A-Group "nubia" was created explicitly by George Reistner based on a racist ideology that separated ancient "Nubia" as the boundary between black African culture and white Egyptian culture on the Nile Valley going into prehistory. That is found in his own writings on the subject.
The flaw of logic continues If Egyptian culture on the Nile Valley was not white using or not using a word naming a neighboring region is irrelevant.
If Egyptian culture on the Nile Valley was not white whether you use the word "Nubia" or "nations to the South" or "Kush", none of that makes a difference as to one's perspective of Egypt
One person could say the Egyptians were black another could say they were white another could say something else. The word "Nubia" would not change those positions. For instance, many people in this forum would say the Egyptians were black and the Nubians were black. It's not a problem. These things could occur simultaneously. It's not like there's a limited supply of black so if you give it to the Nubians you take it away from the Egyptians A-Group is a settlement location. Calling it "Nubian" or not calling it "Nubian" should not change a person's opinion on who the Egyptians were. Additionally, people most frequently refer to Nubians in later time periods corresponding to dynastic Egypt At best one could argue not to use "Nubian" just for the pre-dynastic period
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: ^ Even if they were biologically identical....An Ancient Nubian fully pastoral group speaking Nilo-Saharan vs a sedentary agricultural Egyptian speaking Nile Valley group are not the same. IMO.
The differences among themselves are what we today would recognize as different Ethnicities of the same race of people.
Yoruba and Igbo are damn near identical in genomic research...they inhabit the same country, they are not the same thing.
Oromo and Somali are damn near identical, Oromo just have more variability. Much of their ancestry comes from the same admixture event. Somali are not "Ethiopian" even though some Somali live IN modern Ethiopia. Insert Amhara, all 3 groups are Horn Africans. All 3 have a Omotic genetic substratum....maximized in Oromo, minimized in Somali. All 3 have Levantine ancestry, maximized in Amhara, minimized in Somali. The same type of ancestry cline is going to be similar among Egypt and Nubians.....Egyptians are going to have Ancestry that is absent or minimized in Nubians and Nubians are going to have ancestry that is minimized or Absent Egyptians.
The fact that Euroclowns have played race games does not make these populations "the same". Saying they are "the same" dumbs things way down to a simpleton level and ES is years past that....or is it?
I forgot to respond to this but you are on point, Beyoku! It seems the Euronuts are playing the tactic of mixing ethnic identity with biological ('race') identity. They do this to muddy the waters. Remember how they did that with that old Tishkoff study which shows Amhara have 40% West Asian admixture which they distorted as all Ethiopians. Years later they exaggerated the claim further to say all East Africans have 40% Eurasian admixture LOL .
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Nubia is a vast region. At any period in time various peoples inhabited it. Calling them Nubians? What is similarly nefarious, to me? Calling the inhabitants of Europe Europeans, be they Hungarian or Irish.
Junker removed Nubians from the black peoples of Africa. link
Terms I have problems with? A group and C group for Nile Valley Lower Nubians. Predynastic: Why still call Ta Seti A group? OK thru NK: Why still call Wawat C group? Preference for Reisner over that of prime documents I suppose.
If it weren't for the Christian era on up to now, Kush would be the best replacement for Nubia. It's perfect for times before Nubae came into use courtesy of Erastothenes during the Ptolemaic, 2nd cent BCE. Since then, and the times Red&Black Noba come on the scene and Axum axed 'Meroe', Nubia becomes more appropriate than Kush.
Ta Seti _______________________________________ Wawat (in yellow and green)
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Nubia is a vast region. At any period in time various peoples inhabited it. Calling them Nubians? What is similarly nefarious? Calling the inhabitants of Europe Europeans, be they Hungarian or Irish.
I agree that there is absolutely nothing wrong with using the term "Nubia" or "Nubian" so long as its down so in the correct way, with Nubia being merely a region south of Egypt as per the Roman sources and hence Nubians are the inhabitants of that region. Of course the annoyance comes when there are no specificities beyond that.
quote:Junker removed Nubians from the black peoples of Africa. link
No surprise there. He like many Germans of his day had that Hegelian mentality.
quote:Terms I have problems with? A group and C group for Nile Valley Lower Nubians. Predynastic: Why still call Ta Seti A group? OK - NK: Why still call Wawat C group? Preference for Reisner over that of prime documents I suppose.
If it weren't for the Christian era on up to now Kush would be the best replacement for Nubia. It's perfect for times before Nubae came into use courtesy of Erastothenes during the Ptolemaic. Since then and the times Axum axed Meroe and Red&Black Noba come on the scene, Nubia becomes more appropriate than Kush.
You're right. Ta-Seti and Wawat are a hell of a lot more accurate than A-Group and C-Group. Besides, the labeling doesn't make any sense especially considering that there is no 'B-Group'.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:A-Group "nubia" was created explicitly by George Reistner based on a racist ideology that separated ancient "Nubia" as the boundary between black African culture and white Egyptian culture on the Nile Valley going into prehistory. That is found in his own writings on the subject.
Do you have a direct quote?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
@ Djehuti
Hahaha. Egyptology tried a B group. Turned into a big L.
Anyway This 'Nubia(n)' thing is water under the bridge. You and me and others have done it long ago and basically agree. We're all just a bit revising with add on updates, no?
But check the Reisner Junker connection re Nubia if you haven't already. They were buddy boys. Doug's point, removal of black connection to the Lower Nile Valley. If 1st by Reisner creating a ghetto Nubia leaving Egypt blackless. Then Junker, 2nd, even sweeps Nubia clean of blacks. One two combination punch to knock black out the whole Lower Valley.
Why do I think Nubia is Ptolemaic not Roman? Under Ptolemy III Erastothenes introduces the term Nubae as quoted by Strabo
quote:
[…] the parts on the left side of the course of the Nile, in Libya, are inhabited by Nubae, a large tribe, who, beginning at Meroë, extend as far as the bends of the river, and are not subject to the Aethiopians but are divided into several separate kingdoms.
NOTE: Classical geographers used the Nile to divide Libya(Africa) everywhere west of the Nile from Asia everywhere east of the Nile even if in our continent Africa.
Erastothenes' Nubae are far enough south of Lower Nubia and to the west of Meroe era Kush.
posted
^ Ironically George Reisner is considered the 'Father of Nubiology'. I don't have a direct quote but I remember reading his writings years ago about how Nubian civilization was the product of Egyptian elites living in Nubia as no true Africans are capable of such (Egyptians being of the Hamitic Caucasoid variety and thus not truly African).
https://www.pbs.org/wonders/Episodes/Epi1/1_retel1.htm The first major excavations were undertaken by famed Egyptologist George A. Reisner (1867-1942), whose team, sponsored by Harvard University and the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, would first excavate Kerma in 1913, the Gebel Barkal Temples from 1916-1920, and all the royal pyramids of Kush between 1917-1924. Almost single-handedly, Reisner laid the foundations of Nubian history, reconstructing it from the Bronze Age to the dawn of the Christian era. He also deciphered the names and approximate order and dates of all the Kushite monarchs through some seventy generations, from the 8th century B.C. to the 3rd century A.D. It was a towering achievement, almost unparalleled in the annals of archaeology.
While Reisner's deductions still strike us as astonishing for their brilliance and essential correctness, we are equally appalled to discover his inability to accept that the monuments he excavated were built by bona fide black men. Using entirely specious evidence, he formulated a theory that the founders of the 25th or "Ethiopian" Dynasty of Egypt were not black Sudanese but rather a branch of the "Egypto-Libyan" (by which he meant "fair skinned") ruling class of Dynasty 22, and that they were called "Ethiopians" by the Greeks simply because they dominated a darker-skinned native "negroid" population, which, as he stated, "had never developed either its trade or any industry worthy of mention." Like Taylor and Lepsius, believing absolutely that skin pigmentation was a determinant of intellectual ability and enlightenment, Reisner attributed the apparent cultural decline of the Napatan phase of the Kushite culture (ca. 660-300 B.C.) to the "deadening effects" of racial intermarriage between his imagined light-skinned elite and darker-skinned hoi poloi. The Meroitic cultural renaissance (after ca. 300 B.C.) he explained as simply the result of new influxes of Egyptians. Nubian cultures, he reasoned, were not as developed as the Egyptian because the people were of mixed race, yet by virtue of their relationship to the superior Egyptian race, they were elevated far above the "the inert mass of the black races of Africa."
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Nubia is a vast region. At any period in time various peoples inhabited it. Calling them Nubians? What is similarly nefarious, to me? Calling the inhabitants of Europe Europeans, be they Hungarian or Irish.
Junker removed Nubians from the black peoples of Africa. link
Terms I have problems with? A group and C group for Nile Valley Lower Nubians. Predynastic: Why still call Ta Seti A group? OK thru NK: Why still call Wawat C group? Preference for Reisner over that of prime documents I suppose.
If it weren't for the Christian era on up to now, Kush would be the best replacement for Nubia. It's perfect for times before Nubae came into use courtesy of Erastothenes during the Ptolemaic, 2nd cent BCE. Since then, and the times Red&Black Noba come on the scene and Axum axed 'Meroe', Nubia becomes more appropriate than Kush.
Ta Seti _______________________________________ Wawat (in yellow and green)
Agreed. There are plenty of more historically accurate terms to use over the course of the history of the Nile Valley than just using "Nubia". By that logic, why not call everything along the Nile above Aswan (or below if you prefer) Egypt no matter the time period? They don't do this anywhere else in the world but they do it in "Nubia". 3,000 years ago nobody calls the populations in the area of modern France "French", because it didn't exist as a cultural or political entity. Same thing should apply to so-called "Nubia". More accurate terms like ancient Kerma, Khartoum Mesolithic, Nabta Playa, Kush, Meroe make a lot more sense.
I am not personally talking about the word "Nubian" as in and of itself being bad. The point I am making is that the usage of the term 'Nubia' going back into the prehistory of the Nile Valley prior to and during the rise of the predynastic is purely designed to segregate the Nile Valley into "black" nubia and "white" Egypt. This is precisely about Egyptology and Egyptology only. And that Egyptological use of the term has nothing to do with the actual biological relationships of populations in the Nile Valley during the thousands of years leading up to the rise of KMT. Reisner's naming of "Nubian" prehistory is based on pottery styles and not on human remains. Later anthropologists added remains to the mix but still maintaining Reisner's naming convention and maintaining the underlying assumption that these populations were "racially" different from the populations in PreDynastic Egypt.
Hence, to the point of the thread there is rarely any actual biological or anthropological assessment done of any of these ancient "Nubian" remains by Egyptology. As far as they are concerned, "Nubia" is the only black history on the Nile Valley. Therefore, no DNA needs to be analyzed and no cranial relationships need to be plotted.....
The only reason modern anthropologists consider ancient "Nubians" to be racially distinct from Egyptians is because of Egyptology. As far as mainstream Egyptology is concerned ancient Egypt was a result of Eurasian migration which created a racial identity in Egypt separate from the rest of "black" Africa represented by "Nubia". Hence, the DNA from Abusir will remain the defacto representation for all AE populations for many years, not because other mummies aren't available and not because the science isn't capable of extracting DNA from other remains. It is because Egyptology was founded on racism and promoting that vision of the Nile Valley. Hence it isn't shocking that actual DNA from across the Nile Valley between Lower Sudan and Upper Egypt from the far distant past would show these populations were not racially distinct. That is common sense. But Egyptology was founded on contradicting common sense and logic.
The Book "Daily Life of the Nubians" promotes this nonsense about "Nubia" being a continuous ethno-political-cultural entity along the Nile going back to pre-history. That is absolute garbage and only exists to segregate "black" Nile Valley history from "Egyptian" Nile Valley history.
He even says:
quote: It is interesting to note that in this context no royal gifts have been excavated in Pre-Kerma culture cemeteries, the graves of which in fact, contain almost genuine Egyptian artifacts. This marked absence of egyptian objects in the material remains of Pre-Kerma culture strongly reinforces the suggestion that the Egyptians were dealing directly and exclusively with their mercantile relations with their A-Group Nubian counterparts. Lower Nubia emerges during this period as a buffer zone between Egypt proper and the regions of Africa further to the South.
In other words a buffer between "white" Egypt and "black" Africa. The problem with this statement is it is blantantly nonsense. First, pre-kerma existed from the 4th Millenium BC. In other words prior to the rise of KMT, so there couln't have been any trade from "Egypt". In fact, Pre-Kerma was the cultural center of the Nile Valley and the traditions of pottery and other cultural traits spread there to the North. On top of that, as previously noted, the primary gold mines in that part of the Nile Valley from which Egypt got its gold were local and around Aswan. They didn't need "Nubian buffers" to trade with other black Africans to the South. Ta-Seti rose to power from the gold trade and eventually formed part of the predynastic Egyptian state, which is why Ta-Seti is the first nome of Upper Egypt. This is the part they don't want to admit and this is what this fake "Nubian" complex is designed to cover up. Because again "Nubt" was the center of the gold trade in predynastic Egypt, which means the populations of Ta-Seti were trading with and forming larger political structures with other populations along the Nile as the basis for what they call the "Naqada" period.
quote: Evidence indicates that during the Neolithic phase, from the sixth to the fourth millennia BC, a population settled the fertile Dongola Reach and began practicing agriculture and domesticating animals.1 Archeological excavations in the region have yielded some of the earliest evidence for the practice of agriculture and animal husbandry in the world. The Dongola population has consequently come to play a role in the spread of agriculture to the Near East and other parts of Africa.
As early as the fifth or mid-fourth millennia BC, the Dongola Reach has been the center of culture and civilization in Sudan, particularly along the Nile Valley. The pre-Kerma society, named after the area of Kerma in the Dongola Reach, forms one of the oldest civilized cultures in the world beside that of Egypt and Mesopotamia.
The predominantly agro-pastoral community of pre-Kerma was a center of commerce; pottery included imports from different areas of the Nile, including Egypt.2 By 3000 BC, the area was transformed into a thriving town with an organized urban infrastructure. Governed by a centralized authority, pre-Kerma was a fully developed polity. The town was highly organized; politically, economically, and socially.
Particularly interesting was the layout of the town, which indicates an advanced level of planning and an elaborate defense system. A variety of utilitarian and public buildings were found within the area. A number of buildings with post holes appear to have functioned as centers of administration. Numerous huts seem to have been residences for privileged individuals. Other structures defined include storage houses, workshops, and cattle enclosures.
And again, this is all about pottery styles and even before Reisner, Petrie was using pottery to identify "races" as in a "new race" of invaders to Egypt that supposedly created the culture there.... Again, black topped pottery originated in Pre-Kerma and Nabta Playa. But to hear them tell it, it came from somewhere outside the Nile Valley.
quote: garage in Cornwall, UK, seems an unlikely place for a piece of prehistoric Egyptian culture to turn up. But a few months ago it did.
I was recently contacted by a couple, Guy Funnell and Amanda Hawkins, who had just watched the BBC documentary The Man Who Discovered Egypt which profiled the career of Flinders Petrie. The name rang a bell and reminded them of a little broken pot they had tucked away in storage. Associated with it was a yellow, curling label bearing the title ‘Libyan Pottery’
The vase this note relates to is not something we would call ‘Libyan Pottery’ today. Nowadays we can recognise it as distinctly Egyptian and characteristically Predynastic.
It is a classic example of what Petrie called ‘Black-topped pottery’ or ‘B-ware’. His excavations at the huge cemetery of Naqada had revealed hundreds of such vessels, which were so striking that he first described them as ‘wholly un-Egyptian’. Instead, Petrie thought that these things belonged to a ‘New Race’, possibly invaders from Libya.
Naqada pottery is truly "Nubian" pottery as it comes from the town of "Nubt", the gold trading town that was the center of pre-dynastic culture. And of course that gold came from between Aswan and the second cataract, which means trade between black African cultures in and around "Nubt" and the black cultures around the 1st and second cataract. This power and wealth would have attracted traders and settlers from across the Nile Valley and that wealth and population density and cultural solidification created the conditions for the rise of Upper Egyptian elites who had the power and organization to unify the country. But this is what they won't tell you. They have to make up all sorts of nonsensical models of pre-dynastic hsitory to separate Egypt from the rest of the Nile Valley in order to promote racial fantasies...... That is the point. Technically Naqada/Nubt is your "B-Group" and the Pre-Kerma cattle culture extending from the 3rd cataract to Nabta Playa and Aswan was you 'A-Group', which included Ta-Seti (land of the bow... since Africans have been using bows and arrows since forever-before anybody else on the planet).
It is Petrie's "sequence dating system" for pottery that is the basis of the naming of the Egyptian predynastic periods. And Reisner followed after Petrie and created his "Nubian" dating system. Both of them believed in racial hierarchies in the ancient Nile Valley.
The method used by Petrie for dating the Naqada Period pottery was first described in Petrie 1901: 4-8 and later again in Petrie 1920: 3-4. For a detailed description see there. See a table of pottery arranged according to the Sequence Dates.
1. Petrie divided the pottery into nine different types/classes
2. Petrie took the wavy-handled pottery as guide line. He recognised gradual change from globular to narrow cylindrical types. The globular are the older while the cylindrical are the later types which he found in the royal tombs of the First Dynasty in Abydos.
quote: [QUOTE] Abstract The Naqada relative chronology form s the main cultural framework for the Predynastic period of ancient Egypt. It was devised in the late nineteenth century by Flinders Petrie to facilitate understanding of the prehistoric origins of the Egyptian state . Petrie’s approach served as the blueprint for similar system s across the world and formed the basis for the development of s eriation. In this study, we test the reliability of t he Naqada relative chronology as a dating tool against all the relevant radiocarbon information . The results show that the main blocks of the relative sequence do form a true chronology , but also indicate that the system is much less reliable at the level of individual phases. The nature of the discrepancies and the influence of the relative chronology on current understanding of Early Egypt are discussed.
Introduction The first relative chronology based on the sequencing of ar tefacts was developed for the Predynastic period of ancient Egypt . The brainchild of Flinders Petrie , Sequence Dating ( Petrie 1899) was an innovative response to the absence of clear stratigraphy at many of the key sites . The relative chronology soon became the main c ultural framework for the Predynastic – the crucial period of time that demarcates the emergence of the Egypt state. Moreover, Petrie’s methodology was a breakthrough for empirical archaeology and laid the groundwork for techniques such as seriation and artefact -- b ased cladistics ( Ford and Willey 1949; Brainerd 1951; O’Brien and Lyman 2000).
Petrie conceived his method whilst analysing the ceramic assemblages of the Upper Egyptian cemeteries of Naqada, Ballas and Diospolis Parva (Petrie and Quibell 1896; Petrie 189 9). He began by defining more than 700 types of funerary ceramics and then divid ing t he full corpus int o 9 main classes , largely on the basis of morphology and finish, but also on material composition ( Petrie and Quibell 1896) . He then focused his attention on the 900 + excavated tombs that contained 5 or more types of pottery . Petrie listed the types found in each grave on strips of card and then set about arranging them in order to minimise variation between adjacent cards . He d efined such variation using qualitative terms like ‘ proportionate resemblance ’ and ‘ similarity of style ’. His intention was to construct a continuum that show ed incremental change in pottery styles over time. In addition, Petrie also looked for chronological information within individual ceramic classes , deducing that s ome types showed a ‘ degradation of form ’ with the passage of time . The archetypical example was the W -- ware ( Wavy -- handled pots) . Petrie interpreted this class as having d evelop ed from globular shape s with wavy handles to cylindrical forms embellished with wavy decorations (Petrie 1899) . S uch assumptions were , however, highly informed by the evolutionary gradualism prevalent within the academic milieu of late 19 th century Britain (see Lane Fox 1870; 1875 ; Tylor 1871). D ue to the subsequent hegemony of Petrie’s chronology , such assumptions have had unintended consequences for the study of Early Egypt. One of the most persistent has been the view that the trajectory of Egyptian state form ation mirrored the linear and incremental progression of the ceramic sequences. Much effort has been made over recent decades to explain how misleading this interpretation has been and how poorly matched it is to the archaeological evidence (Friedman 1994; Wengrow 2006; Dee et al . 2013).
Note that Petrie's writings on the discoveries at Naqada and Ballas are overtly and blatantly racist.
quote: The arrangement of this volume is determined by the occurrence in Mr. Quibell's ground of the most decisive evidence as to the date of the foreign remains of a hitherto unsuspected invasion ; as this forms the ground-work of our historical view of the results, it comes first in this volume, in chapters I to V. After his description of the produce of his work in the purely Egyptian remains (ch. I, II), and next in those of the new race of foreigners (ch. III~V), there follows the account of the results of my own work on this same New Race (ch. VI-IX), Mr. Spurrell's account of the flints (ch. X), the historical con- clusions (ch. XI), and lastly, the description of the temple of Nubt (ch. XII), the centre of the worship of Set.
The presence of a body of invaders in Upper Egypt, which was as yet unknown, required us to coin some phrase to distinguish them in brief use, until their position and connection may be established, so that they may be really named descriptively. As the favourite German phrase of nescience, x, is rather confusing if too generally applied, when every imaginable thing gets j^d, we have used as a tentative denomination, the "New Race." When they acquire a fixed standing, and may have a specific title, this temporary phrase may fall away. Meanwhile "New Race," or N. R. remains, mean those which belong exclusively to certain invaders of Egypt of the type here described, which is entirely different to any known among native Egyptians.
So Petrie's "new race" in Naqada/Nubt is the first punch, followed by Reisner's "Nubia" (as separate from "Nubt"/Naqada) and then continued by other scholars upholding the conventions of the other two. These people are the founding fathers of Egyptology and explicitly it is based on racism and a framework of basing AE history on race and a model of white skin superiority and racism in pre-history, which is taught to every student studying Egyptology to this day.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Nile Valley Blackout. From 18th century anthropology/Egyptology through 2018 genetics. Same beat.
Because they build upon what their generations founded.
Meanwhile Blacks reject their generations' foundation as inferior.
Reisner & Junker almost make me appreciate Weigall outright calling Piye, Petisis, and Pehorus, a nigger.
After Volney's glowing description angered USA enslavers, black Egypt/Nubia had to be shutdown. Some Nubia&race quotes from 1784 to 1954 (link).
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: A new analysis interpreting Nilotic relationships and peopling of the Nile Valley – K Godde July 2018
Abstract The process of the peopling of the Nile Valley likely shaped the population structure and early biological similarity of Egyptians and Nubians. As others have noted, affinity among Nilotic populations was due to an aggregation of events, including environmental, linguistic, and sociopolitical changes over a great deal of time. This study seeks to evaluate the relationships of Nubian and Egyptian groups in the context of the original peopling event. Cranial nonmetric traits from 18 Nubian and Egyptian samples, spanning Lower Egypt to Lower Nubia and approximately 7400 years, were analyzed using Mahalanobis D2 as a measure of biological distance. A principal coordinates analysis and spatial-temporal model were applied to these data. The results reveal temporal and spatial patterning consistent with documented events in Egyptian and Nubian population history. Moreover, the Mesolithic Nubian sample clustered with later Nubian and Egyptian samples, indicating that events prior to the Mesolithic were important in shaping the later genetic patterning of the Nubian population. Later contact through the establishment of the Egyptian fort at Buhen, Kerma’s position as a strategic trade center along the Nile, and Egyptian colonization at Tombos **maintained **genetic similarity among the populations.
Wow, I haven’t seen this new work yet. Very exciting.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Speaking of Nubt, I notice that they are now using the term to refer to the Eastern Desert regions of Egypt outside of the Nile Valley. Same contradictory logic however....
quote: The Eastern Desert of Egypt and Sudan, linking the Nile to the Red Sea, has been of strategic importance for the great cultures ruling in the region, like the ancient Egyptian and later Ptolemaic kingdoms and the Roman empires. These deserts areas are rich in mineral resources, including gold, and were also essential for trade routes linking North Africa to the East. While these cultures largely were centered on the Nile valley, access to the desert areas with valuable resources and important trade routes was controlled by the indigenous desert tribes. Due to the largely nomadic lifestyle of these indigenous peoples there are few historic monuments witnessing their historic presence and their material culture in this region is not well known. However, some sites exist and Nubt is one of the most remarkable indigenous sites in the area. The site has, however, never been excavated or even properly mapped. In light of the present gold digging and plundering taking place in its environs, it is urgent that the structures there be documented.
In the presentation I will present our recent trip to Nubt were we mapped the site with RPAS (drone) technology.
Here is a book referencing the new location of "Nubt" in the Eastern Desert. THey present the "Eastern Desert" as some "foreign territory" even though it is within 100 miles of Aswan in Upper Egypt. Again, downplaying and ignoring that the gold mines of Lower Sudan and Upper Egypt is what drove the rise of the local indigenous populations and the rise of the dynastic culture. Not to mention they completely try and separate the populations who lived in the regions with the gold from the Nile Valley proper as if to say the indigenous populations who lived with the gold somehow weren't the same people and part of the same populations who lived in the Nile Valley proper and developed the culture there. Such is the nature of their illogical science. It is no different from using pottery to claim racial distinctions between ancient populations. The "golden culture" of Ancient Egypt was a local and indigenous product of populations from Lower Egypt and Sudan. No other group came in and suddenly created this culture separate from the indigenous people of the region. In fact the only true "egyptian" culture is "nubian" culture which originates in the "gold based" culture of lower Sudan and Upper Egypt, which was the foundation of KMT proper, just like Nubt/Ombos/Naqada as the center of the predynastic. And this is just one more line of evidence on top of the pottery, the gods, the other aspects of material culture and everything else.
posted
------------------ Genetic variation and population structure of Sudanese populations as indicated by 15 Identifiler sequence-tagged repeat (STR) loci
Background There is substantial ethnic, cultural and linguistic diversity among the people living in east Africa, Sudan and the Nile Valley. The region around the Nile Valley has a long history of succession of different groups, coupled with demographic and migration events, potentially leading to genetic structure among humans in the region.
Result We report the genotypes of the 15 Identifiler microsatellite markers for 498 individuals from 18 Sudanese populations representing different ethnic and linguistic groups. The combined power of exclusion (PE) was 0.9999981, and the combined match probability was 1 in 7.4 × 1017. The genotype data from the Sudanese populations was combined with previously published genotype data from Egypt, Somalia and the Karamoja population from Uganda. The Somali population was found to be genetically distinct from the other northeast African populations. Individuals from northern Sudan clustered together with those from Egypt, and individuals from southern Sudan clustered with those from the Karamoja population. The *SIMILARITY* of the Nubian and Egyptian populations suggest that migration, **potentially bidirectional**, occurred along the Nile river Valley, which is consistent with the historical evidence for long-term interactions between Egypt and Nubia.
Conclusion We show that despite the levels of population structure in Sudan, standard forensic summary statistics are robust tools for personal identification and parentage analysis in Sudan. Although some patterns of population structure can be revealed with 15 microsatellites, a much larger set of genetic markers is needed to detect fine-scale population structure in east Africa and the Nile Valley. --------------
What are they telling us? That it is hard to distinguish Nubians from Egyptians and other East Africans …using few forensic STRs (ie CODIS). But it is easy to distinguish Europeans from East Africans
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: The area known today as Sudan may have been the scene of pivotal human evolutionary events, both as a corridor for ancient and modern migrations, as well as the venue of crucial past cultural evolution. Several questions pertaining to the pattern of succession of the different groups in early Sudan have been raised. To shed light on these aspects, ancient DNA (aDNA) and present DNA collection were made and studied using Y-chromosome markers for aDNA, and Y-chromosome and mtDNA markers for present DNA. Bone samples from different skeletal elements of burial sites from Neolithic, Meroitic, Post-Meroitic and Christian periods in Sudan were collected from Sudan National Museum. aDNA extraction was successful in 35 out of 76 samples, PCR was performed for sex determination using Amelogenin marker. Fourteen samples were females and 19 were males. To generate Y-chromosome specific haplogroups A-M13, B-M60, F-M89 and Y Alu Polymorphism (YAP) markers, which define the deep ancestral haplotypes in the phylogenetic tree of Y-chromosome were used. Haplogroups A-M13 was found at high frequencies among Neolithic samples. Haplogroup F-M89 and YAP appeared to be more frequent among Meroitic, Post-Meroitic and Christian periods. Haplogroup B-M60 was not observed in the sample analyzed.
This is sorta off-topic, but it's strange to me that Hassan 2009 was able to determine the Y-chromosomal haplogroups of all those ancient Sudanese samples, yet somehow it's never occurred to anyone since to analyze their autosomal affinity. For that matter, a lot of more recent aDNA papers (e.g. the infamous Abusir el-Meleq one) seemed to be authored by people who have trouble obtaining Y-chromosomal data from their samples. What's up with that?
posted
^ My questions exactly! Notice how they have long held Tut's genomic data in the Egyptian Council of Antiquities not to mention that of other royals of dynastic times, but they were quick to publish the findings of these late period post-dynastic mummies. And even Hassan was able to publish the results of neolithic samples but where are those from Egypt?? If there truly is a Max Planck conspiracy then all the above described is it!
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Nubia is a vast region. At any period in time various peoples inhabited it. Calling them Nubians? What is similarly nefarious, to me? Calling the inhabitants of Europe Europeans, be they Hungarian or Irish.
Junker removed Nubians from the black peoples of Africa. link
Terms I have problems with? A group and C group for Nile Valley Lower Nubians. Predynastic: Why still call Ta Seti A group? OK thru NK: Why still call Wawat C group? Preference for Reisner over that of prime documents I suppose.
If it weren't for the Christian era on up to now, Kush would be the best replacement for Nubia. It's perfect for times before Nubae came into use courtesy of Erastothenes during the Ptolemaic, 2nd cent BCE. Since then, and the times Red&Black Noba come on the scene and Axum axed 'Meroe', Nubia becomes more appropriate than Kush.
Ta Seti _______________________________________ Wawat (in yellow and green)
Agreed. There are plenty of more historically accurate terms to use over the course of the history of the Nile Valley than just using "Nubia". By that logic, why not call everything along the Nile above Aswan (or below if you prefer) Egypt no matter the time period? They don't do this anywhere else in the world but they do it in "Nubia". 3,000 years ago nobody calls the populations in the area of modern France "French", because it didn't exist as a cultural or political entity. Same thing should apply to so-called "Nubia". More accurate terms like ancient Kerma, Khartoum Mesolithic, Nabta Playa, Kush, Meroe make a lot more sense.
I am not personally talking about the word "Nubian" as in and of itself being bad. The point I am making is that the usage of the term 'Nubia' going back into the prehistory of the Nile Valley prior to and during the rise of the predynastic is purely designed to segregate the Nile Valley into "black" nubia and "white" Egypt. This is precisely about Egyptology and Egyptology only. And that Egyptological use of the term has nothing to do with the actual biological relationships of populations in the Nile Valley during the thousands of years leading up to the rise of KMT. Reisner's naming of "Nubian" prehistory is based on pottery styles and not on human remains. Later anthropologists added remains to the mix but still maintaining Reisner's naming convention and maintaining the underlying assumption that these populations were "racially" different from the populations in PreDynastic Egypt.
Hence, to the point of the thread there is rarely any actual biological or anthropological assessment done of any of these ancient "Nubian" remains by Egyptology. As far as they are concerned, "Nubia" is the only black history on the Nile Valley. Therefore, no DNA needs to be analyzed and no cranial relationships need to be plotted.....
The only reason modern anthropologists consider ancient "Nubians" to be racially distinct from Egyptians is because of Egyptology. As far as mainstream Egyptology is concerned ancient Egypt was a result of Eurasian migration which created a racial identity in Egypt separate from the rest of "black" Africa represented by "Nubia". Hence, the DNA from Abusir will remain the defacto representation for all AE populations for many years, not because other mummies aren't available and not because the science isn't capable of extracting DNA from other remains. It is because Egyptology was founded on racism and promoting that vision of the Nile Valley. Hence it isn't shocking that actual DNA from across the Nile Valley between Lower Sudan and Upper Egypt from the far distant past would show these populations were not racially distinct. That is common sense. But Egyptology was founded on contradicting common sense and logic.
The Book "Daily Life of the Nubians" promotes this nonsense about "Nubia" being a continuous ethno-political-cultural entity along the Nile going back to pre-history. That is absolute garbage and only exists to segregate "black" Nile Valley history from "Egyptian" Nile Valley history.
He even says:
quote: It is interesting to note that in this context no royal gifts have been excavated in Pre-Kerma culture cemeteries, the graves of which in fact, contain almost genuine Egyptian artifacts. This marked absence of egyptian objects in the material remains of Pre-Kerma culture strongly reinforces the suggestion that the Egyptians were dealing directly and exclusively with their mercantile relations with their A-Group Nubian counterparts. Lower Nubia emerges during this period as a buffer zone between Egypt proper and the regions of Africa further to the South.
In other words a buffer between "white" Egypt and "black" Africa. The problem with this statement is it is blantantly nonsense. First, pre-kerma existed from the 4th Millenium BC. In other words prior to the rise of KMT, so there couln't have been any trade from "Egypt". In fact, Pre-Kerma was the cultural center of the Nile Valley and the traditions of pottery and other cultural traits spread there to the North. On top of that, as previously noted, the primary gold mines in that part of the Nile Valley from which Egypt got its gold were local and around Aswan. They didn't need "Nubian buffers" to trade with other black Africans to the South. Ta-Seti rose to power from the gold trade and eventually formed part of the predynastic Egyptian state, which is why Ta-Seti is the first nome of Upper Egypt. This is the part they don't want to admit and this is what this fake "Nubian" complex is designed to cover up. Because again "Nubt" was the center of the gold trade in predynastic Egypt, which means the populations of Ta-Seti were trading with and forming larger political structures with other populations along the Nile as the basis for what they call the "Naqada" period.
quote: Evidence indicates that during the Neolithic phase, from the sixth to the fourth millennia BC, a population settled the fertile Dongola Reach and began practicing agriculture and domesticating animals.1 Archeological excavations in the region have yielded some of the earliest evidence for the practice of agriculture and animal husbandry in the world. The Dongola population has consequently come to play a role in the spread of agriculture to the Near East and other parts of Africa.
As early as the fifth or mid-fourth millennia BC, the Dongola Reach has been the center of culture and civilization in Sudan, particularly along the Nile Valley. The pre-Kerma society, named after the area of Kerma in the Dongola Reach, forms one of the oldest civilized cultures in the world beside that of Egypt and Mesopotamia.
The predominantly agro-pastoral community of pre-Kerma was a center of commerce; pottery included imports from different areas of the Nile, including Egypt.2 By 3000 BC, the area was transformed into a thriving town with an organized urban infrastructure. Governed by a centralized authority, pre-Kerma was a fully developed polity. The town was highly organized; politically, economically, and socially.
Particularly interesting was the layout of the town, which indicates an advanced level of planning and an elaborate defense system. A variety of utilitarian and public buildings were found within the area. A number of buildings with post holes appear to have functioned as centers of administration. Numerous huts seem to have been residences for privileged individuals. Other structures defined include storage houses, workshops, and cattle enclosures.
And again, this is all about pottery styles and even before Reisner, Petrie was using pottery to identify "races" as in a "new race" of invaders to Egypt that supposedly created the culture there.... Again, black topped pottery originated in Pre-Kerma and Nabta Playa. But to hear them tell it, it came from somewhere outside the Nile Valley.
quote: garage in Cornwall, UK, seems an unlikely place for a piece of prehistoric Egyptian culture to turn up. But a few months ago it did.
I was recently contacted by a couple, Guy Funnell and Amanda Hawkins, who had just watched the BBC documentary The Man Who Discovered Egypt which profiled the career of Flinders Petrie. The name rang a bell and reminded them of a little broken pot they had tucked away in storage. Associated with it was a yellow, curling label bearing the title ‘Libyan Pottery’
The vase this note relates to is not something we would call ‘Libyan Pottery’ today. Nowadays we can recognise it as distinctly Egyptian and characteristically Predynastic.
It is a classic example of what Petrie called ‘Black-topped pottery’ or ‘B-ware’. His excavations at the huge cemetery of Naqada had revealed hundreds of such vessels, which were so striking that he first described them as ‘wholly un-Egyptian’. Instead, Petrie thought that these things belonged to a ‘New Race’, possibly invaders from Libya.
Naqada pottery is truly "Nubian" pottery as it comes from the town of "Nubt", the gold trading town that was the center of pre-dynastic culture. And of course that gold came from between Aswan and the second cataract, which means trade between black African cultures in and around "Nubt" and the black cultures around the 1st and second cataract. This power and wealth would have attracted traders and settlers from across the Nile Valley and that wealth and population density and cultural solidification created the conditions for the rise of Upper Egyptian elites who had the power and organization to unify the country. But this is what they won't tell you. They have to make up all sorts of nonsensical models of pre-dynastic hsitory to separate Egypt from the rest of the Nile Valley in order to promote racial fantasies...... That is the point. Technically Naqada/Nubt is your "B-Group" and the Pre-Kerma cattle culture extending from the 3rd cataract to Nabta Playa and Aswan was you 'A-Group', which included Ta-Seti (land of the bow... since Africans have been using bows and arrows since forever-before anybody else on the planet).
It is Petrie's "sequence dating system" for pottery that is the basis of the naming of the Egyptian predynastic periods. And Reisner followed after Petrie and created his "Nubian" dating system. Both of them believed in racial hierarchies in the ancient Nile Valley.
The method used by Petrie for dating the Naqada Period pottery was first described in Petrie 1901: 4-8 and later again in Petrie 1920: 3-4. For a detailed description see there. See a table of pottery arranged according to the Sequence Dates.
1. Petrie divided the pottery into nine different types/classes
2. Petrie took the wavy-handled pottery as guide line. He recognised gradual change from globular to narrow cylindrical types. The globular are the older while the cylindrical are the later types which he found in the royal tombs of the First Dynasty in Abydos.
quote: [QUOTE] Abstract The Naqada relative chronology form s the main cultural framework for the Predynastic period of ancient Egypt. It was devised in the late nineteenth century by Flinders Petrie to facilitate understanding of the prehistoric origins of the Egyptian state . Petrie’s approach served as the blueprint for similar system s across the world and formed the basis for the development of s eriation. In this study, we test the reliability of t he Naqada relative chronology as a dating tool against all the relevant radiocarbon information . The results show that the main blocks of the relative sequence do form a true chronology , but also indicate that the system is much less reliable at the level of individual phases. The nature of the discrepancies and the influence of the relative chronology on current understanding of Early Egypt are discussed.
Introduction The first relative chronology based on the sequencing of ar tefacts was developed for the Predynastic period of ancient Egypt . The brainchild of Flinders Petrie , Sequence Dating ( Petrie 1899) was an innovative response to the absence of clear stratigraphy at many of the key sites . The relative chronology soon became the main c ultural framework for the Predynastic – the crucial period of time that demarcates the emergence of the Egypt state. Moreover, Petrie’s methodology was a breakthrough for empirical archaeology and laid the groundwork for techniques such as seriation and artefact -- b ased cladistics ( Ford and Willey 1949; Brainerd 1951; O’Brien and Lyman 2000).
Petrie conceived his method whilst analysing the ceramic assemblages of the Upper Egyptian cemeteries of Naqada, Ballas and Diospolis Parva (Petrie and Quibell 1896; Petrie 189 9). He began by defining more than 700 types of funerary ceramics and then divid ing t he full corpus int o 9 main classes , largely on the basis of morphology and finish, but also on material composition ( Petrie and Quibell 1896) . He then focused his attention on the 900 + excavated tombs that contained 5 or more types of pottery . Petrie listed the types found in each grave on strips of card and then set about arranging them in order to minimise variation between adjacent cards . He d efined such variation using qualitative terms like ‘ proportionate resemblance ’ and ‘ similarity of style ’. His intention was to construct a continuum that show ed incremental change in pottery styles over time. In addition, Petrie also looked for chronological information within individual ceramic classes , deducing that s ome types showed a ‘ degradation of form ’ with the passage of time . The archetypical example was the W -- ware ( Wavy -- handled pots) . Petrie interpreted this class as having d evelop ed from globular shape s with wavy handles to cylindrical forms embellished with wavy decorations (Petrie 1899) . S uch assumptions were , however, highly informed by the evolutionary gradualism prevalent within the academic milieu of late 19 th century Britain (see Lane Fox 1870; 1875 ; Tylor 1871). D ue to the subsequent hegemony of Petrie’s chronology , such assumptions have had unintended consequences for the study of Early Egypt. One of the most persistent has been the view that the trajectory of Egyptian state form ation mirrored the linear and incremental progression of the ceramic sequences. Much effort has been made over recent decades to explain how misleading this interpretation has been and how poorly matched it is to the archaeological evidence (Friedman 1994; Wengrow 2006; Dee et al . 2013).
Note that Petrie's writings on the discoveries at Naqada and Ballas are overtly and blatantly racist.
quote: The arrangement of this volume is determined by the occurrence in Mr. Quibell's ground of the most decisive evidence as to the date of the foreign remains of a hitherto unsuspected invasion ; as this forms the ground-work of our historical view of the results, it comes first in this volume, in chapters I to V. After his description of the produce of his work in the purely Egyptian remains (ch. I, II), and next in those of the new race of foreigners (ch. III~V), there follows the account of the results of my own work on this same New Race (ch. VI-IX), Mr. Spurrell's account of the flints (ch. X), the historical con- clusions (ch. XI), and lastly, the description of the temple of Nubt (ch. XII), the centre of the worship of Set.
The presence of a body of invaders in Upper Egypt, which was as yet unknown, required us to coin some phrase to distinguish them in brief use, until their position and connection may be established, so that they may be really named descriptively. As the favourite German phrase of nescience, x, is rather confusing if too generally applied, when every imaginable thing gets j^d, we have used as a tentative denomination, the "New Race." When they acquire a fixed standing, and may have a specific title, this temporary phrase may fall away. Meanwhile "New Race," or N. R. remains, mean those which belong exclusively to certain invaders of Egypt of the type here described, which is entirely different to any known among native Egyptians.
So Petrie's "new race" in Naqada/Nubt is the first punch, followed by Reisner's "Nubia" (as separate from "Nubt"/Naqada) and then continued by other scholars upholding the conventions of the other two. These people are the founding fathers of Egyptology and explicitly it is based on racism and a framework of basing AE history on race and a model of white skin superiority and racism in pre-history, which is taught to every student studying Egyptology to this day.
posted
Doug M said it best. Naqada is the real Nubia in disguise. This is why Egyptologists do not use the term Nubt but prefer Naqada because it contradicts their usage of Nubia as a synonym for Kush.
Posts: 371 | From: Queens,NY | Registered: Feb 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
The bottom line is that the Egyptologists never "lost" Nubia. They made it up. The bible talks about Kush, not Nubia because there was no "Nubia" i the ancient world at that time.
Egyptologists are now trying to say that they want to "correct the historical reocrd" on Nubia as proof that ancient Africans were able to build civilization. However, the problem with that statement is that it implies that Ancient KMT was NOT African civilization..... So this is still the same old same and even Keita is going along with it and soft shoeing around the fact that ancient Egypt was just as black.
quote: “The museum was paying Reisner to be there and spending lots and lots of money. So he wanted to find things he could bring back and put in the museum,” Doxey said. “But he was also a scholar. And in some ways, it was a symbiotic relationship that the museum wanted him to bring back artwork."
The story of ancient Nubia and ancient Egypt is one of two neighboring kingdoms who fought, but intermingled. Over time they shared beliefs, craftsmanship, and culture. Throughout the galleries, among the artifacts, are videos of different people reflecting on the modern day legacy of ancient Nubia and how it resonates.
In one video, biological anthropologist Shomarka Keita, research affiliate in the Department of Anthropology at the Smithsonian Institution, talks to the issue of race and what he calls a deep shared ancestry of these societies in the Sahara.
"Ancient Nubia and Ancient Egypt share roots, in northeast Africa in the Sahara and along the Nile Valley," Keita said. "There is no evidence that the ancient Egyptians who did medicine, who made observations and sometimes detailed artwork about the environment around them, animals, plants, there is no evidence that they had a theory of human variation that would be commensurate or similar to notions of race as they were developed in Europe."
In another video, Lana Bashir, a student at University of Massachusetts Lowell, gives insight into her own Sudanese heritage and the importance of representation.
"When I look at the statues it gives me this new perspective that you don't always get to see," Bashir said. "...It's rare that you get to see that Africa is full of kings and queens and art and culture."
Notice how they outright omit the fact that the earliest steps toward agriculture, along with the earliest pottery and rock art are all found in the "Nubian" areas of Egypt. In any other part of the world they would say that civilization developed along river valleys as cultures evolved and developed more sophistic forms of social organization. But these clowns want to claim that the civilization of KMT just sprang forth fully developed out of nowhere separate from all the far more ancient cultures in the South that birthed it....
I have to chuckle every time I see these new mummy reconstructions because it is so blatantly obviously fake propaganda....
quote: The reconstructed head, as well as the hair of Idu II. of ancient Egypt at the Roemer- and Pelizaeus museum in Hildesheim, Germany, 24 January 2017. The head and hair from the year 2200 B.C. were created on the foundation of a digital face reconstruction of the once high officer. The mummy of Idu II. lying in the front is one of very few mummies preserved of the Old Kingdom.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: The bottom line is that the Egyptologists never "lost" Nubia. They made it up. The bible talks about Kush, not Nubia because there was no "Nubia" i the ancient world at that time.
Egyptologists are now trying to say that they want to "correct the historical reocrd" on Nubia as proof that ancient Africans were able to build civilization. However, the problem with that statement is that it implies that Ancient KMT was NOT African civilization..... So this is still the same old same and even Keita is going along with it and soft shoeing around the fact that ancient Egypt was just as black.
"Ancient Nubia and Ancient Egypt share roots, in northeast Africa in the Sahara and along the Nile Valley," Keita said. "There is no evidence that the ancient Egyptians who did medicine, who made observations and sometimes detailed artwork about the environment around them, animals, plants, there is no evidence that they had a theory of human variation that would be commensurate or similar to notions of race as they were developed in Europe."
In another video, Lana Bashir, a student at University of Massachusetts Lowell, gives insight into her own Sudanese heritage and the importance of representation.
"When I look at the statues it gives me this new perspective that you don't always get to see," Bashir said. "...It's rare that you get to see that Africa is full of kings and queens and art and culture."
Notice how they outright omit the fact that the earliest steps toward agriculture, along with the earliest pottery and rock art are all found in the "Nubian" areas of Egypt. In any other part of the world they would say that civilization developed along river valleys as cultures evolved and developed more sophistic forms of social organization. But these clowns want to claim that the civilization of KMT just sprang forth fully developed out of nowhere separate from all the far more ancient cultures in the South that birthed it.... .
Why did the Nubian Youth Forum in Egypt get angry?
11/9/2018, 7:53:39 AM
The "Encounter Point" at the World Youth Forum in Sharm el-Sheikh raised the anger of the Nubians in Egypt.
The Nubians / Nubia tribes live on the banks of the Nile River in the north of the Sudan and the southernmost of Egypt for thousands of years.
The Nubians were angry because of the sixth minute of the film, which included a recording of a Nubian family saying "We are Nubians Jain (coming) from Sudan and settled in Aswan Governorate (southern Egypt)."
About 70 public figures have announced their rejection of the Nubia part of the film "Encounter Point" and have asked the forum's organizing committee to apologize for what they considered a "serious mistake" and to delete the scenes from the film.
The websites have been filled with dozens of angry tweets, including a chant to Abdurrahman Al-Omda, who wrote: "Public falsification of the facts in a snapshot of a film presented at the Young People's Congress. We do not write history, history writes us, we are the Nubians and we are still people of language, "No one is able to obliterate our identity, it is not our pride, but history always attests to us."
"The borders of Nubia from the first waterfall to the sixth waterfall, and it was an independent kingdom before the Egyptian civilization for more than 23,000 years, we are not Egyptians and we are not refugees," said Abdullah Sayed.
So the point of view is stated in the last sentence in the above paragraph. He says we (Nubians)are not Egyptians but also not migrants to Egypt, not "refugees" he says Some other Nubians interviewed for the film had said they were from only from Sudan. But this angered other Nubians who said while they were not Egyptians culturally but they were an independent people whose land also included not only along the river in Northern Sudan but also in southern Egypt.
The remark pertains to their ancient land rights that overlaps parts of two nations not culturally identifying as Egyptian.
He said " "The borders of Nubia from the first waterfall to the sixth waterfall, and it was an independent kingdom before the Egyptian civilization.
________________________
"waterfall"
Although the word “cataracts” is derived from the Greek word for “waterfall,” the region is not, in fact, made up of waterfalls, although there are true ones along the route of the Nile.
He was referencing the six cataracts between Khartoum and Aswan, "Nubia"
what they didn't like was someone who did not include the Egyptian geographical parts along with the parts in Sudan because they want their land rights there also
_________________________________________
These are my questions for Doug
1) Modern people in Egypt call themselves Nubian should they stop calling themselves Nubian? If not what should people in southern Egypt who call themselves Nubian call themselves ethnically? I'm not talking national citizenship. They could drop "Nubian", say they are Egyptian nationals and ethnically are of various Nubian language groups, Nobiin, Kenzi, Midrab etc
2) According to the above opinion of a person in Egypt who calls himself Nubian he thinks he is part of a people independent of ancient Egypt with their own language and culture but have lived for many thousand of years on land that includes part of Sudan and part of Egypt and Nubians living in these areas have national rights as per which of these two countries they live in. Is this entirely correct or are the modern people who call themselves Nubians actually decedents of the the dynastic Egyptians?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Exactly and this is why Egyptologists do not use the term Kush because they want to take Nubt out of Egypt and make it a synonym. This is my only issue with the term Nubian. If it’s being used in its proper historical context to refer to The City of Nubt then it’s fine. However it becomes problematic if it’s being used as a Synonym for Kush. This is all done intentionally to Rob The Nubians of their true Indigenous Egyptian Heritage. Sadly many Nubians have bought into this lie and are now claiming the history of Kush which belongs to The Dinka/Nuer.
Posts: 371 | From: Queens,NY | Registered: Feb 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ you and Doug are not on the same page. You make a new thread each day with the word "Nubian" in it and he thinks the word Nubian is a colonizer's word and should not be used and he's been saying that for years.
As for modern people self identifying as Nubian who say that their origin is one of the cities of Nubt in particular you have not shown evidence of any of them saying that
As for references to the people of Nubt being mentioned in Egyptian texts you have not provided any
Doug also does not subscribe to your idea which is to change the modern use of "Nubian" to mean "people originating in Nubt"
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Pepi I's reign was marked by aggressive expansion into Nubia, the spread of trade to far-flung areas such as Lebanon and the Somali coast, but also the growing power of the nobility. One of the king's officials named Weni fought in Asia on his behalf. Pepi I married two sisters – Ankhesenpepi I and II – who were the daughters of Khui, a noble from Abydos and Lady Nebet, made vizier of Upper Egypt. Pepi later made their brother, Djau, a vizier as well. The two sisters' influence was extensive, with both sisters bearing sons who were later to become pharaohs.
Lifesize copper statue, Pepi I, Cairo Museum
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Me and him don’t have to agree. I’ve already proven The Nubians to be Indigenous to Egypt so them being from Nubt cannot be disputed. Just because you see some of them saying otherwise means nothing. They are the ruling class in Sudan so it’s beneficial for them to Identify with Kushite history because the quality of life is better for them there. However none of this changes the fact that they are Egyptians. They are capable of spreading misinformation about themselves just like any other people would to fit their needs.
Posts: 371 | From: Queens,NY | Registered: Feb 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
The notion that Egypt was made up of only one ethnic group/Tribe is nonsensical. Every country in Africa has multiple groups yet people actually believe that only one tribe existed in Egypt? Though I maintain that The Nubians are the people of Nubt. I have never denied that there were Cushitic speakers apart of Egypt as well. We know for a fact that The Beja(Medjay) played an important role and we can also identify certain Egyptians as Afar due to their head butter cone grooming practice.
Posts: 371 | From: Queens,NY | Registered: Feb 2020
| IP: Logged |
Pepi I's reign was marked by aggressive expansion into Nubia, the spread of trade to far-flung areas such as Lebanon and the Somali coast, but also the growing power of the nobility. One of the king's officials named Weni fought in Asia on his behalf. Pepi I married two sisters – Ankhesenpepi I and II – who were the daughters of Khui, a noble from Abydos and Lady Nebet, made vizier of Upper Egypt. Pepi later made their brother, Djau, a vizier as well. The two sisters' influence was extensive, with both sisters bearing sons who were later to become pharaohs.
Lifesize copper statue, Pepi I, Cairo Museum
Interesting, Pepinakht (ppjj-nḫt - "[King] Pepi is strong"[1]).
Statue of Pepi I (2289-2255 BC) detail of the head, found at Hierakonpolis - Egyptian
Tomb of Pepi-nakht Tomb #35 Aswan
Inside the main chamber of the Tomb, chamber 35d
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- "Nothing hurts a racist more than the absolute truth and a punch to the face" Posts: 101 | From: United States | Registered: Aug 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: In my mind, the only true "Nubians" are the speakers of Nubian languages, such as the Nobatae, Makurians, or modern Nubians. And these would have become more prominent in the Middle Nile region after the collapse of Kush in the 4th century AD:
It's possible that the Kushite language shared a common Nilo-Saharan linguistic heritage with the Nubian family, but otherwise I believe the people of Kush were a separate ethnic group from the ancestors of modern Nubians. The people of Wawat (aka the C-Group), Medjay, Yam, and maybe Ta-Seti (aka the A-Group) likewise were their own nationalities. And yet they all get lumped into the "Nubian" identity simply because they inhabited the Middle Nile Valley.
Here is some talk about it.
quote:
By the way do you consider the noba(nubians)of today ethnically the same as the kushites/kerma nubians?or a mostly different civilization from kush even if the noba interrmarried with kushites and got alot of influence from them?
quote: Doctor winters for example always go on to say they are basically a different ethnic group and civililzation.
For example some could say the kushites and noba are sub-ethnic groups that belong to the ethnic group called Nehesy and stll teh same civilzation like ancent rome and italy of the middle ages andmodern times or ancient greece and modern greece and macedonians.
posted
^ Until the Kushite language, or at least Meroitic is translated we can't be certain as to whether the Kushites were Afrisian speakers or Nilo-Saharan speakers. I've heard pretty good arguments for each language phylum.
What is interesting is that both metrically and non-metrically Kerman era Kushites group very close to Naqada Egyptians. Make of that what you will but that doesn't necessarily mean they spoke closely related languages.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: The linguistic affiliation of the Kerma culture is currently unknown, and membership to both the Nilo-Saharan and Afro-Asiatic language families has been proposed.
According to Peter Behrens (1981) and Marianne Bechaus-Gerst (2000), linguistic evidence indicates that the Kerma peoples spoke Afroasiatic languages of the Cushitic branch. They propose that the Nilo-Saharan Nobiin language today contains a number of key pastoralism related loanwords that are of proto-Highland East Cushitic origin, including the terms for sheep/goatskin, hen/cock, livestock enclosure, butter and milk. They argue that this in turn suggests that the Kerma population — which, along with the C-Group Culture, inhabited the Nile Valley immediately before the arrival of the first Nubian speakers — spoke Afroasiatic languages.
Claude Rilly (2010, 2016) on the other hand, suggests that the Kerma peoples spoke Nilo-Saharan languages of the Eastern Sudanic branch, possibly ancestral to the later Meroitic language, which he also suggests was Nilo-Saharan. Rilly also criticizes proposals (by Behrens and Bechaus-Gerst) of significant early Afro-Asiatic influence on Nobiin, and considers evidence of substratal influence on Nobiin from an earlier now extinct Eastern Sudanic language to be stronger.
Julien Cooper (2017) also suggests that Nilo-Saharan languages of the Eastern Sudanic branch were spoken by the people of Kerma, as well as those further south along the Nile, to the west, and those of Saï (an island to the north of Kerma), but that Afro-Asiatic (most likely Cushitic) languages were spoken by other peoples in Lower Nubia (such as the Medjay and the C-Group culture) living in Nubian regions north of Saï toward Egypt and those southeast of the Nile in Punt in the Eastern dessert. Based partly on an analysis of the phonology of place names and personal names from the relevant regions preserved in ancient texts, he argues that the terms from "Kush" and "Irem" (ancient names for Kerma and the region south of it respectively) in Egyptian texts display traits typical of Eastern Sudanic languages, while those from further north (in Lower Nubia) and east are more typical of the Afro-Asiatic family, noting: "The Irem-list also provides a similar inventory to Kush, placing this firmly in an Eastern Sudanic zone. These Irem/Kush-lists are distinctive from the Wawat-, Medjay-, Punt-, and Wetenet-lists, which provide sounds typical to Afroasiatic languages."
Cooper (2017, 2020) suggests that an Eastern Sudanic language (perhaps early Meroitic) was spoken at Kerma by at least 1800 BC (the time from which toponymic evidence is available), whose arrival, and that of a new ethno-linguistic group, around that time may perhaps be indicated by a change in placenames for Upper Nubia used in Egyptian execration texts. However, Cooper also proposes that a similar Eastern Sudanic language may have been already spoken in Upper Nubia, both at Kerma and the Saï polity to its north, earlier (by Kerma Moyen, which began around 2050 BC), while north of Saï, in Lower Nubia, Cushitic languages were spoken and much later replaced by Meroitic. It is posited that early Meroitic spread, displacing Eastern Sudanic and Cushitic languages along the Nile."
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic