posted
^ But Zaharan's post supported my position rather than refuted it:
"Egyptian contact in the 4th millennium B.C. with SW Asia is undeniable, but the effect of this contact on state formation is Egypt is less cleat... The unified state which emerged in Egypt in the 3rd millenium B.C. however, was unlike the polities in Mesopotamia, the Levant, northern Syria, or Early Bronze Age Palestine- in sociopolitical organization, material culture, and belief system. []bThere was undoubtedly heightened commercial contact with SW Asia in the 4th millennium B.C.[/b], but the Early Dynastic state which emerged in Egypt is unique and religious in character."
The above is essentially exactly what I said and also why I believe in Lower Egypt there were trading colonies that were overrun. The colonies were already assimilated into African culture via admixture. These people were overwhelmed by the Upper Egyptians who reinforced the African culture of Kemet/Nubia on all of Egypt's regional states.
Thanks again for providing posts to support my position which I can use in future discussions. However this is quite OT to the spirit of this thread.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
The fact is you don't ask for someone to proove an absence, you prove the presence son.
I'm sure there was Southward migration, infact i'm aware there actually was. This doesn't imply a blasian or mulatto Northern region any more than a few million of us in China today make China blasian.
posted
LOL Osrion, what you highlight is pretty much a well accepted fact--- there was contact between Egypt and SW Asia during predynastic times via trade but exactly how does this imply any communities of Asiatic immigrants in the Delta??! You realize that through trade, Egyptians have had contact with people as far away as Afghanistan but that doesn't mean there were Afgans living in Egypt!!
Perhaps you need to review the definition of contact.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Asiatic iconograph in Egypt a long with trade. The fact that these are adjacent communities with related language. I can go on and on why Asiatic penetration into Egypt makes perfectly good sense and your analogy is pointless.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^When someone like Keita affirms that there is no evidence of large-scale migration of Asiatics into the Nile Valley during the formative period, what REAL evidence can you bring to his attention that he and others may have overlooked?
quote:..sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans."
---Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation, Barry Kemp, Routledge; 2 ed, 2005, pp. 50-55
To ignore the above in favor of some distorted interpretation of iconography is nutty!
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
" it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. "
Read closely please. A Eurocentric would tear you apart on this.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LOL Nitpicking one word won't help you. By "limited" they mean the very fact that archaeology in the Delta is very scanty compared to further south where archaeological evidence is more abundant. Regardless, all of what evidence is available in the Delta including Maadi suggest no Asiatic presence! I don't know why you can't get this through to your brain.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Asiatic iconograph in Egypt a long with trade. The fact that these are adjacent communities with related language. I can go on and on why Asiatic penetration into Egypt makes perfectly good sense and your analogy is pointless.
Asiatic iconography does NOT mean Asiatic people as shown through studies of the remains and of course there was trade, hence how they got the iconography in the first place. That they had related languages is that both are Afrasian and the phylum we know originated in Africa with Semitic being the only one spoken outside of Africa. What you point out makes NO sense as to how this suggests Asiatic penetration!
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^@ Osirion.. And how would you know unless you can easily convert your way of thinking into a Eurocentric framework? Besides, I don't ever recall a Eurocentric "tearing me apart".. I see that quote differently in that the only evidence available doesn't at all prove your case but reinforces their Africanity. Difference of course being that you have NO evidence whatsoever..
I recommend you read the content analyzed in this thread here:
posted
^ LOL Osirion does not even address the anthropological evidence but merely takes *one* claim from one Jewish website while making wild conclusions from all evidence cited.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
^ LOL Nitpicking one word won't help you. By "limited" they mean the very fact that archaeology in the Delta is very scanty compared to further south where archaeological evidence is more abundant. Regardless, all of what evidence is available in the Delta including Maadi suggest no Asiatic presence! I don't know why you can't get this through to your brain.
Well, you are trying to talk to an old school Eurocentric mentality of "population replacement/demic diffusion" origins.
With regards to what you note about the general state of human bio-anthropology archaeology in northern areas of Egypt, which is generally well-known, it's a context that has to be taken into account with probability statistics; that probability says that, one would think it would be easier to come across osirion's elusive "dynastic race - Asians" by chance discovery than the alternative evidence cited above, because they would have been presumably greater in numbers than local Nile Valley Africans, according to mentioned crumbling old school mentality.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ LOL Osirion does not even address the anthropological evidence but merely takes *one* claim from one Jewish website while making wild conclusions from all evidence cited.
LOL You mean like how you never address the fact that Greek classical philosophy was not home grown but a stolen legacy (James, 1958, p. 14)...The Stolen LegacyPosts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: LOL Osrion, what you highlight is pretty much a well accepted fact--- there was contact between Egypt and SW Asia during predynastic times via trade but exactly how does this imply any communities of Asiatic immigrants in the Delta??!
Evergreen Writes: I would want to understand what one means when one refers to "Asiatics" in the southern Levant during this timeframe? We have mesolithic populations from this region with phenetic and genetic characteristics derived within Africa. We have neolithic populations moving out of this region and into SW Europe with phenetic and genetic characteristics derived within Africa as well. Then we have Upper Egyptians "colonizing" the southern Levant during the proto-Dynastic era.
Within this context the term "Asiatics" has to be used tongue-in-cheek. Many of these "Asiatics" would have to ride on the "back of the bus" in the Segregated South.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: LOL Osrion, what you highlight is pretty much a well accepted fact--- there was contact between Egypt and SW Asia during predynastic times via trade but exactly how does this imply any communities of Asiatic immigrants in the Delta??!
Evergreen Writes: I would want to understand what one means when one refers to "Asiatics" in the southern Levant during this timeframe? We have mesolithic populations from this region with phenetic and genetic characteristics derived within Africa. We have neolithic populations moving out of this region and into SW Europe with phenetic and genetic characteristics derived within Africa as well. Then we have Upper Egyptians "colonizing" the southern Levant during the proto-Dynastic era.
Within this context the term "Asiatics" has to be used tongue-in-cheek. Many of these "Asiatics" would have to ride on the "back of the bus" in the Segregated South.
Evergreen Writes: But if we wanted to learn more about the influx of stereotypical "Asiatics" into the southern Levant and Nile Delta we should look to the Middle Bronze Age.
Wild horses running in the desert mountains of Kazakhstan.
ScienceDaily (Apr. 24, 2009) —
Wild horses were domesticated in the Ponto-Caspian steppe region (today Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Romania) in the 3rd millennium B.C. Despite the pivotal role horses have played in the history of human societies, the process of their domestication is not well understood.
In a new study published in the scientific journal Science, an analysis by German researchers from the Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research, Berlin, the German Archaeological Institute, the Humboldt University Berlin, the Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, in cooperation with American and Spanish scientists, has unravelled the mystery about the domestication of the horse.
Based on ancient DNA spanning the time between the Late Pleistocene and the Middle Ages, targeting nuclear genes responsible for coat colorations allows to shed light on the timing and place of horse domestication. Furthermore the study demonstrates how rapid the number of colorations increased as one result of the domestication. As well, it shows very clearly that the huge variability of coloration in domestic horses which can be observed today is a result of selective breeding by ancient farmers.
Our modern human societies were founded on the Neolithic revolution, which was the transformation of wild plants and animals into domestic ones available for human nutrition. Within all domestic animals, no other species has had such a significant impact on the warfare, transportation and communication capabilities of human societies as the horse.
For many millennia, horses were linked to human history changing societies on a continent-wide scale, be it with Alexander the Great’s or Genghis Khan’s armies invading most of Asia and Eastern Europe or Francis Pizarro destroying the Inca Empire with about 30 mounted warriors. The horse was a costly and prestigious animal in all times, featured in gifts from one sovereign to another as a nobleman’s mark.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Evergreen Writes: I would want to understand what one means when one refers to "Asiatics" in the southern Levant during this timeframe? We have mesolithic populations from this region with phenetic and genetic characteristics derived within Africa. We have neolithic populations moving out of this region and into SW Europe with phenetic and genetic characteristics derived within Africa as well.
Which makes mockery of rasolowitz, gringo and Co. swallowing the racial divergence theory of Bowcock (1991) concerning two differentiated populations, two "extremes", two fundamental units coming together to create a hybrid in 35kya.
"Dendrograms are also used to illustrate the divergence of entities called human races or of populations used as their surrogates. This is problematic since few human populations, even authentic breeding ones, are so well differentiated (and independent) from each other as to support the distinctness implied by tree branches" - Keita
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Evergreen wrote: -------------------------- Within this context the term "Asiatics" has to be used tongue-in-cheek. Many of these "Asiatics" would have to ride on the "back of the bus" in the Segregated South. --------------------------
Djehuti thinks otherwise. He believes that only those "he deems" as "negroes" would only be the ones to ride in the back of the bus. You see he believes that only Africans are "negroes".
Djehuti is quite sick psychologically.
The nut actually believes that when the Spanish and white Americans invaded his wretched island they thought of his people and in effect him as "white".
quote:so says the gaping openass: LOL You mean like how you never address the fact that Greek classical philosophy was not home grown but a stolen legacy (James, 1958, p. 14)...The Stolen Legacy
Actually, the very thread you link cites how the so-called 'stolen' philosophy was never stolen by the Greeks but stolen by recent western scholars. You're still wrong and yet you still grab at my Asian dick. Satisfy your Asian fetish elsewhere.
quote: Which makes mockery of rasolowitz, gringo and Co. swallowing the racial divergence theory of Bowcock (1991) concerning two differentiated populations, two "extremes", two fundamental units coming together to create a hybrid in 35kya.
"Dendrograms are also used to illustrate the divergence of entities called human races or of populations used as their surrogates. This is problematic since few human populations, even authentic breeding ones, are so well differentiated (and independent) from each other as to support the distinctness implied by tree branches" - Keita
LOL and now you speak of "swallowing" and "bowcock". Freudian slips on your part. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Well, you are trying to talk to an old school Eurocentric mentality of "population replacement/demic diffusion" origins.
With regards to what you note about the general state of human bio-anthropology archaeology in northern areas of Egypt, which is generally well-known, it's a context that has to be taken into account with probability statistics; that probability says that, one would think it would be easier to come across osirion's elusive "dynastic race - Asians" by chance discovery than the alternative evidence cited above, because they would have been presumably greater in numbers than local Nile Valley Africans, according to mentioned crumbling old school mentality.
It's not such much Eurocentrism he suffers from but his own brand of Jewish ethnocentrism. He better watch out, cuz that really gets deep into the Openass! Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Actually, the very thread you link cites how the so-called 'stolen' philosophy was never stolen by the Greeks but stolen by recent western scholars.
Damn Mary do you ever stop lying? Where did Prof. James (whom you call "silly") say it wasn't stolen by Greeks?
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
^ LOL Nitpicking one word won't help you. By "limited" they mean the very fact that archaeology in the Delta is very scanty compared to further south where archaeological evidence is more abundant. Regardless, all of what evidence is available in the Delta including Maadi suggest no Asiatic presence! I don't know why you can't get this through to your brain.
Well, you are trying to talk to an old school Eurocentric mentality of "population replacement/demic diffusion" origins.
With regards to what you note about the general state of human bio-anthropology archaeology in northern areas of Egypt, which is generally well-known, it's a context that has to be taken into account with probability statistics; that probability says that, one would think it would be easier to come across osirion's elusive "dynastic race - Asians" by chance discovery than the alternative evidence cited above, because they would have been presumably greater in numbers than local Nile Valley Africans, according to mentioned crumbling old school mentality.
Dynastic race of slaves? Now come again with that? I will repeat - the Asiatics of Lower Egypt were conquered and absorbed a long with iconography, some art forms, etc. Their genes becoming part of the genetic pool of NE Africa. But a Dynastic race is absurd. Again - Egypt's culture, customs and techno-complex is Saharan African. The father of Egyptology stated this quite clearly that the type of stone work and tools are Nubian in origin not Asiatic.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
.M. Flinders Petrie, The Making of Egypt, 1939, pp. 125-126
(Famously known as "The Father of Pre-history")
W.M. Flinders Petrie, A History of Egypt - Part One, 1896, pp. 125-129
"The Oromo Penetration. It has long ago been remarked that the black sphinxes, later appropriated by the Hyksos, approximated to the Oromo type of Abyssinia".
"This starts an enquiry how the Oromo connection could thus appear on monuments. In the clearance and planning of the rock tombs at Qau, Antaeopolis, the peculiar plan of those tombs, with great halls and small chambers annexed, was observed to be closely parallel to that of later Nubian temples. In both tomb and temple the chief work is in the solid rock, while the forecourt is of masonry constructed in front of it. Another peculiarity was the hammer-work excavation of one tomb, which had evidently been done with stone balls, as in the Aswan granite working, and this implies a southern connection".
"These people do not appear in any records, and all their monuments have been reappropriated. They left, however, a most striking style of sculpture, in the sphinxes which were later removed to Tanis, but seem originally to have come from El Kab, where a piece of such a sphinx has been found.The type is closely like that of the Oromo. The evidence that all the earlier sculptures of Tanis were collected there by Ramessu II seems clear; and that these sphinxes are earlier than the Hyksos is certain by those kings having appropriated them. No period seems so likely for them as the 7th to the 10th dynasties. The type was heavily bearded, with bushy hair".
"Thus again a southern people reanimated Egypt, like the Sudani 3rd dynasty and the Oromo 12th dynasty".
"All of the perennial enemies of Egypt had poured into the land, from the north-east, the south, and the west, just as in the 7th B.C. the Assyrian and Scythian, the Ethiopian, and the Libyan of Sais struggled over the helpless Egyptians. The history of Egypt from the earliest age has always been the same; each great age has been the product of an able race of invaders."--Petrie
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ you jackass, in that quote Mary is claiming James never pointed to the Greeks as the thieves. You are truely the queer of ES Alive Boy, in your effort to pleasure your BFFs you sacrifice truth.
.M. Flinders Petrie, The Making of Egypt, 1939, pp. 125-126
(Famously known as "The Father of Pre-history")
W.M. Flinders Petrie, A History of Egypt - Part One, 1896, pp. 125-129
"The Oromo Penetration. It has long ago been remarked that the black sphinxes, later appropriated by the Hyksos, approximated to the Oromo type of Abyssinia".
"This starts an enquiry how the Oromo connection could thus appear on monuments. In the clearance and planning of the rock tombs at Qau, Antaeopolis, the peculiar plan of those tombs, with great halls and small chambers annexed, was observed to be closely parallel to that of later Nubian temples. In both tomb and temple the chief work is in the solid rock, while the forecourt is of masonry constructed in front of it. Another peculiarity was the hammer-work excavation of one tomb, which had evidently been done with stone balls, as in the Aswan granite working, and this implies a southern connection".
"These people do not appear in any records, and all their monuments have been reappropriated. They left, however, a most striking style of sculpture, in the sphinxes which were later removed to Tanis, but seem originally to have come from El Kab, where a piece of such a sphinx has been found.The type is closely like that of the Oromo. The evidence that all the earlier sculptures of Tanis were collected there by Ramessu II seems clear; and that these sphinxes are earlier than the Hyksos is certain by those kings having appropriated them. No period seems so likely for them as the 7th to the 10th dynasties. The type was heavily bearded, with bushy hair".
"Thus again a southern people reanimated Egypt, like the Sudani 3rd dynasty and the Oromo 12th dynasty".
"All of the perennial enemies of Egypt had poured into the land, from the north-east, the south, and the west, just as in the 7th B.C. the Assyrian and Scythian, the Ethiopian, and the Libyan of Sais struggled over the helpless Egyptians. The history of Egypt from the earliest age has always been the same; each great age has been the product of an able race of invaders."--Petrie
LMAO @ this fool as a last resort reverting back to Petrie's dynastic race theory (even after decrying it) that has all but been dismissed in modern Archaeology and Egyptology..
the theory of the ‘dynastic race’—a ‘master race’ of invaders from the east, thought to be responsible for imposing civilisation on the ‘primitive’ and unsophisticated indigenous Egyptians—had been articulated by Petrie only ten years before (Petrie 1939) and was still being espoused enthusiastically by scholars such as Emery (1961) and Edwards (1971) two decades after the publication of Massoulard’s work. The recognition of the indigenous roots of classic Egyptian civilisation emphasised the continuities between Predynastic and Early Dynastic culture. The achievements of the First Dynasty, it was realised, were the result of a long period of cultural and political development, rather than a radically new order imposed from outside. This change of perception undoubtedly influenced the course of Early Dynastic scholarship, and has now totally replaced the discredited ‘dynastic race’ theory."---Toby Wilkinson. "Early Dynastic Egypt, p15
You seem to be scrambling right now as suggested by your reliance on outdated theories and extremely sloppy scholarship. Just let it go. You obviously haven't the slightest clue what you're talking about...
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
you jackass, in that quote Mary is claiming James never pointed to the Greeks as the thieves.
I already told you: I ----- D O N ' T give Uhh DAYUhMN!
You mention Djehuti upsets you -- I could care less if Clay Aiken had come on here and pissed you off, i was responding to what i cited. I really --- d o n ' t --- give a sh*t (in this instance) WHAT Djehuti was trying to say.
In the past few centuries er so whites of inner Europe have denied alot of **** that even the Greeks didn't (for ancient Greek historians probably though, how could they deny what was commonly known in those times).
posted
Babes, you always get so emotional even when you deny you give a damn. You must really like as me you say. lol
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Dynastic race of slaves? Now come again with that? I will repeat - the Asiatics of Lower Egypt were conquered and absorbed a long with iconography, some art forms, etc. Their genes becoming part of the genetic pool of NE Africa. But a Dynastic race is absurd. Again - Egypt's culture, customs and techno-complex is Saharan African. The father of Egyptology stated this quite clearly that the type of stone work and tools are Nubian in origin not Asiatic.
Your own argument is absurd due to the very fact there is NO evidence of population of Asiatics in Lower Egypt at all! The Asiatic iconography was derived from Asia via trade along with other cultural materials but physical remains of Lower Egyptians show them all to be African. And what Asiatic genes are you speaking of anyway?? Please don't bring up U6 as it was stated numerous times that it's African in origin.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Dynastic race of slaves? Now come again with that? I will repeat - the Asiatics of Lower Egypt were conquered and absorbed a long with iconography, some art forms, etc. Their genes becoming part of the genetic pool of NE Africa. But a Dynastic race is absurd.
As absurd as it is, and as confused as you carry yourself above about your old school Eurocentric cult-like mentality of some elusive "proto-dynastic" or "dynastic race" of "Asiatics", you are hooked on it so much so, that you keep repeating it like a gospel, as you do with a religion...like you've made abundantly clear here, for example:
"Asiatics of Lower Egypt" were conquered and absorbed
^You are right about one thing though: your broken old school Eurocentric fairy tale ancient Egyptian "race" of "Asiatics of Lower Egypt" is "absurd".
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic