what are the similarities between British Israelism and BHI, also historically.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
Are you talking to yourself?
What is British Israelism and BHI?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Are you talking to yourself?
What is British Israelism and BHI?
you will find out shortly
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
LOL! Is it some kind of code language you and your friends communicate in?
C'mon Lioness, let me in on your code: What is the meaning of British Israelism and BHI?
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''what are the similarities between British Israelism and BHI'' ====
By BHI i presume you mean the 'Black Hebrew Israelites', who are a bunch of lunatics with a membership of about 500.
In contrast British Israelism during its heyday had millions of supporters and many academics or scholars, as well as prestige patrons even including members of the British monarchy.
British Israelism is also multi-denominational and has members or proponents from Baptist, Calvinist, Methodist, Anglican etc backgrounds, while the Black Hebrew Israelites in contrast are an idiotic cult, filled with wierdos and cranks.
Regarding scripture, British Israelism is theologically and Biblically justified, while in contrast the Black Hebrew Israelites have zero understanding of the scripture and they just twist it whereever they can to demonise whites.
- BI has it origins thousands of years ago, or can at least be traced to the early medieval period. Later becomming an established movement in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries.
- BHI in contrast has its origins in american ghettos in the last few years. Basically only dumb black people subscribe to BHI to attack whites. Its pathetic.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
LMAO at this fool trying to make one set of bible thumpers more legitimate than the other. The bible is a fuking myth, anybody can use it to justify whatever bullshyt movement they are a part of. BHI, British Israelism, Catholics, Branch Davidians, Jim Brown, Snake handlers and poison drinkers, Hasidic Jew cults with their nasty Talmudic shyt, Pentecostals, etc, all the same lunatic bunch.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
^^^ LOL...
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
Israelism is the notion that one's own people are the true Israelites, descending from the people of the Bible. To me it's baffling that anyone would wish to prove themselves the descendants of the least charming and most bigoted desert tribe of all the levant. It's astonishing that anyone would buy into the notion that the creator of the universe would have a 'chosen race', and especially that it would be the Hebrews of all people! (The Egyptians would make much better candidates for a chosen race. The Scots had a better idea making up an ancient connection to Egypt! Who wants to descend from the Egyptians' runaway slaves?)
The roots of British Israelism (and French Israelism) are the medieval myths that have the apsotles (including Joseph of Arimathea and Mary Magdalene) coming to Western Europe. British Israelism also involves the legends that the young Jesus came to England, with his uncle Joseph of Arimatheam and hung out in Glastonbury. The idea that Joseph was a tin-trader is conjured up from nowhere. Although not impossible there is really very little early evidence for the notion.
The Bible is completely focussed on the Jews and their world in the Middle East, which is one of many reasons to be suspicious of it. There is no evidence in the Bible that its parochial authors knew or cared anything about either Britain or about Sub-Saharan Africa beyond Nubia (Ethiopia). Both Britons and Africans were active in early Christianity, but the idea that either represent true Israelites is quite absurd.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''The idea that Joseph was a tin-trader is conjured up from nowhere'' =====
No it comes from the Latin Vulgate (Mark 15: 43) -
''venit Ioseph ab Arimathia nobilis decurio''
The term Decurio has multiple meanings in Latin but was commonly used to designate an official under Roman authority who was in charge of metal mining. The term for example is found in Roman inscriptions in Spain relating to a 'minister of mining'. The apocrypha and early Church Fathers also described Joseph as a merchant or trader.
Therefore there is a lot of evidence Joseph was a metal or tin trader. The most renowned mines in classical antiquity were the Cassiterides (cornwall) and many legends further connect Joseph to Cornwall (as well as Glastonbury).
There is also evidence tin from cornwall was used for Solomon's temple. Note that the 'tin isles' are found in early Assyrian, Phoenician and Hebrew inscriptions.
Here is an Assyrian tablet from the 8th century BC (Keilschrifttexte aus Assur verschiedenen Inhalts 1920, No. 92):
"...the Tin-land country which lies beyond the Upper Sea (or Mediterranean)."
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''The Bible is completely focussed on the Jews and their world in the Middle East, which is one of many reasons to be suspicious of it.'' =======
For starters you should look up Two House Theology. Jacob had 12 tribes descend from him, yet only the Jews sprung from Judah (and the Levites who were mingled with all the tribes). After the fall of the united monarchy of Israel, Judah split and was set up as an independant kingdom (with Levites and some from the tribe of Benjamin). In fact the first place the word 'jew' appears in scripture, the jews are at war with the Israelites (10 tribes who became the 'house of Israel' as opposed to Judah).
- The other 10 tribes (which later became 'lost')were never Jewish, nor are their descendants today.
In fact Jewish rabbis themselves have never claimed descent from the 10 tribes or house of Israel.
The Jewish Chronicle of May 22nd, 1879:
''the Ten Tribes are certainly in existence, all that has to be done is to discover which people represent them.''
Chief Rabbi - Dr. H. Adler:
"You are quite right to assume that the Ten Tribes did not return to the Holy Land."
Rabbi Aaron Werner of Spokane, U.S.A., when asked by the late Dr. Schiffner -
"Do the Jews represent all Twelve Tribes?" replied:
"No, the Ten Tribes of Israel were carried away by Sennacherib King of Assyria and have become LOST. The Jews of today are but a remnant made up of the Tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi."
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Anglo_Pyramidologist - Before you get yourself wound-up into a religious and racial frenzy. Your very own British museum, has some really great Assyrian reliefs depicting Hebrews. I guarantee you really, really, want to take a look at them before running your mouth further.
Here is a taste for you - don't bother thanking me.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
The idea that the British Israelites are more Authentic than the BHI is a matter of opinion. The BHI can find scriptures to prove their points as the Brit.Israel can. Thats the point of using the bible as your sole source.
The only similarity between the BHI and BritI is they both believe their "Race" should rule the world because "God" said so, and they both believe they are the chosen people.
The Hebrews were more than anything a Multiracial/Multiethnic people with Eurasians, and Kushites(Both East and West) type people.
To add onto Mike's collection Christian art from the Roman Jewish Catacombs
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''Your very own British museum, has some really great Assyrian reliefs depicting Hebrews'' ====
I'm not sure how those pictures help you. I presume you have wrongly interpeted their hatwear and helmets as being their hair texture, which is incredibly clear on the black obelisk:
Note also the hatwear of Phoenicians:
Its not hair texture. Nice try though. You must be desperate.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
Anglo_Pyramidologist - Before you get yourself wound-up into a religious and racial frenzy. Your very own British museum, has some really great Assyrian reliefs depicting Hebrews. I guarantee you really, really, want to take a look at them before running your mouth further.
Here is a taste for you - don't bother thanking me.
Another Assyrian Ashur-dan III King of Assyria from 773-754 BC
Mike were the Assyrians also black or just the Persians and Hebrews? They do seem to have curly hair and all curly haired people are black right?
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
Dont you guys love when the BHI new testament dudes use Acts 13.1 to prove that the disciples were Black and were being called "Niger" but conveniently ignore the mention of white disciples (when you use their methodology) in that same passage.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Anglo_Pyramidologist - Lets see now:
So you are saying that civilian Hebrews wore hair-like hats and helmets which completely covered their cheeks and chins so as to look like hair?
Well ya!
That is perfectly in keeping with other White man truths and logic. I mean, if this guy can be a Hebrew, well then, the sky is the limit!
Posted by Zioncity (Member # 18034) on :
Confirmed Truth
quote: Dont you guys love when the BHI new testament dudes use Acts 13.1 to prove that the disciples were Black and were being called "Niger" but conveniently ignore the mention of white disciples (when you use their methodology) in that same passage.
Can you please post the scripture that talks about white disciples?
"White" as in skin color in the bible is a curse called leprosy.
2 Kings 5 27The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever. And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow.
Hebrews were of multiethnicity but israelites/judahites were always referred to and grouped with Kushittes, Canaanittes, "Ethiopians"
Alot of those images imo show people with nappy hair. But there is no need to picture spam with the Skulls that were found at Lachish in the above thread.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
^^^ Dude the Hebrews def. had black among their ranks. please see the Images I provided above from Roman Jewish Catacomb art of Early Christians. Remember the Early Christians were mainly Jews.
Anglo Pyramid can run be he cant hide from what the Jews left in the Catacombs. His Jews are supposed to be Racially Pure but they have Images of Moshiach with an Afro and Brown to Black skin, years before Ethiopia converted.
Me and Altakruri already adressed this, The Jews were a Multiethinic bunch with blacks in their ranks. Both BHI and British Israel and Zionists have to deal with those facts.
The Ethiopian Jews probably represent an authentic branch of Jews.
Posted by adrianne (Member # 10761) on :
all true descendents of the hebrews and jews of the bible will have eb3 genes in them,
real jews came from africa
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
I'll only pop in this rubbish of a thread to make clear somethings associated with my name. Jews are a late phenomena in the development of Hebrews to Children of Israel to Israelites & Judahites.
There was marriage with everyone around them from their inception as offspring of Jacob's twelve sons.
In the era of Judaea, the birth of the Jews, we have Dio Cassius, Roman History 37:17:1, writing "other men, who, although of a different race, have adopted the laws of the people." These are converts of non-Hebrew origin not descended from Jacob. Hebrew law recognizes them as Jews but not as Israelites until marrying into Israelite stock whereupon their offspring, being raised by a parent of Israelite ancestry, were able to fully inbibe the everyday culture and mores and thus fully identify as Israelite.
In this same Roman era the majority opinion of the writers of the time as left on record by Tacitus was that were Egyptians expelled due to disease (leprosy) with many having the mindset that"they were a race of Ethiopian origin,"History 5.2-3.
A reflection of this is the Roman era mishnah laws on leprosy declaring Israelites not as black as Kush but the shade of boxwood.
Nakh itself compares Israel to Kushiym and only recognizes Egypt, Ethiopia, and Seba as equals of Israel.
quote:Are ye not as the children of the Ethiopians unto Me, O children of Israel? saith the LORD. Amos 9:7
quote:For I am the LORD thy God, The Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour; I have given Egypt as thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee. Isaiah 43:3
As in another thread this isn't something I'm going to debate. All are free to take it or leave it as your concerns are something other than what has been handed down by people who either saw these early Jews or who were themselves members of that community.
Posted by Afrocentric Liars Exposed (Member # 18528) on :
For the record, I do not subscribe to that BHI approach to Acts 13.1. However, I will use the same methodology that they use. Pay attention to bold faces...
Act 13:1 ¶ Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.
There ya have it! Black and White disciples, based on the spurious BHI innovation.
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: Can you please post the scripture that talks about white disciples?
"White" as in skin color in the bible is a curse called leprosy.
2 Kings 5 27The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever. And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow.
Hebrews were of multiethnicity but israelites/judahites were always referred to and grouped with Kushittes, Canaanittes, "Ethiopians"
Alot of those images imo show people with nappy hair. But there is no need to picture spam with the Skulls that were found at Lachish in the above thread. [/QB]
Posted by Afrocentric Liars Exposed (Member # 18528) on :
2 Kings 5.27 says the following in part - "...metsora kashaleg" and translated as LEPROS AS SNOW. So the particular white color is likened to snow. How did you determine that white skin in the general sense is leprosy when the description does not say that?
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: "White" as in skin color in the bible is a curse called leprosy.
2 Kings 5 27The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever. And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''So you are saying that civilian Hebrews wore hair-like hats and helmets which completely covered their cheeks and chins so as to look like hair?'' ====
In many cases yes.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''"White" as in skin color in the bible is a curse called leprosy.
2 Kings 5 27The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever. And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow.'' =========
Not in the original manuscripts. The colour became added by the Vulgate. This was already debunked before.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''Act 13:1 ¶ Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.'' ====
These reflect hair colours or something abnormal on the skin, never used to describe negroes.
Here is an example from my refuting afrocentric collection:
‘‘Romans with Niger as their surname were Black men’’ (Joel A. Rogers, Nature knows No Color Line)
***
One of the biggest claims by Afrocentrics is that the name ‘‘Niger’’ was given to Romans who were Black Africans, based on the fact Niger meant black or dark. Many notable Roman historical figures had Niger in their name i.e.: Pescennius Niger, Aquilus Niger, Brutidius Niger, now were these men Black? No of course they weren't, as ancient Roman writings themselves prove. In the Historia Augusta, it is explained how Pescennius got his name :
‘‘His countenance was dignified and always somewhat ruddy; his neck was so black that many men say that he was called Niger on this account. The rest of his body, however, was very white..’’
Clearly Pescennius derived his name because he had an unusual black neck, but note how the text states the rest of his body was completely white.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Here is a good example of BHI Racashawar twisting scriptures to prove his point..
^^^You are correct that the original passage does not contain the word "white" and that it was added in the vulgate. However, white is implied because of the description on how to identify and treat leprosy found in leviticus. The word "laban" is used in Leviticus.
Posted by Afrocentric Liars Exposed (Member # 18528) on :
That dude is a joke and a clown.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Here is a good example of BHI Racashawar twisting scriptures to prove his point..
I'm sorry but I can't sit by and read flagrant intentional twisting of Hebrew literature and law without demonstrating its ignorance.
White is understood from the context of Leviticus 13. One mishnah era Rabbi decided to be lenient toward white people lest they all be accounted lepers.
Mishnah describes the white of leprosy as 1 - white like snow (undertones of wine) 2 - white as Temple lime (milk & blood) 3 - white as an egg's skin 4 - white as wool
Thus the congenital leprosy of Gehazi was type 1 but either type skin leprosy is the colour of true blanco white Europeans, a colour not natural in the region where the biblical Israelites lived.
Upon encountering the reddish white and other white Europeans in the Roman era, rather than stigmatize them all as leprous descendants of Gehazi one Rabbi thought to re-interpret the law leniently as favor to supra-Alpine Europeans.
Being white from head to foot classified them as clean lepers as per Leviticus 13:12-13 --
quote: And if the leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of him that hath the plague from his head even to his feet, as far as appeareth to the priest; then the priest shall look; and, behold, if the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague; it is all turned white: he is clean.
Neither is the blond hair an exception nor accepted:
quote: And when a man or woman hath a plague upon the head or upon the beard, then the priest shall look on the plague; and, behold, if the appearance thereof be deeper than the skin, and there be in it yellow thin hair, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a scall, it is leprosy of the head or of the beard.
This is not to disparage any white person but to uncover the illogic of concluding "leprous white as snow" was not the intention of 2 Kings 5:27 as spouted by BI's and their self-hating "black" sycophant supporters.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''William Cooper Destroys and exposes Christian Identity/British Israelism...
That guy is dumb. 7: 04 he claims the Picts were naked savages who covered themselves in 'clay' (didn't he mean woad?). The rest of the video further demonises white northern europeans all out of his own self-hatred and insecurity. According to 4: 36 he's married to a chinese woman and admits himself he's racially mixed. Anyone who is pro-white preservation he therefore is going to attack hence he calls white seperatists in his broadcasts as 'racists'. As for him attempting to debunk CI/BI he clearly hasn't researched anything.
He misses the main point about the history of 10 lost tribes of Israel. If they were practicing the Hebrew religion, continued their language and culture then they would never have become lost. Isaiah and Jeremiah however are very clear the Israelites lost their language (Hebrew) and turned to idolatry (losing their religion).
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Anglo_Pyramidologist - By your own words and examples, you have classed yourself a degenerate idiot like Lioness - congratulations!
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: I'm not sure how those pictures help you. I presume you have wrongly interpeted their hatwear and helmets as being their hair texture, which is incredibly clear on the black obelisk:
Its not hair texture. Nice try though. You must be desperate.
Look who is calling someone else desperate when he himself is the one up to his neck, swimming in desperation. Take a good look at the images Mike showed you. If you need glasses to see better, it can be arranged, you know.
Going by your plain distortion of the obvious truth, I take it you want us to believe those Hebrews are wearing head-covering that extends from the crown of their heads to their beards huh? Going by your LIES, it must be. Because it is not only the hair on their heads that is depicted as afro-textured but their beards are afro-textured as well.
So tell us; are those special covering they have for their afro-textured looking beards as well?
And you had the nerve to call Mike desperate. Geeez!
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
You do not know what you are babbling about. A person whose leprosy has spread from head to toe is not a "clean leper." Such a statement is an oxymoron, as one cannot be a leper and clean simultaneously. Once the leprosy takes its course and either spreads over the entire body or is stopped then that person's basar [flesh] is considered tahaer [clean]. No where in torah is anyone called a "clean leper." People are clean from leprosy (not clean with leprosy as you suggest) and are tahaer to mingle in the camp.
Just to give you an example of this, consider the following new testament narrative (in part):
Mar 1:42 And as soon as he had spoken, immediately the leprosy departed from him, and he was cleansed.
Notice it says "leprosy departed..." This is why your statement is an oxymoron. If leprosy either spreads all over the body, stops its spread or the raw flesh turns white then that person no longer has leprosy.
Being white from head to toe is called "laban" (white) and that is it. Stop interpreting your prejudices and hangups into the law. If you had an iota of understanding of leprosy you would know that adamdam ve'laban (white and reddish) is a required symptom if one is to diagnose that the basar is indeed infected with the plague. A person with white skin bears no resemblence to a leper. Take that pseudojudaism to the other board and peddle it there buddy.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Being white from head to foot classified them as clean lepers as per Leviticus 13:12-13 --
And if the leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of him that hath the plague from his head even to his feet, as far as appeareth to the priest; then the priest shall look; and, behold, if the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague; it is all turned white: he is clean.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
What gets me about his who Black Israel, White Israel, China Israel is that the only reason why people claim to be Israel in the first place is two reason, 1)Because of Christianity, 2)because the Jews are supposed to Rule the world in some Communist opressive "Mellenial Age". The Jews were a bunch of backward bigot nomads until they migrated to Egypt and developed some sort of civilization. They incorporated many Traditions from Mesopotamia and Egypt into their Traditions and turned around and mocked the same people they copied demonizing them as "Satan" or the Enemy. Why people want to fight over their ancestors being Jews, when the Jews in the context of the Levant and Mesopotamia were Historically insignifigant. The Egyptians controlled their asses yet they utter not a peep about Tuthmose 3 wrecking shop on that ass. The only reason why people even care about the Jews is because of Christianity plain and simple.
And the idea that the New Jerusalem or New Kingdom where the Jews will rule and usher back in the Levitical laws is non sense. So in the future is someone eats pork or shrimp will be unclean(Despite Modern Medicine and Modern ways of cleaning Pork and Shrimp) or pick up sticks on the Sabbath(Despite Modern Laws and the fact that Billions of people don't even subscibe to the Bible or even know a Bible and Levitical Law exists)
Are the people and Tribes in the Amazon gonna be tracked down and Killed for Working on the Sabbath??
A bunch of Madness. Its just a racist ideology that was first created by history's most famous Bigots, who ritually mocked the mass slaughter of Egyptians every passover.-to say the Jews were jealous of the Greatness of Egypt is an understatement.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
^^^ The reasons you outlay are not the reasons for identifying the Hebrews bro.
Also it is no more a madness if you understand, there are a BILLION people in Africa. Out of that number in Sub-Sahara African; half are the Hebrews. Notwithstanding those from among them who were taken as slaves to the Americas
Understanding this huge numbers of Hebrews in Africa and elsewhere explains the many problems affecting the continent and the black race. This is because of the curses that God himself put on the Hebrews and he dispersed them around the world pending their repentance and their return to him.
Thus identifying the Hebrews is not done for the reasons YOU think. Rather it is to help uplift the black race by getting them to return to their roots.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Give me a break. Black people are not cursed. Are Indians Hebrews?? The Indian has been subjugated just like Africans, look at South Africa and Ghandi etc.
Are the Irish Hebrews, they were shipped in "Cargo Slave Ships" to the Americas fulfilling Deut. 28. So are the Irish Hebrews.
The main problem with black people is we have out face in the sand, turning to Mecca, Jerusalem, Bhudda etc. when we should be focusing on ourselves. In America you have Ignorance, Violence, Glorifying the scurge of our community known as "Thugs", Drugs etc. Now all of a Sudden we are Moors, We are Hebrews, We are Arab(NOI), we are this and that.
Our Roots are in Africa and our pantheon of gods consisted of Pagan gods, and animist traditions. The Greatest Temples our Brothers created was Waset to an Animist Pantheon, and to Amun the Hidden Ram God of the Nile. Why are people like you ashamed of that, Waset goes back thousands of years before the so called Jew knew that you can create temples, It was animist Africans that developed the idea of building in stone and Freestanding Columns.
Who made you ashamed of the Animist gods your forefathers worshipped??
What has the Jewish Religion done that is so great??
If the Jews were Gods Chosen why Was Egypt, Persia, Greece, Assyria, China, Sumer, etc. etc. etc. etc. More Advanced than anything the Jews Created??
There are many reasons why Africans live in poverty and none of it has to do with being cursed.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Give me a break. Black people are not cursed. Are Indians Hebrews?? The Indian has been subjugated just like Africans, look at South Africa and Ghandi etc.
I take it, you see everything is OKAY with the black race. If it is not WHY. What is cause of of our numerous problems?
And yes, a huge chunk of Indians are also part of the Hebrews.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
As I said Earlier the only reason people even care or know about the Jews is because of Christianity. If it was not for Christianity neither Africans(Out side Ethiopians and Egyptians) or Northern Europeans would be claiming to be Jews nor would anyone consider them great.
Now all of a sudden the BHI and Brit. Israel want to disrespect Christianity, the same movement that introduced them to the Torah and Tenakh and history of the Jews in the First place.
The only thing great the Jews ever did was the Christian movement and that involved a mass number of Gentile Converts. So it blows any credibility of the Jews who always needed so called "Goyim" to do anything Great.
If you are so worried about worshiping Yahweh Africans created our own Jerusalem in Ethiopia.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
^^^ Are you going to answer the questions I posed to you?
IS EVERYTHING OKAY with the black race? Why are blacks at the bottom in EVERYTHING on this earth?
Despite having the second biggest continent on the planet and it is overflowing with natural and mineral resources, why is Africa the poorest place on the planet? Why is it that black people wherever you find them are at the bottom of the rung and the laughing stock of the world?
WHY?
Answer these questions before you try to deny over half a billion people the RIGHT to know their history and thus UPLIFT themselves from their suffering by the knowledge gained.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Dude I never said everything was O.K. In the Modern World Blacks have alot stacked against us.
Our Problems began when we started to trade with and let Europeans and Arabs into our Empires, treating them like Kings and accepting them.(We should have killed en masse any of them that stepped onto our soil that was not there for Fair Trade). Jean-Jacques Rousseau said that the African Empires in West Africa should be hanging every European on African soil trying to Trade what was European Trash for Human Cargo.
Our Problems began when we relied on European made Junk selling Human Cargo for that insead of developing other Industry like our Forefathers did Earlier.
Europeans and Arabs never had the intention of accepting others. Their goal was simple: Domination.
Now we sit up in the modern world talking about how the Original this was black, and the original that was black.
Our Brothers on the Nile developed Surgery, Free standing Columns, Stone Architecture etc. and yet all we care about is if they were black, never mind studying their Laws and Culture.
We need to go back to using Logic and Reason. We have to adopt ideas from the Enlightenment and other Philosophy(Both African and non African) and incorporate in back to what our forefathers and our brothers on the Nile did. As far as Im concerned Black people for the most part are a lost Cause. Turning to Jerusalem, Mecca and every other place on Earth yet at the same time trying claim being an African.
Show me the Egyptians Praying to Mecca and Arab Gods.
The Greatest Temples erected in Ancient Times was erected by Animist Africans not Jews or Arabs. The Arabs were Illiterate Barbarics all the way til the 7th century...Yet a grip of our people following Muhammed...
Like I said madness..
quote:Originally posted by Energy:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Give me a break. Black people are not cursed. Are Indians Hebrews?? The Indian has been subjugated just like Africans, look at South Africa and Ghandi etc.
I take it, you see everything is OKAY with the black race. If it is not WHY. What is cause of of our numerous problems?
And yes, a huge chunk of Indians are also part of the Hebrews.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: If you are so worried about worshiping Yahweh Africans created our own Jerusalem in Ethiopia.
This is a prime reason to know your history before you challenge these things. Just to let you know; Ethiopia is the proper name of the African continent. That is how sub-Sahara Africa was known in ancient times. The demarcation of Africa is what led to a small part of Africa in the East being called Ethiopia. In the proper sense, Ethiopia is the name of the Sub-Sahara African continent.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Being clean does not entail being free of leprosy.
That's straight Hebrew Torah. Quoting from the Greek gospels is no substitute for Torah law nor it's Hebrew&Aramaic mishnaic interpretations. Hebrews neither use nor need Greek scripture but on the other hand Greek scripture relies on the Hebrew which it is not faithful to in the least.
The Greek scriptures have no bearing on Hebrew literature be it Tanakh or Mishnah&Gemara. We go to the Hebrew literature for statute law (Torah) and case studies (Mishnah&Gemara) for application of the statutes. This is beyond understanding of racial cultist untrained in any authentic mainstrean traditional Judaism, such as the "teachings" of the BI/CI or the BHI.
Quite clearly the one who is white from head to toe "the leprosy have covered all his flesh" and though "he is clean" he still "hath the plaque." He can become unclean again if "quick raw flesh" later becomes noticeable in his skin.
Again for the ignorant rabble there are four colours of leprosy as explained in mishnah: 1 - white like snow (undertones of wine) 2 - white as Temple lime (milk & blood) 3 - white as an egg's skin 4 - white as wool; they are not all reddish-white as distorters pushing racialist agendas would make believe.
Gehazi is an example of a clean leper, white from head to toe as was the Syrian captain Naaman who though a leper was clean (all turned white) not with reddish-white spots which would be unclean.
quote: But if the raw flesh again be turned into white, then he shall come unto the priest; and the priest shall look on him; and, behold, if the plague be turned into white, then the priest shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague: he is clean.
And when the flesh hath in the skin thereof a boil, and it is healed, and in the place of the boil there is a white rising, or a bright spot, reddish-white, then it shall be shown to the priest. And the priest shall look; and, behold, if the appearance thereof be lower than the skin, and the hair thereof be turned white, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is the plague of leprosy, it hath broken out in the boil. Lev 13:15-20
We see that the clean leper could be subject to bouts when his status could revert to unclean for a while until it returned to a clean state.
It is because of the inanities like the post I'm replying to, that you don't find rabbis or morehs teaching Hebrew law and principle to non-Jews but let them go merrily on their way down the wrong road since after all the Hebrew laws, principles, interpretations, and literature still stand intact as they have a good 2400 years at the least.
For those truly wanting to learn without racialist motivation as their reasoning I suggest a study not a mere reading of the entire 13th chapter of Leviticus even from a Christian bible.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: You do not know what you are babbling about. A person whose leprosy has spread from head to toe is not a "clean leper." Such a statement is an oxymoron, as one cannot be a leper and clean simultaneously. Once the leprosy takes its course and either spreads over the entire body or is stopped then that person's basar [flesh] is considered tahaer [clean]. No where in torah is anyone called a "clean leper." People are clean from leprosy (not clean with leprosy as you suggest) and are tahaer to mingle in the camp.
Just to give you an example of this, consider the following new testament narrative (in part):
Mar 1:42 And as soon as he had spoken, immediately the leprosy departed from him, and he was cleansed.
Notice it says "leprosy departed..." This is why your statement is an oxymoron. If leprosy either spreads all over the body, stops its spread or the raw flesh turns white then that person no longer has leprosy.
Being white from head to toe is called "laban" (white) and that is it. Stop interpreting your prejudices and hangups into the law. If you had an iota of understanding of leprosy you would know that adamdam ve'laban (white and reddish) is a required symptom if one is to diagnose that the basar is indeed infected with the plague. A person with white skin bears no resemblence to a leper. Take that pseudojudaism to the other board and peddle it there buddy.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Being white from head to foot classified them as clean lepers as per Leviticus 13:12-13 --
And if the leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of him that hath the plague from his head even to his feet, as far as appeareth to the priest; then the priest shall look; and, behold, if the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague; it is all turned white: he is clean.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ Son, I know everything about the BHI and its teachings. Ethiopia is the name of Abbysinia or the Hebesh Empire. You know what Im talking about stop playing games dude.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
The only curse that arguably fits Blacks to the T and, this is assuming that you regard the Bible as the inerrant word of God, is the curse of Ham: Gen 9:25 And he said, Cursed [be] Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
Of all races, the Negro is the only one to have been subjugated by all at some point in history. Admittedely, the Bible does not even consider the geneology of man south of the Sahara. So even that argument falls short. There is no Negro in the Bible. The people viewed humanity beyond their known world as "Beasts."
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Our Brothers on the Nile developed Surgery, Free standing Columns, Stone Architecture etc. and yet all we care about is if they were black, never mind studying their Laws and Culture.
We need to go back to using Logic and Reason. We have to adopt ideas from the Enlightenment and other Philosophy(Both African and non African) and incorporate in back to what our forefathers and our brothers on the Nile did. As far as Im concerned Black people for the most part are a lost Cause. Turning to Jerusalem, Mecca and every other place on Earth yet at the same time trying claim being an African.
Show me the Egyptians Praying to Mecca and Arab Gods.
The Greatest Temples erected in Ancient Times was erected by Animist Africans not Jews or Arabs. The Arabs were Illiterate Barbarics all the way til the 7th century...Yet a grip of our people following Muhammed...
Like I said madness..
First of all the Hebrews are not the same as the ancient Egyptians That is something you need to understand. Because the two people are in Africa does not mean they see themselves as the same people. They do not and have never done so.
Your problem is you assume because something is on the African continent it is a shared glory. Africans don't operate like that. Ancient Egypt and everything to do with it belongs to north Africa and not to the rest of the African continent. How you manage to lay claim to Egypt when me a continental African would not dream of doing so is beyond my comprehension. Therefore, I am not even going to bother discussing AE with you.
When we talk about Hebrews in Africa I am talking about the people in Sub-Sahara Africa. This my history and thus what interests me.
We don't relate to those civilisations you lay claim to in north Africa. Hebrew is who we are, not Egyptians. We need to know who we are as Sub-Saharan Africans so we can uplift themselves.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Energy: ^^^ Are you going to answer the questions I posed to you?
Despite having the second biggest continent on the planet and it is overflowing with natural and mineral resources, why is Africa the poorest place on the planet?
So let me get this straight, First you are a Jew now all of a sudden your problems have to do with a land the Jews never lived on except in the Nile Valley.
Second the reason Africa remains poor despite the Natural Resources is because of Corrupt African Stooges side stepping for European and Arab powers.
African have the potential and have created sophisticated Nations.
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Why is it that black people wherever you find them are at the bottom of the rung and the laughing stock of the world?
WHY?
Because black people made selling our Human cargo the #1 export when the rest of the world was putting a stop to the enslavement of their own people. You expect people to respect you when you are making your greatest industry slaves..??
Also your notion dismisses all the achievements Africans have made in the 19th-21st Century. Our people have made invention and developed Industry. Stop thinking in a slave mindset.
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Answer these questions before you try to deny over half a billion people the RIGHT to know their history and thus UPLIFT themselves from their suffering by the knowledge gained.
Dude our History is in Africa, some of us might be Jews or Arabs but majority were Africans who worshiped Animals and nature and Voodoo and ancestor worship.
Get over it.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: The only curse that arguably fits Blacks to the T and, this is assuming that you regard the Bible as the inerrant word of God, is the curse of Ham: Gen 9:25 And he said, Cursed [be] Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
Of all races, the Negro is the only one to have been subjugated by all at some point in history. Admittedely, the Bible does not even consider the geneology of man south of the Sahara. So even that argument falls short. There is no Negro in the Bible. The people viewed humanity beyond their known world as "Beasts."
WRONG! In case you are not aware, HAM had other children which include the ancient Egyptians. Why did the curse not affect them? ANSWER THAT!
Since you acknowledge the Negro had been subjugated by ALL since ancient times. Can you explain HOW this was even remotely possible taking into consideration the Negro is not WEAK. Maybe we are genetically mentally inferior huh. Is that what you are inferring?
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
You are doing gymnastics with scripture there buddy. The law is quite clear on the matter, one who has the leprosy spread from head to toe and meets certain other criteria, he or she is no longer infected with the plague.
Again, show us a scripture of a "clean leper." You put your foot in your mouth dude. The term is an oxymoron... There is no such thing as a clean leper -- there are lepers who became clean from their leprosy but not a clean leper.
Post up a passage to a "clean leper." BTW... neither Naaman or Gehazi were clean of their leprosy.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Being clean does not entail being free of leprosy.
That's straight Hebrew Torah. Quoting from the Greek gospels is no substitute for Torah law nor it's Hebrew&Aramaic mishnaic interpretations. Hebrews neither use nor need Greek scripture but on the other hand Greek scripture relies on the Hebrew which it is not faithful to in the least.
The Greek scriptures have no bearing on Hebrew literature be it Tanakh or Mishnah&Gemara. We go to the Hebrew literature for statute law (Torah) and case studies (Mishnah&Gemara) for application of the statutes. This is beyond understanding of racial cultist untrained in any authentic mainstrean traditional Judaism, such as the "teachings" of the BI/CI or the BHI.
Quite clearly the one who is white from head to toe "the leprosy have covered all his flesh" and though "he is clean" he still "hath the plaque." He can become unclean again if "quick raw flesh" later becomes noticeable in his skin.
Again for the ignorant rabble there are four colours of leprosy as explained in mishnah: 1 - white like snow (undertones of wine) 2 - white as Temple lime (milk & blood) 3 - white as an egg's skin 4 - white as wool; they are not all reddish-white as distorters pushing racialist agendas would make believe.
Gehazi is an example of a clean leper, white from head to toe as was the Syrian captain Naaman who though a leper was clean (all turned white) not with reddish-white spots which would be unclean.
quote: But if the raw flesh again be turned into white, then he shall come unto the priest; and the priest shall look on him; and, behold, if the plague be turned into white, then the priest shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague: he is clean.
And when the flesh hath in the skin thereof a boil, and it is healed, and in the place of the boil there is a white rising, or a bright spot, reddish-white, then it shall be shown to the priest. And the priest shall look; and, behold, if the appearance thereof be lower than the skin, and the hair thereof be turned white, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is the plague of leprosy, it hath broken out in the boil. Lev 13:15-20
We see that the clean leper could be subject to bouts when his status could revert to unclean for a while until it returned to a clean state.
It is because of the inanities like the post I'm replying to, that you don't find rabbis or morehs teaching Hebrew law and principle to non-Jews but let them go merrily on their way down the wrong road since after all the Hebrew laws, principles, interpretations, and literature still stand intact as they have a good 2400 years at the least.
For those truly wanting to learn without racialist motivation as their reasoning I suggest a study not a mere reading of the entire 13th chapter of Leviticus even from a Christian bible.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: You do not know what you are babbling about. A person whose leprosy has spread from head to toe is not a "clean leper." Such a statement is an oxymoron, as one cannot be a leper and clean simultaneously. Once the leprosy takes its course and either spreads over the entire body or is stopped then that person's basar [flesh] is considered tahaer [clean]. No where in torah is anyone called a "clean leper." People are clean from leprosy (not clean with leprosy as you suggest) and are tahaer to mingle in the camp.
Just to give you an example of this, consider the following new testament narrative (in part):
Mar 1:42 And as soon as he had spoken, immediately the leprosy departed from him, and he was cleansed.
Notice it says "leprosy departed..." This is why your statement is an oxymoron. If leprosy either spreads all over the body, stops its spread or the raw flesh turns white then that person no longer has leprosy.
Being white from head to toe is called "laban" (white) and that is it. Stop interpreting your prejudices and hangups into the law. If you had an iota of understanding of leprosy you would know that adamdam ve'laban (white and reddish) is a required symptom if one is to diagnose that the basar is indeed infected with the plague. A person with white skin bears no resemblence to a leper. Take that pseudojudaism to the other board and peddle it there buddy.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Being white from head to foot classified them as clean lepers as per Leviticus 13:12-13 --
And if the leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of him that hath the plague from his head even to his feet, as far as appeareth to the priest; then the priest shall look; and, behold, if the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague; it is all turned white: he is clean.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
I'm not going to keep posting LEV 13:12-14 again and again. Not my fault you can't or won't get it.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: Again, show us a scripture of a "clean leper."
Post up a passage to a "clean leper."
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Energy: First of all the Hebrews are not the same as the ancient Egyptians That is something you need to understand.
Where did I say they were the same. The Hebrews were wiping their asses with sand paper and a living in tents made of Towls while Africans going back to Nabta Playa had Sophisticated knowledge of Astronomy and were Building advanced structures with underground Chambers and working in stone.
Yet the Jews are supposed to be Gods Chosen people?? Give me a break.
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Because the two people are in Africa does not mean they see themselves as the same people. They do not and have never done so.
The Egyptians originated in the Sahara, the Jews in UR in Sumaria. According to your own supposed writing the Jews are not Africans.
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Your problem is you assume because something is on the African continent it is a shared glory. Africans don't operate like that. Ancient Egypt and everything to do with it belongs to north Africa and not to the rest of the African continent.
Dude STFU seriously. The Egyptians were Animists just like West Africans, and you can bet if the Egyptians went to West Africa they would fit in confortably with the Animist Gods they worshipped, esp the Ram Headed God that resembles Amun.
Second I don't claim Egypt. I consider the people in Luxor, Aswan, Kom Ombos by Brothers of the Nile Hence my calling them Brothers. My people erected plenty of Sophisticated structures in Places like Oulata.
Now all of a sudden you want to attack the African character of Egypt, yes you fit right in with the Jews.
quote:Originally posted by Energy: How you manage to lay claim to Egypt when me a continental African would not dream of doing so is beyond my comprehension. Therefore, I am not even going to bother discussing AE with you.
You are not a continental African, you claim to be a Jew. I don't see you Griping about claiming a culture that originated in F-king Ur in Sumaria and the Levant, yet you try to attack me for saying the Egyptians who were Animist Africans were better than the Jews on a given day. Like I said Im not claiming Egypt, Im proving that the Egyptians were Animists like other Africans and they were 100 times better than the Jews.
quote:Originally posted by Energy: When we talk about Hebrews in Africa I am talking about the people in Sub-Sahara Africa. This my history and thus what interests me.
We don't relate to those civilisations you lay claim to in north Africa. Hebrew is who we are, not Egyptians. We need to know who we are as Sub-Saharan Africans so we can uplift themselves.
Seriously man, you need to really read what you are saying. The people of so called SSA are not Jews, Some Are but Majority are not. And its an insult to say such.
Your forefathers were Animists get over it.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
quote:Originally posted by Energy: WRONG! In case you are not aware, HAM had other children which include the ancient Egyptians. Why did the curse not affect them? ANSWER THAT!
The curse fell on Canaan, not all of Ham's seed.
quote: Since you acknowledge the Negro had been subjugated by ALL since ancient times. Can you explain HOW this was even remotely possible taking into consideration the Negro is not WEAK.
The Negro is not physically weak. But he lacks in the area of organizational skills; he is unable to mount a formidable opposition against invading forces. As well, his belief in animism weakens his ability to confront, militarily, technologically driven foreign aggressors.
quote: Maybe we are mentally genetically inferior huh. Is that what you are inferring?
I think further study needs to be done in this field. I theorize that the Negro's evolution was stunted compared to non-Negro populations outside Africa.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth:
quote:Originally posted by Energy: WRONG! In case you are not aware, HAM had other children which include the ancient Egyptians. Why did the curse not affect them? ANSWER THAT!
The curse fell on Canaan, not all of Ham's seed.
quote: Since you acknowledge the Negro had been subjugated by ALL since ancient times. Can you explain HOW this was even remotely possible taking into consideration the Negro is not WEAK.
The Negro is not physically weak. But he lacks in the area of organizational skills; he is unable to mount a formidable opposition against invading forces. As well, his belief in animism weakens his ability to confront, militarily, technologically driven foreign aggressors.
quote: Maybe we are mentally genetically inferior huh. Is that what you are inferring?
I think further study needs to be done in this field. I theorize that the Negro's evolution was stunted compared to non-Negro populations outside Africa.
Since you now say the curse was on Canaan and not on all of HAM's children what has Canaan got to do with the African continent? Canaanites live in the land of Canaan which is in the Middle East. So you see your claim that blacks carry the curse of Canaan or Ham does not stand up to scrutiny. You need to come up with a better explanation for the degradation of the black race.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: [QUOTE]The Negro is not physically weak. But he lacks in the area of organizational skills; he is unable to mount a formidable opposition against invading forces. As well, his belief in animism weakens his ability to confront, militarily, technologically driven foreign aggressors.
The Creation of Animist Africans..
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
Then I must conclude that you fail to comprehend what you read. Lev 13 (12-14) says nothing regarding a "clean leper." As I initially explained, the term is an oxymoron. Actually, Leviticus describes a former leper pronounced "tahaer" by a levite doctor. If the scripture were saying what you are claiming, we would see something to the effect of "tahaer_h'sara," but we don't.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I'm not going to keep posting LEV 13:12-14 again and again. Not my fault you can't or won't get it.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari:
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: [QUOTE]The Negro is not physically weak. But he lacks in the area of organizational skills; he is unable to mount a formidable opposition against invading forces. As well, his belief in animism weakens his ability to confront, militarily, technologically driven foreign aggressors.
The Creation of Animist Africans..
LOL! What you woefully fail to realise is those Animist Africans are the same Hebrews you call Africans today.
Because you don't know what the Bible contains you assume the Hebrews were some holy people. THEY WERE NOT. The Hebrews were HARDCORE idol worshippers. Hence their destruction and dispersion around the world.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Map of Animist Empires..
He Gives an audience to his people, in order to listen to their complaints and set them right…he sits in a pavilion around which stand 10 horses with gold embodied trappings. Behind the king stand 10 pages holding shields and gold mounted swords; on his right are the sons of princes of his empire, splendidly clad and with gold plaited in their hair. Before him sits the high priest, and behind the high priest sit the other priests…The door of the pavilion is guarded by dogs of an excellent breed who almost never leave the king's presence and who wear collars of gold and silver studded with bells of the same material.
Their religion is paganism and the worship of idols…. Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ''The idea that Joseph was a tin-trader is conjured up from nowhere'' =====
No it comes from the Latin Vulgate (Mark 15: 43) -
''venit Ioseph ab Arimathia nobilis decurio''
The term Decurio has multiple meanings in Latin but was commonly used to designate an official under Roman authority who was in charge of metal mining. The term for example is found in Roman inscriptions in Spain relating to a 'minister of mining'. The apocrypha and early Church Fathers also described Joseph as a merchant or trader.
Therefore there is a lot of evidence Joseph was a metal or tin trader. The most renowned mines in classical antiquity were the Cassiterides (cornwall) and many legends further connect Joseph to Cornwall (as well as Glastonbury).
There is also evidence tin from cornwall was used for Solomon's temple. Note that the 'tin isles' are found in early Assyrian, Phoenician and Hebrew inscriptions.
Here is an Assyrian tablet from the 8th century BC (Keilschrifttexte aus Assur verschiedenen Inhalts 1920, No. 92):
"...the Tin-land country which lies beyond the Upper Sea (or Mediterranean)."
'Decurio' is the word now translated as 'counsellor'. It could denote a politician or a priest. If there was any mercantile connotation in that it's news to me. 'Mercator' or 'negotiator' would be more natural latin words for a trader or businessman. So yes, I do think the idea of Joseph of Arimathea as a tin trader was conjured up from nowhere.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: [QUOTE]The Negro is not physically weak. But he lacks in the area of organizational skills; he is unable to mount a formidable opposition against invading forces. As well, his belief in animism weakens his ability to confront, militarily, technologically driven foreign aggressors.
Animist Empire Map(Notice the Levant so called Israel is under subjugation)
the Chief God of that Empire
Posted by Zioncity (Member # 18034) on :
There is way to much ego trolls, agents, pale faces with leprosy lol and egghead knowitalls on this forum but I appreciate the people who drop and receive knowledge without a biased approach. The constant denial of history and facts only stunts your growth and has no effect whatsoever on the people able to actually comprehend and read. Back to topic
Posted by Ihateeverythingblackorafrican
quote:Act 13:1 ¶ Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.
The word lucius
Lucius (Greek: Λούκιος/Loukios, Etruscan: Luvcie) is derived from the latin word Lux (gen. lucis), meaning "light"
The word for white in latin is albus as oppose to Niger literally meaning the color black. Dont know where you got lucius meaning "white" color from.
There are and were black jews all over west, central and north Africa in Mali, Morocco, Nigeria, Senegal, Cape Verde, There was a kingdom of Jews in Ghana. All before any white version of Christianity or "judaism" was presented to them. What would make you make a blanket igonrant statement like this you seem to be knowledgeable in history?
Posted by just call me jarl
quote:Seriously man, you need to really read what you are saying. The people of so called SSA are not Jews, Some Are but Majority are not. And its an insult to say such.
Your forefathers were Animists get over it.
Or were you not talking about West Africans?
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Map of Animist Empires..
He Gives an audience to his people, in order to listen to their complaints and set them right…he sits in a pavilion around which stand 10 horses with gold embodied trappings. Behind the king stand 10 pages holding shields and gold mounted swords; on his right are the sons of princes of his empire, splendidly clad and with gold plaited in their hair. Before him sits the high priest, and behind the high priest sit the other priests…The door of the pavilion is guarded by dogs of an excellent breed who almost never leave the king's presence and who wear collars of gold and silver studded with bells of the same material.
Their religion is paganism and the worship of idols….
jari, you need to talk to more continental Africans. You would be shocked to realise not all black Africans originated from mainland Africa. You would find many have their origins outside Africa. That is something you need to educate yourself about.
Until you do that, you would always find topics like this confusing.
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ''The Bible is completely focussed on the Jews and their world in the Middle East, which is one of many reasons to be suspicious of it.'' =======
For starters you should look up Two House Theology. Jacob had 12 tribes descend from him, yet only the Jews sprung from Judah (and the Levites who were mingled with all the tribes). After the fall of the united monarchy of Israel, Judah split and was set up as an independant kingdom (with Levites and some from the tribe of Benjamin). In fact the first place the word 'jew' appears in scripture, the jews are at war with the Israelites (10 tribes who became the 'house of Israel' as opposed to Judah).
- The other 10 tribes (which later became 'lost')were never Jewish, nor are their descendants today.
In fact Jewish rabbis themselves have never claimed descent from the 10 tribes or house of Israel.
The Jewish Chronicle of May 22nd, 1879:
''the Ten Tribes are certainly in existence, all that has to be done is to discover which people represent them.''
Chief Rabbi - Dr. H. Adler:
"You are quite right to assume that the Ten Tribes did not return to the Holy Land."
Rabbi Aaron Werner of Spokane, U.S.A., when asked by the late Dr. Schiffner -
"Do the Jews represent all Twelve Tribes?" replied:
"No, the Ten Tribes of Israel were carried away by Sennacherib King of Assyria and have become LOST. The Jews of today are but a remnant made up of the Tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi."
In which case the Iraqis probably have the best claim to descending from the ten lost tribes!
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
@ Zioncity Im talking to Energy who claims all of SSA contained Jews. Were there Jews in West Africa yes, but majority were Pagans.
Second there were Jews in West Africa but these people were insignifigant. the Dominant people were Pagan Animists.
What Empire in Ghana was a Jewish One?? Im sure you are taking about the Za Yemeni myth but the people who Created Ghana were the Sonnike.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Son Provide concrete evidence that the Jews populated majority of African people. As far as people "Claiming" to originate from Jews and Arabs that is heresay. Due to Islam and Christianity some Africans claim to originate from Middle Eastern populations but Geneticics, Archeology, History etc. tells a different story.
quote:Originally posted by Energy:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Map of Animist Empires..
He Gives an audience to his people, in order to listen to their complaints and set them right…he sits in a pavilion around which stand 10 horses with gold embodied trappings. Behind the king stand 10 pages holding shields and gold mounted swords; on his right are the sons of princes of his empire, splendidly clad and with gold plaited in their hair. Before him sits the high priest, and behind the high priest sit the other priests…The door of the pavilion is guarded by dogs of an excellent breed who almost never leave the king's presence and who wear collars of gold and silver studded with bells of the same material.
Their religion is paganism and the worship of idols….
jari, you need to talk to more continental Africans. You would be shocked to realise not all black Africans originated from mainland Africa. You would find many have their origins outside Africa. That is something you need to educate yourself about.
Until you do that, you would always find topics like this confusing.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
LOL! Why do you call me son? I am sure I am way older than you.
With regard to concrete evidence, my African Oral history tells me so. That is my evidence.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ Which makes your case even more sad and pathetic.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
^^^^ Really! You are funny. I am the one giving YOU the knowledge and that makes me sad and pathetic? So what does that make you since YOU don't know half of what you are talking about?
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
Like Jari, I find it humorously ironic that Energy thinks that black people in general have a stronger connection to Middle Eastern Hebrews than to fellow Africans like the Egyptians. It's like me claiming I'm more closely related to Mesopotamians than to Romans.
Why would the Hebrews be more desirable as ancestors than the Egyptians anyway?
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Since you now say the curse was on Canaan and not on all of HAM's children
Then I apologize for not being clear. The curse that was pronounced on Ham fell on his son, Canaan; hence "the curse of Canaan."
quote: what has Canaan got to do with the African continent?
His father inherited both N.Africa (including East Africa) and Palestine.
quote: So you see your claim that blacks carry the curse of Canaan or Ham does not stand up to scrutiny.
You must have only skimmed through my missive. I do not endorse the claim that the curse of Ham fell on the Negro.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: [QUOTE]The Negro is not physically weak. But he lacks in the area of organizational skills; he is unable to mount a formidable opposition against invading forces. As well, his belief in animism weakens his ability to confront, militarily, technologically driven foreign aggressors.
Creation of Animist Africans
Posted by Zioncity (Member # 18034) on :
Posted by Just call me Jarl
quote:Im talking to Energy who claims all of SSA contained Jews. Were there Jews in West Africa yes, but majority were Pagans. Second there were Jews in West Africa but these people were insignifigant. the Dominant people were Pagan Animists. What Empire in Ghana was a Jewish One?? Im sure you are taking about the Za Yemeni myth but the people who Created Ghana were the Sonnike Im talking to Energy who claims all of SSA contained Jews. Were there Jews in West Africa yes, but majority were Pagans.
Second there were Jews in West Africa but these people were insignifigant. the Dominant people were Pagan Animists.
What Empire in Ghana was a Jewish One?? Im sure you are taking about the Za Yemeni myth but the people who Created Ghana were the Sonnike.
Gotcha never knew the Za dynasty werent hebrews I was taught they were Jews from Yemen were they converts?
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari:
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: [QUOTE]The Negro is not physically weak. But he lacks in the area of organizational skills; he is unable to mount a formidable opposition against invading forces. As well, his belief in animism weakens his ability to confront, militarily, technologically driven foreign aggressors.
Creation of Animist Africans
What are these images in aid of Jari? You think by posting more images of ancient Egyptians would wipe out my ancestral history in West Africa? Hahahahahahahaaaa!
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Son, I know your argument back and fouth because I used to ascribe to the BHI teachings, that is until I did my own independent research.
Im not even trying with you. Your theories have holes the size of Montana in them.
I told you Earlier that the Irish and Scottish were Shipped to the America in Slave Ships thus Fulfuilling the supposed Deut. 28 Prophecy. So according to your Theology the Scottish and Irish are Black Hebrew Israelites...LOL
quote:Originally posted by Energy: ^^^^ Really! You are funny. I am the one giving YOU the knowledge and that makes me sad and pathetic? So what does that make you since YOU don't know half of what you are talking about?
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
I wonder how the people claiming Hebrew ancestry for black Africans reconcile their belief with all those bioanthropological studies finding ancient Middle Easterners to have very different, less tropically adapted limb proportions from African peoples like the Egyptians? Did the Hebrews somehow re-evolve tropical proportions after migrating into Africa in the last few millennia even though limb proportion changes take many thousands of years?
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth:
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Since you now say the curse was on Canaan and not on all of HAM's children
Then I apologize for not being clear. The curse that was pronounced on Ham fell on his son, Canaan; hence "the curse of Canaan."
quote: what has Canaan got to do with the African continent?
His father inherited both N.Africa (including East Africa) and Palestine.
quote: So you see your claim that blacks carry the curse of Canaan or Ham does not stand up to scrutiny.
You must have only skimmed through my missive. I do not endorse the claim that the curse of Ham fell on the Negro.
Yeah but the point is Canaan has NOTHING to do with Negroes. The questions I asked earlier was to do with the poor condition of people from Sub-Sahara Africa and blacks in the Americas and your response was it was due to the curse of HAM then you said Canaan. But as you can see yourself. No matter how much you spin it, Canaan has no connection with people in Sub_sahara Africa and blacks in the Americas.
Thus you have to come up with a more plausible explanation for the poor performance of the black race because we have very little or no connection with Canaan.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Further damaging is the fact that Josephus claimed Deut. 28 was fullfilled when Jews were actually Shipped to Egypt as Slaves..LMAO.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Son, I know your argument back and fouth because I used to ascribe to the BHI teachings, that is until I did my own independent research.
Im not even trying with you. Your theories have holes the size of Montana in them.
I told you Earlier that the Irish and Scottish were Shipped to the America in Slave Ships thus Fulfuilling the supposed Deut. 28 Prophecy. So according to your Theology the Scottish and Irish are Black Hebrew Israelites...LOL
quote:Originally posted by Energy: ^^^^ Really! You are funny. I am the one giving YOU the knowledge and that makes me sad and pathetic? So what does that make you since YOU don't know half of what you are talking about?
LOL! Therein lies your problem. You assume I am arguing from the position of a BHI. To tell you the truth, I don't even know what they believe. I am arguing with you per my AUTHENTIC African history which I know you don't know anything about.
Go and get this book at www.mawuvi.com. It was written by a continental African.
It would teach you all you need to know about slavery and the Hebrews in Africa.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Truth these people dismiss Logic and Reason and anything Scientific for Heresay and flimsy Bible Passages.
I know, trust me Science and Anthropology is the Biggest Bullet against them because it proves they Evolved in Africa and Adapted to Africa Millions of years before a Israel or Jew existed.
Notice they will use genetics and science to bolister their claim of Black Superiority but dismiss it when it goes against their ideologies.
Genetics...The Freight Train at the end of the Racialist's Tunnel..LOL
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: I wonder how the people claiming Hebrew ancestry for black Africans reconcile their belief with all those bioanthropological studies finding ancient Middle Easterners to have very different, less tropically adapted limb proportions from African peoples like the Egyptians? Did the Hebrews somehow re-evolve tropical proportions after migrating into Africa in the last few millennia even though limb proportion changes take many thousands of years?
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
^^^^ Maybe we don't have any history in West Africa. Our ancestors lied to us hence the discrepancies huh?
ROTFLMBAO!
Posted by Zioncity (Member # 18034) on :
quote:I wonder how the people claiming Hebrew ancestry for black Africans reconcile their belief with all those bioanthropological studies finding ancient Middle Easterners to have very different, less tropically adapted limb proportions from African peoples like the Egyptians? Did the Hebrews somehow re-evolve tropical proportions after migrating into Africa in the last few millennia even though limb proportion changes take many thousands of years?
Excuse me but wasnt that you asking the same type questions put to rest in this thread herehttp://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=001894
>scratches head<
@Energy
Why are you arguing about what your own personal beliefs are? I actually think the duet 28 prophecy is dead on but i'm not gonna argue to each his own.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
^^ Sorry Zioncity you lost me there. I don't know which personal beliefs you say I am arguing against. Can you elaborate?
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
We have history. Oulata, Nok, Nubia, Egypt, Garamante, Axum, D.mt, Punt.
What I find sad is that your notion that African History outside of the Bible and out side of Jewish Mythology is "No History"...
Like I said the people of Nabta Playa had sophisticated Structures and advanced astrnomy and were developing writing while the Jews were in Sumaria wiping **** from their asses with dried Cactus, picking flies out of their head. Africans have the greatst History and Animist Africans created the greatest temples and the most advanced Mythology.
I doubt the Jews in their heyday even knew what a Sub-Terrain structure was, let alone how to apply it it their Architecture.
quote:Originally posted by Energy: ^^^^ Maybe we don't have any history in West Africa. Our ancestors lied to us hence the discrepancies huh?
ROTFLMBAO!
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
Just call me Jari, what does evidence to high hamitic civilization have to do with the Negro? You lost me on that one.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ Bitch you cant read what the f-k you wrote...
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: [QUOTE]The Negro is not physically weak. But he lacks in the area of organizational skills; he is unable to mount a formidable opposition against invading forces. As well, his belief in animism weakens his ability to confront, militarily, technologically driven foreign aggressors.
You are a Prime example of the long term effects of BHI teachings.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Further damaging is the fact that Josephus claimed Deut. 28 was fullfilled when Jews were actually Shipped to Egypt as Slaves..LMAO.
Josephus NEVER said anything like that. Furthermore Israel is a walking distance to AE so no Jews were ever shipped to Egypt as slaves.
FYI you are quoting a Biblical verse that happened in our days when blacks (Hebrews) were shipped to the American continent as slaves.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: ^^^^ Bitch you cant read what the f-k you wrote...
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: [QUOTE]The Negro is not physically weak. But he lacks in the area of organizational skills; he is unable to mount a formidable opposition against invading forces. As well, his belief in animism weakens his ability to confront, militarily, technologically driven foreign aggressors.
You are a Prime example of the long term effects of BHI teachings.
Geeez! Why cant you just respond without insults? Have you ever heard the saying it is the one without FACTS who hide behind insults to cover up their ignorance?
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
As for black Israelites, this is the realm of fantasy. There may have been a few early Christians in Rome with African origins, but most of the catacomb images are not as swarthy as the ones shown...
The earliest surviving Christian art from Egypt does not support black Israelism either...
A Nubian princess with a very white Virgin Mary watching over her:
Some more Nubian images of white Israelites including a white baby Jesus blessing a dark bishop:
A light-skinned Moses painted by an Ethiopian...
More light skinned saints etc. courtesy of Ethiopian Christians...
Bear in mind that Nubian and especially Ethiopian Christianity was essentially independent and cut-off of the wider Church so the light colouring is unlikely to result from European influence. Now why would black early Christians ever paint white saints if there was even a rumour that the Israelites in the Holy Land were black?
Here is an Egyptian paintings of ancient Semites: mostly not what you call black, but rather with similar features and skin tones to modern Palestinians...
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Those posts were not meant for you, they were meant for Gigantic, hence why I quoted him. He claimed Animist Africans were inferior.
quote:Originally posted by Energy: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Just call me Jari:What are these images in aid of Jari? You think by posting more images of ancient Egyptians would wipe out my ancestral history in West Africa? Hahahahahahahaaaa!
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: What I find sad is that your notion that African History outside of the Bible and out side of Jewish Mythology is "No History"...
I feel the same way. So many of the people who are often mistaken for "Afrocentrists" are actually anti-African because they want to identify with non-African cultures like the Hebrews. Instead of advocating for actual African cultures, they want to prove that this and that non-African civilization was really built by black people. It's like they've internalized negative ideas about Africa and don't want to be associated with it.
I would go so far as to wager their "Afrocentrism" is really a disguise for inner self-hatred. They act like black supremacists to hide the fact that they actually reject their own heritage. It's really tragic how a lack of respect for their own people damages the African Diaspora psyche and tears Diaspora communities apart.
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari:
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: [QUOTE]The Negro is not physically weak. But he lacks in the area of organizational skills; he is unable to mount a formidable opposition against invading forces. As well, his belief in animism weakens his ability to confront, militarily, technologically driven foreign aggressors.
Creation of Animist Africans
Created by this hook-nosed caucasoid polytheist autocrat, who would never pass for a negro in a month of sundays...
Who had his respect for negroes immortalized thus:
The latter carving on that very temple of Abu Simbel, no less.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: What I find sad is that your notion that African History outside of the Bible and out side of Jewish Mythology is "No History"...
I feel the same way. So many of the people who are often mistaken for "Afrocentrists" are actually anti-African because they want to identify with non-African cultures like the Hebrews. Instead of advocating for actual African cultures, they want to prove that this and that non-African civilization was really built by black people. It's like they've internalized negative ideas about Africa and don't want to be associated with it.
I would go so far as to wager their "Afrocentrism" is really a disguise for inner self-hatred. They act like black supremacists to hide the fact that they actually reject their own heritage. It's really tragic how a lack of respect for their own people damages the African Diaspora psyche and tears Diaspora communities apart.
Do you know how patronising you sound? You talk as if the billion plus blacks in Africa have no history.
I already told you many Africans have their oral histories and many of these histories speak of origins outside Africa.
I suggest you read the book; "The call to the Hebrews!" It answers all these questions we are discussing here. You can get it at Amazon or www.mawuvi.com
I swear to you much of this discussion would become redundant as you get to know what continental Africans themselves talk of their origins.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: As for black Israelites, this is the realm of fantasy. There may have been a few early Christians in Rome with African origins, but most of the catacomb images are not as swarthy as the ones shown...Yet there were blacks buried in the Jewish Catacombs.
What is the point, the Jews like all nations were Mulitethnic.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by rahotep101: [QB]The earliest surviving Christian art from Egypt does not support black Israelism either...
Egypt was under the control of the Byzantine Church, Thus under Greek and Roman Europeans.
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: A Nubian princess with a very white Virgin Mary watching over her:
The Nubians were under the Alexandrian Church as well, once again this proves nothing.
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: A light-skinned Moses painted by an Ethiopian...
More light skinned saints etc. courtesy of Ethiopian Christians...
Bear in mind that Nubian and especially Ethiopian Christianity was essentially independent and cut-off of the wider Church so the light colouring is unlikely to result from European influence. Now why would black early Christians ever paint white saints if there was even a rumour that the Israelites in the Holy Land were black?
Here is an Egyptian paintings of ancient Semites: mostly not what you call black, but rather with similar features and skin tones to modern Palestinians...
This is a Bunch of provable lies. The Nubian Church was under the Alexandrian Coptic Control. The Alexandrians Copts were Greeks.
Second none of your cherry picked Ethiopian Art work does not show white people.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Some of the Images you tried to take out of Context
More Ethiopian Art
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
And you sir are a prime example of why porch monkeys should stay out of grown folk business. The statement you are quoting is a continuation of a discussion that you obviously are ignorant to. Here is what I stated earlier that should put in perspective the quote you have of me:
"Of all races, the Negro is the only one to have been subjugated by all at some point in history. Admittedely, the Bible does not even consider the geneology of man south of the Sahara. So even that argument falls short. There is no Negro in the Bible. The people viewed humanity beyond their known world as "Beasts.""
You sir, are what is called "EPIC FAIL."
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Bitch you cant read what the f-k you wrote... You are a Prime example of the long term effects of BHI teachings.
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
The Egyptian Christians were as Egyptian as their Egyptian polytheists ancestors of centuries before. Some of them had names reflecting their pagan roots, such as Origen, which comes from Horus.
The Copts, for the most part, were not part of the Greek Church (Melkites) and had their liturgy in their own ancestral language (Coptic) not in Greek. The native Egyptian church and the Byzantine Church never got on well, and split after the Council of Chalcedon. After that the Egyptians were persecuted as heretics, by their Greek rulers, over some theological minutae. The Alexandrian Copts were not Greeks but were enemies of the Greeks!
The Alexandrian Patriarch, who also held authority over Ethiopia, was not a creature of the Byzantine empire but of the native Egyptain church, which was in schism with the Byzantine church (which was then also the Roman Catholic Church because the two had not yet split). Hence why Ethiopian Orthodox Christianity is also sometimes called Coptic.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
You are such a reject its laughable, really.
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: Created by this hook-nosed caucasoid polytheist autocrat, who would never pass for a negro in a month of sundays...
Ramses did not originate in the Caucus Region he was Nilotic.
Also you can save your Negro Caucasian "Ring around the Rosey" games for some one else. Im not playing in your court, either define a Caucasian on Modern Genetic and Anthropological grounds or go play on Stormfront somewhere.
Kalonji already called your ass out on that. Maybe you should go there and own up to your arguments.
Plenty of Images of Africans with a so called Hooked Nose have been posted to you, the fact that you choose to ignore so reflects on your own ignorance and willfull denial of the facts.
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101:
Who had his respect for negroes immortalized thus:
The latter carving on that very temple of Abu Simbel, no less.
In this Image you have plenty of Nubians with the same skin color as Ramses..LOL. Guess you missed that one huh...
Seriously...
Epic Fail.
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Some of the Images you tried to take out of Context
More Ethiopian Art
I didn't show most of those out of context, only one of those did I show at all, in fact, and that without directing attetion to the black devil in the one corner!
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
As Altakruri said you Euro-clowns love to play the Negro Caucasian tricks. Playing Ring around the Rosey.
It is you people who are a mixture and a degeneration of Africans not vice versa. The so called Caucasian originated in Africa.
The Egyptians were Tropical Adapted, Animist Africans...
End of Story.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: And you sir are a prime example of why porch monkeys should stay out of grown folk business. The statement you are quoting is a continuation of a discussion that you obviously are ignorant to. Here is what I stated earlier that should put in perspective the quote you have of me:
"Of all races, the Negro is the only one to have been subjugated by all at some point in history. Admittedely, the Bible does not even consider the geneology of man south of the Sahara. So even that argument falls short. There is no Negro in the Bible. The people viewed humanity beyond their known world as "Beasts.""
You sir, are what is called "EPIC FAIL."
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Bitch you cant read what the f-k you wrote... You are a Prime example of the long term effects of BHI teachings.
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: You are such a reject its laughable, really.
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: Created by this hook-nosed caucasoid polytheist autocrat, who would never pass for a negro in a month of sundays...
Ramses did not originate in the Caucus Region he was Nilotic.
Also you can save your Negro Caucasian "Ring around the Rosey" games for some one else. Im not playing in your court, either define a Caucasian on Modern Genetic and Anthropological grounds or go play on Stormfront somewhere.
Kalonji already called your ass out on that. Maybe you should go there and own up to your arguments.
Plenty of Images of Africans with a so called Hooked Nose have been posted to you, the fact that you choose to ignore so reflects on your own ignorance and willfull denial of the facts.
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101:
Who had his respect for negroes immortalized thus:
The latter carving on that very temple of Abu Simbel, no less.
In this Image you have plenty of Nubians with the same skin color as Ramses..LOL. Guess you missed that one huh...
Seriously...
Epic Fail.
He's also the same colour as his horse, but the different facial features indicate that Ramesses was neither a negro nor a horse.
Posted by Energy (Member # 16438) on :
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: The Egyptian Christians were as Egyptian as their Egyptian polytheists ancestors of centuries before. Some of them had names reflecting their pagan roots, such as Origen, which comes from Horus.
The Copts, for the most part, were not part of the Greek Church (Melkites) and had their liturgy in theor own ancestral language (Coptic) not in Greek. The native Egyptian church and the Byzantine Church never got on, and split after the Council of Chalcedon, after which the Egyptians were persecuted as heretics, by their Greek rulers, over some theological minutae. The Alexandrian Copts were not Greeks but were enemies of the Greeks!
The Alexandrian Patriarch, who also held authority over Ethiopia, was not a creature of the Byzantine empire but of the native Egyptain church, which was in schism with the Byzantine church (which was then also the Roman Catholic Church because the two had not yet split). Hence why Ethiopian Orthodox Christianity is also sometimes called Coptic.
?????What has Christianity got to do with the Hebrews?
Christianity is a religion. Hebrews are a race of humans. We are discussing the race of the ancient Israelites and not a religion that sprung from their beliefs more than a thousand years after they were gone.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
What are you an Ethiopian, Did you paint those Images?? Very few people on Earth are Jet Black and I doubt the image of the devil had anything to do with black people but with a lack of Light and darkness associated with Satan and Hell.
Please play your games with someone else. No more Ring around the Rosey B.S.
I didn't show most of those out of context, only one of those did I show at all, in fact, and that without directing attetion to the black devil in the one corner! [/QB][/QUOTE]
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Folks Here is a Good example of How Rahotep's Chase the Mulberry Bush Games operate...
Rahotep Introduces and Image that is supposed to prove Egyptians were not Black, However when I point out that Ramses painted himself the same Color as many of the Nubians here is his reply..
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: He's also the same colour as his horse, but the different facial features indicate that Ramesses was neither a negro nor a horse.
As we can see Rahotep pretty much invalidates his whole reply by 1) Introducing an Image that is supposed to prove the Egyptian Art proves they were not black Like Nubians...and then 2) Contrdicts himself by claiming that Ramses painted himself the same color of his horse( trying to Make the similarity to the Nubians invalid)Fallacy Argument
Also I asked Rahotep to define Caucasian and Negro according to Genetic and Anthopological Grounds, until then Im not going to play the "Features" games. Please see older posts on How in Rahotep's eyeballing he labeled the same Pharoah a Negro and a Caucasian.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
LOL!! Weak ass come back. C'mon son!!
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: As Altakruri said you Euro-clowns love to play the Negro Caucasian tricks. Playing Ring around the Rosey.
It is you people who are a mixture and a degeneration of Africans not vice versa. The so called Caucasian originated in Africa.
The Egyptians were Tropical Adapted, Animist Africans...
End of Story.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: And you sir are a prime example of why porch monkeys should stay out of grown folk business. The statement you are quoting is a continuation of a discussion that you obviously are ignorant to. Here is what I stated earlier that should put in perspective the quote you have of me:
"Of all races, the Negro is the only one to have been subjugated by all at some point in history. Admittedely, the Bible does not even consider the geneology of man south of the Sahara. So even that argument falls short. There is no Negro in the Bible. The people viewed humanity beyond their known world as "Beasts.""
You sir, are what is called "EPIC FAIL."
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Bitch you cant read what the f-k you wrote... You are a Prime example of the long term effects of BHI teachings.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Dumbass the Comment was in reference to this..
As well, his belief in animism weakens his ability to confront, militarily, technologically driven foreign aggressors.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth:
quote:The Negro is not physically weak. But he lacks in the area of organizational skills; he is unable to mount a formidable opposition against invading forces. As well, his belief in animism weakens his ability to confront, militarily, technologically driven foreign aggressors.
Please do yourself a favor and at least learn about reading comprehension.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: LOL!! Weak ass come back. C'mon son!!
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: As Altakruri said you Euro-clowns love to play the Negro Caucasian tricks. Playing Ring around the Rosey.
It is you people who are a mixture and a degeneration of Africans not vice versa. The so called Caucasian originated in Africa.
The Egyptians were Tropical Adapted, Animist Africans...
End of Story.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: And you sir are a prime example of why porch monkeys should stay out of grown folk business. The statement you are quoting is a continuation of a discussion that you obviously are ignorant to. Here is what I stated earlier that should put in perspective the quote you have of me:
"Of all races, the Negro is the only one to have been subjugated by all at some point in history. Admittedely, the Bible does not even consider the geneology of man south of the Sahara. So even that argument falls short. There is no Negro in the Bible. The people viewed humanity beyond their known world as "Beasts.""
You sir, are what is called "EPIC FAIL."
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Bitch you cant read what the f-k you wrote... You are a Prime example of the long term effects of BHI teachings.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
^Dude, what part of - the statement is a continuation to an earlier discussion - do you not understand? Are you retarded?
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
I was making the point that the early African Churches weren't under undue influence from European authorities, hence they had no Europeans telling them to paint people from the Bible as white. And if the African Christians had any suspicion that the original Jews were black they would have painted them thus.
Ethiopia did contain black Jews, the Falashas, who mainstream Judaism recognizes as authentic Jews, but Ethiopian art does not always depict biblical personalities as black. There's the odd later painting of king Solomon where he has the makings of an Afro but generally only the Queen of Sheeba is shown as black.
By the way the 'Song of Solomon' tends to suggest that blackness was unusual among the Hebrews. The female speaker, called the Shulamite, seems to defend her blackness: 'I am black but beautiful...'. If blackness was normal then she would surely have felt no need to say this, or else would have said 'black AND beautiful' rather than '~but~'.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
^rahotep, not to mention, the mistress was darkened, a result of severe sun tanning. It was not her natural complexion. Admittedely, her skin color is relative to the skin color of the hebrews. You cannot really use that passage to challenge the claim that she was Black as the term is defined today, i.e., Negroes.
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Folks Here is a Good example of How Rahotep's Chase the Mulberry Bush Games operate...
Rahotep Introduces and Image that is supposed to prove Egyptians were not Black, However when I point out that Ramses painted himself the same Color as many of the Nubians here is his reply..
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: He's also the same colour as his horse, but the different facial features indicate that Ramesses was neither a negro nor a horse.
As we can see Rahotep pretty much invalidates his whole reply by 1) Introducing an Image that is supposed to prove the Egyptian Art proves they were not black Like Nubians...and then 2) Contrdicts himself by claiming that Ramses painted himself the same color of his horse( trying to Make the similarity to the Nubians invalid)Fallacy Argument
Also I asked Rahotep to define Caucasian and Negro according to Genetic and Anthopological Grounds, until then Im not going to play the "Features" games. Please see older posts on How in Rahotep's eyeballing he labeled the same Pharoah a Negro and a Caucasian.
I was most certainly not labelling the same pharaoh a negro and a caucasian. Caucasians can approach the skin tone of the lightest negroes. However the Egyptians associated dark skin with manliness, so that particular painting may not be reliable as to how dark Ramesses was. Balout's analysis of Ramesses' mummy supports this theory...
'...the anthropological study and the microscopic analysis of hair, carried out by four laboratories: Judiciary Medecine (Professor Ceccaldi), Société L'Oréal, Atomic Energy Commission, and Institut Textile de France showed that Ramses II was a 'leucoderm', that is a fair-skinned man, near to the Prehistoric and Antiquity Mediterraneans, or briefly, of the Berber of Africa." [Balout, et al. (1985) 383.]'
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Animist Africans created the greatest temples and the most advanced Mythology.
Dumb Skunt. The Egyptian Mythology was highly advanced. It was more than just the worship of gods, everything about the gods had hidden meanings and aspects. There existed different forms of the same god operating at once and for different purposes. Can you name a Mythology more advanced than Egypt, hell do you even understand Egyptian Mythology??
Only someone like you would try to mock the idea that Egypt's Mythology was Advanced
Epic Fail.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Animist Africans created the greatest temples and the most advanced Mythology.
You can see clearly Rahotep trying to label the same Pharoah(Taraqo) Both Negro and Caucasian or Hamite what ever these clowns are using whenever it suits them..Only to be called out later on it.
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: It seems the two Nubian statues are both usually identified as Taharqa, so woops and well spotted! I've seen the first image identified as Tanutamani, sometimes, however. You must admit the two statues have completely different features. If you came to these images blind you would be unlikely to come to the conclusion that they were of the same ethnicity, let alone that they were the same individual.
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: [QUOTE]I was most certainly not labelling the same pharaoh a negro and a caucasian.
Tricks are for kids...
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: [QB] Dumb Skunt. The Egyptian Mythology was highly advanced. It was more than just the worship of gods, everything about the gods had hidden meanings and aspects.
spookism is advancement?
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Nubia is always the Crutch of the Euroclowns looking to do the dance around the Mulberry Bush....
The Revolving door...One Minute Negro, the Next Minute Caucasian...One Minute the Egyptians painted them all pitch black, the Next Minute when the Nubians have the same skin as the Color, its Symbolic
In one Instance Nubians are Negros...
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101:
quote:
Who had his respect for negroes immortalized thus:
In another there are Caucasian Negros...
quote:Originally posted by rahotep10 1:
I've already made the point that there appear to have been different types of Nubians, hamitic/Caucasoid ones and negro ones, both darker than the Egyptians. Sorry to keep calling a spade a spade, but I speak as I find. [/URL]
Back to the Negro Nubians although the have the same Skin Color...
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: He's also the same colour as his horse, but the different facial features indicate that Ramesses was neither a negro nor a horse.
Rahotep sudden opinion on the same Image he posted 4 or 5 posts back..
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: so that particular painting may not be reliable
Rahotep has officially debunked himself and continues to squirm out of the sinkhole he made for himself.
Yeah you F-ked up posting that image son...
No Mulberry Bush Dances anymore...
[/qb]
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Good Quote, Im going to save this for next time you try to say how much you love Africans and native African religion.
Ill save a Screenshot just in case you try to delete or edit it.
Put the Rats to the Fire and the Truth comes out..
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: [QB] Dumb Skunt. The Egyptian Mythology was highly advanced. It was more than just the worship of gods, everything about the gods had hidden meanings and aspects.
spookism is advancement?
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Ramses was probably a Mixed race Mongrel due to the Egyptian Subjugation of Eurasians at the time...
However the major phenotype of the New Kingdom reflected a Southern Nilotic look.
Harris and Wente reportedly made a connection between the Tasians and Natufians, just as Larry Angel suggested...
The difference between late XVII and XVIII dynasty royal mummies and contemporary Nubians is slight. During the XVIV and XX dynasties we see possibly some mixing between a Nubian element that is more similar to Mesolithic Nubians (low vaults, sloping frontal bone, etc.), with an orthognathous population. Since the Ramessides were of northern extraction, this could represent miscegenation with modern Mediterraneans of Levantine type. The projecting zygomatic arches of Seti I suggest remnants of the old Natufian/Tasian types of the Holocene period.
If the heads of Queens Nodjme and Esemkhebe are any indication, there may have been a new influx of southern blood during the XXI Dynasty.
In summation, the New Kingdom Pharaohs and Queens whose mummies have been recovered bear strong similarity to either contemporary Nubians, as with the XVII and XVIII dynasties, or with Mesolithic-Holocene Nubians, as with the XVIV and XX dynasties. The former dynasties seem to have a strong southern affinity, while the latter possessed evidence of mixing with modern Mediterranean types and also, possibly, with remnants of the old Tasian and Natufian populations. From the few sample available from the XXI Dynasty, there may have been a new infusion from the south at this period. - courtesy of www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Temple.
Also noted that the Ramsedisse House was responsible for the Decline, Backruptcy, and unofficial end of Kemetic Rule.
All the Sutens that made Egypt great came from the South so it makes sense a Delata Family drove Egypt to ruin.
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: [QUOTE]
'...the anthropological study and the microscopic analysis of hair, carried out by four laboratories: Judiciary Medecine (Professor Ceccaldi), Société L'Oréal, Atomic Energy Commission, and Institut Textile de France showed that Ramses II was a 'leucoderm', that is a fair-skinned man, near to the Prehistoric and Antiquity Mediterraneans, or briefly, of the Berber of Africa." [Balout, et al. (1985) 383.]'
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote: By Jarhead
blar blar blar
Irrelevant old news. Obviously one or both of the statues of the Nubian pharaoh was made by a sculptor who had never seen him. Analysis of Ramesses is based on his mummy, whereas to my knowledge we do not have Taharqa's mummy.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Analysis of Ramses mummy suggests he had tropical limbs
You didn't provide analysis, you offered subjective opinion based on your eyeball anthropology
Posted by adrianne (Member # 10761) on :
just call me jari says
"Nubia is always the Crutch of the Euroclowns looking to do the dance around the Mulberry Bush....
The Revolving door...One Minute Negro, the Next Minute Caucasian...One Minute the Egyptians painted them all pitch black, the Next Minute when the Nubians have the same skin as the Color, its Symbolic"
rahotep u have to admit he got u there
whats your comeback to jaris post?
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: What are you an Ethiopian, Did you paint those Images?? Very few people on Earth are Jet Black and I doubt the image of the devil had anything to do with black people but with a lack of Light and darkness associated with Satan and Hell.
Of course the devil is not a black man. The devil is a figment of the imagination. However it's quite nice to point out to BHI freaks and their fellow travellers, many of whom speak of a creature called the 'white devil', that the first black Christians depicted Satan thus:
And Jesus thus:
They could have been wrong, and Jesus could have been as black as you like for all I know or care.
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
This fits here, likewise ...
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Show me a black man that looks like that..That exact skin color..
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Just call me Jari: [qb]
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Rahotep 26 May, 2011 01:16 PM
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: He's also the same colour as his horse, but the different facial features indicate that Ramesses was neither a negro nor a horse.
Rahotep 26 May, 2011 02:18 PM
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: so that particular painting may not be reliable
Rahotep 26 May, 2011 05:48 PM
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: This fits here, likewise ...
What will be his next step
Find out folks around the Mulberry Bush..
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''Show me a black man that looks like that..That exact skin color..'' ======
The earliest Christian literature describes Satan or the devil as black. Usually racially reflecting the Black Sub-Saharan Africans or ethiopians (who because of their ugliness were percieved as demons, monsters and evil).
- The Epistle of Barnabas (c. 100 AD) calls the devil 'ho melas', the 'black one'.
- The Acts of Peter (c. 180) says Satan is black (malas) and a female demon is called ''a most evil looking Aithiops (Ethiopian)''.
- Jerome wrote that the black ethiopians were 'cloaked in the filth of sin'.
Following quotes are from -
Symbolic blackness and ethnic difference in early Christian literature By Gay L. Byron (2002)
''Ethiopians and blacks are personified as demons throughout monastic literature. One well-known example is Antony's encounter with the devil who appeared in the form of a black boy (melas pias).
''Sexual Threats
The sexual danger that the Ethiopians presented to the Desert Fathers is well attested from the monastic literature from the forth through sixth centuries CE.
For example, Palladius, in a work entitled ''On Fornication'' describes devils who appear in the form of Ethiopians.''
see also the following works -
Begrimed and black: Christian traditions on Blacks and blackness By Robert Earl Hood (1994)
Saracens, demons, & Jews: making monsters in medieval art By Debra Higgs Strickland (2003)
The latter work shows how black africans are the origin of monsters in medieval art (because of their ugly appearance).
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
Symbolic blackness and ethnic difference in early Christian literature By Gay L. Byron (2002)
Here is the full title
Symbolic Blackness and Ethnic Difference in Early Christian Literature: BLACKENED BY THEIR SINS: Early Christian Ethno-Political Rhetorics about Egyptians, Ethiopians, Blacks and Blackness
Thankyou for this title I will read it and adress your out of context approach, as well as gather more information on how White Greeks viewed Black Egyptians.. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: Like Jari, I find it humorously ironic that Energy thinks that black people in general have a stronger connection to Middle Eastern Hebrews than to fellow Africans like the Egyptians. It's like me claiming I'm more closely related to Mesopotamians than to Romans.
Why would the Hebrews be more desirable as ancestors than the Egyptians anyway?
The reason would be purely politico-religious. Most African Americans like most Westerners grew up in a Judeo-Christian society where most spirituality and faith is based on the Judeo-Christian Bible.
By the way Jari, I actually disapprove of the term 'Animist' as that seems to be a Western catch-phrase for "primitive religion" and not simply paganism. Animism is the belief that spirits reside in all and everything in nature. It may sound neutral enough but trust me, it is biased when Western scholars apply that term to traditional religions of Sub-Sahara but not the religious beliefs of "Classical" Europeans like the Greeks who believed rivers to be gods and every spring and tree to hold a nymph. By the way, the ancient pagan Israelites and definitely their Hebrew ancestors like their Arabian kinsmen were definitely more 'animistic' than the Egyptians since they would even conceive spirits to dwell in rocks and even worshiped rocks!!
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari:
quote:Originally posted by DaHoisDumb101: This fits here, likewise ...
What will be his next step
Find out folks around the Mulberry Bush..
LMAO
Indeed DaDelusional1 is obviously in denial if he would compare the Nubians' EXACT same complexion as Ramses with lighter skinned blacks but compare Ramses to tanned white guy!!
By the way, Jari notice your citing of Harris and Wente compares the Ramesides facial features to not just any Levantine people but the Natufians as well as the Tasians Mesolithic Egyptians. This means he was not the "mongrel" you think he is but a descendant of indigenous Delta Egyptians who were equally African and black.
If anything it is the Levantines who are the mongrels as they have been receiving peoples from Africa since the epipaleolithic with both Natufians and Harifians.
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Indeed DaDelusional1 is obviously in denial if he would compare the Nubians' EXACT same complexion as Ramses with lighter skinned blacks but compare Ramses to tanned white guy!!
Indeed, if you look closely, you'll see that even if the shaded part of the white guy's face seems reddish brown, the better-lit part is significantly paler than Rameses II. One must also factor in the possibility that the mural has faded slightly over time; Rameses could have been darker when it was first painted.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
He's using that African women to compare to the reddish Nubians but they're the same color as Ramses. Does that make any sense LOL.
His comparison of Ramses to the Italian guy is equally messed up for Truthcentric's aforementioned reasons. Now one has to ask why Rahotep would look for a comparison outside Africa when the Egyptians were clearly related to Africans. Kalonji actually pointed this out in his video how ancient southern Europeans are depicted with dark skin but would Rahotep compare them with Africans? No, he would compare them with indigenous southern Europeans! Likewise, Ancient Egyptians should be compared with indigenous Africans that they were clearly related to.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Indeed DaDelusional1 is obviously in denial if he would compare the Nubians' EXACT same complexion as Ramses with lighter skinned blacks but compare Ramses to tanned white guy!!
Ditto. Since Rameses' pigmentation closely approximates those of the "brownly" pigmented Kushitic figures, and even the horse pulling Rameses for that matter, then it should follow that Rameses--like the Kushites--ought to be equated with the "lighter of the blacks" in the photo. This is the sort of "consistency" one can expect from those consumed by eurocentric radicalism.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz':
Kalonji actually pointed this out in his video how ancient southern Europeans are depicted with dark skin but would Rahotep compare them with Africans? No, he would compare them with indigenous southern Europeans! Likewise, Ancient Egyptians should be compared with indigenous Africans that they were clearly related to.
As a matter of precision, it would be more accurate to say certain southern Europeans were portrayed with "dark skin"; hence, not all. As an illustration, consider the following, reportedly displaying captured Roman soldiers:
The Minoan figures, especially the males, were generally featured in dark skin, that approximates those used on several African, including ancient Egyptian, figures. It is understood within academic circles that the Minoans, who are also implicated as relative recent migrants into the region, likely thought of themselves as more of "Near Easterners", or that they shared more with folks then living in the so-called "Near East", than in terms of any connection with indigenous European natives.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Ra-Whore-tep got caught using the pic as his proof of Ramses Hatred for "Negros". He lost once he posted that image, and tried to squirm his way out. Notice he tried to invoke a response by introducing the "Black Devil V. White Ethiopians" post which is a Red Herring Fallacy..
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': He's using that African women to compare to the reddish Nubians but they're the same color as Ramses. Does that make any sense LOL.
His comparison of Ramses to the Italian guy is equally messed up for Truthcentric's aforementioned reasons. Now one has to ask why Rahotep would look for a comparison outside Africa when the Egyptians were clearly related to Africans. Kalonji actually pointed this out in his video how ancient southern Europeans are depicted with dark skin but would Rahotep compare them with Africans? No, he would compare them with indigenous southern Europeans! Likewise, Ancient Egyptians should be compared with indigenous Africans that they were clearly related to.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Ditto. Since Rameses' pigmentation closely approximates those of the "brownly" pigmented Kushitic figures, and even the horse pulling Rameses for that matter, then it should follow that Rameses--like the Kushites--ought to be equated with the "lighter of the blacks" in the photo. This is the sort of "consistency" one can expect from those consumed by eurocentric radicalism.
Oh so now, the ''bitonal'' arrangement of adjacent figures in Ancient Egyptian art is no longer a stylistic convention, which is not to be taken literal, as you argued elsewhere?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Ramses was probably a Mixed race Mongrel
Jari, do you retract this statement? It's o.k.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
(on the other hand Ramses was of Libyan descent, go figure)
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
My comment says probably. I never said it was final. It could be either way. All I know is that he depicted himself no different than Nubian and Southern Egyptians so he could have been of the Southern Phenotype.
If he was a leukoderm like Whore-tep claims then he depicted himself as a Nilotic African. Once again as I told the Whore-tep that sits on many lies, his features are found in African populations.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Ramses was probably a Mixed race Mongrel
Jari, do you retract this statement? It's o.k.
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
I'm not surprised that got everyone's knickers in a twist. It's deeply inconvenient for the pan-African race fantacy (or negrocentric-Egyptomania) that neither the way Ramesses was depicted nor his physical remains make him remotely resemble the negro enemies of Egypt who are falling under his horses' hooves.
There are images of Ramesses, by the way, which make him a more similar colour to the Syrians, to whom he shows the same tender mercy as he does the Nubains... Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
Anyway this has got completely derailed, and I can't help but feel partly responsible...
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ''Show me a black man that looks like that..That exact skin color..'' ======
The earliest Christian literature describes Satan or the devil as black. Usually racially reflecting the Black Sub-Saharan Africans or ethiopians (who because of their ugliness were percieved as demons, monsters and evil).
- The Epistle of Barnabas (c. 100 AD) calls the devil 'ho melas', the 'black one'.
- The Acts of Peter (c. 180) says Satan is black (malas) and a female demon is called ''a most evil looking Aithiops (Ethiopian)''.
- Jerome wrote that the black ethiopians were 'cloaked in the filth of sin'.
Following quotes are from -
Symbolic blackness and ethnic difference in early Christian literature By Gay L. Byron (2002)
''Ethiopians and blacks are personified as demons throughout monastic literature. One well-known example is Antony's encounter with the devil who appeared in the form of a black boy (melas pias).
''Sexual Threats
The sexual danger that the Ethiopians presented to the Desert Fathers is well attested from the monastic literature from the forth through sixth centuries CE.
For example, Palladius, in a work entitled ''On Fornication'' describes devils who appear in the form of Ethiopians.''
see also the following works -
Begrimed and black: Christian traditions on Blacks and blackness By Robert Earl Hood (1994)
Saracens, demons, & Jews: making monsters in medieval art By Debra Higgs Strickland (2003)
The latter work shows how black africans are the origin of monsters in medieval art (because of their ugly appearance).
I came across several references to the devil appearing in the form of a black man when I was studying witchcraft in early modern Europe. Obviously the learned inquisitors were familiar with these older traditions/prejudices, and asked leading questions resulting in descriptions of a black devil who visited his female servants with lewd intent.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
.
1896
-the first church of Hebrew Israelites in America are not the loons you see on the street:
The Church of God and Saints of Christ (Hebrew Israelite)
While Black Christians traditionally have identified spiritually with the Children of Israel, they never claimed to be descendants of the Israelites.In the late 19th century among some African-Americans, an identification with the ancient Hebrews developed into an identification as ancient Hebrews.One of the first groups of Black Hebrews, the Church of God and Saints of Christ, was founded in 1896
The Church of God and Saints of Christ is a Hebrew Israelite religious group established in Lawrence, Kansas, by William Saunders Crowdy in 1896.William Crowdy began congregations in several cities in the Midwestern and Eastern United States, and sent an emissary to organize locations in at least six African countries. The congregation later established locations in Cuba and the West Indies.
The Church of God and Saints of Christ describes itself as "the oldest African-American congregation in the United States that adheres to the tenets of Judaism."The congregation subscribes to the belief in one God, love for all mankind, and the Ten Commandments as the basis for ethical and moral living.It further teaches that among the descendants of the biblical Israelites are peoples of African descent.However, the congregation believes that anyone, regardless of race, nationality or ethnicity, can embrace Judaism and become a member. Members believe that Jesus was neither God nor the son of God, but rather a strict adherent to Judaism and a prophet sent by God. They also consider William Saunders Crowdy to be a prophet.
The Church of God and Saints of Christ synthesizes rituals drawn from both the Old Testament and New Testament. Its OT observances include circumcision of newborn boys, use of the Hebrew calendar, wearing of yarmulkes, observance of Saturday as the Sabbath, and celebration of Passover and other religious holy days specified by the Bible. Its New Testament rites include baptism (immersion) and footwashing, both of which have Judaic origins from the Old Testament. Despite their name, members of the Church of God and Saints of Christ adhere to Judaism as their religion, and do not believe in Christianity.
The group established its headquarters in Philadelphia in 1899, and William S. Crowdy later relocated to Washington, D.C., in 1903. In 1906, Crowdy named Joseph Wesley Crowdy, William Henry Plummer and Calvin Samuel Skinner as leaders of the congregation. Under these three men, the organization continued to grow in membership. In 1921, William Henry Plummer moved the organization's headquarters to its permanent location in Belleville (city of Suffolk), Virginia, which was purchased by William S. Crowdy in 1903 as the intended headquarters for the organization. Howard Zebulun Plummer was consecrated by Calvin S. Skinner as head of the organization in 1931, and served for over 40 years until 1975. By 1936, the Church of God and Saints of Christ had more than 200 "tabernacles" (congregations) and 37,000 members. Levi Solomon Plummer became the church's leader in 1975. Under the leadership of Levi Solomon Plummer, the congregation constructed a temple at its headquarters, Temple Beth El, in two phases, the first in 1980 and the second in 1987. The temple serves as a permanent location for national events, including the annual Passover celebration.Afterwards, the congregation began to rebuild the headquarters land in Virginia originally purchased by William S. Crowdy.Since 2001, the Church of God and Saints of Christ has been led by Rabbi Jehu A. Crowdy, Jr., a great-grandson of William Saunders Crowdy. As of 2005, it had fifty tabernacles in the United States and dozens in Africa. The organization also manages businesses and residential properties at its headquarters in Suffolk, Virginia, including a hotel and two living communities for senior citizens.
As early as 1909, local branches of the organization severed their ties with the congregation, forming their own organizations. Today, among the groups not affiliated with Rabbi Jehu A. Crowdy, Jr. are headquarted in Cleveland, OH and New Haven, CT.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by 1DumbHo: I'm not surprised that got everyone's knickers in a twist. It's deeply inconvenient for the pan-African race fantasy (or negrocentric-Egyptomania) that neither the way Ramesses was depicted nor his physical remains make him remotely resemble the negro enemies of Egypt who are falling under his horses' hooves.
Even if he is shown to be in the EXACT SAME complexion as some of those "negro" enemies. And again I find it hilarious how you consider the idea of a pan-African race to be a fantasy yet you espouse the notion of a pan-European race that extends outside of Europe! Your hypocrisy is duly noted.
quote:There are images of Ramesses, by the way, which make him a more similar colour to the Syrians, to whom he shows the same tender mercy as he does the Nubains...
*yawn*
You were saying??
The XVIV and XX dynasty heads do not have steep foreheads, receding zygomatic arches or prominent chins. Generally, both glabella and occiput are rounded and projecting to varying degrees. The sagittal contour is usually flattened, at least to some degree, although this sometimes begins before the bregma rather than in post-bregmatic position. The whole mandible is rarely squarish, although the body sometimes has a wavy edge. The latter feature, though, is very common in both ancient and modern Nubians. According to Gill (1986), an undulating mandible is a characteristic of Negroids.
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': He's using that African women to compare to the reddish Nubians but they're the same color as Ramses. Does that make any sense LOL.
His comparison of Ramses to the Italian guy is equally messed up for Truthcentric's aforementioned reasons. Now one has to ask why Rahotep would look for a comparison outside Africa when the Egyptians were clearly related to Africans. Kalonji actually pointed this out in his video how ancient southern Europeans are depicted with dark skin but would Rahotep compare them with Africans? No, he would compare them with indigenous southern Europeans! Likewise, Ancient Egyptians should be compared with indigenous Africans that they were clearly related to.
Yes, as I just pointed out with his belief in a pan-European race that extends outside of Africa yet his dismissal of a pan-African race that can't even cover all of Africa, DaDumb1's logic is seriously flawed and consists of double-think and hypocrisy.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Ditto. Since Rameses' pigmentation closely approximates those of the "brownly" pigmented Kushitic figures, and even the horse pulling Rameses for that matter, then it should follow that Rameses--like the Kushites--ought to be equated with the "lighter of the blacks" in the photo. This is the sort of "consistency" one can expect from those consumed by eurocentric radicalism.
Of course.
Who comes closer to matching the color of this horse?
This woman?
Or this woman?
LOL Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Rahotep Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ''Show me a black man that looks like that..That exact skin color..'' ====== The earliest Christian literature describes Satan or the devil as black. Usually racially reflecting the Black Sub-Saharan Africans or ethiopians (who because of their ugliness were percieved as demons, monsters and evil). - The Epistle of Barnabas (c. 100 AD) calls the devil 'ho melas', the 'black one'. - The Acts of Peter (c. 180) says Satan is black (malas) and a female demon is called ''a most evil looking Aithiops (Ethiopian)''. - Jerome wrote that the black ethiopians were 'cloaked in the filth of sin'. Following quotes are from - Symbolic blackness and ethnic difference in early Christian literature By Gay L. Byron (2002) ''Ethiopians and blacks are personified as demons throughout monastic literature. One well-known example is Antony's encounter with the devil who appeared in the form of a black boy (melas pias). ''Sexual Threats The sexual danger that the Ethiopians presented to the Desert Fathers is well attested from the monastic literature from the forth through sixth centuries CE. For example, Palladius, in a work entitled ''On Fornication'' describes devils who appear in the form of Ethiopians.'' see also the following works - Begrimed and black: Christian traditions on Blacks and blackness By Robert Earl Hood (1994) Saracens, demons, & Jews: making monsters in medieval art By Debra Higgs Strickland (2003) The latter work shows how black africans are the origin of monsters in medieval art (because of their ugly appearance). I came across several references to the devil appearing in the form of a black man when I was studying witchcraft in early modern Europe. Obviously the learned inquisitors were familiar with these older traditions/prejudices, and asked leading questions resulting in descriptions of a black devil who visited his female servants with lewd in
"ARE YOU NOT LIKE THE ETHIOPIANS TO ME, O PEOPLE OF ISRAEL?" (AM. 9:7).
Homer, in even more flattering language, described them as the most just of men, the favorites of the gods. The annals of all the the great early nations of Asia Minor are full of them.
Diodorus continues:
Now the Ethiopians, as historians relate, were the first of all men and the proofs of this statement, they say, are manifest. For that they did not come into their land as immigrants from abroad but were natives of it and so justly bear the name of "autochthones" is, they maintain, conceded by practically all men; furthermore, that those who dwell beneath the noon-day sun were, in all likelihood, the first to be generated by the earth, is clear to all; since, inasmuch as it was the warmth of the sun which, at the generation of the universe, dried up the earth when it was still wet and impregnated it with life, it is reasonable to suppose that the region which was nearest the sun was the first to bring forth living creatures. And they say that they were the first to be taught to honour the gods and to hold sacrifices and processions and festivals and the other rites by which men honour the deity; and that in consequence their piety has been published abroad among all men, and it is generally held that the sacrifices practised among the Ethiopians are those which are the most pleasing to heaven. As witness to this they call upon the poet who is perhaps the oldest and certainly the most venerated among the Greeks; for in the Iliad he represents both Zeus and the rest of the gods with him as absent on a visit to Ethiopia to share in the sacrifices and the banquet which were given annually by the Ethiopians for all the gods together:
"They further write that it was among them that people were first taught to honor the gods and offer sacrifices and arrange processions and festivals and perform other things by which people honor the divine. For this reason their piety is famous among all men, and the sacrifices among the Aithiopians [Ethiopians] are believed to be particularly pleasing to the divinity." For Zeus had yesterday to Ocean's bounds Set forth to feast with Ethiop's faultless men, And he was followed there by all the gods.
And they state that, by reason of their piety towards the deity, they manifestly enjoy the favour of the gods, inasmuch as they have never experienced the rule of an invader from abroad; for from all time they have enjoyed a state of freedom and of peace one with another, and although many and powerful rulers have made war upon them, not one of these has succeeded in his undertaking.
3. Cambyses, for instance, they say, who made war upon them with a great force, both lost all his army and was himself exposed to the greatest peril; Semiramis also, who through the magnitude of her undertakings and achievements has become renowned, after advancing a short distance into Ethiopia gave up her campaign against the whole nation; and Heracles and Dionysus, although they visited all the inhabited earth, failed to subdue the Ethiopians alone who dwell above Egypt, both because of the piety of these men and because of the insurmountable difficulties involved in the attempt.
Notice the Kingdom of Meroe is mentioned they were not talking about highland Ethiopians of today or ancient Arabs or Indians but to the land immediately south of Kemet. http://wysinger.homestead.com/kingaspalta.html Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Harlot, I asked you to show me a black man that looks like that. I can care less what a bunch of Europeans thought, unless you can provide Ethiopians saying the same thing...OH thats right the quotes were AGAINST or ABOUT the Ethiopians...Defeats your whole argument dumbass.
quote:Originally posted by ra-whore-tep101: I came across several references to the devil appearing in the form of a black man when I was studying witchcraft in early modern Europe. Obviously the learned inquisitors were familiar with these older traditions/prejudices, and asked leading questions resulting in descriptions of a black devil who visited his female servants with lewd intent.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Hey Asshole did the German Christians think of a blacks as Ugly Devils when they dedicated a Monestary to the following man..
St. Maurice the Upper Egyptian Coptic Saint...
Here is the Peckerwood who financed the St. Maurice Monestary..
Is this man not the ruler of the glorious Saxony,..Known for its blonds and fairskin...yet they have a Monestary praying to the Black Egyptian Saint Maurice, all on those Rosey Red Knees burning candles and sh#t...Giving offerings and asking Maurice to protect them on the battle field..
^^^^^ Chances are you and the Whore-tep Harlot have ancestors that got on those Rosey knees and prayed to this man's visage for intermission to Moshiach. Seeing how the Brits such as yourselves descend from the Saxons, the very land this monestary was built.
Unlike the Whore-tep Harlot's supposed image of a black man, I can show you plenty of blacks that look like Maurice.
Its kind of Ironic, of all the places it could be located...its in your own forefather's backyard...sucks huh...
Where was your ancestors pride?? Building a Monestary to a Black Devil like that..LOL
LMBAO
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ''Show me a black man that looks like that..That exact skin color..'' ======
The earliest Christian literature describes Satan or the devil as black. Usually racially reflecting the Black Sub-Saharan Africans or ethiopians (who because of their ugliness were percieved as demons, monsters and evil).
- The Epistle of Barnabas (c. 100 AD) calls the devil 'ho melas', the 'black one'.
- The Acts of Peter (c. 180) says Satan is black (malas) and a female demon is called ''a most evil looking Aithiops (Ethiopian)''.
- Jerome wrote that the black ethiopians were 'cloaked in the filth of sin'.
Following quotes are from -
Symbolic blackness and ethnic difference in early Christian literature By Gay L. Byron (2002)
''Ethiopians and blacks are personified as demons throughout monastic literature. One well-known example is Antony's encounter with the devil who appeared in the form of a black boy (melas pias).
''Sexual Threats
The sexual danger that the Ethiopians presented to the Desert Fathers is well attested from the monastic literature from the forth through sixth centuries CE.
For example, Palladius, in a work entitled ''On Fornication'' describes devils who appear in the form of Ethiopians.''
see also the following works -
Begrimed and black: Christian traditions on Blacks and blackness By Robert Earl Hood (1994)
Saracens, demons, & Jews: making monsters in medieval art By Debra Higgs Strickland (2003)
The latter work shows how black africans are the origin of monsters in medieval art (because of their ugly appearance).
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
The thing I love about peckerwood racists such as yourself and the Harlot Whore-tep is tearing to shread your arguments with the holes your racist kind leaves when you make your points.
So "Black Africans were Monsters in European Medieval Art huh...
Images of Jesus 4th century Roman Catacombs..
-Roman Image of Jesus, A.D 530(European)
The Black Madonna Poland(European)
The faithful maintain that a certain Jeremiah sculpted her, some insist the Prophet Jeremiah, others a Coptic monk by that name. In any case, they say that the Lady became a treasure of the Grand Sultan of Babylon, ruler of Egypt, who gave her to a French king during the Crusades. In the Revolutionary year 1794 Our Lady was burnt like a witch on an execution pyre in the public square to cries of, “Down with the Egyptian!”
quote:I walked into the Chapel during mass, an incomprehensible sermon that only confirmed my distance from my own Polish ancestry. I joined what seemed to be a line of people waiting to see the icon. Strangely, those in the front seemed unusually short. My husband gestured at the crutches on the wall, and we thought we understood.
By the time we reached the front of the line, we realized that these visitors from Poland, Brazil, Spain and seemingly every other Catholic country were walking on their knees over the hard marble floor. They began to sing in many languages, “Czerna Madonna,” “Schwarze Madonna,” “Black Madonna.”
We circled the nave, the priests immobile and enraptured, the icon heavy with a nation’s burden. I felt like a fake, a religious dilettante, as I sang along, but it was impossible not to be affected.
Every great figure of Polish history has made the pilgrimage to see the Black Madonna. The newly elected Pope John Paul II preached there at the beginning of the Solidarity Movement in a thinly veiled anti-communist appeal. Lech Walesa flew here the day after his inauguration, as the first president of a democratic Poland, to thank the Black Madonna in person.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ' The latter work shows how black africans are the origin of monsters in medieval art (because of their ugly appearance).
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Our Lady of Good Deliverance, Neuilly near Paris, 14th C. variation on 11th C. original
Romanesque Madonna of Chastreix, Puy-de-Dome, France Photo: Francis Debaisieux
Our Lady of Meymac, France, 12th century
Our Lady of Le Puy photo: Francis Debaisieux France, reproduction, because the original was burnt during the revolution, like witches on public execution pyres, to cries of: "Death to the Egyptian!"
Our Lady of the Good Death (Notre Dame de la Bonne Mort), 12th century, Clermont-Ferrand, France, discovered in 1972 in the mortuary chapel of a bishop.
A Black Christian Knight and European lady some said he may have been part of William The Conquror's invading forces of Britain. Side note that lady looked non too pretty or happy.
Few documents portray the ethnicity of the Moors in medieval Europe with more passion, boldness and clarity than the epic of Morien. Morien is a metrical romance rendered into English prose from the medieval Dutch version of the Lancelot. In the Lancelot, it occupies more than five thousand lines and forms the ending of the first extant volume of that compilation. Neither the date of the original poem or the name of the author is known. The Dutch manuscript is dated to the beginning of the fourteenth century. The whole work is a translation, and apparently a very faithful translation, of a French original. It is quite clear that the Dutch compiler understood his text well, and though possibly somewhat fettered by the requirement of turning prose into verse, he renders it with uncommon fidelity.
Morien is the adventure of a splendidly heroic Moorish knight (possibly a Christian convert) supposed to have lived during the days of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. Sir Morien is described as follows: "He was all black, even as I tell ye: his head, his body, and his hands were all black, saving only his teeth. His shield and his armour were even those of a Moor, and black as a raven."
Initially in the adventure Morien is simply called "the Moor." He first challenges, then battles, and finally wins the unqualified respect and admiration of Sir Lancelot. In addition, Morien is extremely forthright and articulate. Sir Gawain, whose life was saved on the battlefield by Sir Morien, is stated to have "harkened, and smiled at the black knight's speech." It is noted that Morien was as "black as pitch; that was the fashion of his land--Moors are black as burnt brands." And again: "His teeth were white as chalk, otherwise was he altogether black." "Morien, who was black of face and limb," was a great warrior, and it is said that: "His blows were so mighty; did a spear fly towards him, to harm him, it troubled him no whit, but he smote it in twain as if it were a reed; naught might endure before him." Ultimately, and ironically, Sir Morien came to personify all of the finest virtues of the knights of the European Middle Ages. http://www.blackpresence.co.uk/2009/03/black-knights-in-europe/ Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Britsih Israelism:
The following is a two part article that appeared in the April/May 1979 and June 1979 issues of Biblical Research Monthly. You'll find it is a little dated in references to Armstrong and the World Wide Church of God, but otherwise, it is still accurate.
British Israelism: A Mirage
by R.P. Nettelhorst (part one of two parts)
That the ten tribes were distinct and maintained their identity after the Assyrian captivity is an old idea. It goes back to at least the second century B.C.
ANOTHER QUEST FOR THE "TEN LOST TRIBES"
The romance of the ten northern tribes of Israel, apparently lost from the pages of history, has caught the fancy of numerous speculators. The same school of thought which imagined that the wandering Israelites turned into the Afgans, the Nestorians, the Japanese or the Indians of North America has given rise to the British-Israelite theory. They propose that the Anglo-Saxons are the physical descendants of the Israelites and that Great Britain with her daughter America has inherited all the covenant blessings given to Abraham. A great conglomeration of Biblical passages, ancient texts, philological arguments and legends are offered as proof. As this study will show, British Israelism is like a mirage: from a distance it appears solid, but when it is approached and examined it disappears like a vapor.
.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Note the contradictory nature of afrocentrism.
We have posts above claiming the moors were blacks who INVADED the indigenous white people of europe, yet at the same time afrocentrics claim whites are not indigenous.
lol.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Anglo_Pyramidologist, who are the Afrocentrist you are lumping everyone else with.
Name names and who believes what.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Note how when their B.S sens of superiority is Ripped from under their feet, the White Racist starts resorting to strawman and other fallacy logic to squirm away from the reality of history.
No one here is talking about Moors, and the person who revealed the info(Me) has fought against black racists who spout that nonsense you bring up in your strawman argument.
What happened sir, No slick comeback, No more Ethiopian Devils scaring the lilly white beautiful mideval European who bathed once a year. I guess St. Maurice's statue sort of seems "Ironic" to you huh, I guess the Saxons were Afrocentrics too building a monestary to the Ethiopian Devils..LOL.
BTW, Where is your whore at?? Im still waiting on that Image of a black man that matches the image of a Grey Devil in Ethiopian art.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Note the contradictory nature of afrocentrism.
We have posts above claiming the moors were blacks who INVADED the indigenous white people of europe, yet at the same time afrocentrics claim whites are not indigenous.
lol.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
More while those 4th Century Xtian Jews were painting that black Moshiach in their Catacombs we have a black lady living in York.
Startling new forensic research has revealed that multicultural Britain is nothing new after discovering black Africans were living in high society in Roman York.
A study of various remains and artefacts from the 4th century at the Yorkshire Museum shows North Africans were living there thousands of years ago.
The most exciting results came from analysis of the so-called 'Ivory Bangle Lady' whose remains were found in 1901 on the city's Sycamore Terrace.
Her skull was found buried with a range of jewellery including jet and elephant ivory bracelets, earrings, pendants and a glass mirror indicating she was wealthy and was of high social status.
The research used modern forensic ancestry assessment to show it was likely she was of North African descent and may have migrated to York from somewhere warmer. Enlarge African queen
An exquisite pristine blue glass jar that was uncovered
The fascinating study was carried out by the University of Reading's Department of Archaeology, and senior lecturer Dr Hella Eckhardt said: 'Up until now we have had to rely on evidence of such foreigners in Roman Britain from inscriptions.
'However, by analysing the facial features of the Ivory Bangle Lady and measuring her skull, analysing the chemical signature of the food and drink she consumed, and analysing evidence from the burial site we are now able to establish a clear profile of her ancestry and social status.
'We're looking at a population mix which is much closer to contemporary Britain than previous historians had suspected.
'In the case of York, the Roman population may have had more diverse origins than the city has now.
'This skull is particularly interesting, because the stone sarcophagus she was buried in, and the richness of the grave goods, means she was a very wealthy woman, absolutely from the top end of York society.
'Her case contradicts assumptions that may derive from more recent historical experience, namely that immigrants are low status and male, and that African individuals are likely to have been slaves.
'Instead, it is clear that both women and children moved across the Empire, often associated with the military.'
The research is published in the March edition of the journal Antiquity.
The 'Ivory Bangle Lady' and he possessions will be the centrepiece of a new exhibition at the Museum in August entitled 'Roman York: Meet the People Of The Empire'.
York, known as Eboracum during Roman Times, was a legendary fortress and civilian settlement which was visited by a string of emperors.
The experts believe these factors provided reasons for potential immigration to the area and for the foundation of a multi-cultural community.
''Anglo_Pyramidologist, who are the Afrocentrist you are lumping everyone else with.
Name names and who believes what.'' ====
egmond codfried, mike111 (or whatever their names are) etc are afrocentrics who post on this forum that the indigenous britons and other europeans were not white people but instead blacks. I don't know if they are serious or do it for parody however there is a whole tun of afrocentric crap like this on the net which is highly insulting to the native white British who have a linage going back thousands of years In Britain. Blacks only arrived here in last century along with Asians, they are immigrants and have no historical roots in UK.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''Startling new forensic research has revealed that multicultural Britain is nothing new after discovering black Africans were living in high society in Roman York.'' ====
Right, and read the first best rated comment on that link:
'Does one person make a "multicultural" society? Really?'
- They also found a single eskimo remain some years ago in the faroe islands. Does that then mean the faroe Norse were multiculturalists living with eskimos?
Isolated historical happenings can occur. It doesn't mean there were a whole tun of 'black africans' living in Roman Britain. Out of Britain population of about a million at that time, less than 10 were probably non-white. Please put in perspective...
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
You said quote...
"Note the contradictory nature of afrocentrism." Anglo_Pyramidologist -posted 29 May, 2011 06:48 AM
So I will ask once again "What does this have to do with me and my arguments." Where is the contradiction, Do Try debating without using Strawman and other fallacy arguments. It only hurts what little credibility you have.
So what happened with the Ivory Bangle lady, First the monestary to St. Maurice now a black Devil Ethiopian all up in York and sh#t.
Not to mention Morien all Jet black up in British Mythology.
What happened to all them Ethiopian Devils...??
Where was your ancestor's pride??
Its A Damn shame aint it..being all Mulit-racial and ish..LOL.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ''Anglo_Pyramidologist, who are the Afrocentrist you are lumping everyone else with.
Name names and who believes what.'' ====
egmond codfried, mike111 (or whatever their names are) etc are afrocentrics who post on this forum that the indigenous britons and other europeans were not white people but instead blacks. I don't know if they are serious or do it for parody however there is a whole tun of afrocentric crap like this on the net which is highly insulting to the native white British who have a linage going back thousands of years In Britain. Blacks only arrived here in last century along with Asians, they are immigrants and have no historical roots in UK.
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by 1DumbHo: I'm not surprised that got everyone's knickers in a twist. It's deeply inconvenient for the pan-African race fantasy (or negrocentric-Egyptomania) that neither the way Ramesses was depicted nor his physical remains make him remotely resemble the negro enemies of Egypt who are falling under his horses' hooves.
Even if he is shown to be in the EXACT SAME complexion as some of those "negro" enemies. And again I find it hilarious how you consider the idea of a pan-African race to be a fantasy yet you espouse the notion of a pan-European race that extends outside of Europe! Your hypocrisy is duly noted.
quote:There are images of Ramesses, by the way, which make him a more similar colour to the Syrians, to whom he shows the same tender mercy as he does the Nubains...
*yawn*
You were saying??
The XVIV and XX dynasty heads do not have steep foreheads, receding zygomatic arches or prominent chins. Generally, both glabella and occiput are rounded and projecting to varying degrees. The sagittal contour is usually flattened, at least to some degree, although this sometimes begins before the bregma rather than in post-bregmatic position. The whole mandible is rarely squarish, although the body sometimes has a wavy edge. The latter feature, though, is very common in both ancient and modern Nubians. According to Gill (1986), an undulating mandible is a characteristic of Negroids.
That was rather pathetic. They still look the same colour. You're trying very hard and demonstrating nothing. Obviously the captive semite has a charicatured nose, however Ramesses had a hooked nose by the time of his death, as his mummy attests.
How does that semite prisoner's nose greatly differ from that of the real Ramesses?
Uploaded with ImageShack.us Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Rahotep will use a reconstruction when it favors his views. But when it doesn't, which is pretty much every reconstruction out there, he will try to claim that the forensic specialists basically made up the features on their reconstruction. The hypocrisy is amazing
Question: What is the source for Ramses' reconstruction?
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
From Wiki
Quote: "Microscopic inspection of the roots of Ramesses II's hair proved that the original color of the king's hair was once red which suggests that he came from a family of redheads."
A 91 to 99 year old man, with other than WHITE ROOTS!
Damn, White people will believe any Dumb-assed sh1t, as long as it says they were there. You are truly some SAD MFs.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Rahotep will use a reconstruction when it favors his views. But when it doesn't, which is pretty much every reconstruction out there, he will try to claim that the forensic specialists basically made up the features on their reconstruction. The hypocrisy is amazing
Question: What is the source for Ramses' reconstruction?
^^ Of course! That is why he ignores these reconstructions below...
or else dismisses them as 'Afrocentric' when they were made by mainstream experts.
By the way, to answer your question Calabooz the Ramses reconstruction DaWhore just posted was created by a team working for the Discovery/BBC and first aired in a program on Discovery called 'Ramses: Wrath of God or Man'. Ironically Discovery Channel was also the sponsor of this sixth reconstruction of Tut below years before the 7th and final one by National Geographic.
What's interesting is that the American forensic team who made the reconstruction of Tut was double-blinded, meaning they had no idea who the identity of the skull was and thought they were working with a murder victim! Suffice to say, the team who did the construction of Ramses II and his son were not blinded at all and knew the identities of the skulls they worked with and such was the same with the teams for Nat. Geo.
quote:Originally posted by DaDumb1_01: That was rather pathetic. They still look the same colour. You're trying very hard and demonstrating nothing. Obviously the captive semite has a charicatured nose, however Ramesses had a hooked nose by the time of his death, as his mummy attests.
How does that semite prisoner's nose greatly differ from that of the real Ramesses?
LMAO The pathetic one is YOU! One with decent enough vision can see that the portrait of Ramses has traces of darker paint making his complexion much darker than the Semite, you buffoon!! Also, not only in that portrait but virtually *all* portraits of Ramses show him with a small straight nose which is a common trait among not only Egyptians but other black Africans of north and east Africa!
What's more is that the nose shape of his mummy is hardly reliable since it is broken and stuffed!
Peppercorns were placed in his broken nose to restore its shape and his sense of smell in the after life. His nose may have been broken during the mummification process when his brain was removed through his nose
You were saying, Dummy??!! Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^The Tut reconstruction by DSC was actually derived from his golden mask, as opposed to his mummy. If I recall, Hawass hadn't authorized permission to CT scan the mummy at that time because he was afraid of how it would be handled. What's ironic however, is that Hawass later denounced the Nat Geo reconstruction in an article for Ancient Egypt Magazine, claiming instead that the mask would have been the best representation of the boy king:
quote:"After taking the scan, we tried to reconstruct the face of the mummy with moder forensic techniques. Three teams were selected: One from America, one from Egypt, and one from France. We gave the CT images of Tutankhamun to each team, and they all create faces that I think do not even look like the king. For example, the French team ended up with the face of a person who looks French, and whose features do not resemble any Egyptian. However, there were some similarities between the three reconstructions, such as the elongated shape of the head....[]...In my opinion, the mask of Tutankhamun from his tomb still gives us the best idea of what he looked in life."
^Also according to him, the only common feature among the three reconstructions was the elongated cranium, which again points to Tut's African affinities. If anything, what we have here in Hawass is the world's biggest flip-flopper.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Hey Asshole did the German Christians think of a blacks as Ugly Devils when they dedicated a Monestary to the following man..
St. Maurice the Upper Egyptian Coptic Saint...
Here is the Peckerwood who financed the St. Maurice Monestary..
Is this man not the ruler of the glorious Saxony,..Known for its blonds and fairskin...yet they have a Monestary praying to the Black Egyptian Saint Maurice, all on those Rosey Red Knees burning candles and sh#t...Giving offerings and asking Maurice to protect them on the battle field..
^^^^^ Chances are you and the Whore-tep Harlot have ancestors that got on those Rosey knees and prayed to this man's visage for intermission to Moshiach. Seeing how the Brits such as yourselves descend from the Saxons, the very land this monestary was built.
Unlike the Whore-tep Harlot's supposed image of a black man, I can show you plenty of blacks that look like Maurice.
Its kind of Ironic, of all the places it could be located...its in your own forefather's backyard...sucks huh...
Where was your ancestors pride?? Building a Monestary to a Black Devil like that..LOL
LMBAO
ROTFLMAOH
Jari, this post of yours and all its wordings cracked me the hell up!
But you are absolutely correct! A popular Medieval Christian Saint was St. Maurice of Theba who was indeed an Egyptian Copt from Thebes Upper Egypt who was martyred.
Saint Maurice was the captain of the Theban Legion, a unit in the Roman army that had been recruited from Upper Egypt and consisted entirely of Christians. Although loyal to the Empire (ruled over by Maximinus Daia and Diocletian), they still remembered the words of Jesus to render to Caesar the things of Caesar, and to God the things of God. During the Bagaude, an uprising of the Gauls, Maximinus marched against them with the Theban Legion as a part of his army. The revolt was quelled, and upon their return to Aguanum (now Saint-Moritz or Saint Maurice en Valais) in Switzerland, Maximinus gave the order that the whole army should give sacrifices to the Roman gods in thanks for the success of their campaign. As part of the celebration, Maximinus ordered the execution of a number of Christian prisoners. The Theban Legion refused to comply with the order and withdrew from the rites, even going so far as to camp away from the rest of the army so as not to be drawn into what they saw as horrifyingly against their beliefs. Maximinus repeatedly ordered the Theban Legion to comply with his orders, and when they continued to refuse, he ordered the unit "decimated," a practice in which every tenth man was put to death. The Legion was not shaken at all, despite threats of a second decimation, which was performed. Maximinus told those remaining that they would all be killed, but their captain, Maurice, inspired them with the example of the soldiers already martyred, and told them that they were all assured of a place in Heaven for holding fast to their faith. Every last man was beheaded by other soldiers, without resistance. Maximinus even went so far as to carry the executions out against every member of the Theban Legion stationed elsewhere in the Empire from Gaul down to Rome itself. A number of miracles are attributed to these holy soldiers. In Zurich, it is said that the beheaded Saints Felix, Regula, and Exuperantius rose up, and carrying their heads in their hands, walked to the top of a hill, knelt down and prayed, and finally lay down in final death. On this spot, a great cathedral was built and the image of the three saints carrying their heads appears on the coat of arms of Zurich today. Saint Maurice is one of the most popular saints in western Europe. There are over 650 sacred places bearing his name in France alone. Over seventy towns bear his name. In the Middle Ages, Saint Maurice was the patron saint of a number of the dynasties of Europe and later of the Holy Roman emperors, many of whom were anointed before the Altar of Saint Maurice at Saint Peter's Cathedral in Rome. King Sigismund of Burgundy donated land for a monastery in his honor in 515. Henry I (919-936) ceded the Swiss province of Aargua in exchange for the Lance of the Saints; and the sacred relic, the Sword of Saint Maurice, was last used in the coronation of Emperor Charles of Austria as king of Hungary in 1916. Saint Maurice's feast day is September 22.
It's funny how DaWhore only claims the Copts of Alexandria and other heavy Europeanized Delta areas as representatives of the indigenous Egyptians but never rural southern Egypt. Yet here we have first hand accounts by Europeans stating otherwise. In fact, the very name Maurice with its root word 'maur' (moor) spoke to the very black identity of this character and his people!
Oh and you are dead on about the pyramidiot claiming that all blacks in Euro-Christiandom art was evil or demonic, when St. Maurice is obviously was not.
How befitting that their ancestors prayed on their "rosy red knees" to kneegrows! LOL Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: The Tut reconstruction by DSC was actually derived from his golden mask, as opposed to his mummy. If I recall, Hawass hadn't authorized permission to CT scan the mummy at that time because he was afraid of how it would be handled. What's ironic however, is that Hawass later denounced the Nat Geo reconstruction in an article for Ancient Egypt Magazine, claiming instead that the mask would have been the best representation of the boy king:
"After taking the scan, we tried to reconstruct the face of the mummy with moder forensic techniques. Three teams were selected: One from America, one from Egypt, and one from France. We gave the CT images of Tutankhamun to each team, and they all create faces that I think do not even look like the king. For example, the French team ended up with the face of a person who looks French, and whose features do not resemble any Egyptian. However, there were some similarities between the three reconstructions, such as the elongated shape of the head....[]...In my opinion, the mask of Tutankhamun from his tomb still gives us the best idea of what he looked in life."- "Ancient Egypt" issue 44, October/November (2007)
^Also according to him, the only common feature among the three reconstructions was the elongated cranium, which again points to Tut's African affinities. If anything, what we have here in Hawass is the world's biggest flip-flopper.
You're wrong about the Discovery reconstruction! It was based on the skull like *ALL* reconstructions are!! No forensic scientist would ever make a reconstruction based on an artistic portrait!!
"Robin couldn't unwrap this famous mummy to the skeleton, so he built his 3D digital skull by CT scanning a model of the skull, built from X-rays of Tutankhamun, taken in the tomb in the 1960s. You can see some of the X-rays on display at the Science Museum."
What's interesting is that even though the American forensic team was double-blinded and thus supposedly unbiased. They were still somewhat biased in giving Tut a wide nose due to his African ancestry no doubt due to their stereotyping of African phenotype.
If anything I say his painted bust should have been the best model for soft tissue reconstruction.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^OK, I stand corrected. I have no idea where I got that from (likely was confusing Hawass' contradictory statements with my faded memory of the DSC reconstruction) but I do now remember Eurocentrists arguing then that the 2005 reconstructions were supposedly more "accurate" because they were based on CT scans and not X-ray, like the DSC reconstruction. Either way Susan Anton's response to ausar should have put this issue to rest.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: egmond codfried, mike111 (or whatever their names are) etc are afrocentrics who post on this forum that the indigenous britons and other europeans were not white people but instead blacks. I don't know if they are serious or do it for parody however there is a whole tun of afrocentric crap like this on the net which is highly insulting to the native white British who have a linage going back thousands of years In Britain. Blacks only arrived here in last century along with Asians, they are immigrants and have no historical roots in UK.
Ah Ha! Anglo_Pyramidologist you pathetic liar, your ignorance and lack of education has exposed you as a dimwitted troll.
Every English schoolboy knows that the English are a German people, who are NOT NATIVE to Britain. Only some uneducated American "Teabagger" would think that the British are a native people.
You stupid fool, the British royal house was named Saxe-Coburg and Gotha until they changed it to Windsor in 1917.
BBC story
English and Welsh are races apart. Gene scientists claim to have found proof that the Welsh are the "true" Britons.
The research supports the idea that Celtic Britain underwent a form of ethnic cleansing by Anglo-Saxons invaders following the Roman withdrawal in the fifth century. Genetic tests show clear differences between the Welsh and English It suggests that between 50% and 100% of the indigenous population of what was to become England was wiped out, with Offa's Dyke acting as a "genetic barrier" protecting those on the Welsh side. And the upheaval can be traced to this day through genetic differences between the English and the Welsh.
Academics at University College in London comparing a sample of men from the UK with those from an area of the Netherlands where the Anglo-Saxons are thought to have originated found the English subjects had genes that were almost identical. But there were clear differences between the genetic make-up of Welsh people studied.
The research team studied the Y-chromosome, which is passed almost unchanged from father to son, and looked for certain genetic markers. They chose seven market towns mentioned in the Domesday Book of 1086 and studied 313 male volunteers whose paternal grandfather had also lived in the area.
They then compared this with samples from Norway and with Friesland, now a northern province of the Netherlands. The English and Frisians studied had almost identical genetic make-up but the English and Welsh were very different. The researchers concluded the most likely explanation for this was a large-scale Anglo-Saxon invasion, which devastated the Celtic population of England, but did not reach Wales.
Dr Mark Thomas, of the Centre for Genetic Anthropology at UCL, said their findings suggested that a migration occurred within the last 2,500 years.
It reinforced the idea that the Welsh were the true indigenous Britons. In April last year, research for a BBC programme on the Vikings revealed strong genetic links between the Welsh and Irish Celts and the Basques of northern Spain and south France. It suggested a possible link between the Celts and Basques, dating back tens of thousands of years.
The UCL research into the more recent Anglo-Saxon period suggested a migration on a huge scale. "It appears England is made up of an ethnic cleansing event from people coming across from the continent after the Romans left," he said. Archaeologists after the Second World War rejected the traditionally held view that an Anglo-Saxon invasion pushed the indigenous Celtic Britons to the fringes of Britain.
Instead, they said the arrival of Anglo-Saxon culture could have come from trade or a small ruling elite. But the latest research by the UCL team, "using genetics as a history book", appears to support the original view of a large-scale invasion of England. It suggests that the Welsh border was more of a genetic barrier to the Anglo-Saxon Y chromosome gene flow than the North Sea.
Dr Thomas added: "Our findings completely overturn the modern view of the origins of the English."
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''Every English schoolboy knows that the English are a German people'' ========
The Anglo-Saxons were only called 'Germanic' because they spoke a Germanic tongue, as many northern europeans did because of their related origin, even the Geats of Sweden did.
Are the Swedes as 'German people'?
You are twisting the terminology.
============== ''who are NOT NATIVE to Britain. Only some uneducated American "Teabagger" would think that the British are a native people.'' ===========
Again this is false. The Anglo-Saxons were kinsmen to the Picts, Scots and other tribes of Britain. All spoke related language, had the same phenotype, genes and even culture. Celtic, Germanic and Norse mythology is all related, many even shared the same Gods, just under different names.
The fact is the ethnic-British - the native white British today descend from these ancient tribes who have been in Britain for well over a millenia, stretching back far further.
In contrast blacks are recent immigrants.
Do you really think if a black immigrant stands next to the statue of Boudicca in Westminster, London they get a historical or spiritual connection??
Its not your heritage. In fact black immigrants who have virtually now taken over London (whites are now under 40%) are all embracing afro-carribean culture. None claim to be indigeous Brits...
Do you really think Boudicca and the indigenous Brits were black africans? If so then you are mentally ill, or just a troll, saying so for parody.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^Damn, you are one ignorant, but most tellingly, STUPID Albino boy. Fool don't you read ANYTHING before opening you mouth?
In answer to your "Teabagger" ignorant question: YES YOU FOOL, SWEDES ARE GERMANS TOO!
From Wiki:
The Germania by Gaius Cornelius Tacitus, an ethnographic work on the diverse group of Germanic tribes outside of the Roman Empire, is our most important source on the Germanic peoples of the 1st century.
Migration Period Main article: Migration Period 2nd century CE to 5th century CE simplified migrations
During the 5th century CE, as the Western Roman Empire lost military strength and political cohesion, numerous Germanic peoples, under pressure from population growth and invading Asian groups, began migrating en masse in far and diverse directions, taking them to Great Britain and far south through present day Continental Europe to the Mediterranean and northern Africa. Over time, this wandering meant intrusions into other tribal territories, and the ensuing wars for land escalated with the dwindling amount of unoccupied territory.
Wandering tribes then began staking out permanent homes as a means of protection. Much of this resulted in fixed settlements from which many, under a powerful leader, expanded outwards. A defeat meant either scattering or merging with the dominant tribe, and this continual process of assimilation was how nations were formed.
In Denmark the Jutes merged with the Danes, in Sweden the Geats and Gutes merged with the Swedes. In England, the Angles merged with the Saxons and other groups (notably the Jutes), as well as absorbing some natives, to form the Anglo-Saxons.
Anglo_Pyramidologist - Persistent stupidity like yours is a little scary. I gave you the truth, I gave you the source, and yet you persisted, without checking either. That reminds me of what religious people do. Obvious you are a functioning idiot, if American, which is likely, you probably also have a cache of guns. Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^ The ignorance and persistent Stupidity of these people, Anglo_Pyramidologist people, could bring EVERYBODY down. It is not safe to allow people like these to have guns and power. It's like giving a gun to a child.
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabozo': Rahotep will use a reconstruction when it favors his views. But when it doesn't, which is pretty much every reconstruction out there, he will try to claim that the forensic specialists basically made up the features on their reconstruction. The hypocrisy is amazing
Question: What is the source for Ramses' reconstruction?
The source of the Ramesses reconstruction is the mummified head of Ramesses, as you can see, and the nose is perfectly intact so you don't need to guess. That particular image was shown on the Discovery channel.
Also the negroid reconstruction of Tut is laughable, with the enormous nose and lips. Not only do these not resemble any portrait of the king, from the many that we have, but they contradict the mummified remains. Tut's facial features are well enough preserved to show the high, narrow bridge to the nose, and the fact that the lips were full but not fleshy and well within the bounds for a caucasoid type. Three more recent reconstructions, done in France, the US and Egypt, all produced portraits that resembled each other but did not resemble that earlier travesty. (I can only imagine that it was an exercise in political correctness and appeasement towards the afrocentric movement).
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
What is interesting is although they sterotyped on the Nose, from the side profile its a spot on match for Tut-ankh-amun.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [/IMG]
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by 1DumbHo: I'm not surprised that got everyone's knickers in a twist. It's deeply inconvenient for the pan-African race fantasy (or negrocentric-Egyptomania) that neither the way Ramesses was depicted nor his physical remains make him remotely resemble the negro enemies of Egypt who are falling under his horses' hooves.
Even if he is shown to be in the EXACT SAME complexion as some of those "negro" enemies. And again I find it hilarious how you consider the idea of a pan-African race to be a fantasy yet you espouse the notion of a pan-European race that extends outside of Europe! Your hypocrisy is duly noted.
quote:There are images of Ramesses, by the way, which make him a more similar colour to the Syrians, to whom he shows the same tender mercy as he does the Nubains...
*yawn*
You were saying??
As you insist on denying the obvious,here's a graphic demonstration of how the darkest flesh region on the semite captive is actually darker than the darkest flesh area on the Egyptian king...
Uploaded with ImageShack.us Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''Anglo_Pyramidologist - Persistent stupidity like yours is a little scary. I gave you the truth, I gave you the source, and yet you persisted, without checking either.'' =============
Albion (Greek: Ἀλβιών) is the oldest known name of the island of Great Britain.
The Latin word alba is the feminine singular form of the adjective albus, meaning 'white'.
Albion = ''White land''.
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Hey Asshole did the German Christians think of a blacks as Ugly Devils when they dedicated a Monestary to the following man..
St. Maurice the Upper Egyptian Coptic Saint...
Here is the Peckerwood who financed the St. Maurice Monestary..
Is this man not the ruler of the glorious Saxony,..Known for its blonds and fairskin...yet they have a Monestary praying to the Black Egyptian Saint Maurice, all on those Rosey Red Knees burning candles and sh#t...Giving offerings and asking Maurice to protect them on the battle field..
^^^^^ Chances are you and the Whore-tep Harlot have ancestors that got on those Rosey knees and prayed to this man's visage for intermission to Moshiach. Seeing how the Brits such as yourselves descend from the Saxons, the very land this monestary was built.
Unlike the Whore-tep Harlot's supposed image of a black man, I can show you plenty of blacks that look like Maurice.
Its kind of Ironic, of all the places it could be located...its in your own forefather's backyard...sucks huh...
Where was your ancestors pride?? Building a Monestary to a Black Devil like that..LOL
LMBAO
ROTFLMAOH
Jari, this post of yours and all its wordings cracked me the hell up!
But you are absolutely correct! A popular Medieval Christian Saint was St. Maurice of Theba who was indeed an Egyptian Copt from Thebes Upper Egypt who was martyred.
Saint Maurice was the captain of the Theban Legion, a unit in the Roman army that had been recruited from Upper Egypt and consisted entirely of Christians. Although loyal to the Empire (ruled over by Maximinus Daia and Diocletian), they still remembered the words of Jesus to render to Caesar the things of Caesar, and to God the things of God. During the Bagaude, an uprising of the Gauls, Maximinus marched against them with the Theban Legion as a part of his army. The revolt was quelled, and upon their return to Aguanum (now Saint-Moritz or Saint Maurice en Valais) in Switzerland, Maximinus gave the order that the whole army should give sacrifices to the Roman gods in thanks for the success of their campaign. As part of the celebration, Maximinus ordered the execution of a number of Christian prisoners. The Theban Legion refused to comply with the order and withdrew from the rites, even going so far as to camp away from the rest of the army so as not to be drawn into what they saw as horrifyingly against their beliefs. Maximinus repeatedly ordered the Theban Legion to comply with his orders, and when they continued to refuse, he ordered the unit "decimated," a practice in which every tenth man was put to death. The Legion was not shaken at all, despite threats of a second decimation, which was performed. Maximinus told those remaining that they would all be killed, but their captain, Maurice, inspired them with the example of the soldiers already martyred, and told them that they were all assured of a place in Heaven for holding fast to their faith. Every last man was beheaded by other soldiers, without resistance. Maximinus even went so far as to carry the executions out against every member of the Theban Legion stationed elsewhere in the Empire from Gaul down to Rome itself. A number of miracles are attributed to these holy soldiers. In Zurich, it is said that the beheaded Saints Felix, Regula, and Exuperantius rose up, and carrying their heads in their hands, walked to the top of a hill, knelt down and prayed, and finally lay down in final death. On this spot, a great cathedral was built and the image of the three saints carrying their heads appears on the coat of arms of Zurich today. Saint Maurice is one of the most popular saints in western Europe. There are over 650 sacred places bearing his name in France alone. Over seventy towns bear his name. In the Middle Ages, Saint Maurice was the patron saint of a number of the dynasties of Europe and later of the Holy Roman emperors, many of whom were anointed before the Altar of Saint Maurice at Saint Peter's Cathedral in Rome. King Sigismund of Burgundy donated land for a monastery in his honor in 515. Henry I (919-936) ceded the Swiss province of Aargua in exchange for the Lance of the Saints; and the sacred relic, the Sword of Saint Maurice, was last used in the coronation of Emperor Charles of Austria as king of Hungary in 1916. Saint Maurice's feast day is September 22.
It's funny how DaWhore only claims the Copts of Alexandria and other heavy Europeanized Delta areas as representatives of the indigenous Egyptians but never rural southern Egypt. Yet here we have first hand accounts by Europeans stating otherwise. In fact, the very name Maurice with its root word 'maur' (moor) spoke to the very black identity of this character and his people!
Oh and you are dead on about the pyramidiot claiming that all blacks in Euro-Christiandom art was evil or demonic, when St. Maurice is obviously was not.
How befitting that their ancestors prayed on their "rosy red knees" to kneegrows! LOL
We have ancestors who bent a knee to the unemployable son of a Jewish carpenter, to fishermen, tax collectors and former harlots, so why should it be an embarrassment to also revere a centurion in the Roman army? However there is no evidence that the original St Maurice was a negro, just because medieval Germans portrayed him as one. All we know is that he was said to be an officer of the Theban legion. He could have been a Roman or an Egyptian, or a citizen of any other country in the Empire. The medieval Catholic Church liked to think itself universal and thus included representatives of all known races among its iconography. In the Eastern Church there was even a Saint Christopher who belonged to a mythical race of dog-headed men!
My theory about the black St Maurice statue in Magdeburg cathedral is that it may be a tribute to Christian Sudanese or Ethiopian warriors who may have allied with the European Crusaders against the Muslims. (This is also what Basil Davidson thought). More often, however, the crusaders encountered black warriors on the Muslim side (for example at the battle of Arsuf).
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^^ LMAO Your personal "theory" is irrelevant to the FACTS. Fact is the statue was meant ot represent St. Maurice. Fact is Saint Maurice was an indigenous EGYPTIAN from rural Thebes and thus best representative of his ancient ancestors unlike the European descended Alexandrians you love to uphold as the 'real' Egyptians!
quote:Originally posted by DaHoslips101: As you insist on denying the obvious,here's a graphic demonstration of how the darkest flesh region on the semite captive is actually darker than the darkest flesh area on the Egyptian king...
LOL First off, your graphic color palette is off as they are obviously not the same color as the highlighted paint on the portraits. The paint on Ramses is not even that light as your silly palette.
Second of all, I find it funny how you highlighted the area around the eyes, when it is a known fact that all eyes were outlined in black paint. No doubt the black paint faded and/or mixed with the lighter paint around it. LOL
Here is a black-white photo of a mural of Ramses in his siege of Dapur.
Here is a European copy of a mural of Ramses battle of Kadesh.
Ramses fighting Meshwesh Libyans.
Ramses was consistently portrayed with a dark brown i.e. chocolate i.e. BLACK complexion. There is no getting around it. Ramses was darker than the Asiatic and was very dark because he is BLACK like all indigenous Egyptians were.
quote: The source of the Ramesses reconstruction is the mummified head of Ramesses, as you can see, and the nose is perfectly intact so you don't need to guess. That particular image was shown on the Discovery channel.
The nose is NOT perfectly in tact for the reasons I gave before. It was broken during the mummification process and then stuffed with peppercorn.
quote:Also the negroid reconstruction of Tut is laughable, with the enormous nose and lips. Not only do these not resemble any portrait of the king, from the many that we have, but they contradict the mummified remains. Tut's facial features are well enough preserved to show the high, narrow bridge to the nose, and the fact that the lips were full but not fleshy and well within the bounds for a caucasoid type. Three more recent reconstructions, done in France, the US and Egypt, all produced portraits that resembled each other but did not resemble that earlier travesty. (I can only imagine that it was an exercise in political correctness and appeasement towards the afrocentric movement).
LMAO You are an ignoramus. You praise the Ramses reconstruction though the more "negroid" one of Tut as you put it was also created by and shown on the Discovery Channel! The only difference is that the team who reconstructed Tut was double-blinded meaning they didn't know who the skull belonged to and therefore were not prone to any political bias, whereas the team who reconstructed Ramses was NOT double-blinded!
You say that reconstruction of Tut doesn't look like his portraits. Which portraits are you referring to?
As I explained the team who did the Tut reconstruction were still bias in giving Tut wide nose because he was African as not all Africans have that. In fact your whole premise of cockasian features such as narrow bridge nose etc. are all b.s. because of the fact that such features have nothing to do with peoples of the Caucasus Mountains or Europe. Many black Africans have those features as well!! And I already cited Dr. Susan Anton who aided in National Geographic's reconstruction and she agrees also that the label of "caucasian" is nonsense!! You have this habit of ignoring evidence while promoting debunk mess! This is why you will always FAIL.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
Interesting topic
ANTIQUITIES ORIENTAL:ASSUR RELIEF 10TH-6TH BCE
Officer conducts 2 Judeans to the King. Detail of the Assyrian conquest of the Jewish fortified town of Lachish (battle 701 BCE). Part of a relief from the palace of Sennacherib at Niniveh, Mesopotamia (Iraq)
British Museum, London, Great Britain
ANTIQUITIES ORIENTAL:ASSUR RELIEF 10TH-6TH BCE
Assyrian warriors empaling jewish prisoners after conquering Jewish fortress Lachish (battle 701 BCE). Part of a relief from the palace of Sennacherib at Niniveh, Mesopotamia (Iraq) British Museum, London, Great Britain
ANTIQUITIES ORIENTAL:ASSUR RELIEF 10TH-6TH BCE
Assyrian dignitary. Detail of the Assyrian conquest of the Jewish fortified town of Lachish (battle 701 BCE). Part of a relief from the palace of Sennacherib at Niniveh, Mesopotamia (Iraq) British Museum, London, Great Britain
ANTIQUITIES ORIENTAL:ASSUR RELIEF 10TH-6TH BCE
Jewish prisoners with camel and baggage on their way into exile. Detail of the Assyrian conquest of the Jewish fortified town of Lachish (battle 701 BCE). Part of a relief from the palace of Sennacherib at Niniveh, Mesopotamia (Iraq) British Museum, London, Great Britain
ANTIQUITIES ORIENTAL:ASSUR RELIEF 10TH-6TH BCE
2 Jewish captives with folded hands. Detail of the Assyrian conquest of the Jewish fortified town of Lachish (battle 701 BCE). Part of a relief from the palace of Sennacherib at Niniveh, Mesopotamia (Iraq) British Museum, London, Great Britain
ANTIQUITIES ORIENTAL:ASSUR RELIEF 10TH-6TH BCE
Assyrian slingers attacking the Judean fortified town of Lachish (battle 701 BCE). Part of a relief from the palace of Sennacherib at Niniveh, Mesopotamia (Iraq) See also 03-03-02/29 British Museum, London, Great Britain
ANTIQUITIES ORIENTAL:ASSUR RELIEF 10TH-6TH BCE
Assyrian warriors with their spoil from the conquest of the Jewish town of Lachish (battle 701 BCE). Part of a relief from the palace of Sennacherib at Niniveh, Mesopotamia (Iraq) British Museum, London, Great Britain
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
ANTIQUITIES ORIENTAL:ASSUR RELIEF 10TH-6TH BCE Judean exiles carrying provisions. Detail of the Assyrian conquest of the Jewish fortified town of Lachish (battle 701 BCE). Part of a relief from the palace of Sennacherib at Niniveh, Mesopotamia (Iraq) British Museum, London, Great Britain
ANTIQUITIES ORIENTAL:ASSUR RELIEF 10TH-6TH BCE
Assyrian warriors leading two horses. Detail of the Assyrian conquest of the Jewish fortified town of Lachish (battle 701 BCE). Part of a relief from the palace of Sennacherib at Niniveh, Mesopotamia (Iraq) British Museum, London, Great Britain
In addition...
Old Testament Art at the Time of the Assyrian Conquest of Israel
By Bonnie Oswald, BFA, MA
Israel, living in wickedness and idolatry, was warned by prophets Elijah, Elisha, and Hosea, to repent or face conquest. Prophets and Kings from Judah offered help, and invited them to return to the temple in Jerusalem. These offers they scorned, becoming ripe for destruction.
The Assyrians viciously brought that destruction.
Reconstruction of Nineveh
As we read in the Old Testament of the Assyrians conquering Israel and much of Judah, it is easy to visualize these people as they were pictured at the time in the palaces of the Assyrians. Nineveh is a rich trove of art showing the Assyrian kings and captives majestically portrayed in magnificent bas reliefs. Assyrian art is instantly recognizable because of the pictures of raw strength. Everyone is shown heavily muscled, even the animals.
"King Assurbanipal decked out for the hunts. British Museum.
Assyrian God from Nineveh wall relief. Note the muscular legs in this figure, typical of Assyrian Art.
Boston Museum of Fine Arts."
Captives were treated particularly harshly. The Geneva Convention was not in the thought process of the Assyrians, who believed in spreading fear among the surrounding enemies.
By about 900 BC, Assyria was becoming a fierce war machine, dominating the Near East for 300 years until they were conquered by the Babylonians. Centuries of warfare — as the predominant aspect of their culture — hardened them into a brutal people.
In the temples and palaces, rich with militaristic art, there are no happy scenes of banquets, dancing, feasting, or happy family scenes. All Assyrian art is centered on power.
Tilgath Pileser (also known in the Old Testament as Pul) reigned from 745-727 BC. He warred against Syria and advanced along the Mediterranean, subjugating Phoenicia and Gaza. He conquered Israel in 721 BC, removing the Israelites, and advanced on Judah. Palace art shows captives and vassals paying tribute to the kings.
Tilgath Pileser (Pul), shown in court in his palace, from an artist's reconstruction from a bas relief. 8th C. BC, Louvre
Kings’ sport was shooting lions while riding in chariots. Dying lions and lion hunts figure prominently in palace art. While people were depicted with little emotion, animals were shown with great sensitivity, as we see in this excellent relief of a dying lioness.
Dying Lioness, limestone, 650 BC, British Museum
Someday, when we get the scriptures from the Ten Tribes, it will be interesting to hear the stories associated with the hardships they suffered under the Assyrians.
Israelite prisoners being marched out of Israel by Assyrian soldiers.
After the defeat of Israel, the Assyrians advanced on Judah, moving south, and conquering as they went. Watch fires were set that could be seen from one city to another, so the next city in line could see what was the state of the battle.
One of the most poignant archaeological finds related to this period is an ostracon from Lachish. Ostracon were broken pieces of fired clay or pottery. Relatively indestructible, they were used as message pads.
The Lachish Ostracon #4, found in the ruins of Lachish, ends a long message with the sad words, "and let my Lord know that we are watching for the signal fires of Lachish... for we cannot see Azekiah." Azekiah had been defeated, Lachish was next, and the giant Assyrian siege ramp is still visible. The message was never sent.
Ostracon #4 from Lachish.
After defeating Lachish, the Assyrians moved on Jerusalem in 701 BC, and laid siege to the city. They were smitten by a plague (probably bubonic) and woke up all "dead corpses." (2 Kings 18, 19.) The king, Sennacherib, returned to Assyrian, abandoning Jerusalem, where he was assassinated by two of his sons while worshiping in the Assyrian temple.
Assyrians transplanted conquered peoples to other areas in their large kingdom, rendering them relatively helpless and disoriented. Their leadership was destroyed, and they were in unfamiliar areas, under guard. Other captive peoples were moved into their vacated lands. Some original Israelites were undoubtedly still in the area of Israel, having evaded capture. Mixed with the newly transplanted people brought by the Assyrians, they intermarried and mixed religious beliefs, absorbing elements of both.
When Judah was allowed to return under the Persians they scorned these people with their false religious practices, as they were despised at the time of Christ. They became known as the Samaritans.
Source: Meridian Magazine
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
E-M35, which defines the E1b1b1 (formerly E3b1) haplogroup, is considered to be the second highest, next to J, for "Founding Jewish Lineages" in Europe.
It is found in moderate amounts in all Jewish populations, from Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Kurdish, Yemen, Samaritan and even among Djerba Jewish groups.
Welcome!
The Jewish E Project (formerly Jewish E3b Project) is open to all males in Y-DNA haplogroup E and any of its subclades, who have KNOWN Jewish ancestry on their direct paternal line (your father's father's father, etc).
The E haplogroup has been observed in all Jewish groups world wide. One of its major subclades, E1b1b (formerly E3b) is considered to be the 2nd most prevalent haplogroup among the Jewish population.
E-M35, which defines the E1b1b1 (formerly E3b1) haplogroup, is considered to be the second highest, next to J, for "Founding Jewish Lineages" in Europe.
It is found in moderate amounts in all Jewish populations, from Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Kurdish, Yemen, Samaritan and even among Djerba Jewish groups.
—PN2 clade (E3) bearers in the vicinity of the Sudanese-Central African Republic -Ugandan-Kenyan region give rise to E3a ~ between 21 and 18 ky ago [pending additional or new info]; E3b-M35* would have likely arose relatively earlier than E3a*[as evidenced by its near absence in some the populations that carry this], sometime prior to the Ogolian and the LGM period. At this time, it was likely the M78 derivative that came about ~ between 19 and 15 ky ago. It was also likely during this period, that some E3b-M35 variants spilled over to the "southwest Asia", which would be identified as E-M34. The E-M78* likely arose somewhere in the bidirectional-migration route between Northeast and sub-Saharan East Africa; this location was likely in the region straddling upper Egypt and Sudan of the eastern Sahara, amongst earlier E-M35 migrants from sub-Saharan East Africa. These M78 bearers were increasingly pressured to move further south due to progressive aridity, possibly as far as Uganda-Kenya and/or Tanzanian general region.
Quoting Andrew Lancaster's article:
"As shall be shown, there are obvious reasons for considering whether Y Haplogroup E-M35 male lineages may have been present amongst peoples who spread the earliest Afroasiatic languages as well as the earliest technologies associated with farming and pastoralism in the Middle East, Africa and Europe.
"Ehret et al.(2004) in a short letter to , perhaps represents the first published remark associating E-M35 with the of Afroasiatic languages and Neolithic technologies, a subject this article intends to address in more detail."
"Importantly, we also wish to try to go beyond asserting that E-M35 and Afroasiatic have similar modern regional distributions. Therefore, this article shall also examine what is known of the larger phylogenetic (family tree) structure within which E-M35 is only one branching, as we must if we are to consider carefully how much genetics can add to debates in linguistics and archaeology."
"There are several relatively uncontroversial proposals concerning the ancient movements of Afroasiatic languages, each of which we can immediately compare to Haplogroup E-M35 and its sub-clades in population genetics:
Both E-M35 male lineages on the one hand, and Afroasiatic languages on the other, are seen by specialists in the two respective fields as having moved pre-historically within what Cruciani et al.(2007) refer to as a “bi-directional corridor” along the Nile and/or the western coast of the Red Sea, from the Sinai and Mediterranean, to the Horn of Africa."
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
Millions of Jews traced to four women
Study identifies genetic signatures for 3.5 million Ashkenazi Jews
About 3.5 million of today’s Ashkenazi Jews — 40 percent of the total Ashkenazi population — are descended from just four women, a genetic study indicates.
Those women apparently lived somewhere in Europe within the last 2,000 years, but not necessarily in the same place or even the same century, said lead author Dr. Doron Behar of the Rambam Medical Center in Haifa, Israel.
He did the work with Karl Skorecki of the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology and others.
Each woman left a genetic signature that shows up in their descendants today, he and colleagues say in a report published online by the American Journal of Human Genetics. Together, their four signatures appear in about 40 percent of Ashkenazi Jews, while being virtually absent in non-Jews and found only rarely in Jews of non-Ashkenazi origin, the researchers said.
They said the total Ashkenazi population is estimated at around 8 million people. The estimated world Jewish population is about 13 million.
Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern European ancestry. Ultimately, though, they can be traced back to Jews who migrated from Israel to Italy in the first and second centuries, Behar said. Eventually this group moved to Eastern Europe in the 12th and 13th centuries and expanded greatly, reaching about 10 million just before World War II, he said.
Maternal lineages traced
The study involved mitochondrial DNA, called mtDNA, which is passed only through the mother. A woman can pass her mtDNA to grandchildren only by having daughters. So mtDNA is “the perfect tool to trace maternal lineages,” Behar said Thursday in a telephone interview.
About 3.5 million of today’s Ashkenazi Jews — 40 percent of the total Ashkenazi population — are descended from just four women, a genetic study indicates. web page Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
The origin of Eastern European Jews revealed by autosomal, sex chromosomal and mtDNA polymorphisms
Avshalom Zoossmann-Diskin et al.
Abstract
Background
This study aims to establish the likely origin of EEJ (Eastern European Jews) by genetic distance analysis of autosomal markers and haplogroups on the X and Y chromosomes and mtDNA.
Results
According to the autosomal polymorphisms the investigated Jewish populations do not share a common origin, and EEJ are closer to Italians in particular and to Europeans in general than to the other Jewish populations. The similarity of EEJ to Italians and Europeans is also supported by the X chromosomal haplogroups. In contrast according to the Y-chromosomal haplogroups EEJ are closest to the non-Jewish populations of the Eastern Mediterranean. MtDNA shows a mixed pattern, but overall EEJ are more distant from most populations and hold a marginal rather than a central position. The autosomal genetic distance matrix has a very high correlation (0.789) with geography, whereas the X-chromosomal, Y-chromosomal and mtDNA matrices have a lower correlation (0.540, 0.395 and 0.641 respectively).
Conclusions
The close genetic resemblance to Italians accords with the historical presumption that Ashkenazi Jews started their migrations across Europe in Italy and with historical evidence that conversion to Judaism was common in ancient Rome. The reasons for the discrepancy between the biparental markers and the uniparental markers are discussed.
Reviewers
This article was reviewed by Damian Labuda (nominated by Jerzy Jurka), Kateryna Makova and Qasim Ayub (nominated by Dan Graur).
Background
The genetic affinities of the Jewish populations have been studied since the early days of genetics, yet the origin of these populations is still obscure. Some of the studies, trying to establish the origins of the Jewish populations with autosomal markers, claimed that the Jewish populations have a common origin, but others concluded that the Jews are a very diverse group. This corpus of studies has already been critically reviewed [1].
The origin of Eastern European Jews, (EEJ) by far the largest and most important Ashkenazi population, and their affinities to other Jewish and European populations are still not resolved. Studies that compared them by genetic distance analysis of autosomal markers to European Mediterranean populations revealed that they are closer to Europeans than to other Jewish populations [1-3].
EEJ are the largest and most investigated Jewish community, yet their history as Franco-German Jewry is known to us only since their appearance in the 9th century, and their subsequent migration a few hundred years later to Eastern Europe [4,5]. Where did these Jews come from? It seems that they came to Germany and France from Italy [5-8]. It is also possible that some Jews migrated northward from the Italian colonies on the northern shore of the Black Sea [9]. All these Jews are likely the descendents of proselytes. Conversion to Judaism was common in Rome in the first centuries BC and AD. Judaism gained many followers among all ranks of Roman Society [10-13].
The aim of this study is to establish the likely origin of this major Jewish population by using a larger dataset of autosomal markers, and compare the results to analyses based on the available data for the X and Y chromosomes and for mtDNA.
Methods
Six Jewish populations: EEJ, Moroccan Jews, Iraqi Jews. Iranian Jews, Yemenite Jews and Ethiopian Jews, which have been studied for all the autosomal markers used in this study, are included in the analysis. EEJ are defined on the basis of history as those Jews originating from the areas of the Polish-Lithuanian Kingdom and their descendants in bordering regions, encompassing the territories of Russia, Poland, the Baltic States, Belarus, Moldavia, Moldova (the north-eastern part of Romania) and the Ukraine. The Data on the non-autosomal markers were also available for other Jewish populations: Bulgarian Jews (X, mtDNA), Turkish Jews (X, mtDNA), Tunisian Jews (mtDNA), Libyan Jews (Y, mtDNA) and Djerban Jews (Y).
The seventeen autosomal markers are: AK, ADA, PGM1, PGD, ACP, ESD, GPT, HP, GC, J311 MspI & MetH TaqI (both on chromosome 7 near the CF locus), FV G1691A, FII G20210A, MTHFR C677T, CBS 844ins68, ACE ID and PAH XmnI. All the markers are unique-event-polymorphisms, and apart from two insertions (CBS 844ins68, ACE ID) are all SNPs. The first nine markers are polymorphisms of red cell enzymes and serum proteins, and were typed mostly by protein electrophoresis, but the variation at the protein level is directly related in a 1:1 manner to the SNP variation at the DNA level. Indeed, some of the results for the Jewish populations were obtained by PCR methods [1,14]. The polymorphism of the remaining eight markers can only be detected at the DNA level. J311 MspI and MetH TaqI were typed in all the populations including the Israeli populations (unpublished results) by Southern blotting and hybridization [15,16]. The other 6 markers were typed in the Israeli populations by PCR methods. The data on FV G1691A, FII G20210A, MTHFR C677T and CBS 844ins68 have already been published [3,17]. The data on ACE ID and PAH XmnI are still unpublished. These polymorphisms were typed according to the methods of Rigat et al. [18] and Goltsov et al. [19] respectively. Allele frequencies for all the populations are given in Additional file 1: tables S1-4. Table S2 (Additional file 1) presents four markers on both sides of the CF locus. Because of the linkage between them, I chose to use only the two most distal markers, which are separated by a few centimorgans. Haplogroup frequencies of the non-recombining Y chromosome (NRY), the X chromosome (dystrophin locus, dys44, on Xp21.3) and mtDNA are given in Additional file 1: tables S5, S6 and S7 respectively.
Gower (cited in [20]) recommends, that for microevolutionary studies, when sample sizes are quite variable and gene frequencies do not differ greatly, Sanghvi's G2 [21] would be the most appropriate, and this is the measure I used. Distances were also calculated with Nei's [22] formula and the results were very similar (r = 0.990, genetic distance matrix not shown). The neighbor joining tree was computed by PHYLIP 3.66. Since it does not calculate Sanghvi's G2, I used Reynolds et al. distance [23], which is also based on the assumption that gene frequencies change by genetic drift alone, solely for the calculation of the tree (genetic distance matrix not shown). The significance of nodes in the tree and the standard errors of the genetic distances were computed by bootstrapping 10,000 times. Multidimensional scaling plots and Mantel tests for correlation between genetic distance matrices and between them and matrices of geographic distances were computed by NTSYS 1.70. Geographic distances were calculated as great circle distances between the capitals of the countries of origin of the populations (Warsaw was chosen for EEJ). Mantel test significance was assessed by 10,000 permutations.
Results
The autosomal genetic distances (table 1) do not show any particular resemblance between the Jewish populations. EEJ are closer to Italians in particular and to Europeans in general than to the other Jewish populations. All of the distances, apart from one, differ from zero by more than twice their standard error. A difference between two distances can be considered meaningful, if it is more than twice their largest standard error. The differences between the distance of EEJ from Italians and their distances from the other Jewish populations are meaningful according to this criterion, and the same is also true for all the Non-Jewish populations except for Greeks and Russians. In fact the distance between EEJ and Italians is the smallest distance in the matrix. A multidimensional scaling plot of the genetic distance matrix (figure 1) captures the proximity of EEJ to Italians and other European populations. The same is also true for the neighbor joining tree (figure 2). It should be noted that multidimensional scaling plots are a way to present graphically the intricate relationships of genetic distance matrices. As such they are necessarily less accurate than the matrices on which they are based. In order to understand the genetic affinities of a particular population, one must examine its distances in the matrix itself, not in the plot. The same also applies to the neighbor joining tree. The bootstrap values indicate the robustness of the clustering, but not the significance of individual genetic distances.
X-chromosomal haplogroups demonstrate the same relatedness of EEJ to Italians and other Europeans (table 2, figure 3). In contrast, according to the Y-chromosomal haplogroups EEJ are closest to the non-Jewish populations of the Eastern Mediterranean (table 3, figure 4). MtDNA shows a mixed pattern where EEJ are about equally close to Moroccan Jews, Palestinians, Italians and Bulgarian Jews, but overall are more distant from most populations and hold a marginal position in the MDS plot, rather than a central one like in the other plots (table 4, figure 5).
Correlations between genetic distance and geography and between genetic distance matrices based on different markers (excluding the non-Caucasoid populations Ethiopians and Ethiopian Jews) are shown in table 5. The autosomal polymorphisms have a very high correlation (0.789) with geography in contrast to the more moderate correlations of the X-chromosomal, Y-chromosomal and mtDNA polymorphisms (0.540, 0.395 and 0.641 respectively). In order to compare two competing theories regarding the origin of EEJ, their geographic distances were computed as if they originated from Italy or Israel, i.e. the great circle distances for EEJ were calculated not between Warsaw and other capitals, but between Rome or Jerusalem and other capitals. The correlation between the autosomal genetic distance matrix and geography was slightly higher, 0.804, for Rome but dropped to 0.694 for Jerusalem. Autosomal distances are much better correlated with mtDNA distances (0.826) and with X-chromosomal distances (0.732) than with Y-chromosomal distances (0.437). The correlations between the mtDNA and X-chromosomal matrices and the Y-chromosomal matrix are rather poor (0.206 and 0.241 respectively) and insignificant. When the correlations with geography were only calculated for the genetic distances of EEJ and not for the entire matrix (table 6), the same trends emerge with the autosomal correlation from Rome reaching a high of 0.926. The correlations from Jerusalem are negative for the autosomes, the X chromosome and mtDNA. The reverse is true for the Y chromosome.
Discussion
The autosomal genetic distance analysis presented here clearly demonstrates that the investigated Jewish populations do not share a common origin. The resemblance of EEJ to Italians and other European populations portrays them as an autochthonous European population. A study conducted in a New York college in the 1920s point to the same Ashkenazi - Italian similarity on basis of physical characteristics. Freshmen were asked before they knew one another to indicate the origin of their fellow students. Forty percent of the Italians were taken to be Ashkenazi Jews, and the same percentage of Ashkenazi Jews was adjudged Italians [24]. EEJ seem to be mainly Italian (Roman) in origin, which is easily understood, considering the historical evidence presented above.
The high correlation between the autosomal genetic distances and geography and the reduced correlation when EEJ are taken to originate from the Land of Israel reinforce the European origin of EEJ. In fact the correlation of the autosomal markers with geography is higher than previously described for 49 classical markers (0.503) or ~300,000 autosomal SNPs (0.661) in Europe [25]. If for comparison, only non-Jewish European populations are included, the correlation is lower, 0.689, but still higher than the above mentioned correlations. It is also interesting to note how using the three geographic alternatives for EEJ, changes the correlation, when only European populations are included. The correlation remains almost the same, 0.679, for Rome but drops to 0.490 and 0.571 for Warsaw and Jerusalem respectively; further emphasizing the correct geographic origin of EEJ within Europe.
Biparental versus uniparental markers
At first sight it seems that there is more than one explanation for the differing results produced by the analysis of the NRY haplogroups. It thus seems possible that EEJ founder population in Rome was composed of exiled Israelite males and local Roman females. In its simple form this clearly contradicts the facts, because both the autosomal and X-chromosomal polymorphisms demonstrate that EEJ do not occupy an intermediate position between European and Middle Eastern populations, but rather a strict European one. From table 1 it is clear that Italians are as close or closer to the other Jewish populations and Palestinians as EEJ. It is possible that once the founder population was established no other males but many females joined it, thus creating a population that is almost entirely European in all genetic aspects apart from its Y chromosomes. Such phenomenon was described for the population of Antioquia, Columbia, where the autosomes point to 79% of European ancestry and only 16% of Amerindian ancestry, whereas according to mtDNA the ancestry is 90% Amerindian and only 2% European (there is also a small African component). Historical records demonstrate that local Amerindian females joined the population only at its beginning, whereas European males joined it also in later periods [26]. The suggestion that the proselyte ancestors of EEJ were almost entirely females does not however accord with what we know about conversion to Judaism [10,12,27-29].
The inference that the NRY points to a Middle Eastern origin of EEJ is erroneous not only because the Y chromosomal analysis contradicts the analyses based on the other chromosomes, and because the NRY is a single uniparental marker that does not represent the whole history of the population, but also because its smaller effective population size makes it much more vulnerable to severe genetic drift caused by demographic bottlenecks. The demographic histories of three Jewish populations exemplify how different demographic patterns make the uniparental markers more reliable for Iraqi (Babylonian) Jews and Yemenite Jews and less reliable for EEJ. Both Yemenite Jews and Iraqi Jews resemble populations from their regions of origin according to autosomal markers [1,3,30-32]. Yemenite Jews, who are usually considered a small isolate, were numerous enough to have an independent kingdom in the first centuries AD [33]. They numbered a few hundred thousand in the 12th century AD, and gradually declined; reaching only about 30-40,000 in the beginning of the 20th century [34]. Babylonian Jews numbered more than a million in the first century AD [35], and constituted the majority of the population in the area between the Euphrates and the Tigris in the 2nd-3rd centuries AD [36]. Gilbert [37] estimates that by 600 AD there were 806,000 Jews in Mesopotamia, and according to Sassoon [38] it was inhabited by about a million Jews in the 7th century. In the 14th century the estimates for Baghdad alone range from 70,000 to hundreds thousands [38]. By 1939, 11 years before their emigration, there were 91,000 Jews in Iraq [35]. In contrast, the Jewish population of the Polish-Lithuanian Kingdom (EEJ) went through the opposite process. Their history is one of founder effects, migrations, demographic bottlenecks and finally a rapid expansion. We know nothing about their number in the first millennium, but after their emigration from Italy to Western Europe it is estimated that they numbered 4,000 in 1000 and 20,000 a hundred years later [8]. In 1500 already in Eastern Europe they numbered 10,000-30,000, in 1648 230,000-450,000 and in 1764 750,000 [39-41]. In the 19th century because of the partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Kingdom and the immigrations of Jews to Central and Western Europe and America, the estimation of the number of EEJ becomes more difficult, but there is no doubt that the increase in numbers was impressive, as the number of EEJ under Russian rule alone was 5,200,000 in 1897 [41].
The existence of severe demographic bottlenecks in the history of EEJ has also been suggested by genetic studies of disease-causing-mutations and mtDNA [42-46]. The comparison based on this second uniparental marker, mtDNA, may help to resolve from within genetics itself the problem of the Y chromosome reliability for inferring the origin of the male ancestors of EEJ. If the European and Middle Eastern contributions to the gene pool of EEJ were female and male respectively, then comparisons based on mtDNA must place EEJ among other European populations, distant from Middle Eastern populations. The mtDNA analysis presented in this study does not place EEJ among other European populations rather their position is more intermediate and marginal, as can be seen in figure 5 and in figure 6, where autosomal distances are correlated with mtDNA distances. This lends further support to the notion that because of the unique demographic history of EEJ, their uniparental markers were subjected to stronger genetic drift than the biparental markers and thus should not be used to trace their origin.
The data on the Y chromosome itself also support the unreliability of the uniparental markers for discovering the origin of EEJ. Nebel et al. [47] studied haplogroup R-M17, whose frequency is ~12% in Ashkenazi Jews. By comparing the structure of the STRs network among the various Ashkenazi populations and among the various European non-Jewish populations they reached the conclusion that a single male founder introduced this haplogroup into Ashkenazi Jews in the first millennium. Behar et al. [48] write "It is striking that whereas Ashkenazi populations are genetically more diverse at both the SNP and STR level compared with their European non-Jewish counterparts, they have greatly reduced within-haplogroup STR variability ... This contrasting pattern of diversity in Ashkenazi populations is evidence for a reduction in male effective population size, possibly resulting from a series of founder events and high rates of endogamy within Europe. This reduced effective population size may explain the high incidence of founder disease mutations despite overall high levels of NRY diversity". It is unlikely that EEJ are the descendants of a single population. Admixture coupled with small effective population size and bottlenecks can create the puzzling situation we encounter in the uniparental markers. Thus smaller contributions from several populations, including possibly the original Middle Eastern Jewish population, and a major contribution from Italy combined with the unique demography of EEJ can create the current genetic picture without the need to invoke a major contribution from the Middle East, which contradicts the autosomal and X-chromosomal data.
Comments on previous studies
Some previous studies based on classical autosomal markers concluded that EEJ are a Middle Eastern population with genetic affinities to other Jewish populations. The problems with these studies have been previously discussed in detail [1]. These studies used fewer markers (mostly the less reliable antigenic markers) and failed to include European Mediterranean populations, apart from the discriminant analysis of Carmelli and Cavalli-Sforza [49], which used only four markers and contradicts the results of the later more elaborate discriminant analysis [1], and the genetic distance analysis of Livshits et al. [32], which includes a single European Mediterranean population, Spain. Despite this when a genetic distance analysis was performed, the greater similarity of EEJ to Russians and to a lesser extent to Germans more than to Non-European Jews was evident [32]. In fact Russians were more similar to EEJ than to any Non-Jewish European population in that analysis.
Recently, Cochran et al. [50] used 251 autosomal loci to calculate genetic distances and concluded that "from the perspective of a large collection of largely neutral genetic variation Ashkenazim are essentially European, not Middle Eastern". More recently, thousands of SNPs were used by Need et al. [51] to infer the relationships between Ashkenazi Jews and non-Jewish Europeans and Middle Easterners. They concluded that Ashkenazi Jews lie approximately midway between Europeans and the Middle Easterners, implying that Ashkenazi Jews may contain mixed ancestry from these two regions, and that they are close to the Adygei population from the Caucasus. However these conclusions are ill-founded, because, they used a highly selected set of SNPs, which were selected specifically for the purpose of distinguishing between Ashkenazi Jews and other populations and they inferred the origin of Ashkenazi Jews from principal components analysis (PCA), but as Tian et al. [52] show "PCA results are highly dependent on which population groups are included in the analysis. Thus, there should be some caution in interpreting these results and other results from similar analytic methods with respect to ascribing origins of particular ethnic groups'" Tian et al. [52] also published a table of paired Fst distances based on 10,500 random SNPs, which demonstrates that Ashkenazi Jews are not at all close to the Adygei population, and similarly to what is seen in table 1, their smallest distance is to Italians and then to Greeks. Unlike the assertion of Need et al. [51] on the midway position, and again similarly to what is seen in table 1, Italians and Greeks are closer to the Middle Eastern populations than Ashkenazi Jews.
The same phenomenon is seen in the table of Fst distances of Atzmon et al. [53]. North Italians (Bergamo and Tuscany) are a little closer to the Jewish and Middle Eastern populations than Ashkenazi Jews. The Italians from Tuscany (surprisingly the sample from Bergamo was not used) in Behar et al. [54] are also closer to the Jewish and Middle Eastern populations than Ashkenazi Jews. The Italians from Tuscany are in fact the closest population to Ashkenazi Jews in Behar et al. [54]. There is one sample that is apparently a little closer, what they call Sephardic Jews. Unfortunately this sample is composed of two populations, Turkish Jews and Bulgarian Jews, which should have been studied separately like all other Jewish populations. Bulgarian Jews have been shown in the past based on autosomal classical markers to be closer to EEJ than to populations with Sephardic ancestry and considering their history it was concluded that the Ashkenazi component in their gene pool is at least as large or even larger that the Sephardic component [1]. From both The current study and those of Atzmon et al. [53] and Behar et al. [54] it can be seen that the only Jewish populations that are as close to Ashkenazi Jews as non-Jewish Europeans are those with a significant Sephardic (The descendants of the Jews who were expelled from the Iberian peninsula at the end of the 15th century) component in their gene pool. It is not possible at this stage to say what is the source of this resemblance, since we don't know what is the origin of Sephardic Jews, but considering all the genetic affinities of both groups it likely stems from Sephardic Jews being the descendants of converts in the Mediterranean basin rather than from a common Jewish origin in the Land of Israel. When one compares the autosomal distances of EEJ (current study) or Ashkenazi Jews (in Atzmon et al. [53] and Behar et al. [54]) from the Jewish populations that were investigated in the current study, Iraqi, Iranian, Moroccan, Yemenite and Ethiopian Jews, one finds perfect agreement. EEJ or Ashkenazi Jews are much closer to non-Jewish Europeans than to these Jewish populations in all three studies.
The studies of Atzmon et al. [53] and Behar et al. [54] are based on 164,894 and 226,839 SNPs respectively. While this impressive number reduces the errors of the distances that stem from the number of markers, the errors that stem from sampling only a small number of individuals are much larger in these studies, where sample sizes can be as small as 2-4 individuals. The effect of these errors can be seen in table 7. Despite the small number of markers the current matrix has the highest correlation with geography. Moreover it has a higher correlation with each of the two other matrices than the two of them have with each other. The high correlations between the current matrix and the other two attest for the robustness of the autosomal genetic distances in this study. The lower correlation between the two matrices, which are based on more than 150,000 SNPs, is surprising and even more so, if we remember that the four non-Jewish populations are represented by exactly the same individuals taken from the Human Genome Diversity Panel (HGDP). It is likely then that sampling more individuals, which represent more of the variation of the investigated populations, is far more important than typing many markers. It is also possible that the typing error rates of genome-wide microarray studies are much higher, as demonstrated by the genotyping errors that were discovered in 7 out of 29 (24%) reexamined SNPs [55]. It seems therefore, that good characterization of the genetic relationships between populations can be achieved by a small number of good unique-event-polymorphisms.
Conclusions
EEJ are Europeans probably of Roman descent who converted to Judaism at times, when Judaism was the first monotheistic religion that spread in the ancient world. Any other theory about their origin is not supported by the genetic data. Future studies will have to address their genetic affinities to various Italian populations and examine the possibility of other components both European and Non-European in their gene pool.
Competing interests
The author declares that he has no competing interests.
Reviewers' comments
Reviewer's report 1 Damian Labuda, Pediatrics Department, Montreal University Sainte-Justine Hospital Research Center, Montreal, PQ Canada (nominated by Jerzy Jurka, Genetic Information Research Institute, Mountain View, California USA).
The author compiled and reanalyzed the data on autosomal and sex chromosomes polymorphisms collected by different laboratories on different Jewish and West-Eurasiatic populations. His analysis indicates much greater European component of Eastern European Jews, EEJ (essentially Ashkenazim) than of other Jewish groups. Moreover the analysis points to Italians as the closest population to EEJ.
The question is how to interpret this evidence. Imperial Rome was a very cosmopolitan city culturally and genetically diverse. To what extent a sample of contemporary Italians preserves the genetic link to its population? It can simply reflect a mixture of historical influences from different centers around the Mediterranean Sea. We should thus keep in mind that the Italian connection may simply indicate Southern European and Mediterranean links with the latter including Middle Eastern roots.
Interestingly, this analysis that is based on a limited number of markers provided results that are very similar to a paper of Atzmon and colleagues, published five days ago in the American Journal of Human Genetics, and based on the microarray-based genotyping genome of wide distributed markers. I would like the author to comment on this paper in the context of his findings and his thoughts and reflections on the origin of Jewish Diasporas. Should we go back to the single locus analyses, as in the case of uniparentally transmitted markers, but targeting one by one different individual segments of the nuclear genome? Perhaps, in this way we could partition and identify genetic ancestries of different populations, which due to their history of relative isolation, are considered as genetically homogenous.
The author refers to Sangvi's G2 as the most appropriate distance metrics. Could you make it more clear when this metric was used and when that of Reynolds (only to produce a tree?).
Author's response
The historical sources listed above show that conversion to Judaism was common in ancient Rome among all ranks of the Roman society including the imperial families. It is thus unlikely that the original Roman population did not constitute a significant portion of the proselytes. What else can explain the resemblance of EEJ to a general sample of Italians in this study and to more local samples in the two array studies [53,54]? In all three studies the genetic affinities of the Ashkenazim are very similar to the affinities of the Italians, with the Ashkenazim usually being a bit more distant from the other populations, as can be expected from a population that underwent a stronger genetic drift. It is thus unlikely that the Ashkenazim are a mixture of people from different places in the Mediterranean basin, unless current-day Italians themselves not only have absorbed foreign genetic contributions, but actually constitute such a mixture, and this seems unlikely as well. The very high correlation (0.926) between the genetic distances of EEJ and geographic distances, when the latter are calculated from Rome, also supports the origin of EEJ from Italy or its vicinity and not merely from the Mediterranean basin. The similarity to Italians was also evident when several Italian populations from different provinces were included in a comparison based on classical autosomal markers. Most Italian populations were closer to EEJ than all other populations (data not shown).
My comments on the papers by Atzmon et al. [53] and Behar et al. [54] are in the discussion. Studying autosomal haplotypes will indeed contribute to revealing the ancestries of populations, but in order to gain meaningful insights one ought to study at least several loci and ensure that sample sizes are adequate, this may entail more effort than studying single SNPs, and I am not sure that the affinities between the populations are going to be depicted more accurately. I changed the phrasing in Methods to make it clearer that the formula of Reynolds et al. was only used for the calculation of the tree.
Reviewer's report 2
Kateryna Makova, Department of Biology, Penn State University, Pennsylvania USA.
This is an interesting manuscript that presents intriguing results. I have only a few comments:
1. The introduction is very short, while the discussion is lengthy. I suggest moving parts of the Discussion to the Introduction.
2. Some of the statements in the Discussion are too strong. I disagree with statements about "erroneous Y chromosomal genetic distances", "both uniparental markers should not be used to trace their origin", "uniparental markers being unreliable". The author should modify them.
Author's response
I moved the paragraph on the history of EEJ to the Introduction. The current revised version of the paper includes a new comparison based on mtDNA. I maintain that it adds more weight to my assertion that the uniparental markers should not be used to trace the origin of EEJ. In no way did I mean that the uniparental markers are always unreliable; to clarify it I modified the relevant sentence in the discussion. Indeed from the demographic examples that I give in the Discussion, it seems that the uniparental markers can be used to study the origins of Iraqi Jews and Yemenite Jews.
Reviewer's report 3
Qasim Ayub, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, UK (nominated by Dan Graur, Department of Biology and Biochemistry, University of Houston, Houston, USA).
The paper by Zoossmann-Diskin entitled 'The origin of Eastern European Jews revealed by autosomal and sex chromosomal polymorphisms' explores autosomal and sex chromosomal polymorphisms in six Jewish populations using previously published and additional unpublished data. The author concludes that the Jewish populations examined do not share a common origin and that Eastern European Jews are closer to the Italian population.
My major concern is the choice of markers and populations used in this study. The author has analyzed 17 autosomal loci, including 9 polymorphic protein electrophoretic variants in which the genotype was assumed. Although phenotypes often do correlate with genotypes assuming that they do can lead to erroneous results. Of the remaining 8 it is unclear whether the same samples were genotyped as the sample numbers for each locus vary widely (Supplementary Tables 2-4).
The author also uses Y hapologroup frequencies and shows a multidimensional scaling plot of Y chromosomal genetic distance matrix. However, the supplementary data (Supplementary Table 5) lists an outdated nomenclature for Y haplogroups as the M78 marker is no longer considered part of haplogroup E3b1. It would be more appropriate to list which markers are used to designate the haplogroups to ensure that they are comparable. In addition, the haplogroups that are selected for these analyses do not provide phylogenetic resolution to reliably detect male genetic sub-structure within the Middle East. The omission of recent mtDNA studies (Behar et al., 2008, PLoS One 3:e2062) is surprising as is the use of a single X chromosomal locus (DYS44) to make broad conclusions about genetic relatedness.
Current evidence, supported more recently by two major studies carried out on Jewish populations (Atzmon et al., Am J H Genetics 86:850-859; Behar et al., Nature doi:10.1038) using a much larger dataset clearly demonstrate a common genetic thread linking the diverse Mizrahi, Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jewish populations with the populations from the Levant and Middle East. The Ashkenazi show a European component but this is shared with many Eastern and Southern Europeans populations. These studies contradict the author's conclusion and demonstrate the power of using unbiased markers and host populations in corresponding geographic regions to address issues such as genetic relatedness among Jewish and non-Jewish populations
Author's response
I am not sure what Dr Ayub means by "assumed", but I suspect that he means something like the relationships between phenotype and genotype in certain blood groups, in which one (or more) allele is dominant over the other and the gene frequencies of the alleles have to be inferred from the phenotypes assuming Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. In such cases there may indeed be errors in the gene frequencies. Protein electrophoretic markers are completely different. Nothing is inferred! As mentioned in Methods all the protein electrophoretic markers in this study represent a SNP at the DNA level. This SNP causes an amino acid change that can be detected at the protein level. Both alleles are directly viewed on the gel in the same way as both alleles of an RFLP are directly viewed on the gel. Gene frequencies are determined in both cases by simple gene counting and the error rate in protein electrophoresis is no greater than in DNA studies. There is no need to type the same samples for all the polymorphisms, because the unit of study is the population, not the individual. One can use polymorphisms typed by different researchers using different samples and combine them to create a genetic profile of each population. Typing all the polymorphisms on the same sample does not add more credibility to the study. Indeed the renowned works that employed classical autosomal markers to portray the genetic affinities of human populations were based on many different samples typed by many different researchers [56,57].
The nomenclature in the Y chromosome supplementary table has been updated. Following the publication of the study by Behar et al. [54] it was possible to add more Jewish populations to the Y chromosome analysis and increase the number of chromosomes for the Jewish populations. This increase has come however at the expense of resolution, because Behar et al. [54] used fewer haplogroups in their analysis. Consequently the number of haplogroups was reduced from 15 in the original version to 14 in this revised version. I would have been happier if the available data on the Jewish populations had enabled greater resolution to reliably detect male genetic sub-structure within the Middle East, but since this work deals with the genetic affinities of EEJ, the current level is sufficient. The work of Behar et al. from 2008 was instrumental in creating the mtDNA matrix as can be seen in table 7 in Additional file 1. There was no need to cite it previously, as it did not contain any genetic distance analysis that could further clarify the origin of EEJ. I am surprised at Dr Ayub's surprise at the use of a single X chromosomal locus. It would have been better to use many X chromosomal loci, but even the use of single loci is advantageous, as I am sure even Dr Ayub would agree regarding the two other single loci that I use, the non-recombining Y chromosome (NRY) and mtDNA.
As written in the Discussion the genetic distance matrices of Atzmon et al. [53] and Behar et al. [54] do not contradict my results, but reinforce them. I completely reject Dr Ayub's claim that the markers or populations I used are biased in anyway, and I let the reader judge, where exactly the bias lies.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
Structural position of the Pleistocene Gesher Benot Ya'aqov site in the Dead Sea Rift zone
N. Goren-Inbar and S. Belitzky
Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel 91905
Department of Geology, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel 91904
Received 29 June 1988. Available online 19 November 2004.
Abstract
Newly discovered outcrops of the middle Pleistocene Benot Ya'aqov Formation are strongly disturbed due to recent tectonic activity along the Dead Sea Rift. The lacustrine-fluviatile sediments of this formation comprise the littoral facies of a paleo-lake that occupied the adjacent Hula Basin. Acheulian artifacts, found embedded in the formation, have typical African characteristics. The geographical position of the site (the northern extension of the East African Red Sea Rift System) is important for understanding hominid diffusion from Africa to Eurasia.
Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
Posted by rahotep101 (Member # 18764) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^^ LMAO Your personal "theory" is irrelevant to the FACTS. Fact is the statue was meant ot represent St. Maurice. Fact is Saint Maurice was an indigenous EGYPTIAN from rural Thebes and thus best representative of his ancient ancestors unlike the European descended Alexandrians you love to uphold as the 'real' Egyptians!
quote:Originally posted by DaHoslips101: As you insist on denying the obvious,here's a graphic demonstration of how the darkest flesh region on the semite captive is actually darker than the darkest flesh area on the Egyptian king...
...
First off, your graphic color palette is off as they are obviously not the same color as the highlighted paint on the portraits. The paint on Ramses is not even that light as your silly palette.
Second of all, I find it funny how you highlighted the area around the eyes, when it is a known fact that all eyes were outlined in black paint. No doubt the black paint faded and/or mixed with the lighter paint around it. LOL
Here is a black-white photo of a mural of Ramses in his siege of Dapur.
--- Here is a European copy of a mural of Ramses battle of Kadesh.
---
hariot_RamesesII_Kadesh.jpg[/IMG]
Ramses fighting Meshwesh Libyans.
--- Ramses was consistently portrayed with a dark brown i.e. chocolate i.e. BLACK complexion. There is no getting around it. Ramses was darker than the Asiatic and was very dark because he is BLACK like all indigenous Egyptians were.
[QUOTE][qb] The source of the Ramesses reconstruction is the mummified head of Ramesses, as you can see, and the nose is perfectly intact so you don't need to guess. That particular image was shown on the Discovery channel.
The nose is NOT perfectly in tact for the reasons I gave before. It was broken during the mummification process and then stuffed with peppercorn.
quote:Also the negroid reconstruction of Tut is laughable, with the enormous nose and lips. Not only do these not resemble any portrait of the king, from the many that we have, but they contradict the mummified remains. Tut's facial features are well enough preserved to show the high, narrow bridge to the nose, and the fact that the lips were full but not fleshy and well within the bounds for a caucasoid type. Three more recent reconstructions, done in France, the US and Egypt, all produced portraits that resembled each other but did not resemble that earlier travesty. (I can only imagine that it was an exercise in political correctness and appeasement towards the afrocentric movement).
LMAO You are an ignoramus. You praise the Ramses reconstruction though the more "negroid" one of Tut as you put it was also created by and shown on the Discovery Channel! The only difference is that the team who reconstructed Tut was double-blinded meaning they didn't know who the skull belonged to and therefore were not prone to any political bias, whereas the team who reconstructed Ramses was NOT double-blinded!
You say that reconstruction of Tut doesn't look like his portraits. Which portraits are you referring to?
...
As I explained the team who did the Tut reconstruction were still bias in giving Tut wide nose because he was African as not all Africans have that. In fact your whole premise of cockasian features such as narrow bridge nose etc. are all b.s. because of the fact that such features have nothing to do with peoples of the Caucasus Mountains or Europe. Many black Africans have those features as well!! And I already cited Dr. Susan Anton who aided in National Geographic's reconstruction and she agrees also that the label of "caucasian" is nonsense!! You have this habit of ignoring evidence while promoting debunk mess! This is why you will always FAIL.
You show a b/w drawing (not a photo) based on an carved scene of the siege of Dapur, which retains no colour in actuality...
I'm sure the Hittites (who actually won the battle of Kadesh) were lighter skinned than the Egyptians, but that doesn't make the Egyptians blacks.
There was nothing wrong with my contrast image comparing Ramesses to the Syrian captive. Syrians didn't outline their eyes, as a rule, either, and I could easily have taken darker colour from elsewhere on the face. You're still denying the obvious. As for the mummy, Ramesses' nose retained its shape because of the stuffing, it was not distorted.
As for 'cockasoid', Egypt was and is closer to the Caucasus region than to black Africa.
North Africans are primarily caucasoid and not black. The fact remains that Anton and co identified Tut's skull as a North African, clearly having the present day population in mind, not knowing the age of the skull. This indicates that the ancient Egyptians resembled present-day north Africans. No portrait that can be found of Tutankhamun matches the broad-nosed, big lipped reconstruction (A). Anton's team's reconstruction (B), (similarly produced working double-blind), seems to be closer to the portraits.
Theban Egyptians do not resemble the Magdeburg statue of St Maurice, and no Medieval German sculptor is likely to have had a good idea what Theban Egyptians looked like 900 years previously. That's if St Maurice was even an actual Theban, which is hardly establised. Troops are not usually stationed in their home towns, especially when they are serving someone else's empire.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Millions of Jews traced to four women
Study identifies genetic signatures for 3.5 million Ashkenazi Jews
About 3.5 million of today’s Ashkenazi Jews — 40 percent of the total Ashkenazi population — are descended from just four women, a genetic study indicates.
Rasol/Great Jew, Media sensationalism left out the fact that the *origins* of the women are not conclusive. It says "likely from a Hebrew/Levantine mtDNA pool", no ones knows for sure even Hammer admitted it.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by DaDumb1_01: You show a b/w drawing (not a photo) based on an carved scene of the siege of Dapur, which retains no colour in actuality...
Your point? Ramses' complexion is quite clear.
quote:I'm sure the Hittites (who actually won the battle of Kadesh) were lighter skinned than the Egyptians, but that doesn't make the Egyptians blacks.
Even though the Egyptians have chocolate dark complexions. Of course not! LOL
quote:There was nothing wrong with my contrast image comparing Ramesses to the Syrian captive. Syrians didn't outline their eyes, as a rule, either, and I could easily have taken darker colour from elsewhere on the face. You're still denying the obvious. As for the mummy, Ramesses' nose retained its shape because of the stuffing, it was not distorted.
You moron, I was referring to the way eyes were outlined as they were colored or drawn in portraits! As for Ramses' nose, it was explained to you how many times that the nasal bones were broken and then the nose was stuffed. How the hell can the stuffing retain its original shape if it was broken. In fact Explorer cited a source showing how the nasal bone was missing, perhaps discarded by the priests after it was broken during mummification!!
quote:As for 'cockasoid', Egypt was and is closer to the Caucasus region than to black Africa.
Sure. In your mind "black Africa" means Sub-Sahara or the Congo even though blacks are indigenous to *ALL* of Africa including Egypt, dummy!
quote:North Africans are primarily caucasoid and not black. The fact remains that Anton and co identified Tut's skull as a North African, clearly having the present day population in mind, not knowing the age of the skull. This indicates that the ancient Egyptians resembled present-day north Africans. No portrait that can be found of Tutankhamun matches the broad-nosed, big lipped reconstruction (A). Anton's team's reconstruction (B), (similarly produced working double-blind), seems to be closer to the portraits.
And again, you keep repeating the DEBUNKED concept of "caucasoid"! You realize that many black peoples in Sub-Sahara were also classified as "caucasoid" which is why the classification as all racial ones are debunked in the first place!! And correction, Dr. Anton described the skull as African PERIOD. NOT "North African", as she herself states the skull shape is common throughout the continent not just the northern part, liar. Also Dr. Anton's team was NOT double-blinded like the American team from Discovery channel, you twit. You complain about the Discovery reconstruction not looking like his other portraits however ALL of the portraits portray a BLACK person!!
quote:Theban Egyptians do not resemble the Magdeburg statue of St Maurice, and no Medieval German sculptor is likely to have had a good idea what Theban Egyptians looked like 900 years previously. That's if St Maurice was even an actual Theban, which is hardly establised. Troops are not usually stationed in their home towns, especially when they are serving someone else's empire.
That's because the Germans do what many Europeans and white peoples like yourself still do today-- they STEREOTYPE. Thus one stereotypical "Negro" to them is any black person including a Theban Egyptian! LOL Posted by Byron Bumper (Member # 19992) on :
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
