posted
I am well aware that Ramesses III's Version of the book of gates has been discussed several times on this site.
However unlike the previous posts on this site my post is focussed on the text found in the tomb.
Now if my interpretation of the text is correct it states that the Egyptians/RETH were created from Horus' tears, while the Nehesu/Nubians were created from Horus sperm. The Libyans/Themehu and Asiatics/Levantines were seen as sons of Sekhmet.
Personally when I first came across version of the book of gates, I assumed that the Egyptians mislabeled a Nehesu group, but in closer inspection the eyes and face of the people labeled "RMT" are consistent with previous depictions of an Egyptian, as pointed out by Tukuler in this thread: http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=010053 (Image from Tukuler's original post. The far left and center are Egyptians, while the far right is a Nubian) Personally, I feel like the similarities in clothing between the two men could be dismissed as a result of them largely sharing the same culture and traditions. Now with this in mind can one say with a degree of certainly that the Egyptians saw shared kinship/ancestry with the Nubian groups and represented this idea though a religious lens by them sharing Horus as a single father? And as a side question for the thread, I thought that Set was the god of Asiatics/Libyans, why was Sekhmet treated as their creator in this text then?
Posts: 79 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
posted
what do the rest of the Egyptians look like in the wall paintings of the Tomb of Ramses III ?
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ The other Egyptians are depicted as typical with reddish-brown tone, hairstyle etc. Why are you feigning ignorance when it was Tukuler who schooled you when you tried to argue that the jet black colored figure being labeled Egyptian was a "mistake".
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: Now if my interpretation of the text is correct it states that the Egyptians/RETH were created from Horus' tears, while the Nehesu/Nubians were created from Horus sperm. The Libyans/Themehu and Asiatics/Levantines were seen as sons of Sekhmet.
Reth is Egyptian for 'Men' and was the common ethnocentric epithet they used for themselves hence Reth ne Romet meaning 'Men of Peoples'. Nehesu were Nubians (NOT "Negroes"), Themehu were Libyans and Aamu were Asiatics. But your assessment is correct except that it wasn't Sekhmet who created the Aamu and Themehu but the goddess Sekhet. She is goddess of the marshlands i.e. the Delta that was the boundary between both Libya and Asia (the Sinai).
quote:Personally when I first came across version of the book of gates, I assumed that the Egyptians mislabeled a Nehesu group, but in closer inspection the eyes and face of the people labeled "RMT" are consistent with previous depictions of an Egyptian, as pointed out by Tukuler in this thread: http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=010053 (Image from Tukuler's original post. The far left and center are Egyptians, while the far right is a Nubian) Personally, I feel like the similarities in clothing between the two men could be dismissed as a result of them largely sharing the same culture and traditions. Now with this in mind can one say with a degree of certainly that the Egyptians saw shared kinship/ancestry with the Nubian groups and represented this idea though a religious lens by them sharing Horus as a single father? And as a side question for the thread, I thought that Set was the god of Asiatics/Libyans, why was Sekhmet treated as their creator in this text then?
This was a huge debate not just in this forum but in academia as to whether or not the labeling of the jet-black figure was a "mistake", yet it would make NO sense for tomb artists to make such a blaring mistake especially when working on a tomb that was meant to last for eternity. You are correct that the black figure labeled 'Rt' has the same facial profile as the typical brown Egyptian despite having a black complexion and wearing the same attire and hairstyle as the Nhsw.
This is my personal opinion but I believe although there was an ethnic difference between the two Rt, they are considered both Rt probably due to a shared spiritual or religious tradition. We know for example the roots of Egyptian religion pertaining to Heru lay to the south and was interconnected to the 1st nome of Ta-Seti i.e. A-Group/Qustul Culture. So perhaps the black Rt was a Setiu from southern Upper Egypt or Lower Nubia that was part of this tradition of being born from Horus or Ra but from a different part of his body.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Reth is Egyptian for 'Men' and was the common ethnocentric epithet they used for themselves hence Reth ne Romet meaning 'Men of Peoples'
Now this is another thing that's been puzzling me, as there seems to be a debate on what the hieroglyphics mean. I've seen several people on the internet dismiss this piece of evidence by stating that the hieroglyphics simply mean "people" instead of Men of peoples/Egyptians. Obviously suggesting that the black skinned man isn't an actual Egyptian. I'm curious to hear your stance on this argument.
quote:Your assessment is correct except that it wasn't Sekhmet who created the Aamu and Themehu but the goddess Sekhet. She is goddess of the marshlands i.e. the Delta that was the boundary between both Libya and Asia (the Sinai).
My mistake, this certainly clears up my second question. Funny enough, after doing a quick google search it seems "Sekhet" is also a form of gender identity for Ancient Egyptians(An unintended discovery I'm not sure what to do with).
Posts: 79 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: I am well aware that Ramesses III's Version of the book of gates has been discussed several times on this site.
However unlike the previous posts on this site my post is focussed on the text found in the tomb.
Now if my interpretation of the text is correct it states that the Egyptians/RETH were created from Horus' tears, while the Nehesu/Nubians were created from Horus sperm. The Libyans/Themehu and Asiatics/Levantines were seen as sons of Sekhmet.
Personally when I first came across version of the book of gates, I assumed that the Egyptians mislabeled a Nehesu group, but in closer inspection the eyes and face of the people labeled "RMT" are consistent with previous depictions of an Egyptian, as pointed out by Tukuler in this thread: http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=010053 (Image from Tukuler's original post. The far left and center are Egyptians, while the far right is a Nubian) Personally, I feel like the similarities in clothing between the two men could be dismissed as a result of them largely sharing the same culture and traditions. Now with this in mind can one say with a degree of certainly that the Egyptians saw shared kinship/ancestry with the Nubian groups and represented this idea though a religious lens by them sharing Horus as a single father? And as a side question for the thread, I thought that Set was the god of Asiatics/Libyans, why was Sekhmet treated as their creator in this text then?
I have come to the opinion that much of this lay in the political and religious situation that occurred in the 19th dynasty. Namely, that the dynastic Kingdom was growing more and more under the control of the Amun priesthood and various Southerners representing the Kushite lands within the dynastic state. The integration of the two populations had started in the 18th dynasty and all of that came to a head in the 19th dynasty, when the Amun priesthood became the defacto rulers of the Upper Nile all the way to Kush.
I have posted on this many times before, but the point is that Egyptology rarely talks about this important period in the history in the dynastic era. Even though it is this time period that is critical to understand what happened later, especially with the 25th dynasty. And also, you have to keep in mind that Egyptology has always portrayed the 19th dynasty as Asiatic in origin totally in contradiction of the facts. Therefore, this idea that the dynasty was in reality from Upper Egypt and becoming more and more connected to the South gets put on the back burner. Yet this Southern connection is most obviously seen in the mummies of the 21st dynasty which are some of the best preserved and a high point of the art of mummification, with very obvious black features.
Yet that being said, some early Egyptologists did acknowledge these facts and this partly the reason so many early depictinos of the 19th dynasty are obviously more black African in appearance. Whether it is the paintings of Rosellini or the reconstruction of a Temple of Ramses II for the Worlds Fair in 1881 at Hyde Park in London. All of these things point to the knowledge of a southern connection.
quote: It seems probable that one branch of the family, endowed with greater capability than the rest, was settled at Tanis, where Sesostris had, as we have seen, resided for many years; Smendes was the first of this branch to ascend the throne. The remembrance of his remote ancestor, Ramses II, which was still treasured up in the city he had completely rebuilt, as well as in the Delta into which he had infused new life, was doubtless of no small service in securing the crown for his descendant, when, the line of the Theban kings having come to an end, the Tanites put in their claim to the succession. We are unable to discover if war broke out between the two competitors, or if they arrived at an agreement without a struggle; but, at all events, we may assume that, having divided Egypt between them, neither of them felt himself strong enough to overcome his rival, and contented himself with the possession of half the empire, since he could not possess it in its entirety. We may fairly believe that Smendes had the greater right to the throne, and, above all, the more efficient army of the two, since, had it been otherwise, Hrihor would never have consented to yield him the priority.
The unity of Egypt was, to outward appearances, preserved, through the nominal possession by Smendes of the suzerainty; but, as a matter of fact, it had ceased to exist, and the fiction of the two kingdoms had become a reality for the first time within the range of history. Hence forward there were two Egypts, governed by different constitutions and from widely remote centres. Theban Egypt was, before all things, a community recognizing a theocratic government, in which the kingly office was merged in that of the high priest. Separated from Asia by the length of the Delta, it turned its attention, like the Pharaohs of the VIth and XIIth dynasties, to Ethiopia, and owing to its distance from the Mediterranean, and from the new civilization developed on its shores, it became more and more isolated, till at length it was reduced to a purely African state. Northern Egypt, on the contrary, maintained contact with European and Asiatic nations; it took an interest in their future, it borrowed from them to a certain extent whatever struck it as being useful or beautiful, and when the occasion presented itself, it acted in concert with Mediterranean powers. There was an almost constant struggle between these two divisions of the empire, at times breaking out into an open rupture, to end as often in a temporary re-establishment of unity. At one time Ethiopia would succeed in annexing Egypt, and again Egypt would seize some part of Ethiopia; but the settlement of affairs was never final, and the conflicting elements, brought with difficulty into harmony, relapsed into their usual condition at the end of a few years. A kingdom thus divided against itself could never succeed in maintaining its authority over those provinces which, even in the heyday of its power, had proved impatient of its yoke.
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: when I first came across this version of the book of gates, I assumed that the Egyptians mislabeled a Nehesu group, but in closer inspection the eyes and face of the people labeled "RMT" (middle figure) are consistent with the previous depictions of an Egyptian
And of course there is Merenptah, who depicted himself similarly to those portraits of the Nehesi within his tomb ( note the shoulder decoration and belts) :
This^^^^^^^^^ in bold.
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2707 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: I am well aware that Ramesses III's Version of the book of gates has been discussed several times on this site.
However unlike the previous posts on this site my post is focussed on the text found in the tomb.
Now if my interpretation of the text is correct it states that the Egyptians/RETH were created from Horus' tears, while the Nehesu/Nubians were created from Horus sperm. The Libyans/Themehu and Asiatics/Levantines were seen as sons of Sekhmet.
Personally when I first came across version of the book of gates, I assumed that the Egyptians mislabeled a Nehesu group, but in closer inspection the eyes and face of the people labeled "RMT" are consistent with previous depictions of an Egyptian, as pointed out by Tukuler in this thread: http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=010053 (Image from Tukuler's original post. The far left and center are Egyptians, while the far right is a Nubian) Personally, I feel like the similarities in clothing between the two men could be dismissed as a result of them largely sharing the same culture and traditions. Now with this in mind can one say with a degree of certainly that the Egyptians saw shared kinship/ancestry with the Nubian groups and represented this idea though a religious lens by them sharing Horus as a single father? And as a side question for the thread, I thought that Set was the god of Asiatics/Libyans, why was Sekhmet treated as their creator in this text then?
This means that Egyptians saw themselves as Black African AND neighbors to the Nubians, like twin civilization.
It cant be denied that the Egyptians grouped themselves with the Nubians for a reason and that is because they understood that the Asiatics were trying to claim too much of What Egyptians did as a Civilization.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic