On what do you base this conclusion, what is the validation?
Your approach is very very amateuristic! I presented my case based on genetic, historical, geographical and pictorial evidence (as I do most of the time, in case you haven't noticed yet)!
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^ here you have what? do you ever make a cohearant point?
I put that up for the sole reason to show a Libyan with the crossing chest bands and a hair style a little different form other Libyans. I also put up other pictures of Libyans including one you put up
so what's your damn problem?
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: ^^^^ here you have what? do you ever make a cohearant point?
I put that up for the sole reason to show a Libyan with the crossing chest bands and a hair style a little different form other Libyans. I also put up other pictures of Libyans including one you put up
so what's your damn problem?
Yeah yeah yeah again more excuses....and I've put up pics of Libyans coherent in historic trend, with people who have always lived in the Libyan desert. Ever since the Neolithic time (and probably beyond). This is peer reviewed solid evidence. Ironically you left this evidence out, for a parculair reason?lo.
So from where you conclude that image you've showed was /is an "ancient Libyan"? What is the validation of this claim? This is my problem and yours now too.
Let's talk about ancient and modern populations of the Libyan desert. What is the matter? loooool
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: make a new thread then you bimbo
Lol at this academic response and scientific contribution.
Besides that, why would I make another thread on that matter, so you can picture spam it again with everybody and anybody none related to ancient Libyan history. Ya' know your usual pictures.
I foresee your snaky Eurocentric pathological ways.
Now, from where did you conclude that is the image of an ancient Libyan, what is the validation and basis for this claim?
Trying to make the ancient Libyan desert inhabitants (and even modern) into a bunch of cold adapted "white folks". looooool
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
For the image above, if you look carefully you while recognize the sidelocks.
Ironically these too are the ancient (Neoletic) cattle herders from the Libyan desert. Could it be just coincidence? looooool
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: I agree. if you look at the top of this post there is one type of enemy that looks Asiatic (grabbed by Narmer and head with hook in nose) At the bottom of the palette is another diffeent looking type of enemy with a notably different hairstyle:
^^^ this appears to be a type of Libyan as here because the other type of Libyan has this unusual longer length coming down from behind the ear as you see in the type with crossing bands (although these figures appear to have been stripped naked)
I'm missing something here. You claim that the kneeling enemy whose hair is being grabbed is 'Asiatic' yet the naked enemies of the bottom register (above) are NO different in physical appearance as the kneeling enemy AND anthropomorphized Delta.
^ The noses are similar, lips, etc. The only big difference are the hairstyles which are not that significantly different.
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: [qb] I agree. if you look at the top of this post there is one type of enemy that looks Asiatic (grabbed by Narmer and head with hook in nose) At the bottom of the palette is another different looking type of enemy with a notably different hairstyle:
^^^ this appears to be a type of Libyan as here because the other type of Libyan has this unusual longer length coming down from behind the ear as you see in the type with crossing bands (although these figures appear to have been stripped naked)
I'm missing something here. You claim that the kneeling enemy whose hair is being grabbed is 'Asiatic' yet the naked enemies of the bottom register (above) are NO different in physical appearance as the kneeling enemy AND anthropomorphized Delta.
^ The noses are similar, lips, etc. The only big difference are the hairstyles which are not that significantly different.
read my quote again. I specifically said "a notably different hairstyle"
your statement "The only big difference are the hairstyles which are not that significantly different." makes no sense, a "big difference" is innately significant as opposed to a small difference which is insignificant
Libyan Long hair with even longer section growing down behind ear (looks reddish here)
again:
Libyan: Long hair with even longer section growing down behind ear
again:
Narmer palette, lower section Long hair with even longer section growing down behind ear
2) no longer part growing down behind ear, or no sidelock
3) hair is segmented in rows
hair more similar to the below Asiatic than to Libyan:
also keep in mind the Libyan looking figures are in a separated section at the bottom of the palette and are naked no loincloth
As per features there are many instances which Libyans, Asiatics and Egyptians are portrayed with similar features. In other scenes they may look different. Within each of these nationalities are variences and different depictions by different artists. The key to being able to tell them apart visually is clothing style and/or hair.
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: read my quote again. I specifically said "a notably different hairstyle"
Unlike you, my reading comprehension is quite fine and I perfectly understood what you said. A notably different hairstyle does not mean from a different ethnicity or culture let alone "Asiatic".
quote:your statement "The only big difference are the hairstyles which are not that significantly different." makes no sense, a "big difference" is innately significant as opposed to a small difference which is insignificant
It makes perfect sense. The only big difference IS the hairstyle but in the overall scheme of things such a difference is not that significant.
quote:Libyan Long hair with even longer section growing down behind ear (looks reddish here)
again:
Libyan: Long hair with even longer section growing down behind ear
again:
Narmer palette, lower section Long hair with even longer section growing down behind ear
The similarities in hairstyle may point to a connection; however, the style is simply that of long hair which any group can possess. A simple comparison of long haired Libyans from dynastic times and those of predynastic Delta Egyptians from centuries earlier will not suffice. (I have more compelling evidence of Libyan connection other than hair)
quote:DIFFERENT: Narmer palette middle section
^^^ 1) hair medium length not long
2) no longer part growing down behind ear, or no sidelock
3) hair is segmented in rows
hair more similar to the below Asiatic than to Libyan:
I am quite aware of the differences since I have fully functioning eyes of my own. My point is your hairstyle comparison with that particular Asiatic is not suffice as I've already shown you closer affinities with dynastic Egyptians and even Nubians with medium length hair with parted rows. Besides, hairstyle is very plastic and can vary even within a single culture. As far as looks go, more natural unalterable features like those of the face are what scholars tend to rely on more in determining the ethnic origins of people in unpainted engravings and portraits. Even those who claim an Asiatic origin for Delta folks talk more about the difference in facial features between the Delta folks and Narmer. Yet you choose to focus on the hairstyles, even though the facial features of the kneeling Delta man and the Delta personified are the same as those on the bottom register whom you call Libyan!
quote:also keep in mind the Libyan looking figures are in a separated section at the bottom of the palette and are naked no loincloth.
So?!! It is a fact Egyptians during dynastic times, especially the poor went about naked (like in some parts of Africa today and more so in the precolonial past). Libyans are always depicted with loincloths during dynastic times and there are depictions of Asiatic prisoners that are nude. Again, an irrelevant point even more so than the difference in hairstyles.
quote:As per features there are many instances which Libyans, Asiatics and Egyptians are portrayed with similar features. In other scenes they may look different. Within each of these nationalities are variances and different depictions by different artists. The key to being able to tell them apart visually is clothing style and/or hair.
You may be right about the features but it still does not change the fact that the defeated prisoners in the bottom row have features which are the same as the kneeling prisoner AND Delta personified, whereas Narmer and his people have different features. The point is you have no evidence to back up your claim of Asiatics being featured in the palette.
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^ that fact is that if the person being grabbed by Narmer was Libyan he would have the same hairstyle as the Libyans at the bottom. I can't believe you are focusing on features. What about this guy:
^^^^his nose looks nothing like Narmers. in fact bigger, might even look like the enemies' nose. I'm not saying he's European but his features look more similar to a European than this below Asiatic ! His head is also fairly round rather than the elonagated faces common in hron Africans, some of whom have longer noses
never mind features,
If all enemies on the palette were the same they would have the same hair, and the ones on the bottom would not be separated by a dividing line.
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: What do you mean by "foreign race"?
As for what appears to be "fallen figures" on the so-called "Narmer Palette", I've come across allegations that they are supposed to be people from Libya, particularly the "Tehenu" (Thnw). How these observers made the link between these figures, seemingly antagonistic to the Pharaoh of Kmt, and Libya, is open to questioning. I, personally, cannot point to anything specific, that unequivocally suggests that the people in conflict with the Pharaoh are from what is now Libya. However, a number of observations raises doubts about the link specifically tying these fallen figures to the Tehenu.
Some of the people who holds the theory that these early Delta inhabitants were Libyans is ME. I base this on archaeological as well as historic evidence which I will soon present on a thread Takruri created a while back.
Hello Djehuti how are you. Did you ever post the info under Takruri thread. if so direct me to the site of this thread. I have tried to send you a message but your box is full Thanks Ethiop.
Posts: 48 | From: US | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:
The similarities in hairstyle may point to a connection; however, the style is simply that of long hair which any group can possess. A simple comparison of long haired Libyans from dynastic times and those of predynastic Delta Egyptians from centuries earlier will not suffice. (I have more compelling evidence of Libyan connection other than hair)
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss hairstyle as an aid to identify the men in the bottom register on both sides of Narmer's Palette, though Trampled- by-Bull is apparently not quite like the "Runners".
It's not only that the hairstyle is the same in Old Kingdom and New Kingdom as on the palette that allows for a Tjehenu most likely identity. They lack penis-stache and crossbands because they have been despoiled. Looking at some of the other Narmer artifacts the throwstick and pot glyphs (next to men of the this same hair style) is proof positive that they are Tjenehu.
The other two enemy men whose hairstyles are as different from each other as they are from the bottom register men each has a distinct profile.
Breath-grasped-by-Falcon is definitely a marsh man explicitly connected to Lower Egypt (TaMehh). Grasped-by-the-Hair and Naked-Long-Hairs are of TaMehh too, by default since no other land glyphs are there to distinguish them from Breath-grasped-by-Falcon.
These five enemy men possibly show four types found in the north (mehh) papyrus (mehh) land (ta) of Lower Egypt.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Breath-grasped-by-Falcon is definitely a marsh man explicitly connected to Lower Egypt (TaMehh). Grasped-by-the-Hair and Naked-Long-Hairs are of TaMehh too, by default since no other land glyphs are there to distinguish them. [/QB]
this term, TaMehh is not used frequently do you have alternate spellings and further reference. Do you just mean any Lower Egyptian generally? And do you think they are Tamehh soley because there is no glyph? You regarded the other figures as Libyan due in part to hairsyle. But do you disregard hairstyle in "grasped by hair"?
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
"Purifier", Narmer, and Tje.t have very similar profiles.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
From the authentic Cairo museum piece (JE32169/CG14716) not a "fake" replica mold in Canada some damn where.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Looking at some of the other Narmer artifacts the throwstick and pot glyphs (next to men of the this same hair style) is proof positive that they are Tjenehu
Hello Tukuler. I am new to this form. Thanks for the info however the throwstick and pot glyphs are these ogjects in the above image. Also breifly explain the pot glyphs in relation to the Tjenehu. Also the TaMehh are they Libyans in lower egypt. Never seen this word bbefore ( TaMehh) Thanks
Posts: 48 | From: US | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Ethiop:
quote: Looking at some of the other Narmer artifacts the throwstick and pot glyphs (next to men of the this same hair style) is proof positive that they are Tjenehu
Hello Tukuler. I am new to this form. Thanks for the info however the throwstick and pot glyphs are these ogjects in the above image. Also breifly explain the pot glyphs in relation to the Tjenehu. Also the TaMehh are they Libyans in lower egypt. Never seen this word bbefore ( TaMehh) Thanks
Hi Ethiop and welcome!
First let me correct the mispelt Tjenehu. I meant to key in Tjehenu. The Tjehenu were only one of the many "eastern Libyan" peoples.
Neither the throwstick nor the pot appear on the Narmer Palette. Pending further study, I do not recognize any ethnic labels on the Narmer palette.
Ta Mehh is a place name not an ethnic name. It designates the northern/papyrus region of the Nile Delta. It is the word translated as Lower Egypt.
Anybody could've been living there. Apparently, folk always lived just south of the delta since the middle stone age. Many folk originating west of the delta and the Fayum settled near the delta. A smattering of folk migrated back and forth from the Levant to east of the delta for livestock fodder and trade but were never so much permanent settlers.
It's my take that the Narmer Palette shows all three of these major ethnies and maybe even one unguessed ethny.
They consider the side with the big circle as the front of the palette. On the other side and from top to bottom I see the enemies as originating
* Sinai or Levant: (Breath-grasped-by-Falcon) * Fayum or immediately south of delta: (Grasped-by-the-Hair) * west of delta or west of Fayum: (Naked-Long-Haired-"Runners")
I don't hazard to guess from where the enemy all the way at the bottom of the front side originated.
Mind you, I have no definitive proof of any of that and they could all be originated from far north Nile dwellers going back to the stone ages. But other pieces of Dynasty 0 commemorative art do show the pot, or the throwstick and pot, near men who resemble the enemies at bottom of Narmer Palette.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
^^^yes the above two versions of the sandal bearer do appear different. The angle of the nose and the eye shape.
The replica is actually less rough than the real version. If it was made from a mold someone probably came in and tooled it after, smoothing it and intetionally or unintenionally altering the features somewhat, somewhere in this process.
I was duped by the replica I take back previous comments on the sandal bearer,
signed lioness
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I don't accept thanks from exposed snakes sighing "Let me in."
Lyin' Ass Phuckuptions continues deserving its lack of credibility. Just imagine, the one and only authentic original labelled as nothing more than a mere version? GTFOH, quick!!!!
Only a venom injecting sidewinder of a snake would hold a fake replica purposely altered to project European-like features for pre- dynastic Egyptians faked replica onto the mind of unknowing and innocently accepting museum patrons on the same level as the real deal considering both of them versions.
Built in church and university Deceiving the people continually
-- Bob Marley, Babylon System --
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Not to be taken off guard but thanks for an excellent source (now enhanced w/figures).
Take or leave Shaw's interpretations it's his clarifying descriptions that are relevant. The pot and the throwstick w/pot glyphs positively identifies the enemies as Tjehenu. The label and the cylinder enemies in simplist reduction resemble the palette's bottom registers enemies. Parsimony suggests identity of similar characters across artifacts.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
Ancient Egypt: a very short introduction By Ian Shaw
Thought I'd throw in the macehead for full value add. Like the palette, the enemies have no ethnic label(s).
Soliciting photos of originals to replace the sketches.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: I don't accept thanks from exposed snakes sighing "Let me in."
Lyin' Ass Phuckuptions continues deserving its lack of credibility. Just imagine, the one and only authentic original labelled as nothing more than a mere version? GTFOH, quick!!!!
Only a venom injecting sidewinder of a snake would hold a fake replica purposely altered to project European-like features for pre- dynastic Egyptians faked replica onto the mind of unknowing and innocently accepting museum patrons on the same level as the real deal considering both of them versions.
Built in church and university Deceiving the people continually
-- Bob Marley, Babylon System --
That's stupid, it is a "version" but I clearly labeled it as "authentic" and the other one as "replica" so stop this phoney outrage. People are well acquainted your snobbery. For example you regularly pick obscure names like TaMehh for the sole reason to make yourself sound smarter than you and hope you will be too intimidated to ask questions and bow down.
I had never noticed that the replica I had been showing is a replica before and that it is a replica with some differences. You would think when someone admits to an error it's a good thing. I even showed the comparision and discussed differences so that people can also notice this. This probably gets unoticed on the internet, I have not seen a thread yet which highlighted the differences. Although I don't blame Ethiop for the oversight, here we are 4 pages into this thread and only now is it mentioned that the large version of the palette posted in the first intitial thread is a modern replica in a Canadian museum. It would not be that big of a deal if it was a super accurate copy but it's not super accurate.
It's beneficial discussing the differences, maybe the first thread on these details, but your nature is to be a snob and know it all. Apparently you were raised that way and thus you couldn't even handle being a moderator on ESR
Ancient Egypt: a very short introduction By Ian Shaw
Thought I'd throw in the macehead for full value add. Like the palette, the enemies have no ethnic label(s).
Soliciting photos of originals to replace the sketches.
What enemies are you referring to? I can only spot one enemy figure. The three figures who (seem to) have their arms crossed are ritual dancers/runners, and supposedly, they danced around those crescent-like objects. Those objects are actually real objects that have been found, and they're associated with the structure Narmer is sitting on; he's observing some sort of ritual, or perhaps several rituals.
You're right, not seeing any ethnic indications on it. It might be of value to point out that there might be a geographical label. Look above the seated figure opposite of Narmer. That engraving might signify Lower Egypts 12th nome. This nome, which is called Theb-ka, is translated as 'calf and cow'. Thats exactly what is depicted in that engraving; a cow and a calf.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Wow you just knocked be on my fannie. Intresting Tukuler. Yes the image I posted is from Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto, Canada. Compared it to the original in Cario and yes you do have a point. Thanks again
Posts: 48 | From: US | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Thought I'd throw in the macehead for full value add. Like the palette, the enemies have no ethnic label(s).
Soliciting photos of originals to replace the sketches.
What enemies are you referring to? I can only spot one enemy figure. The three figures who (seem to) have their arms crossed are ritual dancers/runners, and supposedly, they danced around those crescent-like objects. Those objects are actually real objects that have been found, and they're associated with the structure Narmer is sitting on; he's observing some sort of ritual, or perhaps several rituals.
You're right, not seeing any ethnic indications on it. It might be of value to point out that there might be a geographical label. Look above the seated figure opposite of Narmer. That engraving might signify Lower Egypts 12th nome. This nome, which is called Theb-ka, is translated as 'calf and cow'. Thats exactly what is depicted in that engraving; a cow and a calf.
Just as you say, only one of the men in the register under the ensign bearers is in the standard captive position of sbi (A13), determinative for xfty (enemy).
xfty is not separated by a register bar from the three men who on close inspection of this poor sketch don't appear bound. xfty is outside the cattle and caprid inventory yet is tallied. Does he share human identiy with the runners and stock identity with the bovids?
I don't see them as dancers because their legs don't conform to xbi (A32) or Holzhausen's 1.15-18, ib. Their arm position rules them out as wrSw dancers. But I can't completely rule them out as dancers though because I don't know what the mww ritual dancers look like.
What about the crescents encasing the runners? Do you have more detailed information on them?
Cow with calf is the glyph for ThebKa. Would that make the other enclosure of ibexes(?) stand for Hebenu the 16th nome of Upper Egypt?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Thanks for these great HD zooms.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
Narmer Palette Late Predynastic/Dynasty 1 ca 3000 BCE Cairo Musueum, JE 32169 / CG 14716
"Ta Mehhu man" and Trampled-by-Bull ?Primarly eastern delta inhabitants/Egyptians of possible Sinai and/or Levant antecedents?
Smitten One and Serpopard Handlers. ?Far northern (Fayum to delta) and mid to south Egyptians descendents of neolithic Nile dwellers with drying western desert refugees and northbound Sudani settlers? [view with browser adjusted to 85% to get all three in line.]
Sprawled or Fleeing Ones ?Primarily western delta Egyptians of west of delta and western desert ancestry?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ this caricature of Hebrews has been seen throughout history.
Every depiction of West Asian people that later became known as Hebrews all have this same appearance to them thoughout Egypt HISTORY!
This is really living in denial if you cannot simply admit to what is plain to see.
-------------------- 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 |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Thought I'd throw in the macehead for full value add. Like the palette, the enemies have no ethnic label(s).
Soliciting photos of originals to replace the sketches.
What enemies are you referring to? I can only spot one enemy figure. The three figures who (seem to) have their arms crossed are ritual dancers/runners, and supposedly, they danced around those crescent-like objects. Those objects are actually real objects that have been found, and they're associated with the structure Narmer is sitting on; he's observing some sort of ritual, or perhaps several rituals.
You're right, not seeing any ethnic indications on it. It might be of value to point out that there might be a geographical label. Look above the seated figure opposite of Narmer. That engraving might signify Lower Egypts 12th nome. This nome, which is called Theb-ka, is translated as 'calf and cow'. Thats exactly what is depicted in that engraving; a cow and a calf.
Just as you say, only one of the men in the register under the ensign bearers is in the standard captive position of sbi (A13), determinative for xfty (enemy).
xfty is not separated by a register bar from the three men who on close inspection of this poor sketch don't appear bound. xfty is outside the cattle and caprid inventory yet is tallied. Does he share human identiy with the runners and stock identity with the bovids?
I don't see them as dancers because their legs don't conform to xbi (A32) or Holzhausen's 1.15-18, ib. Their arm position rules them out as wrSw dancers. But I can't completely rule them out as dancers though because I don't know what the mww ritual dancers look like.
What about the crescents encasing the runners? Do you have more detailed information on them?
Cow with calf is the glyph for ThebKa. Would that make the other enclosure of ibexes(?) stand for Hebenu the 16th nome of Upper Egypt?
The figures that are situated in between the crescent-like objects should not be interpreted as glyphs or as informed by what some glyphs look like.
There appear to be parallels between what is seen on the mace head, and what has been found in 1st dynasty and OK burial associated structures. Starting with the 1st dynasty, royal burials were complemented with large mudbrick enclosures, that were built not near their tombs, but closer to the Nile; at Ancient Egypt's border.
Within those structures, the 1st dynasty rulers would sit atop of platforms designed to observe and oversee rituals, just as is depicted on Narmer's macehead. Djoser's stepped pyramid appears to have been a direct development from such structures, and there are in fact traces of the things depicted on Narmers mace head, found inside Djoser's pyramid complex. Standards of the Egyptian deities seen on the mace head, 4 still surviving crescents-like objects, and animal sacrifice are three examples.
The animals to the right of the mace-head likely signify animals that have been sacrificed, rather than a nome sign.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
There is a clear cut relationship between the subject matter of AE artwork and hieroglyphics such that when a depicted object, animal or person and a heiroglyph are similar they call the same notions.
Do you have more on the crescents and runners that precisely tells what the crescents are, eg., their name, use, etc., and just how they relate to the runners and the name and function of the ritual they suggest to you? Please expand and develop, thanks.
posted
Osirion What's with you and Hebrews,there was no such thing back then.
@Tukuler And thanks for the knowladge about Breath-grasped-by-Falcon I have always thought he was captured by the nose,so this is saying his life is being taken ?
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
I don't have the answers to your questions beyond that they might have a had deeper cosmic meaning, per some Egyptologists. Other than that, it can be said that the crescents appear to have been in use as well during the Hed-Sed festival. During said festival it was the king himself who could use those objects, supposedly to prove his fitness.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hello Tukuler. Question are you and Al takruri the same person. I remember Dejehuti referring to some one name Altakruri.
Posts: 48 | From: US | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
@ Anansi Well actually I've seen foreigners refer to pharaoh as their life breath in New Kingdom texts. So it may well be Narmer as Horus allowing continued existance to Ta Mehhu but only at his pleasure as Narmer/Falcon could just as easily yank the life breath out of the nostrils of the Marshland's people.
@ Swenet
Thanks for what pieces you were able to give. I still think the men between the crescents are "determined" by the captive and tallying and all four look somewhat non-standard at least as Naqada Egyptians. I grant you they are running but find it hard to see them as participating in the pharaoh rejuvenating/qualifying Heb Sed festival. Guess I'll need to look into festivals, runners and dancers of pre-1st Intermediate Egypt.
@ Ethiop
And here I thought it was immediately obvious that I am al~Takruri.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Hello Tukuler. Question are you and Al takruri the same person. I remember Dejehuti referring to some one name Altakruri.
Hi Ethiop. I am Tukuler (Toucouleur).
I now sign major or significant posts with al~Takruri and try to loosen up a little when I sign Tukuler. But as the Lioness duly notes, fine breeding will tell. Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Anybody could've been living there. Apparently, folk always lived just south of the delta since the middle stone age. Many folk originating west of the delta and the Fayum settled near the delta. A smattering of folk migrated back and forth from the Levant to east of the delta for livestock fodder and trade but were never so much permanent settlers.
It's my take that the Narmer Palette shows all three of these major ethnies and maybe even one unguessed ethny.
They consider the side with the big circle as the front of the palette. On the other side and from top to bottom I see the enemies as originating
* Sinai or Levant: (Breath-grasped-by-Falcon)
* Fayum or immediately south of delta: (Grasped-by-the-Hair)
* west of delta or west of Fayum: (Naked-Long-Haired-"Runners") primarily western delta Egyptians of west of delta and western desert ancestry?
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
It's not only that the hairstyle is the same in Old Kingdom and New Kingdom as on the palette that allows for a Tjehenu most likely identity. They lack penis-stache and crossbands because they have been despoiled. Looking at some of the other Narmer artifacts the throwstick and pot glyphs (next to men of the this same hair style) is proof positive that they are Tjenehu.
The Tjehenu were only one of the many "eastern Libyan" peoples
Applying the above to the palette as per alTakruri:
SINAI OR LEVANT MAN
EGYPTIAN PEOPLE FROM FAIYUM, southern middle Egypt
EASTERN LIBYAN, Tjehenu, west of delta EGYPTIAN
if I have this right you are calling Tjehenu (tehenu) Libyans western delta Egyptians
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
You have it all wrong.
If your intent was understanding you would ask me to clarify.
Since you made up labels and falsely attribute them to me your intentional objective is deliberate distortion to belittle.
Once a snake, always a snake. A lie is only effective when heavily interlaced with truths.
An AND gate only works when all its legs are ONES with no ZEROS.
If an AND gate has 1000 legs with 999 legs set to ONE and but just 1 leg set to ZERO the output is ZERO not ONE. The circuit will remain open Electric current will not pass.
Being a ZERO you fail the AND gate filter. You will never nullify my contributions. Only management can do that by deleting.
I've been here since fall 2004. You can fool newbies but the ES AE&E class of 2008 knows better, as should the few who still come here (vainly) in search of real substance.
Save your petty antics for the new breed race bait ES crowd. Trust me, no one ever found ES by GOOGLEing for the bullshit ES management now whole heartedly supports (i.e., "regulated" racialisms, gag me).
New blood finds its way here in search of subject matter like the Class of 2008 posted that built these two forums up.
Where are they now? Scattered to the winds from the last 4 years of management betrayal.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^ I was and am asking you to clarify. It seems like you were saying something similar to Djehootie that western delta Egyptians were of Libyan ancestry or somthing similar. I was trying to apply your quotes as above and I thought I had it right but nor certain. That's why I said "If I have this right" I didn't say "alTakruri' is dumb he thinks..." I am trying to understand what you are saying as it applies to the photos:
_______________________________________________ On the other side and from top to bottom I see the enemies as originating
* Sinai or Levant: (Breath-grasped-by-Falcon)
* Fayum or immediately south of delta: (Grasped-by-the-Hair)
* west of delta or west of Fayum: (Naked-Long-Haired-"Runners") primarily western delta Egyptians of west of delta and western desert ancestry __________________________________________________
Then it seemed you also referred to some of who you called Fayum as Tjehenu. Naturally somebody might not understand exactly what your saying. Some believe that Libyans and Egyptians were of the same "stock" at this time, just that their cultures were different. Others believe they were a differnt people with different roots Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Thanks for what pieces you were able to give. I still think the men between the crescents are "determined" by the captive and tallying and all four look somewhat non-standard at least as Naqada Egyptians. I grant you they are running but find it hard to see them as participating in the pharaoh rejuvenating/qualifying Heb Sed festival. Guess I'll need to look into festivals, runners and dancers of pre-1st Intermediate Egypt.
Just trying to share and contribute where I can.
I know of no determinative that is used in the manner which you are suggesting, but then again, that doesn't say much because I'm not that well versed in Ancient Egyptian writing. Can you think of examples of late dynasty 0/incipient dynasty 1 determinatives (I find it hard to believe they existed back then, considering how archaic the document is), examples where drawings are determined, and examples of determinatives that are separated from the glyphs they add meaning to, by a drawn object, which in this case, would be that 2nd crescent-like object? You don't have to post/find them, I just want to know if they exist, to be able to adjudge your proposal.
There are parallels between what is known about the festival, and what is depicted on the macehead, but haven't taken a stand on whether I think the macehead depicts that festival, only that the crescent-like objects appeared to have been used in several rituals.
Are they really that different from contemporary Upper Egyptians?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
At far lower right corner are
1 - Kneeling man hands tied behind him is A13. 2 - Beneath him is tadpole I18. 3 - Under that are two fingers D50.
Together they read: 120,000 captive enemies.
BTW the first hierglyphs are attested by the ivory labels of Abydos tomb U-j. The two sets of three crescents/semicircles, I see them in Den's ebony label and yepper Den is running in between them. Bingo Swenet! You called that one on the money. Den's ebony label also has the king seated atop stairstepped pavilion too.
I really need to put in some quality time so won't be posting for a while.
@ Lioness Sorry, I'm used to you being underhanded. Will try to give you the benefit of the doubt (setting myself up for a snake bite?).
Ancient Egypt like every place except where humanity first sprang up had to be peopled by settlers from elsewhere.
By the time Tjehenu arrivals adapted Maadian culture and then Naqada culture they were "Lower Egyptians" though it seems the originators of Naqada culture never forgot the Tjehenu factor of early dynastic Lower Egypt. They stamped towrope-throwstick-pot on many artifacts apparently depicting Lower Egypt residence not someplace as far west as the oases and beyond.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
^Just found this. I don't agree with all of it, but it may be helpful.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
To me they obviously go together as no register bar nor panel bar separate them from each other. The L shape is because the artist was making the best use of space of a relatively small object.
If you don't see it that way, fine. If the person in the palanquin, the runners, and the captive enemy are separate to you, fine. There's room for many interpretations since after all no one knows what the artist precisely meant to get across.
Very well could be the enemy leader presenting proven physically fit followers/POWs to Narmer.
Very well could be something else so what's your take on this central row of Palanquin Person, Crescent Runners, and Captive Enemy Tally lined up front and center before Narmer for review?
I have seen an interpretation that reads Palanquin Person as the "queen/a princess" of Lower Egypt come to marry Narmer. I guess this is based on Neith-hotep with Neith being Lower Egypt's 5th nome netjeret.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
@ Lioness Sorry, I'm used to you being underhanded. Will try to give you the benefit of the doubt (setting myself up for a snake bite?).
Ancient Egypt like every place except where humanity first sprang up had to be peopled by settlers from elsewhere.
By the time Tjehenu arrivals adapted Maadian culture and then Naqada culture they were "Lower Egyptians" though it seems the originators of Naqada culture never forgot the Tjehenu factor of early dynastic Lower Egypt. They stamped towrope-throwstick-pot on many artifacts apparently depicting Lower Egypt residence not someplace as far west as the oases and beyond.
I'm not trying to be funny or set you up here. Just trying to find out what you are saying.
Now going to the "Breath-grasped-by-Falcon"
you said:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
They consider the side with the big circle as the front of the palette. On the other side and from top to bottom I see the enemies as originating
* Sinai or Levant: (Breath-grasped-by-Falcon)
* Fayum or immediately south of delta: (Grasped-by-the-Hair)
* west of delta or west of Fayum: (Naked-Long-Haired-"Runners") primarily western delta Egyptians of west of delta and western desert ancestry?
you list Breath-grasped-by-Falcon above as being "Sinai or Levant"
Would it be correct that you believe this person to be Asiatic?
in other words: AAMW (Levantines/Mesopotamians) ?
If this is what you are claiming what are you basing it on and how does it fit in or not fit in with the supposed theme of palette unification of Upper and Lower Egypt? This goes back to the original question of the thread topic
To me they obviously go together as no register bar nor panel bar separate them from each other. The L shape is because the artist was making the best use of space of a relatively small object.
If you don't see it that way, fine. If the person in the palanquin, the runners, and the captive enemy are separate to you, fine. There's room for many interpretations since after all no one knows what the artist precisely meant to get across.
Very well could be the enemy leader presenting proven physically fit followers/POWs to Narmer.
Very well could be something else so what's your take on this central row of Palanquin Person, Crescent Runners, and Captive Enemy Tally lined up front and center before Narmer for review?
I have seen an interpretation that reads Palanquin Person as the "queen/a princess" of Lower Egypt come to marry Narmer. I guess this is based on Neith-hotep with Neith being Lower Egypt's 5th nome netjeret.
Let's start this over, because I get the idea that we're both not understanding each other. I get that your position is, that the runners are informed by the captive glyph, because, in your view, the sections in which they reside, are not separated, and their general appearance is similar.
Up until now I understand you, but after this point you're loosing me.
Can you explain what exactly you mean with that the runners are ''determined by that captive''?
In that picture you called that finger a determinative, but what is your definition of 'determinative'?
To answer you question: I have no explanation because, like I said earlier, I have not that much experience in deciphering real hieroglyphic texts to be able to tell how normal/abnormal it is that some glyph juts halfway out of its register. I do think that it is out of question that the runners are glyps (although I'm not sure if that really is what you meant when you compared them to ''dancing glyphs''), and I do think that it would make far more sense for the artist to make the fingers glyphs below the captive as small as the other fingers, and simply move the whole '120.000 captives' phrase upwards to the middle register, and in between the last runner and the the 2nd crescent, if he really wanted to convey that the captive glyph was directly related to the runners. But like I said, I'm working from suspicion; I haven't taken a stance on it yet.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
So that no one should mistake what I said with something someone purposely distorts as mine and to clarify any honest misunderstandings.
It's not only that the hairstyle is the same in Old Kingdom and New Kingdom as on the palette that allows for a Tjehenu most likely identity. They lack penis-stache and crossbands because they have been despoiled. Looking at some of the other Narmer artifacts the throwstick and pot glyphs (next to men of the this same hair style) is proof positive that they are [Tjehenu].
The other Narmer artifacts I alluded to are a label and a cylinder with either pot or throwstick and pot. I posted them later as:
The pot and the throwstick w/pot glyphs positively identifies the enemies as Tjehenu. The label and the cylinder enemies in simplist reduction resemble the palette's bottom registers enemies. Parsimony suggests identity of similar characters across artifacts.
Notice the label enemy has the pot at his left and sprouts papyrus from his head, recalling Marshman of the palette. On the cylinder, below left of Narmer bopping three rows of enemies there are the throwstick and pot together with a lozenge.
Tjehenu may have been a major ethny in far north Egypt resisting southern political control but Ta Mehhu had other ethnic components as I postulated.
Ta Mehh is a place name not an ethnic name. It designates the northern/papyrus region of the Nile Delta. It is the word translated as Lower Egypt.
Anybody could've been living there. Apparently, folk always lived just south of the delta since the middle stone age. Many folk originating west of the delta and the Fayum settled near the delta. A smattering of folk migrated back and forth from the Levant to east of the delta for livestock fodder and trade but were never so much permanent settlers.
It's my take that the Narmer Palette shows all three of these major ethnies and maybe even one unguessed ethny.
They consider the side with the big circle as the front of the palette. On the other side and from top to bottom I see the enemies as originating [from]
* Sinai or Levant: (Breath-grasped-by-Falcon) * Fayum or immediately south of delta: (Grasped-by-the-Hair) * west of delta or west of Fayum: (Naked-Long-Haired-"Runners")
I don't hazard to guess from where the enemy all the way at the bottom of the front side originated.
Mind you, I have no definitive proof of any of that and they could all be originated from far north Nile dwellers going back to the stone ages. But other pieces of Dynasty 0 commemorative art do show the pot, or the throwstick and pot, near men who resemble the enemies at bottom of Narmer Palette.
In using the term 'originating' I mean at some point in past time their ancestors were from the listed places though inhabiting far north Egypt and thus being pre-unification "Lower Egyptians" (which is really an anachronism since there was no polity or state Lower Egypt before the unification).
I later explicitly tied the enemies' likeness to a source place while not denying any of them as being "pre-unification Lower Egyptians" which apparently they all were.
Rather than introduce figures and captions and misrepresent as my interpretations by saying "as per al~Takruri", why not just honestly leave my own captions in place?
"Ta Mehhu man" and Trampled-by-Bull ?Primarly eastern delta inhabitants/Egyptians of possible Sinai and/or Levant antecedents?
Smitten One and Serpopard Handlers. ?Far northern (Fayum to delta) and mid to south Egyptians descendents of neolithic Nile dwellers with drying western desert refugees and northbound Sudani settlers? [view with browser adjusted to 85% to get all three in line.]
Sprawled or Fleeing Ones ?Primarily western delta Egyptians of west of delta and western desert ancestry?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Osirion What's with you and Hebrews,there was no such thing back then.
@Tukuler And thanks for the knowladge about Breath-grasped-by-Falcon I have always thought he was captured by the nose,so this is saying his life is being taken ?
Keep in mind that Tukuler stated this about the same depiction: SINAI OR LEVANT MAN
Sinai or Levant = Hebrew.
Nomadic West Asians
Why does everyone have an issue wit the term Hebrew?
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
I'm missing something here. You claim that the kneeling enemy whose hair is being grabbed is 'Asiatic' yet the naked enemies of the bottom register (above) are NO different in physical appearance as the kneeling enemy AND anthropomorphized Delta. 
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic