posted
I keep reading things from the 4th to 5th millennium BC but None of these readings ever source anything. Does anybody have something I can review? Thanks.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
To me it seems the two identities weren't as distinct as western scholarship paints it to be. The strict differentiation is just an attempt to project western ideas of race onto people who didn't subscribe to it. There's too much intersection in culture, art, religion, architecture, etc. to really say they ever DID differentiation beyond their differing ruling classes. So, I think the closest you could get to really answering your question is to answer when the Egyptian state formed, and when the first Nubian state formed.
OAN: This is why I like to call it "Nile valley civilization" collectively instead of "Nubian civilization" and "Egyptian civilization".
Posts: 44 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: When the first use of the word Nehesu was given to all Africans south of Egypt. (perhaps all Africans in general)
Egypt recognized many nations and kingdoms in Nubia. Nubia was not unified to the same degree as Egypt.
There are no racial differences between Egypt or any other African nation, this is why Egypt never called Nubians "blacks".
There was no entity called "Nubia" period during the time of ancient KMT. Thats the point. You are trying to force Nile Valley history to fit into a European construct that did not exist. That is why I don't use the term "Nubian" for populations along the Nile over 2000 years ago. The term has only come into use in the Nile Valley since then.
The reason a thread like this gets no answers is because the topic has been beaten to death many times on this forum. Search and you will find.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: When the first use of the word Nehesu was given to all Africans south of Egypt. (perhaps all Africans in general)
Egypt recognized many nations and kingdoms in Nubia. Nubia was not unified to the same degree as Egypt.
There are no racial differences between Egypt or any other African nation, this is why Egypt never called Nubians "blacks".
There was no entity called "Nubia" period during the time of ancient KMT. Thats the point. You are trying to force Nile Valley history to fit into a European construct that did not exist. That is why I don't use the term "Nubian" for populations along the Nile over 2000 years ago. The term has only come into use in the Nile Valley since then.
The reason a thread like this gets no answers is because the topic has been beaten to death many times on this forum. Search and you will find.
Yes but he is mainly mentioning the term Nehesu
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
European archeologists created the concept of ancient "Nubia" as a result of their activities in Egypt in the late 1800s and early 1900s. George Andrew Reisner was one of the first who applied the term to ancient artifacts found in areas to the South of Egypt. There is no historical connection between the term Nubian used in those areas TODAY and those ancient cultures from many thousands of years ago. It is similar to how no African population called themselves Moors back when the Romans created the term. Or how no Native American called themselves Indian when they were first encountered and slaughtered by Europeans.
Same thing here. Yes there is a modern term Nubia and it is used in those same areas but there is no direct relationship between how that term is used today and the words the ancient populations in that same area used for themselves and each other. Therefore, you are not going to find any direct evidence for the term "Nubia" in KMT or any other population along the Nile going back to the dynastic or predynastic period.
The only place where you will find a distinction in terms of ancient cultures of the Nile Valley using the terms "Egypt" and "Nubia" is in European archaeological papers. That does not mean that there were not various cultures along the Nile going back into prehistory. It only means that the term "Nubian" was not the basis of any such distinction within or among those populations in those times. Just like the term "Egypt" was not used in ancient times either. This is a label and structure that was applied in the modern era.
This has absolutely nothing to do with terms and names these ancient populations used for themselves other than the modern word "Nubia" being derived ultimately from the ancient Egyptian word for Gold.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: When did Egypt and Nubia differentiate
You assume they were one and the same. Nubia is a region south of Egypt and not a polity or nation. Egypt was a nation.
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
At the lakeshore An Early Nubian Complex site linked with lacustrine sediments (Eastern Desert, Egypt) Karin Kindermann & Ph. van Peer 2017 Quat.Internat.online 22.11.17 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2017.11.006
Pleistocene open-air sites are very rare in the E.Desert, due to the often erosive hyper-arid landscape & its highly geo-morphological dynamics. But information retrieved from such sites is also important for an enhanced understanding of the MSA in NE.Africa, though open-air sites present challenges of their own (vs cave sites).
We discovered such a new open-air site + Pleistocene lacustrine deposits in close proximity to the Sodmein Cave. The recorded lithic artefacts (eroded out of the sediments) can be attributed to the MSA. Several Nubian type-2 cores assigned this assemblage most likely to the Early Nubian Complex. Together with the stone artefacts from the lowest layer J at the nearby Sodmein Cave, this new open-air site clearly establishes the presence of the Early Nubian Complex east of the Nile. Chronometric dating of the Pleistocene playa silts is in progress, but the Early Nubian Complex can be correlated (according to the NE.African chronological evidence) to the Last Interglacial
The only place where you will find a distinction in terms of ancient cultures of the Nile Valley using the terms "Egypt" and "Nubia" is in European archaeological papers.
True the Egyptians didn't speak English but they did have glyphs for KMt and nHsy
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
The only place where you will find a distinction in terms of ancient cultures of the Nile Valley using the terms "Egypt" and "Nubia" is in European archaeological papers.
True the Egyptians didn't speak English but they did have glyphs for KMt and nHsy
When was the First time NHsy was used in the context of referring to "Nubia"?
...when was the first time NHsy was used at all?
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
The only place where you will find a distinction in terms of ancient cultures of the Nile Valley using the terms "Egypt" and "Nubia" is in European archaeological papers.
True the Egyptians didn't speak English but they did have glyphs for KMt and nHsy
When was the First time NHsy was used in the context of referring to "Nubia"?
...when was the first time NHsy was used at all?
well damn... I guess the question is unanswerable.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
The only place where you will find a distinction in terms of ancient cultures of the Nile Valley using the terms "Egypt" and "Nubia" is in European archaeological papers.
True the Egyptians didn't speak English but they did have glyphs for KMt and nHsy
When was the First time NHsy was used in the context of referring to "Nubia"?
...when was the first time NHsy was used at all?
I don't know what you mean by "at all" Do you think this word would exist and not have been used?
Forget "Nubia" we are talking about Egyptian words, NHsy
King Sneferu’s campaign on the Palermo stone, 4th dynasty is the earliest known period of which the word was used "Ta Nehesy" Also an important Old Kingdom inscription at Abydos, the Una inscription The term is applied to the various groups to the south of the Egyptian nation between the First and Second Cataracts. The word's exact meaning is unknown but it was applied to them.
From what I have been reading I think it probably is a geographic indication with political implications. They were sometimes included in the "Nine bows" enemies of Egypt which also included "Asiatics".
The Stone also contains a record of forty ships that brought wood from an unknown region outside of Egypt during the reign of Sneferu. It is a good source of information on Sneferu, also describing military expeditions such as campaign in Ta Nehesy that resulted in the capture of 7,000 slaves and 200,000 head of cattle. These types of campaigns probably resulted in the disappearance of the A Group. It also tells of his campaigns against the Libyans, and quarrying expeditions to the Turquoise mines of the Sinai.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whether the term Nehesi is used or A-Group or Nubian there is nothing that suggests that the populations in Upper Egypt that developed into ancient KMT were vastly different physically than their neighbors further south. The differences would have been well within the standard kinds of variation seen across any populations anywhere at the time. None of these terms have anything to do with skin color, including the ancient term Nehesi. All attempts to equate these terms to skin color are modern distortions.
As for physical differences, I prefer to use Keita's work as the most factual in this regard and the historic distortion and emphasis on racial distinctions between the two groups are purely propaganda pushed by people with a racial agenda.
quote: Previous work was often concerned with the race of the creators of Naqada cultures and ancient Egyptian in general. Either the homogeneity of remams was under question or Naqada membership in a particular race was at issue. This literature cannot be avoided in any representative review. Modern workers usually work from an inductive perspective utilizing real populations or their equivalent, instead of a deductive reductionist racial identity approach. This theoretical perspective acknowledges primarily the validity of the local popula- tion. Consequently efforts are directed towards establishing population affinity and not racial identities as conceived by earlier workers. It is curious, misleading and unfortunate that the old racial terms are still (mis) used, although the race concept has fallen into disrepute. The no-race school has failed to develop new terminology. Serious workers also utilize archaeological and linguistic data to place their results into a context of the most likely probabilities, since all similar- ity does not mean close relatedness in a genealogical sense. The interest is in real relationships. Morphological or morphotypological studies and comments on the morphology of Naqada crania are not consistent in their conclusions. They have been described as Negroid-Caucasoid hybrids and/or a composite Caucasoid and Negroid population (Fawcett & Lee 1902; Myers 1902; Morant 1925; Falkenburger 1947; Nutter 1958), or as Mediterranean, ultimately not of Black or White origin in close reading of Sergi’s (1901) views. Smith (1909) with Derry (1910) noted that late Predynastic (Naqada) crania morphologically resembled A-group Nubian remains, and that earlier Predynastic (Naqada) crania resembled those of Middle (C-group) Nubians. The Naqada crania have been interpreted as non-Caucasian indigenous tropical Africans, but non-Negro (Giuffrida-Ruggeri 1915; 1916; 1922) and designated Ethiopian or Erythraen (Giuffrida-Ruggeri 1922); however descriptions in Giuffrida-Ruggeri’s work would generally be designated Negroid, although not as extreme as forest belt groups. It should be understood that there is a range of indigenous Saharo-tropi- cal African or just biological African variation, fully predicted at molecular and morphological levels by an evolutionary perspective. Narrow noses and faces do not usually indicate a migration of, or admixture with Europeans or Euripides (see Hiemaux 1975) The Late Pleistocene subfossil record clearly suggest that these characteristics or trends (called Elongated African by Hiernaux, 1975) arose as independent microevolutionary adaptations. The basic concept of real Afri- can cannot be restricted to the Negro (here called Broad trend) phenotype any more than real European is or can be restricted to Nordic or East Baltic phenotypes or that of the Caucasus mountains. That this is done is a product of recent social history, not scientific considerations. African biohistory has produced a range of phenotypes, and while there has been admixture there is no theoretical reason why the major portion of continent wide variation is not due to in situ differentiation.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: [QB] Whether the term Nehesi is used or A-Group or Nubian there is nothing that suggests that the populations in Upper Egypt that developed into ancient KMT were vastly different physically than their neighbors further south. The differences would have been well within the standard kinds of variation seen across any populations anywhere at the time. None of these terms have anything to do with skin color, including the ancient term Nehesi. All attempts to equate these terms to skin color are modern distortions.
In this forum we use the word "Egygtian" all the time even though KMt is the original word transliterated into English letters.
Similarly Nehesi or nHsy was a term used by the Egyptians and "Nubian" means the same thing.
So you can't say that "Nubian" is a concept contrived by Egyptologists. You can only complain that it is not a word used by ancient Egyptians (although many scholars believe Nubia is derived from the ancient Egyptian noun nebu, meaning gold, the word was applied by the Romans - or related to theto Coptic noubti "to weave". But I don't see you complaining every time somebody uses the word "Egyptian".
There are a wide variety of features in Egyptian art. However around the 19th dynasty there is evidence of some phenotypic sterotyping
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
KMT is an actual place that actually existed and has documented records as an actual organized social, political, cultural and economic unit. "Nubia" is not. There was no organized social, political, cultural and economic unit called "Nubia" that covered all of Sudan into the rest of Africa. It did not exist. "Nehesy" at best is a single ethnic group to the South of KMT. There were MULTIPLE ethnic groups to the South of KMT and they were NOT all unified under one common identity, culture, language or state structure. It does not imply or suggest a confederation or collection of people ALL UNIFIED as one ethnic group, tribe, economic trading group or nation state stretching from the first cataract all the way down to Southern Sudan. It did not exist. There is no ancient historical artifacts, documentation, records or evidence suggesting any such thing EVER existed. Just as today "Nubian" is simply an ethnic group within SUDAN which is the actual country. All Sudanese aren't "Nubians". There are multiple ethnic groups in Sudan. "Nubia" as used by Egyptologists in their own writings going back to Reisner, Petrie and many others is simply a synonym for "black people" as a way to separate them from Ancient KMT. KM means black in Egyptian, not "Nub"ian, which meant "gold" in KMT.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Nḥsj(w) was a demonym used by Ancient Egyptians to refer to their southern neighbours for several millenia....
Nḥsj(w) was an ancient Egyptian word used to describe a significant number of different ethnic groups during the Pharaonic era and beyond....
Hence, people from the lands of Ta Seti,Yam, Kush, Punt, Wawat, Medjay, Irtjet, Satjou, Nemy, Miu, etc. have been described as such.
The source you provided makes reference to multiple groups and nowhere does it suggest a single particular ethnic group
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: KMT is an actual place that actually existed and has documented records as an actual organized social, political, cultural and economic unit. "Nubia" is not. There was no organized social, political, cultural and economic unit called "Nubia" that covered all of Sudan into the rest of Africa. It did not exist. "Nehesy" at best is a single ethnic group to the South of KMT. There were MULTIPLE ethnic groups to the South of KMT and they were NOT all unified under one common identity, culture, language or state structure. It does not imply or suggest a confederation or collection of people ALL UNIFIED as one ethnic group, tribe, economic trading group or nation state stretching from the first cataract all the way down to Southern Sudan. It did not exist. There is no ancient historical artifacts, documentation, records or evidence suggesting any such thing EVER existed. Just as today "Nubian" is simply an ethnic group within SUDAN which is the actual country. All Sudanese aren't "Nubians". There are multiple ethnic groups in Sudan. "Nubia" as used by Egyptologists in their own writings going back to Reisner, Petrie and many others is simply a synonym for "black people" as a way to separate them from Ancient KMT. KM means black in Egyptian, not "Nub"ian, which meant "gold" in KMT.
Nehesy is the proper term for all the people south of Egypt and maybe the whole continent.
Nubian was a word that was created by the ancient Greeks and Romans to denote a particular ethnic group. Please do not confuse the two terms of nubian and nehesy.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: KMT is an actual place that actually existed and has documented records as an actual organized social, political, cultural and economic unit. "Nubia" is not. There was no organized social, political, cultural and economic unit called "Nubia" that covered all of Sudan into the rest of Africa. It did not exist. "Nehesy" at best is a single ethnic group to the South of KMT. There were MULTIPLE ethnic groups to the South of KMT and they were NOT all unified under one common identity, culture, language or state structure. It does not imply or suggest a confederation or collection of people ALL UNIFIED as one ethnic group, tribe, economic trading group or nation state stretching from the first cataract all the way down to Southern Sudan. It did not exist. There is no ancient historical artifacts, documentation, records or evidence suggesting any such thing EVER existed. Just as today "Nubian" is simply an ethnic group within SUDAN which is the actual country. All Sudanese aren't "Nubians". There are multiple ethnic groups in Sudan. "Nubia" as used by Egyptologists in their own writings going back to Reisner, Petrie and many others is simply a synonym for "black people" as a way to separate them from Ancient KMT. KM means black in Egyptian, not "Nub"ian, which meant "gold" in KMT.
Nehesy is the proper term for all the people south of Egypt and maybe the whole continent.
Nubian was a word that was created by the ancient Greeks and Romans to denote a particular ethnic group. Please do not confuse the two terms of nubian and nehesy.
neither one of these terms mean black
Yes. That is what I said. Except it is not 100% clear what Nehesy actually refers to in terms of geographic regions and specific ethnic groups. For example the people of Punt are not called Nehesi.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: KMT is an actual place that actually existed and has documented records as an actual organized social, political, cultural and economic unit. "Nubia" is not. There was no organized social, political, cultural and economic unit called "Nubia" that covered all of Sudan into the rest of Africa. It did not exist. "Nehesy" at best is a single ethnic group to the South of KMT. There were MULTIPLE ethnic groups to the South of KMT and they were NOT all unified under one common identity, culture, language or state structure. It does not imply or suggest a confederation or collection of people ALL UNIFIED as one ethnic group, tribe, economic trading group or nation state stretching from the first cataract all the way down to Southern Sudan. It did not exist. There is no ancient historical artifacts, documentation, records or evidence suggesting any such thing EVER existed. Just as today "Nubian" is simply an ethnic group within SUDAN which is the actual country. All Sudanese aren't "Nubians". There are multiple ethnic groups in Sudan. "Nubia" as used by Egyptologists in their own writings going back to Reisner, Petrie and many others is simply a synonym for "black people" as a way to separate them from Ancient KMT. KM means black in Egyptian, not "Nub"ian, which meant "gold" in KMT.
Nehesy is the proper term for all the people south of Egypt and maybe the whole continent.
Nubian was a word that was created by the ancient Greeks and Romans to denote a particular ethnic group. Please do not confuse the two terms of nubian and nehesy.
neither one of these terms mean black
Yes. That is what I said. Except it is not 100% clear what Nehesy actually refers to in terms of geographic regions and specific ethnic groups. For example the people of Punt are not called Nehesi.
that is because punt is a specific place
that is equivalent as saying Nigeria is not called Africa
The only way to debunk this is by showing where Nehsi was mentioned with another African group (example: people of punt, kush, seti, yam, etc etc)
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: KMT is an actual place that actually existed and has documented records as an actual organized social, political, cultural and economic unit. "Nubia" is not. There was no organized social, political, cultural and economic unit called "Nubia" that covered all of Sudan into the rest of Africa. It did not exist. "Nehesy" at best is a single ethnic group to the South of KMT. There were MULTIPLE ethnic groups to the South of KMT and they were NOT all unified under one common identity, culture, language or state structure. It does not imply or suggest a confederation or collection of people ALL UNIFIED as one ethnic group, tribe, economic trading group or nation state stretching from the first cataract all the way down to Southern Sudan. It did not exist. There is no ancient historical artifacts, documentation, records or evidence suggesting any such thing EVER existed. Just as today "Nubian" is simply an ethnic group within SUDAN which is the actual country. All Sudanese aren't "Nubians". There are multiple ethnic groups in Sudan. "Nubia" as used by Egyptologists in their own writings going back to Reisner, Petrie and many others is simply a synonym for "black people" as a way to separate them from Ancient KMT. KM means black in Egyptian, not "Nub"ian, which meant "gold" in KMT.
Nehesy is the proper term for all the people south of Egypt and maybe the whole continent.
Nubian was a word that was created by the ancient Greeks and Romans to denote a particular ethnic group. Please do not confuse the two terms of nubian and nehesy.
neither one of these terms mean black
Yes. That is what I said. Except it is not 100% clear what Nehesy actually refers to in terms of geographic regions and specific ethnic groups. For example the people of Punt are not called Nehesi.
that is because punt is a specific place
that is equivalent as saying Nigeria is not called Africa
The only way to debunk this is by showing where Nehsi was mentioned with another African group (example: people of punt, kush, seti, yam, etc etc)
I was referring to Nehesi meaning "all Africans south of Egypt" as not being necessarily accurate. Punt is south of Egypt as well and assumed to be in Africa. So if Punt is also included in Nehesi then you would have seen it somewhere used in that context. Just like Nigeria most certainly included as part of "Africa".
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: KMT is an actual place that actually existed and has documented records as an actual organized social, political, cultural and economic unit. "Nubia" is not. There was no organized social, political, cultural and economic unit called "Nubia" that covered all of Sudan into the rest of Africa. It did not exist. "Nehesy" at best is a single ethnic group to the South of KMT. There were MULTIPLE ethnic groups to the South of KMT and they were NOT all unified under one common identity, culture, language or state structure. It does not imply or suggest a confederation or collection of people ALL UNIFIED as one ethnic group, tribe, economic trading group or nation state stretching from the first cataract all the way down to Southern Sudan. It did not exist. There is no ancient historical artifacts, documentation, records or evidence suggesting any such thing EVER existed. Just as today "Nubian" is simply an ethnic group within SUDAN which is the actual country. All Sudanese aren't "Nubians". There are multiple ethnic groups in Sudan. "Nubia" as used by Egyptologists in their own writings going back to Reisner, Petrie and many others is simply a synonym for "black people" as a way to separate them from Ancient KMT. KM means black in Egyptian, not "Nub"ian, which meant "gold" in KMT.
Nehesy is the proper term for all the people south of Egypt and maybe the whole continent.
Nubian was a word that was created by the ancient Greeks and Romans to denote a particular ethnic group. Please do not confuse the two terms of nubian and nehesy.
neither one of these terms mean black
Yes. That is what I said. Except it is not 100% clear what Nehesy actually refers to in terms of geographic regions and specific ethnic groups. For example the people of Punt are not called Nehesi.
that is because punt is a specific place
that is equivalent as saying Nigeria is not called Africa
The only way to debunk this is by showing where Nehsi was mentioned with another African group (example: people of punt, kush, seti, yam, etc etc)
I was referring to Nehesi meaning "all Africans south of Egypt" as not being necessarily accurate. Punt is south of Egypt as well and assumed to be in Africa. So if Punt is also included in Nehesi then you would have seen it somewhere used in that context. Just like Nigeria most certainly included as part of "Africa".
Maybe you are right, however; you will have to show where Nehesi and punt were both mentioned as separate nations.
In several tombs in the scene for the afterworld called the Book of Gates the Egyptians depict themselves as part of four groups of men. They depict themselves as different in skin tone from the Nehesy
why would they do this?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
In several tombs in the scene for the afterworld called the Book of Gates the Egyptians depict themselves as part of four groups of men. They depict themselves as different in skin tone from the Nehesy
why would they do this?
Even though the ancient Egyptians and other Africans were both black.The people south of Egypt were more pure than the Egyptians. It is a lot like comparing African Americans to Senegalese or Amharic people to Mursi people.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: KMT is an actual place that actually existed and has documented records as an actual organized social, political, cultural and economic unit. "Nubia" is not. There was no organized social, political, cultural and economic unit called "Nubia" that covered all of Sudan into the rest of Africa. It did not exist. "Nehesy" at best is a single ethnic group to the South of KMT. There were MULTIPLE ethnic groups to the South of KMT and they were NOT all unified under one common identity, culture, language or state structure. It does not imply or suggest a confederation or collection of people ALL UNIFIED as one ethnic group, tribe, economic trading group or nation state stretching from the first cataract all the way down to Southern Sudan. It did not exist. There is no ancient historical artifacts, documentation, records or evidence suggesting any such thing EVER existed. Just as today "Nubian" is simply an ethnic group within SUDAN which is the actual country. All Sudanese aren't "Nubians". There are multiple ethnic groups in Sudan. "Nubia" as used by Egyptologists in their own writings going back to Reisner, Petrie and many others is simply a synonym for "black people" as a way to separate them from Ancient KMT. KM means black in Egyptian, not "Nub"ian, which meant "gold" in KMT.
Nehesy is the proper term for all the people south of Egypt and maybe the whole continent.
Nubian was a word that was created by the ancient Greeks and Romans to denote a particular ethnic group. Please do not confuse the two terms of nubian and nehesy.
neither one of these terms mean black
Yes. That is what I said. Except it is not 100% clear what Nehesy actually refers to in terms of geographic regions and specific ethnic groups. For example the people of Punt are not called Nehesi.
that is because punt is a specific place
that is equivalent as saying Nigeria is not called Africa
The only way to debunk this is by showing where Nehsi was mentioned with another African group (example: people of punt, kush, seti, yam, etc etc)
I was referring to Nehesi meaning "all Africans south of Egypt" as not being necessarily accurate. Punt is south of Egypt as well and assumed to be in Africa. So if Punt is also included in Nehesi then you would have seen it somewhere used in that context. Just like Nigeria most certainly included as part of "Africa".
Maybe you are right, however; you will have to show where Nehesi and punt were both mentioned as separate nations.
Who said Nehesi was a nation? YOU said it was a reference to all Africans to the South of Egypt. I don't agree with that usage. So really it is on YOU to show how that is how it was used.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic