quote:Originally posted by rasol: Have you read this yet?
Opinions?
I Have it on hold at the library and i have read some books from this company before,but i will give a opinion on it once i get it next week. The link below was to really show a bigger picture of the book once you click the picture inside the link.The book is more for younger ages but older folks could read too and it's good to know what is put out there for the young and old folks and to see if there is misinformation or good enought info on this subject,egypt and africa as a whole.
some of it you could read inside the link ,so far it looks alright but you never know what type of misinfo is in the book so i will read the whole thing soon.In one thing they got wrong so far i think was saying the population in ancient nubia was always smaller than egypt,that's true but not when rome controlled egypt.egypt population grew smaller and nubia later grew larger but iguess they must be talking about when egypt was free as awhole but the book so far does not make that clear from what i have read so far.
Hopefully the book would show more other types of costumes during the early kush period and later period,because it's harder to get a picture(drawings) of ancient nubia like egypt but that's changing slowly.
Another book that came out two years ago THAT I POSTED awhile ago and is more detailed was called - daily life of the ancient nubians.
posted
I think that this book is really reinforcing the whole myth of all people south of a certain point on the Nile as being "Nubians", as if they were one cultural political entity. Break the continuity of culture and achievement between "Nubia", Egypt and Kush, by claiming that Nubia traditions were "imported" into Egypt, as if Egypt had to "import" culture from within itself. There was no monolithic "Nubian" culture and the early "Nubians" close to Egypt were PART of Egypt and likewise not really "Nubians" as a separate or distinct ethnic group.
Unfortunately, it is a story that only gets fragmentary coverage, with the fragments that get covered depending on the goal of the book. If the goal of the book is to present "Nubia" or Kush as Africas "first" civilization (as if Egypt wasn't part of Africa), then you will see more about Kush/Meroe and some stuff about A Group Nubia. This tends to be the predominant presentation of the history of "Nubia", even there is much more to it than that. Other fragments are left out that show that "Nubians" were some of the earliest farmers on the Nile, gave Egypt many of its gods, were part of the first nome of Egypt, were considered the "founders" of Egypt and so forth. Likewise, you always see references to "friendly" Nubians in the south of Egypt, as if they were NOT Egyptians. The point here is that this lumping together of peoples as Nubians is more for the purpose of separation than anything else. "Nubians" have always been part of Egypt, were instrumental in its early development and originated many of the cultural traits that became Egyptian culture. Therefore, trying to separate these "Nubians" from Egypt and lump them together with Kush, Kerma and Meroe is really just a hack job of history.
Now here is the kicker. The actual term "Nubian" comes from a hack job on the word "Nubt". Nubt, or the city of gold, was an impotant center of predynastic Egypt. Nubt or Ombos as the Greeks called it, was an important place during the Naquadan predynastic period. Many times the Egyptians referred to people or gods(like Set) from this region as the "Nubti" or (my words) "Nubti"ans, nubians.
Therefore, the origin of the word Nubian is not in reference to the people of Northern Sudan, it is in reference to the people in the south of Egypt who FOUNDED the "city of gold" in the South of Egypt along with the system of gods and goddesses that became the hallmark of Egyptian culture. However, this aspect of the word "Nubian" has been overlooked and pushed under the rug, partly because Nubt(ians) are supposed to be negroes from the south (as in Kerma or Kush) and because early Nubt(ian) culture is the origin of Egyptian culture and many have gone to great lengths to make the southern Negro "Nubians" separate from Egypt. Well, like I said, there was no "Nubia" in ancient Egypt and the closest thing to a "Nubian" or person of gold or person of the city of gold would have been the Nubti(ians) of the city of gold, Nubt in southern Egypt. Nubt is the ancient home of Set worship in Egypt, which is funny, since Set is often referred to as a near eastern imported god, even though the evidence points to ancient predynastic roots in Nubt. Once again, the pattern of distortion and bias is clear in trying to lump Nubians and southern Nile valley people AWAY from Egypt, while lumping Near Easterners and Northern Nile valley people together and CLOSER to Egypt. If you look at the Naquadan period of Egyptian prehistory and the fact that Nubt was at the center of it, you will see how calling ANYONE "Nubian" as SEPARATE from Egypt, makes absolutely NO sense:
I think this whole pattern of use/abuse/misuse of the word Nubian is much more a ploy to keep the native population of the Nile separated and disjointed for the purpose of arcaeological/historical manipulation more than anything else. The predynastic first city state or administrative area (nome) of Egypt was in the south, called "Ta Seti". One of the most important religious capitals as well as possibly the capital of the nome itself was called Nubt or "the City of Gold". Therefore, by all rights the TRUE Nubians are the people of the first nome of Egypt, people who worshipped at the "City of Gold" in the Land of the Bow, the first land, the home of the Gods in southern Egypt.
Going back to another discussion about the Ramessids, the year 400 stela is referenced for the origins of the Ramessid dynasty:
quote: His Majesty has commanded to raise a great stela in granite for the great name of his fathers, in order to raise the name of the father of his fathers ( and for ) his father the King Men-Ma'at-Re, son of Re, Seti Mer-ne-Ptah lasting for eternity, like Re every day.
Year 400, the fourth month of the season of Shammu, the fourth day of the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, Seth-Great-of-valor, son of Re whom he loves, Nubti [11], beloved by Re-Hor-akhty, may he live for ever.
The Regent came, the mayor of the town, the vizier, the fanbearer on the right hand of the King [7], the leader of the bowmen, the chief of the archers, the governor of the fortress of Tjarw [8], the great of Medjay [9], the royal scribe, the administrative officer of the chariotry the lord master of the ceremonies of the Feast of the He-goat [10], the master of Smendes, the first prophet of Seth, the lector-priest of Wadjet-Opet-Tawy, the head of all priests of all the gods, Seti, right of voice, son of the Prince regent, the mayor of the town, the vizier, the chief of the archers, the governor of the fortress of Tjarw, the royal scribe, the administrative officer of the chariotry, Paramesse [12], right of voice, born from the mistress of the house, the songstress of Re, Tiw, right of voice, he says :
Hail to thee, o Seth, son of Nut, great of strength in the boat of millions of years, in the bow of the ship of Re, the great screamer .... .. [ mayest thou ] give me a good time for following [13] your Ka and may I be lasting in ....
Everything in the year 400 stela celebrates the ascension of a Southern Nubti(an) to the throne, symbolic of another link to the first nome of Egypt, the home of the Egyptian dynastic line and the gods and reinforces the idea of the Ramessid line being from the south. It is plain and clear as day to see. Given that Egypt was in crisis it would make sense then that they go back to the south for leadership and attempt to rejuvinate the kingdom from the old established bloodlines in the south. Therefore, the fact that the skulls of the Ramessids seem to be more like Neolithic "Nubian" skulls only affirms that this was an OLD bloodline from the south that was brought onto the throne with the Ramessid dynasty.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nubia is an inaccuracte misused and abused term so plastic that precision in using it is impossible. Judging from the pages of the book viewable at the Amazon site the author probably means the vast territory of the peoples labeled NHHS in rn mdw.
Although its a youth's book the author could have included the late neolithic peopling of the lower Nile from its Saharan, Sudanese, and Horn sources. This would immediately establish the fundamental kinship of upper Egyptians with lower Keshites. A sentence or two on the Khartoum "mesolithic" precursor to downriver cultures is missing as is also the fact of and primacy of A-Group monarchy and that they ruled as far north of the 1st cataract as Nag el Hasaya. Food procurement is mystified, initially noted as farming and herding circa 6000 BCE now 3000 years later is typified as hunting and gathering.
Although I wouldn't expect the author to get into the fine points of TaSeti.x3st vs TaSeti.nwt, I still expect some kind of insight into the polities of the Mazoi, Wawat (Sethu, Irtet, Mekher, Tereres) and Yam, even if by no more than just mentioning them, but I don't find them in the index although I did find Qustul (and Bruce Williams, so maybe the monarchial primacy of TaSeti is in the book).
And I know it'd be an over expectation to see Gebel Barkal notated as that sacred spot near the 4th cataract holy to Amun which linked kingship in Km.t with certain families in Kesh so that we see throughout the history of Km.t there were rulers who held the throne due to Nehesi wives, mothers, or descent.
I eagerly await kenndo's opinion after he reads and asseses the whole book.
My children need books. As with nearly all youth oriented Africana books this one no doubt requires my black marker blot outs and ink pen annotations before passing it on to them, first impressions are of great impact. Still a problem of true acceptance enters my children's mind by the fact that their Africana literature isn't reaching them as published. Until reliable publications come from Afrikan authors and publishing houses what else can a conscious concerned parent do? It's important to me they not see Africana studies as a protest, but proactive and independent as are the Classics or Judaica or Americana etc.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Doug M you are the M.A.N, if someone doesn't understand the posts that Doug M wrote they will NEVER understand Kemet.
Ta Seti cannot be ignored because it was a intregal part of Kemet.
Anyone who subscribes to the myth of a Ancient place called Nubia will NEVER understand or witness the evolution of Kemet. Badarian(who are the Libyans) to Naqada to Dynastic Kemet it's all a evolutionary process coming from simple to more complex environment over many thousand of years.
What's strange is that when "they" promote Nubia they lose Lybia in the process, notice that Kemet had it's main rival to the WEST (Libya) not the South but the WEST called Libya though if someone subscribes to the idea of ancient Nubia then Lybia gets lost in the shuffle and confusion becomes the order of the day. So if you want to understand Kemet you have to first REJECT the Nubia separate blacks living in the south idea, REJECT the notion that black separate Nubians are the group that Egypt gets "slaves" from, notice how the Superiority psychotic complex also shows up in the work of Eurocentric Egyptologist? Nubia is a GAME that Eurocentrics use to plant a notion of inferiority within black people studying Egypt so don't fall for the HOAX.
a Nubi is a goldminer living in the Golden City Ta Nub which is a city located in the southern nome of Kemet called Ta'Sti which is one of the first if not the first and extremely important Nome of Kemet, so this would make the Nubi, goldminers citizens of Kemet.
posted
Unfortunately, it is a story that only gets fragmentary coverage, with the fragments that get covered depending on the goal of the book. If the goal of the book is to present "Nubia" or Kush as Africas "first" civilization (as if Egypt wasn't part of Africa), then you will see more about Kush/Meroe and some stuff about A Group Nubia. This tends to be the predominant presentation of the history of "Nubia", even there is much more to it than that. Other fragments are left out that show that "Nubians" were some of the earliest farmers on the Nile, gave Egypt many of its gods, were part of the first nome of Egypt, were considered the "founders" of Egypt and so forth. Likewise, you always see references to "friendly" Nubians in the south of Egypt, as if they were NOT Egyptians. The point here is that this lumping together of peoples as Nubians is more for the purpose of separation than anything else. "Nubians" have always been part of Egypt, were instrumental in its early development and originated many of the cultural traits that became Egyptian culture. Therefore, trying to separate these "Nubians" from Egypt and lump them together with Kush, Kerma and Meroe is really just a hack job of history.
----------------------------------------------
lower nubia was a separate area(kingdom) than egypt and yes most upper egyptians came from this region . Egypt later came in and wipe out this culture and people,because they went to war during the old kingdom. lower nubia was free from egyptian rule until that period.
THE NORTHERN part of lower nubia is only in egypt today because of the british but lower nubia had it's own kingdoms as well and existed as a state before egypt so i would say egypt really belongs to lower nubia than lower nubia belonging to egypt.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ What is this book's definition of Kushites?
IT seems the region of upper and southern nubia proper and later lower nubia once upper and southern nubian filled it up since lower nubians did disappeared.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
That is lower nubia filled up by those from the south of it since lower nubia at times had no people in it.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
From some of what i read so far,the a-group is mention of course southern/and upper nubia is mention but not as much until later and these two regions seem to be more powerful even during the a-group time period in lower nubia but more work is being done to know more about nubia outside of lower nubia during the a-group in lower nubia and before the a-group.
I guess in the book when mean before the rise of kush they are talking about the second kingdom of kush and not the first but i think more detailed and correct info will be in the book since the kerma period,earlier upper/and southern,and c-group is mention and even nubia during the new kingdom,of course southern nubia was not under egyptian rule. SO it seems the book will/has mention the nubian region having a great civilization before the second kingdom of kush.
I WILL POST something else about what some kids are learning these days.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ What is this book's definition of Kushites?
IT seems the region of upper and southern nubia proper and later lower nubia once upper and southern nubian filled it up since lower nubians did disappeared.
In other words Kush in this book is neither a nation, a culture, or a people, but rather and artifical and implicitly racial construct created by Europeans to 'assign' Africans to a sealed off corner in the history of the Nile Valley.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The book describes all of that-as a peolpe,nation etc, but i have to read the whole thing when i get it.here is a description i have found about the book so far.
DESCRIPTION Who were people of the ancient world? What was it like to be a farmer or a soldier or an artisan in ancient times? This series creates portraits of life in ancient civilizations through the inhabitants. Each chapter focuses on a different part of society, such as peasants, scholars/scribes, priests, soldiers, rulers, and more. This book details the lives of the Kushites, an ancient people in Africa. They were sometimes called the Nubians. Neighbors to ancient Egyptians, the Kushites were known for building temples and tombs, such as the temple of Dendur, creating their own written language called Meroitic, and playing an important role in trade in the ancient world.
note-they did create two meroitic scripts
meroitic in 315 b.c. and a more advanced form in 180 b.c.
Demotic WAS created in the 7th cen. b.c. by taharqa to make the egyptian language better understood for certain nubians.
there should have been more detail info on nubia starting at 8000 b.c.,but it does not hint of a civilization that goes back that far and it does mentions by 6000 b.c there was bit more advancement even if the book only sums it up,maybe it is talk about more in the book,but it should have made it clear that it's civilization goes back further instead of by 6000 b.c. but it does hint there was something going on before and maybe it will be mention more so or clearly in the book,if not there are other better and more detail books out there that makes it clear that civilization goes back in nubia to 8000 b.c.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: What about this book? Is it worth reading for someone just starting to learn Egypt? Good or not good?
If you are TRULY sincere about learning Kemet/Egypt then I can help you and my first suggestion might seem strange but if you do it I GUARANTEE you will be truly informed and happy you did, Your first book should be This Book:
Donald Lateiner did a decent job with the Translation and also didn't omit or coverup the ugly stuff. Read the chapters on Kemet/Egypt alone if you that's what you want, that's ok too but start with this book because it gives you a point of view from someone who was actually their 2400+ years ago. I know you will not be disappointed when you read it. 21st Century Historians are trapped into RACISM so they confuse something that should have been really simple, just talking about what you learned not covering up facts just honestly reporting it. When your finish Reading Herodotus then you will be able to know which historical writers are worth your attention today.
What about this book? Is it worth reading for someone just starting to learn Egypt? Good or not good?
No, I would not recommend the particular book in the link. As a beginner I would recommend you maybe read the cheap E.A. Wallis Budge books at first and progress when you become more familiar with ancient Egypt. If you want to truely get a good understanding of the ancient Egyptians and their world you need to learn mdu ntr[that is hieroglyphics];otherwise you are going off second sources by Egyptologist.
You could also read Greco-Roman sources like Herodotus,Diodorus Siculus,and etc but please note that sometimes these sources are inaccurate and somewhat biased when examined with the papyri,tomb depictions,and archaeological evidence. You are better off getting your sources directly from ancient Egyptian source but the problem remains that most of the ancient Egyptians did not write a narrative history like the ancient Greeks so we only have scraps of papyri,day books,annal stones,various kings lists and archaeology to guide us.
Manetho is another source but only fragments of his work survive in the writings of various church fathers and Joesephus. He was an Egyptian priest that complied the history of his nation from temple accounts. Not always accurate either but he is the basis for the Egyptologist chronology of ancient Egypt.
In the meanwhile, here are some books that were published I recommend:
___Great book that is very unbiased that looks at ancient Egypt from a rare perpective from a Western Egyptologist. He adresses many contreversial issus pertaining to the history of ancient Egypt.
__Unfortunately, this book is out-of-print but you can probably still acess it through inter-library loan at your local library. Has essays by Egyptologist and non-Egyptologist alike about the African cultural natural of ancient Egypt.
___Good book on the introduction of archaeology in areas southward from Egypt. I don't like the title Nubia because no such area existed geographically untill the Greco-Roman era. The ancient Egyptians knew the areas past the first cataract by many names including Ta-seti,Yam,Kush,Nehsi etc.... Might be too technical for beginners but is a nice introduction.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
What about this book? Is it worth reading for someone just starting to learn Egypt? Good or not good?
Just read the few sample pages, and the author sounds as a white supremacist, could almost be a member of stormfront?
hey ausar, is this true what Egyptians said about the so-called nubians?
"The Nubian has but to hear (a sound) and he falls at a voice, it is merely answering him that makes him retreat; if one is agressive against him he turns tail, retreat and he becomes more aggressive. they are certainly not people to be respected: they are craven wretches. My majesty has seen them-it is not a lie."
"Even at the best times Nubians were irresponsible and lazy but dangerous because of their ability in black magic. Amenophis II advised his southern viceroy 'Don't be at all lenient with Nubia! Beware of their people and their magicians!'"
"Kush is usually said to be 'weak/vile' the Nubians are 'doomed' from the outset (...) they were 'the god's abonimation' fit only to be 'tenants' of Egypt."
Lmao, is this true about the egyptians account on "Nubians"? sounds like the author is projecting his own modern sentiments on the ancients, and possibly misinterpritng their accounts. just the title of the book FROM SLAVE TO PHARAOreveals his pre-concieved belief of blacks being mostly slaves through history.
"Egyptians were well aware of the existence of Sudanese blacks. that they spoke a tongue markedly different from Egyptian was self-evident. Egyptians partook of the 'words of God' and every Egyptian longed to hear it even when abroad. In contrast, foreign languages were pure gibberish and those who spoke them, especially Nubians were 'gibberers' ."
Where did he get this from , comments like "especially Nubians were 'gibberers'"? when Egyptian accounts according to ausar didnt tell stories in a narrative way such as Greeks. is this man talking straight out if his ass? It is evedent he has contempt on Nubians.
"it would be interested to know how the nubians reacted to the racial attitudes Egypt manifested towards them, and in particular whether they shared a similar xenophobic aversion to all Egyptians. Unfortunatly such knowledge will always be difficult to acquire. it is very doubtful whether the Nubian and Kushites of the third and second millennia ever developed their own script, so that the vast majority remained illiterate and cannot speak to us over the centuries.(...) one should never underestimate the overwhelming and irresistable attraction of the way of life of the triumpant imperial culture, whether Egyptian, Hellenic, Roman or British "
Lol@British, can't believe he compared British empire which collapsed less than a century since its creation to the rest who survide through millenia Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Indeed, mainstream Egyptology is plagued with people that still think much like the 19th century and early 20th century Egyptologist. A better choice is Robert Morkot's The Black Pharoahs which covers both the early 19th century racism and relationship between both Egyptians and their neighboors past the first cataract.
Robert Morkot reviewed this same book and showed the various bias of it.
However, there are texts that refer to people south of the first cataract as vile,but we observe also there are texts like the Phopecies of Neferti that talk of the origins of the 12th dyansty pharoahs coming from Ta-seti. Ta-seti historically was the first nome of Upper Egypt located around modern day Aswan. Infact, Senworset III's very own family had a Nubian origin. He is the pharoah who wrote the stela that revisionist white supremist like to cite as evidence of segregation policies of the ancient Egyptians.
Let me also emphasize that other various foreigners such as Libyans,Asiatics,etc were often called vile.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
As long as we continue employing the misnomer "Nubian" projected in the current literature a certain of confusion will remain in understanding mdw ntr texts. We must use the specific terms as they are in the primary sources.
If memory serves me correctly the following quote is from one of the original Sesotris:
quote: "The Nubian has but to hear (a sound) and he falls at a voice, it is merely answering him that makes him retreat; if one is agressive against him he turns tail, retreat and he becomes more aggressive. they are certainly not people to be respected: they are craven wretches. My majesty has seen them-it is not a lie."
This pharaoh is talking about his military expeditions against Wawat. Before the unification of the Two Lands, Wawat ruled up to Nag el Hasaya in what would later be the 2nd nome of Upper Egypt (Heru's Throne) immediately north of the 1st nome TaSeti.nwt. So we see there was intense rivalry between TaWy and TaSeti.x3st since predynastic times.
As we progress into the earliest dynastic era a cultural demarcation begins to distinguish the two peoples. KM.t embraced writing while TaSeti and Kesh to the south of it did not.
Getting back to the author of the above quoted inscription Sesostris III wrote it after retaking Buhen fortress. Late in 5th dynasty times Wawat took over Buhen fortress, built in the 4th dynasty by Snefru, and held it until the 12th dynasty when Sesostris took it and pillaged pastoral populations to its south. In the very next dynasty (13th) Kesh took it over holding it until the 18th dynasty.
With all this in mind we can see Sesostris III's boasts are just that, political hype. During the first 14 dynasties of its history that though TaWy built Buhen fortress (exchange place or trade center) Nehesis controlled it for 11 dynasties.
Then too in order to understand Sesostris III implied no "racial" proclivities we need to know his ancestral antecedents. We'll examine that next.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sesostris III (also transliterated as Senusret and Senwosret) was a 12th dynasty ruler. Senusret is a name from the Uahka family, one of whose members took on the name Amenemhet to honor Amen the major deity of Thebes in KM.t and Gebel Barkal deep in Kwsh. The 9th and 10th dynasty Uahka family of Thebes were buried in tombs of type unknown in KM.t but of design in Kush. The Uahka family has been traced back to the 6th dynasty builders of the temples at Qua near Abydos. This family established the 12th dynasty.
Amenemhet I started the 12th dynasty. He was vizier to Mentuhotep IV last pharaoh of dynasty 11. Amenemhet came to rule relying on a certain claim of ancestry and marriage as his right to attain to the rulership. The rulers of Kush were known to have a certain claim on KM.t's throne. This claim grew from the interdependencies between the two nations of KM.t and Kesh having to do with princes and princesses from Kush attending the Kmty court and marrying court members. Amenemhet records a "prophecy" foretelling his upcomance.
quote: provided by Wally (clickable link please go and read it) nswt pw r iyt n rsy imny mAa xrw rn.f sA Hmt pw n tA sty ms pw n Xn nxn iw.f r Ssp HDt iw.f r wTs dSrt iw.f smA sxmty iw.f r sHtp nbwy m mrt.sn pXr iHy m xfa wsr m nwd
There is a king who will come from the south Ameny true of voice is his name. He is the son of a woman of the Land of the Bow, he is a child of the Heartland of Nekhen. He will take up the White Crown, he will raise up the Red Crown, he will unite the Two Mighty Goddesses, he will appease the Two Lord Gods, with what they desire. The field circuit is in his grasp, the oar in the jump.
Amenemhet I warred against Wawat pushing south far enough to establish a center of trade in Kerma at the 3rd cataract. Senusret I mentions the Akherkin, Kas, Khesaa, Shat, and Shemyk among the peoples of Wawat that he subdued. Senwosret III annexed Wawat up to the 2nd cataract as the southern border of KM.t.
Because of their propensities for independence the Senwosrets found it necessary to wage war against Wawat. On their defeat a string of fortresses were built. These were at Buhen, Kor, Dorginarti, Mirgissa, Dabenarti, Askut, Shalfak, Uronarti, Kumma, and Semna. They were to prevent passage of any Nhsw downriver including shipping, caravan, or pastoral transhumants. Clearly these people were a serious force to be reckoned with and not the cowards Senwosret's boasts paint them to be. Even their merchants and cattlemen were feared as capable of successfully confronting Kmtw authority.
It seems that Kush at Kerma and above was the seat of Kmt's fear of adversarial threat from the south. And it was from there indeed that by 16th dynasty times Nhsw politcal intrigue held one third rulership over Egypt. In the words of the ruler at Thebes:
quote:"a chieftain is in Avaris and another in Kush: I sit united with an Aamy and a Nhsy, each man in possession of his slice of this Egypt."
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The phrase Kush khesyt cited ad nausea has been blown far out of proportion. An obvious play on word sounds it means defeated more so than it connotes concepts of contempt. But talk of wretched or vile Kush is irrelevant in understanding how Kmt viewed her southern neighbors and kinsmen. In war talk what enemies aren't described with deprecations? To the contrary we can see that certain families of Kush had a right to the throne of Kmt that was considered the most legitimate of all harking back to the original western (Greek) notion that Egypt originated when Aithiopians settled downriver.
quote:Originally posted by Yonis:
quote:Originally written by Donald Redford: "Kush is usually said to be 'weak/vile' ...
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is a mass of goodness and insight to be gleaned from the primary text.
iw.f r Ssp HDt iw.f r wTs dSrt
He will take the white crown He will take the red crown. [the white and red crown of upper and lower egypt - where dSrt = the color red]
w r qd inbw HqA anx wDA snb nn rdit hAy aAmw r kmt
they will build the Walls of the Ruler may he live, prosper, and be well, to prevent the Asiatics from coming down into Km.t. [where Aamu = Asiatics]
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
I've actually read the Egyptian part of this book series! What I found really surprising is that the book illustrations show the Egyptians as blacks, yet most of the photos they had of actual tomb paintings were 'touched-up' to where the colors were lighter than they really looked to the point that it looked as if the photos were bleached!
Other than that it was a nice read
Posts: 26279 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: The phrase Kush khesyt cited ad nausea has been blown far out of proportion. An obvious play on word sounds it means defeated more so than it connotes concepts of contempt. But talk of wretched or vile Kush is irrelevant in understanding how Kmt viewed her southern neighbors and kinsmen. In war talk what enemies aren't described with deprecations? To the contrary we can see that certain families of Kush had a right to the throne of Kmt that was considered the most legitimate of all harking back to the original western (Greek) notion that Egypt originated when Aithiopians settled downriver.
Correct.
quote:"The Nubian has but to hear (a sound) and he falls at a voice, it is merely answering him that makes him retreat; if one is agressive against him he turns tail, retreat and he becomes more aggressive. they are certainly not people to be respected: they are craven wretches. My majesty has seen them-it is not a lie."...
This seems to be a tactic popular with many nomadic groups, where they would feign retreat and trick their enemies into fleeing but would turn around and strike back even harder.
quote:"Even at the best times Nubians were irresponsible and lazy but dangerous because of their ability in black magic. Amenophis II advised his southern viceroy 'Don't be at all lenient with Nubia! Beware of their people and their magicians!'"
It must be remembered that the Egyptians practiced magic themselves, but yes there was a stereotype that Nubian magic was more dangerous. I am also suspicious of their usage of the term 'black' magic, since this was a term Europeans used not only for evil magic but the type practiced by Africans in general even though the Egyptians were one of the people to practice it.
quote:"Kush is usually said to be 'weak/vile' the Nubians are 'doomed' from the outset (...) they were 'the god's abonimation' fit only to be 'tenants' of Egypt."
LOL We know that this certainly wasn't the case! Kush was a very strong nation and even came close to conquering and destroying Egypt!
quote:Lmao, is this true about the egyptians account on "Nubians"? sounds like the author is projecting his own modern sentiments on the ancients, and possibly misinterpritng their accounts. just the title of the book FROM SLAVE TO PHARAOreveals his pre-concieved belief of blacks being mostly slaves through history.
It seems to me Yonis, that the Author is not only projecting his own personal prejudices but uses Egyptian wartime propoganda as his "proof". This is a common MO of Eurocentrics.
quote:"Egyptians were well aware of the existence of Sudanese blacks. that they spoke a tongue markedly different from Egyptian was self-evident. Egyptians partook of the 'words of God' and every Egyptian longed to hear it even when abroad. In contrast, foreign languages were pure gibberish and those who spoke them, especially Nubians were 'gibberers' ."
Where did he get this from , comments like "especially Nubians were 'gibberers'"? when Egyptian accounts according to ausar didnt tell stories in a narrative way such as Greeks. is this man talking straight out if his ass? It is evedent he has contempt on Nubians.
I don't know how the Egyptians felt about foreign languages but what the author describes sounds an awful lot like the Greeks whose actual term "barbarian" is derived from "barbar" which means jibberish! Perhaps the Egyptians felt the same way with foreign languages but that doesn't prove anything racial, or even linguistic since the Greeks said the same about people who spoke languages related to their own.
quote:"it would be interested to know how the nubians reacted to the racial attitudes Egypt manifested towards them, and in particular whether they shared a similar xenophobic aversion to all Egyptians. Unfortunatly such knowledge will always be difficult to acquire. it is very doubtful whether the Nubian and Kushites of the third and second millennia ever developed their own script, so that the vast majority remained illiterate and cannot speak to us over the centuries.(...) one should never underestimate the overwhelming and irresistable attraction of the way of life of the triumpant imperial culture, whether Egyptian, Hellenic, Roman or British "
The Egyptians may have felt xenophobic but definitely not racially bias. In fact the Egyptians were more xenophobic to non Africans like Asiatics than Nubians which is why their epithets towards Asiatics were much more degrading. Where are the authors mention of these?
Posts: 26279 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know about "conquering and destroying" but the Keshli were quite instrumental in restoring the legitimate monarchy and primeval institutions whenever their northern brother fell prey to Deshreti mechinations whether by Meshwesh or any one of the A3mw peoples or nations.
Xenophobic toward Kesht? Remember now, the monarchy was based on female Keshli association going back to the start of the state and consider the government posts held by Keshli all through the dynastic period as well as the innumerable citizens of Kesht descent.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:"Kush is usually said to be 'weak/vile' the Nubians are 'doomed' from the outset (...) they were 'the god's abonimation' fit only to be 'tenants' of Egypt."
LOL We know that this certainly wasn't the case! Kush was a very strong nation and even came close to conquering and destroying Egypt!
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I take it that this must have something to do with Djehuti's comment:
Tomb reveals Ancient Egypt?s humiliating secret
By Dalya Alberge
Our correspondent reports on how details of crushing defeat by another Nile superpower were kept hidden.
ANCIENT Egyptians airbrushed out of history one of their most humiliating defeats in battle, academics believe. In what the British Museum described as the discovery of a lifetime, a 3,500-year-old inscription shows that the Sudanese kingdom of Kush came close to destroying its northern neighbour.
The revelation is contained in 22 lines of sophisticated hieroglyphics deciphered by Egyptologists from the British Museum and Egypt after their discovery in February in a richly decorated tomb at El Kab, near Thebes, in Upper Egypt.
Vivian Davies, Keeper of the museum?s Department of Ancient Egypt and Sudan, said: "In many ways this is the discovery of a lifetime, one that changes the textbooks. We're absolutely staggered by it."
The inscription details previously unknown important battles unprecedented, since the time of the god?? the beginning of time. Experts now believe that the humiliation of defeat was one that the Ancient Egyptians preferred to omit from their historical accounts.
Contemporary Egyptian descriptions had led historians to assume that the kingdom of Kush was a weak and barbaric neighbouring state for hundreds of years, although it boasted a complex society with vast resources of gold dominating the principal trade routes into the heart of Africa. It did eventually conquer Egypt, in the 8th century BC.
Mr Davies, who headed the joint British Museum and Egyptian archaeological team, said: "Now it is clear that Kush was a superpower which had the capacity to invade Egypt. It was a huge invasion, one that stirred up the entire region, a momentous event that is previously undocumented."
"They swept over the mountains, over the Nile, without limit. This is the first time we?ve got evidence. Far from Egypt being the supreme power of the Nile Valley, clearly Kush was at that time."
"Had they stayed to occupy Egypt, the Kushites might have eliminated it. That's how close Egypt came to extinction.But the Egyptians were resilient enough to survive, and shortly afterwards inaugurated the great imperial age known as the New Kingdom. The Kushites weren't interested in occupation. They went raiding for precious objects, a symbol of domination. They did a lot of damage."
The inscription was found between two internal chambers in a rock-cut tomb that was covered in soot and dirt. It appeared gradually as the grime was removed.
Mr Davies said: "I thought it would be a religious text, but it turned out to be historical. Gradually, a real narrative emerged, a brand new text inscribed in red paint, reading from right to left."
The tomb belonged to Sobeknakht, a Governor of El Kab, an important provincial capital during the latter part of the 17th Dynasty (about 1575-1550BC).
The inscription describes a ferocious invasion of Egypt by armies from Kush and its allies from the south, including the land of Punt, on the southern coast of the Red Sea. It says that vast territories were affected and describes Sobeknakht's heroic role in organising a counter-attack.
The text takes the form of an address to the living by Sobeknakht: "Listen you, who are alive upon earth . . . Kush came . . . aroused along his length, he having stirred up the tribes of Wawat . . . the land of Punt and the Medjaw. . ."
It describes the decisive role played by ?the might of the great one, Nekhbet?, the vulture-goddess of El Kab, as ?strong of heart against the Nubians, who were burnt through fire?, while the ?chief of the nomads fell through the blast of her flame.
The discovery explains why Egyptian treasures, including statues, stelae and an elegant alabaster vessel found in the royal tomb at Kerma, were buried in Kushite tombs: they were war trophies.
Mr Davies said: "That has never been properly explained before. Now it makes sense. It's the key that unlocks the information. Now we know they were looted trophies, symbols of these kings' power over the Egyptians. Each of the four main kings of Kush brought back looted treasures."
The alabaster vessel is contemporary with the latter part of the 17th Dynasty. It bears a funerary text for the spirit of the Governor, Hereditary Prince of Nekheb, Sobek- nakht. Now it is clear that it was looted from Sobeknakht's tomb, or an associated workshop, by the Kushite forces and taken back to Kerma, where it was buried in the precincts of the tomb of the Kushite king who had led or inspired the invasion.
The El Kab tomb was looted long ago, probably in antiquity. There is more to investigate at the enormous site and the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Egypt is now making such work a priority.
Rich pickings from ebony and ivory
Kush was a vast territory spanning modern-day northern Sudan. Ruled by kings who were buried with large quantities of luxury goods, including jewellery and inlaid furniture, it had complex political and religious institutions.
The economy was based on trading in ivory, ebony and incense, as well as slaves. Its skilled craftsmen left behind some of the finest ceramics produced in the ancient world.
The independent kingdom of Kush arose during the 8th century BC. The native kings laid claim to the Egyptian throne, declaring themselves the true heirs of Thutmose III and other great pharaonic ancestors. Under the leadership of King Piye (c747-716BC), they conquered Egypt, ruling as its 25th Dynasty.
The reign of King Taharqo (690-664BC) was a high point of the Kushite empire. He erected imposing temples, shrines and statues throughout the Nile Valley. His pyramid, the largest of the Kushite examples, soared to more than 48m (160ft).
Over 4,000 years interaction between the empires was inevitable. While they had different funerary practices at the time of the El Kab inscription, the Egyptians had tombs and pyramids while the Kushites preferred tumuli (grave mounds), the Kushites went on to build pyramids and mummify their dead.
In return, the Egyptians were particularly influenced by Kushite jewellery design.
What about this book? Is it worth reading for someone just starting to learn Egypt? Good or not good?
Just read the few sample pages, and the author sounds as a white supremacist, could almost be a member of stormfront?
hey ausar, is this true what Egyptians said about the so-called nubians?
"The Nubian has but to hear (a sound) and he falls at a voice, it is merely answering him that makes him retreat; if one is agressive against him he turns tail, retreat and he becomes more aggressive. they are certainly not people to be respected: they are craven wretches. My majesty has seen them-it is not a lie."
"Even at the best times Nubians were irresponsible and lazy but dangerous because of their ability in black magic. Amenophis II advised his southern viceroy 'Don't be at all lenient with Nubia! Beware of their people and their magicians!'"
"Kush is usually said to be 'weak/vile' the Nubians are 'doomed' from the outset (...) they were 'the god's abonimation' fit only to be 'tenants' of Egypt."
Lmao, is this true about the egyptians account on "Nubians"? sounds like the author is projecting his own modern sentiments on the ancients, and possibly misinterpritng their accounts. just the title of the book FROM SLAVE TO PHARAOreveals his pre-concieved belief of blacks being mostly slaves through history.
"Egyptians were well aware of the existence of Sudanese blacks. that they spoke a tongue markedly different from Egyptian was self-evident. Egyptians partook of the 'words of God' and every Egyptian longed to hear it even when abroad. In contrast, foreign languages were pure gibberish and those who spoke them, especially Nubians were 'gibberers' ."
Where did he get this from , comments like "especially Nubians were 'gibberers'"? when Egyptian accounts according to ausar didnt tell stories in a narrative way such as Greeks. is this man talking straight out if his ass? It is evedent he has contempt on Nubians.
"it would be interested to know how the nubians reacted to the racial attitudes Egypt manifested towards them, and in particular whether they shared a similar xenophobic aversion to all Egyptians. Unfortunatly such knowledge will always be difficult to acquire. it is very doubtful whether the Nubian and Kushites of the third and second millennia ever developed their own script, so that the vast majority remained illiterate and cannot speak to us over the centuries.(...) one should never underestimate the overwhelming and irresistable attraction of the way of life of the triumpant imperial culture, whether Egyptian, Hellenic, Roman or British "
Lol@British, can't believe he compared British empire which collapsed less than a century since its creation to the rest who survide through millenia
and VERY informative posts, as usual, alTakruri. Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by basicbows: [qb] In contrast, foreign languages were pure gibberish and those who spoke them, [b]especially Nubians were 'gibberers' ."
Saw a so-called documentary about Kush/Nubia via YouTube. The persons behind that used the same fraudulent "scholarship" as this idiot. In the first few minutes when they immediately skipped Kush's amazing 3,000 year history and prefaced the presentation by saying Egypt "crushed" Kush it was pretty obvious what kind of documentary this was going to be. Needless to say I stopped watching. Same goes here. The author doesn't present the Egyptian's saying "all our ancient neighbors are gibberers, especially the Nubians." The Egyptians, while contemptuous of everyone, never singled out Kush as more wretched than any other people for this or that reason. Must be why the "author" says it himself.
quote: "it would be interested to know how the nubians reacted to the racial attitudes Egypt manifested towards them, and in particular whether they shared a similar xenophobic aversion to all Egyptians.
Not as xenophobic as the Egyptians, who didn't let Asiatics into the royal lineage, while brining in Kushites by the boatload. Amazing how British historians in particular are obsessed with "race" and using it to prove the Egyptians "enslaved, vanquished, conquered --insert Eurocentric imperial adverb here."
quote:Unfortunatly such knowledge will always be difficult to acquire. it is very doubtful whether the Nubian and Kushites of the third and second millennia ever developed their own script, so that the vast majority remained illiterate and cannot speak to us over the centuries.
That stupid statement right there should have prevented this "book" from ever seeing the light of day. If this fool can't be bothered to find out that the Kushites invented one of the oldest script-languages of the ancient world, then he shouldn't be published. His editors should have been fired. BTW, for the Eurocentic trolls who lurk in ths forum, take a good look. This is the "scholarship" upon which the myth of white-Egypt is based. And just out of curiosity, did the author ever mention that the British NEVER had a script-language? Did he mention that English is in fact latin, brought to the illiterate Anglo's when the Romans civilized them.
Seems this racist turd said it best: "Unfortunatly such knowledge will always be difficult to acquire. it is very doubtful whether the [Saxons or Anglos developed] their own script, so that the vast majority remained illiterate and cannot speak to us over the centuries." Too bad many of their least intelligent descendants keep insisting on speaking.
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I always enjoy your posts, especially on matters Kemet, sports bro.
quote:Originally posted by sportbilly:
Saw a so-called documentary about Kush/Nubia via YouTube [...] it was pretty obvious what kind of documentary this was going to be. Needless to say I stopped watching.
Some things we might just need to [tactfully] do ourselves. Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Great posts alTakruri, where could i research more what you just spoke of? Could you point me to a good book.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
There are many books out there, but to really single one out for recommendation is too hard for me to do.
It's not so much what's written in any one book. It's the decades of reading everything available, collecting the truly relevant (sometimes buying a book just for one obscure sentence of material unfound anywhere else), putting the pieces together for ones self, critically analyzing and original "hypothesizing" along with the most important thing of all -- a set of colleagues to sound things out with, colleagues such as I found when I first came to the old Ancient Egypt & Egyptology forum.
Much of what you read was developed on the above named forum. I doubt if a search engine can even dredge up those posts where everybody participated their ingredients to the cake's recipe.
I wish you the best. If you are truly determined to get somewhere, the path and its guide(s) will come to you at the right time.
quote:Originally posted by astenb: Great posts alTakruri, where could i research more what you just spoke of? Could you point me to a good book.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is anyone watching the episode of Djefre Lost Pyramid...Amazing...The Egyptians were AmazingQQQ
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: As long as we continue employing the misnomer "Nubian" projected in the current literature a certain of confusion will remain in understanding mdw ntr texts. We must use the specific terms as they are in the primary sources.
If memory serves me correctly the following quote is from one of the original Sesotris:
quote: "The Nubian has but to hear (a sound) and he falls at a voice, it is merely answering him that makes him retreat; if one is agressive against him he turns tail, retreat and he becomes more aggressive. they are certainly not people to be respected: they are craven wretches. My majesty has seen them-it is not a lie."
This pharaoh is talking about his military expeditions against Wawat. Before the unification of the Two Lands, Wawat ruled up to Nag el Hasaya in what would later be the 2nd nome of Upper Egypt (Heru's Throne) immediately north of the 1st nome TaSeti.nwt. So we see there was intense rivalry between TaWy and TaSeti.x3st since predynastic times.
As we progress into the earliest dynastic era a cultural demarcation begins to distinguish the two peoples. KM.t embraced writing while TaSeti and Kesh to the south of it did not.
Getting back to the author of the above quoted inscription Sesostris III wrote it after retaking Buhen fortress. Late in 5th dynasty times Wawat took over Buhen fortress, built in the 4th dynasty by Snefru, and held it until the 12th dynasty when Sesostris took it and pillaged pastoral populations to its south. In the very next dynasty (13th) Kesh took it over holding it until the 18th dynasty.
With all this in mind we can see Sesostris III's boasts are just that, political hype. During the first 14 dynasties of its history that though TaWy built Buhen fortress (exchange place or trade center) Nehesis controlled it for 11 dynasties.
Then too in order to understand Sesostris III implied no "racial" proclivities we need to know his ancestral antecedents. We'll examine that next.
Confusing confusion with shookness is not a good thing.
Shook ones are not us.
Posts: 368 | From: Oxford | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bottom line; the book, as rasol has previously commented, is just another series in the continuation of 'Apartheid: Nile-Valley style.' - a continuation of such ludicrous works as "The Nubian Pharaohs: Black Kings on the Nile " to imply, not so subtly, that the Egyptian pharaohs were not Black! It is an ideology, and can be best illustrated with an older book that was titled "The Niger - Nile of the Negroes" ! - like who were the peoples who lived on the Nile - which stretches from the Mediterranean all the way to Ethiopia and Central Africa - the longest river in the world! - Mediterranean Sea - Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya, Rwanda, Burundi, Democratic Republic of the Congo...
It's latent European racist mythology posing as history.
My opinion, however, is to read everything! -but read intelligently!
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ Good point. Fortunately, more balanced schlolarship is emerging on the issue as the 2005 Toulouse Conference above notes:
---------------------------- Conférence internationale / International Conference L'Egypte pré- et protodynastique. Les origines de l'Etat Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt. Origin of the State Toulouse (France) - 5-8 sept. 2005
At the Origin of the Egyptian Civilisation: Reconsidering the Relationship between Egypt and Nubia in the Pre- and Protodynastic Periods
-- Maria Carmela GATTO (British Museum, London) 2002
Abstract: --------------------------
The relationship between Egypt and Nubia during the period preceding the formation of the Egyptian state has been discussed on many occasions, particularly as far as the A-Group and Naqada cultures are concerned (Reisner 1910; Williams 1986; Smith 1990).
From the start, the cultural prominence of Egypt over the land of Nubia was postulated. All of the prehistoric evidence found at the beginning of the last century during the first Salvage Campaign related to the construction of the Aswan Dam, was interpreted and described by Reisner as Egyptian. But soon after, a real Nubian culture, similar, but at the same time different from Egypt's, was recorded and defined. Of course, any similarities were still interpreted as being cultural influences from Egypt, as the Nubians were thought to be incapable of reaching a high cultural standard without Egypt's "assistance".
During the last few decades, following the publication of the A-Group royal cemetery at Qustul, a Nubian origin of the Pharaohs was proposed. In fact, the Nubian kings at Qustul were represented with the same iconography as the Egyptian kings from Upper Egypt. According to Williams' chronological interpretation, the Nubian pharaohs had to be dated right before the first known kings of Egypt. For the first time, a different trajectory in the cultural influences between the two regions was taken into consideration, not without criticism.
According to current knowledge, there is a geographical, cultural and political boundary between Egypt and Nubia, and it is located between Gebel es Silsila and Aswan. Any Egyptian evidence in Nubia was seen as an import or as cultural influence, while any Nubian evidence in Upper Egypt was viewed as the sporadic presence of foreign people within Egyptian territory.
In the last few years, new research on the subject, particularly from a Nubian point of view, shows that the interaction between the two cultures was much more complex than previously thought, affecting the time, space and nature of the interaction (Gatto & Tiraterra 1996; Gatto 2000, 2003a, 2003b). The Aswan area was probably never a real borderline, at least not until the New Kingdom. Of particular importance in this perspective is the area between Armant and Dehmit, south of the First Cataract, as well as the surrounding deserts, and for the availability of data, more specifically the Western Desert.
The data recently collected and a new interpretation of available information are bringing to light a stable and long-term interaction between Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia that has to be seen in a very different perspective. The two regions, and so their cultural entities, are not in antithesis to one another, but in the Predynastic period are still the expression of the same cultural tradition, with strong regional variations, particularly in the last part of the 4th millennium BC. Some of them are clearly connected with the major cultural and political changes of Egypt.
This paper aims to revise and better highlight the nature of this relationship, starting from the 5th millennium BC, by pointing out the mutual influences, including the ideological ones, which in some cases became the base of important aspects of the rising Egyptian civilisation.
Bibliography GATTO, M.C., 2000. The most ancient Evidence of the "A-Groups" Culture in Lower Nubia. [in:] KRZYZANIAK, L.; KROEPER, K. & KOBUSIEWICZ, M. (eds.), Recent Research into the Stone Age of Northeastern Africa. Poznan: 105-117. GATTO, M.C., 2003A. Hunting the Elusive Nubian A-Group. Nekhen News 15: 14-15. GATTO, M.C., 2003B. The Early A-Group in upper Lower Nubia, Upper Egypt and surrounding deserts. Paper presented at the VIIe Poznan Symposium, "Archaeology of the Earliest Northeastern Africa", 14-18 July 2003, Poznan. GATTO, M.C. & TIRATERRA, F., 1996. Contacts between the Nubian "A-Groups" and Predynastic Egypt [in:] KRZY?ANIAK, L.; KROEPER, K. & KOBUSIEWICZ, M. (eds.), Interregional Contacts in the Later Prehistory of Northern Africa. Poznan : 331-334. REISNER, G.A., 1910. The Archaeological Survey of Nubia: Report for 1907-1908. Cairo. SMITH, H.S., 1991. The Development of the 'A-Group' Culture in Northern Lower Nubia [in:] DAVIES, W.V. (ed.), Egypt and Africa. Nubia from Prehistory to Islam. London: 92-111. WILLIAMS, B.B., 1986. Excavations between Abu Simbel and the Sudan Frontier, Keith C. Seele, Director. Part 1: The A-Group Royal Cemetery at Qustul: Cemetery L. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition 3. Chicago.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: It's important to me they not see Africana studies as a protest, but proactive and independent as are the Classics or Judaica or Americana etc.
Very important point.
Even in case of Kemet, we don't need to prove it, we need to say it. For example: "Despite increasing foreign influence on Ancient Kemet due to the Hyksos, Assyrian, Greek, Roman and other occupation, Ancient Kemet managed to keep its African character all throughout the Dynastic period. Many monuments were defaced or destroyed by foreign occupation of Kemet. It was a way for them to assert the new power, the new leadership and give them some ancestral justification..." . Here what is important is not the content of what I said but the form.
African history must not be viewed as a protest history but as a history told by scholars of African descent (and sometimes others when it's in line with African scholars).
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Going back to another discussion about the Ramessids, the year 400 stela is referenced for the origins of the Ramessid dynasty:
quote: His Majesty has commanded to raise a great stela in granite for the great name of his fathers, in order to raise the name of the father of his fathers ( and for ) his father the King Men-Ma'at-Re, son of Re, Seti Mer-ne-Ptah lasting for eternity, like Re every day.
Year 400, the fourth month of the season of Shammu, the fourth day of the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, Seth-Great-of-valor, son of Re whom he loves, Nubti [11], beloved by Re-Hor-akhty, may he live for ever.
The Regent came, the mayor of the town, the vizier, the fanbearer on the right hand of the King [7], the leader of the bowmen, the chief of the archers, the governor of the fortress of Tjarw [8], the great of Medjay [9], the royal scribe, the administrative officer of the chariotry the lord master of the ceremonies of the Feast of the He-goat [10], the master of Smendes, the first prophet of Seth, the lector-priest of Wadjet-Opet-Tawy, the head of all priests of all the gods, Seti, right of voice, son of the Prince regent, the mayor of the town, the vizier, the chief of the archers, the governor of the fortress of Tjarw, the royal scribe, the administrative officer of the chariotry, Paramesse [12], right of voice, born from the mistress of the house, the songstress of Re, Tiw, right of voice, he says :
Hail to thee, o Seth, son of Nut, great of strength in the boat of millions of years, in the bow of the ship of Re, the great screamer .... .. [ mayest thou ] give me a good time for following [13] your Ka and may I be lasting in ....
Everything in the year 400 stela celebrates the ascension of a Southern Nubti(an) to the throne, symbolic of another link to the first nome of Egypt, the home of the Egyptian dynastic line and the gods and reinforces the idea of the Ramessid line being from the south. It is plain and clear as day to see. Given that Egypt was in crisis it would make sense then that they go back to the south for leadership and attempt to rejuvinate the kingdom from the old established bloodlines in the south. Therefore, the fact that the skulls of the Ramessids seem to be more like Neolithic "Nubian" skulls only affirms that this was an OLD bloodline from the south that was brought onto the throne with the Ramessid dynasty.
In a book, you add the information in the quote with a nice picture of Ramses I, the founder of the 19th Dynasty. Many people, especially young people, are very visual.
quote: What about this book? Is it worth reading for someone just starting to learn Egypt? Good or not good?
If you are TRULY sincere about learning Kemet/Egypt then I can help you and my first suggestion might seem strange but if you do it I GUARANTEE you will be truly informed and happy you did, Your first book should be This Book:
Donald Lateiner did a decent job with the Translation and also didn't omit or coverup the ugly stuff. Read the chapters on Kemet/Egypt alone if you that's what you want, that's ok too but start with this book because it gives you a point of view from someone who was actually their 2400+ years ago. I know you will not be disappointed when you read it. 21st Century Historians are trapped into RACISM so they confuse something that should have been really simple, just talking about what you learned not covering up facts just honestly reporting it. When your finish Reading Herodotus then you will be able to know which historical writers are worth your attention today.
Hotep
The problem with many 21st century egyptologists is that they built from the 19th, 20th racist historians. So they start with a bias against Africa and African people in general. A bias prevalent in those centuries. Most often seeking to put Ancient Egypt out of Africa. Out of the African cultural continuum.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
There are many books out there, but to really single one out for recommendation is too hard for me to do.
It's not so much what's written in any one book. It's the decades of reading everything available, collecting the truly relevant (sometimes buying a book just for one obscure sentence of material unfound anywhere else), putting the pieces together for ones self, critically analyzing and original "hypothesizing" along with the most important thing of all -- a set of colleagues to sound things out with, colleagues such as I found when I first came to the old Ancient Egypt & Egyptology forum.
Much of what you read was developed on the above named forum. I doubt if a search engine can even dredge up those posts where everybody participated their ingredients to the cake's recipe.
I wish you the best. If you are truly determined to get somewhere, the path and its guide(s) will come to you at the right time.
quote:Originally posted by astenb: Great posts alTakruri, where could i research more what you just spoke of? Could you point me to a good book.
^ This is where everything changed.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
There are many books out there, but to really single one out for recommendation is too hard for me to do.
It's not so much what's written in any one book. It's the decades of reading everything available, collecting the truly relevant (sometimes buying a book just for one obscure sentence of material unfound anywhere else), putting the pieces together for ones self, critically analyzing and original "hypothesizing" along with the most important thing of all -- a set of colleagues to sound things out with, colleagues such as I found when I first came to the old Ancient Egypt & Egyptology forum.
Much of what you read was developed on the above named forum. I doubt if a search engine can even dredge up those posts where everybody participated their ingredients to the cake's recipe.
I wish you the best. If you are truly determined to get somewhere, the path and its guide(s) will come to you at the right time.
quote:Originally posted by astenb: Great posts alTakruri, where could i research more what you just spoke of? Could you point me to a good book.
^ This is where everything changed.
It's nice to do personal research about Ancient Egypt, but African people need to write more about it. The fact that alTakruri cannot recommend one book is very unfortunate. Any African person interested in Ancient Kemet history must do the same thing people on this forum did all over again (beyond reading past posts on this forum). Not many people will do that. I guess if alTakruri is right, there's a need for more African people to write about the Ancient Egypt history from our perspectives.
If people got books to recommend that are not "protest" books and are written from an African perspective they could post it here (in this forum or thread). I and many people I'm sure would like to know about them.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
There are many books out there, but to really single one out for recommendation is too hard for me to do.
It's not so much what's written in any one book. It's the decades of reading everything available, collecting the truly relevant (sometimes buying a book just for one obscure sentence of material unfound anywhere else), putting the pieces together for ones self, critically analyzing and original "hypothesizing" along with the most important thing of all -- a set of colleagues to sound things out with, colleagues such as I found when I first came to the old Ancient Egypt & Egyptology forum.
Much of what you read was developed on the above named forum. I doubt if a search engine can even dredge up those posts where everybody participated their ingredients to the cake's recipe.
I wish you the best. If you are truly determined to get somewhere, the path and its guide(s) will come to you at the right time.
quote:Originally posted by astenb: Great posts alTakruri, where could i research more what you just spoke of? Could you point me to a good book.
^ This is where everything changed.
It's nice to do personal research about Ancient Egypt, but African people need to write more about it. The fact that alTakruri cannot recommend one book is very unfortunate. Any African person interested in Ancient Kemet history must do the same thing people on this forum did all over again (beyond reading past posts on this forum). Not many people will do that. I guess if alTakruri is right, there's a need for more African people to write about the Ancient Egypt history from our perspectives.
If people got books to recommend that are not "protest" books and are written from an African perspective they could post it here (in this forum or thread). I and many people I'm sure would like to know about them.
Let me clarify. What was the turning point in much of my study can be highlighted here:
quote: It's the decades of reading everything available, collecting the truly relevant (sometimes buying a book just for one obscure sentence of material unfound anywhere else), putting the pieces together for ones self, critically analyzing and original "hypothesizing" along with the most important thing of all, a set of colleagues to sound things out with
.
I can say that last part no longer exists around these parts. As for everything else...there is a wealth of information available. I have no time to worry too much about the publications from Intellectually Lazy Eurocentrics or "Butt Hurt" Italians taking revenge via the Ethiopian genome. I do my own hypothesizing based on my own research and in my opinion it is leagues above anything that they do. This research, like music, gives best results when you are doing it for yourself and for the love of knowledge. Not to for self glorification on youtube.......or as reactionary fact blasting against Euroclowns. I am glad he didnt recommend one book because I may have just read the ONE Book. I try and do the same but it doesnt seem to work.
At times when people ask about "......egypt....DNA....Black...Sub Saharan...link..etc" they get mad when I tell them to read EVERY DNA article reference on on Wikipedia for A,B,E, L0-L3. People want the easy answer. I am finished with Easy Answers. There are many many sources on Egypt stuffed in old books..
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: I am glad he didnt recommend one book because I may have just read the ONE Book.
Let's be clear. It's unfortunate there's not even one non-protest book we can recommend but there should be many books written on Ancient Egyptian history from an African perspective (mostly written by African scholars). I'm talking about mainstream books as well as academic books as well as children books.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Good points all, but people seeking simple answers too often want to rely on a "guru" whose word they will accept uncritically- the "because such and such said so, it must be right syndrome." Your writings are a contrast. You carefully buttress each point, anticipating opposing arguments and establishing your case. This kind of careful analysis and reasoning will not disappear anytime soon if serious, credible works are to be produced. In fact it is essential- comes with the territory. Even Keita, who usually goes for a bland, non-controversial approach, hedges and qualifies his points, carefully supporting each assertion so it can be defensible.
I see too often a hankering for "guru scholarship". I seen one organization that had a golden opportunity to spread the word. During black history month a local school district invited them to give a series of classes to some middle and high school kids- captive audience of over 3,000 kids. School district was gonna xerox whatever handouts they needed, thousands of copies worth of stuff free. But what? They came up with a book written in the early 1990s filled with a lot of dubious assertions- like flying gliders and Free Masonry notions, that they then attempted to put across in the classrooms. Needless to say, they bombed, and got embarrassed. Someone showed me the book. Some good points but a lot of other stuff barely credible. They relied on a "guru" who compiled the stuff, and it had a lot of holes with dated references. Liepisus circa 1800 something kept appearing for example. I could only shake my head. If the guru had used up to date sources and credible organization he would have been smokin.
BUt any book written from that African perspective has to be credible sourced and easy to read and well organized. It will have to use careful reasoning, and opposing arguments, models and frameworks have to be dealt with. There is no quickie "shake and bake" way, if something credible will be produced. There are a lot of books out there but they are "guru" style- loaded with a lot of things like Free Masonry, that just don't fit in a general book. Such topics should be dealt with in separate books. If people are doing history of Egypt from pre-dynastic to end of Dynasties why bring in Free Masonry for example?? Deal with that specialized topic separately.
As for books, I think you would find bits and pieces of good accurate writing scattered in other larger books. Like you say, I don't see full-length treatment. SOme stuff by EHret is also good. Keita I think needs to put something out. His stuff is scattered in many places. Van Sertima has some books out like 'Egypt: Child of Africa', that are good. I would not call that a protest book. Van Sertima deals with opposing arguments (as everyone in this field must) but he puts forward a general conceptual framework for the most part- Egypt as a child of Africa, not a headquarters, not some alien construct, but rooted in the African environment. I would say to establish that model, authors will have to draw clear lines and boundaries, so the Africa centered model comes thru clearly. We should not be afraid to to this. In fact, we HAVE to do this.
To be fair also people are busy. The field is huge with massive pipelines of shifting info that is intimidating and too much to some. How can it be grasped and digested? Another great need is thus to make things clear- along with summarizing masses of data so they can be easily digested. Summarize, summarize, summarize, using clear, straightforward language and point by point explanations. It other words we all have to do more teaching. Make it easy for the masses to grasp the knowledge in a structured way, then want to dig deeper.
One way to get started is to use a guiding metaphor or allegory. The framework of a mother producing many sons or daughters, each taking diverse paths but still under one mother is one way to go. SO Egypt as "child of Africa" would be one son (or daughter). Another might be to use a garden metaphor, different plants blooming in parallel, producing different things, different but complementary. Another might be to draw from Egyptian religion- use the figure of a cycle- birth- death - afterlife- and so on.
Most of us pretty much know what such a book would look like. The main problem is time.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Just read the few sample pages, and the author sounds as a white supremacist, could almost be a member of stormfront?![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic