posted
^ Good question. Perhaps because of the different designs of his garment, or better yet, the fact that he is missing tattoos and the type of hat he wears.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: At one time the far right figure was labeled "Libyan" but is now, more often than not, labeled Hittite. And true I've seen siege scenes where Hittites do wear woven garments similar to the leather garments of Libyans.
Yet, that rightmost figure is strikingly recollective of Meshmesh (except missing beard).
Does anyone why the rightmost figure is definitively Hittite?
I'm guessing maybe because Hittites had a "mongoloid"(excuse the term) affinity to them in those days. Even though I seriously don't understand why the Blond haired blue eyed guy is labeld a Bedouin Arab. When were Bedouin ever blond haired and blue eyed?...Kurds?!?!
Posts: 336 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ When were Hittites ever 'mongoloid'??! What constitutes a 'mongoloid' affinity in the first place, and exactly how is this featured among Hittites??
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: The nomenclature of Strabo is neither so extensive, nor does it contain more precise or correct information. He mentions the celebrated oasis of Ammonium and the nation of the Nasamones. Farther west, behind Carthage and the Numidians, he also notices the Getulians, and after them the Garamantes, a people who appear to have colonized both the oasis of Ghadames and the oases of Fezzan. Ptolemy makes the whole of the Mauritania, including Algeria and Morocco, to be bounded on the south by tribes, called Gaetuliae and Melanogaeluti, on the south the latter evidently having contracted alliance of blood with the negroes.
According to Sallust, who supports himself upon the authority of Heimpsal, the Carthaginian historian, “North Africa was first occupied by Libyans and Getulians, who were a barbarous people, a heterogeneous mass, or agglomeration of people of different races, without any form of religion or government, nourishing themselves on herbs, or devouring the raw flesh of animals killed in the chase; for first amongst these were found Blacks, probably some from the interior of Africa, and belonging to the great negro family; then whites, issue of the Semitic stock, who apparently constituted, even at that early period, the dominant race or caste. Later, but at an epoch absolutely unknown, a new horde of Asiatics,” says Sallust, “of Medes, Persians, and Armenians, invaded the countries of the Atlas, and, led on by Hercules, pushed their conquests as far as Spain.” 48
The Persians, mixing themselves with the former inhabitants of the coast, formed the tribes called Numides, or Numidians (which embrace the provinces of Tunis and Constantina), whilst the Medes and the Armenians, allying themselves with the Libyans, nearer to Spain, it is pretended, gave existence to a race of Moors, the term Medes being changed into that of Moors. 49
As to the Getulians confined in the valleys of the Atlas, they resisted all alliance with the new immigrants, and formed the principal nucleus of those tribes who have ever remained in North Africa, rebels to a foreign civilization, or rather determined champions of national freedom, and whom, imitating the Romans and Arabs, we are pleased to call Barbarians or Berbers (Barbari Br�ber 50), and whence is derived the name of the Barbary States. But the Romans likewise called the aboriginal tribes of North Africa, Moors, or Mauri, and some contend that Moors and Berbers are but two different names for the aboriginal tribes, the former being of Greek and the latter of African origin. The Romans might, however, confound the African term berber with barbari, which latter they applied, like the Greeks, to all strangers and foreigners. The revolutions of Africa cast a new tribe of emigrants upon the North African coast, who, if we are to believe the Byzantine historian, Procopius, of the sixth century, were no other than Canaanites, expelled from Palestine by the victorious arms of Joshua, when he established the Israelites in that country. Procopius affirms that, in his time, there was a column standing at Tigisis, on which was this inscription: — “We are those who fled from the robber Joshua, son of Nun.” 51 Now whether Tigisis was in Algeria, or was modern Tangier, as some suppose, it is certain there are several traditions among the Berber tribes of Morocco, which relate that their ancestors were driven out of Palestine. Also, the Berber historian, Ebn–Khal-Doun, who flourished in the fourteenth century, makes all the Berbers descend from one Bar, the son of Mayigh, son of Canaan. However, what may be the truths of these traditions of Sallust or Procopius, there is no difficulty in believing that North Africa was peopled by fugitive and roving tribes, and that the first settlers should be exposed to be plundered by succeeding hordes; for such has been the history of the migrations of all the tribes of the human race.
But the most ancient historical fact on which we can depend is, the invasion, or more properly, the successive invasions of North Africa by the Phoenicians. Their definite establishment on these shores took place towards the foundation of Carthage, about 820 years before our era. Yet we know little of their intercourse or relations with the aboriginal tribes. When the Romans, a century and a half before Christ, received, or wrested, the rule of Africa from the Phoenicians, or Carthaginians, they found before them an indigenous people, whom they indifferently called Moors, Berbers, or Barbarians. A part of these people were called also Nudides, which is perhaps considered the same term as nomades.
Some ages later, the Romans, too weak to resist a vigorous invasion of other conquerors, were subjugated by the Vandals, who, during a century, held possession of North Africa; but, after this time, the Romans again raised their heads, and completely expelled or extirpated the Vandals, so that, as before, there were found only two people or races in Africa: the Romans and the Moors, or aborigines.
Towards the middle of the seventh century after Christ, and a few years after the death of Mahomet, the Romans, in the decline of their power, had to meet the shock of the victorious arms of the Arabians, who poured in upon them triumphant from the East; but, too weak to resist this new tide of invasion, they opposed to them the aborigines, which latter were soon obliged to continue alone the struggle.
The Arabian historians, who recount these wars, speak of Roumi or Romans (of the Byzantine empire) and the Br�ber — evidently the aboriginal tribes — who promptly submitted to the Arabs to rid themselves of the yoke of the Romans; but, after the retreat of their ancient masters, they revolted and remained a long time in arms against their new conquerors — a rule of action which all subjugated nations have been wont to follow. Were we English now to attempt to expel the French from Algeria, we, undoubtedly, should be joined by the Arabs; but who would, most probably, soon also revolt against us, were we to attempt to consolidate our dominion over them.
In the first years of the eighth century, and at the end of the first century of the Hegira, the conquering Arabs passed over to Spain, and, inasmuch as they came from Mauritania, the people of Spain gave them the name of Moors (that of the aborigines of North Africa), although they had, perhaps, nothing in common with them, if we except their Asiatic origin. Another and most singular name was also given to these Arab warriors in France and other parts of Europe — that of Saracens — whose etymology is extremely obscure. 52 From this time the Spaniards have always given the names of Moors (los Moros), not only to the Arabs of Spain, but to all the Arabs; and, confounding farther these two denominations, they have bestowed the name of Moros upon the Arabs of Morocco and those in the environs of Senegal.
The Arabs who invaded Northern Africa about 650, were all natives of Asia, belonging to various provinces of Arabia, and were divided into Ismaelites, Amalekites, Koushites, &c. They were all warriors; and it is considered a title of nobility to have belonged to their first irruption of the enthusiastic sons of the Prophet.
A second invasion took place towards the end of the ninth century — an epoch full of wars — during which, the Caliph Ka�m transported the seat of his government from Kairwan to Cairo, ending in the complete submission of Morocco to the power of Yousef Ben Tashfin. One cannnot now distinguish which tribe of Arabs belong to the first or the second invasion, but all who can shew the slightest proof, claim to belong to the first, as ranking among a band of noble and triumphant warriors.
After eight centuries of rule, the Arabs being expelled from Spain, took refuge in Barbary, but instead of finding the hospitality and protection of their brethren, the greater part of them were pillaged or massacred. The remnant of these wretched fugitives settled along the coast; and it is to their industry and intelligence that we owe the increase, or the foundation of many of the maritime cities. Here, considered as strangers and enemies by the natives, whom they detested, the new colonists sought for, and formed relations with Turks and renegades of all nations, whilst they kept themselves separate from the Arabs and Berbers. This, then, is the bon�-fide origin of the people whom we now generally call Moors. History furnishes us with a striking example of how the expelled Arabs of Spain united with various adventurers against the Berber and North African Arabs. In the year 1500, a thousand Andalusian cavaliers, who had emigrated to Algiers, formed an alliance with the Barbarossas and their fleet of pirates; and, after expelling the native prince, built the modern city of Algiers. And such was the origin of the Algerine Corsairs.
The general result of these observations would, therefore, lead us to consider the Moors of the Romans, as the Berbers or aborigines of North Africa, and the Moors of the Spaniards, as pure Arabians; and if, indeed, these Arabian cavaliers marshalled with them Berbers, as auxiliaries, for the conquest of Spain, this fact does not militate against the broad assumption.
The so-called Moors of Senegal and the Sahara, as well as those of Morocco, are chiefly a mixture of Berbers, Arabs and Negroes; but the present Moors located in the northern coast of Africa, are rather the descendants from the various conquering nations, and especially from renegades and Christian slaves.
The term Moors is not known to the natives themselves. The people speak definitely enough of Arabs and of various Berber tribes. The population of the towns and cities are called generally after the names of these towns and cities, whilst Tuniseen and Tripoline is applied to all the inhabitants of the great towns of Tunis and Tripoli. Europeans resident in Barbary, as a general rule, call all the inhabitants of towns — Moors, and the peasants or people residents in tents — Arabs. But, in Tripoli, I found whole villages inhabited by Arabs, and these I thought might be distinguished as town Arabs. Then the mountains of Tripoli are covered with Arab villages, and some few considerable towns are inhabited by people who are bon�-fide Arabs. Finally, the capitals of North Africa are filled with every class of people found in the country.
posted
^ LOL No problem. By the way, where does that sketch come from anyway?
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Can you provide me a link to this site? Also, what actual Egyptian depictions are the sketches based on?
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Almost every Meshwesh depicted in Bates wears a 'kippah'
What's most unusual, to me, is the lack of any kind of beard. That may've been one consideration prompting Bates to label the figure as a female Libyan (though otherwise I see nothing particularly feminine about it).
=================== truth is prism refracted fact i'm just another point of view ===================
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Good question. Perhaps because of the different designs of his garment, or better yet, the fact that he is missing tattoos and the type of hat he wears.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Thanks Djehuti, I would have missed the French and would have been able to read the German.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Red Cow, there ancient martial combat techniques of Saharan and Northern Africans among the current descendants of those populations in Africa is not is not strictly an "Amazigh" issue, as these traits can be seen from Sudan to Morocco going back 5,000 years or more. Archery as a means of protection, combat and hunting probably goes back prior to that in Africa and is PURELY African and also has a WIDE pattern of dispersal among many ancient African populations across Africa that are older than ancient Egypt. The rock art of the Sahara is an example of ancient archery in Africa. Trying to tie this to "Amazighs" as a unique trait of a LANGUAGE group is ridiculous. Such techniques of self defense, combat and hunting are as old as man himself and goes back many tens of thousands of years. This is why Hercules was often depicted as a black African, symbolizing the ancient stone age Super Hunter of the Savanna of Africa. Such skills were essential to the survival of human beings in the crowded environment of Africa since the development of the human species and has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with any language speakers that can be called "Amazigh".
quote: Although many ancient African cultures, such as the Egyptians, Nubians, and Ethiopians, were prominent for their mastery of archery on the battlefield, projectile weapons such as spears and throwing knives tended to predominate as weapons of war in more recent periods. Still, the folklore and histories of many African peoples describe archery-related feats both in the hunt and in battle, and the development of archery skills remains an important aspect of a boy’s education in many African cultures. The bow and arrow are still commonly used in rural areas for hunting game and in some urban areas as an inexpensive but effective means of protection.
The most widespread traditional bow form in Africa is a simple wood stave that is round in cross section and tapers toward the tips. Bows of flattened or grooved staves also occur frequently. African bows tend to be of moderate length, typically ranging from 100 cm to 170 cm, and are distinguished by a number of characteristic string-attachment techniques, including knotted, eyeleted, and indirect forms. Bowstrings usually are of twisted sinew in eastern and southern Africa and of animal hide or plant material in the central and western regions. Bows are fairly plain; ornamentation usually is limited to animal-skin wrappings that provide decoration as well as support.
The biggest similarity being the crossed bandolier being found all over Africa from Saharan rock art to tomb art of Egyptian archers to various tuareg groups. BTW, the image of the dark brown archer is from the tombs of the Dahkla oasis in Egypt. There are tombs in ALL of the oasis of Egypt from Dakhla, to Bhahariya and Kharga going back to the old kingdom. However, these tombs are very rarely showcased to the public and therefore the photos from them are not often found on the web.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
BTW, I forgot to post this, whenever we often come back to this issue of the ethnic identity of those western populations called Tehenu and Tejenu on this forum. But there are a great many tombs in the Western Oases of Egypt that CLEARLY show the populations of these areas being NOT much different than those of Egypt and Sudan. These tomb images, as I said earlier, are not as prominent or well known as those from Egypt, but there are a great many of them to say the least. From these images it becomes plainly clear that Africans were indeed always in these areas and puts to doubt any idea of FOREIGNERS being the sole ethnic group to the west of Egypt in ancient times. I have some photos that I found on a French site that I will try and find and post if I can....
Found the site and here is an example of an image from Dakhla oasis:
The point here being that the historical ethnic make up of the populations to the West of Egypt in ancient times was related to the populations along the Nile itself. They werent that much different, even after the arrival of the "sea peoples" and other invaders in the New Kingdom. It was only relatively recently (last 2000 years) that foreign types began to predominate in these areas.
posted
Reproduction of MK foreigners painting from Beni Hasan:
I wonder if those people are Libyans as BATES claimed. Maybe it's just me but I don't see any Libyan cultural feature among them. Thoughts?
Posts: 307 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Great pics Doug. The only pictures I've seen from the an Oasis tomb was that on recent excavation of the golden mummies from Kharga Oasis by Hawass. In it were several pictures of dark-brown (black) natives. Other than that, I seen non whatsoever.
I wish more pictures were available to the public. I don't know why, considering such paintings are not much different from the usual dark-brown peoples painted on other Egyptian tombs in the Nile Valley including the Valley of the Kings.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anyone else think it strange that the 'fairer' Tamhou (whether they looked like 'blond-europeans' or simply 'olive-skinned Meds' or ancient 'Sicilians') were located further south than the more Egyptian and African looking Tehennu?
Posts: 11 | From: california | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Were the Tamahou of the south close to the 'Nubians' really the same as the white Tamahou? And if they were, it wouldn't be quite so 'strange' if we knew more about their origins and their migration routes into the vicinity.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, the figures in the famous Seti I rendition of BG4:5 s30 are creamy complexioned and labeled TMHHW.
It's always puzzled me that that was so, seeing that the TMHHW indeed first appear in notice as adjacent to NHHSW, and that that particular spot on the earth is the first place Williamson proposes for the earliest offshoot from proto-Tamazight.
Of course by BG era, TMHHW was more or less generic in usage for various Amenti.x3st residents. We need look to the clothes, plumes, tattoos/cicatrices, etc., in the depictions (especially those of Rameses at Medinat Habu) to see what specific ethnic identifiers are used for the folk most similarly accoutred.
Indigenous whites of Africa, and that far south and away from mountains, seems impossible. [Endemic albinism among autochthone Africans who were thinner nosed and straighter haired to start with? An exode of Aegean mommied THHNW to the far south? Your guesses as good as mine.]Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Again, and hate to put you through such paces, but if you have the time and it doesn't impose on you, please, could you scan and post the map relating to Berber in Joseph O. Vogel (ed) Encyclopedia of Precolonial Africa London AltaMira 1997 the article by Kay Williamson Western African Languages in Historical Perspective
It should go in the TAMAZIGHT - a branch of the Afrisan family of African languages thread
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sefardi3point2: Anyone else think it strange that the 'fairer' Tamhou (whether they looked like 'blond-europeans' or simply 'olive-skinned Meds' or ancient 'Sicilians') were located further south than the more Egyptian and African looking Tehennu?
Where is it that you find that the Egyptians put the fairer Tamhou further south than the African looking Tehennu? In fact, the images and classifications above indicate the opposite, that the Tehenu were considered more coastal variants and the Tamhou were considered closer, physically and geographically to the Nile Valley itself. So I dont understand where you are getting this Southern blonde haired type next to Southern blacks from..
Likewise I have shown tomb images from various dynasties in the Oasis corresponding to the areas labelled as Tamhou on the map above and none of them strike me as being anything but indigenous African.
Do you mind me asking for some references to these people being "southerners". I dont disagree with the blonde haired Libyan, but I do disagree with them being labelled as "southerners".
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
DougM, to be honest, I got that notion of 'southern' Tamehou from this discussion site - the egyptsearch forums. I've been reading these boards for about a year now, and that - the whole 'north/south' thing, specifically the Tamhou being further away from the sea than the Tehennu - was the impression that I got.
I apologize for presenting it as 'fact', but it was nonetheless an impression I got from reading these boards. I make no claim to have researched it otherwise.
Posts: 11 | From: california | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sefardi3point2: DougM, to be honest, I got that notion of 'southern' Tamehou from this discussion site - the egyptsearch forums. I've been reading these boards for about a year now, and that - the whole 'north/south' thing, specifically the Tamhou being further away from the sea than the Tehennu - was the impression that I got.
I apologize for presenting it as 'fact', but it was nonetheless an impression I got from reading these boards. I make no claim to have researched it otherwise.
Its OK, I just was asking because I personally never got that impression before, but that doesnt mean it isnt there somewhere.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
And you are correct. The TMHHW enter written history, afaik, in one of Harkuf's (sp?) letters where he notes intervening in an expedition by one of the NHHSW ethnies against TMHHW. We have no physical description of either those particular NHHSW nor the TMHHW they intend to smite to heaven.
If anyone has colour images of TMHHW that precede the ones in Seti I's tomb please share them with us. By that time at least it looks like creamy colored TMHHW were living in proximity to Upper Egypt and Lower Sudan unless the term TMHHW is only generic in this case. Again, analyzing their accoutrements will tell us which set of Amenti.x3st dwellers they are if not technically TMHHW in its narrowest sense.
quote:Originally posted by sefardi3point2: DougM, to be honest, I got that notion of 'southern' Tamehou from this discussion site - the egyptsearch forums. I've been reading these boards for about a year now, and that - the whole 'north/south' thing, specifically the Tamhou being further away from the sea than the Tehennu - was the impression that I got.
I apologize for presenting it as 'fact', but it was nonetheless an impression I got from reading these boards. I make no claim to have researched it otherwise.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^I guess my question is what image you are referring to and how this image defines those TMHHW thus pictured as being geographically close to Upper Egypt and Lower Sudan. I can understand the physical description but I dont understand the geographical reference.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Again, and hate to put you through such paces, but if you have the time and it doesn't impose on you, please, could you scan and post the map relating to Berber in Joseph O. Vogel (ed) Encyclopedia of Precolonial Africa London AltaMira 1997 the article by Kay Williamson Western African Languages in Historical Perspective
It should go in the TAMAZIGHT - a branch of the Afrisan family of African languages thread
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Just look at the vignette and look at the map you reposted.
To be honest, the map shows the Tehemu almost on top of the Nile valley and probably is not that accurate given that it was done in modern times. My point being that how do we get a geographic reference solely from ancient Egypt? Just because the modern map shows the tehemu in those places doesnt mean that the vignette from SetiI was referring to the same people in the same places. Note that the saite or libyan period Egyptian mummies and artwork are just as African as those of any other period, if not moreso. Not to mention the other stuff from the western desert I mentioned before. This does not reflect a large scale blonde presence, which is why I am picking so hard at this point. Either they came and briefly forayed south before being overwhelmed by indigenous Africans or we are misinterpereting Seti's tomb evidence.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not only does the map show the TMHHW further south than the THHNW, the arrow following the name points even further south.
Have you noticed I suggested matching the accoutrements of the depicted to what we know of the various Ament.x3st folk to see whether labeling them TMHHW was generic or specific.
As for blonds, I have yet to see an AE painting of any blond Libyans whatsoever. Notices of blonds among Libyans are written in Greco-Latin accounts and date a thousand years later than the folk under discussion.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ Don't know if WILSON was referring to the same haircut as that used to depict NK nHsiw, but from what I get the blonde hair reference comes from the same kind of hairstyle worn by nHsiw (wavy lines over a red base)as well as blue eyes (no pic of it sorry):
posted
NHHSW are often painted blond and red headed. I think it was gold dust sprinkled in their hair or maybe the effects of sun bleaching, not to rule out naturally red headed folk.
Most here are of the opinion that the yellow&red is from applying ochre as some Sudani ethnies still continue doing to not just their hair but entire body eg. at wrestling/mating festivals.
What's the citation for that page from the journal?
My comment remains that while I have READ much about blond TMHHW to date I have yet to actually SEE any such AE painting.
As Sergi noted a century ago, these so-called blonds have nothing lighter than chestnut colored hair which in Europe would class them as no more than brunette at best.
quote:Originally posted by Please call me MIDOGBE: ^^ Don't know if WILSON was referring to the same haircut as that used to depict NK nHsiw, but from what I get the blonde hair reference comes from the same kind of hairstyle worn by nHsiw (wavy lines over a red base)as well as blue eyes (no pic of it sorry):
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ The Libyans and the End of the Egyptian Empire John A. Wilson The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures > Vol. 51, No. 2 (Jan., 1935), pp. 73-82
Sorry I'm definitely not knowledgeable about color alteration so I don't know which color of this character's hair preceded the other, but here is a pic of NK Libyan with a part of his hair nowadays being red (scan not mine, no idea about the source): Posts: 307 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Do any of you guys think the white Tamahou share ancestry with the Sea Peoples they were so closely aligned with?
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ When were Hittites ever 'mongoloid'??! What constitutes a 'mongoloid' affinity in the first place, and exactly how is this featured among Hittites??
I think he means "East/Central Asian", like a Kazakh or Chinese. However, I doubt Hittites had that look. They could have been blond-haired and blue-eyed for all anyone knows (after all, Indo-Europeans are from Eastern Europe).
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Actually most Eastern Europeans aren't blonde but are brunette (brown to light brown hair) blonde hair is much more common in the northern areas of Eastern Europe as it is with the rest of Europe. But regardless, you are referring to original or proto-Indo-European speakers. Most speakers of daughter Indo-European languages are dark-haired, from Italians and Greeks to Iranians and Indians. The vast majority of Turks today are dark-haired and I don't see how that couldn't be any different from their ancient ancestors some of whom are related to Greeks and other peoples from Western Asia.
We have depictions of the Hittites and they look no different from most modern-day Turks or even other peoples in Western Asia. The Hittites and other peoples of ancient Anatolia had nothing to do with the Turks from farther east in Asia who later conquered the peninsula. So I think this is where the 'mongloid' confusion comes from.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Actually most Eastern Europeans aren't blonde but are brunette (brown to light brown hair) blonde hair is much more common in the northern areas of Eastern Europe as it is with the rest of Europe. But regardless, you are referring to original or proto-Indo-European speakers. Most speakers of daughter Indo-European languages are dark-haired, from Italians and Greeks to Iranians and Indians.
Incidentally, what do you think the original Indo-Europeans looked like? And why did Indo-European languages come to be spoken by people as diverse as black Indians, Nordics, and tanned Mediterraneans/West Asians (Greeks, Turks, Italians, etc.)?
BTW, do you think there is a possibility that the Egyptians or nearby ancient civilizations ever encountered white or "Mongoloid" people?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Actually most Eastern Europeans aren't blonde but are brunette (brown to light brown hair) blonde hair is much more common in the northern areas of Eastern Europe as it is with the rest of Europe. But regardless, you are referring to original or proto-Indo-European speakers. Most speakers of daughter Indo-European languages are dark-haired, from Italians and Greeks to Iranians and Indians.
Incidentally, what do you think the original Indo-Europeans looked like? And why did Indo-European languages come to be spoken by people as diverse as black Indians, Nordics, and tanned Mediterraneans/West Asians (Greeks, Turks, Italians, etc.)?
BTW, do you think there is a possibility that the Egyptians or nearby ancient civilizations ever encountered white or "Mongoloid" people?
Indo-European languages are spoken among Indians and Europeans because of Alexander Great. You see, the connection between these languages is Greek and Sanskrit.
These languages are related because when Panini wrote a grammar of Sanskrit , which was a lingua franca, Greeks were living India and spoken in the region Panini lived. Panini even mentions Greeks. Because of the numerous Pakrits spoken in India at this time along with Persian and Greek elements and shared vocabulary were included in Panini's grammar that allow us to see a connection between Sanskrit and the other Indo-European languages.
posted
Great find DougM! I hail your image search skills. And following hard upon Rasol's comment, with their facial features and locks of hair, these guys almost look like they could've walked right off the wall of the TMHHW section of Seti I's tomb vignette 30 of BG 4:5.
Makes me wonder more and more if the pale colouring may've been symbolically expressive of their dwelling in Ament.x3st a.k.a. the Duat (Twat) -- land of the dead, and death's symbolic color was ... ... well, er, um ... you know ... white.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Unfortunately, with the modern distribution of these languages along coastal North Africa, many assume that these are the people being referred to in ancient texts. That is not the case.
Along these lines I have noticed that many of the old photos of Africans in Mauretania look very much like the Fuzzy wuzzies of the Sudan and Egypt, the Bedja. Again, this shows the fact that many of these Berbers who were assumed to be Northern "coastal" groups were actually Saharan and Sahelian groups from across a WIDE SWATH of Africa.
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus: Incidentally, what do you think the original Indo-Europeans looked like? And why did Indo-European languages come to be spoken by people as diverse as black Indians, Nordics, and tanned Mediterraneans/West Asians (Greeks, Turks, Italians, etc.)?
Well since linguistics suggests that the homeland of proto-Indo-European lies somewhere in the Russian steppes, then its speakers likely looked Eastern European or 'Russian'(?)
As for how Indo-European languages expanded and took over so large an expanse of Eurasia, well that is still a matter of debate to this day but when considering the spread of other widely spoken language families such as Afrasian or Niger-Congo (Bantu especially) one would say it had something to do with either food production, technology, or both.
quote:BTW, do you think there is a possibility that the Egyptians or nearby ancient civilizations ever encountered white or "Mongoloid" people?
'White' people certainly, considering Europe's proximity, but I don't know about East Asians.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Indo-European languages are spoken among Indians and Europeans because of Alexander Great. You see, the connection between these languages is Greek and Sanskrit.
These languages are related because when Panini wrote a grammar of Sanskrit , which was a lingua franca, Greeks were living India and spoken in the region Panini lived. Panini even mentions Greeks. Because of the numerous Pakrits spoken in India at this time along with Persian and Greek elements and shared vocabulary were included in Panini's grammar that allow us to see a connection between Sanskrit and the other Indo-European languages.
This is absolutely absurd. Indo-European languages spoken in India has nothing to do Alexander the Great no more than Afrasian languages spoken in southwest Asia had to do with Thutmose conquering the Levant!
The Indo-Iranian branch of Indo-European was spoken in Central Asia for at least 5,000 years, and it's entry to Indian subcontinent was 2,000 to 3,000 years.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus: Incidentally, what do you think the original Indo-Europeans looked like? And why did Indo-European languages come to be spoken by people as diverse as black Indians, Nordics, and tanned Mediterraneans/West Asians (Greeks, Turks, Italians, etc.)?
Well since linguistics suggests that the homeland of proto-Indo-European lies somewhere in the Russian steppes, then its speakers likely looked Eastern European or 'Russian'(?)
As for how Indo-European languages expanded and took over so large an expanse of Eurasia, well that is still a matter of debate to this day but when considering the spread of other widely spoken language families such as Afrasian or Niger-Congo (Bantu especially) one would say it had something to do with either food production, technology, or both.
quote:BTW, do you think there is a possibility that the Egyptians or nearby ancient civilizations ever encountered white or "Mongoloid" people?
'White' people certainly, considering Europe's proximity, but I don't know about East Asians.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Indo-European languages are spoken among Indians and Europeans because of Alexander Great. You see, the connection between these languages is Greek and Sanskrit.
These languages are related because when Panini wrote a grammar of Sanskrit , which was a lingua franca, Greeks were living India and spoken in the region Panini lived. Panini even mentions Greeks. Because of the numerous Pakrits spoken in India at this time along with Persian and Greek elements and shared vocabulary were included in Panini's grammar that allow us to see a connection between Sanskrit and the other Indo-European languages.
This is absolutely absurd. Indo-European languages spoken in India has nothing to do Alexander the Great no more than Afrasian languages spoken in southwest Asia had to do with Thutmose conquering the Levant!
The Indo-Iranian branch of Indo-European was spoken in Central Asia for at least 5,000 years, and it's entry to Indian subcontinent was 2,000 to 3,000 years.
If you know so much answer these questions.
1a. Explain why Alexander the Greats introduction of the Greek language to India can not account for the relationship between Sanskrit and Greek.
1.Please explain to the people what Indian languages are related to the European languages ?
2. What is the relationship between the Iranian and Indo-European languages?
3.Are Iranian and Indo-European languages related? If so how are they related?
4. Are Iranian languages, Indo-European languages?
5. Where was this 5000 year old site where Indo-Iranian was spoken?
posted
^ For someone who claims to be a linguist, you ask such elementary questions, but considering your denial of Berber as an African language and your claim of Dravidian as one.. nevermind
Moving back to the topic of this thread...
[QUOTE]Originally posted by alTakruri: [QB] Great find DougM! I hail your image search skills. And following hard upon Rasol's comment, with their facial features and locks of hair, these guys almost look like they could've walked right off the wall of the TMHHW section of Seti I's tomb vignette 30 of BG 4:5.
Makes me wonder more and more if the pale colouring may've been symbolically expressive of their dwelling in Ament.x3st a.k.a. the Duat (Twat) -- land of the dead, and death's symbolic color was ... ... well, er, um ... you know ... white.
Interesting pictorial find. Although I seriously do not think the 'white' Tamahou portrayed on tomb paintings was symbolic. Considering that symbolic depictions usually have figures painted in stark or blank white, whereas the Tamhou are all portrayed as having a pale moreso European 'white' appearance, with brownish hair and blue eyes.
I seriously think the Tamhou were a peoples of European extraction who totally adopted the culture and styles of the indigenous black inhabitants.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK, I'll ask this yet again since no one to date has presented it. Where, oh where, is a painting of blue eyed blond TMHHW in the entire catalog of AE art?
I hear alot of talk, first made by Champollion who so desperately had to find primitive Europeans in association anyway possible with earliest civilization, but never see a single instance.
I repeat, outside of late Graeco-Latin writings, there are no blond haired less lone blue eyed ancient Libyans. (Yes, I'm aware you wrote 'brownish hair.')
Northern Mediterraneans are not and were not Nordic such that by mating with their women the indigenee North Africans could in under a millenium produce an entire ethny of a phenotype unknown in Africa and sparsely if at all represented in the Aegean, Ionian, or Tyrrhenian seas populations.
Mind you, red eyes have also been reportedly found in AE portraiture. There are no people on earth with red eyes. Still, I'm highly interested in a compilation of blue (nearly black blue steel or pastel-like sky blue, which one?) eyes and which ethnies the associated texts assigns any such alleged individuals.
But no doubt the Libyan population in general, and apparently especially so way westward among proto-aMazigh Meshwesh, accrued a steady trickle of Euro infusion that considerably altered their complexions. Since it was the mommies who were whites and near whites we don't have European expatriates wholescale adapting a foreign culture, but rather what we have is the offspring of the Euro-mommies quite naturally practicing what they saw going on around them as they grew up among their African fathers, uncles, aunts, and cousins.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ... whereas the Tamhou are all portrayed as having a pale moreso European 'white' appearance, with brownish hair and blue eyes.
I seriously think the Tamhou were a peoples of European extraction who totally adopted the culture and styles of the indigenous black inhabitants.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Interesting assertion, but on what material cultural features are you basing on to claim there is a continuity between OK Libyans and NK's?
Also are you aware of the megaliths and peculiar tombs found in modern Italy (notably Sicily and Sardinia) as well as in the Maghrib?
Posts: 307 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So what about 'white' Berber types like the Rif and Kabyle who not only display brown hair, but even red and blonde hair and blue eyes??
You know many scholars take the tomb paintings of the white Tamahou to be the ancestors of these modern day white Berbers.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Midogbe: One of the things I meant by "influences" in a post to the "Anthropo-Genetic" thread are these very things.
Djehuti: I don't know what Riffians and Kabyles could even remotely have anything to do at all with TMHHW??? We know precisely when and where their "whiteness" came from and continues to come from.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Takruri, I don't know how you could ask such a thing when TMHHW appear to have the same features as those modern day people and that both groups are associated with the western part of North Africa, not to mention that the modern day Rif and Kabyle speak African (Berber) languages.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ For someone who claims to be a linguist, you ask such elementary questions, but considering your denial of Berber as an African language and your claim of Dravidian as one.. nevermind
Moving back to the topic of this thread...
[QUOTE]Originally posted by alTakruri: [QB] Great find DougM! I hail your image search skills. And following hard upon Rasol's comment, with their facial features and locks of hair, these guys almost look like they could've walked right off the wall of the TMHHW section of Seti I's tomb vignette 30 of BG 4:5.
Makes me wonder more and more if the pale colouring may've been symbolically expressive of their dwelling in Ament.x3st a.k.a. the Duat (Twat) -- land of the dead, and death's symbolic color was ... ... well, er, um ... you know ... white.
Interesting pictorial find. Although I seriously do not think the 'white' Tamahou portrayed on tomb paintings was symbolic. Considering that symbolic depictions usually have figures painted in stark or blank white, whereas the Tamhou are all portrayed as having a pale moreso European 'white' appearance, with brownish hair and blue eyes.
I seriously think the Tamhou were a peoples of European extraction who totally adopted the culture and styles of the indigenous black inhabitants.
Do you mean tehenu or temehu? One is supposedly the aboriginal population of "Libyans", the other is supposedly a foreign derived group who came later.
These are Mauretanians. These mauretanians have features similar to those found amongst the Beja and other Sudanic, Nilotic and Ethiopic Africans. This seems to confirm what has been posted already, namely migrations from East Africa being the basis of the original populations speaking Berber languages. Mauretania was ORIGINALLY a Berber speaking region, before there was even a country called Mauretania. The people there were semi nomadic, with those of the South being more sedentary, with villages having been found in Tichitt going back to at least 2,000 BC.
Beja:
Whether these ancient Nilotic, Sudanic and Ethipic populations could be identified as the Temehu or Tehenu is a whole different question.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |