It appears that the Near East had considerable influence. But I don't believe the predynastic Egyptians were necessarily from the near East, even though it shows that they had a definite connection with those people.
What ancient evidence is there to suggest any kind of foreign influence?
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
Well, they had cold adapted limbs, just like West Asians, but they adapted to the hot wheather of Egypt the second they entered it. Just like the birds in my study. So to answer your question, they were originally Kakazooids from the middle east, the negroids came later during the 25th dynasty.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^Exactly Look on page 34 where they say they refute peer reviewed research that shows that limb elongation occurs during prenatal stages of development in humans. They showed PC graphs that document that the uterus (womb) of the mother can be hot enough to produce limb elongation during the fetal stage, if the mother migrates to a hot environment. The uterus knows.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
We know limb elongation can be influenced by long term genetic adaption. But it can also be influenced to some degree by an in-situ adaption to surrounding temperatures in live individuals, as the study proves. And by your own sources, the ancient Egyptians showed to be nowhere near extremely heat-adapted as compared to even modern inhabitants of Egypt.
This is not what the thread is about, so quit side-stepping the issue and let's get on with it.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
^The difference between the most cold adapted, and the most tropically adapted babies. The first three embryos are excavated stillborn babies from dynastic Egypt, the last embryo dates to modern Egypt. You can see the differences in limb elongation, which corroborates what my study says about higher limb index values for modern Egyptians, compared to the Ancients.
Posted by Khufu (Member # 17461) on :
Don't waste your time entertaining simple minded individuals.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Khufu: Don't waste your time entertaining simple minded individuals.
Ah, this must mean you have nothing to offer.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Sometimes simple is good. Simple most often gets at the heart of the matter.
Posted by Khufu (Member # 17461) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by Khufu: Don't waste your time entertaining simple minded individuals.
Ah, this must mean you have nothing to offer.
I have plenty to offer but it gets real tiresome providing the same information and answers month after month, year after year on the same ol' lame subjects.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
During state formation, outside gene flow was confined to lower Egypt. While Upper Egyptian culture became dynastic civilization. Several scholars have noted that Sudanese were very influential, and given the evidence of Nilotic presence in early state formation, we know this to be probable. The only real Near Eastern connection would be certain agricultural techniques, but there was neither a mass presence of Near Easterners in Egypt nor a significan cultural presence. As a matter of fact, Egyptian cultural customs can be traced to the Sahara. Indeed, prehistoric populations moved into the Nile Valley from the Sahara, shortly after, the return of desert conditions coincided with the onset of Egyptian civilizations. We also have evidence for west African influence, as they also had a Saharan connection. For example, pottery from Mali is as old as the Nile Valley or older, and it may diffused northwards. Also, the Benin haplotype and M. Africanum have been found in predynastic remains, E-M2 found in Egypt at significant frequencies as well.
I won't bother to cite all of the sources referenced above until you wish to have an open-minded discussion and realize when you're wrong.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: It appears that the Near East had considerable influence. But I don't believe the predynastic Egyptians were necessarily from the near East, even though it shows that they had a definite connection with those people.
What ancient evidence is there to suggest any kind of foreign influence?
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': E-M2 found in Egypt at significant frequencies as well.
Legacy of the slave trade, not an indigenous lineage to Egypt.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^Nope, not true. It reaches highest frequencies in upper Egypt where the slave trade had little presence. Keita (2005) also pointed out the problems with associating E-M2 with the Bantu expansion. Furthermore, it is not unlikely it is more ancient given the other evidence of west African influence.
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
E-M2 is not found in indigenous Sudanese nor Ethiopians.
All Egyptian E-M2 carriers are either descendants of slaves or recent West African immigrants (presumably Hausa).
What were the E-M2 sub-clades, those are telltale signs of recent western admixture.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^E-M2 can not be the result of the slave trade because of the aforementioned reason I gave you. Which is why it is never associated with the slave trade, but with the Bantu expansion. And you claim of it not being found amongst Sudanese is just as retarded:
Haplotype IV, designating the M2/PN1 subclade, as noted, is found in high frequency in west, central, and sub-equatorial Africa in speakers of Niger-Congo—which may have a special relationship with Nilosaharan—spoken by Nubians; together they might form a superphylum called Kongo-Saharan or Niger-Saharan (see Gregersen 1972, Blench 1995), but this is not fully supported. The spatial distribution of p49a,f TaqI haplotypes in the geographically-widespread speakers of Nilosaharan languages has not been fully characterized, but the notable presence of haplotype IV in Nubians speaking the Eastern Sudanic branch is interesting in that this subgroup is in the Sahelian branch of speakers, whose ancestors may have participated in the domestication of cattle in the eastern Sahara (Ehret 2000, Wendorf and Schild 2001). Sometimes haplotype IV (and the M2 lineage) is seen as being associated with the “Bantu expansion” (2000-3000 bp), but this does not mean that it is not much older, since expansion and origin times cannot be conflated. Haplotype IV has substantial frequencies in upper Egypt and Nubia, greater than VII and VIII, and even V. Bantu languages were never spoken in these regions or Senegal, where M2 is greater than 90 percent in some studies. — Keita, 2005.
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
Neither of you are correct.
Perahu mentioned slave trade, which doesn't automatically infer Bantu or Bantu expansion, at all, even on the Western side. The Arabs traded for and obtained slaves from the area comprising Ghana / Ouagadou, the Mali Empire, and Songhai. That doesn't always infer they were from there, but at various times due to misfortunate events even men of some status, such as intellectuals owning huge libraries ended up as slaves in either trade direction.
Now, given certain factors like the finding of pharaohs with Benin sickle cell (coastal West African variant) where you'd expect it to be the Iran-India variant and a number of studies agree with this -- I'd say E-M2 could've been there since ancient times.
Also a study finds that much of the "African" ancestry in Jews given the average age infers they got it in their genesis -- that means in ancient times. What makes Perahu definitely wrong (again) fo sho is that this study used a only a Nigerian sample to represent "Africa". This is nothing new, I've seen in the news a long time ago before where this white Jewish lady found out she had (an) African relative(s) living in the Western heart of Africa who shared with her great great etc. grandparents.
None of this answers the girl's question though, which I think is cultural. If she means from outside the nations borders I can think of plenty of Nile Valley and even possibly "Saharan" influences, but I think the question of Middle Eastern influences is an interesting one.
Posted by Perahu (Member # 18548) on :
Hassan et al. 2008 sampled various Sudanese groups from all over the country and did not find any E-M2 in the indigenous samples, only a couple of Hausa (West African immigrants) were found to carry it.
Those E-M2 Nubians probably have recent West African admixture (slave trade), they are not indigenous. Their sub-clade of E-M2 would clearly show this.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:Originally posted by Whatbox: Neither of you are correct.
Perahu mentioned slave trade, which doesn't automatically infer Bantu or Bantu expansion, at all, even on the Western side. The Arabs traded for and obtained slaves from the area comprising Ghana / Ouagadou, the Mali Empire, and Songhai. That doesn't always infer they were from there, but at various times due to misfortunate events even men of some status, such as intellectuals owning huge libraries ended up as slaves in either trade direction.
As ausar demonstrated to that Mao character previously, the slave trade was little to non existant in upper Egypt. So my point was that it isn't the result of the slave trade/it isn't solely the result of the slave trade. It is however associated with the Bantu expansion which is why I brought it up. As noted by Keita though, it could be much older than that.
quote:Now, given certain factors like the finding of pharaohs with Benin sickle cell (coastal West African variant) where you'd expect it to be the Iran-India variant and a number of studies agree with this -- I'd say E-M2 could've been there since ancient times.
I agree, that is what I was trying to clue Perahu in on.
quote:None of this answers the girl's question though, which I think is cultural. If she means from outside the nations borders I can think of plenty of Nile Valley and even possibly "Saharan" influences, but I think the question of Middle Eastern influences is an interesting one.
It started when Perahu responded to my post when I used it to reinforce the influences on Egypt.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:Originally posted by Perahu: Hassan et al. 2008 sampled various Sudanese groups from all over the country and did not find any E-M2 in the indigenous samples, only a couple of Hausa (West African immigrants) were found to carry it.
Different studies give different result when they sample different people you know.
quote:Those E-M2 Nubians probably have recent West African admixture (slave trade), they are not indigenous. Their sub-clade of E-M2 would clearly show this.
If you had comprehended Keita's statement you would not be saying this
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
I'll have to answer, since half the Dynasties had roots upriver, in general the Nile Valley and Ethiopia -- cultural influences.
Posted by The Lioness. (Member # 18830) on :
Kalonji says
quote:You can see the differences in limb elongation, which corroborates what my study says about higher limb index values for modern Egyptians, compared to the Ancients.
^Although it would be interesting to know which sites were used, common sense suggest that the sample cannot pertain to modern Egypt.
The intralimb values ares simply too high, even higher than some predynastic samples. It cannot be argued that this intralimb index value is caused by the Sudanese samples, because the Egyptian sample is slightly smaller than the Sudanese sample in specimen nrs, 70 and 73 respectively. Given the top charting intralimb indices of the combined sample, it is impossible that the combined mean of Egyptians and Sudanese is caused by the weight of the latter. We also see in the graphs documenting the entire body that the Egyptian sample consistently groups in between the two Sudanese samples (fig. 10, 9, 7, 6), and (most of the time) with pygmies before they cluster with Sudanese (fig. 10, 9, 7).
If people want to suggest that such positioning brings to mind the like of Mubarak and Qadafi, it might be better to leave the discussion alone, because it would mean that we're talking to people who are either pulling our leg, or people who simply do not have the mental capacity to perform basic reasoning.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
^^^^^kalonji impersonating me and then quoting his kalonji persona
sad
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
The black-topped pottery of predynastic Egypt. Was it influenced from elsewhere?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The black-topped pottery of predynastic Egypt. Was it influenced from elsewhere?
^That's a nice mention about black-topped pottery, but it doesn't say anything about older or contemporary examples from abroad. The example I gave is not from either Egypt or Nubia. It as at least as old if not older than anything found in either areas.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:but it doesn't say anything about older or contemporary examples from abroad.
Now I know your agenda. You just want to find some connection to Egypt from outside sources. I highly doubt you even care about the actual culture. You just want some non-African source for their civilization
Posted by ausar (Member # 1797) on :
As far as western African slavery in Egypt I have the following to contribute:
Most of the slaves that came into Egypt were primarily from southern Sudan. Certainly around Darfur to Asyut there was a small trickle of western African slaves but most of them were glided at various stations across Middle Egypt. This means most slaves white or black had their testes removed so its doubtful these slaves left much offspring.
The Nubians never really utilized western African slaves. If they had any slaves it was primarily southern Sudanese Dinka and Nuer groups.
Migration to Upper Egypt in the modern era is relatively rare except for a few bedouins from the western desert who intermingle with the local Sa'idi people. Upper Egypt is the poorest section of Egypt and very isolated. Most Sai'idi people don't like Sudanese or western Africans very much. Hausa immigrants are not numerous in Egypt except for a few in Cairo.
Be aware also that most black African female slaves in Egypt had low fertility rates. Arab writers during the middle ages commented upon their phenomenon. Why they had low fertility rates I donot know.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The black-topped pottery of predynastic Egypt. Was it influenced from elsewhere?
^The source for black topped pottery
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': The only real Near Eastern connection would be certain agricultural techniques, but there was neither a mass presence of Near Easterners in Egypt nor a significan cultural presence.
^That link you posted is saying the exact same thing I said- i.e., that certain agricultural techniques can be traced back to the Near East. Yet there was not demic diffusion of farming and Nile Valley inhabitants adopted said agricultural techniques into an indigenous foraging strategy. Not to mention northeast Africans with sub-Saharan morphological traits diffused into the Near East during the Mesolithic. So the Near Eastern farmers would have descended from Africans in my opinion
Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
quote: Originally posted by Calabooz': The only real Near Eastern connection would be certain agricultural techniques, but there was neither a mass presence of Near Easterners in Egypt nor a significan cultural presence.
Indeed. QUOTE:
"..the early cultures of Merimde, the Fayum, Badari Naqada I and II are essentially African and early African social customs and religious beliefs were the root and foundation of the ancient Egyptian way of life." --(Source: Shaw, Thurston (1976) Changes in African Archaeology in the Last Forty Years in African Studies since 1945. p. 156-68. London.)
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
The example I gave is not from either Egypt or Nubia. It as at least as old if not older than anything found in either areas. [/QB]
where is it from what is the source of the photo?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
The example I gave is not from either Egypt or Nubia. It as at least as old if not older than anything found in either areas.
where is it from what is the source of the photo? [/QB]
It is from the time of the Starcevo culture of southeastern Europe.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Depending on the way the ceramics is burnt, it can be black or red.
Black ceramics originates in Dacia, being of great importance in the pre-Roman period. In order to obtain it, the paste is subjected to an incomplete burn. The pots are burnt in a conoid shaped pit, up to 1.5 meters deep. Next to this pit there�s another one, linked by a small canal where the fire is burning. The pots are put in the first pit. When they are well heated and become red, they are covered with a thick layer of moist clay, also used to fill the small canal. Thus, the burning process continues without oxygen and the pots become grey or black.
The black ceramics is still manufactured today in Romania and is also known as �Marginea pottery� (named after a village in the Suceava County).
Red ceramics, obtained by burning it in an oxidizing system, borrowed some elements from the Roman culture. To obtain this color, the pots are dipped after drying off into a coloring substance obtained from a special clay (called �huma�) mixed with water. Then the pots are hand-painted.
The red ceramics (enameled or not) can be found on 90% of the Romanian territory.
Much too young to be a precursor for ancient Sudanese red topped pottery.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
Wishful girl introduces the pot in her post as Predynastic Egyptian, and then goes on to say in another post it is European. Where is the specific link and description of the photo Wishful girl?
Wishful girl, why should the reversed not be entertained, given the high levels of Egypto-Nubian E-M78 in Balkan territory, and the fact that black topped pottery evolved clearly from identical earlier pottery, that only lacks the black color?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Black-topped pottery continued into later cultures of southeastern Europe that were still contemporary or older than Egyptian black-topped ware.
___________________________________________ The surface of the vessels belonging to the fine pottery category are well burnished, some of them being black-topped fired. Black ware and black-topped ware have been found in significant quantities. The chromatic effect of the black-topped pottery is obtained as a result of controlled firing,
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
I do credit ancient supra-Alpine Europeans for the culture they did have and the fine pottery pieces of their manufacture.
While still researching for the exact provenance of the posted work I came across black-topped ware that dates to ~4000BCE in Alba Iulia
quote:The pottery fragments were mostly found in close complexes of the pit-houses, pits and dwelling surface type. Most vessels belong to the black and black-topped ware. The main shapes are biconical bowls and amphorae; the pedestals have cherryred slip. Painted decoration, applied on the vessels before firing, is made with red, on a reddish or orange background.
Simona Varvara et al. MULTI-DISCIPLINARY INVESTIGATION OF THE NEOLITHIC POTTERY FROM ALBA IULIA - LUMEA NOUA (ROMANIA) SETTLEMENT
I have no idea what Alba Iulia black-topped pottery looked like or that the posted work is from Alba Iulia.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
@ SimpleGirl
Why are you witholding the information given where you got the thimbsize version of the black-topped pottery that you posted.
Surely the exact provenance is cited there.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
I'm not saying there is a cultural link between southeastern Europe and Egypt based only upon black-topped ware. This is just one of many things the two have in common. I just thought I would start with the black-topped pottery.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: @ SimpleGirl
Why are you witholding the information given where you got the thimbsize version of the black-topped pottery that you posted.
Surely the exact provenance is cited there.
Actually I just lifted the image from there but it doesn't give much information. I can give you the link but it was real slow for me uploading the images. Click on it if you like. Maybe it will load better for you. Let me go find it.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
I don't care about any of the above. I would like to know the exact provenance of the piece you posted and wrote about as quoted below. Please provide it, thank you.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The example I gave is not from either Egypt or Nubia. It as at least as old if not older than anything found in either areas.
It is from the time of the Starcevo culture of southeastern Europe.
The Nile variety dates to 5500-3100 BCE while the Dneiper one dates to 4400-3600 BCE. So if any influence is involved it was from the former to the latter.
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: Wishful girl introduces the pot in her post as Predynastic Egyptian, and then goes on to say in another post it is European. Where is the specific link and description of the photo Wishful girl?
Wishful girl, why should the reversed not be entertained, given the high levels of Egypto-Nubian E-M78 in Balkan territory, and the fact that black topped pottery evolved clearly from identical earlier pottery, that only lacks the black color?
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The black-topped pottery of predynastic Egypt. Was it influenced from elsewhere?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
This bowl with feet is from predyastic Egypt. I don't believe the idea was unique only to Egypt. You can find other examples in the link I provided.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by alTakruri: [QB] The Nile variety dates to 5500-3100 BCE while the Dneiper one dates to 4400-3600 BCE. So if any ifluence is involved it was from the former to the latter. [QUOTE]
I'm not sure you'll find any black-topped ware dated before 4000 BCE in Egypt. Black-topped ware was well in use before that time period in southeastern Europe.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
I actually have no interest in this thread, as this subject has been discussed before. But my interest was piqued by A Simple Girl's post; "Egypt's Earliest Agricultural Settlement Unearthed - 5,200 B.C. And the subsequent mentions of Mesopotamia.
This reminds me of the breathless exclamations of the Jews in Israel when they uncovered a 400,000 year old human tooth. "Modern man evolved in Israel."
It seems a simple notion to me, but it seems others have problems understanding it - so I will repeat it. "The earliest FOUND, has no necessary relationship with "THE FIRST" of THE EARLIEST".
That is why all available evidence must be combined, in order to have any hope of creating a reasonably accurate historical scenario.
Since the conversation revolves around possible cross-cultural influences; It would probably be good to know the distances between the relevant sites.
Cairo Egypt (ancient Memphis & Heliopolis) to Baghdad Iraq (ancient Sippar) 802 miles. Cairo Egypt to Ankara Turkey (ancient Hattusas) 698 miles. (Depending on urgency - humans can cover 30-50 miles a day). Average time between any of those cities - about 20 days. Point being - THERE WAS CONSTANT INTERCHANGE BETWEEN THEM - AND THE INDUS TOO!
As to their level of development:
Note this structure at Göbekli Tepe - 11,500 B.C. Which is a hilltop sanctuary built on the highest point of an elongated mountain ridge about 15km northeast of the town of Şanlıurfa (Urfa) in southeast Turkey.
Note the finely carved pillars to support the roof. Does it seem like Hunter Gatherer Nomads would have acquired the skills to do such work? What use would Hunter Gatherer Nomads have for such a structure? Hunter Gatherer Nomads do not store food, they move to find food, how would Hunter Gatherer Nomads feed themselves while building the site?
Calabooz' This is a cave painting from Anatolia. I don't know about you, but he sure looks African to me!
A final thought: Forget the White mans breathless Bullsh1t - think for yourselves. Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Interesting
Where in Europe was there black-topped red ware before the 6000±400 years ago Alba Iulia ones?
quote: The earliest Neolithic ceramics in Eastern and Southeastern Europe, belonging to the Starcevo culture, has all the characteristics of double firing in proper kilns. How is one, then, to understand the reason why all other potteries in this area, starting from the late Neolithic to the end of the Late Iron Age, are without exception grey or black - when we know that from Roman times onwards all ceramics has been red?
Aleksandar Durman Early Neolithic pottery vs. the rest of prehistoric pottery.
Which leads us back to question of the age of the supplied pottery piece. Are its characteristics of shape and design neolithic or Roman?
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: [QB] The Nile variety dates to 5500-3100 BCE while the Dneiper one dates to 4400-3600 BCE. So if any influence is involved it was from the former to the latter.
I'm not sure you'll find any black-topped ware dated before 4000 BCE in Egypt. Black-topped ware was well in use before that time period in southeastern Europe.
Even if black-topped ware goes back to the earliest part of the Badarian culture of 5500 BC, it is still only contemporary with the black-topped ware of the Vinca culture.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Shall we move on to pottery marks?
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
The answer to that question is shown to be no.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The black-topped pottery of predynastic Egypt. Was it influenced from elsewhere?
I will add that Badarian culture is indigenous and black-topped red ware dating to 5100 BCE was also found in the Dakhleh Oasis and is indigenous.
Vinca culture is migrant from southern Turkey and Syria and it displaced indigenous Balkan cultural complexes.
There is nothing that suggests Nile Valley black-topped red ware was influenced from elsewhere. None of the literature presupposes so and the idea appears a novel one.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Shall we move on to pottery marks?
Yes, please do. Please go on to cite Northeast African cultural markers in Europe and the Middleeast, to further our knowlegde about the African presence there.
quote:Against this background of disease, movement and pedomorphic reduction of body size (Table 2, 3) one can identify Negroid (Ethiopic or Bushmanoid?) traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters (McCown, 1939) and in Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers (Angel, 1972), probably from Nubia (Anderson, 1969) via the unknown predecessors of Badarians (Morant, 1935) and Tasians,.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^This thread is not about the race of the people that may have contributed to Egyptian culture. Anyone is free to offer their views on whatever other cultures may of had an impact.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
There is also evidence that southeastern Europe had the earliest use of copper tools. Along with the black-topped pottery of predynastic Egypt, comes the earliest evidence of manufactured copper on the continent of Africa.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: There is also evidence that southeastern Europe had the earliest use of copper tools. Along with the black-topped pottery of predynastic Egypt, comes the earliest evidence of manufactured copper on the continent of Africa.
A Simple Girl is right, the Black Eastern Europeans mastered metallurgy from a early date. Their pottery was also quite good, as was their statuary.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Come on now Mike, you're jumping ahead and ruining it for me.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Anyways Mike posted the picture of a burial that shows the early use of a sceptor and the earliest known manufactured gold in the world. The gravesites at Varna may also have been the earliest indication of individuals buried according to status.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^Sorry, thought I was being helpful.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^Sorry, thought I was being helpful.
I like to go slow.lol....You know way too much. Much more than people give you credit for.lol....And you're not fooling me. I know what you're thinking.lol
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: It appears that the Near East had considerable influence. But I don't believe the predynastic Egyptians were necessarily from the near East, even though it shows that they had a definite connection with those people.
And what is this definite connection to the 'Near East'?? Where do you think they are from if not the 'Near East'?
quote:What ancient evidence is there to suggest any kind of foreign influence?
LOL Your very first sentence above is that there was considerable influence, yet you fail to state what that was. Now you are asking us what that is! LOL Why don't you tell us.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: There is also evidence that southeastern Europe had the earliest use of copper tools. Along with the black-topped pottery of predynastic Egypt, comes the earliest evidence of manufactured copper on the continent of Africa.
Ancient West African Iron and steel, better watch out, Wishful girl is on the prowl.
She comes not with hard data such as parallels in morphology, function and application of the goods in both regions, she comes with even more ''high octane'' evidence, such as, the simple stand alone fact that two things co-occurred in two distant regions (while not mentioning that other regions had them too).
Who cares that all early Egyptian phases have been called fundamentally African by knowledgable Egyptologists. Just ignore them and listen to our local expert Wishful girl.
The scepter? Whats with it? Even tribal chiefs in ''primitive'' societies are known for having regelia, is this the best you can do?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Museum Items of Romania www.cimec.ro
About Romanian black topped red pottery: Black and Red Ceramics
Depending on the way the ceramics is burnt, it can be black or red.
Black ceramics originates in Dacia, being of great importance in the pre-Roman period. In order to obtain it, the paste is subjected to an incomplete burn. The pots are burnt in a conoid shaped pit, up to 1.5 meters deep. Next to this pit there�s another one, linked by a small canal where the fire is burning. The pots are put in the first pit. When they are well heated and become red, they are covered with a thick layer of moist clay, also used to fill the small canal. Thus, the burning process continues without oxygen and the pots become grey or black.
The black ceramics is still manufactured today in Romania and is also known as �Marginea pottery� (named after a village in the Suceava County).
Red ceramics, obtained by burning it in an oxidizing system, borrowed some elements from the Roman culture. To obtain this color, the pots are dipped after drying off into a coloring substance obtained from a special clay (called �huma�) mixed with water. Then the pots are hand-painted.
The red ceramics (enameled or not) can be found on 90% of the Romanian territory.
Much too young to be a precursor for ancient Sudanese red topped pottery.
LMAO @ Simpleton trying to pass of a much later European pottery as some precursor to predynastic pottery!
With such dishonesty, one would think she is Lyingass.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: The answer to that question is shown to be no.
I will add that Badarian culture is indigenous and black-topped red ware dating to 5100 BCE was also found in the Dakhleh Oasis and is indigenous.
Vinca culture is migrant from southern Turkey and Syria and it displaced indigenous Balkan cultural complexes.
There is nothing that suggests Nile Valley black-topped red ware was influenced from elsewhere. None of the literature presupposes so and the idea appears a novel one.
By the way, Takruri is correct. The black-topped pottery associated with the Badarians originated in Nubia/Sudan. This is why black-topped pottery in this region is the most diverse and extensive.
^ Not only does the earliest known black-topped ware come from Nabta Playa, here is more...
The Badarian Culture is the earliest attestation of agriculture in Upper Egypt and was first identified in the region of Badari near Sohag. A large number of mainly small sites yielded a total of about 600 graves and 40 poorly documented settlements.
The chronological position of the Badarian Culture is still the subject of some debate. Its relative chronological position in relation to the more recent Naqada Culture was established some time ago through excavation at the stratified site of North Spur Hammamiya. The culture might have already existed by about 5000 BC but it can only be definitely confirmed to have spanned the period around 4400-4000 BC.
The existence of a still earlier culture called the Tasian (Deir Tasa) has been claimed. The culture would have been characterized by the presence of calcium beakers with incised designs which are also known from contexts of similar date in Neolithic Sudan. The existence however of the Tasian as a chronologically or culturally seperated unit has never been demonstrated beyond doubt. Although most scholars consider the Tasian to be simply part of the Badarian Culture it has also been argued that the Tasian represents the continuation of a Lower Egyptian tradition which would be the immediate predecessor of the Naqada I Culture. This seems however implausible first because similarities with the Lower Egyptian Neolithic cultures are not convincing and secondly because of the Tasian's obvious ceramic links with the Sudan. If the Tasian must be considered as a seperate cultural entity then it might represent a nomadic culture with a Sudanese background and which interacted with the Badarian Culture. Despite the existence of some excavated settlement sites the Badarian Culture is mainly known from cemeteries in the low desert. All graves are simply pit burials often incorporating a mat on which the body was placed. Bodies are normally in a loosely contracted position on the left side and with the head to the south looking west.
Analysis of Badarian grave goods and the placement of the wealthier graves in one part of the cemetery clearly seems to indicate social stratification which still seems limited at this point in Egyptian prehistory but which became increasingly important throughout the subsequent Naqada Period.
The pottery that accompanies the dead in their graves is the most characteristic element of the Badarian Culture. The rippled surface that is present on the finest pottery comes from the surface having been combed with an instrument and then afterwards polished to result in a very decorative effect.
The lithic industry is mainly known from settlement sites although the finest examples have been found in graves. It is principally a flake and blade industry to which a limited number of remarkable bifacial worked tools are added. Predominant tools are end-scrapers -- perforators -- retouched pieces. Bifacial tools consist mainly of axes -- bifacial sickles -- concave-base arrowheads. It should also be noted that the characteristic side-blow flakes were also present in the Western Desert.
For a long time it was thought that the Badarian Culture remained restricted to the Badari region. Characteristic Badari finds have however also been found much further to the south at Mahgar Dendera -- Armant-- Elkab -- Hierakonpolis and also to the east in the Wadi Hammamat.
Originally the Badarian Culture was considered a chronologically seperate unit out of which the Naqada Culture developed. However the situation is certainly far more complex. For instance the Naqada I Period seems to be poorly represented in the Badari region; therefore it has been suggested that the Badarian was largely contemporary with the Naqada I Culture in the area to the south of the Badari region. However since a limited number of Badarian or related artefacts have also been discovered south of Badari it might instead be argued that the Badarian Culture was present between at least the Badari region and Hierakonpolis.
Unfortunately most of these finds are very limited in number and a comparison with the lithic industry or the settlement ceramics from the Badari area is in most cases impossible or has not yet been published. The Badarian Culture may therefore have been characterised by regional differences with the unit in the Badari region itself being the only one that has so far been properly investigated or attested. On the other hand a more or less uniform Badarian Culture may have been represented over the whole area between Badari and Hierakonpolis but since the development of the Naqada Culture [also] took place more to the south it seems quite possible that the Badarian survived for a longer time in the Badari region itself.
The origins of the Badarian are equally problematic. It seems that the Badarian Culture did not appear from a single source although the Western Desert was probably the predominant one. On the other hand the provenance of domesticated plants remains controversial; an origin in the Levant via the Lower Egyptian Faiyum and Merimda Cultures might be possible.
Evidence from Badarian settlements shows that the economy of the culture was primarily based on agriculture and animal husbandry. Among the content of storage facilities wheat -- barley -- lentils -- tubers have been found. Furthermore fishing was certainly very important and may have been the principal economic activity during certain period of the year. Hunting on the other hand was apparently of marginal importance... ---Ian Shaw, The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (2003)
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Museum Items of Romania www.cimec.ro
About Romanian black topped red pottery: Black and Red Ceramics
Depending on the way the ceramics is burnt, it can be black or red.
Black ceramics originates in Dacia, being of great importance in the pre-Roman period. In order to obtain it, the paste is subjected to an incomplete burn. The pots are burnt in a conoid shaped pit, up to 1.5 meters deep. Next to this pit there�s another one, linked by a small canal where the fire is burning. The pots are put in the first pit. When they are well heated and become red, they are covered with a thick layer of moist clay, also used to fill the small canal. Thus, the burning process continues without oxygen and the pots become grey or black.
The black ceramics is still manufactured today in Romania and is also known as �Marginea pottery� (named after a village in the Suceava County).
Red ceramics, obtained by burning it in an oxidizing system, borrowed some elements from the Roman culture. To obtain this color, the pots are dipped after drying off into a coloring substance obtained from a special clay (called �huma�) mixed with water. Then the pots are hand-painted.
The red ceramics (enameled or not) can be found on 90% of the Romanian territory.
Much too young to be a precursor for ancient Sudanese red topped pottery.
LMAO @ Simpleton trying to pass of a much later European pottery as some precursor to predynastic pottery!
With such dishonesty, one would think she is Lyingass.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: The answer to that question is shown to be no.
I will add that Badarian culture is indigenous and black-topped red ware dating to 5100 BCE was also found in the Dakhleh Oasis and is indigenous.
Vinca culture is migrant from southern Turkey and Syria and it displaced indigenous Balkan cultural complexes.
There is nothing that suggests Nile Valley black-topped red ware was influenced from elsewhere. None of the literature presupposes so and the idea appears a novel one.
By the way, Takruri is correct. The black-topped pottery associated with the Badarians originated in Nubia/Sudan. This is why black-topped pottery in this region is the most diverse and extensive.
Hey hey...., you posted this before just me...dmn.
I think what this explains is the migration of early sub Saharan farmers into the Medetirainian.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
DJ
You've just supported SG's claim for European priority of black-topped redware by ~1500 yrs.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
SG
Is your premise based on hyperdiffusionism, i.e., that something could only be invented once by one people and if that something shows up later elsewhere it had to have come from the earlier people and place despite any factors Kalonji listed that betray independent innovation?
Is that your basis for Near East influence? I take it by Near East you mean the area between eastern Europe and the Levant, i.e., Greece, Balkans, Turkey?
BTW Vinca is turning out to be quite an eye opener for me
Posted by AGÜEYBANÁ(Mind718) (Member # 15400) on :
^
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: [QB] Prehistoric contacts over the Straits of Gibraltar indicated by genetic analysis of Iberian Bronze Age cattle
The geographic situation of the Iberian Peninsula makes it a natural link between Europe and North Africa. However, it is a matter of debate to what extent African influences via the Straits Gibraltar have affected Iberia’s prehistoric development. Because early African pastoralist communities were dedicated to cattle breeding, a possible means to detect prehistoric African–Iberian contacts might be to analyze the origin of cattle breeds on the Iberian Peninsula. Some contemporary Iberian cattle breeds show a mtDNA haplotype, T1, that is characteristic to African breeds , generally explained as being the result of the Muslim expansion of the 8th century A.D., and of modern imports. To test a possible earlier African influence, we analyzed mtDNA of Bronze Age cattle from the Portalo´ n cave at the Atapuerca site in northern Spain. Although the majority of samples showed the haplotype T3 that dominates among European breeds of today, the T1 haplotype was found in one specimen radiocarbon dated 1800 calibrated years B.C. Accepting T1 as being of African origin, this result indicates prehistoric African–Iberian contacts and lends support to archaeological finds linking early African and Iberian cultures. We also found a wild ox haplotype in the Iberian Bronze Age sample, reflecting local hybridization or backcrossing or that aurochs were hunted by these farming cultures.
The geographical proximity of the Iberian Peninsula to Africa makes the Straits of Gibraltar a likely contact zone between the two continents. Early human communities are known to have existed simultaneously on both sides of the Straits, and it seems possible that interaction between these communities took place with an interchange of populations, ideas, goods, and livestock (1, 2). The hypothesis that such contacts took place, resulting in an ***African influence on Iberia’s prehistoric development***, is thus not a recent one (3) but was overshadowed in the early 1960s by new ideas claiming a Near Eastern origin for the Iberian Neolithic (4). Evidence of human occupation in central Spain before the beginning of the Neolithic, as defined by the introduction of agriculture, is scarce (5, 6). However, by 6000 B.C., it is evident that Neolithic cultures were present along the eastern Spanish Mediterranean coast as well as in Andalusia, represented by the cave culture. Only a few centuries later, the signs of Neolithization are also clear in central Spain. This rapid spread of pastoral communities across the peninsula is proposed to have been due either to colonization by the Andalusian cave culture (7–9) or to the spread of new technology and ideas from the Mediterranean cultures to indigenous Mesolithic hunter-gatherers (10, 11).
These early Neolithic populations of Andalusia appear to have consisted of a number of distinct groups (12), ***one of which is suggested to have African origin*** due to finds of characteristic red ochre ceramics (13, 14). ***Similarities have also been noted between the predynastic Badarian Egyptian culture dated to the 5th millennium B.C. and the Late Atlantic Neolithic culture in western Andalusia (14).*** Previously, the appearance of the Late Atlantic Neolithic culture had been placed at a significantly later date than the Egyptian culture, and this chronology and the cultural similarity were interpreted as implying that Egypt was the original source (14). However, more accurate radiocarbon dates obtained from Late Atlantic Neolithic culture sites subsequently redated the origin of this culture to being approximately the same as that of the predynastic Badarian Egyptian culture (15), ***leading to the hypothesis that these two cultures might derive from a common area, perhaps through pastoral groups living in the Sahara***. The culture linked to the Late Atlantic Neolithic period is known to have been dedicated almost exclusively to cattle breeding, secondarily complemented by sheep and goat breeding (14), suggesting that an investigation of the origin of Iberian cattle may offer further insight into early Iberian–African cultural contacts.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
The Hyksos were an important influence on Egyptian history, particularly at the beginning of the Second Intermediate Period. Most of what we know of the nature of the Hyksos depends upon written sources (of the Egyptians), such as the Rhind Papyrus. Also of considerable importance is the systematic excavation of their capital, Avaris (Tell el-Dab'a).The Hyksos ruled a large part of Egypt for about 100 years.
Egypt would eventually benefit considerably from their experience of foreign rule, and it has been suggested that the Hyksos rule of Egypt was far less damaging then later 18th Dynasty records would lead us to believe. It would make Egypt a stronger country, with a much more viable military. Because of Egypt's strength and ability to isolate herself from the outside world, cultural and technological growth was often stagnant. Until the Hyksos invasion, the history of Egypt and Asia were mostly isolated, while afterwards, they would be permanently entwined. The Hyksos brought more than weapons to Egypt. It was due to the Hyksos that the hump backed Zebu cattle made their appearance in Egypt. Also, we find new vegetable and fruit crops that were cultivated, along with improvements in pottery and linen arising from the introduction of improved potter's wheels and the vertical loom.
Perhaps one of the greatest contribution of the Hyksos was the preservation of famous Egyptian documents, both literary and scientific. During the reign of Apophis, the fifth king of the “Great Hyksos,” scribes were commissioned to recopy Egyptian texts so they would not be lost. One such text was the Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus. This unique text, dating from about 3000 BC, gives a clear perspective of the human body as studied by the Egyptians, with details of specific clinical cases, examinations, and prognosis. The Westcar Papyrus preserved the only known version of an ancient Egyptian story that may have otherwise been lost. Other restored documents include the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus, the most important mathematical exposition ever found in Egypt.
But it was the diffusion of innovations with more obvious military applications, such as bronze-working, which went far to compensate for the technological backwardness of Middle Kingdom Egypt, and it was these advantages that eventually allowed the kingdom at Thebes to gain back control of the Two Lands.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
This is an overstatement, probably some Jewish historian trying to down play Egypt. How in the Hell can Egypt's culture and technology be stagnant prior to the Hyksos when in the 3rd-4th Dynasties the Egyptians built the worlds largest stone structures not to be topped until the building of the Iffel Tower?? How does that make any sense??
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Because of Egypt's strength and ability to isolate herself from the outside world, cultural and technological growth was often stagnant.
Far as Im concerned the only thing the Hyksos did for Egypt was introduce weapons and the Chariot. Big WOW... Egypt was already a great empire and a cultural powerhouse before any Hyksos stepped foot on her soil.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Until the Hyksos invasion, the history of Egypt and Asia were mostly isolated, while afterwards, they would be permanently entwined.
^^^^ Notice in typical Euroasian centric fashion this historian somehow believes Asia was important to Egypt's power and sophistication. Ignoring all the data and evidence that proved proto-Egyptians were already innovative back in the deserts of Nabt-Playa.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
Egypt would eventually benefit considerably from their experience of foreign rule, and it has been suggested that the Hyksos rule of Egypt was far less damaging then later 18th Dynasty records would lead us to believe.
Hmm, Lets see all of these innovations(besides Millatary) the Hyksos supposedly bestowed upon Egypt.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: The Hyksos brought more than weapons to Egypt. It was due to the Hyksos that the hump backed Zebu cattle made their appearance in Egypt. Also, we find new vegetable and fruit crops that were cultivated, along with improvements in pottery and linen arising from the introduction of improved potter's wheels and the vertical loom.
WOW!! Cattle, some new crops and improved pottery, yeah The Hyksos outdid themselves..lol.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Perhaps one of the greatest contribution of the Hyksos was the preservation of famous Egyptian documents, both literary and scientific. During the reign of Apophis, the fifth king of the “Great Hyksos,” scribes were commissioned to recopy Egyptian texts so they would not be lost. One such text was the Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus. This unique text, dating from about 3000 BC, gives a clear perspective of the human body as studied by the Egyptians, with details of specific clinical cases, examinations, and prognosis. The Westcar Papyrus preserved the only known version of an ancient Egyptian story that may have otherwise been lost. Other restored documents include the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus, the most important mathematical exposition ever found in Egypt.
How Obsurd!! What a laugh these Eurasian-centric historians are. Get this some illiterate sand dwelling savages paid and hired Egyptian scribes or hired sand dwelling Saveges TRAINED as Egyptian scribes to preserve scientific works made by Egyptians(Which other Phroahs did). Despite all the innovations and superior culture bestowed upon the stagnant Egyptians the Illiterate Hyksos did not leave at least one Scientific papyrus of their own innovtions, yet they get credit for preserving Egyptian records in the Egyptian language..LOL.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
But it was the diffusion of innovations with more obvious military applications, such as bronze-working, which went far to compensate for the technological backwardness of Middle Kingdom Egypt, and it was these advantages that eventually allowed the kingdom at Thebes to gain back control of the Two Lands.
^^^^^ First off how was Middle Kingdom Egypt backward?? Where is the proof of this. Second it was Egypt's ability to control and manage large armies that ultimately won them control back of the Delta. Notice despite all the innovations the superior Hyksos had they never conquered Upper Egypt. It was more than weapons that led to the defeat of the Hyksos, if that was the case they would have won of at least ruled longer than 100 years..
The Hyksos could only control as small area contained to the delta never able to penetrate deeper into Upper Egypt.., while The Egyptians decimated and beat that ass as far north as the Levant, surely history shows who was backward and who was not.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
If the Hyksos were so progressive for Egypt, why were they kicked out and dispelled.
Aren't records stating that the hyksos were straight up terrorizing and acttually even enslaving the native people of Egypt.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: If the Hyksos were so progressive for Egypt, why were they kicked out and dispelled.
Aren't records stating that the hyksos were straight up terrorizing and acttually even enslaving the native people of Egypt.
Josephus claims to quote directly from Manetho, who's original history is lost to us, when he describes the conquest and occupation of Egypt by the Hyksos:
"By main force they easily seized it without striking a blow; and having overpowered the rulers of the land, they hen burned our cities ruthlessly, razed to the ground the temples of gods...Finally, they appointed as king one of their number whose name was Salitis."
Some of this rings true, while other parts seem not to be. It appears that the Hyksos left much of Egypt alone. It is clear that Avaris (Tell el-Dab'a) was occupied by a people who exhibited specifically non-Egyptian cultural traits. We find this in the layout of the town itself, the houses, and particularly the burials, which were intermixed with the living community, unlike those of the Egyptians. While we know that the Hyksos established centers, as their influenced gradually moved towards Memphis along the eastern edge of the Delta, at Farasha, Tell el-Sahaba, Bubastis, Inshas and Tell el-Yahudiyas, very little of this particular culture has been found at other Egyptian sites. At the same time, the Hyksos living in Egypt have been described as "Peculiarly Egyptian".
They were great builders and artisans. And little seems to have changed between the Egyptian style of governing, and that of the Hyksos. While the Hyksos imported some of their own gods, they also appear to have honored the Egyptian deities as well, such as Seth, who became assimilated with some Hyksos deities. Of course, we must also recall that Egypt already had somewhat of a history with the "Asiatics", including wars and considerable trade, so it would not be surprising to find some mix of cultures even among the Egyptians of the Delta.
Eventually, the Hyksos tolerance of rival claimants to the land beginning in the 15th Dynasty would spell their expulsion by the end of the 17th Dynasty, beginning with the reign of Kamose. By now, the baleful experience of foreign rule had done much to shatter the traditional Egyptian mindset of superiority in both culture and the security of the Egyptian state in the face of external threats.
However, the Hyksos never really ruled Egypt completely. Their expansion southwards was eventually checked. In fact, at least early on, this may have been the result of a massive plague, for at Tell el-Dab'a we find mass graves with little attention to the burials. Though the ruler of Avaris claimed to be King of Upper and Lower Egypt, we know from a stelae dating to the 17th Dynasty king Kamose, that Hermopolis marked the Avaris' king's theoretical southern boundary, while Cusae, a little further south, was actually the specific boarder point. Yet Southern, or Upper Egypt was reduced to a vassaldom, probably as a result of the effectiveness, eventually, of the Hyksos military forces, at least until the reign of Kamose. Therefore, we do regard them as the legitimate rulers of the whole country during parts of the Second Intermediate Period, considered a chaotic time which the Hyksos at least partially helped to create in Egypt.
References:
Armies of the Pharaohs Healy, Mark 1992
Atlas of Ancient Egypt
Baines, John; Malek, Jaromir 1980
Les Livres De France
Chronicle of the Pharaohs (The Reign-By-Reign Record of the Rulers and Dynasties of Ancient Egypt) Clayton, Peter A.1994
Thames and Hudson Ltd
Dictionary of Ancient Egypt, The Shaw, Ian; Nicholson, Paul 1995 Harry N. Abrams, Inc., Publishers
History of Ancient Egypt, A Grimal, Nicolas 1988 Blackwell
Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, The Shaw, Ian Oxford University Press
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: SG
Is your premise based on hyperdiffusionism, i.e., that something could only be invented once by one people and if that something shows up later elsewhere it had to have come from the earlier people and place despite any factors Kalonji listed that betray independent innovation?
No I don't believe that things can only be invented one time and that is it. I believe that they can be invented independently by multiple cultures. But when two cultures mirror each other in more than just a few ways, it seems likely there was influence of one upon the other, especially if one happened earlier in time.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
Did it ever occur to you that the things you say are mirrored between the two cultures, are in place because they arise out of normal stages of human development?
Copper working, royal regelia, golden accessories...
What you're doing is the equivalent of finding it remarkable that both Europeans and Mayans made permanant buildings.
Is this sloppyness an indication of what you claim to have left in the bag, will amount to?
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: Did it ever occur to you that the things you say are mirrored between the two cultures, are in place because they arise out of normal stages of human development?
Copper working, royal regelia, golden accessories...
Be careful with that Kalonji, you are actually repeating a neo-evolutionary idea that has for too long plagued African history. There are no "normal stages in human development", only historical contingency.
Notwithstanding of course that SimpleGirl has no clue as to what she's talking about.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata:
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: Did it ever occur to you that the things you say are mirrored between the two cultures, are in place because they arise out of normal stages of human development?
Copper working, royal regelia, golden accessories...
Be careful with that Kalonji, you are actually repeating a neo-evolutionary idea that has for too long plagued African history. There are no "normal stages in human development", only historical contingency.
Notwithstanding of course that SimpleGirl has no clue as to what she's talking about.
Good point. Anthropologists have often found that their models of development that were based on the standards of some Middle Eastern populations can't be applied carelessly to other regions. It is noteworthy that even here, Egypt often followed the (Northeast)African pattern, rather than the levantine/Mesopotamian one.
Its strong pastoral traditions before systematic and permanently settled agriculture is one of those patterns that directly defy talks of Levantine and Mesopotamian diffusion.
Increasing scholarly interest in developing or reviving accounts of Egyptian state formation based upon African models of political development constitutes more than an intellectual engagement with current social agendas. It also represents a frustration with the inability of existing models of social evolution, developed principally in relation to the archaeological record of South West Asia, to account for the distinguishing features of Egyptian political culture outlined above (cf. Fairservis 1989). David Wengrow in: Ancient Egypt in Africa
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Also from Vinca burials, there were many individuals buried in a fetal-like position just as in many predynastic graves of Egypt. This is just another one of the many things that parallel similarity between the two cultures.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
And as I also pointed out earlier, southeastern European cultures had what is possibly the earliest evidence of burials according to hierchal status. This is one of the main features that defined ancient Egyptian society and burial traditions.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
A Chinese archaeological team, jointly set up by School of Archaeology and Museum Studies of the Peking University and Beijing Research Institute of Cultural Relics, has discovered recently an early Neolithic human skeleton buried in the fetal position that lived about 9,000 years ago. The tomb faces the Qingshui River with backing on to a mountain slope, just to avoid attacks from northwest winds. In an about 1.2-meter-long tomb, there lies a skeleton about one meter long. The head of the skeleton is intact. However, the skeleton posture is very strange, looking just like a baby in a mother's womb, in terminology, this is known as a burial in the fetal position.
The earliest discovered burial sites are those of Neanderthal man, though according to researcher George Constable, they "were not credited with deliberate meaningful burial of their dead until more than a half-century after their discovery." The well-known anthropologist and archaeologist Louis Leaky said of the discoveries that their grave sites were intentional and thus indicates the Neanderthals displayed a keen self-awareness and a concern for the human spirit.
Many burial sites have been discovered in Europe and the Near East. The placement of the remains reveals ritualistic elements, as the cadavers were found in a sleeping or fetal position. Some remains have also been found with plants or flowers, placed in the hands or the body, and sometimes with red pigment, possibly used in a symbolic rite. Some Neanderthals were found buried together in a group, meaning that entire family groups remained united after death.
Mongolians believe in the return of the soul. Therefore the lamas pray and offer food to keep evil spirits away and to protect the remaining family. They also place blue stones in the dead persons bed to prevent evil spirits from entering it.
No one but a lama is allowed to touch the corpse, and a white silk veil is placed over the face. The naked body is flanked by men on the right side of the yurt while women are placed on the left. Both have their respective right or left hand placed under their heads, and are situated in the fetal position.
I'm not saying that everything should be unique only to the early neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe. I'm only making note of the similarities between two cultures.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Kalonji,you can find some cultures that buried their dead in a fetal position. Some cultures that may of had black-topped pottery. Some cultures that buried their kings and queens with gold and sceptors. Blah.... blah... blah.... blah.... blah. But when you can only find two cultures that had all these things in common, then there might be a connection.
I've only just begun. So hang on tight and enjoy the ride.lol
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:I'm not saying that everything should be unique only to the early neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe. I'm only making note of the similarities between two cultures.
Do you know how strange this sounds? If you don't think these things are unique to any one culture, than how can you be arguing for similarities? I swear, discussing things with you is like talking to a brick wall.
quote:But when you can only find two cultures that had all these things in common, then there might be a connection.
Most of the things you tried to force a connection with have been found in numerous cultures. For example, black-red pottery has been found all throughout India, China, etc., so if you argue for a connection with one place, you have to tell us why it applies to whatever cultures you are trying to make the connection to and not the several other cultures with the same type of ceramics etc., If you want to attempt to make a connection, you have to give evidence. Like, for example, right now and here I can show you a connection with West Africa and north Africa via pottery:
quote:Conclusion: Thus, with a solid stratigraphie and chronological context at Ounjougou, there is no doubt that ceramics appeared in sub-Saharan West Africa at least as early as in the Nile Valley,some time before 9400 cal BC. This innovation must be coupled with the re-establishment of the tropical grassland during the Early Holocene. Starting in the middle of the tenth millennium cal BC, the new technological complex may have rapidly diffused northwards, together with the advancing monsoon front, the greening of the Sahara and the massive expansion of edible Panicoid grasses
Source: The emergence of pottery in Africa during the tenth millennium cal BC: new evidence from Ounjougou (Mali)
E. Huysecom^*, M. Rasse , L Lespez^, K. Neumann , A. Fahmy^, A. Ballouche*-', S. Ozainne^ M. MaggettP, Ch. Tribolo** 6ż S. Soriano'^ (2009)
So we have evidence that west African pottery styles may have diffused north. Now, where is your evidence that European influenced Egypt in any way? What about the Egyptian/Nubian lineages found in southern Europe introduced in the Mesolithic and the sub-clades with considerable frequency? If anything, it was Africa that influenced Europe. We have tons of evidence of significant gene flow into Europe, but you can offer no evidence of significant gene flow into Egypt.
quote:Even if black-topped ware goes back to the earliest part of the Badarian culture of 5500 BC, it is still only contemporary with the black-topped ware of the Vinca culture.
Keita (2005) put to rest the thought of the Badarian having been colonized by Europeans or influenced in any way
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^ You're a joke. Show us an earlier use of gold in Africa. Or Copper tools etc. You don't have an argument so go back to your studies.lol
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
I'm surprised at how seriously people are taking this girl. She clearly misunderstands how archaeologists use ceramic typology to identify archaeological cultures. Not only do they study symbolism and stylistic motif, but perform precise measurements and look to identify points of radiation and signs of geographic continuity along sites. Chronologically, they look for signs of antecedent cultures as well. Since the Vinca and Badari cultures emerge around the same time there is no reason for invoking diffusion and since she has identified no antecedents there is no basis for suggesting common origin.
I WOULD call it parallel evolution if the similarities weren't so superficial. Ignoring the differences in morphology as well as manufacture/temper is dangerous as they indicate completely different traditions, clearly. The Egyptian pottery is oval to globular in shape while the above Vinca pottery is triangular. The Vinca also had developed sand-tempered ware while the Egyptian pottery was made with tempered/untempered pastes, despite the fact that the Egyptians had numerous options for tempers. This suggests a long period of internal development in stylistic taste prior to the appearance of red and black ware. The Vinca pottery is not literally "black-topped" as you can see the interior from top to base is black while the Egypto-Nubian pottery is black-topped on the exterior AND interior. This is because the Egyptians used different firing methods to achieve the black coloring which owed more to a process of carbon absorption as opposed to the use of contrasting pigments.
There is a reason no sane archaeologist has attempted to make such a tenuous connection. Simplemind's theory is stupid and deserves no more attention than Abozo's nonsense.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
While I don't take SG's diffusionist stance seriously because of the differing modes of production, she does appear to be correct about Vinca primacy in black-topped red ware (vs NV) and copper metallurgy (period).
I know of no outside influences that aided inception of Egyptian civilization. Even "agriculture" is questionable if certain cultigens themselves are not. Even then, the Near East (Greece, Balkans, Turkey) isn't a factor.
While all three continents obviously contributed items to each other, "civilizing influence" is a quite different matter.
SG has backed down from influence and now speaks of similarity of culture. But there too there is no cultural similarity between Vinca and Deir Tasa/Badari.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^I'll give the Vinca credit where credit is due, agreed. Maybe even simple mind deserves SOME credit for at least attempting to make her connections based on pretty decent intuition. It is simply when one digs deeper that her ideas are revealed as misguided and naive.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: The Vinca pottery is not literally "black-topped" as you can see the interior from top to base is black while the Egypto-Nubian pottery is black-topped on the exterior AND interior. This is because the Egyptians used different firing methods to achieve the black coloring which owed more to a process of carbon absorption as opposed to the use of contrasting pigments. [/QB]
I haven't seen any evidence for this. Please, if you have such, show us.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^This is based on empirical evidence. The evidence you seek is visibly apparent within the link you shared on the previous page. See Baba and Sait (2004) for more on Egyptian firing methods.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
The near east had its influence upon Egypt, but wasn't a necessity in its development. They of course had a common place of origin.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: ^This is based on empirical evidence. The evidence you seek is visibly apparent within the link you shared on the previous page. See Baba and Sait (2004) for more on Egyptian firing methods.
I didn't ask for subjective opinions about the firing techniques of the two cultures. I asked for hard evidence to suggest any differences. Do you have the evidence?
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Don't confuse contribution with influence. But what contributions did the Near East (Greece, Balkans, Turkey) give to pre-dynastic Egypt (i.e., the neolithic to dynasty 00)?
Please include up to date references, thank you.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The near east had its influence upon Egypt, but wasn't a necessity in its development.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: The Vinca pottery is not literally "black-topped" as you can see the interior from top to base is black while the Egypto-Nubian pottery is black-topped on the exterior AND interior. This is because the Egyptians used different firing methods to achieve the black coloring which owed more to a process of carbon absorption as opposed to the use of contrasting pigments. [/QB]
I don't see any reason for your statement. Here is an Egyptian pot and it has no clear distinction inside indicating black from red.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^My statement is based on cited source material. Plus, the above makes no sense and doesn't even follow my statement.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: ^My statement is based on cited source material. I was also referring to Badarian era ceramics.
I would like to see the cited source material that indicates a contrast between the two(vinca and Badarian) methods for firing with the two different results from the firing methods.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: ^My statement is based on cited source material. I was also referring to Badarian era ceramics.
I would like to see the cited source material that indicates a contrast between the two(vinca and Badarian) methods for firing with the two different results from the firing methods.
Scratch that, it doesn't even matter which 'era' as it's the same tradition, same point; black-rimmed on exterior and interior.
In any event, put up or shut up. Burden is on YOU to show pottery styles descend from the same tradition (which they clearly do not). With that said, I will leave you to your shenanigans as you scramble to collect evidence that doesn't exist.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
The Simpleton is obviously desperate. No archaeologist has ever stated that the black-topped red ware of the Nile Valley share common origins with those of the Balkans for the same reason they don't with the black-topped red ware of the Indus Valley in India!
She also keeps talking about "influences" from the Near East and "common origins" without stating exactly what those are.
I agree with Sundjata. Why are people taking this fool seriously??
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Most of the things you tried to force a connection with have been found in numerous cultures. For example, black-red pottery has been found all throughout India, China, etc., so if you argue for a connection with one place, you have to tell us why it applies to whatever cultures you are trying to make the connection to and not the several other cultures with the same type of ceramics etc., If you want to attempt to make a connection, you have to give evidence. Like, for example, right now and here I can show you a connection with West Africa and north Africa via pottery:
Conclusion: Thus, with a solid stratigraphie and chronological context at Ounjougou, there is no doubt that ceramics appeared in sub-Saharan West Africa at least as early as in the Nile Valley,some time before 9400 cal BC. This innovation must be coupled with the re-establishment of the tropical grassland during the Early Holocene. Starting in the middle of the tenth millennium cal BC, the new technological complex may have rapidly diffused northwards, together with the advancing monsoon front, the greening of the Sahara and the massive expansion of edible Panicoid grassesSource: The emergence of pottery in Africa during the tenth millennium cal BC: new evidence from Ounjougou (Mali)
E. Huysecom^*, M. Rasse , L Lespez^, K. Neumann , A. Fahmy^, A. Ballouche*-', S. Ozainne^ M. MaggettP, Ch. Tribolo** 6ż S. Soriano'^ (2009)
So we have evidence that west African pottery styles may have diffused north. Now, where is your evidence that European influenced Egypt in any way? What about the Egyptian/Nubian lineages found in southern Europe introduced in the Mesolithic and the sub-clades with considerable frequency? If anything, it was Africa that influenced Europe. We have tons of evidence of significant gene flow into Europe, but you can offer no evidence of significant gene flow into Egypt.
quote:Even if black-topped ware goes back to the earliest part of the Badarian culture of 5500 BC, it is still only contemporary with the black-topped ware of the Vinca culture.
Keita (2005) put to rest the thought of the Badarian having been colonized by Europeans or influenced in any way
quote:To which the Simpleton replied: ^ You're a joke. Show us an earlier use of gold in Africa. Or Copper tools etc. You don't have an argument so go back to your studies. lol
So Calabooz is a "joke" for citing an actual source debunking your b.s. and your lies on Africa?
And you see why this girl is known as the Simpleton. Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
My initial attempt was to simply keep ridiculing her along the way, and have fun doing it, but as I've said ever since I've became a member here, these ideas must be nipped in the bud and welcomed as opportunities for us to put them down for every novice to see. If no new false ideas of are brought to our awareness here on this forum, either by dissenters, or by our own as Zaharan recently did with the ''wiki books'', we're giving them the chance to build networks of lies around false arguments. Statements that are pro African in a wider context, such as Keita’s comment that the particularly close skeletal relationship Badarians have with Teita should not be taken as indicating equally close genetic relationships per se, are used as evidence that Africans were not close to Badarians. We also see with the limb proportion studies, that their last resort is to attempt to built networks of lies around isolated sections of papers that don’t support them in a wider context. They gratefully embrace sloppy word formulations handed to them by researchers eg they distort Ancient Egyptian samples labeled ‘’Egypt’’ to mean modern Egypt, so yes, these network of lies are real and the people who spread them should not be left to spread their lies undisturbed, because their proponants happen to be incompetent dorks.
To get back on topic, this resurrected idea - yes, the black topped pottery notions are not new or unheard of academic circles (see Petrie) – should not be credited as accurate without further specifics. Wishful girl is incredibly ill sourced, and one of her own links shows that Cyprus had such pottery as well. If Cyprus, what about Crete? We know that pre-dynastic pottery, along with a host of other Nile Valley cultural objects, are found in contemporary (southern) Crete. Until the Nile Valley and nearby areas, in particular the Western desert and Nilotic Sudan, enjoy the same intensity and frequency of excavations as the Middle East and adjacent areas, the dates between both regions cannot be compared fairly.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Don't confuse contribution with influence. But what contributions did the Near East (Greece, Balkans, Turkey) give to pre-dynastic Egypt (i.e., the neolithic to dynasty 00)?
Please include up to date references, thank you.
Actually by near east I mean Mesopotamia in general. I don't think Egypt was a direct spawn of Mesopotamia, but they definitely knew of each other and had much contact and influence.
There are now scholars entertaining the idea that the Sumerians came from the general area around the Black sea. Alot of scholars generally agree that Egypt was a direct result of Mesopotamian influence. I personally believe that both the Egyptians and the Sumerians had a common place of origin instead, and one was not a direct result of the other.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Don't confuse contribution with influence. But what contributions did the Near East (Greece, Balkans, Turkey) give to pre-dynastic Egypt (i.e., the neolithic to dynasty 00)?
Please include up to date references, thank you.
Actually by near east I mean Mesopotamia in general. I don't think Egypt was a direct spawn of Mesopotamia, but they definitely knew of each other and had much contact and influence.
There are now scholars entertaining the idea that the Sumerians came from the general area around the Black sea. Alot of scholars generally agree that Egypt was a direct result of Mesopotamian influence. I personally believe that both the Egyptians and the Sumerians had a common place of origin instead, and one was not a direct result of the other.
put up some links of scholars saying these things, thanks
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^This sounds incredibly stupid Simple Girl.
No scholar really agrees that Mesopotamia had such a significant influence on Egypt. For instance:
"Mesopotamian writing is also in pictographic form, and it has been suggested that the Egyptians borrowed from cuneiform in creating hieroglyphics. Scholars who point to the typically Egyptian concepts symbolized by hieroglyphics commonly reject this suggestion, however."--Deborah Vess PH.D (2006)
It is however widely acknowledged that Sudanese had a major impact on Egypt, and that Egyptian civilization was in a way derived from Sudanese culture:
The period when sub-Saharan Africa was most influential in Egypt was a time when neither Egypt, as we understand it culturally, nor the Sahara, as we understand it geographically, existed. Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant. Egypt rapidly found a method of disciplining the river, the land, and the people to transform the country into a titanic garden. Egypt rapidly developed detailed cultural forms that dwarfed its forebears in urbanity and elaboration. Thus, when new details arrived, they were rapidly adapted to the vast cultural superstructure already present. On the other hand, pharaonic culture was so bound to its place near the Nile that its huge, interlocked religious, administrative, and formal structures could not be readily transferred to relatively mobile cultures of the desert, savanna, and forest. The influence of the mature pharaonic civilizations of Egypt and Kush was almost confined to their sophisticated trade goods and some significant elements of technology. Nevertheless, the religious substratum of Egypt and Kush was so similar to that of many cultures in southern Sudan today that it remains possible that fundamental elements derived from the two high cultures to the north live on.--Joseph O. Vogel (1997)
You have yet to back up even one of your more asinine statements.
As for your claim of a common origin, how can this be when I have demonstrated to you time and time again that the ancient Egyptians had origins in sub-Saharan Africa Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
I kindly requested up to date references so list by name these "lot of scholars" and the publication dates of their works detailing "that Egypt was a direct result of Mesopotamian influence."
Don't give me random motif examples from a knife handle or a painting because both predate similar ones from anywhere else.
Give me at least three current up to date reports or books detailing actual civilization factors foreign to Africa that laid the basis for the rise of Egyptian civilization. Egyptian civilization developed between the neolithic and dynasty 00.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Don't confuse contribution with influence. But what contributions did the Near East (Greece, Balkans, Turkey) give to pre-dynastic Egypt (i.e., the neolithic to dynasty 00)?
Please include up to date references, thank you.
Actually by near east I mean Mesopotamia in general. I don't think Egypt was a direct spawn of Mesopotamia, but they definitely knew of each other and had much contact and influence.
There are now scholars entertaining the idea that the Sumerians came from the general area around the Black sea. Alot of scholars generally agree that Egypt was a direct result of Mesopotamian influence. I personally believe that both the Egyptians and the Sumerians had a common place of origin instead, and one was not a direct result of the other.
7am, waking up in the morning Gotta be fresh, gotta go downstairs Gotta have my bowl, gotta have cereal Seein’ everything, the time is goin’ Tickin’ on and on, everybody’s rushin’ Gotta get down to the bus stop Gotta catch my bus, I see my friends (My friends)
Kickin’ in the front seat Sittin’ in the back seat Gotta make my mind up Which seat can I take?
It’s Friday, Friday Gotta get down on Friday Everybody’s lookin’ forward to the weekend, weekend Friday, Friday Gettin’ down on Friday Everybody’s lookin’ forward to the weekend
Partyin’, partyin’ (Yeah) Partyin’, partyin’ (Yeah) Fun, fun, fun, fun Lookin’ forward to the weekend
[Rebecca Black - Verse 2]
7:45, we’re drivin’ on the highway Cruisin’ so fast, I want time to fly Fun, fun, think about fun You know what it is I got this, you got this My friend is by my right I got this, you got this Now you know it
Kickin’ in the front seat Sittin’ in the back seat Gotta make my mind up Which seat can I take?
Gettin’ down on Friday Everybody’s lookin’ forward to the weekend
Partyin’, partyin’ (Yeah) Partyin’, partyin’ (Yeah) Fun, fun, fun, fun Lookin’ forward to the weekend
[Bridge]
Yesterday was Thursday, Thursday Today i-is Friday, Friday (Partyin’) We-we-we so excited We so excited We gonna have a ball today
Tomorrow is Saturday And Sunday comes after...wards I don’t want this weekend to end
[Rap Verse]
R-B, Rebecca Black So chillin’ in the front seat (In the front seat) In the back seat (In the back seat) I’m drivin’, cruisin’ (Yeah, yeah) Fast lanes, switchin’ lanes Wit’ a car up on my side (Woo!) (C’mon) Passin’ by is a school bus in front of me Makes tick tock, tick tock, wanna scream Check my time, it’s Friday, it’s a weekend We gonna have fun, c’mon, c’mon, y’all
[Chorus]
It’s Friday, Friday Gotta get down on Friday Everybody’s lookin’ forward to the weekend, weekend Friday, Friday Gettin’ down on Friday Everybody’s lookin’ forward to the weekend
Partyin’, partyin’ (Yeah) Partyin’, partyin’ (Yeah) Fun, fun, fun, fun Lookin’ forward to the weekend
It’s Friday, Friday Gotta get down on Friday Everybody’s lookin’ forward to the weekend, weekend Friday, Friday Gettin’ down on Friday Everybody’s lookin’ forward to the weekend
Partyin’, partyin’ (Yeah) Partyin’, partyin’ (Yeah) Fun, fun, fun, fun Lookin’ forward to the weekend
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ ROTFLMAO Posted by Ekiti-Parapo (Member # 6729) on :
^^ ROTFLMBAO Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Here is a comparison of early proto-writing from Jemdet Nasr and Tartaria. I believe there is at least 2000 years separating the two, with the Tartaria example being the oldest.
This is but one example linking the Sumerians with a southeastern European place of origin.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
The tablets from Tartaria Romania date to 5300 B.C. Here is a picture of the actual tablets below.
Posted by Ekiti-Parapo (Member # 6729) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Here is a comparison of early proto-writing from Jemdet Nasr and Tartaria. I believe there is at least 1000 years separating the two, with the Tartaria example being the oldest.
This is but one example linking the Sumerians with a southeastern European place of origin.
Great stuff. It only just occured to me that the only way (barring someone from the past travelling into the future, or some secret group having preserved knowledge) to accurately interpret ancient scribblings is via comparisons. You can be pretty confident of THE meaning of a glyph (or combinations thereof) if you can find enough "pattern matches" in both the glyph shape and apparent meaning (not so easy to determine).
Ancient cultures with modern guardians (such as the Dogon) are an icing on the cake for this type of work because you can get to the "meaning" precisely without having to wonder if you got it wrong.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Notice the holes through two of them. Kinda like amulets or seal impressions that could be worn around the neck. Didn't the Egyptians have something like these called scarabs?
Posted by Ekiti-Parapo (Member # 6729) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The tablets from Tartaria Romania date to 5300 B.C. Here is a picture of the actual tablets below.
My questions about this method however are: how many "pattern matches" do you have to find to be conclusive? In the cases where there's no one left to give clues to meanings, can those artifacts be used?
Two very important questions I reckon.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
The Tartaria tablets represent what may be the earliest known writing or proto-writing in the world.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Here is a comparison of early proto-writing from Jemdet Nasr and Tartaria. I believe there is at least 2000 years separating the two, with the Tartaria example being the oldest.
This is but one example linking the Sumerians with a southeastern European place of origin.
A Simple Girl - The fact that southern Europeans and Mesopotamians share a common script does not necessarily link them ethnically.
You are forgetting the purpose of writing. i.e. Spoken language is for direct communication, writing is for remote communication: the link is trade.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The tablets from Tartaria Romania date to 5300 B.C. Here is a picture of the actual tablets below.
The Proto-Magyar were one of the many ethnic groups which formerly lived in the Fertile African Crescent. They offered prayers to *kan, e.g., Magyar kan, konyorog, Manding kani, and Dravidian ka-n. They also worshipped the god Amon, who they called Anya
The name Maa is found in many Proto-Saharan ethnonyms. For example the Manding called themselves Ma-nde (the children of Ma), the Sumerians called themselves Mah-Gar-ri (exalted God's children), and the Magyar of ancient times referred to themselves as Muh-ger-ri , or Ma-ka-r (exalted children).
According to David MacRitchies the most ancient Uralic speakers were called czernii ugris or 'Black Ugris'. The Ugris were also called Hunni. The name Ugrian, is the origin for the word Hungarian. The Hungarians were also called Sabatocospali ,"the Blacks".
The Carpathian blacks arrived in the area in the 4th millennium B.C. The Tripolye culture dates from 3800 to 2100 B.C. The Tripolye culture was established in the Ukraine, Moldavia and Romania along the Siret River in the Ukraine. The Tripolye people may have collected/cultivated barley, millet and wheat. They also had domesticated cattle, sheep-goats and pigs. As in Africa, their principle domesticate at this time was cattle .
During the middle Neolithic copper was being exploited in several mountainous regions of Europe. The center for copper mining in Europe was the Carpathian mountains. Many copper objects have been found on Tripolyean sites .
Many animal and human figurines have been found on Tripolyean sites. The Tripolye rotund ceramic female figurines are analogous to the rotund female figurines found in ancient Nubia.
It appears that for over a millennium the Linear Pottery and Cris farming groups practiced agriculture in the core region of Tripolyean culture. The middle Neolithic Tripolye people on the other hand are associated with cattle herding and mining.
The Vinca Tordos culture is very interesting because of the evidence of writing found in this culture. The famous Tartaria tablets were produced by the Vinca Tordos culture. The Vinca Tordos culture is associated with western Bulgaria, southwest Romania and Yugoslavia.
The Vinca people in addition to possessing writing were also engaged in copper metallurgy. They also made clay and stone figurines and fine pottery. As among the contemporary Nubians and Tripolyeans culture the Vinca people made fine human and animal figurines .
In conclusion the archaeological evidence suggest that The Old Europeans may have been Blacks who carried the N1 lineage to Europe that were later replaced by Indo-European speaking populations. There were probably no ancient white foragers of farmers in ancient Europe.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
The Tartarian writing was invented in Africa. .
.
It is based on the Thinite writing systems which was used by African people to write their language in ancient times.
In 1983,Vamos-Toth Bator and I deciphered the Tartarian tablets and discovered that it is not relating to an astrological event, it was an amulet worn by a Proto-Magyar dignitary.
Figure2: The Symbols on the Tartaria Tablet
Figure 3: The Tartaria Tablet
This amulet was deciphered by giving the characters of the Tartarian tablet phonetic values consistent with the Proto-Saharan script. Winters and Vamos-Toth found that the interpretation of the Tartarian tablet in Magyar and Manding was quite similar. Reading the Tartarian inscription from left to right in Magyar we have:
Jo taj dogo ko. "Goodness here adheres(to you from) the Deity. Taj-a to bo. Here the source of abundance. To egybe . (The Deity is) the source of Unity. Ko ne. The Deity (is) for me. Mi ont ke Which integrates (me) into one Unity (with the Deity)."
Breakdown of Symbols on Tartarian Tablet This Magyar decipherment corresponds to the Manding reading of the same signs: Yo ta togo Ko "(Make my) Present state of Existence here the Refuge[of] God Ne Ko My God fo to (is a) pleasant Refuge Mi nde Ge to consume indeed Purity."
The use of the term Ko to denote God, by the Proto-Magyar in the Tartarian amulet, supports the Kushite origin of the Magyar people who made this amulet.
The genetic unity of the Magyar and Mande translations show the African origin of the ancient Tartarians.
Posted by The Lioness. (Member # 18830) on :
Staring out my window I brush my hair Getting dressed to meet my friends but I don’t know what to wear Commercial shows on my T.V. about these cool designer jeans That I put on at the mall, change the channel and I see
Hannah Montana’s wearing my jeans Ashley Tisdale’s wearing my jeans Keke Palmer’s wearing my jeans I just can’t believe they wore those jeans like me! O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) she wore those jeans like me O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) she wore those jeans like me Like me (me) (me) (me) x4 She wore those jeans like me
Staring at the mall window I finger through a smile I thought about how cool I’d look if I had them on right now I’m anxious, excited, they’re on my mind It feels like Heelys are racing on my spine
I just can’t wait to call these my jeans Everyone can look at me and my jeans I can go anywhere in my jeans But I still can’t believe she wore those jeans like me O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) she wore those jeans like me O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) she wore those jeans like me Like me (me) (me) (me) (x4) She wore those jeans like me
One, here comes the two to the three Not, it’s the T-R-I-double G Why? She got those cool new jeans that sittin’ in the J-E-T but she’s fly You might see me in a video, tv show, MTV, Nick, HBO Jenna could be a model in a fashion show, look there she goes
ABC, 123, that girl wore her jeans like me I bet she’s mad ‘cause I look fab Ha ha ha ha, jack my swag Sticks and stones may break my bones but mine look new and hers just look so o-old, so o-old, so old
Oh my, look at those jeans They should be posted in magazines Matter of fact, let me get my phone You can strike a pose, smile for the camera, FREEZE! What, Trig bought a new Blackberry? (x3) Ah, just take the picture already! Sorry, I was stuck in a daydream when I bought those jeans With my new ice creams and I looked so good when I hit the scene So fresh, so clean, all eyes on me Then I turned on my T.V. What do I see, the Black Eyed Peas? And Jay Z? I just can’t believe they wore they jeans like me
O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) she wore those jeans like me O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) she wore those jeans like me Like me (me) (me) (me) x4 She wore those jeans like me O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) she wore those jeans like me O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) O-M-G (oh oh ohhh) she wore those jeans like me Like me (me) (me) (me) x4
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Lioness the 1st time was funny now u just trolling cut it out already!!!
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LOL It's still funny to me. I believe 'the Lioness' is showing the mentality of Lyinass and Simpleton. They need to leave the scholarship alone and go back to their tween pop music sh*t. LOL
By the way, how many times must Simpleton keep posting those symbols. Didn't we show her in 2 or 3 past threads that those symbols have NOTHING to do with the development of Egyptian hieroglyphs which are are AFRICAN animal totems derived from southern Nilotic sources??
Seriously, the twit needs to get back to her Rebecca Black music since history and academics really aren't her strong points. Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^ I would like to see the symbols you are talking about in an ancient context that predates Old European/Vinca script, and not something in a modern or made up fashion.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] ^ LOL It's still funny to me. I believe 'the Lioness' is showing the mentality of Lyinass and Simpleton.
Looks more like she is showing her own mentality, especially since that is all that seems to be on her mind.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Lol, this thread is funny.
quote:I would like to see the symbols you are talking about in an ancient context that predates Old European/Vinca script, and not something in a modern or made up fashion.
Holy phuckin sh!t LOL Wow. I cannot believe, or maybe I can, that you insist on repeating the same things. Especially when you were humiliated here:
On the exact same issue LOL!! Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ My point exactly! We went over this sh*t with her before on that thread and I believe another one before that, yet her dumbass keeps repeating herself.
Egyptian hieroglyphs have NOTHING to do with European pictographs however old they might be! Get over it, you dumb b|tch!
I'm sorry but this twit has becoming more annoying than usual.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: A lot of scholars generally agree that Egypt was a direct result of Mesopotamian influence.
Virtually no scholar at all agrees with this notion ever since the late 60s and 70s when the roots of pharaonic culture was discovered in south of Aswan in Ta Seti.
quote:I personally believe that both the Egyptians and the Sumerians had a common place of origin instead, and one was not a direct result of the other.
And what place is that? We KNOW the Egyptians originated in the continent where they remained-- Africa. Are you saying the Sumerians came Africa as well? LOL Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^You still refuse to offer any examples that predate Old European/Vinca script thimble head. And no, the Sumerians didn't come from Africa.
You have no evidence of any African script predating the evidence I have offered. Maybe the Rebecca Black lyrics were meant for you.lol
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Lol, this thread is funny.
quote:I would like to see the symbols you are talking about in an ancient context that predates Old European/Vinca script, and not something in a modern or made up fashion.
Holy phuckin sh!t LOL Wow. I cannot believe, or maybe I can, that you insist on repeating the same things. Especially when you were humiliated here:
And show us all where exactly I was humiliated? The fact is, you have been humiliated more than once, and you're about to get humiliated again. lol
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Why do you pretend that people even agree with you. I mean, you always say "us" this and "us" that, so who are the others included in your use of the word "us"? Lol...
Anyways, I won't bother to repost things that other posters gave you in the other thread, just because you are too lazy, now and then, to bother reading let alone comprehending things. Cya
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Why do you pretend that people even agree with you. I mean, you always say "us" this and "us" that, so who are the others included in your use of the word "us"? Lol...
Anyways, I won't bother to repost things that other posters gave you in the other thread, just because you are too lazy, now and then, to bother reading let alone comprehending things. Cya
There's nothing really to comprehend other than that you and thimble head are trolling around and have nothing useful to offer to the topic. cya
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Simple Girl, there's an article mentioned by Asar Imhotep in the Egyptology section:
Further steps towards an aggregative diachronic approach to world mythology starting from the African continent.
Back-Migration into Africa some 15,000 years ago from Asia responsible for African culture
quote:Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: Have any of you come across this information before? I have been following Dr. Van Binsbergen's thesis for a while and find it overall untenable for various reason which would take a book to discuss. It's a shame that with all of his information, as to not sound "Afrocentrist) (as if he knew what it actually means) he still argues for a central west Asian origin for Africa's language and cultural ideas based on his Borean thesis of languages, which itself is based on Nostratic and other super families of languages. He runs into a major dilemma when we consider that Afro-Asiatic (if it even exist) is alleged to be the oldest of the Nostratic languages, meaning that all the languages in the proposed nostratic comes from Afro-Asiatic. Yet AA was birthed in Africa, not Asia, with the only branch of AA dominating in "Asia" is Semitic. So for his argument to be sound, the Africans would have had to back migrate from Asia to begin Afro-Asiatic, leave Africa and start all the other language families, then re-back-migrate into Africa and introduce all of the cultural packages, that were "advanced" in Asia.
Looks pretty interesting Lioness. I haven't read it all the way through, but it seems to be saying pretty much what I'm saying here.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^Pretty much. The only person who will ever agree with you is a pseudo scholar Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^Pretty much. The only person who will ever agree with you is a pseudo scholar
why do you call him pseudo? Because he doesn't agree?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Modern scholars, proponents of the Dynastic Race Theory:
David Rohl British Egyptologist and former director of the Institute for the Study of Interdisciplinary Sciences (ISIS) who from the 1980s has put forth several theories revising the chronology of Ancient Egypt and Israel to form a new chronology. awarded the prestigious W.F. Masom History Research Scholarship by the University of London as well as being awarded his degree in Ancient History and Egyptology in 1990.
Walter Bryan Emery, a former Chair of Egyptology at University College London
_________________________________________________
Mary Lefkowitz has a chapter in her book Black Athena revisited called:
The Dynastic Race Theory was the earliest thesis to attempt to explain how predynastic Egypt developed into the sophisticated monarchy of Dynastic Egypt. The Theory holds that the earliest roots of the Ancient Egyptian dynastic civilisation were imported by "invaders" from Mesopotamia. In the early 20th century Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie, one of the leading Egyptologists of his day, deduced that the skeletal remains found at pre-dynastic sites at Naqada (Upper Egypt) indicated the presence of two different races. He inferred that one of them was foreign to Egypt, and must have been an invader. Based on plentiful cultural evidence, such as architectural styles, pottery styles, cylinder seals and a few artworks, as well as numerous rock and tomb paintings, Petrie determined that the invader race had come from Mesopotamia, and had imposed themselves on the local Badarian (African) people and become their rulers. This came to be called the “Dynastic Race Theory”.[1][2] The theory further argued that the Mesopotamians then conquered both Upper and Lower Egypt and founded the First Dynasty
I posted an article he wrote in that thread called
The ‘Dynastic Race’
-although I don't necessarily endorse his point of view
lioness productions
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^Yes he points out all the basic similarities between the Sumerians and Egyptians. There are just too many of them to deny that there was any influence or contact.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: ^Yes he points out all the basic similarities between the Sumerians and Egyptians. There are just too many of them to deny that there was any influence or contact.
They can't date the early artifacts precisely. Therefore it can't be determined if the Sumerians influenced the Egyptians or the Egyptians influenced the Sumerians. Also the exact connections must be looked at. Some influences are more much more important than others.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:why do you call him pseudo? Because he doesn't agree?
Don't be stupid, assuming you are able to do even that. Nobody who actually researches this thoroughly comes to the conclusion that Africa's culture and language came from central Asia, hence the reason why Asar Imhotep was so easily able to expose his theory.
quote:Modern scholars, proponents of the Dynastic Race Theory:
The Dynastic race theory has been debunked for years now. Don't know why you referenced Lefkowitz since she doesn't hold that view. And Petrie especially has been debunked by Zakrzewski, Keita etc., etc., on the dynastic race.
quote:^Yes he points out all the basic similarities between the Sumerians and Egyptians. There are just too many of them to deny that there was any influence or contact.
Of course there was some sort of contact, nobody has denied that. This was through trade, military contact etc., please post these similarities you speak of and then provide evidence that they are somehow non-indigenous to Egypt. As Sundjata pointed out, they are so superficial anyways.
Waiting for you to address the following:
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^This sounds incredibly stupid Simple Girl.
No scholar really agrees that Mesopotamia had such a significant influence on Egypt. For instance:
"Mesopotamian writing is also in pictographic form, and it has been suggested that the Egyptians borrowed from cuneiform in creating hieroglyphics. Scholars who point to the typically Egyptian concepts symbolized by hieroglyphics commonly reject this suggestion, however."--Deborah Vess PH.D (2006)
It is however widely acknowledged that Sudanese had a major impact on Egypt, and that Egyptian civilization was in a way derived from Sudanese culture:
The period when sub-Saharan Africa was most influential in Egypt was a time when neither Egypt, as we understand it culturally, nor the Sahara, as we understand it geographically, existed. Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant. Egypt rapidly found a method of disciplining the river, the land, and the people to transform the country into a titanic garden. Egypt rapidly developed detailed cultural forms that dwarfed its forebears in urbanity and elaboration. Thus, when new details arrived, they were rapidly adapted to the vast cultural superstructure already present. On the other hand, pharaonic culture was so bound to its place near the Nile that its huge, interlocked religious, administrative, and formal structures could not be readily transferred to relatively mobile cultures of the desert, savanna, and forest. The influence of the mature pharaonic civilizations of Egypt and Kush was almost confined to their sophisticated trade goods and some significant elements of technology. Nevertheless, the religious substratum of Egypt and Kush was so similar to that of many cultures in southern Sudan today that it remains possible that fundamental elements derived from the two high cultures to the north live on.--Joseph O. Vogel (1997)
You have yet to back up even one of your more asinine statements.
As for your claim of a common origin, how can this be when I have demonstrated to you time and time again that the ancient Egyptians had origins in sub-Saharan Africa
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LOL You ask too much of the Simpleton. What the hell kind of evidence do you expect her to provide??
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: ^You still refuse to offer any examples that predate Old European/Vinca script thimble head. And no, the Sumerians didn't come from Africa.
Again, what the hell does Vinca script have to do with Egypt since it was shown to you many times now that Egyptian hieroglyphs are totally indigenous and developed from pictographs found in Nubia.
quote:You have no evidence of any African script predating the evidence I have offered. Maybe the Rebecca Black lyrics were meant for you. lol
Irrelevant. Again, what does the script you present have to do with Egypt, you twit. The Rebecca Black lyrics are obviously meant for you as you are a dumb air-headed American white girl. Everyone in this forum can see that. A Simpleton mind like yours has no business in scholarship. LOL Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Simpleton to Lyingass: Looks pretty interesting Lioness. I haven't read it all the way through, but it seems to be saying pretty much what I'm saying here.
So you agree then that Africans would have had to back-migrate from Asia to begin Afro-Asiatic, leave Africa and start all the other language families, then re-back-migrate into Africa and introduce all of the "advanced" culture?? LMAO
That so-called theory has more holes than swiss cheese.
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: why do you call him pseudo? Because he doesn't agree?
No. Because he contradicts the all prevailing theory of other linguists and philologists that Afro-asiatic originated in Africa plain and simple. The ONLY Afro-asiatic language extent outside of Africa is Semitic which in genetic linguistics is an outlier.
Even human genetics supports that Semitic or at least its ancestor was introduced to Asia by Africans via the presence of PN2 lineages in the area dating to the mesolithic which is the same time period proto-Semitic would have developed.
You like Simpleton are idiots.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Simple Girl
Don't mean to beat on simple, but can you show the forum the similarities between Egypt and Sumeria and what makes Egyptian techniques come from Sumeria instead of indeginous.
Would love to see a list of what makes Egypt and Sumeria so simliar.
Peace
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Lioness has already posted many of those similarities between Sumer and Egypt.
I'm not suggesting that Sumer actually influenced the whole of Egyptian civilization, but there was undoubtably much contact and similarity. My belief is that the people both originated from a common place and were well aware of each other from the start.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
If you look at the early neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe, almost all the prerequisites for Egyptian and Sumerian culture were already in place way before the first Dynasty.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Simple Girl
From the link you posted, Lioness posted a article from David Rohl who claims the dynastic race theory that "NO" scholars today promote.
Now back to the simlarities between Sumeria and Egypt you did not list any and I will not read a Dyanstic race article because it is just foolish and dumb.
If it is in the article Simple then list it from there since you read it.
What are these prerequisites in Europe that layed the foundation for Egypt? Please post them.
Peace
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Well I've posted the link for you to read but you think that it is too foolish and dumb. In fact you've already made up your mind on who you think the first Egyptians should be, so why are you wasting my time?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:but there was undoubtably much contact and similarity.
What was told to you earlier about said "similarities"? Go back and read.
quote:My belief is that the people both originated from a common place and were well aware of each other from the start.
So you admit that it is just your belief, huh? Well, guess what, no research acknowledges that. The ancient Egyptians had common origins along with Sudanese from sub-Saharan Africa. There is no evidence that Egyptians and Mesopotamians shared common origin in southern Europe. Nobody denies cultural influences, however there is no evidence that there was a major or significant presence of Near Easterners/Europeans. Al-Takuri explained to you earlier that there is a distinction between influence and contribution. Your hypothesis is to be rejected by Keita:
quote:The results are not supportive of European agriculturalists colonizing el-Badari in the early- to mid-Holocene. The Badarian series evinces greater phenetic affinity with the tropical African comparative groups and, notably, the east African Teita.
--Keita (2005)
quote:In fact you've already made up your mind on who you think the first Egyptians should be
Lol, you are describing yourself. Everything you say can *NOT* be supported by any research or else you would have provided it.
Still waiting for you to address the following, if you can:
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^This sounds incredibly stupid Simple Girl.
No scholar really agrees that Mesopotamia had such a significant influence on Egypt. For instance:
"Mesopotamian writing is also in pictographic form, and it has been suggested that the Egyptians borrowed from cuneiform in creating hieroglyphics. Scholars who point to the typically Egyptian concepts symbolized by hieroglyphics commonly reject this suggestion, however."--Deborah Vess PH.D (2006)
It is however widely acknowledged that Sudanese had a major impact on Egypt, and that Egyptian civilization was in a way derived from Sudanese culture:
The period when sub-Saharan Africa was most influential in Egypt was a time when neither Egypt, as we understand it culturally, nor the Sahara, as we understand it geographically, existed. Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant. Egypt rapidly found a method of disciplining the river, the land, and the people to transform the country into a titanic garden. Egypt rapidly developed detailed cultural forms that dwarfed its forebears in urbanity and elaboration. Thus, when new details arrived, they were rapidly adapted to the vast cultural superstructure already present. On the other hand, pharaonic culture was so bound to its place near the Nile that its huge, interlocked religious, administrative, and formal structures could not be readily transferred to relatively mobile cultures of the desert, savanna, and forest. The influence of the mature pharaonic civilizations of Egypt and Kush was almost confined to their sophisticated trade goods and some significant elements of technology. Nevertheless, the religious substratum of Egypt and Kush was so similar to that of many cultures in southern Sudan today that it remains possible that fundamental elements derived from the two high cultures to the north live on.--Joseph O. Vogel (1997)
You have yet to back up even one of your more asinine statements.
As for your claim of a common origin, how can this be when I have demonstrated to you time and time again that the ancient Egyptians had origins in sub-Saharan Africa
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Simple Girl
The only mind being made up is the scholars that have debunked the dynastic race theory.
"NO" credible egyptologist Black or White claims any coming of immigrants that taught the Egyptians there cultures.
Moving on....Still waiting on you to post the similarities between Egypt and Sumeria. Please post them so the forum can read them.
Peace
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz':
quote:Originally posted by lioness: why do you call him pseudo? Because he doesn't agree?
Nobody who actually researches this thoroughly comes to the conclusion that Africa's culture and language came from central Asia,
Wim van Binsbergen, African,Studies (at the African Studies Centre, Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Leiden,
I'm not saying I agree with this guy but he is a university scholar who has written books and you and Dejhooti are nobodies on the internet. So you are not exactly in a position to label someone a "pseudo scholar", Your definition of a pseudo scholar is somebody who doesn't tow the afroeccentric party line. You try to drag in Asar to save you to cover up the fact that you didn't read the article and have no objectivity.
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Modern scholars, proponents of the Dynastic Race Theory:The Dynastic race theory has been debunked for years now. Don't know why you referenced Lefkowitz since she doesn't hold that view. And Petrie especially has been debunked by Zakrzewski, Keita etc., etc., on the dynastic race.
dingbat, I put up the Lefkowitz because it IS critical of the dynastic race theory. I realize entertaining differing points of view is something foreign to your lock step.
L' had to change his name back to Calabooz to escape the thrashing he received under that name
...and don't go running to Asar for help little man
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Just because he is at a university doesn't mean he is right. To me, anybody who comes to the conclusion that Africa's culture and language came from Central Asia could not have done nearly enough research/resorted to outdated material.
quote:I put up the Lefkowitz because it IS critical of the dynastic race theory.
OK
quote:L' had to change his name back to Calabooz to escape the thrashing he received under that name
Sure lioness, whatever you say. Even though I changed back to my original Username and every post I made under a different Username was changed as well. I think you are referring to the thrashing that we gave you on the limb proportions thread, not vice versa. Lol....
When did I go to Asar for help? You are the one who even quoted him in the first place, I just pointed out that he exposed a little of the guys theory
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Don't confuse contribution with influence. But what contributions did the Near East (Greece, Balkans, Turkey) give to pre-dynastic Egypt (i.e., the neolithic to dynasty 00)?
Please include up to date references, thank you.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The near east had its influence upon Egypt, but wasn't a necessity in its development.
From my understanding that influence came from the central African Natufians residing in the Levant during the time of Pre-Pottery Neolithic and Pre-Pottery Neolithic A and B.
If influence/ contribution was actually the case.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Don't confuse contribution with influence. But what contributions did the Near East (Greece, Balkans, Turkey) give to pre-dynastic Egypt (i.e., the neolithic to dynasty 00)?
Please include up to date references, thank you.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The near east had its influence upon Egypt, but wasn't a necessity in its development.
From my understanding that influence came from the central African Natufians residing in the Levant during the time of Pre-Pottery Neolithic and Pre-Pottery Neolithic A and B.
If influence/ contribution was actually the case.
Could this indicate the return of early Natufians?
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: ^Yes he points out all the basic similarities between the Sumerians and Egyptians. There are just too many of them to deny that there was any influence or contact.
What happened to the preponderance of parallel inventions, you know? Posted by Omo Baba (Member # 18816) on :
So this is it then for Simple Girl's effort at scholarly work. Pity!!
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
We must be careful with what we put out there.
I don't know about any central Africa Natufians.
Ttbomk, northeast African Mashubians migrated to the Levant where they encountered the indigenee Kebarans. Afterwards, Natufian culture emerged whose people at first predominantly resembled inner African phenotypes but with no further influxes finally lost those features.
The Natufians of course laid the ground work for neolithic farming techniques that spread to both Europe and North Africa. Hence, as you say, the initial influence was from Africa to the Levant and then on to Europe.
Later, elements unique to each region contributed to each other as stone and metal technologies coexisted and as the latter replaced the former.
Because of involvement in long distance trade I'd say that after the stone-metal and metal ages began no civilization developed in a local vacuum though intercontinental contact was less likely for developing civilizations far from the Indian Ocean or the Mediterranean.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Don't confuse contribution with influence. But what contributions did the Near East (Greece, Balkans, Turkey) give to pre-dynastic Egypt (i.e., the neolithic to dynasty 00)?
Please include up to date references, thank you.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The near east had its influence upon Egypt, but wasn't a necessity in its development.
From my understanding that influence came from the central African Natufians residing in the Levant during the time of Pre-Pottery Neolithic and Pre-Pottery Neolithic A and B.
If influence/ contribution was actually the case.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Great find!
The quartz technology points to Ounjougou as an internal West African Holocene culture in contact with the Sahara to which they contributed pottery.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Could this indicate the return of early Natufians?
I am starting to think that we underestimate the importance of the Natufians.
I think they were movers and inventors.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: We must be careful with what we put out there.
I don't know about any central Africa Natufians.
Ttbomk, northeast African Mashubians migrated to the Levant where they encountered the indigenee Kebarans. Afterwards, Natufian culture emerged whose people at first predominantly resembled inner African phenotypes but with no further influxes finally lost those features.
The Natufians of course laid the ground work for neolithic farming techniques that spread to both Europe and North Africa. Hence, as you say, the initial influence was from Africa to the Levant and then on to Europe.
Later, elements unique to each region contributed to each other as stone and metal technologies coexisted and as the latter replaced the former.
Because of involvement in long distance trade I'd say that after the stone-metal and metal ages began no civilization developed in a local vacuum though intercontinental contact was less likely for developing civilizations far from the Indian Ocean or the Mediterranean.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Don't confuse contribution with influence. But what contributions did the Near East (Greece, Balkans, Turkey) give to pre-dynastic Egypt (i.e., the neolithic to dynasty 00)?
Please include up to date references, thank you.
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: The near east had its influence upon Egypt, but wasn't a necessity in its development.
From my understanding that influence came from the central African Natufians residing in the Levant during the time of Pre-Pottery Neolithic and Pre-Pottery Neolithic A and B.
If influence/ contribution was actually the case.
A study by Brace et al. stated that Natufians relate closest to Congo/ Chad region Africans. ( central Africans).
I think that these early Natufians were part of the so called back migration.
I am going to look for parallels as much as possible.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Great find!
The quartz technology points to Ounjougou as an internal West African Holocene culture in contact with the Sahara to which they contributed pottery.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Could this indicate the return of early Natufians?
I am starting to think that we underestimate the importance of the Natufians.
I think they were movers and inventors.
The founders of civilization in South West Asia were the Anu people, archaeologists call Natufians. By 13,000 BC, according to J.D. Clark ("The origins of domestication in Ethiopia", Fifth Panafrican Congress of prehistory and quaternary Studies, Nairobi,1977) the Natufians were collecting grasses which later became domesticated crops in Southwest Asia. In Palestine the Natufians established intensive grass collection.
The Natufians used the Ibero-Maurusian tool industry (see F. Wendorf, TheHistory of Nubia, Dallas,1968, pp.941-46). These Natufians , according to Christopher Ehret ( "On the antiquity of agriculture in Ethiopia", Jour. of African History 20, [1979], p.161) were small stature folk who spread agriculture throughout Nubia into the Red Sea. The Natufians took the Ibero-Maurusian tools into Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.
The Natufians practiced evulsion of the incisors the same as Bantu people and inhabitants of the Saharan fringes.
The modern civilizations of the Middle East were created by the Natufians.Since the Natufians came from Nubia, they can not be classified as Euorpeans, as you claim in your post.
As you can see they were not cold adapted.
Trenton W. Holliday,in "Evolution at the Crossroads: Modern Human Emergence in Western Asia, American Anthropologist,102(1) [2000], tested the hypothesis that if modern Africans had dispersed into the Levant from Africa , "tropically adapted hominids" would be represented in the archaeological history of theLavant,especially in relation to the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids. This researcher found that the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids (20,000-10,000),were assigned to the Sub-Saharan population, along with the Natufians samples (4000 BP). Holliday also found African fauna in the area.
Holliday confirmed his hypothesis that the replacement of the Neanderthal people were Sub-Saharan Africans. This shows that there were no European types in the Middle East Between 20,000-4,000BP. Moreover, we clearly see the continuity between African culture from Nubia to the Levant.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: ^Yes he points out all the basic similarities between the Sumerians and Egyptians. There are just too many of them to deny that there was any influence or contact.
They are similar because the Sumerians came from Africa. The Sumerians were Kushites that's why they referred to themselves as the Kings of Kish/Kush.
The original inhabitants of the Sahara where the Egyptian or Kemitic civilization originated were not Berbers or Indo-Europeans (Winters 1985b). This was the ancient homeland of the Dravidians, Egyptians, Sumerians, Niger-Kordofanian-Mande and Elamite speakers is called the Fertile African Crescent (Anselin 1989, p.16, 1992; Winters,1985). The inhabitants of this area lived in the highland regions of the Fezzan in modern Libya and Hoggar until after 4000 B.C. We call these people the Proto-Saharans (Winters 1985). The generic term for this group is Kushite.
The Proto-Saharans were called Ta-Seti and Tehunu by the Egyptians. In the archaeological literature they were called A-Group and C-Group respectively. Farid (1985, p.82) noted that: We can notice that at the beginning of the neolithic stage in Egypt on the edge of the Western Desert corresponds with expansion of the Saharian Neolithic culture and the growth of its population .
The Fertile Saharan Crescent is an arc shaped series of highland regions in the Saharan zone of Africa. The Saharan zone is bounded on the north by the Atlas mountains, the Atlantic Ocean in the West, the tropical rain forest in the south and the Red Sea in the East. It was here that the ancestors of the founders of the river valley civilizations in Africa, the Middle East, China and Indus Valley developed their highly organized and technological societies (Winters,1985).
The discovery of Intercultural style vessels from Susa (in Iran),Sumerian, Egyptian and Indus Valley sites suggest a shared ideological identity among these people (Kohl 1978). In fact the appearance of shared iconographic symbols and beliefs within diverse areas suggest cultural and ethnic unity among the people practicing these cultures. The common naturalistic motifs shared by the major civilizations include, writing (symbols), combatant snakes , the scorpion, bull and etc.
This evidence of cultural unity is explained by the origin of these people in the Proto-Sahara (Winters 1985).
References:
Farid., El-Yahky.(1985) "The Sahara and Predynastic Egyptian Overview",The Journal for the Society for the Study Egyptian Antiquities 7, (1-2) , 58-65.
Farid ,El-Yahky.(1984). "The Origin and Development of sanctuaries in Predynastic Egypt", Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 14, no3 (1984), pages 70-73.
Kohl, R L.(1978). "The blance of trade in Southwest Asia in the mid-third millennium B.C.", Current Anthropology19, 463 -492.
Winters, C.A.(1985a). "The Proto-Culture of the Dravidians ,Manding and Sumerians", Tamil Civilization 3, no1 (March 1985a) ,pages 1-9. http://olmec98.net/Fertile1.pdf
.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Great find!
The quartz technology points to Ounjougou as an internal West African Holocene culture in contact with the Sahara to which they contributed pottery.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Could this indicate the return of early Natufians?
I am starting to think that we underestimate the importance of the Natufians.
I think they were movers and inventors.
The founders of civilization in South West Asia were the Anu people, archaeologists call Natufians. By 13,000 BC, according to J.D. Clark ("The origins of domestication in Ethiopia", Fifth Panafrican Congress of prehistory and quaternary Studies, Nairobi,1977) the Natufians were collecting grasses which later became domesticated crops in Southwest Asia. In Palestine the Natufians established intensive grass collection.
The Natufians used the Ibero-Maurusian tool industry (see F. Wendorf, TheHistory of Nubia, Dallas,1968, pp.941-46). These Natufians , according to Christopher Ehret ( "On the antiquity of agriculture in Ethiopia", Jour. of African History 20, [1979], p.161) were small stature folk who spread agriculture throughout Nubia into the Red Sea. The Natufians took the Ibero-Maurusian tools into Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.
The Natufians practiced evulsion of the incisors the same as Bantu people and inhabitants of the Saharan fringes.
The modern civilizations of the Middle East were created by the Natufians.Since the Natufians came from Nubia, they can not be classified as Euorpeans, as you claim in your post.
As you can see they were not cold adapted.
Trenton W. Holliday,in "Evolution at the Crossroads: Modern Human Emergence in Western Asia, American Anthropologist,102(1) [2000], tested the hypothesis that if modern Africans had dispersed into the Levant from Africa , "tropically adapted hominids" would be represented in the archaeological history of theLavant,especially in relation to the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids. This researcher found that the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids (20,000-10,000),were assigned to the Sub-Saharan population, along with the Natufians samples (4000 BP). Holliday also found African fauna in the area.
Holliday confirmed his hypothesis that the replacement of the Neanderthal people were Sub-Saharan Africans. This shows that there were no European types in the Middle East Between 20,000-4,000BP. Moreover, we clearly see the continuity between African culture from Nubia to the Levant.
Thanks Dr. Clyde,
I think that the term Natufians is being used as a generic definition. Like a cluster name, consciously or unconsciously.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Great find!
The quartz technology points to Ounjougou as an internal West African Holocene culture in contact with the Sahara to which they contributed pottery.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Could this indicate the return of early Natufians?
I am starting to think that we underestimate the importance of the Natufians.
I think they were movers and inventors.
The founders of civilization in South West Asia were the Anu people, archaeologists call Natufians. By 13,000 BC, according to J.D. Clark ("The origins of domestication in Ethiopia", Fifth Panafrican Congress of prehistory and quaternary Studies, Nairobi,1977) the Natufians were collecting grasses which later became domesticated crops in Southwest Asia. In Palestine the Natufians established intensive grass collection.
The Natufians used the Ibero-Maurusian tool industry (see F. Wendorf, TheHistory of Nubia, Dallas,1968, pp.941-46). These Natufians , according to Christopher Ehret ( "On the antiquity of agriculture in Ethiopia", Jour. of African History 20, [1979], p.161) were small stature folk who spread agriculture throughout Nubia into the Red Sea. The Natufians took the Ibero-Maurusian tools into Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.
The Natufians practiced evulsion of the incisors the same as Bantu people and inhabitants of the Saharan fringes.
The modern civilizations of the Middle East were created by the Natufians.Since the Natufians came from Nubia, they can not be classified as Euorpeans, as you claim in your post.
As you can see they were not cold adapted.
Trenton W. Holliday,in "Evolution at the Crossroads: Modern Human Emergence in Western Asia, American Anthropologist,102(1) [2000], tested the hypothesis that if modern Africans had dispersed into the Levant from Africa , "tropically adapted hominids" would be represented in the archaeological history of theLavant,especially in relation to the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids. This researcher found that the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids (20,000-10,000),were assigned to the Sub-Saharan population, along with the Natufians samples (4000 BP). Holliday also found African fauna in the area.
Holliday confirmed his hypothesis that the replacement of the Neanderthal people were Sub-Saharan Africans. This shows that there were no European types in the Middle East Between 20,000-4,000BP. Moreover, we clearly see the continuity between African culture from Nubia to the Levant.
Where did I classify them as Europeans? In what post?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
That is an OLD website that was debunked in this forum years ago.
For one thing, many of the predynastic rock painting motifs they make reference to that they claim have no precursors was proven false just several years later when Egyptologists uncovered older artwork in the Sahara.
Also some the Sumerian motifs was actually shown to date to a period of Semitic influence from Syria and Arabia and prehistoric rock art found there associated with proto-Semites.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Great find!
The quartz technology points to Ounjougou as an internal West African Holocene culture in contact with the Sahara to which they contributed pottery.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Could this indicate the return of early Natufians?
I agree! Excellent find, Ish. I also concur with Takruri that it's erroneous to call these people 'Natufians' when they obviously weren't. But this finding only supports Ehret's assertions that we find pottery in Africa far earlier than we do in the 'Near East'. Also, grain grinding culture is obviously far older than even the Mushabeans who are the Natufians ancestors.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^Yep. Also as the study I posted earlier points out, this technological complex from Mali may have diffused rapidly northwards as it is as old as Nile Valley Pottery. In another thread I also posted on rock art in Mali. These findings were further supported by a recent genetic article.
Of course, Simple Girl won't address anything.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^Yep. Also as the study I posted earlier points out, this technological complex from Mali may have diffused rapidly northwards as it is as old as Nile Valley Pottery. In another thread I also posted on rock art in Mali. These findings were further supported by a recent genetic article.
Of course, Simple Girl won't address anything.
What am I suppose to address? All the antecedent markers for ancient Egyptian culture exists in the neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe.
And all you have is one ceramic sherd fron sub-saharan Africa?lol
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
The earliest known ceramics in the world predate your sherd by over 10 millennium.
That is an OLD website that was debunked in this forum years ago.
For one thing, many of the predynastic rock painting motifs they make reference to that they claim have no precursors was proven false just several years later when Egyptologists uncovered older artwork in the Sahara.
Also some the Sumerian motifs was actually shown to date to a period of Semitic influence from Syria and Arabia and prehistoric rock art found there associated with proto-Semites.
Nothing you have has debunked anything. I don't believe you have anything to go on. If you do, than go ahead and present it. If you don't, than consider yourself debunked.lol
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:The earliest known ceramics in the world predate your sherd by over 10 millennium.
That isn't the point of the study I posted. The point is that we have evidence that the technological complex in Mali may have rapidly spread northwards. Post evidence that what you posted even made its way into Africa.
quote:What am I suppose to address? All the antecedent markers for ancient Egyptian culture exists in the neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe.
Hm... lets see. How about you start with the study I presented that refutes that:
"The results are not supportive of European agriculturalists colonizing el-Badari in the early- to mid-Holocene. The Badarian series evinces greater phenetic affinity with the tropical African comparative groups and, notably, the east African Teita."--Keita (2005)
Then, you may start to address the evidence I posted showing Egyptian culture was greatly influenced by Sudan and that the hieroglyphics were native:
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^This sounds incredibly stupid Simple Girl.
No scholar really agrees that Mesopotamia had such a significant influence on Egypt. For instance:
"Mesopotamian writing is also in pictographic form, and it has been suggested that the Egyptians borrowed from cuneiform in creating hieroglyphics. Scholars who point to the typically Egyptian concepts symbolized by hieroglyphics commonly reject this suggestion, however."--Deborah Vess PH.D (2006)
It is however widely acknowledged that Sudanese had a major impact on Egypt, and that Egyptian civilization was influenced by Sudanese culture:
The period when sub-Saharan Africa was most influential in Egypt was a time when neither Egypt, as we understand it culturally, nor the Sahara, as we understand it geographically, existed. Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant. Egypt rapidly found a method of disciplining the river, the land, and the people to transform the country into a titanic garden. Egypt rapidly developed detailed cultural forms that dwarfed its forebears in urbanity and elaboration. Thus, when new details arrived, they were rapidly adapted to the vast cultural superstructure already present. On the other hand, pharaonic culture was so bound to its place near the Nile that its huge, interlocked religious, administrative, and formal structures could not be readily transferred to relatively mobile cultures of the desert, savanna, and forest. The influence of the mature pharaonic civilizations of Egypt and Kush was almost confined to their sophisticated trade goods and some significant elements of technology. Nevertheless, the religious substratum of Egypt and Kush was so similar to that of many cultures in southern Sudan today that it remains possible that fundamental elements derived from the two high cultures to the north live on.--Joseph O. Vogel (1997)
You have yet to back up even one of your more asinine statements.
As for your claim of a common origin, how can this be when I have demonstrated to you time and time again that the ancient Egyptians had origins in sub-Saharan Africa
Not to mention that the Neolithic in Sudan is as old as that in Upper Egypt.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] ^ Actually its been established by anthroplogists that the early Sumerians and peoples of southern Mesopotamia in general were black peoples closely related to the black indigenous populations of Iran and India. The problem of course is that the general public is unaware of this fact.
That is an OLD website that was debunked in this forum years ago.
For one thing, many of the predynastic rock painting motifs they make reference to that they claim have no precursors was proven false just several years later when Egyptologists uncovered older artwork in the Sahara.
Also some the Sumerian motifs was actually shown to date to a period of Semitic influence from Syria and Arabia and prehistoric rock art found there associated with proto-Semites.
Nothing you have has debunked anything. I don't believe you have anything to go on. If you do, than go ahead and present it. If you don't, than consider yourself debunked.lol
Are you slow or just ignorant?
PINHASI Ron, SEMAL Patrick (2000).
The position of the Nazlet Khater specimen among prehistoric and modern African and Levantine populations.
"The morphometric affinities of the 33,000 year old skeleton from Nazlet Khater, Upper Egypt are examined using multivariate statistical procedures.
The results indicate a strong association between some of the sub-Saharan Middle Stone Age (MSA) specimens, and the Nazlet Khater mandible.
Furthermore, the results suggest that variability between African populations during the Neolithic and Protohistoric periods was more pronounced than the range of variability observed among recent African and Levantine populations."
That is an OLD website that was debunked in this forum years ago.
For one thing, many of the predynastic rock painting motifs they make reference to that they claim have no precursors was proven false just several years later when Egyptologists uncovered older artwork in the Sahara.
Also some the Sumerian motifs was actually shown to date to a period of Semitic influence from Syria and Arabia and prehistoric rock art found there associated with proto-Semites.
Nothing you have has debunked anything. I don't believe you have anything to go on. If you do, than go ahead and present it. If you don't, than consider yourself debunked.lol
You lost before you even started,
Nubia's Oldest House?
Some of the most important evidence of early man in Nubia was discovered recently by an expedition of the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, under the direction of Dr. Kryzstof Grzymski, on the east bank of the Nile, about 70 miles (116 km) south of Dongola, Sudan. During the early 1990's, this team discovered several sites containing hundreds of Paleolithic hand axes. At one site, however, the team identified an apparent stone tool workshop, where thousands of sandstone hand axes and flakes lay on the ground around a row of large stones set in a line, suggesting the remains of a shelter. This seems to be the earliest "habitation" site yet discovered in the Nile Valley and may be up to 70,000 years old.
What the Nubian environment was like throughout these distant times, we cannot know with certainty, but it must have changed many times. For many thousands of years it was probably far different than what it is today. Between about 50,000 to 25,000 years ago, the hand axe gradually disappeared and was replaced with numerous distinctive chipped stone industries that varied from region to region, suggesting the presence in Nubia of many different peoples or tribal groups dwelling in close proximity to each other. When we first encounter skeletal remains in Nubia, they are those of modern man: homo sapiens .
Nubia's Oldest Battle?
From about 25,000 to 8,000 years ago, the environment gradually evolved to its present state. From this phase several very early settlement sites have been identified at the Second Cataract, near the Egypt-Sudan border. These appear to have been used seasonally by people leading a semi-nomadic existence. The people hunted, fished, and ground wild grain. The first cemeteries also appear, suggesting that people may have been living at least partly sedentary lives. One cemetery site at Jebel Sahaba, near Wadi Halfa, Sudan, contained a number of bodies that had suffered violent deaths and were buried in a mass grave. This suggests that people, even 10,000 years ago, had begun to compete with each other for resources and were willing to kill each other to control them.
May I remind you of the FACT that Nubia is at the South of Egypt. The South is where Egyptian culture arose and spread to the North.This evidence is overwhelming. Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
That is an OLD website that was debunked in this forum years ago.
For one thing, many of the predynastic rock painting motifs they make reference to that they claim have no precursors was proven false just several years later when Egyptologists uncovered older artwork in the Sahara.
Also some the Sumerian motifs was actually shown to date to a period of Semitic influence from Syria and Arabia and prehistoric rock art found there associated with proto-Semites.
Nothing you have has debunked anything. I don't believe you have anything to go on. If you do, than go ahead and present it. If you don't, than consider yourself debunked.lol
Wadi Kubbaniya (ca. 17,000–15,000 B.C.)
In Egypt, the earliest evidence of humans can be recognized only from tools found scattered over an ancient surface, sometimes with hearths nearby. In Wadi Kubbaniya, a dried-up streambed cutting through the Western Desert to the floodplain northwest of Aswan in Upper Egypt, some interesting sites of the kind described above have been recorded. A cluster of Late Paleolithic camps was located in two different topographic zones: on the tops of dunes and the floor of the wadi (streambed) where it enters the valley. Although no signs of houses were found, diverse and sophisticated stone implements for hunting, fishing, and collecting and processing plants were discovered around hearths. Most tools were bladelets made from a local stone called chert that is widely used in tool fabrication. The bones of wild cattle, hartebeest, many types of fish and birds, as well as the occasional hippopotamus have been identified in the occupation layers. Charred remains of plants that the inhabitants consumed, especially tubers, have also been found.
It appears from the zoological and botanical remains at the various sites in this wadi that the two environmental zones were exploited at different times. We know that the dune sites were occupied when the Nile River flooded the wadi because large numbers of fish and migratory bird bones were found at this location. When the water receded, people then moved down onto the silt left behind on the wadi floor and the floodplain, probably following large animals that looked for water there in the dry season. Paleolithic peoples lived at Wadi Kubbaniya for about 2,000 years, exploiting the different environments as the seasons changed. Other ancient camps have been discovered along the Nile from Sudan to the Mediterranean, yielding similar tools and food remains. These sites demonstrate that the early inhabitants of the Nile valley and its nearby deserts had learned how to exploit local environments, developing economic strategies that were maintained in later cultural traditions of pharaonic Egypt.
That is an OLD website that was debunked in this forum years ago.
For one thing, many of the predynastic rock painting motifs they make reference to that they claim have no precursors was proven false just several years later when Egyptologists uncovered older artwork in the Sahara.
Also some the Sumerian motifs was actually shown to date to a period of Semitic influence from Syria and Arabia and prehistoric rock art found there associated with proto-Semites.
Nothing you have has debunked anything. I don't believe you have anything to go on. If you do, than go ahead and present it. If you don't, than consider yourself debunked.lol
Busharia reveals the precocious appearance of pottery on the African continent around the 9th millennium B.C.
The site of Busharia is located near the desert, at the edge of the alluvial plain and near an old Nile channel. It reveals the remains of human occupation at the onset of the Holocene. The settlement is rather eroded, only a few artefacts, ostrich egg fragments and extremely old ceramic sherds remain. These sherds date to circa 8200 B.C. The ceramic assemblage is homogenous, which suggests the existence of a single occupation phase. The decorations and the use of the return technique, common in the central Sahara around the 6th millennium B.C., are unique in this Nubian context for such an early period.
Remains discovered on site suggest the existence of a semi-sedentary population living from hunting, fishing, and the gathering of wild plants. A trial trench and a small-scale excavation were conducted on this Mesolithic site; however, it is impossible to obtain at present a better understanding of the context related to the first ceramics in the region. As this site is located near cultivated zones, it is thus threatened with short-term destruction.
Three scale models—of the Mesolithic hut of el-Barga (7500 B.C.), the proto-urban agglomeration of the Pre-Kerma (3000 B.C.) and the ancient city of Kerma (2500-1500 B.C.)—give a glimpse of the world of the living. They show the evolution of settlements for each of the key periods in Nubian history. Huts indicate the birth of a sedentary way of life, the agglomeration confirms the settling of populations on a territory and the capital of the Kingdom of Kerma marks the culmination of the complexification of Nubian architecture with its ever more monumental constructions. The three models were created in Switzerland by Hugo Lienhard and were installed in the museum in January 2009.
Wadi el-Arab reveals an almost continuous series of settlement remains spanning two millennia as well as the first Neolithic burials known in Africa.
This site is located today in a desert region. Discovered in 2005, it has been under excavation since 2006. This is an open-air site occupied on several occasions during a period between 8300 and 6600 B.C. Its inhabitants then lived in a rather wooded environment, living on fishing, hunting and gathering.
The site reveals numerous flint tools and flakes, grinding stone fragments, ceramic sherds, ostrich eggshell beads, shells and mollusc remains, fish vertebrae and faunal remains. Rare domesticated ox bones were discovered and dated to circa 7000 B.C. This discovery is important for the question regarding the origin of animal domestication in Africa because it reinforces the idea of a local domestication of African oxen from aurochs living in the Nile Valley.
During the 2006-2007 campaign, six burial pits were excavated in three different areas. Dated to between 7000 and 6600, these burials are the first known Neolithic burials on the African continent.
Project Director : Prof. Matthieu Honegger
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^Yep. Also as the study I posted earlier points out, this technological complex from Mali may have diffused rapidly northwards as it is as old as Nile Valley Pottery. In another thread I also posted on rock art in Mali. These findings were further supported by a recent genetic article.
Of course, Simple Girl won't address anything.
What am I suppose to address? All the antecedent markers for ancient Egyptian culture exists in the neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe.
And all you have is one ceramic sherd fron sub-saharan Africa?lol
They were and are the SIMILAR PEOPLE!!!!
An Examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development?
Homo. 2009;60(5):389-404. Epub 2009 Sep 19.
Godde K. Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 250 South Stadium Hall, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA. kgodde@utk.edu
"The clustering of the Nubian and Egyptian samples together supports this paper's hypothesis and demonstrates that there may be a close relationship between the two populations. This relationship is consistent with Berry and Berry (1972), among others, who noted a similarity between Nubians and Egyptians. If Nubians and Egyptians were not biologically similar, one would expect the scores to separately cluster by population (e.g. Nubians compared to Nubians would have small biological distances, and Nubians compared to Egyptians would have high biological distances). However, this was not the case in the current analysis and the Results suggest homogeneity between the two populations."
"We also compare Egyptian body proportions to those of modern American Blacks and Whites... Long bone stature regression equations were then derived for each sex. Our results confirm that, although ancient Egyptians are closer in body proportion to modern American Blacks than they are to American Whites, proportions in Blacks and Egyptians are not identical... Intralimb indices are not significantly different between Egyptians and American Blacks...brachial indices are definitely more ‘African’... There is no evidence for significant variation in proportions among temporal or social groupings; thus, the new formula may be broadly applicable to ancient Egyptian remains." ("Stature estimation in ancient Egyptians: A new technique based on anatomical reconstruction of stature." Michelle H. Raxter, Christopher B. Ruff, Ayman Azab, Moushira Erfan, Muhammad Soliman, Aly El-Sawaf,(Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008, Jun;136(2):147-5
Well then...
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^Yep. Also as the study I posted earlier points out, this technological complex from Mali may have diffused rapidly northwards as it is as old as Nile Valley Pottery. In another thread I also posted on rock art in Mali. These findings were further supported by a recent genetic article.
Of course, Simple Girl won't address anything.
What am I suppose to address? All the antecedent markers for ancient Egyptian culture exists in the neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe.
And all you have is one ceramic sherd fron sub-saharan Africa?lol
Ancient humans 'followed rains'
Prehistoric humans roamed the world's largest desert for some 5,000 years, archaeologists have revealed.
The Eastern Sahara of Egypt, Sudan, Libya and Chad was home to nomadic people who followed rains that turned the desert into grassland.
When the landscape dried up about 7,000 years ago, there was a mass exodus to the Nile and other parts of Africa.
The close link between human settlement and climate has lessons for today, researchers report in Science.
"Even modern day conflicts such as Dafur are caused by environmental degradation as it has been in the past," Dr Stefan Kropelin of the University of Cologne, Germany, told the BBC News website.
"The basic struggle for food, water and pasture is still a big problem in the Sahara zone. This process started thousands of years ago and has a long tradition."
Jigsaw puzzle
The Eastern Sahara, which covers more than 2 million sq km, an area the size of Western Europe, is now almost uninhabited by people or animals, providing a unique window into the past.
Dr Kropelin and colleague Dr Rudolph Kuper pieced together the 10,000-year jigsaw of human migration and settlement; studying more than 100 archaeological sites over the course of 30 years.
In the largest study of its kind, they built up a detailed picture of human evolution in the world's largest desert. They found that far from the inhospitable climate of today, the area was once semi-humid.
Between about 14,000 and 13,000 years ago, the area was very dry. But a drastic switch in environmental conditions some 10,500 years ago brought rain and monsoon-like conditions.
Nomadic human settlers moved in from the south, taking up residence beside rivers and lakes. They were hunter-gatherers at first, living off plants and wild game.
Eventually they became more settled, domesticating cattle for the first time, and making intricate pottery.
Neolithic farmers
Humid conditions prevailed until about 6,000 years ago, when the Sahara abruptly dried out. There was then a gradual exodus of people to the Nile Valley and other parts of the African continent.
“ The domestication of cattle was invented in the Sahara in the humid phase and was then slowly pushed over the rest of Africa”
Dr. Stefan Kropelin of the University of Cologne
"The Nile Valley was almost devoid of settlement until about exactly the time that the Egyptian Sahara was so dry people could not live there anymore," Dr Kropelin told the BBC News website.
"People preferred to live on savannah land. Only when this wasn't possible they migrated towards southern Sudan and the Nile.
"They brought all their know-how to the rest of the continent - the domestication of cattle was invented in the Sahara in the humid phase and was then slowly pushed over the rest of Africa.
"This Neolithic way of life, which still is a way of life in a sense; preservation of food for the dry season and many other such cultural elements, was introduced to central and southern Africa from the Sahara."
'Motor of evolution'
Dr. Kuper said the distribution of people and languages, which is so politically important today, has its roots in the desiccation of the Sahara.
The switch in environmental conditions acted as a "motor of Africa's evolution," he said.
"It happened during these 5,000 years of the savannah that people changed from hunter-gathers to cattle keepers," he said.
"This important step in human history has been made for the first time in the African Sahara."
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
That is an OLD website that was debunked in this forum years ago.
For one thing, many of the predynastic rock painting motifs they make reference to that they claim have no precursors was proven false just several years later when Egyptologists uncovered older artwork in the Sahara.
Also some the Sumerian motifs was actually shown to date to a period of Semitic influence from Syria and Arabia and prehistoric rock art found there associated with proto-Semites.
Nothing you have has debunked anything. I don't believe you have anything to go on. If you do, than go ahead and present it. If you don't, than consider yourself debunked.lol
Sahara cave may hold clues to dawn of Egypt
CAIRO (Reuters)- Archaeologists are studying prehistoric rock drawings discovered in a remote cave in 2002, including dancing figures and strange headless beasts, as they seek new clues about the rise of Egyptian civilisation.
Amateur explorers stumbled across the cave, which includes 5,000 images painted or engraved into stone, in the vast, empty desert near Egypt's southwest border with Libya and Sudan.
Rudolph Kuper, a German archaeologist, said the detail depicted in the "Cave of the Beasts" indicate the site is at least 8,000 years old, likely the work of hunter-gatherers whose descendants may have been among the early settlers of the then-swampy and inhospitable Nile Valley.
The cave is 10 km (6 miles) from the "Cave of the Swimmers" romanticised in the film the "English Patient", but with far more, and better preserved, images.
By studying the sandstone cave and other nearby sites, the archaeologists are trying to build a timeline to compare the culture and technologies of the peoples who inhabited the area.
"It is the most amazing cave ... in North Africa and Egypt," said Karin Kindermann, member of a German-led team that recently made a trip to the site 900 km (560 miles) southwest of Cairo.
"You take a piece of the puzzle and see where it could fit. This is an important piece," she said.
The Eastern Sahara, a region the size of Western Europe that extends from Egypt into Libya, Sudan and Chad, is the world's largest warm, dry desert. Rainfall in the desert's centre averages less than 2 millimetres a year.
The region was once much less arid.
About 8500 BC, seasonal rainfall appeared in the region, creating a savanna and attracting hunter-gatherers. By 5300 BC, the rains had stopped and human settlements receded to highland areas. By 3500 BC, the settlements disappeared entirely.
MOVING TOWARDS THE NILE VALLEY
"After 3-4,000 years of savanna life environment in the Sahara, the desert returned and people were forced to move eastwards to the Nile Valley, contributing to the foundation of Egyptian civilisation, and southwards to the African continent," said Kuper, an expert at Germany's Heinrich Barth Institute.
The mass exodus corresponds with the rise of sedentary life along the Nile that later blossomed into pharaonic civilisation that dominated the region for thousands of years and whose art, architecture and government helped shape Western culture.
"It was a movement, I think, step-by-step, because the desert didn't rush in. The rains would withdraw, then return, and so on. But step by step it became more dry, and people moved toward the Nile Valley or toward the south," Kuper said.
Kuper and his team are recording the geological, botanic and archaeological evidence around the cave, including stone tools and pottery, and will compare it to other sites in the Eastern Sahara region, adding new pieces to a prehistoric puzzle.
"It seems that the paintings of the Cave of the Beasts pre-date the introduction of domesticated animals. That means they predate 6000 BC," said Kuper, who led his first field trip to the cave in April 2009. "That is what we dare to say."
The visible art work covers a surface 18 metres wide and 6 metres high. In October, Kuper's team scanned the cave by laser to capture high-definition, three-dimensional images.
A test dig a few weeks ago during the team's third expedition to the sandstone cave uncovered yet more drawings that extend down 80 cms below the sand, Kindermann said.
"Now we have increasing evidence how rich the prehistoric culture in the Eastern Sahara was," Kuper said.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
That is an OLD website that was debunked in this forum years ago.
For one thing, many of the predynastic rock painting motifs they make reference to that they claim have no precursors was proven false just several years later when Egyptologists uncovered older artwork in the Sahara.
Also some the Sumerian motifs was actually shown to date to a period of Semitic influence from Syria and Arabia and prehistoric rock art found there associated with proto-Semites.
Nothing you have has debunked anything. I don't believe you have anything to go on. If you do, than go ahead and present it. If you don't, than consider yourself debunked.lol
The nubian mesolithic: A consideration of the Wadi Halfa remains
References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.
Meredith F. Small*
Morphological variation of the skeletal remains of ancient Nubia has been traditionally explained as a product of multiple migrations into the Nile Valley. In contrast, various researchers have noted a continuity in craniofacial variation from Mesolithic through Neolithic times. This apparent continuity could be explained by in situ cultural evolution producing shifts in selective pressures which may act on teeth, the facial complex, and the cranial vault.
A series of 13 Mesolithic skulls from Wadi Halfa, Sudan, are compared to Nubian Neolithic remains by means of extended canonical analysis. Results support recent research which suggests consistent trends of facial reduction and cranial vault expansion from Mesolithic through Neolithic times.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
That is an OLD website that was debunked in this forum years ago.
For one thing, many of the predynastic rock painting motifs they make reference to that they claim have no precursors was proven false just several years later when Egyptologists uncovered older artwork in the Sahara.
Also some the Sumerian motifs was actually shown to date to a period of Semitic influence from Syria and Arabia and prehistoric rock art found there associated with proto-Semites.
Nothing you have has debunked anything. I don't believe you have anything to go on. If you do, than go ahead and present it. If you don't, than consider yourself debunked.lol
Yale Egyptological Institute in Egypt Supported by the William K. and Marilyn M. Simpson Endowment for Egyptology
The Wadi of the Horus Qa-a: A Tableau of Royal Ritual Power in the Theban Western Desert John Coleman Darnell1
That is an OLD website that was debunked in this forum years ago.
For one thing, many of the predynastic rock painting motifs they make reference to that they claim have no precursors was proven false just several years later when Egyptologists uncovered older artwork in the Sahara.
Also some the Sumerian motifs was actually shown to date to a period of Semitic influence from Syria and Arabia and prehistoric rock art found there associated with proto-Semites.
Nothing you have has debunked anything. I don't believe you have anything to go on. If you do, than go ahead and present it. If you don't, than consider yourself debunked.lol
Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13
"Materials and methods In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three types of tissues were sampled from different mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approximately 1550_/1080 BC)...... The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of negriod origin."
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^Yep. Also as the study I posted earlier points out, this technological complex from Mali may have diffused rapidly northwards as it is as old as Nile Valley Pottery. In another thread I also posted on rock art in Mali. These findings were further supported by a recent genetic article.
Of course, Simple Girl won't address anything.
The interesting point here is..."E-M78 represents 74.5% of haplogroup E*, the highest frequencies observed in Masalit and Fur populations."
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] ^ Actually its been established by anthroplogists that the early Sumerians and peoples of southern Mesopotamia in general were black peoples closely related to the black indigenous populations of Iran and India. The problem of course is that the general public is unaware of this fact.
I am looking for this specific information. Do you have any studies? I like to know more about this.
Can you post them or link them?
Thanks in advance.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Link didn't work.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Ish....you really haven't provided much in the way of predynastic evidence. I have read all that you posted and well, it just isn't that convincing. Everything that I have contributed so far shows more of a connection than you have shown.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Are you brain damaged??!! NOTHING you posted shows any close connection between "Southeastern Eureopeans" and predynastic Egyptians! Rather everything we posted shows you that the Egyptians are continuous with other Africans both biologically and culturally.
By the way, you do realize that the neolithic in Europe is not indigenous but was rather introduced from the 'Near East', not only by Asiatics but also by people of AFRICAN extraction as evidence by both hg J and hg E dating to the rise of the neolithic in that area!!
The network of the E-M78 chromosomes reveals a strong geographic structuring, since each of the clusters a, b, and g reaches high frequencies in only one of the regions analyzed. Cluster a ... is very common in the Balkans (with frequencies of 20%–32%), and its frequencies decline toward western Europe, 7.4% in Sicily, 7.0% in continental Italy, 4.3% in Corsica, 3.0% in France, 2.2% in Iberia and 1.1% in Sardinia, and northeastern (2.6%) Europe. In the Near East, this cluster is essentially limited to Turkey (3.4%). The relatively high frequency of DYS413 24/23 haplogroup E chromosomes in Greece suggests that cluster a of the E-M78 haplogroup is common in the Aegean area, too...
The present distributions of these clusters also suggest episodes of range expansions... the clinal frequency distribution of E-M78a within Europe testifies to important dispersal(s), most likely Neolithic or post-Neolithic. These took place from the Balkans, where the highest frequencies are observed, in all directions, as far as Iberia to the west and, most likely, also to Turkey to the southeast. Thus, it appears that, in Europe, the overall frequency pattern of the haplogroup E-M78, the most frequent E3b haplogroup in this region, is mostly ... consistent with either a smallscale leapfrog migration from Anatolia into southeastern Europe at the beginning of the Neolithic or with an expansion of indigenous people in southeastern Europe in response to the arrival of the Neolithic cultural package. At the present level of phylogenetic resolution, it is difficult to distinguish between these possibilities.
Fulvio Cruciani, et al. "Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E3b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa" Am. J. Hum. Genet. 74:1014–1022, 2004
The Skeletons of Lerna Hollow (Argolid, Greece) Al B. Wesolowsky Hesperia, Vol. 42, No. 3. (Jul. - Sep., 1973), pp. 340-351.
"The female of forty-plus years of age from Grave 2 was examined by J. L. Angel who noted what he interpreted as a number of ' negroid ' (not full negro) traits in the face." lo The skull is fairly complete, but not enough so for discriminant function analysis." There is marked maxillary prognathism and the orbits may be described as rectangular, traits frequently used in forensic diagnosis of Negro crania....
Larry Angel (1972): "One can identify Negroid traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters.(McCown, 1939) and in Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers, probably from Nubia via the predecesors of the Badarians and Tasians..."
So all your talk of neolithic southeastern Europe basically shoots yourself in the face. Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Are you brain damaged??!! NOTHING you posted shows any close connection between "Southeastern Eureopeans" and predynastic Egyptians! Rather everything we posted shows you that the Egyptians are continuous with other Africans both biologically and culturally.
Yeah, keep dreaming thimble head. Everything I have shown so far(and that isn't even the half of it) parallels nicely with predynastic and dynastic Egypt. The black-topped pottery. The early use of sceptors. The burial of subjects dilineated by special status. The earliest manufactured use of gold. People buried in a fetal position. The list goes on and on.
You live in a dream world thimble head.lol
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Now you're starting to sound like Marc Washington.lol
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
The people of the mesolithic and neolithic Europe didn't even express themselves in the form of black Africans.lol
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Now you're starting to sound like Marc Washington.lol
Hey wait a minute, I think this is Marc Washington.lol
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:The people of the mesolithic and neolithic Europe didn't even express themselves in the form of black Africans.lol
Define what a black African looks like. Whatever you say, the fact remains that E-M78 migrated to southern Europe during the Mesolithic period. So, you have to explain why you think Europeans contributed to Africa and not vice versa. But first, we're still waiting for you to address the following:
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz':
quote:The earliest known ceramics in the world predate your sherd by over 10 millennium.
That isn't the point of the study I posted. The point is that we have evidence that the technological complex in Mali may have rapidly spread northwards. Post evidence that what you posted even made its way into Africa.
quote:What am I suppose to address? All the antecedent markers for ancient Egyptian culture exists in the neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe.
Hm... lets see. How about you start with the study I presented that refutes that:
"The results are not supportive of European agriculturalists colonizing el-Badari in the early- to mid-Holocene. The Badarian series evinces greater phenetic affinity with the tropical African comparative groups and, notably, the east African Teita."--Keita (2005)
Then, you may start to address the evidence I posted showing Egyptian culture was greatly influenced by Sudan and that the hieroglyphics were native:
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^This sounds incredibly stupid Simple Girl.
No scholar really agrees that Mesopotamia had such a significant influence on Egypt. For instance:
"Mesopotamian writing is also in pictographic form, and it has been suggested that the Egyptians borrowed from cuneiform in creating hieroglyphics. Scholars who point to the typically Egyptian concepts symbolized by hieroglyphics commonly reject this suggestion, however."--Deborah Vess PH.D (2006)
It is however widely acknowledged that Sudanese had a major impact on Egypt, and that Egyptian civilization was influenced by Sudanese culture:
The period when sub-Saharan Africa was most influential in Egypt was a time when neither Egypt, as we understand it culturally, nor the Sahara, as we understand it geographically, existed. Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant. Egypt rapidly found a method of disciplining the river, the land, and the people to transform the country into a titanic garden. Egypt rapidly developed detailed cultural forms that dwarfed its forebears in urbanity and elaboration. Thus, when new details arrived, they were rapidly adapted to the vast cultural superstructure already present. On the other hand, pharaonic culture was so bound to its place near the Nile that its huge, interlocked religious, administrative, and formal structures could not be readily transferred to relatively mobile cultures of the desert, savanna, and forest. The influence of the mature pharaonic civilizations of Egypt and Kush was almost confined to their sophisticated trade goods and some significant elements of technology. Nevertheless, the religious substratum of Egypt and Kush was so similar to that of many cultures in southern Sudan today that it remains possible that fundamental elements derived from the two high cultures to the north live on.--Joseph O. Vogel (1997)
You have yet to back up even one of your more asinine statements.
As for your claim of a common origin, how can this be when I have demonstrated to you time and time again that the ancient Egyptians had origins in sub-Saharan Africa
Not to mention that the Neolithic in Sudan is as old as that in Upper Egypt.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^ Basically lower Nubia (Sudan) was contemporary with Egypt. In other words "they were one and the same". You must be really desparate to suggest that Sudan exercised any real influence upon Egypt in such a short amount of time.lol
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Not to mention that the Neolithic in Sudan is as old as that in Upper Egypt.
This last statement of yours says it all. It is as old and nothing more. The two were one and the same.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Well the Nubian kingdom of Ta-Seti predates any kingdoms in Egypt by at least a thousand years. Also, it was shown to you in several threads that the Khartoum Mesolithic possess many elements found in later neolithic Egypt. We've shown this to you before in 3 or 4 other threads yet you either ignore them or make a pathetic attempt to dismiss them.
Of course the two Neolithic cultures were not the same. The Vinca culture was not the same as the Lerna culture yet nobody thinks the two are not related as both are Balkan neolithic cultures and share some relation to each other dummy!
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: Yeah, keep dreaming thimble head. Everything I have shown so far(and that isn't even the half of it) parallels nicely with predynastic and dynastic Egypt. The black-topped pottery. The early use of sceptors. The burial of subjects dilineated by special status. The earliest manufactured use of gold. People buried in a fetal position. The list goes on and on.
You live in a dream world thimble head.lol
LMAO It is YOU who is living in a dream world. We just showed you in the last page how all these things you point out are coincidence as many other cultures in other parts of the world hold these same elements. You fail to show the exact context that such elements share a direct genetic relation to one another let alone that one is derived from the other you moron! Show us how black-topped pottery of Egypt relates to the Balkans as opposed to Sudanese pottery right next door or fetal burial positions right in the Sahara or the obvious African "fetish" style scepters like the was and djed seen in other neighboring African cultures as opposed to European ones! LOL Just face the facts. You have lost long ago and deep down you know it. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: Now you're starting to sound like Marc Washington.lol
How so? Marc's claims are based on entirely laughable notions of vague so-called "negroid" features on statues and depictions. Whereas my evidence is based not only on skeletal remains but genetics! Are you able to refute the evidence I presented, or do you just deny it?? I think the latter is true of you.
quote: The people of the mesolithic and neolithic Europe didn't even express themselves in the form of black Africans.lol
And exactly how does this depiction not express a black African?? It is not painted so of course black skin is not shown. How do you expect an African to be expressed??
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Thimble head. You have yet to show any real ancient evidence from sub-saharan Africa that disputes my stance. Go ahead and show us an ancient predynastic use of a sub-saharan sceptor that predates Egyptian or the Vincas.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Show us black-topped pottery from the sub-sahara that predates the Egyptians or the Vinca and other southeastern European cultures.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Show us an earlier use of gold or copper in sub-saharan cultures that predate Egyptian or Vinca cultures.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
And how about zoomorphic expressions of the bird goddess?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: Thimble head. You have yet to show any real ancient evidence from sub-saharan Africa that disputes my stance. Go ahead and show us an ancient predynastic use of a sub-saharan sceptor that predates Egyptian or the Vincas.
Microcephalic twit. We have shown you tons of evidence, yet you have yet to conclusively show any direct correlation via archaeological context that predynastic Egypt is genetically related to Vinca culture rather than to neighboring Nile Valley African cultures, you dummy!! Why is it no other archaeologist either Egyptologist or Balkan archaeologist makes the claims you do micro??!! Have you ever thought about that??
Saharan holding 'was' scepter
Egyptian was scepter
Somali hangool
By the way during predynastic times there was no Sahara anyway which is why it is useless to divide Africa's population into 'Sub-Sahara' and 'North'!
Now show us a Balkan version of a totemic scepter!
quote: Show us black-topped pottery from the sub-sahara that predates the Egyptians or the Vinca and other southeastern European cultures.
It's obvious microcephalic brains means poor memory as I recall citing a source showing that black topped pottery in the Nile originated from Nabta Playa here: http://www.britishmuseum.org/PDF/Nelson%20Khalifa.pdf
Even if Vinca pottery predates it, it doesn't matter because the exact make and model of the black-topped in the Nile Valley matches that of neighboring Nabta NOT Vinca, you dummy!
quote: Show us an earlier use of gold or copper in sub-saharan cultures that predate Egyptian or Vinca cultures.
You moron. The chalcolithic culture in Egypt which is associated with the Badarian originated in 'Nubia' in the first place. Obviously copper and gold mining was being done further south at an early period since peoples from not only Nubia but Punt were giving Egypt tribute in gold since the Old Kingdom.
quote: And how about zoomorphic expressions of the bird goddess?
What bird goddess??
You mean this?!
It's not a "zoomorphic" expression but a TOTEMIC one!
Recently the archaeologist Barry J. Kemp has considered some of these early claims for the importance of cultural importations and argues for an Upper Egyptian origin for Horus, the falcon god of the sky, which had been proposed by others as an Asiatic import. Kemp also realitically points to the "unlimited agricultural potential" of the Egyptian landscape in which the sustenance of a settled life by the growing of crops found nothing bu encouragement and could have developed naturally. It is most helpful to search among surviving Nilotic tribes, such as the Dinka of the White Nile, to gain insight into the material and spiritual life of the early predynastic Egyptians. The Dinka, who were studied intensively by anthropologists during the first half of the twentieth century, were a herding society that did some farming an a little hunting. Their value system and social life revolved, to a large extent, around their cattle, which provided them with food, drink, and clothing as well as inspiration in song and dance. While ther ewere rich pasture-lands along the riverbanks, during floods the herds had to be moved to the unsettled savanna at a higher elevation. Human settlements were on outcroppings that kept villagers dry. Although the Dinka tribespeople interviewed by the anthropologist Godfrey Lienhardt professed a belief in a supreme divinity, they also had clan divinities, which often took the emblem of a particular animal. As the Dinka explained it, if a clan took a giraffe or an elephant as its clan divinity, it did not mean that divinity was present in all such animals, but it did require that such animals be treated with respect. The divinity represented by the animal is one and apart: so if by some great tragedy all the giraffes were to be exterminated, the spirit of ancestral Giraffe would endure and would help to protect the clan. Thus it was not the individual animal member but the concept Giraffe that belonged to a wider class of powers. "It seems that the Dinka themselves often think of them as acquired by chance-- a chance association, though an important one, between the founding ancestor of a clan and the species, which then becomes the clan divinity of all his descendants. Because the surviving emblems from predynastic Egypt show falcons, cows, hippopotamuses, and gazelles, and among the names of the first kings of the historic period are Catfish and Scorpion, and later dieties appear as crocodiles, lionesses, vultures, and ibises, it is tempting to see here the vestiges of early clan divinities. The prehistoric schematic clay figurines of human shape (and of both sexes) with arms gracefully raised and bent inward, usually above the head but sometimes positioned more forward, bear a striking resemblance to the Dinka photographed by Leinhardt. In these photographs the Dinka dance with just such curved, rasied arms. According to Lienhardt, the Dinka are portraying the sweeping horms of a "display ox." So important and central to their socieity are the cattle they keep, that Dinka youths are reported, when sitting by themselves alone with their herd, as holding their arms extended and curved in just this position. This could explain why the few predynastic figurines that appear to be seated still exhibit this formation of the arms.
Barbara S. Lesko, The Great Goddesses of Egypt
This was presented to you before microbrains! Tell me, why did Lekso and even Kemp compare predynastic cultural settings to the modern Dinka of southern Sudan instead of modern Macedonians and Albanians of the Blakans, you stupid twit??
You are one dumb b|tch. Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Thimble head. You have yet to show any real ancient evidence from sub-saharan Africa that disputes my stance. Go ahead and show us an ancient predynastic use of a sub-saharan sceptor that predates Egyptian or the Vincas.
Here is the Qustul, Nubian insense burner.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Thimble head you still haven't provided any concrete evidence for anything. The Vinca black-topped pottery still predates anything predynastic Egyptian. You haven't provided any evidence of gold or copper being mined prior to the first examples of gold or copper in Egypt. You haven't shown us any form of burials pertaining to the divided status of individuals. You haven't shown us any date for your stick you brand as a sceptor.
Everything I have shown you, predates anything you have shown us so far. There is more evidence in the neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe for Egypt, than the whole of Africa.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: ^ Basically lower Nubia (Sudan) was contemporary with Egypt. In other words "they were one and the same". You must be really desparate to suggest that Sudan exercised any real influence upon Egypt in such a short amount of time.lol
Dumbass, I was not the one who made that statement, Joseph Vogel did. Given the genetic, archaeological etc., data, Sudanese were present in predynastic Egypt. Where is your evidence that Southern Europeans were present in predynastic Egypt? Oh wait, there is **NONE** as the study I just posted states, Europeans DID NOT colonize upper Egypt. But as Hassan et al. states, Nilotics did colonize upper Egypt in the predynastic. So, what makes more sense, Sudanese influencing Egypt or Euoropeans? The former, because **THEY** colonized upper Egypt whereas the latter did NOT and nowhere to be found. Now address J. Vogel's statement or don't, it still holds true.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Not to mention that the Neolithic in Sudan is as old as that in Upper Egypt.
This last statement of yours says it all. It is as old and nothing more. The two were one and the same.
My bad, I meant to say Neolithic developments. Still unaddressed by Simple Girl:
1)Egyptian hieroglyphics were not derived from a non-African source
2)Europeans did not colonize upper Egypt at all
3)Upper Egyptian culture was influenced by Sudan/Saharan cultures.
She for some reason thinks I'm making this up when I cited my sources already. Lets see yours Simple Girl
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Badarian pottery has before been suggested to be derived from the Khartoum Neolithic of Sudan
Review of Predynastic Development in the Nile Valley By A. J. Arkell and Peter J. Ucko Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 6, No. 2 (Apr., 1965), pp. 145-166
quote:The black top and ripple-characteristic of Badarian pottery-could well be descended from the black-topped pottery of the Khartoum Neolithic people who sometimes burnished pots already decorated with the older incised decoration giving them an incipient ripple (Arkell 1953a:pl. 3, figs. 10-11). Shell fish- hooks'occur in both the Khartoum Neolithic and the Badarian; those of the latter being typologically later in that some of them are perforated for the attachment of the line-an improvement made easier by the possession 'of copper awls, it being impossible to make a sufficiently small hole in shell with a stone borer. The Badarians also had some fishhooks (Fig. 17) and- combs made out of ivory. They also seem to have shared with the Khartoum Neolithic the rare flat- topped macehead (Arkell 1953a:49; Brunton l937:pl. XLII.22; and a fragment from Mostagedda, Area 200, now at University College London: No. UC 6161)
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Ish....you really haven't provided much in the way of predynastic evidence. I have read all that you posted and well, it just isn't that convincing. Everything that I have contributed so far shows more of a connection than you have shown.
Really.... and what do the studies say which I have posted?
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: ^ Basically lower Nubia (Sudan) was contemporary with Egypt. In other words "they were one and the same". You must be really desparate to suggest that Sudan exercised any real influence upon Egypt in such a short amount of time.lol
Are you sure you really understood any of the studies and references I have posted? It appears not.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
Even better the word NUB means GOLD.
A places of reference? I do think so....
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: Thimble head. You have yet to show any real ancient evidence from sub-saharan Africa that disputes my stance. Go ahead and show us an ancient predynastic use of a sub-saharan sceptor that predates Egyptian or the Vincas.
Microcephalic twit. We have shown you tons of evidence, yet you have yet to conclusively show any direct correlation via archaeological context that predynastic Egypt is genetically related to Vinca culture rather than to neighboring Nile Valley African cultures, you dummy!! Why is it no other archaeologist either Egyptologist or Balkan archaeologist makes the claims you do micro??!! Have you ever thought about that??
Saharan holding 'was' scepter
Egyptian was scepter
Somali hangool
By the way during predynastic times there was no Sahara anyway which is why it is useless to divide Africa's population into 'Sub-Sahara' and 'North'!
Now show us a Balkan version of a totemic scepter!
quote: Show us black-topped pottery from the sub-sahara that predates the Egyptians or the Vinca and other southeastern European cultures.
It's obvious microcephalic brains means poor memory as I recall citing a source showing that black topped pottery in the Nile originated from Nabta Playa here: http://www.britishmuseum.org/PDF/Nelson%20Khalifa.pdf
Even if Vinca pottery predates it, it doesn't matter because the exact make and model of the black-topped in the Nile Valley matches that of neighboring Nabta NOT Vinca, you dummy!
quote: Show us an earlier use of gold or copper in sub-saharan cultures that predate Egyptian or Vinca cultures.
You moron. The chalcolithic culture in Egypt which is associated with the Badarian originated in 'Nubia' in the first place. Obviously copper and gold mining was being done further south at an early period since peoples from not only Nubia but Punt were giving Egypt tribute in gold since the Old Kingdom.
quote: And how about zoomorphic expressions of the bird goddess?
What bird goddess??
You mean this?!
It's not a "zoomorphic" expression but a TOTEMIC one!
Recently the archaeologist Barry J. Kemp has considered some of these early claims for the importance of cultural importations and argues for an Upper Egyptian origin for Horus, the falcon god of the sky, which had been proposed by others as an Asiatic import. Kemp also realitically points to the "unlimited agricultural potential" of the Egyptian landscape in which the sustenance of a settled life by the growing of crops found nothing bu encouragement and could have developed naturally. It is most helpful to search among surviving Nilotic tribes, such as the Dinka of the White Nile, to gain insight into the material and spiritual life of the early predynastic Egyptians. The Dinka, who were studied intensively by anthropologists during the first half of the twentieth century, were a herding society that did some farming an a little hunting. Their value system and social life revolved, to a large extent, around their cattle, which provided them with food, drink, and clothing as well as inspiration in song and dance. While ther ewere rich pasture-lands along the riverbanks, during floods the herds had to be moved to the unsettled savanna at a higher elevation. Human settlements were on outcroppings that kept villagers dry. Although the Dinka tribespeople interviewed by the anthropologist Godfrey Lienhardt professed a belief in a supreme divinity, they also had clan divinities, which often took the emblem of a particular animal. As the Dinka explained it, if a clan took a giraffe or an elephant as its clan divinity, it did not mean that divinity was present in all such animals, but it did require that such animals be treated with respect. The divinity represented by the animal is one and apart: so if by some great tragedy all the giraffes were to be exterminated, the spirit of ancestral Giraffe would endure and would help to protect the clan. Thus it was not the individual animal member but the concept Giraffe that belonged to a wider class of powers. "It seems that the Dinka themselves often think of them as acquired by chance-- a chance association, though an important one, between the founding ancestor of a clan and the species, which then becomes the clan divinity of all his descendants. Because the surviving emblems from predynastic Egypt show falcons, cows, hippopotamuses, and gazelles, and among the names of the first kings of the historic period are Catfish and Scorpion, and later dieties appear as crocodiles, lionesses, vultures, and ibises, it is tempting to see here the vestiges of early clan divinities. The prehistoric schematic clay figurines of human shape (and of both sexes) with arms gracefully raised and bent inward, usually above the head but sometimes positioned more forward, bear a striking resemblance to the Dinka photographed by Leinhardt. In these photographs the Dinka dance with just such curved, rasied arms. According to Lienhardt, the Dinka are portraying the sweeping horms of a "display ox." So important and central to their socieity are the cattle they keep, that Dinka youths are reported, when sitting by themselves alone with their herd, as holding their arms extended and curved in just this position. This could explain why the few predynastic figurines that appear to be seated still exhibit this formation of the arms.
Barbara S. Lesko, The Great Goddesses of Egypt
This was presented to you before microbrains! Tell me, why did Lekso and even Kemp compare predynastic cultural settings to the modern Dinka of southern Sudan instead of modern Macedonians and Albanians of the Blakans, you stupid twit??
You are one dumb b|tch.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
Even better the word NUB means GOLD.
A places of reference? I do think so....
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: Thimble head. You have yet to show any real ancient evidence from sub-saharan Africa that disputes my stance. Go ahead and show us an ancient predynastic use of a sub-saharan sceptor that predates Egyptian or the Vincas.
Microcephalic twit. We have shown you tons of evidence, yet you have yet to conclusively show any direct correlation via archaeological context that predynastic Egypt is genetically related to Vinca culture rather than to neighboring Nile Valley African cultures, you dummy!! Why is it no other archaeologist either Egyptologist or Balkan archaeologist makes the claims you do micro??!! Have you ever thought about that??
Saharan holding 'was' scepter
Egyptian was scepter
Somali hangool
By the way during predynastic times there was no Sahara anyway which is why it is useless to divide Africa's population into 'Sub-Sahara' and 'North'!
Now show us a Balkan version of a totemic scepter!
quote: Show us black-topped pottery from the sub-sahara that predates the Egyptians or the Vinca and other southeastern European cultures.
It's obvious microcephalic brains means poor memory as I recall citing a source showing that black topped pottery in the Nile originated from Nabta Playa here: http://www.britishmuseum.org/PDF/Nelson%20Khalifa.pdf
Even if Vinca pottery predates it, it doesn't matter because the exact make and model of the black-topped in the Nile Valley matches that of neighboring Nabta NOT Vinca, you dummy!
quote: Show us an earlier use of gold or copper in sub-saharan cultures that predate Egyptian or Vinca cultures.
You moron. The chalcolithic culture in Egypt which is associated with the Badarian originated in 'Nubia' in the first place. Obviously copper and gold mining was being done further south at an early period since peoples from not only Nubia but Punt were giving Egypt tribute in gold since the Old Kingdom.
quote: And how about zoomorphic expressions of the bird goddess?
What bird goddess??
You mean this?!
It's not a "zoomorphic" expression but a TOTEMIC one!
Recently the archaeologist Barry J. Kemp has considered some of these early claims for the importance of cultural importations and argues for an Upper Egyptian origin for Horus, the falcon god of the sky, which had been proposed by others as an Asiatic import. Kemp also realitically points to the "unlimited agricultural potential" of the Egyptian landscape in which the sustenance of a settled life by the growing of crops found nothing bu encouragement and could have developed naturally. It is most helpful to search among surviving Nilotic tribes, such as the Dinka of the White Nile, to gain insight into the material and spiritual life of the early predynastic Egyptians. The Dinka, who were studied intensively by anthropologists during the first half of the twentieth century, were a herding society that did some farming an a little hunting. Their value system and social life revolved, to a large extent, around their cattle, which provided them with food, drink, and clothing as well as inspiration in song and dance. While ther ewere rich pasture-lands along the riverbanks, during floods the herds had to be moved to the unsettled savanna at a higher elevation. Human settlements were on outcroppings that kept villagers dry. Although the Dinka tribespeople interviewed by the anthropologist Godfrey Lienhardt professed a belief in a supreme divinity, they also had clan divinities, which often took the emblem of a particular animal. As the Dinka explained it, if a clan took a giraffe or an elephant as its clan divinity, it did not mean that divinity was present in all such animals, but it did require that such animals be treated with respect. The divinity represented by the animal is one and apart: so if by some great tragedy all the giraffes were to be exterminated, the spirit of ancestral Giraffe would endure and would help to protect the clan. Thus it was not the individual animal member but the concept Giraffe that belonged to a wider class of powers. "It seems that the Dinka themselves often think of them as acquired by chance-- a chance association, though an important one, between the founding ancestor of a clan and the species, which then becomes the clan divinity of all his descendants. Because the surviving emblems from predynastic Egypt show falcons, cows, hippopotamuses, and gazelles, and among the names of the first kings of the historic period are Catfish and Scorpion, and later dieties appear as crocodiles, lionesses, vultures, and ibises, it is tempting to see here the vestiges of early clan divinities. The prehistoric schematic clay figurines of human shape (and of both sexes) with arms gracefully raised and bent inward, usually above the head but sometimes positioned more forward, bear a striking resemblance to the Dinka photographed by Leinhardt. In these photographs the Dinka dance with just such curved, rasied arms. According to Lienhardt, the Dinka are portraying the sweeping horms of a "display ox." So important and central to their socieity are the cattle they keep, that Dinka youths are reported, when sitting by themselves alone with their herd, as holding their arms extended and curved in just this position. This could explain why the few predynastic figurines that appear to be seated still exhibit this formation of the arms.
Barbara S. Lesko, The Great Goddesses of Egypt
This was presented to you before microbrains! Tell me, why did Lekso and even Kemp compare predynastic cultural settings to the modern Dinka of southern Sudan instead of modern Macedonians and Albanians of the Blakans, you stupid twit??
You are one dumb b|tch.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Thimble head you still haven't provided any concrete evidence for anything. The Vinca black-topped pottery still predates anything predynastic Egyptian. You haven't provided any evidence of gold or copper being mined prior to the first examples of gold or copper in Egypt. You haven't shown us any form of burials pertaining to the divided status of individuals. You haven't shown us any date for your stick you brand as a sceptor.
Everything I have shown you, predates anything you have shown us so far. There is more evidence in the neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe for Egypt, than the whole of Africa.
The whole of Africa? What kind of stupid doorknob are you?
Do you have any idea how large the African continent is.
Egypt / the Nile valley culture is already larger than the entire of Europe. Yet, in this tiny Europe I don't see a lot of similarities. Most of Egypts real ancient culture concentrates in the South. What we call Nubia today and comprises with the same people as during ancient times.
From what I read metallurgy from ancient Egypt came from the South, "Nubia", and dates back 6-4 kya. Fact is "Nubia" is older then "Egypt". And the studies I have provided show a continues flow of them into Egypt/ the North from the South/ Nubia.
Anyway, it's like saying that Maya, Incas cultures should be All Over The Americas in order to be validated as Native American cultures.
Or the Vinca culture ALL OVER EUROPE.
I even read somewhere that a lot of the Vinca is fraud and was made somewhere in the 17-18th century. I am not sure, but it would not surprise me.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: I even read somewhere that a lot of the Vinca is fraud and was made somewhere in the 17-18th century. I am not sure, but it would not surprise me.
Ish Gebor - While you are quite right to be cautious of what White people say, you must also understand that they do sometimes tell the truth.
In this case, because most Blacks don't realize that the Vinca was a Black culture, Whites have not yet found it necessary to begin the lie cycle.
If you are after truth and knowledge, you must also be carefully not to get into the protect Africa mode. Yes, everybody gets on Southern Africans: they never did anything, they never invented anything etc. And yes, as a Black person, there is the natural inclination to defend against that, but when you do it falsely, you are no better than White people with their made-up history.
The fact is, even though man undoubtedly evolved in central Africa: based on artifacts so-far-found, mans cultural and technological advancements happened north of the Sahara and outside of Africa (except for the Nigerian Boat): in places like Nubia/Egypt, the Indus valley, Mesopotamia, Crete, Turkey, Eastern Europe.
One of the most incredible examples of the Black mans genius, are items that nobody talks about: Whites don't talk about them because it would lead to exposing their lies about them. Blacks don't talk about them because they have believed the White mans lies about who painted them.
But the Grimaldi European cave paintings are a wonder to behold. Nowhere else, does artwork of this advanced technique and realism exist - from 35,000 years ago!
Lascaux France Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
My own theory as to why European Blacks became so advanced, is "Time-on-their-hands".
Anyone who has ever lived in the northern latitudes knows that in winter, you can be housebound for a very long time. With nothing else to do, except the occasional hunting trip or foraging for food, ancient man had nothing else to do but work on arts and crafts.
I mentioned before about how White people lie about such things; note this piece from Suite101: Zoological Record in Lascaux Cave Paintings.
As the climate warmed after the height of the last ice age, modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens – Cro-magnon man) lived in the Vezere valley and painted on the cave walls of Lascaux (France).
White people are so used to lying, that they don't even try to be accurate with their lies. Modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) and Cro-magnon man, are not the same creature! Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
Grimaldi Man: The First homo sapien spaiens in Europe
.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
From the newspaper story:
The head is based on remains of one of the earliest known anatomically modern Europeans.
The lower jawbone was discovered by potholers in the Carpathian mountains in Romania in 2002. The rest of the fragments were found the following year.
The bones were carbon-dated to between 34,000 and 36,000 years ago when Europe was occupied by two species of human.
They were the Neanderthals, who had arrived from Africa tens of thousands of years earlier, and the more recent modern humans, also known as Cro-Magnons.
Although the skull is similar to a modern human head, it has a larger cranium, is more robust and has larger molars. Although it is impossible to work out the skin colour of the prehistoric hunter, it is likely to have been darker than modern white Europeans.
BTW - Cro-magnon had NOT entered Europe yet. The earliest entry for him is 35,000 or less, not more. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Ignoring the pseudo-scholarly nonsense above.
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: Thimble head you still haven't provided any concrete evidence for anything. The Vinca black-topped pottery still predates anything predynastic Egyptian. You haven't provided any evidence of gold or copper being mined prior to the first examples of gold or copper in Egypt. You haven't shown us any form of burials pertaining to the divided status of individuals. You haven't shown us any date for your stick you brand as a sceptor.
Wow you must be brain damaged. We have shown you tons of evidence on this thread and others. First of all African neolithic culture PREDATES the European one. Evidence of pottery in the African Sahara predates those of any found in Europe retard.
Second, I've cited evidence showing you that Europe's neolithic was introduced by peoples including those of African ancestry! You have not bothered to add
quote:Everything I have shown you, predates anything you have shown us so far. There is more evidence in the neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe for Egypt, than the whole of Africa.
WRONG nitwit. You don't even know anything about a single region of Africa let alone the "whole" of it. How long are you going to be in this state of delusion??
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Information for laypeople and simpletons alike:
From about 20,000 BCE, there are further refinements in stone technology. Very specialized tools appeared, including arrowheads, fishhooks, grindstones, and awls. These most refined of stone implements have the generic name 'microlithic.' This era of the late Paleolithic also saw the development of complex composite tools such as bows and arrows. As well, fishing equipment, including boats, and even pottery appeared in some environmental niches. As tools became more specialized and finely made, local variations, including stylistic ones, became more and more the rule...
From the standpoint of African history the most important development of the late Stone Age was the emergence of more settled ('sedentary') societies. These probably developed first along the banks of the Upper Nile in the Cataracts region, in modern day southern Egypt and northern Sudan (ancient Nubia). Evidence of barley harvesting there dates from as early as 16,000 BCE. The ability to make greater use of abundant wild grains, probably coupled with greater exploitation of aquatic resources, led to a more settled existence for some people. These more sedentary peoples were a part of what is now known collectively as the African Aquatic Culture/ Tradition. This way of life spread from the Upper Nile into a much larger area of Africa during the last great wet phase of African climate history, which began about 9,000 and peaked about 7,000 BCE. The higher rainfall levels of the period created numerous very large shallow lakes across what are now the arid southern borderlands of the Sahara desert. Inhabitants of shore communities crafted microlithic tools to exploit a marine environment: fishing and trapping aquatic animals. This provided abundant food supplies, particularly high in protein and supported the earliest known permanent settlements. Culturally and linguistically related peoples ancestral to modern Black Africans established settlements throughout this vast, ancient great lakes area. It is theorized that they spoke the mother Nilo-Saharan tongue. Sophisticated water-related technologies supported not only the development of settled communities, but also the invention of things like pottery, which were formerly thought to be associated exclusively with the Food Production Revolution of the later New Stone Age, or Neolithic. While the African aquatic tradition itself lasted only until the beginning of the modern drier period, around 3,000 BCE, its legacy has been felt ever since.
Basil Davidson, Africa in History (1975)
But people who do world history usually begin with the origins of agriculture. There are at least seven or eight maybe eleven to thirteen world regions which independently invented agriculture. None in Europe, by the way. One, of course, is in the Middle East, and many people still believe that this was the first, from which all the others developed. The idea of diffusion from the Middle East still lingers. That idea really can't be sustained...
Here's the point: agriculture was invented in Africa in at least three centers, and maybe even four. In Africa, you find the earliest domestication of cattle. The location, the pottery and other materials we've found makes it likely that happened among the Nilo-Saharan peoples, the sites are in southern Egypt. There is an exceptionally strong correlation between archaeology and language on this issue...
There's another really interesting innovation in Africa: pottery. There are two places in the world which develop pottery really early. One is Japan, where you find pottery before 10,000 BCE, going back to at least 11,000 or 12,000 BCE. And then you've got pottery by 10,500 BCE in the eastern Sahara, and it spreads widely in the southern Sahara. Unlike the Middle Eastern ceramics, where you can see the development of pottery at every stage, the stuff we find in the southern Sahara is already great pottery. So there's probably 500 years we're missing from the archaeological record. So let's say that pottery develops in the southern Sahara 2,500 years before Middle Eastern pottery. The Middle Eastern stuff does look like it was developed independently of the African, but hey, this is really interesting! Africa is not too far away; there may have been some diffusion.
Christopher Ehret, UCLA Interviewed by World History Connected Co-editor Tom Laichas (2004)
So you have one white British guy from the 70s and a white American guy from just several years ago emphatically state that some of the worlds earliest pottery come from Africa. They also state that neolithic culture started independently in Africa. Unlike Europe whose neolithic culture is DERIVED. Everything from the species of domestic plants and animals to styles of pottery and architecture which first appeared in Southeaster Europe all have origins in the Near East. Even genetic lineages of humans hg J and hg E are associated with this.
Barbara S. Lesko, Great Goddesses of Ancient Egypt
Out of Africa
There is much evidence from ancient Egypt contradicting the opinion commonly held by historians that all women of all earlier cultures were relegated to the private sphere. In pharaonic times Egyptian women were regularly called up to do national service, as were men. In religious life women were active participants in the cult, serving in many ranks of the clerical hierarchy, and certainly did not require a male to mediate between them and a deity. Similarly, Egyptian women were independent legal persons and did not need a male cosignatory or legal guardian. They were free to earn wages and make purchases in the marketplace. Ancient Egyptian women owned and had complete control over both movable and immovable property such as real estate. This right could not be claimed by women in some parts of the United States as late as the 1960s. The independence and leadership roles of ancient Egyptian women may be part of an African cultural pattern that began millennia ago and continued into recent times. In the 1860s the famous Dr. David Livingstone wrote of meeting female chiefs in the Congo, and in most of the monarchical systems of tradtional Africa there were either one or two women of the highest rank who occupied a position on a par with that of the king or complementary to it. Anthropologist who have studied tribes and records of early travelers and missionaries tell us that "everywhere in Africa that one scrapes the surface one finds ethno-historical data on the authority once shared by women." Recent work with traditional African societies has revealed that both men and women were recognized as having important roles in the public sphere. Thus it is not too surprising to find that in Egypt in several excavated cemeteries from the early cultural periods the richest tombs were those of women. In another grave at Badari (grave no. 3740) a woman was buried with a weapon that was commonly used in sacrifice, a "knobbed mace-head of pink limestone," as well as a slate cosmetic palette. These were valuable objects and indicated high status as well as wealth. If prominent roles for females were the norm for many African societies and for this reason show up already in ancient Egypt, perhaps there are other indications of an African cultural heritage pertinent to our study. Early Egyptologists, such as E.A. Wallis Budge and Flinders Petrie, seemed to be reluctant to credit much cultural development to the indigenous inhabitants of the Nile Valley and were quick to attribute the arrival of agriculture and important deities to the incursion of western Asiatics into the region. However, the most recent research indicates that Egyptian agriculture was started in the western oases centuries before the agriculturalists migrated east toward the Nile Valley. Such a bias against the creativity of an African culture is reflected even by more recent writers and scholars such as E.O. James who did not consider Africa pertinent for his study of the pancultural cult of the mother goddess. He claimed that even the sun god of the Egyptians, Re, was and import from the cloud-covered eastern Mediterranean, a claim unsubstantiated by any evidence (James provides none) and illogical for the sun-drenched land of Egypt. It might be argued that the sun's heat was a destructive force and the sun would be more appreciated in a cooler and damper climate, but the harmful aspect of the sun was seldom acknowledged later in Egypt and its benign aspect more emphasized. The sun's disk is frequently encountered in Egyptian religious iconography, and the sun god Re was the supreme deity in the pantheon during much of pharaonic history. Recently the archaeologist Barry J. Kemp has considered some of these early claims for the importance of cultural importations and argues for an Upper Egyptian origin for Horus, the falcon god of the sky, which had been proposed by others as an Asiatic import. Kemp also realistically points to the "unlimited agricultural potential" of the Egyptian landscape in which the sustenance of a settled life by the growing of crops found nothing bu encouragement and could have developed naturally. It is most helpful to search among surviving Nilotic tribes, such as the Dinka of the White Nile, to gain insight into the material and spiritual life of the early predynastic Egyptians. The Dinka, who were studied intensively by anthropologists during the first half of the twentieth century, were a herding society that did some farming an a little hunting. Their value system and social life revolved, to a large extent, around their cattle, which provided them with food, drink, and clothing as well as inspiration in song and dance. While there were rich pasture-lands along the riverbanks, during floods the herds had to be moved to the unsettled savanna at a higher elevation. Human settlements were on outcroppings that kept villagers dry. Although the Dinka tribespeople interviewed by the anthropologist Godfrey Lienhardt professed a belief in a supreme divinity, they also had clan divinities, which often took the emblem of a particular animal. As the Dinka explained it, if a clan took a giraffe or an elephant as its clan divinity, it did not mean that divinity was present in all such animals, but it did require that such animals be treated with respect. The divinity represented by the animal is one and apart: so if by some great tragedy all the giraffes were to be exterminated, the spirit of ancestral Giraffe would endure and would help to protect the clan. Thus it was not the individual animal member but the concept Giraffe that belonged to a wider class of powers. "It seems that the Dinka themselves often think of them as acquired by chance-- a chance association, though an important one, between the founding ancestor of a clan and the species, which then becomes the clan divinity of all his descendants. Because the surviving emblems from predynastic Egypt show falcons, cows, hippopotamuses, and gazelles, and among the names of the first kings of the historic period are Catfish and Scorpion, and later deities appear as crocodiles, lionesses, vultures, and ibises, it is tempting to see here the vestiges of early clan divinities. The prehistoric schematic clay figurines of human shape (and of both sexes) with arms gracefully raised and bent inward, usually above the head but sometimes positioned more forward, bear a striking resemblance to the Dinka photographed by Leinhardt. In these photographs the Dinka dance with just such curved, raised arms. According to Lienhardt, the Dinka are portraying the sweeping horns of a "display ox." So important and central to their society are the cattle they keep, that Dinka youths are reported, when sitting by themselves alone with their herd, as holding their arms extended and curved in just this position. This could explain why the few predynastic figurines that appear to be seated still exhibit this formation of the arms.
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: Pastoralism and political space: some examples As Hartog has demonstrated in his study of Herodotus’ portrayal of the Scythians, the conviction that mobile societies are incapable of generating distinct forms of social power has deep roots in western thought. As a people who were at once mobile herders and yet subject to royal power, the Scythians contravened a basic norm of ancient Greek political thought: the inseparability of political structures from the material framework of the town (polis) and from the practice of agriculture. Like other nomads, they were normally described as a negative reflection of Greek values and practices. In their exercise of military or royal power, however, they could only be represented in the idiom of a settled, ‘domesticated’ people, i.e. according to conventional understandings of the relationship between power, space and labour (Hartog 1988: 200–206; cf. Weissleder 1978).
Similarly, Burton (1980: 273) points out the strong tendency “to assume that a village is the primordial fully social arrangement and that the physical existence of clustered habitation sites imbues social relationships with a measure of permanence”. As he demonstrates through a study of Atuot cattle-keepers in the Upper Nile region of southern Sudan, this point of view cannot be applied unquestioningly to mobile populations: “One observes a remarkably higher population in the cattle camps in contrast to the village areas, and, after a period of residence, a greater ‘moral density’ as well. It would perhaps make better sense to speak of cultivation camps and cattle villages” (Burton 1980: 273). Similar observations were made by Evans-Pritchard (1940: 116) in relation to the Nuer, and by Lienhardt with regard to the neighbouring Dinka:
In view of the fact that the permanent settlements of the Dinka contain all their members at two seasons of the year only – for the sowing and around harvest time – it is understandable that political groups should be spoken of in the idiom of the cattleherding group or cattle-camp (wut) and not of the homestead, village, or settlement (baai). (Lienhardt 1961: 7)
Historically, political and religious networks in the Upper Nile region have converged upon focal shrines which take the form of huge earthen mounds. “In a region where people must be continuously on the move, seasonally and periodically,” writes Johnson (1990: 43), “such focal points are mediating centers, bringing together old and new members of the community”. Luang Deng (The Cattle Byre of Deng) is among the oldest functioning mound-shrines in the Upper Nile region. Howell reported that some Dinka buried their dead facing towards it, and hung offerings of cattle-horns, iron bangles and tobacco on two sacred trees located at its summit. Representing the abode of the divinity Deng and his kin, the mound acted to fix “in one spot (rather than only in a succession of persons) the site where Divinity, or a divinity, could be approached” (Johnson 1990: 49; cf. Seligman and Seligman 1932: 180). Mawson (1991) has described events surrounding the construction of another mound-shrine, Luang Mayual of the Agar Dinka. In addition to reconstituting communal bonds through labour, the periodic rebuilding of Luang Mayual also provided an opportunity for the strategic negotiation of social influence. Animal sacrifices performed on the mound acquired a status which transcended immediate kinship relations, while heifers consecrated there acquired a special value in bride-wealth payments. Hence “access to cattle in this context was both a direct indication of relative politico-religious influence and an important way of reproducing influence in the future” (Mawson 1991: 361–362; cf. Johnson 1994: 106).
These modern Nilotic examples serve to illustrate how mobile pastoralists may generate idioms of political organization and practice that cannot be subsumed within models of social development based upon the metaphor of fixed, bounded structures (village, town, city/nation state). What they do not demonstrate is any form of direct relationship between modern and prehistoric peoples of the Nile Valley, beyond the fact that their respective social morphologies differ in similar ways from that of the largely urban intelligentsia which has made them an object of study.
David Wengrow in: Ancient Egypt in Africa
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz':
Dumbass, I was not the one who made that statement, Joseph Vogel did. Given the genetic, archaeological etc., data, Sudanese were present in predynastic Egypt. Where is your evidence that Southern Europeans were present in predynastic Egypt? Oh wait, there is **NONE** as the study I just posted states, Europeans DID NOT colonize upper Egypt. But as Hassan et al. states, Nilotics did colonize upper Egypt in the predynastic. So, what makes more sense, Sudanese influencing Egypt or Euoropeans? The former, because **THEY** colonized upper Egypt whereas the latter did NOT and nowhere to be found. Now address J. Vogel's statement or don't, it still holds true.
Of course Vogel is not the only one to say this as countless other scholars say the same for the obvious reasons.
The chronological position of the Badarian Culture is still the subject of some debate. Its relative chronological position in relation to the more recent Naqada Culture was established some time ago through excavation at the stratified site of North Spur Hammamiya. The culture might have already existed by about 5000 BC but it can only be definitely confirmed to have spanned the period around 4400-4000 BC.
The existence of a still earlier culture called the Tasian (Deir Tasa) has been claimed. The culture would have been characterized by the presence of calcium beakers with incised designs which are also known from contexts of similar date in Neolithic Sudan. The existence however of the Tasian as a chronologically or culturally seperated unit has never been demonstrated beyond doubt. Although most scholars consider the Tasian to be simply part of the Badarian Culture it has also been argued that the Tasian represents the continuation of a Lower Egyptian tradition which would be the immediate predecessor of the Naqada I Culture. This seems however implausible first because similarities with the Lower Egyptian Neolithic cultures are not convincing and secondly because of the Tasian's obvious ceramic links with the Sudan. If the Tasian must be considered as a seperate cultural entity then it might represent a nomadic culture with a Sudanese background and which interacted with the Badarian Culture. Despite the existence of some excavated settlement sites the Badarian Culture is mainly known from cemeteries in the low desert. All graves are simply pit burials often incorporating a mat on which the body was placed. Bodies are normally in a loosely contracted position on the left side and with the head to the south looking west.
Analysis of Badarian grave goods and the placement of the wealthier graves in one part of the cemetery clearly seems to indicate social stratification which still seems limited at this point in Egyptian prehistory but which became increasingly important throughout the subsequent Naqada Period.
The pottery that accompanies the dead in their graves is the most characteristic element of the Badarian Culture. The rippled surface that is present on the finest pottery comes from the surface having been combed with an instrument and then afterwards polished to result in a very decorative effect.
The lithic industry is mainly known from settlement sites although the finest examples have been found in graves. It is principally a flake and blade industry to which a limited number of remarkable bifacial worked tools are added. Predominant tools are end-scrapers -- perforators -- retouched pieces. Bifacial tools consist mainly of axes -- bifacial sickles -- concave-base arrowheads. It should also be noted that the characteristic side-blow flakes were also present in the Western Desert.
For a long time it was thought that the Badarian Culture remained restricted to the Badari region. Characteristic Badari finds have however also been found much further to the south at Mahgar Dendera -- Armant-- Elkab -- Hierakonpolis and also to the east in the Wadi Hammamat.
Originally the Badarian Culture was considered a chronologically seperate unit out of which the Naqada Culture developed. However the situation is certainly far more complex. For instance the Naqada I Period seems to be poorly represented in the Badari region; therefore it has been suggested that the Badarian was largely contemporary with the Naqada I Culture in the area to the south of the Badari region. However since a limited number of Badarian or related artefacts have also been discovered south of Badari it might instead be argued that the Badarian Culture was present between at least the Badari region and Hierakonpolis. ---Ian Shaw, The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (2003)
Here is what one study says about the physical remains of Naqada elite in Nekhen (Hierakonpolis): A biological affinities study based on frequencies of cranial nonmetric traits in skeletal samples from three cemeteries at Predynastic Naqada, Egypt, confirms the results of a recent nonmetric dental morphological analysis. Both cranial and dental traits analyses indicate that the individuals buried in a cemetery characterized archaeologically as high status are significantly different from individuals buried in two other, apparently non-elite cemeteries and that the non-elite samples are not significantly different from each other. A comparison with neighboring Nile Valley skeletal samples suggests that the high status cemetery represents an endogamous ruling or elite segment of the local population at Naqada, which is more closely related to populations in northern Nubia than to neighboring populations in southern Egypt.
T. Prowse, and N. Lovell "Concordance of Cranial and Dental Morphological Traits and Evidence for Endogamy in Ancient Egypt" American Journal of Physical Anthropology
So where are Simpleton's studies showing European influence?? LOL Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
I don't think "all" whites lie, since I do quote white scholars, but what I read about the Vinca was at some Hundarian site a while ago. This is why my initial input was that I have some doubts.
But the Vinca culture is in contrast the first farmers into that region.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: I even read somewhere that a lot of the Vinca is fraud and was made somewhere in the 17-18th century. I am not sure, but it would not surprise me.
Ish Gebor - While you are quite right to be cautious of what White people say, you must also understand that they do sometimes tell the truth.
In this case, because most Blacks don't realize that the Vinca was a Black culture, Whites have not yet found it necessary to begin the lie cycle.
If you are after truth and knowledge, you must also be carefully not to get into the protect Africa mode. Yes, everybody gets on Southern Africans: they never did anything, they never invented anything etc. And yes, as a Black person, there is the natural inclination to defend against that, but when you do it falsely, you are no better than White people with their made-up history.
The fact is, even though man undoubtedly evolved in central Africa: based on artifacts so-far-found, mans cultural and technological advancements happened north of the Sahara and outside of Africa (except for the Nigerian Boat): in places like Nubia/Egypt, the Indus valley, Mesopotamia, Crete, Turkey, Eastern Europe.
One of the most incredible examples of the Black mans genius, are items that nobody talks about: Whites don't talk about them because it would lead to exposing their lies about them. Blacks don't talk about them because they have believed the White mans lies about who painted them.
But the Grimaldi European cave paintings are a wonder to behold. Nowhere else, does artwork of this advanced technique and realism exist - from 35,000 years ago!
Lascaux France
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
^^Hundarian is. Hungarian.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ But what do any of these European cultures have to do with Egypt?? Answer: NON Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
These burials are in Turkey which are similar to the burials in southeastern Europe and predynastic Egypt. The bodies being contracted and wrapped in reed woven mats.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:These burials are in Turkey which are similar to the burials in southeastern Europe and predynastic Egypt. The bodies being contracted and wrapped in reed woven mats.
Lol... don't tell me you are arguing a connection based on this? Egyptians have been buried in cemeteries since the Mesolithic age...
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Yes, exactly!! What a moron!!
Hey Simpleton, please point out any actual studies citing these similarities as proof of cultural influence on Egypt or the presence of Turks or Europeans in Egypt!! How about addressing all the studies I cited??
By the way, why are you pointing to neolithic cultures of Turkey anyway, when we have the following:
Thus, it appears that, in Europe, the overall frequency pattern of the haplogroup E-M78, the most frequent E3b haplogroup in this region, is mostly ... consistent with either a smallscale leapfrog migration from Anatolia into southeastern Europe at the beginning of the Neolithic or with an expansion of indigenous people in southeastern Europe in response to the arrival of the Neolithic cultural package. At the present level of phylogenetic resolution, it is difficult to distinguish between these possibilities. Fulvio Cruciani, et al. "Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E3b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa" Am. J. Hum. Genet. 74:1014–1022, 2004
Larry Angel (1972): "One can identify Negroid traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters.(McCown, 1939) and in Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers, probably from Nubia via the predecesors of the Badarians and Tasians..."
LMAO In other words it is the opposite scenario-- Africans influencing Anatolians and Europeans! Why is it you never touched on any of the above info, microcephalic twit??! You merely accuse me of being like Marc Washington even though he never cited such studies proving his pseudoscholarly points the way YOU do! Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
No doubt the microcephalic twit is squirming. I what stupid response she'll come up with this time. Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Interesting in regards to Burials:
Badarian Burials: Evidence of Social Inequality in Middle Egypt During the Early Predynastic Era by Wendy Anderson
Source: Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, Vol. 29 (1992), pp. 51-66
quote:The results of this analysis therefore indicate that the burials of some Badarian adults and subadults are evidence of "greater energy expenditure" than those of other adults and subadults. Such individuals were in the minority and were presumably those who held a different and higher status in relation to the majority of individuals within Badarian society. The tombs of these individuals who were accorded separate status and more lavish burial offerings contain some types of grave goods that are not shared by other members of the society. Thus, the findings of this analysis are inconsistent with the portrayal of Badarian society as "egalitarian or lacking in social complexity. It therefore appears that "differential access to resources is demonstrated by the very unequal distribution of grave goods, and, moreover, that because economic differences between members of the Badarian community were striking, their social system must be considered to have been inegalitarian. Although it was not demonstrated that such differential access included "the basic resources that sustain life, this seems highly likely as well.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
Series The Cambridge Ancient History
Volume 3 Part 3 The Expansion of the Greek World, Eighth to Sixth Centuries B.C.
Chapter Title Chapter 36b: The Greeks in Egypt
Publication Date 1982
Author T. F. R. G. Braun Digital Object Identifier (DOI) 10.1017/CHOL9780521234474.003
Overview Greek-Egyptian relations before Psammetichus I
Greeks arrived to settle in Egypt in the reign of Psammetichus I (664–610 B.C.). For the period that follows, Herodotus found that Egyptian and non-Egyptian information could be combined (II. 147). Thanks to Greek settlers mingling with the Egyptians, knowledge was now accurate (II. 154). Significantly, no Greek pottery datable to the period between Mycenaean times and 664 B.C. has so far been found in Egypt. Egyptian trinkets, on the other hand, were reaching the Greek world in the eighth century, and a bronze Egyptian jug at Lefkandi in Euboea would seem to date back as far as the ninth. These could have arrived by way of Phoenicia or Cyprus.
Some contact then, even if indirect, there must have been in the disturbed century before Psammetichus I. The Greeks retained some recollection of the Egyptian history of this time. We have seen how the king of Ethiopia and Egypt, who must have been Shabako (c. 716–c. 702 B.C.) in 711 surrendered Yamani of Ashdod, possibly a Greek (above, p. 16). This ‘Sabakōs’ is an historical figure for Herodotus (II. 137, 139) who in the fifth century could get a fair amount of information about the 25th (Nubian or Kushite) dynasty. Shabako's enemy was the delta king Bakenrenef son of Tefnakhte (c. 720–715 ?), whom he eventually captured and burnt alive. Bakenrenef, as Bocchoris, was to figure in Greek imagination, though Herodotus does not mention him. He is celebrated as a sagacious lawgiver in the Egyptian account of Diodorus (I. 45, 65, 79, 94) which derives from earlier Greek writing – probably in large measure from Hecataeus of Abdera, c. 300 B.C.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Okay. I don't know what the above has to do with predynastic culture or any influence but whatever.
I still await the microcephalic Simpleton's response.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
resort to insult in a debate is unprofessional
lioness productions
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
LMAO In other words it is the opposite scenario-- Africans influencing Anatolians and Europeans! [/QB]
And yet you have shown very little that predates and supports your claim. The graves above are from 8,000 B.C. You haven't shown any signifigant amount of evidence from sub-saharan Africa that predates anything I have shown thus far. And that means all the way down to the black-topped ware which I have shown an earlier use of in southeastern Europe.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Here let me help you out a little bit:
quote: A long tradition existed in Egypt of cultural contact and the integration of new styles, technologies, and symbols. Neolithic contacts between Western Asia and Egypt include the transmission of lithic technologies such as the Helwan retouch (Gopher 1993), domesticated plants and animals sometime after 6000 B.C. (Wetterstrom-1993), and maceheads (Cialowicz 1989). Chalcolithic contacts include the transfer of metallurgical technology and raw materials through the trading entrepot at Maadi (Rizkana and Seeher 1989, Seeher 1990). Uruk-related material in Egypt which may be dated to the middle Naqada II horizon includes the introduction of cylinder seals, lapis lazuli, and stylistic influences on locally produced knife handles (Crowfoot-Payne 1968; Boehmer 1974a, b; Midant-Reyes 1987; Smith 1992; Sievertsen 1992; Pittman 1996; Bavay 1997).
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:The graves above are from 8,000 B.C. You haven't shown any signifigant amount of evidence from sub-saharan Africa that predates anything I have shown thus far. And that means all the way down to the black-topped ware which I have shown an earlier use of in southeastern Europe.
This is a strawman argument Simple Girl. I have no idea why you think sub-Saharan Africa must be similar to Egypt in order for Egypt to be indigenous to Egypt.
As I said, Egyptians have been buried in cemeteries since the Mesolithic. And the predynastic burials are highly interconnected with social status. Furthermore, I have already given you evidence that the Badarian black-topped ware may be derived from Sudan as the black-topped ware in Sudan is older than the Badarian pottery. And according to you, that in southeastern Europe is only contemporary. As Al-Takuri pointed out, much to young to be older than Sudanese.
You keep ignoring things and continue in your fantasy world where you are so obsessed with making these connections to the Mediterranean or elsewhere that no other scholar acknowledges.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Other probable Syro-Mesopotamian elements in mid-to-late Naqada II art include the "master of animals" motif, winged griffins, serpent-headed panthers, and intertwined beasts (Kantor 1992:15, fig. 6; Smith 1992). All figure prominently in Uruk-period glyptic, especially from Susa, and appear in Egypt individually and in clusters in contexts such as the Painted Tomb at Hierakonpolis and the Gebel el-Arak knife handle. The incorporation of these motifs further illustrates the impact of Egypto-Mesopotamian interaction--not simply emulation by Egypt but reinterpretation of foreign iconography to fit existing and developing ideological needs (see generally Bard 1992a, Hassan 1992).
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
How does this support the claims that we are addressing:
1)Black topped pottery was introduced from southeastern Europe
And
2)Egypt and Mesopotamia shared common origin
Claim #1 was already refuted and it was shown to you that Badarian black topped pottery was derived from Sudan possibly.
And clam #2 isn't all that much supported by your citations.
We are aware of what you are saying Simple Girl. But for example, Egyptians adopted Domesticates into an indigenous foraging strategy over time on their terms. It isn't as if there was even a significant presence of Near Easterners like there were for Nilotic peoples. Fact of the matter is, Sudanese helped give rise to Egyptian civilization as upper Egyptian culture could be called a derivative of Sudanese culture, all you are posting is evidence for a cultural influence. Which is not to be mistaken by a contribution.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': [QUOTE] As I said, Egyptians have been buried in cemeteries since the Mesolithic. And the predynastic burials are highly interconnected with social status.
Of course I know that. Why do you think I made the connection between the Varna Necropolis especially, and the predynastic Egyptian graves? Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^Uh... the graves at Varna Necropolis are dated to 4700-4200 BC and part of a Chalcolithic culture. The remains from cemetery 117 at the border of Sudan have been dated to 12,000-14,000 B.P Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:The decoration of stone palettes, a local Egyptian device which began in Naqada I, reflects Uruk influences by Naqada II-III; the best-known examples are the rosette on the Scorpion macehead (Smith 1992, Cialowicz 1997) and the intertwined beasts on the obverse of the Narmer Palette (Davis 1989:159-63, figs. 6.14-15). Egyptian imitations of Uruk-style bent-spout vessels appear in ceramic, stone, and eventually copper, as do stone imitations of four-lugged jars. These are in addition to Egyptian stone imitations of Southern Levantine ceramic forms such as one-handled pitchers and the feature of the ledge handle (Kantor 1992; el-Khouli 1978:pl. 83). The placement of local smithing scenes on palettes and maceheads and the imitation of pressure-flaked knives in copper also demonstrate expanding court control over the visual environment and craft production (Radwan 1983; Williams and Logan 1987; Davis 1992; Baines 1995b:97, 110-12).
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^Uh... the graves at Varna Necropolis are dated to 4700-4200 BC and part of a Chalcolithic culture. The remains from cemetery 117 at the border of Sudan have been dated to 12,000-14,000 B.P
How can you make a connection if Egyptian cemeteries are older than the Varna Necropolis? That makes no sense and exposes your mentality.
Ah, so you mean that all those 12,000-14'000 year old graves had all the formalities of the graves from the Gerzean(Naqada) era?
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^What a stupid question. OK, I'm done here.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
I don't know what you're talking about dude, but I'm talking about a period before Egyptian statehood that shows pre-eminent evidence for such a developement.
What did they find in those 12-14 thousand year old graves? A hieroglyph tatooed to the forehead of a mummified black man?lol
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
The background: the lost society of the central Sahara and the rise of ancient Egypt
The origins of ancient Egypt are archaeology’s greatest unsolved mystery. What prompted this remarkable culture to develop such distinctive rituals as mummification? Where did they get their ideas? As far as we know, Egypt was only preceded by one great civilisation: Mesopotamia. Although Mesopotamia is a far older culture – there is no evidence to suggest that these people had developed any similar funerary practises. But if Egyptian innovations did not come from earlier known civilisations – where did they come from?
The answer has come from an unlikely quarter – the barren Sahara desert. In the last few decades evidence has been mounting that the Egyptian civilisation was not the first advanced society in Africa. At the same time as Mesopotamia rose in the near east, another culture thrived in Africa. Although few people have heard of it – this central Saharan culture is providing evidence for the invention of ritual activity which had previously been attributed to the Egyptians...
The mummy and archaeology in Libya:
An Italian team of archaeologists first explored the Libyan Sahara almost fifty years ago. In 1958 they struck gold. Professor Fabrizio Mori discovered the black mummy at the Uan Muhuggiag rockshelter. The mummy of a young boy, Uan Muhuggiag was destined for controversy. He was older than any comparable Egyptian mummy and his mere existence challenged the very idea that Egyptians were the first in the region to mummify their dead. Although the Italian team from the university of Rome “La Sapienza”, has since discovered other mummified tissue, they have not yet discovered another complete mummy in the region. But Uan Muhuggiag was no one off. The sophistication of his mummification suggested he was the result of a long tradition of mummification. Investigations in the area continue under the direction of Dr Savino di Lernia and Professor Mario Liverani... Courtesy of Djehuti
Taken with the Ws scepter and other cultural contacts in the Sahara we can see clearly where the later Kemetians got there start and it ain't in Eastern Europe.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
^I believe the black mummy you are referring to got its name from the black wrappings and not its skin. If i'm wrong than please correct me.
There is two other mummies from Libya found to be at least 500 years older than the Uan Muhuggiag mummy, and they appear to be not black at all.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Here is one of the mummies that predates the Uan Muhuggiag mummy by at least 500 years.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Mesopotamia: Uruk cylander seal with intertwined Serpopard motif (cross between a serpent and leopard)
precise date unknown
Egypt: Narmer Pallete
precise date unknown
_________________________________________________
SOMEBODY IS A COPY CAT
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Simple girl
quote:I believe the black mummy you are referring to got its name from the black wrappings and not its skin. If i'm wrong than please correct me. There is two other mummies from Libya found to be at least 500 years older than the Uan Muhuggiag mummy, and they appear to be not black at al
But the point is not the skin of the mummy itself which depending on the situation could lighten or darkened the mummy but where it was found and how it was made.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
LMAO @ "black wrappings"!
First of all, the Mummy was preserved in gazelle skin NOT wrapped. 2nd, do you expect the skin complexion of 6,000 year dried corpse to be same as when living??! By the way, when the mummy was originally discovered it's skin color was dark gray! The mummy was called "black" because of its features. Even though its features were not much different from Egyptians.
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: Here is one of the mummies that predates the Uan Muhuggiag mummy by at least 500 years.
So?! Are you saying that this mummy was of the same beige color when she was alive?? LOL I guess you prefer to eyeball anthropology instead of more accurate skeletal and cranial analysis or melanin tests. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton:
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^Uh... the graves at Varna Necropolis are dated to 4700-4200 BC and part of a Chalcolithic culture. The remains from cemetery 117 at the border of Sudan have been dated to 12,000-14,000 B.P
How can you make a connection if Egyptian cemeteries are older than the Varna Necropolis? That makes no sense and exposes your mentality.
Ah, so you mean that all those 12,000-14'000 year old graves had all the formalities of the graves from the Gerzean(Naqada) era?
quote: I don't know what you're talking about dude, but I'm talking about a period before Egyptian statehood that shows pre-eminent evidence for such a developement.
What did they find in those 12-14 thousand year old graves? A hieroglyph tatooed to the forehead of a mummified black man?lol
Herein lies the problem you don't know what we're talking about because you are IGNORANT and stupid to boost.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton:
quote:The decoration of stone palettes, a local Egyptian device which began in Naqada I, reflects Uruk influences by Naqada II-III; the best-known examples are the rosette on the Scorpion macehead (Smith 1992, Cialowicz 1997) and the intertwined beasts on the obverse of the Narmer Palette (Davis 1989:159-63, figs. 6.14-15). Egyptian imitations of Uruk-style bent-spout vessels appear in ceramic, stone, and eventually copper, as do stone imitations of four-lugged jars. These are in addition to Egyptian stone imitations of Southern Levantine ceramic forms such as one-handled pitchers and the feature of the ledge handle (Kantor 1992; el-Khouli 1978:pl. 83). The placement of local smithing scenes on palettes and maceheads and the imitation of pressure-flaked knives in copper also demonstrate expanding court control over the visual environment and craft production (Radwan 1983; Williams and Logan 1987; Davis 1992; Baines 1995b:97, 110-12).
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass:
Mesopotamia: Uruk cylander seal with intertwined Serpopard motif (cross between a serpent and leopard)
precise date unknown
Egypt: Narmer Pallete
precise date unknown
_________________________________________________
SOMEBODY IS A COPY CAT
Hey, dummies. We addressed all of this months ago here! There must be correlation between you girls' low intellects and your poor memories. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: resort to insult in a debate is unprofessional
lyinass productions
There is no debate with idiots who keep repeating the same debunked nonsense. We have been more than patient with you twits. Enough is enough. Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: resort to insult in a debate is unprofessional
lyinass productions
There is no debate with idiots who keep repeating the same debunked nonsense. We have been more than patient with you twits. Enough is enough.
You think that simply because a topic was discussed before it was resolved. As I said the precise dates of the Uruk cylinder seal and Narmer pallette dates are unknown therefore which came first is unknown but a connection between the two cultures is evident with this item. Your comment is entirely worthless. If you had command of the detail of a “debunking” you would be able to state it without having to resort to “look at this old thread here”, if not a quote from that thread where the matter was resolved. Neither of which you have done. I simply posted a picture of the Uruk cylinder seal and the Narmer Pallette. They are two items which exist and both have the Serpopard motif. That is fact and has not been “debunked” . Your waste of space remarks have been “debunked”
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: There is no debate with idiots who keep repeating the same debunked nonsense. We have been more than patient with you twits. Enough is enough.
If there is no debate then you should remain silent, enough is enough.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: The mummy was called "black" because of its features.
Where is the support for this retarded remark? What are black features and where is the evidence that this mummy was called that because of “features” ? Again you have no counter argument just a holier than thou wannabe attempt
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
We have been more than patient with you
who is this "we" that you think you speak for? You are living in the fantasy that you own own this forum. The only thing you own are the skid marks on your underwear and the comic books in your grandmother's basement.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:Simple whether or not the Verna finds pre dates anything found in Africa the simple facts are they were not responsible for the rise of the civilization in Kemet period. The "Black" Mummy of Uan Muhuggiag
That's exactly it! They don't. And Simple Girl wants us to believe that the early burials must have had the same exact customs as the latter ones, even though it is obvious that these things develop over time. Something Simple Girl just can't comprehend, she thinks things could not have happened over a long period of time, and always asks us how they just happened over night LOL! So her logic is basically, if it didn't happen over night, it's not indigenous.
I just added her to my ignore list along with Argyle and the other troll like characters.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
The Gebel el-Arak Knife is a 25.50 cm long knife dating from circa 3300 to 3200 BC, the late pre-dynastic period in Egypt, which when it was purchased in Cairo was said to have been found at the site of Gebel el-Arak, south of Abydos.
The blade is made of ripple-flaked flintstone and the handle of the ivory of a hippopotamus canine tooth. The handle is richly carved in low relief with a scene of a battle on the side that would have faced a right-handed user and with mythological themes on the other surface.
The opposite side of the handle shows Mesopotamian influence featuring the god El, wearing Mesopotamian clothing, flanked by two upright lions symbolizing the Morning and Evening Stars (now both identified with the planet Venus).
Grimal refrains from speculating on the identity of the ambiguous figure, referring to it as a "warrior". This side of the handle also contains a "knob", a perforated suspension lug that would have supported the knife handle, keeping it level while resting on a level surface and also could have been used to thread a cord to hang it from the body as an ornament.
Much of the evidence of Mesopotamian influence in Egypt lies in the style and design of it's art and architecture. Recessed and paneled brick, for example, typical of Mesopotamian monumental architecture, begins to appear. Mestomptamina motifs, such as pairs of entwined animals or compaosite animals, especially grifins and serpent necked felines, decorative knife handles and vot Barbara Watterson,
more, page 40-41:
The Egyptians, Blackwell Publishing 1997, ISBN 0631211950, p.41ive pallettes.
Also see H. Kantor Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 11, pp 239-50 (1959)
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz':
I just added her to my ignore list along with Argyle and the other troll like characters.
^^^^^
_________________ productions
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: resort to insult in a debate is unprofessional
lyinass productions
There is no debate with idiots who keep repeating the same debunked nonsense. We have been more than patient with you twits. Enough is enough.
And who has debunked us? It surely hasn't been the likes of you.lol....If anything you have debunked yourself.If you could only see just how desperate you are.lol
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Simple Girl, while we have cited sources of southern cultural influences to Egypt that were necessary for Egyptian state for state formation the things you posted don't seem as if they in any way helped shape the rise of Egypt. Egyptian cultures could trace cattle domestication, religion, etc., back to Sudan and the Sahara and these things were essential in forming Egyptian civilization as we know it. Any Middle Eastern cultural influence hardly even made a genetic contribution let alone shaped the rise of Egypt.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LOL I think deep down in the recesses of her subconscious in whatever functioning state of a mind she has left, she knows it. So she instead chooses to blow hot air. This whole thread is nothing but a steam vent for her inadequacies in accepting Egypt's African origins and identity.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
What is the point you're trying to make? That Africans introduced the iron age to the world? I've never seen the thread until now.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Okay. I don't know what the above has to do with predynastic culture or any influence but whatever.
I still await the microcephalic Simpleton's response.
It has nothing to do with the pre dynasty, its obvious. Their minor influence and contact was late in Egyptian history and not before.
That is the irony.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: My own theory as to why European Blacks became so advanced, is "Time-on-their-hands".
Anyone who has ever lived in the northern latitudes knows that in winter, you can be housebound for a very long time. With nothing else to do, except the occasional hunting trip or foraging for food, ancient man had nothing else to do but work on arts and crafts.
I mentioned before about how White people lie about such things; note this piece from Suite101: Zoological Record in Lascaux Cave Paintings.
As the climate warmed after the height of the last ice age, modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens – Cro-magnon man) lived in the Vezere valley and painted on the cave walls of Lascaux (France).
White people are so used to lying, that they don't even try to be accurate with their lies. Modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) and Cro-magnon man, are not the same creature!
Isn't the cro-magnon just a made up story by a rose-crucian named Blavatsky.
This is where the story originates, as far as I know.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Other probable Syro-Mesopotamian elements in mid-to-late Naqada II art include the "master of animals" motif, winged griffins, serpent-headed panthers, and intertwined beasts (Kantor 1992:15, fig. 6; Smith 1992). All figure prominently in Uruk-period glyptic, especially from Susa, and appear in Egypt individually and in clusters in contexts such as the Painted Tomb at Hierakonpolis and the Gebel el-Arak knife handle. The incorporation of these motifs further illustrates the impact of Egypto-Mesopotamian interaction--not simply emulation by Egypt but reinterpretation of foreign iconography to fit existing and developing ideological needs (see generally Bard 1992a, Hassan 1992).
Question is, what those authors know about African archeology and the connects between the South of Egypt as the root. (during that time?)
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: ^I believe the black mummy you are referring to got its name from the black wrappings and not its skin. If i'm wrong than please correct me.
There is two other mummies from Libya found to be at least 500 years older than the Uan Muhuggiag mummy, and they appear to be not black at all.
What you "believe" is not important. That mummy was of a 2.5 year old black boy.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Here let me help you out a little bit:
quote: A long tradition existed in Egypt of cultural contact and the integration of new styles, technologies, and symbols. Neolithic contacts between Western Asia and Egypt include the transmission of lithic technologies such as the Helwan retouch (Gopher 1993), domesticated plants and animals sometime after 6000 B.C. (Wetterstrom-1993), and maceheads (Cialowicz 1989). Chalcolithic contacts include the transfer of metallurgical technology and raw materials through the trading entrepot at Maadi (Rizkana and Seeher 1989, Seeher 1990). Uruk-related material in Egypt which may be dated to the middle Naqada II horizon includes the introduction of cylinder seals, lapis lazuli, and stylistic influences on locally produced knife handles (Crowfoot-Payne 1968; Boehmer 1974a, b; Midant-Reyes 1987; Smith 1992; Sievertsen 1992; Pittman 1996; Bavay 1997).
The mystery of the Persian mummy: original or fake?
W. Kretschmer, , K. von Grundherr, K. Kritzler, G. Norge roth, A. Scharf and T. Uhl
Physikalisches Institut, Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, D-91058, Erlangen, Germany
Available online 19 May 2004.
Abstract
We report on the 14C dating of a mummy found two years ago in the western part of Pakistan.
According to the drawings and inscriptions on the coffin it was thought to be the daughter of Xerxes, the great king of ancient Persia (518–465 BC).
AMS measurements were performed on pieces of textile, straw mat and charcoal resulting in a 14C content of about 113 pMC instead of an expected value of 75 pMC.
Additional measurements of bone-, skin- and muscular tissue samples suggested the individual died in AD 1994–1996 and revealed the mummy to be a modern fake.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Here let me help you out a little bit:
quote: A long tradition existed in Egypt of cultural contact and the integration of new styles, technologies, and symbols. Neolithic contacts between Western Asia and Egypt include the transmission of lithic technologies such as the Helwan retouch (Gopher 1993), domesticated plants and animals sometime after 6000 B.C. (Wetterstrom-1993), and maceheads (Cialowicz 1989). Chalcolithic contacts include the transfer of metallurgical technology and raw materials through the trading entrepot at Maadi (Rizkana and Seeher 1989, Seeher 1990). Uruk-related material in Egypt which may be dated to the middle Naqada II horizon includes the introduction of cylinder seals, lapis lazuli, and stylistic influences on locally produced knife handles (Crowfoot-Payne 1968; Boehmer 1974a, b; Midant-Reyes 1987; Smith 1992; Sievertsen 1992; Pittman 1996; Bavay 1997).
What a joke! HILARIOUS!
Beyond the hype
Although the recent discovery of a 2500-year-old Persian mummy has proved to be a fake,
Revelation of the racist fabrications by this group of handlers, or more specifically Western museum directors, is reported in the current issue of Archaeology Magazine 54 (September-October 2001, p. 27).
This report is associated with an article by Peter Lacovara et al. Archaeology reported that in the absence of scholarship the directors of the Niagara Falls Museum in Ontario, Canada “fabricated pedigrees” for many of their Egyptian mummies in the mid-nineteenth century. The most imaginative of these fake pedigrees, or false identities, was created for a bearded male mummy of the Roman period. The museum officials invented the following elaborate story for him which is a complete myth:“General Ossipumphnoferu the General in Chief of Thotmes III.... He was a man of military skill, also a famous magician. He was 60 years old when he died. The scar on his forehead was caused by an enraged elephant while defending the king from his onslaughts. A palace was erected for the general near that of the king.” The museum officials took their scandalous activity even further, as for many years the “general” was displayed in the coffin of Iawttayesheret, a high-ranking woman from the 25th dynasty, which was 700 years before his time! It is incredible that the directors of a public museum would take an unidentified Roman period mummy, with a European facial appearance, put him in a woman’s coffin from 700 years earlier, and then create a bogus identity for him as a famous general during a period which was another 700 years earlier than the coffin he was buried in! Eventhough this mummy and other artifacts at the museum were not studied comprehensively by an Egyptologist, this is yet another case which documents that Western museum directors would go to any lengths in the 19th and early 20th century to falsify evidence.
Currently, there is no doubt that this list of conspirators includes local Egyptian government workers, who are carrying out many acts of destruction on a regular basis. These men either work for the Egyptian government on “conservation” projects, or for various European or North American archeological teams. On several occasions in the 1980s and 1990s, these unsupervised minimally-skilled government workers have been caught on video tape plastering over temple images and inscriptions! In fact, it is impossible to visit the Karnak Temple in Luxor and not see the recent defacement, and it is suspicious that with rare exception Egyptologists are silent about this matter.
What is the point you're trying to make? That Africans introduced the iron age to the world? I've never seen the thread until now.
How Old is the Iron Age in Sub-Saharan Africa? Africa's Storied Past
Archaeological Institute of America Volume 52 Number 3, May/June 1999
by Roderick J. McIntosh, professor of anthropology at Rice University
For too long, many scholars dismissed Africa as a cultural backwater unworthy of serious study.
But 50 years of archaeology have shown that the continent has pottery thousands of years older than that of the Near East and Europe, true steel two and a half millennia before its nineteenth-century European "invention," and urban civilizations without despots and wars.
These are more than just African insights; they are fundamental revelations about how humans have interacted with each other and their environment and how societies have changed in the past.
Archaeologists long thought that agriculture must always have preceded herding, but during the last 20 years, evidence has emerged that in Africa full-time herding appeared as early as 7500 B.C., millennia before farming.
It was also thought that the idea of plant domestication was imported from the Near East around the turn of the third millennium B.C., but experiments with sorghum and millet began as early as 9,000 years ago, and full domestication independent of Near Eastern developments happened as early as 900 B.C.
Furthermore, some regions of Africa have all the hallmarks of sedentarism (living year-round in the same place) without agriculture, quite at odds with the traditional model of the emergence of villages, derived from the Near Eastern Neolithic, as a consequence of cereal farming.
In Africa and just about everywhere else, archaeologists long assumed that monuments, palatial architecture, and conspicuously wealthy burials reflected some degree of stratified, state organization. A number of African cases, however, suggest that more egalitarian societies could also build great monuments, and that large cities could develop without palaces and elite burials.
Archaeologists long argued that the spread of Bantu-speaking people throughout Africa was rapid, no earlier than the first millennium A.D., and facilitated by their superior knowledge of iron technology. But excavations at various sites have shown that there is no abrupt change from the Late Stone Age (supposedly pre-Bantu) to the Iron Age (early Bantu). Stone remained in use even after iron was introduced, and so-called proto-Bantu ceramics appear even before iron. This is not to underestimate the importance of iron in Africa. Iron furnaces have been found dating from the eighth century B.C., and possibly as early as 1300 B.C.; true steel was invented by the middle of the first millennium B.C.
We can also now appreciate that the African response to outside contact was anything but passive. Slave forts and colonial cities had adjacent African trading settlements, and new states arose thanks to the economic realities of the times or new technologies like firearms or steamships.
Despite severe financial crises, several African nations have a well-trained second generation of archaeologists trained in Africa. The challenge for these scholars is to cajole their governments into adequately funding field research, museums, and research institutions; to ensure the passage of cultural property protection laws; and to find ways to make archaeology relevant to the concerns of all citizens. If they succeed, not only will they have won a victory for Africa, but they will have set an example for the rest of the world.
Ish Gebor and the rest of E/S crew I am enjoying the schooling or is it a beatdown of ms thang... Guys when you have time check out ma new posting on African Megalith. This thread takes on a trip to megalithic sites in Africa some to do with the stars some not please feel free to add your own finds.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: My own theory as to why European Blacks became so advanced, is "Time-on-their-hands".
Anyone who has ever lived in the northern latitudes knows that in winter, you can be housebound for a very long time. With nothing else to do, except the occasional hunting trip or foraging for food, ancient man had nothing else to do but work on arts and crafts.
I mentioned before about how White people lie about such things; note this piece from Suite101: Zoological Record in Lascaux Cave Paintings.
As the climate warmed after the height of the last ice age, modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens – Cro-magnon man) lived in the Vezere valley and painted on the cave walls of Lascaux (France).
White people are so used to lying, that they don't even try to be accurate with their lies. Modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) and Cro-magnon man, are not the same creature!
Isn't the cro-magnon just a made up story by a rose-crucian named Blavatsky.
This is where the story originates, as far as I know.
So are you saying that there were no cro-magnon?
If so, what are you basing that determination on?
BTW - who is Blavatsky?
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: Here is one of the mummies that predates the Uan Muhuggiag mummy by at least 500 years.
Plus the Northwest Berber type gene arose in Northwest Africa correlating with that time, 5-6 kya. When they moved from East to Northwest.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: My own theory as to why European Blacks became so advanced, is "Time-on-their-hands".
Anyone who has ever lived in the northern latitudes knows that in winter, you can be housebound for a very long time. With nothing else to do, except the occasional hunting trip or foraging for food, ancient man had nothing else to do but work on arts and crafts.
I mentioned before about how White people lie about such things; note this piece from Suite101: Zoological Record in Lascaux Cave Paintings.
As the climate warmed after the height of the last ice age, modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens – Cro-magnon man) lived in the Vezere valley and painted on the cave walls of Lascaux (France).
White people are so used to lying, that they don't even try to be accurate with their lies. Modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) and Cro-magnon man, are not the same creature!
Isn't the cro-magnon just a made up story by a rose-crucian named Blavatsky.
This is where the story originates, as far as I know.
So are you saying that there were no cro-magnon?
If so, what are you basing that determination on?
BTW - who is Blavatsky?
I don't know if there was really a cro magnon. But Blavatsky was part of a secret society named rose-crucian.
See made more weird and dubious claims.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
who is Blavatsky
a physic who believes in Atlantis an occult figure forerunner of the Nazi Viril and Thule sociaties
Racial theories
Blavatsky used the compounded word Root-race as a technical term to describe each of the seven successive stages of human evolution that take place over large time periods in her cosmology. She called the current stage, the fifth one, "Aryan".[34] This word was commonly employed by the scholars of the 19th century to refer to what today is known as the Indo-European ethnic groups, although Blavatsky's description of the Aryan Root-race comprised the entire humanity. This Root-race was preceded by the fourth one, which developed in Atlantis, while the third Root-race is denominated "Lemurian". She described the Aryan Root-race in the following way: “ The Aryan races, for instance, now varying from dark brown, almost black, red-brown-yellow, down to the whitest creamy colour, are yet all of one and the same stock — the Fifth Root-Race — and spring from one single progenitor, (...) who is said to have lived over 18,000,000 years ago, and also 850,000 years ago — at the time of the sinking of the last remnants of the great continent of Atlantis.[35] ” Although the whole humanity belongs to the same Root-race, her evolutionary view naturally admits a difference in development between various ethnic groups: “ The occult doctrine admits of no such divisions as the Aryan and the Semite, accepting even the Turanian with ample reservations. The Semites, especially the Arabs, are later Aryans — degenerate in spirituality and perfected in materiality."[36] ” She also states that: “ There are, or rather still were a few years ago, descendants of these half-animal tribes or races, both of remote Lemurian and Lemuro-Atlantean origin ... Of such semi-animal creatures, the sole remnants known to Ethnology were the Tasmanians, a portion of the Australians and a mountain tribe in China, the men and women of which are entirely covered with hair.[37] ” It is important to notice, however, that her teachings talk about three separate levels of evolution: physical, intellectual, and spiritual.[38] Blavatsky states that there are differences in the spiritual evolution of the Monads, in their intellectual development of the souls, and in the physical qualities of the bodies. She also states that cultures follow a cycle of rising, development, degeneration, and eventually disappear. But these three levels of evolution are separate. In her teachings, the incarnating souls are beyond sex, nationality, religions, and other physical or cultural characteristics. In its evolutionary journey, every soul has to take birth in every culture in the world, where it acquires different skills and learns different lessons. [39] This means that ethnic groups do not have attached a particular group of souls more or less evolved than those of other groups (except, perhaps, in the case of savages of some tribes). Thus, even though she declares the Arabs are "later Aryans, degenerate in spirituality and perfected in materiality" she also stated that there were wise and initiated teachers among the Jews and the Arabs.[40] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helena_Blavatsky Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
See = she^
What are we dealing with?
Slaughter for Evidence to prove evolution?
After publishing Darwin's Origin of Species and Descent of Man, a big campaign was initiated to find out the fossils that would possibly be displayed as an evidence for the theory. Archaeologists started looking for the fossils of imaginary creatures called transitional forms. For decades, they dug different parts of the earth to prove their point with no success. Their disappointment eventually led them to the forgery of Piltdown man. In 1912, the English biologist Charles Dawson fitted an orangutan jaw to a human skull and exhibited it as a transitional form between human and ape. It became evident only after 37 years that the Piltdown man which was exhibited in British Museum as the biggest evidence for evolution, was solely a forgery. Yet, more sophisticated forgery methods were being developed by evolutionists.
In the meantime, some evolutionists held strongly the idea that there existed some living fossils. According to the belief, if mankind had ape-like ancestors, there should still, in some part of the world, be some semi-human beings who still have not completed the evolution process. Towards the end of the 1800s, the victims were found. The native inhabitants of Tanzania, called Aborigines were designated as living evidences of evolution. Even Ernest Haeckel got into the act with Darwin and others.
The different orbit structure and the relatively heavy lower jaw of Aborigines were the main reasons of why these human beings were defined as transitional forms. Evolutionist archaeologists and many fossil-hunters who joined them, set out to dig the graves of Aborigines and take the skulls to western evolutionist museums. Soon, the skulls were distributed to each one of the institutions, schools in the West as the confirmation of evolution.
The fossil-hunters did not hesitate to become skull-hunters when the number of graves were not enough to meet their needs. Since Aborigines served as transitional forms, they had to be regarded as animals rather than human beings. For the sake of the development of science, the lives of Aborigines could be sacrificed just as guinea pigs!
Skull-hunters killed Aborigines and legitimized this act asserting that they were doing it for science. The skulls of the hunted natives were sold to museums after some chemical reactions that would make them look old. The skulls with bullet holes were filled in with utmost attention. According to Creation Magazine published in Australia, a group of observers that came in from South Galler were shocked when they saw that dozens of women, children and men were killed by evolutionists. Forty five skulls were chosen among the killed Aborigines, the flesh of them were set aside and boiled. The best ten were packaged to be sent to England.
Today, thousands of skulls of Aborigines are still in the warehouse of Smithsonian Institution. Some of these skulls belong to the corpses dug from the graves where as some others are the skulls of innocent people killed to prove evolution.
There were also African victims of the evolutionist violence. The most famous one was the pigmy Ota Benga who was taken to the world of the white men to be displayed as a transitional form. Oto Benga was caught in 1904 by a researcher Samuel Verner in Kongo then a colony of Belgium. The native whose name meant friend in his native language, was married and had two kids. Yet he was chained, put into a cage and sent by a boat to the evolutionist scientists who within the same year displayed him in the St. Louis World Fair together with other monkey species as the closest transitional form to humankind. Two years later, he was taken to Branx Zoo in New York where he was, this time displayed as one of the ancestors of human beings together with a few chimpanzees, a gorilla called Dinah and an orangutan called Dohung. Dr. William T. Hornaday, the director of the zoo who was also a fanatical evolutionist delivered long speeches about how he was proud of having such a precious transitional form. The guests, on the other hand, treated Ota Benga as an ordinary animal. Ota Benga could not bear the treatment he received and committed suicide.
Darwin was a member of a secret society as well.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Excellent links Ish Gebor, and great job exposing the Simpleton for the fraud she is just like her outdated sources. Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
Mike, seriously, STFU.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Nice Ish Gebor.
More info:
Barbed Bone Points: Tradition and Continuity in Saharan and Sub-Saharan Africa John E. Yellen
quote:Examination of African barbed bone points recovered from Holocene sites provides a context to interpret three Late Pleistocene occurrences from Katanda and Ishango, Zaire, and White Paintings Shelter, Botswana. In sites dated to ca. 10,000 BP and younger, such artifacts are found widely distributed across the Sahara Desert, the Sahel, the Nile, and the East African Lakes. They are present in both ceramic and aceramic contexts, sometimes associated with domesticates. The almost-universal presence of fish remains indicates a subsistence adaptation which incorporates a riverine/lacustrine component. Typologically these points exhibit **sufficient similarity in form and method of manufacture to be subsumed within a single African "tradition."** They are ***absent at Fayum, where a distinct Natufian form occurs**. Specimens dating to ca. 20,000 BP at Ishango, possibly a similar age at White Paintings Shelter, and up to 90,000 BP at Katanda clearly fall within this same African tradition and thus indicate a very **long-term continuity which crosses traditionally conceived sub-Saharan cultural boundaries**.
So, we see a continuum from sub-Saharan African which crosses conceived boundaries. This continuity ranges from sub-Saharan Africa, the Sahel up to the Nile Valley **except** for the distinct culture of the Fayum, although still predominately African. And artifacts have been found to be distributed throughout Africa Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^Good find! Brada just posted (see here) on the Ishango-Egyptian connection with respect to the northward diffusion of mathematical counting systems. Further connections through barbed bone point technology would only serve to reinforce that. Mention of a Natufian tradition persisting in the Fayum is also very interesting. Perhaps THIS symbolizes a return of the Natufian to NE Africa coincident with the introduction of agriculture in Egypt?
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:Mention of a Natufian tradition persisting in the Fayum is also very interesting. Perhaps this symbolizes a return of the Natufian to NE Africa coincident with the introduction of agriculture in Egypt?
Yeah, that could be it. According to Rudolph Kuper and Stefan Kropelin, certain (agricultural) aspects of the Fayum are rooted in Near Eastern tradition. Which is probably why she mentioned a distinct Natufian form occurring. However, on the other hand **essential** cultural aspects trace back to the Sahara
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^This would seem significant though since the Natufian are seen as responsible for the spread of agriculture elsewhere. What date/s does Yellen attribute to this specific technology seen in the Fayum?
Edit: As a matter of fact, I'm getting it now from Jstor, I'll check it out.
Posted by Neferet (Member # 17109) on :
Uh oh...you forgot to say "lol"
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': BTW, Brada bumped this thread for you:
What is the point you're trying to make? That Africans introduced the iron age to the world? I've never seen the thread until now.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
She questions whether or not they Fayum material (8th millennium B.C.) can be considered as apart of the continuum, although it is related to southern areas. She says it conforms more to the Natufian/Near Eastern material, even though rare for Natufians. The continuity extends into Egypt but ends somewhere between Catfish Caves and the Fayum. She does mention however that "Fayum sites appear to share a subsistence adaptation consistent with predomestication sites to the South" she just doesn't know if they can be included in the same group
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: ^This would seem significant though since the Natufian are seen as responsible for the spread of agriculture elsewhere. What date/s does Yellen attribute to this specific technology seen in the Fayum?
Edit: As a matter of fact, I'm getting it now from Jstor, I'll check it out.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ In other words the Fayum tradition represents pre-Natufian i.e. Mushabian culture.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl:
quote:
Revelation of the racist fabrications by this group of handlers, or more specifically Western museum directors, is reported in the current issue of Archaeology Magazine 54 (September-October 2001, p. 27).
This report is associated with an article by Peter Lacovara et al. Archaeology reported that in the absence of scholarship the directors of the Niagara Falls Museum in Ontario, Canada “fabricated pedigrees” for many of their Egyptian mummies in the mid-nineteenth century. The most imaginative of these fake pedigrees, or false identities, was created for a bearded male mummy of the Roman period. The museum officials invented the following elaborate story for him which is a complete myth:“General Ossipumphnoferu the General in Chief of Thotmes III.... He was a man of military skill, also a famous magician. He was 60 years old when he died. The scar on his forehead was caused by an enraged elephant while defending the king from his onslaughts. A palace was erected for the general near that of the king.” The museum officials took their scandalous activity even further, as for many years the “general” was displayed in the coffin of Iawttayesheret, a high-ranking woman from the 25th dynasty, which was 700 years before his time! It is incredible that the directors of a public museum would take an unidentified Roman period mummy, with a European facial appearance, put him in a woman’s coffin from 700 years earlier, and then create a bogus identity for him as a famous general during a period which was another 700 years earlier than the coffin he was buried in! Eventhough this mummy and other artifacts at the museum were not studied comprehensively by an Egyptologist, this is yet another case which documents that Western museum directors would go to any lengths in the 19th and early 20th century to falsify evidence.
Currently, there is no doubt that this list of conspirators includes local Egyptian government workers, who are carrying out many acts of destruction on a regular basis. These men either work for the Egyptian government on “conservation” projects, or for various European or North American archeological teams. On several occasions in the 1980s and 1990s, these unsupervised minimally-skilled government workers have been caught on video tape plastering over temple images and inscriptions! In fact, it is impossible to visit the Karnak Temple in Luxor and not see the recent defacement, and it is suspicious that with rare exception Egyptologists are silent about this matter.
To clarify, the above is a statement written by Prof. Manu Ampim about an article written by Peter Lacovara et al. in Archeology Magazine. The link above only provides the abstract of the original article
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Nice Ish Gebor.
More info:
Barbed Bone Points: Tradition and Continuity in Saharan and Sub-Saharan Africa John E. Yellen
quote:Examination of African barbed bone points recovered from Holocene sites provides a context to interpret three Late Pleistocene occurrences from Katanda and Ishango, Zaire, and White Paintings Shelter, Botswana. In sites dated to ca. 10,000 BP and younger, such artifacts are found widely distributed across the Sahara Desert, the Sahel, the Nile, and the East African Lakes. They are present in both ceramic and aceramic contexts, sometimes associated with domesticates. The almost-universal presence of fish remains indicates a subsistence adaptation which incorporates a riverine/lacustrine component. Typologically these points exhibit **sufficient similarity in form and method of manufacture to be subsumed within a single African "tradition."** They are ***absent at Fayum, where a distinct Natufian form occurs**. Specimens dating to ca. 20,000 BP at Ishango, possibly a similar age at White Paintings Shelter, and up to 90,000 BP at Katanda clearly fall within this same African tradition and thus indicate a very **long-term continuity which crosses traditionally conceived sub-Saharan cultural boundaries**.
So, we see a continuum from sub-Saharan African which crosses conceived boundaries. This continuity ranges from sub-Saharan Africa, the Sahel up to the Nile Valley **except** for the distinct culture of the Fayum, although still predominately African. And artifacts have been found to be distributed throughout Africa
Thats good, but this is even better.
Prehistoric Period
The Lebombo Bone
The first ever computing devises used are believed to be found around 35,000 BC.
Archeologists while excavating within the Border Cave in the Lebombo Mountains of Swaziland, discovered and important artifact. It was a small piece of the fibula bone, known as the Lebombo bone, you can guess where the name of the bone came from. It was named after the Lebombo Mountains.
This piece of fibula bone consisted of 29 distinct notches that were deliberately carved into a baboon’s fibula bone. The Lebombo bone is the oldest known mathematical artifact ever discovered.
There are no clear indications that they were used for computing at that period. It could be assumed that they may have been used in some sort of counting or to keep track of calendar. There are clear indications as the Lebombo bone resembles to the calendar sticks still used by Bushmen in Namibia.
Dirk Huylebrouck, the Mathematical Tourist columnist in the Mathematical Intelligencer, tells us about the remarkable Ishango bone, a 22,000 year old arithmetical exercise!
Revelation of the racist fabrications by this group of handlers, or more specifically Western museum directors, is reported in the current issue of Archaeology Magazine 54 (September-October 2001, p. 27).
This report is associated with an article by Peter Lacovara et al. Archaeology reported that in the absence of scholarship the directors of the Niagara Falls Museum in Ontario, Canada “fabricated pedigrees” for many of their Egyptian mummies in the mid-nineteenth century. The most imaginative of these fake pedigrees, or false identities, was created for a bearded male mummy of the Roman period. The museum officials invented the following elaborate story for him which is a complete myth:“General Ossipumphnoferu the General in Chief of Thotmes III.... He was a man of military skill, also a famous magician. He was 60 years old when he died. The scar on his forehead was caused by an enraged elephant while defending the king from his onslaughts. A palace was erected for the general near that of the king.” The museum officials took their scandalous activity even further, as for many years the “general” was displayed in the coffin of Iawttayesheret, a high-ranking woman from the 25th dynasty, which was 700 years before his time! It is incredible that the directors of a public museum would take an unidentified Roman period mummy, with a European facial appearance, put him in a woman’s coffin from 700 years earlier, and then create a bogus identity for him as a famous general during a period which was another 700 years earlier than the coffin he was buried in! Eventhough this mummy and other artifacts at the museum were not studied comprehensively by an Egyptologist, this is yet another case which documents that Western museum directors would go to any lengths in the 19th and early 20th century to falsify evidence.
Currently, there is no doubt that this list of conspirators includes local Egyptian government workers, who are carrying out many acts of destruction on a regular basis. These men either work for the Egyptian government on “conservation” projects, or for various European or North American archeological teams. On several occasions in the 1980s and 1990s, these unsupervised minimally-skilled government workers have been caught on video tape plastering over temple images and inscriptions! In fact, it is impossible to visit the Karnak Temple in Luxor and not see the recent defacement, and it is suspicious that with rare exception Egyptologists are silent about this matter.
To clarify, the above is a statement written by Prof. Manu Ampim about an article written by Peter Lacovara et al. in Archeology Magazine. The link above only provides the abstract of the original article
The reason why I put in the link, was to show that this info is not something made up. But actually really exists.
Posted by AGÜEYBANÁ(Mind718) (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by Neferet: Uh oh...you forgot to say "lol"
Atleast I'm not the only one that noticed this.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Ish Gabor great find will copy and repost links and text over at ESR later I want this preserved
Over the next three decades, with millions of Rockefeller dollars, Breasted organized numerous expeditions throughout Egypt and the Near East, purchasing antiquities for the museum's collection, as well as for the Art Institute of Chicago and the Field Museum, where he became an honorary curator. He also scouted out locations for the Oriental Institute's archaeological investigations, some of which are still being conducted to this day. Although he lived an adventurous life, his university salary was so small that he had to lecture widely and publish frequently. In one book intended for high-school students, entitled Ancient Times (1908), he coined the phrase "fertile crescent."
Mr. John D. Rockefeller, jun., acquired a keen interest in Egyptian colour-work, the firstfruits of which were the munificent grant which he made to the Egypt Exploration Society for the publication of the temple of Abydos (see Journal, xv, 272). This grant he has now followed up by another of similar munificence, which will make possible the publication in the finest conceivable style of more than a hundred of Mrs. Davies' copies of Egyptian paintings. The work is to appear under the auspices of the Chicago Oriental Institute, which, under Professor Breasted's untiring leadership, has initiated so many great archaeological enterprises. The editorship and the preparation of the explanatory text will be in the hands of Dr. Alan Gardiner. All lovers of ancient art, as well as all Egyptologists, are being placed under a deep obligation by this grandly conceived under-taking set on foot by our American friends.
The work of copying the temple of Sethos I at Abydos, reported upon in the last number of the Journal (p. 272), is progressing well, though the departure of Mr. Beazley on Feb. 1st reduced the staff to three. In view of the widening of our original plans through the generosity of Mr. Rockefeller and the arrangement with the Oriental Institute of Chicago, it was decided to include in the first volume not only the religious scenes of the seven central chapels but also the accompanying ceiling decorations, door-jambs, etc.
And spread the word.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
One more x-pose-say,
There are times when indiscretion is the better part of diplomacy. No one knows it better than Professor James Henry Breasted, celebrated Egyptologist of the University of Chicago.
For six months he had been trying quietly to persuade the Egyptian government to accept a large number of John Davison Rockefeller Jr.'s dollars for a museum to house the relics that diggers of all nations are constantly extracting from the soil of the oldest nation. Mr. Rockefeller had written King Fuad a personal letter, and Professor Breasted was there to back it up.
Proud Egyptian nationalists had maintained a muttering opposition. Sensitive Egyptian government archeologists had been afraid it would cast a slur on their efficiency, as they had felt when Carter and Carnarvon entered Luxor. Egyptian liberals, Egyptian scholars and King Fuad were of course quite overcome with astonished gratitude and eagerness, but they could not offend the mutterers, and an amazing bit of munificence hung fire because of a hitch at the receiving end.
So last week Professor Breasted was indiscreet. He announced Mr. Rockefeller's offer prematurely, that is, before Egypt's acceptance was certain. The figure announced was the exceedingly plump one of ten millions. So swift and sweeping was public enthusiasm that the opposition could but dwindle. King Fuad waited to compose his reply, but a Rockefeller architect, fresh from Cairo, declared that all was well, that plans were already being draughted for two one-story buildings to stand on the island of Gezira, opposite Cairo's richest residential quarter. These are to cost about five and a half millions, the balance of the gift being banked to maintain them.
Some of the nationalist opposition to Mr. Rockefeller's gift was excited by his stipulation that the museum be for 30 years under an international directorate of scientists, headed by Professor Breasted.
Where is Simpleton? Does she not have anything to add?? LOL Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
More on pottery:
The Wavy Line and the Dotted Wavy Line Pottery in the Prehistory of the Central Nile and the Sahara-Sahel Belt
Abbas S. Mohammed-Ali1, and Abdel-Rahim M. Khabir
African Archaeological Review, Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2003
quote:From the chronological standpoint, it seems that the overall radiometric dates of the early ceramics from the Central Nile Valley are generally in accordance with their counterpart in the Sahara-Sahel Belt, dated to the tenth–eighth millennium bp (eighth–sixth millenium BC). These dates may suggest that pottery developed locally from early prototypes as early as 10,000 bp. The origin(s) of the wavy line and dotted wavy line ce- ramics is much more complex than was once thought. The reason(s) behind the invention of pottery lies mainly in the need for containers that permit wider uses of food techniques than is otherwise possible, as well as other different sets of advantages for the general mode of living (Arnold, 1985, pp. 127–166). The in- vention of pottery and harpoons are critical events in the process that led to the expansion of aquatic resource exploitation, as is manifested in the Nile Valley (see supra; Haaland, 1995; Sutton, 1974, pp. 529–531). Also, the Sahara-Sahel Belt might have only opened up for the kind of resource exploitation that neces- sitates the invention of ceramics by the early Holocene (see Clark, 1980; Hassan, 1986).
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
DJ
quote:Where is Simpleton? Does she not have anything to add?? LOL
NO!! she will disappear only to reemerge later either in this thread or another repeating the same ignorant nonsense.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: DJ
quote:Where is Simpleton? Does she not have anything to add?? LOL
NO!! she will disappear only to reemerge later either in this thread or another repeating the same ignorant nonsense.
What am I suppose to be here everyday? I take it that I am suppose to offer a counter proposal to everything I don't agree with posted on this thread? People are free to offer any ideas that they think contributed to Egyptian culture. I don't go around bashing everyone that I may not agree with.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^I want to know why you have been unable to sustain any of your claims herein. Also, why you think the Near Eastern influences were essential to the formation of Egyptian state. You disagree with everything written down in an academic journal along with corresponding evidence.
BTW, didn't you know, early West Asians looked like Africans.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^I want to know why you have been unable to sustain any of your claims herein.
You and the others post a bone that may or may not represent anything but a bone with scratches on it, and you want me to sustain my claims?lol....I think most of what I have offered has more factual basis than your bone.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^I take it you don't understand the significance of the likes of the Ishango bone? Let me put it this way....
Earliest mathematical artifact that is part of an African tradition that is distributed from south, west, central, Sahara, and north Africa and was probably represents the spread of the counting system that was the basis for Egyptian mathematics?
BTW, those "scratches" represent the earliest calculator in the world.
You are extremely biased and obviously ignorant.
Another way of putting it, Near Eastern influences were not essential to state formation, sub-Saharan and Saharan influences on the other hand, were.
Question: Are you one of the following people:
princessofthenile
Or
Missy5465?
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Of course the Ishango bone represents the earliest calculator in the world, to you. Since it was found in sub-saharan Africa.lol.....If the bone had been found in Europe, you would have denied that it had any special significance at all other than being a gnawed on bone. Europe has its own bone too. And it's at least 10,000 years older than your bone. And it definitely was used as a mathematical tallying tool. Unlike your bone which is questionable. In fact I bet that you could take just about any random sets of marks separated by spaces, and make some mathematical sense out of it.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:Europe has its own bone too. And it's at least 10,000 years older than your bone.
How is this relevant?
In case you failed to understand, in Africa this represents a cultural continuity that extends from sub-Saharan Africa, as far as south Africa, up to the Nile Valley. Any mathematical artifact outside of this African tradition is irrelevant
quote:Unlike your bone which is questionable.
Yeah, to you it's questionable because it is in sub-Saharan Africa LOL! You are doing the exact thing you said I would do. The difference is, this bone IS in sub-Saharan Africa not Europe.
"The Ishango bone is the oldest known object containing **logical carvings**. It was discovered in the Congo, and has been dated to be 22{,}000 years old. The middle column of marks on the bone contains the sequence of number 3, 6, 4, 8, 10, 5, 5, 7 (Sloane's A100000)."--Weisstein, Eric W.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
This is evidence of a real tallying system and not just may have been. This is much older than your wishbone. Your wishbone is not the oldest known object to contain logical carvings if that is even what they really are in the first place.
quote:An early evidence of a "mathematical system" was found on a bone discovered in the Czech Republic. It dates from about 30,000 B.C.E. The bone contains fifty-five individual tally marks, divided into eleven groups of five marks each, just as tally marks might be grouped today. There is a dividing line, separating the first twenty-five marks from the remaining twenty, that makes totaling the tally marks even easier.
Posted by adrianne (Member # 10761) on :
simple girl
you have to explain why the first egyptians looked like the guys below
Q. did the first ancient egyptians look like the guys above
A.yes or no
answer the question simple girl
CASE CLOSED
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:This is evidence of a real tallying system and not just may have been. This is much older than your wishbone. Your wishbone is not the oldest known object to contain logical carvings if that is even what they really are in the first place.
According to my citation- yes it is. On the other hand I never claimed it was the oldest mathematical artifact. That would be the Lebombo bone of Swaziland ALSO IN AFRICA that dates to 35,000b.c 5,000 years older than your European bone LMAO!
I again must reiterate that your citation is completely irrelevant to the fact that IN AFRICA Barbed bone points exist as an AFRICAN TRADITION that continues from south Africa, West Africa, Central Africa, the Sahel and the Nile Valley. And that even the Ishango bone is apart of this African tradition which may signify the spread of the counting system to Egypt thereby being the basis of Egyptian mathematics.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
That's what I am talking about Calabooz' these Guys and Gal show-up make all sort of ridiculous claims about the origins of this or that African civilization we post evidence to contrary it gets ignored in favor of out dated sources or stuff they themselves made up,and makes absolutely no sense if I was Simple I would at least do some research on the Ishango Bones if nothing else to devise a counter argument instead being dismissive without even looking at the evidence but as AlTakruri said earlier they have their own agenda no amount of primary evidence will shake that the truth is not what they are after. For lurkers out there this is what we are going on about http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyduQYmlowM&feature=player_embedded please click http://etopia.sintlucas.be/3.14/Ishango_meeting/Mathematics_Africa.pdf Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
dbl
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Not only do they show up with their ridiculous claims they dominate the board and dictate its direction and some of you engage the worst of them as if they were friends.
But what do we find on the white boards? Control. Strict control. You don't stand a chance on any of their boards because they will not tolerate you. They will ban you and in most cases will delete, edit, or misrepresent whatever you post there. They will not allow themselves to stagnate and repeat the same counter material year in and year out. No, they will expand and build on all their foregoings coming up with something new.
Blacks will never learn there is a clash of races and whites are intent on winning and judging by how whites here whose agenda is obviously racist are tolerated and reached out to here, they will win even on the black's "home" turf. Why we even have blacks spreading info on Euro culture here after the enemy whites introduce it. Ever see that happen on a white board? Ever see them advance anything positive about African civ after a black introduces it on their boards?
And our friendly whites, what do they do? Are they vociferous in countering their fellow whites of bad intentions? Why aren't they the leading vanguard against the racist whites who post here?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by adrianne: simple girl you have to explain why the first egyptians looked like the guys below
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
This isn't our home turf. Never has been (we've simply always been numerically superior). It's just too bad that ESR never got the attention it deserved and I admit to being part of the blame for not posting there that much.
Maybe we can give it another shot in the near future. Setting something up with our own web host/URL while developing some kind of strategy to attract membership beforehand may prove more productive.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Not only do they show up with their ridiculous claims they dominate the board and dictate its direction and some of you engage the worst of them as if they were friends.
But what do we find on the white boards? Control. Strict control. You don't stand a chance on any of their boards because they will not tolerate you. They will ban you and in most cases will delete, edit, or misrepresent whatever you post there. They will not allow themselves to stagnate and repeat the same counter material year in and year out. No, they will expand and build on all their foregoings coming up with something new.
Blacks will never learn there is a clash of races and whites are intent on winning and judging by how whites here whose agenda is obviously racist are tolerated and reached out to here, they will win even on the black's "home" turf. Why we even have blacks spreading info on Euro culture here after the enemy whites introduce it. Ever see that happen on a white board? Ever see them advance anything positive about African civ after a black introduces it on their boards?
And our friendly whites, what do they do? Are they vociferous in countering their fellow whites of bad intentions? Why aren't they the leading vanguard against the racist whites who post here?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
alTakruri stop yopur cryin Sundjata's right it's about ownership. The simple fact is that ESR is black owned and Egyptsearch is not
But Instead of using our time to post and promote a properly moderated black owned forum like ESR we negroes prefer to post at Egyptsearch. Likewise instead of using more of his time to post on ESR Charlie Bass prefers to post on arthroscope.
WE ARE THE PROBLEM
on the other hand who can deny the delight of globalblacksupremacy being able to make numerous posts in stormfront with a name like that? Imagine a poster with the name "white supremacy" posting in ESR. We not having it Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
It has been said that ausar's moderation is preferable over alTurkuri because alTukruri even annoys black folk with his holier than thou attitude. I don't know if this is actually true but it has been rumored to be.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Ah STFU you white b|tch in black-face!
I disagree with Takruri. This was never a 'black' forum to begin with and there are those of us who are non-black such as Brandon and myself who accept the FACTUAL REALITY of Egypt's black African identity. I DO agree though that the main problem with this forum is loss of control to the idiotic trolls whereas their own Euronut dominions have totalitarian reign and allow no dissident speech that undermines them! Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz':
quote:This is evidence of a real tallying system and not just may have been. This is much older than your wishbone. Your wishbone is not the oldest known object to contain logical carvings if that is even what they really are in the first place.
According to my citation- yes it is. On the other hand I never claimed it was the oldest mathematical artifact. That would be the Lebombo bone of Swaziland ALSO IN AFRICA that dates to 35,000b.c 5,000 years older than your European bone LMAO!
I again must reiterate that your citation is completely irrelevant to the fact that IN AFRICA Barbed bone points exist as an AFRICAN TRADITION that continues from south Africa, West Africa, Central Africa, the Sahel and the Nile Valley. And that even the Ishango bone is apart of this African tradition which may signify the spread of the counting system to Egypt thereby being the basis of Egyptian mathematics.
LMAO The Simpleton's dumbass is debunked yet again!
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz':
More on pottery:
The Wavy Line and the Dotted Wavy Line Pottery in the Prehistory of the Central Nile and the Sahara-Sahel Belt
Abbas S. Mohammed-Ali1, and Abdel-Rahim M. Khabir
African Archaeological Review, Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2003
From the chronological standpoint, it seems that the overall radiometric dates of the early ceramics from the Central Nile Valley are generally in accordance with their counterpart in the Sahara-Sahel Belt, dated to the tenth–eighth millennium bp. (eighth–sixth millenium BC). These dates may suggest that pottery developed locally from early prototypes as early as 10,000 bp. The origin(s) of the wavy line and dotted wavy line ceramics is much more complex than was once thought. The reason(s) behind the invention of pottery lies mainly in the need for containers that permit wider uses of food techniques than is otherwise possible, as well as other different sets of advantages for the general mode of living (Arnold, 1985, pp. 127–166). The invention of pottery and harpoons are critical events in the process that led to the expansion of aquatic resource exploitation, as is manifested in the Nile Valley (see supra; Haaland, 1995; Sutton, 1974, pp. 529–531). Also, the Sahara-Sahel Belt might have only opened up for the kind of resource exploitation that necessitates the invention of ceramics by the early Holocene (see Clark, 1980; Hassan, 1986).
Where is the European pottery that antedates this, Simpleton? LOL Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Ah STFU you white b|tch in black-face!
I disagree with Takruri. This was never a 'black' forum to begin with and there are those of us who are non-black such as Brandon and myself who accept the FACTUAL REALITY of Egypt's black African identity. I DO agree though that the main problem with this forum is loss of control to the idiotic trolls whereas their own Euronut dominions have totalitarian reign and allow no dissident speech that undermines them!
You are wrong. This was once a black site and then it got diluted by foreigners.
The exact same thing caused the downfall of ancient Egypt.
Even though you and Brandon have your mind right I just don't think that we can afford to have non-blacks on the ESR.
We need one site that's pure and it already exists. It just needs tweaking and re-energizing. We will just have to sacrifice the sympathizers, sorry. What I recommend for the ESR is that each member would have to prove they are black by submitting photos and verifiable identification in order to be allowed to post. This would be checked out and the information kept private with an administrator. We need at least one ancient Egypt site to be black owned and people of African descent only. If white people can do this and take over then we should be able to do it.
The second thing I recommend is a policy to discourage brain drain from the ESR. This means members must pledge no posting on Egyptsearch or other non-black Egyptian history or anthropology sites. That may seem strict but this is why ESR is not more dynamic. The finest minds like to come here and fool around with the white people more than post on the ESR.
lioness productions blacks only from now on
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Ah STFU you white b|tch in black-face!
I disagree with Takruri. This was never a 'black' forum to begin with and there are those of us who are non-black such as Brandon and myself who accept the FACTUAL REALITY of Egypt's black African identity. I DO agree though that the main problem with this forum is loss of control to the idiotic trolls whereas their own Euronut dominions have totalitarian reign and allow no dissident speech that undermines them!
You are wrong. This was once a black site and then it got diluted by foreigners.
The exact same thing caused the downfall of ancient Egypt.
Even though you and Brandon have your mind right I just don't think that we can afford to have non-blacks on the ESR.
We need one site that's pure and it already exists. It just needs tweaking and re-energizing. We will just have to sacrifice the sympathizers, sorry. What I recommend for the ESR is that each member would have to prove they are black by submitting photos and verifiable identification in order to be allowed to post. This would be checked out and the information kept private with an administrator. We need at least one ancient Egypt site to be black owned and people of African descent only. If white people can do this and take over then we should be able to do it.
The second thing I recommend is a policy to discourage brain drain from the ESR. This means members must pledge no posting on Egyptsearch or other non-black Egyptian history or anthropology sites. That may seem strict but this is why ESR is not more dynamic. The finest minds like to come here and fool around with the white people more than post on the ESR.
lioness productions blacks only from now on
I believe everyone is welcome. I like the fact that the Egypt forum is dedicated solely to Egypt. This site, on the other hand, is dynamic because everything is open to discussion here.
This site is the way it has always been. It is a wide open site where you can talk about anything related to African people.
You may not agree with everything written here but it is wide open. If people have problems with trolls they shouldn't feed 'em.
.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
More on pottery:
The Wavy Line and the Dotted Wavy Line Pottery in the Prehistory of the Central Nile and the Sahara-Sahel Belt
Abbas S. Mohammed-Ali1, and Abdel-Rahim M. Khabir
African Archaeological Review, Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2003
From the chronological standpoint, it seems that the overall radiometric dates of the early ceramics from the Central Nile Valley are generally in accordance with their counterpart in the Sahara-Sahel Belt, dated to the tenth–eighth millennium bp. (eighth–sixth millenium BC). These dates may suggest that pottery developed locally from early prototypes as early as 10,000 bp. The origin(s) of the wavy line and dotted wavy line ceramics is much more complex than was once thought. The reason(s) behind the invention of pottery lies mainly in the need for containers that permit wider uses of food techniques than is otherwise possible, as well as other different sets of advantages for the general mode of living (Arnold, 1985, pp. 127–166). The invention of pottery and harpoons are critical events in the process that led to the expansion of aquatic resource exploitation, as is manifested in the Nile Valley (see supra; Haaland, 1995; Sutton, 1974, pp. 529–531). Also, the Sahara-Sahel Belt might have only opened up for the kind of resource exploitation that necessitates the invention of ceramics by the early Holocene (see Clark, 1980; Hassan, 1986).
Where is the European pottery that antedates this, Simpleton? LOL [/QB][/QUOTE]
What are you trying to say thimble head? That pottery was invented in Egypt and diffused north to Europe? Or that ceramics was invented in Egypt and moved north to Europe? Your source isn't clear on what it is referring to and when.
quote:These dates may suggest that pottery developed locally from early prototypes as early as 10,000 bp.
What are the prototypes referred to? Is it ceramics or actual pottery? Just because pottery may have been in use, doesn't mean it would exclude a possibility of outside influence.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Climate-Controlled Holocene Occupation in the Sahara: Motor of Africa’s Evolution
Rudolph Kuper and Stefan Kropelin*
quote:During the early Holocene humid optimum, the southern Sahara and the Nile valley apparently were too moist and hazardous for appreciable human occupation. (C) After 7000 B.C.E., human settlement became well established all over the Eastern Sahara, fostering the development of cattle pastoralism. (D) Retreating monsoonal rains caused the onset of desiccation of the Egyptian Sahara at 5300 B.C.E. Prehistoric populations were forced to the Nile valley or ecological refuges and forced to exodus into the Sudanese Sahara where rainfall and surface water were still sufficient. The return of full desert conditions all over Egypt at about 3500 B.C.E. **coincided with the initial stages of pharaonic civilization in the Nile valley**.
The Wavy Line and the Dotted Wavy Line Pottery in the Prehistory of the Central Nile and the Sahara-Sahel Belt
Abbas S. Mohammed-Ali1; and Abdel-Rahim M.Khabir
quote:The utilization of local raw materials for ceramics (matrix and temper) and lithic tools strengthens the possibility of cultural heterogeneity of the Mesolithic and Neolithic components along the Nile Valley and the Sahara-Sahel Belt during the early Holocene. The apparent similarities between the wavy line and the dotted wavy line components of the Central Nile Valley and the Sahara-Sahel Belt, coupled with the disparate nature of their lithic tool types and technologies, have been considered a sign of **diffusion of ideas to autonomous groups of people** (Hays, 1974; Renfrew, 1969). Despite the **broadly similar way of life and the general resemblance in subsistence economy shared by the wavy line and dotted wavy line pottery makers** and/or owners, these decorations are not always coincident in either space or time, whether in the Central Nile Valley or the Sahara-Sahel Belt.
....Much earlier than the Middle East
quote:What are the prototypes referred to? Is it ceramics or actual pottery? Just because pottery may have been in use, doesn't mean it would exclude a possibility of outside influence.
Read the article. Outside influence is not even suggested based on the early dates and the similarity of Saharan/Nile Valley Pottery styles. Even earlier than that of the Middle East!
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
A bull-horned goddess from the Cucuteni culture Ukraine:
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Okay and what the hell does this have to do with Egypt??
Are you saying that somehow has any relation to this?
LOL Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Simple are Ukrainians responsible for the rise of Kemitian culture and civilization??
All the above proves is that Ukrainians had a cow but prove the Ukrainians had
The Ws Scepter the white crown the red crown or had the frightful precursor to the beast Ammit the devourer All radiating from here^ soo how far is the Ukraine from Kemet again???
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: A bull-horned goddess from the Cucuteni culture Ukraine:
^Possibly a connection with Hathor the horned Egyptian goddess.
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
Animal headed scepters were fairly common in the neolithic of southeastern Europe. Here's a horses head on the end of a scepter:
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
So? Do you realize how many cultures evolve similar objects independently of each other? Unless you have actual evidence supporting your claims then you're just making stuff up. Just name one scholar who is enforcing the claims you're making. Of course there are none because there is no evidence!
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': So? Do you realize how many cultures evolve similar objects independently of each other? Unless you have actual evidence supporting your claims then you're just making stuff up. Just name one scholar who is enforcing the claims you're making. Of course there are none because there is no evidence!
Some of what you are saying is true. Two cultures can develop similar objects without knowledge of each other. On the other hand the Gebel el-Arak knife from Egypt shows the God El in Mesopotamian clothing. There is also the Narmer palette and Uruk cylinder seal which have serpopards in the same configuration, necks entwined with each other heads facing each other. Which came first, who influenced who, and the relevance of these things is uncertain. But there is some connection there apart from other cases where two cultures develop similar motifs independently. It doesn't apply in these two cases. Clearly in these cases the objects come out of a knowledge of the other culture.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:On the other hand the Gebel el-Arak knife from Egypt shows the God El in Mesopotamian clothing. There is also the Narmer palette and Uruk cylinder seal which have serpopards in the same configuration, necks entwined with each other heads facing each other. Which came first, who influenced who, and the relevance of these things is uncertain. But there is some connection there apart from other cases where two cultures develop similar motifs independently. It doesn't apply in these two cases. Clearly in these cases the objects come out of a knowledge of the other culture.
I actually like talking to you when you don't sound so retarded.
Some of what you say is also true. However, I was referring specifically to Simple Girl's comparison of Egypt to southeastern Europe. She is trying to literally force a connection between the two when there is hardly a connection to be made at all.
In regards to Mesopotamian influence, the Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of ancient Egypt offers insight:
quote:It is often assumed that Egyptian writing was invented under a stimulus of the Mesopotamian writing system, developed in the late fourth millennium BC, that might have come at the time of the short-lived Uruk Culture expansion into Syria. A variety of artistic and architectural evidence for contact between Mesopotamia and late Predynastic Egypt has been found, but none of it can be dated precisely in relation to Tomb U-j. Moreover, the Egyptian writing system is different from the Mesopotamian and must have been developed independently. The possibility of “stimulus diffusion” from Mesopotamia remains, but ***the influence cannot have gone beyond the transmission of an idea.*** A second point of contrast with Mesopotamia is in uses of writing. The earliest Egyptian writing consists of inscribed tags, ink notations on pottery, again principally from the royal cemetery at Abydos, and hieroglyphs incorporated into artistic compositions, of which the chief clear examples are such pieces as the Narmer Palette, which is probably more than a century later than Tomb U-j. Thus, while administrative uses of writing appear to have come at the beginning—examples from the Abydos tombs include such notations as “produce of Lower Egypt”—the system was integrated fully into pictorial representation. An intermediate, emblematic mode of representation in which symbols, including hieroglyphs, were shown in action also evolved before the 1st Dynasty. These three modes together formed a powerful artistic complex that endured as
--Edited by Kathryn A. Bard
So we can rule out Mesopotamia giving Egypt hieroglyphics and any possible influence "did not go beyond the transmission of an idea".
quote:who influenced who
Good question.
Ideas travel. This doesn't mean that the ideas Mesopotamia offered Egypt helped the rise of Egyptian civilization
"He [Gunther Dreyer] concluded his presentation by noting similarities between specific Egyptian and Mesopotamian objects and suggesting that perhaps there is an initial influence of Egyptian writing on Mesopotamia because there are signs on Mesopotamian objects that are only "readable" from the standpoint of the Egyptian language, but not the Mesopotamian language." - Mario Beatty, "Too Much Stuff": Recent Finds in Predynastic Egypt"
The real contributions that gave rise to Egypt were Saharan's and Sudanese:
"The communities using the cemeteries described above were almost the last dwellers of the dying savanna, which is today’s desert. The worsening drought soon forced them to migrate toward the Nile Valley, where they undoubtedly brought their culture, organizational system and beliefs contributing to the birth of ancient Egyptian civilization."--Michal Kobusiewicz et al.
quote:The real contributions that gave rise to Egypt were Saharan's and Sudanese:
"The communities using the cemeteries described above were almost the last dwellers of the dying savanna, which is today’s desert. The worsening drought soon forced them to migrate toward the Nile Valley, where they undoubtedly brought their culture, organizational system and beliefs contributing to the birth of ancient Egyptian civilization.
That doesn't necessarily have to be true. Just because people may have occupied areas around the Nile, it doesn't mean they contributed greatly to the rise of Egypt. Look at the North American Indians. Did they contribute greatly to the rise of civilization in present day North America?
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:That doesn't necessarily have to be true. Just because people may have occupied areas around the Nile, it doesn't mean they contributed greatly to the rise of Egypt. Look at the North American Indians. Did they contribute greatly to the rise of civilization in present day North America?
What the heck are you talking about? It's not simply because they live near Egypt, it's because we have tons of archaeological evidence to support it. I don't give a damn about your opinion. What I posted is from a recent article wherein the authors base their statements on recent findings from Egypt and Sudan.
So yes it IS true. You may not like it but it's still true. I have no idea for the life of me why you are so eager to look for nonexistent connections all the way from Europe when the archaeological evidence clearly does not support anything you have to say on the matter. My advice to you: stop being so biased. You're letting your want for Egypt to have been a southern European/Middle Eastern derivative filled with mythical "Caucasoids" to cloud your interpretation of the actual data.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
That^ is not
This^ notice the distinctive hooves at the bottom Was scepters were used as symbols of power or dominion, and were associated with the gods (such as Set or Anubis[1]) as well as with the pharaoh. Was scepters also represent the typhonic beast or Set-animal (the mascot of the Egyptian god Set). In later use, it was a symbol of control over the force of chaos that Set represented. In a funerary context the was-sceptre was responsible for the well-being of the deceased, and was thus sometimes included in the tomb equipment or in the decoration of the tomb or coffin. The sceptre is also considered an amulet. The Egyptians perceived the sky as being supported on four pillars, which could have the shape of was-sceptres. The 'was'-sceptre is also the symbol of the fourth Upper Egyptian nome, the nome of Thebes ( called 'Waset' in Egyptian) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Was
The fact is Simple you are trying to force a connect as pointed out to by Calabooz above with East Europeans and your examples of America and native American only works when there was actually real mass sustained migration prompting culture shift including language now prove that Ukrainians spoke any form of African languages.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ This is retarded. Despite anything the Simpleton says NO scholar has ever suggested Egyptian culture to be derived from anything other than the Sahara and Sudan-- all within AFRICA.
She keeps pointing to similarities that are obviously totally out of context archaeologically and otherwise.
We've already proven she lost her argument pages ago. What's the point??
Posted by A Simple Girl (Member # 18316) on :
quote:What the heck are you talking about? It's not simply because they live near Egypt, it's because we have tons of archaeological evidence to support it. I don't give a damn about your opinion. What I posted is from a recent article wherein the authors base their statements on recent findings from Egypt and Sudan.
No where does your source give any indication at all that these people could have contributed anything greatly to the rise of Egyptian civilization.
Also an interesting piece from your source states that:
quote:From a physical anthropological viewpoint, the population sample exhibits evidence of North African and sub-Saharan admixture.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Simple first off you didn't even bother reading the fkin link did you Reading actually means READING AND NEXT COME THE UNDERSTANDING Not SKIMMING and then making up SH!!!T based on half azzed understanding, and wishful thinking.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simpleton: No where does your source give any indication at all that these people could have contributed anything greatly to the rise of Egyptian civilization.
You obviously didn't read the whole paper, because it explained how this culture was among the earliest evidences of systemic organization and leadership, possibly kingship which directed the building of Nabta megaliths and tombs!
You say these people right there in the Nile Valley could not have contributed to Egypt but Ukrainians did?!! LMAO
Also an interesting piece from your source states that:
quote:From a physical anthropological viewpoint, the population sample exhibits evidence of North African and sub-Saharan admixture.
Yes. Interesting in that it makes no sense since this culture happened during a time when there was NO Sahara!
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
WTF 0_0
Simple Girl, if you don`t want to bother comprehending the info then that's your problem.
And what do you take "mixture of North and sub-Saharan features" to mean exactly? The only reason they say that is because Joel Irish is an author and he is probably referring to mass reduced teeth that he associates with north Africans and Europeans. Biologically these people had facial characteristics as seen in Saharan and southern Africans. But to say mixture of sub-Saharan and North African features indicates that North Africans couldn't have sub-Saharan features and vice versa which isn't true since Northeast Africans since the Holocene have had sub-Saharan morphological affinities
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Man...This simple person is a joke.
She believes people from Ukraine helped build Egypt yet people in Egypts Sahara region did not.
Excuse me while I laugh..Bahahahahahhah.
How sad do you have to be to claim something like what Simple Girl stated. She truly is a sad case and I feel sorry for her.
Peace
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Nabta Playa Stone Circle
Nabta Playa is an internally drained basin that served as an important ceremonial center for nomadic tribes during the early part of 9560 BC. Located 62 miles west of Abu Simbel some 60 miles west of the Nile near the Egyptian-Sudanese border. Nabta contains a number of standing and toppled megaliths. They include flat, tomb-like stone structures and a small stone circle that predates Stonehenge (2600 B.C.), and other similar prehistoric sites by 1000's of years. Research suggests that it may have been a prehistoric "calendar" marking the summer solstice.
a large smoothly carved Cow megalith was uncovered under over 7 meters of sand. The bedrock beneath was also shaped, and the megaliths circles placed on top of the buried structures.
High level of organization
Archaeological discoveries reveal that these prehistoric peoples led livelihoods seemingly at a higher level of organization than their contemporaries who lived closer to the Nile Valley:. The people of Nabta Playa had:
* above-ground and below-ground stone construction, * villages designed in pre-planned arrangements, and * deep wells that held water throughout the year.
Findings also indicate that the region was occupied only seasonally, most likely only in the summer period, when the local lake filled with water for grazing cattle. Analysis of human remains suggests that these people migrated from sub-Saharan Africa. [edit] Religious ties to ancient Egypt
By the 6th millennium BC, evidence of a prehistoric religion or cult appears, with a number of sacrificed cattle buried in stone-roofed chambers lined with clay.[2] It has been suggested that the associated cattle cult indicated in Nabta Playa marks an early evolution of Ancient Egypt's Hathor cult. For example, Hathor was worshipped as a nighttime protector in desert regions (see Serabit el-Khadim). To directly quote professors Wendorf and Schild:
... there are many aspects of political and ceremonial life in the Predynastic and Old Kingdom that reflects a strong impact from Saharan cattle pastoralists...
Nevertheless, though the religious practices of the region involving cattle suggest ties to Ancient Egypt, Egyptologist Mark Lehner cautions:
It makes sense, but not in a facile, direct way. You can't go straight from these megaliths to the pyramid of Djoser.
Circular stone structure at Nabta
Other subterranean complexes are also found in Nabta Playa, one of which included evidence of perhaps an early Egyptian attempt at sculpture.
___________________________________________
If people in the South were the ancestors of the Egyptians why did they war with them and why did not say, apart from the vague Prophesy of Nefertiti, emphatically and repeatedly that these were their ancestors? Why did they depict them differently and label them "foreigners" ? Why did the pyramids of Meroe came after the Egyptians stopped building pyramids?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Again you make the mistake of stereotyping. The Egyptians claim ancestry from *SOME* southerners, mainly the Setjau and probably Wawat peoples but not others like the Kushites. Why they waged war against other southerners is like asking why Greeks waged war against northerners like the Illyrians, Thracians, or even the Macedonians who there seems to be a close relation and even shared ancestry. Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Hahaha! lioness you are such a weirdo
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
O'Connor (Ancient Nubia: Egypt's Rival in Africa) pointed out, in the section cited by Wegner, about the Qustul burner:
"Williams' theory is exciting, but the evidence for it is not convincing. At the time his theory was published, the Qustul 'royal' tombs antedated the earliest royal tombs of Egypt, of Nakada phase IIIb. But recently an Abydos royal tomb of IIIA has been found [Tomb of U-j - KGG], so Qustul loses chronological primacy.
A stone incense burner [the Qustul burner - KGG] is of special importance. It was carved with motifs Egyptian in style and content (including a depiction of a pharaoh in a traditional crown), yet incense burners are typical of Nubia, not Egypt. Surely it, and therefore its pharaonic iconography, are Nubian in origin, Williams argued. But it is more plausible (because of the thoroughly A-Group or Nubian character of the Qustul cemetery) to suggest that the incense burner was made in Egypt, or decorated by Egyptian artisans, as a special gift for the ruler of Qustul of the day.
The real importance of the Qustul cemetery is that the size and richness of the graves indicate rulers (possibly 3 to 8; Williams suggests 10-12) were buried there, together with their high-status kinfolk. Moreover, because no other Terminal A-Group cemetery approached the importance of the Qustul cemetery, its occupants likely controlled all of Lower Nubia, which would have formed a unitary political unit. In geographical and population size, this entity would have been a complex chiefdom and not a state, but its rulers were sufficiently high in status to be called 'kings.'
Early in the Egyptian 1st Dynasty, the A-Group ended and the Nubians were driven from Lower Nubia, not to return for about 6 centuries. This can only have been due to organized Egyptian aggression, intended to place this trade corridor, and the source of valuable stones and gold (in flanking deserts), under direct Egyptian control.
The Egyptians not only prevented Nubian resettlement; early in the 4th Dynasty (ca. 2500 BC) they founded in Lower Nubia several strategically placed towns, such as Buhen. These improved Egypt's access to Lower Nubian mineral sources and perhaps reflect an increased volume of trade with Upper Nubia. However, some 160 years later Egypt abandoned these towns, and Nubians began to resettle Lower Nubia..." (O'Connor 1993: 20-23)
O'Connor, D. 1993. _Ancient Nubia: Egypt's Rival in Africa_. Philadelphia: University Museum/ Univ. of Pennsylvania.
Samuel Mark, in his _From Egypt to Mesopotamia: A Study of Predynastic Trade Routes_ (cited above), also pointed out the following problems with Williams' chronology of the Qustul burner as preceding development of the Egyptian culture in Egypt:
a) The L 24 tomb in which the Qustul burner was found was dated by Williams to Naqada IIIa is based upon fragments of pots, which is assigned that date by Williams due to a questionable dating of a find of a knife in a tomb at Azor in Palestine. When based upon the styling of the jugs and pots alone, the date of the burner is set to 3100 BCE [First Dynasty].
b) Within the L 24 tomb, 3 types of pot stands were found. Williams proposes a Naqada IIIa dating, although the archaeological review on the items shows these to be of Dynasty I design.
c) A shallow bowl fragment and a portion of a cylinder jar with wavy lines were also found in L 24. Williams argues again for a Naqada IIIa dating for these items, but the shallow stone bowl design was produced only in the First Dynasty, as well as the cylinder jar (although a possible earlier development of the cylinder jar is noted).
d) The "linchpin" to Williams' argument for an earlier dating, however, for the burner and all L 24 items requires acceptance of a theory for an earlier dating of a mummified arm recovered from the tomb of Djer [third pharaoh of the First Dynasty], proposing that this arm was stolen from a Naqada IIIa tomb and moved to Djer's tomb in Abydos. He bases this conjecture on one bracelet found on the arm, decorated with serekhs and a falcon perched on top (which is suggested as a part of the possible reconstruction of the Qustul burner). Based upon his review of the style, he proposes that this motif was no longer used by Djer's time and must have come from an earlier tomb. [Petrie, contra, dates the same bracelet to early in the reign of Djer, based upon evidence discussed below].
However, Williams does not take into account that _other items found in Djer's tomb_ also contained plaques of similar design made of lapis lazuli and ivory which parallel the gold and turquoise plaques found on the bracelet, and are, again, datable to the First Dynasty.
This is also compounded by the fact that the arm was found wrapped in linen, which was part of the mummification process of the First Dynasty, but was not part of the Naqada IIIa period.
Finally, there exists iconography in Egypt for the serekh, falcon, and other images found on the Qustul burner, which predate the Naqada IIIa period. Mark sums up these points by saying
"According to the archaeological evidence from L 24, then, it seems that the tomb should be dated to the early First Dynasty, as should the Qustul burner. Therefore, based upon the evidence, the Nubian incense burners, the Scorpion macehead, and the Metropolitan Museum [Gebel el Arak] knife handle all date to the unification of Egypt or later." [pp. 112-115].
IOW, the influence of Egypt is TO the Qustul burner as a matter of a traded item, and NOT as evidence of an origin point, in Mark's view.
Archaeologically, it has been shown that social stratification necessary to create a "kingship" concept was not present in ancient Nubian culture until after the beginning of the dynastic period, by which time the kingship system was well-established.* Hoffman in his _Egypt Before the Pharaohs_, (New York, 1979) presented the archaeological evidence [ as evidenced by the creation of elite tombs of greater size and valuables] that shows the influence went from Egypt to Nubia in the concept of the "divine king" as opposed to your statement. He notes:
"In Lower Nubia [/Sudan], however, this social order did not emerge. The society remained more or less egalitarian until the impact of Egypt was felt directly. For example, Reisner's successor in Nubia, C.M. Firth, excavated what appears to be the earliest example of a 'chiefly' grave in Lower Nubia in the late Gerzean[/Naqada II] or Protodynastic times (ca 3300-3100 BC). At Cemetery 137 Firth discovered a group of rectangular graves roofed by large sandstone slabs. Many appear to have served as family tombs, since a number of burials were found inside. One grave in particular was comparatively rich, boasting many heavy copper axes, chisels, and bar ingots; several stone vases, a dipper of banded slate, a lion's head of rose quartz, covered with green faience glaze, a mica mirror, two maces with gold-plated handles and two large bird-shaped palettes (Firth, 1927: 206 and Trigger, 1965:75). Judging from the style of animals on one of the mace handles and the round-toppoed variety of ther adz, the grave can be dated to the early part of the First Dynasty -- the very moment when Egypt was undergoing unification. But compared to contemporary graves in Egypt, this tomb is poor indeed and a late expression of emerging social-economic class distinctions; and there is clearly an attempt to import the ritual paraphernalia already associated with emergent Egyptian kingship (e.g., the maceheads and palette)." [Hoffman, 1979: 260]
Hoffman cites Trigger as to why this social stratification was limited in lower Nubia even in Protodynastic times, and can be summarized as follows:
a) no opportunities for the land in Lower Nubia to acquire any special value which would develop a public authority and the state;
b) At most Nubian chieftains appeared to have served as tribute/toll takers along the riverside, controlling the passage of trade up the Nile in regional fashion. While this may have placed them, by their wealth, at the apex of their immediate society, it was enough to support their immediate retainers, and not in a state or overall public authoritative function.
c) In other cases, Trigger believes the Nubian chieftain served as do their modern contemporaries, the village omdahs, as a "first among equals. In any case, the power which any of these chiefs was limited both in terms of area and authority."
["History and Settlement in Lower Nubia", Bruce Trigger, Yale University, 1965, Publications in Anthropology 69: 75]
-- Katherine Griffis-Greenberg, MA (Lon) Member, International Association of Egyptologists American Research Center in Egypt, ASOR, EES, SSEA
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Williams show Ta-Seti kings engaged in military campaigns in Upper Egypt and Libya. Williams states the following in regards to this:
At an A-Group storage cache at Siali, which lies north of Qutsul, is more proof of royalty. On a portion of a seal from this find is a man saluting a bow and a palace façade with the Horus-falcon. Williams states, “the obvious interpretation is that the man is saluting the name for Nubia - Ta-Seti, or 'Land of the Bow.'” This indicates that Ta-Seti was indeed an established kingship and state.
Other evidence pointed out by Williams show Ta-Seti kings engaged in military campaigns in Upper Egypt and Libya. Williams states the following in regards to this:
“the fallen enemy is labeled Ta-Shemau or Upper Egypt. Although the second group remaining on this bowl is fainter than the first, it can be seen that 'the enemy' has fallen on his back rather than forward. The long flat sign (land) extends from the enemy's knee and the unimpeded vertical identifying sign appears to make a kind of question above - this, in all probability, is the label Ta-Tjemeh or Libya”. http://www.playahata.com/pages/bhfigures/bhfigures24.html
Ta-Seti was a pre-unified pre Kemetian state able to take action in Upper Kemet and Libya and had direct trade with the Levant no amount of hand wringing is gonna chance that only further archeological discovery might.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Btw later Kemetic tombs such as this belonging to Zoser of the 3rd took it's architectural influence from the the Ta-Setians of old.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Lioness why did Briton went to war with America,or Spain went to war with Cuba or France went to war with Haiti??
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: ... ___________________________________________
If people in the South were the ancestors of the Egyptians why did they war with them and why did not say, apart from the vague Prophesy of Nefertiti, emphatically and repeatedly that these were their ancestors? Why did they depict them differently and label them "foreigners" ? Why did the pyramids of Meroe came after the Egyptians stopped building pyramids?
Chronologically
Antiquity
* 1193-1184 Trojan War * 1104-900 Dorian invasion * 743-724 First Messenian War * 710-650 Lelantine War * 685-668 Second Messenian War * 669-668 Sparta-Argos war * 595-585 First Sacred War * 560 Second Arcadian War * 548 Thirean War * 540 Battle of Alalia * 538-522 Polycrates wars * 500-499 Persian invasion of Naxos * 492-490 First Persian War * 482-479 Second Persian War * 460-445 First Peloponnesian War * 449-448 Second Sacred War * 440-439 Samian War * 431-404 Second Peloponnesian War * 395-387 Corinthian War * 390 Gallic invasion of Rome * 323-322 Lamian War * 267-261 Chremonidean War * 264-241 First Punic War * 229-228 Illyrian Wars * 220-219 Illyrian Wars * 218-201 Second Punic War * 214-205 First Macedonian War * 200-197 Second Macedonian War * 171-168 Third Macedonian War * 135-132 First Servile War * 113-101 Cimbrian War * 104-100 Second Servile War * 73-71 Third Servile War * 58-51 Gallic Wars
before 19th century
Only some wars are listed
*~600-793 Frisian-Frankish Wars * 1208-1227 Conquest of Estonia * 1209-1229 Albigensian Crusade * 1220-1264 The Age of the Sturlungs * 1282-1302 War of the Sicilian Vespers * 1296-1357 Wars of Scottish Independence * 1337-1453 Hundred Years' War * 1419-1434 Hussite Wars * 1455-1487 Wars of the Roses * 1522–1559 Habsburg-Valois Wars * 1558-1583 Livonian War * 1562-1598 French Wars of Religion * 1568–1648 Eighty Years' War * 1580-1583 War of the Portuguese Succession * 1585-1604 Anglo-Spanish War (1585) * 1594-1603 Nine Years War (Ireland) * 1618–1648 Thirty Years' War * 1640-1688 Portuguese Restoration War * 1642–1651 English Civil War * 1652-1674 Anglo-Dutch Wars * 1667–1668 War of Devolution * 1667–1683 Great Turkish War * 1672-1678 Franco-Dutch War * 1688-1697 War of the League of Augsburg * 1700–1721 Great Northern War * 1701–1713 War of the Spanish Succession * 1718-1720 War of the Quadruple Alliance * 1740–1748 War of the Austrian Succession * 1756–1763 Seven Years' War * 1789–1799 French Revolution
19th century
* 1792–1815 Napoleonic Wars * 1830 Ten Days Campaign (following the Belgian Revolt) * 1830-1831 Polish-Russian war * 1848-1849 Hungarian Revolution and War of Independence * 1848-1851 First Schleswig War * 1848–1866 Italian Independence wars
* 1848–1849 First Italian Independence War * 1859 Second Italian Independence War * 1866 Third Italian Independence War
* 1854–1856 Crimean War * 1864 Second Schleswig War * 1864 January Uprising * 1866 Austro-Prussian War * 1870–1871 Franco-Prussian War * 1877–1878 Russo–Turkish War * 1885 Serbo-Bulgarian War * 1893–1896 Cod War of 1893 * 1897 First Greco–Turkish War
1900-1945
* 1911-1912 Italo-Turkish War * 1912–1913 Balkan Wars o 1912-1913 First Balkan War o 1913 Second Balkan War * 1914–1918 World War I * 1916 Easter Rising * 1917–1921 Russian Civil War * 1918 Finnish Civil War * 1918 Polish-Czech war for Teschen Silesia * 1918–1919 Polish-Ukrainian War * 1918–1919 Greater Poland Uprising * 1918–1920 Estonian Liberation War * 1918-1920 Latvian War of Independence * 1919-1922 Greco-Turkish War * 1919-1923 Turkish War of Independence * 1919–1920 Czechoslovakia-Hungary War * 1919–1921 Silesian Uprisings * 1919–1921 Polish-Soviet War * 1919–1921 Anglo-Irish War * 1920 Polish-Lithuanian War * 1922–1923 Irish Civil War * 1936–1939 Spanish Civil War * 1939–1945 World War II o 1939-1940 Winter War o 1941-1944 Continuation War o 1944 Slovak National Uprising
5th century BC
* Roman-Etruscan Wars (ongoing)
4th century BC
* Roman-Etruscan Wars (ongoing) * First Samnite War (343-341 BC) * Latin War (340-338 BC) * Second Samnite War (326-304 BC)
3rd century BC
* Third Samnite War (298-290 BC) * Pyrrhic War (280-275 BC) * First Punic War (264-241 BC) * First Illyrian War (229-228 BC) * Second Illyrian War (220-219 BC) * Second Punic War (218-201 BC) * First Macedonian War (214-205 BC)
2nd century BC
* Second Macedonian War (200-196 BC) * Roman-Spartan War (195 BC) * Roman-Syrian War (192 BC - 188 BC) * Aetolian War (191-189 BC) * First Celtiberian War (181-179 BC) * Third Macedonian War (171-168 BC) * Lusitanian War (155-139 BC) * First Numantine War/Second Celtiberian War (154-151 BC) * Fourth Macedonian War (150-148 BC) * Third Punic War (149-146 BC) * Second Numantine War/Third Celtiberian War (143-133 BC) * First Servile War (135-132 BC) * Cimbrian War (113-101 BC) * Jugurthine War (112-105 BC) * Second Servile War (104-103 BC)
1st century BC
* Roman-Parthian Wars (ongoing) * Roman-Persian Wars (92 BC-627) * Social War (91-88 BC) * First Mithridatic War (90-85 BC) * First Marian-Sullan Civil War (88-87 BC) * Second Mithridatic War (83-82 BC) * Sertorius' revolt (83-81 BC) * Second Marian-Sullan Civil War (82-81 BC) * Third Mithridatic War (73-67 BC) * Third Servile War (73-71 BC) * Fourth Mithridatic War (66-63 BC) * Catilinarian Civil War (63-62 BC) * Gallic Wars (59-51 BC) * Caesar's civil war (49-45 BC) * Post-Caesarian civil war (44 BC) * Liberators' civil war (44-42 BC) * Sicilian revolt (44-36 BC) * Fulvia's civil war (Perusine War)(41-40 BC) * Final war of the Roman Republic (32-30 BC)
1st century
* Roman-Parthian Wars (ongoing) * Roman conquest of Britain (43) * First Jewish-Roman War (66-73) * Roman Civil War of 68-69 AD
2nd century
* Roman-Parthian Wars (ongoing) * First Dacian War (101-102) * Second Dacian War (105-106) * Kitos War (115-117) * Bar Kokhba's revolt (132-135) * Marcomannic Wars (166-180) * Roman Civil War of 193-197 AD
3rd century
* Roman-Parthian Wars (ongoing) * Roman Civil War of 238 AD * First Roman-Gothic War (249-252 AD) * Second Roman-Gothic War (253-268 AD) * Third Roman-Gothic War (270 AD)
4th century
* Civil Wars of the Tetrarchy (306-324 AD) * Roman Civil War of 350-351 AD * Roman Civil War of 360-361 AD * Fourth Roman-Gothic War (367-369 AD) * Gothic War (376-382) * Roman Civil War of 387-388 AD * Roman Civil War of 394 AD
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
___________________________________________
If people in the South were the ancestors of the Egyptians why did they war with them and why did not say, apart from the vague Prophesy of Nefertiti, emphatically and repeatedly that these were their ancestors? Why did they depict them differently and label them "foreigners" ? Why did the pyramids of Meroe came after the Egyptians stopped building pyramids?
Why .....why?
Wars were very common in ancient Greece. The Greeks lived in little city-states, each one like a small town in the United States today, with no more than about 100,000 people in each city-state. These city-states - Athens, Sparta, Corinth, Thebes - were always fighting each other over their borders. Often they would get together in leagues, a lot of city-states together, to fight as allies.
Sometimes other people invaded Greece, and then there would be wars to defend the city-states from the invaders. Sometimes the city-states fought together, and sometimes they didn't. Then again, sometimes the Greeks fought in other countries. They invaded other countries and took them over, or they raided other cities and took their stuff. And they often fought for pay, as mercenaries, when one foreign country fought another.
Although there were many wars in ancient Greece, most of them we don't know very much about. There are four main wars that we do know about, thanks to the writing of Homer and Herodotus and Thucydides and Arrian. These are the Trojan War (about 1250 BC, which could be a legend), the Persian Wars (490-480 BC) and the Peloponnesian War (441-404 BC) and the campaigns of Alexander the Great (331-323 BC). Then a little later, Greece was taken over by the Romans (146 BC), which we know about thanks to Polybius.
About 650 BC, Greek generals in various different city-states came up with a new way of fighting battles that gave Greek soldiers of the Archaic period a big advantage over the soldiers of other countries like Egypt or the Lydians. Instead of fighting all in a big crowd, running forward and just trying to get at the enemy any which way, Greek generals trained their soldiers to fight in lines, shoulder to shoulder. In this way each man (women were not allowed to be soldiers) was protected by the shield of the man standing next to him. When they all marched forward together, no enemy spears or arrows could get through their wall of shields.
A soldier who fought this way was called a hoplite (HOP-light), and a group of soldiers who fought this way were called a hoplite phalanx (FAY-lanks). A hoplite phalanx was a very strong military formation - but it only worked if all the soldiers were well trained, and if they were all brave enough to hold the line. If anyone started to run away, the whole line would fall apart, and it wouldn't work. Or, if some men went slower than others, or got out of step, it wouldn't work. So hoplites needed to spend a lot of time training, the way people today train to be in a marching band, for instance.
The Peloponnesian War began in 431 BC between the Athenian Empire (or The Delian League) and the Peloponnesian League which included Sparta and Corinth. The war was documented by Thucydides, an Athenian general and historian, in his work History of the Peloponnesian War. Most of the extant comedies of Aristophanes were written during this war, and poke fun at the generals and events. The war lasted 27 years, with a 6-year truce in the middle, and ended with Athens' surrender in 404 BC.
Causes of the war
According to Thucydides, the cause of the war was the "fear of the growth of the power of Athens" throughout the middle of the 5th century BC. After a coalition of Greek states thwarted an attempted invasion of the Greek mainland by the Persian empire, several of those states formed the Delian league in 478 BC in order to create and fund a standing navy which could be used against the Persians in areas under their control. Athens, the largest member of the league and the major Greek naval power, took the leadership of the league and appointed financial officers to oversee its treasury, which was located on the island of Delos, the League headquarters.
Over the following decades Athens, through its great influence in the League, was able to convert it into an Athenian empire. Though some members of the League embraced Athenian conversion, just as many were bitterly opposed to the governments imposed upon them. Gradually League funds went more directly into Athenian projects, rather than into defending the Aegean and Greece from Persia. Pericles had the League treasury relocated from its home on Delos to Athens, from whence most of the funds were used in vast building projects such as the Parthenon. As the member states of the League gradually lost their independence, it transformed into the Athenian Empire, whose growth Sparta watched with concern.
The League, based around the Ionian and Aegean Sea, was by its very nature reliant on ships for trade and to fend off pirates and Persian fleets. As the League developed into the Athenian Empire, member states gradually lost control of their own ships, which they gave to Athens annually as tribute. Consequently, Athens began to accumulate a huge navy. This increase in Athenian military power allowed it to challenge the Lacedaemonians (commonly known as the Spartans), who, as leaders of the Peloponnesian League, had long been the sole major military power in Greece.
The immediate cause of the war comprised several specific Athenian actions that affected Sparta's allies, notably Corinth. The Athenian navy intervened in a dispute between Corinth and Corcyra, preventing Corinth from invading Corcyra at the Battle of Sybota, and placed Potidaea, a Corinthian colony, under siege. The Athenian Empire also levied economic sanctions against Megara, an ally of Sparta. These sanctions, known as the Megarian decree, were largely ignored by Thucydides, but modern economic historians have noted that forbidding Megara to trade with the prosperous Athenian empire would have been disastrous for the Megarans. The decree was likely a greater catalyst for the war than Thucydides and other ancient authors admitted, more so than simple fear of Athenian power.
The "Archidamian War"Sparta and its allies, with the exception of Corinth, were almost exclusively land based powers, able to summon large land armies which were very nearly unbeatable (thanks to the legendary Spartan forces). The Athenian Empire, although based in the peninsula of Attica, spread out across the islands of the Aegean Sea; Athens drew its immense wealth from tribute paid from these islands. Thus, the two powers were relatively unable to fight decisive battles.
The Spartan strategy during the first war, known as the Archidamian War after its king Archidamus II, who invaded Attica, the land surrounding Athens. While this invasion deprived Athens of the productive land around their city, Athens itself was able to maintain access to the sea, and did not suffer much. Many of the citizens of Attica abandoned their farms and moved inside the Long Walls, which connected Athens to its port of Piraeus. The Spartans also occupied Attica for only a few weeks at a time; in the tradition of earlier hoplite warfare the soldiers expected to go home to participate in the harvest. Moreover, Spartan slaves, known as helots, needed to be kept under control, and could not be left unsupervised for long periods of time. The longest Spartan invasion, in 430 BC, lasted just forty days.
The Athenian strategy was initially guided by the strategos, or general, Pericles, who advised the Athenians to avoid open battle with the far more numerous and better trained Spartan hoplites, relying instead on the fleet. The Athenian fleet, which heavily outnumbered the Spartan, went on the offensive, winning victories off Naupactus (now known as "Návpaktos"). In 430, however, an outbreak of a plague (thought by some to be anthrax tramped up from the soil by the thousands of refugees from Attica hiding out in Athens during a siege by the invading Peloponnesians, although no authoritative consensus exists among modern medical authorities as to the correct diagnosis).
The plague ravaged the densely packed city, and in the long run, was a significant cause in the final defeat of Athens. The plague wiped out over 30,000 citizens, sailors and soldiers and even Pericles and his sons, roughly one quarter of the Athenian population. The plague was a disaster which they could never hope to recover from, as Athenian manpower was drastically reduced and even foreign mercenaries refused to hire themselves out to a city riddled with plague. The fear of plague was so widespread that the Spartan invasion of Attica was abandoned, as their troops were unwilling to be near the diseased enemy.
After the death of Pericles, the Athenians turned somewhat against Pericles's conservative, defensive strategy and to a more aggressive strategy of bringing the war to Sparta and its allies. Rising to particular importance in Athenian democracy at this time was Cleon, a leader of the hawkish elements of the Athenian democracy. Led militarily by a clever new general Demosthenes (not to be confused with the later Athenian orator Demosthenes), the Athenians managed some successes as they continued their naval raids on the Peloponnese, stretched their military activities into Boeotia and Aetolia, and began fortifying posts around the Peloponnese.
One of these posts was near Pylos on a tiny island called Sphacteria, where the course of the first war turned in Athens's favor. The post off Pylos struck Sparta where it was weakest: its dependence on the helots. Sparta was dependent on a class of slaves, known as helots, to tend the fields while its citizens trained to become such fine soldiers.
The helots made the Spartan system possible, but now the post off Pylos began attracting helot runaways. To lose these slaves was bad enough, but the fear of a general revolt of helots emboldened by the nearby Athenian presence drove the Spartans to action. Demosthenes, however, outmaneuvered the Spartans and trapped a group of Spartan soldiers on Sphacteria as he waited for them to surrender.
Weeks later, though, Demosthenes proved unable to finish off these irrepressible Spartans. After boasting that he could put an end to the affair in the Assembly, to most Athenians' surprise (and perhaps to his as well), the inexperienced Cleon won a great victory at the Battle of Pylos and the related Battle of Sphacteria in 425 BC. The Athenians captured between 300 and 400 Spartan hoplites. The hostages gave the Athenians a valuable bargaining chip.
The Battle of Sphacteria was more a humiliating surrender than a devastating one, however.After the battle, Brasidas, a Spartan general, raised an army of allies and helots and went for one of the sources of Athenian power, capturing the Athenian colony of Amphipolis, which happened to control several nearby silver mines which the Athenians were using to finance the war. In subsequent battles, both Brasidas and Cleon were killed (see Battle of Amphipolis). The Spartans and Athenians agreed to exchange the hostages for the towns captured by Brasidas, and signed a truce.
The Peace of Nicias
The Peace of Nicias lasted for some six years, but was a time of constant skirmishing in and around the Peloponnese. While the Spartans refrained from action themselves, some of their allies began to talk of revolt. They were supported in this by Argos, a powerful state within the Peloponnese that had remained independent of Lacedaemon. The Argives, allies of the Athenians, succeeded in forming a grand alliance against Sparta.
The Battle of Mantinea was the largest land battle fought within Greece during the Peloponnesian War. The Lacedaemonians, with their neighbors the Tegeans, faced the combined armies of Argos, Athens, Mantinea, and Arcadia. The Spartans, "utterly worsted with respect to skill but superior in point of courage", routed the alliance against them. While the battle was indecisive with respect to the Athenian-Peloponnesian conflict, Sparta succeeded in defeating Argos, thus ensuring their supremacy over the people of Peloponnese.
The Sicilian Expedition
In the 17th year of the war, word came to Athens that one of their distant allies in Sicily was under attack from Syracuse. The people of Syracuse were ethnically Dorian, while the Athenians, and their ally in Sicily, were Ionian. The Athenians felt obliged to assist their ally.
The Athenians people did not act solely from altruism: they held visions of conquering all of Sicily. Syracuse, the principal city of Sicily, was not much smaller than Athens, and conquering all of Sicily would have brought Athens an immense amount of resources. In the final stages of the preparations for departure the hermai (religious statues) were mutilated by unknown persons, and Alcibiades, the Athenian general in charge of the expedition, was charged with religious crimes. Fearing that he would be unjustly condemned, Alcibiades defected to Sparta and Nicias was placed in charge of the mission. After his defection, Alcibiades informed the Spartans that the Athenian planned to use Sicily as a springboard for the conquest of all of Italy, and to use the resources and soldiers from these new conquests to conquer all of the Peloponnese.
The Athenian force consisted of over 100 ships and some 5000 infantry. Upon landing in Sicily, several cities immediately joined the Athenian cause. Instead of attacking at once, Nicias procrastinated and the campaigning season of 415 BC ended with Syracuse scarcely damaged. With winter approaching, the Athenians were then forced to withdraw into their quarters, and they spent the winter gathering allies and preparing to destroy Syracuse. The delay allowed the Syracusans to send for help from Sparta, who sent their general Gylippus to Sicily with reinforcements. Upon arriving, he raised up a force from several Sicilian cities, and went to the relief of Syracuse. He took command of the Syracusan troops, and in a series of battles defeated the Athenian forces, and prevented them from investing the city.
The Second War
The Lacedaemonians were not content with simply sending aid to Sicily; they also resolved to take the war to the Athenians. On the advice of Alcibiades, they fortified Decelea, near Athens, and prevented the Athenians from making use of their land year round. The fortification of Decelea also prevented the shipment of supplies overland to Athens, and forced all supplies to be brought in by sea at increased expense.
The Corinthians, the Spartans, and others in the Peloponnesian League sent more reinforcements to Syracuse, in the hopes of driving off the Athenians; but instead of withdrawing, the Athenians sent another hundred ships and another 5000 troops to Sicily. Under Gylippus, the Syracusans and their allies were able to decisively beat the Athenians on land; and Gylippus encouraged the Syracusans to build a navy, which was able to defeat the Athenian fleet when they attempted to withdraw. The Athenian army, attempting to withdraw overland to other, more friendly Sicilian cities, was divided and defeated; the entire Athenian fleet was destroyed, and virtually the entire Athenian army was sold off into slavery.
Following the defeat of the Athenians in Sicily, it was widely believed that the end of the Athenian Empire was at hand. Her treasury was nearly empty, her docks were depleted, and the flower of her youth was dead or imprisoned in a foreign land. They underestimated the strength of the Athenian Empire, but the beginning of the end was indeed at hand.
Athens Recovers
Following the destruction of the Sicilian Expedition, Lacedaemon encouraged the revolt of Athens's tributary allies, and indeed, much of Ionia rose in revolt against Athens. The Syracusans sent their fleet to the Peloponnesians, and the Persians decided to support the Spartans with money and ships. Revolt and faction threatened in Athens itself.
The Athenians managed to survive for several reasons. First, their foes were severely lacking in vigor. Corinth and Syracuse were slow to bring their fleets into the Aegean, and Sparta's other allies were also slow to furnish troops or ships. The Ionian states that rebelled expected protection, and frequently rejoined the Athenian side. The Persians were slow to furnish promised funds and ships, frustrating battle plans. Perhaps most importantly, Spartan officers were not trained to be diplomats, and were somewhat politically insensitive.
At the start of the war, the Athenians had prudently put aside some money and 100 ships that were to be used only as a last resort.
These ships were now released, and served as the core of the Athenians' fleet throughout the rest of the war. An oligarchical revolution occurred in Athens, in which a group of 400 seized power. A peace with Sparta might have been possible, but the Athenian fleet, now based on the island of Samos, refused to accept the change. In 411 BC this fleet engaged the Spartans at the Battle of Syme. The fleet appointed Alcibiades their leader, and continued the war in Athens's name. Their opposition led to the reinstitution of a democratic government in Athens within two years.
Alcibiades, while condemned as a traitor, was a very strong personality. He prevented the Athenian fleet from attacking Athens; instead, he helped restore democracy by more subtle pressure. He also persuaded the Athenian fleet to attack the Spartans at the battle of Cyzicus in 410. In the battle, the Athenians obliterated the Spartan fleet, and succeeded in reestablishing the financial basis of the Athenian empire.
Between 410 and 406, Athens won victory after victory, and had recovered large portions of its empire. All of this was due, in no small part, to Alcibiades.
Lysander triumphs
Faction triumphed in Athens: following a minor Spartan victory by Lysander at the naval battle of Notium, Alcibiades was not reelected general. He retired, leaving Athens to the mercy of a new and cunning opponent. Lysander was a rare Spartan, comfortable at controlling ships, trustworthy abroad, and with good personal relationships with the Persians.
Opportunity cooperated with him. After a naval battle at Arginusae, in which the Athenians lost 12 ships, the Athenians were unable to rescue the crews due to bad weather. Blaming instead the generals, the Athenians executed all of their top naval commanders, and destroyed the morale of their navy.Lysander, seizing the opportunity, sailed at once to the Hellespont, the source of Athens's grain. Threatened with starvation, the Athenian fleet had no choice but to follow. By means of a ruse, Lysander tricked the Athenians into a total defeat at the battle of Aegospotami, destroying 168 ships; only 12 Athenian ships escaped, and several of these sailed to Cyprus, including the strategos Conon, who was not anxious to face the judgment of the Assembly.
Facing starvation and disease from the prolonged siege, Athens surrendered in 404 BC, and her allies soon surrendered as well. The democrats at Samos, loyal to the bitter last, held on slightly longer, and were allowed to flee with their lives. The surrender stripped Athens of her walls, her fleet, and all of her overseas possessions.
Effects
For a short period of time, Athens was ruled by the 'thirty oligarchs'. According to a foonote in The Trial and Death of Socrates translated by GMA Grube pg 35, the thirty oligarchs was "the harsh oligarchy that was set up after the final defeat of Athens by Sparta in the Peloponnesian War in 404 BC, and that ruled Athens for some nine months in 404-403 before the democracy was restored."
Although the power of Athens was broken, she made something of a recovery as a result of the Corinthian War and continued to play an active role in Greek politics. Sparta was in turn humbled by Thebes at the Battle of Leuctra in 371 BC, but it was all brought to an end a few years later by Philip II of Macedon.
The Corinthian War was an ancient conflict fought between 395 BC and 387 BC. In the course of it a number of Greek city states challenged the hegemony that Sparta had established following its victory in the Peloponnesian War.This war saw Sparta, already at war with Persia, facing an alliance between its traditional enemies Athens and Argos, and its former allies Thebes and Corinth. The war was largely a stalemate, focusing on the Spartan king Agesilaus's siege of Corinth, which lasted until 390 BC, when the city was relieved by the Athenian general Iphicrates. This victory gave the Persians, who had been bankrolling the allies, pause, leading to the Peace of Antalcidas of 387 BC, in which the Greek states recognized Persian hegemony over Greece, which in effect played out as Spartan domination.
The war continues to fascinate later generations, both because of the way it engulfed the Greek world, and because the insight Thucydides provides into the motivations of its participants is deeper than what is known about any other war in ancient times.
Reference: G.L. Cawkwell, Thucydides and the Peloponnesian War (1997 London)
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Okay, and as informative as all that is, it is a waste of bandspace. Asking why the Egyptians went to war with their neighbors is like asking why the Greeks went to war with theirs or the Chinese with theirs. It is stupid and a non-sequitor that has nothing to do with the fact that the Egyptians are equally as African as their southern neighbors.
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Williams show Ta-Seti kings engaged in military campaigns in Upper Egypt and Libya. Williams states the following in regards to this:
At an A-Group storage cache at Siali, which lies north of Qutsul, is more proof of royalty. On a portion of a seal from this find is a man saluting a bow and a palace façade with the Horus-falcon. Williams states, “the obvious interpretation is that the man is saluting the name for Nubia - Ta-Seti, or 'Land of the Bow.'” This indicates that Ta-Seti was indeed an established kingship and state.
Other evidence pointed out by Williams show Ta-Seti kings engaged in military campaigns in Upper Egypt and Libya. Williams states the following in regards to this:
“the fallen enemy is labeled Ta-Shemau or Upper Egypt. Although the second group remaining on this bowl is fainter than the first, it can be seen that 'the enemy' has fallen on his back rather than forward. The long flat sign (land) extends from the enemy's knee and the unimpeded vertical identifying sign appears to make a kind of question above - this, in all probability, is the label Ta-Tjemeh or Libya”. http://www.playahata.com/pages/bhfigures/bhfigures24.html
Ta-Seti was a pre-unified pre Kemetian state able to take action in Upper Kemet and Libya and had direct trade with the Levant no amount of hand wringing is gonna chance that only further archeological discovery might.
Very interesting Brada! I've known about Ta-Seti's conflicts with Ta Shemu but I didn't even know Ta-Tjemeh even existed at this time. If this is so, then Libya was obviously a major polity during this time as well.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Is it Ta-Tjemeh Libya or Ta Mehhu "lower" Egypt. Unfortunately Williams left out any image of bowl L19
No doubt Ta Mehhu was predominantly populated by the old Tehenu peoples who, like the TaSeti/Wawat, were conquered and forced into the empire or unified Egyptian state, but thi mention of Tjemeh far precedes and leaves a gap between it and the mention Weni makes of it locating it in the area of the up to 2nd cataract Nehesi.
EDIT: I looked at pl.88-92 of bowl L19 in Williams(1986) and though I can follow him on TaShemaw I just can't make out the images in the quote where he sees Ta-Tjemeh.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Maybe I'll start a new thread on African archaeology because this journal has great info and I doubt anybody really checks in on this thread anymore esp. since it's Simple Girls
Cultural Origins of the Egyptian Neolithic and Predynastic: An Evaluation of the Evidence from the Dakhleh Oasis (South Central Egypt) --Ashten R. Warfe
The African Archaeological Review, Vol. 20, No. 4 (Dec., 2003), pp. 175-202
quote:It is here that wheat, barley, goats, cat tle, and pigs were domesticated in some cases several thousands of years before these same species appeared in Lower Egypt (Mellaart, 1975, pp. 48-51). In more recent years, research in the Egyptian Western Desert indicates some of these species were domesticated here too, probably over a thousand years before they first appear in Lower Egypt (Gautier, 1987, p. 177; Stemler and Falk, 1980, p. 393; Wendorf and Schild, 1984, pp. 426-428). In addition, it was found that the desert groups possessed a greater number of material traits that compare with the assemblages of Lower Egypt than the Levant and Greater Mesopotamia. As such, the balance of scholarly opinion tends to favor the Western Desert as contributing the most toward the Neolithization of Egypt, at least in terms of cultural influence, whereas southwest Asia is seen more as the source for domesticates (Barich, 1993, p. 182; Canev?, 1992, p. 221; Hassan, 1986, pp. 70-71; Holmes, 1992, pp. 301 315; McDonald, 1991; Wendorf and Schild, 1984, pp. 426-428; Wenke, 1999, pp. 18-19; Wetterstrom, 1993).
1)The major cultural source for the Egyptian predynastic was the desert
2)Near Eastern influence was generally in the form of domesticates (not cattle, as cattle was independently domesticated in Africa)
And on another note, whatever Nile Valley inhabitants adopted from the Near East was into an indigenous foraging strategy.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
The Saharan Divide in the Nile Valley: The Evidence from Qasr Ibrim --John Alexander
The African Archaeological Review, Vol. 6 (1988), pp. 73-90
quote:Recent research at Qasr Ibrim in Egyptian Nubia shows that, during the last 3000 years, this hill-top site commanding a long stretch of the Nile in the First Cataract region was usually controlled by polities centered further to the south -Napatan, Meroitic and Christian. Even when controlled by northerners - Greek, Roman or Turkish - is was still a frontier post. It is suggested that this evidence, showing that the frontier between the states dominating the Lower and Middle Nile was located as far north as the First Cataract, helps explain the **lack of Mediterranean influence in the Upper Nile basin and, beyond**, in sub-Saharan Africa. The 'Nubian Corridor' was, in fact, blocked so far north that it is best described as a cul de sac.
Posted by melchior7 (Member # 18960) on :
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: It appears that the Near East had considerable influence. But I don't believe the predynastic Egyptians were necessarily from the near East, even though it shows that they had a definite connection with those people.
What ancient evidence is there to suggest any kind of foreign influence?
Well if you mean material influence, we know that some of the rudimentary requirements for civilizatin like agriculture, the domestication of certain animals, pottery etc had their origin in the Near East and spread from there into Egypt. Also some would argue that the Egyptian Pyramids have their precedent in the Mesopotamia Zigurrat and would say in fact that Djoser's' step-pyramid in Saqarra is considered by Egyptologist's to be the oldest pyramid in the world is actually a 7-stepped ziggurat. Additionally under the reign of the Hyksos several technological innovations were introduced to Egypt such as keels to stabilize sea going ships, use of the horse and chariots not to mention the wheel, the crossbow, introduction of bronze tools, the technique for making glass etc. Afrter of the era of the Hykos that Egypt had the wherewithal to oppose it's will on neiboring regions and build its empire.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: It appears that the Near East had considerable influence. But I don't believe the predynastic Egyptians were necessarily from the near East, even though it shows that they had a definite connection with those people.
What ancient evidence is there to suggest any kind of foreign influence?
Well if you mean material influence, we know that some of the rudimentary requirements for civilizatin like agriculture, the domestication of certain animals, pottery etc had their origin in the Near East and spread from there into Egypt. Also some would argue that the Egyptian Pyramids have their precedent in the Mesopotamia Zigurrat and would say in fact that Djoser's' step-pyramid in Saqarra is considered by Egyptologist's to be the oldest pyramid in the world is actually a 7-stepped ziggurat. Additionally under the reign of the Hyksos several technological innovations were introduced to Egypt such as keels to stabilize sea going ships, use of the horse and chariots not to mention the wheel, the crossbow, introduction of bronze tools, the technique for making glass etc. Afrter of the era of the Hykos that Egypt had the wherewithal to oppose it's will on neiboring regions and build its empire.
All of your arguments have been debunked major!
Posted by melchior7 (Member # 18960) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: It appears that the Near East had considerable influence. But I don't believe the predynastic Egyptians were necessarily from the near East, even though it shows that they had a definite connection with those people.
What ancient evidence is there to suggest any kind of foreign influence?
Well if you mean material influence, we know that some of the rudimentary requirements for civilizatin like agriculture, the domestication of certain animals, pottery etc had their origin in the Near East and spread from there into Egypt. Also some would argue that the Egyptian Pyramids have their precedent in the Mesopotamia Zigurrat and would say in fact that Djoser's' step-pyramid in Saqarra is considered by Egyptologist's to be the oldest pyramid in the world is actually a 7-stepped ziggurat. Additionally under the reign of the Hyksos several technological innovations were introduced to Egypt such as keels to stabilize sea going ships, use of the horse and chariots not to mention the wheel, the crossbow, introduction of bronze tools, the technique for making glass etc. Afrter of the era of the Hykos that Egypt had the wherewithal to oppose it's will on neiboring regions and build its empire.
All of your arguments have been debunked major!
Sure, if you say so...
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:Originally posted by A Simple Girl: It appears that the Near East had considerable influence. But I don't believe the predynastic Egyptians were necessarily from the near East, even though it shows that they had a definite connection with those people.
What ancient evidence is there to suggest any kind of foreign influence?
Well if you mean material influence, we know that some of the rudimentary requirements for civilizatin like agriculture, the domestication of certain animals, pottery etc had their origin in the Near East and spread from there into Egypt. Also some would argue that the Egyptian Pyramids have their precedent in the Mesopotamia Zigurrat and would say in fact that Djoser's' step-pyramid in Saqarra is considered by Egyptologist's to be the oldest pyramid in the world is actually a 7-stepped ziggurat. Additionally under the reign of the Hyksos several technological innovations were introduced to Egypt such as keels to stabilize sea going ships, use of the horse and chariots not to mention the wheel, the crossbow, introduction of bronze tools, the technique for making glass etc. Afrter of the era of the Hykos that Egypt had the wherewithal to oppose it's will on neiboring regions and build its empire.
All of your arguments have been debunked major!
Sure, if you say so...
Yup, majorly your crap has been debunked. But your senile brain can't comprehend the data. Your pottery argument, agriculture argument, and many animals are indigenous to Africa. Of course Northeast Africans had contact with people from abroad. Duh.
But generally, the culture and history is due to Africans.
Try to read some new data, dimwit nazi!
Posted by Ish Gebor AKA Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by adrianne: simple girl you have to explain why the first egyptians looked like the guys below
Hummm,.....
I have no idea, do you?lol Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: I actually have no interest in this thread, as this subject has been discussed before. But my interest was piqued by A Simple Girl's post; "Egypt's Earliest Agricultural Settlement Unearthed - 5,200 B.C. And the subsequent mentions of Mesopotamia.
This reminds me of the breathless exclamations of the Jews in Israel when they uncovered a 400,000 year old human tooth. "Modern man evolved in Israel."
It seems a simple notion to me, but it seems others have problems understanding it - so I will repeat it. "The earliest FOUND, has no necessary relationship with "THE FIRST" of THE EARLIEST".
That is why all available evidence must be combined, in order to have any hope of creating a reasonably accurate historical scenario.
Since the conversation revolves around possible cross-cultural influences; It would probably be good to know the distances between the relevant sites.
Cairo Egypt (ancient Memphis & Heliopolis) to Baghdad Iraq (ancient Sippar) 802 miles. Cairo Egypt to Ankara Turkey (ancient Hattusas) 698 miles. (Depending on urgency - humans can cover 30-50 miles a day). Average time between any of those cities - about 20 days. Point being - THERE WAS CONSTANT INTERCHANGE BETWEEN THEM - AND THE INDUS TOO!
As to their level of development:
Note this structure at Göbekli Tepe - 11,500 B.C. Which is a hilltop sanctuary built on the highest point of an elongated mountain ridge about 15km northeast of the town of Şanlıurfa (Urfa) in southeast Turkey.
Note the finely carved pillars to support the roof. Does it seem like Hunter Gatherer Nomads would have acquired the skills to do such work? What use would Hunter Gatherer Nomads have for such a structure? Hunter Gatherer Nomads do not store food, they move to find food, how would Hunter Gatherer Nomads feed themselves while building the site?
Calabooz' This is a cave painting from Anatolia. I don't know about you, but he sure looks African to me!
A final thought: Forget the White mans breathless Bullsh1t - think for yourselves.
This is actually what the author mentioned.
..."and would have attracted hunter-gatherers from Africa and the Levant."...
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Egypt was already a great empire and a cultural powerhouse before any Hyksos stepped foot on her soil.
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Yes, exactly!! What a moron!!
productions
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
