...
EgyptSearch Forums Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

» EgyptSearch Forums » Egyptology » Mediterranean: its validity or lack thereof » Post A Reply

Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon: Icon 1     Icon 2     Icon 3     Icon 4     Icon 5     Icon 6     Icon 7    
Icon 8     Icon 9     Icon 10     Icon 11     Icon 12     Icon 13     Icon 14    
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

 

Instant Graemlins Instant UBB Code™
Smile   Frown   Embarrassed   Big Grin   Wink   Razz  
Cool   Roll Eyes   Mad   Eek!   Confused    
Insert URL Hyperlink - UBB Code™   Insert Email Address - UBB Code™
Bold - UBB Code™   Italics - UBB Code™
Quote - UBB Code™   Code Tag - UBB Code™
List Start - UBB Code™   List Item - UBB Code™
List End - UBB Code™   Image - UBB Code™

What is UBB Code™?
Options


Disable Graemlins in this post.


 


T O P I C     R E V I E W
alTakruri
Member # 10195
 - posted
Mediterranean is a term still bandied about when
more precise words will not suffice a positer's pet
theory.

There is not now nor has there ever been any
cuisine, culture, music, language, architecture,
basic spirituality, agriculture, flora, fauna, etc
that is universal to all lands embanking that sea.

Nor can civilizations as different as say the northeast
African civilization of ancient Egypt and the sub-Alpine
European civilization of Rome be lumped together as
so-called "Mediterranean civilization" when they have
so very little in common (especially ethnically).

So, outside of geography or climate, what do the aboriginal
cultures of the twenty one Mediterranean littoral countries
  1. Morocco
  2. Algeria
  3. Malta
  4. Tunisia
  5. Libya
  6. Egypt
  7. Palestine
  8. Israel
  9. Lebanon
  10. Syria
  11. Turkey
  12. Cyprus
  13. Crete
  14. Greece
  15. Albania
  16. Italy
  17. Sicily
  18. Sardinia
  19. Corsica
  20. France
  21. Spain
have in common that could hope to justify Mediterranean
as a blanket description for the all of them?
 
Mystery Solver
Member # 9033
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by alTakruri:


So, outside of geography or climate, what do the aboriginal
cultures of the twenty one Mediterranean littoral countries...

Those who use it, generally justify with the flimsy idea that it is a general reference to regions bordering the Mediterranean sea, and/or the idea that these cultural complexes in the past, had "traded" amongst themselves within relative geographical proximity. In some cases like that of ancient Egypt, the advocates seemingly prefer this term over "Red Sea civilization", which is also an application based on the same level of flimsiness. For those [particularly non-Africans], who don't get amusement from the idea that "ancient Egypt" is African based, the term incites a sense of relief of not having to refer to this complex in an African context, but rather, lump it with non-African territories under the generalized "Mediterranean" moniker, and in effect, distance its relationship with the rest of Africa and simultaneously increase its relationship with non-African entities lumped into the same construct.
 
Mystery Solver
Member # 9033
 - posted
Interestingly, coming from someone who frequents this board, UP Man/Achillobator/Tyrannosaurus wrote elsewhere:

Well, why did you choose to use "Semite"? Besides, the consensus seems to be that the Ancient Egyptians were a multi-chromatic society, with blacks predominanting in Upper Egypt and more Mediterranean people in the north.


What is "more Mediterranean" supposed to be? Goes back to my point that:

For those [particularly non-Africans], who don't get amusement from the idea that "ancient Egypt" is African based, the term incites a sense of relief of not having to refer to this complex in an African context, but rather, lump it with non-African territories under the generalized "Mediterranean" moniker, and in effect, distance its relationship with the rest of Africa and simultaneously increase its relationship with non-African entities lumped into the same construct.
 
Djehuti
Member # 6698
 - posted
^Strictly speaking, 'Mediterranean' is the sea that bounds southern Europe, Southwest Asia, and Northern Africa. Of course the Eurocents have really done a number on the term. To use the Mediterranean as some focal point of the "caucasian race". Especially anthropologist Sergei, who came up with his "Mediterranean race" which was a subgroup of the "caucasian race". What's funny is that many peoples who are not even close to the Mediterranean like Indians and Southeast Asians were classified as such.
 
alTakruri
Member # 10195
 - posted
Sergi never classified all his Mediterraneans as
members of a caucasian race. If you insist that
he did, please provide a citatin from him (not
from somebody reviewing him who can't tell the
difference between Sergi and those who Sergi
quotes in disagreement). Nor did Sergi class
Levantines within his Mediterranean race.
 
Djehuti
Member # 6698
 - posted
^Well if not Sergei than Coon. One or the other (I can't keep track of all these debunked Eurocent scholars).
 
alTakruri
Member # 10195
 - posted
Well dayyum pahdnuh, that's a like saying
if not Djehuti tththen Jaime (Salsasin, etc.) [Smile]

And if anything Sergi was Medicentric and
I doubt he's debunked. His science is now
outdated, his separating African Meds from
Africsn non-Meds is disproved, yet in his
day independent minded black history scholars
used Sergi's Med Race book to the best of
their interest for all it and he were worth.
 
King_Scorpion
Member # 4818
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mystery Solver:
quote:
Originally posted by alTakruri:


So, outside of geography or climate, what do the aboriginal
cultures of the twenty one Mediterranean littoral countries...

Those who use it, generally justify with the flimsy idea that it is a general reference to regions bordering the Mediterranean sea, and/or the idea that these cultural complexes in the past, had "traded" amongst themselves within relative geographical proximity. In some cases like that of ancient Egypt, the advocates seemingly prefer this term over "Red Sea civilization", which is also an application based on the same level of flimsiness. For those [particularly non-Africans], who don't get amusement from the idea that "ancient Egypt" is African based, the term incites a sense of relief of not having to refer to this complex in an African context, but rather, lump it with non-African territories under the generalized "Mediterranean" moniker, and in effect, distance its relationship with the rest of Africa and simultaneously increase its relationship with non-African entities lumped into the same construct.
BINGO!! We have a winner...
 
Djehuti
Member # 6698
 - posted
^^Of course, Mysterysolver is only repeating what is long been known about the use of the phrase "Mediterranean" when it comes to ancient cultures.

quote:
Originally posted by alTakruri:
Well dayyum pahdnuh, that's a like saying
if not Djehuti tththen Jaime (Salsasin, etc.) [Smile]

And if anything Sergi was Medicentric and
I doubt he's debunked. His science is now
outdated, his separating African Meds from
Africsn non-Meds is disproved, yet in his
day independent minded black history scholars
used Sergi's Med Race book to the best of
their interest for all it and he were worth.

Takruri, I take it that you are a fan of Sergi's work(?)
 
Mystery Solver
Member # 9033
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by Djehuti:

^^Of course, Mysterysolver is only repeating what is long been known about the use of the phrase "Mediterranean" when it comes to ancient cultures.

"only repeating what is long been known about the use of the phrase "Mediterranean" when it comes to ancient cultures"...after whom, and specifically where?.....which if it is the case, just goes to show the underlying intellectual deprivation with which those who are supposedly in the know of the above, continue to propagate its contextualization as described [above], and hence in doing so, attempt to lend it some "legitimacy", as well as general acceptance by an inalert and subservient audience.
 
alTakruri
Member # 10195
 - posted
No, I'm not a fan nor have I any heroes.

I must have seen Sergi on the local public library
shelves in my youth. My first truly conscious allusion
to it was when I entered college and found it in the
broadside Black Manhood by an author only known as
Ta(r)harqa, who quoted Sergi's famous anti-Eurocentric
rebuttal to his colleagues' "dark whites" doublespeak in
reference to Ethiopians, "If they are black then how can they be white?"

Then I recalled Rogers' use of Sergi. I didn't know
it at the time, but DuBois quoted passages from Sergi
as did Parker.

Just as Diop is not debunked though on certain issues
is outdated today, so is Sergi who hails from a much
earlier time than Diop, so we would quite naturally
not expect late 1800's anthropology to know or use
the tools at our disposal in this the 21st century.


Yet, what Sergi saw in osteo measurements we see in
NRY, specifically E3b. We're on much surer ground than
Sergi was because he was wrong about some of the peoples
he excluded as well as though he mistakenly included.
He was right about the East African origins and spread
to North Africa and the northern Mediterranean shores.

And despite the title of his book and its postulations,
there's no such thing as a Mediterranean race or stock.


http://phpbb-host.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=61&start=35&mforum=thenile

http://phpbb-host.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=17&start=20&mforum=thenile

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=004444;p=1#000004


Somewhere where I can't find it is a recent discussion
involving Sergi where Rasol made a good point
about Sergi
in very astute verbiage such that I got an understanding
of Sergi that before then I couldn't see :that he separated
his black Eurafrican subgroup from the rest of the black
Africans. Anybody who can dig up that thread?

quote:
Originally posted by Djehuti:
Takruri, I take it that you are a fan of Sergi's work(?)


 
Djehuti
Member # 6698
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mystery Solver:

"only repeating what is long been known about the use of the phrase "Mediterranean" when it comes to ancient cultures"[/i]...after whom, and specifically where...

I am saying, you are just repeating a well known fact about the fallacy that is Eurocentrics use of the term "Mediterranean". It is a geographic term that has been slyly used as a cultural term.
quote:
Originally posted by alTakruri:

No, I'm not a fan nor have I any heroes.

I must have seen Sergi on the local public library shelves in my youth. My first truly conscious allusion to it was when I entered college and found it in the broadside Black Manhood by an author only known as Ta(r)harqa, who quoted Sergi's famous anti-Eurocentric rebuttal to his colleagues' "dark whites" doublespeak in reference to Ethiopians, "If they are blackthen how can they be white?"

Then I recalled Rogers' use of Sergi. I didn't know it at the time, but DuBois quoted passages from Sergi as did Parker.

Just as Diop is not debunked though on certain issues is outdated today, so is Sergi who hails from a much earlier time than Diop, so we would quite naturally not expect late 1800's anthropology to know or use the tools at our disposal in this the 21st century.

Yet, what Sergi saw in osteo measurements we see in NRY, specifically E3b. We're on much surer ground than Sergi was because he was wrong about some of the peoples he excluded as well as though he mistakenly included. He was right about the East African origins and spread to North Africa and the northern Mediterranean shores.

And despite the title of his book and its postulations, there's no such thing as a Mediterranean race or stock.


http://phpbb-host.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=61&start=35&mforum=thenile

http://phpbb-host.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=17&start=20&mforum=thenile

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=004444;p=1#000004

Somewhere where I can't find it is a recent discussion involving Sergi where Rasol made a good point about Sergi in very astute verbiage such that I got an understanding of Sergi that before then I couldn't see :that he separated his black Eurafrican subgroup from the rest of the black Africans. Anybody who can dig up that thread?

^That is pretty much what I meant-- that Sergi is wrong for seperating his so-called "Eurafricans" from other Africans.
 
Tukuler
Member # 19944
 - posted
Despite dismal effort to smear by
association with Coon and such
Ilk, no, Sergi was no "wacist." nor
did he ever posit the nonsense
recently attributed to him.

As I did years ago in an above post
I invite proofs to the contrary but do
not reply unless you have a copy of
Mediterranean Race in your hands.
 
xyyman
Member # 13597
 - posted
?? 2007!!!
 
xyyman
Member # 13597
 - posted
BTW. DJ and his typical slick talking forked tongued response.
 
xyyman
Member # 13597
 - posted
There is no such thing as a Mediterranean “Race” but he was right in his postulation. We know that now. An African Origin of the Neolithics who brought civilization to the shores of Africa , Southern Europe(we now know they reached into Northern Europe since the Scandinavians farmers were also Neolithics), Persia and the Harrapan Valley. As I stated before. He separated Asiatics from Neolithic Eurafrican based upon Osteo measurements. Coon came to the same conclusion.

I remember when I brought up that discussion with the then rabid un-reformed Cass. He told me I was wrong but went back to read my quoted passages. He took back everything he said. Lol! Was Sergi an Africanist?
 
Djehuti
Member # 6698
 - posted
^ How is my response "forked tongued"?? I suggest you quit defaming me and admit to YOUR ignorance!

As for the African origin of the Neolithic, I suggest you read what I posted on "basal Eurasians" here.
 



Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3