posted
If one wishes to understand how processes work, then one must be prepared to do the research.
In my own African-American community, there has always existed a sense of family, of belonging to each other, and this is reflected in the colloquial usage of the terms 'brothers' and 'sisters'. ("My brothers and sisters...") This does not reflect the ideology that all Africans in America are literally biological brothers and sisters, but that we all belong to a single family or race. And this concept did not miraculously occur within the confines of living in America but are deeply rooted in ancient African history. It is most clearly defined in the ideology of the Rmnku (another word for Ancient Egyptians):
These terms expressed the same meanings as they do today as used by African Americans. The Rmnku, in general were monogamous, but when they married a woman they referred to her as their 'sister' and when the woman married a man, he was referred to as her 'brother.' This was an ideological expression that they were, after all, of the same family or race. 'My sister' was essentially the same as saying 'My wife' This concept, however, was taken quite literally by the ruling elite who actually married their siblings in order to create political and legal legitimacy, because of the Rmnku matriarchal system.
All of this information is available if one takes the time to study the language of the Mdu Ntr...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ True, but as usual you fail to prove how this proves that the modern notion of 'races' was held back in ancient times, let alone espoused by the Egyptians!
Mind you people in Mesopotamia used similar terms of endearment-- 'brother' for man and 'sister' for woman.
Posts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Family is to race for the racialist, as lollipop is to cigarette for a tobacco company.
Wally for me, your need to reduce issues to semantics suggests that you are uncomfortable discussing issues at a deeper level.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
We have all seen Western examples of the 'Devil' as being portrayed as a red man with horns, etc; such as Red Devil fireworks, or Red Devil records, etc. This too, is another example of the process by which ideas and ideologies emerge and in many cases are changed or distorted.
The concept of the Devil as being red is derived from the ancient African ideology that distinguishes the ideal or good (Kemut or Blacks) from the non-ideal of that which is evil (Deshrut or Reds). In the African idiom, the word 'red' denotes lightness in regards to blackness, even though a Black person can and is often referred to as 'Red' if that individual is light-skinned (ie, Malcolm X, Redd Foxx, Nelson Mandela, and so on...)
This concept, when it was borrowed by the Europeans, who considered themselves "Whites" and not "Reds", became distorted and they literally painted their images of the Devil (Set/Satan/Lucifer) as being red-skinned, whereas in Africa, he was simply white or light-skinned...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Set no doubt came to be known as an Evil God and is associated with the Red Desert, but what evidence is there that the iconic images in Christian art across Europe that depict the Devil as red are derived from the Ancient Egytian's association of Set with the Desert.
And I have never seen an image that depicts Set as having the skintone of light-skinned SW Asians even if the Egyptians regarded them as "red men" in contrast to the "black men" of Africa such as themselves.
Without corroborative evidence this isn't a very strong theory.
Posts: 1203 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wally: [QB] ...and why the devil is red...
We have all seen Western examples of the 'Devil' as being portrayed as a red man with horns, etc; such as Red Devil fireworks, or Red Devil records, etc. This too, is another example of the process by which ideas and ideologies emerge and in many cases are changed or distorted.
The concept of the Devil as being red is derived from the ancient African ideology that distinguishes the ideal or good (Kemut or Blacks) from the non-ideal of that which is evil (Deshrut or Reds).
I agree with this.
quote:In the African idiom, the word 'red' denotes lightness in regards to blackness, even though a Black person can and is often referred to as 'Red' if that individual is light-skinned (ie, Malcolm X, Redd Foxx, Nelson Mandela, and so on...)
Agree. I'm surprised you don't realise that you've just explained why the term is not racial.
quote:This concept, when it was borrowed by the Europeans, who considered themselves "Whites" and not "Reds",
I think the Hebrews intercept the notion of the Red Devil before it gets to the Europeans, but you are correct.
quote: became distorted and they literally painted their images of the Devil (Set/Satan/Lucifer) as being red-skinned, whereas in Africa, he was simply white or light-skinned...
Yep. This is and African color dialectic. Has nothing to do with race though.
Also, you freely use the term 'distortion' to imply that any meaning that changes from a Kemetic meaning at a given point in time is distorted.
This wrongly implies a privledged point of time from which all else can be measured.
Here is what I am driving at.
Set originates in Nubia. He was not originally associated with Asiatics or Red people....
....therefore even the idea of Set as Satan, Satan as Devil, Devil as Red and/or as Evil is a 'change' from and earlier meaning.
If you are going to call all changes in meaning distortion, then this would be a distortion too, no?
This leads to the irony of MM's observation
quote:Set no doubt came to be known as an Evil God and is associated with the Red Desert, but what evidence is there that the iconic images in Christian art across Europe that depict the Devil as red are derived from the Ancient Egytian's association of Set with the Desert.
Set originally had nothing to do with Red, Asiatics, Desert or Evil.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansa Musa: Set no doubt came to be known as an Evil God and is associated with the Red Desert, but what evidence is there that the iconic images in Christian art across Europe that depict the Devil as red are derived from the Ancient Egytian's association of Set with the Desert.
And I have never seen an image that depicts Set as having the skintone of light-skinned SW Asians even if the Egyptians regarded them as "red men" in contrast to the "black men" of Africa such as themselves.
Without corroborative evidence this isn't a very strong theory.
I have provided ample corroborative evidence, unless of course, you require some document which states "Christian art that depicts the Devil as red is derived from the Ancient Egyptian..." Come on, have you not yet grasped the utility of extrapolation? (to infer from what is known) and the process of history whereby it's a continuation of prior events:
Set- "the god of evil" B; 713b We don't need to extrapolate here for we know that the original name of this god was Setesh and Sutk;Set being the later stage...
Boti- "fiends, red-haired devils, filthy and abominable creatures"
Deshrut- "red devils"
Desheru- "the 'red ones', IE, the wicked gods who were associated with Set.
Desheru heru-sen- "'those whose faces are red'- a class of beings in the Duat" B; 890a S.deshr- "to redden" B; 715b S.deshru- "red things, bloody wounds" (Coptic: Drosh, Throsh, Thwrsh) (Wolof: Deret)
Du- "to be bad, or evil, or stinking" Du.t- "bad thing, evil, wickedness"
Dudu- "the god of Evil (Set)
Thus, the words Set, Deshr, Boti, etc, are all synonyms. A good Thesaurus would be helpful here for some of us . Many cannot see, for example, that the word 'servant' is the same as 'servile', 'slave' ...
Words that 'expand' with expansion
You will also note that the ethnographic murals seem to be found in the tombs of certain dynasties; Sesostris II, Rameses III, etc. - dynasties which were increasingly moving into Western Asia. In fact it was during the reign of the 4th ruler of the 19th dynasty, Merneptah, when the first White folk were brought into Kemet as war captives and to serve as laborers on Pharaoh's various work-sites. This new situation lead to an expansion of the language as well:
Temhi- "a kind of precious stone or earth, a kind of ochre(?)" (Ochre is the common name for hematite, a naturally occurring element. hematite occurs in two colors: red and yellow. Ochre was used for painting and coloring purposes.) ......Extrapolation >- Ochre here refers to "red"
Temhu- **"Libyans" according to Budge, but which would later be expanded to include all Red peoples, including the Whites or Europeans...
Temhit- "a goddess of the red land, or desert" - It literally means "Red Lady"- a White or light-skinned woman...
**actually the word "Libyan" is derived from the Mdu Ntr "Lebu" which means "People who live by the sea/lake/..."
I hope this helps...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
That said, before anyone on this planet can call another satan or the devil or whatever ridiculous name then all one need do is look in a mirror for the correct determination of truth.
I don't think it matters at all where the term originates except to those who use it as an identifying, useless description to shuffle behavior away from this human predisposition we unfortunately are saddled with.
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
. Many cannot see, for example, that the word 'servant' is the same as 'servile', 'slave' ...![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic