quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: You guys are amazing! You post up reliefs that are not even remotely a depiction of blacks but you are swearing by them? What kind of mental delusions are you suffering from? Not even the very Iranian people see a black person in those reliefs but y'all do?
Your Right Afronut...they're not black they are Dark Caucasians...Blacks are only found in SSA...The Blubbery lipped True Negro.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doctoris Scientia: Biologically Greeks are mush more biologically related to populations in Southwest Asia then they are to people in Northwest Asia or Europe. The genetic distance between a Palestinian and a Greek is half that of the genetic distance between a Greek and a Northern European.
To mean white means Northwest Asian or European, a people who share a relatively recent common ancestor, and who are historically, culturally, and biologically intertwined. Greeks if not for it's influence on Rome and therefore Europe remains an outliner.
While there are some Iranians who look "white", most of them are distinctively Southwest Asian, they have features that are no different from peoples from across that region. Even if the skin tone of that populations varies. for every "white" or "European looking" Iranian, you'll have a very dark skinned Southern Indian looking Iranian or a very East Asian looking Iranian.
Greeks look like Persians because they are biologically Southwest Asian. There's a reason why Kim K., who's from Armenia is not considered white by most people.
Also, the second man you posted is the predomiant "type" in Iran and surrounding locals, even in Armenia and Georgia. The "white" looking ones are usually found in the extreme locals of the Iranian nations towards Russia, and even there the majority of the people look like the second man.
The reason why you can group Africans under one domiant banner, Saharo-Tropical Africans, is because of their unigue origin on the African continent. Obvious shared cultural, historical, and physical attributes. And lastly, Africans being the "root" of the human species.
You have to look at Africa in a different perspective then you do in regard to other non-African regions.
...the fact that they speak in a obviously British accent makes it even more annoying.
Northwest Asia and Southwest Asia are two distinctive human populations, the same for Central and Southern Asia. They may share some similarities, but they are all distinct.
Most people today do not consider Iranians white, since most Iranians do resemble Europeans. I mean most Frenchmen are characterized by darker skin, but most people consider them European or "white".
To be white means to have white or very pale skin. It is often used as a relative term, hence, white Persians versus black aboriginal Indians. White skin is not unique to Europe. When I say white I do not imply a social, cultural or close biological relationship. Whites can look the same and be genetically distant. Just like a black man in Africa can look like a black person in Asia or the Pacific and not be biologically close.
So don't misunderstand what I say when I use the term white or black. It is not being used as a term intended to be a catch all phrase for everything about a people or a person. It is simply a description of physical features. Some people from Iran have features just like some people from Europe. And it only makes sense.
The only people trying to pigeonhole white into meaning northwest European is historically white racists and nationalists. But that meaning is only 200-300 years old and has nothing to do with ancient whites prior to 1500 AD.
I certainly don't subscribe to that nonsense about white as a racial type being defined by certain features other than skin color. White to me means very pale. It doesn't matter what eye color, nose shape, hair color or any of the other things that some (primarily 18th and 19th century racists) use to define white. That is tantamount to claiming that because East Africans have different features than central Africans in general, that they are not both black. This is nonsense. The Chinese are white just like Europeans. Please don't even pretend to claim that they are not since they are not from Europe. That has nothing to do with it.
But I do agree that Persians do have some distinct features and that the "European type" is not the majority of the population.
Human facial features are not strictly limited by geography or nationality is my only point even though generally features among populations are different from place to place.
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: Persians were a composition of many people beginning with the Dravidian related Elam and ending with the Western European related Tokhari. Thus if they want to make a West Euroopean looking Persian that should be fine with everybody.
Modern man in an ancient Elamite town
You don't know what you're talking about. The Persians spoke Elamite. The Tokari were not western Europeans.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Some other White people from that part of the world. The thing is, I can't tell the difference between them and regular Europeans.
I'm thinking that they must ALL be the same people.
.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
The ancients were sure the Kushites had founded the Elamite civilization. According to Strabo, the Roman geographer the first Elamite colony of Susa, was founded by Tithonus, a King of Kush, and father of Memnon. Strabo in Book 15,chapter 3,728, wrote that "In fact, it is claimed that Susa was founded by Tithonus Memnon's father, and that his citadel bore the name Memnonium. The Susians are also called Cissians; and Aeschylus, calls Memnon's mother Cissia. Elam The most important Kushite colony in Iran was Elam. The Elamites like other Africans practiced the custom of matrilineal descent.
The history of Elam is usually divided into three periods the Kings of Awan, Kings of Simashki and the Sukkalmah period. For over 300 years the Elamite Kings of Awan ruled Elam, and much of Mesopotamia.Much of this period is unknown. During the 3rd Millennium B.C., the Elamites and Su people (a term used for mountain people in the Western Zagros) sacked Ur. The King of the Dynasty of Simaskhi, led to Elamite rule in Sumer. The first king of the Simashki Dynasty was Girnamme.
In Sumer, the Elamites contributed nuch to Sumerian civilization. The Elamite Kings of Sumer were called the Kings of Kish.
After a Sumerian King of Kish pushed the Elamites out of Mesopotamia, Elam went into a period of chaos until around 2500 B.C., when King Peli became the ruler of Elam. After Peli, there were six other Elamite Kings until Elam was conquered by Sargon of Akkad.
Before the Sukkalmah period (c.1900-1500 B.C.) much of what we know about Elam comes from the Akkadian sources. This period is called the Sukkalmah period, because the rulers of Elam were called Sukkalmah ‘grand regent”. The Elamite title for king ws sunkir.
During the Sukkahmah Dynasty there was a tripartite system of rule. The Susa text indicate that there was a senior ruler called sukkalmah ‘grand regent’ of Elam and Shimashki, he was usually the brother of the sukkahmah, and a junior co-regent, entitled sukkal of Susa. This nephew was usually from the maternal side of the King’s family. Thus the sukkal of Susa was often called the ruhusak ‘sister’s son’
The first rulers of the Sukkamah period was Eabarat (=Eparti). He was followed by the ruhusak Addahushu, the “sukkal and magustrate of the people of Susa”. He is known mostly for his building of several temples and the erection of his “justic stele” outlining the laws of Elam .
The Elamites/Old Persians were probably descendants of the Mande people. This is obvious in the language and names of the Elamite Kings. I hope you remember the book Roots, the main character Kunte Kinte. His name is interesting because we have the following ruler during the Sukkalmah Dynasty: Kutur-Nahhunte I (c. 1752) who conquered southern Babylonia The name Kutur Nahhunte, would correspond to a popular Mande name Kunte among the Mande speaking people. The Elamite name Peli, is also popular among the Mande, in the form of Pe, this name was also common among the Olmec people of ancient Mexico.
It should also be noted that the Mande term for people is Si, this corresponds to the word Su, used to designate the mountain people of Elam. The Elamite term Su would correspond to the Mande termSi-u (the /u/ is the plural suffix in the Mande language).
By the 2nd Millennium B.C., a new more aggressive dynasty appeared in Elam. The Kings of this Dynasty called themselves ‘divine messenger, father and king’ of Susa and Anzan. One of the rulers of this Dynasty was Shutruk-Nahhunte. Shutruk-Nahhunte, like Kutur invaded Mesopotamia and took Babylon around 1160B.C.
After Kutur took Babylon, the Elamites ruled Babylon until Hammurabi defeated the Elamite King Rin-Sin. Later the Elamites were driven from Larsa and other Sumerian cities back to the Susiana plains.
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Matamoros:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The ancient king Shammar is also supposed to have settled in the East with his people. The name of the town of Samarkand is supposed to have come from this tribe.
Bedouin of the Banu Shammar Central Arabia
Dana this man looks like the Immortals on the Persian Reliefs. Looks like what I vision the Elamites of old looked like.
We all know that Abraham came from the land of the Chaldeans and Elamites who were said to have come from the loins of Kush(Ethiopians or the Blackest PEOPLE known to the Torah writers.)
That man might be a remnant of the Hebrews.
Other than the boy on the boat(an Egyptian) I have no clue who the people pictured are. Hebrews, Elamites??
Its from "authentic Jews" website...
Several peoples occupied Elam including the original groups related to Kudur Nakhunte who seem to have depicted themselves as relatively small and very black people with flat noses and flared nostrils as Maspero said. Other people in Elam and Iran before the Parthians and other Eurasiatics were the early Persians and (Amardians, Daae) and other groups probably descended from the Hyksos people of Arabia.
The photo at the top you posted seems to be of Tuareg. There are also Ethiopians or Eritreans and a Moor of the Maghreb (today meaning Hassaniyya or Trarza) in this photograph if I am remembering correctly. The one on the center bottom was an Egyptian I think.
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike111: [qb] dana marniche - It's not that they SHARE anything!
They are EXACTLY the SAME!
Normally these are BLACK SKINNED PEOPLE.
They are Dravidian Albinos!
if you say so Mike.
No dana marniche, it's not what I say, it's what Andreas Deffner says. The Albino pictures above, are taken from the study by Andreas Deffner titled: White, too white A Portrait of Albinism in India.
I take it you didn't check the link. Very strange behavior.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Henry Rawlinson used the Book of Genesis to find the identity of the Mesopotamia. He made it clear that the original inhabitants of Babylonia were represented by the name Nimrod and were represented by the family of Ham: Kushites, Egyptians and etc. This name came from the popularity among these people of hunting the leopard (Nimri). And as noted in earlier post the Egyptian and Nubian rulers always associated leopard spots with royalty, just as Siva is associated with the feline. As a result, Rawlinson used an African language Galla, to decipher the cuneiform writing.
The Sumerians and Elamites came from Africa, like the founders of the Indus Valley civilization. This is why the Elamite and Sumerian languages are closely related to African and Dravidian languages.
The Kushites when they migrated from Middle Africa to Asia continued to call themselves Kushites. This is most evident in place names and the names of gods. The Kassites, chief rulers of Iran occupied the central part of the Zagros. The Kassite god was called Kashshu, which was also the name of the people. The K-S-H, name element is also found in India. For example Kishkinthai, was the name applied to an ancient Dravidian kingdom in South India. Also it should be remembered that the Kings of Sumer, were often referred to as the " Kings of Kush".
The major Kushite tribe in Central Asia was called Kushana. The Kushan of China were styled Ta Yueh-ti or "the Great Lunar Race". Along the Salt Swamp, there was a state called Ku-Shih of Tibet. The city of K-san, was situated in the direction of Kushan, which was located in the Western part of the Gansu Province of China.
The Elamites later conquered Sumer. They called this line of Kings,he "King of Kish'. This term has affinity to the term Kush,that was given to the Kerma dynasty, founded by the C-Group people of Kush. It is interesting to note that the Elamite language, is closely related to the African languages including Egyptian and the Dravidian languages of India.
The most important Kushite colony in Iran was ancient Elam. The Elamites called their country KHATAM or KHALTAM (Ka-taam). The capital of Khaltam which we call Susa, was called KHUZ (Ka-u-uz) by the Aryans, NIME (Ni-may) by the people of Sumer, and KUSHSHI (Cush-she) by the Elamites.In the Akkadian inscriptions the Elamites were called GIZ-BAM (the land of the bow). The ancient Chinese or Bak tribesmen which dominate China today called the Elamites KASHTI. Moreover, in the Bible the Book of Jeremiah (xlxx,35), we read "bow of Elam". It is interesting to note that both Khaltam-ti and Kashti as the name for Elam, agrees with Ta-Seti, the ancient name for Nubia located in the Meroitic Sudan.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
There is textual evidence supporting a relationship between the founders of Sumer, Elam and Dilmun. Col. Henry Rawlinson , used textual evidence to determine that a link existed between the Mesopotamians to their ancestors in Africa . Rawlinson called these people Kushites.
There is a positive relationship between crania from Africa and Eurasia. The archaeologist Marcel-Auguste Dieulafoy (Dieulafoy,2004) and Hanberry (1981) maintains that their was a Sub-Saharan strain in Persia . These researchers maintain that it was evident that an Ethiopian dynasty ruled Elam from a perusal of its statuary of the royal family and members of the army ( Dieulafoy, 2004; Dieulafoy, 2010;Hansberry,1981). Dieulafoy (2010 ) noted that the textual evidence and iconography make it clear that the Elamites were Africans, and part of the Kushite confederation .Dieulafoy (2010) made it clear that the Elamites at Susa were Sub-Saharan Africans.
Marcel Dieulafoy and M. de Quatrefages observed that the craniometrics of the ancient Elamites of Susa indicate that they were Sub-Saharan Africans or Negroes (Dieulafoy,2010). Ancient Sub-Saharan African skeletons have also been found in Mesopotamia (Tomczyk et al, 2010). The craniometric data indicates that continuity existed between ancient and medieval Sub-Saharan Africans in Mesopotamia (Ricault & Waelkens,2008).
Rawlinson,H. “ Letter read at the meeting of the Royal Asiatic Society on February 5, 1853”, The Athenaeum, (No. 1321) ,p.228.
Rawlinson,H. “Note on the early History of Babylonia”, Journal Royal Asiatic Soc., 15, 215-259.
Ricaut,F.X. and Waelkens.2008. Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzatine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements, Hum Biol, 80(5):535-564.
Tomczyk,J., Jedrychowska-Danska, K., Ploszaj,T & Witas H.W. (2010). Anthropological analysis of the osteological material from an ancient tomb (Early Bronze Age) from the middle Euphrates valley, Terqa (Syria) , International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, Retrieved 04/04/10 from (www.interscience.wiley.com)DOI:10.1002/oa.1150 .
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
There is textual evidence supporting a relationship between the founders of Sumer, Elam and Dilmun. Col. Henry Rawlinson , used textual evidence to determine that a link existed between the Mesopotamians to their ancestors in Africa . Rawlinson called these people Kushites.
There is a positive relationship between crania from Africa and Eurasia. The archaeologist Marcel-Auguste Dieulafoy (Dieulafoy,2004) and Hanberry (1981) maintains that their was a Sub-Saharan strain in Persia . These researchers maintain that it was evident that an Ethiopian dynasty ruled Elam from a perusal of its statuary of the royal family and members of the army ( Dieulafoy, 2004; Dieulafoy, 2010;Hansberry,1981). Dieulafoy (2010 ) noted that the textual evidence and iconography make it clear that the Elamites were Africans, and part of the Kushite confederation .Dieulafoy (2010) made it clear that the Elamites at Susa were Sub-Saharan Africans.
Marcel Dieulafoy and M. de Quatrefages observed that the craniometrics of the ancient Elamites of Susa indicate that they were Sub-Saharan Africans or Negroes (Dieulafoy,2010). Ancient Sub-Saharan African skeletons have also been found in Mesopotamia (Tomczyk et al, 2010). The craniometric data indicates that continuity existed between ancient and medieval Sub-Saharan Africans in Mesopotamia (Ricault & Waelkens,2008).
Rawlinson,H. “ Letter read at the meeting of the Royal Asiatic Society on February 5, 1853”, The Athenaeum, (No. 1321) ,p.228.
Rawlinson,H. “Note on the early History of Babylonia”, Journal Royal Asiatic Soc., 15, 215-259.
Ricaut,F.X. and Waelkens.2008. Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzatine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements, Hum Biol, 80(5):535-564.
Tomczyk,J., Jedrychowska-Danska, K., Ploszaj,T & Witas H.W. (2010). Anthropological analysis of the osteological material from an ancient tomb (Early Bronze Age) from the middle Euphrates valley, Terqa (Syria) , International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, Retrieved 04/04/10 from (www.interscience.wiley.com)DOI:10.1002/oa.1150 .
Many European archaeologists from the 18th and 19th century remarked on the African "negroid" traits found in many parts of the Near East. And this isn't shocking considering that blacks are aboriginal to these areas just like everywhere else. The "Near East" is one of the most ancient corridors for African migrations into Europe and Asia.
That said, I wouldn't be so quick to lump all these people together as "Kushites".
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: Persians were a composition of many people beginning with the Dravidian related Elam and ending with the Western European related Tokhari. Thus if they want to make a West Euroopean looking Persian that should be fine with everybody.
Modern man in an ancient Elamite town
You don't know what you're talking about. The Persians spoke Elamite. The Tokari were not western Europeans.
'
Actually the Elamites spoke Elamite and Persians spoke Persian. And if they came from Africa it was several THOUSANDS OF YEARS BC!
Speak for yourself! The Tokharians are displayed as people with red-blond hair although I agree there were possibly Thuggara there who may have given their name to those Central Asians. Just like the Persians gave their name to the modern ones! In any case white Tokharians and black Sabari invaded the territory of northern India from Central Asia after the Persians.
What YOU have to understand is that there were several likely "black" populations in Iran including the Kassites whose modern remnants are likely the Shihu or Shuwahiyyen who still claim descent from a Shihu. The Kassites had rulers like Shihu Sembara who is likely the wicked black Sembara of later Hindu scripture. In addition to these people were the small Dravidian related Taman who are possibly linked to the Ur III culture judging from skeletal remains.
There were also the remnant of the taller populations related to the Hyksos who had spread abroad from Canaan (southwestern Arabia) into Wadi Mathani and the northern Maitanni. There descendants were the Daae (Daasas) or Meluhha of Iran and India better known as the Medes or Persians. There rulers were called Az-Dahaka (Astyages/Deiokes, etc.) from their south Arabian legendary ruler.
Not surprisingly the Daae or Dahae tribes are equated with the Kurus-Panchalas and Meluchhas in Indic mythos who in turn are thought to be descendants of Kurush or Cyrus, the name of several Persian rulers. The Kurus are said to be of the race of the Purus or Pauravas - the purim or tripura builders of Central Asia known as the Medes. I identify the Meds of the Jat region as a remnant of these people and hence they are called
"The black-faced Meds are like tamarisk sparks without even a glow of courage..." p. 328 the People of India 1999. These the black Jats have nothing to do with the early Dravidian related people of Elam who spoke "Elamite".
These people were all settled in the Elam and Gandhara area long before the coming of the fair skinned brachycephalic Scythic people with prominent noses from Ferghana.
Before all that were the large and highly prognathic Ubaid settlers *-4th millenium B>C. who were also probably in part connected to the earliest Eridu culture and also are known to have moved into Iran and India. These people may have been connected tto the original Umm an Nar and the Ethiopian Icthyophagii or fish-eaters.
I see all of these distinct people portrayed in early Elamite iconography as well as the later fair-skinned Scythic related people. My hypotheses comes from archeology and physical anthropology as well as ethnohistory and linguistics.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Medes or Meds or Daae have NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ELAMITE speaking inhabitants of IRAN.
"The black-faced Meds are like tamarisk sparks without even a glow of courage..." p. 328 the People of India 1999.
They are the ancestors of tall black Jati or Jats once known as Kuru or Kaurava and Puru or Paurava - the Mlechhas whose name "Arya" was taken or adopted from them "according to Herodotus and the Rig Veda itself)and whose dialect was the Prakrit.
In the Rig Vedas, Indra proclaims in Veda X 49, he has "deprived the Dasyu race of the name of Arya" and "Indra who slayed Vritra and stormed towns has destoyed the troops of the black Dasas..." II 20 , 6 and 7 Encyclopaedia Indica Volume 12 by Shyam Singh Shashi, p. 121.
Also the Rig Veda also speaks many of the destruction of the pura or tripura triple walled fortresses of "the Dasas" which were in fact built by the early Daae or Persians in Central Asia.
Herodotus also states clear the people that adopted the Aryan name from the Mede were the people who were "Scyths" or Scytho Haumovera Soma using Scythians who wore cone like hats and had prominent noses. The latter had nothing to do with the Achaemenids as we can all plainly see.
All kinds of excuses have arisen about why the Dasyu are called black. For example one excuse is that it was "symbolic".
"Indra, the slayer of Vrittra, the destroyer of cities, has scattered the Dasyu sprang from a black womb." Rig Veda II 20.6
"Active and bright have they come forth, impetuous in speed like bulls, Driving the black skin far away. 2 Quelling the riteless Dasyu, may we think upon the bridge of bliss, Leaving the bridge of woe behind." (9.xli.1: book 9, hymn XLI, verse 1)"
In reality Indra was none other than Intauruta of Maitanni which was none other than Thaur or Thawr or (the ox or bull) of the early and modern Ethiopic or Afro-Arabian "Semites", and all of the Aryan deities similarly can be traced to the early Afro semitic deities especially Amurru genealogies of kings.
It would not be surprising if the Maitanni dialect developed as a result of these early semitic speakers settling amongst Ural Altaic speakers.
Asko Parpola a famous "Indologist" is convinced that the Dasas were the pre-Vedic “carriers of the Bronze Age culture of Greater Iran”. Parpola is also the organizer of the 12th World Sanskrit conference of 2003.
The Elamite culture and the people of the Meds came from two SEPARATE groups.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Matamoros: I have to disagree here the Persian people were historically known as white people. Not that I think I would call Jake Gylenhal a Persian but the Persians were known to be white historically.
What gets me is why are people SO UPSET NOW, the movie 300 had the Persians as Ragheaded, Black and homosexual and no one complained about that B.S movie. The Overt White Supremacy in the horrible **** movie yet people even here probably paid money to see it and own it.
If you are against the movie don't see it, with the Online movie thing ITS NOT THAT HARD...GEEZ.
I concur, the Persians (NOT be confused with *all* Iranians) were indeed 'white' and largely still are. Ironically Classical Greek records describe Persians as white of skin compared to darker or tanned Greeks. My problem with the movie however is the same with the rest of Hollywood. It is only when the Persians are the protagonists or good-guys that they are white. Yet as what Jari-mat stated above when they are bad guys, their complexions get darker all of a sudden.
I am also annoyed that the characters speak with British accents! I was already fed up with that Shakespearean sh*t with regards to depictions of Greeks and Romans and now even Iranians! Again, only when the Persians are dark baddies do they speak with a non-English accent.
But if you think this is bad, it is nothing compared to Paramount's Last Airbender!
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Matamoros: I have to disagree here the Persian people were historically known as white people. Not that I think I would call Jake Gylenhal a Persian but the Persians were known to be white historically.
What gets me is why are people SO UPSET NOW, the movie 300 had the Persians as Ragheaded, Black and homosexual and no one complained about that B.S movie. The Overt White Supremacy in the horrible **** movie yet people even here probably paid money to see it and own it.
If you are against the movie don't see it, with the Online movie thing ITS NOT THAT HARD...GEEZ.
I concur, the Persians (NOT be confused with *all* Iranians) were indeed 'white' and largely still are. Ironically Classical Greek records describe Persians as white of skin compared to darker or tanned Greeks. My problem with the movie however is the same with the rest of Hollywood. It is only when the Persians are the protagonists or good-guys that they are white. Yet as what Jari-mat stated above when they are bad guys, their complexions get darker all of a sudden.
I am also annoyed that the characters speak with British accents! I was already fed up with that Shakespearean sh*t with regards to depictions of Greeks and Romans and now even Iranians! Again, only when the Persians are dark baddies do they speak with a non-English accent.
But if you think this is bad, it is nothing compared to Paramount's Last Airbender!
The thing is Hollywood caters to its mainly white audience. Ameny-Ra made this clear on the Thread about the 17th dynasty script. If the whites want to believe Imhotep was a South African Afrikaneer so be it. If they want to believe that Xerxes was an 8ft tall Homosexual so be it. If they want to believe that the Greeks were blond and blue eyed Germans(people the Greeks considered Barbaric) so be it.
posted
^ Oh yes, the quintessential 'blondism' that accompanies Hollywood depictions of Classic Greeks.
Don't forget 'Alexander'
Obviously the perpetuation of Nordic fantasies on obviously Mediterranean peoples.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Oh, I forgot to add that this is Disney we are talking about, the same child-family oriented company that made that surreptitiously insulting movie to blacks and peoples of African descent known as 'The Frog Princess'. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Matamoros: I have to disagree here the Persian people were historically known as white people. Not that I think I would call Jake Gylenhal a Persian but the Persians were known to be white historically.
What gets me is why are people SO UPSET NOW, the movie 300 had the Persians as Ragheaded, Black and homosexual and no one complained about that B.S movie. The Overt White Supremacy in the horrible **** movie yet people even here probably paid money to see it and own it.
If you are against the movie don't see it, with the Online movie thing ITS NOT THAT HARD...GEEZ.
I concur, the Persians (NOT be confused with *all* Iranians) were indeed 'white' and largely still are. Ironically Classical Greek records describe Persians as white of skin compared to darker or tanned Greeks. My problem with the movie however is the same with the rest of Hollywood. It is only when the Persians are the protagonists or good-guys that they are white. Yet as what Jari-mat stated above when they are bad guys, their complexions get darker all of a sudden.
I am also annoyed that the characters speak with British accents! I was already fed up with that Shakespearean sh*t with regards to depictions of Greeks and Romans and now even Iranians! Again, only when the Persians are dark baddies do they speak with a non-English accent.
But if you think this is bad, it is nothing compared to Paramount's Last Airbender!
The Persians and Medes are "historically" known to have been the very dark-skinned Central Asian people called Daae, Amardians, Derbikes and Kurus. Some of these people still occupy India and Gandhara where they were said to have been pushed.
Later on other Asians moved into the area just like "the Arabian peninsula" where the people were known as black. The name of the Persians and later the name "Arya" were adopted from the Medes by the Scythians like Herodotus said. As in Arabia and North Africa the physical anthropology, iconography and archeology also testifies to this transformation. Berbers, Arabs and Persians were originally the names of African-related people who have now become known for being otherwise.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Oh, I forgot to add that this is Disney we are talking about, the same child-family oriented company that made that surreptitiously insulting movie to blacks and peoples of African descent known as 'The Frog Princess'.
That page is interesting. Do you know what was insulting about the film aside from her being made a frog for most of the film. (That's hilarious by the way and typical). I knew there had to be something wrong about the movie.
I also know the French made a comic book of ancient Egyptians where they depict the Egyptians as Ethiopian looking so I'm not surprised about the film they made. They've always been more intellectually-inclined than Americans and Brits I guess. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
Not only a comic, but they also made a movie showing the Egyptians as Black people with blue eyes. Never seen it but I hear it's good read this there is some pics of the movie you may find interesting:
Not only a comic, but they also made a movie showing the Egyptians as Black people with blue eyes. Never seen it but I hear it's good read this there is some pics of the movie you may find interesting:
French people are very progressive when It comes to Egypt.
Peace
Well, I was just reading it King and all I can say is WOW - and thank you so much. That is definitely one of the most enjoyable posts and topics I've read on the forum since i've been on ti and I'm, in fact, about to place it on my favorites.
Also, unbelievable how civil people are towards each other engaging in reasonable conversation with not trolls to be found. I hope the latter didn't all just come on after I showed up.LOL. Anyway, I especially enjoyed the talk about Zahi - absolutely hilarious - and probably true.
I guess the French or Francophone Belgians have great respect for their Champollions who claimed the hundreds of ancient skeletons that had been investigated by a Dr. Larrey turned out identical to modern Kenuzi Nubians adn others of "Abyssinian" type. Actually I have to keep reminding myself that much of my inspiration for the study of black culture Egypt has actually come from white friends from Germany, France and Japan. its a long story but I think Americans aren't aware sometimes that there are many people around the world who are fascinated with black culture and know the truth about the African past. They certainly have a greater appreciation of things African than many of us blacks in America do.
Back to the topic again. I also was not aware that Joanne Fletcher was the one who did that rather African looking depiction of Nefertiti and I'm wondering what she feels about what happened to her. I remember seeing her on the Discovery or Learning Channel here in the U.S. one but didn't hear about what she said about the hair.
I will definitely be checking on where to get the video because if I do find a copy I will try to import the movie into the U.S. for educational purposes if its good enough for public school children to see. Maybe they've also added sub-titles by now. I'd really be interested in promoting such a movie in the U.S. if its really what people have said it is so thanks again for the heads up.
I forgot to mention that in the post Djehuti pointed me to you mentioned something about Disney films for children and certain "sexual" innuendos that could be found in them. Is this something that you read about or just something you've surmised. It is really horrifying if that is fact.
If you know anything about this from external sources please let me know about this too. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: Persians were a composition of many people beginning with the Dravidian related Elam and ending with the Western European related Tokhari. Thus if they want to make a West Euroopean looking Persian that should be fine with everybody.
Modern man in an ancient Elamite town
You don't know what you're talking about. The Persians spoke Elamite. The Tokari were not western Europeans.
'
Actually the Elamites spoke Elamite and Persians spoke Persian. And if they came from Africa it was several THOUSANDS OF YEARS BC!
Speak for yourself! The Tokharians are displayed as people with red-blond hair although I agree there were possibly Thuggara there who may have given their name to those Central Asians. Just like the Persians gave their name to the modern ones! In any case white Tokharians and black Sabari invaded the territory of northern India from Central Asia after the Persians.
What YOU have to understand is that there were several likely "black" populations in Iran including the Kassites whose modern remnants are likely the Shihu or Shuwahiyyen who still claim descent from a Shihu. The Kassites had rulers like Shihu Sembara who is likely the wicked black Sembara of later Hindu scripture. In addition to these people were the small Dravidian related Taman who are possibly linked to the Ur III culture judging from skeletal remains.
There were also the remnant of the taller populations related to the Hyksos who had spread abroad from Canaan (southwestern Arabia) into Wadi Mathani and the northern Maitanni. There descendants were the Daae (Daasas) or Meluhha of Iran and India better known as the Medes or Persians. There rulers were called Az-Dahaka (Astyages/Deiokes, etc.) from their south Arabian legendary ruler.
Not surprisingly the Daae or Dahae tribes are equated with the Kurus-Panchalas and Meluchhas in Indic mythos who in turn are thought to be descendants of Kurush or Cyrus, the name of several Persian rulers. The Kurus are said to be of the race of the Purus or Pauravas - the purim or tripura builders of Central Asia known as the Medes. I identify the Meds of the Jat region as a remnant of these people and hence they are called
"The black-faced Meds are like tamarisk sparks without even a glow of courage..." p. 328 the People of India 1999. These the black Jats have nothing to do with the early Dravidian related people of Elam who spoke "Elamite".
These people were all settled in the Elam and Gandhara area long before the coming of the fair skinned brachycephalic Scythic people with prominent noses from Ferghana.
Before all that were the large and highly prognathic Ubaid settlers *-4th millenium B>C. who were also probably in part connected to the earliest Eridu culture and also are known to have moved into Iran and India. These people may have been connected tto the original Umm an Nar and the Ethiopian Icthyophagii or fish-eaters.
I see all of these distinct people portrayed in early Elamite iconography as well as the later fair-skinned Scythic related people. My hypotheses comes from archeology and physical anthropology as well as ethnohistory and linguistics.
Your views are based on ignorance. Persian is nothing more than Elamite so there is no linguistic support for your theory. The Kassite language is nothing more than a varient of Dravidian.
The Tokarian language was a lingua franca.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
No lie Dana, Disney is a company I just don't trust. They have been caught countless times putting swear words, Sexual words, and nudity in their cartoons. Read this website to get a taste of Disney and how corrupt they are:
Walt Disney was into the ocult thats why they have so many Mickey mouse and witchcraft videos. To me things like Harry Potter, Disney etc are not innocent but are tools used to have children believing in the sorcery and witchcraft of the people who do them. They are trying to indoctrinate our children into the occult.
All you have to do to see this is just look at the Mickey mouse club of Britney and Timberlake. Most of the mickey mouse club people ended up with terrible lives of drugs, sex and violence and mental health problems, coincedence? I highly doubt it.
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The Medes or Meds or Daae have NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ELAMITE speaking inhabitants of IRAN.
"The black-faced Meds are like tamarisk sparks without even a glow of courage..." p. 328 the People of India 1999.
They are the ancestors of tall black Jati or Jats once known as Kuru or Kaurava and Puru or Paurava - the Mlechhas whose name "Arya" was taken or adopted from them "according to Herodotus and the Rig Veda itself)and whose dialect was the Prakrit.
In the Rig Vedas, Indra proclaims in Veda X 49, he has "deprived the Dasyu race of the name of Arya" and "Indra who slayed Vritra and stormed towns has destoyed the troops of the black Dasas..." II 20 , 6 and 7 Encyclopaedia Indica Volume 12 by Shyam Singh Shashi, p. 121.
Also the Rig Veda also speaks many of the destruction of the pura or tripura triple walled fortresses of "the Dasas" which were in fact built by the early Daae or Persians in Central Asia.
Herodotus also states clear the people that adopted the Aryan name from the Mede were the people who were "Scyths" or Scytho Haumovera Soma using Scythians who wore cone like hats and had prominent noses. The latter had nothing to do with the Achaemenids as we can all plainly see.
All kinds of excuses have arisen about why the Dasyu are called black. For example one excuse is that it was "symbolic".
"Indra, the slayer of Vrittra, the destroyer of cities, has scattered the Dasyu sprang from a black womb." Rig Veda II 20.6
"Active and bright have they come forth, impetuous in speed like bulls, Driving the black skin far away. 2 Quelling the riteless Dasyu, may we think upon the bridge of bliss, Leaving the bridge of woe behind." (9.xli.1: book 9, hymn XLI, verse 1)"
In reality Indra was none other than Intauruta of Maitanni which was none other than Thaur or Thawr or (the ox or bull) of the early and modern Ethiopic or Afro-Arabian "Semites", and all of the Aryan deities similarly can be traced to the early Afro semitic deities especially Amurru genealogies of kings.
It would not be surprising if the Maitanni dialect developed as a result of these early semitic speakers settling amongst Ural Altaic speakers.
Asko Parpola a famous "Indologist" is convinced that the Dasas were the pre-Vedic “carriers of the Bronze Age culture of Greater Iran”. Parpola is also the organizer of the 12th World Sanskrit conference of 2003.
The Elamite culture and the people of the Meds came from two SEPARATE groups.
There is nothing in this post that relates to the Medes.
The Medes did not live in India so why are you talking about India?
Parpola's work is not really that great. Check out the following if you desire education about Parpola' faults
Winters,Clyde Ahmad, "Review of Dr. Asko Parpolas' "The Coming of the Aryans". International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 18, no2 (1989) , pages 98-127.
posted
Mitanni has nothing to do with Semitic languages.
An important group in Anantolia in addition to the Hatti, were the Hurrians. The Hurrians enter Mesopotamia from the northeastern hilly area . They introduced horse-drawn war chariots to Mesopotamia .
Hurrians penetrate Mesopotamia and Syria-Palestine between 1700-1500 BC. The major Hurrian Kingdom was Mitanni, which was founded by Sudarna I (c.1550), was established at Washukanni on the Khabur River. The Hurrian capital was Urkesh, one of its earliest kings was called Tupkish.
Linguistic and historical evidence support the view that Dravidians influenced Mittanni and Lycia. (Winters 1989a) Alain Anselin is sure that Dravidian speaking peoples once inhabited the Aegean. For example Anselin (1982, pp.111-114) has discussed many Dravidian place names found in the Aegean Sea area.
Two major groups in ancient Anatolia were the Hurrians and Lycians. Although the Hurrians are considered to be Indo-European speakers, some Hurrians probably spoke a Dravidian language.
The Hurrians lived in Mittanni. Mittanni was situated on the great bend of the Upper Euphrates river. Hurrian was spoken in eastern Anatolia and North Syria.
Most of what we know about Hurrian comes from the Tel al-Armarna letters. These letters were written to the Egyptian pharaoh. These letters are important because they were written in a language different from diplomatic Babylonian.
The letters written in the unknown language were numbered 22 and 25. In 1909 Bork, in Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatische Gesellschaft, wrote a translation of the letters.
In 1930, G.W. Brown proposed that the words in letters 22 and 25 were Dravidian especially Tamil. Brown (1930), has shown that the vowels and consonants of Hurrian and Dravidian are analogous. In support of this theory Brown (1930) noted the following similarities between Dravidian and Hurrian: 1) presence of a fullness of forms employed by both languages; 2) presence of active and passive verbal forms are not distinguished; 3) presence of verbal forms that are formed by particles; 4) presence of true relative pronouns is not found in these languages; 5) both languages employ negative verbal forms; 6) identical use of -m, as nominative; 7) similar pronouns; and 8) similar ending formations:
Dravidian Hurrian a a -kku -ikka imbu impu
There are analogous Dravidian and Hurrian terms:
English Hurrian Dravidian mountain paba parampu lady,woman aallay ali King Sarr,zarr Ca, cira god en en give tan tara to rule irn ire father attai attan wife,woman asti atti
Many researchers have noted the presence of many Indo-Aryan words. In Hurrians. This has led some researchers to conclude that Indo –Europeans may have ruled the Hurrians. This results from the fact that the names of the Hurrian gods are similar to the Aryan gods:
There are other Hurrian and Sanskrit terms that appear to show a relationship:
English Hurrian Sanskrit Tamil One aika eka okka ‘together’ Three tera tri Five panza panca añcu Seven satta sapta Nine na nava onpatu Other Hurrian terms relate to Indo-Aryan:
English Hurrian I-A Tamil Brown babru babhru pukar Grey parita palita paraitu ‘old’ Reddish pinkara pingala puuval
English Mitanni Vedic Tamil Warrior marya marya makan, maravan
Although researchers believe that the Hurrians-Mitanni were dominated by Indo-Aryans this is not supported by the evidence. Bjarte Kaldhol found that only 5 out of 500 Hurrian names were I-A sounding .
The linguistic evidence discussed above is consistent with the view that the only Indian elements in Anatolian culture were of Dravidian ,rather than Indo-Aryan origin. This evidence from Mittanni adds further confirmation to the findings of N. Lahovary in Dravidian Origins and the West, that prove the earlier presence of Dravidian speakers in Anatolia.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Clyde "The Head Buffoon In Charge" Winters is posting once again on something his tiny mind knows nothing about.
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde - It is interesting that the Garo people of northeastern India and northern Bangladesh, call themselves the Mande (or People). It is said that they are originally from Tibet. Is there a connection with the West African Mande, other than the obvious African ancestry?
Haplogroup "D": It is found today at high frequency among populations in Tibet, the Japanese archipelago, and the Andaman Islands, though curiously not in India.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Clyde - It is interesting that the Garo people of northeastern India and northern Bangladesh, call themselves the Mande (or People). It is said that they are originally from Tibet. Is there a connection with the West African Mande, other than the obvious African ancestry?
Haplogroup "D": It is found today at high frequency among populations in Tibet, the Japanese archipelago, and the Andaman Islands, though curiously not in India.
Hi I have known about the mande speaking people of India for years but I have not been able to find a linguistic sample of their language so I can not really tell if their is a linguistic relationship.
The Mande and Dravidian speaking people probably left Middle Africa around the same time.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Matamoros: I have to disagree here the Persian people were historically known as white people. Not that I think I would call Jake Gylenhal a Persian but the Persians were known to be white historically.
What gets me is why are people SO UPSET NOW, the movie 300 had the Persians as Ragheaded, Black and homosexual and no one complained about that B.S movie. The Overt White Supremacy in the horrible **** movie yet people even here probably paid money to see it and own it.
If you are against the movie don't see it, with the Online movie thing ITS NOT THAT HARD...GEEZ.
I concur, the Persians (NOT be confused with *all* Iranians) were indeed 'white' and largely still are. Ironically Classical Greek records describe Persians as white of skin compared to darker or tanned Greeks. My problem with the movie however is the same with the rest of Hollywood. It is only when the Persians are the protagonists or good-guys that they are white. Yet as what Jari-mat stated above when they are bad guys, their complexions get darker all of a sudden.
I am also annoyed that the characters speak with British accents! I was already fed up with that Shakespearean sh*t with regards to depictions of Greeks and Romans and now even Iranians! Again, only when the Persians are dark baddies do they speak with a non-English accent.
But if you think this is bad, it is nothing compared to Paramount's Last Airbender!
Ok...I saw the movie last night. Let me say that it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. Being a video game fan myself...it's kinda annoying seeing video game movies suck @$$ while comic book movies flourish. I agree, the Persians were not a Black people, but there were still some serious casting mistakes. Firstly, many people are justly attacking this movie for the accents. I agree, it throws you out of what is really a very beautifully-made movie. The acting isn't even bad. Persia is depicted very well in terms of color/textures and style. Secondly, I actually didn't have a problem with Jake Gyllanhaal as Destan, my casting problem was with the guy who played the King of Persia. He looked more like an English monarch as times when he was riding through a crowd...not believable at all.
It's interesting the difference in the depictions of the Persians when you compare Prince of Persia to 300. In 300, there were several extras that were clearly Black. The most talked about being the messenger from the beginning of the movie who was kicked into the well. PoP is very different in that there are almost no Black extras not even in the crowd. Some will say this is not historically-inaccurate though. There is one Black character in the movie who at first I thought they were going to portray as a slave (I was waiting for that...the only Black character in the movie is a slave). But he actually wasn't a slave and had a bit of a scene to himself where he fought a Hassanssin (Assassin) and was a heroic character.
Overall, I gave it a 7/10 on IMDB.
Posts: 1219 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Matamoros: I have to disagree here the Persian people were historically known as white people. Not that I think I would call Jake Gylenhal a Persian but the Persians were known to be white historically.
What gets me is why are people SO UPSET NOW, the movie 300 had the Persians as Ragheaded, Black and homosexual and no one complained about that B.S movie. The Overt White Supremacy in the horrible **** movie yet people even here probably paid money to see it and own it.
If you are against the movie don't see it, with the Online movie thing ITS NOT THAT HARD...GEEZ.
I concur, the Persians (NOT be confused with *all* Iranians) were indeed 'white' and largely still are. Ironically Classical Greek records describe Persians as white of skin compared to darker or tanned Greeks. My problem with the movie however is the same with the rest of Hollywood. It is only when the Persians are the protagonists or good-guys that they are white. Yet as what Jari-mat stated above when they are bad guys, their complexions get darker all of a sudden.
I am also annoyed that the characters speak with British accents! I was already fed up with that Shakespearean sh*t with regards to depictions of Greeks and Romans and now even Iranians! Again, only when the Persians are dark baddies do they speak with a non-English accent.
But if you think this is bad, it is nothing compared to Paramount's Last Airbender!
Ok...I saw the movie last night. Let me say that it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. Being a video game fan myself...it's kinda annoying seeing video game movies suck @$$ while comic book movies flourish. I agree, the Persians were not a Black people, but there were still some serious casting mistakes. Firstly, many people are justly attacking this movie for the accents. I agree, it throws you out of what is really a very beautifully-made movie. The acting isn't even bad. Persia is depicted very well in terms of color/textures and style. Secondly, I actually didn't have a problem with Jake Gyllanhaal as Destan, my casting problem was with the guy who played the King of Persia. He looked more like an English monarch as times when he was riding through a crowd...not believable at all.
It's interesting the difference in the depictions of the Persians when you compare Prince of Persia to 300. In 300, there were several extras that were clearly Black. The most talked about being the messenger from the beginning of the movie who was kicked into the well. PoP is very different in that there are almost no Black extras not even in the crowd. Some will say this is not historically-inaccurate though. There is one Black character in the movie who at first I thought they were going to portray as a slave (I was waiting for that...the only Black character in the movie is a slave). But he actually wasn't a slave and had a bit of a scene to himself where he fought a Hassanssin (Assassin) and was a heroic character.
Overall, I gave it a 7/10 on IMDB.
In regard to 300, I doubt any of those African people in the movie were supposed to be actual Persians, but instead people from places like Egypt, Kush, Saba etc. Since the movie kept on mentioning things in regard to hoe Persia incompassed many different lands. Having Africans clearly showed that. Having people from Southwest Asia would not have made that clear... not as much as having people from Europe, Southern Asia, or places further east. I think the main reason why people made a fuss about Africans being represented in 300, is that they weren't slaves but people of influence and great position. In contrast to if we had a blonde, blue eyes messager gallop into Sparta.
Posts: 341 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doctoris Scientia wrote: ---------------------------------- In regard to 300, I doubt any of those African people in the movie were supposed to be actual Persians, but instead people from places like Egypt, Kush, Saba etc. Since the movie kept on mentioning things in regard to hoe Persia incompassed many different lands. Having Africans clearly showed that. Having people from Southwest Asia would not have made that clear... not as much as having people from Europe, Southern Asia, or places further east. I think the main reason why people made a fuss about Africans being represented in 300, is that they weren't slaves but people of influence and great position. ---------------------------------
Look, dummy. The makers of 300 were catering to their white teenage clientele. This demographic wanted to see whites kill and maim so called "black people".
If they had to lie about who the Persians were in order to cater to this depraved need, then that is what they did.
Use your brain before you post.
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
King_Scorpion - Quote: "Ironically Classical Greek records describe Persians as white of skin compared to darker or tanned Greeks."
I have heard this quite often, but I know of no such historical source. Would you mind telling me what you are talking about?
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Didn't you and Jari go Head to Head on this already.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: King_Scorpion - Quote: "Ironically Classical Greek records describe Persians as white of skin compared to darker or tanned Greeks."
I have heard this quite often, but I know of no such historical source. Would you mind telling me what you are talking about?
Ummm...I didn't type that.
Posts: 1219 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: King_Scorpion - Quote: "Ironically Classical Greek records describe Persians as white of skin compared to darker or tanned Greeks."
I have heard this quite often, but I know of no such historical source. Would you mind telling me what you are talking about?
Ummm...I didn't type that.
Sorry K_S, it was DJ who first posted that.
Wish he would stick to Whites suddenly turning White in Europe. Now that I think of it, I kind of miss that picture of the Scandinavian Albino.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
[1.139] If a Persian has the leprosy he is not allowed to enter into a city, or to have any dealings with the other Persians; he must, they say, have sinned against the sun. Foreigners attacked by this disorder, are forced to leave the country: even white pigeons are often driven away, as guilty of the same offence.
Book 8 - URANIA [8.27] A little before this, and just after the blow had been struck at Thermopylae, a herald was sent into Phocis (central Greece) by the Thessalians (central Greece, modern Aeolia), who had always been on bad terms with the Phocians, and especially since their last overthrow. For it was not many years previous to this invasion of Greece by the king, that the Thessalians, with their allies, entered Phocis in full force, but were defeated by the Phocians in an engagement wherein they were very roughly handled. The Phocians, who had with them as soothsayer Tellias of Elis, were blocked up in the mountain of Parnassus, when the following stratagem was contrived for them by their Elean ally. He took six hundred of their bravest men, and whitened their bodies and their arms with chalk; then instructing them to slay every one whom they should meet that was not whitened like themselves, he made a night attack upon the Thessalians.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kenndo: only part of kush perisa invaded was lower kush,and i the end they were kick out.
True, but it was common for nation-states to "lend" troops to foreign powers, especially those in close proximity to each other. So the fact that there were Africans in the Persian army, as depicted in the movie, shouldn't be a surprise. And from what I understand Africans were among the various men who followed Xerxes into Greece.
On another note:
The movie Alexander the Great did the best in depicting the acient Persians, and an alright try at depicting the Greeks.
Posts: 341 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ What you have are confused fools like Clyde who confuse the Indo-Iranian Kushanas with Kushites of Nile Valley Africa and Kassites of ancient Iraq.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Sorry K_S, it was DJ who first posted that.
Wish he would stick to Whites suddenly turning White in Europe. Now that I think of it, I kind of miss that picture of the Scandinavian Albino.
Idiot, no populations turned white 'suddenly'. It happened gradually in a process known as evolution. Again, I don't have the time to educate dimwits like yourself. You might want to attempt to educate yourself on the matter.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde, who were the Assyrians? What is their origin? Were they Mediterranean Caucasoids?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ What you have are confused fools like Clyde who confuse the Indo-Iranian Kushanas with Kushites of Nile Valley Africa and Kassites of ancient Iraq.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Sorry K_S, it was DJ who first posted that.
Wish he would stick to Whites suddenly turning White in Europe. Now that I think of it, I kind of miss that picture of the Scandinavian Albino.
Idiot, no populations turned white 'suddenly'. It happened gradually in a process known as evolution. Again, I don't have the time to educate dimwits like yourself. You might want to attempt to educate yourself on the matter.
Old postings never die.
BTW - Why is the Dravidian Albino kid darker than the Scandinavian guy - who is not, Err an Albino???
Quote: "Ironically Classical Greek records describe Persians as white of skin compared to darker or tanned Greeks."
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
He will wait until someone else post THEN respond with .. """WE told you so. """"
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Herodotus is known to have included much nonsense in his books. Does anyone give credence to his claim that the Phoenicians came from Arabia?
Herodotus The Persian Wars Written 440 B.C.E. Book 1 - CLIO
[1.1] According to the Persians best informed in history, the Phoenicians began to quarrel. This people, who had formerly dwelt on the shores of the Erythraean (Red) Sea, having migrated to the Mediterranean and settled in the parts which they now inhabit, began at once, they say, to adventure on long voyages, freighting their vessels with the wares of Egypt and Assyria. They landed at many places on the coast, and among the rest at Argos, which was then preeminent above all the states included now under the common name of Hellas.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lion: Clyde, who were the Assyrians? What is their origin? Were they Mediterranean Caucasoids?
The Sumerian King Gudea
The Sumerians were a Black/African group that migrated to Mesopotamia and replaced the Ubadians or Anu people.
.
The Assyrians were not Caucasoids. They were descendants of the Gutians. They are represented by the non-Black populations found in places like Syria and Turkey today.
Here we have a Gutian on the Left and a Sumerian on the right
European Caucasoids do not come on the scene in history until after after 1500BC when they begin to invade the Black civilizations, first in Anatolia and later Europe and the Meditteranean region.
posted
Kind of OT but anyone know about the story of the "Price of Persia" in the Biblical record that is a Demon attempting to stop the Angel (Michael?) from delivering a prophecy to Daniel?
In the video game a LONG time ago you were an actual Persian prince :
Later on this game was update and incorporated the biblical theme and you could actualy turn into the Demon in the game.
I wonder what kind of slant the movie has on it?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Herodotus is known to have included much nonsense in his books. Does anyone give credence to his claim that the Phoenicians came from Arabia?
Herodotus The Persian Wars Written 440 B.C.E. Book 1 - CLIO
[1.1] According to the Persians best informed in history, the Phoenicians began to quarrel. This people, who had formerly dwelt on the shores of the Erythraean (Red) Sea, having migrated to the Mediterranean and settled in the parts which they now inhabit, began at once, they say, to adventure on long voyages, freighting their vessels with the wares of Egypt and Assyria. They landed at many places on the coast, and among the rest at Argos, which was then preeminent above all the states included now under the common name of Hellas.
This may not be false. We know that the Phonecians spoke a Semitic language.
In relation to Mesopotamia we discover that the original inhabitants the Ubadians spoke a non-Semitic language. They were replaced by the Sumerians who also spoke a non Semitic language.
Later the Sumerians were conquored by the Akkadians who spoke a Semitic language. We know that the Akkadians had probably come from Ethiopia, which is the original home of the Semitic speaking people.
Who are we to say that when the Semitic people migrated across the Red Sea into mesopotamia, that another group: Phonecians didn't continue westward and settled on either side of the Mediterranean region. If this is true we would see the Phonecians coming from the Red Sea region, since this was the home of the speakers of this family of languages.
posted
Clyde - I never gave the chronology much thought, because most historians consider the Phonecians move northward (circa 1,200 B.C.) to be related to the Hebrew tribes warring on them from the hills.
It just occurred to me that something else happened at about that same time.
The Peleset and Tjeker (Minoans) of Crete, the “Philistines” moved into southern Canaan! Perhaps the Hebrews had nothing to do with it.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
The Assyrians were not Caucasoids. They were descendants of the Gutians. They are represented by the non-Black populations found in places like Syria and Turkey today.
European Caucasoids do not come on the scene in history until after after 1500BC when they begin to invade the Black civilizations, first in Anatolia and later Europe and the Meditteranean region.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: the Assyrians were a home grown Caucasian group of the Nordic type; Long Blond hair, blue eyes, aquiline nose, indigenous to northern Mesopotamia.
Mike, are you joking?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
if you say so Mike.
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic