DK World History Atlas Mapping the Human Journey: Revised and Updated, November 2004

Recommended.

Structurally divided as follows:

World History

North America

South America

Africa

Europe

West Asia

South and SouthEast Asia

North and East Asia

Australia and Oceania

* the near east -> near to what? east of what? is a eurocentric concept and is being eliminated from the modern historical discourse.

AFRICA:

Exploration and Mapping.

The Early History of Africa
15,000 BCE - 500 BCE

Inlcudes following prerequisite information:

* Holocene Sahara enters wet phase.

* African domestication of cattle.

* Nazlet Khater, Naqada, Fayum early Nile Valley Africans.

* West African Agriculture [yams, sorghum]

Normalisation of the Nile Valley's role in human history - Kush and Kemet are Nile Valley civilisations:

The Fertile Valleys of the Nile, Indus, Tigris, Euphrates, and Yellow rivers were able to support large populations and it was here that great 'civilisations' of the Ancient world emerged
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001791.html

quote:

---

Egypt has one foot in Africa and one in the near east. This is usually the case for all nations on any border.

---

quote:

---

The western scholars you speak of were simply putting AE in its correct position. AE is not Nubia.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
you are right and world historians are wrong???? We should be impressed.

---

NO, they are right...

DK World History Atlas Mapping the Human Journey: Revised and Updated, November 2004

...and you are an idiot.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:

because it is part of European civilization. Greece is the foundation of European civilization.

---

Thought Writes:

How could Greece be a part of 'European Civilization' if there was no 'European Civilization' before Greece? Greece was a part of Mediterranean Civilization and developed out of the pre-existing High Cultures such as Sumeria and Egypt.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
You said that "ham" was a Kemetic word, right? Well, my question was, from which Kemetic text does this word makes its appearance, in the form that you pointed out? One or two examples of specific Kemetic texts that use this word, as you spelt it out, is what I am looking for.

Apparently, if the deciphers listed this word as a Kemetic one, they must have come across it on a specific Kemetic text or script, and would hence, make a reference to this source.

Ps-Alternatively, is/was "ham" found in any Coptic word or text, which again, is the major aid for Mdu Ntr decipherment?

[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 07 May 2005).]

---

I don't know Budge's exact methodology but when he lists a Pharaonic Egyptian word he usually gives a reference source to verify his interpretation of that word. (It was only reluctantly that Egyptology took the 'radical' step of using Coptic in order to understand Pharaonic Egyptian. But having done so, it served to bring the ancient tongue closer to life.)

I previously gave the example of the root "km" and one example of its usage taken from the "Song of Solomon" as it is written in the Coptic bible, another example of how modern Egyptology verifies its interpretation of Pharaonic Egyptian:

quote:

---

Anok dé ang oukamê...je ang oukamê anok.
"But as for me (Anok dé), I am (ang) black (ou-kamê)...that (je) I am black."

---

The Coptic bible's book of Revelations gave Budge verification of the correct usage of the Pharaonic Egyptian word(s) "Hm" > Coptic: hmom, hmem - "heat, hot"

-- Are you really just trying to find out if the Pharaonic Egyptian word (Ham) is older than the Hebrew word? If so, that would be a good project for someone (else) to undertake...

(I, personally, am satisfied that the Egyptian words are the 'parent' words and the Hebrew ones are the 'child' ones)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
The Coptic bible's book of Revelations gave Budge verification of the correct usage of the Pharaonic Egyptian word(s) "Hm" > Coptic: hmom, hmem - "heat, hot"

-- Are you really just trying to find out if the Pharaonic Egyptian word (Ham) is older than the Hebrew word? If so, that would be a good project for someone (else) to undertake...

(I, personally, am satisfied that the Egyptian words are the 'parent' words and the Hebrew ones are the 'child' ones)

---

Well, I am already aware of Kem or 'Km' as a Kemetic word, and therefore, not questioning that. And no, I am not trying to find out whether "Ham" , as a Kemetic word, is older than the Hebraic word. If "ham" was used Kemetic, then it has got to be older in its Kemetic usage, than that of the Hebraic word.

It is clear to me, from how you laid it down, that Coptic used 'hmom' or 'hmem', meaning 'heat' or 'hot'. My inquiry was whether this word, as simply 'ham', was ever used in Kemetic in that particular form. I figured that if this word was found in Coptic, again as simply 'ham', then it may well have been used in that manner in Egyptic. Alternatively, if 'ham' was found in some Kemetic script, but was no longer in use in Coptic, it would again follow that it was used in Kemetic as such, i.e., simply 'ham'.

To put it more simplistic terms:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:

I'll repeat myself; it is possible to find out more about the Ancient Egyptians by studying the Mdu Ntr than it is by virtually any other method. It certainly, of course, shouldn't be the only method used...

---

quote:

---

Thought Writes:

Why is that Wally?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:

**note: the primitive inhabitants of both Arabia and Ethiopia were Negroes (in the anthropological sense); ie, Black Africans (in the political sense).

---

quote:

---

Thought Writes:

What is a 'Negroe' in anthropological terms, Wally?

---

Now follow me Thought...
a) The best and most extensive knowledge we have of the Ancient Greeks comes from our knowledge of the ancient Greek language and the ability to read those historical documents (their own history of themselves); all other knowledge is secondary. This is true.

b) Like the Ancient Egyptians, modern anthropologists did not invent the different human ethnic and racial groups, they did, however, label them.
"Negro" is a label modern Western anthropologists use to label (some)Black African peoples. We use to call "Negroes", Kememu; White folks call us "Negroes" (at least now in Anthropology 101)...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
...I am not in doubt that 'ham' came from the Kemetic word, but the question is whether the word was borrowed from Kemetic unaltered, or was it then slightly modified into simply 'ham', so as to fit the Hebraic tongue, or to make it as simplified as possible, in writing it in Hebrew.

---

from Dictionary.com:

Ham; (Hebrew) - warm, hot, and hence the south; also an Egyptian word meaning "black"

--the only modification, if any, is that of most borrowed words from another language, pronounciation:

Negro: (Spanish) black - Nay.groh
Negro: (> English) black - Nee.gro

quote:

---

b) Like the Ancient Egyptians, modern anthropologists did not invent the different human ethnic and racial groups, they did, however, label them.
"Negro" is a label modern Western anthropologists use to label (some)Black African peoples. We use to call "Negroes", Kememu; White folks call us "Negroes"

---

Respectfully Wally you didn't answer Thought's question. MDW NTR is not current anthropology - in current anthropology Hamite and Negro are invalid.

I do feel the question is not for you as you are clearly uncomfortable with physical anthropology.

I am just afraid that you and Thought will talk past each other.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
from Dictionary.com:

Ham; (Hebrew) - warm, hot, and hence the south; also an Egyptian word meaning "black"

--the only modification, if any, is that of most borrowed words from another language, pronounciation:

---

Actually, I wasn't under the impression that the pronounciation was the difference, and this maybe the reason for the different spellings, if indeed that is the case. It is possible that 'ham' as applied in the bible, is spelt in 'approximation' to how the word actually sounded, when the Egyptians spoke it.

Just to be on the safe side, and not just jump into conclusion: You are essentially telling me, that 'ham', as I just referred to it, is found in Kemetic and meaning 'black'? You are saying, that no alterations to the spelling has occurred? ...and which would mean that somewhere in Kemetic or Coptic scripture, we are bound to find 'ham', spelt out as I just did, but in Kemetic or Coptic-Greek characters, which represent 'h', 'a', and 'm', respectively?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
Actually, I wasn't under the impression that the pronounciation was the difference, and this maybe the reason for the different spellings, if indeed that is the case. It is possible that 'ham' as applied in the bible, is spelt in 'approximation' to how the word actually sounded, when the Egyptians spoke it.

Just to be on the safe side, and not just jump into conclusion: You are essentially telling me, that 'ham', as I just referred to it, is found in Kemetic and meaning 'black'? You are saying, that no alterations to the spelling has occurred? ...and which would mean that somewhere in Kemetic or Coptic scripture, we are bound to find 'ham', spelt out as I just did, but in Kemetic or Coptic-Greek characters, which represent 'h', 'a', and 'm', respectively?

---

Hm; (Hebrew) - warm, hot

Budge; page 447a
Hm; (Egyptian) - warm, hot ; followed by the determinative: incense burner/censer

to see this visually from Gardiner's list;
1st letter
O4 http://www.jimloy.com/hiero/gardner2.htm
2nd letter
G17 http://www.jimloy.com/hiero/gardner1.htm
Determinative: incense burner

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Respectfully Wally you didn't answer Thought's question. MDW NTR is not current anthropology - in current anthropology Hamite and Negro are invalid.

I do feel the question is not for you as you are clearly uncomfortable with physical anthropology.

I am just afraid that you and Thought will talk past each other.

He will question in terms of physical science and you will answer in terms of mdw ntr.

---

You're probably right.
I'm more or less in Diop's camp on the issue of the questionable role of "physical anthropology" and Egyptian history; I mean, how much reliance is placed, if any, on physical anthropology in the interpretation and presentation of Greek, Roman, Mayan, Chinese history?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:

I mean, how much reliance is placed, if any, on physical anthropology in the interpretation and presentation of Greek, Roman, Mayan, Chinese history?

---

Thought Writes:

That is exactly what we have been questioning here with Evil E. It has been demonstrated using Modern Greeks and Modern Oromo East Africans that the Modern Greeks have HIGHER non-European (African and Middle Eastern) genetic frequencies than Modern Oromo East Africans have non-African genetic frequencies (Thanks Rasol). The Hamitic Hypothesis R.I.P.!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:

But, out of curiosity, what does current anthropology use as valid word identifiers for those it previously referred to as Hamites and Negroes?
Are we still here?

---

Thought Writes:

Hamite and Negroe are racial classifiers. Race is a non-starter in MODERN biological anthropology. Humans may LOOK similar or dissimilar and have or not have close genetic lineages/Bloodlines. A good example is modern Greeks who are phenotypically distant from the Borano of Kenya, yet genetically close based on Y-Clade analysis. Environment, diet, time and space may all effect how one looks. Groups from distant direct lineages may LOOK similar because they have adapted to similar environments and diets, yet they are still not directly or closely related to one another. A good example are the people of Papua New Guinea who LOOK like some tropical Africans, yet have closer direct ancestry with the Japanese! Likewise the blue eyed Kabyle Berbers look more like the people of Central Asia than the Surma of southern Sudan, yet the Kabyle and the Surma share in a closely related male lineage.

quote:

---

It has been demonstrated using Modern Greeks and Modern Oromo East Africans that the Modern Greeks have HIGHER non-European (African and Middle Eastern) genetic frequencies than Modern Oromo East Africans. The Hamitic Hypothesis R.I.P.!

---

I think you mean to say that the Greeks have higher non European genetic frequences, than the Oromo have non African genetic frequencies?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
Thought is practicing his voodoo again...he knows the Greeks are European despite the results of the biased , flawed study he leans on.

---

Thought Writes:

Which study am I "leaning on" "Professor"? I doubt you REALLY have a clue. Once again, another non-specific example by Hoe-In-Him.....

quote:

---

Remember that neither the Egyptians or the Hebrews used vowels when writing words, hence:

Hm; (Hebrew) - warm, hot

Budge; page 447a
Hm; (Egyptian) - warm, hot ; followed by the determinative: incense burner/censer

to see this visually from Gardiner's list;
1st letter
O4 http://www.jimloy.com/hiero/gardner2.htm
2nd letter
G17 http://www.jimloy.com/hiero/gardner1.htm
Determinative: incense burner

---

Okay, these folks didn't use vowels. So now, do we have such a word as simply 'hm', with nothing else added to the word, in Egyptic or Coptic?

quote:

---

But, out of curiosity, what does current anthropology use as valid word identifiers for those it previously referred to as Hamites and Negroes?
Are we still here?

---

We are.

Race classifications aren't.

Diop challenged the next generation of African scholars to carry his work forward.

Dr. Shomarka Keita has done so, and in my opinion provides the best example of carrying the work of understanding Africa's peoples and past thru physical anthropology foward.

Keita, and an increasing number of bioanthropologists discuss African phenotype in terms of adaptation to environment, for example: tropical adaptations to hot and wet climates, as opposed to hot and dry climates.

Keita uses the term "Africoid" to describe peoples whose physical features reflect adaptation to African climate and conditions.

For example, in Rwanda -

- the Hutu would be considered as having a 'broad' tropical phenotype.

- the Tutsi have more of an 'elongated' tropical phenotype.

- the Twa have more of a diminuative tropical phenotype.

They are all tropically adapted in terms of dark skin for protection against tropical UV, elongated and attenuated limb ratios for heat dissipation, curly hair, and some other features.

They differ in that the Tutsi are tallest and somewhat more gracile [on average], the Hutu are medium height and more robust [stocky, the Twa are small and stocky.

This probably reflects the different climates these three groups biologically evolved in.

The Hamite myth applied here essentially stated that the Tutsi were essentially white men and black skin, but biologically, the Tutsi in fact are completely African and closely related, esp. to the Hutu, and it's clear based on genetics that this is not withstanding what must certainly be significant recent intermixture between the two groups.

The three Rwandan peoples are just different kinds of Black Africans. Racial catagories -are there 3 races there or 2 or 1 (?), are arbitrary in terms of the biology of it.

The key point to understand about Hamite in anthropology is that it's function was to define the 'opposite' of Negro.

I know you think that's crazy Wally, and you're right, since both words mean Black.

But in anthropology, Hamites are Africans who are 'really' white [under the skin] whether they are white [like some NW African Berbers] or blue-Black, like the Shilluk of Sudan.

Wally: The main reasons the Hamito-semito language group collapsed is because it was based on the theory that people who look like the Tutsi would speak - Egyptian, Semetic languages, whereas people who look like the Hausa would speak - "Negro" languages.

And of course, it implied a privledged position for Semitic languages.

Of course the reality didn't conform to the stereotype. ie - people who looked like "negros" spoke "hamitic" languages that were older than any of the semitic languages.

So now when we speak of the Tutsi we relate the facts and not the stereotypes:

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
We are.

Race classifications aren't.

Diop challenged the next generation of African scholars to carry his work forward.

Dr. Shomarka Keita has done so, and in my opinion provides the best example of carrying the work of understanding Africa's peoples and past thru physical anthropology foward.

Keita, and an increasing number of bioanthropologists discuss African phenotype in terms of adaptation to environment, for example: tropical adaptations to hot and wet climates, as opposed to hot and dry climates.

Keita uses the term "Africoid" to describe peoples whose physical features reflect adaptation to African climate and conditions.

For example, in Rwanda -

- the Hutu would be considered as having a 'broad' tropical phenotype.

- the Tutsi have more of an 'elongated' tropical phenotype.

- the Twa have more of a diminuative tropical phenotype.

They are all tropically adapted in terms of dark skin for protection against tropical UV, elongated and attenuated limb ratios for heat dissipation, curly hair, and some other features.

They differ in that the Tutsi are tallest and somewhat more gracile [on average], the Hutu are medium height and more robust [stocky, the Twa are small and stocky.

This probably reflects the different climates these three groups biologically evolved in.

The Hamite myth applied here essentially stated that the Tutsi were essentially white men and black skin, but biologically, the Tutsi in fact are completely African and closely related, esp. to the Hutu, and it's clear based on genetics that this is not withstanding what must certainly be significant recent intermixture between the two groups.

The three Rwandan peoples are just different kinds of Black Africans. Racial catagories -are there 3 races there or 2 or 1 (?), are arbitrary in terms of the biology of it.

The key point to understand about Hamite in anthropology is that it's function was to define the 'opposite' of Negro.

I know you think that's crazy Wally, and you're right, since both words mean Black.

But in anthropology, Hamites are Africans who are 'really' white [under the skin] whether they are white [like some NW African Berbers] or blue-Black, like the Shilluk of Sudan.

Wally: The main reasons the Hamito-semito language group collapsed is because it was based on the theory that people who look like the Tutsi would speak - Egyptian, Semetic languages, whereas people who look like the Hausa would speak - "Negro" languages.

And of course, it implied a privledged position for Semitic languages.

Of course the reality didn't conform to the stereotype. ie - people who looked like "negros" spoke "hamitic" languages that were older than any of the semitic languages.

So now when we speak of the Tutsi we relate the facts and not the stereotypes:

They are a Black African people with an elongated phenotype, likely reflecting a Nilotic history [ie migrating into central Africa from the region of Ethiopia/Sudan], and currently speaking a Bantu language.

---

Rasol,
Unfortunately Tutsis and Himas from Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi and Rwanda were dumped with East Africans, but it seems based on genetics and culture that they are closer to the Central Saharan culture. Indeed the only place you find humpless cows (bos taurus) with huge horns is Southern Cameroun on the Kuri islands, among the Kuri people and on rock paintings in the Central Sahara, they do not have the extremely mixed ones from East Africa (mixed with the indicus type from Asia) like the massai,dinka, somali or oromos' cows. Tutsi and East Africans share only the phenotype, nothing else: they don’t have the E3b haplogroup which is typical of East Africans. I believe they came from Central Sahara and before the bantu expansion wich explain the presence of haplogroup B among them which links them to the Twa: who are the most ancient people in the Great Lake region. The fact that Tutsi used to own most of the land can be explained by the fact that they lived there before the Bantu expansion. The theory of subjugation was invented by colonizers.

quote:

---

Originally posted by relaxx:

Tutsi and East Africans share only the phenotype, nothing else they don’t have the E3b haplogroup which is typical of East Africans.

---

Well, no, you may have somewhat missed the point.

And I am not surprised because the Hamite myth has never been useful for any purpose other than faciliating relentless miscomprehension of African identity. lol.

The PN2 clade deleneates the COMMON ANCESTRY of East and West Africans....much of North Africa too.

The Tutsi share BOTH a phenotype and a genotype with other Africans, just not in a way that was predicted via defunct Hamite theory.

Tutsi elongated phenotype is more common, though not exclusive, to East Africa.

Tutsi PN2 clade E3A genotype, is more common, though not exclusive to West Africa.

Some Sudanese groups such as the Surma, have a more broad featured phenotype more typical of West Africa. Yet they are PN2 E3b, which is more typical of East Africa.

There is a reason for this.

It is because E3a and E3b are related KEY POINT, and likely born of either an East or central Sahelian population.

Try to understand that "East or West/Central" origins of PN2 are irrelevant, since PN2 populations spread East and West prior to the diverage into E3A and E3b.

quote:

---

There are 18 known haplogroups or top level clades labeled A thru R. Clades have sub clades - which are children of their respective top level clade. The children are known as sibling clades in terms of their relationships to each other. Those children in turn have children and so on.
E3a and E3b are haplotypic brothers and children of of E3 (pn2 clade). E3, E3a and E3b all originate in Africa. The Pn2 clade is the dominment Y chromosome type in Africa.

The Haplotypes themselves do not determine phenotype. No clades do. There are elongated and broad African types of E3a and E3b Elongated and broad Africans likely diverge based on morphological adaptation to dry and humid tropical climates respectively. Accordingly both types are Black. The haplotypes ARE INDIGENOUS TO AFRICA and originate after the base european asian and australian populations migrated out of Africa and so are not indigenous to those regions.

E3a and E3b appear to have split geographically with E3a carriers generally traveling central west and south, and E3b carriers traveling east north and west.

Haplotypes do not determine language [of course], but E3b is most closely associated with the Afrasan speakers an E3a with Bantu speakers - for instance.

And none of this has anything to do with European peoples [self labeled caucasians] other than that they inherit ithe haplotypes as African admixture either directly or indirectly thru either the Levantine corridor; Egypto/Nubian colonisation in the Agean and Southwest Europe from across the Maghreb during the Moorish occupation

---

E3a and E3b are African and form a common clade - The Pn2 clade. A clade is a lineage. A lineage, by definition equals -> a common ancestry.

The genetic "difference" between E3A and E3B

E3a --- SRY10831.1, M42, M94, M139, M168, P9, M145, M213, Yap, SRY4064, M96, P29, P2, DYS391p, M2, P1

E3b --- SRY10831.1, M42, M94, M139, M168, P9, M145, M213, Yap, SRY4064, M96, P29, P2, DYS391p, M35
http://www.lakeathens.com/dna/Y-DNA-Haplogroups.htm

quote:

---

The Y-chromosome clade defined by the PN2 transition (PN2/M35, PN2/M2) shatters the boundaries of phenotypically defined races and true breeding populations across a great geographical expanse. African peoples with a range of skin colors, hair forms and physiognomies have substantial percentages of males whose Y chromosomes form closely related clades with each other.

---

quote:

---

The distribution of [E3A] in Africa has usually been explained by the "Bantu migrations", but their presence in the Nile Valley in non-Bantu speakers cannot be explained in this way.

Their existence is better explained by their being present in populations of the early Holocene Sahara, who in part went on to people the Nile Valley in the mid-Holocene (!!!), according to Hassan (1988); this occured long before the "Bantu migrations", which also do not exlain the high frequency of M2 in Senegal, since there are no Bantu speakers there either

---

quote:

---

A good example are the people of Papua New Guinea who LOOK like some tropical Africans, yet have closer direct ancestry with the Japanese!

---

As an aside, I was watching the South Africa vs. Fiji Rubgy match.

In terms of physical appearance the clearest difference between the two groups of players were the number of 'clearly non African looking' players.....on the South African team.

quote:

---

Originally posted by relaxx:

Unfortunately Tutsis and Himas from Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi and Rwanda were dumped with East Africans, but it seems based on genetics and culture that they are closer to the Central Saharan culture.

---

Thought Writes:

E3a and E3b are both found in the Central Saharan region. E3b2 seems to be more prevelent in the NORTHERN central sahara, while E3a seems to be more prevelent in the SOUTHERN Central sahara.

quote:

---

Originally posted by relaxx:
[QUOTE]

Genetics in domestic animals can explain human migrations better than human phenotypes.

---

Thought Writes:

The expansion of technology
is ONE explanation of many lines of evidence in tracing human migrations. The demic diffusion model has been used by Eurocentrics for years, however technology can pass between populations WITHOUT genetic exchange.

quote:

---

The split between E3a and E3b occurred quite recently sometime around 15K and 26K, west and east africans are the same people: and split quite recently.

---

That is the key point I am trying to convey.

quote:

---

The Sahara was a major contribution to the peopling of Africa, however I don't really agree with the following: "They are a Black African people with an elongated phenotype, likely reflecting a Nilotic history [ie migrating into central Africa from the region of Ethiopia/Sudan]

---

You may be correct that Tutsi migration pattern is more Sahel to Cameroon to Rwanda, then Sahel to Sudan/Ethiopia to Rwanda, or...you may be wrong. Tutsi pre-Rwandan origins are uncertain, and I don't contest your opinion on it.

quote:

---

By the way can you please tell me which population in Sudan have E3a haplogroups?

---

You mean E3b?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

E3a and E3b are both found in the Central Saharan region. E3b2 seems to be more prevelent in the NORTHERN central sahara, while E3a seems to be more prevelent in the SOUTHERN Central sahara.

---

To Thought:

What is your source on this? Which current population groups fall into the "NORTHERN central sahara" E3b2 haplotype-carrying groups?

To Relaxx:

Interesting theory you have on the migration of the pastoralist groups of East Africa but beside the similarities in the longhorn cattle what other evidence do you have for that migration?

Also what is your source on the time frame you gave (between 15kya and 26kya) for the split of the E3 clade into E3a and E3b?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The distribution of [E3A] in Africa has usually been explained by the "Bantu migrations", but their presence in the Nile Valley in non-Bantu speakers cannot be explained in this way.
Their existence is better explained by their being present in populations of the early
----------------------

Rasol,
Sorry, I meant the Nile Valley, I know you're quoting Keita, do you know what population he's referring to. By the way in Sudan I do believe that southern Sudanese carry E3b.
Relaxx

quote:

---

Originally posted by YuhiVII:
To Thought:

What is your source on this? Which current population groups fall into the "NORTHERN central sahara" E3b2 haplotype-carrying groups?

---

Remember the Berbers that keep constantly coming up in our discussions, they are an example of E3b2 carrying populations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
Okay, these folks didn't use vowels. So now, do we have such a word as simply 'hm', with nothing else added to the word, in Egyptic or Coptic?

[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 10 May 2005).]

---

Again,
The Egyptian word is "hm" and it means "hot", the Coptic equivalent is "khm;khmom"

Oh, and for fun, there's also an Egyptian word "Shm"/Shem and it means "little, small, weak..."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
Again,
The Egyptian word is "hm" and it means "hot", the Coptic equivalent is "khm;khmom"

Oh, and for fun, there's also an Egyptian word "Shm"/Shem and it means "little, small, weak..."

---

Relating to 'semi' [latine] 'shem'-> 'dusky' [hebrew], in between....say Kem and Tam, Ham and Jepth, black and white?

To Relaxx:

Interesting theory you have on the migration of the pastoralist groups of East Africa but beside the similarities in the longhorn cattle what other evidence do you have for that migration?
----------------------
Yuhi (are you related to the kings?),Please check how Tutsis are closer to non Eastern Africans in that link: http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/AJHG_2004_v74_p000-0130.pdf

[QUOTE]Originally posted by YuhiVII:
[B] To Thought:

Also what is your source on the time frame you gave (between 15kya and 26kya) for the split of the E3 clade into E3a and E3b?
-----------------------
Please check this link:
http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/hape3b.pdf

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:

The Egyptian word is "hm" and it means "hot", the Coptic equivalent is "khm;khmom"

---

In which case, a reference to a specific Kemetic text, in which the deciphers discovered this word 'hm', shouldn't be too much to ask, right?

quote:

---

Originally posted by YuhiVII:
To Thought:

What is your source on this? Which current population groups fall into the "NORTHERN central sahara" E3b2 haplotype-carrying groups?

To Relaxx:

Interesting theory you have on the migration of the pastoralist groups of East Africa but beside the similarities in the longhorn cattle what other evidence do you have for that migration?

Also what is your source on the time frame you gave (between 15kya and 26kya) for the split of the E3 clade into E3a and E3b?

---

Yuhi,

I just want to precise that the Kuri cattle are found are found aroun the lake chad: bordered by Northern Cameroon, Tchad, Niger and Nigeria.

quote:

---

Originally posted by relaxx:
Yuhi,

I just want to precise that the Kuri cattle are found are found aroun the lake chad: bordered by Northern Cameroon, Tchad, Niger and Nigeria.

Relaxx

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by YuhiVII:
Thanks for the info. I hadn't really taken that angle (i.e following the movement of domesticated cattle) when looking at the pastoralist groups. The next step would be an analysis of cattle DNA to confirm this.
To answer your question: No am not related to the kings however I am originally from the great lakes region.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
In which case, a reference to a specific Kemetic text, in which the deciphers discovered this word 'hm', shouldn't be too much to ask, right?

---

a) you've got the word, above from Gardiner

b) start looking in Budge's "Book of the Dead"
which contains the actual Mdu Ntr, then
there's the pyramid texts, etc....

quote:

---

Originally posted by relaxx:

Yuhi,
Here is a link: http://www.ucd.ie/ascience/html/pages/academic/dmachugh/downloads/Hanotte_et_al.(200 0).pdf
Relaxx

---

Relaxx:

Great link! Actually in order to continue this line of discussion (which I think is now fairly off-topic in this thread) I suggest you join up on this forum:
http://www.aimoo.com/forum/categories.cfm?id=645026&CategoryID=417994

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:

As I have already said, Budge (my source)
doesn't list the text from which this hieroglyph was found.
But if you are determined, as it is apparent that you are, to find the original source;

a) you've got the word, above from Gardiner

b) start looking in Budge's "Book of the Dead" which contains the actual Mdu Ntr, then there's the pyramid texts, etc....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
I guess that is what I'll have to do, in order to get an example of the original text in which this word is supposed to have been picked up. Hope Budge's "Book of the Dead" is easily accessible.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
I would recommend the Faulkner version over the Budge translation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
I will look into these books, not merely for translations, but for the actual specific text(s), in which the Kemetians were supposed to have used the word 'hm', and then perhaps share it with others, who care to learn more about it.
Can you please give me the specific title of the Faulkner version that you are referring to? I like to diversify my sources on a particular information.

---

Budge's book is in virtually all public libraries, and since you're looking for the hieroglyphic text it would not differ in the two texts, and so wouldn't make a difference. (I would agree with Ausar that Faulkner's translation would probably be more accurate, but Gardiner's books are harder to find). anyway both will say "hm" means "heat, smoke, warm, etc.)...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
Budge's book is in virtually all public libraries, and since you're looking for the hieroglyphic text it would not differ in the two texts, and so wouldn't make a difference.

---