern Upper Egyptian/Ta-Nahashy sites.. "
Thus i responded with sites and images.
quote:Please post evidece of himbeing Near Eastern, Caucasian is defunct and dismissed in this argument.
I RETRACT the statement of him being NEAR EASTERN. He was Egyptian.
As for the image of Hemiunu's sculpture, it's fairly obvious that Hemiunu has had a patch up, but there is enough of the original carving to give an idea of his facial features. Hemiunu: Honestly, I doubt you will find many who share your view of the carving bearing a black man.
With regard to this image:
Is this image supposed to refute or convey something?
A Reserve Head:
I figure since you had nothing to say about the Reserve Heads, it seems you like many others have a problem with this image.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ unpainted depictions of folk with 'fine' features is not proof of non-blacks as anyone familiar with the diversity of black Africans knows that black peoples with such features exist even in Sub-Sahara.
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Let me show everyone the Straws Spiralman is grasping at..He claimed..
Nabta Playa is a site, not a culture.
Next time you quote, don't selectively pick out. I ASKED you: where are your advanced sites, SCULPTURES, MURALS ETC SOUTH OF Egypt PREDATING THOSE in the NEAR EAST?
If you cannot provide an appropriate response to debunk the question then do not respond.
quote:Nabta Playa is a site, not a culture.
I retracted on my previous ignorant assertion of sites not producing any cultures. Also what does everyone else have to do with our debate?
I hope you are not trying to prove something to anyone else on this forum. If so, then i cannot take you seriously.
The list of sites i produced was a previous response to:
quote:I await this Architectural, cultural, and materials bestowed upon Egypt and all the Delta and Near East cities that sprung up before the Southern Upper Egyptian/Ta-Nahashy sites..
In which now you claim:
quote:This is a strawman argument, considering you listed these "Sites"...
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
I'm sorry but when i listed those sites, my discussion was with a different user and not you Jari, hence my argument was not a strawman.
Yes it is a strawman because you posted to a reply I made to you in reference to the original subject, Hence You claiming Nabta is a site and not a culture but in the same breath posting "Sites" like Jerico and Catal Hyuk is a strawman argument and attempt to save face.
Second, I was incorrect to say that sites do not correlate with cultures. Moving on.... ^^^ Yes you were.
What Strawman, do you know what a strawman is?
This..
[Direct quote by Spiralman..]If anything Egypt controlled what was below the southern frontiers hence knowledge FLED South, died at Nubia and failed to spread anywhere else in the continent.
Is a strawman..
We are talking about the culture of Km't and if it srung from the South yet you are going off talking about Km.t Controling the Southern Frontiers(Thousands of years AFTER the time frame we are discussing) and talking about the culture dying at "Nubia" and going no where in the continent. None of this is relevent to the topic at hand and the only reason you post it to lead me off on a tangent to somehow link Km.t with the rest of Africa..etc.
hence a Strawman argument.
Since you listed Nabta Playa and the Badari which i already knew off. I'm convinced that the south had an impact on the development of Ancient Egyptian civilization, but that impact couldn't have been that much being that the South displays nothing on a par with Ancient Egypt in architecture, culture etc.
If you are(Now Suddenly) convinced the South had an impact on the development of Km.t then what the hell are you arguing about. Why sit up here and imply Egypt Colonized Nubia and bestowed all the culture on them and at the same time glamorize and uphold Near Eastern sites that had no impact at all on Km.t.
You want to downplay the South's role in the development of Km.t because you thing this is some Afrocentric ploy..LOL.
Strawman, never claimed the Egyptian Pyramids evolved from the Mastabas. I am already aware of the Ziggurat and its architectural reconstruction including the Step Pyramid evolving from Mastabas. I don't see how your current response refutes what i stated in response to your previous statement.
This is not a strawman, DO YOU KNOW THAT A STRAWMAN IS
you posted "Near Eastern Pyramids" Followed by "Egyptian Pyramids" then "Said to be contructed by Heniue who was supposedly according to you.."Near Eastern and Caucasian" in origin...LOL
Come on Lebowski, COME ON..Dude you know damn well what you were implying and I reasonably showed the pyramids developed from Mastabas not Near Eastern Ziggurats which had NOTHING to do with the development of the Pyramids Kid, I studied it bro.
Thus i responded with sites and images.
Those sites and images(Ziggurats) have nothing to do with architecture and its development in Km.t which were developed IN Egypt..
Honestly, I doubt you will find many who share your view of the carving bearing a black man.
Where did I say he was a "Black Man"??? I simply showed you that head is a little Dubious considering when it was first found its head was destroyed.
Is this image supposed to refute or convey something?
Nope Just posting more Reserve Heads you seemed to forget about..
I figure since you had nothing to say about the Reserve Heads, it seems you like many others have a problem with this image. ^^^ I have no problem at all with the reserve heads..LOL
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman: The Seated Scribe (He has blue eyes):
Actually his eyes are NOT blue as can be seen in this close up:
Next time you quote, don't selectively pick out. I ASKED you: where are your advanced sites, SCULPTURES, MURALS ETC SOUTH OF Egypt PREDATING THOSE in the NEAR EAST?
If you cannot provide an appropriate response to debunk the question then do not respond.
I selected you to show how you operated, you ask me for sites and when I post sites you claim they are not culture..I responded to you kid so what are you talking about.
I retracted on the fact that sites cannot produce cultures. Also what does everyone else have to do with our debate?
I hope you are not trying to prove something to anyone else on this forum. If so, then i cannot take you seriously.
You are right I was being childish by getting others involved and appealing to public ridicule I apologize for that, and this has nothing to do with anyone else If you want you can P.M me further on this so we can explain ourselves better.
as I said Im sorry for that it was childish of me.
In which now you claim:
This is a strawman argument, considering you listed these "Sites".
Im sorry but as far as I know there is no Jericho, Catal Hyuk, Sumaria etc BEstoying civilization on Km.t. Egypt was a native culture developed in Egypt with influences from the South, West(Lybia) and East..
Sure there was advanced sites in the Middle East but there was advanced sites in Nubia too, and Nubia despite how developed into a sister Empire of Egypt.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonSense: You guys are showing MORE evidence of PAE culture flowing from north to south and east to west. Not one shred of evidence from the south to north into PAE...
Explorer is right. You are delusional. Perhaps you've forgotten about all the archaeological evidence from epipaleolithic times showing migrations from the south going to the north into the east (Levant) and west Northwest Africa with the Halfan culture becoming the Ibero-Maurusian culture in the west In Morocco and even Spain as well as the Kebaran culture in the Levant. What about the Mushabean culture that came afterward that joined with the Natufian in the Levant to become the Natufian. Or what of the Harifian culture after that which introduced pastoral nomadism into the Levant and even Arabia?? What about all the genetic evidence to support this like PN2 (E) derived haplogroups in the 'Near East' or Afroasiatic languages with Semitic being the only one spoken outside of Africa in that regions??
quote:Go read my prior posts in the Bauval book thread on Nabta Playa/Cattle pastoralism and in this thread on the earliest Naqada PAE royal cultural symbols of the Falcon, Hedjet, sailing vessels, Hieroglyphs and Protoglyphs. See W.Y. Adams et al. refuting Bruce Williams on the Qutsul burner too.
We've read your posts, and they are all B.S. There is no getting around it. The pharaonic symbols like the falcon, hedjet, and hieroglyphs were all found in the Qustul culture of Lower Nubia first before the Naqada culture of Upper Egypt. Virtually all Egyptologists and other scholars agree that earliest known kings' tombs are found in Qustul in Lower Nubia. Indeed the earliest evidence of complex cemeteries and funerary institutions in the Nile Valley are to be found there. What you also fail to realize due to your ignorance of African culture is that all of these cultural elements you point out have been acknowledged by from the earliest (even racist) scholars to be of indigenous African origin. If you knew anything about black African culture you would recognize that these features are all totemic in nature. Everything from the hawk iconography to the hedjet headdress, to even the use of hieroglyphs are all based on African totemism. Scholars from Petrie to Champollion to Gardiner saw these as "primitive" and even "negroid" vestiges of culture where animals and plants are used to symbolize tribes, ancestors, rulers, even deities. In the 'Qustul culture' of Ta-Seti there were three main totems, two of them being the hawk and baboon. The hedjet crown was said to symbolize a bull's penis which echoes back European explorers and scholars who remarked about the "odd" and "unusual" headdresses of African kings and chieftains which represent animal or plant "fetishes". We know hieroglyphs are made up mostly of animal symbols and again the earliest evidence of which is found in Qustul and Sayalah. Even the very concept of pharaoh itself is African where the king is also recognized as a god. In the Sudan in particular some kings reign after a certain period of thirty years until they are sacrificed. In Egypt, after the same period of time instead of being sacrificed, the pharaoh goes through a ritual of rejuvenation to continue his reign called the Heb Sed. He wears a tail of a bull or ox, the same way many kings in Africa do. The first part of the title of this thread, the 'Narmer Palette' actually shows obvious African totemism and other symbolism as well as the ritual sacrifice of a defeated enemy as first described in detail by Diop in the context of his own African culture where the king conducts the very same sacrifice!
So tell us this, false prophet. I was able to point out but a handful of the myriad of African cultural aspects in ancient Egyptian culture, Can you point out any Asiatic cultural aspects??
In the meantime let's ponder this, you speak of the Naqada culture having the hawk. Yet the earliest evidence of the hawk totem in Naqada is in association with the predynastic city of Nekhen (hierakonpolis). Below is a study based on cemeteries in Nekhen:
A biological affinities study based on frequencies of cranial nonmetric traits in skeletal samples from three cemeteries at Predynastic Naqada, Egypt, confirms the results of a recent nonmetric dental morphological analysis. Both cranial and dental traits analyses indicate that the individuals buried in a cemetery characterized archaeologically as high status are significantly different from individuals buried in two other, apparently non-elite cemeteries and that the non-elite samples are not significantly different from each other. A comparison with neighboring Nile Valley skeletal samples suggests that the high status cemetery represents an endogamous ruling or elite segment of the local population at Naqada, which is more closely related to populations in northern Nubia than to neighboring populations in southern Egypt. T. Prowse, and N. Lovell "Concordance of cranial and dental morphological traits and evidence for endogamy in ancient Egypt" American journal of physical anthropology. 1996, vol. 101, no2, pp. 237-246 (2 p.1/4)
So much for your movement of culture from north to south! LOL Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: I'm sorry but when i listed those sites, my discussion was with a different user and not you Jari, hence my argument was not a strawman.
Yes it is a strawman....
Claiming Nabta was a site and not a culture is not a strawman Jari but an erroneous claim which need correcting.
Jari quotes:
Spiral: If anything Egypt controlled what was below the southern frontiers hence knowledge FLED South, died at Nubia and failed to spread anywhere else in the continent.
How is this a strawman?
quote:if you are(Now Suddenly) convinced the South had an impact on the development of Km.t then what the hell are you arguing about. Why sit up here and imply Egypt Colonized Nubia and bestowed all the culture on them and at the same time glamorize and uphold Near Eastern sites that had no impact at all on Km.t.
Excerpt from Spiralman in response: but that impact couldn't have been that much being that the South displays nothing on a par with Ancient Egypt in architecture, culture etc.
quote:[You want to downplay the South's role in the development of Km.t because you thing this is some Afrocentric ploy..LOL.
You are wrong. I am not trying to downplay anything. The evidence speaks for itself.
quote:This is not a strawman, DO YOU KNOW THAT A STRAWMAN IS
How does posting ...
"Near Eastern Pyramids" Followed with "Egyptian Pyramids" then "Said to be contructed by Heniue who was supposedly according to you.."Near Eastern and Caucasian" in origin...
Make a strawman argument?
If i fictionally claimed THAT you claimed he was Near Eastern AND Caucasian then you can claim i strawmanned you. - A fake argument set up to be defeated due to the fact you never claimed Hemiunu was Near Eastern or Caucasian.
quote:Spiral: Honestly, I doubt you will find many who share your view of the carving bearing a black man.
Where did I say he was a "Black Man"??? I simply showed you that head is a little Dubious considering when it was first found its head was destroyed.
NOW this is my strawman, Because i fictionally claimed YOU claimed that you share the view of Hemiunu bearing the carving of a black man.
If i am incorrect on the definition anyone on here is free to educate me, though i hope we do not go off topic.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralbrain:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman: The Seated Scribe (He has blue eyes):
Actually his eyes are NOT blue as can be seen in this close up:
Also, this is was how the scribe looked some years ago when he had more of his original dark paint that was remnant of his black skin.
The features of the scribe are no different from the African man in the green shirt
Of course trolls like you only have selective memory. Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Next time you quote, don't selectively pick out. I ASKED you: where are your advanced sites, SCULPTURES, MURALS ETC SOUTH OF Egypt PREDATING THOSE in the NEAR EAST?
If you cannot provide an appropriate response to debunk the question then do not respond.
I selected you to show how you operated, you ask me for sites and when I post sites you claim they are not culture..I responded to you kid so what are you talking about.
I retracted on the fact that sites cannot produce cultures. Also what does everyone else have to do with our debate?
I hope you are not trying to prove something to anyone else on this forum. If so, then i cannot take you seriously.
You are right I was being childish by getting others involved and appealing to public ridicule I apologize for that, and this has nothing to do with anyone else If you want you can P.M me further on this so we can explain ourselves better.
as I said Im sorry for that it was childish of me.
In which now you claim:
This is a strawman argument, considering you listed these "Sites".
Im sorry but as far as I know there is no Jericho, Catal Hyuk, Sumaria etc BEstoying civilization on Km.t. Egypt was a native culture developed in Egypt with influences from the South, West(Lybia) and East..
Sure there was advanced sites in the Middle East but there was advanced sites in Nubia too, and Nubia despite how developed into a sister Empire of Egypt.
Thank you for the civility in your response. I would also like to apologize if i offended you in any way during our discourse.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
but that impact couldn't have been that much being that the South displays nothing on a par with Ancient Egypt in architecture, culture etc. What do you expect the folks to wake up one day and Suddenly go to Egypt and Say...Look here are the Blueprints for the Pyramids..etc etc etc. Its all took THOUSANDS of years to develop. Also Nubia in it own right had very complicated and advanced cities and villages, just because those in the near East are more popular does not change this fact, to me you seem to think the South was backward and cultureless when this is clearly not the case. Im not saying you said this but this is what Im precieving from you..am I correct??
You are wrong. I am not trying to downplay anything. The evidence speaks for itself.
How can the evidence speak for itself when the culture of the Middle East is more popular and more discussed than those of the Southern Nile Valley and Early pre-dynastic Egypt. The South had advance cultures just as the Near East and it all goes back on Par with sites like Jericho..The Evidence clearly shows, when studied, that Egypts culture is Southerly in origin and not vice versa.
Now was there influence from the Near East, Im sure there was, was there Migrants from Sumaria etc. who culturally impacted Egypt, Im sure there was, but the south was ripe with sites too, and the fact that these people had been living in the Nile Valley for thousands of year as opposed to people living in the Near East, makes more sense that these people were the spark that led to the formation of Egypt.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Next time you quote, don't selectively pick out. I ASKED you: where are your advanced sites, SCULPTURES, MURALS ETC SOUTH OF Egypt PREDATING THOSE in the NEAR EAST?
If you cannot provide an appropriate response to debunk the question then do not respond.
I selected you to show how you operated, you ask me for sites and when I post sites you claim they are not culture..I responded to you kid so what are you talking about.
I retracted on the fact that sites cannot produce cultures. Also what does everyone else have to do with our debate?
I hope you are not trying to prove something to anyone else on this forum. If so, then i cannot take you seriously.
You are right I was being childish by getting others involved and appealing to public ridicule I apologize for that, and this has nothing to do with anyone else If you want you can P.M me further on this so we can explain ourselves better.
as I said Im sorry for that it was childish of me.
In which now you claim:
This is a strawman argument, considering you listed these "Sites".
Im sorry but as far as I know there is no Jericho, Catal Hyuk, Sumaria etc BEstoying civilization on Km.t. Egypt was a native culture developed in Egypt with influences from the South, West(Lybia) and East..
Sure there was advanced sites in the Middle East but there was advanced sites in Nubia too, and Nubia despite how developed into a sister Empire of Egypt.
Thank you for the civility in your response. I would also like to apologize if i offended you in any way during our discourse.
Its all good and If I did I also apologize.
Honestly I think was have the same conclusion we just disargee who had a bigger impact, the Near East or the Southern Nile Valley.
I believe the South did simply because..
1) Proximity and familiarity with the Nile Valley, familiarity with the inundation and Seasons, Familiarity with sites perfect for building Temples and permanent villages and cities.
2) To me Egypt seems to be a sole product of the Nile Valley, hence why there is nothing like Egypt out of the Nile.
3) Alot of sites in Nubia and the south are relatively unknown, for instance alot of people still don't know about Nabta Playa and Robert Bouval has to make a book to get this info out.(I think Nabta is one of the most important sites in the world, not because its in Africa but considering the similarities to stonehenge and what this tells us about the development of time keeping)
Now I think Egypt's culture developed in Egypt but the south was right there, which is why some Nubians told Greek writers they felt Egypt was a "colony" of them, the Nahashy always felt a claim to the throne.
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Spiralbrain: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Spiralman: [qb] The Seated Scribe (He has blue eyes):
Actually his eyes are NOT blue as can be seen in this close up:
Djehuti, do you admit that you were in error of the fact he has blue eyes, yes or no?
And regarding his dark paint. Yes, i can see the sculpture was originally dark on skin color but that is beside the point. I never brought up anything concerning the sculpture and his phenotype apart from the fact of his blue eyes.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ To be honest I am somewhat suspicious of the blue eyes. In all past depictions I've seen of the statue the eyes were darker. I hate to jump to the conclusion of alteration conspiracies but then again the original dark paint was literally air-brushed off. So replacing the eyes with blue glass marbles wouldn't be too far off.
Also, your whole cherry-picked point is moot since the scribe like all ancient Egyptians were still black Africans.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ To be honest I am somewhat suspicious of the blue eyes. In all past depictions I've seen of the statue the eyes were darker. I hate to jump to the conclusion of alteration conspiracies but then again the original dark paint was literally air-brushed off. So replacing the eyes with blue glass marbles wouldn't be too far off.
Also, your whole cherry-picked point is moot since the scribe like all ancient Egyptians were still black Africans.
And what real proof do you have that the original paint has been airbrushed off? Please show us the proof and not something that is your mere opinion.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Are you there? Everyone already knows you're a joke.LOL
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Uhmm, because remnants of the original dark brown pigment are still scattered on the statue.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: all ancient Egyptians were still black Africans.
This is an Indian man:
1) If he is a Black Asian because his skin is relatively dark then all Egyptians may have been Black.
But if the above Indian man is not Black yet still has dark skin then you cannot say all Egyptians are Black.
2) Regardless of how you define black (or don't define it) the statement that all Egyptians were black is unprovable and will remain unprovable forever.
There are many images like the above. Is the man on the right "black" entirely due to his medium brown skin tone? Is he black because certain anthropologists have examined a certain number of skeletal remains of ancient Egyptians and have speculated on the entire dynastic Egyptian population?
3) If in ancient times somebody who lived in Somalia migrated to Egypt and started living there how long would they or their descendants have to live there to be regarded as Egyptians?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
This is an Indian man:
1) If he is a Black Asian because his skin is relatively dark then all Egyptians may have been Black.
This is your imagination, that you add a falsely premised caveat to.
There is not a straw of evidence that AE figures looked anything like this guy. In fact, they were generally displayed in a lot darker pigmentation, well within the tropical African continuum.
quote:
2) Regardless of how you define black (or don't define it) the statement that all Egyptians were black is unprovable and will remain unprovable forever.
I guess with your anti-African emotionalism, "packed with melanin" doesn't count for jack as empirical proof to you, of what thousands of images of AE figures relay in the dark pigmentation of Kemetic figures and what their body proportions communicate. Your behavior can be likened to looking at the grass, but still denying that it is green, and swearing that the color can never be demonstrated to have existed.
quote: 3) If in ancient times somebody who lived in Somalia migrated to Egypt and started living there how long would they or their descendants have to live there to be regarded as Egyptians?
It wouldn't matter, because Somalians are by far more closely related to native AEs than that Indian guy you posted, and used as some kind of litmus test for AE authenticity. You are the opposite spectrum of Clyde...make ridiculous wide-eyed attempts to de-Africanize indigenous Africans and relate them closer to people that they have the least chance of being closely related to.
^Yeah, they sure look like that Indian. LOL
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
If some guy have blue eyes or a 100 or even a 1000 does not change the fact of Ta-Seti as the 1st nome of Kemet and not Naqada complete with royal paraphernalia first found in and about the area of Ta-Seti,or on rocks at Glif-El Kabir, Kargur Talh,Nabta Playta,that the Ta-Setians had royal palaces and traded with the people of the Levant directly without the need for a Kemetian middleman should be lost on no one because at that stage Kemites did not have a state.
Göbekli Tepe do you no good because if you are looking for a certain phenotype for those sites.
Originally posted by Calypso: BONES OF CANNIBALS A PALESTINE RIDDLE Wireless to THE NEW YORK TIMES. New York Times 1857; Aug 4, 1932; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2003) pg. 21
Negroid people of 5000 B. C. ATE BODIES OF ENEMIES Men, Short of Stature, Burned Bones of Dead After Burial, London Session Hears. TEETH OF WOMEN DRAWN Linking relics to Burnt Skeletons from Ur scientist speculate an old cremation custom.
Seven or eight thousand years ago in what geologist call modern times a race of negroid cannibals lived In Palestine, burned the bones of their dead after burial, and devoured the bodies of their enemies. Skulls and thighbones of this race were unearthed within the last four years, first at Shukbah near Jerusalem and later in caves at Mount Carmel, and because they puzzled the excavators who found them they received the new name “Natufians.”
Today the first authoritative account of them was given by Sir Arthur Keith to the congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences and showed them to be one of the greatest riddles of archaeology.
They were clearly a Negroid people, said Sir Arthur, with wide faces flat- noses and long large heads.
They were short of stature 5 feet 3 or 4 inches tall-and their thighs and legs were remarkably strong.
While their arms and shoulders were weak.
Alone Among prehistoric peoples they had a custom of extracting the two upper central incisor teeth of their women.
Jagged holes in the fronts of their skulls indicate that they ate human brains.
They may have been ancestors or the Arabs or Semites of biblical times, in Sir Arthur's opinion.
They had some facial characteristics like those of the Neolithic or late Stone Age men of Malta and the remoter Aurignacian men of Southern Europe.
Natufian remains, it should be remembered, are in no way connected with the more recent discoveries of a new race of fossil men, also in caves, near Mt Carmel. The fossil men, so remarkably different from all others yet found, became extinct in the remotely distant past, while the Natufians may still have been living when the first city-states of Sumeria arose.
Sir Arthur based his conclusions today on twenty comparatively complete skulls of eighty-seven found by Miss Garrod.
Cites Features of Race
“Several features stand out quite definitely'' he asserted; first the Natufians were a long-headed people - they had cap-shaped occiputs (the lower back part of the head).
Secondly, the dimensions or their heads were greater than in the pre-dynastic Egyptians.
Thirdly, their faces were short and wide. Fourthly, they were prognathous (with projecting jaws). Fifthly, their nasal bones were not narrow and high, but formed a wide, low arch.
Sixthly, their chins were not prominent, but were masked by the fullness of the teeth-bearing parts of the jaw.
“The Natufians at Shukbah seem to have practiced cannibalism, for it is only by making this supposition that one can explain the cutting and fracturing of bones. The characters of the cuts and the broken surfaces show the bones were still in a fresh state when the damage was done. I believe the Shukbah people ate human brains.”
The cannibalism theory was strongly disputed by Professor Elliott smith, eminent geologist, who said he was entirely skeptical of it.
Also Professor Smith said it was not uncommon in Egypt to find burned bones in graves.
Professor Smith objected, too, that it was hardly possible that these people had had Negro blood, but Sir Arthur speedily corrected him. By the word Negroid he meant merely Negro-like characteristics such as are found throughout Europe and even in Scandinavia. Sir Arthur drew the inference that the Natufians had carried Aurignacian culture into Palestine after the last glacier age, which was approximately 35000 years ago.
So says a perhaps inaccurate report 70 odd yrs ago about the cultural aspect.
This is one of the many sites in West Africa that was contemporary with pre-dynastic, archaic, and Old Kingdom Egypt. Here's an extract from an otherwise unavailable for free article by one of the subject's main scholars covering Tichitt's last phases.
Coping with uncertainty: Neolithic life in the Dhar Tichitt-Walata, Mauritania, (ca. 4000–2300 BP)
Augustin F.C. Holl
Abstract The sandstone escarpment of the Dhar Tichitt in South-Central Mauritania was inhabited by Neolithic agropastoral communities for approximately one and half millennium during the Late Holocene, from ca. 4000 to 2300 BP. The absence of prior evidence of human settlement points to the influx of mobile herders moving away from the “drying” Sahara towards more humid lower latitudes. These herders took advantage of the peculiarities of the local geology and environment and succeeded in domesticating bulrush millet – Pennisetum sp. The emerging agropastoral subsistence complex had conflicting and/or complementary requirements depending on circumstances. In the long run, the social adjustment to the new subsistence complex, shifting site location strategies, nested settlement patterns and the rise of more encompassing polities appear to have been used to cope with climatic hazards in this relatively circumscribed area. An intense arid spell in the middle of the first millennium BC triggered the collapse of the whole Neolithic agropastoral system and the abandonment of the areas. These regions, resettled by sparse oasis-dwellers populations and iron-using communities starting from the first half of the first millennium AD, became part of the famous Ghana “empire”, the earliest state in West African history.
quote:Where are your advanced sites, sculptures, murals etc south of Egypt predating those in the Near East? We cannot locate any such examples yet were expected to believe people migrated north with nothing and ultimately accomplished something so soon. If you were correct and knowledge came from the south we would be able to trace it ethnographically, historically and archeologically validating evidence of Southern knowledge and migration dating prior & post to the establishment of Ancient Egypt, yet nothing like this exist and neither did the south demonstrate anything on a par with Egypt. Knowledge clearly came from the north and died at Nubia.
Posted by Apocalypse (Member # 8587) on :
^Brada always bringing truth. Keep on keeping on Brada.
On another note: did Spiralman claim that the ziggurats influenced the pyramids? Is he nuts! Does he know when the first ziggurats were constructed?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple-minded Girl: And what real proof do you have that the original paint has been airbrushed off? Please show us the proof and not something that is your mere opinion.
Well I don't know if it was exactly airbrushed off, but something happened to the remnants of dark paint that was its original skin color.
before
after
quote: Are you there? Everyone already knows you're a joke.LOL
I'm here. But NO, everyone knows that it is YOU who is the joke and very pathetic one at that. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
This is an Indian man:
1) If he is a Black Asian because his skin is relatively dark then all Egyptians may have been Black.
This is your imagination, that you add a falsely premised caveat to.
There is not a straw of evidence that AE figures looked anything like this guy. In fact, they were generally displayed in a lot darker pigmentation, well within the tropical African continuum.
quote:
2) Regardless of how you define black (or don't define it) the statement that all Egyptians were black is unprovable and will remain unprovable forever.
I guess with your anti-African emotionalism, "packed with melanin" doesn't count for jack as empirical proof to you, of what thousands of images of AE figures relay in the dark pigmentation of Kemetic figures and what their body proportions communicate. Your behavior can be likened to looking at the grass, but still denying that it is green, and swearing that the color can never be demonstrated to have existed.
quote: 3) If in ancient times somebody who lived in Somalia migrated to Egypt and started living there how long would they or their descendants have to live there to be regarded as Egyptians?
It wouldn't matter, because Somalians are by far more closely related to native AEs than that Indian guy you posted, and used as some kind of litmus test for AE authenticity. You are the opposite spectrum of Clyde...make ridiculous wide-eyed attempts to de-Africanize indigenous Africans and relate them closer to people that they have the least chance of being closely related to.
^Yeah, they sure look like that Indian. LOL
I don't know if this lyingass chick is Indian herself, but I personally know Indians and even they know that Egyptians were Africans. No Indian in the right mind would try to claim Egypt as theirs. Why should they, when they have advanced cultures of their own. I mean they aren't like the low self-esteemed whites who love to usurp every advanced culture in the world as their own. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: If some guy have blue eyes or a 100 or even a 1000 does not change the fact of Ta-Seti as the 1st nome of Kemet and not Naqada complete with royal paraphernalia first found in and about the area of Ta-Seti,or on rocks at Glif-El Kabir, Kargur Talh,Nabta Playta,that the Ta-Setians had royal palaces and traded with the people of the Levant directly without the need for a Kemetian middleman should be lost on no one because at that stage Kemites did not have a state.
To understand ancient Egyptian history or Nile Valley history in general one must know about Nubia since cultural advancement originated there. If fools like Spiral-brain, Simple-minded girl, or NonProof, knew anything about ancient Kemet, they would know that Ta-Seti in Nubia was called the 1st nome by the Egyptians and for good reason.
quote:Göbekli Tepe do you no good because if you are looking for a certain phenotype for those sites.
Originally posted by Calypso: BONES OF CANNIBALS A PALESTINE RIDDLE Wireless to THE NEW YORK TIMES. New York Times 1857; Aug 4, 1932; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2003) pg. 21
Negroid people of 5000 B. C. ATE BODIES OF ENEMIES Men, Short of Stature, Burned Bones of Dead After Burial, London Session Hears. TEETH OF WOMEN DRAWN Linking relics to Burnt Skeletons from Ur scientist speculate an old cremation custom.
Seven or eight thousand years ago in what geologist call modern times a race of negroid cannibals lived In Palestine, burned the bones of their dead after burial, and devoured the bodies of their enemies. Skulls and thighbones of this race were unearthed within the last four years, first at Shukbah near Jerusalem and later in caves at Mount Carmel, and because they puzzled the excavators who found them they received the new name “Natufians.”
Today the first authoritative account of them was given by Sir Arthur Keith to the congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences and showed them to be one of the greatest riddles of archaeology.
They were clearly a Negroid people, said Sir Arthur, with wide faces flat- noses and long large heads.
They were short of stature 5 feet 3 or 4 inches tall-and their thighs and legs were remarkably strong.
While their arms and shoulders were weak.
Alone Among prehistoric peoples they had a custom of extracting the two upper central incisor teeth of their women.
Jagged holes in the fronts of their skulls indicate that they ate human brains.
They may have been ancestors or the Arabs or Semites of biblical times, in Sir Arthur's opinion.
They had some facial characteristics like those of the Neolithic or late Stone Age men of Malta and the remoter Aurignacian men of Southern Europe.
Natufian remains, it should be remembered, are in no way connected with the more recent discoveries of a new race of fossil men, also in caves, near Mt Carmel. The fossil men, so remarkably different from all others yet found, became extinct in the remotely distant past, while the Natufians may still have been living when the first city-states of Sumeria arose.
Sir Arthur based his conclusions today on twenty comparatively complete skulls of eighty-seven found by Miss Garrod.
Cites Features of Race
“Several features stand out quite definitely'' he asserted; first the Natufians were a long-headed people - they had cap-shaped occiputs (the lower back part of the head).
Secondly, the dimensions or their heads were greater than in the pre-dynastic Egyptians.
Thirdly, their faces were short and wide. Fourthly, they were prognathous (with projecting jaws). Fifthly, their nasal bones were not narrow and high, but formed a wide, low arch.
Sixthly, their chins were not prominent, but were masked by the fullness of the teeth-bearing parts of the jaw.
“The Natufians at Shukbah seem to have practiced cannibalism, for it is only by making this supposition that one can explain the cutting and fracturing of bones. The characters of the cuts and the broken surfaces show the bones were still in a fresh state when the damage was done. I believe the Shukbah people ate human brains.”
The cannibalism theory was strongly disputed by Professor Elliott smith, eminent geologist, who said he was entirely skeptical of it.
Also Professor Smith said it was not uncommon in Egypt to find burned bones in graves.
Professor Smith objected, too, that it was hardly possible that these people had had Negro blood, but Sir Arthur speedily corrected him. By the word Negroid he meant merely Negro-like characteristics such as are found throughout Europe and even in Scandinavia. Sir Arthur drew the inference that the Natufians had carried Aurignacian culture into Palestine after the last glacier age, which was approximately 35000 years ago.
So says a perhaps inaccurate report 70 odd yrs ago about the cultural aspect.
Indeed. Even the racists whites who discovered the Natufians could not deny the "negroid" features of the skulls, yet they could not bring themselves to admit the presence of "negroes" in the 'Holy Land' so they merely went with the cop-out that they were merely "negro-like" and not real "negroes". Of course you NEVER hear talk of "caucasian-like" peoples that aren't really caucasian. LOL Of course today we have genetic evidence that shows these people carried African lineages and were thus black Africans or "negroes" as you will. We also know that these people were the forebears of agriculture and not "cannibalism" as was initially thought.
quote:http://www.human-evol.cam.ac.uk/Members/Stock/Pubs/Stock-AJPA2005-F81WadiMataha.pdf A more up to date report but I am sure you won't read it preferring to make up stuff.
This is one of the many sites in West Africa that was contemporary with pre-dynastic, archaic, and Old Kingdom Egypt. Here's an extract from an otherwise unavailable for free article by one of the subject's main scholars covering Tichitt's last phases.
Coping with uncertainty: Neolithic life in the Dhar Tichitt-Walata, Mauritania, (ca. 4000–2300 BP)
Augustin F.C. Holl
Abstract The sandstone escarpment of the Dhar Tichitt in South-Central Mauritania was inhabited by Neolithic agropastoral communities for approximately one and half millennium during the Late Holocene, from ca. 4000 to 2300 BP. The absence of prior evidence of human settlement points to the influx of mobile herders moving away from the “drying” Sahara towards more humid lower latitudes. These herders took advantage of the peculiarities of the local geology and environment and succeeded in domesticating bulrush millet – Pennisetum sp. The emerging agropastoral subsistence complex had conflicting and/or complementary requirements depending on circumstances. In the long run, the social adjustment to the new subsistence complex, shifting site location strategies, nested settlement patterns and the rise of more encompassing polities appear to have been used to cope with climatic hazards in this relatively circumscribed area. An intense arid spell in the middle of the first millennium BC triggered the collapse of the whole Neolithic agropastoral system and the abandonment of the areas. These regions, resettled by sparse oasis-dwellers populations and iron-using communities starting from the first half of the first millennium AD, became part of the famous Ghana “empire”, the earliest state in West African history.
quote:Where are your advanced sites, sculptures, murals etc south of Egypt predating those in the Near East? We cannot locate any such examples yet were expected to believe people migrated north with nothing and ultimately accomplished something so soon. If you were correct and knowledge came from the south we would be able to trace it ethnographically, historically and archeologically validating evidence of Southern knowledge and migration dating prior & post to the establishment of Ancient Egypt, yet nothing like this exist and neither did the south demonstrate anything on a par with Egypt. Knowledge clearly came from the north and died at Nubia.
Titichit is just one of MANY centers in Sub-Saharan Africa. Brada, don't even bother trying to educate Spiraled-brains. Better yet why not turn the tables on him. Ask him to provide evidence of advanced culture in Europe north of the Mediterranean and free of non-European influence, since even the civilizations of Mediterranean Europe are of Asiatic and even African designs.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Again...
quote:Originally posted by NonSense: You guys are showing MORE evidence of PAE culture flowing from north to south and east to west. Not one shred of evidence from the south to north into PAE...
Explorer is right. You are delusional. Perhaps you've forgotten about all the archaeological evidence from epipaleolithic times showing migrations from the south going to the north into the east (Levant) and west Northwest Africa with the Halfan culture becoming the Ibero-Maurusian culture in the west In Morocco and even Spain as well as the Kebaran culture in the Levant. What about the Mushabean culture that came afterward that joined with the Natufian in the Levant to become the Natufian. Or what of the Harifian culture after that which introduced pastoral nomadism into the Levant and even Arabia?? What about all the genetic evidence to support this like PN2 (E) derived haplogroups in the 'Near East' or Afroasiatic languages with Semitic being the only one spoken outside of Africa in that regions??
quote:Go read my prior posts in the Bauval book thread on Nabta Playa/Cattle pastoralism and in this thread on the earliest Naqada PAE royal cultural symbols of the Falcon, Hedjet, sailing vessels, Hieroglyphs and Protoglyphs. See W.Y. Adams et al. refuting Bruce Williams on the Qutsul burner too.
We've read your posts, and they are all B.S. There is no getting around it. The pharaonic symbols like the falcon, hedjet, and hieroglyphs were all found in the Qustul culture of Lower Nubia first before the Naqada culture of Upper Egypt. Virtually all Egyptologists and other scholars agree that earliest known kings' tombs are found in Qustul in Lower Nubia. Indeed the earliest evidence of complex cemeteries and funerary institutions in the Nile Valley are to be found there. What you also fail to realize due to your ignorance of African culture is that all of these cultural elements you point out have been acknowledged by from the earliest (even racist) scholars to be of indigenous African origin. If you knew anything about black African culture you would recognize that these features are all totemic in nature. Everything from the hawk iconography to the hedjet headdress, to even the use of hieroglyphs are all based on African totemism. Scholars from Petrie to Champollion to Gardiner saw these as "primitive" and even "negroid" vestiges of culture where animals and plants are used to symbolize tribes, ancestors, rulers, even deities. In the 'Qustul culture' of Ta-Seti there were three main totems, two of them being the hawk and baboon. The hedjet crown was said to symbolize a bull's penis which echoes back European explorers and scholars who remarked about the "odd" and "unusual" headdresses of African kings and chieftains which represent animal or plant "fetishes". We know hieroglyphs are made up mostly of animal symbols and again the earliest evidence of which is found in Qustul and Sayalah. Even the very concept of pharaoh itself is African where the king is also recognized as a god. In the Sudan in particular some kings reign after a certain period of thirty years until they are sacrificed. In Egypt, after the same period of time instead of being sacrificed, the pharaoh goes through a ritual of rejuvenation to continue his reign called the Heb Sed. He wears a tail of a bull or ox, the same way many kings in Africa do. The first part of the title of this thread, the 'Narmer Palette' actually shows obvious African totemism and other symbolism as well as the ritual sacrifice of a defeated enemy as first described in detail by Diop in the context of his own African culture where the king conducts the very same sacrifice!
So tell us this, false prophet. I was able to point out but a handful of the myriad of African cultural aspects in ancient Egyptian culture, Can you point out any Asiatic cultural aspects??
In the meantime let's ponder this, you speak of the Naqada culture having the hawk. Yet the earliest evidence of the hawk totem in Naqada is in association with the predynastic city of Nekhen (hierakonpolis). Below is a study based on cemeteries in Nekhen:
A biological affinities study based on frequencies of cranial nonmetric traits in skeletal samples from three cemeteries at Predynastic Naqada, Egypt, confirms the results of a recent nonmetric dental morphological analysis. Both cranial and dental traits analyses indicate that the individuals buried in a cemetery characterized archaeologically as high status are significantly different from individuals buried in two other, apparently non-elite cemeteries and that the non-elite samples are not significantly different from each other. A comparison with neighboring Nile Valley skeletal samples suggests that the high status cemetery represents an endogamous ruling or elite segment of the local population at Naqada, which is more closely related to populations in northern Nubia than to neighboring populations in southern Egypt. T. Prowse, and N. Lovell "Concordance of cranial and dental morphological traits and evidence for endogamy in ancient Egypt" American journal of physical anthropology. 1996, vol. 101, no2, pp. 237-246 (2 p.1/4)
So much for your movement of culture from north to south! LOL
I don't expect a response from NonSense, as he is too cowardly to address FACTS that are too obvious, but I am curious to see what his idiot followers have to say. Though I prefer to read from the intelligent posters. Posted by zarahan (Member # 15718) on :
^^you gotta stop being so logical man.. lol
yassuh.. it was all nawth to south.....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
I honestly think seated scribe's features don't look black to me. He doesn't look like green shirt man to me and green shirt man is unusual looking to begin with. Green shirt looks about 55-60 yrs old. Also when people age their face gets more bony looking, less firm skin. The seated scribe looks about mid 40 years old. His lips are very thin and his nostrils are very small, jaw squarish, big ears. His eyes are blueish. Wally says it's fake. I'm going to have to go with brother Wally on this one
Look at this other scribe:
Look at that hair, it's got straight lines in it. You really think he heat combed it like that? Why are the lines so thick. He looks South Asian for some reason. Africans doesn't look like this. The East Africans have long narrow heads, this guy has a very round head. The size of the nostril holes is very small. It has got to be another fake, if not they were hiring scribes from Southern Asia somewhere.
Let me ask you something. Wally said that the seated scribe in the above picture was fake. Even if he was painted darker he's not that light. As he is he is still dark enough to be what many people, at least AA's, would consider black. Wally questioned this statue and said it was fake. Why would he think that? Because he saw the features and head shape aint lookin right to be black.
I'm going to have to go with Wally on this one.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
They are all fakes.lol
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Look at that hair, it's got straight lines in it. You really think he heat combed it like that? Why are the lines so thick.
Maybe they're dreadlocks?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Look at that hair, it's got straight lines in it. You really think he heat combed it like that? Why are the lines so thick.
Maybe they're dreadlocks?
rastas in AE ???
Posted by Siptah (Member # 17601) on :
The Seated Scribe et al doesn't have blue eyes. The used material inlaid in the sculpture's eyes has a clear transparent surface absorbing the surrounding color reflecting back at the viewer.
I think the Seated Scribe looks like a black man with thin lips.
I agree with The Lioness's, i don't think the Green Shirt man resembles him that much.
If anything The Seated Scribe looks more like the actor Peter Mensah than the Green Shirt man.
Posted by Siptah (Member # 17601) on :
The Seated Scribe bearing some of his original dark paint.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Siptah: The Seated Scribe et al doesn't have blue eyes. The used material inlaid in the sculpture's eyes has a clear transparent surface absorbing the surrounding color reflecting back at the viewer.
This makes sense. Because most pictures show him with darker eyes and only in the brightest light do they look 'blue'.
quote:I think the Seated Scribe looks like a black man with thin lips.
I agree with The Lioness's, i don't think the Green Shirt man resembles him that much.
I still think the features are very similar to the man in the green shirt as well as the politician below him.
Of course, according to NonProof these men above are all "caucasoid" anyway because of the said features.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Look at this other scribe:
Look at that hair, it's got straight lines in it. You really think he heat combed it like that? Why are the lines so thick.
Apparently you are unaware of the fact that the Egyptians wore wigs of plant fiber that give the appearance of straight hair. Actually the same type of wigs are worn by Africans on the other side of the Sahara in West Africa as well as first demonstrated by Diop in his book.
quote:He looks South Asian for some reason. Africans doesn't look like this. The East Africans have long narrow heads, this guy has a very round head. The size of the nostril holes is very small. It has got to be another fake, if not they were hiring scribes from Southern Asia somewhere.
Again nobody cares what you think because your are delusional and utterly ignorant about the diversity of African looks, yet obsess about this nonsensical South Asian/Indian population theory of Egypt. Not to mention that the scribe also has his original dark paint faded off.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by zarahan: ^^you gotta stop being so logical man.. lol
yassuh.. it was all nawth to south.....
Is that the reason why NonProof refuses to answer what I addressed about the African totemic root of Egypt, and why he chooses instead to go on a troll rampage as 'SuperDuperTroll-iosis'? Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
The first known examples of dreadlocks date back to North Africa. In ancient dynastic Egypt examples of Egyptians wearing locked hairstyles and wigs have appeared on bas-reliefs, statuary and other artifacts.[3] Mummified remains of ancient Egyptians with locks, as well as locked wigs, have also been recovered from archaeological sites. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreadlocks Rastas in Kemet??? why not!! Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Apparently you are unaware of the fact that the Egyptians wore wigs of plant fiber that give the appearance of straight hair. Actually the same type of wigs are worn by Africans on the other side of the Sahara in West Africa as well as first demonstrated by Diop in his book.
If there's one thing I've almost never seen in all ancient Egyptian art, it's people with short, straight hair like this:
Almost every time an Egyptian sports what may be interpreted as straight hair, it's at least fairly long and possibly the kind of plant-fiber wig you're describing. Whenever you see an Egyptian with shorter hair, the texture is either undefined or it's clearly Africoid. See these examples:
Another thing I've noticed about Egyptian art is that often there are horizontal grooves carved into the men's hair, like this:
I've noticed that black men's hair, particularly when it is fairly short, often has little "waves" in it. If you look closely at this photo you can see these waves:
The waves look exactly like the horizontal grooves you see on Egyptian male statues!
I await the Eurocentric explanation to all this.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Again...
quote:Originally posted by NonSense: You guys are showing MORE evidence of PAE culture flowing from north to south and east to west. Not one shred of evidence from the south to north into PAE...
Explorer is right. You are delusional. Perhaps you've forgotten about all the archaeological evidence from epipaleolithic times showing migrations from the south going to the north into the east (Levant) and west Northwest Africa with the Halfan culture becoming the Ibero-Maurusian culture in the west In Morocco and even Spain as well as the Kebaran culture in the Levant. What about the Mushabean culture that came afterward that joined with the Natufian in the Levant to become the Natufian. Or what of the Harifian culture after that which introduced pastoral nomadism into the Levant and even Arabia?? What about all the genetic evidence to support this like PN2 (E) derived haplogroups in the 'Near East' or Afroasiatic languages with Semitic being the only one spoken outside of Africa in that regions??
quote:Go read my prior posts in the Bauval book thread on Nabta Playa/Cattle pastoralism and in this thread on the earliest Naqada PAE royal cultural symbols of the Falcon, Hedjet, sailing vessels, Hieroglyphs and Protoglyphs. See W.Y. Adams et al. refuting Bruce Williams on the Qutsul burner too.
We've read your posts, and they are all B.S. There is no getting around it. The pharaonic symbols like the falcon, hedjet, and hieroglyphs were all found in the Qustul culture of Lower Nubia first before the Naqada culture of Upper Egypt. Virtually all Egyptologists and other scholars agree that earliest known kings' tombs are found in Qustul in Lower Nubia. Indeed the earliest evidence of complex cemeteries and funerary institutions in the Nile Valley are to be found there. What you also fail to realize due to your ignorance of African culture is that all of these cultural elements you point out have been acknowledged by from the earliest (even racist) scholars to be of indigenous African origin. If you knew anything about black African culture you would recognize that these features are all totemic in nature. Everything from the hawk iconography to the hedjet headdress, to even the use of hieroglyphs are all based on African totemism. Scholars from Petrie to Champollion to Gardiner saw these as "primitive" and even "negroid" vestiges of culture where animals and plants are used to symbolize tribes, ancestors, rulers, even deities. In the 'Qustul culture' of Ta-Seti there were three main totems, two of them being the hawk and baboon. The hedjet crown was said to symbolize a bull's penis which echoes back European explorers and scholars who remarked about the "odd" and "unusual" headdresses of African kings and chieftains which represent animal or plant "fetishes". We know hieroglyphs are made up mostly of animal symbols and again the earliest evidence of which is found in Qustul and Sayalah. Even the very concept of pharaoh itself is African where the king is also recognized as a god. In the Sudan in particular some kings reign after a certain period of thirty years until they are sacrificed. In Egypt, after the same period of time instead of being sacrificed, the pharaoh goes through a ritual of rejuvenation to continue his reign called the Heb Sed. He wears a tail of a bull or ox, the same way many kings in Africa do. The first part of the title of this thread, the 'Narmer Palette' actually shows obvious African totemism and other symbolism as well as the ritual sacrifice of a defeated enemy as first described in detail by Diop in the context of his own African culture where the king conducts the very same sacrifice!
So tell us this, false prophet. I was able to point out but a handful of the myriad of African cultural aspects in ancient Egyptian culture, Can you point out any Asiatic cultural aspects??
In the meantime let's ponder this, you speak of the Naqada culture having the hawk. Yet the earliest evidence of the hawk totem in Naqada is in association with the predynastic city of Nekhen (hierakonpolis). Below is a study based on cemeteries in Nekhen:
A biological affinities study based on frequencies of cranial nonmetric traits in skeletal samples from three cemeteries at Predynastic Naqada, Egypt, confirms the results of a recent nonmetric dental morphological analysis. Both cranial and dental traits analyses indicate that the individuals buried in a cemetery characterized archaeologically as high status are significantly different from individuals buried in two other, apparently non-elite cemeteries and that the non-elite samples are not significantly different from each other. A comparison with neighboring Nile Valley skeletal samples suggests that the high status cemetery represents an endogamous ruling or elite segment of the local population at Naqada, which is more closely related to populations in northern Nubia than to neighboring populations in southern Egypt. T. Prowse, and N. Lovell "Concordance of cranial and dental morphological traits and evidence for endogamy in ancient Egypt" American journal of physical anthropology. 1996, vol. 101, no2, pp. 237-246 (2 p.1/4)
So much for your movement of culture from north to south! LOL
I don't expect a response from NonSense, as he is too cowardly to address FACTS that are too obvious, but I am curious to see what his idiot followers have to say. Though I prefer to read from the intelligent posters.
Nice recap.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Is he us ?
Are we him ?
Is he the seated scribe?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
I honestly think seated scribe's features don't look black to me.
Princess of goof, you are looking at the statue with its dark pigmentation, and you claim it does not look "black" to you; is it the skin color that renders what is "black" or are muscle shapes that constitute what is black? Oh wait, you are the same person who thinks Dynastic Egyptians were Indians. LOL
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: [QB]
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
I honestly think seated scribe's features don't look black to me.
Princess of goof, you are looking at the statue with its dark pigmentation, and you claim it does not look "black" to you; is it the skin color that renders what is "black" or are muscle shapes that constitute what is black?
Below I'm looking at a person who has a similar complexion to the seated scribe
Here's another:
Explorer are these Black people??
Yes or no please, let's keep it direct and to the point.
Are the above two persons Black people? If you can't answer yes or no or if you have to rephrase the question and add words forget it, don't even bother. thank you
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
I don't care what those people are. You are a wide-eyed loon for thinking that the Kemetians were Indians. Another name for you would be a "Dynastic Race" crackpot.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Apparently our demonstration that the seated scribe's original dark paint has been loss has gone over the lyingass's head.
But then this is the same idiot who postulates Indian origin for Egyptians.
quote:Originally posted by the lyingass:
Is he us ?
Are we him ?
Is he the seated scribe?
Who is "we" or "us"?? You mean Egyptians or Indians? LOL Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
I never said the Egyptians were Indian. It's John's theory. I thought the theory was interesting enough to quote John on and such connections are not unconnected to certain Afrocentric theories.
In the art Egyptians have be known to look black African, Indian, Semitic, European, "oriental".
As Keita said if people from different parts of the world look similar they may have common ancestry or may not have common ancestry.
Overwhelmingly so Jamaicans are Black. People from Nigeria also.
Are the two people form India above Black? Easy enough question
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: I never said the Egyptians were Indian. It's John's theory. I thought the theory was interesting enough to quote John on and such connections are not unconnected to certain Afrocentric theories.
Even though John's theory is plain WRONG. And India has nothing to do with Egypt or any of Africa.
quote:In the art Egyptians have be known to look black African, Indian, Semitic, European, "oriental".
That is YOUR twisted opinion. Anyone familiar with ancient Egyptian art knows they look black African period.
quote:As Keita said if people from different parts of the world look similar they may have common ancestry or may not have common ancestry.
Correct. Which is why there are black peoples native to Asia including India and Southeast Asia but as Asians neither have any ties to Africa including Egypt.
quote:Overwhelmingly so Jamaicans are Black. People from Nigeria also.
But Jamaicans are of recent African descent and Nigerians are Africans. Just as Egyptians are Africans.
quote:Are the two people form India above Black? Easy enough question
No. But even if they were. Again NOTHING to do with Egypt! Are you done spewing your nonsense?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
I never said the Egyptians were Indian.
Of course you have; you have used an Indian to determine the authenticity of ancient Egyptians, which is quite comical. Tell me, did Africans replace Indians in Egypt?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Why else do we call her lyinass? LOL
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: The first known examples of dreadlocks date back to North Africa. In ancient dynastic Egypt examples of Egyptians wearing locked hairstyles and wigs have appeared on bas-reliefs, statuary and other artifacts.[3] Mummified remains of ancient Egyptians with locks, as well as locked wigs, have also been recovered from archaeological sites. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreadlocks Rastas in Kemet??? why not!!
These look like braids to me, though I have seen a few examples in Egyptian paintings of men wearing dreads; usually these were short length and were worn by workers or laborers.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: Almost every time an Egyptian sports what may be interpreted as straight hair, it's at least fairly long and possibly the kind of plant-fiber wig you're describing. Whenever you see an Egyptian with shorter hair, the texture is either undefined or it's clearly Africoid. See these examples:
Indeed. In all too many depictions men and even women depicted with short cropped hair, they are shown with tight curls.
Let's not even mention afros.
quote:Another thing I've noticed about Egyptian art is that often there are horizontal grooves carved into the men's hair, like this:
I've noticed that black men's hair, particularly when it is fairly short, often has little "waves" in it. If you look closely at this photo you can see these waves:
The waves look exactly like the horizontal grooves you see on Egyptian male statues!
I await the Eurocentric explanation to all this.
Very perceptive. I've noticed that look in some ancient Egyptian depictions as well. Actually this look can be achieved in short-cropped hair of black people by applying certain gels. In fact the traditional substance used was animal fat. I was told this by African American friends, and when I researched it further it turns out the use of animal fat to attain such a hairstyle is a practice that is as very ancient as it is very common on the African continent. It is practiced by peoples in west Africa, southern Africa, as well as east Africa. No surprise the Egyptians did it as well.
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Let's not even mention afros.
Are there any other images of Egyptian women with afros besides this? Honestly, I think afros look cute on women, so I think it's a shame that the afro style wasn't common among Egyptian women.
quote:Very perceptive. I've noticed that look in some ancient Egyptian depictions as well. Actually this look can be achieved in short-cropped hair of black people by applying certain gels. In fact the traditional substance used was animal fat. I was told this by African American friends, and when I researched it further it turns out the use of animal fat to attain such a hairstyle is a practice that is as very ancient as it is very common on the African continent. It is practiced by peoples in west Africa, southern Africa, as well as east Africa. No surprise the Egyptians did it as well.
You mean the "wavy" look is artificial? I always thought it was natural.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: Are there any other images of Egyptian women with afros besides this? Honestly, I think afros look cute on women, so I think it's a shame that the afro style wasn't common among Egyptian women.
Most depictions of women with afros I've seen come from Old Kingdom art when the common style was short hair. I'm surprised you haven't seen any as there are plenty.of them.
Here are just several.
quote:You mean the "wavy" look is artificial? I always thought it was natural.
Not from what I learned. Although I think people with naturally wavy hair may have that look when hair is short, more often it achieved through alteration by lipid substances like oils or animal fats.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Very perceptive. I've noticed that look in some ancient Egyptian depictions as well. Actually this look can be achieved in short-cropped hair of black people by applying certain gels. In fact the traditional substance used was animal fat. I was told this by African American friends, and when I researched it further it turns out the use of animal fat to attain such a hairstyle is a practice that is as very ancient as it is very common on the African continent. It is practiced by peoples in west Africa, southern Africa, as well as east Africa. No surprise the Egyptians did it as well.
You mean the "wavy" look is artificial? I always thought it was natural.
It is natural not artificial. One simply needs a brush and a do-rag to keep the hair flattened, with perhaps some coconut oil for shine. Point is you need the specific type of hair for it.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
Goof-in-skirt says that a scribe who is apparently darker in pigmentation than this fellow, can yet be synonymously represented by this fellow's skin tone.
quote:I never said the Egyptians were Indian. It's John's theory.
You have bought into the crackpot theory. It shows how gullible of a character you are, and how your anti-African psych entices you to easily buy into any line, no matter how stupid it may be, as long as it gives you an avenue to artificially de-Africanize anything that is African.
quote:
In the art Egyptians have be known to look black African, Indian, Semitic, European, "oriental".
By whom, and through what specific objective markers? Fool, Maghrebi Tamazights, Sudanese, Egyptians, Ethiopians all speak Semitic languages; do they look "Semitic"? Semitic is a language phylum, not a phenotype. What the heck does "oriental" look like? LOL
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Went over the link. Just goes to show how people who look so alike outwardly, could just as well be more distant genetically. Now of course, context is always key. Some recent Africans are relatively closely related to say, Indian sub-Continent "blacks" through mtDNA hg M, while some Asian "black" carrying Y-DNA hg D markers are relatively closer to hg E carrying Africans than "non-hg DE" derived Eurasian groups.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: [QB] Explorer What the heck does "oriental" look like? LOL
"Oriental" is often (not always) associated with Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Thai, Vietnamese, Cambodian, Southeast Asia etc.
Hatshepsut, looks Japanese here
Hatshepsut
___________________________________
Luxor - Tutankhamun colossal statue looking a little oriental here:
Tut looking Indian here.
Why should I lie? It would be nice if I would say he looks West African here like myself. Unfortunately he looks Indian to me in this particular sculpture. My apologies to the centrics
"HA HA HA Lioness says Hatshepsut is Japanese HA HA he he ha ha I am retarded"
-no idiot I said "looks" not "is"
"But lioness is trying to de-Africanize"
- Africa is a continental concept devised by the Greeks. The Egyptians and other ancient people before the Greeks did not have a concept of continents or an equivalent to Africa. The nationalist interpretation of today did not apply then, city-states and tribes were separate identities.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
The idiot writes:
"HA HA HA Lioness says Hatshepsut is Japanese HA HA he he ha ha I am retarded" - lioness
^Ditto.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
The idiot goes onto write:
quote:- Africa is a continental concept devised by the Greeks. The Egyptians and other ancient people before the Greeks did not have a concept of continents or an equivalent to Africa. The nationalist interpretation of today did not apply then, city-states and tribes were separate identities.
1)Africa as continent is not a "Greek invention". It is an objective fact. When people speak of Africa in this day and age, this is what is being referred to.
2)The name "Africa" was not even applied by Greeks.
3)Ancient Egyptians as being Africans is also a scientific FACT, not like your fairy tale Indian AEs. This applies to culture; the core culture was African -- a FACT, not your fairy tale Indian. They spoke Afrisan (Ancient Egyptian), not fairy tale Hindu.
4)The ancient Egyptians did in fact time and again speak of their lineage affiliations to their south; they never spoke of their lineage to their east [Levant] or north [Europe]. Thus, while a concept of an entire continent, let alone continental unity may have evaded them, they still looked to other Africans as their closest population relatives. They even thought the land of pygmies was also 'divine'. Guess where that was: Africa, of course!
^And what you call "oriental"-looking Hatshepsut, is actually a statue of "young" Akhenaten; see below...
^Look at Akhenaten-era style post-cranial feminine-like body.
Posted by Wally (Member # 2936) on :
...do y'all EVER relate your research to your own personal life experiences??? I mean, I use to date a sista who is a 'dead clone' of this very feminine portrait of Ikhnaton...
and this little Upper Egyptian girl could substitute for my little cousin at school and no one would be the wiser; until she spoke...
... Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Wally you dated a little girl that doesn't count
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LOL Amazing. The more the empty skirt (lyinass) talks, the dumber she looks.
By the way, she claims she is West African. Either she is lying as usual or she is a West African with mental health problems because I know many West Africans and they are just as very intelligent as they are very educated. And they can tell the difference between black Africans (Tut) and black Asians.
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: It is natural not artificial. One simply needs a brush and a do-rag to keep the hair flattened, with perhaps some coconut oil for shine. Point is you need the specific type of hair for it.
Yes. From what I've heard the traditional substance was animal fat or butter of some kind. As for 'do-rags', the Egyptians certainly had head cloths as well as tight fitting caps, and they certainly had brushes. So there you go.
P.S. Notice how the lyingass empty skirt stays clear of addressing the various African centered customs and traits such as the example just mentioned. Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Does not look like an African person:
^^^^if you don't notice an oriental quality about this you're blind
It doesn't mean that the Egyptians were "oriental" But the above statue doesn't look very African to me.
Thutmose not looking very African either, not in the least. Look at the defined hard looking nose bone and the upward angle. It looks half European with oriental qualities in the eyes and the lips are small, non elongated head shape. You can't find a lot of African people looking like this, one feature here of there maybe but not as a whole. You go all over Africa looking, but traveling to distances much further from Egypt than the Levant
For political reasons you can't admit it.
Doesn't look like a black kid to me. Looks more Indian.
That's doesn't mean he was Indian. But after seeing so much of Egyptian art where people sometimes look black and that other times Asian it makes me wonder. Is it an surprise that Egypt borders Asia?
It looks like blacks in Egypt were doing a lot of mingling. They wern't as hung up about it
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lynass: Does not look like an African person:
Of course 'African' in your mind is very limited so I'm right you are lying about being African because you don't have a clue about how Africans look like.
quote:
^^^^if you don't notice an oriental quality about this you're blind
What pray tell is an "oriental quality"
quote:
It doesn't mean that the Egyptians were "oriental" But the above statue doesn't look very African to me.
Of course they don't to YOU because you are an idiot.
quote:
Thutmose not looking very African either, not in the least. Look at the defined hard looking nose bone and the upward angle. It looks half European with oriental qualities in the eyes and the lips are small, non elongated head shape. You can't find a lot of African people looking like this, one feature here of there maybe but not as a whole. You go all over Africa looking, but traveling to distances much further from Egypt than the Levant.
Again, if you were truly West African then you would know that there are West Africans who have such looks.
By your definition this West African woman below is also "Half European with oriental qualities".
quote:For political reasons you can't admit it.
Doesn't look like a black kid to me. Looks more Indian.
Nothing "political" about. For psychological reasons you can't admit that Tut IS black. Many Indians are black as well, but Tut and the Egyptians are AFRICANS.
quote:That's doesn't mean he was Indian. But after seeing so much of Egyptian art where people sometimes look black and that other times Asian it makes me wonder. Is it an surprise that Egypt borders Asia?
Art can be subjective, and the interpretation of art even more so! So when an idiot like yourself who has no idea of the diversity of features Africans come in can make all kinds of wild claims about Egyptian looks.
quote:It looks like blacks in Egypt were doing a lot of mingling. They wern't as hung up about it
Not what bio-anthropology and genetics shows. The only one hung up is YOU-- hung up over the black African identity and nature of the Egyptians.
Now why is it, whenever we talk about cultural aspects that are undeniably African such as the hairstyles, customs, etc. you are don't post a word? Is it because there are no "oriental" qualities? LOL Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
Thutmose not looking very African either, not in the least. Look at the defined hard looking nose bone and the upward angle. It looks half European with oriental qualities in the eyes and the lips are small, non elongated head shape. You can't find a lot of African people looking like this, one feature here of there maybe but not as a whole. You go all over Africa looking, but traveling to distances much further from Egypt than the Levant
Then you must not have seen many northern Sudanese:
His nose is almost the same shape as Thutmose's and his lips are thin, yet he's clearly black.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ I remember a Somali friend of mine commenting on how some Sudanese are jet black in color but they have the same facial features as white people-- thin lips and long pointy noses. Again such features are also found in West Africa, but don't expect the Lyingass empty skirt to know about all this.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
If a person from the Levant were to migrate into Egypt and live there permanently they would be African sooner or later
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
The darkness or lightness of the seated scribe is probably nothing more than the result of different lighting when the images were shot. Here are three different photos of Michelle Obama.
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The darkness or lightness of the seated scribe is probably nothing more than the result of different lighting when the images were shot. Here are three different photos of Michelle Obama.
Young Michelle Obama
Did she have plastic surgery?
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I remember a Somali friend of mine commenting on how some Sudanese are jet black in color but they have the same facial features as white people-- thin lips and long pointy noses. Again such features are also found in West Africa, but don't expect the Lyingass empty skirt to know about all this.
Yeah Right
Schizophrenics can't tell the difference between real and fictional friends. You must have given your Filipino mom hell growing up.
Posted by Spiralman (Member # 16230) on :
LOL @ Djehuti et al on their statements concerning indigenous black African diversity. You Afrocentrics are hilarious, you shout black African diversity here and there when you need to explain the portrayal of the Ancient Egyptians. Heck, why don't you try to claim every civilization under the sun by screaming black African diversity? What good is Ancient Egypt being a black civilization if the physiognomies of the average daily black person doesn't hold up to the sculptures, bust and features of the people of Ancient Egypt?
Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I remember a Somali friend of mine commenting on how some Sudanese are jet black in color but they have the same facial features as white people-- thin lips and long pointy noses. Again such features are also found in West Africa, but don't expect the Lyingass empty skirt to know about all this.
Yeah Right
Schizophrenics can't tell the difference between real and fictional friends. You must have given your Filipino mom hell growing up.
Lol if anyone is a delusional schizophrenic then its you with your mythical white Nubian nonsense
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
By the way, she claims she is West African. Either she is lying as usual or she is a West African with mental health problems...
lyinarse is not a western African by any measure; he/she is simply playing a keyboard "African". People like to play roles of what they are not in real life on the internet, and lyinarse is just fulfilling that fantasy. Heck, I can choose to play "Santa typing from the North pole" for all we know, and there will still be gullible ones out there who would actually believe it, LOL. lyinarse is in all probability some eurocentric sap of a Hindu decent. With the striking ignorance lyinarse displays about Africa, he/she could not possibly have ever set foot on the continent.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: If a person from the Levant were to migrate into Egypt and live there permanently they would be African sooner or later
But this has no relevance to Egyptians including Tut being indigenous Egyptians and thus Africans NOT migrants from the Levant.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple-minded Girl: The darkness or lightness of the seated scribe is probably nothing more than the result of different lighting when the images were shot. Here are three different photos of Michelle Obama.
Lighting has no bearing on older photos showing the scribe with remnants of his original dark color.
quote:Originally posted by NonIntelligence: Yeah Right
Schizophrenics can't tell the difference between real and fictional friends. You must have given your Filipino mom hell growing up.
What makes you think I'm lying. The Atlanta area is a pretty diverse community. How about you address the FACTS instead of ad-hominem remarks about my sanity, which I find funny coming from an individual that seems to be in denial of reality.
Speaking of which...
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman: LOL @ Djehuti et al on their statements concerning indigenous black African diversity. You Afrocentrics are hilarious, you shout black African diversity here and there when you need to explain the portrayal of the Ancient Egyptians. What good is Ancient Egypt being a black civilization if the average daily black person physiognomy doesn't hold up to the sculptures, bust and features of the people of Ancient Egypt?
Black African diversity if is a FACT. Africans hold the most genetic diversity in the planet since they are the oldest populations. That black people vary in features is an anthropological fact. I'm sorry if you only consider the "average daily black person physiognomy" to be the stereotypical sambo "negroid". On the flip side, you and your Eurocentric ilk have no problem with European diversity with talk of 'Nordic', 'Alpine' and 'Mediterranean', with the latter including non Europeans from the Middle East and South Asia to the Pacific! LOL
A West African
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ceasar: Lol if anyone is a delusional schizophrenic then its you with your mythical white Nubian nonsense
LOL My point exactly! Next thing, this fool will postulate white Monomotapa who built Great Zimbabwe.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: lyinarse is not a western African by any measure; he/she is simply playing a keyboard "African". People like to play roles of what they are not in real life on the internet, and lyinarse is just fulfilling that fantasy. Heck, I can choose to play "Santa typing from the North pole" for all we know, and there will still be gullible ones out there who would actually believe it, LOL. lyinarse is in all probability some eurocentric sap of a Hindu decent. With the striking ignorance lyinarse displays about Africa, he/she could not possibly have ever set foot on the continent.
My thoughts exactly. Her obsession with Indians makes me think she is one, albeit a mentally deranged one with low self-esteem.
Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
Djehuti wants to post modern photos to make an ancient point. What nonsense are we going to be subjected to next?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ My point was about the phenotype of Africans, and that it is diverse. What is your point about the photo I posted? Are you saying the person is a caucasian also due to her aquiline nose?? LOL Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
These trolls have tried to address the bio-anthropological evidence of Egypt's African identity only to fail miserably.
What of the cultural aspects?...
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: The pharaonic symbols like the falcon, hedjet, and hieroglyphs were all found in the Qustul culture of Lower Nubia first before the Naqada culture of Upper Egypt. Virtually all Egyptologists and other scholars agree that earliest known kings' tombs are found in Qustul in Lower Nubia. Indeed the earliest evidence of complex cemeteries and funerary institutions in the Nile Valley are to be found there. What you also fail to realize due to your ignorance of African culture is that all of these cultural elements you point out have been acknowledged by from the earliest (even racist) scholars to be of indigenous African origin. If you knew anything about black African culture you would recognize that these features are all totemic in nature. Everything from the hawk iconography to the hedjet headdress, to even the use of hieroglyphs are all based on African totemism. Scholars from Petrie to Champollion to Gardiner saw these as "primitive" and even "negroid" vestiges of culture where animals and plants are used to symbolize tribes, ancestors, rulers, even deities. In the 'Qustul culture' of Ta-Seti there were three main totems, two of them being the hawk and baboon. The hedjet crown was said to symbolize a bull's penis which echoes back European explorers and scholars who remarked about the "odd" and "unusual" headdresses of African kings and chieftains which represent animal or plant "fetishes". We know hieroglyphs are made up mostly of animal symbols and again the earliest evidence of which is found in Qustul and Sayalah. Even the very concept of pharaoh itself is African where the king is also recognized as a god. In the Sudan in particular some kings reign after a certain period of thirty years until they are sacrificed. In Egypt, after the same period of time instead of being sacrificed, the pharaoh goes through a ritual of rejuvenation to continue his reign called the Heb Sed. He wears a tail of a bull or ox, the same way many kings in Africa do. The first part of the title of this thread, the 'Narmer Palette' actually shows obvious African totemism and other symbolism as well as the ritual sacrifice of a defeated enemy as first described in detail by Diop in the context of his own African culture where the king conducts the very same sacrifice!
So tell us this, false prophet. I was able to point out but a handful of the myriad of African cultural aspects in ancient Egyptian culture, Can you point out any Asiatic cultural aspects??
In the meantime let's ponder this, you speak of the Naqada culture having the hawk. Yet the earliest evidence of the hawk totem in Naqada is in association with the predynastic city of Nekhen (hierakonpolis). Below is a study based on cemeteries in Nekhen:
A biological affinities study based on frequencies of cranial nonmetric traits in skeletal samples from three cemeteries at Predynastic Naqada, Egypt, confirms the results of a recent nonmetric dental morphological analysis. Both cranial and dental traits analyses indicate that the individuals buried in a cemetery characterized archaeologically as high status are significantly different from individuals buried in two other, apparently non-elite cemeteries and that the non-elite samples are not significantly different from each other. A comparison with neighboring Nile Valley skeletal samples suggests that the high status cemetery represents an endogamous ruling or elite segment of the local population at Naqada, which is more closely related to populations in northern Nubia than to neighboring populations in southern Egypt. T. Prowse, and N. Lovell "Concordance of cranial and dental morphological traits and evidence for endogamy in ancient Egypt" American journal of physical anthropology. 1996, vol. 101, no2, pp. 237-246 (2 p.1/4)
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Indeed. In all too many depictions men and even women depicted with short cropped hair, they are shown with tight curls.
Let's not even mention afros.
quote:Another thing I've noticed about Egyptian art is that often there are horizontal grooves carved into the men's hair, like this:
I've noticed that black men's hair, particularly when it is fairly short, often has little "waves" in it. If you look closely at this photo you can see these waves:
The waves look exactly like the horizontal grooves you see on Egyptian male statues!
I await the Eurocentric explanation to all this.
Very perceptive. I've noticed that look in some ancient Egyptian depictions as well. Actually this look can be achieved in short-cropped hair of black people by applying certain gels. In fact the traditional substance used was animal fat. I was told this by African American friends, and when I researched it further it turns out the use of animal fat to attain such a hairstyle is a practice that is as very ancient as it is very common on the African continent. It is practiced by peoples in west Africa, southern Africa, as well as east Africa. No surprise the Egyptians did it as well.
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
Fula woman from Mali with $4000 of gold and a very nice nose
LOL, Fula are heavily admixed people found in multiple countries across Africa. The Sudanese Fula are 54% R1 Y-dna which has a West Asian origin. The Eyeball experts of ES. Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet: Fula woman from Mali with $4000 of gold and a very nice nose
LOL, Fula are heavily admixed people found in multiple countries across Africa. The Sudanese Fula are 54% R1 Y-dna which has a West Asian origin. The Eyeball experts of ES.
Lol the Fulani are not heavily mixed, stop with that bullshit. The tishkoff study destroyed that nonsense.
The blue portion is the Saharan/Dogon cluster, and Tishkoff doesn't even know for sure if is fully Eurasian. All the rest is African
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ceasar:
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet: Fula woman from Mali with $4000 of gold and a very nice nose
LOL, Fula are heavily admixed people found in multiple countries across Africa. The Sudanese Fula are 54% R1 Y-dna which has a West Asian origin. The Eyeball experts of ES.
Lol the Fulani are not heavily mixed, stop with that bullshit. The tishkoff study destroyed that nonsense.
The blue portion is the Saharan/Dogon cluster, and Tishkoff doesn't even know for sure if is fully Eurasian. All the rest is African
Tiskoff et al. only tested Fula from Cameroon and Nigeria and the Dogon samples were not good. Fula also share a lactose mutation with Mozabites and Eurasians.
A number of Africans (predominantly CMA, Fulani, and eastern Afroasiatic speakers) exhibit low to moderate levels of European–Middle Eastern ancestry, consistent with possible gene flow from those regions.
The Fulani and Cushitic AACs, which likely reflect Saharan African and East African ancestry, respectively, are closest to the non-African(Eurasian)AACs, consistent with an East African migration of modern humans out of Africa or a back-migration of non-Africans into Saharan and Eastern Africa. Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet:
quote:Originally posted by Ceasar:
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet: Fula woman from Mali with $4000 of gold and a very nice nose
LOL, Fula are heavily admixed people found in multiple countries across Africa. The Sudanese Fula are 54% R1 Y-dna which has a West Asian origin. The Eyeball experts of ES.
Lol the Fulani are not heavily mixed, stop with that bullshit. The tishkoff study destroyed that nonsense.
The blue portion is the Saharan/Dogon cluster, and Tishkoff doesn't even know for sure if is fully Eurasian. All the rest is African
Tiskoff et al. only tested Fula from Cameroon and Nigeria and the Dogon samples were not good. Fula also share a lactose mutation with Mozabites and Eurasians.
A number of Africans (predominantly CMA, Fulani, and eastern Afroasiatic speakers) exhibit low to moderate levels of European–Middle Eastern ancestry, consistent with possible gene flow from those regions.
The Fulani and Cushitic AACs, which likely reflect Saharan African and East African ancestry, respectively, are closest to the non-African(Eurasian)AACs, consistent with an East African migration of modern humans out of Africa or a back-migration of non-Africans into Saharan and Eastern Africa.
Why would other Fulani's be so much more mixed then the other ones? Is there any evidence of the other Fulani's that have not been tested being shown to have mixed so much more with Eurasians? There is no evidence for that. It has to do with OOA African position, because if their was a lot of back-migration the blue cluster would be a lot larger in the Fulani and other east African populations. And even they have some ancient Eurasian ancestors, they are still a lot more related to other Africans then the are with Eurasians. Intermediate doesn't necessarily mean 50/50. And by the way a lot of eurasian populations have detectable sub-sharan ancestral markers but I don't see you going around calling them substantially mixed.
Why do eurocentrics like to go into Africa and try to exaggerate the amount of admixture? Dude drop that ****, I don't understand people who feel the need devalue and diminish other ethnic groups.
As you can see for yourself the Fulani and Cushitic closer cluster more so with Africans then non Africans. Look at page 36. And who said that the dogon samples were bad? Out your your mouth or Tishkoff show me evidence.
Your mythical heavily mixed Fulani, Nubian and east Africans that cluster with Eurasians are pure garbage
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Of course Africans have the greatest amount of diversity in the world, especially since they have been greatly mixed since ancient times. Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Of course Africans have the greatest amount of diversity in the world, especially since they have been greatly mixed since ancient times.
Why do you even post here? you don't contribute anything intellectually to the discussions and you have the analytical and reasoning capabilities of a 5 year old.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Djehuti and the others wants to play eyeball anthropology only on their terms.lol....Let's all post our favorite Old Kingdom photos and compare them to modern day individuals.lol
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ceasar:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Of course Africans have the greatest amount of diversity in the world, especially since they have been greatly mixed since ancient times.
Why do you even post here? you don't contribute anything intellectually to the discussions and you have the analytical and reasoning capabilities of a 5 year old.
That's at least better than the credit I give you.lol
Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
And all you dumb ass idiots talking about Eurasian back migration don't understand that these people would have looked like this
What is he 15% Caucasoid lol?
Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by Ceasar:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Of course Africans have the greatest amount of diversity in the world, especially since they have been greatly mixed since ancient times.
Why do you even post here? you don't contribute anything intellectually to the discussions and you have the analytical and reasoning capabilities of a 5 year old.
That's at least better than the credit I give you.lol
Ok miss simple, Like it really matters, I am so not worthy of your respect and I am in awe of your intellectual prowess, lol get out of here with that **** you have a decimal point IQ
Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Djehuti and the others wants to play eyeball anthropology only on their terms.lol....Let's all post our favorite Old Kingdom photos and compare them to modern day individuals.lol
Maybe in your pseudo parallel reality that goes on in that vast hollow head of yours
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ceasar:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Djehuti and the others wants to play eyeball anthropology only on their terms.lol....Let's all post our favorite Old Kingdom photos and compare them to modern day individuals.lol
Maybe in your pseudo parallel reality that goes on in that vast hollow head of yours
I haven't even started to play yet.lol
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet:
quote:Originally posted by Ceasar:
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet: Fula woman from Mali with $4000 of gold and a very nice nose
LOL, Fula are heavily admixed people found in multiple countries across Africa. The Sudanese Fula are 54% R1 Y-dna which has a West Asian origin. The Eyeball experts of ES.
Lol the Fulani are not heavily mixed, stop with that bullshit. The tishkoff study destroyed that nonsense.
The blue portion is the Saharan/Dogon cluster, and Tishkoff doesn't even know for sure if is fully Eurasian. All the rest is African
Tiskoff et al. only tested Fula from Cameroon and Nigeria and the Dogon samples were not good. Fula also share a lactose mutation with Mozabites and Eurasians.
A number of Africans (predominantly CMA, Fulani, and eastern Afroasiatic speakers) exhibit low to moderate levels of European–Middle Eastern ancestry, consistent with possible gene flow from those regions.
The Fulani and Cushitic AACs, which likely reflect Saharan African and East African ancestry, respectively, are closest to the non-African(Eurasian)AACs, consistent with an East African migration of modern humans out of Africa or a back-migration of non-Africans into Saharan and Eastern Africa.
Genetic research make it clear the Fulani are not of Eurasian origin:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Djehuti and the others wants to play eyeball anthropology only on their terms.lol....Let's all post our favorite Old Kingdom photos and compare them to modern day individuals.lol
Maybe in your pseudo parallel reality that goes on in that vast hollow head of yours
I haven't even started to play yet.lol
what???
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Re: Fulani. nonprohet's klutzian mentality: A subset is more diverse than the superset it came from. As such, African diversity was only attained from external gene flow. LOL
Ps:
According to our own anthropological examination (data not shown), the non-sub-Saharan haplogroups are not carried by "West Eurasian-like" individuals, as might be anticipated, but were rather detected in common "Fulani type" peoples. - Cerny et al. (2006), mtDNA of Fulani Nomads and Their Genetic Relationships to Neighboring Sedentary Populations
Posted by NonProphet (Member # 17745) on :
^ES Keita Ideologues who use Set theory in Math combined with strawman idiot remarks.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Wow people are still trying to claim that Fulani are external Africans??
Thats just pathetic but not surprising. The Truth is that Fulbe are West African people. The ones that have west eurasian genes are NOT the Fula that nonprophet thinks. As can be read from Explorer the Fulani with East African Features, are the ones that have a extreme West African Haplogroups. The fula that look like regular West African people have extra eurasian lineages so that throws a wrench in the ideas of people like prophet who have a vested interest in turning the Fula white. First Nubians, Egyptians and now Fulanis when will this madness end?
Peace
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
^ Maybe they'll claim the Zulu next.
Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
And just to slap down more Nonprofits bullshit, non prophet talks about how Nubians cluster more so with Eurasians than other Africans. Tishkoff analyzed the beja northern-eastern Sudanese population, even though they are not really Nubians there ancestral proportions cannot be to different from that of the Nubians.(the best representative since the core Nubian population was in northern Sudan) and still after being exposed to thousands of years of near eastern gene flow found there DNA to be mostly of African origin with about 25% Saharan/dogon affinities.
^ES Keita Ideologues who use Set theory in Math combined with strawman idiot remarks.
You are a total moron, you know that, don't you. And what is a Keita ideology? The first I've ever come across such a thing. Being a total ignoramus, you fail to see how the "set theory" is a reflection of scientific reality of the world around us. So, I guess you reject math, just as you reject intelligence. Go figure.
Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet: ^ES Keita Ideologues who use Set theory in Math combined with strawman idiot remarks.
Thats all you can say because your Caucasoid bullshit blew up in your face
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
The dummy tried to point to Fulanis [regarding facial profile] by saying they are mixed, and when a study is posted tearing that down to smithereens, he cries "strawman". LOL
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Like what Truthcentric said the next thing for these people is for them to claim the ZULU's as Eurasian. Baahahahhahaahhaha
Even after seeing the study posted by Explorer that refuted his claims he still is in denial, Yet he is comfortable claiming that WE are "Afrocentric looneys" who take studies out of context. This is the messed up part to his dreams of a non Black Egypt and a "White" Nubia. You just got to shake your head at him and laugh bahahahahahah.
Peace
Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ceasar:
quote:Originally posted by NonProphet: ^ES Keita Ideologues who use Set theory in Math combined with strawman idiot remarks.
Thats all you can say because your Caucasoid bullshit blew up in your face
I know this is the same cat that posted some Nubian statue and compared it with with some red haired European and talked about the striking resemblance lol
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
This is something in response to getting the original post back on track.
It is funny. The author speculates that the stamp-seal must have arrived in "Mesopotamia" earlier, not from actual evidence of seals themselves, which he admits himself is lacking, but from supposed carvings on stone material. He figured that the actual seals were made from perishable stuff. What the evidence actually shows, was that the Nile Valley had access to seals at about the same time as the so-called area of "Mesopotamia", and here again, the author admits to this reality.
The author tries to then make parallels between "Mesopotamian" [mainly Uruk and Susa items] and Nile Valley examples of pictographs on cylinder seals, and each time, speculating that the Nile Valley folks emulated the former, again not from anything more substantive than to say that he feels the notion of glyptic-seals came initially from "Mesopotamia", where it transitioned from the stamp-seal to the cylindrical one. Through all this, evidence of actual seals in both regions were actually contemporaneous.
All in all, even if we were to give credence to what the author says, he is not implying some sort of transplantation of "Mesopotamian" culture in the Nile Valley, or even some sort of "dynastic race" theory; rather, he is implying that the seal culture was adopted by Nile Valley folks on their own accord, initially using the seals as decorative/jewelry stuff. He even goes onto say that Nile Valley folks developed their own manufacturing techniques for these seals, as the use of seals [via his speculation] shifted from the initial social perception of seals.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LOL What do you expect from an idiot who posts sources but never reads them.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple-minded Girl: Of course Africans have the greatest amount of diversity in the world, especially since they have been greatly mixed since ancient times.
Nope. Africans have the greatest diversity because they are the OLDEST populations in the world since humankind itself originated in Africa. Also, the notion that Africans have "greatly mixed" is a lie since all genetic tests confirm that the vast majority-- over 90% of lineages in the continent are indigenous. On the contrary the same cannot be said about Southwest Asia or even Europe. A third of Europe's Y lineages are African, yet I don't see you calling calling Europeans mixed. Why is that?
As for NonProven, he claims the Fulani woman has an aquiline nose due to R1 lineages. Well first off R1 is a Y-chromosome lineage so only MALES carry them. Second, lineages don't determine phenotype as even most men from northern Cameroon who also carry R1 look like this..
..no different from other West Africans in surrounding areas.
The Fulani of east Africa geographically closer to Eurasia look like this...
No different from other east Africans in surrounding areas.
So NO, I don't go by "eyeball" anthropology or any science the way you dummies do! LOL Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ LOL What do you expect from an idiot who posts sources but never reads them.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple-minded Girl: Of course Africans have the greatest amount of diversity in the world, especially since they have been greatly mixed since ancient times.
Nope. Africans have the greatest diversity because they are the OLDEST populations in the world since humankind itself originated in Africa. Also, the notion that Africans have "greatly mixed" is a lie since all genetic tests confirm that the vast majority-- over 90% of lineages in the continent are indigenous. On the contrary the same cannot be said about Southwest Asia or even Europe. A third of Europe's Y lineages are African, yet I don't see you calling calling Europeans mixed. Why is that?
That's funny since we don't see any large populations of these type of people being indigenous to Europe:
As we do these type of people being indigenous to Northern Africa:
Now which do you assume has a more similar relationship based upon genetics and phenotype?
Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ LOL What do you expect from an idiot who posts sources but never reads them.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple-minded Girl: Of course Africans have the greatest amount of diversity in the world, especially since they have been greatly mixed since ancient times.
Nope. Africans have the greatest diversity because they are the OLDEST populations in the world since humankind itself originated in Africa. Also, the notion that Africans have "greatly mixed" is a lie since all genetic tests confirm that the vast majority-- over 90% of lineages in the continent are indigenous. On the contrary the same cannot be said about Southwest Asia or even Europe. A third of Europe's Y lineages are African, yet I don't see you calling calling Europeans mixed. Why is that?
That's funny since we don't see any large populations of these type of people be indigenous to Europe:
As we do these type of people being indigenous to Northern Africa:
Now which do you assume has a more similar relationship based upon genetics and phenotype?
Which ethnic group do the two lighter skinned people belong to?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] ^ LOL What do you expect from an idiot who posts sources but never reads them. [qb]
It is not based totally upon any one persons opinion. Obviously it is you that hasn't read it.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: The dummy tried to point to Fulanis [regarding facial profile] by saying they are mixed, and when a study is posted tearing that down to smithereens, he cries "strawman". LOL
quote:Originally posted by KING: Like what Truthcentric said the next thing for these people is for them to claim the ZULU's as Eurasian. Baahahahhahaahhaha
Even after seeing the study posted by Explorer that refuted his claims he still is in denial, Yet he is comfortable claiming that WE are "Afrocentric looneys" who take studies out of context. This is the messed up part to his dreams of a non Black Egypt and a "White" Nubia. You just got to shake your head at him and laugh bahahahahahah.
Peace
Indeed, FalsePromise definitely has a mental affliction. He and other white losers like him feel this sick twisted need to white-wash other peoples and cultures even if they are Africans.
The ancient Egyptians, especially the royals like the ones above are Cockasians, I promise! Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: That's funny since we don't see any large populations of these type of people being indigenous to Europe:
As we do these type of people being indigenous to Northern Africa:
Now which do you assume has a more similar relationship based upon genetics and phenotype?
Apparently it flew past your brains (again) that just because they carry lineages from a certain people does not mean they have to look exactly like those people. A third of Europeans carry lineages from Africa they received during neolithic times, how does that mean they look like those black Africans?? In the meantime, coastal Berbers of North Africa, who by the way don't represent all Berbers let alone all North Africans as plenty are still black, are known to have European lineages especially from recent historical times as North Africa was invaded by the Germanic Vandals and Alani people. Of course this makes sense considering that white skin is NOT indigenous to Africa and in fact white Berbers suffer from high rates of sun burn and skin cancer since their pale skins are not conducive to the subtropical sun of Northern Africa the same way white Afrikaners are with the subtropical sun of South Africa.
Tell me, would you consider the whites of South Africa to be indigenous to Africa even if they lived there for 800 to a thousand years more??
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
pics Originally posted by Djehuti:
These Egyptians look rather different from one another. Why is that? You say it's African diversity. So now you go looking anywhere on the continent of Africa no matter what the distance. Asia is attached to Egypt. But no it's not the whole diversity of Africa. It's ancient Egypt a particular region of Africa which had some input of people from nearby regions but not from many other places further off. There were no planes and trains with Angolans and Nigerians migrating looking for construction work on the pyramids.
So why is acceptable to look at all these places South of Egypt as possible input into Egypt but not look at places North of Egypt simply because today we use a different continental name, Asia even though the Levant is closer to Egypt than a place like the horn !!!
That's just arbitrary.
A lot of Ancient Egyptians look like this^^^
Some theorized she had Kushite ancestry. Many other Egyptians in the art had smaller lips and were not as dark.
Doesn't look like an African in this particular artifact. looks more like an Indian. The head is round, not elongated. The ears are big (very overlooked racial giveaway bonus) The nostrils are small. The mouth does not have a wide opening. O.k. , now you're on google looking for an supposedly a contemporary African with no genetic background information provided. Suppose you find somebody from Somalia that looks similar. Suppose I find somebody in Jordan that looks similar. Why do you not even acknowledge the Jordan person similarity, Jordan is closer to Egypt, is the sole reason it doesn't have the word "Africa" affiliated to it? Somebody could make an argument that Tut probably did not have a drop of ancestry from two feet North of Egypt but still admit that in this particular piece of art he looks South Asian.
Somewhat Black looking. Looks somewhat mixed with a South European. Again the nostrils are quite small for a Black person. He looks like an intermediary but more on the black hand side
Looks entirely like a Kushite true Negroid Sub Saharan type (piercing ES alarm belles ringing) He's got a very rounded nose and big lips, fro showing. People are just being ridiculous if this looks typical as a rendition by Egyptians of Egyptians. This stands out and that's why you see it on so many Afrocentric sites. Most Egyptians are depicted with less rounded relatively straighter narrower noses and smaller lips. Some do look like this rendition of Amenhotep III but most do not look that black (ES alarm bells going of even louder than before) How can she say that????? Well I'll give you a more common looking Egyptian, Djehuti's last example below:
what did I tell you? there it is, very small lips and a long straight not rounded nose. Looks totally different than the one previous. How could that be? He doesn't look that African but by African American standards it could be a black person, or could be an Arab, could be a South Asian of some kind.
Now think for a moment, What does a South Asian look like? Now look at this picture. It could look like that so why is a South Asian out of the question? It's a bias against Asia. I say there were plenty of African looking types in AE. But also many South Asian looking types. Most looked like persons falling in between these categories defying everybody's political claims.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Lighting has no bearing on older photos showing[ the scribe with remnants of his original dark color.
Look at the seated scribe's leg. Around the knee is darker than the upper chest. This around the knee darker part is no darker than this Indian guy:
So the darkness doesn't prove anything. There are two different color coats of paint on top of the white stone. One is medium orange brown the other is drake chocolate brown.The story behind this we do not know. But it's irrelevant because the seated scribe does not look African and it's not based on color. Wally noticed this. He called it an anomaly. He also posted a lot of pictures of contemporary Egyptians so he know what Egyptians look like.
He is right, seated Egyptian sticks out like a sore thumb. He has a wide square type head. His nose looks European. The nostrils are small. His ears are very large. His lips are very thin. Many Egyptians looked semi Asian but seated scribe looks all Indo Caucasian.
I could post any European. As long as he is painted in a chocolate brown skin tone some of you would make the argument he looks African and then start posting pictures of various Africans.
Seated Scribe does not look African. He was hired from somewhere else. Or is fake.
Lioness has spoken
-and Wally
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
lyinarse, "dark pigmentation" does prove something. It is what folks go by, when people are called "black". I'll let you in on a secret: "black" is pigmentation, not a morphology.
The scribe is African, which by definition, makes your claim that he does not look "African" boneheaded-thinking. And what do you know about what an African looks like; it is apparent you've never seen one in person.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
^Typical typological Lioness. Nearly one year registered, and her posts still radiate ignorance, lol. What the hell is a ''Kushite true Negroid Sub Saharan type''?
Imagine how phucked up someones concept of anthropology has to be for him/her to spout that.
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
Doesn't look like an African in this particular artifact. looks more like an Indian. The head is round, not elongated.
When people describe African skulls as being elongated, they're referring to the length from the front to back of the skull, not the facial shape. As for the round face shape, that's actually quite common among Nilotic peoples:
BTW, King Tut isn't the only Egyptian with a round face. I've noticed that round faces like those of Nilotes are actually rather common in Egyptian sculptures, and someone else has also noticed that.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote: When people describe African skulls as being elongated, they're referring to the length from the front to back of the skull, not the facial shape.
''Elongated'', as in ''elongated africans'' refers to a relatively high incidence of narrow nose, calvaria and face shapes in a given (African) population.
Of course, Tut's facial shape on that mannequin is far from round. Facial shape is meassured by index, not by randomly ascribing what you think it is. But we all know that that is what Lioness is good at.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
Doesn't look like an African in this particular artifact. looks more like an Indian. The head is round, not elongated.
When people describe African skulls as being elongated, they're referring to the length from the front to back of the skull, not the facial shape. As for the round face shape, that's actually quite common among Nilotic peoples:
BTW, King Tut isn't the only Egyptian with a round face. I've noticed that round faces like those of Nilotes are actually rather common in Egyptian sculptures, and someone else has also noticed that.
You need a different example. The lady you posted does not have a round face.
This woman does not have a round face:
Here's a roundish face:
Another roundish face, very similar to Tut wood bust:
that's only one element that makes wood Tut bust not look African -big ears -small nostrils -nose not wide -lips small -mouth opening not wide
Prove lioness wrong, 1st step. look in Africa -WHY? whay not look to all places close to Egypt including Africa and the Middle East?
why, you are looking, say 1000 miles South of Egypt why not 1000 North as well?
Because if you go even two feet North it's different type people land?
Look at this theory "Out of Africa"
Supposedly people are divided into two categories. Africans and the "out of Africa people"
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
____________________ Explorer approved Black people:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: lioness, "dark pigmentation" does prove something. It is what folks go by, when people are called "black". I'll let you in on a secret: "black" is pigmentation, not a morphology.
Sorry Djehuti it's not only the true Negro types
/closed
Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
lol are people actually trying to say that Egyptians look more Indian than African lol? Lioness your delusional lol
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ceasar: lol are people actually trying to say that Egyptians look more Indian than African lol? Lioness your delusional lol
No, in the art Egyptians looked a variety of ways from Black to Mexican (I said looked not are)
they were heavily race mixing these 'gyptians
mingling with the both the true Negroes and Asians.
This is where the dilution all happens.
The seated scribe was probably a person from South Asia who had good penmanship
______________________________________
Amenemhat II
_______________ Amenemhat III
something's up
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lyingass-moron: ____________________ Explorer approved Black people:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: lioness, "dark pigmentation" does prove something. It is what folks go by, when people are called "black". I'll let you in on a secret: "black" is pigmentation, not a morphology.
Sorry Djehuti it's not only the true Negro types
/closed
These two Indians above are not black. Nobody not even Explorer ever said they were. Yet your deranged ass keeps trying to say the chocolate dark Egyptians looked like these individuals which are not that dark.
You are a psycho who can't comment on anything logical let alone scientific. You are dismissed.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: lioness, "dark pigmentation" does prove something. It is what folks go by, when people are called "black". I'll let you in on a secret: "black" is pigmentation, not a morphology.
These two Indians above are not black. Nobody not even Explorer ever said they were.
It is only you who said they weren't black. It is you who don't understand simple logic. By Explorers logic as quoted above the two Indians inevitably "Black". How much clearer could he make it. He said pertaining to the word "Black" being used to described people:
"dark pigmentation does prove something"
"Black" is pigmentation"
"not a morphology"
-read next time, the two Indians according to Explorer are BLACK
/close
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Posted by Siptah (Member # 17601) on :
@Lionness,
What is your definition of a True Negro as opposed to a Non True Negro?
True Caucasoid / Caucasian as opposed to a Non True Caucasoid / Caucasian.
True Mongoloid as opposed to a Non True Mongoloid.
If you racialists want fairness and careful consideration with your racialist descriptions when the topic of physiognomy is concerned and you address black populations as "True" Negroes in converse then you must also make the comparison toward the "True" type of Caucasians or Mongoloids.
When you do not make the appropriate comparisons you create the perception of a "True" type as opposed to the Non True types as being somewhat of a peculiarity making it an indication of interjected politics subjected to black populations utilized in a political fashion for whatever political purposes.
If not, then your opinions will be considered pointless but questionable and the argument will persist on circulating.
Posted by Siptah (Member # 17601) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
"mingling with the both the true Negroes and Asians."
Where is your true descriptors of Asians?
Why is a True descriptor used for comparative purposes as opposed to a Non True descriptor?
quote: "King Tut doesn't look like an African in this particular artifact...The head is round, not elongated...He looks South West Asian"
quote: "The seated Egyptian sticks out like a sore thumb. He has a wide square type head....His lips are very thin....He doesn't look African but Asian"
quote: "Kushite true Negroid Sub Saharan type"
???
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: It is only you who said they weren't black. It is you who don't understand simple logic. By Explorers logic as quoted above the two Indians inevitably "Black". How much clearer could he make it. He said pertaining to the word "Black" being used to described people:
"dark pigmentation does prove something"
"Black" is pigmentation"
"not a morphology"
-read next time, the two Indians according to Explorer are BLACK
/close
As usual you take things out of context. By dark pigmentation, Explorer meant very dark. If not, then even a tanned European would be 'black' YOUR misinterpreted definitions, you moron!
quote:Originally posted by A Simple-minded Girl:
Yes this boy is dark enough to be considered 'black'. But is he African? NO.
Both you empty skulled, empty skirts need to give it a rest. You're both an embarrassment to all girls out there with functioning brains. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lynass: "King Tut doesn't look like an African in this particular artifact...The head is round, not elongated...He looks South West Asian"
LOL
That's funny. I thought round face is identified with "negroes" and long face with "caucasoids", yet here, the dumb girl claims the opposite. And she also posts pictures of east Asian "mongoloids" exhibiting both types! So what are we to make of all these contradictions??
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Negroes have Afro type hair, full lips and wide nostrils. The truest ones fit this description (maybe)
Either that or the two Indians above are Negroes
you can't have your cake an eat it too.
What does "Negro" mean? It means "black"
Explorer says as pertaining to people "Black" means dark pigmentation alone Djehuti says it's not enough for Black membership.
I'm going back and forth between these two wise men trying to figure out who is wiser.
One hour I'm a true Negroist the next I'm a "there are no races-ist."
I await the experts to sort it out.
I may have to go into my none of these Asians or Africans are black they are brown position if they keep pushing me. That tends to be more accurate although some equatorial types are virtually black
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lynass: Negroes have Afro type hair, full lips and wide nostrils. The truest ones fit this description (maybe)
You don't get it do you? Racial typology is invalid.
By your definition this boy below is "negro"
Yet he is Asian NOT African.
And then we have Africans like this woman.
Despite what some idiots say, she is 100% African with no admixture.
That comes to show that your racial typology is B.S.
By the way, as for afro-type hair, what kind of hair do these ancient Egyptians have anyway?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
____________________ Explorer approved Black people:
...
Fantasizing as a continental-African is apparently not good enough for lyinarse. If you are as good at understanding truth as you are in manufacturing tales, you'd be a good sport.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: That's funny since we don't see any large populations of these type of people being indigenous to Europe:
As we do these type of people being indigenous to Northern Africa:
Now which do you assume has a more similar relationship based upon genetics and phenotype?
Apparently it flew past your brains (again) that just because they carry lineages from a certain people does not mean they have to look exactly like those people. A third of Europeans carry lineages from Africa they received during neolithic times, how does that mean they look like those black Africans?? In the meantime, coastal Berbers of North Africa, who by the way don't represent all Berbers let alone all North Africans as plenty are still black, are known to have European lineages especially from recent historical times as North Africa was invaded by the Germanic Vandals and Alani people. Of course this makes sense considering that white skin is NOT indigenous to Africa and in fact white Berbers suffer from high rates of sun burn and skin cancer since their pale skins are not conducive to the subtropical sun of Northern Africa the same way white Afrikaners are with the subtropical sun of South Africa.
Tell me, would you consider the whites of South Africa to be indigenous to Africa even if they lived there for 800 to a thousand years more??
It's funny that I don't even have to argue my point any further with you.You don't even realize that you have just proven my point.lol
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by the lynass: [qb] Negroes have Afro type hair, full lips and wide nostrils. The truest ones fit this description (maybe)
You don't get it do you? Racial typology is invalid.
By your definition this boy below is "negro"
Yet he is Asian NOT African.
And then we have Africans like this woman.
Despite what some idiots say, she is 100% African with no admixture.
whites who came from Europe and now live in Africa are Africans. what's your point? Stop trying to flip the script. We were talking about who is black and who is not, not who is an African. By Explorer's logic the Indian man and the Negrito are both Black Asians. By your standard the Indian man is not black. This is because you have a racial typology that goes beyond just skin pigmentation.
Then we come to this African with the huge nose. You say 100% no Asian ancestry. How do you know that? Have you seen DNA test results on this particular woman?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^He can't prove she has no admixture. lol....Let's see the dna proof desperate one.lol....He makes claims that he can't back up.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ The proof that the Fula woman and her people aren't mixed was shown in the previous page by several posters, you moron! Or did your brain damaged mind miss these:
Not only do West African Fulani share the same mt lineages as other West Africans, but Fula men carry the typical West African male lineage E1b1a at 100% more than any other group. As was explained on the other page also, there are West Africans who carry the alleged Eurasian male lineage R1 yet display stereotypically "negroid" typology. How do you explain this?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lynass: whites who came from Europe and now live in Africa are Africans. what's your point?
My point is they ares still not indigenous, you twit.
quote:Stop trying to flip the script.
'Flipping the script' is something that YOU are guilty of, and you do it all the time. Like when you attribute Egyptian features to every other population except Africans which the Egyptians are.
quote:We were talking about who is black and who is not, not who is an African. By Explorer's logic the Indian man and the Negrito are both Black Asians.
Which Indian man is this? Most Indian men you post have complexions that are relatively too light to be called 'black'.
quote:By your standard the Indian man is not black. This is because you have a racial typology that goes beyond just skin pigmentation.
Nope. I don't have any racial typology at all like you. That man would be considered 'brown' due to his medium tone.
quote:Then we come to this African with the huge nose. You say 100% no Asian ancestry. How do you know that? Have you seen DNA test results on this particular woman?
Yes, and such results were posted on the last page, dummy! It seems you and Simple-minded girl have a penchant for ignoring or disregarding scientific evidence when posted. Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote: Originally posted by The Explorer: lioness, "dark pigmentation" does prove something. It is what folks go by, when people are called "black". I'll let you in on a secret: "black" is pigmentation, not a morphology.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: We were talking about who is black and who is not, not who is an African. By Explorer's logic the Indian man and the Negrito are both Black Asians.
Which Indian man is this? Most Indian men you post have complexions that are relatively too light to be called 'black'.
All the men above are Black people by Explorer's definition
or are you saying ALL of them are brown rather than black?
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Does not look like an African person:
^^^^if you don't notice an oriental quality about this you're blind
It doesn't mean that the Egyptians were "oriental" But the above statue doesn't look very African to me.
Thutmose not looking very African either, not in the least. Look at the defined hard looking nose bone and the upward angle. It looks half European with oriental qualities in the eyes and the lips are small, non elongated head shape. You can't find a lot of African people looking like this, one feature here of there maybe but not as a whole. You go all over Africa looking, but traveling to distances much further from Egypt than the Levant
For political reasons you can't admit it.
Doesn't look like a black kid to me. Looks more Indian.
That's doesn't mean he was Indian. But after seeing so much of Egyptian art where people sometimes look black and that other times Asian it makes me wonder. Is it an surprise that Egypt borders Asia?
It looks like blacks in Egypt were doing a lot of mingling. They wern't as hung up about it
^Don't like like Asian people to me. If you don't notice some African qualities you must be blind, and arguing for political reasons. It looks like the whites from india were doing a lot of mixing with Kushite true negro sub saharans Before Lioness starts to defeat me with her superior debating skills, I would like to point out that I didn't say that the Indians in the pictures above are Africans, I'm just saying that they look like Africans. India is closer to Africa than it is to Australia so racial mixing must have occured. I don't know what Australia has to do with it, but I just thought saying that sounded cool. On wikipedia it says that the Indian and African continents were once connected. It is very likely that true negro sub saharan kushites and indians used this route to exchange peoples and technology.
Altakruri said that the Ancient Egyptians knew hindu's. This came from Altakruri himself, go take it up with him. I don't know what it all means, but if you look at the world map, India is closer to Africa (Somalia) than Senegal is to Egypt. There were selective pressures, and both Indians and some East Africans carry haplogroup M.
(shows y dna map)
Posted by Siptah (Member # 17601) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness The Seated Scribe: "He has a wide square type head"
And? According to you South West Asians have both round and wide square type heads
quote:"His nose looks European"
LOL what European nose?
Where is his (Indo) European nose?
Do Europeans have flat noses?
His head is elongated, his jaw is prognathous, his orbits are not sloping, his nose is flat, his hair is carved in a fashion indicating that its not straight...
quote:"His lips are very thin"
Lips do not have a cranio-metrical basis.
quote:"His ears are big"
His eyes are also very unrealistically big, and I've never seen anyone with ears or eyes as big as his. Art is subjective and I believe there were principles used in dynastic art, stylizing and idealizing many features.
Here are some physiognomic (Indo) European examples i could find as close as to The Seated Scribe:
Do their eyes and ears look as BIG as the Seated Scribe?
Even the Seated Scribe's fat disposition and cheekbone is different to those (Indo) European examples and he has a lot of fat on him.
Observe the fat stored under their Jaws and their drooped cheekbones in contrast to the Seated Scribe higher cheekbones with no to less fat under his Jaw.
Why doesn't he possess the full physiognomy of an Indo European Lioness?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ The proof that the Fula woman and her people aren't mixed was shown in the previous page by several posters, you moron! Or did your brain damaged mind miss these:
Not only do West African Fulani share the same mt lineages as other West Africans, but Fula men carry the typical West African male lineage E1b1a at 100% more than any other group. As was explained on the other page also, there are West Africans who carry the alleged Eurasian male lineage R1 yet display stereotypically "negroid" typology. How do you explain this?
Your own source debunks your claim that she is definitely not mixed.You have got to be about the biggest idiot on this forum.lol
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Siptah:
Not bad, this guy could be older a little more sagging, the head shape and jaw pretty good though. The seated scribe's jaw is very square, this man has that. Seated scribe has super thin lips, even thinner than white dude but they are definitely similar. He has a wide mouth opening which emphasizes the thinness of the lips.
see if you can find a match for the nose, keeping with the small nostril size and straightness. Also a big ear.
Experiment: print out a picture of the seated scribe, ask some random people on the street where do they think he comes from.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^
Siptah, Kalonji, this is getting nowhere. The stupid b|tch keeps making the same idiotic arguments over and over again no matter how many times she is corrected and even tries to distort the words of others namely Explorer in regards to the definition of 'black'.
Every sane person in the world knows that the Egyptians like Tut below are BLACK...
and are nothing like Indians let alone these individuals here.
So my question is why argue with a retarded WHITE racist who plays pretend black girl in this forum while trolling passive-aggressively?? She knows she can't win any argument against the FACT that Egyptians were black Africans, so she resorts to foolish troll tactics of arguing in circles about skin color and facial features.
I say let's stick to the original topic of this thread which is about the Narmer Palette and other predynastic motifs attributed to Mesopotamia, and thus continue to inflict psychological pain.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Pretty good resemblance, a Somali with Arabian ancestry. But jaw is not that square and wide though, head not that wide
this guy has that same wide head shape but features not as good as President Ahmed
A cross between these two men might be closest
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
1934: December 15, Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed is born a member of the Darod clan According to early Islamic books and Somali tradition, Muhammad ibn Aqil's descendant Abdirahman bin Isma'il al-Jabarti (Darod), a son of the Sufi sheikh of the Qadiriyyah order, fled his homeland in the Arabian Peninsula after an argument with his uncle. During the 10th or 11th century CE, he is believed to have then settled in northern Somalia just across the Red Sea and married the daughter of the Dir chief, which is said to have given rise to the Darod clan family The Darod population in Somalia lives principally in the north, with a presence in the Mogadishu area as well as in the southwestern region. Outside of Somalia proper, there are various Darod sub-clans in the Ogaden and the North Eastern Province (currently administered by Ethiopia and Kenya, respectively), as well as Yemen.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ The Arabian origins of the Darod clan is merely a legend, backed up by no actual historical or scientific evidence at all. Genetic studies of Somalis show no difference at all between members of different clans and Somalis are overwhelmingly African in lineage both paternally and maternally.
So your point about Somalis being of foreign origins is as silly as the Fulani or Watutsi based simply on facial features.
In fact, your whole notion of attributing the diversity of craniofacial features among Africans to non-Africans has been refuted.
By the way, that Somali politician may not have the exact same square jaw as the scribe but his jaw line is the exact same as Tutankhamun.
Consider yourself dismissed.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote: Originally posted by Djehuty: I say let's stick to the original topic of this thread which is about the Narmer Palette and other predynastic motifs attributed to Mesopotamia, and thus continue to inflict psychological pain.
Yes, Let's ignore Typical Typolical Trashbag until she says something substantive.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ The Arabian origins of the Darod clan is merely a legend, backed up by no actual historical or scientific evidence at all. Genetic studies of Somalis show no difference at all between members of different clans and Somalis are overwhelmingly African in lineage both paternally and maternally.
So your point about Somalis being of foreign origins is as silly as the Fulani or Watutsi based simply on facial features.
In fact, your whole notion of attributing the diversity of craniofacial features among Africans to non-Africans has been refuted.
By the way, that Somali politician may not have the exact same square jaw as the scribe but his jaw line is the exact same as Tutankhamun.
Consider yourself dismissed.
According to an mtDNA study by Holden (2005), a large proportion of the maternal ancestry of Somalis consists of the M1 haplogroup, which is common among Ethiopians and North Africans, particularly Egyptians and Algerians. M1 is believed to have originated in Asia, where its parent M clade represents the majority of mtDNA lineages (particularly in India).
"We analysed mtDNA variation in ~250 persons from Libya, Somalia, and Congo/Zambia, as representatives of the three regions of interest. Our initial results indicate a sharp cline in M1 frequencies that generally does not extend into sub-Saharan Africa. While our North and especially East African samples contained frequencies of M1 over 20%, our sub-Saharan samples consisted almost entirely of the L1 or L2 haplogroups only. In addition, there existed a significant amount of homogeneity within the M1 haplogroup. This sharp cline indicates a history of little admixture between these regions. This could imply a more recent ancestry for M1 in Africa, as older lineages are more diverse and widespread by nature, and may be an indication of a back-migration into Africa from the Middle East.
A.D. Holden (2005), MtDNA variation in North, East, and Central African populations gives clues to a possible back-migration from the Middle East, Program of the Seventy-Fourth Annual Meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists (2005)
_________________________________________
"Somali, as a representative East African population, seem to have experienced a detectable amount of Caucasoid maternal influence... the proportion m of Caucasoid lineages in the Somali is m = 0.46 [46%]... Our results agree with the hypothesis of a maternal influence of Caucasoid lineages in East Africa, although its contribution seems to be higher than previously reported in mtDNA studies."
Comas et al. from (1999), Analysis of mtDNA HVRII in several human populations using an immobilised SSO probe hybridisation assay, Eur J Hum Genet. 1999 May-Jun;7(4):459-68.
_______________________________________
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ That topic has been addressed multiple times before. Paraclade M1 is African in origin and is different from Eurasian M. The similarities can be due to either parallel mutation and/or simple common origin being derived from L3 which originated in Africa and is ancestral to many humans in Africa and *all* outside of Africa. M1 is found both in its highest frequencies as well as diversity in Africa, particularly East Africa, and not outside the African continent! Add this together with the fact that over 80% of Somalis carry African paternal lineage E1b1b (among the highest frequencies in the world) including the Darod clan who claim paternal ancestry from an Arab, and you can see that Somalis are by far totally African.
I see those photos of Somalis having such features has disturbed you that you now attempt to portray Somalis as "mixed"; however, just like your attempts with ancient Egyptians, you still FAIL.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Our initial results indicate a sharp cline in M1 frequencies that generally does not extend into sub-Saharan Africa.
LOL, I suppose the sub-Saharan territories of Somalia or Ethiopia are not "sub-Saharan", just like the spherical earth is not spherical after all, or that a fluid does not flow. These blockheads write like they got right out of kindergarten. This is basic geography, people.
quote:So your point about Somalis being of foreign origins is as silly as the Fulani or Watutsi based simply on facial features.
Next she'll manufacture foreign origin fairy tales for the San as a reason they don't conform to her eurocentric "true Negro" imagination of continental Africans, whom she never met in her life.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Our initial results indicate a sharp cline in M1 frequencies that generally does not extend into sub-Saharan Africa.
LOL, I suppose the sub-Saharan territories of Somalia or Ethiopia are not "sub-Saharan", just like the spherical earth is not spherical after all, or that a fluid does not flow. These blockheads write like they got right out of kindergarten. This is basic geography, people.
quote:So your point about Somalis being of foreign origins is as silly as the Fulani or Watutsi based simply on facial features.
Next she'll manufacture foreign origin fairy tales for the San as a reason they don't conform to her eurocentric "true Negro" imagination of continental Africans, whom she never met in her life.
Explorer are you going on record saying saying Somali's have no Asian ancestry and the the Darod's own claims of Arabian peninsula origins have no foundation?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
The similarities can be due to either parallel mutation and/or simple common origin being derived from L3 which originated in Africa and is ancestral to many humans in Africa and *all* outside of Africa.
Molecular specifics of basal motifs in coding and control region (HVR1) suggest that hg M1 and the Asian hg M markers have a common origin, although in the past, hg M1's placement in the hg M family was done on the basis of some random parallel control region mutations between hg M1 clades and the Asian counterparts. A prototype haplotype for hg M has been found in sub-Saharan Africa [western Africa, ironically], but not Asia. Furthermore, unlike hg N, hg M shares HVR1 position nucleotide of 10873C with African L types, aside from a segment of hg L3. Why is that important? Prevailing evidence suggests that 10873C is only a one time mutational event. These are all indications that the ancestral hg M clade emerged right in Africa, before spilling over.
lyinarse posts, possibly without even understanding it:
quote: "Somali, as a representative East African population, seem to have experienced a detectable amount of Caucasoid maternal influence... the proportion m of Caucasoid lineages in the Somali is m = 0.46 [46%]... Our results agree with the hypothesis of a maternal influence of Caucasoid lineages in East Africa, although its contribution seems to be higher than previously reported in mtDNA studies."
Comas et al. from (1999), Analysis of mtDNA HVRII in several human populations using an immobilised SSO probe hybridisation assay, Eur J Hum Genet. 1999 May-Jun;7(4):459-68.
Care to educate us on what haplogroups these "caucasoid lineages" are, in terms of the present nomenclature system of mtDNA phylogeny?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Explorer are you going on record saying saying Somali's have no Asian ancestry and the the Darod's own claims of Arabian peninsula origins have no foundation? [/QB]
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Well, let's hear about the requested nomenclature for the "caucasoid lineages" noted in your citation. Surely, you don't post stuff that you don't understand [but only sounds good to you]?
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ The Arabian origins of the Darod clan is merely a legend, backed up by no actual historical or scientific evidence at all. Genetic studies of Somalis show no difference at all between members of different clans and Somalis are overwhelmingly African in lineage both paternally and maternally.
So your point about Somalis being of foreign origins is as silly as the Fulani or Watutsi based simply on facial features.
In fact, your whole notion of attributing the diversity of craniofacial features among Africans to non-Africans has been refuted.
By the way, that Somali politician may not have the exact same square jaw as the scribe but his jaw line is the exact same as Tutankhamun.
Consider yourself dismissed.
According to an mtDNA study by Holden (2005), a large proportion of the maternal ancestry of Somalis consists of the M1 haplogroup, which is common among Ethiopians and North Africans, particularly Egyptians and Algerians. M1 is believed to have originated in Asia, where its parent M clade represents the majority of mtDNA lineages (particularly in India).
"We analysed mtDNA variation in ~250 persons from Libya, Somalia, and Congo/Zambia, as representatives of the three regions of interest. Our initial results indicate a sharp cline in M1 frequencies that generally does not extend into sub-Saharan Africa. While our North and especially East African samples contained frequencies of M1 over 20%, our sub-Saharan samples consisted almost entirely of the L1 or L2 haplogroups only. In addition, there existed a significant amount of homogeneity within the M1 haplogroup. This sharp cline indicates a history of little admixture between these regions. This could imply a more recent ancestry for M1 in Africa, as older lineages are more diverse and widespread by nature, and may be an indication of a back-migration into Africa from the Middle East.
A.D. Holden (2005), MtDNA variation in North, East, and Central African populations gives clues to a possible back-migration from the Middle East, Program of the Seventy-Fourth Annual Meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists (2005)
_________________________________________
"Somali, as a representative East African population, seem to have experienced a detectable amount of Caucasoid maternal influence... the proportion m of Caucasoid lineages in the Somali is m = 0.46 [46%]... Our results agree with the hypothesis of a maternal influence of Caucasoid lineages in East Africa, although its contribution seems to be higher than previously reported in mtDNA studies."
Comas et al. from (1999), Analysis of mtDNA HVRII in several human populations using an immobilised SSO probe hybridisation assay, Eur J Hum Genet. 1999 May-Jun;7(4):459-68.
_______________________________________
LOL LMAO @ Lioness waiting for people to allude to academic findings so she can research it via google and use it here in ES as if she actually knows what she is yappin about. The thing that cracks me up about people using M1 to explain Somali morphology, is that they act as if haplogroups are indicative of morphology. This means that in order to make her case, she will have to demonstrate that there was an ancient pre Somali morphology that leaned towards the stereotypical African variant, and that said variant changed upon the entering of this elusive M1 carrying group from Eurasia. What phucks her case up even more, is that there are certain groups in mainland Africa that have very similar morphology in terms of cranial shape (Hottentots), but with Zero admixture from Eurasia. She will also have to explain, if she holds that 40% of Somali are Eurasian, why they are distinct in skin color and limb proportions from North Africans populations who do have 50% Eurasian admixture.
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
Even if the presence of M1 in East Africa indicates a back-migration into Africa, that doesn't necessarily mean that these hypothetical Eurasian back-migrants were what lioness would call "Caucasoid". Epipaleolithic skulls from the Nile Valley have a very "Negroid" appearance, so if these Epipaleothic people had significant Eurasian ancestry it was clearly not from people who had evolved a "Caucasoid" morphology.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Of course. The liar fails to realize that during that time ALL peoples were black and displayed "negroid" morphology. There are still Eurasians that display such morphology today in the form of the Andamanese and other 'Negrito' type aboriginals.
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: LOL LMAO @ Lioness waiting for people to allude to academic findings so she can research it via google and use it here in ES as if she actually knows what she is yappin about. The thing that cracks me up about people using M1 to explain Somali morphology, is that they act as if haplogroups are indicative of morphology. This means that in order to make her case, she will have to demonstrate that there was an ancient pre Somali morphology that leaned towards the stereotypical African variant, and that said variant changed upon the entering of this elusive M1 carrying group from Eurasia. What phucks her case up even more, is that there are certain groups in mainland Africa that have very similar morphology in terms of cranial shape (Hottentots), but with Zero admixture from Eurasia. She will also have to explain, if she holds that 40% of Somali are Eurasian, why they are distinct in skin color and limb proportions from North Africans populations who do have 50% Eurasian admixture.
Indeed, speaking of "Hottentots"...
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Next she'll manufacture foreign origin fairy tales for the San as a reason they don't conform to her eurocentric "true Negro" imagination of continental Africans, whom she never met in her life.
Khoisan ("Hottentots" and "Bushmen")
Perhaps her Lyingass will now postulate east Asian ("Mongoloid") origins for these people also. LOL
The Lyingass cannot get around it, Africans' phenotypical diversity is wholly indigenous and has NOTHING to do with admixture.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
The similarities can be due to either parallel mutation and/or simple common origin being derived from L3 which originated in Africa and is ancestral to many humans in Africa and *all* outside of Africa.
Molecular specifics of basal motifs in coding and control region (HVR1) suggest that hg M1 and the Asian hg M markers have a common origin, although in the past, hg M1's placement in the hg M family was done on the basis of some random parallel control region mutations between hg M1 clades and the Asian counterparts. A prototype haplotype for hg M has been found in sub-Saharan Africa [western Africa, ironically], but not Asia. Furthermore, unlike hg N, hg M shares HVR1 position nucleotide of 10873C with African L types, aside from a segment of hg L3. Why is that important? Prevailing evidence suggests that 10873C is only a one time mutational event. These are all indications that the ancestral hg M clade emerged right in Africa, before spilling over.
lyinarse posts, possibly without even understanding it:
quote: "Somali, as a representative East African population, seem to have experienced a detectable amount of Caucasoid maternal influence... the proportion m of Caucasoid lineages in the Somali is m = 0.46 [46%]... Our results agree with the hypothesis of a maternal influence of Caucasoid lineages in East Africa, although its contribution seems to be higher than previously reported in mtDNA studies."
Comas et al. from (1999), Analysis of mtDNA HVRII in several human populations using an immobilised SSO probe hybridisation assay, Eur J Hum Genet. 1999 May-Jun;7(4):459-68.
Care to educate us on what haplogroups these "caucasoid lineages" are, in terms of the present nomenclature system of mtDNA phylogeny?
Kalonji is right. This desperate b|tch just googles stuff she thinks supports her claims without really understanding them. What a dumb girl! LOL Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: LOL LMAO @ Lioness waiting for people to allude to academic findings so she can research it via google and use it here in ES as if she actually knows what she is yappin about.
I'm tellin' ya, classic lyinass.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Some Somalians:
Somalia President Abdullahi Yusuf.
The man has straight hair, in his case this indicates Arabian peninsula ancestry
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Europe demonstrates the shortest genetic distance of all continents to Africa.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^^Explain.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:The man has straight hair, in his case this indicates Arabian peninsula ancestry
^Also explain how straight hair is indicative of ancestry from the Arabian peninsule, when Amhara's with sometimes as much as 40% J haplogroup, actually have lesser incidences of straight, wavy and curly hair than Somali's have:
quote:According to our own classification, 40 per cent of the Amharas have non-negroid, wavy or curly hair, and the rest frizzly; the non-negroid class among the Gallas is 30 per cent, among the Somalis 86 per cent. Some of the Somalis actually have straight hair.
^According to racist Carleton Coon
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:The man has straight hair, in his case this indicates Arabian peninsula ancestry
^Also explain how straight hair is indicative of ancestry from the Arabian peninsule, when Amhara's with sometimes as much as 40% J haplogroup, actually have lesser incidences of straight, wavy and curly hair than Somali's do:
quote:According to our own classification, 40 per cent of the Amharas have non-negroid, wavy or curly hair, and the rest frizzly; the non-negroid class among the Gallas is 30 per cent, among the Somalis 86 per cent. Some of the Somalis actually have straight hair.
^According to racist Carleton Coon
are you sure you wanted to go there?
^According to racist Carleton Coon in the same chapter you quote from, The Mediterranean Race in East Africa
The Somalis: The whole Horn of Africa, including the three Somali lands and the Ogaden region of Ethiopia, is occupied by various tribes of Somalis, nomadic Hamites who profess Islam and claim descent from Arabian missionaries. Their origin is not clearly known, but it is evident that there must have been some Galla as well as Arabian mixture, grafted onto a local Hamitic population....
Needless to say, the Gallas and Amharas have mixed with each other greatly in the regions in which they have been in contact; both the Amharas and Gallas have absorbed the earlier Cushitic agricultural peoples in great numbers. The most important single influence has been the infiltration of negroes, through the slave trade, into the entire Ethiopian plateau region. So extensive has this infiltration been that it is unlikely that a single genetic line in the entire Horn of Africa is completely free from negroid admixture; but individuals may be found among the Amharas, Gallas, and Somalis who show no visible signs of negro blood. These individuals are extremely rare. On the whole the negroid element in the Hamitic cannot be much more than one-fourth of the whole, but it has penetrated every ethnic group and every social level. Just when this penetration had become complete we do not know, but one suspects that it had already occurred by the sixth century A.D., when the Ethiopians ruled the Yemen. The Gallas, despite their tradition of descent from white men, were already partly negroid at the time of their arrival in Ethiopia....
Among the Somalis, however, an entirely different situation is found, for the majority are lumped around the von Luschan #29. Numbers 27 and 30 account for most of the others; hence there is a single and characteristic Somali color, which is a rich, glossy, chocolate-brown, which accounts for seven-eights of the entire Somali group. A very few are darker, and individuals are as light as light brown, in a very few cases as light as Arabs. The contrast between highland Ethiopians and Somalis in skin color is so great that one must postulate that the original non-negroid narrow-bodied and narrow-faced strain which the living Somalis represent was not white skinned in any sense of the word, for the Somalis are the least negroid people in East Africa. Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
What the phuck does this all have to do with the fact that the piece I quoted about Somali hair types exposed your ignorance and sh!t talking yet again, after you made that bogus claim that straight hair was indicative of ancestry from Arabia?
Again: Explain how straight hair can be indicative of Arabian ancestry, when there are neighboring groups (Amhara) with more Arabian ancestry, but with lesser incidence of so called non-negroid hair.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:The man has straight hair, in his case this indicates Arabian peninsula ancestry
^Also explain how straight hair is indicative of ancestry from the Arabian peninsule, when Amhara's with sometimes as much as 40% J haplogroup, actually have lesser incidences of straight, wavy and curly hair than Somali's do:
quote:According to our own classification, 40 per cent of the Amharas have non-negroid, wavy or curly hair, and the rest frizzly; the non-negroid class among the Gallas is 30 per cent, among the Somalis 86 per cent. Some of the Somalis actually have straight hair.
^According to racist Carleton Coon
are you sure you wanted to go there?
^According to racist Carleton Coon in the same chapter you quote from, The Mediterranean Race in East Africa
The Somalis: The whole Horn of Africa, including the three Somali lands and the Ogaden region of Ethiopia, is occupied by various tribes of Somalis, nomadic Hamites who profess Islam and claim descent from Arabian missionaries. Their origin is not clearly known, but it is evident that there must have been some Galla as well as Arabian mixture, grafted onto a local Hamitic population....
Needless to say, the Gallas and Amharas have mixed with each other greatly in the regions in which they have been in contact; both the Amharas and Gallas have absorbed the earlier Cushitic agricultural peoples in great numbers. The most important single influence has been the infiltration of negroes, through the slave trade, into the entire Ethiopian plateau region. So extensive has this infiltration been that it is unlikely that a single genetic line in the entire Horn of Africa is completely free from negroid admixture; but individuals may be found among the Amharas, Gallas, and Somalis who show no visible signs of negro blood. These individuals are extremely rare. On the whole the negroid element in the Hamitic cannot be much more than one-fourth of the whole, but it has penetrated every ethnic group and every social level. Just when this penetration had become complete we do not know, but one suspects that it had already occurred by the sixth century A.D., when the Ethiopians ruled the Yemen. The Gallas, despite their tradition of descent from white men, were already partly negroid at the time of their arrival in Ethiopia....
Among the Somalis, however, an entirely different situation is found, for the majority are lumped around the von Luschan #29. Numbers 27 and 30 account for most of the others; hence there is a single and characteristic Somali color, which is a rich, glossy, chocolate-brown, which accounts for seven-eights of the entire Somali group. A very few are darker, and individuals are as light as light brown, in a very few cases as light as Arabs. The contrast between highland Ethiopians and Somalis in skin color is so great that one must postulate that the original non-negroid narrow-bodied and narrow-faced strain which the living Somalis represent was not white skinned in any sense of the word, for the Somalis are the least negroid people in East Africa.
LMAO @ Lioness waiting for people to allude to academic findings so she can research it via google and use it here in ES as if she actually knows what she is yappin about.
You are nothing but an airhead, who hasn't read jackshit about anthropology in her leisure time in her life. Whenever you're pressed to explain something, you have zero internal frame of reference about the availability of relevant research, like for example, how I countered your sh!t talking about Somali hair in a mere second. You substitute being a well read person on topics about Africa, with talking sh!t in fora, and subsequently googling (counter) material using keywords that you saw someone else talk about in that exact same thread.
That is exactly how you came up with the Darod mythology. That is exactly how you came up with the Carlton Coon text you quoted above. That is exactly how you came up with talking about haplogroup M, after I mentioned that certain Africans and Indians are related via that genetic marker, a couple of posts ago
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Kalonji don't go emotional on me.
To suggest that straight hair is not a cold adaptive trait is outside of mainstream anthropology.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:To suggest that straight hair is not a cold adaptive trait is outside of mainstream anthropology.
Straight hair is a cold adaptive trait?
LMAO with this airhead.
First you say straight hair is indicative of Arabian ancestry, which I have demonstrated to be false.
And now you're postulating that straight hair is an adaptation to cold climate?
Since when does southern Arabia present climatic conditions that are conducive to short limbs?
Ok. I'm officially starting to question whether I'm conversing with a sane individual.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ That straight or wavy hair is some how cold adapted is just another of the countless lies told by her Lyinass.
A West African girl
According to the lying lunatic, the girl above must have Arabian ancestry also due to her hair texture.
As for such hair being "cold adapted", then how do you explain it being prevalent in the tropics of South Asia.
The majority of Arabia lies in the tropics also.
quote:Ok. I'm officially starting to question whether I'm conversing with a sane individual.
And you just now question this?! This is the same girl who claims to be a "West African" but had no clue about the thin lipped, aquiline nosed, Fulani woman even though Fulani are one of the largest groups in West Africa! LOL This person is so nutty, I question whether she is even really girl. (You know we had past incidences of tranny trolls in this forum). Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:To suggest that straight hair is not a cold adaptive trait is outside of mainstream anthropology.
Straight hair is a cold adaptive trait?
LMAO with this airhead.
First you say straight hair is indicative of Arabian ancestry, which I have demonstrated to be false.
And now you're postulating that straight hair is an adaptation to cold climate?
Since when does southern Arabia present climatic conditions that are conducive to short limbs?
Ok. I'm officially starting to question whether I'm conversing with a sane individual.
Lol I don't know why you continue to go back and forth with someone who lives in their own little alternative reality on planet earth
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ That's why I prefer to discuss the original topic of this thread and not the phenotype and genotype diversity of Africans with someone who is in denial of such.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
It is because you don't understand the historical movement of peoples. The Indians come out of people like the Harappa of North East Pakistan and prior other Central Asian areas. They got their straight hair as an adaptation to colder climate. This also goes for Arabs. Any Arabs who have straight hair is because they have ancestry going back to a colder climate, for example Tigris and Euphrates before they entered into Southern Arabia.
The people who settled in the Southern regions of India have darker skin as a result of the higher UV but retained their straight hair which is an adaptation that is an independent mechanism from skin pigmentation and doesn't always correlate as is obvious.
Or perhaps straight hair is random and has no purpose
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: It is because you don't understand the historical movement of peoples. The Indians come out of people like the Harappa of North East Pakistan and prior other Central Asian areas. They got their straight hair as an adaptation to colder climate. This also goes for Arabs. Any Arabs who have straight hair is because they have ancestry going back to a colder climate, for example Tigris and Euphrates before they entered into Southern Arabia.
The people who settled in the Southern regions of India have darker skin as a result of the higher UV but retained their straight hair which is an adaptation that is an independent mechanism from skin pigmentation and doesn't always correlate as is obvious.
Or perhaps straight hair is random and has no purpose
Where do you get all these assertions from? Don't you feel at least a little bit conflicted when your typing with your ass open, knowing that you're going to get called out on your fancyfull, fictive and not to mention, unsourced claims?
At this point you're just covering up doodoo with even more doodoo. LOL.
What excrement do you have in store to explain away why Australian aboriginals often have straight hair?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
just look at a map Aboriginal Australians did not originate in Australia. Like everyone else they came from Africa. The ancestors of Australians are people somewhere between Africa and Australia who had straight hair due to adaptation to cold climate. Once the hair changes to straight it doesn't go back due to a return to a hotter climate. Straight hair is suitable to a hot or cold climate.
Skin is a different story and is effected by both UV and diet and can lighten or darken.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:between Africa and Australia who had straight hair due to adaptation to cold climate.
^Cold climate.. ancestors of Aboriginals.. You were saying?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:between Africa and Australia who had straight hair due to adaptation to cold climate.
^Cold climate.. ancestors of Aboriginals.. You were saying? [/QB]
that map is highly theoretical as to the migration of people who become Australians. The problems with map speculation on the direction people move over 50,000 years ago is that it gives the impression they kept going in the straightest path and didn't settle anywhere first. Also it cannot be proven that there was a major migration went from Ethiopia into Arabia independent of another major migration coming out of Egypt. However the map shows a pass through Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Some of these regions have cold climates in part of them. The people have straight hair. This map reinforces my point rather than yours.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ If straight hair is cold adapted then why are ALL their other traits tropically adapted-- limb proportions, black skin, etc??
On second thought. Don't answer, we know you have nothing more to offer than pigshit.
I don't know about other posters, but I'm done with you.
What's the point in discussing bio-anthropology with someone who doesn't even have elementary knowledge in either evolutionary biology or human populations.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ If straight hair is cold adapted then why are ALL their other traits tropically adapted-- limb proportions, black skin, etc??
On second thought. Don't answer, we know you have nothing more to offer than pigshit.
I don't know about other posters, but I'm done with you.
What's the point in discussing bio-anthropology with someone who doesn't even have elementary knowledge in either evolutionary biology or human populations.
you dare to address the lioness?
I explained this already. Straight hair is a result of adaptation to a cold climate. It is better suited to a cold environment especially when let to grow long, it lets less cold air penetrate compared to afro type hair. When people who have this cold adaptation are re-introduced into the hot climate they retain their straight hair because straight hair, especially when cut short is not a problem in hot environments. However light skin is a problem in high UV areas particularly if a person is not protected by clothing. So when cold adapted populations are reintroduced into the high sunlight environment their skin tans in some cases and over time the population becomes darker.
Or perhaps straight hair has no purpose, it's just so you can twirl your fingers in it
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Or perhaps you are just an ignorant idiot who has no clue as to what she's talking about.
Getting back to track.
It has been established by mainstream academia that proto-hieroglyphs of the Nile Valley predate Sumerian Cuneiform by several centuries. Indeed, one could argue the other way around-- that Egyptian influenced Sumerian writing!
He [Gunther Dreyer] concluded his presentation by noting similarities between specific Egyptian and Mesopotamian objects and suggesting that perhaps there is an initial influence of Egyptian writing on Mesopotamia because there are signs on Mesopotamian objects that are only "readable" from the standpoint of the Egyptian language, but not the Mesopotamian language. - Mario Beatty, "Too Much Stuff": Recent Finds in Predynastic Egypt
By the way, the earliest proto-hieroglyphs are to be found in Sayalah and Qustul sites which correspond to the 'Nubian' kingdom of Ta-Seti.
THIS IS STRIKE 1.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralbrains: Basalt statuette known as 'MacGregor Man', Ancient Egyptian, predynastic period, 3250 B.C.
Looks like a sculpture i would expect from Sumer.
How is the statue above Sumerian-like? One simple-minded poster claims the eyebrows are thick, yet thick eyebrows alone don't mean anything. Besides, in Sumerian art the eyebrows meet in the middle to form a kind of 'uni-brow'. Here the brows are totally separate by a space in between. Also, Egyptians during dynastic period are depicted with thick eyebrows along with black skins. Sumerian men wore round hats, but theirs were a little taller with thick brims to them. The statue above is more so a tight fitting cap the kind worn by gods like Ptah or high ranking Egyptians or even Puntite men further south in Africa. The full beard means nothing since many men including Africans can wear full beards. But notice what the man is wearing. It might be hard to see because of the dark colored stone and poor lighting, but the figure is wearing a penis-sheath. Such penis sheaths were common attire of predynastic Egyptian men and is also worn by 'tribal' Africans today further south in the Sudan and Ethiopia.
As for the overall style of the statue. It looks not much different from other Nagada statue of a male figure, one without a penis sheath.
And here is a reconstruction from Egyptologists of what the statue above looked like with its head as well as what the entire Naqada settlement may have looked like.
Gee. Looks very African to me.
THIS IS STRIKE 2.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralbrains:
I think the artifacts presented reveal that Egypt owes some of its debt to Sumerian and or Near Eastern influence.
The motif of the 'hero' wrestling with beasts was at first thought to be Sumerian also as that is where it frequently appeared...
Until that it was discovered in Saharan rock art dating back thousands of years earlier.
Details from a tomb painting from Hierakonpolis, from prehistoric Egypt's Naqada culture. A new study suggests the Naqada people, the earlier Badarians and the later Egyptians were essentially the same group. The painting shows a procession of boats, one of which has an awning "sheltering a figure who is probably the ruler and the person for whom the tomb was built," writes Toby Wilkinson in the book Predynastic Egypt. The artwork shows "the ruler engaged in various activities—including a ritual water-borne procession, perhaps an ancestor of some of the later festivals of kingship," Wilkinson writes, and "sought to express the multiple roles of the king in relation to his people and the supernatural." Remarkable, he adds, "is the number of features characteristic of classic Egyptian art," present already 300 years before pharaohs inaugurated classic Egyptian civilization by unifying the land around 3,100 B.C. A man holding apart two wild animals in the lower left is a type of "hero" or "master of the beasts" figure found in other artworks of its time, Wilkinson adds.
By the way, the Narmer Palette dates back to around 3,100 B.C. whereas the Uruk cylinder seal dates back to around 3,000 B.C. Thus the Narmer palette with its depiction of 'serpopards' is a full century earlier than the Uruk one. Add this to Egypt's trade with Mesopotamia and it is more than coincidence.
THIS IS STRIKE 3, but wait there’s more…
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Behold the Narmer Palette. The very symbolic including totemic nature of the palette as well as the scenes and rituals they depict are very African.
In both sides of the palette at the top there is Narmer’s name a totemic one of the catfish flanked by two water buffaloes with the faces of women, likely protective goddesses.
^ On this side above is shown a procession with Narmer wearing the deshret or red crown that resembles a Nile lily with his sandal bearer behind him. Because kings in Africa were considered divine, the fact that he is marching barefoot means his is consecrating the ground. In front of Narmer is either a woman or a man unusually dressed in feminine attire wearing a dress that covers his chest as well as long hair, probably a wig. Because of this, many think it is a shaman. In front of this person is four standard bearers. In the first standard is a totem of a placenta, the second bears a jackal reclined on something, and the front two are birds perhaps hawks. In front of these are decapitated bodies lined up in a row. Below in the second register are two leonine creatures with long serpent like necks intertwined, each neck noosed by a man. This represents the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt. In last register below a bull symbolizing the king rams into a fort breaking it while trampling on an enemy.
^ On this side we see the king in the forefront wearing his own hedjet (white headdress) which resembles a bull penis, wielding his pear-shaped mace about to strike an enemy down which he grips by the hair. This is a classic smiting pose as depicted all throughout the dynastic period. However, such a scene may originate in the ritual of human sacrifice as such rituals were common to many other divine kings in Africa. The sandal-bearer stands in the background holding a kettle of water used as ablutions to cleanse the king after his ritual sacrifice as seen in other African cultures and first cited by Diop. Above the helpless enemy is the symbol of the delta with the head of a man. A hawk is perched above grabbing out the breath of life from the Delta’s nostrils. In the register below are two men who represent enemy cities.
ALL YOU IDIOTS ARE OUT!
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Of course trolls like Spiralbrains, Simpleton, Lyngass, and NonProven, want to ignore the above. Not my problem.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Djehuti says that:It's been established by anthropologists that the early Sumerians and peoples of southern Mesopotamia in general were black peoples closely related to the black indigenous populations of Iran and India. The problem of course is the general public is unaware of this fact.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^Just in case the Sumerians influenced any bit of the pre-history and rise of dynastic Egypt that is.lol
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ I just debunked you and your friends asses, and that all you can muster as a rebuttal?? LOL
Yes, it is common knowledge to those educated in Near Eastern history that the original populations of Mesopotamia were described as "australoid" and thus were black peoples long before lighter skinned "armenoid" types took over. This has NOTHING to do with Egypt whose black peoples were indigenous to that area which is AFRICA.
No save face here. There are black Eurasians as there are black Africans. Ancient Egyptians were the latter. Please feel free to refute any of what is stated.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^And you have evidence that the Australoids are a predominate people in Mesopotamia as of when?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] ^ I just debunked you and your friends asses, and that all you can muster as a rebuttal?? LOL
Debunked us? lol....I'm still waiting for the Saharan rock art example you mentioned.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^^
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Details from a tomb painting from Hierakonpolis, from prehistoric Egypt's Naqada culture. A new study suggests the Naqada people, the earlier Badarians and the later Egyptians were essentially the same group. The painting shows a procession of boats, one of which has an awning "sheltering a figure who is probably the ruler and the person for whom the tomb was built," writes Toby Wilkinson in the book Predynastic Egypt. The artwork shows "the ruler engaged in various activities—including a ritual water-borne procession, perhaps an ancestor of some of the later festivals of kingship," Wilkinson writes, and "sought to express the multiple roles of the king in relation to his people and the supernatural." Remarkable, he adds, "is the number of features characteristic of classic Egyptian art," present already 300 years before pharaohs inaugurated classic Egyptian civilization by unifying the land around 3,100 B.C. A man holding apart two wild animals in the lower left is a type of "hero" or "master of the beasts" figure found in other artworks of its time, Wilkinson adds. By the way, the Narmer Palette dates back to around 3,100 B.C. whereas the Uruk cylinder seal dates back to around 3,000 B.C. Thus the Narmer palette with its depiction of 'serpopards' is a full century earlier than the Uruk one. Add this to Egypt's trade with Mesopotamia and it is more than coincidence.
Apparently your eyesight is as atrocious as your reading comprehension.
Now I'm still waiting for you to seek psychiatric help.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Nobody knows the precise date of the Narmer Palette and Uruk Cylinder Seal. It is not even certain in what century either they came from so it is impossible to know the origin of the Serpopard Motifs.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^^
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Details from a tomb painting from Hierakonpolis, from prehistoric Egypt's Naqada culture. A new study suggests the Naqada people, the earlier Badarians and the later Egyptians were essentially the same group. The painting shows a procession of boats, one of which has an awning "sheltering a figure who is probably the ruler and the person for whom the tomb was built," writes Toby Wilkinson in the book Predynastic Egypt. The artwork shows "the ruler engaged in various activities—including a ritual water-borne procession, perhaps an ancestor of some of the later festivals of kingship," Wilkinson writes, and "sought to express the multiple roles of the king in relation to his people and the supernatural." Remarkable, he adds, "is the number of features characteristic of classic Egyptian art," present already 300 years before pharaohs inaugurated classic Egyptian civilization by unifying the land around 3,100 B.C. A man holding apart two wild animals in the lower left is a type of "hero" or "master of the beasts" figure found in other artworks of its time, Wilkinson adds. By the way, the Narmer Palette dates back to around 3,100 B.C. whereas the Uruk cylinder seal dates back to around 3,000 B.C. Thus the Narmer palette with its depiction of 'serpopards' is a full century earlier than the Uruk one. Add this to Egypt's trade with Mesopotamia and it is more than coincidence.
Apparently your eyesight is as atrocious as your reading comprehension.
Now I'm still waiting for you to seek psychiatric help.
Oh you mean this rock art that you want to trick everyone into believing was found out in the desert under some abandoned cliff or in some cave?....lol
And you are dating this rock art to about 3400 b.c.? Hmmmm.....I suppose the other material in the same tomb should be dated to about the same period don't you think?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ What the hell are you talking about?? Yes the paintings come from real prehistoric rock art found in the eastern desert as cited by Egyptologist Toby Wilkinson, you loon!! As for a "tomb", I don't know what tomb you're talking about. I'm talking about prehistoric evidence from predynastic times.
Get the hell out of here and seek professional help. Personally I think you need medication for psychotic delusions. Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
^LOL. Informative sequence of posts though.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Thanks. At least someone appreciates sound evidence and reasonable conclusions. Of course not the resident loony trolls.
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: Nobody knows the precise date of the Narmer Palette and Uruk Cylinder Seal. It is not even certain in what century either they came from so it is impossible to know the origin of the Serpopard Motifs.
Not true, because the so-called "serporard" motif has been found in Saharan rock art as well.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple-minded Girl: And you have evidence that the Australoids are a predominate people in Mesopotamia as of when?
Yeah. This was discussed many times before, most recently here!!
Do you have evidence for any of the sh*t YOU write??
Answer: NON whatsoever.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
You are are some serious meds.lol.....This is getting more comical by the post.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Anyone know which rock this painting is on in the Eastern desert? I may want to visit and have a look at it sometime....lol
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: "sheltering a figure who is probably the ruler and the person for whom the tomb was built," writes Toby Wilkinson in the book Predynastic Egypt.
the book is called Early Dynastic Egypt not Predynatsic Egypt. If you believe otherwise list source info proving that he wrote book called this, not an article erroneously referring to this wrong title.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: because the so-called "serporard" motif has been found in Saharan rock art as well.
I don't think so, what is your source? Saharan rock art is even less precise to to date a particular painting. However there are no serporards in Saharan rock art. Illustrations won't do, only photos of the original wall art and/or quote from credible article or book, original source mentioning this.
Dating is essential for any meaningful interpretation of rock art. Without knowing which art depictions were contemporary with others it is impossible to determine which themes were portrayed at a given time. At the same time, it is impossible to tie in the rock art with archaeological and historical data, meaning that it is unusable as supplemental data.
Dating Summary
Relative dating is still controversial and is quite clearly not without difficulties, although some approaches offer hope in general terms. Watchman offers a cautiously optimistic opinion: “Challenges for rock art chronologists are to define protocols for sampling, to refine and develop dating techniques and to select appropriate paintings to establish regional chronologies” (1993, p.63). Muzzolini (1992) also believes that there is genuine potential for establishing rock art chronologies in the Sahara, and sets out to demonstrate how it can be achieved. He observes that very few archaeologists use rock art because of the perceived difficulties in dating it, and that rock art experts are often thought to use guesswork rather than a disciplined approach (p.147). He accepts that dating rock art by association with nearby archaeological remains is “mere conjecture” (p.147). Instead his approach, like that described by Chippindale and Tacon (1998 WR) weaves together many threads of data towards establishing a sequence. Smith concludes (1967 p.11) that providing a date for the earliest Saharan rock art “still hangs in mid-air”, but advises against ruling out an Epipalaeolithic or even Palaeolithic date for some Saharan rock art on the grounds that the archaeology is certainly there, even if it cannot yet be linked to the rock art.
Direct dating, although offering considerable potential, still seems to have a long way to go.
Racial Determinations
Attempts to determine racial characteristics from rock art representations, which might help to identify movements of people through space and time, have been plagued by difficulties. Of the different suggestions by different writers summarized by Smith for north Africa (1968, p.23), the main notable feature is the lack of consensus.
____________________________________________
Actual archaeologists recognize the problems in dating rock art and items such as the Qustul Incense burner. Polemicists see one date on the internet or one date in a range of dates from a credible source and if it is to their liking pretend it's not part of an estimated range and does not have variances of hundreds of years. That's not objective scholarship.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
http://www.minamar.com/gelf_egypt/karkur_talh_wadi_sora_kopa.htm Plan a trip Simple visit them all I am sure if you look really really hard you will find the non African images or connection that you seek..but Blk Asians as the foundation of Kemet is a step up dead wrong non the least but a step up.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Indeed, now the lying ass is questioning the validity of rock dating! LOL
Why can't she accept that Egyptian civilization evolved from indigenous [African] sources as pointed out by mainstream academia?!
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton Girl: You are are some serious meds.lol.....This is getting more comical by the post.
LOL The thoughts of I and everyone else here of YOU.
Again, you offer NOTHING to refute my consecutive series of posts. All you offer are YOUR opinions which don't count for much without evidence.
LOL Indeed. You are a moron. I don't agree with the notion that the pre-Sumerian or proto-Sumerian peoples were Indian per say, but they were black-skinned Eurasians as is also expressed by historical records.
Again, go see a psychiatrist about your psychotic delusions.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Indeed, now the lying ass is questioning the validity of rock dating! LOL
Explorer even mentioned that rock art is unreliable as evidence
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Why can't she accept that Egyptian civilization evolved from indigenous [African] sources as pointed out by mainstream academia?!
I accept that Egyptian civilization evolved from indigenous [African] sources pointed out by mainstream politically correct academia.
just not as exclusivity. Just like the Greeks
that's what all this is about a concept of racial exclusivity
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ No. It has nothing to do with exclusivity so much as a penchant to take credit away from Africans by some default cop-out known as multiracial/multiculturalism! This is why you also make nonsensical claims about east African Somalis and West African Fulani being of 'mixed' origins simply due to certain features.
Nobody is arguing against any presence of Asiatics in Egypt. But one must remember that 1. Africans migrated to Asia FIRST influencing that region via Semitic language and culture. 2. Dynastic Egyptian culture originated in the south and is PURELY African. And 3. There is way more evidence of Asiatic input in Greek culture than there is for Egyptian, a lot more. These 3 facts just deeply disturb you for the Eurocentric nutcase that you are.
And we know you're a silly Eurocentric white girl (or boy) and not some "West African" as you claim! LOL Posted by Ceasar (Member # 18274) on :
Lol Do people here really believe that straight hair is strictly a cold adaption?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ No; just dummies like Lyingass.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ceasar: Lol Do people here really believe that straight hair is strictly a cold adaption?
Yes, anthropologists believe this
Your statement makes no sense. An adaptation is in relation to a particular environmental condition so it is not also related to another completely opposite environment.
There is a reason that people do not have afro type hair in Northern climates.
The straight haired people who live in climates relatively closer to the equator developed straight hair because their ancestors lived in colder climates. That is where the straight haired adaptation occurred. Unless they had access to fish their ancestors also had lighter skin. When they went back into areas closer to the equator their skin darkened. Their hair did not change back into afro type hair. Why this is is unknown. It is possible that indigenous South Americans or South Indians given a longer period time might develop afro type hair again.
But it is clear and obvious that straight hair especially when grown long is warmer than afro type hair and is therefore more suited to cold environments. It is clear that the ancestors of both South Asian Indians and South American Natives had ancestors form more Northern Areas.
This is logical and obvious
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
Explorer even mentioned that rock art is unreliable as evidence
Where?
And attend to this:
Let's hear about the requested nomenclature for the "caucasoid lineages" noted in your citation.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
It is clear that the ancestors of both South Asian Indians and South American Natives had ancestors form more Northern Areas.
This is logical and obvious
I suppose from your mindset, Australian aborigines' ancestors came "northern areas"?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
It is clear that the ancestors of both South Asian Indians and South American Natives had ancestors form more Northern Areas.
This is logical and obvious
I suppose from your mindset, Australian aborigines' ancestors came "northern areas"?
of course even the map kalonji, though hypothetical demonstrates this:
en route to Australia, Iran, Afghanistan, possibly even further North first. All of these places have people with straight hair. Basic OOA
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Where does the map show Australian aborigine ancestry from "northern areas", by which you were referring temperate regions? Or are you blind and cannot read the map?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
The map is a hypothetical migration direction that kalonji posted.
However, According to most Western scholars, Austronesian peoples originated on the island of Taiwan. Archaeological evidence (e.g., Bellwood 1997) suggests that speakers of pre-Proto-Austronesian spread from the South Chinese mainland to Taiwan at some time around 8,000 years ago. The South Chinese come from the Central Chinese. The climate is continental. This is why Chinese people have straight hair. This doesn't necessarily mean Austronesian people are related to modern Chinese people or that the ancestors of Chinese people existed at the same time, but what it shows is that ancestors of Austronesian people were probably in areas of China where conditions are cold enough to evolve kinky hair to straight. But the evolution of kinky hair to straight could have occurred in any number of places as people left Africa prior to people even populating China. Add to this Glacial Maximum and other differences in climate in Paleolithic times.
None of this matters to the topic and very early origins are speculative. Geography and migrations pattern are irrelevant to the fact that straight hair or kinky hair are adaptations to climate. The adaptation seems to take much longer than a change in skin pigmentation.
If there had been a land bridge going all the way from Africa to South America and people went directly there many ancient South Americans would have had kinky afro type hair. But this is not what happened. Before people populated South America they were in Central America and before that North America/canada. That is an area where straight hair would be a useful adaptation because it's warmer. That is why South Americans have straight hair, they came from the North.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
^So you're basically invoking Holocenic events in East Asia that don't even involve (ancestors of) Australian Aboriginals, in a discussion where we're talking about the route that the ancestors of Australian Aboriginals took when they migrated out of Africa?
Airhead, do you even realize that the ancestors of Australian Aboriginals were among the earliest to migrate from Africa? They reached Australia very shortly after that via the route that was outlined in the map I posted.
quote:The map is a hypothetical migration direction that kalonji posted.
Says who?
How much time is needed for a given population to adapt to climatic conditions?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
So now, the map is "a hypothetical migration direction", when your intended use for it falls flat, eh?
What does Austronesian folks have to do with Australian aboriginals anyhow? Are you suggesting that Australian aboriginals came from China?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: They reached Australia very shortly after
^^^^nonsense "very shortly" , lol
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
There's also that little matter:
Let's hear about the requested nomenclature for the "caucasoid lineages" noted in your citation.
eurocentric white-supremacist demagoguery does not pay, lyinarse.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: They reached Australia very shortly after
^^^^nonsense "very shortly" , lol
^Yes, from the perspective of time periods involved in evolution, even a few millenia are nothing. A migration from Africa to Australia would indeed be ''very short'' in that scope. Human sense of time, and what they feel is time consuming doesn't apply here.
Now answer my questions, you phunking airhead.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: So now, the map is "a hypothetical migration direction", when your intended use for it falls flat, eh?
What does Austronesian folks have to do with Australian aboriginals anyhow? Are you suggesting that Australian aboriginals came from China?
My use for it did not fall flat, the orange line, the path form Africa to Australia passes through Iran, Afghanistan which has cold climates. This supports the relationship between cold environment and straight hair.
Then I gave you another theory and ancestry if we keep following the path in a backwards direction toward Africa related eventually to China which also has cold climates, and we add to this paleolithic climate conditions.
So we have two models which can account for ancestry leading back to cold climates. just like people in South America came from the North, this is why they have straight hair
Of course all this ancient geography is a diversion tactic to get away from the fact that straight hair is an evolutionary adaptation to cold climates and some of us can't face that
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
My use for it did not fall flat, the orange line, the path form Africa to Australia passes through Iran, Afghanistan which has cold climates.
So, taking the southern route via Ethiopia and following the coastal southern areas of Asia does not blast your 'northern" ancestry theory? Or are you of the mentality that tropical regions are the "northern areas", which are cold?
It looks like you don't even know where either Iran or Afghanistan is on the map. You are a mental mess.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: They reached Australia very shortly after
^^^^nonsense "very shortly" , lol
^Yes, from the perspective of time periods involved in evolution, even a few millenia are nothing. A migration from Africa to Australia would indeed be ''very short'' in that scope. Human sense of time, and what they feel is time consuming doesn't apply here.
lol, as if you had evidence that it took "few millenia" for people who left Africa to get to Australia. You made that up, dingbat
by the way straight hair is an evolutionary adaptation to cold climates. get used to it, we call it evolution, not something you can switch on an off to suit your blockhead preconceptions
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
lyinarse, confirm: Are tropical regions cold? LOL
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explored: lioness, confirm: Are tropical regions cold? LOL
You must be a multi-regionalist, thinking that humans came about in various regions of the world independently, in this case Australians originated in Australia to the extent they never had ancestors leading back to Africa.
By the way straight hair is an adaptive trait to cold climate conditions.
Australia has a wide variety of climates including temperate.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:The map is a hypothetical migration direction that kalonji posted.
Says who?
How much time is needed for a given population to adapt to climatic conditions?
Answer these questions, airhead.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
The straight hair hair of groups such as the Australians and East indians (Dravidians) probably originated in Africa.
The ancestors of these groups probably lived in periglacial regions of Africa where straight hair probably evolved. .
. The Dravidians for example were part of the Maa Confederation and lived in the highland areas of Middle Africa like the Tibesti, until after the great flood when they migrated out of the highlands into the valley regions, and thence to Asia, where along with the Mande speakers the Dravidians expanded into Iran, India and eventually China.
In summary the straight hair of Africans relate to living in the periglacial regions of Africa before the great glaciers melted completely.
The map you showed is indicating periglacial ice forming around mountains. Your sources do not mention human habitation in these areas. Assuming straight hair developed in these regions is complete speculation and I have never heard of this being proposed by any anthropologist.
Out of Africa migration maps with arrows are also speculative:
^^^^either map is possible, including the upper map which excludes an exodus across the Red Sea.
The brow ridge of Australian Aborigines is closer to Europeans than to Africans although their dark skin and broad features are closer to Africans. Australian and New Guinean populations share phenotypic features that are unique to the region. The Haplogroup O1 branch is believed to have evolved during the Late Pleistocene (Upper Paleolithic) in Southeast Asia. The genetic marker, Haplogroup O1a-M119 is found frequently among Austronesian peoples, Kradai peoples, and various other ethnic minorities in China, who collectively make up the Austro-Tai peoples. This lineage is presumed to be a marker of the prehistoric Austronesian expansion, with possible origins encompassing the regions along the southeastern coast of China and neighboring Taiwan, and is found among modern populations of Maritime Southeast Asia and Oceania.
Haplogroup O1 lineages are found primarily in Southeast Asian populations of Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines, southern China and Taiwan.
Haplogroup O1a-M119 Y-chromosomes also have been found to occur at low frequency among various populations of Siberia, such as the Nivkhs (one of 17 sampled Y-chromosomes), Ulchi/Nanai (2/53), Yenisey Evenks (1/31), and especially the Buryats living in the Sayan-Baikal uplands of Irkutsk Oblast (6/13).
The fact that Negritos of the Andaman Islands, Malaysia, Thailand, and the Philippines have origins believed related to or ancestors of Aboriginal Australians but the Negritos have exclusively kinky afro type hair while man Australians have straight and other types of hair shows that the straight type of hair did not evolve in Africa. The people who have straight hair who were in the South Asian area who would later become Australians separated from the Negritos and went further North where they acquired straight hair dude to adaptation to colder climates, the later went down South eventually reaching Australia.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
What if some Negritos mixed with Neanderthals? just a thought
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: What if some Negritos mixed with Neanderthals? just a thought
I don't believe the negritos existed at this time. The only group at this time would have been Australians and Khoisan.
.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Cylde you are more polite than other folks.
The map you showed is indicating periglacial ice forming around mountains. Your sources do not mention human habitation in these areas. Assuming straight hair developed in these regions is complete speculation and I have never heard of this being proposed by any anthropologist.
Out of Africa migration maps with arrows are also speculative:
Everything we know about ancient population movements is speculation because we lack any eyewitnesses.
This is probably because most people are unaware that there were glaciers in Africa. I call the Africans who formerly lived in the Saharan highlands: Proto-Saharans. You can read about them here:
It has been established by mainstream academia that proto-hieroglyphs of the Nile Valley predate Sumerian Cuneiform by several centuries. Indeed, one could argue the other way around-- that Egyptian influenced Sumerian writing!
He [Gunther Dreyer] concluded his presentation by noting similarities between specific Egyptian and Mesopotamian objects and suggesting that perhaps there is an initial influence of Egyptian writing on Mesopotamia because there are signs on Mesopotamian objects that are only "readable" from the standpoint of the Egyptian language, but not the Mesopotamian language. - Mario Beatty, "Too Much Stuff": Recent Finds in Predynastic Egypt
By the way, the earliest proto-hieroglyphs are to be found in Sayalah and Qustul sites which correspond to the 'Nubian' kingdom of Ta-Seti.
THIS IS STRIKE 1.
Actually this is a strike against you. It hasn't been proven that any proto-form of the Egyptians predates cuneiform as a written language.
But notice here folks on how he tries to compare a proto-form of the language to an already well established intelligible written language which has proto-forms that date well back over a millennium. These written languages just don't happen overnite.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:The map is a hypothetical migration direction that kalonji posted.
Says who?
How much time is needed for a given population to adapt to climatic conditions?
Answer these questions, airhead.
Every time you come back posting doo doo like the content of your last speculative post, while questions forwarded to you remain unanswered, you're proving how feeble you and your doodoo claims really are.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
LOL What did I tell you guys?? You talk anthropology or any science with this ditz, and it gets you nowhere but more of her stupidity!
Any person with decent eyesight can see that the route to Australia REMAINED in the tropics-- from the Horn of Africa into southern Arabia, then into India, then into southeast Asia which at that time was the Sundanese subcontinent a subcontinent larger than India and Arabia combined and even larger than Europe, though it isn't shown in the map-- ALL in the tropics!
By the way, the small map above is more accurate than the large one Lynass posted since during that time period Arabia and Central Asia was a vast desert wasteland which also isn't shown on the map, thus the only feasible route for early modern humans would be along the TROPICAL coasts.
And again, if straight hair is a cold-adaptation why do so many folks in the tropics have it as well, when NON of their other features are cold adapted??
Let's see what next the ditz will pull out of her Lyingass.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton Girl: Actually this is a strike against you. It hasn't been proven that any proto-form of the Egyptians predates cuneiform as a written language.
But notice here folks on how he tries to compare a proto-form of the language to an already well established intelligible written language which has proto-forms that date well back over a millennium. These written languages just don't happen overnite.
Hey twit! Your memory span must be as low as your intelligence since you forgot about these:
quote:Nevine El-Aref, "Did writing originate in Egypt?" Al-Ahram Weekly: 1 - 7 April 1999, Issue No. 423
According to mainstream Egyptologist Kent Weeks, professor of Egyptology at the American University in Cairo, Dreyer's data suggests "one of the greatest discoveries in history of writing and ancient Egyptian culture."[155]
[155] "Egyptian writing dating to 3300 B.C. discovered," The Japan Times, December 17, 1998
Dreyer has moved beyond his early findings to pose a separate, speculative hypothesis- that the Egyptians were the first in the world to develop systematic writing as opposed to the commonly held view that the Mesopotamians did.[156]
Some Egyptian archaeology authorities appear to support Dreyer's hypothesis of Egyptian primacy. According to a 1999 statement by one Gaballa Ali Gaballa, secretary-general of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities: "The earliest known Sumerian writings date back to 3000BC while the German team's find shows that Abydos inscriptions date to 3400BC. The first Pharaonic dynasty began in 2920BC with King Menes. The earliest known writing in Dynasty Zero is much earlier than the oldest writing discovered in Mesopotamia." [157]
^ All the above was cited in this thread here which YOU posted in all showing Egyptian hieroglyphs PREDATE Sumerian cuneiform.
And proto-hieroglyphs are still found earliest in Qustul, Nubia.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:by the way, the small map above is more accurate than the large one Lynass posted since during that time period Arabia and Central Asia was a vast desert wasteland which also isn't shown on the map, thus the only feasible route for early modern humans would be along the TROPICAL coasts.
Not only that, but the time period of 100.000 shown on her map represents what scientists think of a lineage that died out, or retreated back to Africa. The map gives off the false impression that there was a congregation of peoples in the Levantine/Mesopotamian area around 100.000 bc that remained there for thousands of years until they diverged to the rest of the world in the Upper Paleolithic. Of course, she only picked the map for that exact reason; because it opens up the floodgates of speculation about her cold adapted straight haired AMH. Too bad for her, it'll go down as yet another self defeating, self depricating post, indicative of her own willful ignorance.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
@ Djehuti:Nothing but an extension of the Naqada II culture. Now you should be able to show us when the oldest known sentence formed in hieroglyphics when and was formed? Come on and cough it up.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
And since these people came from southern Chad as you claim, you should be able to show us many parallels that coincide with the cultural aspects of both. Let's see them.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: @ Djehuti:Nothing but an extension of the Naqada II culture. Now you should be able to show us when the oldest known sentence formed in hieroglyphics when and was formed? Come on and cough it up.
We've been over this, moron. Qustul (3800-3100 BCE) PREDATES Naqada II (3500-3200 BCE)!! Also, Naqada just like Qustul still developed in AFRICA! So your whole argument is null and void.
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:by the way, the small map above is more accurate than the large one Lynass posted since during that time period Arabia and Central Asia was a vast desert wasteland which also isn't shown on the map, thus the only feasible route for early modern humans would be along the TROPICAL coasts.
Not only that, but the time period of 100.000 shown on her map represents what scientists think of a lineage that died out, or retreated back to Africa. The map gives off the false impression that there was a congregation of peoples in the Levantine/Mesopotamian area around 100.000 bc that remained there for thousands of years until they diverged to the rest of the world in the Upper Paleolithic. Of course, she only picked the map for that exact reason; because it opens up the floodgates of speculation about her cold adapted straight haired AMH. Too bad for her, it'll go down as yet another self defeating, self depricating post, indicative of her own willful ignorance.
Of course. I expect nothing less from a lying dummy.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
I also want to see the proto-hieroglyphs from Qustul with an affirmation as to their dating. Not that they don't exist, just want you to provide the evidence.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QUOTE]Originally posted by A Simpleton: [qb] @ Djehuti:Nothing but an extension of the Naqada II culture. Now you should be able to show us when the oldest known sentence formed in hieroglyphics when and was formed? Come on and cough it up.
We've been over this, moron. Qustul (3800-3100 BCE) PREDATES Naqada II (3500-3200 BCE)!! Also, Naqada just like Qustul still developed in AFRICA! So your whole argument is null and void. [qb]
This still doesn't answer the question as to where the first known intelligible sentence written in hieroglyphs has been found.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
You must be a multi-regionalist, thinking that humans came...yada yada yada
You are so dense that even the most basic question easily evades your understanding, let alone read a map. Try again:
lyinarse, confirm: Are tropical regions cold? LOL
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
The simple fact is this everyone in this thread believes that straight hair evolved in Africa.
I don't say it's impossible but I do say it is outside of mainstream anthropology.
You have to admit though using photos like the people below to make the argument, without genetic of other data pertaining to these individuals maintaining that their longer range ancestry is exclusively African is dubious. At best you can say their ancestry is unknown. I would agree to that.
Apart from Clyde, even in multiple posts people did not put forth a hypothesis for the evolution of straight hair or it's origins. why is that?
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: The simple fact is this everyone in this thread believes that straight hair evolved in Africa.
I don't say it's impossible but I do say it is outside of mainstream anthropology.
Can you show me where in mainstream anthropology you find credence for the above?
As far as I know;
What is known archaeologically and bio-anthropologically is the ancestors of Australians never resided in a cold area, atleast not long enough for an adaptive trait to evolve.
What we know is that Australians carry very ancient genetic lineages none of which are derived from northern Asia.
What we know is that the home of anatomically modern humans is in Africa wherein there is a presence of this same straighter hair.
What we know is that Africa is home to more than 90% of the phenotypical diversity found around the world.
What can be said is the most plausible scenario.
Being that Oceanic populations who carry the most ancient underived OOA lineages retain this straighter hair with no evidence of any admixture for the cause.
Is that straighter hair was already present in Africa before A.M.H. successfully left Africa to populate the world.
This trait was most likely a part of the diversity in the band of populations that successfully starting leaving Africa over 60kya.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Simple those glyph posted earlier back can be read,those aren't graffiti tags or chicken scratches.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: people did not put forth a hypothesis for the evolution of straight hair or it's origins. why is that?
Have you? And I mean with credentials.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: You have to admit though using photos like the people below to make the argument, without genetic of other data pertaining to these individuals maintaining that their longer range ancestry is exclusively African is dubious. At best you can say their ancestry is unknown. I would agree to that.
Translation Lyinass says;
I think Africans albeit the immense genetic and phenotypic diversity proven bio-anthropologically again and again to be found in Africa.
That Africans can only have a certain look, anyone that doesn't fit my own limited criteria for what an African is, is obviously mixed with non Africans.
Akin to saying the grandson gave his grandfather features.
^^Contradiction forever oozes from lyinasses posts.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
Is that straighter hair was already present in Africa before A.M.H. successfully left Africa to populate the world. This trait was most likely a part of the diversity in the band of populations that successfully starting leaving Africa over 60kya.
Is it possible that some of the A.M.H. Africans that left Africa to populate the rest of the world had straight hair and pale skin before they left Africa?
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
Is that straighter hair was already present in Africa before A.M.H. successfully left Africa to populate the world. This trait was most likely a part of the diversity in the band of populations that successfully starting leaving Africa over 60kya.
Is it possible that some of the A.M.H. Africans that left Africa to populate the rest of the world had straight hair and pale skin before they left Africa?
Well I already commented on the straighter hair above.
As for pale skin being amongst the OOA population over 60kya, this would imply albinism, which is rare and random.
As pale skin is out of place in the African environment due to immediate obvious UV radiation harms, it is not plausible to think that pale skin would successfully evolve and survive in Africa.
Pale skin wouldn't allow for the reservation of folate, just one of the main necessities of child reproduction.
The list can go an, but I hope you get the point which is quite simple.
Btw, when will you address the below...?
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: people did not put forth a hypothesis for the evolution of straight hair or it's origins. why is that?
Have you? And I mean with credentials.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: [QUOTE]Originally posted by the lioness: people did not put forth a hypothesis for the evolution of straight hair or it's origins. why is that?
Have you? And I mean with credentials.
I'm still researching this topic. At this point in time it seems different types of hair and the evolution of hair is not a well understood area. It is not even know which type of hair comes first. Cold adaptation is a theory. I will provide credentials later. Is simply cannot be proven that straight hair evolved in Africa by going on google and posting some person who lives in Africa with no accompanying information as to their genes and ancestry. This gets done over and over again. You ask me for credentials, that is legit. But who starts this? The person who posts pictures of contemporary Africans with straight hair and claims they have no out of Africa ancestry with no credentials.
^^^^^^there is no tribe in Africa that has hair like this.
I use photos here because everybody agrees the above type of hair (and others) is common in Australian Aborigines. It is not common in Africa.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^You have been noted saying, that anyone who says straight hair is not a cold adaptation was going against modern mainstream anthropology.
Why would you say this if you have no evidence from mainstream anthropology that promotes this?
Plain and simple, stop making things up, capish?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^You have been noted saying, that anyone who says straight hair is not a cold adaptation was going against modern mainstream anthropology.
Why would you say this if you have no evidence from mainstream anthropology that promotes this?
Plain and simple, stop making things up, capish?
Because I read it a while ago and I need to reestablish where I read it and then find primary sources. If you have any information on the topic of why people have straight hair/origins of you should post it, instead of playing chess on the ad hominem level.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^In other words you made a bold claim knowing full well that you couldn't substantiate it, and now you want me to give you a source so you can google it. Classic lyinass.
Posted by 99 (Member # 18402) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Because I read it a while ago and I need to reestablish where I read it and then find primary sources.
^ What this really means:
I just made it up and was hoping no one would call BS.
Lyin-ass.
You do know that anyone who reads your posts finds them *all* to be like that.
All - of - them.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
You have to check me on stuff, I make up things sometimes.
what is the explanation for lighter skin? It's due to lower UV levels and diet.
What is the explanation for people have shorter proportion limbs? It's due to cold temperatures, less surface area to become cold.
What is the explanation for straight hair? It's one of those examples of diversity that is completely random and has no purpose, no adaptive explanation.
I just made it up that there was an explanation for it and got busted, thanks for correcting me
signed, lioness
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
The diversity of hair type of course has adaptive quality to it, that is related to environment [possibly related to body temp regulation], however, there may also be an element of sexual or mating-selection involved in some cases. This might explain why it does not correlate with temperature, as neatly as say body proportions do. The most logical conclusion is that the likes of Australian aboriginals have straight hair, because it was part of human diversity in Africa, before a.m.hs left. There are different hair textures in sub-Saharan Africa even to this day; there may have been even more in the past, but some became less frequent with time, while others became more so. Again, most likely due to the aforementioned elements in the natural selection process.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: The diversity of hair type of course has adaptive quality to it, that is related to environment [possibly related to body temp regulation], however, there may also be an element of sexual or mating-selection involved in some cases. This might explain why it does not correlate with temperature, as neatly as say body proportions do. The most logical conclusion is that the likes of Australian aboriginals have straight hair, because it was part of human diversity in Africa, before a.m.hs left. There are different hair textures in sub-Saharan Africa even to this day; there may have been even more in the past, but some became less frequent with time, while others became more so. Again, most likely due to the aforementioned elements in the natural selection process.
KING ISLAND, TASMANIA (Australian Island of the Southern Coast)
In 1989 an Aboriginal skeleton was found in a cave on King Island in Bass Strait off the northwestern tip of Tasmania by Robin Sim. This was studied in situ b Thorne (with the permission of the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre) before being reburied. Charcoal adhering to some of the skeletal remains gave a date of 14 270 +- 640 BP (ANU-7039). At that time of lower sea level, King Island was linked by land to both Tasmania and the mainland, and the cave would have been about 20 to 25 kilometres inland, on the side of a raised plateau overlooking a wide coastal plain. the method of burial seems to have been secondary disposal, the bones being gathered together in a small pile and covered with jagged rocks forming a small mound within the cave. There were no artefacts, but small pieces of ochre were found on the cranium and femur. the ochre must have been brought from elsewhere, and may either have been added to the human remains or may reflect that the deceased had ochre on his hair and body, as recorded ethnographically by such explorers as Baudin and Peron. The cranium, mandible, a femur, fibula, tibia, some vertebrae and other fragmentary remains were found. the individual proved to be a man aged between about 25 and 35 years. The cranium is fully rounded, the face moderate in size and flat rather than prognathous, and there is no pronounced development of a brow ridge. Thorne concludes:
The King Island skeleton is morphologically gracile and shows none of the cranial features that distinguish the Kow Swamp people from the Keilor or other early Holocene gracile Australian human remains ... In many ways this individual mirrors the canial morphology of Keilor and thus expands the southerly range of the gracile group of late Pleistocene Australians. The King Island remains, with Keilor, suggest that the gracile skeletal form was the basis of the most southerly of the earliest Australians.
Peter Brown has recently suggested that King Island man may have been a woman, but Thorne's field measurements are confirmed by photographs with a scale, which demonstrate that the femur head is 49 millimeters in diameter, right outside the female range. the femur is also relatively short. short, robust femurs with big heads are the classic cold-adapted limb proportions of populations from high latitudes or elevations, such as Eskimos and Sherpas. It seems that Tasmanian Aborigines too had become short and stocky by 14 000 years ago, an adaptation to conserve body heat in the roaring forties, where they had lived since some 35 000 years ago. These remains provide the oldest evidence of the physical form of the early Tasmanians, their custom of secondary disposal of the dead and use of chore probably in connection with burial rites. These remains provide the oldest evidence of the physical form of the early Tasmanians, their custom of secondary disposal of the dead and use of chore probably in connection with burial rites. ________________________________________
^^^^^This is evidence of cold adapation in some Aborigines
Some parts of Tasmania, the Central Plateau, early morning temperatures drop to 32 degrees in Januaray and February averaging 39 F. The lowest recorded minimum temperature was −13 °C (8.6 °F) on 30 June 1983, at Butlers Gorge, Shannon, and Tarraleah
This means that the ancestors of Australian Aborigines may have had afro type hair when they left Africa and acquired straight hair later. Therefore Australians cannot be used to exclude the possibility of straight hair being an adaptation to colder climates.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: The diversity of hair type of course has adaptive quality to it, that is related to environment
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
Straight hair is a cold adaptive trait?
LMAO with this airhead.
But this also has significant implications:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: News clip from Nature:
quote: Published online 22 December 2010 | Nature 468, 1012 (2010) | doi:10.1038/4681012a
News
Fossil genome reveals ancestral link
A distant cousin raises questions about human origins.
Ewen Callaway
When the ancient genome was compared to a spectrum of modern human populations, a striking relationship emerged. Unlike most groups, Melanesians — inhabitants of Papua New Guinea and islands northeast of Australia — seem to have inherited as much as one-twentieth of their DNA from Denisovan roots
-according to a genome sequence recovered from a Denisovan finger bone in a cave in southern Siberia.
Siberia's not tropical
LION!
-ess
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:^^^^^This is evidence of cold adapation in some Aborigines
You're nothing but an idiot who uses outdated typological approaches. It’s safe to say that virtually every population, whether cold adapted or otherwise, contains individuals who fall outside of their population mean, while still being tied to their population genetically. You did the same thing with your absent data of so-called short limbed Ramses II's, and then you have the audacity to be talking about ''going against mainstream Anthropology''.
Even if cold adaptation occurred in Tasmania, how the phuck are we supposed to know that straight hair occurred in them, or the remains of King Island man for that matter? I’m not just going to assume that they had it, you prove it, you dunce.
Just like you epically failed to explain why straight hair in the Horn fails to correlate linearly with Arabian ancestry, ie, it occurs more in Somali’s with lesser foreign ancestry compared to surrounding tribes with higher incidences of whooly hair and higher Arabian ancestry, you will also be unable to explain why Tasmanians don’t have straighter hair as much as would be predicted, going by your cold adapted model. According to this anecdotal source:
quote:Physically, an interesting point of difference between the Tasmanians and the Australians was their hair. While continental aboriginals have wavy hair varying in color from black to blond, the Tasmanians had tightly coiled black hair, which may suggest a link to Melanesians. This cannot be substantiated, however, because of the absolute lack of Tasmanian DNA.
Watch for more doodoo and excrement in her subsequent post, specifically, the type of doodoo that entails using material that is irrelevant to the topic at hand, a lack of text other than what she typed and opinionates herself and selective replies, if she has the balls to continue and further embarress herself, that is.
quote:Some parts of Tasmania, the Central Plateau, early morning temperatures drop to 32 degrees in Januaray and February averaging 39 F. The lowest recorded minimum temperature was −13 °C (8.6 °F) on 30 June 1983, at Butlers Gorge, Shannon, and Tarraleah
This means
That you're talking out of your neck. Your model fails to explain why your ''cold adapted'' Tasmanians had higher incidences of whooly hair.
^Cold adapted Tasmanian. With imagined straight hair.
All in all, we can conclude that the explaination of straight hair in OOA populations, and subsequent adaptation or retention of straight hair in respective areas, whatever the pressures might have been, is the most logical conclusion that requires no invocation of verbal gymnastics and imagined scenario's to account for non-whooly hair in Black Asian and African populations. These verbal gymnastics remind me of the Hametic Hypothesis; both offer no explanations for why a select few traits changed while the rest remained unaltered. In the case of black Asians, the airhead wants us to believe that straight hair is cold adapted, yet limbs and skin color tell another story.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Why should I do all the work. This whole branch of the discussion was sparked by Dehooti posting some people who live in Africa and people saying that straight hair evolved in Africa.
Obviously burden of proof is one the person making the claim.
It's highly suspicious that straight hair, rare in Africa is found concentrated in areas like the horn and Ethiopia trade routes, migration exists to Yemen/Arabia. The fact that you don't find it deeper into the center of the continent should learn you something. Some people have even gone as far to say that straight hair is not adaptive. Stop scamming
The burden of proof is one the person making the claim. I have to go out now and prove the moon is not made of cheese?
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
Non-response from a person who went on record saying:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote: Originally posted by the Lioness: The fact is that Kobe doesn't have an aquiline nose while Khafra's is aquiline. It has a slight bend in it. Kobe's does not. But never mind Kobe Bryant the American, racially Khafra could go either way.
Why do you start retreating from your original request:
quote: Originally posted by the Lioness: In my opinion his nose is not an African nose. Find a tribe in Africa that has this type of nose..
first you ask for African examples of such nose types, and now when provided, you retreat to whether or not Khafra was African. Racially, any phenotype can go either way. You can ask that question about anyone whose origins are not stated, including ''Broad featured'' types like Mugabe and Narmer. Their phenotype exists in Asia as well, so whats your point?
I RETRACT THE STATEMENT THAT I THINK KHAFRA'S NOSE DOES NOT LOOK AFRICAN alert the media, lioness proven wrong
How the phuck are we to trust you with knowing about diversity in (Paleolithic) Africa when you couldn’t even get African nose types straight (pun intended)?
You started this by saying that straight hair on the Somali politican was indicative of Arabian ancestry, don't blame Djehuty for your doodoo remarks.
Lioness, you're done. You offered no counter response to the points raised in my previous post, and until you do, I'll take it as just another reluctant consension that you took a loss.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
like I said the burden of proof is the person posting a photo of Yusef Ahmed and claiming his genetic ancestry is 100% African. That's hilarious since the Darod tribe themselves claim origins in Yemen. You guys really are silly and desperate.
I'm more flexible because I can admit error. You stick to flimsy assumptions so stubbornly I whittle you away into toothpicks.
Another meal for the lioness,
LION!
ess
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
Lioness, you're done. Besides bitch!ng and worrying about claims someone else made and sugar coating your loss as flexibility, you have offered no counter response to the points raised in my previous post, and until you do, I'll take it as just another reluctant consension that you took a loss.
Your ass reminds me of corny Vanilla Ice who once stated that because he was stripped of his publishing rights by Death Row in the early nineties, he contributed/was essential to the making of Dr Dre's classic album. Just like him, you can sugar coat your epic fails all you want, but your ass still took a loss.
Your admittance of error has nothing to do with flexibility, rather, it offers a glimpse in your retarded and backward concept of Africa, indicated by your block-headed assumption that a Khafra type nose has no equivalent there. You should be ashamed for even letting it get to the point that you had to admit you was wrong, because everyone with single brain cell knows that an occasional straight nose occurs even in populations with the broadest noses. Your challenge for a picture of a straight nosed African was bound to fail, before you even thought of having it thought up, LOL.
Posted by JMT2 (Member # 16951) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: You have to check me on stuff, I make up things sometimes.
what is the explanation for lighter skin? It's due to lower UV levels and diet.
What is the explanation for people have shorter proportion limbs? It's due to cold temperatures, less surface area to become cold.
What is the explanation for straight hair? It's one of those examples of diversity that is completely random and has no purpose, no adaptive explanation.
I just made it up that there was an explanation for it and got busted, thanks for correcting me
signed, lioness
You make shiit up damn near everytime you touch your keyboard such as your retarded theory of "whites will turn black if they live near the equator" nonsense. I read your equally retarded explanation on how you arrived at this conclusion; nothing based on any peer reviewed scientific analysis. What you did was cut and paste from several different erroneous sources. This behavior isn't surprising since your trolling azz averages 34 post per day. You have a lot of time on your hands don't you? Are you content being chronically unemployed or do the owners of ES pay you to keep this raggedy forum going you dirty little cunt?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
^^^^if you called a woman "a dirty little cunt" in Senegal or ancient Kemet they would beat you into the ground
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: You have to check me on stuff, I make up things sometimes.
So...this is your sincere response in question to your bold claim?
The asinine claim that anyone stating straighter hair was not a cold adaptation is going against mainstream anthropology? <<<--- which you obviously made up and admitted.
How dense are you? This is a serious question, so how dense?
I mean, who in their right mind goes around spouting madeup nonsense as blatantly as you do?
Seriously, it's not sometimes, it's all the time that you make things up like this.
Which is why you're always being checked, and henceforth made to look like a fool.
You must like being made to look like a fool, unless you really are that slow at learning.
You expect to receive respect, yet you're sitting there steady making things up?
This is the same thing you've been doing since you signed up and started posting here.
You fraudulent pawn.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
I won't go too much into your posting stuff on Tasmanians, who are not one and same as the mainland Australian aboriginals in any case, because I think your opponents have already effectively handled you on it. I will add though, with the way you tried to irrelevantly justify hair texture with limb-proportions, you might well have dismissed say, KhoiSans, as being predisposed to having straight hair. Undoubtedly the same could be said of the Tasmanians, who have a different hair texture but are geographically closer to mainland Australian aboriginals. Likewise, people in Asia on equivalent latitudes as equatorial Africans, do not necessarily sport highly curled up or "woolly" hair. Conversely, if one were to take your theory [re: why the Australian aboriginals on the other hand, have straight hair] at face value, then these folks, even if they supposedly had a distant ancestry in the more northward climes, should have reverted to non-straight hair by now, as the straight hair would have lost its adaptive property in the new environment thousands upon thousands years ago.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: I won't go too much into your posting stuff on Tasmanians, who are not one and same as the mainland Australian aboriginals in any case, because I think your opponents have already effectively handled you on it. I will add though, with the way you tried to irrelevantly justify hair texture with limb-proportions, you might well have dismissed say, KhoiSans, as being predisposed to having straight hair. Undoubtedly the same could be said of the Tasmanians, who have a different hair texture but are geographically closer to mainland Australian aboriginals. Likewise, people in Asia on equivalent latitudes as equatorial Africans, do not necessarily sport highly curled up or "woolly" hair. Conversely, if one were to take your theory [re: why the Australian aboriginals on the other hand, have straight hair] at face value, then these folks, even if they supposedly had a distant ancestry in the more northward climes, should have reverted to non-straight hair by now, as the straight hair would have lost its adaptive property in the new environment thousands upon thousands years ago.
Evolution of hair is not well understood. How long it takes to go from one form to another is not understood. Fur is not hair it has different structure, one aspect, it doesn't continue to grow long on the head if not cut, it just stops growing at a certain point. There are other differences.
Which came first kinky afro hair or straight hair, even that is unknown. It is speculated that afro hair can turn into straight hair over time. But there seems to be no evidence of that process in reverse. Non-African people in tropical regions have Asian type hair. Their hair is even straighter than many Europeans, it seems to be not even starting to change slightly back into kinky afro type hair. It's not even like curly European hair.
Posted by 99 (Member # 18402) on :
quote:Fur is not hair it has different structure, one aspect, it doesn't continue to grow long on the head if not cut, it just stops at a certain point.
^ Nope, the above comment is false, non-sequitur *and* irrelevant. lol.
Why do you make unsubstantiated remarks that make no sense and have no source?
Is it just for the sake of being an attention whore?
Posted by 99 (Member # 18402) on :
Lyin-ess, here idiot.....
There is no actual difference between hair and fur. Though unique to mammals, hair and fur are chemically indistinguishable and are made of keratin, giving them the same chemical make-up as skin, feathers, and nails. http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-hair-and-fur.htm
...., I don't know why I bother to help you, though, you aren't worth it:
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote: Originally posted by Kalonji: Watch for more doodoo and excrement in her subsequent post, specifically, the type of doodoo that entails using material that is irrelevant to the topic at hand, a lack of text other than what she typed and opinionates herself and selective replies, if she has the balls to continue and further embarress herself, that is.
quote: Lioness writes:
Evolution of hair is not well understood. How long it takes to go from one form to another is not understood. Fur is not hair it has different structure, one aspect, it doesn't continue to grow long on the head if not cut, it just stops growing at a certain point. There are other differences.
Which came first kinky afro hair or straight hair, even that is unknown. It is speculated that afro hair can turn into straight hair over time. But there seems to be no evidence of that process in reverse. Non-African people in tropical regions have Asian type hair. Their hair is even straighter than many Europeans, it seems to be not even starting to change slightly back into kinky afro type hair. It's not even like curly European hair.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by 99: Lyin-ess, here idiot.....
There is no actual difference between hair and fur. Though unique to mammals, hair and fur are chemically indistinguishable and are made of keratin, giving them the same chemical make-up as skin, feathers, and nails. http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-hair-and-fur.htm
...., I don't know why I bother to help you, though, you aren't worth it:
your source is wisegeek.com
mine is
Neufeld AH, Conroy GD. Human head hair is not fur. Evolutionary Anthropology, vol. 13:3, p. 89, June 2004.
don't talk to me about sources, you don't know what you are talking about. If you don't have sources on the ancestry of Abdullahi Yusuf, it's wiser to be quiet.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: I RETRACT THE STATEMENT THAT I THINK KHAFRA'S NOSE DOES NOT LOOK AFRICAN alert the media, lioness proven wrong [/qb]
I'm glad you brought that up
I RETRACT THE RETRACTION OF THE STATEMENT THAT I THINK KHAFRA'S NOSE DOES NOT LOOK AFRICAN lioness not proven wrong
I got duped by people posting Kobe Bryant and other American sports stars. We don't know his ancestry really is. AA's average somewhere between 12-22% non-African. Lok at his light skinned mom probably not Khosian. If if you post a picture of an African person who knows if they don't have Asian ancestry. A Central or West African in a tribal setting would be be convincing still not certain. A lot of these pictures people post are anecdotal and with no background information. When I revisit Khafre I never should have backtracked on my original statement. I caved a little on that one. Stupid of me to be persuaded by a picture of an African American. Khafra only looks semi-African to me. (ES alarm bell ringing loudly) He does have some African looking Prognosis in his mouth area but his nose doesn't look African (ES switches on second back up alarm) A profile view gives the best view of size and shape of the nose and jaw. A frontal view or a 3/4 gives the best view for a general impression. Looking at the side view:
His nose is slightly bigger than medium size. It protrudes a little. If you look in the middle of it there is a very slight outward bend in it although generally straight. The nostril openings are not big. African noses have larger nostrils. There is no slight outward bend. Our noses most often have an inner dip to them. You can see the hard bone quality on the upper portion of the Khafra nose. Africans don't have that we (I mean a lot of AA's also) We have a broader more spread out middle area. You can go and post some East Africans but a lot of them with the Semite noses come about from mixing with non Black Arabs who were crossing the red sea for hundreds of years. Some of them looked like Black people others had dark skin and did not look like Black people. For example, some Indian people look like Europeans but can have very dark skin. It's all borne out in the DNA, Ethiopians ans Somalis got quite a bit of back migration Asian in them. (ES alarm bell going off, one ear drum pops)
Come on people,lets' look at the general impression front view:
damn he looks white here, you got to admit
Now we go to another view:
Now he's looking part Black here. It's an upward angle, more typical of a kid point view looking up. His lips look a little fuller at this angle. His head has got a rounded square shape. It's more of a European head shape. His nose here at this slightly upward angle you can't really get a good sense of it. Back to the profile view for that.
So we sum it all up Khafra looks part African part European. That's the way it is.
What needs to be done for a convincing Afrocentric case is for particular Africans who have these crossover features to have their DNA tested and if they have no Asian ancestry you have a strong case. You have the DNA you have the pictures.
This is a good idea I'm giving you. You need to thank me and keep it in the air because it will help the Egyptians as pure African purity case.
Or we can go on forever in these forum , people posting random pictures, no info on their actual genetics.
Get your African contacts together, have someone find some Africans that are thought to have these what people call "Caucasian features but also thought to have no admixture. Do the DNA tests along with a picture of them. If we have a 100% African DNA result then we have proof that these type of features are not back migration from Asia/Middle East but are examples of indigenous African diversity.
That's what needs to be done to build the Egyptians as pure Africans case. It shouldn't be that difficult to set up
-lioness, peace out
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
No one gives a sh!t about what you accept or retract. Your (non)acceptance of facts, such as the fact that no world region has a monopoly on nose types, has no bearing on objective reality.
First you phucked up on being unable to explain why certain Horner populations have straight hair in proportions that run counter to their non-African ancestry, after pulling out your ass that straight hair was indicative of Arabian ancestry. Then you phucked up again by being unable to explain why Tasmanians, and even Khoisan for that matter, had/have hair types that, AGAIN, runs counter to your model.
Now you're trying to argue that Kobe's straight nose is indicative of Eurasian ancestry, right after failing to produce evidence for your earlier frivolous, doodoo stained assertions about straight hair? You're one persistant trashback, aren't you?
What makes you think that your input has any currency left on this forum, lol.
Phuck outta here with your subjective analysis of Khaffra's statue.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
Evolution of hair is not well understood....
In other words, your another attempt to pigeonhole African diversity into the "forest Negro" mythology has backfired. Let's not get carried away; you are merely used as a piñata to push forward information, as always.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
Just like you epically failed to explain why straight hair in the Horn fails to correlate linearly with Arabian ancestry, ie, it occurs more in Somali’s with lesser foreign ancestry compared to surrounding tribes with higher incidences of whooly hair and higher Arabian ancestry
That sounds even more made up than the stuff I make up. I bet you can't back that up with sources. I have been listing some sources.
I'm starting to lose faith in your scientificulness
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
Evolution of hair is not well understood....
In other words, your another attempt to pigeonhole African diversity into the "forest Negro" mythology has backfired. Let's not get carried away; you are merely used as a piñata to push forward information, as always.
____________________________________
Solution Key
QUESTION:______________________________
(put any question in blank)
ANSWER: African diversity
_________________________________
^^^^works in all situations
*you're not endorsing the term "negro" are you? , saying include the desert negroes are negro too?
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
Just like you epically failed to explain why straight hair in the Horn fails to correlate linearly with Arabian ancestry, ie, it occurs more in Somali’s with lesser foreign ancestry compared to surrounding tribes with higher incidences of whooly hair and higher Arabian ancestry
That sounds even more made up than the stuff I make up. I bet you can't back that up with sources.
LOL. I've been repeating that Somali's have more straight hair and less Arabian ancestry, for what, four times now? You're just now picking that up?
LMAO.
Compare SOM with AMH (Amhara), or do you want me to that for you as well?
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:According to our own classification, 40 per cent of the Amharas have non-negroid, wavy or curly hair, and the rest frizzly; the non-negroid class among the Gallas is 30 per cent, among the Somalis 86 per cent. Some of the Somalis actually have straight hair.
^According to racist Carleton Coon
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Kalonji
Good Find Sizzla.
Shows that Somalis and Oromos have very little Hap J unlike the Amhara. This should put to rest the idea that Horners with straight hair have that because of mixing with Arabs.
Peace
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
kalonji, check this out another non-African nose:
Amenemhat III ,12th Dynasty, Temple of Amun at Karnak,
they weren't all black folk, only some
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: I got duped by people posting Kobe Bryant and other American sports stars. We don't know his ancestry really is. AA's average somewhere between 12-22% non-African.
From the above one can only take it as you insinuating that AA's who may or may not have some ancestry from Europeans or possibly Native Americans aren't black anymore, am I right?
Basically, you're saying AA's aren't black either.
Do you realize how dumb that sounds?
Lol when will your idiotic madness end.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
Just like you epically failed to explain why straight hair in the Horn fails to correlate linearly with Arabian ancestry, ie, it occurs more in Somali’s with lesser foreign ancestry compared to surrounding tribes with higher incidences of whooly hair and higher Arabian ancestry
That sounds even more made up than the stuff I make up. I bet you can't back that up with sources.
LOL. I've been repeating that Somali's have more straight hair and less Arabian ancestry, for what, four times now? You're just now picking that up?
LMAO.
Compare SOM with AMH (Amhara), or do you want me to that for you as well?
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:According to our own classification, 40 per cent of the Amharas have non-negroid, wavy or curly hair, and the rest frizzly; the non-negroid class among the Gallas is 30 per cent, among the Somalis 86 per cent. Some of the Somalis actually have straight hair.
^According to racist Carleton Coon
kalonji why do you do this? I already debunked this. You are using Coon to try to prove your own unique hair hypothesis, that you came to by cherry picking from the Coon page, The Mediterranean Race in East Africa.
"The Somalis: The whole Horn of Africa, including the three Somali lands and the Ogaden region of Ethiopia, is occupied by various tribes of Somalis, nomadic Hamites who profess Islam and claim descent from Arabian missionaries. Their origin is not clearly known, but it is evident that there must have been some Galla as well as Arabian mixture, grafted onto a local Hamitic population. Before proceeding further, it may be well to state that all of the peoples of this “Hamitic” area, whether Hamitic or Semitic in speech, represent a blend in varying proportions between Mediterraneans of several varieties, especially of the tall, Atlanto-Mediterranean group, and negroes. Other elements include, of course, the Veddoid brought in solution from southern Arabia; there is also a possibility of traces of dilute pygmy and Bushman blood in southwestern Ethiopia and Somaliland, although neither of these has been proved. Needless to say, the Gallas and Amharas have mixed with each other greatly in the regions in which they have been in contact; both the Amharas and Gallas have absorbed the earlier Cushitic agricultural peoples in great numbers. The most important single influence has been the infiltration of negroes, through the slave trade, into the entire Ethiopian plateau region. So extensive has this infiltration been that it is unlikely that a single genetic line in the entire Horn of Africa is completely free from negroid admixture; but individuals may be found among the Amharas, Gallas, and Somalis who show no visible signs of negro blood. These individuals are extremely rare. On the whole the negroid element in the Hamitic cannot be much more than one-fourth of the whole,"
do you read what you put forward as a source?
Maybe you didn't cherry pick, you took it from somewhere else that extracted that quote. Very sloppy kalonj comparing SOM with AMH here is moot. Coon, your source describes both peoples as less comprised of African in ancestry
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: I got duped by people posting Kobe Bryant and other American sports stars. We don't know his ancestry really is. AA's average somewhere between 12-22% non-African.
From the above one can only take it as you insinuating that AA's who may or may not have some ancestry from Europeans or possibly Native Americans aren't black anymore, am I right?
Basically, you're saying AA's aren't black either.
Lol when will your idiotic madness end.
Mom look at that Amenemhat III, it's pretty strikingly non-African looking.
No you are not right, my point about AA's is that AA's without knowing given particular AA person's genetic profile cannot be used to argue Egyptians as being 100% African.
You can't now switch to the vague term "black" A "black" person can supposedly have 20% or more European or Asian ancestry but we are not talking about that. We are talking about what is 100% African or not 100% African ancestry of ancient Egyptians before late periods, including some Pharaohs and other high posts
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: I got duped by people posting Kobe Bryant and other American sports stars. We don't know his ancestry really is. AA's average somewhere between 12-22% non-African.
From the above one can only take it as you insinuating that AA's who may or may not have some ancestry from Europeans or possibly Native Americans aren't black anymore, am I right?
Basically, you're saying AA's aren't black either.
Lol when will your idiotic madness end.
Mom look at that Amenemhat III, it's pretty strikingly non-African looking.
So now you're some type of an eyeball anthropologist? I see.
Your opinion of what an African is supposed to look like matters more than what bio-anthropology and archaeology has concluded?
You're insane. This clown game you're playing isn't fooling anyone.
This is you -->>
quote:posted by the lioness: You have to check me on stuff, I make up things sometimes.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: No you are not right, my point about AA's is that AA's without knowing given particular AA person's genetic profile cannot be used to argue Egyptians as being 100% African.
Of course I am right, which is why you avoided the point, which is do you consider AA's black?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: You can't now switch to the vague term "black" A "black" person can supposedly have 20% or more European or Asian ancestry but we are not talking about that.
Since when did black become a vague word?
You know very well who is considered black or white in America.
Example, since you questioned Kobe's legitimacy as being representative of an African with such a nose you clinch on to ever so tightly considering it to be a non African nose, is Kobe Bryant black to you?
If a civilization of Kobe Bryant lookalikes arose would you call them black people?
You question beards as being indicative of non African ancestry, is Kimbo slice not black to you?
Kimbo slice indicative of him being not a real African to you huh? You slowmo.
Is he some European in disguise? Your logic is shot.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: We are talking about what is 100% African or not 100% African ancestry of ancient Egyptians before late periods, including some Pharaohs and other high posts
Well your eyeball speculation isn't helping much. Try something else.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
Unlike the portion that I quoted, which contains objective observations made by Coon, your quotation (that was supposed to debunk me) contains assertations that neither you nor he backed up with empirical evidence.
For example, where is Coons multivariate analysis that shows that Somali's group with Mediteraneans?
Where was Coon's genetic evidence that Somali's had significant Arabian admixture?
LOL.
So of course I cherry picked, and I had good reason to. The keyword is EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE, you should look that up sometime.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: This should put to rest the idea that Horners with straight hair have that because of mixing with Arabs.
Indeed.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: Of course I am right, which is why you avoided the point, which is do you consider AA's black?
I consider some African Americans black and others like many of the Mozabite Berbers and some modern Egyptians all African Americans if they moved to America but not all black. Others would be "part black". But this whole "black" term people morph the definition of to fit given situation. It can be a problem mixing it with scientific data.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: I consider some African Americans black and others like many of the Mozabite Berbers and some modern Egyptians all African Americans but not all black.
What the...? You consider some African Americans like Mozabite Berbers and some Modern Egyptians all African Americans? But not all black?
Atleast when you make up your B.S. try to make sense, dummy.
You know full well who is part of the African American community.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Others would be "part black". But this whole "black" term people morph the definition of to fit given situation.
You meant to say people such as yourself?
Lol. Stop projecting fool.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: It can be a problem mixing it with scientific data.
Well answer, being that you put Kobes validity of being a real African on the line, is he black to you?
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: I consider some African Americans black
^^This says a lot about your idiocy...
Hey guess what African Americans you're really not black (anymore), only some of you are--- signed lioness a.k.a. lyindumbass Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
If this African were to move to Chicago he would become an African American.
/close thread
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
According to who, you? LOL This is the problem, no one else believes the b.s. you spout but you!!
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
She is trying to conflate the ethnic meaning of ''African American'' with the literal meaning, ie, a (North)African who migrated to America, hence, African American.
All fun and games to make up for her inability to maturely and materially make her point.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^I know what she's "trying" to do, which is why she's being exposed, you know, the usual.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
I see what you're trying to do saying North Africans are not Africans, typical true negroism
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: I see what you're trying to do saying North Africans are not Africans, typical true negroism
Nope, what I'm saying is that they're not African Americans, big difference.
More on your idiocy follows.
Just a moment ago you were being called out on saying Kobe Bryant wasn't a good representative of being an African possibly because he has admixture with no evidence.
So now you're going to call the above individual you posted an African while Kobe Bryant is not good enough to represent an African?
What sense do you ever make here?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: [qb] I see what you're trying to do saying North Africans are not Africans, typical true negroism
Nope, what I'm saying is that they're not African Americans, big difference.
Of course they are not African Americans until they move to America and start living there.
Kobe is an African American who is probably not that recent from Africa, therefore he is not good guess for being 100% African genetically
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: [qb] I see what you're trying to do saying North Africans are not Africans, typical true negroism
Nope, what I'm saying is that they're not African Americans, big difference.
Of course they are not African Americans until they move to America and start living there.
Where does your definition of what an African American is, come from?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Kobe is an African American who is probably not that recent from Africa, therefore he is not good guess for being 100% African genetically
Is Kobe Bryant black?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: Is Kobe Bryant black?
only his hair and eye pupils are, most of the rest of him is brown*
This is scientifically provable with a spectrophotometer
*the lioness doesn't go by Herodotus sterotypes
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^Lousy copout.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^Lousy copout.
what, people are supposed to cop in to your racial classifications?
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^Lousy copout.
what, people are supposed to cop in to your racial classifications?
Go here and find the meaning of cop out and cop in, you Lyingass Pinkoid:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^Lousy copout.
what, people are supposed to cop in to your racial classifications?
Nope, my point was/is you beat around the bush, you never give a flat out answer.
You ignore questions;
Where does your definition of what an African American is, come from?
You know full well who is considered black in America and who is not.
You know full well that African Americans are considered black, yet you want to act like you don't know, and instead play dumb.
You know that Kobe Bryant considers himself black and is considered black, hence his nickname in basketball "the black mamba".
You're a lousy copout.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
This thread is about Egypt and Mesopotamia not about dumb racial views Americans have. No I will not go to Disneyland with you
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^Another lousy copout. LOL
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Getting back to the main point of this thread. Does anyone have anymore evidence of a near eastern influence on Egypt in the period just preceding the first dynasties?
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
I don't get it, you're asking that as if you had any evidence to begin with.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
I don't have evidence of anything.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: I don't have evidence of anything.
Good to know.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Kemet was African period!! you Simple have no evidence to the contrary so let it rest,learn when to fold Simple learn when to fold.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Kemet was African period!!
Of course it was African since it was in Africa.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Kemet was African period!!
Of course it was African since it was in Africa.
With considerable influence from abroad.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
simple-minded has to keep mythically invoking "considerable influence from abroad", because like I said in another thread, it serves a therapeutic purpose for being in an awkward position of being highly addicted to a "Black African" culture [case in point: simple-minded is here 24/7 obsessing over AE instead of his/her/its own non-African heritage] while fearing and phobic of "Blacks".
Posted by Siptah (Member # 17601) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: simple-minded has to keep mythically invoking "considerable influence from abroad", because like I said in another thread, it serves a therapeutic purpose for being in an awkward position of being highly addicted to a "Black African" culture [case in point: simple-minded is here 24/7 obsessing over AE instead of his/her/its own non-African heritage] while fearing and phobic of "Blacks".
Ah but did the black people ever do something to receive such fear and anti-black religion?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: simple-minded has to keep mythically invoking "considerable influence from abroad", because like I said in another thread, it serves a therapeutic purpose for being in an awkward position of being highly addicted to a "Black African" culture [case in point: simple-minded is here 24/7 obsessing over AE instead of his/her/its own non-African heritage] while fearing and phobic of "Blacks".
It seems more likely that you have done a very good evaluation of yourself. Replacing the word 'black' with the word 'white' of course.lol
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Nope. Explorer's commentary is a PERFECT description of you to the tee.
Exactly how is Explorer fearing of phobic of whites?? What, because he defends the TRUTH of ancient Egypt being an African civilization created by indigenous i.e. BLACK African people??! Funny how when crazed Afrocentrics like Mike and Marc Washington claim ancient Rome was black, the same Explorer debunks them the same way he debunks you!
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: @ Djehuti:Nothing but an extension of the Naqada II culture. Now you should be able to show us when the oldest known sentence formed in hieroglyphics when and was formed? Come on and cough it up.
How many times must I keep telling you twit that the A-Group culture of Nubia is OLDER than Naqada II. Qustul (3800-3100 BCE) Naqada II (3500-3200 BCE)! Or can you not do simple math?
And there's no way getting around it. Egyptian hieroglyphic writing does pre-date Sumerian cuneiform. The earliest hieroglyphs to date come from Upper Egypt near Abydos. See here.
quote: And since these people came from southern Chad as you claim, you should be able to show us many parallels that coincide with the cultural aspects of both. Let's see them.
First of all, I said the primary origins of pharaonic culture are in SUDAN. Second of all I just cited several important examples several pages ago, or did you miss them like you do a lot of posts that debunk you??
Again, some important cultural elements shared with the Sudanese: divine kingship including the rites and rituals tying the king to the land; the cattle cult; the totemism; the matriarchal customs; the clothing style-- white linen skirts and gowns, beaded jewelry including collars, headbands etc and leopard skin clothing for religious purposes, totemic headdresses; body art-- tattoos and scarifications, hairstyles-- braids, martial arts-- wrestling and stick fighting, weapons like spears, bows, and throwing sticks for hunting; burial customs including body positions and gestures.
Now how about you name me one aspect of Egyptian culture that is NOT African??
quote:I also want to see the proto-hieroglyphs from Qustul with an affirmation as to their dating. Not that they don't exist, just want you to provide the evidence.
LOL I have provided a lot of evidence as it is and you still doubt them. Why should I do all the work for you? How about you research the pictographs of Qustul and Sayalah that predate even the proto-hieroglyphs of Egypt??
You fail to realize that not only is Egypt African but its roots lie farther to the south in 'Nubia' or rather the Sudan. The earliest settled culture known in the Nile Valley is the Khartoum Mesolithic which is dated from 7050-5000 BC though some sites go back as far as over 8000 BC. The culture was settled pastoralism supplemented by fishing and hunting. This culture had the earliest urban dwellings or towns and the earliest complex burials or tombs. This culture may very well be the ancestor of the Badarian culture if not Naqada I! I suggest you do research on the Khartoum Mesolithic, on the Anu people mentioned in Egyptian records as the first people of the south, and read books like The prehistory of the Nile valley by Anthony John Arkell and People, Water, and Grain: The Beginnings of Domestication in the Sahara and the Nile Valley by Barbara E. Barich, instead of talking out your racist ass. Egypt like Sudan just below it is African and continuous with the rest of Africa!
You're just angry because Explorer is right, you are one of those white losers obsessed with an African culture yet your racism compels you to de-Africanize it, as crazy as that is! LOL Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Again, some important cultural elements shared with the Sudanese: divine kingship including the rites and rituals tying the king to the land; the cattle cult; the totemism; the matriarchal customs; the clothing style-- white linen skirts and gowns, beaded jewelry including collars, headbands etc and leopard skin clothing for religious purposes, totemic headdresses; body art-- tattoos and scarifications, hairstyles-- braids, martial arts-- wrestling and stick fighting, weapons like spears, bows, and throwing sticks for hunting; burial customs including body positions and gestures.
Now how about you name me one aspect of Egyptian culture that is NOT African??
many of the items you list could be attributed to tribal people in may parts of the world. One of the more unique things about ancient Egypt is the large scale architecture, pyramid construction, huge monuments and columned temples
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Correction. Many of what I listed can only be attributed to Africans unless you can provide an example of global coincidence. Other than totemism, which in the case of Egyptians uses African animals and perhaps matriarchy, everything else is African and East African in particular.
Your problem is that you are ignoramus when it comes to African cultures (as well as everything else anthropological), even though you claim to be "West African". LOL Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ I thought so. Moving on...
quote:Originally posted by NonProof: The Wadi of the Horus Qa-a: A Tableau of Royal Ritual Power in the Theban Western Desert
John Coleman Darnell (1)
Figure 8
The first vessel from the left (Figure 8) is one of a small number of early depictions of vessels with sails in Egyptian(10) and Nubian(11) art; again, in terms of location of the sail on the vessel, and considering the surrounding imagery, the sail and vessel in the Wadi of the Horus Qa-a recall the similarly located sail in the vessel carrying the prisoner on the most elaborate incense burner from Qustul.(12) Although most of the other vessels with sails in early Egyptian and Nubian depictions have high upturned prows and sterns, and are of Naqada III date, the vessel in the Wadi of the Horus Qa-a tableau belongs to the tradition of boat depictions on Naqada II Decorated Ware. Given the similarity of the Qa-a tableau vessels to those of Tomb 100 and Decorated Ware pottery depictions, the Qa-a Wadi boat with sail is apparently the earliest known depiction of a sail.(13)
1. The following is a shortened version of a portion of “The Wadi of the Horus Qa-a: a New Tableau of Royal Ritual Power in the Theban Western Desert,” in R. Friedman, ed., Egypt at its Origins 3, Proceedings of the Third International Colloquium on Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt (Leuven, forthcoming).
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: Now now NonProphet...we must not overload their tiny brains all at once.lol
Say what now??
Nubian (Mesolithic) Boat
Discovery The earliest evidence for an ancient boat on the Nile is a rock art pictograph that dates to the Mesolithic. The El Salha Archaeological Project of the Italian Institute for African and Oriental Studies has been working in the central Sudan since the fall of 2000. The project's priority is the archeology of the Mesolithic and Neolithic cultures of this region of the Nile Valley. Of great interest to maritime archeology is an elongated burial mound on the west bank of the Nile, 25 km south of Omdurman. Beneath this Post-Meriotic burial and disturbed deposits was a compact, homogeneous layer of the Khartoum Mesolithic. Diagnostic gastropods were in this layer and radiocarbon dating delineates a time span of 7050 to 6820 BC.
An important artifact that speaks to the early history of boat design and ship building was found in the Khartoum Mesolithic layer. A recognizable outline of Nile boat had been cut into a granite pebble. This is the oldest known representation of a Nile boat, and the oldest depiction of a boat that is more advanced in design than a canoe. The dating of this pictograph pushes back the earliest evidence for Nile boats by 3,000 years. Boat Design / Steering Some detail and aspects of boat construction can be inferred from the image on the granite pebble, as first reported by D. Usai and S. Salvatori in December, 2007. The back half of the boat image is in the best state of preservation. A steering system and cabin are situated at the approximate center of the boat. A composite steering system can be discerned with a tiller placed at a greater than 45° angle with a long pole ending in an ovoid blade. Tiller and pole with blade are fixed to the top of a vertical yoke. Boat and steering system design resemble those painted on the walls of Badarian huts and pottery jars. There are similarities with some boats depicted in rock engravings in Nubia (Sudan); and those painted on walls and pottery in the Gerzan and Nagada cultures of Predynastic Egypt. “In particular the image of a steering gear fixed to a vertical pole inserted in the stern upper hull can be found in boat rock engravings from the Abka region in Sudanese Nubia; and from Akkad which is south of the third Cataract on the left bank of the Nile in the Northern Dongola Reach. The blade strongly resembled those of the boat of El Khab. This kind of composite helm was still in use on Egyptian ships built during the New Kingdom. The dome-like cabin on the upper hull is also a well known feature on boat representations dating to the Gerzean and Predynastic periods in Egypt and Nubia.” The Khartoum Mesolithic boat may be said to represent the end of important, coordinated developments in boat design. The specific features of the boat depicted on the rock from the 16 D-5 site must have been designed earlier in the Nubian Mesolithic. As this approach to hull design, cabin layout and steering mechanism are found on boats thousands of years later, it had been judged the best possible architecture for small and medium size Nile boats during the Khartoum Mesolithic. As the first and best choice in Nile boat nautical architecture, this design persisted in boat building tradition for several thousand years. Slight modifications would produce either a fishing or cargo boat...
Original source here: The Oldest Representation of a Nile Boat by D. Usai & S. Salvatori, Antiquity Vol 81 issue 314 December 2007.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Just to recap...
quote:Originally posted by Spiralbrains: Basalt statuette known as 'MacGregor Man', Ancient Egyptian, predynastic period, 3250 B.C.
Looks like a sculpture i would expect from Sumer.
How is the statue above Sumerian-like? One simple-minded poster claims the eyebrows are thick, yet thick eyebrows alone don't mean anything. Besides, in Sumerian art the eyebrows meet in the middle to form a kind of 'uni-brow'. Here the brows are totally separate by a space in between. Also, Egyptians during dynastic period are depicted with thick eyebrows along with black skins. Sumerian men wore round hats, but theirs were a little taller with thick brims to them. The statue above is more so a tight fitting cap the kind worn by gods like Ptah or high ranking Egyptians or even Puntite men further south in Africa. The full beard means nothing since many men including Africans can wear full beards. But notice what the man is wearing. It might be hard to see because of the dark colored stone and poor lighting, but the figure is wearing a penis-sheath. Such penis sheaths were common attire of predynastic Egyptian men and is also worn by 'tribal' Africans today further south in the Sudan and Ethiopia.
As for the overall style of the statue. It looks not much different from other Nagada statue of a male figure, one without a penis sheath.
And here is a reconstruction from Egyptologists of what the statue above looked like with its head as well as what the entire Naqada settlement may have looked like.
A very African settlement.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spiralbrains:
I think the artifacts presented reveal that Egypt owes some of its debt to Sumerian and or Near Eastern influence.
The motif of the 'hero' wrestling with beasts was at first thought to be Sumerian also as that is where it frequently appeared...
Until that it was discovered in Saharan rock art dating back thousands of years earlier.
Details from a tomb painting from Hierakonpolis, from prehistoric Egypt's Naqada culture. A new study suggests the Naqada people, the earlier Badarians and the later Egyptians were essentially the same group. The painting shows a procession of boats, one of which has an awning "sheltering a figure who is probably the ruler and the person for whom the tomb was built," writes Toby Wilkinson in the book Predynastic Egypt. The artwork shows "the ruler engaged in various activities—including a ritual water-borne procession, perhaps an ancestor of some of the later festivals of kingship," Wilkinson writes, and "sought to express the multiple roles of the king in relation to his people and the supernatural." Remarkable, he adds, "is the number of features characteristic of classic Egyptian art," present already 300 years before pharaohs inaugurated classic Egyptian civilization by unifying the land around 3,100 B.C. A man holding apart two wild animals in the lower left is a type of "hero" or "master of the beasts" figure found in other artworks of its time, Wilkinson adds.
By the way, the Narmer Palette dates back to around 3,100 B.C. whereas the Uruk cylinder seal dates back to around 3,000 B.C. Thus the Narmer palette with its depiction of 'serpopards' is a full century earlier than the Uruk one. Add this to Egypt's trade with Mesopotamia and it is more than coincidence.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Behold the Narmer Palette. The very symbolic including totemic nature of the palette as well as the scenes and rituals they depict are very African.
In both sides of the palette at the top there is Narmer’s name a totemic one of the catfish flanked by two water buffaloes with the faces of women, likely protective goddesses.
^ On this side above is shown a procession with Narmer wearing the deshret or red crown that resembles a Nile lily with his sandal bearer behind him. Because kings in Africa were considered divine, the fact that he is marching barefoot means his is consecrating the ground. In front of Narmer is either a woman or a man unusually dressed in feminine attire wearing a dress that covers his chest as well as long hair, probably a wig. Because of this, many think it is a shaman. In front of this person is four standard bearers. In the first standard is a totem of a placenta, the second bears a jackal reclined on something, and the front two are birds perhaps hawks. In front of these are decapitated bodies lined up in a row. Below in the second register are two leonine creatures with long serpent like necks intertwined, each neck noosed by a man. This represents the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt. In last register below a bull symbolizing the king rams into a fort breaking it while trampling on an enemy.
^ On this side we see the king in the forefront wearing his own hedjet (white headdress) which resembles a bull penis, wielding his pear-shaped mace about to strike an enemy down which he grips by the hair. This is a classic smiting pose as depicted all throughout the dynastic period. However, such a scene may originate in the ritual of human sacrifice as such rituals were common to many other divine kings in Africa. The sandal-bearer stands in the background holding a kettle of water used as ablutions to cleanse the king after his ritual sacrifice as seen in other African cultures and first cited by Diop. Above the helpless enemy is the symbol of the delta with the head of a man. A hawk is perched above grabbing out the breath of life from the Delta’s nostrils. In the register below are two men who represent enemy cities.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
"The evidence also points to linkages to other northeast African peoples, not coincidentally approximating the modern range of languages closely related to Egyptian in the Afro-Asiatic group (formerly called Hamito-Semetic). These linguistic similarities place ancient Egyptian in a close relationship with languages spoken today as far west as Chad, and as far south as Somalia. Archaeological evidence also strongly supports an African origin. A widespread northeastern African cultural assemblage, including distinctive multiple barbed harpoons and pottery decorated with dotted wavy line patterns, appears during the early Neolithic (also known as the Aqualithic, a reference to the mild climate of the Sahara at this time).
Saharan and Sudanese rock art from this time resembles early Egyptian iconography. Strong connections between Nubian (Sudanese) and Egyptian material culture continue in later Neolithic Badarian culture of Upper Egypt. Similarities include black-topped wares, vessels with characteristic ripple-burnished surfaces, a special tulip-shaped vessel with incised and white-filled decoration, palettes, and harpoons...
Other ancient Egyptian practices show strong similarities to modern African cultures including divine kingship, the use of headrests, body art, circumcision, and male coming-of-age rituals, all suggesting an African substratum or foundation for Egyptian civilization."
Donald Redford (2001) The Oxford encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, Volume 3. Oxford University Press. p. 28
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Djehuti in desperation mode, reviving old posts of the same thread, waiting for flood protection time limits, Lol, computer graphics simulations, illustrations of rock art not the original posted earlier
There is some cultural influence of Africa on Egypt, language, signs, symbols, deities, hiarstyles There also are many of these things unique to Egypt. There is also a lack of precedent in Africa for Egyptian architecture development and these developments are why people mention ancient Egypt so much, stone pyramids, stone temple with large columns, etc
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lyingass: Djehuti in desperation mode, reviving old posts of the same thread, waiting for flood protection time limits, Lol, computer graphics simulations, illustrations of rock art not the original posted earlier
LMAO I think you're projecting, since the only one desperate that I see is YOU. What I did was merely a recap to prove my point.
The computer graphic simulations are reconstruction based on the actual work of Egyptologists who've studied the Naqada cultures. These cultures are entirely African in origin as they are in design. The same is said about the rock art. That you have a problem with this is too bad.
quote:There is some cultural influence of Africa on Egypt, language, signs, symbols, deities, hiarstyles
LOL It is more than just "some" but actually A LOT. Again, if you actually knew about African culture, you would know that almost everything about Egyptian culture screams African. But your ignorance is not my problem.
quote:There also are many of these things unique to Egypt. There is also a lack of precedent in Africa for Egyptian architecture development and these developments are why people mention ancient Egypt so much, stone pyramids, stone temple with large columns, etc
One can say the same about Meso-American culture as opposed to the rest of Native American culture or rather yet Greco-Roman culture as opposed to the rest of Europe.
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: The earliest settled culture known in the Nile Valley is the Khartoum Mesolithic which is dated from 7050-5000 BC though some sites go back as far as over 8000 BC. The culture was settled pastoralism supplemented by fishing and hunting. This culture had the earliest urban dwellings or towns and the earliest complex burials or tombs.
Were the early Khartoumians really pastoralists though? I read here that there is no evidence of domesticated animals near the Khartoum Mesolithic sites. I do agree though that the Khartoum Mesolithic is probably ancestral to Egyptian civilization.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: One can say the same about Meso-American culture as opposed to the rest of Native American culture or rather yet Greco-Roman culture as opposed to the rest of Europe. [/QB]
You could say the same about Meso-American architecture.
But not about Greco-Roman architecture. Greco-Roman architecture is influenced by ancient Egyptians architecture.
Greco-Roman culture is also influenced by Egyptian culture. But stop playing games culture and technology (architecture) is not always the same thing.
Example, a non-Western culture could imitate opera that doesn't mean the can build an airplane. Sometimes they do both but in earlier periods sometimes both was not going on at the same time.
I see you as you try to switch words up and blur things.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Okay. So what is your point? That still does not negate the fact that essentially all of Egypt's culture is African. While Europe on the other hand has lots of influence and input from both Asia and Africa. Sorry if this pains you.
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: Were the early Khartoumians really pastoralists though? I read here that there is no evidence of domesticated animals near the Khartoum Mesolithic sites. I do agree though that the Khartoum Mesolithic is probably ancestral to Egyptian civilization.
That's strange considering most sources I've read describes the Khartoum Mesolithic as pastoral also. Though fishing and hunting were part of the economy so was cattle raising.
One of the mains sources I have for this is the book Chronology of the Khartoum ‘Mesolithic’ and ‘Neolithic’ and Related Sites in the Sudan: Statistical Analysis and Comparisons with Egypt by Fekri Hassan.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Okay. So what is your point? That still does not negate the fact that essentially all of Egypt's culture is African. While Europe on the other hand has lots of influence and input from both Asia and Africa. Sorry if this pains you.
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: Were the early Khartoumians really pastoralists though? I read here that there is no evidence of domesticated animals near the Khartoum Mesolithic sites. I do agree though that the Khartoum Mesolithic is probably ancestral to Egyptian civilization.
That's strange considering most sources I've read describes the Khartoum Mesolithic as pastoral also. Though fishing and hunting were part of the economy so was cattle raising.
One of the mains sources I have for this is the book Chronology of the Khartoum ‘Mesolithic’ and ‘Neolithic’ and Related Sites in the Sudan: Statistical Analysis and Comparisons with Egypt by Fekri Hassan.
That's an article in African Archaeological Review not a book, some people have only read the abstract though
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote: The Western Desert has a long history of human use beginning at least as early as the early Middle Pleistocene and offers a rare opportunity to study past human adaptation to a hyperarid environment. For example, during the early Holocene among the more interesting developments is the appearance of presumably domestic cattle perhaps as early as 11,000 cal B.P.; the accompanying presence of sophisticated and well-made pottery in the Early Khartoum tradition (Banks 1980; Close 1995); the introduction of caprovids from Southwest Asia between ca. 8400 and 8000 cal B.P. (Gautier 1980); technological innovations such as deep wells which made it possible for groups to live in the desert throughout the year (Wendorf et al. 1984); the emergence of a regional ceremonial center with megalithic alignments,
This Wendorf is outdated though. The early holocenic cattle in ancient Sudan are morphologically wild, not domesticated.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Have you some quotes on Khartoum Mesolithic pastoralists that you can post in a new thread?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: Were the early Khartoumians really pastoralists though? I read here that there is no evidence of domesticated animals near the Khartoum Mesolithic sites. I do agree though that the Khartoum Mesolithic is probably ancestral to Egyptian civilization.
That's strange considering most sources I've read describes the Khartoum Mesolithic as pastoral also. Though fishing and hunting were part of the economy so was cattle raising.
One of the mains sources I have for this is the book Chronology of the Khartoum ‘Mesolithic’ and ‘Neolithic’ and Related Sites in the Sudan: Statistical Analysis and Comparisons with Egypt by Fekri Hassan.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
You have to check me on stuff, I make up things sometimes.
Oh my God, why are some of you still arguing with this child?!
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by the Djehuti:
One of the mains sources I have for this is the book Chronology of the Khartoum ‘Mesolithic’ and ‘Neolithic’ and Related Sites in the Sudan: Statistical Analysis and Comparisons with Egypt by Fekri Hassan.
Originally posted by the lioness: That's an article in African Archaeological Review not a book, some people have only read the abstract though
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
You have to check me on stuff, I make up things sometimes.
Oh my God, why are some of you still arguing with this child?!
you're right Sundjata, Chronology of the Khartoum is really a book. It's not actually an article in African Archaeological Review. I made that up
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Figure 8 
Take note of the early palace facade far left on the Qustol incence burner and Djoser's building
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
