posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by X-Ras:

Whats the future of this forum? Its lost some luster and the more serious discussions have disappeared...

---

quote:

---

Its full of picture thread spamming now..

---

You can blame King for that!!

quote:

---

What can be done to improve the situation here? Anyone have any suggestions?

---

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

I think the main problem is that this forum is not SOLELY dedicated to Egyptian history, anthropology and culture. Therefore, there is only ONE sub forum in which to post about Egyptian history and culture and the wider African context of which Egypt was a part. If this was a forum dedicated to Egyptian history, anthropology, culture as well as the relation of Egypt to Africa, there would be a place to put picture threads and other off topic information. Unfortunately, everything is put into this one forum as a catch all.

---

quote:

---

Another thing you have to remember is that many of the posters here are NOT professional Egyptologists. This is significant because of the NEW RULES in Egypt regarding research and publishing findings. Many times the latest information concerning research in Egypt is kept within a small circle until the Egyptian antiquities organization ALLOWS it to be published. So, unless more people here become active in various Egyptological societies and foundations that are doing ongoing research in Egypt, there wont be a lot of information to discuss. A lot of what gets discovered in Egypt barely gets a mention in the news, so the only way to get information on the latest research is to either go to college libraries and get the latest journals and books or to become a member of an Egyptology group.

---

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

The future of this forum is really in limbo. I have not decided after 06 if I want to continue with the forum. Most likely I will switch my attention to Nile Valley Civlization forum,or just leave forums along.

---

Please don't leave altogether Ausar, you have been a great help with these topics. We need you!

quote:

---

Most people on this board are exclusively interested in the ''race'' of the ancient Egyptians but of nothing else in ancient Egypt. I don't mind dicussions of the origin of the ancient Egyptians but this board needs more balance.

---

quote:

---

One way you can improve this board is to make yourself well rounded in both the origins and culture of ancient Egypt.

---

As always, but the biggest hurdle is for people to start actually DOING this!

Also, is it me, or does it seem like this forum has also lost alot of humor? It seems like the only time we get alot of humor and entertainment is when trolls like Evil-E are around.

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by SarahA:

Djehuti I don't understand why you are so against these picture threads. I have learned alot about African people and how beautiful they are. If you don't like the pictures then don't open the threads. Why can't you understand that most people enjoy looking at these pictures of Africans. I have always wanted to find a forum where I could find pictures of Africans. They are beautiful people and I hope that King keeps posting pictures. I have been educated by seeing these people. Where I am from you never get to see the divirsity of African people. They are always sterotyped as looking a certain way. These pictures have shown me that Africans are very beautiful and diverse people. So I don't mean to be rude but if you don't like the pictures then don't open the threads. Ausar I hope that Egyptsearch stays open this is a great forum about Egypt. I understand that you don't really like the Race aspect of Egyptsearch but this is a very important and touchy subject. I believe that the reason why their is so much race topics is because people come hear with thoughts that the Ancient Egyptians were not Africans. So posters like Rasol Supercar and others have to keep repeating themselves about the Race of the Ancient Egyptians. I for one believe that Ancient Egyptians were African. Egypt was populated from the south, west and a little from the east. This would make the Ancient Egyptians Black Africans with a minor middle eastern component. I hope you stay on this forum because I have read alot of your posts and you are a very informed moderator. I hope you stay.

Sarah Anderson

---

And where did YOU come from all of a sudden, "Sarah".

I have my suspicions about you already, especially from your style of writing.

Again, as I have repeated for the hundredth time, I hold NOTHING against King's pictures but as X-ras pointed out, they are have nothing to do with the subject of this forum and are a big (although positive) distraction.

If you want to see pictures of Africans then may I suggest you go on Google and see first hand the source of the vast majority of King's pictures!!

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Institutionally, anthropology emerged from the development of natural history (expounded by authors such as Buffon) that occurred during the European colonization of the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. Programs of ethnographic study have their origins in this era as the study of the "human primitives" overseen by colonial administrations. There was a tendency in late 18th century Enlightenment thought to understand human society as natural phenomena that behaved in accordance with certain principles and that could be observed empirically.[1] In some ways, studying the language, culture, physiology, and artifacts of European colonies was not unlike studying the flora and fauna of those places. Some critics point to the fact that the material culture of "civilized" nations such as China have historically been displayed in fine-art museums alongside European art, while artifacts from African and Native North American cultures were displayed in Natural History Museums, alongside dinosaur bones and nature dioramas. The British Museum or the Parisian Musée de l'Homme are examples of such museums—the Musée de l'Homme held the "Hottentot Venus" remains until the 1970s. Saartje Baartman, a Namaqua woman, was examined by anatomist Georges Cuvier.

---

Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:
I think the main problem is that this forum is not SOLELY dedicated to Egyptian history, anthropology and culture. Therefore, there is only ONE sub forum in which to post about Egyptian history and culture and the wider African context of which Egypt was a part. If this was a forum dedicated to Egyptian history, anthropology, culture as well as the relation of Egypt to Africa, there would be a place to put picture threads and other off topic information. Unfortunately, everything is put into this one forum as a catch all.

Another thing you have to remember is that many of the posters here are NOT professional Egyptologists. This is significant because of the NEW RULES in Egypt regarding research and publishing findings. Many times the latest information concerning research in Egypt is kept within a small circle until the Egyptian antiquities organization ALLOWS it to be published. So, unless more people here become active in various Egyptological societies and foundations that are doing ongoing research in Egypt, there wont be a lot of information to discuss. A lot of what gets discovered in Egypt barely gets a mention in the news, so the only way to get information on the latest research is to either go to college libraries and get the latest journals and books or to become a member of an Egyptology group.

---

Posts: 1219 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
And where did YOU come from all of a sudden, "Sarah".

I have my suspicions about you already, especially from your style of writing.

Again, as I have repeated for the hundredth time, I hold NOTHING against King's pictures but as X-ras pointed out, they are have nothing to do with the subject of this forum and are a big (although positive) distraction.

If you want to see pictures of Africans then may I suggest you go on Google and see first hand the source of the vast majority of King's pictures!!

---

Posts: 12 | From: Vacation Spot | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by King_Scorpion:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:
I think the main problem is that this forum is not SOLELY dedicated to Egyptian history, anthropology and culture. Therefore, there is only ONE sub forum in which to post about Egyptian history and culture and the wider African context of which Egypt was a part. If this was a forum dedicated to Egyptian history, anthropology, culture as well as the relation of Egypt to Africa, there would be a place to put picture threads and other off topic information. Unfortunately, everything is put into this one forum as a catch all.

Another thing you have to remember is that many of the posters here are NOT professional Egyptologists. This is significant because of the NEW RULES in Egypt regarding research and publishing findings. Many times the latest information concerning research in Egypt is kept within a small circle until the Egyptian antiquities organization ALLOWS it to be published. So, unless more people here become active in various Egyptological societies and foundations that are doing ongoing research in Egypt, there wont be a lot of information to discuss. A lot of what gets discovered in Egypt barely gets a mention in the news, so the only way to get information on the latest research is to either go to college libraries and get the latest journals and books or to become a member of an Egyptology group.

---

I've never agreed with the censoring done by the Egytological community. It not only creates an air of suspicion, but the world deserves to know what is going on...and what new theories there are. There's so much about the Egyptological community that is full of BS that it's not even funny!

---

They have to make sure that whatever they find fits into the established B.S. I mean propaganda of the department....

Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^^Whatever you say, King's friend.

---

Posts: 12 | From: Vacation Spot | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

I agree that we need to study the culture, lifestyle and religion of Egypt. However, in order to understand those things you need to know HOW those were part of a LARGER pattern of human migration and development IN AFRICA. Therefore, you have to look at the people in and around Egypt, in Africa, for clues to the ORIGINS of many "pharoanic" beliefs. Trust me, there are MANY African cultures that predated Egypt that had many of the same styles of kingship, cosmology and other traits. Looking at REAL African history, not the European DISTORTED version of African history will allow you to SEE the real picture of development of Egypt. Unfortunately, the actions of Europeans and Arabs in the last 600 years has DESTROYED many African civilizations, not just for PROFIT, but also to ERASE the evidence of African culture and human development PRIOR to whites. Just like you cannot talk about the development of the United States without talking about European history and culture (even though it was an INDIAN country at first), you cannot talk about Egypt without talking about African history and culture.

The FACT that Egyptology separates the Egyptians from Africa and the FACT that Egyptology separates Egyptians from other Africans, makes this whole PROCESS that much more difficult. Egyptsearch is a good forum, even with the race baiting and trolling that sometimes takes place. However, no matter how much TRUTH is put out on this forum, there will STILL be a whole bunch of LIES and DECEPTION pushed by the ORTHODOX Egyptological establishment. Egyptology STILL wants to make ancient Egypt into a "caucasian" race and culture. So, if you dont like the heat, stay out of the kitchen, as they say. Because, bottom line, until Egyptology starts presenting the FACTS of Egypt being a BLACK African civilization and culture, then a forum like this will ALWAYS be needed. In fact, I dont believe Egyptology or the SCA will EVER promote Egypt as a BLACK African civilization. As far as they are concerned it will ALWAYS be a caucasian civilization, even though the SCA is RUN BY EGYPTIANS. This is because Egyptology, just like anthropology and archaeology were DESIGNED FOR WHITE SUPREMACY, nothing else. The FACTS should be OBVIOUS by now.
Anthropology, archaeology and Egyptology were all part of the SAME process of colonial exploitation and DESTRUCTION of African people and culture.

But hey, maybe shutting this one down will finally FORCE people to jump to the Nile Valley Forum.

I just hope that somehow some of the GOOD information that has been posted here can be archived for the future.

More from the history of Anthropology:

quote:

---

Late eighteenth century ethnology established the scientific foundation for the field, which began to mature when Andrew Jackson was President of the United States (1829-1837). Jackson was responsible for implementing the Indian Removal Act, the coerced and forced removal of an estimated 100,000 American Indians during the 1830s to Indian Territory in present-day Oklahoma; for insuring that the franchise was extended to all white men, irrespective of financial means while denying virtually all black men the right to vote; and, for suppressing abolitionists’ efforts to end slavery while vigorously defending that institution. Finally, he was responsible for appointing Chief Justice Roger B. Taney who would decide, in Scott v. Sandford (1857), that Negroes were “beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race. . . and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” As a result of this decision, black people, whether free or enslaved, could never become citizens of the United States.

It was in this context that the so-called American School of Anthropology thrived as the champion of polygenism or the doctrine of multiple origins—sparking a debate between those influenced by the Bible who believed in the unity of humanity and those who argued from a scientific standpoint for the plurality of origins and the antiquity of distinct types. Like the monogenists, these theories were not monolithic and often used words like races, species, hybrid, and mongrel interchangeably. A scientific consensus began to emerge during this period “that there exists a Genus Homo, embracing many primordial types of ‘species.’” Charles Caldwell, Samuel George Morton, Samuel A. Cartwright, George Gliddon, Josiah C. Nott, and Louis Agassiz, and even South Carolina Governor James Henry Hammond were all influential proponents of this school. While some were disinterested scientists, others were passionate advocates who used science to promote slavery in a period of increasing sectional strife. All were complicit in establishing the putative science that justified slavery, informed the Dred Scott decision, underpinned miscegenation laws, and eventually fueled Jim Crow. Samuel G. Morton, for example, claimed to be just a scientist but he did not hesitate to provide evidence of Negro inferiority to John C. Calhoun, the prominent pro-slavery Secretary of State to help him negotiate the annexation of Texas as a slave state.
.......
Politics of anthropology

American cultural anthropology developed during the first four decades of the 20th century under the powerful influence of Franz Boas and his students and their struggle against racial determinism and the ethnocentrism of 19th century cultural evolutionism. With the additional impact of the Great Depression and World War II, American anthropology developed a pronounced liberal-left tone by the 1950s. However, the discipline's deep involvement with nonwestern cultures put it in a vulnerable position during the campus upheavals of the late 1960s and in the subsequent "culture wars." The "politics of anthropology" has become a pervasive concern since then. Whatever the realities, the notion of anthropology as somehow complicit in morally unacceptable projects has become a significant topic both within the discipline and in "cultural studies" and "post-colonialism," etc. A few of the central elements in this discourse are the following:

* The claim that the discipline grew out of colonialism, perhaps was in league with it, and derived some of its key notions from it, consciously or not. (See, e.g., Gough, Pels and Salemink, but cf. Lewis 2004). It is often assumed that an example of this exploitative relationship can be seen in the relationship between of British anthropologists and colonial forces in Africa, yet this assumption has not been supported by much evidence. (See Asad et al; cf. Desai.)

* The idea that social and political problems must arise because anthropologists usually have more power than the people they study; it is a form of colonialist theft in which the anthropologist gains power at the expense of subjects (Rabinow, Dwyer, McGrane). Anthropologists, they argue, can gain yet more power by exploiting knowledge and artifacts of the people they study while the people they study gain nothing, or even lose, in the exchange (e.g. Deloria). Little critical writing has been published in response to these wide-ranging claims, themselves the product of the political concerns and atmosphere of their own times. (See Trencher for a critique.)

* It is claimed the discipline was ahistorical, and dealt with its "objects" (sic) "out of time," to their detriment (Fabian). It is often claimed that anthropologists regularly "exoticized 'the Other,'" or, with equal assurance, that they inappropriately universalized "Others" and "human nature." (For references and a response see Lewis 1998.)

* Other more explicitly political concerns have to do with anthropologists’ entanglements with government intelligence agencies, on the one hand, and anti-war politics on the other. Franz Boas publicly objected to US participation in World War I, and after the war he published a brief expose and condemnation of the participation of several American archeologists in espionage in Mexico under their cover as scientists. But by the 1940s, many of Boas' anthropologist contemporaries were active in the allied war effort against the "Axis" (Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperial Japan). Many served in the armed forces but others worked in intelligence (e.g. Office of Strategic Services [OSS} and the Office of War Information). David H. Price's work on American anthropology during the Cold War provides detailed accounts of the pursuit and dismissal of several anthropologists for their vocal left-wing sympathies. On the other hand, attempts to accuse anthropologists of complicity with the CIA and government intelligence activities during the Vietnam War years have turned up surprisingly little. (Anthropologists did not participate in the stillborn Project Camelot, for example. See Lewis 2005) On the contrary, many anthropologists (students and teachers) were active in the antiwar movement and a great many resolutions condemning the war in all its aspects were passed overwhelmingly at the annual meetings of the American Anthropological Association (AAA). In the decades since the Vietnam war the tone of cultural and social anthropology, at least, has been increasingly politicized, with the dominant liberal tone of earlier generations replaced with one more radical, a mix of, and varying degrees of, Marxist, feminist, post-colonial, post-modern, Saidian, Foucaultian, identity-based, and more.

Professional anthropological bodies often object to the use of anthropology for the benefit of the state. Their codes of ethics or statements may proscribe anthropologists from giving secret briefings. The British Association for Social Anthropology has called certain scholarships ethically dangerous. The AAA's current 'Statement of Professional Responsibility' clearly states that "in relation with their own government and with host governments... no secret research, no secret reports or debriefings of any kind should be agreed to or given."

More recently, there have been concerns expressed about bioprospecting, along with struggles for self-representation for native peoples and the repatriation of indigenous remains and material culture, with anthropologists often in the lead on these issues.

Other political controversies come from the emphasis in American anthropology on cultural relativism and its long-standing antipathy to the concept of race. The development of sociobiology in the late 1960s was opposed by cultural anthropologists such as Marshall Sahlins, who argued that these positions were reductive. While authors such John Randal Baker continued to develop the biological concept of race into the 1970s, the rise of genetics has proven to be central to developments on this front. As genetics continues to advance as a science some anthropologists such as Luca Cavalli-Sforza have continued to transform and advance notions of race through the use of recent developments in genetics, such as tracing past migrations of peoples through their mitochondrial and Y-chromosomal DNA, and ancestry-informative markers.

---

quote:

---

In the Old World, archaeology has tended to focus on the study of physical remains, the methods used in recovering them and the theoretical and philosophical underpinnings in achieving the subject's goals. The discipline's roots in antiquarianism and the study of Latin and Ancient Greek provided it with a natural affinity with the field of history. In the New World, archaeology is more commonly devoted to the study of human societies and is treated as one of the four subfields of Anthropology. The other subfields of anthropology supplement the findings of archaeology in a holistic manner. These subfields are cultural anthropology, which studies behavioural, symbolic, and material dimensions of culture; linguistics, which studies language, including the origins of language and language groups; and physical anthropology, which includes the study of human evolution and physical and genetic characteristics. Other disciplines also supplement archaeology, such as paleontology, paleozoology, paleoethnobotany, paleobotany, geography, geology, art history, and classics.

Archaeology has been described as a craft that enlists the sciences to illuminate the humanities. The American archaeologist Walter Taylor asserted in his major work "A Study of Archeology" (1948, American Anthropological Association) that "Archaeology is neither history nor anthropology. As an autonomous discipline, it consists of a method and a set of specialised techniques for the gathering, or 'production' of cultural information".

---

quote:

---

Egyptology is the scientific study of Ancient Egypt and Egyptian antiquities and is a regional and thematic branch of the larger disciplines of ancient history and archaeology. A practitioner of the discipline is an Egyptologist.

Egyptology investigates the range of Ancient Egyptian culture (language, literature, history, religion, art, economics, and ethics) from the 5th millennium BC up to the end of Roman rule in the 4th century AD.

Modern Egyptology (as opposed to an antiquarian interest in the land of Egypt) is generally perceived as beginning in the year 1822, when Jean-François Champollion announced his general decipherment of the system of Egyptian hieroglyphics for the first time, employing the Rosetta Stone as his primary aid. With subsequently ever-increasing knowledge of Egyptian writing and language, the study of Ancient Egyptian civilisation was able to proceed with greater academic rigour and with all the added impetus that comprehension of the written sources was able to engender.

---

Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hotep2u:
Greetings:

Folks IGNORE the Dodo Bird because for some reason the bird brain attacks most posters who comes to Egyptsearch.
Honestly if you are for Afrikan people then watch out because the hater will attack with relentless one liners showing his dis-pleasure that you don't think how he wants you to think or you don't worship him as a GOD, why do you think he uses the name Djehuti because he expects you to worship him.

OHH GREAT and MIGHTY DJEHUTI please forgive us of our sins, We your humble servants have strayed from Egyptian topics that you want us to discuss.
How dare we look at pictures of Afrikans that King shows us, King you are evil person Djehuti will take away your crown King so repent before it's too late, because Djehuti is upset.

What type of offerings should we sacrifice in the honor of the God of Egyptians discussions.

Hotep

---

LMFAO!!!

Hotep2u that's some funny s***!

Posts: 3423 | From: the jungle - when y'all stop playing games, call me. | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
I understand what intention of many that want to put Egypt back in Africa historically. The early Egyptologist and many modern Egyptologist have/had their own agenda. I am quite understanding but ancient Egypt is much more than just halpotypes;genotypes,or phenotypes. The ancient Egyptians had a deep culture and way of life that is little explored by people on this board. Let me emphasize I am not against topics seeking the origins of the ancient Egyptians nor on their ''race'' but it appears that many other facets of ancient Egypt are being ignored.

---

Here's my free advice .

Use the issue of the 'race' of the ancient Kemetians as a lure to get the folks into the door.

Then you can expose them to the aspects of Kemetic culture and history that most interest you.

The controversy over the identity of the Egyptians is *your friend*.

Without this relevant, political, polemical issue, AE is just musty history text.

How many forums are there with roiling LIVELY discussions on Sumererian, or Incan civilisation?

Not many. And why is that?

I've seen on this forum, many people have become interested in the Fulani, or the Tutsi, the Beja or Masai, in linguistics, skeletal anthropology and genetics....all because of the central 'controversy' over the identify of the AE.

Bottom line: it's YOUR JOB to make Kemetic culture interesting and relevant...to the "masses".

Don't underestimate yourself or the results of your efforts in that regard.

And Egyptian scholar willing to speak to the realities of Ancient Egypt, and not just pimp it t the "white ws.t" or bow down before Arab/Islamic imperialism is a very powerful person and makes and invaluable contribution.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Reid:

Mixed race? All I said was that Egypt had people you could call Asiatic. If this is supposed to be some cheap shot at me, then I hope you can do better then this. This was very pathetic. The truth is that Egypt had Asiatic people in it...

---

Of course Egypt had an influx of Asiatics during the Middle Kingdom, hence the Hyksos. This does not by any means changes Egyptian culture from African to part Asiatic.

On the other hand, you had ancient Greece which IS derived largely from Asiatics and whose culture had many Asiatic roots yet you never hear about Greece being 'Asiatic' but only European. Egypt is the one where people love to attribute there being an Asiatic flavor.

quote:

---

...what is "shatterd" Is you thinking that you own this forum and people have to listen to what you say. You have to realize that you don't own this forum and nobody cares what you think. What makes your word any better then anyone elses word.

---

LMAO And exactly gave you the idea that I think I "own this forum"??

Seriously Reid, I think you need a break from the forum altogether and get some rest. You obviously aren't thinking clearly.

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

Of course Egypt had an influx of Asiatics during the Middle Kingdom, hence the Hyksos. This does not by any means changes Egyptian culture from African to part Asiatic.

On the other hand, you had ancient Greece which IS derived largely from Asiatics and whose culture had many Asiatic roots yet you never hear about Greece being 'Asiatic' but only European. Egypt is the one where people love to attribute there being an Asiatic flavor.

---

Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Sounds to me like we need to rename this forum "Egyptology" and create a new forum dedicated to African roots, Ancient history etc. Anyone have ideas for a new forum name?

---

Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by sammy:
No violations at all :-) I'm surprised you're still putting up with all this to be moderator.
I understand what you mean about origins of Egypt, but it seems like we need a separate forum for all these off-topic African threads.

---

Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged |