posted
I have heard some folks claiming that the Kemeu would not called themselves Black-KM because that would suggest they harbored some type of racist or prejudice based on color against others or if they were surrounded by blacks then it wouldn't make much sense to self identify as such. But then we have this http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=bag&action=display&thread=545Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wally, 05 September, 2009 02:03 PM:
quote:Originally posted by Finesse: Hello im new here and I have a question. What is the reason as to why the ancient egyptians call there nation black/Kemet? I sorry but this still confuses me. were they reffering to the land or the people? and if they were talking about themselves still why? wwhen there are other nations who were black. why differentiate themselves like that
Why should a common universal practice be confusing? This is a universal characteristic of human cultures - continuing to this day -Ethnic Exclusivity!:
a) The Ancient Egyptians also referred to themselves as 'Rome.t' which means 'the Men'/ 'the People' - they were aware that there were other nations of men/people on earth...
b) The 'Eskimo' consist of Inuit, Inupiat, Yupik, and Alutiit, each of which is a regional variant meaning “the people” or “the real people.”
c) The Oromo of Ethiopia; Oromo is derived from 'orma' - person to 'oromo' - people; hence 'the People'
d) Britain from a Celtic word, Pritani, "painted people/men"; and of course, the Brits weren't the only ones in the world who used body paint and tattoos...
e) In Swazi we have this expression "Iliso Lesizwe Esimnyama" or "Eye of the Black Nation"; Swaziland "-the Black Nation", floating in a sea of Black nations--
km “twinkling” – definitely has no association with “black.” I6-G17-Y1 km “credit, profit” – I6-Y1 kmyt “herd of cattle” – I6-J15-M17-M17-E1-Z2 kmt “large granite, jar, pot” – I6-X1-W24-Z1
There is no such thing as "black credit" or "black twinkling." Cattle can include goats, cows and sheep. Are you going to argue that ALL of the cows, goats and sheep were black?
This reasoning has lead to many false conclusions and its root is in the method of intra-Egyptian etymolizing instead of looking for the term in related languages to bring clarity. Thus, we have linguistic fundamentalism and people stuck on the notion that every k-m root with the I6 glyph somehow magically means "black."
The earliest attestations of the word have the N23 irrigated land determinative. This is clearly a sign of cultivation. What people don't realize is that they have the same word written in a different form, but given a different definition.
Ancient Egyptian pkh3 = farmland
The /3/ was and /l/. The k-m root in Egyptian often corresponds to ciLuba k-l/k-n root:
[note: The CV phonetics might conceal a fugitive following nasal or resonant. Westermann (1927) frequently reconstructs such resonants at the end of his Proto-Western Sudanic roots (ka, kal "crab", ka, kan "side")]
...From root kale/kala/kola "grow, mature, ripen, rich/productive soil." This same root k-l is the same for "power, force" which relates to a "generative" energy, thus an association with "rich/productive soil."
ku Bu-kola (b-k-l) (A) force (B) expressly (to express...in other words, to manifest)
ci-kole-lu = how to educate. Remember the word educate means "to draw out" just like you would "draw out the fruit, plants" (the productivity) from the soil.
Kole-la (A) act harshly against somebody, overwhelm, molest, the short shrift (B) êtretrop heavy to bear (C) be too difficult to (D) be borne by somebody (E) force, compel
Kole-sha (A) welcome, wish to do well (B) increase (C) to harden, strengthen (D) strengthen (E) to support somebody, forces
There is no logical reason to render kmt as "black land." It is clear as day: productive, rich, fertile land which when you examine related black African languages also doubles to mean "community, city, village or country." This is in contrast to the dshr.t which is "unproductive, sterile, land." At some point one has to critically examine the glyphs and language for one's self and not take the entries in dictionaries at face value.
Just because it's in a dictionary doesn't make it correct. Thus why we have methods to verify if the obscure word means what the dictionary claims. This prevents us from making errors based on monoliguistic etymolizing (searching for meaning exclusively in the language under examination).
The root k-m/k-m-t is "polysemic" and cannot be reduced to a sole meaning of "black." The Egyptians were meticulous in their communication; giving us clear clues as to what they meant. The niw.t and N23 determinatives in no way can be reduced to color.
By your logic the following would mean "hidden nurse" because there is a root m-n that means "hidden."
mna.t = nurse, guardian
Or this word would mean "angry alligator person" adw = agressor
Or this word would mean "flamingo blood" dsr = blood
As we can see, the root doesn't necessarily describe the determinative. The determinative is there to describe a characteristic of the root word. Thus why an alligator is used to help you envision "aggressive" behavior. And the flamingo (because of its red color) to help describe the character of blood. The same convention is used with the N23 and Niw.t determinatives. The former is to let you know it is irrigated, farm, productive land (the kind that allows for urbanization). The niw.t is there to inform you it is a populace. The people are the citizens of the nation, town, country. It doesn't get any plainer
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: No not confused just pointing out the the confusion in others..
I wasn't addressing the post to you, rather to your point; you know, trying to embellish or expand upon what you were saying... Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Btw Wally some great linguistic discussions taking place over at E.S.R
I go there occassionally; it's a more disciplined site than this one, and also where the Lyin_ass, has recently culled his latest response quoting imhotep06 (Asar Imhotep):
quote:By your logic the following would mean "hidden nurse" because there is a root m-n that means "hidden."
mna.t = nurse, guardian
Or this word would mean "angry alligator person" adw = agressor
Or this word would mean "flamingo blood" dsr = blood
This post is aimed, I suspect judging by the flow of the thread, at alTakruri; and I find it to be condescending, offensive, and completely wrong. No student of Mdu Ntr (like alTakruri, myself...) would have any problem in reading and understanding that:
a) moone = nurse
b) adu = a man of wrath, to be angry, to rage at
c) deresh(dshr) = blood (in Wolof the word is deret)
"hidden nurse"!?! - please, give us a break!
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Btw Wally some great linguistic discussions taking place over at E.S.R
I go there occassionally; it's a more disciplined site than this one, and also where the Lyin_ass, has recently culled his latest response quoting imhotep06 (Asar Imhotep):
quote:By your logic the following would mean "hidden nurse" because there is a root m-n that means "hidden."
mna.t = nurse, guardian
Or this word would mean "angry alligator person" adw = agressor
Or this word would mean "flamingo blood" dsr = blood
This post is aimed, I suspect judging by the flow of the thread, at alTakruri; and I find it to be condescending, offensive, and completely wrong. No student of Mdu Ntr (like alTakruri, myself...) would have any problem in reading and understanding that:
a) moone = nurse
b) adu = a man of wrath, to be angry, to rage at
c) deresh(dshr) = blood (in Wolof the word is deret)
"hidden nurse"!?! - please, give us a break!
that wasn't the point. The point was your narrow dictionary only methodology in interpreting km would produce ridiculous results if the same narrow methodology of interpretation was applied to things such as the random examples above
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: The point was your narrow dictionary only methodology in interpreting km would produce ridiculous results if the same narrow methodology of interpretation was applied to things such as the random examples above
The dictionary approach is not narrow, it is the only way you can legitimately know Egyptian.
The Egyptian language was deciphered using Coptic. As a result, your reading of Egyptian must remain within the Context of Coptic.
I have made it clear that Egyptian was probably a lingua franca. Since it was made up using elements from a number of related African languages it would be natural to find similarities between Egyptian and other Black African languages.
. .
But these similarities can not supercede Egyptian meanings based on Coptic. They can help further understanding the meaning of terms but they can not erase the actual meaning of words attested in the Egyptian language recorded in an Egyptian language (i.e, Coptic or ancient Egyptian).
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde makes a good point. When I said "dictionary only" I meant hieroglyphic dictionary only as imhotep06 was saying and that we should look at the context of given word in other related languages, in actuality using other dictionaries and language references. Also recognizing that Budge is not the be all and end all at determining given meaning and accuracy of the Ptolemy V's issued Rosetta translation also which was incomplete due to damage.There exists no one definitive English translation of because of the minor differences between the three original texts and because modern understanding of the ancient languages continues to develop.
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: I have heard some folks claiming that the Kemeu would not called themselves Black-KM because that would suggest they harbored some type of racist or prejudice based on color against others or if they were surrounded by blacks then it wouldn't make much sense to self identify as such. But then we have this http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=bag&action=display&thread=545
Of course this is false, because 'black' is considered sacred in many African traditions including Egypt. There was no "racial" prejudice or color issue in ancient Egypt and to say so is an absurd lie to say the least.
But then what does any of this have to do with Nefertiti??
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The dictionary approach is not narrow, it is the only way you can legitimately know Egyptian. The Egyptian language was deciphered using Coptic. As a result, your reading of Egyptian must remain within the Context of Coptic.
I couldn't agree more, as a matter of fact I have uploaded a Coptic dictionary for interested parties who might wish to download, it is at:
quote:Of course this is false, because 'black' is considered sacred in many African traditions including Egypt. There was no "racial" prejudice or color issue in ancient Egypt and to say so is an absurd lie to say the least. But then what does any of this have to do with Nefertiti??
The conversation was a carry over from page I between Lioness and Wally.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic