posted
My first exposure to Egyptian and Ancient Congo contact was in the comment section of a Youtube video that I currently can't remember. I didn't believe it at first, but when I researched ancient Egyptian trade routes, I found out that there was in fact trade between the ancient civilizations.
With this established, I remembered that E. Wallis Bulge proposed central Africa being a part of Punt, but mentioned Uganda instead of Congo. Either way this belief is supported by reports of a Twa(African Pygmy) being retrieved from Punt, which are an ethnic group of Africans native to Uganda.
However, since Pygmies are also native to the DRC and keeping this trade route in mind is it safe to say that Congo was part of Punt? I recall that trade with the Puntities continued during Thutmosis III's reign, and his cartouche being present in the Congo excavation acts as further evidence. That being said, what do you guys think?
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: Not necessarily. Not all trade is direct.
Could you elaborate further? The facts seem to line up, and there doesn't seem to be any significant barriers preventing direct trade between Egypt and the DRC.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: Not necessarily. Not all trade is direct.
Could you elaborate further? The facts seem to line up, and there doesn't seem to be any significant barriers preventing direct trade between Egypt and the DRC.
Meaning if the story is true, that doesn’t meant they traded directly with the Egyptians. They could’ve been trading with the people of Punt, or the trade items could have came from the Egyptians, to the Nubians, to this or that group until it landed in the Congo.
Posts: 44 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yea I agree with @Itoli. This doesn't mean anything. Its similar to Chinese bowls being found in Great Zimbabwe, it most likely came to Great Zimbabwe via Swahili traders from the coastal city states like Kilwa.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: Not necessarily. Not all trade is direct.
Could you elaborate further? The facts seem to line up, and there doesn't seem to be any significant barriers preventing direct trade between Egypt and the DRC.
Meaning if the story is true, that doesn’t meant they traded directly with the Egyptians. They could’ve been trading with the people of Punt, or the trade items could have came from the Egyptians, to the Nubians, to this or that group until it landed in the Congo.
That's fair. I'm curious on what you make of the evidence on Punt stretching to central Africa if Egyptian exploration had reached that far then it's reasonable to assume that their was direct trade between them and the Congonians.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
posted
You have to put it in its proper context. Early voyages to Punt actually sailed up the Nile through Lower Sudan. And if you keep on going South, you will get to Uganda. We don't know how far they went before going overland to Punt, but at some point, there was a war with the combined forces of Punt, Kush and others against the Nile valley kingdom, so they started sailing down the Red Sea coast to get to Punt. We do not know the exact geographic nature of Punt even though recent DNA analysis of mummified baboons puts it in the Horn of Africa. But there is no reason this area could not have been part of a larger trade network into central Africa. Keep in mind that Uganda, Congo and Southern Sudan all have ethnic groups that have historic relationships and all of them have the flora, fauna, stilt huts and other cultural attributes seen in the depictions of ancient Punt. So yes, this is basically the heart of Africa referred to as "gods land" by the people of Kmt.
quote: During the mid-2nd millennium BC, changes in the geo-political landscape of north-east Africa altered the dynamic nature of over-land and maritime exchange between Middle Kingdom Egypt (c. 2055–1650BC) and its southern neighbors. The emergence of the Kingdom of Kerma (ie ancient Kush) in the region of upper Nubia (northern Sudan) as a formidable competitor, altered the organization of overland trading routes which funneled valued commodities into the Nile valley civilizations from central Sudan and the Sudan-Eritea lowlands. This change prompted the Middle kingdom kings to expand their maritime trade in the red-sea in order to bypass Kerma.
The land of Punt first appears in ancient Egyptian texts during the reign of King Sahura (r 2487–2475BC, 5th dynasty, Old kingdom era), on a document called "The Palermo Stone" which records the king receiving goods from Punt that included myrrh and electrum.7 Records about the expeditions of the Old kingdom kings; Djedkara (r. 2414–2375BC) and Pepy II (r. 2278– 2247BC) into Upper Nubia (around the time of Kerma's emergence), also mention them receiving a "pygmy" among other “ gifts of the mining-region of Punt”. From the 25th century BC to the 11th century BC, ancient Egyptian trading expeditions acquired goods from Punt indirectly and later directly, that included; electrum, gold, panther skins, ebony, throw-sticks, ivory, myrrh, eye paint, apes and baboons. The importance of Punt’s luxuries in ancient Egyptian royal iconography and religion was such that it was also considered part of “god’s land”; a generalized location south and east of Egypt that also contained the lands of Irem and Amau 8
According to descriptions of Old Kingdom and Middle Kingdom trading expeditions to its southern neighbors, the land of Punt could be reached via an inland route via Upper Nubia as well as by a sea route, but by the time of Mentuhotep III around 1996BC, trading expeditions were no longer sent through Upper Nubia despite Egypt's expansion into lower Nubia. Possibly reflecting the formidable power of imperial Kerma, which at its height in the mid-2nd millennium Bc, would lead a major invasion deep into Egypt with a coalition of forces that included soldiers from Punt and many of Egypt's southern neighbors.
posted
Direct contact between ancient Nile civilizations and the Congo isn't impossible, but the sheer geographic distances involved make it seem more likely to me that those artifacts passed through many trading intermediaries to get from Egypt to equatorial and sub-equatorial Africa. Let's not forget that Africa is a big continent.
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: Not necessarily. Not all trade is direct.
Could you elaborate further? The facts seem to line up, and there doesn't seem to be any significant barriers preventing direct trade between Egypt and the DRC.
Meaning if the story is true, that doesn’t meant they traded directly with the Egyptians. They could’ve been trading with the people of Punt, or the trade items could have came from the Egyptians, to the Nubians, to this or that group until it landed in the Congo.
That's fair. I'm curious on what you make of the evidence on Punt stretching to central Africa if Egyptian exploration had reached that far then it's reasonable to assume that their was direct trade between them and the Congonians.
What evidence are you referring to? The pygmies? They hold the same dynamic as the purported artifact. Pygmies from Ancient Egypt were often referred to in terms of human cargo by Egyptians (isww) so they weren't necessarily taken from their place of origin in the same way many of the slaves during the TAST weren't necessarily taken from the coast. If Punt was part of a larger East/Central African trade network, then human cargo in that trade network would naturally be available to Egyptians when they made contact.
Posts: 44 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Direct contact between ancient Nile civilizations and the Congo isn't impossible, but the sheer geographic distances involved make it seem more likely to me that those artifacts passed through many trading intermediaries to get from Egypt to equatorial and sub-equatorial Africa. Let's not forget that Africa is a big continent.
Direct contact between Kush and the African interior is well established iirc, with Kush acting as an intermediary between the interior and Egypt. Also considering Egypt once ruled as far as Napata during Tutmose III's time, I'd say its more than reasonable that there was contact between Egypt and interior Africa even if sporadic.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Direct contact between ancient Nile civilizations and the Congo isn't impossible, but the sheer geographic distances involved make it seem more likely to me that those artifacts passed through many trading intermediaries to get from Egypt to equatorial and sub-equatorial Africa. Let's not forget that Africa is a big continent.
Direct contact between Kush and the African interior is well established iirc, with Kush acting as an intermediary between the interior and Egypt. Also considering Egypt once ruled as far as Napata during Tutmose III's time, I'd say its more than reasonable that there was contact between Egypt and interior Africa even if sporadic.
The question I see is whether Punt was part of the African interior. We know that the people of KMT traveled directly to Punt many times and not via intermediaries. The distance from Middle Egypt to Djibouti is somewhere around a 1,000 miles as a bechmark. While the distance from Djibouti to the modern border of Uganada is somewhat less than that. There is no reason why Punt itself wasn't part of an a trade network with the African interior.
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: [QB] My first exposure to Egyptian and Ancient Congo contact was in the comment section of a Youtube video that I currently can't remember. I didn't believe it at first, but when I researched ancient Egyptian trade routes, I found out that there was in fact trade between the ancient civilizations.
It's not established until you get to a primary source that documents the finding of a statuette of Osiris in Congo (then Zaire) and under what circumstances if this is true, the circumstances being highly relevant to determining, when such a statuette got there was it 20th century BC or was it 19th century AD ?
And is it true at all? Where is this statuette?
the first step is to see if there are any footnotes and you can see right above the footnote is [15] and [16] so we go to your link, Libertrainsism.com, to the article, COMMERCE AND TRADE IN ANCIENT AFRICA: EGYPT and scroll down to the references:
15. Quoted in Jean Leclant, “The Empire of Kush: Napata and Meroe,” General History of Africa Volume II ed. G. Mokhtar (Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 1990) pg. 278-297
16. Hamid Zayed “Egypt’s Relations with the rest of Africa,” General History of Africa Volume II ed. G. Mokhtar (Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 1990) pg. 136
^^ no further footnote, nothing leading us to documentation of this alleged find. The fact that it is printed in a book does not prove it's real This is reference 16 of the article in Libertrain.com Reference 15 is a whole later chapter “The Empire of Kush: Napata and Meroe,” p 278-297 That is about trade relation in general. It does not mention this statuette, just reference 16, this page above
So a primary source is needed that documents the finding, supposedly, of this statuette before trying to consider if it has historical relevance. The book has pictures of some of the artifacts but not this one
Here are the keywords that could be used in various combinations to try to see if there is some primary source document this in Congo (then Zaire) >>
Osiris statuette statue seventh century 7th Thutmose III Zaire Congo Lualaba Kalmengongo Zambezi Hamid Zayed (author)
"A statuette of Osiris, dating from the seventh century before our era, was found in Zaire on the banks of the River Lualaba, near the confluence of the Kalmengongo; a statue inscribed with the cartouche of Thutmose III (—1490 to —1468) was found south of the Zambezi" _________________________________
^ you may see this on various other websites, that is just all copying the same information We need an excavation record or museum, a primary source or news article around the time of discovery with details on who purportedly found a statue of Osiris in Congo and when. It's possible even though this was published by the U.N., the claim could have been a hoax
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Direct contact between ancient Nile civilizations and the Congo isn't impossible, but the sheer geographic distances involved make it seem more likely to me that those artifacts passed through many trading intermediaries to get from Egypt to equatorial and sub-equatorial Africa. Let's not forget that Africa is a big continent.
Direct contact between Kush and the African interior is well established iirc, with Kush acting as an intermediary between the interior and Egypt. Also considering Egypt once ruled as far as Napata during Tutmose III's time, I'd say its more than reasonable that there was contact between Egypt and interior Africa even if sporadic.
The question I see is whether Punt was part of the African interior. We know that the people of KMT traveled directly to Punt many times and not via intermediaries. The distance from Middle Egypt to Djibouti is somewhere around a 1,000 miles as a bechmark. While the distance from Djibouti to the modern border of Uganada is somewhat less than that. There is no reason why Punt itself wasn't part of an a trade network with the African interior.
quote: The Songhai being Sahelosaharians they share a broad culture in common with their immediate Sahelian neighbors who are the Tuareg with whom they have the most cultural affinity, then the Arabs of the Sahel and the Maghreb followed by the Hausa, the Fula people and others Sahelian group both Afro-Asiatic and Nilo-Saharan, to the east in Sudan they have adopted several cultural characteristics from the Sudanese Arabs, Nubians and Beja people.
Economy
quote: The proto-Songhay (Nilo-Saharan or Afro-asiatic pastoralists of Neolithic) who migrated in the 4th millennium BC from North East Africa (Nile Valley) to the central Sahara (Aïr Mountains) were essentially nomadic pastoralists. Their settled descendants are partly farmers, breeders, traders, caravanners, fishermen, hunters, sedentary craftsmen occupying large historic cities and large villages and for another part nomadic herders camel breeders in the immensities of the Sahara and living in nomadic tents.
Wikipedia
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, there has been no finds of ancient Egytian artifacts in or near Eritrea, Ethiopia and Somalia that I am aware of, given that this is the most likely location of Punt.
quote: The “Puntite” Sites (ca. 2000 BCE–third century CE)
In relation to the discussion of cairn sites, it must be noted that since 2012 in Somaliland, there have been reports of “Pharaonic” or “Puntite sites,” which all seem to be associated with cairns (see Map 2). There is no scope in this article to discuss the Land of Punt, which is located possibly somewhere on the African side of the southern Red Sea Coast, but readers can consult the literature (e.g., Bard and Fattovich 2007; Phillips 1997; Kitchen 1993). I was asked by the Somaliland Government to investigate claims made about the existence of such objects in the summer of 2014. The Ministry of Tourism had been having problems with a man who called himself a Sheikh and claimed to have spirits working with him, digging sites. I let him take me to the sites he found with the help of these spirits (gins). Another man who works with him showed me pictures of the digging, and a film of the two of them and another man, involved with the Ministry, digging such sites. The Sheikh took me to his house in Hargeysa to show me the so-called “Pharaonic” sculptures. He proudly declared that he was selling them for up to US $15000, and named well-known figures as his clientele. The Ministry was worried that due to the demand for illicit antiquities, there might be (re)productions of sculptures. However, the sites were former cairns that had been emptied of their stones. Usually stonecutters who are selling stones to construction companies roam the landscapes for cairn sites, as these are perfectly sized stones for building local houses. I was shown sites with alleged Pharaonic artefacts; these include the twin peaks of Naaso Hablood (“girl’s breasts,” 107), Maxamood Mooge (109), Hargeysa Airport area and Masalaha (108). I have previously climbed the left peak, which has shelters with stone tools. Also, there are underground caves that show ancient habitation in the area between the two peaks. The Land of Punt thus may well be the area of current-day Somalia/Somaliland. However, the current interest has triggered looting activities, as demand has increased from wealthy locals for so-called “Puntite” sculptures. The sculptures and decorated tiles claimed to be of “Puntite” origin must be examined properly along with the sites attributed to them, some of them noted in the maps herein.
One other thing I would like to point out is in doing some searches for this thread, I notice that Eurocentric pseudo science is on full display in the sources I found. Blatant falsehoods and gibberish still being promoted to this day.
For example:
quote: The people of Punt were depicted in the same reddish brown color the ancient Egyptians' used to depict themselves, not because Egyptian artists wanted to show that the Puntites shared the same "race" (a clearly anachronistic concept), nor was it even a realistic portrait of the country and its people. Instead, just like the depictions of reddish-brown foreigners Aegeans from Greece, the Puntite foreigners' proximity to the Egyptian self-depiction was determined by Punt's role in legitimation of Pharaonic power and the importance of Punt's products in ancient Egyptian cosmology.
So according to these "experts", the colors of the puntites were "reddish brown". Wrong. They were dark brown not red at all. But according to them and their "scholarship" we aren't supposed to see this as what it is.
Not to mention in the images on wikipedia under Punt" a lot of them have been red corrected, with users claiming that the dark versions aren't accurate. Yet if you go back to photos taken before digital photography, that is exactly how they looked. These people are just full of absolute deception and this is all deliberate.
quote: regarding the trees -- the file itself states, "Author: Trees_to_transplant_from_Punt_to_Egypt_-_Hatshepsut_Mortuary_Temple.JPG: 83d40m (talk) 00:02, 2 February 2008 (UTC). Original uploader was 83d40m at en.wikipedia" and I am displaying them with their respective dates. JMCC1 states clearly that his upload is a derivative of mine in which a color adjustment was the only edit. I must note that Egyptians were not depicted in their art with such dark skin tones as the derivative displays -- they reserved depiction of that dark of a skin tone for cultural groups (farther to the south) -- and the adjustment makes their hair seem green.
All trying to deny that they are the ones distorting these images deliberately. Any look on the web for trees punt egypt and you will see the same colors. Which means this whole narrative about "reddish brown" is part of a deliberate policy of distortion of facts.
Then going back to the quote from the article, they claim that the skin color of the puntites is symbolic (as I have shown they are dark brown), but somehow not an indication that they both had dark brown skin as "black Africans". In fact, they take the same stance as the nonsense ancient egyptian race controversy article in claiming that black skin in Africa equals race and is anachronistic. Like what the living f*ck is anachronistic about black skin in Africa? These people and their talking point is purely to deny black skin in the ancient Nile as if it is "foreign" to Africa. And the fact that all these articles all have the same talking points shows it is clearly the same Eurocentric racist paradigm at work.
Case in point this article on Punt and the image associated with it:
quote:The Land of Punt was long associated with the gods and Egypt's legendary past partly because so many of the materials from Punt were used in temple rituals. The leopard skins from Punt were worn by priests, the gold became statuary, the incense was burned in the temples. A deeper association, however, sprang from the belief that the gods who blessed Egypt had equal affection for Punt. Hatshepsut's inscriptions claim the goddess Hathor came from Punt and there is evidence that one of the most popular Egyptian gods of childbirth, Bes, (known as the Dwarf God) was also associated with the region.
And in their own words they say that this clearly indicates a region somewhere in Africa, but then they have this image to go along with it:
When the reliefs from Hatshepsuts temple look nothing like this and all the native have a dark brown skin tone, including hatshepsut herself, depicted as a male pharaoh.
Not to mention, in the reliefs there are no black "slaves" anywhere and if anything the blacks are shown as soldiers and leaders of the expedition....
quote: Nehsi was an official at the court of the ancient Egyptian pharaoh Hatshepsut. He appears to have been of Nubian descent–nehsi (nHs.j) meaning He of Nubia–and held a number of important official positions, such as Wearer of the Royal Seal and chief treasurer. He is depicted in the "Punt Reliefs" in the temple of Deir el-Bahri where he is described as having been responsible for dispatching Hatshepsut's expedition to Punt.[1] This has been interpreted by some as his having led the expedition from beginning to end.[2]
So according to these "experts", the colors of the puntites were "reddish brown". Wrong. They were dark brown not red at all. But according to them and their "scholarship" we aren't supposed to see this as what it is.
Not to mention in the images on wikipedia under Punt" a lot of them have been red corrected, with users claiming that the dark versions aren't accurate. Yet if you go back to photos taken before digital photography, that is exactly how they looked. These people are just full of absolute deception and this is all deliberate.
Doug likes the top photo better but which one more accurately depicts what we would see naturally at the Temple of Hatshepsut? There should be some videos revealing if that background color is really that intensely bluish-greenish. Keep in mind different figures even of the same group can vary, we see reddish here but other Punites in my previous post, dark brown and it's the same photographer. One is a wall painting, the other king and queen and figure bellow are dark brown, if you click the link these are separate fragments, not wall art
Here is an article showing how many people who handle their photos in photoshop enhance the color by editing to make color more intense
Similarly you can increase the contrast by using slider controls in the editing, this can make the darks darker and the light areas lighter for a crisper looking photo
You would not be able to tell by looking if the photo was edited like this or not unless overdone to the point of looking impossible in real life If done well, you can improve the look of the photo (but this is subjective)
There are a lot of variables also There are also selections on the camera itself that can enhance things Pre-digital camera had some of this also There there are the environmental conditions during the taking of the photo. Was it taken inside or outside. If outside what were the sunlight conditions If inside, many of these tombs are lit a bit dimly, a phot might look good but not being super accurate as to the actual color There there are objects in museums, sometimes they are lit well, other times lit dimly for a more theatrical mysterious effect Sometimes the objects look sexier under some of this less than clinical conditions
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: What evidence are you referring to? The pygmies? They hold the same dynamic as the purported artifact. Pygmies from Ancient Egypt were often referred to in terms of human cargo by Egyptians (isww) so they weren't necessarily taken from their place of origin in the same way many of the slaves during the TAST weren't necessarily taken from the coast. If Punt was part of a larger East/Central African trade network, then human cargo in that trade network would naturally be available to Egyptians when they made contact.
Issw directly translates to "I have bought (this)" which means the Pygmies/dwarfs where either bought as human cargo(like you said) or it could refer to how they were rented/compensated for their services, so I personally wouldn't use it as hard evidence for an expansive pygmy trade between the Kemites and the Horners. Sadly, the specifics on how Harkhuf obtained the pygmy is unclear, but it's possible he may have encountered a Mbuti pygmy on his final expedition and choose to bring it back with him given the lack of evidence suggesting that a "trans-African pygmy trade" existed in that time period.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: It's not established until you get to a primary source that documents the finding of a statuette of Osiris in Congo (then Zaire) and under what circumstances if this is true, the circumstances being highly relevant to determining, when such a statuette got there was it 20th century BC or was it 19th century AD ?
And is it true at all? Where is this statuette?
the first step is to see if there are any footnotes and you can see right above the footnote is [15] and [16] so we go to your link, Libertrainsism.com, to the article, COMMERCE AND TRADE IN ANCIENT AFRICA: EGYPT and scroll down to the references:
15. Quoted in Jean Leclant, “The Empire of Kush: Napata and Meroe,” General History of Africa Volume II ed. G. Mokhtar (Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 1990) pg. 278-297
16. Hamid Zayed “Egypt’s Relations with the rest of Africa,” General History of Africa Volume II ed. G. Mokhtar (Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 1990) pg. 136
^^ no further footnote, nothing leading us to documentation of this alleged find. The fact that it is printed in a book does not prove it's real This is reference 16 of the article in Libertrain.com Reference 15 is a whole later chapter “The Empire of Kush: Napata and Meroe,” p 278-297 That is about trade relation in general. It does not mention this statuette, just reference 16, this page above
So a primary source is needed that documents the finding, supposedly, of this statuette before trying to consider if it has historical relevance. The book has pictures of some of the artifacts but not this one
Here are the keywords that could be used in various combinations to try to see if there is some primary source document this in Congo (then Zaire) >>
Osiris statuette statue seventh century 7th Thutmose III Zaire Congo Lualaba Kalmengongo Zambezi Hamid Zayed (author)
"A statuette of Osiris, dating from the seventh century before our era, was found in Zaire on the banks of the River Lualaba, near the confluence of the Kalmengongo; a statue inscribed with the cartouche of Thutmose III (—1490 to —1468) was found south of the Zambezi" _________________________________
^ you may see this on various other websites, that is just all copying the same information We need an excavation record or museum, a primary source or news article around the time of discovery with details on who purportedly found a statue of Osiris in Congo and when. It's possible even though this was published by the U.N., the claim could have been a hoax
Unfortunately, I can't find any images pertaining to the discovery. However the text undoubtably would've been peer reviewed, meaning if there wasn't any truth to such a significant discovery it would've been caught.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: Unfortunately, I can't find any images pertaining to the discovery. However the text undoubtably would've been peer reviewed, meaning if there wasn't any truth to such a significant discovery it would've been caught.
It depends what type of logic you are using and which peer is doing the reviewing Logic would hold that if such a significant discovery was made there should be some documentation, article or mention in a book that is not just a repeat of what was claimed in this book
Logic would hold that if such a significant discovery was made the item would be in a museum and discussed by other authors This is possibly a hoax. I'm not sure about it so will not say more about it until verified file under: unproven claims awaiting verification
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: What evidence are you referring to? The pygmies? They hold the same dynamic as the purported artifact. Pygmies from Ancient Egypt were often referred to in terms of human cargo by Egyptians (isww) so they weren't necessarily taken from their place of origin in the same way many of the slaves during the TAST weren't necessarily taken from the coast. If Punt was part of a larger East/Central African trade network, then human cargo in that trade network would naturally be available to Egyptians when they made contact.
Issw directly translates to "I have bought (this)" which means the Pygmies/dwarfs where either bought as human cargo(like you said) or it could refer to how they were rented/compensated for their services, so I personally wouldn't use it as hard evidence for an expansive pygmy trade between the Kemites and the Horners. Sadly, the specifics on how Harkhuf obtained the pygmy is unclear, but it's possible he may have encountered a Mbuti pygmy on his final expedition and choose to bring it back with him given the lack of evidence suggesting that a "trans-African pygmy trade" existed in that time period.
if it were in reference to them being commissioned workers, wouldn't the term be applied to all commissioned workers? The dwarves appear to be the only servants referred to in terms of a purchased object so I'm not quite sure that explanation is plausible.
Posts: 44 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: What evidence are you referring to? The pygmies? They hold the same dynamic as the purported artifact. Pygmies from Ancient Egypt were often referred to in terms of human cargo by Egyptians (isww) so they weren't necessarily taken from their place of origin in the same way many of the slaves during the TAST weren't necessarily taken from the coast. If Punt was part of a larger East/Central African trade network, then human cargo in that trade network would naturally be available to Egyptians when they made contact.
Issw directly translates to "I have bought (this)" which means the Pygmies/dwarfs where either bought as human cargo(like you said) or it could refer to how they were rented/compensated for their services, so I personally wouldn't use it as hard evidence for an expansive pygmy trade between the Kemites and the Horners. Sadly, the specifics on how Harkhuf obtained the pygmy is unclear, but it's possible he may have encountered a Mbuti pygmy on his final expedition and choose to bring it back with him given the lack of evidence suggesting that a "trans-African pygmy trade" existed in that time period.
if it were in reference to them being commissioned workers, wouldn't the term be applied to all commissioned workers? The dwarves appear to be the only servants referred to in terms of a purchased object so I'm not quite sure that explanation is plausible.
Let's not forget the religious and cultural significance of the Pygmies that would separate them socially from a native Kemite. In the Old Kingdom period they were seen as people with celestial gifts and their performances were sacred. I'd say it's reasonable to believe that a Kemite, would want to rent one to perform in a special event to not only signify it's importance, but also provide a way to brag to their friends.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: What evidence are you referring to? The pygmies? They hold the same dynamic as the purported artifact. Pygmies from Ancient Egypt were often referred to in terms of human cargo by Egyptians (isww) so they weren't necessarily taken from their place of origin in the same way many of the slaves during the TAST weren't necessarily taken from the coast. If Punt was part of a larger East/Central African trade network, then human cargo in that trade network would naturally be available to Egyptians when they made contact.
Issw directly translates to "I have bought (this)" which means the Pygmies/dwarfs where either bought as human cargo(like you said) or it could refer to how they were rented/compensated for their services, so I personally wouldn't use it as hard evidence for an expansive pygmy trade between the Kemites and the Horners. Sadly, the specifics on how Harkhuf obtained the pygmy is unclear, but it's possible he may have encountered a Mbuti pygmy on his final expedition and choose to bring it back with him given the lack of evidence suggesting that a "trans-African pygmy trade" existed in that time period.
if it were in reference to them being commissioned workers, wouldn't the term be applied to all commissioned workers? The dwarves appear to be the only servants referred to in terms of a purchased object so I'm not quite sure that explanation is plausible.
Let's not forget the religious and cultural significance of the Pygmies that would separate them socially from a native Kemite. In the Old Kingdom period they were seen as people with celestial gifts and their performances were sacred. I'd say it's reasonable to believe that a Kemite, would want to rent one to perform in a special event to not only signify it's importance, but also provide a way to brag to their friends.
Reverence would result in them being referenced with more respect, not less. Also, not all dwarves in Ancient Egypt were pygmies. I don't doubt that some short dwarves came from surrounding areas, but how are we jumping from that, to your conclusion in the OP? Most of this argument is preceded by several layers of wild assumptions.
Posts: 44 | From: West Bumble... | Registered: Apr 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: It depends what type of logic you are using and which peer is doing the reviewing Logic would hold that if such a significant discovery was made there should be some documentation, article or mention in a book that is not just a repeat of what was claimed in this book
Logic would hold that if such a significant discovery was made the item would be in a museum and discussed by other authors This is possibly a hoax. I'm not sure about it so will not say more about it until verified file under: unproven claims awaiting verification
Since you do have a point, let's assume that this archeological discovery is a hoax as you suggested. Even if we cast it aside, there's still evidence that there may have been contact between civilizations. You mentioned the Puntite queen earlier, she's a good example as she shows symptoms of having Steatopygia, which is found among South Africans and Central African pygmies. Many have theorized that the horn of Africa was a meeting point for the Puntites and the ancient Kemites; so with this in mind she and her husband may have been Mbuti pygmies from Congo.
And on top of this, I'm sure you're well aware of the shared symbolism among the cultures. Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Itoli: ]Reverence would result in them being referenced with more respect, not less. Also, not all dwarves in Ancient Egypt were pygmies. I don't doubt that some short dwarves came from surrounding areas, but how are we jumping from that, to your conclusion in the OP? Most of this argument is preceded by several layers of wild assumptions.
They were respected; In Harkhuf's autobiography Pepi II was clearly excited that Harkhuf had found one, and he even demands that Harkhuf treats the Pygmy with the upmost respect and security as they travel back to Egypt. As for evidence, I've provided more in my response to Lioness.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: And on top of this, I'm sure you're well aware of the shared symbolism among the cultures.
You can't just show similar beard styles and call that "symbolism" unless you have further credible evidence of special meaning in common to both examples rather than just common fashion appearances.
"A symbol is a mark, sign, or a word that indicates, signifies, or it is understood as representing an idea, object, or relationship."
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: My first exposure to Egyptian and Ancient Congo contact was in the comment section of a Youtube video that I currently can't remember. I didn't believe it at first, but when I researched ancient Egyptian trade routes, I found out that there was in fact trade between the ancient civilizations.
With this established, I remembered that E. Wallis Bulge proposed central Africa being a part of Punt, but mentioned Uganda instead of Congo. Either way this belief is supported by reports of a Twa(African Pygmy) being retrieved from Punt, which are an ethnic group of Africans native to Uganda.
However, since Pygmies are also native to the DRC and keeping this trade route in mind is it safe to say that Congo was part of Punt? I recall that trade with the Puntities continued during Thutmosis III's reign, and his cartouche being present in the Congo excavation acts as further evidence. That being said, what do you guys think?
First off, we have evidence going back to predynastic times of trade with Punt that includes items like gold, ivory, wood, and obsidian. The exact type of wood as well as obsidian point to the region of Ethiopia-Eritrea. This was later confirmed by mummified baboons from Punt.
As for the Pygmies, they are not a single people but genetics has shown them to be comprised of several groups with distinct genetic origins. Of course the commonality they share is very short stature.
Of course the territories of these Pygmy groups today has not always been the same. We have archaeological evidence as well as traditions from people like the Maasai who say that Pygmies once ranged into Kenya. That said, Harkhuf's letter describes the sacred dwarf as coming from the "land of the horizon-dwellers" and not really Punt although he was said to have obtained this Pygmy either in Punt or Yam.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: And on top of this, I'm sure you're well aware of the shared symbolism among the cultures.
You can't just show similar beard styles and call that "symbolism" unless you have further credible evidence of special meaning in common to both examples rather than just common fashion appearances.
"A symbol is a mark, sign, or a word that indicates, signifies, or it is understood as representing an idea, object, or relationship."
Even without having indepth knowledge of both cultures, you can still deduce that the "beard" and "tool" the Kemetian and Congo Kings possess represent power and authority(given that only the monarchs in the respective societies possess such features).
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: First off, we have evidence going back to predynastic times of trade with Punt that includes items like gold, ivory, wood, and obsidian. The exact type of wood as well as obsidian point to the region of Ethiopia-Eritrea. This was later confirmed by mummified baboons from Punt.
I don't disagree with the idea that Punt is situated in the Horn of Africa. My arguement is that it's boarders may have stretched to modern day Congo, using the evidence the Kemites left behind.
quote: As for the Pygmies, they are not a single people but genetics has shown them to be comprised of several groups with distinct genetic origins. Of course the commonality they share is very short stature.
This is true, however, the Mbuti Pygmies would capture our attention here given their close geographical proximity to Yam and the Horn.
quote: Of course the territories of these Pygmy groups today has not always been the same. We have archaeological evidence as well as traditions from people like the Maasai who say that Pygmies once ranged into Kenya.
This is true, however using the information we have so far on historical African migrations it's also equally possible that the Mbuti Pygmies remained in their Congo environment from Harkhuf's time to the present day.
quote: That said, Harkhuf's letter describes the sacred dwarf as coming from the "land of the horizon-dwellers" and not really Punt although he was said to have obtained this Pygmy either in Punt or Yam.
By pulling from Harkhuf's autobiography we can deduct that African pygmies were seen as being native to "Punt"
Text 1: "You also say in your letter that you will bring back a Pygmy (for) the dances of the God and coming from the land of the inhabitants of the horizon and similar to the Pygmy which the treasurer of the God, Bawerded brought back from Punt in the time of the king Isesi ." In the bolded text Pepi II reveals that a man named "Bawerded" obtained a pygmy from Punt in King Isesi's time. Bawerded had most likely visited modern day Uganda/Congo and obtained a pygmy there.
Text 2: "You also say to My Majesty: never before has such a (Pygmy) been brought back by any of those who have visited the land of Yam.. It is said that, each year, you accomplish that which your royal Lord wishes and praises."
In the bolded text Pepi II reveals that pygmies were not known to be found in Yam's borders. This would mean that the lands that they inhabited passed Yam's borders and was situated in Puntite territory. If we follow a map and go past the blue and white nile you'd end up in Modern day Uganda or Congo. As for how Harkhuf obtained the pygmy is a mystery, but it's still made clear that they were seen as being native to Puntite territory in Pepi II's time.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: And on top of this, I'm sure you're well aware of the shared symbolism among the cultures.
You can't just show similar beard styles and call that "symbolism" unless you have further credible evidence of special meaning in common to both examples rather than just common fashion appearances.
"A symbol is a mark, sign, or a word that indicates, signifies, or it is understood as representing an idea, object, or relationship."
Even without having indepth knowledge of both cultures, you can still deduce that the "beard" and "tool" the Kemetian and Congo Kings possess represent power and authority(given that only the monarchs in the respective societies possess such features).
this is a crook and a flail
you have to know the names of them before even beginning to comment on them Instead of saying vaguely "they are symbols of power"
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: Even without having indepth knowledge of both cultures, you can still deduce that the "beard" and "tool" the Kemetian and Congo Kings possess represent power and authority(given that only the monarchs in the respective societies possess such features).
This forum is to reduce guessing and that you do more research before presenting something The figure at left is not a king I know his name and I know the name of the weapon he holds Once you know this that is the prequisite of comparing it to something else from another culture Then you have to research the other Congo knife, find out it's name and see if there is further information about it, if anybody discusses the history of it
Actually he is, according to Egyptian mythology. Amun was recognized as the King of all the Egyptian gods in the middle kingdom period.
quote: I know his name and I know the name of the weapon he holds Once you know this that is the prequisite of comparing it to something else from another culture Then you have to research the other Congo knife, find out it's name and see if there is further information about it, if anybody discusses the history of it
use this tool:
Listen, I just phrased my comment that way to prove a point. Also I noticed that you ignored my mention of the Puntite queen exhibiting steatopygia, which is another piece of evidence given that this condition is present among modern day central Africa pygmies and absent among Horners.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: I don't disagree with the idea that Punt is situated in the Horn of Africa. My argument is that it's boarders may have stretched to modern day Congo, using the evidence the Kemites left behind.
The Egyptians left plenty of evidence in the form of textual descriptions of Punt i.e. its islands, sea coast, mountains, highlands and valleys and even labeled districts according to these geographic areas-- all which corresponds to Ethiopia NOT the Congo and the same goes for the commodities they brought back.
quote:This is true, however, the Mbuti Pygmies would capture our attention here given their close geographical proximity to Yam and the Horn.
That was my point.
quote:This is true, however using the information we have so far on historical African migrations it's also equally possible that the Mbuti Pygmies remained in their Congo environment from Harkhuf's time to the present day.
How so when we have traditions from other Africans of pygmies once living in their territories which they are no longer found today.
Here is a map based on the genetic findings of Cavalli-Sforza which shows areas Pygmies currently inhabit as well as where they formerly inhabited.
^ As you can see that included Ethiopia.
quote:By pulling from Harkhuf's autobiography we can deduct that African pygmies were seen as being native to "Punt"
Using translation I obtained from here: https://www.osirisnet.net/tombes/assouan/herkhouf/e_herkhouf_01.htm I will present the evidence. Text 1: "You also say in your letter that you will bring back a Pygmy (for) the dances of the God and coming from the land of the inhabitants of the horizon and similar to the Pygmy which the treasurer of the God, Bawerded brought back from Punt in the time of the king Isesi ." In the bolded text Pepi II reveals that a man named "Bawerded" obtained a pygmy from Punt in King Isesi's time. Bawerded had most likely visited modern day Uganda/Congo and obtained a pygmy there.
Text 2: "You also say to My Majesty: never before has such a (Pygmy) been brought back by any of those who have visited the land of Yam.. It is said that, each year, you accomplish that which your royal Lord wishes and praises."
In the bolded text Pepi II reveals that pygmies were not known to be found in Yam's borders. This would mean that the lands that they inhabited passed Yam's borders and was situated in Puntite territory. If we follow a map and go past the blue and white nile you'd end up in Modern day Uganda or Congo. As for how Harkhuf obtained the pygmy is a mystery, but it's still made clear that they were seen as being native to Puntite territory in Pepi II's time.
Yes and my answer above still stands.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: I don't disagree with the idea that Punt is situated in the Horn of Africa. My argument is that it's boarders may have stretched to modern day Congo, using the evidence the Kemites left behind.
The Egyptians left plenty of evidence in the form of textual descriptions of Punt i.e. its islands, sea coast, mountains, highlands and valleys and even labeled districts according to these geographic areas-- all which corresponds to Ethiopia NOT the Congo and the same goes for the commodities they brought back.
quote:This is true, however, the Mbuti Pygmies would capture our attention here given their close geographical proximity to Yam and the Horn.
That was my point.
quote:This is true, however using the information we have so far on historical African migrations it's also equally possible that the Mbuti Pygmies remained in their Congo environment from Harkhuf's time to the present day.
How so when we have traditions from other Africans of pygmies once living in their territories which they are no longer found today.
Here is a map based on the genetic findings of Cavalli-Sforza which shows areas Pygmies currently inhabit as well as where they formerly inhabited.
^ As you can see that included Ethiopia.
quote:By pulling from Harkhuf's autobiography we can deduct that African pygmies were seen as being native to "Punt"
Using translation I obtained from here: https://www.osirisnet.net/tombes/assouan/herkhouf/e_herkhouf_01.htm I will present the evidence. Text 1: "You also say in your letter that you will bring back a Pygmy (for) the dances of the God and coming from the land of the inhabitants of the horizon and similar to the Pygmy which the treasurer of the God, Bawerded brought back from Punt in the time of the king Isesi ." In the bolded text Pepi II reveals that a man named "Bawerded" obtained a pygmy from Punt in King Isesi's time. Bawerded had most likely visited modern day Uganda/Congo and obtained a pygmy there.
Text 2: "You also say to My Majesty: never before has such a (Pygmy) been brought back by any of those who have visited the land of Yam.. It is said that, each year, you accomplish that which your royal Lord wishes and praises."
In the bolded text Pepi II reveals that pygmies were not known to be found in Yam's borders. This would mean that the lands that they inhabited passed Yam's borders and was situated in Puntite territory. If we follow a map and go past the blue and white nile you'd end up in Modern day Uganda or Congo. As for how Harkhuf obtained the pygmy is a mystery, but it's still made clear that they were seen as being native to Puntite territory in Pepi II's time.
Yes and my answer above still stands.
I admit I can't find any counter evidence to give a proper rebuttal. So I'll accept that Congo/Uganda weren't part of Punt. However, I'm curious on wether you believe that there may have been ancient contact between the two groups. I found an interesting image on Quora, that I'd like to share and the resemblance is striking.
posted
^ Of course there was contact. Nobody has denied this. Even E. A. Wallis Budge Co-Father of Egyptology has maintained a Nilotic chain of cultural continuity from the Delta down into the Great Lakes region of Africa. Since predynastic times Egypt was part of an extensive trade network that predates the Bronze Age.
Therefore there was a very long chain of cultural transmission that went both ways and not just one. This is why I question people both Eurocentrics and Afrocentrics who try to attribute the commonalities between Central African cultures and Egypt as being due to diffusion from Egypt only.
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way, I looked up the original Mdu Neter for "Land of the Horizon Dwellers" in regards to the origins of the Pygmy. That translation never made sense to me because "horizon" either meant east (sunrise horizon) or west (sunset horizon). But apparently the original term Harkhuf wrote was:
meaning Ta-Akhetu Neteru
A better translation would be Land of Divine Ancestors since the last glyph is the determinative for neteru (gods)
The actual glyph for akhet as in horizon is but the bird glyph used is for that of an ancestor or ancestral spirit being called akhet as in when the ba and ka of the deceased unite they become akhet. Both words are etymologically related because akhet means 'dawn' or 'dawning' which is the process of spiritual rebirth. Budge often called the lands of the upper Nile perhaps its source as the ancestral lands of the Egyptians. Ta Akhet Neteru seems to be a general name for the land south of Ta Nehesi (Nubia) and included Pwnt (Punt). As to how far south Ta-Akhet reached and whether it included Uganda or the Congo is up for debate.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Of course there was contact. Nobody has denied this.
The exact location of Punt is unknown
but you are saying there was contact between Punt and Congo
Are you referring to this region?
That Punt had contact with this region and at the same time he location of Punt can't even be specified? Contact with what group in Congo?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
https://brill.com/display/book/9789004379602/BP000007.xml According to Egyptian textual and iconographic sources, Punt was the southernmost region included in the commercial network of the pharaonic state, and was regarded as a distinct country from the other southern regions within the Egyptian sphere of political and economic influence (see e.g., O’Connor 1993: 42; Schiaparelli 1916; Zibelius 1972). In the New Kingdom Punt encompassed several districts, suggesting that this land included different regions broadly stretching along the Red Sea coast and the African hinterland (see Breyer 2016: 541–543; Edel 1983; O’Connor 2006; Zyhlarz 1958). The land of Punt was a mountainous region with access to the sea. Dom palms grew there (as well as in Egypt), and baboons, which were not indigenous to Egypt, were found in Punt. In Egyptian representational art Puntite men were depicted with short hair and headbands, wearing short skirts, while Puntite women had long hair, headbands and long skirts. Their standardized dress in representational art possibly suggests that the Egyptians perceived them as the same population. Only in the 18th Dynasty was another Puntite group, with long hair, associated with Punt, possibly suggesting that another Puntite group participated in trade with Egypt at this time (see Cooper 2015: 70–75; Diego Espinel 2011: 449–453). In the “Tale of the Shipwrecked Sailor,” which dates to the Middle Kingdom, the sailor is found by a huge, bearded snake, covered with gold and lapis lazuli, who describes himself as the “ruler” (hekaw) of Punt (see Lefebvre 1949: 29–40). In later New Kingdom texts, however, the werew (chiefs) of Punt were distinguished from the hekaw (rulers) of Nubia, which possibly suggests that there were small-scale polities in the Punt region at this time (Manzo 1999: 29–30, 35; see also Lorton 1974: 26–38, 60–68; Sachko 1998). The reliefs and texts recording a seafaring expedition to Punt in the Deir el-Bahri funerary temple of Queen/King Hatshepsut (ca. 1473–1458 BC) describe this land as a country inhabited by pastoral and/or agro-pastoral people with short-horned cattle, while herders with long-horned cattle occupied its hinterland (Breasted 1906–7 iv: 102–122; Millet 1962; Naville 1898: Pl. 56–86; Sethe 1905, 1906 (2): 315–355; W.S. Smith 1962).
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dwarves are not noted in Egyptology and depicted in art but where is any evidence of pygmies being referred to in Egyptian texts?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarfs_and_pygmies_in_ancient_Egypt Hieroglyphic writing The ancient Egyptians used three terms to describe peoples with short stature: the first of these was Deneg, Daneg or Dag (depending on different transcriptions), which simply means "little human", "dwarf" and/or "pygmy". The Egyptian hieroglyphs used for these words could be combined with the determinative of a dwarf, alternatively the determinative was used alone. Stelae of the 1st Dynasty show only the determinative, implying that the determinative itself was read Deneg, Daneg or Dag and with the same meaning.[2][3][4] In later times, these words were often combined with further determinatives such as the one for "clothes/fashion" (Gardiner sign S38), literally describing a "fashion dwarf" (Egyptian Daneg-seret); or with the determinative of a dancer (Gardiner sign A32) for a "dancing dwarf" (Egyptian Daneg-ibaw).[2][3][4] During the Middle Kingdom period, two new words concerning dwarfs and pygmies appeared: Nemw, meaning "malformed one" pointing to the genetic origin of Egyptian dwarfs as persons born with achondroplasia; and Hewa meaning "shepherd" or "cattle drover".[2][3][4]
Differentiations The Ancient Egyptians differentiated between "real" (genetic) dwarfs and pygmies, who arrived in Egypt, presumably as valuably exotic captives, from (again presumably) those areas of west Africa where members of this ethnic group still live (an enormous distance from the pharaonic kingdom, particularly given the lack of modern communications), though a possible origin for the dancing pygmies might have been modern day Sudan or Ethiopia (if they were formerly more widespread). Pygmies were exclusively hired on very special occasions for dancing and for acrobatic performances at temples and shrines. Dwarfs instead, were exclusively hired for highly skilled craftings and artistic duties. However, modern Egyptologists admonish for caution, the ancient Egyptian did not differ between dwarfs and pygmies to discriminate them, they simply chose their activities according to their skills.[5][6]
Ancient Greek accounts:
https://www.theoi.com/Phylos/Pygmaioi.html THE PYGMAIOI (Pygmies) were a tribe of diminutive African men who lived on the southernmost shores of the great earth-encircling river Okeanos (Oceanus) where they were engaged in an endless war with flocks migrating cranes.
The Pygmaioi were described as tiny, black-skinned men who grew to a height of one "pygme"--a "pygme" being the length from a man's elbow to his nuckle-bone (approximately 1 1/2 foot).
The Pygmies were located by ancient geographers in India (eastern "Aithiopia") and Sub-Saharan Africa (western "Aithiopia") at the southernmost reaches of the world.
ENCYCLOPEDIA PYGMAEUS (Pugmaios), a being whose length is a pugmê, that is, from the elbow to the hand. (Eustath. ad Hom. p. 372.) The Pygmaei, in the plural, is the name of a fabulous nation of dwarfs, the Liliputians of antiquity, who, according to Homer, had every spring to sustain a war against the cranes on the banks of Oceanus. (Hom. Il. iii. 5, &c.) They were believed to have been descended from Pygmaeus, a son of Dorus and grandson of Epaphus. (Steph. Byz. s. v. Pugmaioi.) Later writers usually place them near the sources of the Nile, whither the cranes are said to have migrated every year to take possession of the fields of the pygmies. (Eustath. p. 372; Aristot. Hist. Animal. viii. 12; Strab. i. p. 42, xvii. p. 821.) The reports of them have been embellished in a variety of ways by the ancients. Hecataeus, for example, related that they cut down every corn ear with an axe, for they were conceived to be an agricultural people. When Heracles came into their country, they climbed with ladders to the edge of his goblet to drink from it; and when they attacked the hero, a whole army of them made an assault upon his left hand, while two others made the attack on his right hand. (Philostr. Icon. ii. 21.) Aristotle did not believe that the accounts of the Pygmies were altogether fabulous, but thought that they were a tribe in Upper Egypt, who had exceedingly small horses, and lived in caves. (Hist. Animal. viii. 14.) In later times we also hear of northern Pygmies, who lived in the neighbourhood of Thule; they are described as very shortlived, small, and armed with spears like needles. (Eustath. ad Hom. p. 372.) Lastly, we also have mention of Indian pygmies, who lived under the earth on the east of the river Ganges, (Ctesias, Ind. ii. pp. 250, 294; Philostr. Vit. Apollon. iii. 47; Plin. H. N. vi. 22.) Various attempts have been made to account for the singular belief in the existence of such a dwarfish nation, but it seems to have its origin in the love of the marvellous, and the desire to imagine human beings, in different climes and in different ages, to be either much greater or much smaller than ourselves. (Comp. Ov. Fast. vi. 176, Met. vi. 90; Aelian, Hist. An. xv. 29.)
The Ancient Egyptians differentiated between "real" (genetic) dwarfs and pygmies, who arrived in Egypt, presumably as valuably exotic captives, from (again presumably) those areas of west Africa where members of this ethnic group still live (an enormous distance from the pharaonic kingdom, particularly given the lack of modern communications), though a possible origin for the dancing pygmies might have been modern day Sudan or Ethiopia (if they were formerly more widespread). Pygmies were exclusively hired on very special occasions for dancing and for acrobatic performances at temples and shrines. Dwarfs instead, were exclusively hired for highly skilled craftings and artistic duties. However, modern Egyptologists admonish for caution, the ancient Egyptian did not differ between dwarfs and pygmies to discriminate them, they simply chose their activities according to their skills.[5][6][/i]
funny what is said here, first as to last
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ How so? I agree the wording is a bit off. They should have said that the Egyptians did discriminate based on physical abilities. Why didn't you emboldened the last part of the sentence?--they simply chose their activities according to their skills.
So the Egyptians distinguished between daneg nemu--achondraplasia or disproportional dwarfism and daneg hewa-- either the rarer proportional dwarfism OR Pygmy from an actual small statured population. The former is type of disability with health issues.
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Hieroglyphic writing The ancient Egyptians used three terms to describe peoples with short stature: the first of these was Deneg, Daneg or Dag (depending on different transcriptions), which simply means "little human", "dwarf" and/or "pygmy". The Egyptian hieroglyphs used for these words could be combined with the determinative of a dwarf, alternatively the determinative was used alone. Stelae of the 1st Dynasty show only the determinative, implying that the determinative itself was read Deneg, Daneg or Dag and with the same meaning.[2][3][4] In later times, these words were often combined with further determinatives such as the one for "clothes/fashion" (Gardiner sign S38), literally describing a "fashion dwarf" (Egyptian Daneg-seret); or with the determinative of a dancer (Gardiner sign A32) for a "dancing dwarf" (Egyptian Daneg-ibaw).[2][3][4] During the Middle Kingdom period, two new words concerning dwarfs and pygmies appeared:
Nemw, meaning "malformed one" pointing to the genetic origin of Egyptian dwarfs as persons born with achondroplasia;
and Hewa
meaning "shepherd" or "cattle drover".[2][3][4]
I suppose this is the key. So I construe from this "Hewa" implies pygmy but they did not say that directly
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Differentiations..
a possible origin for the dancing pygmies might have been modern day Sudan or Ethiopia (if they were formerly more widespread)....
Pygmies were exclusively hired on very special occasions for dancing and for acrobatic performances at temples and shrines.
Dwarfs instead, were exclusively hired for highly skilled craftings and artistic duties.
.
.
quote: Hewa meaning "shepherd" or "cattle drover".[/b][2][3][4]
^^this would have to be persued further in the references, I don't see how pastoral references would apply to pygmies
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Lioness
i know u see my comments
Pls respond
Posts: 2491 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I suppose this is the key. So I construe from this "Hewa" implies pygmy but they did not say that directly
Nemw means malformed, so this no doubt refers to the more common form of dwarfism known as achondroplasia with the disproportionate big head short limbs etc. So Hewa has to refer to the rarer form of dwarfism which is simply stunted stature but with proportionate body form and non of the joint and spine issues that the former kind has. 'Pygmies' are essentially populations with stunted statures. What I find interesting is the fact that Pygmies seemed to have a ritual role in Egypt as sacred dancers and performers. They were described as performing the 'dance of gods'.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Importance of Nubia: a link between Central Africa and the Mediterranean The most revealing of the inscriptions of these Aswan nobles relates to the life of Harkhuf, the famous caravan leader who served in the reigns of Merenre and Pepi II. He led four missions to the land of Yam, a region not yet identified but certainly beyond the Second Cataract to the south. Three of these expeditions were made during the reign of King Merenre and the fourth under King Pepi II. On the first journey Harkhuf and his father were commissioned to 'explore a road to Yam', a mission that took them seven months to accomplish. The second journey, which Harkhuf made alone, lasted for eight months. In this journey he took the Elephantine road (the desert road starting on the west bank at Aswan) and returned through Irtet, Mekher and Tererés. Here Harkhuf makes it clear that the lands of Irtet and Setu were under the jurisdiction of a single ruler. His third journey was undertaken along the oasis route. During this journey he learned that the chief of Yam had gone to Libya to conquer it. He followed him into that country and managed to appease him. He returned from this journey 'with 300 donkeys loaded with incense, ebony, oil, panther skins, elephant tusks, tree trunks and many other beautiful objects'. When he passed north through the territories of Irtet, Setu and Wawat, which were now united under one chief, Harkhuf was conducted by a military escort from Yam. On the fourth and last expedition Harkhuf brought back from the land of Yam a dancing dwarf for the young King Pepi II, who was extremely delighted with it.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
but the bird glyph used is for that of an ancestor or ancestral spirit being called akhet as in when the ba and ka of the deceased unite they become akhet. Both words are etymologically related because akhet means 'dawn' or 'dawning' which is the process of spiritual rebirth. Budge often called the lands of the upper Nile perhaps its source as the ancestral lands of the Egyptians. Ta Akhet Neteru seems to be a general name for the land south of Ta Nehesi (Nubia) and included Pwnt (Punt). As to how far south Ta-Akhet reached and whether it included Uganda or the Congo is up for debate.
Printer-friendly view of this topic