How does Egypt compare to other ancient civilizations? Was it the greatest? If yes, why? If no, why not?

I want well thought out responses everyone and yes, you may use your text books and whatever sources you may have...

What did the Kemetians contribute to the modern world? Can you name some examples? What was so great about Kemetian civlization?

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

What did the Kemetians contribute to the modern world? Can you name some examples? What was so great about Kemetian civlization?

---

I believe Wally's "made in Kemet" arguably lists these accomplishments. I hope we did not get this far, not to see Kemetian innovations that are taken for granted in modern society!

What did the Kemetians contribute to the modern world? Can you name some examples? What was so great about Kemetian civlization?

I don't think you can judge whether any civilization was great by what it contributed to the modern world. Kemet's been gone for 2,000 years. What other civilization from around that time has contributed much to the modern world?

(If you cite the Greeks, then you have to also give credit to the Kemetans.)

--

I think Kemet was great because it was "ahead of its time" in a number of important aspects, ie. basic egalitarianism, rights for women, social mobility (to a degree), emphasis on education, and other humanist values. Also, its art and technology arguably surpassed that of its contemporaries. Its monuments continue to astound the world -- indeed, if I'm not misremembering, the tallest structure in the world up to 1940 was the great pyramid. Its religion, I believe, was the basis of Abrahamic faiths that dominate the world today.

Its style of warfare was honorable -- I think I remember reading an account of a pharaoh *putting off a battle* until his foe was ready, before defeating him. Compare that to modern warfare.

...And of course, even foreigners who conquered Kemet were impressed enough to want to BE Kemetans -- adopting the language, belief system, etc.

--

...But back to the monuments and art -- they're so impressive that even modern people want to know more about Kemet, and some moderns even adopt and try to revive the belief system. No missionaries, no proselytizing necessary -- the art, literature, and monuments do the work; they're that potent.

In fact, I've read others observe the same thing I've noticed about Kemetan art & hieroglyphics: there's something "extra" to it that you can't quite put your finger on, something, for lack of a better term, magical. Same goes for the literature. The Book of Coming forth by Day is quite poetic, even in translation.

From antiquity through today, people call Kemetans giants, and speculate that gods (or aliens) must have been involved in the wonders they left us. Few other civilations are held in such high regard so widely.

Also -- they seemed to love nature, and love life. No repressed prudes, the Kemetans -- yet they were quite religious people. They seem to have reconciled the spiritual with the earthly and didn't separate the two.

Over a 4,000 year history, they experienced remarkably little totalitarianism -- the common folk seemed to have been *fans* of the rulers, and in some cases even had access to them. ...Worshipped them as gods after their deaths in fact.

...And the Kemetan philosophy still resonates. Of course, it depends on individual interpretation, but for a lot of people, it's a very interesting way of looking at the world, with it's emphasis on renewal, balance, etc. There were female gods as well as masculine; even foreign gods were let into the pantheon, seamlessly.

Their way of looking at their "devil" was even more healthy than today's, with a sort of "acceptance", it's easier to reconcile evil in the world.

Also arguably, Kemet gave the world writing -- even what became our modern alphabet may have some relation to the Kemetan writing system.

Plus, it's a very old civilization, perhaps the oldest civilization, and the longest-running one in history. Impressive!

I'm rambling -- but anyway, all in all, Kemet is a very intellectually and spiritually stimulating civilization. I won't say that it's the "greatest", but it's definitely among the greatest, and was the greatest of its time.

--

...Since there were famines in Kemet, disease, some totalitarianism, etc., you can't really compare it to (or judge it by) let's say, America 2004. (It's worth saying, though, if the West lasts for 4,000 years, you bet it will have its ups & downs!)

BUT -- Kemet rates among great civilizations right up there with America, and didn't have to call on (as far as we know) genocide, nor institutionalized slavery, nor racism to make it what it was.

...So it was definitely great. In order to say it was the greatest, though, you'll have to define the criteria for "greatness" more specifically...

Just noticed that Neo's original question asks for comparison to other ancient civilizations, rather than modern ones, like America.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sunstorm2004:
BUT -- Kemet rates among great civilizations right up there with America, and didn't have to call on (as far as we know) genocide, nor institutionalized slavery, nor racism to make it what it was.

---

I don't mean to sound "anti-American" when I say that comparing Kemet with America, is doing it injustice. Of course, Kemet in its time didn't have all the modern technological marvel we have today...that is understandable. But if I were to compare it with Modern America (which would be kind of silly), I would rate Kemet better. The reason for this is that, Kemetians tolerated various races, as long as you were considered Egyptian. Some foreigners who become Egyptian, and worked their way to become a Pharaoh, were accepted. When has America ever accepted a foreigner (even a naturalized citizen) as a President? Kemetians had women Pharaohs, who at times had as much power as their male counterparts. When have women ever ruled in America? Kemetians weren't concerned much about the race of their ruler, as long as he/she abided by Egyptian customs and law. When has an American Indian, Latino or a Black man ever been an American president? The Kemetians at times integrated captives of war into their society, and sometimes even granted them lands. When did such a thing occur in America, where POWs have been given clemency and given U.S citizenship? Kemetians gave credit to their inventors, regardless of what race the person was. When have Blacks, women, and other minorities, ever been openly acknowledged as contributors to the technological innovations and the economy of America? If all this sounds like a human rights issue, then you are right. What is a great civilization after all, if it is not about the people who make that civilization. A great civilization is supposed to treat all its citizens with respect...no first class, second or third class citizens, have laws and customs that determine one's identity as a citizen, embrace people who want to become hardcore citizens and contribute to the advancement of the nation, and to encourage competancy as national identity rather than someone's skin color or physical appearance. It seems that Kemet almost had all these things. While it wasn't perfect (e.g. rigid Pharaonic system), given the era in which it thrived, Kemet could almost become a model for today's societies. On addition to the human rights issue, Kemet had strong armies, technological break throughs, and other qualities mentioned in the previous post.

It's really difficult for me to answer this question but I'll try.

Yeah, Rome.

...With its orgies & gluttony, and people vs animals, men vs women, and slaves vs criminals battling to the death in the coliseum, for a thumbs up or a thumbs down. And then they put christ on the cross.

Please! Ultimately, I think it's values that make a civilization great & I don't think Rome compares.

Anyway -- Ausar, not sure if you've read this thread, but do you think my take above on the virtues of AE makes it out to be some "utopia place," or is it pretty much on target? Also Wally, same question, what do you think?

Just curious.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sunstorm2004:
And then they put christ on the cross.

---

lol. hail caesar!

* masada
* caligula
* the cruxifiction

Crucifixion actually came from the Persians and not the Romans. The following was reserved for revolters.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
Romans got most of the technological development from Greece or the Etruscans. Some great things they contributed were screws and concrete.

Crucifixion actually came from the Persians and not the Romans. The following was reserved for revolters.

---

quote:

---

So the Romans considered Jesus a revolter...

---

That's a discussion in itself. I will say that the normal depiction of Christ on a cross next to two killers is not an accurate depiction. Yes,of course he was a revolter. That is if you believe history over the Gospels.

Neo wrote:
Rome is a very close second

sunstorm2004:
Yeah, Rome.
...With its orgies & gluttony, and people vs animals, men vs women, and slaves vs criminals battling to the death in the coliseum, for a thumbs up or a thumbs down. And then they put Christ on the cross.
Please! Ultimately, I think it's values that make a civilization great & I don't think Rome compares.
Anyway -- Ausar, not sure if you've read this thread, but do you think my take above on the virtues of AE makes it out to be some "utopia place," or is it pretty much on target? Also Wally, same question, what do you think?

My reply to sunstorm2004:
I agree with you totally regarding Rome. It's debatable whether one can consider Ancient Rome as even being a civilized society. You would probably have to create a new category, of say, "Civilized Barbarians" There should be little doubt that Kemet was the most nearly perfect society ever created, before or since! The only other ancient civilization that comes closest is that of China...

..........

from Ausar;

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So the Romans considered Jesus a revolter...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ausar:

That's a discussion in itself. I will say that the normal depiction of Christ on a cross next to two killers is not an accurate depiction. Yes,of course he was a revolter. That is if you believe history over the Gospels.

My reply to Ausar:
I am not a practicing Christian, but I love to point out to them a simple fact, when they 'parrot' Luke's description of Christ as being a "Prince of Peace" by showing them the passage in the New Testament where Christ states :(paraphrasing) "Do not think that I have come to this earth to bring peace, no, I bring a Sword. I will turn father against son..."
To the chase: According to a portion of the "Gospel," in this case, Matthew, Jesus the Christ was a revolutionary, who was assassinated for the simple reason that he was perceived as a threat to the 'stability of the Roman state..."

(Now, this is NOT a religious debate about whether or not there was a Jesus, for god's sake. I'm relating an ideological reference from a book. So let's not start, y'all...)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keiko:
Can I just say AE was better because I say so? Just kidding...

Anyway...I think it is better because, for one, it lasted so long! There dedication, not only to the deities but to pharoah, was incredible. You can't forget the pyramids, wonderful engineering. And all the other tombs, and their talent at art and sculptor. The list can go on...

---

I disagree with the many comments on this website.African scholars and others realize the the greatest african civilization would be the nubians of nubia,because it was first,it had a more impact on africa,and it was a more creative and inventive culture than egypt and was more advanced.Having bigger tombs does not make you more advanced or a better culture.Many african culture like mali,nubia were more developed in late ancient times,mali later in the middle ages,but we are talking about ancient times.Nubian civilization would last the longest since in was found recently that the city of kerma really goes back to 5000 b.c. and nubian civilization still exist in sudan and southern egypt.take a look at some links.some are not update or some comments are not incorrect,like who invade meroe in one link,but it was corrected,another would be who invade meroe and does not go on to say the new nubian kingdoms were form,and maybe some other mistakes,but overall these links are correct.ALMOST every book or link would have some misinfo or mistakes,but take a look at these great links with mostly correct info. click and read all of them or save and read later-http://ancientneareast.tripod.com/Nubia.html http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/latestfindings.html
http://www.umich.edu/~newsinfo/MT/95/Oct95/mt10o95.html
http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/ancientafrica.html
http://www.dignubia.org/
http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/quest/projects/anderson.html
http://www.royalty.nu/Africa/Nubia.html
http://members.cox.net/waldorfedu/waldorfeduPages/Kush.html
http://main.edc.org/newsroom/features/dignubia.asp
http://www.netessays.net/viewpaper/4883.html

Let's see if we can illicit some viewpoint:

QUESTION FOR ALL: What is your opinion on why the 18th dynasty of Kemet is regarded as Egyptian and the 25th designated as Nubian?

quote:

---

Originally posted by BahYBasha:
The best engineers in the world that had ever lived on earth are AE. Just read more about the construction of the Pyramids amd its location compared to some starts known by the AE. They were amazing!
no wonder, a whole chapter in the Quran is about pharon.

---

that does not make them the best because thier tombs were bigger.read these links showing that thier were other african culture greater than egypt or more advanced or read links above.OF course every modern culture more so,the african would be more advanced than
early times but we are talking about who made the greatest impact worldwide,and be greater does not mean being more developed or advanced or better.here is some more links. http://internetpuppets.org/global.html
the link below does not tell you inside that nubia kicked out the ethiopians called the axumites in 350 a.d. to make new nubian kingdoms,but it is still a good link http://ancientneareast.tripod.com/Nubia.html

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Kenndo: Good info. You might be surprised at the number of different perspectives on Nubia if you go thru comments on this site.

Let's see if we can illicit some viewpoint:

QUESTION FOR ALL: What is your opinion on why the 18th dynasty of Kemet is regarded as Egyptian and the 25th designated as Nubian?

Does the Nubian/Egyptian designation illuminate African history or does it cast shadow (obfuscate) over it?

---

Interesting question. I frankly ask myself that question, about what is up with this designation of the 25th being Nubian, when it is apparent that elements within the 18th Dynasty were also either from Nubia, or descendants of Nubians.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Kenndo: Good info. You might be surprised at the number of different perspectives on Nubia if you go thru comments on this site.

Let's see if we can illicit some viewpoint:

QUESTION FOR ALL: What is your opinion on why the 18th dynasty of Kemet is regarded as Egyptian and the 25th designated as Nubian?

Does the Nubian/Egyptian designation illuminate African history or does it cast shadow (obfuscate) over it?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by kenndo:
I disagree with the many comments on this website.African scholars and others realize the the greatest african civilization would be the nubians of nubia,because it was first,it had a more impact on africa,and it was a more creative and inventive culture than egypt and was more advanced.Having bigger tombs does not make you more advanced or a better culture.Many african culture like mali,nubia were more developed in late ancient times,mali later in the middle ages,but we are talking about ancient times.Nubian civilization would last the longest since in was found recently that the city of kerma really goes back to 5000 b.c. and nubian civilization still exist in sudan and southern egypt.take a look at some links.some are not update or some comments are not incorrect,like who invade meroe in one link,but it was corrected,another would be who invade meroe and does not go on to say the new nubian kingdoms were form,and maybe some other mistakes,but overall these links are correct.ALMOST every book or link would have some misinfo or mistakes,but take a look at these great links with mostly correct info. click and read all of them or save and read later-

---

The reality is that Egypto/Nubian civilization is essentially the same civilization. There is no fundamental distinction, except at times politically, between the two.

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
Interesting question. I frankly ask myself that question, about what is up with this designation of the 25th being Nubian, when it is apparent that elements within the 18th Dynasty were also either from Nubia, or descendants of Nubians.

Of course, this Nubian/Egyptian designation is simply of way seperating Egypt from the rest of Africa. Thus the need to emphasize strong "Nubian" rule of the 25th Dynasty. Actually evidence points out that the original pharaohs of early dynastic Egypt can trace their origins to the Nubian region. Anyway, to answer your question directly, the answer is that the designation casts show over African history.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by kenndo:
[b] I disagree with the many comments on this website.African scholars and others realize the the greatest african civilization would be the nubians of nubia,because it was first,it had a more impact on africa,and it was a more creative and inventive culture than egypt and was more advanced.Having bigger tombs does not make you more advanced or a better culture.Many african culture like mali,nubia were more developed in late ancient times,mali later in the middle ages,but we are talking about ancient times.Nubian civilization would last the longest since in was found recently that the city of kerma really goes back to 5000 b.c. and nubian civilization still exist in sudan and southern egypt.take a look at some links.some are not update or some comments are not incorrect,like who invade meroe in one link,but it was corrected,another would be who invade meroe and does not go on to say the new nubian kingdoms were form,and maybe some other mistakes,but overall these links are correct.ALMOST every book or link would have some misinfo or mistakes,but take a look at these great links with mostly correct info. click and read all of them or save and read later-

---

The reality is that Egypto/Nubian civilization is essentially the same civilization. There is no fundamental distinction, except at times politically, between the two.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Southern Upper Egypt was not significannly different ethnically than Nubia,but Middle and Lower Egypt were probabaly more ethnically diverse. Still many Nubian deities like Ma'ahmes and Amun were incorporated into AE soceity. When Thutmoses I finally conquered Nubia he found the people there whorshiping a similar deity to his very own. Some believe Amun was brought into Egypt by a half Upper Egyptian from Aswan and a Nubian named Amenemhet I. He was the founder of the 12th dyansty. According to Robert Morkot in The Black Pharoahs he might have had some Nubian ancestry.

Btw,A-group and C-group are ethnically the same people. C-group is often wrongly attributed to Libyans when it was 100 % Nubian.

Kendo,you might want to read Robert Morkot's The Black Pharoahs. He gives a really underestimated people such as the Nubians the credit they deserve.

Let me also mention that the Medijay were related ethnically to the modern beja people in Sudan. These people developed their culture from the Pan-grave culture around Northern Sudan at about the same time as C-group Nubians arose.

I personally believe Kerma was already fully developed by the Old Kingdom in Upper Nubia. Kerma might have been the region that Harkhuf went to in the land of Yam. Located around modern Dongola.

The Nubians also provided better weapondry into AE soceity with the Nubian long-bow. The weapon was not fully replaced untill about the Hykos invasion brought the composite bow.

25th dyansty also improved the cannon of art that was used all the way up to the Coptic period. Not to mention also that I believe Demotic was created around this period.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
Racist Egyptologist like George Resiner and Brugsch used to say that the 25th dyansty was either started by Libyan Berbers or Upper Egyptian Amun priest. We know this today to be absurd. Nubians developed a complex urban civlization around Kerma. The first Upper Egyptian nome around modern day Aswan was called the Nubian nome of Ta-Seti,and Egyptians themselves called Nubia--the first of the first.

Southern Upper Egypt was not significannly different ethnically than Nubia,but Middle and Lower Egypt were probabaly more ethnically diverse. Still many Nubian deities like Ma'ahmes and Amun were incorporated into AE soceity. When Thutmoses I finally conquered Nubia he found the people there whorshiping a similar deity to his very own. Some believe Amun was brought into Egypt by a half Upper Egyptian from Aswan and a Nubian named Amenemhet I. He was the founder of the 12th dyansty. According to Robert Morkot in The Black Pharoahs he might have had some Nubian ancestry.

Btw,A-group and C-group are ethnically the same people. C-group is often wrongly attributed to Libyans when it was 100 % Nubian.

Kendo,you might want to read Robert Morkot's The Black Pharoahs. He gives a really underestimated people such as the Nubians the credit they deserve.

Let me also mention that the Medijay were related ethnically to the modern beja people in Sudan. These people developed their culture from the Pan-grave culture around Northern Sudan at about the same time as C-group Nubians arose.

I personally believe Kerma was already fully developed by the Old Kingdom in Upper Nubia. Kerma might have been the region that Harkhuf went to in the land of Yam. Located around modern Dongola.

The Nubians also provided better weapondry into AE soceity with the Nubian long-bow. The weapon was not fully replaced untill about the Hykos invasion brought the composite bow.

25th dyansty also improved the cannon of art that was used all the way up to the Coptic period. Not to mention also that I believe Demotic was created around this period.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by kenndo:
OF course just one correction,southern nubia was never conquered by the egyptians,just upper and lower nubia.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
You got me confused here. Is it just a typo, or am I missing some details here, when you said that Southern Nubia wasn't conquered, but Upper Nubia was? Isn't Upper Nubia the same thing as Southern Nubia?

---

hi.i am back.no ,southern nubia would be the region from sennar to the area close to west butana, and upper nubia would be a region close to west butana or berber to the third cataract.The great christian nubian kingdom of makoria would be in upper nubia and the great christian nubian kingdom of alwa would be in southern nubia.The arabs did not really conquered nubia by the way.they took over upper nubia for a short time after the late 1300's by being there for awhile.in other words the nubians were living side by side with the them under nubian rule,but alwa was really conquered by the funj from sennar with arab help,but the funj were southern nubians largely and took over upper nubia from the arabs and had the arabs under thier rule.a few nubian regions broke away later after the 1600 's a.d. and had a more almost clear nubian kingdom again and that lasted to the late 1800's a.d.

IT was the british who gave the sudan to the arabs,and the arabs never defeated the nubians as awhole in nubia.THE BRITS could not even defeat some of the nubians as well.This is one of the reasons for the civil war in the sudan.the brits gave the sudan to the arabs as awhole,but they did have one leader that was nubian in recent times for that state.Hopefully the africans who are african in culture would get the sudan back as awhole,but to a certain extent many nubians and other africans in the sudan are free,more so in the south,and they are more free than the africans in egypt today.GET the book ancient nubia:egypt's rival in africa.they have the maps of the different regions of nubia i just mention.peace.

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
Here's a short essay topic.

[b]How does Egypt compare to other ancient civilizations? Was it the greatest? If yes, why? If no, why not?

I want well thought out responses everyone and yes, you may use your text books and whatever sources you may have...

[/B]

---

"According to the unanimous testimony of the Ancients, first the Ethiopians and then the Egyptians created and raised to an extraordinary stage of development all the elements of civilization, while other peoples, especially the Eurasians, were still deep in barbarism...
When we say that the ancestors of the Blacks, who today live mainly in Black Africa, were the first to invent mathematics, astronomy, the calendar, sciences in general, arts, religion, agriculture, social organization, medicine, writing, technique, architecture; that they were the first to erect buildings out of 6 million tons of stone (the Great Pyramid) as architects and engineers-not simply as unskilled laborers; that they built the immense temple of Karnak, that forest of columns with its famed hypostyle hall large enough to hold Notre-Dame and its towers; that they sculpted the first colossal statues (Colossi of Memnon, etc.)-when we say all that we are merely expressing the plain unvarnished truth that no one today can refute by arguments worthy of the name..."

Now, is that "greatest" enough for ya?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by neo*geo:
[b]Here's a short essay topic.

[b]How does Egypt compare to other ancient civilizations? Was it the greatest? If yes, why? If no, why not?

I want well thought out responses everyone and yes, you may use your text books and whatever sources you may have...

[/B]

---

"According to the unanimous testimony of the Ancients, first the Ethiopians and then the Egyptians created and raised to an extraordinary stage of development all the elements of civilization, while other peoples, especially the Eurasians, were still deep in barbarism...
When we say that the ancestors of the Blacks, who today live mainly in Black Africa, were the first to invent mathematics, astronomy, the calendar, sciences in general, arts, religion, agriculture, social organization, medicine, writing, technique, architecture; that they were the first to erect buildings out of 6 million tons of stone (the Great Pyramid) as architects and engineers-not simply as unskilled laborers; that they built the immense temple of Karnak, that forest of columns with its famed hypostyle hall large enough to hold Notre-Dame and its towers; that they sculpted the first colossal statues (Colossi of Memnon, etc.)-when we say all that we are merely expressing the plain unvarnished truth that no one today can refute by arguments worthy of the name..."

Now, is that "greatest" enough for ya?

[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 23 July 2004).][/B][/QUOTE]

I agree,the two greatest would be nubia and egypt,but nubia more so because it was first and it's greater creative culture in merotic times,values, building and it became more powerful than egypt as well and it's greater impact on africa in the long run if you combine these things,but the question should be who became the most advanced,in ancient times,and the middle ages.IN ancient times that would be nubia in late ancient times,than axum would be second.other african cultures in terms of advancement would become more advanced than egypt as well AND MODERN africa would be more developed dispite the problems.IF EGYPT was still free and not under roman or arab rule it might have been on the level of other africa cultures today,but the nubians in egypt still have thier culture,and i feel sorry for the rest of the black egyptians who's culture is from ancient egypt.ONE MORe
thing,example-greece was greater than rome because it was more creative,but rome was more powerful than greece and a little bit more advanced because they took the ideas from greece and others and advanced some of them.lets not forget that greece always had civil wars and women had lesser rights than rome,so morals were about the same but rome advanced some other things and became a little more developed than greece.

another example-is that kush(meroitic nubia)was greater than christian nubia,but christan nubia was more advanced than meroitic nubia and had a stronger army,all armed with steel,and it was less so in kush times.so you see greater does not mean more developed but it could mean more important depending on it's impact and creativeness,and being more developed some times is as important or more important,depending on the situation and impact that culture had or time period.

I think black americans and africans should be helping the africans in the sudan to get thier country back,but i know most arabs in the sudan are blacks,but they are brainwashed,and blacks should be helping those blacks in egypt and other areas where they need it.that is all for now.peace.

quote:

---

IF EGYPT was still free and not under roman or arab rule it might have been on the level of other africa cultures today,but the nubians in egypt still have thier culture,and i feel sorry for the rest of the black egyptians who's culture is from ancient egypt.ONE MORe

---

More things than people know survive in modern day Egypt from the past. Most amung the rural poor Egyptians in Middle and Upper Egypt. From birth rituals to spirtual pratices to other various pratices. Problem is not many scholars with the exception of Winifried S. Blackman have taken the time to reserch or study these survivals. The culture is still there but greatly camaflagued with Islamic pratices that no one notices it.