posted
I want to revisit this subject which has been mentioned on the board many times.
It has been said that the Ancient Egyptians in their native language called their nation kmt which translates roughly as "The Black Land."
It has been argued in academia that black in this context is an ethnic label and it's been suggested that its in reference to skin color.
Other scholars claim that black is in reference to the color of the soil.
I've also read here on various webpages that the Ancient Egyptians called themselves Kememu meaning "Black people." But when I searched for a source I could not find it. What I did find was some commentary from the 1974 UNESCO symposium where Diop and Obenga debated other Egyptologists about the racial identity of the Ancient Egyptians.
Here is what is written there:
I haven't heard any compelling evidence for either suggestion. If anyone has a source for the Ancient Egyptians calling themselves Black people and evidence that this is in reference to skin color please provide it.
Posts: 647 | From: Atlanta | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think the Egyptians would have referred to themselves as "the black people" simply because they would not have been the only black people in that part of the world. Would a European tribe distinguish itself from other Europeans by naming itself "the white people"?
posted
I have to agree with B.P the Egyptians don't seem to have had the modern notion of "Black" to call themselves the "black People"..
The only place I see this idea is from Wally..
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
Just like our American word "gray". Without a determinative the word could refer to anything.
The AE didn't just call their nation kemet, they called their state Kemet [Nut]. Nut here is used as a determinative meaning town, or civilization, colony, settlement, community, you get the idea.
Now, the term does have a secondary meaning -- km can also mean "ultimate".
"Km" (which both the "rmyw" i.e. "ancient egyptians" and the "nhhsw" i.e. "the southward NileRiverValley dwellers in general" were labeled under) was eventually juxtaposed with its compliment "dshr" ("red") (which was applied to the "3myw" and "Tmhhw" or "Asiatic and late "Libyan" respectively).
My theory is the above thing is analogous with the modern day "Western" vs "developing" thing.
One notices in their naming of different places the Nut vs the Khast or .nwt vs .xhst determinative which differentiates between an actual civilization being there and the name - whatever name given - simply referring to an area or geographic piece of land.
I really won't argue though against the term possibly being indicative of just national identity, but i will say though ithought kememu was just a conjunction of kem rom and ou black, people and plurality making the 'people' more grand which a number of African self-ethnonyms seem to also do (chauvinism probably).
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: I don't think the Egyptians would have referred to themselves as "the black people" simply because they would not have been the only black people in that part of the world. Would a European tribe distinguish itself from other Europeans by naming itself "the white people"?
Who said they were distinguishing between them and "other Africans". As if our modern concept of continents ("Europe") had any meaning back then.
Continents aren't terribly important to me in this discussion but geographically speaking i wouldn't compare the AE to a random European tribe if any -- i'd compare them to a group near Asia.
I've read where in the "Middle East" people use terms like red (peachy), white (light & olive toned) and black. Now if you were talking about the ancient Batutsi or something ...
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
No I don't think so, the ancient egyptians did not have the modern social construct of race like we do
Posts: 89 | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
"Kmt" is the feminine version of "Km", meaning black. There is no "soil" in this term. That is revisionist Eurocentric garbage, that there is soil in it.
Some have even erroneously tried to turn the single lexicon into a compound word derived from two lexicons.
The ancient Egyptians were willing to call themselves "Kmt" or literally, "black", because to them, "black" also sacred. Examples of the use of the term can be found in the Kahun papyrus, where it appears on several occasions.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Ad nauseam...
"Kmt" is the feminine version of "Km", meaning black. There is no "soil" in this term. That is revisionist Eurocentric garbage, that there is soil in it.
Some have even erroneously tried to turn the single lexicon into a compound word derived from two lexicons.
The ancient Egyptians were willing to call themselves "Kmt" or literally, "black", because to them, "black" also sacred. Examples of the use of the term can be found in the Kahun papyrus, where it appears on several occasions.
If soil is not part of the word are we to assume that they were referring to skin which is also not part of the word?
Also what is the particular reason black was considered sacred and were other colors considered sacred?
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Kudos's The Explorer, you appear to be right. In this translation Km means the people (Egypt) and Kmt means the Land.
Kahun papyrus
Hymns to king Senusret III (1872-1853 BC)
Part Two: rejoicing over the king
Haa-wy [...] rwd.n.k pAwt.sn Haa-wy [...].k ir.n.k tAS.sn Haa-wy i[...] imy-bAH saA.n.k [ps]Sw.sn Haa-wy km [...] xpS.k mk.n.k iswt[.sn?] Haa-wy pat m sxr.k iT.n bAw.k HAw[.sn?] Haa-wy idbwy m nrw.k swsx.n.k Xrt.sn Haa-wy DAmw.k sTst rdi.n.k rwd.sn Haa-wy tAwy m pHty.k mk.n.k inbw.sn
How the [...] rejoice, for you have made their offerings flourish How the [...] rejoice at your [...], for you have drawn up their border How the [...] in the presence rejoice, for you have enlarged their shares How the Egyptians (?) rejoice at your strong arm, for you have protected [their ?] traditions How the nobles rejoice at your activity, for your power has grasped [their?] prosperity How the two riverbanks rejoice at your dread, for you have extended their domain How your recruits at levy rejoice, for you have caused them to flourish How the two lands rejoice at your might, for you have protected their walls
Part Four: the arrival of the king
ii.n.f n.n iT.f tA Sma Xnm.n sxmty m tp.f ii.n.f smA.n.f tAwy Abx.n.f Swt n bit ii.n.f HqA.n.f kmt rdi.n.f dSrt m ab.f ii.n.f mk.n.f tAwy sgrH.n.f idbwy ii.n.f sanx.n.f kmt xsr.n.f Snw.s ii.n.f sanx.n.f pat srq.n.f Htyt rxyt ii.n.f ptpt.n.f xAswt Hw.n.f iwntyw xmw snd[.f] ii.n.f [..]A.n.f tAS.f nHm.n.f awA ii.n.f [..] Xrdw.n qrs.n iAw.n Hr (?)
He has come to us, grasping the land of Upper Egypt, the Double Crown has joined his head He has come, he has united the Two Lands, he has merged the reed with the bee He has come, he has ruled the Black Land, he has placed the Red Land in its midst He has come, he has protected the Two Lands, he has calmed the two riverbanks He has come, he has given Egypt life, he has dispelled her woes He has come, he has given the nobles life, he has given breath to the throats of the people He has come, he has trampled the foreign lands, he has struck the nomads ignorant of [his] fear He has come, he has [..] his border, he has rescued the oppressed He has come, [...] our children, we may bury our old .. (?)
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Ad nauseam...
"Kmt" is the feminine version of "Km", meaning black. There is no "soil" in this term. That is revisionist Eurocentric garbage, that there is soil in it.
Some have even erroneously tried to turn the single lexicon into a compound word derived from two lexicons.
The ancient Egyptians were willing to call themselves "Kmt" or literally, "black", because to them, "black" also sacred. Examples of the use of the term can be found in the Kahun papyrus, where it appears on several occasions.
I agree but does it really boil down to Eurocentric revisionism, for example, Black was sacred as you said, for Rebirth, the Soil of KM.T was fertile as opossed to the Red Land or desert.
What Im getting at is if the A. Egyptians called themselves Black in the modern sense which seems unlikely..
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
What we know about KM is that it just means "Black".
We also know that In Egyptian language the word for Land is "TA". Hence the reason for "Ta-Seti, Ta Khent etc"
Like Explorer said there is No word in KM.T for Land.
The reason why people call Egypt "Black Land", Is because of Herodutus. He was the first to claim Egypt as Black Land, Yet He Also Claimed that Egyptians were Also "Black People" which is where we have people Claiming Him as the Father of Lie to coverup this FACT he claimed.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But the Kemites were not the only people in ancient times to self-describe themselves as Blacks The Sumerians Sag giga Blacked headed people The Akkadians Salmat kakkadi Black headed people They might be more..what it does not mean was that they were necessarily chauvinistic about color that would be a modern take on an ancient people.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The AE called themselves the blacks and their land the black nation because they considered themselves children of the soil and first among men in many ways. This sacred connection to the soil and the seed of the earth as the first children of the "gods" in God's Land (inner Africa) is symbolized the sacred mound of creation and the various trinities of nature (netjer) which always consisted of the male, female and child. This is the whole meaning of the concept. It isn't simple as people want to make it, but blackness had multiple levels of meaning, which did include skin color.
In all reality the simple point they were making is what genetics has confirmed: blacks are the first human children of the earth and Africans are first among men and hence children of Gods divine nature and seed in creation.
Nothing complex about it.
This is also why many later religions like Judaism have tried to create their own fictitious theory of the origin of man's bloodline in order to put themselves as first among men. But of course the whole idea of the seed of Abraham first populating the earth is pure nonsense.
Posts: 8891 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The AE called themselves the blacks and their land the black nation because they considered themselves children of the soil and first among men in many ways.
So the the idea of Khem and Khem-et has nothing to do with Skin and is in reference to the Soil, which the so called Eurocentric White man suggested in the First Place, Black Land, Black Nation, Black People is in reference to the Soil. Which signifies Rebirth.
but blackness had multiple levels of meaning, which did include skin color. You contradict yourself, the Skin Color was in reference to Rebirth and Rebirth concept stems from the concept of the Soil.
This is also why many later religions like Judaism have tried to create their own fictitious theory of the origin of man's bloodline in order to put themselves as first among men. But of course the whole idea of the seed of Abraham first populating the earth is pure nonsense.
Abraham's seed did not populate the whole Earth Adam's seed did..What this has to do with the concept of Km.t is beyond me.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: The AE called themselves the blacks and their land the black nation because they considered themselves children of the soil and first among men in many ways.
So the the idea of Khem and Khem-et has nothing to do with Skin and is in reference to the Soil, which the so called Eurocentric White man suggested in the First Place, Black Land, Black Nation, Black People is in reference to the Soil. Which signifies Rebirth.
but blackness had multiple levels of meaning, which did include skin color. You contradict yourself, the Skin Color was in reference to Rebirth and Rebirth concept stems from the concept of the Soil.
This is also why many later religions like Judaism have tried to create their own fictitious theory of the origin of man's bloodline in order to put themselves as first among men. But of course the whole idea of the seed of Abraham first populating the earth is pure nonsense.
Abraham's seed did not populate the whole Earth Adam's seed did..What this has to do with the concept of Km.t is beyond me.
Please stop letting words get in the way of comprehension:
quote:The AE called themselves the blacks and their land the black nation because they considered themselves children of the soil and first among men in many ways.
Osiris is a symbol of what? The earth. Isis is a symbol of what? Mother nature, the sky, the womb, the infinite black universe. Heru is a symbol of what? The sun, the son, the seed of the universe, earth, born in the womb.
The earth in this form of cosmology means the substance of the universe as being impregnated with gods seed or creative force. It is a statement of the physical force of creation as manifest in nature. Nature creates from itself in an endless cycle of life and death which is eternal. Nothing is created or destroyed but changes form through the process of chemistry or change. Hence the symbol of the pyramid, a triangle, symbolic of the delta, or change and the primeval first cause of causes or first ripple in time and space that put everything in motion. It is the process of change acting upon the matter substance of the universe that brings about everything in physical existence. Hence, the idea of Khem being the rich, fertile matter substance of creation from which all things come and the concept of chemistry as the process of changing matter from one form to another. Most of the male deities are tied to this concept of the divine substance of creation as the will force or power behind creation, hence Geb, Osiris, Ra, Heru, Ptah, Khnum and so on. This idea of change also applied to the cycles of life where the soul was born again in its "golden" form after the "new dawn" or resurrection in the fields of amenta. This "golden form" represented perfection of the soul as gold was the skin of the gods and partly the symbolism behind the golden coffins. It is from this idea of transformation and the idea of gold as being the 'perfect substance' that you get the concept of transmutation in alchemy and turning substances into gold.
If soil is not part of the word are we to assume that they were referring to skin which is also not part of the word?
Do you know the Kemetic word for "skin"?
quote: Also what is the particular reason black was considered sacred and were other colors considered sacred?
See below, about the significance of "black" in the Kemetic cosmological world, and why it gained primacy in Kemetic cosmology. There were other colors like 'green'. Each color had its spiritual significance.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari:
I agree but does it really boil down to Eurocentric revisionism, for example, Black was sacred as you said, for Rebirth, the Soil of KM.T was fertile as opossed to the Red Land or desert.
What Im getting at is if the A. Egyptians called themselves Black in the modern sense which seems unlikely..
There is no "soil" in "Kmt". Period. That's what I'm referring to as revisionism. You disagree? Prove it.
Neither "black", nor its sacredness, has anything to do with "soil".
Could the Kemetians calling themselves "black" be a reflection of their skin? Plausible, but the reason they felt the need to call themselves black was because "black" emphasized sacredness, unlike "black"'s spiritual placement in 'western' ideology. Kemet's ideology appears to have been the complete inverse of the western one, wherein "black" instead of "white", was a sign of all things good. If one goes back to Kemetian creationist stories of how things started, one comes across the idea that in a primeval water of total "darkness", was contained a gem to create something out of "nothingness". This 'total darkness" described the "nothingness" before said "nothingness" created "something" from itself. "total darkness" is best described in human perception as being "devoid of light", and the best way humans can physically describe such an entity, is with the color "black". The storyline itself is reminiscent of what sections of physicists today say about how the universe started out as a thick dense hot spot that come out of "nothing" and underwent a "big bang", although I doubt the Kemetians were mindful of anything like the "big bang".
Is it a coincidence that the Europeans call themselves "white" and interpret "white" as all things good? If you think so, then think of Kemet's "black" in the same sense.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: The AE called themselves the blacks and their land the black nation because they considered themselves children of the soil and first among men in many ways.
So the the idea of Khem and Khem-et has nothing to do with Skin and is in reference to the Soil, which the so called Eurocentric White man suggested in the First Place, Black Land, Black Nation, Black People is in reference to the Soil. Which signifies Rebirth.
but blackness had multiple levels of meaning, which did include skin color. You contradict yourself, the Skin Color was in reference to Rebirth and Rebirth concept stems from the concept of the Soil.
This is also why many later religions like Judaism have tried to create their own fictitious theory of the origin of man's bloodline in order to put themselves as first among men. But of course the whole idea of the seed of Abraham first populating the earth is pure nonsense.
Abraham's seed did not populate the whole Earth Adam's seed did..What this has to do with the concept of Km.t is beyond me.
Adam's seed initially populated the earth but after the flood it was Abraham's progeny that gave birth to the "races" of mankind according to biblical tradition. That tradition borrows heavily from the Egyptian tradition of the seed of Amun and other dieties in Egypt as the basis for all mankind.
Posts: 8891 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^^ What the hell are you talking about Abraham came from the Progenity of Eber who came from Shem, Shem came from the Seed of Noah, who was from the Seed of Adam..
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: ^^^^^ What the hell are you talking about Abraham came from the Progenity of Eber who came from Shem, Shem came from the Seed of Noah, who was from the Seed of Adam..
I meant to say Noah's seed as the basis of the races of mankind after the flood.....
Otherwise the point is the same.
I am not into the Bible and hence, my recollection of names is a bit lacking. The point is that according to this tradition the "chosen people" of Noah and Abraham are first among men, including the first humans from which all others are created according to this fable. Abraham is the father of the Abrahamic religions, which are Christianity, Judaism and Islam. That is what I got confused. When you hear of Abraham's seed you are talking about the biblical tradition relating to the spread of Christianity by the descendants of Abraham, literally and spiritually as followers of Christ. In this tradition Abraham's seed become the inheritors and rulers of the earth as "first among men".
quote: God made a twofold promise to Abraham. The first was a material promise that he would be the father of many nations and that kings would descend from him. God promised him that his progeny would inherit the land of Canaan, an expanse that He defined as stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates rivers. The second, but more important, promise was spiritual. God promised Abraham that in his Seed all the nations of the earth would be blessed. This promise encompasses the life and work of Abraham's best known and most revered descendant, Jesus Christ.
This promise was later extended to include the inheritance of the whole world (Romans 4:13). Abraham's physical descendants, the nation of Israel, inherited the land of Canaan. This was a type of Abraham's spiritual descendants inheriting the earth.
But that is nothing more than geopolitical propaganda cloaked under the veil of religion. Abraham never existed and the whole concept of the symbolism of "the seed" representing the creation of mankind is borrowed from Egypt and elsewhere, along with the concept of "first among men" and therefore "right to rule" or "sit on the throne" or "speak with divine authority" over all the earth.
Posts: 8891 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Kemet's ideology appears to have been the complete inverse of the western one, wherein "black" instead of "white", was a sign of all things good.
The compete inverse would be that the Egyptians would say black was good white is bad but they didn't say white is bad. So it's not a complete inverse. They associated black with nighttime and the after death world. This is similar to the Western. The thing that is different is that in the West there is also the idea that villains dress in black. But that didn't have to do with skin tone. At the same time it's not as simple as that. Much more frequent than villains shown as dressing in black is black being used in the West to show formal authority. The most formal authoritative clothing is the black suit and tie. Also Western priests dress in black. The most common color for clothing we see in Egypt is white. So if black is scared why do white people, in formal occasions and priests dress in black and Egyptians don't on formal occasions and priests don't ear black? The situation is complex.
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting topic. al takruri presented evidence of the Egyptians refering to themselves at least in one instance as "black people" this evidence came from the "Hymn to Usertesen" in plate III the Kahun papyrus.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The reference can be seen in the upper right hand quadrant on rows 3 and 5.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
The compete inverse would be that the Egyptians would say black was good white is bad but they didn't say white is bad.
You need to familiarize yourself with Kemetic concepts before blindly making presumptuous conclusions. In Kmtnwt, 'dshrt' (deshret) was used as the equivalent of "white".
quote: They associated black with nighttime and the after death world.
This is similar to the Western.
What would you have anyone associate nighttime with? Blue or white?
The netherworld in Kemet naturally has to be linked to the color 'black' because light is absent at that stage and its eternal. It is a life-form going back to the state before the life attained its biological medium [skin, cells, body, etc].
In 'western' world, death is generally seen as a sad and gloomy thing, hence the 'black' attires. In the Kemetic world, it was seen as a cause for celebration, as the deceased was leaving one world and entering another, the hereafter. Furthermore, the deceased has undergone the original balance of things (nature), i.e. "total darkness".
quote: The thing that is different is that in the West there is also the idea that villains dress in black.
...which would be the exact opposite of its meaning in Kmtnwt. In Kmt, "black" is not an attribute of the villian, 'dshrt' [Kmtyw equivalent of 'white'] is that attribute. "Black" is the attribute of the good and divine. Despite your petty protests, you merely repeat my point.
quote: But that didn't have to do with skin tone.
You are imagining that somebody said otherwise.
quote: Much more frequent than villains shown as dressing in black is black being used in the West to show formal authority.
Let me see; like say, the 'black cat', the 'black-hearted', the 'dark continent', 'come from the dark-side and come into the light', 'black Friday', 'Prince of darkness'. Yeah, I can see how this might be interpreted as "formal authority". LOL
quote: The most formal authoritative clothing is the black suit and tie. Also Western priests dress in black.
If you are referring to tuxedos, then you must have forgotten that they also come in white, depending on a person's choice, and even the black ones are usually complemented with 'white' shirts [or does that not count?]. Furthermore, such is viewed as a rigid, "business-appropriate" attire, that places the gathering group at hand at more or less the same footing in said gathering; it is not something that is generally viewed as "relaxing" or indicative of 'comfort'. 'Western' popes wear "white" robes. And your point?
quote: The most common color for clothing we see in Egypt is white.
And? You are such a klutz. Just because they perceive 'black' as being symbol of all things 'good' and the original state of nature [which is why Pharaoh figures are portrayed in charcoal-black at times], doesn't mean everything they used had to necessarily be 'black' as well. Likewise, for the 'western world'. Stay on-topic. The question is why they felt the need to refer to themselves as 'blacks', considering that they would not have been alone in the regard, in that general territory. You were given a succinct answer, and now you want to turn that into some flimsy chitchat about the color of every appliance used in society. Car tires are generally 'black'; do you want to get into why that is too? LOL
posted
It's funny that the Egyptians didn't generally portray themselves as being black of color on the vast majority of their mummy cases, even though they had the means to do so.
Posts: 676 | From: the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I suppose it is a mere coincidence that the popular deity of death, Anpu (Anubis), is anthropic deity with a black head of a jackal?
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: I suppose it is a mere coincidence that the popular deity of death, Anpu (Anubis), is anthropic deity with a black head of a jackal?
Are you trying to cite this as proof that all the Egyptians were black? Posts: 676 | From: the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
The American meaning of "black" is nothing more than a social designation of people who are supposedly the lowest form of humanity regardless of their skin color.
To give examples. Abraham Lincoln, abolitionists, and republicans were called black because they were despised and considered reprehensible individuals. Those people certainly weren't black in color.
Look at how Europe in its fables declares someone the dark knight, the black knight, the dark kingdom, the dark land, etc, etc. And Europeans were not dark or black.
What is happening is that "black American negroes" who have accepted their white masters characterization of them and even worse, insanely use that characterization as their ethnic description are now trying to project their bogus racial terms on the Ancient Egyptians.
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic