Mesopotamia - a tropic or arid tropic civilization linked to tropically adapted peoples
Nordic Mesopotamia? Across the web Neo-Nazis and Human Biodiversity proponents (HB) wage an arcane war of “racial science” built around claimed superiority of cold-climate “Nordic” peoples. Tropical areas it is claimed produced little civilization until the coming of cold-climate Asiatics and Europeans? But is this “the truth” as claimed?
Debunking 1: Greater Mesopotamia (Palestine, Iraq, Syria, southwestern Iran) falls within the Subtropic/Tropic Arid Zone, NOT the cold-climate zones of Europe or Asia. The subtropics are the geographical and climatic zone of the Earth immediately north and south of the tropical zone, at latitudes 23.5°N and 23.5°S. The Greater Mesopotamian area is assigned to the subtropics or the arid tropics by modern climatologists. (See: Troll and Pfaffen, 1964. ‘Seasonal patterns of the earth and Thompson, A. (1997) Applied climatology: pg 179;
Debunking 2: Peoples of the Palestine area, and the Sumerians did NOT look like cold-clime “white Nordics” or Asiatics. Modern data shows a wide range with links to African sub-Saharan elements.
------------------------------------------------- DETAILS: THE NATUFIANS
Natufians: HBDers point to research of Arthur Keith (1927, 1934) at Ur / al Ubaid cemetery, which found “EurAfrican” Negroid-Mediterranean types. HBD proponents also reference Carelton Coon heavily, a supporter of the southern segregationist cause during the 1960s (Caspari 2003). As to the Palestinian area, Coon (1939 ‘Races of Europe) held that skulls indicate a Mediterranean type with minor negro admixture, although contradictorily noting the prognathism of the specimens gives “a somewhat negroid cast to the face.”
Other research shows Natufian links with tropical Upper Egypt. [quote:]
“The first report on the Lachish skulls included a thorough examination of pathology, metrics, artificial deformation, and epigenetic affinity. Utilizing craniometrics, Risdon (1939) concluded that the group was very similar to dynastic Egyptian material.In fact, he stated that the entire population was of foreign origin, representing descendants of a group derived primarily from Upper Egypt. This conclusion was subsequently supported by a craniometric study by Musgrave and Evans (1981). Keita (1988, p. 377) likewise examined the skulls metrically, omitting those that were either “artificially deformed, female, warped, split, [or] juvenile,” using only those measurements that he believed were consistent population discriminators. He concluded that the group was fairly heterogeneous, having close relationships to North African, Egyptian, and Nubian groups, thus lending support to an “Egypto-Nubian presence” (Keita, 1988, p. 388). –(-Ulinger et al. (2005) Bioarchaeological Analysis of Cultural Transition in the Southern Levant. AJPA 128:2:466-76)
Modern scholars dismiss Carleton Coon's “racial” analysis but confirm the sub-Saharan elements in the Natufians. [quote:]
“A late Pleistocene-early Holocene northward migration (from Africa to the Levant and to Anatolia) of these populations has been hypothesized from skeletal data (Angel 1972, 1973; Brace 2005) and from archaeological data, as indicated by the probable Nile Valley origin of the "Mesolithic" (epi-Paleolithic) Mushabi culture found in the Levant (Bar Yosef 1987). This migration finds some support in the presence in Mediterranean populations (Sicily, Greece, southern Turkey, etc.; Patrinos et al.; Schiliro et al. 1990) of the Benin sickle cell haplotype. This haplotype originated in West Africa and is probably associated with the spread of malaria to southern Europe through an eastern Mediterranean route (Salares et al. 2004) following the expansion of both human and mosquito populations brought about by the advent of the Neolithic transition (Hume et al 2003; Joy et al. 2003; Rich et al 1998).
"This northward migration of northeastern African populations carrying sub-Saharan biological elements is concordant with the morphological homogeneity of the Natufian populations (Bocquentin 2003), which present morphological affinity with sub-Saharan populations (Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005). In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al 2005)..” --F. X. Ricaut, M. Waelkens. (2008). Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements Human Biology. 80:5, pp. 535-564
Sidebar: The dubious categories of US anthropologist Carleton Coon
------------------------------------------- DETAILS: THE SUMERIANS
English Sumerians and Aryan stocks: As to the Sumerians, Coon asserted that "Sumerians who lived over five thousand years ago in Mesopotamia are almost identical in skull and face form with living Englishmen."
L. A. Waddell (1930- Egyptian Civilization Its Sumerian Origin..) held that the Nile Valley civilization was due to the Sumerians and that t he first dynastic Pharaoh of Egypt, Menes, was identical to the son of Sargon the Great of Sumeria, and that a great empire extended from India in the east to Britain in the west and that it was ruled over by Sargon I and later by his son Manis Tusu, whom he equates with the Menes of the Egyptian kingdom. The actual Sumerians who controlled this world-girdling empire, Waddell maintained, were of blue-eyed Nordic Aryan stock. [quote:] "The unity as regards type and source of the ancient civilizations of Sumerian Mesopotamia, India, Egypt is in keeping with the physique of the ruling people in all countries, which is shown by their portraits, sculptures and skeletal remains to have been of the long-headed, fair, grey or blue-eyed type recognized by moderns as marking the Aryan section of the caucasian race." (Waddell 1930)
US Anthropologist Carleton Coon (Races of Europe) was to affirm and extend these theories.
The Sumerians had a range of physical variation with clear resemblances on some counts to tropical Africans, not reputed blue-eyed "Nordics" or "Aryans."
Linkages to other tropically adapted peoples and Upper Egypt: Sir Arthur Keith (1934 - Al-'Ybaid: 216,240) also held that the Sumerians were related to Englishmen. [Quote:]
"The Neolithic people of English long barrows are also related to them- perhaps distantly" Such resemblances between older tropically adapted Europeans and peoples outside Europe, such as in Africa, has been noted by Brace 2005 (The Questionable Contribution of the Neolithic) and by Hanihara (1996) as to the resemblance of other peoples in the greater Mesopotamian area to tropical Africans (Hanihara 1996- Comparison of craniofacial..') Keith speculates as to links between the Sumerians and Afghanistan and Baluchistan, but in actual comparison of data, Keith notes that Sumerian specimens he examined showed some resemblance to specimens from tropical Upper Egypt (described by researcher Dr. Fouquet in Vol II of Morgan's 'Sur les Origines de l'Egypt- 1896) but had no resemblance to other Egyptian specimens. [Quote:]
"They were akin to the predynastic people of Egypt described by Dr. Foquet, but differed from all other predynastic and dynastic Egyptians." (Keith 1934, in Al-'Ubaid, pp. 216,240)
More linkages to tropical Africans- Buxton and Rice and Penniman
Buxton and Rice (1931- 'Excavations at Kish') examined 26 Sumerian crania and calculated 17 as Eurafrians, five Mediterraneans/Australoid, and four Armenoid, showing that long-headed people were the dominant element in Sumeria. Penniman (1923-33) excavated 14 crania at Kish, describing 2 as brachycephalic and eight dolichocephalic or EuraAfrican type adn 4 miscellaneous. Dolichocephalic crania in older analyses are generally considered a marker of "negroid", mulatto or sub-Saharan variants. [quote:] "Head shapes vary outside the "White Race" too. Most members of the "Black Race" are long or medium-headed and most members of the "Yellow-Brown Race' are short-headed." (Boyd, W. races and People. 1955). The Catholic Encyclopedia (1913- "Human Race") also notes dolichocephaly as a marker of "blacks", asserting as to "the Ethiopian race" that: "the skull is dolichocephalic, the forehead full, the cheek-bones prominent, the nostrils wide, the alveolar arch narrow and prominent, the jaws prognathous, and the lower jaw large and strong."
Penniman likened many of the Sumerian specmens to Egyptians. [quote] "First there is the Eurafrican.. In ancient times, this type is found in Mesopotamia and Egypt and may be compared with the Ombe Capelle skull. It is possibly identical with men who lived in the high desert west of the Nile in paleolithic times.." (-Penniman, T.K. "A Note on the Inhabitants of Kish.." Excavations at Kish, 1923-33 Vol 4. pp 65-72)
Comparison of Sumerians to people of the western Desert - One recent (2008) study notes:
"..the Qarunian (Faiyum) early Neolithic crania (Henneberg et al. 1989; Midant-Reynes 2000), and the Nabta specimen from the Neolithic Nabta Playa site in the western desert of Egypt (Henneberg et al. 1980) - show, with regard to the great African biological diversity, similarities with some of the sub-Saharan middle Paleolithic and modern sub-Saharan specimens.This affinity pattern between ancient Egyptians and sub-Saharans has also been noticed by several other investigators.." --Ricaut and Walekens (2008) 'Cranial Discrete traits..' Human Biology, 80:5, pp. 535-564
Quote on Qarunian (Faiyum) desert area remains (c. 7000 BC) "The body was that of a forty-year old woman with a height of about 1.6 meters, who was of a more modern racial type than the classic 'Mechtoid' of the Fakhurian culture (see pp. 65-6), being generally more gracile, having large teeth and thick jaws bearing some resemblance to the modern 'negroid' type." (Beatrix Midant-Reynes, Ian Shaw (2000). The Prehistory of Egypt. Wiley-Blackwell. pg. 82)
Sumerian summary:
While not being absolutely identical, several excavations and analyses link the Sumerians with tropical African types in terms of (a) resemblance to Upper Egypt predynastic specimens, (b) dolichocephalic features, and (c) resemblance to tropical peoples of the Western Desert.
The Penniman excavation of Sumerians found 8 out of 14, or 57% to be dolichocephalic, suggesting again the range of variation in the ancient Sumerians including tropical African features. Buxton and Rice found 17 out of 26 crania or 65% to be a similar tropical variant, plus another 5 'Austric'. The Australoid phenotype is similar to that of Africans craniofacially (See Hanihara 96 below). These similarities link again with the observations of Keith and the resemblance between Sumerian skulls and those of tropical Upper Egypt.
Modern reanalyses of the data find both the Rice-Buxton and the Peniman data falling within the range for Saharao-tropical variant Africans (Van Sertima and Rashidi, 1987, p.23), confirming the Upper Egyptian matches with the Upper Egypt data of Fouquet reported by Keith (1934), and Penniman's Egyptian linkage. Ricaut and Walekens show that data in the Western Desert points once again to linkages with an African tropical variant.
----------------------------------------
DETAILS: GREATER MESOPOTAMIA - OTHER PLACES SUCH AS IRAN- still show links to tropical Africans.
In addition to the Palestinian data, data from Iran show that early West Asians looked like today’s sub-Saharan Africans.
quote:
"Distance analysis and factor analysis, based on Q-mode correlation coefficients, were applied to 23 craniofacial measurements in 1,802 recent and prehistoric crania from major geographical areas of the Old World. The major findings are as follows: 1) Australians show closer similarities to African populations than to Melanesians. 2) Recent Europeans align with East Asians, and early West Asians resemble Africans. 3) The Asian population complex with regional difference between northern and southern members is manifest. 4) Clinal variations of craniofacial features can be detected in the Afro-European region on the one hand, and Australasian and East Asian region on the other hand. 5) The craniofacial variations of major geographical groups are not necessarily consistent with their geographical distribution pattern. This may be a sign that the evolutionary divergence in craniofacial shape among recent populations of different geographical areas is of a highly limited degree. Taking all of these into account, a single origin for anatomically modern humans is the most parsimonious interpretation of the craniofacial variations presented in this study." (Hanihara T. Comparison of craniofacial features of major human groups. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1996 Mar;99(3):389-412.)
------------------------------------------------
CONCLUSION The HBD claim is false. Tropical peoples did indeed develop advanced civilizations without needing cold-climate "role models". Mesopotamia is in the Arid tropic (subtropical) zone and developed advanced civilizations long before reputed European or Asiatic cold-climate “leaders”. The peoples who developed these ancient civilizations did NOT look like cold-climate “Nordics" or Eastern Asiatics. Instead, they show a range of variation, including clear resemblance on some counts to other tropically adapted peoples of Africa. Scholars who deny these findings are inconsistent - like Coon above. Documented resemblances between Sumerians and other tropical peoples covers (a) Upper Egyptians, (b) dolichocephalism and (c) high desert Egyptians, both within the range of tropical African variants.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I see the Afrocentrists are scrambling for cover and hunkering down (LOL)! Since the recent revelation that the Neandertal contributed genes to human dna and that the OOA theory or, Africa as the ancestral parent to humanity, is being systematically abandoned, Afrocentrists have come to wits end. Afrocentrists no longer have exclusive claim to humanity. They can no longer boast of being contributors to the advancement of civilization. As such, Afrocentrists are now going all out w/outlandish claims, as evidenced in the preceding post (LOL). Afrocentrists are now, w/guns blazing, hijacking every history not nailed to the wall & floor (LOL)!
Lock up the houses people! THEY ARE COMING FOR YOUR HERITAGE!
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
[QUOTE]Originally posted by zarahan: [qb] "Nordic" Mesopotamia debunked
Hi Zarahan - Although I think it can be shown that modern anthropology is confirming the African affiliation of ancient western Asian populations I did not understand some of the things you wrote in the above piece. For one how you surmised that the findings at Lachish show Natufian links. I have never seen anything saying the Natufians were linked to the population spoken of at Lachish - a people that came much later. Natufians had probable links to the Obeid/Ubaid group (people with a rather large physique and Negroid facial traits) of Mesopotamia, Eridu, Anatolia but not necessarily groups like ancient Upper Egyptians and other small gracile people.
Not every group in Mesopotamia or western Asia was of Natufian origin. The Ubaid/Obeid people of Eridu or early neolithic Mesopatamia and Arabia have a better chance of being Natufian descendants. There was an apparent link between them as the skeletal markings on them are the same according to early archeologist Bedrich Hrozny.
I wrote the below on another part of the forum:
{One important group of artistic depictions comes from the area of Jubba in northern Saudi Arabia. The numerous rock carvings there have given the name Jubba style to the the type of artistic depiction. Sometimes referred to as “Karora style” it dates back according to some to at 5,500 B.C. in northern Saudi Arabia. The style is characterized by long and short bovids with body markings often represented with body in profile. Similarly human figures are large and elongated in profile except for the waist up. The style of rock art is found all over northern Saudi Arabia and extends to the Wadi Dawasir region in the southwest. “A strong interregional interaction if not proper movement of people from Arabia to Ethiopia in the 3rd - 2nd millenium B.C. is supported by the occurrence of rock pictures in a typical style in both regions. In the Horn of Africa where it is found sometimes called the Ethiopian Arabian style or Karora Style and by the 1st millenium B.C. is found in the African Sahara. Alessandra Avanzini, Profumi d’Arabia: Atti del Convegno, 1997 p. 281.
This rock art may have had something to do with the Obeid or Ubaid culture of Arabia which was well known in eastern Arabia and moved into Mesopotamia to form the first Mesopotamian cultures at Eridu.
“Goat or dog-headed people are quite common. So, an iconographical link seems to exist between the goat-headed hunters of Jubba, the T-lad M-headed anthropomorphs of the Latmos area and the "Ziegen-Dämon" of Obeid Culture. Von der Osten-Sacken argues that this anthropomorphic figure is the first deity of Mesopotamian Pantheon. Gobekli Tepe and the Rock Art of the Near East. Klaus Schmidt, 2000 TÜBA-AR 3 (2000) 1–14 The pottery using Ubaid people of Arabia and Mesopotamia and the Levant form a link between the mesolithic and Neolithic Near East. Ubaid culture is characterized by large village settlements, characterized by multi-roomed rectangular mud-brick houses and the appearance of the first temples of public architecture in Mesopotamia. They founded the early cities of Adab, Eridu, Kish, Kullab, Lagash, Larsa, Nippur and extend down the coast of eastern Arabia including Bahrein or early Dilmun. They made lizard headed anthropomorphic figurines and worshipped the mother Goddess. Unlike the other early “Mediterranean type” inhabitants and later brachycephalic Eurasiatic peoples in southern Mesopotamia, the Ubaid skeletons are large bodied, large headed, dolicocephalic with long wide noses and accompanying prognathism. For that reason, A. Sayce had described them as “Negroid’. Skeletal markings were similar to those of ancient Natufians who have also been found to have sub-Saharan Central African affinities. Cambridge Ancient History Vol. 1, Part I reads, “Keith's interesting conclusions—that the skulls of the ancient Sumerians were relatively narrow, that they were dolichocephalic, a large-headed, large-brained people, approaching or exceeding in these respects the longer-headed races of Europe, and that the men's noses were long and wide—is applicable to some of the 'Ubaid dead of the latter half of the third and the beginning of the second millennium B.C. The Cambridge Ancient History, Iorwerth Eiddon Stephen Edwards, 1970, p. 358. The editors earlier say, “ Another impression that arose on the first examination was that the Eridu skulls showed a marked prognathism…” p. 348.}
This group of large Negroids who were usually referred to as "Eurafricans" seemed to have played a major part in the later so called Umm an Nar culture which influenced the African Kerma kingdom culturally and probably biologically.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ Great info above that you present. I will have to pull the lachish study and examine it in more detail. In the meantime I will revise the above to incorporate the findings of your excellent Cambridge ancient History reference. It seems then that based on the above, that on 4 counts, the ancient peoples of Mesopotamia can be linked with tropical African variants.
1) They all lived in an arid tropic/subtropical zone
2) The Natufians show clear sub-Saharan affinities
3) The Sumerians show clear resemblances with tropical variants on 4 counts:
a) Resemblance to Upper Egyptian specimens (Keith)
b) Clear dolichocephaly in most Sumerian specimens- often used as a 'negroid' marker in older analyses
c) Resemblance of Sumerian specimens to peoples of the Egyptian Western desert, ih whom modern scholars find sub-Saharan affinities
d) The U'baid people showing prognathism, wide nostrils and and other tropical features in your Cambridge History
=============================== HENCE TO REVISE THE ORIGINAL POST AND INCORPORATE YOUR NEW REFERENCE:
Mesopotamia - a tropic or arid tropic civilization linked to tropically adapted peoples - "Nordic" Mesopotamia debunked
Nordic Mesopotamia? Across the web Neo-Nazis and Human Biodiversity proponents (HB) wage an arcane war of “racial science” built around claimed superiority of cold-climate “Nordic” peoples. Tropical areas it is claimed produced little civilization until the coming of cold-climate Asiatics and Europeans? But is this “the truth” as claimed?
Natufian negroids who happen to be mediterranean inconsistently claimed... HBD proponents reference Carelton Coon heavily, a supporter of the southern segregationist cause during the 1960s (Caspari 2003). As to the Palestinian area, Coon (1939 'Races of Europe) held that skulls indicate a Mediterranean type with minor negro admixture, although contradictorily noting the prognathism of the specimens gives "a somewhat negroid cast to the face."
"English" Sumerians and "Aryan" stocks claimed: As to the Sumerians, Coon asserted that "Sumerians who lived over five thousand years ago in Mesopotamia are almost identical in skull and face form with living Englishmen."
L. A. Waddell (1930- Egyptian Civilization Its Sumerian Origin..) held that the Nile Valley civilization was due to the Sumerians and that the first dynastic Pharaoh of Egypt, Menes, was identical to the son of Sargon the Great of Sumeria, and that a great empire extended from India in the east to Britain in the west and that it was ruled over by Sargon I and later by his son Manis Tusu, whom he equates with the Menes of the Egyptian kingdom. The actual Sumerians who controlled this world-girdling empire, Waddell maintained, were of blue-eyed Nordic Aryan stock. [quote:] "The unity as regards type and source of the ancient civilizations of Sumerian Mesopotamia, India, Egypt is in keeping with the physique of the ruling people in all countries, which is shown by their portraits, sculptures and skeletal remains to have been of the long-headed, fair, grey or blue-eyed type recognized by moderns as marking the Aryan section of the caucasian race." (Waddell 1930)
US Anthropologist Carleton Coon (Races of Europe) was to affirm and extend these theories.
------------------------------------------ Debunking 1: Greater Mesopotamia (Palestine, Iraq, Syria, southwestern Iran) falls within the Subtropic/Tropic Arid Zone, NOT the cold-climate zones of Europe or Asia. The subtropics are the geographical and climatic zone of the Earth immediately north and south of the tropical zone, at latitudes 23.5°N and 23.5°S. The Greater Mesopotamian area is assigned to the subtropics or the arid tropics by modern climatologists. (See: Troll and Pfaffen, 1964. ‘Seasonal patterns of the earth and Thompson, A. (1997) Applied climatology: pg 179;
Debunking 2: Peoples of the Palestine area, and the Sumerians did NOT look like cold-clime “white Nordics” or Asiatics. Modern data shows a wide range with links to African sub-Saharan elements.
------------------------------------------------- DETAILS: THE NATUFIANS
Modern scholars dismiss Carleton Coon's “racial” analysis but confirm the sub-Saharan elements in the Natufians. [quote:]
“A late Pleistocene-early Holocene northward migration (from Africa to the Levant and to Anatolia) of these populations has been hypothesized from skeletal data (Angel 1972, 1973; Brace 2005) and from archaeological data, as indicated by the probable Nile Valley origin of the "Mesolithic" (epi-Paleolithic) Mushabi culture found in the Levant (Bar Yosef 1987). This migration finds some support in the presence in Mediterranean populations (Sicily, Greece, southern Turkey, etc.; Patrinos et al.; Schiliro et al. 1990) of the Benin sickle cell haplotype. This haplotype originated in West Africa and is probably associated with the spread of malaria to southern Europe through an eastern Mediterranean route (Salares et al. 2004) following the expansion of both human and mosquito populations brought about by the advent of the Neolithic transition (Hume et al 2003; Joy et al. 2003; Rich et al 1998).
"This northward migration of northeastern African populations carrying sub-Saharan biological elements is concordant with the morphological homogeneity of the Natufian populations (Bocquentin 2003), which present morphological affinity with sub-Saharan populations (Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005). In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al 2005)..” --F. X. Ricaut, M. Waelkens. (2008). Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements Human Biology. 80:5, pp. 535-564
Sidebar: The dubious categories of US anthropologist Carleton Coon
------------------------------------------- DETAILS: THE SUMERIANS
The Sumerians had a range of physical variation with clear resemblances on 4 counts to tropical Africans, not reputed blue-eyed "Nordics" or "Aryans."
Count 1) Linkages to other tropically adapted peoples and Upper Egypt: Sir Arthur Keith (1934 - Al-'Ybaid: 216,240) also held that the Sumerians were related to Englishmen. [Quote:]
"The Neolithic people of English long barrows are also related to them- perhaps distantly" Such resemblances between older tropically adapted Europeans and peoples outside Europe, such as in Africa, has been noted by Brace 2005 (The Questionable Contribution of the Neolithic) and by Hanihara (1996) as to the resemblance of other peoples in the greater Mesopotamian area to tropical Africans (Hanihara 1996- Comparison of craniofacial..') Keith speculates as to links between the Sumerians and Afghanistan and Baluchistan, but in actual comparison of data, Keith notes that Sumerian specimens he examined showed some resemblance to specimens from tropical Upper Egypt (described by researcher Dr. Fouquet in Vol II of Morgan's 'Sur les Origines de l'Egypt- 1896) but had no resemblance to other Egyptian specimens. [Quote:]
"They were akin to the predynastic people of Egypt described by Dr. Foquet.." (Keith 1934, in Al-'Ubaid, pp. 216,240)
Count 2) Dolichocephalic crania of the negroid "EurAfrican" type: Dolichocephalic crania in older analyses are often seen as a marker of "negroid" or African variants, not "Nordics."
Buxton and Rice (1931- 'Excavations at Kish') examined 26 Sumerian crania and calculated 17 as Eurafrians, five Mediterraneans/Australoid, and four Armenoid, showing that long-headed people were the dominant element in Sumeria. Penniman (1923-33) excavated 14 crania at Kish, describing 2 as brachycephalic and eight dolichocephalic or EuraAfrican type adn 4 miscellaneous.
Dolichocephalic crania in older analyses are often seen as a marker of "negroid", or tropical variants. [quote:] "The peoples in north-western Europe.. are medium-headed, on the average.. Most members of the "Black Race" are long or medium-headed.." (Boyd, W. races and People. 1955). The Catholic Encyclopedia (1913- "Human Race") also notes dolichocephaly as a marker of "blacks", asserting as to "the Ethiopian race" that: "the skull is dolichocephalic, the forehead full, the cheek-bones prominent, the nostrils wide, the alveolar arch narrow and prominent, the jaws prognathous, and the lower jaw large and strong."
COunt 3) Link of Sumerian specimens to Western Desert Egyptians. [quote] "First there is the Eurafrican.. In ancient times, this type is found in Mesopotamia and Egypt and may be compared with the Ombe Capelle skull. It is possibly identical with men who lived in the high desert west of the Nile in paleolithic times.." (-Penniman, T.K. "A Note on the Inhabitants of Kish.." Excavations at Kish, 1923-33 Vol 4. pp 65-72)
sub-saharan elements in the western Desert - One recent (2008) study notes:
"..the Qarunian (Faiyum) early Neolithic crania (Henneberg et al. 1989; Midant-Reynes 2000), and the Nabta specimen from the Neolithic Nabta Playa site in the western desert of Egypt (Henneberg et al. 1980) - show, with regard to the great African biological diversity, similarities with some of the sub-Saharan middle Paleolithic and modern sub-Saharan specimens.This affinity pattern between ancient Egyptians and sub-Saharans has also been noticed by several other investigators.." --Ricaut and Walekens (2008) 'Cranial Discrete traits..' Human Biology, 80:5, pp. 535-564
Quote on Qarunian (Faiyum) desert area remains (c. 7000 BC) "The body was that of a forty-year old woman with a height of about 1.6 meters, who was of a more modern racial type than the classic 'Mechtoid' of the Fakhurian culture (see pp. 65-6), being generally more gracile, having large teeth and thick jaws bearing some resemblance to the modern 'negroid' type." (Beatrix Midant-Reynes, Ian Shaw (2000). The Prehistory of Egypt. Wiley-Blackwell. pg. 82)
Sumerian summary:
Sumerian summary: While they were their own variant and not absolutely 100% identical to other tropicals, several excavations and analyses link the Sumerians with tropical African types much more than Europeans in terms of (a) resemblance to Upper Egypt predynastic specimens, (b) dolichocephalic features, and (c) resemblance to tropical peoples of the Western Desert, and (4) similarities of the Mesopotamian U'baid specimens to other tropicals in terms of prognathism, wide noses and other features. This is consistent with the pattern shown in items a, b and c above.
The Penniman excavation of Sumerians found 8 out of 14, or 57% to be dolichocephalic, suggesting again the range of variation in the ancient Sumerians including tropical African features. Buxton and Rice found 17 out of 26 crania or 65% to be a similar tropical variant. This links again with the observations of Keith and the resemblance between Sumerian skulls and those of tropical Upper Egypt.
Modern reanalyses of the data find both the Rice-Buxton and the Peniman data falling within the range for Saharao-tropical variant Africans (Van Sertima and Rashidi, 1987, p.23), confirming the Upper Egyptian matches with the Upper Egypt data of Fouquet reported by Keith (1934), and Penniman's Egyptian linkage. Ricaut and Walekens show that data in the Western Desert points once again to linkages with an African tropical variant, and the Cambridge History shows the Mesopotamian U'baids, precurors of the Sumerians to have a similar tropical affinity.
----------------------------------------
DETAILS: GREATER MESOPOTAMIA - OTHER PLACES SUCH AS IRAN- still show links to tropical Africans.
In addition to the Palestinian data, data from Iran show that early West Asians looked like today’s sub-Saharan Africans.
quote:
"Distance analysis and factor analysis, based on Q-mode correlation coefficients, were applied to 23 craniofacial measurements in 1,802 recent and prehistoric crania from major geographical areas of the Old World. The major findings are as follows: 1) Australians show closer similarities to African populations than to Melanesians. 2) Recent Europeans align with East Asians, and early West Asians resemble Africans. 3) The Asian population complex with regional difference between northern and southern members is manifest. 4) Clinal variations of craniofacial features can be detected in the Afro-European region on the one hand, and Australasian and East Asian region on the other hand. 5) The craniofacial variations of major geographical groups are not necessarily consistent with their geographical distribution pattern. This may be a sign that the evolutionary divergence in craniofacial shape among recent populations of different geographical areas is of a highly limited degree. Taking all of these into account, a single origin for anatomically modern humans is the most parsimonious interpretation of the craniofacial variations presented in this study." (Hanihara T. Comparison of craniofacial features of major human groups. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1996 Mar;99(3):389-412.)
------------------------------------------------
CONCLUSION
Conclusion: The HBD claim is false. Tropical peoples did indeed develop advanced civilizations without needing cold-climate "role models". Mesopotamia is in the Arid tropic (subtropical) zone and developed advanced civilizations long before reputed European or Asiatic cold-climate “leaders”. The peoples who developed these ancient civilizations did NOT look like cold-climate “Nordics" or Eastern Asiatics. Instead, they show a range of variation, including clear resemblance on some counts to other tropically adapted peoples of Africa. Resemblances between Sumerians and other tropical peoples covers 4 points: (a) Upper Egyptians, (b) dolichocephalism, (c) high desert Egyptians, and (d) U'baid specimens showing prognathism and other features within the range of tropical variants.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would say that Ubaid groups had wide platyrrhine noses with marked prognathism, but not necessarily "wide nostrils" as you mentioned.
Also the Ubaid were among the earliest 6th to 5th millenium types of Mesopotamia while later types associated with the at Jemdet Nasr and Ur III cultures were usually stated to be of the smaller Mediterranean variety of African found in ancient Egypt, Nubia, Sahara and other places, i.e. Amratian, Badarian, etc..
It is up to geneticists to determine if the early assessments of physical anthropologists were true.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Zarahan - I just wanted make certain the quote below that you cited was all one paragraph from a single source:
"This northward migration of northeastern African populations carrying sub-Saharan biological elements is concordant with the morphological homogeneity of the Natufian populations (Bocquentin 2003), which present morphological affinity with sub-Saharan populations (Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005). In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al 2005)..' --F. X. Ricaut, M. Waelkens. (2008). Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements Human Biology. 80:5, pp. 535-564"
-------------------- D. Reynolds-Marniche Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: I would say that Ubaid groups had wide platyrrhine noses with marked prognathism, but not necessarily "wide nostrils" as you mentioned.
Also the Ubaid were among the earliest 6th to 5th millenium types of Mesopotamia while later types associated with the at Jemdet Nasr and Ur III cultures were usually stated to be of the smaller Mediterranean variety of African found in ancient Egypt, Nubia, Sahara and other places, i.e. Amratian, Badarian, etc..
It is up to geneticists to determine if the early assessments of physical anthropologists were true.
^^Yep- all those quotes are from one para in Ricaut.
Platyrrhine noses are often considered "negroid" but the more accurate descript would be noses withn the range of tropically adapted peoples. The whole thrust of the post is to not to say that the Sumerians were identical to West africans or East Africans- they were not absoloutely identical- but to show how strongly the Sumerians and Natufians fit within that tropical range- on 4 counts, in contrast to the empty claim of "Nordic" cold climate primacy. On the web the HBDers rely heavily on Carleton Coon's Nordic approach or his distorted classification of "Mediterranean" to represent Sub-Saharan types.
Your quote on the U'baid adds the 4th line of evidence:
"Another impression that arose on the first examination was that the Eridu skulls showed a marked prognathism .. Keith's interesting conclusions-that the skulls of the ancient Sumerians were relatively narrow, that they were dolichocephalic, a large-headed, large-brained people, approaching or exceeding in these respects the longer-headed races of Europe, and that the men's noses were long and wide-is applicable to some of the 'Ubaid dead of the latter half of the third and the beginning of the second millennium B.C." --Cambridge Ancient Hist, Vol 1, Part I, 1970, p. 348; 358. http://knol.google.com/k/mainstream-academic-research/mesopotamia-a-tropical-arid-tropics/3q8x30897t2cs/31#edit
Below is a statement from a plastic surgeon;s website on said platyrrhine noses. He considers them a marker of 'black' people, although I would add that narrow noses are a routine part of the NATIVE African range as well.
"Rhinoplasty, Multiracial
The African nose is classified as a platyrrhine nose, which generally means a wider, flatter nasal shape. Often the nasal base is flared and the bridge is wide. The skin can be quite thick and the cartilages thinner and less defined. Distinctive anatomic differences exist between the nonwhite nose (platyrrhine, mesorrhine) and the white nose (leptorrhine). Surgeons who perform rhinoplasty in multiracial patients must recognize these differences and must implement specific surgical strategies to achieve the desired aesthetic and functional outcome.An image depicting rhinoplasty on a nonwhite nose can be seen below." http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/840236-overview
Lateral view (a) - Characteristics of the platyrrhine multiracial nose (on the left) compared with the Caucasian nose (on the right) include reduced bony and cartilaginous dorsal support and lack of tip projection and definition. Base view (b) - The platyrrhine multiracial nose often has wide flared nasal alae, poor tip support, and a thick, subcutaneous, fibrofatty pad, resulting in blunted tip definition. The ideal equilateral triangle appearance of the nose on base view is not achieved.
So those noses are very well within the range of tropically adapted peoples, who of course, also have narrow noses as well in ultra diverse Africa. ----------------------------------------------
It is good we have these physical anthropology studies to cross check against DNA studies. The same distortion and misleading methods and continual double-standards appear on the DNA side as they do on the phy anthro side. Just looking for data on the Natufians I ran into someone waving a dental study that allegedly claimed North Africans to be close to Europeans, at not at all related to those distant, alien "sub-Saharans." How was this result achieved? Yep, you guessed it, by stacking and rigging the sampling deck- see below.
I don't think geneticists should have the last word at all. Keita urges students of African history to look for consistency and data drawn from many sources- using a balanced package of analysis - and not to rely on only one line of evidence. The DNA studies on Africans can be distorted very easily as seen below. A consistent pattern across multiple lines of evidence, including cultural material, is the key.
Dental distortions
DNA distortions: Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Unconfirmed Lies: I see the Afrocentrists are scrambling for cover and hunkering down (LOL)! Since the recent revelation that the Neandertal contributed genes to human dna and that the OOA theory or, Africa as the ancestral parent to humanity, is being systematically abandoned, Afrocentrists have come to wits end. Afrocentrists no longer have exclusive claim to humanity. They can no longer boast of being contributors to the advancement of civilization. As such, Afrocentrists are now going all out w/outlandish claims, as evidenced in the preceding post (LOL). Afrocentrists are now, w/guns blazing, hijacking every history not nailed to the wall & floor (LOL)!
Lock up the houses people! THEY ARE COMING FOR YOUR HERITAGE!
LMAO
Dude who are you kidding??! Since when is the Out-of-Africa theory even on the verge of abandonment?? Even IF Neanderthals contributed genes to human ancestors, how does that negate humanity's African origin? Last time I checked, Neanderthals lived in the Middle East also and not just Europe which could explain any admixture between outgoing Homo Sapiens (leaving Africa). Regardless, you and other wacko whites have long been going after other peoples' heritages including Africans, hence ancient Egypt.
Behold your Caca-zoid Egyptians!
Posts: 26280 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Anyone with a basic understanding of latitude and climate would know that Mesopotamia lies in subtropical to temperate climes, with southern Mesopotamia/Iraq (site of Sumer) being in the subtropical along the same latitudes as the Egyptian delta. Of course the rest of the 'Middle East' and particularly Arabia is definitely subtropical to tropical. So how the indigenous population could be "Nordic" is beyond me.
Also, anthropology of the past several decades has already described the earliest populations as "australoid" or "negroid" so definitely these were not whites. Even the later elements described as "Mediterranean" are dubious enough just as the very racial term itself.
Posts: 26280 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ Indeed. Do you have any references re the "australoid look" (which would be tropically adapted anyway) of the earliest populations?
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by NoKnowledgeClown: All total bullshit you guy are pathetic
This from the guy who provides no evidence or data or anything logical for that matter but instead gay pornography.
Yes, well I think I'll take Zarahan's posts any day.
quote:Originally posted by zarahan: Yep- all those quotes are from one para in Ricaut.
Platyrrhine noses are often considered "negroid" but the more accurate descript would be noses withn the range of tropically adapted peoples. The whole thrust of the post is to not to say that the Sumerians were identical to West africans or East Africans- they were not absoloutely identical- but to show how strongly the Sumerians and Natufians fit within that tropical range- on 4 counts, in contrast to the empty claim of "Nordic" cold climate primacy. On the web the HBDers rely heavily on Carleton Coon's Nordic approach or his distorted classification of "Mediterranean" to represent Sub-Saharan types.
Your quote on the U'baid adds the 4th line of evidence:
"Another impression that arose on the first examination was that the Eridu skulls showed a marked prognathism .. Keith's interesting conclusions-that the skulls of the ancient Sumerians were relatively narrow, that they were dolichocephalic, a large-headed, large-brained people, approaching or exceeding in these respects the longer-headed races of Europe, and that the men's noses were long and wide-is applicable to some of the 'Ubaid dead of the latter half of the third and the beginning of the second millennium B.C." --Cambridge Ancient Hist, Vol 1, Part I, 1970, p. 348; 358. http://knol.google.com/k/mainstream-academic-research/mesopotamia-a-tropical-arid-tropics/3q8x30897t2cs/31#edit
Below is a statement from a plastic surgeon;s website on said platyrrhine noses. He considers them a marker of 'black' people, although I would add that narrow noses are a routine part of the NATIVE African range as well.
"Rhinoplasty, Multiracial
The African nose is classified as a platyrrhine nose, which generally means a wider, flatter nasal shape. Often the nasal base is flared and the bridge is wide. The skin can be quite thick and the cartilages thinner and less defined. Distinctive anatomic differences exist between the nonwhite nose (platyrrhine, mesorrhine) and the white nose (leptorrhine). Surgeons who perform rhinoplasty in multiracial patients must recognize these differences and must implement specific surgical strategies to achieve the desired aesthetic and functional outcome.An image depicting rhinoplasty on a nonwhite nose can be seen below." http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/840236-overview
Lateral view (a) - Characteristics of the platyrrhine multiracial nose (on the left) compared with the Caucasian nose (on the right) include reduced bony and cartilaginous dorsal support and lack of tip projection and definition. Base view (b) - The platyrrhine multiracial nose often has wide flared nasal alae, poor tip support, and a thick, subcutaneous, fibrofatty pad, resulting in blunted tip definition. The ideal equilateral triangle appearance of the nose on base view is not achieved.
So those noses are very well within the range of tropically adapted peoples, who of course, also have narrow noses as well in ultra diverse Africa. ----------------------------------------------
It is good we have these physical anthropology studies to cross check against DNA studies. The same distortion and misleading methods and continual double-standards appear on the DNA side as they do on the phy anthro side. Just looking for data on the Natufians I ran into someone waving a dental study that allegedly claimed North Africans to be close to Europeans, at not at all related to those distant, alien "sub-Saharans." How was this result achieved? Yep, you guessed it, by stacking and rigging the sampling deck- see below.
I don't think geneticists should have the last word at all. Keita urges students of African history to look for consistency and data drawn from many sources- using a balanced package of analysis - and not to rely on only one line of evidence. The DNA studies on Africans can be distorted very easily as seen below. A consistent pattern across multiple lines of evidence, including cultural material, is the key.
Dental distortions
DNA distortions:
Sorry but gay sh*t can't refute the above, clown. Posts: 26280 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan: ^^ Indeed. Do you have any references re the "australoid look" (which would be tropically adapted anyway) of the earliest populations?
There were several books or studies which made this description. Brandon made a thread about it here. By the way, by "Australoid" type, they specifically mean "proto-Australoid" or "Veddoid" types seen in near by India. Of course we know that racial constructs or types don't really exist anyway, but definitely their phenotype of early Mesopotamians was indeed tropical.
Posts: 26280 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^No dumbass. You are hopelessly confused as to the time frames under discussion and the fact that within those time frames certain of the people under discussion are in fact derivative of tropical Africans.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
A little healthy criticism here, this image isn't that striking to me.
For one, I don't find it too significant that Bantu speakers would group with West Asia (really right next door to Africa) before anyone else, out of those, East Asia, Europe, and and Oceania. Same thing for the Europeans grouping with East Asians, not really surprising who else are they really gonna group with?
Additionally, while at first glance I did not notice Oceania, looking again I do now however find it sig- that those West Asians resemble Africans, then Oceanians, before resembling anyone else.
I still don't find the chart all that surprising though.
posted
"Early West Asians" is too vague in the above graphic. It should be a defined time period, a range of dates. or this period given from the same article, quoted
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^All of that IS defined in the paper, you fruitbasket.
The Iranian sample consist not just of ancients, but Islamic era Iranians as well, which contributes (I believe) to the relatively distant relationship to the used African Bantu speaking samples (see the length of the ''West Asian'' branch that connects to the African branch for instance).
Still though, the closest relationships was with the Bantu speaking Africans (all of them, but the closest to Natal Nguni), and second, more surprisingly, China, followed by the European samples.
posted
^Yep thats what you're reduced to, when science slaps the sh!t out of your frivolous beliefs regarding the phenotype(s) of Bantu speakers; letting a celeb crackhead communicate in your stead.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thats right, fruitbasket. You're not going to try the mulatto thingy, or photo examples of tanned white people when it comes to Elamites?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
LOL, I googled the dude and he's not dark skinned at all. I knew there was something fishy, hence my surprise at the fruit basket throwing in the towel.
So no, nothing like Auda ibu Tayi. It’s more like this indigenous Iranian, standing next to the structures his ancestors built:
^Originally posted by Dana, I believe
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: LOL, I googled the dude and he's not dark skinned at all. I knew there was something fishy, hence my surprise at the fruit basket throwing in the towel.
LOL show us a photograph of this dude you googled and claim not to be dark skinned
I said photo
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: similar looking fellow, Auda ibu Tayi
You do know this is a black-and-white photo that has been colorized, don't you? It's obvious from the picture file's URL.
Posts: 7082 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: similar looking fellow, Auda ibu Tayi
You do know this is a black-and-white photo that has been colorized, don't you? It's obvious from the picture file's URL.
I think that is true this looks like a photo of the Syrian Tayyi who look different than the Arabian ones. True Tayyi look just like peoples of the Horn.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
A little healthy criticism here, this image isn't that striking to me.
For one, I don't find it too significant that Bantu speakers would group with West Asia (really right next door to Africa) before anyone else, out of those, East Asia, Europe, and and Oceania. Same thing for the Europeans grouping with East Asians, not really surprising who else are they really gonna group with?
Additionally, while at first glance I did not notice Oceania, looking again I do now however find it sig- that those West Asians resemble Africans, then Oceanians, before resembling anyone else.
I still don't find the chart all that surprising though.
The early Iranians spoken of by Hanihara are of larger Tepe Hissar, Alishar Huyuk and Ubaid Mesopotamian type spoken of by Sayce Krogman and other early phsycial anthropologists. Those gigantic or robust and highly prognathic, platyrrhine or chamaerrhine nosed people who I have started to think are ancestral Bantu related to peoples of Umm an Nar, some of the black Polynesian types and Mesolithic people of the Nile. The early Ubaid people built the early Ziggurat civilization of Mesopotamia.
This also gives rise again to my question about the Bantu origin of the ancient Egyptians, the age of the great pyramid and it is why I started the posts posing a question about the Bantu relationship to early proto-historic Egypt. Why is it the pyramids around the world from Tonga in the South Pacific to Olmecs always seem to be associated with a large Negroid type. Were these people proto-Bantu gracilized Ubaidians.
I read somewhere the early building techniques that led to the pyramids of the Olmec civilization actually go back to the 2nd or 3rd millenium B.C. in that area.
How old really are the first pyramids and the Sphinx in Egypt? maybe the revisionists are right in terms of the chronology of the first pyramids in Egypt.
These early mesolithic West Asians however had little to do with later Cushitic and Haratin looking so called "proto-mediterranean or 'Austric" inhabitants of Iran and Arabia who enter after the beginning of the neolithic and Copper Ages most probably from the south.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
A little healthy criticism here, this image isn't that striking to me.
For one, I don't find it too significant that Bantu speakers would group with West Asia (really right next door to Africa) before anyone else, out of those, East Asia, Europe, and and Oceania. Same thing for the Europeans grouping with East Asians, not really surprising who else are they really gonna group with?
Additionally, while at first glance I did not notice Oceania, looking again I do now however find it sig- that those West Asians resemble Africans, then Oceanians, before resembling anyone else.
I still don't find the chart all that surprising though.
The chart should be surprising to many of those people that think ancient West Asians i.e. Arabians, Syrians, Iranians, Anatolians etc. were affiliated with or represented by people of the modern Levant. And of course many people do.
These are the same people that don't understand that until relatively recently Arabia was populated almost exclusively by blacks who were an extension of Neolithic Africans into the peninsula where they combined or intermingled with large-bodied black Ubaid type Mesopotamians.
It actually fits with the recent Brace studies rather well.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^What do you mean ''Elam guards'', your picture clearly says, ''Persian guards''. I don't play with numbskulls like you, who prefer to debate with equivocal material like uncolored art (lol), when conclusive evidence is available.
Hanihara: 2) Recent Europeans align with East Asians, and early West Asians resemble Africans.
^There is nothing to debate, Elamites (and some of the people surrounding them) resembled Africans, per the scientific data. And since you don't care about scientific data, I have nothing to say to you, petty insect.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
^^^ let Swenet take a stab at putting up people that have these features and skin tone.
-Afraid to go there of course
The Daae or Dahae persians of Persian Susa and the Elamites a Dravidic speaking and looking people were two different populations. How many times does this have to be told to you - Your Snakiness.
Funny how the complexion painted on Persians I saw at the Louvre look more like the people below.
True Persian guard or Parsaye/Faras of Persia during the Achaemenid period and before inundation by white brachycephalic long-haired Scythians - see below. lol! Iranian and Arabian traditions call these the peoples of Ad Dahak, Zohak also known Hadad and Rabi'a al Faras from which comes the name Fairuz legendary ancestor of Persians. The name Fairuz and Faras means horse. He is also ancestor of many northern Arabians.
Their early kings or heroes according to later tradition arose in the land of Haumuvara or Himyar. They moved North to Wadi Madani or Naharin south of Taif Maitanni and Nahrain, thus the Greeks often refer to the Midianites as Medes.
The Dahaka or children of Hadad came from the Arabians before the Scythian invasions of southern Asia and Arabia. In Tabari's work Dahak is said to have been the brother of Akk who came from the Azd tribe of Marib.
Why use lightened up versions of these paintings.
True Elamites taken away by Asurbanipal's forces
True Susinian Elamite guard
True ancestral European related Scythians came into Central Asia including Dahistan (land of the Dahae) or Tripura building "Da'asa" and China from the North and united with the Dahae after the period of the Achaemenids. Finally Getae and Tokharians and other groups came in.
After this peoples of Siberian and Central Asian affiliation moved into Iran and northern India, as the big blonde Getae(Massagetae = Hephtalitae) and strawberry blond Tokharians had done before them.
Now take a stab at that Your Snakiness
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Medieval portrayal of Zahhak by Central Asians.
Over time Central Asians characteristically depicted depicted themselves as Persians and the original Arabs or semites in their histories and depictions. Just as the white Scythians did before them in India present themselves as the original Aryans or Medes.
In the Arabic Majmalu-T-Tawarik(1200A.D.) we read, "The Jats and Meds are reputed to be descendants of Ham, the son of Noah and they occupied the banks of the Indus in the province of Sindh."
THERE ARE NO INDIC-ARYAN GODS OTHER THAN THE ONES BROUGHT THERE BY THE DAAE.
Greeks called the early people of Persia and the Ethiopians Kephenians from Cepheus ruler of "Ethiopia" in Yafa which is a name of a south Arabian town and people as much as it is the original name of Joppa in Palestine.
Su’da ancient ancestress of the Daae received her name from Sa'uda the daughter of Akk (Og) wife of Nizar son of Maa'd bin Adnan, king of Canaan (for the original Canaan in Tihama See the Bible Came from Arabia by Kamal Salibi ). She is Su’dabeh a character in the Persian epic of the Shahnameh who tempts Siyavesh or Sievus. She is the wife of Key Kavoos or Kaush (Qabus or Gabas), shah of Iran and stepmother of prince Siyavash (Yusaf/Joseph). She is most famous for her role in the epic of Siyavash or Siev (the black horse deity) choosing exile. Siev according to the Armenian patriarch John was also Seva son of Kush and the name Sevatek or Sevardik he said meant the black sons. They lived in the area of the Caucasus. The Joseph story of seduction by the wife of Pharaoh is nearly identical to that of Siavus.
In the Hindu texts the Daasas are black-skinned builders of Tripura (as the early Medes and Dahae built) and descendants of the Meluchhas who were the authors of Prakrit. These Meluchhas were undoubtedly the ancestors of North Arabians called Musri or Musuri as shown by Assyrian epics.
In the Zend Avesta the serpent Dahak came from the region of Bauri or Babiru (Babylon) to Asia reaffirming the Afro-semitic origins of his story of Ad- Daae and Az Dahakka. He is also called the son of Walid or Velid a Hyksos or Amalekite king verifying his Meluchha origin from Amalek son of Ad.
According to tradition Riyan son of Walid in whose reign Joseph or Asaf was sold into Mizra (Musuri), he also ruled in Memphis. Qabus (Kai Kavus) - son of Masab and husband to Assiyeh (Asenath) was invited by Joseph to embrace the true religion but refused. Walid (Al Awadh or Lud) brother of Kabus drowned in the Red Sea. “most of the commentators of the Koran tell us this prince was an Arab of the tribe of Ad”. "The son of Amalek was Ad, a celebrated prince among the Arabians, and as some suppose, the son of Uz, and grandson of Aram, the son of Shem."
It is clear that the mythology of the so-called Indic Aryans comes directly out of the Afro-semitic traditions brought into Asia in the 2nd millenium and likely after the time of Jacob and Joseph when these Canaanites called Amalek or Adites -the African Himyarites - otherwise known as "Ethiopians" and Sabeans - spread abroad from the Eritrean Sea into Syria, the Aegean and Mesopotamia.
A film was done on the Exodus by a Jacobovici " who suggests that the Hyksos and the Hebrews were one and the same thesis he supports with Egyptian-style signet rings uncovered in the Hyksos capital of Avaris (30°47'14.71"N, 31°49'16.92"E) that read "Yakov/Yakub" (from Yaqub-her), similar to the Hebrew name of the Biblical patriarch Jacob (Ya'aqov)...." Ryan is thought to by some to be Ian-Ra of the Hyksos scarabs. The king named Jacob-Hor is also said to have been mentioned in several scarabs.
Sargon mentioned "the district of Musur which belongs to Meluhha". The Amalekites or Meluhha named Musuri (Misra) ruled between the area of the southern Hijaz and Mecca and the Nile and were Canaanites or Kenaana from Yemen (Tihama). From them also came the name Farwan or Pharaoh.
The Amalek or Ad are still living now in south Arabia. They are closely related to the Dawasir and taller Mahra or Mahara population of south Arabia and the Horn.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Joseph (Asaf) was an Amalekites or Meluhha man of who rose to power over the Musri. Assiyah the Arab Djurham woman ancestral to the Sulaym (Solymi?) is likely Asenath. The "Amalekite" Kabus or Qabus (Jacob?) son of Masab and husband to Assiyeh (Asenath?) "was invited by Joseph to embrace the true religion but refused".
To understand the early connection between the Meluchha Amalek, Nubians and Musuri of Egypt it is useful to read the below written several years ago on ANE
"JOE.J.BAKER wrote:
> I responded that there were only> two countries called Musri one was north on Ninua (and I should add here, east > of the Tigris with its southern border reached to the Jebel Bashiqah). The second was Egypt. There was no other - all references to Musri can be assigned to one or the other.
To this is to note, that Musri is the semitic name for Lower Egypt, Assarhadon wanting to be more specific used the name Paturisi for the south. I want to assert Musri is the name Lower Egypt got in consequence of the Hyksos occupation. To make the difference, later after the Hyksos period, remained the name Musri the general name for Egypt, while to be more specific the rest Hyksos state became known as Meluhha, vulgo known as Musri (Assarhadon). A first reference might be of interest Senacheribs 3-rd campaign (battle of Eltekeh): "Hezekiah, the Iaudai ... called upon the Musri kings, the bowmen and horses of the king of Meluhha. As for Hezekiah. the terrifying splendor of my majesty overcame him, and the Urbi, mercenary troops, which he had brought in to strengthen Jerusalem,..., deserted him." This allows an identification of both Musri=Meluhha=Urbi (Arabs). We have further the contemporary description of the road of Meluhha (in the imaginary geography of Sargon of Akkade). The road begins at Bazzu (identified in the Arabian desert), at the cistern of the Euphrates. This as well as its length makes its identification with the kings´road Melek>>Meluhha) possible. The work is probably a description of the empire of Sargon II in mythical terms. The name Musri (Misor) is preserved in Jordan till to present days for the socalled highland of Gilead. This is a retreat of the Amalekites connected by Arab historiography constantly with the Hyksos. Another occurence of the name Musri, the river of Musri, is the border river between Juda and the Amalekites, regionally also known as Besor due to the variance between b and m in semitic. See as an example Bar (aram. son) against ..."
"The Magan are mentioned by Plinius as Arabs dwelling in Arabia, west of the mouth of the Euphrates. The Malacae (that is Amalek) are mentioned too in Arabia in a late source (thanks to Aayko Eyma). The name of the Hyksos involves the Egyptian word for king, like the one of Amalek (coming from Malik/Melek/Meluhha).
Earlier on, during the 12-th century there is a straw mention of Magan, as a place on Syrian side of the Euphrates, a hunting place of an Assyrian king, not far of Karkemish.
Magan is called vulgo Kush in the manner Meluhha too Musri. Kush became the cultivated name for Ethiopia.
The list of occurences of Meluhha/Musri in Asia may be enlarged. It is however difficult to discern in each case, which Musri is realy meant.
It is perhaps time to ask why one used so frequently for Egypt a semitic name instead of a more appropriate one."
The Amalek Canaanites who were the Meluchha of Syria and Nubia probably introduced the winged griffin into thh Aegean, Central Asia and Anatolia. According to Bernal with regard to their settlement in Crete of the Middle Minoan Mycenaean period - "This Hyksos connection is further indicated by the introduction of the flying gallop and of the two royal emblems, the sphinx and the griffin..." Black Athena Volume II is of inestimable value in showing the connection between the early Aegean culture and these Canaanites.
These Syrian princes are in a latter time known as Keftiu or Kaphturim who occupy all of the Aegean coast and Syria. They appear at Tunip in Syria as black men.
Horses and chariots in the Flying gallop style which appear in the Tassili of Algeria and Acacus in Libya with the bitriangular schematisme ,double axe and introduction of Tifinagh. 'there are lots of equids on the 'Hyksos' scarabs showing ridden and other animals stretched out in flying gallop. These were recorded in detail by Petrie."
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
Great thread, when one looks at the timeline of the Holocene it's clearly understandable.
When did certain groups entered, who were these people, from where did they originate and what was the climatic circumstance like, during and prior to Holocene and afterwards. There is where the clue lies.
The site of Beisamoun is located in the western margins of the Hula Basin, c. 10 km south of Qiryat Shemona. A moderate Mediterranean climate and water resources in the immediate vicinity of the site, such as the ‘Enan and Agamon springs, were one of the major factors for establishing prehistoric settlements in this region, one of which was ‘Ein Mallaha, a major Natufian site in the Levant.
posted
I am bumping this thread because it talk about black in asia and give you a idea of thier looks etc...
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic