The Standard of Ur From Ur, southern Iraq, about 2600-2400 BC
The Standard of Ur From Ur, southern Iraq, about 2600-2400 BC
This object was found in one of the largest graves in the Royal Cemetery at Ur, lying in the corner of a chamber above the right shoulder of a man. Its original function is not yet understood.
Leonard Woolley, the excavator at Ur, imagined that it was carried on a pole as a standard, hence its common name. Another theory suggests that it formed the soundbox of a musical instrument.
When found, the original wooden frame for the mosaic of shell, red limestone and lapis lazuli had decayed, and the two main panels had been crushed together by the weight of the soil. The bitumen acting as glue had disintegrated and the end panels were broken. As a result, the present restoration is only a best guess as to how it originally appeared.
The main panels are known as 'War' and 'Peace'. 'War' shows one of the earliest representations of a Sumerian army. Chariots, each pulled by four donkeys, trample enemies; infantry with cloaks carry spears; enemy soldiers are killed with axes, others are paraded naked and presented to the king who holds a spear.
The 'Peace' panel depicts animals, fish and other goods brought in procession to a banquet. Seated figures, wearing woollen fleeces or fringed skirts, drink to the accompaniment of a musician playing a lyre. Banquet scenes such as this are common on cylinder seals of the period, such as on the seal of the 'Queen' Pu-abi, also in the British Museum.
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The above are not Semites if I am not mistaken but Sumerians..who called themselves the Black headed people.
And wasn't it you who made a thread that claimed Mesopotamians are more related to the folks of the Indian sub-continent???...so what gives with the question.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: The above are not Semites if I am not mistaken but Sumerians..who called themselves the Black headed people.
And wasn't it you who made a thread that claimed Mesopotamians are more related to the folks of the Indian sub-continent???...so what gives with the question.
The Indian predecessor is deep into prehistoric times, tens of thousands of years before Sumer, part of the OOA far prior to any civilizations, 60kya etc
also people known as black people are dark brown over our whole body. That's why they don't call us black headed today. The hair on our heads is black. As we can see the Sumerians had shaved heads the Akkadians let their hair grow
Sumer, from non-Semitic into the Semitic Akkadian>
wiki:
Sumer (from Akkadian Šumeru; Sumerian 𒆠𒂗𒂠 ki-en-ĝir15, approximately "land of the civilized kings" or "native land"[note 1]) was an ancient civilization and historical region in southern Mesopotamia, modern Iraq, during the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age. Although the earliest historical records in the region do not go back much further than ca. 2900 BC, modern historians have asserted that Sumer was first permanently settled between ca. 4500 and 4000 BC by a non-Semitic people who may or may not have spoken the Sumerian language (pointing to the names of cities, rivers, basic occupations, etc. as evidence). These conjectured, prehistoric people are now called "proto-Euphrateans" or "Ubaidians", and are theorized to have evolved from the Samarra culture of northern Mesopotamia (Assyria).[ The Ubaidians were the first civilizing force in Sumer, draining the marshes for agriculture, developing trade, and establishing industries, including weaving, leatherwork, metalwork, masonry, and pottery.[However, some scholars such as Piotr Michalowski and Gerd Steiner, contest the idea of a Proto-Euphratean language or one substrate language. It has been suggested by them and others, that the Sumerian language was originally that of the hunter and fisher peoples, who lived in the marshland and the east Arabian littoral region, and were part of the Arabian bifacial culture.
Sumerian civilization took form in the Uruk period (4th millennium BC), continuing into the Jemdat Nasr and Early Dynastic periods. During the 3rd millennium BC, a close cultural symbiosis developed between the Sumerians (who spoke a Language Isolate) and the Semitic Akkadian speakers, which included widespread bilingualism. The influence of Sumerian on Akkadian (and vice versa) is evident in all areas, from lexical borrowing on a massive scale, to syntactic, morphological, and phonological convergence. This has prompted scholars to refer to Sumerian and Akkadian in the 3rd millennium BC as a sprachbund.Sumer was conquered by the Semitic-speaking kings of the Akkadian Empire around 2270 BC (short chronology), but Sumerian continued as a sacred language. Native Sumerian rule re-emerged for about a century in the Third Dynasty of Ur (Sumerian Renaissance) of the 21st to 20th centuries BC, but the Akkadian language also remained in use. The Sumerian city of Eridu, on the coast of the Persian Gulf, was the world's first city, where three separate cultures fused - that of peasant Ubaidian farmers, living in mud-brick huts and practicing irrigation; that of mobile nomadic Semitic pastoralists living in black tents and following herds of sheep and goats; and that of fisher folk, living in reed huts in the marshlands, who may have been the ancestors of the Sumerians.
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: The above are not Semites if I am not mistaken but Sumerians..who called themselves the Black headed people.
And wasn't it you who made a thread that claimed Mesopotamians are more related to the folks of the Indian sub-continent???...so what gives with the question.
From a older thread which has been deleted after last years disaster...
quote: The forehead was retreating and the brow ridges were always prominent, the cheek bones were rather broad and the nose also was broad, in some case inclining to extreme platyrrhine…There can be no doubt that this type is that which has been described by Sergi, Giuffrida-Ruggeri, and Fleure, and named the Eurafican type…
L.H. Dudley & D. Talbot Rice the Field Museum and Oxford Expedition (1931)
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
If you were trying to find matches between Sumerians and modern day people why would you put up pictures of Africans?
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
[/QB]
^^^ Jalal Thiyab Thijeel, general secretary of the Movement of Free Iraqis
If this man is representing blacks in Iraq and not claiming to be of B.C. period Mesopotamian/ Iraqi descent why are you using him to compare to ancient Sumerians? stop playing games
Black Iraqis Black Iraqis do not come from the same parentage; they are from various African origins. Their forebears were brought in different stages of history and they resided in various places. There are the Nubians (from Nuba) and the Zanzibari (from Zanzibar island in the Arab Sea, Yemen), of which the word “Zinji” [Negro] was derived and given to the Black Iraqis during their revolution known as the Zinj Revolution. Some blacks came from Ghana and other from Habasha (currently Ethiopia). During the first half of the 20th century, the Black Iraqis lived in south and middle Iraq, with the majority living in Al-Basrah due to landlords’, merchants’ and aristocrats’ need for individuals to protect and support them in the recurrent conflicts. Al-Basrah, at the time, did not know the type of tribal society known by some governorates, such as Thi Qar and Maysan. Thus, aristocrats depended on the Black Iraqis in their confrontations and to serve their needs. That’s why they brought lots of them from Nuba (in Egypt), Eritrea and Habasha and used them in daily affairs. The Saadouns, the Nakeebs, the Shiekh Khazaal el Ka’abis were among the first influential families to enslave the Blacks and use them in their farms and marine and commercial works. After the 1958 revolution, which toppled feudality and terminated the aristocrats’ influence, the Blacks settled in Al-Zubair, where they used to work. The region had large areas of land not possessed by anyone, which enabled them to build simple dwellings to live in. Before that, they had worked in Al-Faw and Abul-Khasib, where there were a lot of date warehouses owned by some Kuwaitis, like Ibn Ibrahim and others. During the war with Iran, they moved to Al-Zubair. When the Iranians occupied Al-Faw in 1986 and destroyed its orchards and economic businesses, Al-Zubair remained the Blacks’ stronghold, where more than 200,000 of them lived. A similar number of the Black Iraqis lives in other areas in Abul-Khasib and in Al-Hussein and Al-Jumhouriya neighborhoods while more than one million of them live in Al-Sadr City in Baghdad (the majority of population in certain quarters of this city are Blacks), and in Thi Qar, Maysan and other governorates. The number of Blacks in Iraq is estimated at more than 2 million
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: "EVERYWHERE" on Earth, Blacks demonstrate great diversity in phenotype. So how stupid to suggest that any "ONE" look is Black.
Full lips, big Penis.
I'm surpised to you this penis is big.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
Full lips, broad nose, straight hair.
^^^ a large triangular portion on the tip of the nose of this 6 inch statuette is broken off. When the tips of noses are broken off statues the noses look like flatter noses. What does the long straight hair that hangs down and beard tell you? very dissimilar to an African. Mike you show the Persepolis stuff and plly your curly hair vs straight hair theory but not here? That broken nose tip threw you off?
Assyria - Portal Guardian from Nimroud. British Museum - A lamassu (Cuneiform: 𒀭𒆗, AN.KAL; Sumerian: dlamma; Akkadian: lamassu) is a protective deity, often depicted with a bull or lion's body, eagle's wings, and human's head.
big Jewish looking nose, the base is quite wide
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Winged sphinx from Darius' palace at Susa, 510 BC
check out the pointy nose and small thin lips
I would hesitate to call this a black or white person but I would say probably not of African type
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
^^^ Turkish people, the man at bottom is black in skin tone notice the young man at top's full lips, they're fuller than that Darius relief and most Persepolis reliefs
Are these Muurs? ask Ironedlion, I'm not sure
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry I got involved, your instinct for nonsense and stupidity has obviously overwhelmed you.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Iku-shamagan, King of Mari. Detail of 08-02-08/8. Steatit statuette (2650 BCE) Early dynastic period II, from the temple of Ishtar at Mari, Syria
Troll, Mike just died of a heart attack, you think this is an African type dude? You can't be serious.
TRUTHHITMAN look at this
The statues found at the Abu Temple in Tell Asmar from c. 2700 BCE
"a man with a shaven head”. Louvre Museum (#AO 4351). . "in the period of Gudea”, circa 2100 B.C. It was found in the Sumerian city of Girsu (modern Telloh). Girsu was the holy city of the kingdom of Lagash, home of the E-ninnu, the temple of the war god Ningirsu
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
If you were trying to find matches between Sumerians and modern day people why would you put up pictures of Africans?
quote: which suggested that the African ancestry in West Eurasians is at least as closely related to East Africans (e.g. Hapmap3 Luhya (LWK)) as to West Africans (e.g. Nigerian Yoruba (YRI)) (the same analyses show that there is no evidence of relatedness to Chadic populations like Bulala) (Text S5 and Figure S12).
-- Moorjani et al. 2011 The History of African Gene Flow into Southern Europeans, Levantines, and Jews
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
^^^ Turkish people, the man at bottom is black in skin tone notice the young man at top's full lips, they're fuller than that Darius relief and most Persepolis reliefs
Are these Muurs? ask Ironedlion, I'm not sure
Your obsession with Turks and what-not is amusing. But especially with Turks.
You amuse me as a impostor "African American woman".
Always trying to prove that Africans didn't contribute to nothing and did not migrate outside of Africa. And on the other hand you try to prove the Eurocentric idiocy that everybody from outside of Africa migrated back into Africa....you dunce!
Every time you post you expose yourself.
For your information Turks are not from Iraq.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: The Evolution of Human Genetic and Phenotypic Variation in Africa
Africa is the birthplace of modern humans, and is the source of the geographic expansion of ancestral populations into other regions of the world.
Indigenous Africans are characterized by high levels of genetic diversity within and between populations. The pattern of genetic variation in these populations has been shaped by demographic events occurring over the last 200,000 years.
--Sarah Tishkoff
Delusional eurunuty clown! And at the same time you will post how Turks can be more "diverse" that whole of Africa? Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
^^^ Jalal Thiyab Thijeel, general secretary of the Movement of Free Iraqis
If this man is representing blacks in Iraq and not claiming to be of B.C. period Mesopotamian/ Iraqi descent why are you using him to compare to ancient Sumerians? stop playing games
Black Iraqis Black Iraqis do not come from the same parentage; they are from various African origins. Their forebears were brought in different stages of history and they resided in various places. There are the Nubians (from Nuba) and the Zanzibari (from Zanzibar island in the Arab Sea, Yemen), of which the word “Zinji” [Negro] was derived and given to the Black Iraqis during their revolution known as the Zinj Revolution. Some blacks came from Ghana and other from Habasha (currently Ethiopia). During the first half of the 20th century, the Black Iraqis lived in south and middle Iraq, with the majority living in Al-Basrah due to landlords’, merchants’ and aristocrats’ need for individuals to protect and support them in the recurrent conflicts. Al-Basrah, at the time, did not know the type of tribal society known by some governorates, such as Thi Qar and Maysan. Thus, aristocrats depended on the Black Iraqis in their confrontations and to serve their needs. That’s why they brought lots of them from Nuba (in Egypt), Eritrea and Habasha and used them in daily affairs. The Saadouns, the Nakeebs, the Shiekh Khazaal el Ka’abis were among the first influential families to enslave the Blacks and use them in their farms and marine and commercial works. After the 1958 revolution, which toppled feudality and terminated the aristocrats’ influence, the Blacks settled in Al-Zubair, where they used to work. The region had large areas of land not possessed by anyone, which enabled them to build simple dwellings to live in. Before that, they had worked in Al-Faw and Abul-Khasib, where there were a lot of date warehouses owned by some Kuwaitis, like Ibn Ibrahim and others. During the war with Iran, they moved to Al-Zubair. When the Iranians occupied Al-Faw in 1986 and destroyed its orchards and economic businesses, Al-Zubair remained the Blacks’ stronghold, where more than 200,000 of them lived. A similar number of the Black Iraqis lives in other areas in Abul-Khasib and in Al-Hussein and Al-Jumhouriya neighborhoods while more than one million of them live in Al-Sadr City in Baghdad (the majority of population in certain quarters of this city are Blacks), and in Thi Qar, Maysan and other governorates. The number of Blacks in Iraq is estimated at more than 2 million [/QB]
Typical dumb eurunut, by posting the above you double crossed yourself again...
First off, I don't expect for those people to write honest about ancient history when it comes to original inhabitance of that region. Since they've invaded that space.
Second, they look nothing like the images I have posted.
E3b originated in East Africa and expanded into the Near East and northern Africa at the end of the Pleistocene (Underhill et al. 2001).
quote:
Previous genetic studies have suggested a history of sub-Saharan African gene flow into some West Eurasian populations after the initial dispersal out of Africa that occurred at least 45,000 years ago. However, there has been no accurate characterization of the proportion of mixture, or of its date.
[...]
Text S5 and Figure S12). We also used the 4 Population Test to assess whether the tree ((LWK, YRI),(West Eurasian, CEU)) is consistent with the data, and found no evidence for a violation, which is consistent with a mixture of either West African or East African ancestors or both contributing to the African ancestry in West Eurasians (Table S14; Figure S13). Historically, a mixture of West and East African ancestry is plausible, since African gene flow into West Eurasia is documented from both West Africa during Roman times [34] and from East Africa during migrations from Egypt [7]. It is important to point out, however, that the difficulty of pinpointing the exact African source population is not expected to bias our inferences about the total proportion and date of mixture. The f4 Ancestry Estimation method is unbiased even when we use a poor surrogates for the true ancestral African population (as long as the phylogeny is correct), as we confirmed by repeating analyses replacing YRI with LWK, and obtaining similar results (Table S15). Our ROLLOFF admixture date estimates are also similar whether we use LWK or YRI to represent ancestral African population (Table S15), as predicted by the theory.
-- Moorjani et al. 2011 The History of African Gene Flow into Southern Europeans, Levantines, and Jews
You are amusing. I can give you that. You lying euronut, "African American woman impostor".
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
a disk of fired clay discovered in 1908 from the Minoan palace of Phaistos on the Greek island of Crete, possibly dating to the middle or late Minoan Bronze Age (2nd millennium BC). It is about 15 cm (5.9 in) in diameter and covered on both sides with a spiral of stamped symbols. Its purpose and meaning, and even its original geographical place of manufacture, remain disputed, making it one of the most famous mysteries of archaeology. Attempts at decipherment are generally thought to be unlikely to succeed unless more examples of the signs are found, as it is generally agreed that there is not enough context available for a meaningful analysis. Although the Phaistos Disc is generally accepted as authentic by archaeologists, a few scholars believe that the disc is a forgery or a hoax.
The author Kevin James is so obscure he is not even listed in a list of 27 authors, as recent as 2010, who have written about the Phaistos Disc.
But I guess if something is in a book it must be true Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
a disk of fired clay discovered in 1908 from the Minoan palace of Phaistos on the Greek island of Crete, possibly dating to the middle or late Minoan Bronze Age (2nd millennium BC). It is about 15 cm (5.9 in) in diameter and covered on both sides with a spiral of stamped symbols. Its purpose and meaning, and even its original geographical place of manufacture, remain disputed, making it one of the most famous mysteries of archaeology. Attempts at decipherment are generally thought to be unlikely to succeed unless more examples of the signs are found, as it is generally agreed that there is not enough context available for a meaningful analysis. Although the Phaistos Disc is generally accepted as authentic by archaeologists, a few scholars believe that the disc is a forgery or a hoax.
The author Kevin James is so obscure he is not even listed in a list of 27 authors, as recent as 2010, who have written about the Phaistos Disc.
But I guess if something is in a book it must be true
Funny how the idiot above is again is responding selectively. And trying to divert the issue.
Unapologetic typical euronut tactic.
quote:
A striking finding from our study is the consistent detection of 3–5% sub-Saharan African ancestry in the 8 diverse Jewish groups we studied, Ashkenazis (from northern Europe), Sephardis (from Italy, Turkey and Greece), and Mizrahis (from Syria, Iran and Iraq).
[...]
We estimate that the average date of the mixture of 72 generations (~2,000 years assuming 29 years per generation [30]) is older than that in Southern Europeans or other Levantines. The point estimates over all 8 populations are between 1,600–3,400 years ago, but with largely overlapping confidence intervals. It is intriguing that the Mizrahi Irani and Iraqi Jews—who are thought
to descend at least in part from Jews who were exiled to Babylon about 2,600 years ago [39], [40]—share the signal of African admixture.
-- Moorjani et al. 2011 The History of African Gene Flow into Southern Europeans, Levantines, and Jews
You are amusing. I can give you that. You lying euronut, "African American woman impostor".
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^ is this chart supposed to prove something?
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
quote:
A striking finding from our study is the consistent detection of 3–5% sub-Saharan African ancestry in the 8 diverse Jewish groups we studied, Ashkenazis (from northern Europe), Sephardis (from Italy, Turkey and Greece), and Mizrahis (from Syria, Iran and Iraq).
[...]
so based on thsi 3-5% that means the first place you look for photos of people Africa is the first place you look for people who might look like ancient Sumerians?
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^ is this chart supposed to prove something?
Again, selective diversion. To distract...to defend your Eurocentric ideology.
To estimate the proportion of sub-Saharan African ancestry in the various West Eurasian populations that showed significant evidence of mixture, we used f4 Ancestry Estimation [21], a method which produces accurate estimates of ancestry proportions, even in the absence of data from the true ancestral populations. This method estimates mixture proportions by fitting a model of mixture between two ancestral populations, followed by (possibly large) population-specific genetic drift. Briefly, we calculate a statistic that is proportional to the correlation in the allele frequency difference between West Eurasians and sub-Saharan Africans, and divide it by the same statistic for a population of sub-Saharan African ancestry, like YRI (Figure 2). This method has been shown through simulation to be robust to ascertainment bias on the SNP arrays and deviations from the assumed model of mixture (e.g. date and number of mixture events) [21].
The finding of sub-Saharan African ancestry in West Eurasians predicts that there will be a signature of admixture LD in the populations that experienced this mixture. That is, there will be LD between all markers that are highly differentiated between the two ancestral populations and the allele will be strongly correlated to the local ancestry [23]. Hence, there will be chromosomal segments of African ancestry with lengths that reflect the number of recombination events that have occurred since mixture, and thus can be used to estimate an admixture date. Figure 3 shows that this expected pattern is observed empirically in the decay of LD in four example West Eurasian populations, where we enhance the effects of admixture LD by weighting the SNP comparisons by frequency difference between the ancestral Africans (YRI) and ancestral West Eurasians (CEU). In the Southern European, Jewish and Levantine populations, this procedure produces clear evidence of admixture LD (Figure 3). However, Northern Europeans (Russians in Figure 3) do not show any evidence of African gene flow, consistent with the 4 Population and 3 Population Test results and Figure 1. Similar results are seen for other West Eurasian and Jewish populations that show evidence of mixture in the 4 Population Test.
quote: The history of human migrations from Africa into West Eurasia is only partially understood. Archaeological and genetic evidence indicate that anatomically modern humans arrived in Europe from an African source at least 45,000 years ago, following the initial dispersal out of Africa [1], [2]. However, it is known that Southern Europeans and Levantines (people from modern day Palestine, Israel, Syria and Jordan) have also inherited genetic material of African origin due to subsequent migrations.
-- Moorjani et al. 2011 The History of African Gene Flow into Southern Europeans, Levantines, and Jews
You are amusing. I can give you that. You lying euronut, "African American woman impostor".
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
so based on these charts the first place you look for photos of people Africa is the first place you look for people who might look like ancient Sumerians?
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor: Again, selective diversion. To distract....
I addressed the content of your previous post directly so that's not diversion. What you do is diversion. Even Calabooze caught you copy & pasting too much. You hide behind that.
What's your point, Sumerians were 3-5% West African and listened to Luther Vandross?
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: so based on these charts the first place you look for photos of people Africa is the first place you look for people who might look like ancient Sumerians?
More diversion to distract the issue.
See, dullard, I have posted additional information. Which disputes your blogs and pseudo claims.
I have posted plenty of information which shows that people of African descent have been absorbed into west Eurasian populations. And guess what? It was from prior to the enslavement of (North) East Africans into West Asia.
quote: E3b originated in East Africa and expanded into the Near East and northern Africa at the end of the Pleistocene
Underhill et al. 2001
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: so based on these charts the first place you look for photos of people Africa is the first place you look for people who might look like ancient Sumerians?
More diversion to distract the issue.
See, dullard, I have posted additional information. Which disputes your pseudo blogs and pseudo claims.
I have posted plenty of information which shows that people of African descent have been absorbed into west Eurasian populations. And guess what? It was from prior to the enslavement of (North) East Africans into West Asia.
quote: E3b originated in East Africa and expanded into the Near East and northern Africa at the end of the Pleistocene
Underhill et al. 2001
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor: Again, selective diversion. To distract....
quote:
I addressed the content of your previous post directly so that's not diversion. What you do is diversion. Even Calabooze caught you copy & pasting too much. You hide behind that. you keep fvcking around and your gonna get another foot in ass
No, you did not respond to my posts as a whole. You selectively skipped the inconvenience. Then iterated your pseudo again.
Now you quickly start binding behind Calabooze? LOL
While you copy /past from pseudo blogs to win the argument.
You try to misguided people by telling them I copy/ past. Thou I do this. As reference to and from scholarly sources.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: so based on these charts the first place you look for photos of people Africa is the first place you look for people who might look like ancient Sumerians?
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor: Again, selective diversion. To distract....
I addressed the content of your previous post directly so that's not diversion. What you do is diversion. Even Calabooze caught you copy & pasting too much. You hide behind that.
What's your point, Sumerians were 3-5% West African and listened to Luther Vandross?
The fact of the matter is that these indigenous populations have been absorbed by incoming populations.
The remaining MRCA is evidence of this.
The more you post the more you prove that you aren't an African American woman. But merely a racist troll, as Calabooz called you a troll. Remember that!!!
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
No, you did not respond to my posts as a whole. You selectively skipped the inconvenience. Then iterated your pseudo again. [/QB]
that's because only now do you make a claim:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
I have posted plenty of information which shows that people of African descent have been absorbed into west Eurasian populations. And guess what? It was from prior to the enslavement of (North) East Africans into West Asia.
before you were too shy and bashful about making a claim, so you put up a lot of charts and quotes hoping a person will guess some particular point about it. That just messes up the forum. You over-do everything to excess The topic is Sumerians. You put up West African admixture in Syrian Jews admixture 3.9 and Iranian Jews 2.9. And so based on this, based on information you posted, they are African type people?
This is supposed to be strong evidence for the Sumerians being black people with afros? We women of African descent don't have to go out trying to claim every ancient civilization, that's a male thing need for conquest
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Troll > this is how your mind works. If I say MOST people have 5 fingers in your mind I said ALL people have 5 fingers. Then you post 18 posts of people with 6 fingers, 3 fingers etc. and article quotes
That's your basic problem. You're an extremist. If somebody say "most" it upsets you and you act out
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Troll > this is how your mind works. If I say MOST people have 5 fingers in your mind I said ALL people have 5 fingers. Then you post 18 posts of people with 6 fingers, 3 fingers etc. and article quotes
That's your basic problem. You're an extremist. If somebody say "most" it upsets you and you act out
Euronut troll, let me explain how your mind works.
You claim that Africans have not contributed to anything. Not in Africa and outside of Africa.
You claim that multiple backmigration events have taken place and you are a vivid supporter of this. But, without actually evidence...
You never explained why you claim that Turks or Greeks for that matter can or are suppose be more diverse in phenotype than the Africans. Which is an hilarious pseudo claim all by itself, anyway.
You will claim that europeans can have every color complexion and hair texture on earth, as situ. Yet, the Africans can't. People who are actually biologically older and from the historical place with much variety.
You will claim a pseudo blog and or wiki entry over peer reviewed scientific evaluation. And will iterate on that, in all your believe and disbelieve.
However, the facts I've posted speak against YOU! Exhibit after exhibit, from multiple disciplines to approve my point (what describe as 3 and 6 fingers).
This is how your racist, "African American woman" impostor, mind operates.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
you're putting words in my mouth and exaggerating. For example I never said Turks and Greeks are more diverse. I say if you are looking at these places maybe the first place to look for people who might be similar to the ancient people look at the modern Iraqis, Turks and Greeks rather than going into an African picture file and trying to do matches. Jalal Thiyab Thijeel is not claiming most black people in Iraq had been there in BC times.
You confuse perhistoric genetic input with cultural input from the past 6000 years. I say looking at the ancient Sumerians, some of them may have not been an African looking type you say that's Eurocentric I say the Egyptians had a large African input but some of the royals even before the late period had some Asiatic wives. You say that's impossible that's Eurocentric. You're an extremist
What's wrong with West Africa anyway? Why must everything be judged on huge monuments? That's Euroecentric Things like the pyramids and Stone Henge are useless objects. I find Egypt very intersting but I don't feel a connection to it.
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: you're putting words in my mouth and exaggerating. For example I never said Turks and Greeks are more diverse. I say if you are looking at these places maybe the first place to look for people who might be similar to the ancient people look at the modern Iraqis, Turks and Greeks rather than going into an African picture file and trying to do matches. Jalal Thiyab Thijeel is not claiming most black people in Iraq had been there in BC times.
You confuse perhistoric genetic input with cultural input from the past 6000 years. I say looking at the ancient Sumerians, some of them may have not been an African looking type you say that's Eurocentric I say the Egyptians had a large African input but some of the royals even before the late period had some Asiatic wives. You say that's impossible that's Eurocentric. You're an extremist
What's wrong with West Africa anyway? Why must everything be judged on huge monuments? That's Euroecentric Things like the pyramids and Stone Henge are useless objects. I find Egypt very intersting but I don't feel a connection to it.
I am not exaggerating. Your actions are all over the forum. As you have been posting your delusional theory for years.
No, you did not say...Turks or Greeks are more diverse. But you persist and insist on it by showing pictures of unknown individuals as suggestive they are more diverse. Underlining how a Turkish guy has full lips despite and no matter what. Posting "Turks with exclamation points".As if that will dismiss the scholarship from different disciplines I have posted? lol
Your claim is that Europeans range from the lightest to the darkest complexion, with every type of hair texture. Suggesting all this is due to situ. While Africans do not?lol
Now, fact of the matter is, Africans were present in West Asia long before any slavery from East-Africa to West Asia existed.
As was shown by different disciplines. So you can sit there on your dumb ass ignoring all of it. But the facts speak for themselves.
Another fact is too, that Africans are most diverse in phenotype...so your "stereotype rant" can be flushed to a place where the sun doesn't shine.
Now, onto KMT (Egypt). As was shown by different disciples as well, these people were African in origin. But you how fought and still fight this idea that it even could have been possible.
And it doesn't mean that early technology such stone Hence wasn't exchangeable. Heck, even Maya and Incas had stone Hence technology. They were isolated from the rest of the world, right?
I don't know what to make of your "West Africa" argument? Nobody is saying there is something wrong with West Africa! Sorry, but this is a typical Eurocentric argument, to segregate West Africa. However, as late as during the spread of Islam West Africans have moved from West to East Africa, by freewill.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^ I am making a comparisons bewteen modern Turks and ancient Mesopotamians because these are neighboring countries
but instead of looking at nearby neighboring regions you want to go looking all over Africa to find matches for Sumerians.
The Turks Europeans and everybody looked African 40,000 years ago but since then they changed and Sumer is only 6000 years ago.
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^ I am making a comparisons bewteen modern Turks and ancient Mesopotamians because these are neighboring countries
but instead of looking at nearby neighboring regions you want to go looking all over Africa to find matches for Sumerians.
The Turks Europeans and everybody looked African 40,000 years ago but since then they changed and Sumer is only 6000 years ago.
You still don't get it, do you?
There are multiple disciplines which I have cited, saying Africans entered that region prior and during those days. And even until recently (as you've posted which pseudo blogs) Not just 40Kya. SMH
It's not something I made up. And in no way am I saying or claiming Summer had only people from African descent. But there surely were present there, during those days. Most of this knowledge is well known within "secret societies".
Turks did it exist as a people during those days. Turkish people I know have told me themselves they descent from people such as those from Uzbekistan etc they told me that those people are actually "proto-Turks" which also translates into the language they speak, they told me the Turkish is more "developed from for example Uzbeks which has lesser word prefix is and suffixes in reference to objects and subjects etc.... Some also stated that they are related to some Mongolian tribes such as Genghis Khan.
All you do is look for excuses, constantly. You are dismissed, green cabby!
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
There are multiple disciplines which I have cited, saying Africans entered that region prior and during those days. And even untill recently. Not just 40Kya. SMH
During the 3rd millennium BC, a close cultural symbiosis developed between the Sumerians (who spoke a Language Isolate) and the Semitic Akkadian speakers, which included widespread bilingualism. Sumer was conquered by the Semitic-speaking kings of the Akkadian Empire around 2270 BC (short chronology), but Sumerian continued as a sacred language.
^^^ This is the Semitic time period. Either these people were Africans or they weren't
If they were not Africans, if they were people who had deep roots in the Mesoptamian region going back tens of thousands of years are you claiming that between 3000 and 2000 BC therre was some significant influx of African migrants that came in from Africa and they altered the composition of the population?
You should have a source that says that, not some charts which talk about low admixture percentages with Africans of modern Iraqis/Syrians
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
There are multiple disciplines which I have cited, saying Africans entered that region prior and during those days. And even untill recently. Not just 40Kya. SMH
just show me a legitimate book that says that not Mystery Clay by some unknown author with no credentials.
There should be a lot of books on Sumer. Surely you could find one talking about this historical African influx
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
There are multiple disciplines which I have cited, saying Africans entered that region prior and during those days. And even untill recently. Not just 40Kya. SMH
During the 3rd millennium BC, a close cultural symbiosis developed between the Sumerians (who spoke a Language Isolate) and the Semitic Akkadian speakers, which included widespread bilingualism. Sumer was conquered by the Semitic-speaking kings of the Akkadian Empire around 2270 BC (short chronology), but Sumerian continued as a sacred language.
^^^ This is the Semitic time period. Either these people were Africans or they weren't
If they were not Africans, if they were people who had deep roots in the Mesoptamian region going back tens of thousands of years are you claiming that between 3000 and 2000 BC therre was some significant influx of African migrants that came in from Africa and they altered the composition of the population?
You should have a source that says that, not some charts which talk about low admixture percentages with Africans of modern Iraqis/Syrians
Yes, I looked at the video.
Did you read the scholarly sources I have posted?SMH
The sources I have posted state that African were absorbed and other groups entered there during those days.
quote: Archaeology has shown that in about 2500 BC the ruling elite in the city of Ur went to their final resting place surrounded by their wealth and the attendant bodies of their court personnel.
What it shows is that these people lived/ entered there only recently.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
read the end of my last comment. Obvioulsly I read your source. You didn't even list his name. It's not a credible source
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: read the end of my last comment. Obvioulsly I read your source. You didn't even list his name. It's not a credible source
I have no idea what you are talking about? I didn't list "his" name? It's not a credible sources?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
There are multiple disciplines which I have cited, saying Africans entered that region prior and during those days. And even untill recently. Not just 40Kya. SMH
During the 3rd millennium BC, a close cultural symbiosis developed between the Sumerians (who spoke a Language Isolate) and the Semitic Akkadian speakers, which included widespread bilingualism. Sumer was conquered by the Semitic-speaking kings of the Akkadian Empire around 2270 BC (short chronology), but Sumerian continued as a sacred language.
^^^ This is the Semitic time period. Either these people were Africans or they weren't
If they were not Africans, if they were people who had deep roots in the Mesoptamian region going back tens of thousands of years are you claiming that between 3000 and 2000 BC therre was some significant influx of African migrants that came in from Africa and they altered the composition of the population?
You should have a source that says that, not some charts which talk about low admixture percentages with Africans of modern Iraqis/Syrians
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
There are multiple disciplines which I have cited, saying Africans entered that region prior and during those days. And even untill recently. Not just 40Kya. SMH
just show me a legitimate book that says that not Mystery Clay by some unknown author with no credentials.
There should be a lot of books on Sumer. Surely you could find one talking about this historical African influx
Oh, I see. Well I posted that from a older thread which has been deleted. I did not know the author. But I so know it was posted by someone else last year.
Despite of this, I have posted other material from different disciplines which does correlate with that sources. It was just another checkmark in the list of summations. All these other references did show the author and publication. So much for you selective response.
Either way, you're dismissed.
So, where is the "blackhead", because I don't see it?
From Ur, southern Iraq, about 2600-2400 BC Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
History as written today is nothing but falsehood. For example, here is a Sumerian:
But instead of showing Sumerians in textbooks scholars provide pictures of Gutians from Lagash:
Without the concept of race the lie being taught that the Sumerians were non-Blacks--Gutians-- will exist forever, since text book publishers only publish what they want us to believe.You can continue to follow the Eurocentrists propaganda that erases Blacks from ancient history--I would rather stick to reality.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Controversy surrounding the Kushite/African/Black origins of the Elamites, Sumerians, Akkadians and “Assyrians” is simple and yet complicated. It involves both the racism exhibited toward the African slaves in the Western Hemisphere and Africans generally which led to the idea that Africans had no history ; and the need of Julius Oppert to make Semites white, to accommodate the “white” ancestry of European Jews.
To understand this dichotomy we have to look at the history of scholarship surrounding the rise of Sumero-Akkadian studies. The study of the Sumerians, Akkadians. Assyrians and Elamites began with the decipherment of the cuneiform script by Henry Rawlinson. Henry Rawlinson had spent most of his career in the Orient. This appears to have gave him an open mind in regards to history. He recognized the Ancient Model of History, the idea that civilization was founded by the Kushite or Hamitic people of the Bible.
As result, Rawlinson was surprised during his research to discover that the founders of the Mesopotamian civilization were of Kushite origin. He made it clear that the Semitic speakers of Akkad and the non-Semitic speakers of Sumer were both Black or Negro people who called themselves sag-gig-ga “Black Heads”. In Rawlinson’s day the Sumerian people were recognized as Akkadian or Chaldean, while the Semitic speaking blacks were called Assyrians.
Rawlinson identified these Akkadians as Turanian or Scythic people. But he made it clear that these ancient Scythic or Turanian speaking people were Kushites or Blacks.
A major supporter of Rawlinson was Edward Hincks. Hincks continued Rawlinson’s work and identified the ancient group as Chaldeans, and also called them Turanian speakers. Hincks, though, never dicussed their ethnic origin.
A late comer to the study of the Sumerians and the Akkadians was Julius Oppert. Oppert was a German born of Jewish parents. He made it clear that the Chaldean and Akkadian people spoke different languages. He noted that the original founders of Mesopotamia civilization called themselves Ki-en-gi “land of the true lords”. It was the Semitic speakers who called themselves Akkadians.
Assyrians called the Ki-en-gi people Sumiritu “the sacred language”. Oppert popularized the Assyrian name Sumer, for the original founders of the civilization. Thus we have today the Akkadians and Sumerians of ancient Mesopotamia.
Oppert began to popularize the idea that the Sumerians were related to the contemporary Altaic and Turanian speaking people, e.g., Turks and Magyar (Hungarian) speaking people. He made it clear that the Akkadians were Semites like himself . To support this idea Oppert pointed out that typological features between Sumerian and Altaic languages existed. This feature was agglutination.
The problem with identifying the Sumerians as descendants from contemporary Turanian speakers resulted from the fact that Sumerian and the Turkish languages are not genetically related. As a result Oppert began to criticize the work of Hincks (who was dead at the time) in relation to the identification of the Sumerian people as Turanian following the research of Rawlinson.
Oppert knew Rawlinson had used African languages to decipher cuneiform writing. But he did not compare the Sumerian to African languages, probably, due to the fact that he knew they were related given Rawlinson's earlier research.
It is strange to some observers that Oppert,never criticized Rawlinson who had proposed the Turanian origin of the Ki-en-gi (Sumerians). But this was not strange at all. Oppert did not attack Rawlinson who was still alive at the time because he knew that Rawlinson said the Sumerians were the original Scythic and Turanian people he called Kushites. Moreover, Rawlinson made it clear that both the Akkadians and Sumerians were Blacks. For Oppert to have debated this issue with Rawlinson, who deciphered the cuneiform script, would have meant that he would have had to accept the fact that Semites were Black. There was no way Oppert would have wanted to acknowledge his African heritage, given the Anti-Semitism experienced by Jews living in Europe.
Although Oppert successfully hid the recognition that the Akkadians and the Sumerians both refered to themselves as sag-gig-ga “black heads”, some researchers were unable to follow the status quo and ignore this reality. For example, Francois Lenormant, made it clear, following the research of Rawlinson, that the Elamite and Sumerians spoke genetically related languages. This idea was hard to reconcile with the depiction of people on the monuments of Iran, especially the Behistun monument, which depicted Negroes (with curly hair and beards) representing the Assyrians, Jews and Elamites who ruled the area. As a result, Oppert began the myth that the Sumerian languages was isolated from other languages spoken in the world evethough it shared typological features with the Altaic languages. Oppert taught Akkadian-Sumerian in many of the leading Universities in France and Germany. Many of his students soon began to dominate the Academe, or held chairs in Sumerian and Akkadian studies these researchers continued to perpetuate the myth that the Elamite and Sumerian languages were not related.
There was no way to keep from researchers who read the original Sumerian, Akkadian and Assyrian text that these people recognized that they were ethnically Blacks. This fact was made clear by Albert Terrien de LaCouperie. Born in France, de LaCouperie was a well known linguist and China expert. Although native of France most of his writings are in English. In the journal he published called the Babylonian and Oriental Record, he outlined many aspects of ancient history. In these pages he made it clear that the Sumerians, Akkadians and even the Assyrians who called themselves almat kakkadi ‘black headed people”, were all Blacks of Kushite origin. Eventhough de LaCouperie taught at the University of London, the prestige of Oppert, and the fact that the main centers for Sumero-Akkadian studies in France and Germany were founded by Oppert and or his students led to researchers ignoring the evidence that the Sumerians , Akkadians and Assyrians were Black.
In summary, the cuneiform evidence makes it clear that the Sumerians, Akkadians and Assyrians recognized themselves as Negroes: “black heads”. This fact was supported by the statues of Gudea, the Akkadians and Assyrians. Plus the Behistun monument made it clear that the Elamites were also Blacks.
The textual evidence also makes it clear that Oppert began the discussion of a typological relationship between Sumerian and Turkic languages. He also manufactured the idea that the Semites of Mesopotamia and Iran, the Assyrians and Akkadians were “whites”, like himself. Due to this brain washing, and whitening out of Blacks in history, many people today can look at depictions of Assyrians, Achamenians, and Akkadians and fail to see the Negro origin of these people.
Gutian....Sumerian
To make the Sumerians “white” textbooks print pictures of artifacts dating to the Gutian rule of Lagash, to pass them off as the true originators of Sumerian civilization. No Gutian rulers of Lagash are recognized in the Sumerian King List.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Note the difference in handshake between the Gutian and the Sumerian.
Sumerians noted that the Gutians:
"They are not classed among people, not reckoned as part of the land Gutian people who know no inhibitions, With human intelligence but canine instinct and monkey's features"
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor: So, where is the "blackhead", because I don't see it?
The “Standard of Ur” is a small trapezoidal box (8.5 Inches high by 19.5 Inches long) whose two sides and end panels are covered with figurative and geometric mosaics made of pieces of shell, lapis lazuli, and red limestone set into bitumen. It was found in PG779 near a soldier whom Woolley thought had carried it on a long pole as the royal emblem of a king. Although it is more likely to have been the sound box for a musical instrument.
The people are made of Shell, the background is made of lapis lazuli (the blue stone), the Diamonds in the border are made of red limestone.
Figures made of Shell or Ivory cannot depict color. The material is White, thus everything depicted with it will be white.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic