Egyptian Memorial Stone of a Syrian Soldier Drinking Beer
An Eighteenth Dynasty painting of a Syrian mercenary shown drinking beer in the company of his Egyptian wife and child.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
I found the Original but copied it as a screenshot I can't find the original Website..It's supposed to be a Syrian and Egyptian Woman.
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: Does anyone know anything about this picture:
Egyptian Memorial Stone of a Syrian Soldier Drinking Beer
An Eighteenth Dynasty painting of a Syrian mercenary shown drinking beer in the company of his Egyptian wife and child.
Were Syrians allowed to marry Egyptian Women?
Also, The woman looks less African than the Syrian!
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mau:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: Does anyone know anything about this picture:
Egyptian Memorial Stone of a Syrian Soldier Drinking Beer
An Eighteenth Dynasty painting of a Syrian mercenary shown drinking beer in the company of his Egyptian wife and child.
Were Syrians allowed to marry Egyptian Women?
Also, The woman looks less African than the Syrian!
The Syrian looks like what he is - an Arab.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Nice work awlaadberry and Jari.
I have not seen this before.
awlaadberry don't jump to conclusions, it will take many comparisons to determine where the man is from.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
I wish I could find the Website I copied it from...I think the website said It was a "Levantine" rather than a "Syrian" but I could be wrong..
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Guys - the dagger in his waistband suggests to me that he is a Canaanite.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Mike I think you are Correct, like I said the site I copied it from said he was from the Levant(Canaan), Im about 85% sure of that. Good eye Mike more prooof that he is a Levantine/Canaanite.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
awlaadberry don't jump to conclusions, it will take many comparisons to determine where the man is from.
What do you mean?
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: I wish I could find the Website I copied it from...I think the website said It was a "Levantine" rather than a "Syrian" but I could be wrong..
How does being Levantine make him not Syrian?
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: I found the Original but copied it as a screenshot I can't find the original Website..It's supposed to be a Syrian and Egyptian Woman.
Is there a picture here? If so, I didn't receive it.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: I found the Original but copied it as a screenshot I can't find the original Website..It's supposed to be a Syrian and Egyptian Woman.
Is there a picture here? If so, I didn't receive it.
I thought Syria was more specific and applied to the Assyrian Empire.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
awlaadberry - Syria was originally a small area in southern Canaan. Probably where the Philistines finally settled.
The modern region of Syria was a Roman creation. In those days it did not exist.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: [QB] Guys - the dagger in his waistband suggests to me that he is a Canaanite.
Which dagger and which picture? I think that you all are looking at something that I didn't receive.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: awlaadberry - Syria was originally a small area in southern Canaan. Probably where the Philistines finally settled.
The modern region of Syria was a Roman creation. In those days it did not exist.
Did Syria not apply to Assyria?? Did'nt know Modern Syria was a Roman Invention..Note Taken. Assyria
Alwaadberry I poste a Link to the Image..
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: awlaadberry - Syria was originally a small area in southern Canaan. Probably where the Philistines finally settled.
The modern region of Syria was a Roman creation. In those days it did not exist.
Ancient Syria was a much larger area than modern Syria and Syria is/was the Levant or a part of the Levant.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari:
Alwaadberry I poste a Link to the Image..
The link doesn't work either. It says "Domain unregistered. To view register at..."
Posted by AswaniAswad (Member # 16742) on :
Awlaad how would u say a Syrian is an Arab. Not all Syrians are arabs many syrians are really arameans including much of Iraq.
Many Syrians,Iraqi,and Lebanese are not arab,its like claiming the Akkadians to be Arabs.
Many Jacobites dont have an arab lineage.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: Awlaad how would u say a Syrian is an Arab. Not all Syrians are arabs many syrians are really arameans including much of Iraq.
Many Syrians,Iraqi,and Lebanese are not arab,its like claiming the Akkadians to be Arabs.
Many Jacobites dont have an arab lineage.
Because I am talking about the ancient Syrians like the one in the picture I posted. The ancient Syrians were the Amorites and they are Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
Did ancient Syrians consider themselves Arabs?
I know ancient Persians didn't, and there are even modern Iran-nationalists who oppose Arab cultural domination / assimilation / imperialism.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Whatbox: Did ancient Syrians consider themselves Arabs?
I know ancient Persians didn't, and there are even modern Iran-nationalists who oppose Arab cultural domination / assimilation / imperialism.
The Persians aren't Arabs. Unless you mean the Elamites.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Elamites are not Persians either but the original inhabitants of Iran before the Indo-European speaking Medes and Persians took over the land
quote:Originally posted by Ma'Ass: Were Syrians allowed to marry Egyptian Women?
Also, The woman looks less African than the Syrian!
To your first question, yes-- as long as the Egyptian women were not royals.
As to your second ridiculous comment, LOL Sure the woman looks less African despite her chocolate dark skin braided hair and white linen dress. Quit dreaming Afrangi. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Guys - the dagger in his waistband suggests to me that he is a Canaanite.
Interesting. That may explain his black appearance. We know the Bible among other sources suggest the Canaanites close relations to Egyptians and other Africans.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Guys - the dagger in his waistband suggests to me that he is a Canaanite.
Interesting. That may explain his black appearance. We know the Bible among other sources suggest the Canaanites close relations to Egyptians and other Africans.
Do you still believe that anyone dark must come from what you call "Africa"?
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
Egyptians are very closely related to people from the Levant, especially The Druse, Palestinians, and even Jews.
In the old days, there was no color barrier and people cared more about culture than color.
Africa is a very meaningless word and African has no relevant meaning except for some with political agendas.
Africa is part of Asia/Europe. One Large Landmass, where people moved freely, stopped only by enemies and sometimes natural barriers.
Travel from Cairo to Israel by airplane is only about an hour long.
Cairo to Ghana takes about 8 hours.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Then you must be one of those "some" with a political agenda, because the "Levant" is even more "meaningless" than "Africa".
As for the ramble about "no color barrier", that should therefore extend to other Africans. The Egyptians were very resolute about distinguishing themselves from "Asiatics" (Ammu). So, your characterization about these two entities being "very closely" related is another political agenda.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Indeed, but the kooky khawaga fails to realize his own double-speak.
In the mean time he misconstrues my point that the Bible states that Canaan is one of the four sons of Ham with the other sons being Kush (Sudan), Mizraim (Egypt), and Phut (Libya). Egypt, the entire Nile Valley, and perhaps Africa as a whole was referred to by the ancient Hebrews as 'The Land of Ham'. Therefore it is clear to anyone that the best interpretation is that Canaan is an extension of Africa.
Of course ancient Canaanites are not the same as Modern day Druse, Palestinians, and Jews who may have ancestry from Canaanites but also have ancestry from other peoples.
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
The Egyptians were very resolute about distinguishing themselves from "Asiatics" (Ammu).
You missed the other half, which is they did the same with Black Africans as well.
No need to go into a picture spam, but there are hundreds of such images everywhere you care to look.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ And how can the Egyptians distinguish themselves from black Africans when they ARE black Africans, moron??
What term did they even use for "black Africans".
By the way, the Egyptian word for black is KM which they used for themselves!
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mau:
You missed the other half, which is they did the same with Black Africans as well.
And there's more. Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Mau Egyptians are very closely related to people from the Levant, especially The Druse, Palestinians, and even Jews. In the old days, there was no color barrier and people cared more about culture than color.
Yes well kinda since they were running the Levant since the time of PepyI and II
is majesty sent me to lead this army 5 times to subdue the land of the Sand Dwellers, every time they rebelled, with these troops. I acted so that his majesty praised me for it. Told that there were rebels amongst these foreigners at the 'Nose-of-the-Gazelle's-head' I crossed in ships, together with these troops. I put to land at the back of the height of the mountain range to the north of the land of the Sand-Dwellers, while (the other) half of this army were travelling by land. I turned back, I obstructed all of them and slew every rebel amongst them. http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/pepi1.htm Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
Compare this man (the man in the first picture) to the men in the second picture. There is no difference in appearance.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ And how can the Egyptians distinguish themselves from black Africans when they ARE black Africans, moron??
What term did they even use for "black Africans".
By the way, the Egyptian word for black is KM which they used for themselves!
Didn't they call these "foreigners":
It wasn't about "African" and "non-African" because there was no "Africa".
Posted by Pulp (Member # 15591) on :
illustration after tomb of Seti I
Posted by Pulp (Member # 15591) on :
As I mentioned they played with skin color but with maintaining a general foreign appearance for the observer to recognize. Maybe with increased pressure of foreigners they wanted to draw a sharper line via white and black to themselves. Tiles found in the tomb of Rameses III depicting a Libyan, Nubian, Syrian, Bedouin, Hittite But the murals from Benni Hassan are one of the first showing Ammorites.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pulp: As I mentioned they played with skin color but with maintaining a general foreign appearance for the observer to recognize. Maybe with increased pressure of foreigners they wanted to draw a sharper line via white and black to themselves. Tiles found in the tomb of Rameses III depicting a Libyan, Nubian, Syrian, Bedouin, Hittite But the murals from Benni Hassan are one of the first showing Ammorites.
There is not a "general foreign appearance" here but five different appearances
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Whoops - Sorry Lioness. Pulp - The picture that you posted is bogus An "AUTHENTIC" Egyptian tile was "GLAZED".
The nonsense that you posted is NOT Glazed.
THESE are authentic Egyptian tile.
ONCE THE GLAZE HAS WORN OFF, OR HAS BEEN REMOVED, THERE IS NO WAY TO SAY WHAT THE ORIGINAL LOOKED LIKE - COLOR WISE.
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ And how can the Egyptians distinguish themselves from black Africans when they ARE black Africans, moron??
What term did they even use for "black Africans".
By the way, the Egyptian word for black is KM which they used for themselves!
Didn't they call these "foreigners":
It wasn't about "African" and "non-African" because there was no "Africa".
Excellent Points: There Was No Africa During Ancient Times. It is All About Regional Neighbors And Relationships.
As, I have Already Shown These "House Negros", Africa Is A Racist Western Concoction.
Mediterranean Region - Red Sea Region - makes much more sense than Africa. Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: ______SYRIAN______________________________KUSHITE_____________________________LIBYAN _____________HORUS__________________EGYPTIAN_______________________________________SYRIAN
illustration after tomb of Seti I
Lioness - This IS YOUR bogus post.
You know very well that this is a bogus MODERN DRAWING from the Theban mapping project.
In authentic Egyptian art, they are all of similar color.
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
With Ugly Looking Neighbors Like These
The Egyptians Must've Been Paranoid & Wanted To Keep Them Out of Egypt!!
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: ______SYRIAN______________________________KUSHITE_____________________________LIBYAN _____________HORUS__________________EGYPTIAN_______________________________________SYRIAN
illustration after tomb of Seti I
The Ancient Egyptians Seem "Perfect"!!
Combining All The Best Features In The Region!
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: ______SYRIAN______________________________KUSHITE_____________________________LIBYAN _____________HORUS__________________EGYPTIAN_______________________________________SYRIAN
illustration after tomb of Seti I
Lioness - This IS YOUR bogus post.
You know very well that this is a bogus MODERN DRAWING from the Theban mapping project.
In authentic Egyptian art, they are all of similar color.
Great picture Mike!
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: the thing is Lioness KNOWS this, as Altakruri already debunked her on the Herd of Ra/Mural or Races thread.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: ______SYRIAN______________________________KUSHITE_____________________________LIBYAN _____________HORUS__________________EGYPTIAN_______________________________________SYRIAN
illustration after tomb of Seti I
Lioness - This IS YOUR bogus post.
You know very well that this is a bogus MODERN DRAWING from the Theban mapping project.
In authentic Egyptian art, they are all of similar color.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: Awlaad how would u say a Syrian is an Arab. Not all Syrians are arabs many syrians are really arameans including much of Iraq.
Many Syrians,Iraqi,and Lebanese are not arab,its like claiming the Akkadians to be Arabs.
Many Jacobites dont have an arab lineage.
Because I am talking about the ancient Syrians like the one in the picture I posted. The ancient Syrians were the Amorites and they are Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.
Interesting that you say that Tariq because the guy does look somewhat like a modern Murad from the Yemen. But Amorites and Phoenicians were definitely not the only people occupying Syria/Palestine. There were a lot of round-headed fair-skinned folk there whom the Greeks called "white Syrians" who had nothing to do with Arabs.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Whoops - Sorry Lioness. Pulp - The picture that you posted is bogus An "AUTHENTIC" Egyptian tile was "GLAZED".
The nonsense that you posted is NOT Glazed.
THESE are authentic Egyptian tile.
ONCE THE GLAZE HAS WORN OFF, OR HAS BEEN REMOVED, THERE IS NO WAY TO SAY WHAT THE ORIGINAL LOOKED LIKE - COLOR WISE.
A thousand thanks Mike even though I can't get with that spouting of "whites are albinos" stuff I do have to admit many of your photo postings are indispensable to this forum and to furthering our knowledge of ancient peoples of the past. I hope you are keeping detailed documentation of all of your sources because i lost knwoledge of the whereabouts of a precious Old Kingdom painting of the Libyan Tehenu of the Fayum that shows beyond a doubt the original color and Fulani appearance of the ancestors of Libyans.
All I know is that it was in a book by Nina Davies that can not be withdrawn from libraries in Canada or the United States. If you find it on-line please post it.
The Syro-Canaanites, Libyans and some other groups were definitely often portrayed near the same color as teh Egyptians in Egyptian art. Lyin_ snake and others on this forum as well as European historians of the past do a grave disservice to these ancient peoples by posting all of the faded or lightened up and redrawn works that looked nothing like the originals.
Posted by Pulp (Member # 15591) on :
Can anyone here post a link to the museum that holds these tiles? Thx
It appears to be an international museum website.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: Didn't they call these "foreigners":
Yes. Foreigners were simply people who were non-Egyptians.
quote:It wasn't about "African" and "non-African" because there was no "Africa".
Of course the vast majority of foreigners the Egyptians encountered were fellow Africans. Just because they did not know of the concept of a continent or "Africa" does not mean it did not exist
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pulp: One of the oldest portrays of Ammu in comparison to ancient Egyptians below. Benni Hassan
On the same wall painting...
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Wall painting of foreign tribute from the Tomb of Puimre
Upon closer inspection...
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
quote: quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It wasn't about "African" and "non-African" because there was no "Africa". --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course the vast majority of foreigners the Egyptians encountered were fellow Africans. Just because they did not know of the concept of a continent or "Africa" does not mean it did not exist
There never was an Africa and Africa was created just for House Negros, to keep them from being part of the one continent.
Sadly, it is these same House Negros who would rather keep their White Masters' Creation Alive!
Black is also another useless meaningless term created by the same Racist Masters to keep certain people in perpetual prison. Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Mau - you are one silly boy.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: [QB] Compare this man (the man in the first picture) to the men in the second picture. There is no difference in appearance.
That's not surprising, considering they are both "Ammu", even if from different territories in the "Near East".
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
You will also find pictures of ancient Egyptians the same color as the Ammu in the picture you posted.
Nope. Unless the color was worn out or they are female personalities, you will not find ancient Egyptian male figures in the color of those "Ammu" male figures.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Is there something to be said here about as to why the throw stick [determinative for anything foreign] appears right ahead of the 'Ammu' but not in the other cases? Could this be read as a sign for 'the rest' [questionable, given the hieroglyphic ethnic designations, but still worth exploring], or is it relegated to the 'Ammu' in this image? Questions to ponder about.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
There never was an Africa and Africa was created just for House Negros, to keep them from being part of the one continent.
Sadly, it is these same House Negros who would rather keep their White Masters' Creation Alive!
Black is also another useless meaningless term created by the same Racist Masters to keep certain people in perpetual prison.
It looks like it was also "fabricated" for a House Sand Niggar like you, since even you couldn't resist noting that you are "From: Africa" under your profile. Funny stuff, LOL.
You sound like those gay republicans figures who spew anti-gay rhetoric.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pulp: [QB] Can anyone here post a link to the museum that holds these tiles? Thx
note: many pieces may not be featured at a given time on the Museum's website but the item can still be in their collection, example these tiles, otherwise searchable, google images:
kunsthistorisches museum ramesses tile
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: Awlaad how would u say a Syrian is an Arab. Not all Syrians are arabs many syrians are really arameans including much of Iraq.
Many Syrians,Iraqi,and Lebanese are not arab,its like claiming the Akkadians to be Arabs.
Many Jacobites dont have an arab lineage.
Because I am talking about the ancient Syrians like the one in the picture I posted. The ancient Syrians were the Amorites and they are Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.
Interesting that you say that Tariq because the guy does look somewhat like a modern Murad from the Yemen. But Amorites and Phoenicians were definitely not the only people occupying Syria/Palestine. There were a lot of round-headed fair-skinned folk there whom the Greeks called "white Syrians" who had nothing to do with Arabs.
Hi Dana! Actually I was referring to the dark-skinned Syrians like the one in the picture I posted. I'm not sure who Strabo was referring to when he said "White Syrians".
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: [qb] Didn't they call these "foreigners":
Yes. Foreigners were simply people who were non-Egyptians.
This is the very point I am trying to drive home. There was no "Africa" and there never has been one. The term "Africa" is a term given to you by outsiders with the aim of dividing and conquering and that is exactly what they have done very well - divided and conquered. What surprises me is your inability to see this.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Of course the vast majority of foreigners the Egyptians encountered were fellow Africans. Just because they did not know of the concept of a continent or "Africa" does not mean it did not exist [/QUOTE]
The ancient Egyptians (or the People of Kemet or the Copts) weren't ignorant people in need of outsiders to teach them the concept of the area they lived in. Give them the credit they deserve. They were intelligent people. You call the people they encountered and called foreigners "fellow Africans", but the ancient Egyptians (or the People of Kemet or the Copts) didn't call them that. They called them foreigners.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Wall painting of foreign tribute from the Tomb of Puimre
Upon closer inspection...
For some reason, the pictures you posted aren't opening on my computer. I wonder if they are opening for others here.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
This is the very point I am trying to drive home. There was no "Africa" and there never has been one.
This is like saying that the earth is not spherical and never could be "spherical", because some ancients or another thought it was flat.
quote: The term "Africa" is a term given to you by outsiders with the aim of dividing and conquering
Do you know the etymological origin of "Africa", 'cause the last time I checked, it was still shrouded in mystery.
It is a matter of note that even ancient Egyptians looked towards inside Africa to claim their origins, in direct contrast to modern revisionists. All the lands of divinity were in Africa; none outside of it. Why is that?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Yemeni Arabs
Posted by alurubenson (Member # 12885) on :
nominated statements for the weekly award of :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
This is the very point I am trying to drive home. There was no "Africa" and there never has been one.
Nominee answers to above post: This is like saying that the earth is not spherical and never could be "spherical", because some ancients or another thought it was flat.
quote:It looks like it was also "fabricated" for a House Sand Niggar like you, since even you couldn't resist noting that you are "From: Africa" under your profile. Funny stuff, LOL.
You sound like those gay republicans figures who spew anti-gay rhetoric.
quote:Of course the vast majority of foreigners the Egyptians encountered were fellow Africans. Just because they did not know of the concept of a continent or "Africa" does not mean it did not exist
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
This is the very point I am trying to drive home. There was no "Africa" and there never has been one.
This is like saying that the earth is not spherical and never could be "spherical", because some ancients or another thought it was flat.
quote: The term "Africa" is a term given to you by outsiders with the aim of dividing and conquering
Do you know the etymological origin of "Africa", 'cause the last time I checked, it was still shrouded in mystery.
It is a matter of note that even ancient Egyptians looked towards inside Africa to claim their origins, in direct contrast to modern revisionists. All the lands of divinity were in Africa; none outside of it. Why is that?
Pigeon Brain is just another "House Negro", who can't think for himself, but loves to remain a "perpetual Prisoner".
His White Master created a separate prison for him and called it Africa (The Dark Continent) and then called him "Black" and he accepted his fate without using his limited Pigeon Brain.
What a waste, Choosing to be a prisoner forever!
Could this be the reason why so many such people are destroying their lives and nations?
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
alurubenson
Would you care to go here and defend your translation.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ma-asshole:
Pigeon Brain is just another "House Negro", who can't think for himself, but loves to remain a "perpetual Prisoner".
His White Master created a separate prison for him and called it Africa (The Dark Continent) and then called him "Black" and he accepted his fate without using his limited Pigeon Brain.
What a waste, Choosing to be a prisoner forever!
Could this be the reason why so many such people are destroying their lives and nations?
Camel shyt for brain, how do you come off talking about anyone prisoned when a Caged Sand Niggar like you has been enslaved to a no-return point of not being able to even have an original language of your own? You have been focked in the skull by both Arabs and Europeans.
And you speak of people accepting Africa; what do you suppose your own dumb mindfucked Diaper Head is doing when you write under your profile that you are from Africa? Is that no parroting after your white masters? Is that not hypocritical of you, Desert Monkey?
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
^
Now, the House Negro, with the Pigeon Brain wants to stand up and admit Defeat.
With limited brain faculty, the House Negro is happy to Parrot what his White Master's Created for him, becasue he has fed him well all those years.
Yes, such a sorry excuse for a human being, without the capacity to think for himself is indeed a sad case for existence.
Your sorry Negro Ass Can Jump Up and Down and Salute Your White Slave Master, but you'll always be prisoner and a beggar.
If you start to think for yourself and use your limited pigeon brain, you'll realize that Africa was created by your White Master to keep you and Other Negros from getting anywhere. You have just F*cked Yourself!!
Now, House Negro .....go away and wallow in your Black African MUCK in Your Dark Continent!
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
camel-forking towelhead sodo-monkey, when you've got a language of your own, instead of your slave master's, then come and moan to us about 'house negroes'.
Get the Arab foot out of your ass first, before you talk about some "house negro".
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by awlaadberry:
This is the very point I am trying to drive home. There was no "Africa" and there never has been one.
This is like saying that the earth is not spherical and never could be "spherical", because some ancients or another thought it was flat.
quote:
Will you give me a break with the "the earth is not flat" BS?! We're not talking about the shape of the earth here, so cut out the nonsense!
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
I'm not going give your ass a break for being a total dolt. You are a disgrace for scholarship.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: [QB]
quote: The term "Africa" is a term given to you by outsiders with the aim of dividing and conquering
Do you know the etymological origin of "Africa", 'cause the last time I checked, it was still shrouded in mystery.
The term originally referred to the area of present-day Tunisia. So if you want to call anyone "African", you should call the Tunisians "African". That's all.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
List the hard data [including etymological data + the words evolutionary stages through time, backed by the primary text names and time first attestation]that you are getting this from, klutz. This ain't the "simon says so" circus troop.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: I'm not going give your ass a break for being a total dolt. You are a disgrace for scholarship.
You can resort to your childish name-calling all you want. It's very clear who is the disgrace.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
I'm calling you by your rightful name. You are not fit for grown up conversation.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: List the hard data [including etymological data + the words evolutionary stages through time, backed by the primary text names and time first attestation]that you are getting this from, klutz. This ain't the "simon says so" circus troop.
If you knew anything about history, you would know this. I'm not going to list anything for you. Look it up yourself if you want to know. Until you know, you should shut your mouth.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
I know something about one particular history; that your head is frozen in the past. Before you make crackpot claims about a history of the word, make sure you know its history first. Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
Will you give me a break with the "the earth is not flat" BS?! We're not talking about the shape of the earth here, so cut out the nonsense!
It's called showing analogous thinking. The ancients may be forgiven for their limited knowledge in geography; they are the product of their time, but there is no excuse for your similarly limited thinking in the 21st century.
This from the same clown who mistakes his ill-education in English for 'flip-flopping'.
When for instance, someone writes:
Get me the police instruction book.
And then re-writes it as: Get me the instruction book for the police.
This moron will mistake the phenomenon for flip flopping.
If someone says: I'll take the chicken breast.
And then writes: I'll take the breast of chicken.
The fool will mistake that for flip-flopping.
This is grammar that he can learn from prep-schoolers.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
How contradictory you are. You dismiss the notion of Africa as a recent term never used by the Egyptians but claim the Term "Foreigners" was used by the Egyptians.
The Term referred to the people south of Egypt was "Nahesi" and yes the Egyptians showed themselves to be linked with Nehesi people.
^^^^^^ The Egyptians themselves claimed to come from Punt(Modern day Eritrea/Ethiopia). the Puntites were Nehesi, and Africans.
Call it what you want but the Egyptians saw themselves as Part of Africa, not Arabia, Asia, etc. but Africa and the Nile valley.
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Of course the vast majority of foreigners the Egyptians encountered were fellow Africans. Just because they did not know of the concept of a continent or "Africa" does not mean it did not exist
The ancient Egyptians (or the People of Kemet or the Copts) weren't ignorant people in need of outsiders to teach them the concept of the area they lived in. Give them the credit they deserve. They were intelligent people. You call the people they encountered and called foreigners "fellow Africans", but the ancient Egyptians (or the People of Kemet or the Copts) didn't call them that. They called them foreigners. [/QUOTE]
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: I'm calling you by your rightful name. You are not fit for grown up conversation.
Pigeon Brain - House Negro , You're Nothing but a Stupid Kid Who Can't Think For Himself.
We're going to Ride Your Stupid Ass, So Hard, You're going to wish you were a Field Negro
It seems your limited Pigeon Brain has cheated you from the ability to think for yourself, that you have decided to let your White Slave Master tell you who the F*ck You Are and Where The F*ck you came from.
House Negro, go piss on yourself, because that is what you are.
You have lost the Argument and We're Not Giving Your Ass Any Breaks!
Now, House Negro: Get Lost In Your Dark Continent!
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Ma'DuneCoon, a confirmed faggot, wants to ride my you know what...
We're going to Ride Your Stupid Ass, So Hard - by the diaper fuckhead
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
^@The Explorer. Why do you white people alway's resort to name calling when you can't prove your point.
When some resorts to name calling it's proof they are wrong.
Name calling is a cognitive bias and a technique to promote propaganda.Propagandists use the name-calling technique to incite fears or arouse positive prejudices with the intent that invoked fear (based on fearmongering tactics) or trust will encourage those that read, see or hear propaganda to construct a negative opinion, in respect to the former, or a positive opinion, with respect to the latter, about a person, group, or set of beliefs or ideas that the propagandist would wish the recipients to believe. The method is intended to provoke conclusions and actions about a matter apart from an impartial examinations of the facts of the matter. When this tactic is used instead of an argument, name-calling is thus a substitute for rational, fact-based arguments against an idea or belief, based upon its own merits, and becomes an argumentum ad hominem.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Hey Ma-ass try removing Africa from your location before trying to talk crap. You are the head Hyena.
Back to the field for your Muktaba House Mongoloid arse!!
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: How contradictory you are. You dismiss the notion of Africa as a recent term never used by the Egyptians but claim the Term "Foreigners" was used by the Egyptians.
The Term referred to the people south of Egypt was "Nahesi" and yes the Egyptians showed themselves to be linked with Nehesi people.
^^^^^^
[/QB][/QUOTE]
How am I contradictory???
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: [QB] The Egyptians themselves claimed to come from Punt(Modern day Eritrea/Ethiopia). the Puntites were Nehesi, and Africans.
Call it what you want but the Egyptians saw themselves as Part of Africa, not Arabia, Asia, etc. but Africa and the Nile valley.
I keep telling you that there is no such thing as "African" and that the people of the past didn't call themselves "Africans", but you keep repeating that they were "Africans". Why do you keep calling them something that they didn't call themselves? Isn't that bad manners?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
@ That punk, bi'shoppin'ma'vagina
Why are you coal-burning chicks convinced that you are some keyboard x-ray bug-eyes, who can physically see through cyberspace to tell whom the fock you are bitching to? Are you pumped on coke and/or gay potion?
You ought to save your PTSS-anonymous sermons to your gay support group, am I correct? Your time is better spent worrying about little boy sodomizers of your churches, "bishop", instead of making a career of imagining skin colors of folks you never met.
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
^
Honestly, It is hard to be civil to these FOOLS, when they're so hard headed, especially the Pigeon Brain Kid. Egyptians First, Arabs Second, And Whites Last:
They All Despised Those House Negros.
Africans Are Our Friends, But We Hate Those House Negros, Because They're Nothing But Conniving, Gutless, Pigeon Brains.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Get your camel-shagging mau'hawked ass outta here, you desert stormed beef jerky. LOL
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
I keep telling you that there is no such thing as "African" and that the people of the past didn't call themselves "Africans" ^^^^ You can call it what you want the Egyptians linked themselves with people within the Continent of__________(Fill in the Blank) more specifically they claimed to originate in Punt(East_______________Fill in the Blank) which is Modern day Eritrea and Ethiopia.
They did not link themselves with Asiatics, Arabs, or any other people except those south of them in the continent of_______________(Fill in the blank.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Ma'asshole says:
quote:Originally posted by Ma'big'fat'ass:
Africans Are Our Friends
What "Africans"? Thought your were deluded of its non-existence.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
LOL, I gotta admit I like your style, you are not like "The Hyenas", you are more subtle with your agenda.
O.K lets play...
You claim the Egyptians never called themselves "Africans" but at the same time subtly imply that other Africans were "Foreigners" to them despite there the Egyptians not using the word "Foreigner" but Nehesi to designate the Africans south of them.
Its quite clear who the Egyptians showed were like themselves but Mr. Slick Rick Alwaadberry forgot about the images of "Nehesi" with the same features and skin and culture as the Egyptians...right.
Guess you forgot about the Image of Ramses Driving a Chariot into the "Nehesi" where they have the same skin color as the Pharoah himself...
Means nothing though..Huh??
quote:Originally posted by Slick-Rick awlaadberry: How am I contradictory???
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: I keep telling you that there is no such thing as "African" and that the people of the past didn't call themselves "Africans" ^^^^ You can call it what you want the Egyptians linked themselves with people within the Continent of__________(Fill in the Blank) more specifically they claimed to originate in Punt(East_______________Fill in the Blank) which is Modern day Eritrea and Ethiopia.
They did not link themselves with Asiatics, Arabs, or any other people except those south of them in the continent of_______________(Fill in the blank.
Linked themselves to them how and where is your proof? And how do you explain this: Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Yes, that can easily be explained: They are prisoners of war!
"Slick-Rick" is full of contradiction. Uses the word "Arabian", which wasn't used by the ancients either, but wants to do away with "African", because ancients presumably did not use the word.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Slick Rick did I not just Give you the info about the Egyptians linking themselves to Punt, Modern Day Eritrea and Ethiopia??
Mr. Slick did I not just give you an Image where the Defeated NHSI have the same skin and features as the Egyptians??
Guess that means nothing huh, just a run of the mill coincidence.
quote:Originally posted by Slick-Rick awlaadberry:
^^^^^ LOL, So I guess Africans can't go to war with each other, Greeks/Roman did it, Romans/Celts did hell the Arabs did it plenty of times but if Africans do it they are two seperate entities with nothing in common...
Slick-Rick Alwaadberry...
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Slick Rick did I not just Give you the info about the Egyptians linking themselves to Punt, Modern Day Eritrea and Ethiopia??
Mr. Slick did I not just give you an Image where the Defeated NHSI have the same skin and features as the Egyptians??
Guess that means nothing huh, just a run of the mill coincidence.
quote:Originally posted by Slick-Rick awlaadberry: [qb]
^^^^^
No. It means nothing whatsoever. They didn't call themselves "Africans". I want you to show me where they called themselves "Africans" or said that they were the same as all the people living in the area called "Africa", but different from people across the Red Sea. That's all I want you to show me. All of this other stuff that you are saying means nothing.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Uses the word "Arabian", which wasn't used by the ancients either, but wants to do away with "African", because ancients presumably did not use the word.
The more you talk, the more you show your ignorance, so why don't you just shut your mouth. Of course the word Arab was used by the ancients. Stop showing your ignorance.
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: I keep telling you that there is no such thing as "African" and that the people of the past didn't call themselves "Africans" ^^^^ You can call it what you want the Egyptians linked themselves with people within the Continent of__________(Fill in the Blank) more specifically they claimed to originate in Punt(East_______________Fill in the Blank) which is Modern day Eritrea and Ethiopia.
They did not link themselves with Asiatics, Arabs, or any other people except those south of them in the continent of_______________(Fill in the blank.
Linked themselves to them how and where is your proof? And how do you explain this:
This proves that the Ancient Egyptians were the first people to enslave these House Negros. They even recorded their deeds with great pride!
Egyptians First, Arabs Second, Whites Third:
They All Enslaved House Negros!
That guy on the left looks a little like Pigeon Brain with his compact head!
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Mr. Slick-Rick I said the Egyptians called the people South of them(Africans in this case) NHSI-Southerner.
The NHSI came in all colors and shapes, some almost identical to the Egyptians themselves.
The NHSI of Punt(Modern Day Ethiopia/Eritrea) were seen as brothers in the Eyes of the Egyptians.
and what was across the Red Sea?? Other than Sand Dunes and Camel Jockeys I can't recall?? What was "Across the Red Sea" that Egyptians would link themselves too??
Punt indeed seems to have been a commercial center for goods not only from within its own borders, but from elsewhere in Africa.
However, many modern Egyptologists place Punt much nearer to Egypt. We known that some of Punt's treasures were carried over land by way of Nmay and Irem (through the modern Sudan). We also hear of the children of the chiefs of Punt that were raised at the Egyptian court alongside the children of Kush (Nubia) and Irem. Therefore, it has been assumed that Punt was not so far away, and most modern scholars place it perhaps on Africa's East Coast perhaps only just south of Egypt. Furthermore, modern attempts to classify flora and fauna suggest that Punt may have been located in the southern Sudanese or the Eritrean region of Ethiopia.
The more you talk, the more you show your ignorance, so why don't you just shut your mouth. Of course the word Arab was used by the ancients. Stop showing your ignorance.
Toilet rug head, bitching is thoroughly cheap. How about you demonstrate the invalidity of what is being said about your warped up psyche.
"Arabian" is not a word of antiquity. I dare your arab ass to demonstrate it with hard data.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ma'big'fat'ass:
This proves that the Ancient Egyptians were the first people to enslave these House Negros. They even recorded their deeds with great pride! [/b]
Egyptians First, Arabs Second, Whites Third:
They All Enslaved House Negros!
That guy on the left looks a little like Pigeon Brain with his compact head!
Oil-monkey, what do you make of this?
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
LOL, Bird of a Feather...
The Muktaba Mongoloid and his Slick-Rick Abdeed..
Is this the New Jihidist Agenda?? To claim Africa does'nt exist..lol
and poke fun at the Kushite Africans???
Alwaadberry_______ ^^^^Ma-Ass
Your Asiatic A-rab ancestors as slaves in Drag tending the hair of the Nile Valley African Queens...
quote:Originally posted by Ma-ass:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
Linked themselves to them how and where is your proof? And how do you explain this:
This proves that the Ancient Egyptians were the first people to enslave these House Negros. They even recorded their deeds with great pride!
Egyptians First, Arabs Second, Whites Third:
They All Enslaved House Negros!
That guy on the left looks a little like Pigeon Brain with his compact head! [/QUOTE]
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Mr. Slick-Rick I said the Egyptians called the people South of them(Africans in this case) NHSI-Southerner.
The NHSI came in all colors and shapes, some almost identical to the Egyptians themselves.
The NHSI of Punt(Modern Day Ethiopia/Eritrea) were seen as brothers in the Eyes of the Egyptians.
and what was across the Red Sea?? Other than Sand Dunes and Camel Jockeys I can't recall?? What was "Across the Red Sea" that Egyptians would link themselves too??
Punt indeed seems to have been a commercial center for goods not only from within its own borders, but from elsewhere in Africa.
However, many modern Egyptologists place Punt much nearer to Egypt. We known that some of Punt's treasures were carried over land by way of Nmay and Irem (through the modern Sudan). We also hear of the children of the chiefs of Punt that were raised at the Egyptian court alongside the children of Kush (Nubia) and Irem. Therefore, it has been assumed that Punt was not so far away, and most modern scholars place it perhaps on Africa's East Coast perhaps only just south of Egypt. Furthermore, modern attempts to classify flora and fauna suggest that Punt may have been located in the southern Sudanese or the Eritrean region of Ethiopia.
It's clear to me that discussing this with you is a waste of my time.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
So is this you admission of defeat??
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Mr. Slick-Rick I said the Egyptians called the people South of them(Africans in this case) NHSI-Southerner.
The NHSI came in all colors and shapes, some almost identical to the Egyptians themselves.
The NHSI of Punt(Modern Day Ethiopia/Eritrea) were seen as brothers in the Eyes of the Egyptians.
and what was across the Red Sea?? Other than Sand Dunes and Camel Jockeys I can't recall?? What was "Across the Red Sea" that Egyptians would link themselves too??
Punt indeed seems to have been a commercial center for goods not only from within its own borders, but from elsewhere in Africa.
However, many modern Egyptologists place Punt much nearer to Egypt. We known that some of Punt's treasures were carried over land by way of Nmay and Irem (through the modern Sudan). We also hear of the children of the chiefs of Punt that were raised at the Egyptian court alongside the children of Kush (Nubia) and Irem. Therefore, it has been assumed that Punt was not so far away, and most modern scholars place it perhaps on Africa's East Coast perhaps only just south of Egypt. Furthermore, modern attempts to classify flora and fauna suggest that Punt may have been located in the southern Sudanese or the Eritrean region of Ethiopia.
It's clear to me that discussing this with you is a waste of my time.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Ma'asshole says:
quote:Originally posted by Ma'big'fat'ass:
Africans Are Our Friends
What "Africans"? Thought your were deluded of its non-existence.
ROTFLMAO
Hilarious how the Arab-Russo fool contradicts himself!
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
He is not alone. awlaadberry says the people of antiquity did not use the word "Africa", but is willing to use the word "Arabia" that was not known in antiquity either.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Egypt is in the continent Africa. At the time of Pharonic Egypt the Egyptians did not have a concept of continents, did not have a word equivalent to Africa and did not record anything indicating knowledge of the boundaries of Africa or Asia.
Therefore Explorer, Jari, awlaadberry and mau are all right.
Another example: North America has an accepted geographic definition . However the pre colonial natives did not have an equivalent word or concept for the continent or knowledge of the boundaries of such a huge landmass.
So it's true that Egypt is in Africa but the Egyptians didn't know it or know the dimensions and boundaries of Africa. Arabia is in Asia.
As far as people of these regions is concerned the continental names are relevant sometimes and not relevant other times.
For example ancient Egypt and Libya are in Africa.
Arabia is in Asia
Namibia is in Africa.
Khosian Namibians are Africans. The ancient Arabs were Asian.
However the original Arabs may be more similar genetically similar to the ancient Egyptians than they are to the Khosians.
So in accepting continental names as geography we cannot necessarily assume that that means any people in a given continent are more related to each other than they are to people from another continent. In some cases they are but not all. At the same time you can say this and accept the standard continental names as geographic.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: "Slick-Rick" is full of contradiction. Uses the word "Arabian", which wasn't used by the ancients either, but wants to do away with "African", because ancients presumably did not use the word.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Slick Rick did I not just Give you the info about the Egyptians linking themselves to Punt, Modern Day Eritrea and Ethiopia??
Mr. Slick did I not just give you an Image where the Defeated NHSI have the same skin and features as the Egyptians??
Guess that means nothing huh, just a run of the mill coincidence.
quote:Originally posted by Slick-Rick awlaadberry:
^^^^^ LOL, So I guess Africans can't go to war with each other, Greeks/Roman did it, Romans/Celts did hell the Arabs did it plenty of times but if Africans do it they are two seperate entities with nothing in common...
Slick-Rick Alwaadberry...
It's obvious Ma'Asshole and Awlottamess can't keep their stories straight.
Posted by Mau (Member # 18613) on :
^ The Kid is back with his Silly Stickers and wacky lack of comprehension.
Africa is a Myth, so are so called Africans.
Black People are another Myth, that can not be defined even by so called Blacks, themselves.
Therefore, you lose on both counts and consider yourself defeated.
Educated People such as Chairman Mau, can use the term for the sake of convenience, but this does not mean that we agree with the terminology, House Negro Fool!
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: He is not alone. awlaadberry says the people of antiquity did not use the word "Africa", but is willing to use the word "Arabia" that was not known in antiquity either.
The origin of the word "Arab"
Hitherto, the first actual use of the word Arab in history is to be found in an Assyrian inscription of 853 B.C., commemorating the defeat of a mutinous chieftain, called Gindibu the Aribi during the reign of king Shalmaneser III (858-824 B.C.). Arabs are then mentioned quite often, until the 6th century B.C. as Aribi or Arabuthat indicates a vassalage to the Assyrians. The first Greek who is accredited to have acquired some geographical knowledge was Homer, who flourished in 1000 or 800 B.C. He has referred to the Syrians under the name Arimi (the Biblical, Aram) and the Arabs under the name of Erembi. The place-name Arabia occurs for the first time in Greek writings. Herodotus (484-425 B.C,), followed by most other Greek and Latin writers, extended the term Arabia and Arab to the whole peninsula and everything in it, even including the eastern desert of Egypt between the Red Sea and the Nile. References to the Arabs, in addition, are also found in the anonymous "Periplus of the Erythraean Sea" (between 95 A.D. and 130 A.C.). The word Saracen, first used in Greek literature too, is a transcription of an Arabic word meaning "easterner." As for the Arabs' use of the word, it occurs for the first time in the ancient epigraphical material originating in southern Arabia, where it is clearly used for Bedouin. In the north, the word is used firstly in the 4th century A.D., in one of the oldest surviving records of the language that became classical Arabic.
Further account of the Arabs comes in the 10th chapter of Genesis of the Old Testament, which names the descendants of Noah, whose elder son, Shem is regarded as the ancestor of the Hebrews, Arabs and Armaens, - the speakers of Semitic language. But the term Arabs is not explicitly mentioned in Genesis. It is however suggested that the "mixed multitude" (Hebrew, erev) mentioned in Exodus (xii, 38) as having accompanied the Israelites into the wanderness from Egypt may be for Arabs. According to "Dictionary of the Bible" (ed. by James Hastings, New York, 1898, 1st vol., p. 135), "The employment of the name Arab for an inhabitant of any portion of the vast peninsula known to us as Arabia, begins somewhere in the 3rd century B.C., though the only trace of it in Old Testament is in the 2 ch., 21, where the Arabians that are near the Ethiopeans' would seem naturally to refer to the neighbours of the Habasha, whence there are grounds for placing in the extreme south of Yamen." The word arabia is expressly given to this country in the Old Testament (I Kings x. 15) when describing the visit of the Queen Sheba to Sololmon, which took place 1005 B.C. We also find the word arabah in Deut. i. 7 and ii. 8. Some writers hold that the village called Arabah, situated near Tehama, may be the name for the whole peninsula, an opinion scarcely deserving the least notice.
In the Bible, the name Arab is the first word used in the second book of Chronicles (xvii, 11) to refer to nomads from the east bank of the Jordan river in the time of king Jehosophat (900-800 B.C.), such as "...and the Arabians brought him flocks, seven thousand and seven hundred rams, and seven thousand and seven hundred he- goats."
The word arab or arabah is probably derived from a Semitic root related to nomadism. In the Arabic language, the word arab (derived from i'rab), means "those who speak clearly" as contrast with ajam (those who speak indistincly). In Holy Koran, the word arab has never used for the country of Arabia, but characterised the residence of Ismail, the son of Abraham as an "uncultivated land." In the time of Ismail his place of residence had no name, therefore, it was given the name of an "uncultivated land." In the Old Testament, the word midbar is used for Ismail's home, meaning a desert or a barren land, which closely corresponds to the Koranic description.
The peninsula was divided by the ancient geographers into Arabia Petraea, Arabia Felix and Arabia Deserta. The Arabia Petraea corresponded to the present Hijaz and eastern Najd. Arabia Felix to Yamen and Hazarmawt and Arabia Deserta comprised the rest of the country. Arab Peninsula (jazirat al-Arab) is situated in south-west Asia, embosomed with sea waters on its three sides, i.e., the Red Sea in the west, the Arabian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman in the east, and the Arabian Sea in the south; is considered to be a largest peninsula in the world with an area of about 1,230,000 sq. miles, i.e., about one third of Europe, or almost six times bigger than France, ten times that of Italy and eight times bigger than Switzerland. Geographically it is an extention of the Sahara desert. It is divided into various parts of which Hijaz, Najd, Yamen, Hazarmawt and Oman are most important. The whole land is almost barren. The climate is extremely hot in summer and the coastal tracts are among the most torrid regions.
Egypt is in the continent Africa. At the time of Pharonic Egypt the Egyptians did not have a concept of continents, did not have a word equivalent to Africa and did not record anything indicating knowledge of the boundaries of Africa or Asia.
Out of curiosity, can you explain why all the holy lands were in Africa [from Ym to Pwnt], but not in Asia, according to the ancient Egyptians?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
The origin of the word "Arab"
Hitherto, the first actual use of the word Arab in history is to be found in an Assyrian inscription of 853 B.C., c...
Here's another take on that, courtesy Wiki...
Although the term mâtu arbâi describing Gindibu in Assyrians texts is conventionally translated of Arab land, nothing is known with certainty about the exact location or extent of the land being referred to, nor what literal meaning the name had. In fact several different ethnonyms are found in Assyrian texts that are conventionally translated "Arab": Arabi, Arubu, Aribi and Urbi. The presence of Proto-Arabic names amongst those qualified by the terms arguably justifies the translation "Arab" although it is not certain if they all in fact represent the same group. They may plausibly be borrowings from Aramaic or Canaanite of words derived from either the proto-Semitic root ʿgh-r-b or ʿ-r-b. It is in the case of the Assyrian forms that a possible derivation from ʿgh-r-b ("west") is most plausible, referring to people or land lying west of Assyria in a similar vein to the later Greek use of the term Saracen meaning in Arabic "Easterners", šarqiyyūn for people living in the east.
And in any case, nowhere in the above, is there a word "Arabia", as understood today.
You hypocrisy can be seen from the fact that on one hand, you claim that you can trace the word 'Africa' back to antiquity, by describing it as a word use for 'Tunisia', and on another hand, you say it means nothing because it was not used by people of antiquity. You are full of double talk.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote: Originally posted by Mike111:
In authentic Egyptian art, they are all of similar color.
Mike, your brain is really off kilter. Here you are saying that the colors are similar A few threads later, see below, you posted examples of people in three different colors, namely jet black, red brown, and yellow ocher. Mike you've got to watch these contradictions. They keep coming back to bite you.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
THESE are authentic Egyptian tile.
ONCE THE GLAZE HAS WORN OFF, OR HAS BEEN REMOVED, THERE IS NO WAY TO SAY WHAT THE ORIGINAL LOOKED LIKE - COLOR WISE.
HOREMHEB last Pharaoh of the 18th Dynasty from 1319 BC to late 1292 BC, Before he became pharaoh, Horemheb was the commander in chief of the army under the reigns of Tutankamun and Ay.
deal with it,
it's a "mixed"
bag
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: [QB]
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
The origin of the word "Arab"
Hitherto, the first actual use of the word Arab in history is to be found in an Assyrian inscription of 853 B.C., c...
Here's another take on that, courtesy Wiki...
Although the term mâtu arbâi describing Gindibu in Assyrians texts is conventionally translated of Arab land, nothing is known with certainty about the exact location or extent of the land being referred to, nor what literal meaning the name had. In fact several different ethnonyms are found in Assyrian texts that are conventionally translated "Arab": Arabi, Arubu, Aribi and Urbi. The presence of Proto-Arabic names amongst those qualified by the terms arguably justifies the translation "Arab" although it is not certain if they all in fact represent the same group. They may plausibly be borrowings from Aramaic or Canaanite of words derived from either the proto-Semitic root ʿgh-r-b or ʿ-r-b. It is in the case of the Assyrian forms that a possible derivation from ʿgh-r-b ("west") is most plausible, referring to people or land lying west of Assyria in a similar vein to the later Greek use of the term Saracen meaning in Arabic "Easterners", šarqiyyūn for people living in the east.
And in any case, nowhere in the above, is there a word "Arabia", as understood today.
You are pathetic. Do you know this?
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
You hypocrisy can be seen from the fact that on one hand, you claim that you can trace the word 'Africa' back to antiquity, by describing it as a word use for 'Tunisia', and on another hand, you say it means nothing because it was not used by people of antiquity. You are full of double talk.
Do you use the word "African" to mean just the people of Tunisia??? If not, your "Africa/African" has no meaning.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Assyria was located in what is now modern day Iraq. West of there would be Syria which is also, along with Turkey, Syria is East of Greece. A little later on Assyria expanded the empire to include part of northern Arabia (671 BC) It seems though, Arabia would be more properly South of Assyria rather than West. I guess it's just nitpicking though. They probably were lumping people together
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
awlaadberry you could argue that "Africa" is a definite geographical region but it doesn't always define a people's similarity, especially when considering the proximity of Arabia in Asia compared to Egypt and then comparing West Africa or South Africa which are much further away although in the geographical region "Africa"
You could allow them them their geographic name but move on to your point about if that large geographical name defines a people as different or does not define people as different from close by areas of another continent.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
You are pathetic. Do you know this?
Here is what I know: You are a fuckhead.
quote: Do you use the word "African" to mean just the people of Tunisia??? If not, your "Africa/African" has no meaning.
In that case, using your own wacky standards, your "Arabian" has no meaning.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: awlaadberry you could argue that "Africa" is a definite geographical region but it doesn't always define a people's similarity, especially when considering the proximity of Arabia in Asia compared to Egypt and then comparing West Africa or South Africa which are much further away although in the geographical region "Africa"
You could allow them them their geographic name but move on to your point about if that large geographical name defines a people as different or does not define people as different from close by areas of another continent.
But how can I allow them the geographical name when talking about history when the name "Africa/African" didn't exist throughout history - not in the sense that they are using it. Their use of the term is misleading. How can they call the ancient Egyptians "African" when they (the ancient Egyptians) didn't call themselves "African"? How can they call the people in Djibouti "African" and the people a hop skip and a jump across the Bab Al Mandab another thing? That's ridiculous. How can they call the people all the way in Gabon the same people ("African") as the people in Egypt, but the people a stone's throw away in Arabia a different people? That's preposterous.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
"Arabia" is a fictitious entity that did not exist throughout history, and so, according to awlaadberry's dopey thinking, "Arabia" ought to have no meaning. It is a useless word. Ancient Sumerians, Canaanites, the Uruk or even Elamites never called themselves "Arabs". It is a mystery how this loon ever made it past rudimentary geography class.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: How can they call the people all the way in Gabon the same people ("African") as the people in Egypt, but the people a stone's throw away in Arabia a different people? That's preposterous.
[/QB]
what is the common thread if there is one that specifically connects an Arabian to an Egyptian apart from that they are close to each other?
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: How can they call the people all the way in Gabon the same people ("African") as the people in Egypt, but the people a stone's throw away in Arabia a different people? That's preposterous.
what is the common thread if there is one that specifically connects an Arabian to an Egyptian apart from that they are close to each other? [/QB]
Adnani Arabs are half "Egyptian" because the mother of the Adnani Arabs was an "Egyptian".
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: "Arabia" is a fictitious entity that did not exist throughout history, and so, according to awlaadberry's dopey thinking, "Arabia" ought to have no meaning. It is a useless word. Ancient Sumerians, Canaanites, the Uruk or even Elamites never called themselves "Arabs". It is a mystery how this loon ever made it past rudimentary geography class.
Ancient Accounts of Arabia, 430 BCE - 550 CE
* Herodotus: The Histories, c. 430 BCE * Strabo: Geography, c. 22 CE * Dio Cassius: History of Rome, c. 220 CE * Ammianus Marcellinus: The Roman History, c. 380 CE * Procopius of Caesarea: History of the Wars, c. 550 CE
************************************************** Herodotus: The Histories, Book III, c. 430 BCE
The Arabs keep such pledges more religiously than almost any other people. They plight faith with the forms following. When two men would swear a friendship, they stand on each side of a third: he with a sharp stone makes a cut on the inside of the hand of each near the middle finger, and, taking a piece from their dress, dips it in the blood of each, and moistens therewith seven stones lying in the midst, calling the while on Bacchus and Urania. After this, the man who makes the pledge commends the stranger (or the citizen, if citizen he be) to all his friends, and they deem themselves bound to stand to the engagement. They have but these two gods, to wit, Bacchus and Urania; and they say that in their mode of cutting the hair, they follow Bacchus. Now their practice is to cut it in a ring, away from the temples. Bacchus they call in their language Orotal, and Urania, Alilat. . . .There is a great river in Arabia, called the Corys, which empties itself into the Erythraean sea. The Arabian king, they say, made a pipe of the skins of oxen and other beasts, reaching from this river all the way to the desert, and so brought the water to certain cisterns which he had dug in the desert to receive it. It is a twelve days' journey from the river to this desert tract. And the water, they say, was brought through three different pipes to three separate places. . . .The Arabs brought every year a thousand talents of frankincense. . . .
Arabia is the last of inhabited lands towards the south, and it is the only country which produces frankincense, myrrh, cassia, cinnamon, and laudanum. The Arabians do not get any of these, except the myrrh, without trouble...
Strabo: Geography, Book XVI, Chap. iv, 1-4, 18-19, 21-26, c. 22 CE
Book XVI.iv.1: Arabia commences on the side of Babylonia with Maecene [modern Kuwait]. In front of this district, on one side lies the desert of the Arabians, on the other are the marshes opposite to the Chaldeans, formed by the overflowing of the Euphrates, and in another direction is the Sea of Persia. This country has an unhealthy and cloudy atmosphere; it is subject to showers, and also to scorching heat; still its products are excellent. The vine grows in the marshes; as much earth as the plant may require is laid upon hurdles of reeds; the hurdle is frequently carried away by the water, and is then forced back again by poles to its proper situation. . . .
Dio Cassius: History of Rome, Book LIII.xxix.3-8., c. 220 CE
For 23 B.C.: While this was going on, another and a new campaign had at once its beginning and its end. It was conducted by Aelius Gallus, the governor of Egypt, against the country called Arabia Felix, of which Sabos was king. At first Aelius encountered no one, yet he did not proceed without difficulty; for the desert, the sun, and the water (which had some peculiar nature), all caused his men great distress, so that the larger part of the army perished...
quote:Adnani Arabs are half "Egyptian" because the mother of the Adnani Arabs was an "Egyptian".
But the Egyptians are really Arabs right, because they descend from Mizrah Arabs. That means Adnani Arabs are Mizrah > Egypt > Adnani super Arabs with tripple Arab status.. lol
1) Didn't you claim that lineage ougth to be traced paternally?
2) Care to explain why the egyptians oriented themselves to the South and West?
Both in burial customs and in their conceptualisation of east west north south etc.
quote: The study of the burials and their goods indicate the early stages of the Egyptian belief in an afterlife. Most of the inhabitants were buried in simple rectangular pits three to four feet deep, which were roofed with crude ceilings of interwoven branches and brush and capes of low mounds of dirt. The dead were laid on reed mats in a contracted, fetal position, reclining on their left side with legs flexed and arms bent, hands in front of the face or neck. With few exceptions, the head lay at the southern end of the tomb with the face pointing to the west.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:Adnani Arabs are half "Egyptian" because the mother of the Adnani Arabs was an "Egyptian".
But the Egyptians are really Arabs right, because they descend from Mizrah Arabs. That means Adnani Arabs are Mizrah > Egypt > Adnani super Arabs with tripple Arab status.. lol
1) Didn't you claim that lineage ougth to be traced paternally?
2) Care to explain why the egyptians oriented themselves to the South and West?
Both in burial customs and in their conceptualisation of east west north south etc.
quote: The study of the burials and their goods indicate the early stages of the Egyptian belief in an afterlife. Most of the inhabitants were buried in simple rectangular pits three to four feet deep, which were roofed with crude ceilings of interwoven branches and brush and capes of low mounds of dirt. The dead were laid on reed mats in a contracted, fetal position, reclining on their left side with legs flexed and arms bent, hands in front of the face or neck. With few exceptions, the head lay at the southern end of the tomb with the face pointing to the west.
You aren't making any sense. Lioness asked me how the Arabs are connected to the Egyptians and I showed her by explaining to her the fact that the Adnani Arabs are half Egyptian because the mother of the Adnani Arabs is Hagar the Egyptian. Did I say that the Arabs don't trace their lineage paternally???
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
Kalonji, Explorer et al - How are you connected to the ancient Egyptians?
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
It’s simple
When you talk about the Fulani having a paternal Arabian ancestor, you don’t say they’re half Arab, you say they’re 100% Arab.
When you mention Adnani ancestry you say they were half Egyptian and half Arab. You don’t see the inconsistency?
Let me break it down for you:
1) Africans deep into Africa are 100% Arabs according to you eg Fulani, Tuareg etc
But that isn’t enough.
2) Arabs deep in Arabia have a stake in African history as well according to you.
Earlier, you declined to look into Kings maternal data that refuted Arab origin for the Fulani, and you justified your dismissal of said data with the following:
quote:Originally posted by Awlaad: You are starting off wrong. We Arabs use y-DNA to talk about origin - not mtdna. We are patrilineal.
Either:
1.Fulani, Tuareg, Adnani Arabs etc with proposed Arabian paternal ancestry are half Arab and half African per the the latest version of your ever changing logic
Or
2.Adnani Arabs are exclusively Arabs, despite their proposed Egyptian maternal input
You can’t have both because they suit you
Which one is it?
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: It’s simple
When you talk about the Fulani having a paternal Arabian ancestor, you don’t say they’re half Arab, you say they’re 100% Arab.
When you mention Adnani ancestry you say they were half Egyptian and half Arab. You don’t see the inconsistency?
Let me break it down for you:
1) Africans deep into Africa are 100% Arabs according to you eg Fulani, Tuareg etc
But that isn’t enough.
2) Arabs deep in Arabia have a stake in African history as well according to you.
Earlier, you declined to look into Kings maternal data that refuted Arab origin for the Fulani, and you justified your dismissal of said data with the following:
quote:Originally posted by Awlaad: You are starting off wrong. We Arabs use y-DNA to talk about origin - not mtdna. We are patrilineal.
Either:
1.Fulani, Tuareg, Adnani Arabs etc with proposed Arabian paternal ancestry are half Arab and half African per the the latest version of your ever changing logic
Or
2.Adnani Arabs are exclusively Arabs, despite their proposed Egyptian maternal input
You can’t have both because they suit you
Which one is it?
Don't pretend that you don't understand what I said. Lioness asked me how the Arabs are connected to the ancient Egyptians and I answered that the Adnani Arabs were formed by an Egyptian mother - Hagar. That's what I mean by they are half Egyptian. That doesn't make the Arabs Egyptians and it doesn't mean that the Arabs claim descent from their mother. What are you talking about?
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
I didn't ask you what led you to say what you say, or whether it was Lioness who asked you that question. Nor did I imply that Arabs claim descent from Hager <--- miscomprehensions that exist in your mind only
Despite your attempts to acrobat your way out of answering my question by giving me a whole bunch of irrelevancies, none of what you have written above makes my questions to you obsolete
Quit beating around the bush and be a man about it. If you don't want to answer the question, and are content with being a walking contradiction, you can just say it.
In case you feel you're fully consistent, prove it and answer the question:
quote:Either:
1.Fulani, Tuareg, Adnani Arabs etc with proposed Arabian paternal ancestry are half Arab and half African per the the latest version of your ever changing logic
Or
2.Adnani Arabs are exclusively Arabs, despite their proposed Egyptian maternal input
You can’t have both because they suit you
Which one is it?
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: I didn't ask you what led you to say what you say, or whether it was Lioness who asked you that question. Nor did I imply that Arabs claim descent from Hager <--- miscomprehensions that exist in your mind only
Despite your attempts to acrobat your way out of answering my question by giving me a whole bunch of irrelevancies, none of what you have written above makes my questions to you obsolete
Quit beating around the bush and be a man about it. If you don't want to answer the question, and are content with being a walking contradiction, you can just say it.
In case you feel you're fully consistent, prove it and answer the question:
quote:Either:
1.Fulani, Tuareg, Adnani Arabs etc with proposed Arabian paternal ancestry are half Arab and half African per the the latest version of your ever changing logic
Or
2.Adnani Arabs are exclusively Arabs, despite their proposed Egyptian maternal input
You can’t have both because they suit you
Which one is it?
1.Fulani, Tuareg, Adnani Arabs etc with proposed Arabian paternal ancestry are half Arab and half African per the the latest version of your ever changing logic
I'M TELLING YOU THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN AFRICAN AND YOU ARE ASKING ME IF THE FULANI, TUAREG, AND ADNANI ARABS ARE HALF AFRICAN!
Or
2.Adnani Arabs are exclusively Arabs, despite their proposed Egyptian maternal input
YES. THE ADNANI ARABS ARE EXCLUSIVELY ARABS DESPITE THEIR EGYPTIAN MATERNAL INPUT. JUST LIKE A CAKE IS A CAKE AND NOT AN EGG DESPITE THE FACT THAT AN EGG WAS USED TO MAKE THAT CAKE. THE ADNANI ARABS WERE FORMED AS A RESULT OF THE UNION BETWEEN OUR FATHER ABRAHAM (PBUH) AND HAGAR (PBUH).
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
"Arabia" is a fictitious entity that did not exist throughout history, and so, according to awlaadberry's dopey thinking, "Arabia" ought to have no meaning. It is a useless word. Ancient Sumerians, Canaanites, the Uruk or even Elamites never called themselves "Arabs". It is a mystery how this loon ever made it past rudimentary geography class.
Ancient Accounts of Arabia, 430 BCE - 550 CE
* Herodotus: The Histories, c. 430 BCE * Strabo: Geography, c. 22 CE * Dio Cassius: History of Rome, c. 220 CE * Ammianus Marcellinus: The Roman History, c. 380 CE * Procopius of Caesarea: History of the Wars, c. 550 CE ...
Your earlier attempts to push the concept of "Arabia" into antiquity, by referencing Assyrian and other like ancient terms came to a naught, as there are no indications that those words actually imply "Arabia" in any sense of the word as we know it, despite translations. Your immediate reaction to this was to helplessly direct ad hominem in my direction, to which I replied in kind.
Now you want to invoke Herodotus and Strabo. It will be interesting to see you give us the exact Greek words these Greek historians supposedly used. Herodutus and Strabo are not 'Arabs', but outsiders to top that.
Furthermore, even your Herodotus and Strabo citations use the word in the context that does not include the entire Arabian peninsula, but just certain segments of it. Your beef with the name "Africa," is its supposed etymological context of initial use as a reference to a portion of the Maghreb.
You complain that the Ancient Egyptians didn't call themselves "Africans", but there is yet another etymological case different from that of the said Maghrebian context, wherein the term is linked to the Egyptian idea of "Birth place".
Then there is that matter of the name being given to the region by outsiders, and not something that the locals of that region originally called themselves--i.e. "Arabians" or even "Arabs". This was another of your emotional appeal to reject the term "Africa", i.e. the locals in different areas didn't initially call themselves "Africans". Ancients like those of Sumer, Babylon, Phoenicia, Philistine, Kingdom of Aram Damascus did not call themselves "Arabs"; this was a name they took on later, after foreigners imposed it on them.
The etymological construction of "Arabia" or even "Arab" is just about as clear as that of "Africa".
These are your own kooky standards of course, trying to impose an antiquated mindset onto the 21st century, but even by those standards, your "Arabia" is rendered just as useless as "Africa", which you complain and moan about all day and night long, without rest.
"Africa" is the name of the African tectonic plate. Ancients had no concept of tectonic plates; we in the 21st century do, because of advances in knowledge. Whether some country is closer to another than the next, is irrelevant to this name. It is a name for a concrete reality -- the African plate. Trying to impose modern understanding onto the ancients, or vice versa, i.e. trying to bring back an antiquated outmoded mindset into the 21st century is total lunacy. The ancients' limited understanding of the globe has no bearing on where they actually lived. Saying that the ancient Egyptians didn't specifically call themselves "Africans" has no bearing on the understanding that they in fact lived in Africa. With your approach to thinking, the 'flat earth' understanding might as well be brought back into the 21st century, and replace the factual understanding of the "spherical earth". Your way of thinking cannot even be called stupidity anymore; it is a mental disease.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
Kalonji, Explorer et al - How are you connected to the ancient Egyptians?
How about we do this, i.e. get you to answer this:
Did the ancient Egyptians connect themselves with Arabians, like they did other Africans?
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:YES. THE ADNANI ARABS ARE EXCLUSIVELY ARABS DESPITE THEIR EGYPTIAN MATERNAL INPUT.
Then there is no link between Ancient Egyptians and Arabs, per your own understanding of what requires a linkage; paternal ancestry.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
Explorer... SHUT UP!!!
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:YES. THE ADNANI ARABS ARE EXCLUSIVELY ARABS DESPITE THEIR EGYPTIAN MATERNAL INPUT.
Then there is no link between Ancient Egyptians and Arabs, per your own understanding of what requires a linkage; paternal ancestry.
look at the DNA
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
^Explain yourself, please.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:YES. THE ADNANI ARABS ARE EXCLUSIVELY ARABS DESPITE THEIR EGYPTIAN MATERNAL INPUT.
Then there is no link between Ancient Egyptians and Arabs, per your own understanding of what requires a linkage; paternal ancestry.
Understand things any way you want, Kalonji. It doesn't even matter because what you think is irrelevant.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
awlaadbetty can only be helplessly emotional after intellectual ass-whooping I administered.
awlaadbetty, since you have nothing else to offer in grown up conversation, here's something for you to do: Fock your camel -- that would be the "arab" thing to do. Leave civilized conversation to the human beings.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Understand things any way you want, Kalonji. It doesn't even matter because what you think is irrelevant.
^Awlaad's modus operandi
Copping out when there is no escape hatch.
Truth of the matter: You have been spouting nonsense about Fulani being 100% Arab, despite the fact that the exact same folk tradition that you're basing this claim on, says that their maternal ancester was from Senegal.
You're not willing to concede on making Fula at least half Arab/half Senegalese, but you're all too happy about making 50/50 linkages between Arabs and Ancient Egyptians.
The Hagar folklore has the exact same formula as Madeumaa folklore:
African women + Arab man = tribe
Posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian (Member # 10893) on :
Awlaadberry,
You have helped me to understand that the Ancient Syrians were not white skinned, but reddish.
I understand you. Tribal affiliation is not determined by the mother, but the father in Semitic thought. However, the Fulbe and Tuareg are originally matrilineal.
Hagar is the mother of Ishmael. It was the sons of Ishmael who enslaved Yosef into Egypt and even Yosef had an Egyptian wife.
Let's say anyone who speaks and AfroAsiatic language belongs to the AfroAsiatic family. This includes people from Cameroon to Morocco to Arabia, etc.
It's one big family. Since, the Mande and Fullah became Muslim, they learned Arabic which is in the AfroAsiatic language Family.
Jesus, Yeshua, Issa, Essa, spoke Aramiac which is in the AfroAsiatic family and as an African American I have ancestry which comes from the AfroAsiatic langauge family.
Geologically, Africa includes the Arabian Peninsula; the Zagros Mountains of Iran and the Anatolian Plateau of Turkey mark where the African Plate collided with Eurasia. The Afrotropic ecozone and the Saharo-Arabian desert to its north unite the region biogeographically, and the Afro-Asiatic language family unites the north linguistically.
Shalom u vracha.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji:
quote:Understand things any way you want, Kalonji. It doesn't even matter because what you think is irrelevant.
^Awlaad's modus operandi
Copping out when there is no escape hatch.
Truth of the matter: You have been spouting nonsense about Fulani being 100% Arab, despite the fact that the exact same folk tradition that you're basing this claim on, says that their maternal ancester was from Senegal.
You're not willing to concede on making Fula at least half Arab/half Senegalese, but you're all too happy about making 50/50 linkages between Arabs and Ancient Egyptians.
The Hagar folklore has the exact same formula as Madeumaa folklore:
African women + Arab man = tribe
Can you show us all where I mentioned percentages when talking about the fact that the Fulani are of Arab origin?
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
You're implying it in your very question, silly; ''Arab origin''.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: [QB] Truth of the matter: You have been spouting nonsense about Fulani being 100% Arab, despite the fact that the exact same folk tradition that you're basing this claim on, says that their maternal ancester was from Senegal.
From what I understand, the maternal ancestor of the Fulani was from the Turud tribe. Do you know anything about the origin of the Turud tribe?
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: You're implying it in your very question, silly; ''Arab origin''.
How's that? What are you talking about?
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian: Awlaadberry,
You have helped me to understand that the Ancient Syrians were not white skinned, but reddish.
I understand you. Tribal affiliation is not determined by the mother, but the father in Semitic thought. However, the Fulbe and Tuareg are originally matrilineal.
Hagar is the mother of Ishmael. It was the sons of Ishmael who enslaved Yosef into Egypt and even Yosef had an Egyptian wife.
Let's say anyone who speaks and AfroAsiatic language belongs to the AfroAsiatic family. This includes people from Cameroon to Morocco to Arabia, etc.
It's one big family. Since, the Mande and Fullah became Muslim, they learned Arabic which is in the AfroAsiatic language Family.
Jesus, Yeshua, Issa, Essa, spoke Aramiac which is in the AfroAsiatic family and as an African American I have ancestry which comes from the AfroAsiatic langauge family.
Geologically, Africa includes the Arabian Peninsula; the Zagros Mountains of Iran and the Anatolian Plateau of Turkey mark where the African Plate collided with Eurasia. The Afrotropic ecozone and the Saharo-Arabian desert to its north unite the region biogeographically, and the Afro-Asiatic language family unites the north linguistically.
Shalom u vracha.
What you've said here makes a lot more sense than what Explorer and Kalonji are saying.
Posted by AswaniAswad (Member # 16742) on :
How would u have ancestry from afroasiatic family group when u left that family group.
African-Americans crack me up really its obvious u are your own new tribe u cant just come back and jump into a lineage inless u marry in.
Ancient Egyptians did not take the last name of there fathers as there last names. Egyptians took the First name of there father as there last name.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad:
Egyptians took the First name of there father as there last name.
Examples?
Posted by Neferet (Member # 17109) on :
Like the Abyssinians take on the father's first name as the last name?
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: How would u have ancestry from afroasiatic family group when u left that family group.
African-Americans crack me up really its obvious u are your own new tribe u cant just come back and jump into a lineage inless u marry in.
Ancient Egyptians did not take the last name of there fathers as there last names. Egyptians took the First name of there father as there last name.
Posted by AswaniAswad (Member # 16742) on :
Mordechai Abir, The Era of the Princes: the Challenge of Islam and the Re-unification of the Christian empire, 1769-1855. London: Longmans, 1968
Arabia by the nineteenth century only few Arabs in the towns of the Hijaz did not have some Ethiopian blood in their veins.
I guess the author some yehudi is claiming that there is no arab without ethiopian blood.
I think we should treat arab or those who speak arabic as just that speakers of arabic. Most arabs would trace a lineage to this clan or that clan but none of the clans are called arab.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
HOREMHEB last Pharaoh of the 18th Dynasty from 1319 BC to late 1292 BC, Before he became pharaoh, Horemheb was the commander in chief of the army under the reigns of Tutankamun and Ay.
deal with it,
it's a "mixed"
bag
What are you saying? That Egyptians are mixed with Hittites??
Horemheb painted
Deal with it. You are mentally mixed up.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Deal with it. You are mentally mixed up. [/QB]
you don't get it, my reply was a sidebar for Mike and his wacky ideas about Hittites:
Mike111 (aka realhistoryww.com) Most historians date Phrygia at about 1,200 B.C. But; that is because they reference it to the collapse of the mythical Caucasian "Hittite" Empire – the problem is - there was NO Hittite Empire: it was in reality simply the Hatti Empire. (more on this mythical Empire below).During the late 1800's, archaeologists discovered artifacts in Anatolia that were of such poor artistic quality, that it was assumed that they could not possibly have been made by native Anatolians. Ever on the lookout for opportunities to inject a Caucasian presence into a history, where there was none. They combined the occurrence in the "Kültepe tablets" of supposedly Indo-European personal names ( in correspondence between Assyrian merchants and local rulers of central Anatolia - the Hatti), with what was assumed to be, ancient Caucasian artifacts. They then identified them with those King James Bible "Hittites". How the connection was made is a mystery, but it is assumed that since these Biblical Hittites were an obscure people - no one would know the difference. The Hittites were supposedly a great Empire and civilization. But yet, there is precious little archaeological evidence of their existence, and even that meager bit, seems bogus.Because of the insurmountable problems associated with trying to prove the existence of this mythical Hittite Empire: Many researchers have now come to the conclusion that there never really was a Caucasian Empire in Anatolia at all - just wishful thinking on the part of some.But the problem is: Caucasians write the history books. So references to the Hittites and the bogus Hittite Empire, abound throughout history, as written by Caucasians.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
AswaniAswad,
What are you talking about?
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Egyptians took the First name of there father as there last name.
Examples?
Does he mean like "Amunhotep "Son of Hapu"....Ahmose "Son of Ebana"?? it would be similar to the Irish Surname "O'Conner" I.E Son of Conner..
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
I think he meant something to the effect of as follows...
If someone's name is Michael Johnson, then his son will take on his first name as his last name, such that if the name of Micheal Johnson's son was Theodore, then Theodore will be called "Theodore Michael". This system of naming is found amongst Ethiopians.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Is there any evidence of this among Egyptians? Also weren't entire clans in Egypt named after females?
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: Awlaad how would u say a Syrian is an Arab. Not all Syrians are arabs many syrians are really arameans including much of Iraq.
Many Syrians,Iraqi,and Lebanese are not arab,its like claiming the Akkadians to be Arabs.
Many Jacobites dont have an arab lineage.
Because I am talking about the ancient Syrians like the one in the picture I posted. The ancient Syrians were the Amorites and they are Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.
Interesting that you say that Tariq because the guy does look somewhat like a modern Murad from the Yemen. But Amorites and Phoenicians were definitely not the only people occupying Syria/Palestine. There were a lot of round-headed fair-skinned folk there whom the Greeks called "white Syrians" who had nothing to do with Arabs.
Hi Dana! Actually I was referring to the dark-skinned Syrians like the one in the picture I posted. I'm not sure who Strabo was referring to when he said "White Syrians".
Yes I know the darker guy looks very Yemenite of Murad/Qaran stock and may very well be a Canaanite if he is indeed a Syrian. As I've said inseveral postings it is my belief the Amorites a group of the "black Syrians" were anextensio of the Murad/Amurat, just as the name of the Banu Kanaan or Kenanah also of the Yemen and Wadi Bisha even today is the root of the name Canaan, i.e. (Hamdan/Nadir/Hudhail/Dhibyan or Zibeon the Horite).
Almost all of the names of the Canaanites/Israelites as mentioned in the Hebrew book of Genesis and Exodus are found today in southern Arabia among the darker Arabs there.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by Red, White, and Blue + Christian: Awlaadberry,
You have helped me to understand that the Ancient Syrians were not white skinned, but reddish.
I understand you. Tribal affiliation is not determined by the mother, but the father in Semitic thought. However, the Fulbe and Tuareg are originally matrilineal.
Hagar is the mother of Ishmael. It was the sons of Ishmael who enslaved Yosef into Egypt and even Yosef had an Egyptian wife.
Let's say anyone who speaks and AfroAsiatic language belongs to the AfroAsiatic family. This includes people from Cameroon to Morocco to Arabia, etc.
It's one big family. Since, the Mande and Fullah became Muslim, they learned Arabic which is in the AfroAsiatic language Family.
Jesus, Yeshua, Issa, Essa, spoke Aramiac which is in the AfroAsiatic family and as an African American I have ancestry which comes from the AfroAsiatic langauge family.
Geologically, Africa includes the Arabian Peninsula; the Zagros Mountains of Iran and the Anatolian Plateau of Turkey mark where the African Plate collided with Eurasia. The Afrotropic ecozone and the Saharo-Arabian desert to its north unite the region biogeographically, and the Afro-Asiatic language family unites the north linguistically.
Shalom u vracha.
What you've said here makes a lot more sense than what Explorer and Kalonji are saying.
To add to this though is the fact that the original Semitic speakers or AFricans who lived in Arabia and the Levant and including early converts to Judaism were in fact strictly matrilineal and matrifocal. This is especially the case in Arabia where traces are still found among the Mahra Qara and other African Arab peoples.
W. Robertson Smith talks a lot about this change from matrifocal and matrilineal society among the Arabs and particularly the bedouin.
There is no evidence that the ancestors of modern Middle Easterners were ever matrifocal however.
Posted by The Great One (Member # 18613) on :
Mike, I don't need to post a link, because I have just destroyed All These "House Negroes" with Simple Facts.
It is actually quite easy to beat people who are so wrapped up in their wishful fantasy.
You can always tell when you have spoken the truth and defeated them, when they start tripping over themselves to launch multiple attacks on your character. Sady, these House Negroes' ears would perk up when some Idiot White Writer tells them something they like.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
