If you look back in the archive there is a brief discussion about this with a former poster here named Al Takuri. What you see in the so-called Rameses III and Seti I tomb is called the Book of Gates. It records the different ethnicities and their closeness to Heru. al-Takuri indentified that both the rmt and nsh[nehsi] were group together compared to the other ethnic groups such as the Libyans or others.

IMO, I think people should not treat artwork as just something random. Most early Old Kingdom art[except for sculptors] were not meant to be realistic like in Middle to New Kingdom art in terms of realistic color covention. The tombs of the nobels and also daily scenes of life show realistic colors amongst the population. Unlike the early Old Kingdom artwork.

You will find this is validated by most historians in AE artwork.

quote:

---

Al Takruri: Book of Gates the Gate of Teka Hra chapter.
This is the text where in the mdw ntr above
the head of Heru the Kmtyw & Nhsw are lumped
together as KM.t.nwt while the Tmhw & Aamw
are dshr.t.nwt a polity not DSHr.t.x3st a
piece of land.

In examining the painting I quickly discovered
that only a select handful of scholars truly
realize what the painting represents in its
full context.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
You state that most scholars are not grasping the full meaning of the book of Gates iconography. What is it that they are missing, and how and why? Remember many people reading this have no idea of what the book of Gates, Heru, Seth, etc.. are.

---

quote:

---

Al Takruri:
Well some view vignette 30 in the Gate of Teka Hra of the Book of Gates
as a table of nations -- terminology borrowed from the description of Genesis
chapter 10 -- when it hardly is a picturing of all the different nations known to
19th Dynasty Egypt. In fact to compare it to Genesis 10 it would only be the
four sons of Hham: Kush, Missrayim, Fut, and Kena`an.

Others see it as the four races of man known to the AE. The problem with
that is race science was unknown to the author of the text or the artist of the
painting. At that time there were only two broad colour groupings known
anywhere in the ancient world, dark and light. And whats more important
to the ancients was the ethnicity or nationality. Belonging to a colour group
didn't automatically imply kinship relations among all the ethnies sharing
similar colour.

Another view, of those who havent seen the vignette as a whole but seen
only sections of one group, is that it portrays immigrants or mercenaries
or such. Actually everyone depicted is dead and in the Dwat or underworld.
And on top of that, they are freshly dead today so to speak since the Book
of Gates chapter by chapter is a record of the Suns travel after sunset and
before sunrise.

I'll leave it to you or others to explain what the Book of Gates is but I will say
that the scene is showing peoples under Re who are eligible for Osirian
resurrection. As such, one people known to the AE are intentinally left out.
They being the Hua Nebu i.e. the northern people of the Aegean.

There's little left to free interpretation or other than an understanding that
real people complexions are shown because the painting was only made
for one reason, to be an illustration of a text. The text that it illustrates is right
above the head of Heru and four groups of peoples. In each of the tombs
where the vignette appears the skin tones may vary some from tomb to
tomb but are still within the general range of colour of the ethnic group.

I probably didn't get to many points you want brought out but we can all
continue discussing this important document relating to Kmtyw identity
in the most sacred of all contexts, life after death for the worthy souls.
I hope that anybody with any questions about anything I post will feel
free to hit me or just raise the question for the group in general to all
chime in with their takes. The more we share the more we all learn..

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anacalypsis:
Ausar, or anyone else who wants to try, is there an answer to my question stated earlier about the race chart found in Ramsese III tomb???

Question, in the supposed race chart (for lack of a better word/phrase) that was found on the tomb of Ramsese the II, what did the colors or representations mean??

How have scholars interpreted this chart?? Are there contrasting points of views on what those color representations meant, or do most (scholars) conclude the same thing??

Any takers on this?

---

quote:

---

AlTakruri: Help me out. What did I miss? I tried to answer by showing

1. its not a chart of races
   
2. the skin tones are natural not symbolic.
   
3. examples of erroneous interpretations

I have seen this scene from tombs
KV 8 Merenptah
KV11 Ramses III
KV15 Seti II
KV17 Seti I.

The painting from Ramses III tomb in Lepsius' Denkmaler plate 48

is only a condensation of what's actually on the wall of the tomb.

What's actually on the tomb wall is another rendition of vignette 30 in
the Gate of Teka Hra of the Book of Gates. All the kings in the span
of time between Horemheb and Ramses VI have the complete text
of the Book of Gates and illustrartions to go with it. It was a vital sacred
text for the departed, a guide for what to expect in Amenti, the world of
the afterlife. This one particular vignette is a register of the dead meant
to portray representatives of easterners (any of their nations), Nile Valley
folk (up and down river), and westerners (any of their tribes).

The scene depicts the sun in the netherworld in the 5th hour after sunset with Heru
addressing those who died the previous day. He verbally distinguishes them as
the blacks (Nile Valley folk, i.e., Egyptians and Nehesis) under his protection,
and the reds (folk dwelling east or west of the Nile) under Sekhet's protection.

To understand this one needs to examine a copy of the full vignette,
both the text and the art as is available in Lepsius' Denkmaler plate 136.

Then to understand it in context, one needs to read the rest of the Gate
of Teka Hra of which these paintings are only one small part.

Its also important to know that in comparison to the other paintings of
the exact same scene in the tombs of other pharaohs, the one in the
tomb of Ramses III is controversial in its ethnic labeling in that those
clothed and groomed as Asiatics and Libyans have swapped their
normal place as dictated by the text. In addition to that, the colour
and clothes of the Egyptians and Nehesis do not serve to make
any noticeable difference between them unlike their presentations
in the other last of 18th through middle of the 20th dynasty renditions
of this vignette.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

You will find this is validated by most historians in AE artwork.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Al Takruri is always missed,
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 08 June 2005).]

---

I agree with you completely; but can you blame him for not wanting to participate in a forum that has become essentially silly and irrelevant due to the allowed distractions of a handful of juvenile morons?

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

If you look back in the archive there is a brief discussion about this with a former poster here named Al Takuri. What you see in the so-called Rameses III and Seti I tomb is called the Book of Gates. It records the different ethnicity's and their closeness to Heru. al-Takuri identified that both the rmt and nsh[nehsi] were grouped together compared to the other ethnic groups such as the Libyans or others.
IMO, I think people should not treat artwork as just something random. Most early Old Kingdom art[except for sculptors] were not meant to be realistic like in Middle to New Kingdom art in terms of realistic color convention. The tombs of the nobles and also daily scenes of life show realistic colors amongst the population. Unlike the early Old Kingdom artwork.

You will find this is validated by most historians in AE artwork.

---

Exactly,
but keep in mind that most people continue to make the mistake of not translating the Egyptian words for these ethnic groups into their exact meanings; which I think leads to confusion.

Namou Sho > Nam=traveler - ou=people - Sho=sands;
"people who travel the sands" - Nomads who are pictorially shown to be Asiatic.
Tamhou > hematite; ochre; reddish > Red ones - What today we refer to as White people.

And,
This is not exclusively an African term to describe White or European people.

quote:

---

During the 17th century, the Portuguese, for the most part, had exclusive rights on Chinese trade. Those next on the scene were the Dutch and the English. These were called hong moa, the red heads. This inoffensive word, however, can be translated to mean red devils; the reason being that in Buddhism's equivalent of hell the demons are usually depicted with red hair.

---

quote:

---

I agree with you completely; but can you blame him for not wanting to participate in a forum that has become essentially silly and irrelevant due to the allowed distractions of a handful of juvenile morons?

---

No I can't.

It is an elementary matter for owners of this website to empower the forum moderators to enforce standards of conduct under penalty of being banned.

If they choose not to do so, it must reflect a lack of interest on their part on making this forum the best that it can be.

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:

Okay so what is the mural saying! I don't follow what you guys are talking about at all. Which ones are the RED ones that are suppose to be White???

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
No I can't.

It is an elementary matter for owners of this website to empower the forum moderators to enforce standards of conduct under penalty of being banned.

If they choose not to do so, it must reflect a lack of interest on their part on making this forum the best that it can be.

That's too bad.

---

Tamahou are Libyan tribes that probably lived around in northern Africa. I don't know really where they came from except many had reddish-blonde hair. These people are drawn upon the walls of the ancient Egyptian temples.

You can't identify them with Europeans because the people of Hau-nebu are actually Greek people. Notice they are not called Tamahou.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

Tamahou are Libyan tribes that probably lived around in northern Africa. I don't know really where they came from except many had reddish-blonde hair. These people are drawn upon the walls of the ancient Egyptian temples.

You can't identify them with Europeans because the people of Hau-nebu are actually Greek people. Notice they are not called Tamahou.

---

Ausar, I agree with you to a point;
however

a) take note that you, yourself, described the "Tamahou" as being Libyan tribes. This is true because the word "Tmhw" is a general ethnic term used by the Ancient Egyptians to describe people who were lighter than they were; it's a collective term.

b) It's also conceivable that the terms "Deshret (Red)" and "Tamhu (Red)" could have been used to describe lighter-skinned Africans around the Great Lakes Region (ie, the Khoisan) where this language is generally agreed to have originated, and before these early central Africans ever even saw a White person, but would later be applied to these newly encountered groups. Language is not static...

c) If you examine the figure to the far right on the painting from Ramses III tomb in Lepsius' Denkmaler plate 48, directly to its right there is a word "Tmhw" - did the Libyans wear this type of attire or resemble this figure?

d) European isn't just a geographical expression; it's also ethnic. Here's a definition given by Champollion:
Europeans; "all blonds and white-skinned people living not only in Europe, but Asia as well, their starting point."
This would also include the Libyans which you described.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:

And the "Hau Nebu" Greeks would certainly have been called "Deshretu"...

---

Wally, the Tamahou in the picture are wearing typical attire. You can tell even by markings that Libyans wore. Of note modern Berbers[Imazigh] have some of those identical tatto markings on their face and body. What is so odd about these Tamahou figures is that they have very African cultural chracteristics but look like pale Europeans.

AE never came incontact with Western/Northern Europeans. The only Europeans they knew were Southern European Greeks or Minoans. The other ''white'' type people that ancient Egyptians encountered were the Mitanni or Hitties. Mitanni people are shown in realistic bas-reliefs with blonde hair. As are the Libyans occasionaly shown with red or blondish hair. Libyans are also shown sometimes have a dark reddish-brown color[these are identifiable with the Tehennu]

Most Asiatic people[bedouins or Syro-Palestineans] are shown with a yellowish kind of complexion. Others are shown like the the offering scene of Tut-ankh-amun with slightly darker complexions.

The earliest Berbers were indigenous black Africans but in time were succeeded by 'caucasian' Berbers.

And to the direct north of Egypt was the Mediterranean inhabited by the various peoples there like the Minoans and Greeks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
From what I understand to the Northeast of Egytp in the Levant were the Asiatics and to the Northwest were the Berbers.

The earliest Berbers were indigenous black Africans but in time were succeeded by 'caucasian' Berbers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

Wally, the Tamahou in the picture are wearing typical attire. You can tell even by markings that Libyans wore. Of note modern Berbers[Imazigh] have some of those identical tatto markings on their face and body. What is so odd about these Tamahou figures is that they have very African cultural chracteristics but look like pale Europeans.

---

quote:

---

The other ''white'' type people that ancient Egyptians encountered were the Mitanni or Hitties. Mitanni people are shown in realistic bas-reliefs with blonde hair. As are the Libyans occasionaly shown with red or blondish hair.

---

quote:

---

Libyans are also shown sometimes have a dark reddish-brown color[these are identifiable with the Tehennu]

---

quote:

---

Most Asiatic people[bedouins or Syro-Palestineans] are shown with a yellowish kind of complexion. Others are shown like the the offering scene of Tut-ankh-amun with slightly darker complexions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
By this, you probably mean those northwestern coastal light skin tone Berbers. But then, you too are falling into the trap of using those fraudelent terms, considering that it has been shown many times, that most Berbers trace their paternal ancestry to East Africa via the indigenous E3b2-M81, not to mention their indigenous languages, which aren't found anywhere else, but Africa. How then can such diverse people be considered "Caucasian"?

---

I'm talking about the white Berbers like the Riff and Shuwa!! These people are definitely non-Africans! Not only that, but as Ausar said, these people look northwestern European with reddish blonde hair. In fact Rasol himself said they most likely originated from Iberia!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
I'm talking about the white Berbers like the Riff and Shuwa!! These people are definitely non-Africans! Not only that, but as Ausar said, these people look northwestern European with reddish blonde hair. In fact Rasol himself said they most likely originated from Iberia!!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
I'm talking about the white Berbers like the Riff and Shuwa!! These people are definitely non-Africans! Not only that, but as Ausar said, these people look northwestern European with reddish blonde hair. In fact Rasol himself said they most likely originated from Iberia!!

---

I did?

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
Camps was a French proto-historian that identified the Tehennu[the reddish brown people in Egyptian artwork with penis sheaths] with the Fulani people.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
And the "Hau Nebu" Greeks would certainly have been called "Deshretu"...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
The question is, did they?

---

There were several names for Greece and Greeks in the Mdu Ntr:
Uinn, HaNebu; Hau Nebu; and Nebu Meht;

Nebu Meht is probably more easily translated and would mean either of two things - "Northern peoples" or "Northern lords"

and,
as Al Takruri has already explained:"...the Tmhw & Aamw
are dshr.t.nwt a polity not DSHr.t.x3st a
piece of land."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
[B] There were several names for Greece and Greeks in the Mdu Ntr:
Uinn, HaNebu; Hau Nebu; and Nebu Meht;

Nebu Meht is probably more easily translated and would mean either of two things - "Northern peoples" or "Northern lords"

and, as Al Takruri has already explained:"...the Tmhw & Aamw are dshr.t.nwt a polity not DSHr.t.x3st a
piece of land."

Since the Greeks were certainly considered to be "Deshretu" by the Ancient Egyptians, what would be the reasonable odds that they were never called that?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
You didn't answer my question. The question was, did the Kemetians call the Greeks "Deshretu"? Yes or no. It is as simple as that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
Yes!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
BTW, have you heard of Gabriel Camps? Camps was a French proto-historian that identified the Tehennu[the reddish brown people in Egyptian artwork with penis sheaths] with the Fulani people.

---

Tehenn = "sparkling", "dazzling", "Egyptian Faience (an opaque glaze, usually strong greenish blue)"
Tehennu would then mean "sparkling or dazzling or bright blue - people"
Could the Tehennu be the ancestors of the Tuareg (The Blue Men of the desert; because the blue robes they wear makes their skins blue), as well as the Fulani, a related people?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
Okay then, which Kemetic text/record corroborates the claim that, Greeks were called "Deshretu"?

---

Are you kidding me?
Take some time and read the second post here, to which I referred to above (al Takruri's statement):

Summary: to the Ancient Egyptians, all peoples not Kemetiu or Nahasu are Deshretu.

Don't have to show you no more documents. You'd be wasting my time.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
Are you kidding me?
Take some time and read the second post here, to which I referred to above (al Takruri's statement):

Summary: to the Ancient Egyptians, al peoples not Kemetiu or Nahasu are Deshretu.

---

No such thing as too much evidence.

Encyclopedia: Upper and Lower Egypt

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
If we could document a specific reference to the Greeks as Deshrutu it would further clarify matters.

No such thing as too much evidence.

Encyclopedia: Upper and Lower Egypt

[i]This part of the country was also divided into nomes; however, as the place was mostly undeveloped scrubland, the organisation of the nomes underwent several changes. Ultimately there were twenty nomes and the first of these was at Memphis. Taken together, the Two Kingdoms formed Kemet ('Black'). It is claimed that Kemet means 'Black soil', but the term Kmt is a noun, which does not include 'soil', and in this respect Kmt means 'Black Nation'. Deshret ("Red"), on the other hand, was used to describe a type of place, which the Kemetians/Egyptian dispised. It is usually seen as a 'Afro-centric' argument, but the meaning of Kmt was stated by Champollion the Younger's (who deciphered the Rossetta stone) document, 'Expressions et Termes Particuliers' (Expression of Particular Terms). Link to the document is provided at the bottom of this page. The Kmt = 'Black Soil' fallacy was picked up from Herodotus when he says, “Egypt is a land of black soil...We know that Libya is a redder earth.” (Herodotus, The History, Book 2:12), but in the same book he also states that, "the Colchians are Egyptians...on the fact that they are black-skinned and have wooly hair." (Herodotus, The History, Book 2:104).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
Well, the burden is on you to substantiate your claims, and if you can't do this, then your claims are questionable. You claim that the Kemetians used a certain reference to the ancient Greeks, and I am asking you to corroborate this with a historical fact, for if it isn't, then it isn't a historical fact. You call the act of substantiation a waste of time, and I call it [b]necessary for scholarship. Perhaps, it is more of a waste of time, to think that your claims are valid![/B]

---

(sigh)
Here's my original statement:

quote:

---

And the "Hau Nebu" Greeks would certainly have been called "Deshretu"...(by the Egyptians)

---

--And why?
--Because the Egyptians called all peoples not part of the Km.t Nwt (Egyptians and other Blacks) "Deshretu". This has been known at least since Diop, and pretty much re-stated by the quote from al Takruri.

It's called a logical inference:
If the Egyptians called all non-Blacks "Deshretu", and the Greeks were non-Blacks, they would have been called "Deshretu" as well.

I think that your belaboring the point of providing a specific text is specious.

quote:

---

Nick: You know that the Greeks called the Egyptians barbarians.
Gus: Where did you get that? How do you know?
Nick: Gus, the Greeks called all non-Greeks barbarians. Want me to prove it to you?
Gus: Yeah, but show me where they called the Egyptians barbarians.
Nick: (sigh...)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
[b] --And why?
--Because the Egyptians called all peoples not part of the Km.t Nwt (Egyptians and other Blacks) "Deshretu". This has been known at least since Diop, and pretty much re-stated by the quote from al Takruri.

It's called a logical inference:
If the Egyptians called all non-Blacks "Deshretu", and the Greeks were non-Blacks, they would have been called "Deshretu" as well.

I think that your belaboring the point of providing a specific text is specious.

Nick: You know that the Greeks called the Egyptians barbarians.
Gus: Where did you get that? How do you know?
Nick: Gus, the Greeks called all non-Greeks barbarians. Want me to prove it to you?
Gus: Yeah, but show me where they called the Egyptians barbarians.
Nick: (sigh...)

---

But... actually I wasn't aware of the Greeks calling the Egyptians Barbarians, and moreover to the degree that the concept was juxtaposed to civilised, to my knowledge the term most particularly referenced the Germanic people of the North, and not the civilised Egyptians held at least in Herodotus times in high regard?

Btw: Barbarian itself is said to have originated specifically in Greek mockery of the harsh germanic dialect, in which 'bar 'bar' 'ber' 'ber' sounds, grating to Greek ears were constantly made.

Here is another question - Black berber groups like the Tehenu [Siwa], would they also have been referred to as Deshretu?, as Kememu? neither?

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
But... actually I wasn't aware of the Greeks calling the Egyptians Barbarians, and moreover to the degree that the concept was juxtaposed to civilised, to my knowledge the term most particularly referenced the Germanic people of the North, and not the civilised Egyptians held at least in Herodotus times in high regard?

Btw: Barbarian itself is said to have originated specifically in Greek mockery of the harsh germanic dialect, in which 'bar 'bar' 'ber' 'ber' sounds, grating to Greek ears were constantly made.

Here is another question - Black berber groups like the Tehenu [Siwa], would they also have been referred to as Deshretu?, as Kememu? neither?

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 12 June 2005).]

---

Here's an excellent source on the issue of Greek chauvinism that should answer your questions: http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/errington.html

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
Here's an excellent source on the issue of Greek chauvinism that should answer your questions: http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/errington.html

On the classification of the Tehennu, this too must be inferred. (Say, did anyone really read al Takruri's statements). To the Ancient Egyptians there were two worlds km.t nwt (black - community, town, city, village) and dshr.t nwt. You were either Black or Red. I would infer from this that the Black Tehennu would be considered as belonging to the km.t nwt.

---

I posted the Al-Takruri reply, and I understood it.

Still trying to understand your replies, which are 'not' saying quite the same thing.

Your analogy of deshretu to barbarian begs more questions than it answers - especially since the Km.t alligned other Africans to Km.t but the Greeks did NOT align other Europeans to "Greek" but rather barbarians.

It's also worth noting that your website suggests that Nehesu could also mean barbarian, which is supposed to be according to you, analogous to deshretu, and further undermines the analogy.

I think respectfully, that certain contradictions are emerging and you may not see them.

quote:

---

But... actually I wasn't aware of the Greeks calling the Egyptians Barbarians, and moreover to the degree that the concept was juxtaposed to civilised, to my knowledge the term most particularly referenced the Germanic people of the North, and not the civilised Egyptians held at least in Herodotus times in high regard?

---

One way to consider the AE view is what I pointed out in another dicussion. AE saw all foreigners as chasos[isofret] against Ma'at[order or balance]. This view was extended to all foreigners unless they were finally assimilated into the ancient Egyptian lifestyle. Yes, in many ways ancient Egyptians were more cosmopolitan than the Greeks allowing people to gain residence as opposed to the Greeks who restricted residence to non-Athenians.

It appears that after the Late Dyanstic Period[27th to 32th dyansty] when the Greeks evidently moved into Egypt they began to streotype Egyptians,or treat them differently from the initial contact.

People often claim that every Greco-Roman texts hearlds the ancient Egyptians as civilizers,but this is not actually true. In Aeschylus' Suppliants and Euripedes's Helen Egyptian males are streotyped as being hypersexed.

The Greeks had more compassion for Egyptians than the Romans. The Romans looked down upon the Egyptians,and even made laws banning Egyptians from going into majority cities like Alexandria.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
--And why?
--Because the Egyptians called all peoples not part of the Km.t Nwt (Egyptians and other Blacks) "Deshretu".

---

And from which Kemetic records, is it specifically stated that *all* other folks (regardless of physical variations or ethnicity), who weren't part of "Kmt. Nwt", were considered "Deshretu"? Which folks were considered part of "Kmt. Nwt", besides Kemetians themselves?

quote:

---

Wally:
This has been known at least since Diop, and pretty much re-stated by the quote from al Takruri.

---

Well, if Diop claimed to have come to the conclusion as you just did, then, you would have no problem in citing the Kemetic sources, not to mention, the translator(s) of those sources, from which Diop drew his conclusion.

quote:

---

Wally:
I think that your belaboring the point of providing a specific text is specious.

---

Well, trolls also think that requests for clarification and substantiation is a code of conduct, which is irrelevant. Why should anyone, who takes the same position, be considered any different?

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

I posted the Al-Takruri reply, and I understood it.

Still trying to understand your replies, which are 'not' saying quite the same thing.

Your analogy of deshretu to barbarian begs more questions than it answers - especially since the Km.t alligned other Africans to Km.t but the Greeks did NOT align other Europeans to "Greek" but rather barbarians.

It's also worth noting that your website suggests that Nehesu could also mean barbarian, which is supposed to be according to you, analogous to deshretu, and further undermines the analogy.

I think respectfully, that certain contradictions are emerging and you may not see them.

Or, perhaps I am just slow. In which case, please humour me and explain, carefully, and in small words.

---

I could tell by your first response that you missed my point completely. It's sailing above Super car's head as well. I was not drawing an analogy between deshretu and barbarian. I was demonstrating how you can draw a conclusion based on what is already known.

Examples:
a) We know that the Europeans who came to the Americas called the native peoples "Indians" and "Red men"; from this we can conclude that they called the Seminole, a native people, "Indian" or "Red men" also.

b) We know that the Greeks called non-Greeks barbarians; from this we can conclude that they called the Egyptians, non-Greeks, barbarians also.

quote:

---

The ancient Greeks called barbarians those who spoke other, incomprehensible languages. Persians and Egyptians who were not at lower standard than Greeks were called barbarians while the Greek Dorians, who really were at a much lower cultural level than the Greek Achaeans and Ionians, were never called barbarians. The lesson is clear. The ancient Greeks called all non-Greeks barbarians...

---

c) We know that the Egyptians called non-Blacks "Deshretu"; from this we can conclude that they called the Greeks, non-Blacks, "Deshretu" also.

You can also use this method to gain knowledge of something. For example:
We know that the Egyptian word "Nwt (Niut)" means "village, town, city, a community of people"; but if we examine its usage as demonstrated by al Takruri, we can conclude that it also meant "nation"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
c) We know that the Egyptians called non-Blacks "Deshretu"; from this we can conclude that they called the Greeks, non-Blacks, "Deshretu" also.

You can also use this method to gain knowledge of something. For example:
We know that the Egyptian word "Nwt (Niut)" means "village, town, city, a community of people"; but if we examine its usage as demonstrated by al Takruri, we can conclude that it also meant "nation"

See how that works...

---

quote:

---

Wally:
I could tell by your first response that you missed my point completely. It's sailing above Super car's head as well. I was not drawing an analogy between deshretu and barbarian. I was demonstrating how you can draw a conclusion based on what is already known.

---

Wally, as it should be apparent to any informed person reading my exchange with you, it is you, who doesn't seem to grasp what is being said.

I understood what you said from the onset, which is simply that, all dark folks were considered "Kmt.nwt", and light skin folks were put into the "Deshretu" bracket.

What you fail to comprehend from my requests, for reasons I don't know, is that I am not confused about what you are saying, but rather, I am asking for substantiation of your claims.

Simply put, where in the Kemetic texts, is it specifically stated that "ALL" dark folks (regardless whether they were Kemetians or not) were considered "Kmt.nwt", while "ALL" light skin folks were "Deshretu"? Which specific text(s) state this, and who translated it/them as such?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
Wally, as it should be apparent to any informed person reading my exchange with you, it is you, who doesn't seem to grasp what is being said.

I understood what you said from the onset, which is simply that, all dark folks were considered "Kmt.nwt", and light skin folks were put into the "Deshretu" bracket.

What you fail to comprehend from my requests, for reasons I don't know, is that I am not confused about what you are saying, but rather, I am asking for [b]substantiation of your claims.

Simply put, where in the Kemetic texts, is it specifically stated that "ALL" dark folks (regardless whether they were Kemetians or not) were considered "Kmt.nwt", while "ALL" light skin folks were "Deshretu"? Which specific text(s) state this, and who translated it/them as such?

[/B]

---

Any person, informed or not, would question why you just don't seem to get it.

Please read the following:

quote:

---

The ancient Greeks called barbarians those who spoke other, incomprehensible languages. Persians and Egyptians who were not at lower standard than Greeks were called barbarians while the Greek Dorians, who really were at a much lower cultural level than the Greek Achaeans and Ionians, were never called barbarians. The lesson is clear. The ancient Greeks called all non-Greeks barbarians...
--from a critique of "Malcolm Errington - A History of Macedonia"

---

You will note that nowhere in the quotation (or in any that I know of, for that matter) where it specifically states that some Greek text stated "ie, Everyone who is not Greek is a barbarian". The author draws his conclusion logically, based on the facts that he presents.
You would probably not be satisfied by this method.

Now,
read the following:

quote:

---

Al Takruri: Book of Gates the Gate of Teka Hra chapter.
This is the text where in the mdw ntr above
the head of Heru the Kmtyw & Nhsw are lumped
together as KM.t.nwt while the Tmhw & Aamw
are dshr.t.nwt a polity not DSHr.t.x3st a
piece of land.

---

Once again, this text (which answers your question of "which specific text...") tells you that in the Mdw Ntr you have the following categories and sub-categories of peoples:

KM.t.nwt- (Greater) Black Nation
-- Kmtyw - the citizens of Black (ie, Egyptians)
-- Nhsw - Blacks, who were not Egyptian (ie, "strangers")

DSHr.t.nwt- (Greater) Red Nation
-- Tmhw - Libyans; Champollion's Europeans ("red ones")
-- Aamw - Asiatics

quote:

---

Wally:
Now,
read the following:

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

Al Takruri: Book of Gates the Gate of Teka Hra chapter.
This is the text where in the mdw ntr above
the head of Heru the Kmtyw & Nhsw are lumped
together as KM.t.nwt while the Tmhw & Aamw
are dshr.t.nwt a polity not DSHr.t.x3st a
piece of land.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Once again, this text (which answers your question of "which specific text...") tells you that in the Mdw Ntr you have the following categories and sub-categories of peoples:

KM.t.nwt- (Greater) Black Nation
-- Kmtyw - the citizens of Black (ie, Egyptians)
-- Nhsw - Blacks, who were not Egyptian (ie, "strangers")

DSHr.t.nwt- (Greater) Red Nation
-- Tmhw - Libyans; Champollion's Europeans ("red ones")
-- Aamw - Asiatics

Now, logically from the above, it would appear that the Egyptians considered this list to be comprehensive, and included "all" the peoples of the earth, (apparently as far as they were concerned).
This should satisfy your need to substantiate "all"
and
I am not wasting anymore time with you on this.

---

I omitted the rest, because it was just rubbish that didn't address my simple questions, concerning the texts that specifically state this, and who translated these texts.

You are simply re-posting a comment, which states that since "Kmtyw" and "Nhsw" were "lumped" together, that this somehow means that they are all considered "Blacks", while the "Tmhw" and "Aamw" are considered "Dshrt.nwt". Does this in anyway translate into, "What Kemetic text specifically states that all dark people are part of "kmt.nwt", while *all* non-dark folks are "dshrt.nwt"? Does it also anwer, who did the translations?

As far as "Nhsw" are concerned, is there a specific reference of its application to people, who weren't considered part of the "Nubian" regions?

I certainly don't have time to waste in dancing around simple questions, that require simple straightforward answers.