quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Interesting thing is this Greco-Latin idea of black-white south north dichotomy is pervasive.
I think the janiform ceramics introduces the concept and in a sense is seen in Manilius:
Indeed the janiform vases are a perfect example of this dichotomy. The Greeks especially love to portray (white) European vs. (black) African faces. I believe Dr. Sally Ann-Ashton wrote a paper on this and features such vases in the Manchester Museum.
quote: _____________________________ Aethiopes Germania _________________________________ India Gallia ______________________________ Aegyptia Hispania _______________________________ Afrorum Romanis _____________________________ Mauretani Graecia
_____________________________________ Syriam
View the parabola of the Mediterranean lands with Syriam at the vertex, southerns facing left, northerners facing right.
Manilius lists Syriam among whites/lights/northerners and comments on the character of Syriam's hair so unlike the others.
Perhaps this reflects Syria's mixed status. Recall that the Greeks originally included Levantine people under 'Aethiopia' until Iron Age times when they recorded the immigration in the region of what they called 'Leuko-Syrians'. No doubt these Leuko-Syrians mixed with black indigenes producing the 'whites' with the darkest skin and curliest hairs.
quote:Black-white dichotomy also appears more directly in other literary sources. It's usually done with any one people from each of the two major colours.
Indeed, much to the despair of the lyinass. LOLPosts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Even your idiotic picture spam betrays you for Tut's complexion is much darker than your ridiculous collage of North Asians, a mixed Maghrebi, and light-skinned African American! You are pathetic as you are dumb! LOL
As we can see Djehutie now resorts to outright lies as we can easily see that all the people shown here have the same skin tone as the Egyptian some even darker and this despite the fact that the Tutankhamun bust is shown in dark gallery lighting. And if one were to follow through his logic Will Smith is not black. But furthermore. Manilus descibed 'Moors' i.e . "Mauri" ie " black skinned people" as one to two decirnably lighter tones than the above medium dark toned people including Egyptian "Tut's complexion is much darker" < the kid is stupid, see for yourself folks
Again!!!
Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues
A-M Mekota1, M Vermehren Department of Biology I, Biodiversity Research/Anthropology1and Department of Veterinary Anatomy II2,
Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Germany Submitted January 8, 2002; revised May 4, 2004; accepted August 12, 2004
Abstract
During an excavation headed by the German Institute for Archaeology, Cairo, at the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt, three types of tissues from different mummies were sampled to compare 13 well known rehydration methods for mummified tissue with three newly developed methods. Furthermore, three fixatives were tested with each of the rehydration fluids.
Meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and a placenta were used for this study. The rehydration and fixation procedures were uniform for all methods.
Materials and methods
In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three types of tissues were sampled from different mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approxi- mately 1550-1080 BC).
Skin Skin sections showed particularly good tissue preservation, although cellular outlines were never distinct. Although much of the epidermis had already separated from the dermis, the remaining epidermis often was preserved well (Fig. 1).
The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin.
In the dermis, the hair follicles, hair, and sebaceous and sweat glands were readily apparent (Fig. 2). Blood vessels, but no red blood cells, and small peripheral nerves were identified unambiguously (Fig. 3). The subcutaneous layer showed loose connective tissue fibers attached to the dermis, and fat cell remnants were observed.
To evaluate the influence of postmortum tissue decay by micro-organisms, the samples were tested for the presence of fungi using silver staining.
Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7Á/13
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
Interesting thing is this Greco-Latin idea of black-white south north dichotomy is pervasive.
I think the janiform ceramics introduces the concept and in a sense is seen in Manilius:
____________________________ Aethiopes Germania ________________________________ India Gallia _____________________________ Aegyptia Hispania ______________________________ Afrorum Romanis ____________________________ Mauretani Graecia
____________________________________ Syriam
View the parabola of the Mediterranean lands with Syriam at the vertex, southerns facing left, northerners facing right.
Manilius lists Syriam among whites/lights/northerners and comments on the character of Syriam's hair so unlike the others
Indeed the janiform vases are a perfect example of this dichotomy. The Greeks especially love to portray (white) European vs. (black) African faces. I believe Dr. Sally Ann-Ashton wrote a paper on this and features such vases in the Manchester Museum.
quote: .
Perhaps this reflects Syria's mixed status. Recall that the Greeks originally included Levantine people under 'Aethiopia' until Iron Age times when they recorded the immigration in the region of what they called 'Leuko-Syrians'. No doubt these Leuko-Syrians mixed with black indigenes producing the 'whites' with the darkest skin and curliest hairs.
quote:Black-white dichotomy also appears more directly in other literary sources. It's usually done with any one people from each of the two major colours.
Indeed, much to the despair of the lyinass. LOL
TTBOMK Leuco-Syrians were an Anatolian people in the same vicinity as the Lydians
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Manilius lists Syriam among whites/lights/northerners and comments on the character of Syriam's hair so unlike the others.
Perhaps this reflects Syria's mixed status. Recall that the Greeks originally included Levantine people under 'Aethiopia' until Iron Age times when they recorded the immigration in the region of what they called 'Leuko-Syrians'. No doubt these Leuko-Syrians mixed with black indigenes producing the 'whites' with the darkest skin and curliest hairs.
quote:Black-white dichotomy also appears more directly in other literary sources. It's usually done with any one people from each of the two major colours.
Indeed, much to the despair of the lyinass. LOL
HI. This question is addressed to anyone, but more specifically Tukuler or Djehuti who raised this topic. So which indigenous Black peoples populated Syria before the invasion of the white turks? I thought the Natufians were more of a Neolothic period people, and were long gone by the Iron Age.
Posts: 34 | From: Cali | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
The oldest remains found in Syria date from the Palaeolithic era (c.800,000 BC). On 23 August 1993 a joint Japan-Syria excavation team discovered fossilized Paleolithic human remains at the Dederiyeh Cave some 400 km north of Damascus. The bones found in this massive cave were those of a Black Neanderthal child, estimated to have been about two years old, who lived in the Middle Palaeolithic era (ca. 200,000 to 40,000 years ago). Although many Black Neanderthal bones had been discovered already, this was practically the first time that an almost complete child's skeleton had been found in its original burial state.
Archaeologists have demonstrated that civilization in Syria was one of the most ancient on earth. Syria is part of the Fertile Crescent, and since approximately 10,000 BC it was one of the centers of Neolithic culture (PPNA) where agriculture and cattle breeding appeared for the first time in the world. The Neolithic period (PPNB) is represented by rectangular houses of the Mureybet culture.
The excavations have revealed four occupation phases I–IV, ranging from the Natufian up to the Middle Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) and dating to 10,200–8,000 BC, based on AMS radiocarbon dates.[9] Phase IA (10,200–9,700 BC) represents the Natufian occupation of Mureybet.
Ebla
The ruins of Ebla, near Idlib in northern Syria, were discovered and excavated in 1975. Ebla appears to have been an East Semitic speaking city-state founded around 3000 BC. At its zenith, from about 2500 to 2400 BC, it may have controlled an empire reaching north to Anatolia, east to Mesopotamia and south to the Red Sea. Ebla traded with the Mesopotamian states of Sumer Akkad and Assyria, as well as with peoples to the northwest. Gifts from Pharaohs, found during excavations, confirm Ebla's contact with Egypt. Scholars believe the language of Ebla was closely related to the fellow East Semitic Akkadian language of Mesopotamia and to be among the oldest known written languages.
Black facial featured Seated Ruler, 2000-1700 BC, North Syria, possibly area of Ebla, limestone
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by [b]matu[/]:
So which indigenous Black peoples populated Syria before the invasion of the white turks?
.
1 - There were no capital B black people then. 2 - I don't cotton to "Turk" theory.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Did I forget to welcome you to ES? Forgive my oversight and tho my 2 point reply was sparse the area between Egypt to Turkey was never solely populated by any one colour. It was a zone of confluence.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
HI! No worries, I appreciate the clarification. Again, I read somewhere (on this board and the sister board) on the Natufians populating the Levant. Otherwise, who do you suppose the Greeks referred to in this area as "Aethiopians"?
I ask because I'm curious to know the ethnic make-up of the people of the Levant during the Bronze (Biblical) times. From looking at their ancient depictions, I'm convinced the Ancient Hebrews of the Bible were a (heavily mixed) Black people. To drive home my understanding however, I'd like to know what their neighbors looked like. Especially after the Hebrews were scattered (Assyria/Babylon/Persia/Medes).
quote:Originally posted by matu: [QB] HI! No worries, I appreciate the clarification. Again, I read somewhere (on this board and the sister board) on the Natufians populating the Levant. Otherwise, who do you suppose the Greeks referred to in this area as "Aethiopians"?
quote: Aethiopia first appears as a geographical term in classical sources, in reference to the Upper Nile region, as well as all the regions south of the Sahara desert. Its earliest mention is in the works of Homer: twice in the Iliad, and three times in the Odyssey. The Greek historian Herodotus specifically uses it to refer to such parts of Sub-Saharan Africa as were then known parts of the inhabitable world.
^^^the term does not apply to the Levant
If you want to talk about what Greek writers said you need to quote them before people can comment
The Natufian culture existed from 13,000 to 9,800 B.C. It ended over 9,000 years before greek civilization began . Therefore it is irrelevant to what Greek writers said. the Greeks did not know about them
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
The Greeks' Aithiopia was never limited to continental Africa. That is solely a modern interpretation as is force fitting or trying to alter Joppa (Tel Aviv) from Canaan to some place not the Levant.
The Aithiopia of the Andromeda story is clearly the south Levant without a doubt. Black people were not and are not limited to continental Africa.
Many people are adverse to the fact of black ancient Israelites and Judahites and their Judaean descendents because it offends their religious sentiments that Paul, John the Baptist, and most of all Holy Mother Mary Mother of God and therefore Jesus the Christ could even remotely possibly be from even a hybrid black people.
As taught numerous times here, the Gaza Strip was one place ancient Greek authors called Aithiopia (any land whose main population were very dark skinned).
The Levant contained the Aithiopia of the Andromeda myths' famous and still standing city Jaffa, aka Joppa / Tel Aviv / Yaffa.
* Andromeda (Greek mythology): in Greek mythology, beautiful daughter of King Cepheus and Queen Cassiope of Joppa in Palestine (called Ethiopia) and wife of Perseus.
Later Latin authors used that myth reference to support the fact of dark skinned Judaeans being thought of by most Romans as of Ćthiopian descent.
The majority of people say the Judaeans were those Ethiopians whom fear and hatred obliged to change their habitations, in the reign of king Cepheus.
Tacitus -- The Histories Book V.2
This was last presented (again) on ES just this past May in the Earliest Israelite img thread.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Correct. Other than the Andromeda myth, I recall reading about another myth about how the gods (again) cursed Aethiopia this time to be plagued by harpies which caused famine. Again, it had to be the Levant because it the land was described as ruled by descendants of Kepheus and many fled to nearby Egypt.
I also read of old sources which you Tukuler pointed out which openly admit that the Levant was inhabited by very dark i.e. black skinned peoples and one source even speculates that the Egyptian queen Tiye judging by her bust may probably be of 'Syrian' descent.
And here again are Egyptian depictions of black Levantine/Canaanites:
What's funny is that even today there are black Bedouin in both the Sinai and Gaza area who are NOT of recent African descent but have noted since pre-Islamic times.
the Euronut troll Manu is correct when he says the genetic difference between Egyptians and Palestinians is very small, but what he doesn't say is that Palestinians themselves show recent African ancestry from the neolithic and earlier.
To answer your question Matu as to which indigenous black group lived in Syria. It is difficult to say. There were the Natufians but then there were their predecessors the Kebarans. One could even go back as far back as 80,000 years ago to the earliest Out-of-African Skhul and Qafzeh remains as representative of the first black people of the area.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Finally finished reading that thread from the link you posted, Lioness. Thanks. Any idea who later moved into these areas previously occupied by the Natufians? It may have been addressed in those posts, but I didn't see it. Lots of back and forth on Mushabeans and Kebarans instead.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: The Greeks' Aithiopia was never limited to continental Africa. That is solely a modern interpretation as is force fitting or trying to alter Joppa (Tel Aviv) from Canaan to some place not the Levant.
The Aithiopia of the Andromeda story is clearly the south Levant without a doubt. Black people were not and are not limited to continental Africa.
Many people are adverse to the fact of black ancient Israelites and Judahites and their Judaean descendents because it offends their religious sentiments that Paul, John the Baptist, and most of all Holy Mother Mary Mother of God and therefore Jesus the Christ could even remotely possibly be from even a hybrid black people.
As taught numerous times here, the Gaza Strip was one place ancient Greek authors called Aithiopia (any land whose main population were very dark skinned).
The Levant contained the Aithiopia of the Andromeda myths' famous and still standing city Jaffa, aka Joppa / Tel Aviv / Yaffa.
* Andromeda (Greek mythology): in Greek mythology, beautiful daughter of King Cepheus and Queen Cassiope of Joppa in Palestine (called Ethiopia) and wife of Perseus.
Later Latin authors used that myth reference to support the fact of dark skinned Judaeans being thought of by most Romans as of Ćthiopian descent.
The majority of people say the Judaeans were those Ethiopians whom fear and hatred obliged to change their habitations, in the reign of king Cepheus.
Tacitus -- The Histories Book V.2
This was last presented (again) on ES just this past May in the Earliest Israelite img thread.
Thank you. I'm aware that the term "Ethiopian" was used for dark-skinned peoples outside continental Africa, notably Arabia, India and even parts of Eurasia (Turkey, Greece, Crete, Cyprus, etc). Thanks for that link on Greek Aethiopia, I was aware of Tacitus linking the Hebrews to Ethiopians, but not of Strabo linking them to Egyptians. Nice - I added that to my notes. That second link I'll finish up on it tomorrow.
Posts: 34 | From: Cali | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Correct. Other than the Andromeda myth, I recall reading about another myth about how the gods (again) cursed Aethiopia this time to be plagued by harpies which caused famine. Again, it had to be the Levant because it the land was described as ruled by descendants of Kepheus and many fled to nearby Egypt.
I also read of old sources which you Tukuler pointed out which openly admit that the Levant was inhabited by very dark i.e. black skinned peoples and one source even speculates that the Egyptian queen Tiye judging by her bust may probably be of 'Syrian' descent.
And here again are Egyptian depictions of black Levantine/Canaanites:
What's funny is that even today there are black Bedouin in both the Sinai and Gaza area who are NOT of recent African descent but have noted since pre-Islamic times.
the Euronut troll Manu is correct when he says the genetic difference between Egyptians and Palestinians is very small, but what he doesn't say is that Palestinians themselves show recent African ancestry from the neolithic and earlier.
To answer your question Matu as to which indigenous black group lived in Syria. It is difficult to say. There were the Natufians but then there were their predecessors the Kebarans. One could even go back as far back as 80,000 years ago to the earliest Out-of-African Skhul and Qafzeh remains as representative of the first black people of the area.
Thanks Djehuti. My observations:
-These are great images. I've seen that Canaanite tile before -- among other artifacts clearly showing Black Canaanites. I still can't fathom why certain groups want to label the Canaanites or Amorites White.
- I wish I could see the actual wall painting of that hieroglyph -- I've come to distrust renditions.
- And wasn't Queen Tiye Ethiopian (Nubian)?
- Per the Bible and Josephus, the Hamathites (and Hittites) were a Canaanite tribe occupying Syria. I'm more of a student of the Bible than a scientist/historian, so I have no idea what those groups translate to in archeological terms.
- "The children of Ham possessed the land of Syria and Amanus, and the mountains of Libanus; seizing upon all that was on its sea-coasts, and as far as the ocean, and keeping it as their own. Some indeed of its names are utterly vanished away; others of them being changed, and another sound given them, are hardly to be discovered; yet a few there are which have kept their denominations entire." ( Josephus' 1st century, Antiquities of the Jews, Book I, Chapter 6 )
Posts: 34 | From: Cali | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by matu: Finally finished reading that thread from the link you posted, Lioness. Thanks. Any idea who later moved into these areas previously occupied by the Natufians? It may have been addressed in those posts, but I didn't see it. Lots of back and forth on Mushabeans and Kebarans instead.
I have already addressed this twice. You mentioned ancient Syria, you need to look into the Ebla civilzation in Syria 3500 BC. Mushabeans and Kebarans are both prior to Natufians and Natufian culture ends 9,800 B.C.
Its language, Eblaite, is now considered the earliest attested Semitic language after Akkadian. The site is most famous for the Ebla tablets, an archive of about 20,000 cuneiform tablets found there.
This is too easy, simply go to wikipedia and look up the history of Syria. (we can go into more scholarly references if needed)
Artifacts from Sumer, Cyprus, Egypt and as far as Afghanistan were recovered from the palaces of the city. Ebla continued to be a trading state during the third kingdom. Archaeological finds show that there was extensive exchange with Egypt and coastal Syrian cities such as Byblos
quote:Originally posted by matu:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
The majority of people say the Judaeans were those Ethiopians whom fear and hatred obliged to change their habitations, in the reign of king Cepheus.
Tacitus -- The Histories Book V.2 [/list]
This was last presented (again) on ES just this past May in the Earliest Israelite img thread. [/qb]
Thank you. I'm aware that the term "Ethiopian" was used for dark-skinned peoples outside continental Africa, notably Arabia, India and even parts of Eurasia (Turkey, Greece, Crete, Cyprus, etc). Thanks for that link on Greek Aethiopia, I was aware of Tacitus linking the Hebrews to Ethiopians, but not of Strabo linking them to Egyptians. Nice - I added that to my notes. That second link I'll finish up on it tomorrow.
[7.70] The eastern Ethiopians - for two nations of this name served in the army - were marshalled with the Indians. They differed in nothing from the other Ethiopians, save in their language, and the character of their hair. For the eastern Ethiopians have straight hair, while they of Libya are more woolly-haired than any other people in the world.
Objections exist that state that the proposed link between the Yahweh of the Israelites and the Shasu is uncertain, given that in the Merneptah reliefs, the group later known as the Israelites are not described or depicted as Shasu. The Shasu are usually depicted hieroglyphically with a determinative indicating a land not a people. Frank J. Yurco and Michael G. Hasel would distinguish the Shasu in Merneptah's Karnak reliefs from the people of Israel since they wear different clothing, hairstyles, and are determined differently by Egyptian scribes. Moreover, Israel is determined as a people, though not necessarily as a socioethnic group.Egyptian scribes tended to bundle up rather disparate groups of people under one 'artificial unifying rubric.' The most frequent designation for the "foes of Shasu" is the hill-country determinative.Thus they are differentiated from the Canaanites, who are defending the fortified cities of Ashkelon, Gezer, and Yenoam. At the same time, the hill-country determinative is not always used for Shasu, as is the case in the "Shasu of Yhw" name rings from Soleb and Amarah-West. Gösta Werner Ahlström argued that the reason Shasu and Israelites are differentiated from each other in the Merneptah Stele is because these Shasu were nomads while the Israelites were a sedentary subset of the Shasu.
One of the most intriguing of the Nineteenth Dynasty documents referring to the Shasu is a letter, dated 1192 B.C., which states in part:
Another communication to my Lord: We have finished letting the Shasu tribes of Edom pass the fortress of Merneptah Hotep-hir-Maat…which is in Tjeku, to the pools of Per Atum of Merneptah Hotep-hir-Maat, which are in Tkeku, to keep them alive and to keep their cattle alive…
the German scholar Siegfried Herrmann, who translated the above text, has identified the area of Tjeku, where the Shasu Edomites were settled
There are a few references in Egyptian texts to Shasu nomads living in the area of Nubia south of Egypt, but the vast majority of references are to Shasu living north of Egypt, and it is these Shasu who are the focus of this paper.
The term Shasu is almost exclusively used in New Kingdom texts for semi-nomadic peoples living in parts of Lebanon, Syria, Sinai, Canaan, and Transjordan. When used for nomads living in these areas, the term Shasu seems to have been used by the Egyptians almost exclusively for people groups that can clearly be identified as Semitic herders.
It is clear from New Kingdom texts that the Shasu were rarely if ever under the control of the Egyptian government and were almost always looked upon as enemies of the Egyptians. For example, at the famous Battle of Kadesh in ca. 1275 BC, there were Shasu soldiers who were allies of the Hitites against Rameses II.
It is likely that the Egyptians of the New Kingdom Period classified all of the Edomites, Ammonites, Moabites, Amalekites, Midianites, Kenites, Hapiru, and Israelites as Shasu. This list should also probably include the Amorites and the Arameans. There is even a reference dating to ca. 1250 BC in Papyrus Anastasi I to a group of giant Shasu living in Canaan who could be identified with the giants encountered by the Israelites at the time of the Exodus.7
there is no evidence that the Shasu of Yahweh were Edomites. If they were Edomites, then it must be explained why the Edomites are strangely mentioned twice in the list at Amarah West since Redford translates the phrase t3 sh3sw sa-a-r-ar on this list as the "land of the Shasu of Se’ir"
____________________________________
These are who scholars call Syrians (or Syro-Palestinians) , one of the four ethnic groups in Book of Gates Scenes. They may have overlap with where the Shasu were illustration below based on wall painting from tomb of Seti I, Syrians top two left, also bottom two far right
Tomb of Merenptah, Syrian, left
Most of Egypt's conflicts with the Asiatic enemies revolved around Egypt's attempted control the Syrian area of Canaan, and the various city states of that region along the Mediterranean coast north of the Sinai. At first, it would seem that the conflicts within Syria with these various enemies of Egypt were to provide a buffer zone for Egypt's defense. However, like Mitanni and Hittites, Egypt's prolonged interest in the region derived from their desire to dominate and exploit the economic resources and trade. During the New Kingdom, Syria was the crossroads of world commerce, with goods from the Aegean and beyond entering the Near East by way of ports such as Ugarit. When one considers the inherent fertility and richness in natural resources, Syria obviously offered much to the predatory powers who sought to use this wealth for their own purposes. Hence, some thirty-thee centuries ago, "world power" was synonymous with the control of Syria, so it is not surprising that for nearly two hundred years, the great powers of Egypt, Mitanni and Hatti expended much blood and treasure in wars designed to ensure their respective control of this vitally strategic region.
Block from a relief depicting a battle Period: New Kingdom Dynasty: Dynasty 18 Reign: possibly reign of Amenhotep II Date: ca. 1427–1400 B.C. Geography: From Egypt, Upper Egypt; Thebes, el-Asasif, Temple of Ramesses IV, foundation (reused), MMA 1912–1913 Medium: Sandstone, paint Dimensions: H. 61 cm (24 in); w. 115 cm (45 1/4 in)
Builders reused this painted relief block in the foundation of Ramesses IV's mortuary temple, subsequently excavated by the Metropolitan Museum. In the relief, western Asian soldiers are shown being trampled under the horses that pull the royal chariot, signaling the foreigners' defeat in battle by the might of the Egyptian pharaoh. When the piece was excavated, this and another fragment of a battle scene (13.180.22) were dated to the reign of Ramesses II. A recent study of their stylistic and iconographic features, however, has caused scholars to redate them earlier, probably to the reign of Amenhotep II. This redating indicates that by the middle of the Eighteenth Dynasty, monumental battle scenes had become part of the decorative scheme of a temple's exterior walls.
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Lioness, nothing you posted refutes what I or Tukuler said. We aren't saying that all ancient Levantine peoples were black only that there were black people that existed among them. The pictures of Asiatics or Levantines you posted are proof of this. In fact from what I've seen MOST of the Levantine depictions are of non-black people which also explains why anthropologists have noted a disconnect between Egyptians and Levantine people in skeletal affinities.
You posted a picture of a light-skinned Shasu Bedouin along side the black one I posted (assuming that the paint was not faded)
And again a scene of Tutankhamun receiving tribute from Retenu (Canaan)
^ There are fair-skinned Retenu alongside the black ones.
Our point was simply there was indeed a black presence despite the chagrin of many including yourself.
quote:Originally posted by matu: Thanks Djehuti. My observations:
-These are great images. I've seen that Canaanite tile before -- among other artifacts clearly showing Black Canaanites. I still can't fathom why certain groups want to label the Canaanites or Amorites White.
Again, this comes from the fact that many people in the Levant were not black and so there is some confusion as to the identity of Canaanites as an ethnic group to those who inhabit the land of Canaan in general let alone the whole Levant region.
quote:- I wish I could see the actual wall painting of that hieroglyph -- I've come to distrust renditions.
Actually for the most part renditions tend to be accurate in regards to color at least for those murals where the coloring is well preserved.
quote:- And wasn't Queen Tiye Ethiopian (Nubian)?
No. She and he family were ethnic Egyptians who come from the Akhmim area of Upper Egypt. The whole premise that she was Nubian is a false one obviously stemming from the very dark complexion of her bust yet such a complexion is not uncommon in Upper Egypt especially southern Upper Egypt. There is obviously racial bias as most folks have know of Nefertiti's bust but have never seen that of Tiye or even heard of her. FYI I believe the original paint of Nefertiti's skin tone for her bust is also faded (whether deliberate or not) since I've seen old photos and even some recent ones showing traces of darker paint.
quote:- Per the Bible and Josephus, the Hamathites (and Hittites) were a Canaanite tribe occupying Syria. I'm more of a student of the Bible than a scientist/historian, so I have no idea what those groups translate to in archeological terms.
- "The children of Ham possessed the land of Syria and Amanus, and the mountains of Libanus; seizing upon all that was on its sea-coasts, and as far as the ocean, and keeping it as their own. Some indeed of its names are utterly vanished away; others of them being changed, and another sound given them, are hardly to be discovered; yet a few there are which have kept their denominations entire." ( Josephus' 1st century, Antiquities of the Jews, Book I, Chapter 6 )
The 'Hittites' of the Bible are NOT the same as the Hittites of Anatolia but rather Hethites or descendants of Heth who are a Canaanite group. The problem with the Bible is that while the Book of Nations may make ethnic distinctions and even relations between such ethnicities the relations are not always clear. For example Elam is included along with the children of Shem even though the vast majority of Shemites speak Semitic languages while the Elamites did not and in fact the Elamites were a black Asiatic people themselves. Tukuler and others have pointed out that the Shemites were originally an all black people along with the Hamites. And there are others who even go as far as to say the original Shemites and Japhethites were all black. What is clear is that blacks were present in Western Asia and not just Africa (which includes Egypt)
I will say that if history using Biblical texts is your thing then this would be a good book:
The above book is good but it's not excellent based on the fact that the author Goldenberg still falls into the trap of using debunked notions of "true negro" or "true black" and applying it to only Kushites but not the other 'brothers' of Ham namely Egyptians and Canaanites. Strangely he admits that Kushites lived on both sides of the Red Sea i.e. Sudan and modern Ethiopia as well as Arabia but then says Egyptians were not 'truly black' but merely darker than the Israelites even though the Hebrew text he uses clearly refutes his assertion. Interestingly and just as strange, in regards to the Canaanites, he does cite Hebrew passages showing that Cushim or blacks did exist in the southern Levant in the Negev desert and around areas of Judaea as well as Midian and Sinai. So why he denies the Egyptians as blacks is bizarre.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Lioness, nothing you posted refutes what I or Tukuler said. We aren't saying that all ancient Levantine peoples were black only that there were black people that existed among them. The pictures of Asiatics or Levantines you posted are proof of this. In fact from what I've seen MOST of the Levantine depictions are of non-black people which also explains why anthropologists have noted a disconnect between Egyptians and Levantine people in skeletal affinities.
You posted a picture of a light-skinned Shasu Bedouin along side the black one I posted (assuming that the paint was not faded)
And again a scene of Tutankhamun receiving tribute from Retenu (Canaan)
^ There are fair-skinned Retenu alongside the black ones.
Our point was simply there was indeed a black presence despite the chagrin of many including yourself.
quote:Originally posted by matu: Thanks Djehuti. My observations:
-These are great images. I've seen that Canaanite tile before -- among other artifacts clearly showing Black Canaanites. I still can't fathom why certain groups want to label the Canaanites or Amorites White.
Again, this comes from the fact that many people in the Levant were not black and so there is some confusion as to the identity of Canaanites as an ethnic group to those who inhabit the land of Canaan in general let alone the whole Levant region.
quote:- I wish I could see the actual wall painting of that hieroglyph -- I've come to distrust renditions.
Actually for the most part renditions tend to be accurate in regards to color at least for those murals where the coloring is well preserved.
quote:- And wasn't Queen Tiye Ethiopian (Nubian)?
No. She and he family were ethnic Egyptians who come from the Akhmim area of Upper Egypt. The whole premise that she was Nubian is a false one obviously stemming from the very dark complexion of her bust yet such a complexion is not uncommon in Upper Egypt especially southern Upper Egypt. There is obviously racial bias as most folks have know of Nefertiti's bust but have never seen that of Tiye or even heard of her. FYI I believe the original paint of Nefertiti's skin tone for her bust is also faded (whether deliberate or not) since I've seen old photos and even some recent ones showing traces of darker paint.
quote:- Per the Bible and Josephus, the Hamathites (and Hittites) were a Canaanite tribe occupying Syria. I'm more of a student of the Bible than a scientist/historian, so I have no idea what those groups translate to in archeological terms.
- "The children of Ham possessed the land of Syria and Amanus, and the mountains of Libanus; seizing upon all that was on its sea-coasts, and as far as the ocean, and keeping it as their own. Some indeed of its names are utterly vanished away; others of them being changed, and another sound given them, are hardly to be discovered; yet a few there are which have kept their denominations entire." ( Josephus' 1st century, Antiquities of the Jews, Book I, Chapter 6 )
The 'Hittites' of the Bible are NOT the same as the Hittites of Anatolia but rather Hethites or descendants of Heth who are a Canaanite group. The problem with the Bible is that while the Book of Nations may make ethnic distinctions and even relations between such ethnicities the relations are not always clear. For example Elam is included along with the children of Shem even though the vast majority of Shemites speak Semitic languages while the Elamites did not and in fact the Elamites were a black Asiatic people themselves. Tukuler and others have pointed out that the Shemites were originally an all black people along with the Hamites. And there are others who even go as far as to say the original Shemites and Japhethites were all black. What is clear is that blacks were present in Western Asia and not just Africa (which includes Egypt)
I will say that if history using Biblical texts is your thing then this would be a good book:
The above book is good but it's not excellent based on the fact that the author Goldenberg still falls into the trap of using debunked notions of "true negro" or "true black" and applying it to only Kushites but not the other 'brothers' of Ham namely Egyptians and Canaanites. Strangely he admits that Kushites lived on both sides of the Red Sea i.e. Sudan and modern Ethiopia as well as Arabia but then says Egyptians were not 'truly black' but merely darker than the Israelites even though the Hebrew text he uses clearly refutes his assertion. Interestingly and just as strange, in regards to the Canaanites, he does cite Hebrew passages showing that Cushim or blacks did exist in the southern Levant in the Negev desert and around areas of Judaea as well as Midian and Sinai. So why he denies the Egyptians as blacks is bizarre.
Very interesting. So going back full circle: who were the non-Black groups that existed among the Hebrews in the Levant/Mesopotamia? I know the Egyptians, Ethiopians and Elam were Black. From their depictions, I also believe the ancient Canaanites and indigenous Arab clans were Black; and from the earliest historical Rabbinic and ARab records, Shem is described as Black as well. Black Shem and Black Ham's progeny populated Mesopotamia and Africa respectively -- as well as intermixed extensively. So who were these non-Black populations in your estimation?
Regarding the Hittites - I've often wondered if the great Hittites of Turkey were the progeny of Heth. Depending on who you ask, I've heard cases for both. I'm inclined to believe what the Bible says - which repeatedly refers to Heth as Hittites (not Hethites).
Posts: 34 | From: Cali | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Hittites are mentioned more than 50 times in the Bible. They were descended from Heth, the son of Canaan (and great-grandson of Noah, Genesis 10:15). They ruled the area of Syria and eastern Turkey and battled with Egypt and Babylon for territory. Babylonian and Assyrian records refer to Syria and Palestine as "Hatti-land," and Joshua 1:4 includes their territory as a great part of the Promised Land for Israel. Abraham was well acquainted with the Hittites, and he bought the burial cave for Sarah from them in Genesis 23. Esau took wives from among the Hittites (Genesis 26:34), and Uriah the Hittite was one of David's mighty men (2 Samuel 11:3). The Hittites are mentioned throughout the kingdom years and even after the Jews’ return from captivity (Ezra 9:1). It is assumed that the Hittites were eventually absorbed into the surrounding cultures and lost their distinctive identity. http://www.gotquestions.org/Hittites.html#ixzz3EP281ECL
- Gen 23:10 And Ephron dwelt among the children of Heth: and Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the audience of the children of Heth..
- Gen 26:34 And Esau was forty years old when he took to wife Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and Bashemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite
- Gen 10:15 And Canaan begat Sidon his firstborn, and Heth (father of the Hittites)
- Josh 1:4 From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites
- 2 Sam 11:3 And David sent and inquired after the woman. And one said, Is not this Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Hittite?
- Ezra 9:1 Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites
posted
^ No, the Hittites of the Bible (Hethites) are not the same as the historically prominent Hittites of Anatolia (Asia Minor). These were two completely different people who became mixed up because of the similarity in names.
As for your question as to the origin of non-black people in Southwest Asia, I believe these were people that migrated into the area from further north and northeast during prehistoric times and were present by the Bronze Age.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
- Hm, what are the odds? That the book of Joshua positions the land of the (Biblical) Hittites to be near that of the Hittites of Anatolia. Per the Bible, the Hittites weren't indigenous to Anatolia, Gomer/Togormah was. The Hittites whoever they were, were invaders. Per Joshua 1:4, they were indigenous to the lands around Lebanon and the Euphrates -- which bordered Togormah.
I'm curious to see what sources you have stating the Hittites of the Bible didn't become the Hittites of Anatolia.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Matu, how would the ancients classify these modern Syrian soccer players? Black or white?
That's a good question. I'm not sure. I know from reading the links sent by Tukuler, that an ancient Greek historian identified Syrians by their curly hair. Quite frankly, I believe the indigenous peoples of this area were "Black". I'm still trying to figure out how these modern "middle eastern peoples" got their light skins. Djehuti alluded earlier that European populations migrated into Mesopotamia. But who these groups were and when they migrated is something I need to research further.
Proving the indigenous peoples of Canaan, stretching south to Arabia and east into Elam having Black skin isn't all that difficult. Figuring the ethnic makeup of the northern areas of the Hittite kingdom, Assyria, Bablyon, etc in ancient times is a bit more daunting.
Posts: 34 | From: Cali | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
As DJ wrote, the b*nei Hheth are neither the Hatti nor the Hittites of Anatolia. B*nei Hheth are local south Levantines (Canaanite Hhamites) whereas the central Anatolians are Meshech and Tubal (Yaphethites).
However I'd like DJ to expand on Greek God cursed Aithiopia. I have it Aithiopia was where Greek Gods vacationed and gorged themselves at Aithiop hosted festivals.
Cassiopeia's punishment naturally effected her people but Yaffa Aithiopia was not the direct object only consequential.
Also this is the first I've heard of Harpies and Aithiopia. You've helped me out on Greek myths before, please do it again.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
From something I wrote c.1998
The eastern Mediterranean is a nexus of three continents. Semitic speakers were among the first but weren't the only inhabitants of the region. Indo-Europeans, Caucasics, Altaics, etc., came after them probably via Daryal Gorge through the Caucasus.
"Semites" are partially North East Africans who migrated into the Arabian peninsula and moved northward (as far as up to Turkey) where they met and mingled with and were maybe blocked from further spread by southward invading Eurasian peoples (Altaic and Indo-European speakers) in pre-historic times. Upon the eclipse of the southerners the hybrids and assimilated settlers (beginning circa -1800 with the maryannu caste) became heir to the names and languages of the original people they married into and whose culture they emulated and lexicon enriched.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: As DJ wrote, the b*nei Hheth are neither the Hatti nor the Hittites of Anatolia. B*nei Hheth are local south Levantines (Canaanite Hhamites) whereas the central Anatolians are Meshech and Tubal (Yaphethites).
I'm inclined to think otherwise ONLY b/c of the Biblical/Historical record of Josephus which places the land of Hheth right next to the land of Hatti. I'm not dogmatic about it either way though -- what supporting evidence do you have to the contrary?
Posts: 34 | From: Cali | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: From something I wrote c.1998
The eastern Mediterranean is a nexus of three continents. Semitic speakers were among the first but weren't the only inhabitants of the region. Indo-Europeans, Caucasics, Altaics, etc., came after them probably via Daryal Gorge through the Caucasus. Ok
"Semites" are partially North East Africans who migrated into the Arabian peninsula and moved northward (as far as up to Turkey) where they met and mingled with and were maybe blocked from further spread by southward invading Eurasian peoples (Altaic and Indo-European speakers) in pre-historic times. Do you know appx when this was? 15K BC? 5K BC? Or more recently? Upon the eclipse of the southerners the hybrids and assimilated settlers (beginning circa -1800 with the maryannu caste) became heir to the names and languages of the original people they married into and whose culture they emulated and lexicon enriched.
I see. So the Semites are a mix of the preceding Semetic-speaking NE African migrants and the Indo-European Central Asian invaders, who all ended up speaking the Semetic languages of the original African settlers, is that correct?
Did these hybrid people become what we see now in Turkey? Are these the ancestors of the ancient Babylonians, Persians and Assyrians?
I'm curious to know your thoughts on the vid. Posts: 34 | From: Cali | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I don't have time to watch that vid. From the first 30 secs I don't see what it has to do with what I wrote at all. Certainly, I'm not coming from where Mike111 is, not in the least.
It wasn't the point under consideration when I wrote that piece but besides NE Afr and "Caucasus" there were of course the people who already inhabited the land whom the first NE Afrs to the Levant met and mixed with in the early Holocene.
There is no such thing as an "Afro-Asiatic common Semitic type." Semites appear more caucasoid toward the north (eg. Paddan Aram), more inner africoid in the south (eg. Amharas), and more like Indians in the east (eg. Kuwaitis & Omanis) for obvious reasons. Yet the majority of Arabian Peninsula Semites are distinguishable from either Asian Caucasians, Eastern Africans, or Indian (Dravidian) sub- continentals for the most part.
You asked me for dates for the introgression of non- Semitic speakers from the north. I will have to look into that but shooting from the hip I'd say it was spread out over time during the middle Holocene mostly.
Whenever it started, this blending continues today with types from western Europe, West Africa and southeast Asia entering in the mix.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: As DJ wrote, the b*nei Hheth are neither the Hatti nor the Hittites of Anatolia. B*nei Hheth are local south Levantines (Canaanite Hhamites) whereas the central Anatolians are Meshech and Tubal (Yaphethites).
However I'd like DJ to expand on Greek God cursed Aithiopia. I have it Aithiopia was where Greek Gods vacationed and gorged themselves at Aithiop hosted festivals.
Cassiopeia's punishment naturally effected her people but Yaffa Aithiopia was not the direct object only consequential.
Also this is the first I've heard of Harpies and Aithiopia. You've helped me out on Greek myths before, please do it again.
I don't know the exact source but it was a passage from a book I read years ago on 'Ethiopia' in Classical mythology. It never said that the gods cursed the land directly but that the land was plagued with famine by harpies who are understood to be agents of the gods.
Now that I did a google search the only sources I could find are the Aenaeas legend that Italy was cursed with famine by the harpies and a paleothea entry on harpies causing famine in Ethiopia.
As far as the gods vacationing in Ethiopia where they have great feasts, I believe you are confused with the 'Blameless and Pious Ethiopia' of Oceanus Australis i.e. the southern ends of the earth bordering the world ocean. This was the Ethiopia of Africa where the blackest people of the world live according to Greek legends. Such was very different from the Joppa Ethiopia as NEVER did the gods curse any inhabitant due to their reverent piety unlike Joppa's queen Cassiopeia who incurred the wrath of the gods.
This is why one must be careful about the name 'Ethiopia' which was label applied to various lands.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by matu: Your summary sounds 'generally' similar to what's said here on realhistoryww.com: "How Race is Made": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk4SdqmDISg
I'm curious to know your thoughts on the vid.
I should warn you that Mike and his website which you cite holds many (though not all) inaccuracies. Mike is pretty much an Afrocentric nutcase who tends to paint black various ancient peoples who never were and is the polar opposite of Euronuts who white-wash ancient peoples.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
@ DJ
I had checked Graves with no luck. Keep trying to remember where you read it. After all you are my Greek "classical" mythology teacher. Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: It wasn't the point under consideration when I wrote that piece but besides NE Afr and "Caucasus" there were of course the people who already inhabited the land whom the first NE Afrs to the Levant met and mixed with in the early Holocene.
One thing I notice is how when the early inhabitants of Southwest Asia is discussed often the focus is on "Caucasus" or populations around that area and this is especially true with the Euronuts. However, I hear little discussed about say, Arabia. When it was the early Holocene inhabitants of Arabia who were the founders of pre-Sumerian civilization in Mesopotamia i.e. the Ubadians or proto-Euphrateans. Although I disagree with Dana that these people were affiliated with Africans, they do exhibit tropical affinities.
quote:There is no such thing as an "Afro-Asiatic common Semitic type." Semites appear more caucasoid toward the north (eg. Paddan Aram), more inner africoid in the south (eg. Amharas), and more like Indians in the east (eg. Kuwaitis & Omanis) for obvious reasons. Yet the majority of Arabian Peninsula Semites are distinguishable from either Asian Caucasians, Eastern Africans, or Indian (Dravidian) sub- continentals for the most part.
The same thing can be equally applied to Indo-Iranian as a branch of Indo-European. The vast majority of Indo-Iranian speakers are South Asians who look very much different from the white European speakers of other Indo-European languages. And even among the Indo-Iranian speakers there is diversity of looks that vary from Iran through Pakisatan, India, and Sri Lanka.
quote:You asked me for dates for the introgression of non- Semitic speakers from the north. I will have to look into that but shooting from the hip I'd say it was spread out over time during the middle Holocene mostly.
Many linguists agree that there was profound influence on early Semitic speakers by the aboriginal peoples as seen in the non-Afrisian features that are noted to be 'Hurrian' in nature. Which supports that Semites entered in the north via Sinai instead of the south from Ethiopia as is the other theory.
quote:Whenever it started, this blending continues today with types from western Europe, West Africa and southeast Asia entering in the mix.
Yes specifically peoples from the aforementioned regions that are Muslim and have been Islamicized, especially Muslim West Africans and Indonesians.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
If I could streamline it I would.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by matu:
quote: Originally posted by Tukuler: As DJ wrote, the b*nei Hheth are neither the Hatti nor the Hittites of Anatolia. B*nei Hheth are local south Levantines (Canaanite Hhamites) whereas the central Anatolians are Meshech and Tubal (Yaphethites).
I'm inclined to think otherwise ONLY b/c of the Biblical/Historical record of Josephus which places the land of Hheth right next to the land of Hatti. I'm not dogmatic about it either way though -- what supporting evidence do you have to the contrary?
.
Wrote this in '98 or so. Tho I didn't list references the post abounds with internet searchable keywords and terms compounded in standard lexicons like Gesenius, Jastrow, or Brown Driver Briggs.
Originally posted 11 April, 2005 by alTakruri~:
Here's something I wrote a few years ago. Hope it's of some help.
In the Hebrew book B*reshiyth, Hhittiy (hhet-thaw-yodh) may not mean the Hittites of Anatolia. Hhittiy derives from Hheth. The Hhittiy are more commonly designated by b*nei Hheth. These Hhittiy are located far south at Hebron in Canaan circa 1750 BCE. They have authority to transfer land ownership through a council of equals.
Though it's possible these Hhittiy are connected somehow to the Anatolian Hittites, they are clearly Canaanites to the Author of B*reshiyth. Whenever a Hhittiy is given a name in B*reshiyth, it's always a name in the language of Canaan. They are Hhamites.
The Anatolian Hittites with their major city Khattushash (Hattusa) are the Khatti in their own Indo-European language Khattili. They also had a language Neshili.
These are identified as Yaphetites in the Table of Nations. Meshech is the Hebrew homonym for the Hatti name Mosokh -- founder of their city Massukh or Massukhanda. Togarmah (son of Gomer) and Tubal are the other Anatolian Hittite representatives in the Table of Nations, residing opposite the Taurus mountains in the Hatti heartland. There is a relief near Ivriz depicting the Hatti king Warpalawa of Tubal worshipping his fertility god Tarhund. Togarmah is the Tegarma (of cuneiform inscriptions.
The Indo-European and presumed Europid/white/Caucasian Hatti gave their name to the confederacy of peoples forming the Hittite empire. Both Egyptian and Hatti iconography of Hittites shows them of no one conforming phenotype. Presumably, the non-Europid looking Hittites belong to the people conquered by the invading Hatti at the middle of the 2nd millenium BCE. They appear to have some affinities with Mongol types.
Please critique.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
First, because the Hittite polity was an empire, it is no surprise that Egyptian depictions of national 'Hittites' were heterogeneous and differ in both physical features and clothing.
Second, the Hattians who did represent the core or main populace of the empire were an indigenous non-Indo-European speaking people who were ruled by the IE speaking Hittite/Nesili. Judging from all descriptions and depictions of them from other peoples in the ancient world as well as skeletal remains, the Hattians were traditionally described by scholars to be a brachycephalic (broad-headed) 'Armenoid' people with prominent hooked noses and was a type common from Asia Minor, the Caucasus, and the northern areas of Assyria and Syria. It is because of this many scholars suggest the region to be the home of the so-called 'Jewish-type' which was actually Hurrian and differed from the 'original Semitic type' of other parts of the Levant, Assyria, and northern Arabia. And though I haven't seen it first hand, I have read that there were Egyptian depictions of actual Hittite/Nasili elites who looked more European i.e. small aquiline noses with blue eyes and even blonde hair.
Lastly the 'mongol' type is actually a mis-characterization of some of the early Hittite and other IE remains of northeastern Anatolia and the Caucasus as they were brachycephalic people with horse-riding culture that is similar to though not identical to Mongol nomads of the steppes.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by matu: Your summary sounds 'generally' similar to what's said here on realhistoryww.com: "How Race is Made": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk4SdqmDISg
I'm curious to know your thoughts on the vid.
I should warn you that Mike and his website which you cite holds many (though not all) inaccuracies. Mike is pretty much an Afrocentric nutcase who tends to paint black various ancient peoples who never were and is the polar opposite of Euronuts who white-wash ancient peoples.
That's too bad. I really like his work. That site is a VERY comprehensive body of work! Can you briefly list which groups he paints Black? I don't want to repeat misinformation because I rely a lot on his website to gain historical knowledge, and share said knowledge with my Bible study class.
Posts: 34 | From: Cali | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by Tukuler: As DJ wrote, the b*nei Hheth are neither the Hatti nor the Hittites of Anatolia. B*nei Hheth are local south Levantines (Canaanite Hhamites) whereas the central Anatolians are Meshech and Tubal (Yaphethites).
Wrote this in '98 or so. Tho I didn't list references the post abounds with internet searchable keywords and terms compounded in standard lexicons like Gesenius, Jastrow, or Brown Driver Briggs.
Originally posted 11 April, 2005 by alTakruri~:
Here's something I wrote a few years ago. Hope it's of some help.
In the Hebrew book B*reshiyth, Hhittiy (hhet-thaw-yodh) may not mean the Hittites of Anatolia. Hhittiy derives from Hheth. The Hhittiy are more commonly designated by b*nei Hheth. These Hhittiy are located far south at Hebron in Canaan circa 1750 BCE. They have authority to transfer land ownership through a council of equals.
The Bible indicates that the Land of the Hittites was concentrated closer to the Euphrates River. While I agree that the bible supports *some* Hittites present in South Canaan, (Ephron, Elon, Zohar the Hittites), the land of their fathers was north of Canaan. Look at any Table of Nations map, they all place Heth next to Anatolia. Josh 1:4 From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites
Though it's possible these Hhittiy are connected somehow to the Anatolian Hittites, they are clearly Canaanites to the Author of B*reshiyth. Agreed Whenever a Hhittiy is given a name in B*reshiyth, it's always a name in the language of Canaan. They are Hhamites.
The Anatolian Hittites with their major city Khattushash (Hattusa) are the Khatti in their own Indo-European language Khattili. They also had a language Neshili. From my understanding of the Table of Nations, none of Japhet's descendants are ever given the name (or nickname) "Hittites". There was no such thing as an Anatolian HIttite, those HIttites were Canaanites (like you said earlier) who invaded the Land of Hatti. They were not indigenes to the Land of Hatti, therefore they weren't Anatolian. Japhet was.
These are identified as Yaphetites in the Table of Nations. Yep Meshech is the Hebrew homonym for the Hatti name Mosokh -- founder of their city Massukh or Massukhanda. Togarmah (son of Gomer) and Tubal are the other Anatolian Hittite representatives in the Table of Nations, residing opposite the Taurus mountains in the Hatti heartland. There is a relief near Ivriz depicting the Hatti king Warpalawa of Tubal worshipping his fertility god Tarhund. Togarmah is the Tegarma (of cuneiform inscriptions.
The Indo-European and presumed Europid/white/Caucasian Hatti gave their name to the confederacy of peoples forming the Hittite empire. Both Egyptian and Hatti iconography of Hittites shows them of no one conforming phenotype. Doesn't this support an invasion/conquest of some sort in the Land of Hatti? Presumably, the non-Europid looking Hittites belong to the people conquered by the invading Hatti at the middle of the 2nd millenium BCE. They appear to have some affinities with Mongol types.
According the following verses, the Hamitic Hittites of the Bible were a strong and mighty people (as well as cave dealers )
2 Kings 7:6: "For the Lord had made the host of the Syrians to hear a noise of chariots, and a noise of horses, even the noise of a great host: and they said one to another, Lo, the king of Israel hath hired against us the kings of the Hittites, and the kings of the Egyptians, to come upon us."
2 Chronicles 1:17: "And they fetched up, and brought forth out of Egypt a chariot for six hundred shekels of silver, and a horse for a hundred and fifty: and so brought they out horses for all the kings of the Hittites, and for the kings of Syria, by their means."
Per the Concordance the Hittites (H2850) during Abraham's time are the same Hittites (2850) of military valor. Per Concordance: Hittite = "descendant of Heth" the nation descended from Heth, the 2nd son of Canaan; once inhabitants of central Anatolia (modern Turkey), later in north Lebanon
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ A few cents to the above info.
First, because the Hittite polity was an empire, it is no surprise that Egyptian depictions of national 'Hittites' were heterogeneous and differ in both physical features and clothing. Exactly
Second, the Hattians who did represent the core or main populace of the empire were an indigenous non-Indo-European speaking people who were ruled by the IE speaking Hittite/Nesili. And here I thought that per the Table of Nations in Gen 10, the Hattians were Japhetites (Europeans), and the Semetic speaking Hittites were the invading Canaanites to the Land of Hatti. Judging from all descriptions and depictions of them from other peoples in the ancient world as well as skeletal remains, the Hattians were traditionally described by scholars to be a brachycephalic (broad-headed) 'Armenoid' people with prominent hooked noses and was a type common from Asia Minor, the Caucasus, and the northern areas of Assyria and Syria. It is because of this many scholars suggest the region to be the home of the so-called 'Jewish-type' which was actually Hurrian and differed from the 'original Semitic type' of other parts of the Levant, Assyria, and northern Arabia. And though I haven't seen it first hand, I have read that there were Egyptian depictions of actual Hittite/Nasili elites who looked more European i.e. small aquiline noses with blue eyes and even blonde hair. Could those blonde hair blue eyed people be the indigenous people of Land of Hatti, even though they were pejoratively called Hittites?
Lastly the 'mongol' type is actually a mis-characterization of some of the early Hittite and other IE remains of northeastern Anatolia and the Caucasus as they were brachycephalic people with horse-riding culture that is similar to though not identical to Mongol nomads of the steppes. [/QB]
posted
^ Don't confuse actual language group with genealogy or you'll run into trouble.
For example, Elam is considered to descend from Shem yet the Elamites did not speak Semitic languages.
The Table of Nations is generally speaking accurate that Anatolia was inhabited by and large by 'Japhethites' i.e. fair-skinned northerners regardless of whether they spoke Indo-European or not.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by matu: Your summary sounds 'generally' similar to what's said here on realhistoryww.com: "How Race is Made": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk4SdqmDISg
I'm curious to know your thoughts on the vid.
I should warn you that Mike and his website which you cite holds many (though not all) inaccuracies. Mike is pretty much an Afrocentric nutcase who tends to paint black various ancient peoples who never were and is the polar opposite of Euronuts who white-wash ancient peoples.
That's too bad. I really like his work. That site is a VERY comprehensive body of work! Can you briefly list which groups he paints Black? I don't want to repeat misinformation because I rely a lot on his website to gain historical knowledge, and share said knowledge with my Bible study class.
It is highly inaccurate to call Mike an Afrocentric. Stop saying that, It's an insult to afrocentrics
Cheikh Anta Diop, Molefi Asante and Runoko Rashidi are Afrocentrics.
Mike is not an Afrocentric at all
Mike hates Africa, Africans and white Europeans
read it again
Mike hates Africa, Africans and white Europeans
Mike could be called Black Eurocentric He loves and reveres European culture and sees Africa as backward (there are many many quotes by him which verify this) But he also promotes the idea that European civilization was founded and ruled by blacks until 1648 and that whites are impostors Afrocentrics have a lot of common ideas, That is not one of them
Mike believes that most Black Americans are not descendants of Africans they are descendants or Black Europeans
And Mike remains anonymous, one of multiple have to regard his ideas as suspect
He throws in a lot of legitimate plagiarized historical information and mixes it with bizarre distortions, misrepresentation and hatred
I also remain anonymous - but I don't have a history website
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ Don't confuse actual language group with genealogy or you'll run into trouble.
For example, Elam is considered to descend from Shem yet the Elamites did not speak Semitic languages.
The Table of Nations is generally speaking accurate that Anatolia was inhabited by and large by 'Japhethites' i.e. fair-skinned northerners regardless of whether they spoke Indo-European or not.
.
This is why I use Shemite and Hhamite when writing about Hebrew literature instead of the linguists' Semite and Hamite.
The b*nei Hheth in TaNaKH of Hebron at the extreme south of the Levant adjacent to the Gaza Strip are not the Hittites, who subordinated the earlier Hatti of central Anatolia, known as Meshech and Tubal in the Hebrew books.
There are plenty modern archaeology articles and books outlining Indo-European speaking Hittite migrants from somewhere north and east of Anatolia. They were literate, their writings are extant.
Connecting them to far south Palestine b*nei Hheth, though still perpetuated, is an unfortunate misidentification by translators not having the archaeology and linguist material we have today.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
^ Don't confuse actual language group with genealogy or you'll run into trouble.
For example, Elam is considered to descend from Shem yet the Elamites did not speak Semitic languages.
The Table of Nations is generally speaking accurate that Anatolia was inhabited by and large by 'Japhethites' i.e. fair-skinned northerners regardless of whether they spoke Indo-European or not.
.
This is why I use Shemite and Hhamite when writing about Hebrew literature instead of the linguists' Semite and Hamite.
The b*nei Hheth in TaNaKH of Hebron at the extreme south of the Levant adjacent to the Gaza Strip are not the Hittites, who subordinated the earlier Hatti of central Anatolia, known as Meshech and Tubal in the Hebrew books.
There are plenty modern archaeology articles and books outlining Indo-European speaking Hittite migrants from somewhere north and east of Anatolia. They were literate, their writings are extant.
Connecting them to far south Palestine b*nei Hheth, though still perpetuated, is an unfortunate misidentification by translators not having the archaeology and linguist material we have today.
I hear you. But I think b*nei Hheth being in Hebron is only PART of the story as can be seen on map below:
Per the Bible, and any Table of Nations map, the land of b*nei Hheth must have also included land north of Canaan, near the Euphrates. I've seen maps depicting both regions (Hebron and Lebanon). While I couldn't find any ANCIENT map of northern Hittites prior to their invasion of Hatti, this bible verse still proves TRICKY. Because the below verse doesn't support the indigenous land of b*nei Hheth to be Hebron OR the Caucus, but of Lebanon near the Euphrates.
Josh 1:4 "From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and unto the great sea toward the going down of the sun, shall be your coast."
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
The Y*hoshu`a quote outlines within the Levant and Mesopotamia the extent of the 'Am Yisra'el land claim.
As Canaanites the b*nei Hheth are just one Semitic speaking Canaanite group of that region. There home was in the environs of Hebron as shown on the big map. Where is the recorded historical or archaeological evidence for a mass migration either to or from Hebron and central Anatolia?
My goal is not to convince you and I guess most grasp both of our points but if you won't go and reference archaeology science instead of nothing but religious "so the Bible say" kind of stuff then I leave this sub-topic to you because what more can I say without repeating myself.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: The Y*hoshu`a quote outlines within the Levant and Mesopotamia the extent of the 'Am Yisra'el land claim.
As Canaanites the b*nei Hheth are just one Semitic speaking Canaanite group of that region. There home was in the environs of Hebron as shown on the big map.
My goal is not to convince you and I guess most grasp both of our points but if you won't go and reference the science of archaeology instead of nothing but religious "so the Bible say" kind of stuff then I am done because what more can I say.
I know you're not trying to convince me, nor I you. I have no problem searching the archeological record outside the Bible, now that you just provided it. And no, I don't speak like that. Thanks.
Posts: 34 | From: Cali | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Sorry, I didn't mean you speak that way however that mentality does exist and is pervasive in a set of believers while other of the faithful integrate the two or set them side by side both as truths but different truths.
PS at one time I owned the BR set and the BAR up to 2002.
Why not take advantage of the trial issue? It works without filling out the plasticash info.
I'm betting you'll love it. And if not, write CANCEL when returning the invoice. Whattaya got to loose? (no I'm not an ad man )
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Sorry, I didn't mean you speak that way however that mentality does exist and is pervasive in a set of believers while other of the faithful integrate the two or set them side by side both as truths but different truths.
PS at one time I owned the BR set and the BAR up to 2002.
Why not take advantage of the trial issue? It works without filling out the plasticash info.
I'm betting you'll love it. And if not, write CANCEL when returning the invoice. Whattaya got to loose? (no I'm not an ad man )
Yay - this is good stuff. I knew I recognized the name (Pritchard), it was a book I put on my wish list several months earlier, on my quest to understand what the people of the Near East looked like during Biblical times. I had to go back and double check my list, and sure enough the book was there -- can't wait to read it now, THANK YOU!
Um, what do you mean, when you say you used to own the "BR set and the BAR"?
Posts: 34 | From: Cali | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Sorry, I didn't mean you speak
Printer-friendly view of this topic