a) find Budge's dictionary and turn to page 1045; go over to the 'b' column ; you are looking for the geographical expression for "Egypt"

b) you found it, good. Notice there are several words for Egypt. You are looking for the one with the little quail chick in it...

c) got it, ok. This word is written Kemwt(nw) or Kemut (nu)

Egyptian 101
"kem" is an adjective; it means black

"ut" makes the word a noun-adjective in the feminine plural; you know, like "s"

Now, there is only one way, I repeat, absolutely only one way to correctly translate this word.

You got it - Blacks
This is what Ancient Egyptians called themselves, you know like America;Americans, well Black;Blacks.

You may now continue with the nonsense...

c) got it, ok. This word is written Kemwt(nw) or Kemut (nu)

Egyptian 101
"kem" is an adjective; it means black

Yes, Black soil, not black people ! Black soil meant fertile soil.
although it doesn@t make a difference what colour are my people-
As a former Egyptologist, I assure you that Egyptians colour-wise did not change, they are the same light brown in the north and a little darker in the south.
Remember that there was no Africa as we know it now, but there were plenty of tribes, each of them had its own art, but few who survived sadly, so we do not really know the degree of the true wealth.
My Nigerian friends claim that Egyptians are originally from Nigeria, just like the American African here who claim the same thing- of course,it is a hush hush talks- Nigeria is a new phenomenun, and so are Afro-Americans, Egypt is many, many 1000's years old.But it gives me great pleasure to see the world around me claim to belong to my people

quote:

---

Egyptian 101
"kem" is an adjective; it means black

Yes, Black soil, not black people !

---

Nope. kem (km) is just the 'black' as an adjective as Wally pointed it. You can't presumptively add a specific noun on to a general adjective.

quote:

---

As a former Egyptologist

---

quote:

---

I assure you that Egyptians colour-wise did not change, they are the same light brown in the north and a little darker in the south.

---

quote:

---

Remember that there was no Africa as we know it now, but there were plenty of tribes, each of them had its own art, but few who survived sadly, so we do not really know the degree of the true wealth.

---

Thought Writes:

Of course they have changed since the conquests of Greeks and Arabs, just as the modern Mexicans have changed since the conquest of the Spanish only five hundred years ago. These conquests changed the gene frequency and phenotype of the indigenous Egyptians but does not negate the relationship between the ancient and modern Egyptians.

{My Nigerian friends claim that Egyptians are originally from Nigeria, just like the American African here who claim the same thing- of course,it is a hush hush talks- Nigeria is a new phenomenun, and so are Afro-Americans, Egypt is many, many 1000's years old.}

Thought Writes:

quote:

---

salama writes:

My Nigerian friends claim that Egyptians are originally from Nigeria, just like the American African here who claim the same thing- of course,it is a hush hush talks- Nigeria is a new phenomenun, and so are Afro-Americans, Egypt is many, many 1000's years old.But it gives me great pleasure to see the world around me claim to belong to my people

---

You're missing the point. What you're talking about above is an altogether separate debate.

Don't try to discredit one idea with another. That's underhanded.

---

Whatever the truth may be, the Eurocentrics make such weak, desperate and illogical arguments! That's telling.

C'mon guys, the world is lurking here, waiting for you to come up with something substantive... But you're just getting thrashed.

Maybe the strategy is simply to tire everyone out... But even *that's* not working.

quote:

---

Originally posted by salama:
My Nigerian friends claim that Egyptians are originally from Nigeria, just like the American African here who claim the same thing- of course,it is a hush hush talks- Nigeria is a new phenomenun, and so are Afro-Americans, Egypt is many, many 1000's years old.But it gives me great pleasure to see the world around me claim to belong to my people

---

Actually, I think you misunderstand. No one believes the nations of West Africa are older than Egypt. What a growing number of people believe, including myself, is that West Africans and Egyptians have a relationship that goes back 8-10,000 years.

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:

As far as the meaning of "Kmt" goes, the key word is "interpretation". Since no one on Earth is an expert on the language of the ancient Egyptians, I don't see how anyone can imply that one meaning is correct. There certainly is a lot of evidence on both sides of the debate...

---

Like I said, You may now continue with the nonsense...
Interpretation??? Expert???
Do you have to be a "Spanishologist" to be able to "interpret" the meaning of "Madre de Dios?"
How about "Le Bon Temps" or "moshi-moshi"
How about a "debate" on the meaning of "se la vie" perhaps. Egypt, I guess, exists on another plane of reality.
Such nonsense...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
Like I said, You may now continue with the nonsense...
Interpretation??? Expert???
Do you have to be a "Spanishologist" to be able to "interpret" the meaning of "Madre de Dios?"
How about "Le Bon Temps" or "moshi-moshi"
How about a "debate" on the meaning of "se la vie" perhaps. Egypt, I guess, exists on another plane of reality.
Such nonsense...

---

No, you live on another plane of reality. The ancient Egyptian language hasn't even been completely deciphered. It's a dead language that hasn't been spoken in about 2000-2500 years. It's intellectually dishonest for anyone to claim that one interpretation is correct.

quote:

---

Yes, Black soil, not black people ! Black soil meant fertile soil.
although it doesn@t make a difference what colour are my people-
As a former Egyptologist, I assure you that Egyptians colour-wise did not change, they are the same light brown in the north and a little darker in the south.
Remember that there was no Africa as we know it now, but there were plenty of tribes, each of them had its own art, but few who survived sadly, so we do not really know the degree of the true wealth.
My Nigerian friends claim that Egyptians are originally from Nigeria, just like the American African here who claim the same thing- of course,it is a hush hush talks- Nigeria is a new phenomenun, and so are Afro-Americans, Egypt is many, many 1000's years old.But it gives me great pleasure to see the world around me claim to belong to my people

---

Salama, understand that the ancient Egyptians themselves started off as tribal commmunities in deep pre-history. Archaeological evidence shows that early populations of Egypt came from the Eastern and Central Sahara when it was once more moist. The majority of the Western African populations also come from this Neolithic population around the pre-dyanstic. This explains why there are many cultural similarities between the dyanstic Egyptians and Western African groups.

The interior of Africa during the dyanstic period of ancient Egypt was not nearly as populated as it is today. The migrating Western Africans from the Central and Southern Sahara displaced the original inhabitants of that region. The oldest agritcultural center in Western Africa is dated to around 1500 B.C.

Might sound weird but many African groups oral history connect them with people from a great river in the East. Some of these oral legends were fabricated by missionaries but others might be legitmate.

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
No, you live on another plane of reality. The ancient Egyptian language hasn't even been completely deciphered. It's a dead language that hasn't been spoken in about 2000-2500 years. It's intellectually dishonest for anyone to claim that one interpretation is correct.

And why can't we live and let die? If people choose to accept a different interpetation, so be it. It's not as if there isn't scholarly evidence for both sides of the debate.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
No, you live on another plane of reality. The ancient Egyptian language hasn't even been completely deciphered. It's a dead language that hasn't been spoken in about 2000-2500 years. It's intellectually dishonest for anyone to claim that one interpretation is correct.

And why can't we live and let die? If people choose to accept a different interpetation, so be it. It's not as if there isn't scholarly evidence for both sides of the debate.

---

For the sake of discussion, I won't even go into Sahidi; the local dialects (especially in Upper Egypt)of Egyptian Arabic with you on this one, I'll simply concede that ancient Egyptian is "dead" in the same sense that Latin is.

I'll bet you a dollar and a dime that nobody "debates" the Latin meanings of 'populi,' 'populus,' or 'publicus.'

How many different interpretations will you get for the Latin word 'Niger?'

And you missed the point completely by replicating the reduction of the names of Egypt to the singular and repeated simplicity used by "Egyptologist" (Kmt) to confuse people! Do you know how many names there were for Memphis, Denderah, or Thebes?
Well, for the entire Egyptian nationality you had:

Kmt (Kemet) - which anyone can play fast and loose with
Kmwt (Kemut) - which nobody can
Kmmw (Kememou;Kememu) - ditto
Kmmtjw (Kemetiu)
T3wj (Tawi)
T3merj (Tameri)
etc., etc,

Like Latin, Korean, or Swahili, the Ancient Egyptian language was governed by specific and fixed rules that were in no way arbitrary or vague...

I think much of what is Kemetic (ie - Egyptian) civilisation began further south in Ta Seti: Group A Nubia, and earlier. The Edfu text, later texts from dynastic Kemet, linguistic and archeological evidence, all suggests that Group A culture moved into Ta Shemu (Upper Egypt) FROM Ta Seti (Nubia), perhaps the pre-dynastic Kings conqured Ta Shemu from Ta Seti, and moving the capital there. Since archeology shows the people shared a culture, and skeletal anthropology shows affinity that border's on "identity" (Keita,Weeks) this is really a geographic issue: ie where is the culture centrally located, and not ethnic.

Indeed, I do not think there was ANY ethnic difference between Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia (concepts MEANINGLESS IN 3800 bc!) at that time.

By the time of Narmer the culture of the Nile Valley was centered in Ta Shemu.

Namer conquers the delta, cira 3200(~) and again 'moves' the capital, beginning the history of dynastic Kemet, or Egypt as we call it.

Although I think the Group A Nubians of Ta Seti and the pre dynastic "Egyptians" are essentially, the same people. Lower Nubia was never as heavily populated as Upper Egypt in antiquity because the Nile Valley is very narrow there. It is in fact a hot dry mostly wasteland that was famous for much of Pre Kush history mostly for its "Nub" (ie, gold), and not for agricultural produce.

I think various African ethnic groups moved into and out of both regions, and the political boundaries also changed constantly.

For example, the 1st ruling class of Kemetic history (Narmer's people), the Annu, may be a distinct African ethnic group from the 2nd or 3rd ruling classes. Similarly the later Kushites may be a distinct African ethnic group from Group A Nubia.

In sumation:

* Nubia is derived from a Kemetic word meaning gold.

* It is a geographic area also since Roman times.

* Treating it as geography we may say that much of Nubia was a part of Kemet for most of it's dynastic history.

* And we may also say that "Egyptian" history originates largely in Nubia, and that is not a paradox either, since a part of Nubia was generally a part of Egypt, and still is to this day.

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
No, you live on another plane of reality. The ancient Egyptian language hasn't even been completely deciphered. It's a dead language that hasn't been spoken in about 2000-2500 years. It's intellectually dishonest for anyone to claim that one interpretation is correct.

And why can't we live and let die? If people choose to accept a different interpetation, so be it. It's not as if there isn't scholarly evidence for both sides of the debate.

---

quote:

---

Alright, let's start with your scholarly evidence for the other side of the debate:Black "soil".

---

Indeed, the argument that we can't know about the language because the Kemet is "dead" is somewhat of a copout.

After all. If you believe that then it would apply to any aspect of history. It would apply moreso to every other aspect of history besides the language in fact. Why? Because it is the written record that survives through time.

Finally the argument is ironic, because Kemetic language does live on in somewhat Grecified form as Sahdic Coptic.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
I'll simply concede that ancient Egyptian is "dead" in the same sense that Latin is.

---

It's not dead in the same sense that Latin is. It doesn't compare to Latin. Ancient Egyptian wasn't written for 2000 years while Latin was still written and spoken long after the fall of the Roman empire. We have thousands of ancient documents written in Latin to help us fully understand the meanings and complexities of the language.

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
It's not dead in the same sense that Latin is. It doesn't compare to Latin. Ancient Egyptian wasn't written for 2000 years while Latin was still written and spoken long after the fall of the Roman empire. We have thousands of ancient documents written in Latin to help us fully understand the meanings and complexities of the language.

Without the Rosetta stone would we know what Kmt means? We know everything about Latin wheras we still have much to learn about ancient Egyptian.

I personally don't have an opinion as to which interpretation is correct.

---

neo*geo, my brother...
Every Egyptologist on the planet, alive or dead will tell you that the word kmwt (kemut - a name for Ancient Egypt) means 'blacks', every one of them!
That is why they refrain from using it. With the word Kemet or Black (singular), ignoring the determinative, you can freely make black mean anything you choose; people, soil, cow dung... Do you see the distinction now between kemet and kemut, and why one is used and the other, equally valid, is never used?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
neo*geo, my brother...
[b]Every Egyptologist on the planet, alive or dead will tell you that the word kmwt (kemut - a name for Ancient Egypt) means 'blacks', every one of them!
[/B]

---

Keep in mind that even Queen Cleopatra was sometimes referred to as "Kemut" despite the fact that she was of Macedonian ethnicity.

Based on Egypt's diversity, it's a big leap in interpretation to say that they called themselves "black people". Even if ancient Egyptians were predominantly "black-skinned" Africans it would be unusal for a nation to identify itself by a physical characteristic that isn't the least bit an exclusive one.

Did the ancient Chinese feel the need to call themselves "yellow people"? Did the Britons call themselves "white people"?

If you want to stick to African cultures, what other ancient African people called themselves "black people"?

I understand that Egyptians are a unique people in a unique geographic location which is the only reason why people can still debate over this stuff.

There is no vast conspiracy to hide the "true" meaning of the name. Take yourself out of the 21st century and put yourself in their time. This is the era before the definition of a "black person" was "anyone with sub-Saharan African ancestry."

Before going any further, answer these questions:

With their knowledge of the interior of Africa and the other continents around them, why would they choose to label themselves "black people" as if they were the only black peoples in Africa?

With Egypt's physical diversity from north to south, why would skin color play a role in how they chose to indentify themselves as a nation?

The Nubians were the most literally black-skinned people known in their time, is there a reference to Egyptians calling Nubians Kemut or Kammau?

Thought Writes:

I assume you mean phenotyic diversity, not physical diversity. I agree that Ancient Egypt phenotypically diverse, however modern science indicates that the bulk of this diversity originates within Inner Africa.

{The Nubians were the most literally black-skinned people known in their time, is there a reference to Egyptians calling Nubians Kemut or Kammau?}

Thought Writes:

There is no evidence to support "Nubians" being darker or lighter than Egyptians prior to the New Kingdom.

[/B][/QUOTE]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:

There is no evidence to support "Nubians" being darker or lighter than Egyptians prior to the New Kingdom.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
There is written evidence of lower and upper Egyptians being phenotypically different(as in, not having as many physical affinities with Nubians) as early as the Old Kingdom and physical evidence from pre-dynastic times...

---

Thought Writes:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

Please provide me with your sources or recant this false statement.

---

You can start with the "tales of Sinhue"

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
Keep in mind that even Queen Cleopatra was sometimes referred to as "Kemut" despite the fact that she was of Macedonian ethnicity.

Based on Egypt's diversity, it's a big leap in interpretation to say that they called themselves "black people". Even if ancient Egyptians were predominantly "black-skinned" Africans it would be unusal for a nation to identify itself by a physical characteristic that isn't the least bit an exclusive one.

Did the ancient Chinese feel the need to call themselves "yellow people"? Did the Britons call themselves "white people"?

If you want to stick to African cultures, what other ancient African people called themselves "black people"?

I understand that Egyptians are a unique people in a unique geographic location which is the only reason why people can still debate over this stuff.

There is no vast conspiracy to hide the "true" meaning of the name. Take yourself out of the 21st century and put yourself in their time. This is the era before the definition of a "black person" was "anyone with sub-Saharan African ancestry."

Before going any further, answer these questions:

With their knowledge of the interior of Africa and the other continents around them, why would they choose to label themselves "black people" as if they were the only black peoples in Africa?

With Egypt's physical diversity from north to south, why would skin color play a role in how they chose to indentify themselves as a nation?

The Nubians were the most literally black-skinned people known in their time, is there a reference to Egyptians calling Nubians Kemut or Kammau?

---

--Cleopatra would not be referred to as kemut (blacks) because that would be grammatically incorrect; she would be called kemit (black woman);sat kemet(woman of black -which wouldn't necessarily mean she was black; merely a citizen);

--The fact that the Kememu called themselves kememu was never predicated upon what other peoples called themselves.

and I am so exhausted by people who can only respond to evidence presented with empty rhetoric as to what they believe to be true.
No, you tell us what these words describing Egypt and Egyptians really mean...

[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 11 December 2004).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
You can start with the "tales of Sinhue"

---

How do the tales of Sinhue support your claims? Please post it and mark where it supports:

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
You can start with the "tales of Sinhue"

---

Thought Writes:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kem-Au:
How do the tales of Sinhue support your claims? Please post it and mark where it supports:

From neo...
"evidence of lower and upper Egyptians being phenotypically different(as in, not having as many physical affinities with Nubians) as early as the Old Kingdom and physical evidence from pre-dynastic times..."

---

No, enough already of all this 'phenotype,''cranial type,''physical affinities' rhetoric. First, let him tell us what the Egyptian words describing Egypt and Egyptians really mean.

Otherwise we'll be circling the wagons for days...

Neo: I never thought of the tales of Sinhue as documenting differences in appearance, although I'm open to the idea that the delta inhabitants were more heterogenious than the south from very early times.

The Thebans[Wasetans] of the 11th dyansty fought bitter wars with the people in Middle Egypt. Around the second dyansty we have battles between Khasekhemwy and the northern populations. Pictures of on the base of his statue show captives from the north. Don't forget also that the Narmer palette shows people bound up and pictures of bulls trampling people of the Delta.

The Lapwings[rehkyt] of the Narmer palaette are shown hanging from ropes symbolizing the subjigation of the people who lived in the Delta.

The physical remains from the Delta are very slim,but we do have some remains from Maadi and the Omari culture from Lower Egypt.I have not seen many published reports on these findings,so I guess this would be an area that S.O Keita would have to study more.

With interpretation of the word Kmt you might be putting all your eggs in one basket. My recommendation to prove the Africaness of Egypt is by it's cultural and archaeological remains. Findings at Nabta Playa and Dakhla Oasis are begging to unveil the roots of ancient Kemetian[Egyptian] civlization. You must have more than on discipline besides just linguistics.

neo*geo,don't get wrapped up in the Nubian question either. Nubians were painted in various colors and even hairstyles. Look at some pictures of the Medijay are shown in bas reliefs like the modern Beja people in Sudan. The really dark Nubians are shown similar to the tones of the Southern Sudanese in modern Sudan. You can tell by their hairstyles and scarification that many match the modern southern Sudanese. The names for Nubia were as follows:Wawat,Irtjet,Irem,Yam,Ta-Seti,Medijay and Kush. Kush was around the 3rd to 5th cataract. Wawat and Ta-seti was south of modern day Aswan the first catract. Ta-Seti was traditionally called the 'First of the First' in literature like the Famine Stela.

Understand that Sinuhe was written at a time when Asiatics had swarmed the Delta region. Earlier texts like the Adominations of Ipuwer[some date to 8th dyansty] and Instructions of Mer--ka-re date to around the 9/10 dyansties. These texts also record an Asiatic pressence.

No matter how much I disagree with you, I respect the fact that you keep the discussions academic. While it appears that you have invested a lot of time and research into reaching the conclusions you posted, in order to convince skeptics you have to respond to legitimate objections.

So again I ask:

- What precedent is there for a nation to name themselves based on something as non-exclusive as skin color? If you lived in a household with other people of similar or equal height, would it make sense for them to nickname you "shorty"?

- Did the Egyptians ever call Nubians or any other peoples from the interior of Africa "Kemut" or "Kammau"?

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Neo: I never thought of the tales of Sinhue as documenting differences in appearance, although I'm open to the idea that the delta inhabitants were more heterogenious than the south from very early times.

---

I wasn't referencing the tales of sinhue as physical evidence. The physical evidence is well documented that in pre-dynastic periods, lower Egyptians had a distinct culture and were not phenotypically homogeneous as early upper Egyptians were. Some have observed that they were taller and more robust than upper Egyptians. I'm not saying they weren't indigenous Africans. They may have been related to the diverse berber populations of north Africa.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Your comment about Cleopatra being referred to as Kemut; is that based on something you can document?

---

Can't document everything I know unfortuantely. There are a lot of books on ancient Egypt that are out of print now.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

If not, it would appear that you are making a false argument about an issue you claim to have no opinion on.

---

I just need clarification on a unanswered questions. I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing this time. While I haven't concluded one way or the other on the issue I will admit that I feel the evidence for "Kemet" meaning black people is not as strong as the more widely accepted translation. I'm open to any evidence that will lower my degree of skepticism towards Wally/Diop's theory.

quote:

---

I wasn't referencing the tales of sinhue as physical evidence.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
There is written evidence of lower and upper Egyptians being phenotypically different(as in, not having as many physical affinities with Nubians) as early as the Old Kingdom and physical evidence from pre-dynastic times...

---

quote:

---

Thought Writes:
Please provide me with your sources or recant this false statement.

---

quote:

---

Neo writes: You can start with the "tales of Sinhue"

---

quote:

---

The physical evidence is well documented that in pre-dynastic periods, lower Egyptians had a distinct culture and were not phenotypically homogeneous as early upper Egyptians were.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Your comment about Cleopatra being referred to as Kemut; is that based on something you can document?

---

quote:

---

Can't document everything I know unfortuantely. There are a lot of books on ancient Egypt that are out of print now.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

If not, it would appear that you are making a false argument about an issue you claim to have no opinion on.

---

quote:

---

I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing this time. While I haven't concluded one way or the other on the issue I will admit that I feel the evidence for "Kemet" meaning black people is not as strong as the more widely accepted translation.

---

quote:

---

I'm open to any evidence that will lower my degree of skepticism towards Wally/Diop's theory.

---

* You are not addressing the evidence.

* You seem to be attempting to provide counter evidence that does not actually exist.

quote:

---

I have studied the history of racism in the West and I have seen no examples of African people's calling themselves "blacks" before the British applied the term to West African immigrants in Europe

---

That is a 'non sequitor' as black is a British (English) word that merely translates earlier references to dark skinned Africans ->including Negro, Moor, Sudan, Hamite, Ethiopian, Melas and Kem.

Specific example:The Black Madonna of Europe, is derived from the African Goddess KemIsi (Black Mother) of Kemet.

Are you saying the concept of the Black Madonna was somehow invented by the British to apply to West Africans?

Are you saying that the Black Madonna does not derived from KemIsi? ?

Are you saying that the Black Madonna is a reference to 'soil' and does not in any way reference the fact that she is 'black'? ? ?

Are you denying that KemIsi constitutes and authentic African reference to Black as phenotype? ? ? ?

""Roman legions carried this figure of Black Isis holding the Black infant Horus all over Europe where shrines were established to her. So holy and venerate were these shrines that when Christianity invaded Europe, these figures of the Black Isis holding the Black Horus were not destroyed but turned into figures of the Black Madonna and Child. Today these are still the holiest shrines in Catholic Europe"...in all the Romish countries of Europe, in France, Italy, Germany, etc., the God Christ, as well as his mother, are described in their old pictures and statues to be black. The infant God in the arms of his black mother, his eyes and drapery white, is himself perfectly black."
- The worship of the Virgin Mother - T.W. Doane, also see Gerald Massey: Egypt and the light of the World.

Let's be clear on this: Kem Isis is an original "Egyptian" reference to Egyptians as phenotypical kemet - black people, that is translated as such by the [wst].

Neo: just because you study the history of European racism does not mean that Black history begins with Europe. Quite often, precisely the opposite is true.

quote:

---

sunstorm wrote:

A question though: How old is the term "kemet"? Does it reach back to unification? And what would be the historical context of calling oneself the "black nation"?

---

quote:

---

rasol responded:

Specific references to Kem (black) as it pertains to skin color go back to the old kingdom and are probably older than the term Kemet[niwt], as applied to the nation.

I know of two specific examples of cultures that made specific and sanctified references to dark skin.

* Nile Valley. (Kem)

and....

* Indus Valley. (Kali)

Ask yourself what do these civilisations have in common, (besides Black peoples).

---

...So what do these civilizations have in common?

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
That is a 'non sequitor' as black is a British (English) word that merely translates earlier references to dark skinned Africans ->including Negro, Moor, Sudan, Hamite, Ethiopian, Melas and Kem.

---

The problem with what you are saying is that all of these titles don't have varying meanings at all times in history. Sudan doesn't mean "black people" in Arabic; Moor is a reference to Muslims from Morocco and western Sudan, not skin color; Hamite is a racist term that in earlier times meant "dark caucasion"; Melas means dark skin but not black skin; and yes, Kem has been used to describe skin color in ancient Egypt. I will address this issue with Kem in my next post.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Specific example:The Black Madonna of Europe, is derived from the African Goddess KemIsi (Black Mother) of Kemet.

Are you saying the concept of the Black Madonna was somehow invented by the British to apply to West Africans?

---

No. Now your confusing meaning and time periods. I would like to see a reference or a photo showing the Kemisi you speak of.

The God of the afterworld, Osiris was often depicted with jet black, blue, or green skin. Other Gods and Goddesses were similarly depicted with black, blue, or green skin for symbolic reasons.

It's not very strong to use myths and allegories for examples of the application of the word Kem. Myths and allegories are very symbolic and colors can and often do represent something other than what you are implying.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Are you saying that the Black Madonna does not derived from KemIsi? ?

---

It's possible but it's irrelevant to the topic at hand.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Are you denying that KemIsi constitutes and authentic African reference to Black as phenotype? ? ? ?

---

Yes because it's a reference to a religious symbol(a symbol that has been depicted in a wide variety of ways) and not an actual person. But why stop there?

Are you saying we should reference the depictions of Seth as an example of red hair as an Egyptian phenotype?

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Let's be clear on this: Kem Isis is an original "Egyptian" reference to Egyptians as phenotypical kemet - black people, that is translated as such by the [wst].

---

So let me get this straight. You're whole conclusion hinges on a symbol that never actually lived? That's weak rasol.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Neo: just because you study the history of European racism does not mean that Black history begins with Europe.

---

And African history doesn't begin or end with Egypt.

quote:

---

It doesn't mean black people. It is the word black as a noun adjective.

---

Finally, we found a point at which we agree. Kem can be applied to skin color, soil color, paint color, hair color, etc..

quote:

---

There is no disputing the fact that the word black was used in reference to phenotype as no alternative translation has ever been offered for words such as Kemset, Pepi the Black, KemIsi or it's Greek derivitive the Black Madonna.

---

But this is a major flaw in your argument.

I'll give you the same example I gave Wally: if you lived amongst a group of people with similar or equal height why would you be nicknamed "shorty"? If you aren't significantly shorter than most other people around you it wouldn't make sense for you to be called shorty. There would have to be a symbolic or inner meaning that outsiders may not understand.

This is why when you reference ancient Egyptians like Kemsit or Pepi the black you are hurting your Kemet means "black people" statement. Kemsit and "Pepi the black" were of Nubian ancestry and they must have had significantly darker skin color than most Egyptians for them to be nicknamed "black". For one to be named based on a physical attribution that attribute must be something that makes them stand out from most other people...

Thought Writes:

Yet, you have not provided us with ANY sources to date! Both Upper and Lower Egyptians were diverse. Both Upper and Lower Egyptians descended from a early Holocene East African ancestral stock.

{Some have observed that they were taller and more robust than upper Egyptians. I'm not saying they weren't indigenous Africans. They may have been related to the diverse berber populations of north Africa.}

Thought Writes:

Again, current anthropological data indicate that Berbers and Egyptians BOTH descend from a early Holocene East African ancestral stock.

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
My point is that there is no point in history where Africans called themselves "black people" prior to encounters with white Europeans.

---

This is a mistaken notion. African self definition into a
two coloured scheme of red and black is an old thing
not introduced by anyone from anywhere else. It originally
did not include whites but later, once they were encountered,
whites were sometimes added to the red class or else a new
category of white was made for them.

In first appears in writing in Kmt where Nile Valley folk
RM RMT & NHSW are classed together as blacks
apposed to Libyan TMHW & Asiatic AAMW who are
classed together as reds. The Axumites record their
conflict in Meroe against the Red Noba and the Black
Noba.

Across the Red Sea in Arabia the distinction between
reds and blacks continues today and is noted in a 1200
year old essay by al Jahiz.

Further south, in East Africa, Byrk noted the red/black
distinction among the Nandi when he queried a youth
about a pretty girl standing nearby. He was told: “Don't
you see that I'm red and she's black?”

In southern Africa the baNtu see themselves as black
the Khoi, San, & Twa as red, whom they call the little red
men .

Then in the western Sudan, Maurs, Tuareg, Bela, & Fulani
are the reds among the other Africans living there who call
them red.

It is only unfamiliarity wuth Africa on its own terms that allows
colour consciousness to be beyond the internal cognizant
ability of Africans. What whites introduced to the world is the
idea of a natural hierarchy of inferior and superior races by
colour.

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
This is why when you reference ancient Egyptians like Kemsit or Pepi the black you are hurting your Kemet means "black people" statement. Kemsit and "Pepi the black" were of Nubian ancestry and they must have had significantly darker skin color than most Egyptians for them to be nicknamed "black". For one to be named based on a physical attribution that attribute must be something that makes them stand out from most other people...

---

Doing it again; painting Nubians as a homogeneous entity, racially seperate from Kemetians. In this regard, I wonder how you are any different from 18th century racist Egyptologists. It appears that it has to be countless times repeated that Nubians weren't a homogenous group themselves, in that, lower Nubians were generally less dark than those found in upper Nubia. It also has to be repeated that in Kemet's southern Nubian region or lower Nubia, the folks there weren't racially different from other upper Egyptian regions. Lower Nubia has throughout much of history, been a part of Egypt, and called a variety of names by Kemetians. If you have any peer-reviewed science journal(s) that comes to the conclusion that upper Egyptians were racially distinct from lower Nubians, I'll be happy to take a look at it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:

But this is a major flaw in your argument.

I'll give you the same example I gave Wally: if you lived amongst a group of people with similar or equal height why would you be nicknamed "shorty"? If you aren't significantly shorter than most other people around you it wouldn't make sense for you to be called shorty. There would have to be a symbolic or inner meaning that outsiders may not understand.

This is why when you reference ancient Egyptians like Kemsit or Pepi the black you are hurting your Kemet means "black people" statement. Kemsit and "Pepi the black" were of Nubian ancestry and they must have had significantly darker skin color than most Egyptians for them to be nicknamed "black". For one to be named based on a physical attribution that attribute must be something that makes them stand out from most other people...

Words can change meanings over time but human nature doesn't change...

---

This argument seems to ignore that the Kmtyw did not live in a vacuum and knew of people
in and beyond the deserts to their east and west who in general were much lighter than
they wereand that both of these were in the Delta.

Also both white and black people often nickname
a person whose complexion is extreme as
whitey among whites, blackie or redboy among blacks.

None of this, or the argument of what nations have ever named themselves after a
colour, have anything to do with the fact that the AE did chose KM as the root of their
word for their nation.

We have AE records that use KM in association with people determinatives.
Are there AE records that use KM with
determinatives indicating soil, ground, earth,
etc? KM as an adjective can describe most anything physical or metaphysical.

[This message has been edited by alTakruri (edited 12 December 2004).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

This is a mistaken notion. African self definition into a
two coloured scheme of red and black is an old thing
not introduced by anyone from anywhere else.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
I'm aware of this but we're not talking about self-definition, we're talking about defining an entire ethnic group or nation. The African self-conciousness about skin color is one of the main reasons I am skeptical about the whole kemet=black people idea.

---

Yes we are talking self definition. The AE self definition of KM.t.nwt, their own
home made self defined national appellative.

You made the statement
<<My point is that there is no point in history where Africans called themselves "black people" prior to encounters with white Europeans. And let me add that "black-skinned" and "black people" do not mean the same thing in antiquity as they do today.>>

I showed that to be inaccurate.

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
Keep in mind that even Queen Cleopatra was sometimes referred to as "Kemut" despite the fact that she was of Macedonian ethnicity.

Based on Egypt's diversity, it's a big leap in interpretation to say that they called themselves "black people". Even if ancient Egyptians were predominantly "black-skinned" Africans it would be unusal for a nation to identify itself by a physical characteristic that isn't the least bit an exclusive one.

Did the ancient Chinese feel the need to call themselves "yellow people"? Did the Britons call themselves "white people"?

If you want to stick to African cultures, what other ancient African people called themselves "black people"?

I understand that Egyptians are a unique people in a unique geographic location which is the only reason why people can still debate over this stuff.

There is no vast conspiracy to hide the "true" meaning of the name. Take yourself out of the 21st century and put yourself in their time. This is the era before the definition of a "black person" was "anyone with sub-Saharan African ancestry."

Before going any further, answer these questions:

With their knowledge of the interior of Africa and the other continents around them, why would they choose to label themselves "black people" as if they were the only black peoples in Africa?

With Egypt's physical diversity from north to south, why would skin color play a role in how they chose to indentify themselves as a nation?

The Nubians were the most literally black-skinned people known in their time, is there a reference to Egyptians calling Nubians Kemut or Kammau?

---

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

Brother Neo*Geo and Others,

Your argument holds a lot of validity.

Yes, why would a group of people call themselves Blacks, especially when many of them were NOT Black and some were almost White.

It would be PUZZLING to name a society after their their SKIN COLOR, when they're surrounded by people who are REALLY Black and deserve the name a lot more than them, the Egyptians.

I think you have Turned the Tables on many of these Afro-Centric Psuedo_Historians, by pointing out the obvious.

I had a chance to ask some of friends about their impression of the Ancient Egyptians, and without a hesitation, they said that the A/E's were not Black Africans. Mind you, this is not coming from a white person, but an American-Chinese and others.

All these people with a Political Agenda, should look at the Mirror and touch their Noses, because the Truth is right in front of their FACE........There is no Doubt about it, just like your nose......It will not Go Away.

Please Wakeup from your Afro-Centric Dream, and come back to the REAL World. Your arguments are FULL of Holes, that large Trucks can pass through.

Black Land, as the Color of the annual Flood and the Fertile Delta. Black Land, Yes. Black People, NO...that is the Truth!

There is still a little Hope for You, you just have to wakeup from your Dream Land....and get Back to Reality.........

Egyptians are Egyptians and Egyptians ONLY!!

Outsiders, were ALL enemies of EGYPT....and BARBARIANS, Including the NUBIANS.....If You want Proof look at the picture of King Tut's Sandals, you'll see that he Steps on all the Enemies of Egypt, including the Blacks.

Why would people with Light Brown to Dark Brown complexions call themselves Blacks!!

Were they that Stupid....and Why would they Paint their Women a very Pale Color (almost White), when not exposed to the Sun as the Men....

Guys, please let's get Real and try to think a little Outside of this Empty Afro-Centric BOX.

Just my two cents for now.....Coming to you from a True Egyptian, Born and Raised in the land Of Egypt!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
Doing it again; painting Nubians as a homogeneous entity, racially seperate from Kemetians.

---

You guys need to seek psychiatric help. Every argument on ancient Egypt doesn't have to turn into a racial one. How many times do we have to repeat the same simple understanding? Race is not the same as skin color and race in ancient times is not the same as race today. I am in no way saying that Nubians were not diverse just as Egyptians were. What I'm saying is that we KNOW that Kemsit was a Nubian woman and we KNOW that the 6th dynasty royal family may have been a Nubian one. Nubians varied in skin color but generally, they were literally the color "black" as their descendants around Sudan are today.

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:

In this regard, I wonder how you are any different from 18th century racist Egyptologists.

---

And I wonder how you are any different from Adolph Hitler... Not to be so blunt but I take offense to being compared to racists simply because you fail to understand my point of view due to either lack of reading comprehension or reading my old posts on the subject...

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:

It appears that it has to be countless times repeated that Nubians weren't a homogenous group themselves, in that, lower Nubians were generally less dark than those found in upper Nubia.

---

This is a questionable generalization. Indeed, there are lower Nubians in Egypt and Sudan like the Beja who have had "red" skin since antiquity. However, Nubians from Aswan, Egypt to Khartoum, Sudan are generally black complexioned.

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:

It also has to be repeated that in Kemet's southern Nubian region or lower Nubia, the folks there weren't racially different from other upper Egyptian regions.

---

quote:

---

Neo writes: This is why when you reference ancient Egyptians like Kemsit or Pepi the black you are hurting your Kemet means "black people" statement. Kemsit and "Pepi the black" were of Nubian ancestry

---

Now, did you not just ask........

quote:

---

The Nubians were the most literally black-skinned people known in their time, is there a reference to Egyptians calling Nubians Kemut or Kammau.

---

You just just answered that question yourself, and on your own terms. However, you need to check yourself on the use of the word "nubian", as that is the term that was not ever used to describe Kememu. You are engaged in a classic 'nubian obfuscation', in which the word nubian is used to generate confusion over the precense of black people in Kemet.

I know a Filipino who says of course the AE
were a black people. He has devoted considerable time and energy in freeing the mind of the mentally paralyzed who can look
at painting, sculpture, or written document and deny what their eyes are seeing.

There is hor if only you want to thrust off this mental illness and leave the asylim and come back to the world of the mentally healthy.

Overcome emotional outburst and rationally examine documentation to free your mind from
the chains of leftover colonial domination.

Why eschew your supposed proud born and raised
Egyptian identity. With so much natioanalistic chauvinism why not once again become a true Egyptian citizen and live in Egypt and contribute to your nation of people?

quote:

---

Originally posted by ABAZA:

---

quote:

---

If you aren't significantly shorter than most other people around you it wouldn't make sense for you to be called shorty. There would have to be a symbolic or inner meaning that outsiders may not understand.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

I showed that to be inaccurate.

---

You have not shown it to be innaccurate because you haven't named an entire nation or ethnic group that named itself based on skin color.

quote:

---

noe*geo writes:
You guys need to seek psychiatric help. Every argument on ancient Egypt doesn't have to turn into a racial one. How many times do we have to repeat the same simple understanding? Race is not the same as skin color and race in ancient times is not the same as race today. I am in no way saying that Nubians were not diverse just as Egyptians were. What I'm saying is that we KNOW that Kemsit was a Nubian woman and we KNOW that the 6th dynasty royal family may have been a Nubian one. Nubians varied in skin color but generally, they were literally the color "black" as their descendants around Sudan are today.

---

You don’t only need psychiatric help, but with they way you are communicating your thoughts, you need to be locked in a mental institution. You said that the Nubians had significantly darker skin than most Egyptians. Hence, you put the Nubians in a homogeneous entity, which is supposedly different from Egyptians racially. Here are your own words, which it appears you are incapable of remembering:

quote:

---

neo*geo:
"Pepi the black" were of Nubian ancestry and they must have had significantly darker skin color than most Egyptians for them to be nicknamed "black". For one to be named based on a physical attribution that attribute must be something that makes them stand out from most other people…

---

quote:

---

neo*geo:
And I wonder how you are any different from Adolph Hitler... Not to be so blunt but I take offense to being compared to racists simply because you fail to understand my point of view due to either lack of reading comprehension or reading my old posts on the subject…

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[QUOTE]If you aren't significantly shorter than most other people around you it wouldn't make sense for you to be called shorty. There would have to be a symbolic or inner meaning that outsiders may not understand.

---

It does exist in the US due in part to the fact that natural blondes are not as common here...

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
You have not shown it to be innaccurate because you haven't named an entire nation or ethnic group that named itself based on skin color.

We can argue all day about what individuals choose to identify themselves as but it's irrelevant. The political name for a nation is not a decision made by an individual, it's something agreed upon by a group of individuals over a period of time...

---

Qyite to the contray I have shown a few.

If you refuse to comprehend the examples of groups of Africans classifying other groups of Africans as either red or black in distinction to themselves in turn as either red or black thats your choice. You have been shown but you do not have to accept what you have been shown.

The African peoples themselves created the terminology, accepted it, and continue to apply it.