posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kokakola
i dont know if all the Beja have large teeth and i dont know about the teeth of the ancient egyptian.

---

Just shut up.
Obviously, you don't know anything, which you keep conveying with your ignorant posts. Where are your ''Dravidian-like light brown'' Pan grave Egypto-Sudanese?

Here is another one for you and Sundiata:

quote:

---

Contemporary with them are the archaeological remains of another cultural group, “the pan-grave people”. They have been suggested to have a likely direct link to the Beja of later periods, and been identified with the Medjayu of written sources (Bietak 1986: 17 f). Sites related to them have been found at Khor Arba´at and Erkowit in the heartland of present-day Beja (Arkell 1955: 78). The evidence suggests that only a minority of “the pan-grave people” lived in the Nile Valley, where they existed in small enclave communities among the Egyptians and C-group populations, being periodically used as desert scouts, warriors or mine workers (Bietak, ibid.) The majority were probably desert nomads, breeding donkeys, sheep and goats.

---

http://www.njas.helsinki.fi/pdf-files/vol15num4/hjort.pdf
(P 475)

You hear no one using Pan grave burials in A and C-group territory as evidence that they were a major player in the peopling of the A and C-group, yet people attempt to use Pan grave burials in dynastic Egypt as evidence that they were a major player in Egypts state formation.

I have yet to see a grain of evidence that the ancestors of the Medjay were involved in Egypts state formation in a major way, to be able to speak of a monolithic predynastic Beja type. I don't even know how anyone can agree with the troll, because obviously, Beja people are not replicas of the Medjay people. How the hell can a modern derrivative be present to engage in affairs that precede their genesis? Its shabby, to say the least.

The troll is using the appearance of modern Eastern Desert Africans, and she relies heavily on skin color, without having established first that Predynastic ''Beja'' are the same as modern Beja.

---

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
I believe a lot of these claims stem from the common belief and misconception that groups of people have always inhabited the same abode as they do today. They count out immigrations or emmigrations to and from the region. That an early ancestral people of the Egyptians were closely related to the Medjay and later Beja is not an issue, but to say that they are the very same is rather far leap.

---

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Why do the C group cluster whith the badarians?

---

quote:

---

Why do Tigre (who do have "medjay" ancestries) cluster with Naqadan?

---

quote:

---

the C group could also be the "Shemsu Hor"/"Mesniu" who were populatiing Edfu & Hierakonpolis

---

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
Can someone summarize- who were the MEdjay?

---

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Most notable at Balabish, however, was the excavation of a Pan-grave cemetery. The
Pan-graves belonged to people of a different material culture from the Egyptians. They
entered Upper Egypt in small numbers between the Middle and New Kingdoms. Unlike
the shallow Pan-graves that Petrie excavated at Hu, the Balabish Pan-graves were deep
(about 1.5m). Most of the Pan-graves were round or oval in shape, and there was no
evidence of superstructures. Twenty-one round graves and thirteen oval graves with
contracted burials were excavated with typical Pan-grave goods, but fifteen rectangular
graves with extended burials and Pan-grave goods were also found scattered among the
others and extending into the area of the New Kingdom cemetery. Graves were oriented
north or northwest, following the course of the Nile at Balabish. Two deposits of pots
containing “ointment” were found in small holes, but without burials.
Unlike Egyptian burials, the Pan-grave burials at Balabish contained a large number of
leather goods, especially leather garments, sometimes with beads sewn in the seams, and
leather wrist guards used by archers, in both decorated and plain styles. Leather sandals
of a different syle from Egyptian ones of the New Kingdom were found in six graves.
Beads were made of imported Red Sea shells and ostrich eggshells, but carnelian and
glazed blue beads were also common. In one grave was a typical Pan-grave bracelet of
flat, rectangular shell beads strung together. Pottery was also typically Pan-grave; the
most common classes found in burials were bowls of the Black-topped Red class and
“hatched ware” made of Nile clay

Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of
Ancient Egypt - Kathryn A.Bard

---

quote:

---

In his excavations of Cemetery X, about 0.5km southwest of the Roman fort, Petrie
was the first to identify burials of what he called “Pan-graves.” These were shallow,
circular or oval graves with reused artifacts of Middle Kingdom date, such as cosmetic
(kohl) vases and Egyptian pottery of the Second Intermediate Period, but also artifacts
that were distinctly non-Egyptian. The latter included bracelets made of flat, rectangular
shell beads threaded together in strips. Pan-grave pottery was also different from
Egyptian pottery. These included bowls and cups of a handmade black ware with
diagonal lines or “basket” patterns incised around the rim, and fine Black-topped Red
class cups with everted rims that would later be known as “Kerma Ware” (from the
kingdom of Kerma located near the Third Cataract in Upper Nubia). Stacked deposits of
animal skulls, cut away at the back leaving only the frontal bones and horns and painted
with red ocher and black carbon, were also excavated. The largest of these deposits
contained the skulls of 138 goats, 5 oxen, 5 calves and 1 sheep, stacked in rows facing
west, along with a pair of copper tweezers.
Petrie correctly concluded that the Pan-graves belonged to (foreign) people who came
into Egypt after the fall of the Middle Kingdom. Pan-grave pottery and Kerma Ware were
also excavated by Petrie at another cemetery (YS) to the west of Cemetery X, where they
were found in rectangular (Egyptian-style) graves with mainly Egyptian pottery and
artifacts. The YS burials could either represent increasingly “Egyptianized” burials of
Pan-grave people who were becoming assimilated in Egyptian society, or Egyptians who
had some contact with the local Pan-grave people.

Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of
Ancient Egypt - Kathryn A.Bard

---

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

"For a while between 3400 and 3200 BCE, the
most powerful of the small states may have been
Ta-Seti, actually located in northern Nubian
stretches on the Nile, just south of Egypt. The
pictorial documents left by its kings reveal
Ta-Seti's claim to have conquered and ruled over
Upper Egypt for a time."

---

quote:

---

The white crown is first attested
on two royal artefacts from the late Predynastic period, the carved ivory handle of a flint
knife (Williams and Logan 1987, esp. 273, fig. 1) and the decorated incense burner from
Qustul Cemetery L. The knife handle is unprovenanced but is likely to have come from
somewhere in Upper Egypt. Given the evidence for cultural contacts between Qustul and
Hierakonpolis in Naqada III, it is tempting to locate the origins of the white crown at
Hierakonpolis.
-Early Dynastic Egypt - Toby Wilkinson

---

quote:

---

The earliest
known depiction of the white crown is on a ceremonial incense burner from Cemetery L
at Qustul in Lower Nubia (Williams 1986: pls 34, 38). Tomb L24 contained a variety of
prestige objects, and in all probability belonged to a late Predynastic king of Lower
Nubia, contemporary with the ruler buried in Abydos tomb U-j (Naqada IIIa2, c. 3150
BC). The Qustul incense burner is a remarkable object of supreme importance for the
development of Egyptian royal iconography. The incised scenes around the edge of the
object include the representation of a seated ruler, wearing the tall white crown. Evidence
of close contacts between the rulers of Qustul and their contemporaries at Hierakonpolis
may support the theory that the white crown originated at the latter site.
-Early Dynastic Egypt - Toby Wilkinson

---

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
^The title of that book reminds me of his interview with world history connected where he talks about the four civilisations of Africa, and why he calls them that.

quote:

---

"For a while between 3400 and 3200 BCE, the
most powerful of the small states may have been
Ta-Seti, actually located in northern Nubian
stretches on the Nile, just south of Egypt. The
pictorial documents left by its kings reveal
Ta-Seti's claim to have conquered and ruled over
Upper Egypt for a time."

---

There are several depictions that show royal regalia, and they are all first seen among A-group peoples. Prowse and Lovell published skeletal data that shows that A-group people had closer ties with Cem. T than neighboring Egyptian populations.

There is trade with the A-group peoples and pred. Hierakonpolis, and it is in that town that we first find Horus temples and worship, and we also see horus symbols first appearing among the A-group people. There are many connections that can be made, and that need to be tested, but the thing is, no scholar has ever come close to examining all those connections, and looking at what the most parsimonious explanation is, regarding the origin of Kingship along the Nile.

Most scholars only tell show one sided stories, that are biased towards Egyptians. I have read some books on pred. Egypt and when they talk about the A-group people, they all seem to agree on the following:

quote:

---

The white crown is first attested
on two royal artefacts from the late Predynastic period, the carved ivory handle of a flint
knife (Williams and Logan 1987, esp. 273, fig. 1) and the decorated incense burner from
Qustul Cemetery L. The knife handle is unprovenanced but is likely to have come from
somewhere in Upper Egypt. Given the evidence for cultural contacts between Qustul and
Hierakonpolis in Naqada III, it is tempting to locate the origins of the white crown at
Hierakonpolis.
-Early Dynastic Egypt - Toby Wilkinson

---

and

quote:

---

The earliest
known depiction of the white crown is on a ceremonial incense burner from Cemetery L
at Qustul in Lower Nubia (Williams 1986: pls 34, 38). Tomb L24 contained a variety of
prestige objects, and in all probability belonged to a late Predynastic king of Lower
Nubia, contemporary with the ruler buried in Abydos tomb U-j (Naqada IIIa2, c. 3150
BC). The Qustul incense burner is a remarkable object of supreme importance for the
development of Egyptian royal iconography. The incised scenes around the edge of the
object include the representation of a seated ruler, wearing the tall white crown. Evidence
of close contacts between the rulers of Qustul and their contemporaries at Hierakonpolis
may support the theory that the white crown originated at the latter site.
-Early Dynastic Egypt - Toby Wilkinson

---

And this is what they never mention (See image, and description):

http://books.google.nl/books?id=D1U36cyU6LkC&pg=PA94&img=1&zoom=3&hl=nl&sig=ACfU3U3j-bBaAnrfjh644JfwOTWPpjDS0Q&w=575

and (this probably what Ehret was talking about):

http://books.google.nl/books?id=D1U36cyU6LkC&pg=PA95&img=1&zoom=3&hl=nl&ots=34LWw6HzZn&sig=ACfU3U2LOWJeo1pR0BMhbgoYlpiFN2oKMQ&w=575

and (notice the archaic Horus burner)

http://books.google.nl/books?id=D1U36cyU6LkC&pg=PA96&img=1&zoom=3&hl=nl&ots=34LWw6HzZn&sig=ACfU3U06wUTj1JBBPrASEa-4Dlxlgej2EQ&w=575

Williams' case for the existence of Kingship in Nubia before Egypt would be much stronger if he had access to the skeletal material I mentioned above. Prowse and Lovell probably didn't review Williams' work in their paper, so any other conclusion than a local origin for Cem. T might have been far-fetched to them (especially since Naqadans have had a history of being called immigrants).

---

Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
^The title of that book reminds me of his interview with world history connected where he talks about the four civilisations of Africa, and why he calls them that.

quote:

---

"For a while between 3400 and 3200 BCE, the
most powerful of the small states may have been
Ta-Seti, actually located in northern Nubian
stretches on the Nile, just south of Egypt. The
pictorial documents left by its kings reveal
Ta-Seti's claim to have conquered and ruled over
Upper Egypt for a time."

---

There are several depictions that show royal regalia, and they are all first seen among A-group peoples. Prowse and Lovell published skeletal data that shows that A-group people had closer ties with Cem. T than neighboring Egyptian populations.

There is trade with the A-group peoples and pred. Hierakonpolis, and it is in that town that we first find Horus temples and worship, and we also see horus symbols first appearing among the A-group people. There are many connections that can be made, and that need to be tested, but the thing is, no scholar has ever come close to examining all those connections, and looking at what the most parsimonious explanation is, regarding the origin of Kingship along the Nile.

Most scholars only tell show one sided stories, that are biased towards Egyptians. I have read some books on pred. Egypt and when they talk about the A-group people, they all seem to agree on the following:

quote:

---

The white crown is first attested
on two royal artefacts from the late Predynastic period, the carved ivory handle of a flint
knife (Williams and Logan 1987, esp. 273, fig. 1) and the decorated incense burner from
Qustul Cemetery L. The knife handle is unprovenanced but is likely to have come from
somewhere in Upper Egypt. Given the evidence for cultural contacts between Qustul and
Hierakonpolis in Naqada III, it is tempting to locate the origins of the white crown at
Hierakonpolis.
-Early Dynastic Egypt - Toby Wilkinson

---

and

quote:

---

The earliest
known depiction of the white crown is on a ceremonial incense burner from Cemetery L
at Qustul in Lower Nubia (Williams 1986: pls 34, 38). Tomb L24 contained a variety of
prestige objects, and in all probability belonged to a late Predynastic king of Lower
Nubia, contemporary with the ruler buried in Abydos tomb U-j (Naqada IIIa2, c. 3150
BC). The Qustul incense burner is a remarkable object of supreme importance for the
development of Egyptian royal iconography. The incised scenes around the edge of the
object include the representation of a seated ruler, wearing the tall white crown. Evidence
of close contacts between the rulers of Qustul and their contemporaries at Hierakonpolis
may support the theory that the white crown originated at the latter site.
-Early Dynastic Egypt - Toby Wilkinson

---

And this is what they never mention (See image, and description):

http://books.google.nl/books?id=D1U36cyU6LkC&pg=PA94&img=1&zoom=3&hl=nl&sig=ACfU3U3j-bBaAnrfjh644JfwOTWPpjDS0Q&w=575

and (this probably what Ehret was talking about):

http://books.google.nl/books?id=D1U36cyU6LkC&pg=PA95&img=1&zoom=3&hl=nl&ots=34LWw6HzZn&sig=ACfU3U2LOWJeo1pR0BMhbgoYlpiFN2oKMQ&w=575

and (notice the archaic Horus burner)

http://books.google.nl/books?id=D1U36cyU6LkC&pg=PA96&img=1&zoom=3&hl=nl&ots=34LWw6HzZn&sig=ACfU3U06wUTj1JBBPrASEa-4Dlxlgej2EQ&w=575

Williams' case for the existence of Kingship in Nubia before Egypt would be much stronger if he had access to the skeletal material I mentioned above. Prowse and Lovell probably didn't review Williams' work in their paper, so any other conclusion than a local origin for Cem. T might have been far-fetched to them (especially since Naqadans have had a history of being called immigrants).

---

The earliest settlements in the "Nile Valley" are in Upper Egypt and Sudan. Note that the Nile Valley stretches from Egypt to Kenya but most often people seem to make it synonymous with Egypt proper when it isn't. The terms "A-Group", "Pan-Grave" and so forth are meaningless and arbitrary because they are based on styles of pottery and burials and not physical anthropology. The people who coined this term were trying to play up a "racial" distinction between Egyptians and "Nubians" in prehistory which did not exist. Because there was not such thing as Egypt or "Nubian" in prehistory. Therefore they used any and every thing they could to play up such a difference. The fact is that because of the drying Sahara the most densely populated areas of the Nile Valley were in Upper Egypt and Northern Sudan prior to the rise of Kmt. These areas were the most wet and lush and had been refuges for populations migrating North from Up the Nile and those going back and forth to the Sahara for thousands of years. It is this area from which the ancient Egyptians originated. We shouldn't get stuck on terminology because nobody knows what these people called themselves hence it is irrelevant to worry so much about it, except of course for those terminologies designed and created to obfuscate this fact.

---

Posts: 1296 | From: the planet | Registered: May 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by typeZeiss:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
^The title of that book reminds me of his interview with world history connected where he talks about the four civilisations of Africa, and why he calls them that.

quote:

---

"For a while between 3400 and 3200 BCE, the
most powerful of the small states may have been
Ta-Seti, actually located in northern Nubian
stretches on the Nile, just south of Egypt. The
pictorial documents left by its kings reveal
Ta-Seti's claim to have conquered and ruled over
Upper Egypt for a time."

---

There are several depictions that show royal regalia, and they are all first seen among A-group peoples. Prowse and Lovell published skeletal data that shows that A-group people had closer ties with Cem. T than neighboring Egyptian populations.

There is trade with the A-group peoples and pred. Hierakonpolis, and it is in that town that we first find Horus temples and worship, and we also see horus symbols first appearing among the A-group people. There are many connections that can be made, and that need to be tested, but the thing is, no scholar has ever come close to examining all those connections, and looking at what the most parsimonious explanation is, regarding the origin of Kingship along the Nile.

Most scholars only tell show one sided stories, that are biased towards Egyptians. I have read some books on pred. Egypt and when they talk about the A-group people, they all seem to agree on the following:

quote:

---

The white crown is first attested
on two royal artefacts from the late Predynastic period, the carved ivory handle of a flint
knife (Williams and Logan 1987, esp. 273, fig. 1) and the decorated incense burner from
Qustul Cemetery L. The knife handle is unprovenanced but is likely to have come from
somewhere in Upper Egypt. Given the evidence for cultural contacts between Qustul and
Hierakonpolis in Naqada III, it is tempting to locate the origins of the white crown at
Hierakonpolis.
-Early Dynastic Egypt - Toby Wilkinson

---

and

quote:

---

The earliest
known depiction of the white crown is on a ceremonial incense burner from Cemetery L
at Qustul in Lower Nubia (Williams 1986: pls 34, 38). Tomb L24 contained a variety of
prestige objects, and in all probability belonged to a late Predynastic king of Lower
Nubia, contemporary with the ruler buried in Abydos tomb U-j (Naqada IIIa2, c. 3150
BC). The Qustul incense burner is a remarkable object of supreme importance for the
development of Egyptian royal iconography. The incised scenes around the edge of the
object include the representation of a seated ruler, wearing the tall white crown. Evidence
of close contacts between the rulers of Qustul and their contemporaries at Hierakonpolis
may support the theory that the white crown originated at the latter site.
-Early Dynastic Egypt - Toby Wilkinson

---

And this is what they never mention (See image, and description):

http://books.google.nl/books?id=D1U36cyU6LkC&pg=PA94&img=1&zoom=3&hl=nl&sig=ACfU3U3j-bBaAnrfjh644JfwOTWPpjDS0Q&w=575

and (this probably what Ehret was talking about):

http://books.google.nl/books?id=D1U36cyU6LkC&pg=PA95&img=1&zoom=3&hl=nl&ots=34LWw6HzZn&sig=ACfU3U2LOWJeo1pR0BMhbgoYlpiFN2oKMQ&w=575

and (notice the archaic Horus burner)

http://books.google.nl/books?id=D1U36cyU6LkC&pg=PA96&img=1&zoom=3&hl=nl&ots=34LWw6HzZn&sig=ACfU3U06wUTj1JBBPrASEa-4Dlxlgej2EQ&w=575

Williams' case for the existence of Kingship in Nubia before Egypt would be much stronger if he had access to the skeletal material I mentioned above. Prowse and Lovell probably didn't review Williams' work in their paper, so any other conclusion than a local origin for Cem. T might have been far-fetched to them (especially since Naqadans have had a history of being called immigrants).

---

The earliest settlements in the "Nile Valley" are in Upper Egypt and Sudan. Note that the Nile Valley stretches from Egypt to Kenya but most often people seem to make it synonymous with Egypt proper when it isn't. The terms "A-Group", "Pan-Grave" and so forth are meaningless and arbitrary because they are based on styles of pottery and burials and not physical anthropology. The people who coined this term were trying to play up a "racial" distinction between Egyptians and "Nubians" in prehistory which did not exist. Because there was not such thing as Egypt or "Nubian" in prehistory. Therefore they used any and every thing they could to play up such a difference. The fact is that because of the drying Sahara the most densely populated areas of the Nile Valley were in Upper Egypt and Northern Sudan prior to the rise of Kmt. These areas were the most wet and lush and had been refuges for populations migrating North from Up the Nile and those going back and forth to the Sahara for thousands of years. It is this area from which the ancient Egyptians originated. We shouldn't get stuck on terminology because nobody knows what these people called themselves hence it is irrelevant to worry so much about it, except of course for those terminologies designed and created to obfuscate this fact.

---

They oldest kingdom they have found so far is in Sudan, they said it is at least 8,000 years old. If the people were in the Sahara (which they were) and they knew how to build cities/states/kingdoms (which they did) then there has to be something of significant proportions in that desert some where we don't know about.

---

Unfortunately, the likelihood of further archaeological study at Qustul, or any other site in Nubia, is all but impossible became many of the primary areas of investigation now lie under 250 feet of water, at the bottom of Lake Nasser. This man-made lake covers an area of approximately 500 square miles, and it is the second largest man-made lake in the world. Over 150,000 Nubians and Sudanese were forced to relocate off the land their ancestors had called home for over 5,000 years. Over 45 Nubian villages were washed away along the banks of the Nile south of Aswan. They were resettled in and around the city of Aswan and in villages further north. Twenty-three Nubian monuments were saved from the rising waters There is no way to estimate the total number of temples and tombs which now lie at the bottom of Lake Nasser, nor is there any way of knowing the many secrets these structures currently hold. Because of the creation of the Aswan High Dam, the world will never have an opportunity to study the full impact Africans from the southern Nile Valley had on the development of ancient Egypt and subsequent civilizations.

Posts: 197 | From: 5th Dynasty Abusir Temple | Registered: Jul 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by typeZeiss:

The oldest kingdom they have found so far is in Sudan, they said it is at least 8,000 years old. If the people were in the Sahara (which they were) and they knew how to build cities/states/kingdoms (which they did) then there has to be something of significant proportions in that desert some where we don't know about.

---

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

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ Indeed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by typeZeiss:

The oldest kingdom they have found so far is in Sudan, they said it is at least 8,000 years old. If the people were in the Sahara (which they were) and they knew how to build cities/states/kingdoms (which they did) then there has to be something of significant proportions in that desert some where we don't know about.

---

That is my hypothesis exactly. The Sahara is a vast region (the largest desert in the world really). At the same time it is a poorly excavated area. Though sand storms and shifting sands make archaeology quite difficult. Also, if cities were built especially in such an early time these cities would have been mud-brick or adobe in composition which is quite more perishable than rock. Ancient Egyptian cities for example are far and few between compared to contemporary civilizations in the so-called 'Near East' that is Southwest Asia.

---

Posts: 1296 | From: the planet | Registered: May 2011  |  IP: Logged |