posted
There are some that theorize that Nefertiti was a Mittani Princess that was married by Akhenaten to cement diplomatic ties between these two Nations - a well known practice in the ancient world.
Nefertari also looks non-Egyptian - she has a distinct western Asian look... or maybe these two women were just from Lower Egypt -> a region that was subjected to never ending invasions and demographic violations from Western Asia from very early on.
Amun-Ra The Ultimate Member # 20039
posted
It's quite possible since even after the Aamu/Hyksos (foreign rulers) were reportedly "expelled" by Ahmose and Ahmose-Nefertari, the founders of the 18th Dynasty; Ancient Egypt keep a certain cosmopolitan flavor. Some prominent Ancient Egyptians officials were Aamu or Kushites or close direct descendants of them. Kushites were also considered to be of foreign origin in Ancient Egypt. We also know Cleopatra was of a Greek descent but she reigned during a late foreign dynasty, so it's not a big surprise.
While what you say is possible in general it's not a good idea to eyeball Ancient Egyptian statues and paintings. It's better to use Ancient Egyptian literature about it (that is about the origin of Nefertiti in this case) or even better wait for DNA results. I have a few images showing Nefertiti with more African traits. They are often labelled (by museum) Nefertiti or Amarna princess. In the sense, that they are not sure if it's Nefertiti or an Amarna princess. Even the same Kushite king may look African in some works and kind of like a caucasian in another. I can show you images of the same prominent pharaoh which looks African but still different from one statue/painting to another. That is the same king with different looks (not like somebody aging but like somebody completely different).
xyyman Member # 13597
posted
Come on AMRTU. Use what little you have between the ear.
Tut was more SSA than all the Amarnas based upon STR. Is Nefertiti his mother? Then.......
Sometimes I question if you guys ever finished school. Analytical skills is lacking.
Amun-Ra The Ultimate Member # 20039
posted
^^^Are you retarded? I'm the one who said, people should be careful and use DNA instead. Is Nefertiti his mother? That's a question not an affirmation you dimwit. Also, even if the 18th Dynasty are mostly African based on DNA results, this doesn't exclude foreign admixtures.
xyyman Member # 13597
posted
Read the OP AMRTU. Of course she wasn't. Her son is pure African. Unless the Mittani are also Africans. An dthe present people there are not indigenous.
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Read the OP AMRTU. Of course she wasn't. Her son is pure African. Unless the Mittani are also Africans. An dthe present people there are not indigenous.
The Hurrians/Mittani were Kushites. They were Blacks just like the Egyptians.
The Tehenu in Anatolia
Using boats the Kushites moved down ancient waterways many now dried up, to establish new towns in Asia and Europe after 3500 BC. The Kushites remained supreme around the world until 1400-1200 BC. During this period the Hua (Chinese) and Indo-European (I-E) speakers began to conquer the Kushites whose cities and economies were destroyed as a result of natural catastrophes which took place on the planet between 1400-1200 BC. Later, after 500 AD, Turkish speaking people began to settle parts of Central Asia. This is the reason behind the presence of the K-s-h element in many place names in Asia e.g., Kashgar, HinduKush, and Kosh. The HinduKush in Harappan times had lapis lazuli deposits.
Kushites expanded into Inner Asia from two primary points of dispersal : Iran and Anatolia. In Anatolia the Kushites were called Hattians and Kaska. In the 2nd millennium BC, the north and east of Anatolia was inhabited by non-I-E speakers.
Anatolia was divided into two lands “the land of Kanis” and the “land of Hatti”. The Hatti were related to the Kaska people who lived in the Pontic mountains.
Hattians lived in Anatolia. They worshipped Kasku and Kusuh. They were especially prominent in the Pontic mountains. Their sister nation in the Halys Basin were the Kaska tribes. The Kaska and Hattians share the same names for gods, along with personal and place-names . The Kaska had a strong empire which was never defeated by the Hittites.
Singer (1981) has suggested that the Kaska, are remnants of the indigenous Hattian population which was forced northward by the Hittites. But at least as late as 1800 BC, Anatolia was basically settled by Hattians.
Anatolia was occupied by many Kushite groups,including the Kashkas and or Hatti. The Hatti , like the Dravidian speaking people were probably related
Some of the Tehenu or Kushites settled Anatolia. Some of the major Anatolian Kushite tribes were the Kaska and Hatti speakers who spoke non-IE languages called Khattili. The gods of the Hattic people were Kasku and Kusuh (< Kush).
The Hattic people, may be related to the[b] Hatiu, one of the Delta Tehenu tribes. Many archaeologist believe that the Tehenu people were related to the C-Group people. The Hattic language is closely related to African and Dravidian languages for example:
up,upper….. tufa ………..tp……………… dya, tu 'raising ground'
to stretch put… pd ………pe,……………….. bamba
o prosper …….falfat …..-- …………………..find'ya
pour ……………duq …….---………………….. du 'to dispense'
child …………..pin………,pinu………………… den
Mother ………..na-a ………--…………………….. na
lord …………….sa ………..--………………………. sa
place ………….-ka………… -ka
The languages have similar syntax Hattic le fil 'his house'; Mande a falu 'his father's house'. This suggest that the first Anatolians were Kushites, a view supported by the Hattic name for themselves: Kashka.
•Hurrians
An important group in Anantolia in addition to the Hatti, were the Hurrians. The Hurrians enter Mesopotamia from the northeastern hilly area . They introduced horse-drawn war chariots to Mesopotamia .
Hurrians penetrate Mesopotamia and Syria-Palestine between 1700-1500 BC. The major Hurrian Kingdom was Mitanni , which was founded by Sudarna I (c.1550), was established at Washukanni on the Khabur River . The Hurrian capital was Urkesh, one of its earliest kings was called Tupkish.
Linguistic and historical evidence support the view that Dravidians influenced Mittanni and Lycia . (Winters 1989a) Alain Anselin is sure that Dravidian speaking peoples once inhabited the Aegean . For example Anselin (1982, pp.111-114) has discussed many Dravidian place names found in the Aegean Sea area.
Two major groups in ancient Anatolia were the Hurrians and Lycians. Although the Hurrians are considered to be Indo-European speakers, some Hurrians probably spoke a Dravidian language.
The Hurrians lived in Mittanni. Mittanni was situated on the great bend of the Upper Euphrates river. Hurrian was spoken in eastern Anatolia and North Syria .
Most of what we know about Hurrian comes from the Tel al-Armarna letters. These letters were written to the Egyptian pharaoh. These letters are important because they were written in a language different from diplomatic Babylonian.
The letters written in the unknown language were numbered 22 and 25. In 1909 Bork, in Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatische Gesellschaft, wrote a translation of the letters.
In 1930, G.W. Brown proposed that the words in letters 22 and 25 were Dravidian especially Tamil. Brown (1930), has shown that the vowels and consonants of Hurrian and Dravidian are analogous. In support of this theory Brown (1930) noted the following similarities between Dravidian and Hurrian: 1) presence of a fullness of forms employed by both languages; 2) presence of active and passive verbal forms are not distinguished; 3) presence of verbal forms that are formed by particles; 4) presence of true relative pronouns is not found in these languages; 5) both languages employ negative verbal forms; 6) identical use of -m, as nominative; 7) similar pronouns; and 8) similar ending formations:
Dravidian Hurrian
a a
-kku -ikka
imbu impu
There are analogous Dravidian and Hurrian terms:
English Hurrian Dravidian
mountain paba parampu
lady,woman aallay ali
King Sarr,zarr Ca, cira
god en en
give tan tara
to rule irn ire
father attai attan
wife,woman asti atti
Many researchers have noted the presence of many Indo-Aryan words. In Hurrians. This has led some researchers to conclude that Indo –Europeans may have ruled the Hurrians. This results from the fact that the names of the Hurrian gods are similar to the Aryan gods:
Hurrian Sanskrit
Mi-it-va Mitra
Aru-na Varuna
In-da-ra Indra
Na-sa-at-tiya Nasatya
There are other Hurrian and Sanskrit terms that appear to show a relationship:
English Hurrian Sanskrit Tamil
One aika eka okka ‘together’
Three tera tri
Five panza panca añcu
Seven satta sapta
Nine na nava onpatu
Other Hurrian terms relate to Indo-Aryan:
English Hurrian I-A Tamil
Brown babru babhru pukar
Grey parita palita paraitu ‘old’
Reddish pinkara pingala puuval
English Mitanni Vedic Tamil
Warrior marya marya makan, maravan
References:
Itamar Singer, Hittites and Hattians in Anatolia at the beginning of the Second Millennium B.C., Journal of Indo-European Studies, 9 (1-2) (1981), pp.119-149.
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
Hatti In the ancient literature the Proto Dravidians are called Kushites. Using boats the Kushites moved down ancient waterways many now dried up, to establish new towns in Asia and Europe after 3500 BC. The Kushites remained supreme around the world until 1400 1200 BC. During this period the Hua (Chinese) and Indo European (I E) speakers began to conquer the Kushites whose cities and economies were destroyed as a result of natural catastrophes which took place on the planet between 1400 1200 BC. Later, after 500 AD, Turkish speaking people began to settle parts of Central Asia. This is the reason behind the presence of the K s h element in many place names in Asia e.g., Kashgar, HinduKush, and Kosh. The HinduKush in Harappan times had lapis lazuli deposits.
Proto Saharans/Kushites expanded into Inner Asia from two primary points of dispersal : Iran and Anatolia. In Anatolia the Kushites were called Hattians and Kaska. In the 2nd millennium BC, the north and east of Anatolia was inhabited by non I E speakers.
Anatolia was divided into two lands “the land of Kanis” and the “land of Hatti”. The Hatti were related to the Kaska people who lived in the Pontic mountains.
Hattians lived in Anatolia. They worshipped Kasku and Kusuh. They were especially prominent in the Pontic mountains. Their sister nation in the Halys Basin were the Kaska tribes. The Kaska and Hattians share the same names for gods, along with personal and place names (1). The Kaska had a strong empire which was never defeated by the Hittites.
Singer (1981) has suggested that the Kaska, are remnants of the indigenous Hattian population which was forced northward by the Hittites. But at least as late as 1800 BC, Anatolia was basically settled by Hattians (2)
Anatolia was occupied by many Kushite groups,including the Kashkas and or Hatti. The Hatti , like the Dravidian speaking people were probably related . The Hatti were probably members of the Tehenu tribes.
The Tehenu was composed of various ethnic groups. One of the Tehenu tribes was identified by the Egyptians as the Hatiu or Haltiu.
During the Fifth Dynasty of Egypt (2563-2423), namely during the reign of Sahure there is mention of the Tehenu people. Sahure referred to the Tehenu leader “Hati Tehenu” .(3) These Hatiu, may correspond to the Hatti speaking people of Anatolia. The Hatti people often referred to themselves as Kashkas or Kaskas.
The Hatti controlled the city state of Kussara. Kussara was situated in southern Anatolia.
The earliest known ruler of Kussara was Pitkhanas. It was his son Anitta (c. 1790-1750 BC) who expanded the Kussara empire through much of Anatolia.
Many researchers get the Hittites (Nesa) mixed up with the original settlers of Anatolia called Hatti according to Steiner “.[T]his discrepancy is either totally neglected and more or less skillfully veiled, or it is explained by the assumption that the Hittites when conquering the country of Hatti adjusted themselves to the Hattians adopting their personal names and worshipping their gods, out of reverence for a higher culture” .(4)
Neshili, was probably spoken by the Hatti, not the IE Hittite. Yet, this language is classified as an IE langauge. Researchers maintain that the Hatti spoke 'Hattili' or Khattili “language of the Hatti”, and the IE Hittites spoke "Neshumnili"/ Neshili .(5) Researchers maintain that only 10% of the terms in Neshumnili is IE. This supports the view that Nesumnili may have been a lingua franca.
It is clear that the Anatolians spoke many languages including:Palaic, Hatti, Luwian and Hurrian, but the people as you know mainly wrote their writings in Neshumnili. The first people to use this system as the language of the royal chancery were Hatti Itamar Singer makes it clear that the Hittites adopted the language of the Hatti .(6) Steiner wrote that, " In the complex linguistic situation of Central Anatolia, in the 2nd Millennium B.C. with at least three, but probably more different languages being spoken within the same area there must have been the need for a language of communication or lingua franca [i.e., Neshumnili), whenever commercial transactions or political enterprises were undertaken on a larger scale" .(7)
•The Hatti language which provided the Hittites with many of the terms Indo-Aryan nationalists use to claim and Aryan origin for the Indus civilization is closely related to African languages including Egyptians. For example: Big, mighty, powerful protect, help upper
Hattic ur $uh tufa Egyptian wr swh tp Malinke fara solo dya, tu ‘raising’ Head stretch (out) prosper to pour Hattic tu put falfalat duq
Egyptian tup pd Malinke tu ‘strike head’ pe, bemba fin’ya du Eye hand Place King, term of respect
The Malinke-Bambara and Hatti language share other cognates and grammatical features. For example,in both languages the pronoun can be prefixed to nouns, e.g., Hatti le ‘his’, le fil ‘his house’; Malinke-Bambara a ‘his’, a falu ‘his father’s house’. Other Hatti and Malinke- Bambara cognates include: Hattic b’la ka -ka Kaati Malinke n’ye teke -ka ka, kuntigi ‘headman’
Good hypothesis generation suggest that given the fact that the Malinke-Bambara and Hatti languages share cognate terms, Sumerian terms may also relate to Hatti terms since they were also Kushites. Below we compare a few Hatti, Sumerian and Malinke Bambara terms:
Mother father lord,ruler build, to set up Hattic na-a ša tex Malinke na baba sa te Sumerian na ‘she’ aba tu ‘to create’ To pour child,son up, to raise strength,powerful land Hatti dug pin,pinu tufa ur -ka Malinke du den dya, tu fara -ka Sumerian dub peš dul usu ki
Conclusion
In summary, the Hattic speaking people were members of the Kushite tribe called Tehenu. They were probably called Hati ( pl. Hatiu), by the Egyptians.
The language of the Hittites was more than likely a lingua franca, with Hattic, at its base. In Western Anatolia many languages were spoken including Hattic, Palaic, Luwian and Hurrian used Nesa as a lingua franca. For example, the king of Arzawa, asked the Egyptian in the Amarna Letters, to write them back in Nesumnili rather than Egyptian .(8)
Steiner notes that “In the complex linguistic situation of Central Anatolia in the 2nd Millennium B.C., with at least three, but probably more different languages being spoken within the same area there must have been the need for a language of communication or lingua franca whenever commercial transaction or political enterprises were undertaken on a larger scale” .(9)
This led Steiner to conclude that “moreover the structure of Hittite easily allowed one to integrate not only proper names, but also nouns of other languages into the morphological system. Indeed, it is a well known fact the vocabulary of Hittite is strongly interspersed with lexemes from other languages, which is a phenomenon typical of a “lingua franca” .(10)
Footnotes
1. Itamar Singer, Hittites and Hattians in Anatolia at the beginning of the Second Millennium B.C., Journal of Indo-European Studies, 9 (1-2) (1981), pp.119-149.
2 Gerd Steiner, The role of the Hittites in ancient Anatolia, Journal of Indo-European Studies, 9 (1-2) (1981), 119-149.
3 El Mosallamy,A.H.S. Libyco-Berber relations with ancient Egypt:The Tehenu in Egyptian records. In (pp.51-68) 1986, p.55; and L. Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Konigs Sahure. Vol. II, Table 1.
4 Steiner, p.160.
5 I.M. Diakonoff and P.L. Kohl, Early Antiquity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990.
6. Itamar Singer, Hittites and Hattians in Anatolia at the Beginning of the Second Millennium BC,Journal of Indo-European Studies,
9 (1-2) (pp.119-149).
7 Ibid., p.162.
8 Ibid., p.161.
9 Ibid., p.162
10 Ibid., p.165.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
I've heard the theory, but the problem with it is that if Nefertiti is of Mitanni origin, then so it Tiye!! That's because Nefertiti is the niece of Tiye, being the daughter of her brother Aye. There is the theory that Tiye and Aye's father Yuya is Mitanni due to the appearance of his mummy however closer inspection of his skull as well as the skulls of Tuya and Tiye show very much African features.
BlessedbyHorus Member # 22000
posted
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I've heard the theory, but the problem with it is that if Nefertiti is of Mitanni origin, then so it Tiye!! That's because Nefertiti is the niece of Tiye, being the daughter of her brother Aye. There is the theory that Tiye and Aye's father Yuya is Mitanni due to the appearance of his mummy however closer inspection of his skull as well as the skulls of Tuya and Tiye show very much African features.
But more importantly lets not forget the autosomal study on Tuya family by DNAtribes....
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^ LOL Oh yeah! I totally forgot about that study! Well considering all of this, I believe the 'dynastic Mitanni' theory is debunked.
posted
^ And exactly where is the double speak? I brought up the cranial features being African and Blessed brought up autosomal features being African which I agree with. Don't be butt-sore that I'm back to call your b.s. out as well.
Doug M Member # 7650
posted
Yeah this idea of Mitanni origins smacks of the absurd theoretical ramblings of Eurocentric scholars trying to find some way to inject non black people into AE. And how does a mummy "look" Mitanni? That is absurdly ridiculous. Do we have any Mitanni mummies to compare against?
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Yeah this idea of Mitanni origins smacks of the absurd theoretical ramblings of Eurocentric scholars trying to find some way to inject non black people into AE. And how does a mummy "look" Mitanni? That is absurdly ridiculous. Do we have any Mitanni mummies to compare against?
Why do you keep saying the Miranni were not Blacks?
What is your evidence?
.
the lioness, Member # 17353
posted
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Why do you keep saying the Mitanni were not Blacks?
What is your evidence?
this is the evidence ^^
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Why do you keep saying the Mitanni were not Blacks?
What is your evidence?
this is the evidence ^^
This is just part of the evidence.
The Hurrians/Mittani were Kushites. They were Blacks just like the Egyptians.
The Tehenu in Anatolia
Using boats the Kushites moved down ancient waterways many now dried up, to establish new towns in Asia and Europe after 3500 BC. The Kushites remained supreme around the world until 1400-1200 BC. During this period the Hua (Chinese) and Indo-European (I-E) speakers began to conquer the Kushites whose cities and economies were destroyed as a result of natural catastrophes which took place on the planet between 1400-1200 BC. Later, after 500 AD, Turkish speaking people began to settle parts of Central Asia. This is the reason behind the presence of the K-s-h element in many place names in Asia e.g., Kashgar, HinduKush, and Kosh. The HinduKush in Harappan times had lapis lazuli deposits.
Kushites expanded into Inner Asia from two primary points of dispersal : Iran and Anatolia. In Anatolia the Kushites were called Hattians and Kaska. In the 2nd millennium BC, the north and east of Anatolia was inhabited by non-I-E speakers.
Anatolia was divided into two lands “the land of Kanis” and the “land of Hatti”. The Hatti were related to the Kaska people who lived in the Pontic mountains.
Hattians lived in Anatolia. They worshipped Kasku and Kusuh. They were especially prominent in the Pontic mountains. Their sister nation in the Halys Basin were the Kaska tribes. The Kaska and Hattians share the same names for gods, along with personal and place-names . The Kaska had a strong empire which was never defeated by the Hittites.
Singer (1981) has suggested that the Kaska, are remnants of the indigenous Hattian population which was forced northward by the Hittites. But at least as late as 1800 BC, Anatolia was basically settled by Hattians.
Anatolia was occupied by many Kushite groups,including the Kashkas and or Hatti. The Hatti , like the Dravidian speaking people were probably related
Some of the Tehenu or Kushites settled Anatolia. Some of the major Anatolian Kushite tribes were the Kaska and Hatti speakers who spoke non-IE languages called Khattili. The gods of the Hattic people were Kasku and Kusuh (< Kush).
The Hattic people, may be related to the[b] Hatiu, one of the Delta Tehenu tribes. Many archaeologist believe that the Tehenu people were related to the C-Group people. The Hattic language is closely related to African and Dravidian languages for example:
up,upper….. tufa ………..tp……………… dya, tu 'raising ground'
to stretch put… pd ………pe,……………….. bamba
o prosper …….falfat …..-- …………………..find'ya
pour ……………duq …….---………………….. du 'to dispense'
child …………..pin………,pinu………………… den
Mother ………..na-a ………--…………………….. na
lord …………….sa ………..--………………………. sa
place ………….-ka………… -ka
The languages have similar syntax Hattic le fil 'his house'; Mande a falu 'his father's house'. This suggest that the first Anatolians were Kushites, a view supported by the Hattic name for themselves: Kashka.
•Hurrians
An important group in Anantolia in addition to the Hatti, were the Hurrians. The Hurrians enter Mesopotamia from the northeastern hilly area . They introduced horse-drawn war chariots to Mesopotamia .
Hurrians penetrate Mesopotamia and Syria-Palestine between 1700-1500 BC. The major Hurrian Kingdom was Mitanni , which was founded by Sudarna I (c.1550), was established at Washukanni on the Khabur River . The Hurrian capital was Urkesh, one of its earliest kings was called Tupkish.
Linguistic and historical evidence support the view that Dravidians influenced Mittanni and Lycia . (Winters 1989a) Alain Anselin is sure that Dravidian speaking peoples once inhabited the Aegean . For example Anselin (1982, pp.111-114) has discussed many Dravidian place names found in the Aegean Sea area.
Two major groups in ancient Anatolia were the Hurrians and Lycians. Although the Hurrians are considered to be Indo-European speakers, some Hurrians probably spoke a Dravidian language.
The Hurrians lived in Mittanni. Mittanni was situated on the great bend of the Upper Euphrates river. Hurrian was spoken in eastern Anatolia and North Syria .
Most of what we know about Hurrian comes from the Tel al-Armarna letters. These letters were written to the Egyptian pharaoh. These letters are important because they were written in a language different from diplomatic Babylonian.
The letters written in the unknown language were numbered 22 and 25. In 1909 Bork, in Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatische Gesellschaft, wrote a translation of the letters.
In 1930, G.W. Brown proposed that the words in letters 22 and 25 were Dravidian especially Tamil. Brown (1930), has shown that the vowels and consonants of Hurrian and Dravidian are analogous. In support of this theory Brown (1930) noted the following similarities between Dravidian and Hurrian: 1) presence of a fullness of forms employed by both languages; 2) presence of active and passive verbal forms are not distinguished; 3) presence of verbal forms that are formed by particles; 4) presence of true relative pronouns is not found in these languages; 5) both languages employ negative verbal forms; 6) identical use of -m, as nominative; 7) similar pronouns; and 8) similar ending formations:
Dravidian Hurrian
a a
-kku -ikka
imbu impu
There are analogous Dravidian and Hurrian terms:
English Hurrian Dravidian
mountain paba parampu
lady,woman aallay ali
King Sarr,zarr Ca, cira
god en en
give tan tara
to rule irn ire
father attai attan
wife,woman asti atti
Many researchers have noted the presence of many Indo-Aryan words. In Hurrians. This has led some researchers to conclude that Indo –Europeans may have ruled the Hurrians. This results from the fact that the names of the Hurrian gods are similar to the Aryan gods:
Hurrian Sanskrit
Mi-it-va Mitra
Aru-na Varuna
In-da-ra Indra
Na-sa-at-tiya Nasatya
There are other Hurrian and Sanskrit terms that appear to show a relationship:
English Hurrian Sanskrit Tamil
One aika eka okka ‘together’
Three tera tri
Five panza panca añcu
Seven satta sapta
Nine na nava onpatu
Other Hurrian terms relate to Indo-Aryan:
English Hurrian I-A Tamil
Brown babru babhru pukar
Grey parita palita paraitu ‘old’
Reddish pinkara pingala puuval
English Mitanni Vedic Tamil
Warrior marya marya makan, maravan
References:
Itamar Singer, Hittites and Hattians in Anatolia at the beginning of the Second Millennium B.C., Journal of Indo-European Studies, 9 (1-2) (1981), pp.119-149.
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Why do you keep saying the Mitanni were not Blacks?
What is your evidence?
this is the evidence ^^
n addition to the linguistic evidence we also have textual, iconography and skeletal evidence of the people from Mesopotamia to Persia being Blacks or Sub-Saharan Africans, the recent popular term for Black Africans in the archaeological and genetics literature.
There is a positive relationship between crania from Africa and Eurasia. The archaeologist Marcel-Auguste Dieulafoy (Dieulafoy,2004) and Hanberry (1981) maintains that their was a Sub-Saharan strain in Persia . These researchers maintain that it was evident that an Ethiopian dynasty ruled Elam from a perusal of its statuary of the royal family and members of the army ( Dieulafoy, 2004; Dieulafoy, 2010;Hansberry,1981). Dieulafoy (2010 ) noted that the textual evidence and iconography make it clear that the Elamites were Africans, and part of the Kushite confederation .Dieulafoy (2010) made it clear that the Elamites at Susa were Sub-Saharan Africans.
Marcel Dieulafoy and M. de Quatrefages observed that the craniometrics of the ancient Elamites of Susa indicate that they were Sub-Saharan Africans or Negroes (Dieulafoy,2010). Ancient Sub-Saharan African skeletons have also been found in Mesopotamia (Tomczyk et al, 2010). The craniometric data indicates that continuity existed between ancient and medieval Sub-Saharan Africans in Mesopotamia (Ricault & Waelkens,2008).
Rawlinson,H. “ Letter read at the meeting of the Royal Asiatic Society on February 5, 1853”, The Athenaeum, (No. 1321) ,p.228.
Rawlinson,H. “Note on the early History of Babylonia”, Journal Royal Asiatic Soc., 15, 215-259.
Ricaut,F.X. and Waelkens.2008. Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzatine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements, Hum Biol, 80(5):535-564.
Tomczyk,J., Jedrychowska-Danska, K., Ploszaj,T & Witas H.W. (2010). Anthropological analysis of the osteological material from an ancient tomb (Early Bronze Age) from the middle Euphrates valley, Terqa (Syria) , International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, Retrieved 04/04/10 from (www.interscience.wiley.com)DOI:10.1002/oa.1150 .
the lioness, Member # 17353
posted
Clyde why are you talking about people other than the Mitanni? Plus look at the nose on that dude. Do you see blacks in Africa with those big beards?
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde why are you talking about people other than the Mitanni? Plus look at the nose on that dude. Do you see blacks in Africa with those big beards?
Racist lioness, stop pretending to be stupid! People usually don't wear beards in Africa because of the wet climate and the flies-- especially Mosquitoes .
.
.
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde why are you talking about people other than the Mitanni? Plus look at the nose on that dude. Do you see blacks in Africa with those big beards?
posted 
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Oh yeah! I totally forgot about that study! Well considering all of this, I believe the 'dynastic Mitanni' theory is debunked.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
or African genes. lol!
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
