posted
I was watching Black Athena on Youtube and an Egyptian Egyptologist had a different definition of what the colors mean in the paintings which was interesting and don't correlate with the religious thinking on this board and I always wanted to know is that if the ancient Egyptians are the same people as the ancient Sudanese then why did they depict them so differently as far as color and features when they are just right south of them yet in the middle east you see most of the depictions as the same amongst themselves this is addressed in the video?
posted
All speculation, speculation that doesn't hold under scientific scrutiny. Ancient Egyptians were found to be Indigenous extremely tropically adapted Africans, and contained epithelial cells packed with Melanin.
The origins of the ancient Egyptian state and its formation have received much attention through analysis of mortuary contexts, skeletal material, and trade. Genetic diversity was analyzed by studying craniometric variation within a series of six time-successive Egyptian populations in order to investigate the evidence for migration over the period of the development of social hierarchy and the Egyptian state. Craniometric variation, based upon 16 measurements, was assessed through principal components analysis, discriminant function analysis, and Mahalanobis D2 matrix computation. Spatial and temporal relationships were assessed by Mantel and Partial Mantel tests.The results indicate overallpopulation continuity over the Predynastic and earlyDynastic, and high levels of genetic heterogeneity, therebysuggesting that state formation occurred as a mainlyindigenous process. Nevertheless, significant differences were found in morphology between both geographically-pooled and cemetery-specific temporal groups, indicating that some migration occurred along the Egyptian Nile Valley over the periods studied. Am J Phys Anthropol 132:501–509, 2007.
Variation in Ancient Egyptian Stature and Body Proportions Sonia R. Zakrzewski*
Stature is comprised of contributions from several body portions, i.e., from the lower limb and from the trunk and cranium. The analyses performed on each individual bone were undertaken to see whether the small stature change found could be assigned to differences in growth of either the lower limb or the trunk (employing upper limb measurements as an indirect proxy for trunk size). Both upper and lower limb measurements (individual long bone lengths) exhibited significant change through time, although neither upper limb length (humerus radius) nor lower limb length (femur tibia) themselves exhibited significant change through time. All long bone lengths that changed display the same trend of increasing in length up until the start of the Dynastic period, and then decrease to the MK. None of the body ratios separating upper and lower portions exhibit statistically significant change through time. This pattern supports suggestions that the relative constancy of stature (i.e., the relatively low level of change through time) cannot easily be compartmentalized. This result is in agreement with previous research that found no significant change in body proportions between the Predynastic period and the Middle Kingdom (Masali, 1972; Robins, 1983). The ancient Egyptians have been described as having a “super negroid” body plan (Robins, 1983). Variations in the proximal to distal segments of each limb were therefore examined. Of the ratios considered, only maximum humerus length to maximum ulna length (XLH/XLU) showed statistically significant change through time. This change was a relative decrease in the length of the humerus as compared with the ulna, suggesting the development of an increasingly African body plan with time. This may also be the result of Nubian mercenaries being included in the sample from Gebelein. EGYPTIAN STATURE AND BODY PROPORTIONS 227 The nature of the body plan was also investigated by comparing the intermembral, brachial, and crural indices for these samples with values obtained from the literature. No significant differences were found in either index through time for either sex. The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the “super-negroid”body plan described by Robins (1983). The values for the brachial and crural indices show that the distal segments of each limb are longer relative to the proximal segments than in many “African” populations (data from Aiello and Dean, 1990).
This pattern is supported by Figure 7 (a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994), which indicatesthat the Egyptians generallyhave tropical bodyplans.Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. Despite these differences, all samples lie relatively clusteredtogether as compared to the other populations.
----------------
Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13
"Materials and methods In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three types of tissues were sampled from different mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approximately 1550_/1080 BC)..... The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin."Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by DevilNegrokiller_Wolofi: I was watching Black Athena on Youtube and an Egyptian Egyptologist had a different definition of what the colors mean in the paintings which was interesting and don't correlate with the religious thinking on this board and I always wanted to know is that if the ancient Egyptians are the same people as the ancient Sudanese then why did they depict them so differently as far as color and features when they are just right south of them yet in the middle east you see most of the depictions as the same amongst themselves this is addressed in the video?
That is a stupid question. Of COURSE brown skin is indigenous to Sudan and Egypt.
The woman said that, in their art, the Egyptians contrasted the color black with the "red" of the desert as the difference between fertile and desert. But she left one part out. The FERTILITY of blackness was also associated with the MAN of the Nile who was considered the FIRST CREATED HUMAN on earth and the incarnation of the DIVINE SEED of creation. Which simply means that the BLACK MAN and BLACK WOMAN of the Upper Nile (inner Africa) are the father and mother of mankind and that their FERTILITY is responsible for the existence of the human species. NONE of which changes the fact that brown skinned indigenous Nile Valley Africans are black Africans and can be found in the Sudan and Egypt. THAT is what is meant by them being CLOSE to one another. Brown skin in Egyptian art is not something UNIQUE to Egypt. Such a concept is utterly stupid as Africa is the HOME of brown skinned people of all shades.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by DevilNegrokiller_Wolofi: I am looking for answers from people that care about Egyptian culture, not culture VULTURES that want to jump to conclusions.
Thank you
Of course you're not really seeking information about culture of any sort, instead just another attempt at asking the stupid question of who were the Ancient Egyptians or why Nubians were depicted differently etc...
As we can all read exactly what you stated originally...
quote: Posted by Devil: I always wanted to know is that if the ancient Egyptians are the same people as the ancient Sudanese then why did they depict them so differently as far as color and features when they are just right south of them yet in the middle east you see most of the depictions as the same amongst themselves this is addressed in the video?
Therefore my reply was
All speculation, speculation that doesn't hold under scientific scrutiny. Ancient Egyptians were found to be Indigenous extremely tropically adapted Africans, and contained epithelial cells packed with Melanin.
Spatial and temporal relationships were assessed by Mantel and Partial Mantel tests.The results indicate overallpopulation continuity over the Predynastic and earlyDynastic, and high levels of genetic heterogeneity, therebysuggesting that state formation occurred as a mainlyindigenous process.
quote:
http://wysinger.homestead.com/egyptian_body_proportions.pdf No significant differences were found in either index through time for either sex. The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the “super-negroid”body plan described by Robins (1983). The values for the brachial and crural indices show that the distal segments of each limb are longer relative to the proximal segments than in many “African” populations (data from Aiello and Dean, 1990).
This pattern is supported by Figure 7 (a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994), which indicatesthat the Egyptians generallyhave tropical bodyplans.Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. Despite these differences, all samples lie relatively clusteredtogether as compared to the other populations.
"Materials and methods In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three types of tissues were sampled from different mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approximately 1550_/1080 BC)..... The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin."
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
In other words Egyptians and Sudanese were both indigenous black African people. No two black African populations are the same, the Dinka are not the Yoruba, the Mangbetu are not the San and so forth. The differences between ancient Egyptians and Sudanese were ethnic and nationalistic, but they were still black Africans. Black in Africa encompasses a wide range of complexions and if the JET BLACK images of Kushites are the only TRUE black Africans then most Africans in the world today would NOT be black, because MOST black people are NOT jet black to begin with and never were. And in Sudan today you have some Sudanese who are medium brown and some who are almost blue black, but they are STILL all black Africans.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What's amazing is that this proven know nothing trolling retard, who flashes women and children with an erection that has pink blisters on it, is still able to get you losers to dance on his puppet strings.
As I said earlier, you two chumps are intellectual frauds. Your whole existence depends on responding to individuals who need pyschiatric care. Individuals that no normal person would seriously respond to other than to administer a beatdown.
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
DevilNegrokiller_Wolofi - It seems strange to have to tell another Black person this but "All Black people do NOT look alike". So yes, Doug M is exactly right.
The reason for this is very simple: as you should know, skin color, or level of melanin, is an adaption related to a body's exposure to the sun. As you should also know, Africa is a very large place. Consequently it has variation in climate and sunlight index.
By the Koopen chart:
North Africa
Deserts take up about one third of the Earth's land surface.[1] They usually have a large diurnal and seasonal temperature range, with high daytime temperatures, and low nighttime temperatures (due to extremely low humidity). The temperature in the daytime can reach 45 °C/113 °F or higher in the summer, and dip to 0 °C/32°F or lower in the winter. Water acts to trap infrared radiation from both the sun and the ground, and dry desert air is incapable of blocking sunlight during the day or trapping heat during the night. Thus, during daylight most of the sun's heat reaches the ground, and as soon as the sun sets the desert cools quickly by radiating its heat into space. Urban areas in deserts lack large (more than 14 °C/25 °F) daily temperature variations, partially due to the urban heat island effect.
Central Africa
An equatorial climate is a type of tropical climate in which there is no dry season – all months have mean precipitation values of at least 30 mm (2.4 inches). Equatorial climates have no pronounced summer or winter; it is hot and wet throughout the year and rainfall is heavy and falls throughout the afternoon on an almost daily basis.
Extreme South Africa
Humid subtropical climate (Köppen Cfa or Cwa) is a climate zone characterized by hot, humid summers and chilly to mild winters. This climate type covers a broad category of climates, and the term "subtropical" may be a misnomer for the winter climate in the cooler areas within this category; in fact Wladimir Köppen never talked about a humid subtropical climate, but rather about a sinic climate (sinisches Klima), for his subclass Cw of temperate climates. Significant amounts of precipitation occur in all seasons in most areas. Winter rainfall (and sometimes snowfall) is associated with large storms that the westerlies steer from west to east. Most summer rainfall occurs during thunderstorms and an occasional tropical storm, hurricane or cyclone.
------------------------------------- DevilNegrokiller_Wolofi - It seems strange to have to tell another Black person this but "All Black people do NOT look alike" -------------------------------------
Look! The loon has his sockpuppets talking to one other. This boy needs a prescription of Haldol.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAAHA
Everyone knows that Mike111, Wolofi, Vida, Bettyboo are the same character, that shares the same mind, whose body is wrapped tightly by a straightjacket.
quote:Originally posted by DevilNegrokiller_Wolofi: I was watching Black Athena on Youtube and an Egyptian Egyptologist had a different definition of what the colors mean in the paintings which was interesting and don't correlate with the religious thinking on this board and I always wanted to know is that if the ancient Egyptians are the same people as the ancient Sudanese then why did they depict them so differently as far as color and features when they are just right south of them yet in the middle east you see most of the depictions as the same amongst themselves this is addressed in the video?
That is a stupid question. Of COURSE brown skin is indigenous to Sudan and Egypt.
The woman said that, in their art, the Egyptians contrasted the color black with the "red" of the desert as the difference between fertile and desert. But she left one part out. The FERTILITY of blackness was also associated with the MAN of the Nile who was considered the FIRST CREATED HUMAN on earth and the incarnation of the DIVINE SEED of creation. Which simply means that the BLACK MAN and BLACK WOMAN of the Upper Nile (inner Africa) are the father and mother of mankind and that their FERTILITY is responsible for the existence of the human species. NONE of which changes the fact that brown skinned indigenous Nile Valley Africans are black Africans and can be found in the Sudan and Egypt. THAT is what is meant by them being CLOSE to one another. Brown skin in Egyptian art is not something UNIQUE to Egypt. Such a concept is utterly stupid as Africa is the HOME of brown skinned people of all shades.
Ok but WHY did they paint themselves so totally different from the other Africans? There are huge differences in the appearance of the art that noone can deny. Variety in African features is irrelevant when I am talking about people that live RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO EACH OTHER!!!
Posts: 152 | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^I don't think anyone really understands what you are talking about. Try posting some examples of what you mean.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Totally different HOW? They painted themselves BROWN. What does brown mean to YOU is the better question. Because ANYBODY with an ounce of common sense would know that brown skin is found in ALL black African populations. Even the Egyptians acknowledged this, because MOST of their portraits of people from the South showed people who ranged from brown to black, which means you are making a mountain out of a mole hill. ALL black African populations have people who are "reddish" brown like the AE portraits and DARK BROWN like the Kushites, but they are STILL BLACK and even the AE themselves used VARIOUS shades of brown for themselves in their OWN art. So again, you are over emphasizing something that is meaningless, it is like asking whether blonde haired people are the only TRUE whites of Europe. But this is exactly the kind of nonsense that Europeans want you to believe and they DO NOT have ANY intention of portraying the AE as they portrayed themselves, which was BROWN. They only want the AE to be WHITE, which the AE were not.
But like I said, most black Africans are NOT JET BLACK like this and come in a range of complexions and the AE realized this as well:
But you will find a LARGE NUMBER of black Africans in the WORLD who are brown like this:
But again, if one was to do a TRUE ethographic study of Sudan one would find the SAME kind of variation among Nile Valley Africans in Sudan as that found in AE art, including features like the AE. John Garang is an example of ONE TYPE of Sudanese:
Alek Wek is another:
But even she nor he is literally JET BLACK.
But most of the people you see in later Egyptian art are in reality SOUTHERN Sudanese:
However, Northern Sudanese are much more like upper Egyptians than Southern Sudanese. And this was even more true in Ancient times. But again, this shows that AE art was incredibly accurate in portraying subtle ethnic and cultural differences between different populations.
Again, the distinction you try to make are meaningless, because the AE did not consider themselves as WHITE. And like you said, it is impossible for the AE to have been DRASTICALLY different from the people next door to them. The only reason for such a distinction is because the LATER dynasties of Egypt came in contact with more SOUTHERN elements of Sudan who are VERY DARK. And it could also be a way of distinguishing themselves from a nationalistic and ethnic perspective, even if the actual complexions of the two populations were quite similar. But again, THE ONLY reason such a distinction becomes an issue is because WHITES want to pretend that the brown of the AE means WHITE, which has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with indigenous diversity among black African people. Which is why you are asking silly questions in an attempt to pretend not to understand that fundamental point.
This is how the AE portrayed themselves and such people are found in black African populations all over the planet:
Bottom line, the Egyptian distinction between brown (ancient Egyptians) and jet black (Kushites) is not the same as what WHITE FOLKS want to pretend is a distinction between WHITE people (Ancient Egyptians) and BROWN people (black Africans). Whites know this and this is exactly why they play so many games with the truth in order to INTENTIONALLY cause confusion.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by argyle104: What's amazing is that this proven know nothing trolling retard, who flashes women and children with an erection that has pink blisters on it, is still able to get you losers to dance on his puppet strings.
As I said earlier, you two chumps are intellectual frauds. Your whole existence depends on responding to individuals who need pyschiatric care. Individuals that no normal person would seriously respond to other than to administer a beatdown.
Ritalin Description
Ritalin hydrochloride, methylphenidate hydrochloride USP, is a mild central nervous system (CNS) stimulant, available as tablets of 5, 10, and 20 mg for oral administration; Ritalin-SR is available as sustained-release tablets of 20 mg for oral administration. Methylphenidate hydrochloride is methyl α-phenyl-2-piperidineacetate
INDICATIONS
Attention Deficit Disorders, Narcolepsy
Attention Deficit Disorders (previously known as Minimal Brain Dysfunction in Children). Other terms being used to describe the behavioral syndrome below include: Hyperkinetic Child Syndrome, Minimal Brain Damage, Minimal Cerebral Dysfunction, Minor Cerebral Dysfunction.
Ritalin is indicated as an integral part of a total treatment program which typically includes other remedial measures (psychological, educational, social) for a stabilizing effect in children with a behavioral syndrome characterized by the following group of developmentally inappropriate symptoms: moderate-to-severe distractibility, short attention span, hyperactivity, emotional lability, and impulsivity. The diagnosis of this syndrome should not be made with finality when these symptoms are only of comparatively recent origin. Nonlocalizing (soft) neurological signs, learning disability, and abnormal EEG may or may not be present, and a diagnosis of central nervous system dysfunction may or may not be warranted.
Special Diagnostic Considerations
Specific etiology of this syndrome is unknown, and there is no single diagnostic test. Adequate diagnosis requires the use not only of medical but of special psychological, educational, and social resources.
Characteristics commonly reported include: chronic history of short attention span, distractibility, emotional lability, impulsivity, and moderate-to-severe hyperactivity; minor neurological signs and abnormal EEG. Learning may or may not be impaired. The diagnosis must be based upon a complete history and evaluation of the child and not solely on the presence of one or more of these characteristics.
Drug treatment is not indicated for all children with this syndrome. Stimulants are not intended for use in the child who exhibits symptoms secondary to environmental factors and/or primary psychiatric disorders, including psychosis. Appropriate educational placement is essential and psychosocial intervention is generally necessary. When remedial measures alone are insufficient, the decision to prescribe stimulant medication will depend upon the physician’s assessment of the chronicity and severity of the child’s symptoms
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ok but WHY did they paint themselves so totally different from the other Africans? There are huge differences in the appearance of the art that noone can deny. Variety in African features is irrelevant when I am talking about people that live RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO EACH OTHER!!!
Give clear examples, please post the pics and describe exactly what you're talking about. Thanks.
Otherwise, like I said, your **SPECULATION** does not hold up under scientific scrutiny.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
In other words, whee is the evidence that the art from AE showed HUGE differences from AE to Kush.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doug, The huge difference is that Egyptians were north african caucasians, much like the Syrians and Libyans while the Kushites were african negroids. Everyone seems to understand that except you. Dr. Hawass: "Tut was a North African caucasian."
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
A quick way to settle this issue--which crops up ever so often is to compare the pigmentation colours that contemporary Africans use on billboards in Africa[and there are a lot] to advertise products--with those used by the AEs for self portrayal.
Case already closed: the pigmenation colours are the same. And it is fact that Southern Sudansese are darker than 90% of other Africans.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Another interesting comparison is that between the pigmentation Ethiopians[modern] use to portray their Coptic religious figures and the pigmentation of the AEs.
The AEs portayed themselves using darker hues.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Doug, The huge difference is that Egyptians were north african caucasians, much like the Syrians and Libyans while the Kushites were african negroids. Everyone seems to understand that except you. Dr. Hawass: "Tut was a North African caucasian."
This is how I know you're nothing but a speculator.
Understand, Zahi Hawass is an archaeologist and NOT an anthropologist, therefore whatever he has to say on the issue of Ancient Egptians, regarding genetics or anthropology, is completely irellevant... to factual consensus, by actual anthropologist.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Doug, The huge difference is that Egyptians were north african caucasians, much like the Syrians and Libyans while the Kushites were african negroids. Everyone seems to understand that except you. Dr. Hawass: "Tut was a North African caucasian."
What is a north African caucasian Mr. Patriot? Do you not know that such a statement regarding ancient Egypt is a contradiction in terms and fundamentally incorrect. It is tantamount to saying that the AE were indigenous African white blacks, which is impossible. Yet that is precisely the nonsense that white archaeologists and their trained puppets are supposed to say.
The reasons why it is invalid are simple. First, the ancient Egyptians did not originate in or around the caucasus Mountains. They originated IN AFRICA, from the Sahara and the Nile Valley to the South of Egypt. Neither of these places have indigenous Caucasian people, because Caucasian means person of the Caucasus mountains. Caucasian people are NOT NATIVE to ANY part of Africa. The ONLY way Caucasian people can be in ANY part of Africa is through migration. Ancient Egyptians were INDIGENOUS people of the Nile Valley, which means they WERE NOT migrants from OUTSIDE Africa and they WERE NOT migrants from the Caucasus mountain region.
Caucasian is also used as an euphemism for white skinned person. The AE did not consider themselves as white skinned people. Not in their art, not in their cosmology and not in any aspect of their world view. And white skin is not INDIGENOUS to Africa. The only way it is there is due either albinism or the migrations of such people from somewhere else. The AE considered themselves as brown skinned, which IS indigenous to Africa and can be found among ANY population of black Africans IN OR OUT of Africa. Caucasians ARE NOT BROWN, they never have been and they never WILL BE, precisely because of the environmental factors of the Caucasus region. Therefore, INDIGENOUS Nile Valley Africans CAN NOT be caucasians.
So again, your words make no sense and only reflects the workings of your lying brain.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Of course you're not really seeking information about culture of any sort, instead just another attempt at asking the stupid question of who were the Ancient Egyptians or why Nubians were depicted differently etc...
Will smith does not look much like a Kushite. - Knowledgeiskey718
quote:Originally posted by DevilNegrokiller_Wolofi: if the ancient Egyptians are the same people as the ancient Sudanese then why did they depict them so differently as far as color and features when they are just right south of them
First of all if you get your information primarily from YouTube that makes you lazy.
If you can see that jet-black was the color of perfection in the AE's world, and that they use it as much to depict themselves as the Nubians that makes you blind.
If you think anyone cares that you're an arab squatting in Africa, trying to justify your presence there, then you're stupid.
Any more questions, genius?
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sportbilly: [QUOTE]Originally posted by DevilNegrokiller_Wolofi: [qb] if the ancient Egyptians are the same people as the ancient Sudanese then why did they depict them so differently as far as color and features when they are just right south of them
DevilNegroKillerWolofi (a confused name for a confused mind!) since you're having a hard time accpeting the truth that the arabs had NOTHING to do with Egypt perhaps I can help you stop being a such a dumbass using the old, LONG-dead "they depicted Nubians differently" canard. Here's goes.
First of all if you get your information primarily from YouTube that makes you lazy. But since you can't read (a common arab handicap) I'll use primarily pictures to conduct this lesson. Cartoons in fact, since I know you people love that sort of thing.
The British and Anglo-Americans depict the Irish and the Scots as different than themselves. Here's a cartoon of the Irish, as depicted by an Anglo artist. Same people, same country, same phenotypical traits, but the Anglo's saw the Irish as unrefined and unsophisticated. This is a distinction of CLASS, not RACE. Now, does that mean the Irish weren't white? In Devil Wolofi land it does!
Say, here's cartoon from 19th century England comapring the Irish with blacks! Guess a dumbass like Devil Wolofi will see this as proof-positive that the Irish aren't white. Now here's a picture of a real Irishman, Pierce Brosnan. Does he look anything like the picture above?
And neither the British nor the Irish depict the Jews as being like themselves. Again, a CLASS distinction, not a racial one.
Now, here's a picture of a real Jew, Jeff Goldblum.
Of course we have to consider the way the arabs are portrayed. Now, compare that to the real thing.
Ooops, guess I kinda made your point on that one, didn't I? Wonder if anyone has any pics of an arab at the moment of detonation!
There is of course the difference in how the Romans portrayed themselves and the way they portrayed their white neighbors the Gauls --naked savages fighting with sticks against a sophsticated Roman army. Now, are the Gauls the non-white race here, or the Romans?
We won't even get into how the Ainu Japanese were depicted differently than other Japanese. Again, even in Japan, a culture with NO contact with Egypt (the way you have no contact with intelligent people) they drew a CLASS disticntion, not a racial one. The Japanese, in case a poor illiterate wannabe arab like you doesn't know, are also the "exact, same people from the exact same area." And yet, they followed the same pattern as the Brtis vis a vis the Irish and the Egyptians vis a vis the Nubians. Seems everybody gets it except you. Well, you arabs were always so hopeless on that part of the world anyway.
Read Cheik Anta Diop's brilliant work The African Origin of Civilization to find out more. Or in your case, ask someone to read it to you.
Come back on amateur night, you clown
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: Of course you're not really seeking information about culture of any sort, instead just another attempt at asking the stupid question of who were the Ancient Egyptians or why Nubians were depicted differently etc...
Will smith does not look much like a Kushite. - Knowledgeiskey718
LOL
Jackassoben???
Keita: The existence of intermediate groups, whether they are products of gene flow or reflective of gradients of differentiation, or are the results of other microevolutionary processes, tends to negate the validity of the implicit or explicit practice associated with the concept of race.
quote:Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718:
quote: Posted by Jackassoben: Oh jesus, he is talking about labeling of "mixed" peoples, groups, not entire geographical regions, by a single racial label [like Obama is "black"] when they are in fact hybrids, mixed.
Lol, Obama is a factual hybrid , according to Akoben, but Europeans being 2/3rd Asian and 1/3rd African are not. Wheres the logic Akoben???
Burns don't it???
"Europe shows a shorter genetic distance from Africa than do all the other continents......The overall contributions from Asia and Africa were estimated to be around two-thirds and one-third, respectively. Simulations have shown (7) that this hypothesis explains quite well the discrepancy between trees obtained by maximum likelihood and neighbor joining. " - L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
sportbilly - Quote: "There is of course the difference in how the Romans portrayed themselves and the way they portrayed their white neighbors the Gauls --naked savages fighting with sticks against a sophsticated Roman army. Now, are the Gauls the non-white race here, or the Romans?"
sportbilly - Please post these Romans portrayals of their white neighbors the Gauls. My material (which I have posted) is quite the opposite.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Present your evidence that the Ancient Egyptians made the representation of "Nubians" based on a class system rather than on what some of them looked like.
And why are you buying into the idiocy that Ancient Egyptians always represented themselves only one way and always represented "Nubians" only one way?
That is the furthest thing from actual reality. A Eurocetric ruse created for people with simple minds who are too lazy to actually research and find the various images that the Ancient Egyptians used to represent themselves and the so called "Nubians".
PS idiot there was no group of people called "Nubians".
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Re above: forgot to add text. Here are billboard representations of Africans(Nigerians) by themselves. The pigmentataion colours used are exactly those the AEs used on their murals.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
In answer to your question, here's a coin depicting a Roman next to one depicting a Gallic woman And a Gallic man
Beside that is another coin celebrating the Romans victory over the Gauls by showing them as naked savages with shaggy hair.
Now of course the people of Gaul were pretty much to be found all over parts of Europe and the Celts of the British Isles. Would anyone in their right minds says that the Gauls and the Romans were not both white? Dumbass Wolofi would. That was the point I was trying to make. Now, the fact the AE depicted themselves as all sorts of shades of brown and black has been beaten to death here so I won't repeat it. I'm simply making the point that the same people of the same race can see one another differently, but in most cases that has nothing to do with race. Wolofi has taken refuge in an argument that was stillborn. You were saying Mike that your "material (which I have posted) is quite the opposite." You'll have to fill me in on what you mean by "opposite" because it sounds to me like we're both essentially saying the same thing, though I think perhaps my using the word "white" to describe the Gauls might have caused some confusion.
Speaking of confused, my good friend Argyle, who's mouth never closes. I respect Mike111, so I've given examples in response to his question. You on the other hand are a loudmouth asshole who should have been sent to Ban Land a LONG time ago. So, take a wild swinging guess at whether you'll EVER get "examples," or even a response beyond this one? That's right, shitstain --ZERO! Now turn off the latest reruns of Jerry Springer and go back out to the barn where you and the family goat --sorry, I mean, your Dad-- can spend some more "quality time."
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
sportbilly - Okay, but please keep your eyes open for any descriptive written Roman material. I am still trying to figure out definitively, if Vercingetorix (bottom picture) and his people, (the original people of the area), are called by the names Celts and Gauls by the Romans, or if Celts are another people entirely.
As usual with European history, Whites have it so jumbled that it is impossible to decipher, without first hand written accounts - making a big assumption that they would be accurately translated. Of course, I know that they exist, (Romans were prolific writers). But the fact that they are not available to the public, tells you all you need to know. I guess we'll get them, at about the same time that we get the "Dead Sea Scrolls" - never.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Historical records and ancient Egyptian art document that the Egyptian kingdom stretched to its furthest southern extent during the 18th dynasty. Thutmosis III is known to have expanded the Egyptian kingdom to the 5th cataract. Most of the image of Kushites and Southerners come from this period. Likewise, the populations in Sudan matching the images of some of those Southerners are mostly in the far South of Sudan to this day.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Of course you're not really seeking information about culture of any sort, instead just another attempt at asking the stupid question of who were the Ancient Egyptians or why Nubians were depicted differently etc...
Will smith does not look much like a Kushite. - Knowledgeiskey718
LOL
LOL Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Man Akoben you are probably the most attentive person here you impress me lol.
Posts: 152 | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
In answer to your question, here's a coin depicting a Roman next to one depicting a Gallic woman And a Gallic man
Beside that is another coin celebrating the Romans victory over the Gauls by showing them as naked savages with shaggy hair.
Now of course the people of Gaul were pretty much to be found all over parts of Europe and the Celts of the British Isles. Would anyone in their right minds says that the Gauls and the Romans were not both white? Dumbass Wolofi would. That was the point I was trying to make. Now, the fact the AE depicted themselves as all sorts of shades of brown and black has been beaten to death here so I won't repeat it. I'm simply making the point that the same people of the same race can see one another differently, but in most cases that has nothing to do with race. Wolofi has taken refuge in an argument that was stillborn. You were saying Mike that your "material (which I have posted) is quite the opposite." You'll have to fill me in on what you mean by "opposite" because it sounds to me like we're both essentially saying the same thing, though I think perhaps my using the word "white" to describe the Gauls might have caused some confusion.
Speaking of confused, my good friend Argyle, who's mouth never closes. I respect Mike111, so I've given examples in response to his question. You on the other hand are a loudmouth asshole who should have been sent to Ban Land a LONG time ago. So, take a wild swinging guess at whether you'll EVER get "examples," or even a response beyond this one? That's right, shitstain --ZERO! Now turn off the latest reruns of Jerry Springer and go back out to the barn where you and the family goat --sorry, I mean, your Dad-- can spend some more "quality time."
Dumb ass do you I know you? LOL. What is all that about? Why are you nigs on here so female-ish and through insults at the first sign of inquiry or contention?
Shitstain? WTF is wrong with you I don't even know you dude you need medication.
Doug M thank you for maturely attempting to answer my question all of these other girls are ridiculous. Posts: 152 | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by DevilNegrokiller_Wolofi:
quote:Originally posted by akoben:
quote: Of course you're not really seeking information about culture of any sort, instead just another attempt at asking the stupid question of who were the Ancient Egyptians or why Nubians were depicted differently etc...
Will smith does not look much like a Kushite. - Knowledgeiskey718
LOL
LOL Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Man Akoben you are probably the most attentive person here you impress me lol.
Poor jackassoben always on my nuts, too bad he doesn't know how to quote properly, because I never said what he is attributing to me. Therefore Wolofi you're just as much of an idiotic peon as jackassoben.
The existence of ***intermediate*** groups (Europeans) whether they are products of ***gene flow or reflective of gradients of differentiation, or are the results of other microevolutionary processes**** tends to negate the validity of the implicit or explicit practice associated with the concept of race.---SOY Keita
quote:Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718:
quote: Posted by Jackassoben: Oh jesus, he is talking about labeling of "mixed" peoples, groups, not entire geographical regions, by a single racial label [like Obama is "black"] when they are in fact hybrids, mixed.
Lol, Obama is a factual hybrid , according to Akoben, but Europeans being 2/3rd Asian and 1/3rd African are not. Wheres the logic Akoben???
Burns don't it???
"Europe shows a shorter genetic distance from Africa than do all the other continents......The overall contributions from Asia and Africa were estimated to be around two-thirds and one-third, respectively. Simulations have shown (7) that this hypothesis explains quite well the discrepancy between trees obtained by maximum likelihood and neighbor joining. " - L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic