...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Ancient Kush: the missing link?
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Barachit: [qb] Hi, everyone! I would like to get in this thread some references on ancient Kush, especially on this topic: Religions, Government, Customs, Cultures etc... The studies on this civilization is very scarce which is a pity. People will blame eurocentrism, but i sound to me that afro-centered scholars are doing the same thing that european, which an over fixation on Kemet. It's a trend now to declare that such African tribes came directly from Kemet whitout taking into consideration that another African civilization exist along with Kemet in the Nile Valley during thousands of years. So i hope that some of y'all will drop informations, books reference on our kushite roots,peace! [/qb][/QUOTE]Right ....... You're "new" and want this information, like it has never been posted here before in numerous threads. But see below nevertheless.. NEBSEN says: [b]Most Afrocentric scholars that I have read say just the opposite that ancient Egypt( Khemt) came from ancient Kush( Nubia)[/b] Indeed. So I don't see what mysterious "trend" is being talked about. What "trend" by the strawman "Afrocentrics"? ---- [IMG]http://media.web.britannica.com/eb-media/12/93212-004-418248D3.gif[/IMG] HERE'S A RECAP FROM ANOTHER POST ON RELOADED REPRODUCED BELOW AS TO ALLEGED "OVER FOCUS" ON EGYPT 1) Attention on Egypt is partly attention to what's large scale. It hooks into a UNIVERSAL "history" problem. Many people simply find history overall boring. I don't see many white people for example hunched over books dealing with white Slavic civilization circa 900BC, or for that matter Germany 900BC. There has to be something for people that captures the imagination, something that would make them passionate if you want a popular response. That's why we have historians - to dig into all the tedious detail. Henry the Seventh for example according to a number of historians was a guy who did some good for England, increasing revenues and running a relatively efficient administration. But who the hell ever heard of or cares about Henry the Seventh, when you have the dramatic sex, lies and cruelty of Henry the Eight? Who do people know or care about? Certainly not the accomplishments of Henry the Seventh. 2) Documentation is a big factor. Ancient Egypt left over 3,000 years of documentation, compared to say, the 50-60 years span of the Zulu kingdom. With that kind of long term, even spectacular documentation in the form of monuments and pyramids, it is a slam dunk ancient Egypt would get more attention. It gets more, because it generated more detail over the ages. White people themselves in some instances seem to prefer Egypt to their own cold climate civilizations. What do white people flock by the hundreds of thousands, and spend tens of millions to see every year? Ancient mud huts in Ireland, circa 200BC, or spectacular Egyptian pyramids, c. 2000BC? White people themselves have made their preference known on this score, and have appropriated to a great extent, the history, symbols and some might say even the religion of Egypt. White people have especially been obsessive about "Egyptomania" - throughout history, even consuming human flesh from Egypt as part of their history. White hypocrisy is rife on this score. As Van Sertima rhetorically asked those hypocritical whites who question why blacks "should" be interested in Egypt. "What does it matter so much to you who we are interested in?" [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3