posted
Of course doesn't matter what one shows the stubborn naysayer whose view is more akin to religious belief than objective factual observation, but anyway ...
This is what Diop and Obenga offered at the UNESCO symposium, that none of the Egyptologist/etc., could dispute, leaving the naysayers flabbergasted. It remains indisputable to this day, has always been such, will always be so.
[presented with thanks to Bonotchi Montgomery and Raymond Davis]Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Can you say something about the papyrus? Can you say something about AEL grammar? Can you say something about KM or k-m? Can you say something about t? Can you say something about nwt? Can you say something about rmt? Can you say something about st?
No? OK, then let's chit-chat.
My reference to religion is to juxtapose fact against faith.
We who show primary textual documents present facts.
Those who do otherwise present only belief.
Religion is based on belief and faith.
Thus, champions of KM.t never applying to people are only being religious in outlook, not factually objective.
Capice?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Of course doesn't matter what one shows the stubborn naysayer whose view is more akin to religious belief than objective factual observation, but anyway ...
This is what Diop and Obenga offered at the UNESCO symposium, that none of the Egyptologist/etc., could dispute, leaving the naysayers flabbergasted. It remains indisputable to this day, has always been such, will always be so.
[presented with thanks to Bonotchi Montgomery and Raymond Davis]
However, just showing fragments of demotic texts without the EXACT phrases highlighted and translated does not help those who dont read heiroglyphics. What PASSAGE in those pages are you referring to and how is it translated?
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: ...My reference to religion is to juxtapose fact against faith.
We who show primary textual documents present facts.
Those who do otherwise present only belief.
Religion is based on belief and faith.
Thus, champions of KM.t never applying to people are only being religious in outlook, not factually objective.
Capice?
Religion is mostly based on an idea/phenomena called “belief”. Faith is a simpler issue since the phenomena of faith can be fully independent of belief. Faith is usually based on the idea hope which itself is a process of thought triggered by an actual event(s), mental or otherwise; thus “faith” is far more superior sense of spirituality and less chaotic than to the idea of belief.
The phenomena of "belief" on the other hand is fully independent of phenomena of “truth and lies” and “belief” can be based on one or the other but is usually based on a mixture of both, making the idea of belief an extremely complex and dangerous phenomena for describing any spiritual insight. The chaotic mixture that forms the backbone of “belief” is the root causes of many of the issues we have today. For example, specialists and non-specialists who mix/graft the idea of belief with factual information.
It is also important to note, that by using “truth”, in its purest form, as benchmark for measuring the value of “fact and fictions”, it becomes crystal clear that “fiction”, even when based on some truth is a lie. At best, fiction, in some ways, should remain as a form of entertainments/amusement and nothing more (Fictional examples: “X-Men” vs. “Moses parting the sea” vs. “Jews being slaves in Ancient Kemet”).
alTakruri, in response to some of your statements above, I view religion toady as mostly based on the phenomena of belief than faith. Therefore, juxtaposing “fact against faith” makes no sense. It should be, juxtaposing fact and faith or bringing them together for some kind of comparison.
As for “primary textual documents”, unfortunately the Eurocentric and deeply racist intellectual atmosphere we find ourselves today, especially when related to recorded history is highly questionable, right down to the age of the physical materials of the documents themselves. Thus, the curiosity of the possible of certain “primary textual documents” being based on belief or idea becomes an almost irresistible question to answer.
Posts: 179 | From: United States | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
What is religion without reason? To have faith and belief, you need first reason, and without reason, there is no religion, and it's reason that makes us humans.
The first word in Qur'an, Allah (swt) tells us Read.
You wrote:
quote: We who show primary textual documents present facts.
And Islam is based on textual documents---The Qur'an and The Ahadith.
Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Of course doesn't matter what one shows the stubborn naysayer whose view is more akin to religious belief than objective factual observation, but anyway ...
What is religion without reason? To have faith and belief, you need first reason, and without reason, there is no religion, and it's reason that makes us humans.
That doesn't make an ounce of sense. Reason demands objectivity. There is nothing objective about faith or religion. Nada...
Posts: 262 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The coal is a biliteral that symbolizes the color black, the bird is a monoliteral for the letter m.
"Historians tell us that our current M started out as the Egyptian hieroglyph for “owl.” Over thousands of years, this simple line drawing was further distilled into the hieratic symbol for the ‘em’ sound. Eventually, the great-grandparent of our M looked a bit like a handwritten ‘m’ balanced on the tip of one stroke."Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Of course doesn't matter what one shows the stubborn naysayer whose view is more akin to religious belief than objective factual observation, but anyway ...
This is what Diop and Obenga offered at the UNESCO symposium, that none of the Egyptologist/etc., could dispute, leaving the naysayers flabbergasted. It remains indisputable to this day, has always been such, will always be so.
[presented with thanks to Bonotchi Montgomery and Raymond Davis] [/QB]
Nice tracking down the Kahun piece, as noted by Diop in his French reconstructions of the term, and the same goes for clearly designating the lines in question and pieces of the papyri in question.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Of course doesn't matter what one shows the stubborn naysayer whose view is more akin to religious belief than objective factual observation, but anyway ...
What did I do?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
They know jumpin jack flash about the topic apparently can't comprehend enough to see that I explicitly cited the lines KM.t is written on and haven't followed the more than week long discussion and debate closely enough to at long last be able to recognize the glyphs for KM, t, yw, nwt, and rmt.
I do hope distractors open a "defense of faith" thread because I'm pleading for moderation to delete all off topic threads. I'm about something serious here. It's a major find and I don't want it trivialized or cluttered with sh it-shat.
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Excellent opening post AlTakruri.
Please stay on topic everyone.
people rmT
black kmT
nation nwT
[ 05. April 2007, 10:08 PM: Message edited by: Horus_Den_1 ]
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for jogging my memory with the papyrus' name leading me back to a discussion/debate involving it on another forum from years ago.
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: Nice tracking down the Kahun piece, as noted by Diop in his French reconstructions of the term, and the same goes for clearly designating the lines in question and pieces of the papyri in question.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, note that the OWL M is only a phonetic complement. It's unpronounced and only asserts that the CHARCOAL KM is really a biliteral whose ending sound is M.
quote:Originally posted by rasol: The coal is a biliteral that symbolizes the color black, the bird is a monoliteral for the letter m.
"Historians tell us that our current M started out as the Egyptian hieroglyph for “owl.” Over thousands of years, this simple line drawing was further distilled into the hieratic symbol for the ‘em’ sound. Eventually, the great-grandparent of our M looked a bit like a handwritten ‘m’ balanced on the tip of one stroke."
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I want this thread to stay on topic and I ain't playin.
I've requested the moderator to delete every off topic post.
I expect one of the moderators to comply with my request to rescue this important find (of some 30 years or more ago) from obfuscation by those who can't contribute anything meaningful or relevant.
No one doing research on this matter wants to wade through wads of cow pods sifting for the grains of scholarship herein.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think i messed up on line 3 ra' nf deshret(bird)(khast) could it mean borders of the desert meaning that if one goes up the nile there will be the desert wasteland on ones peripheals haq nef kmt.(rome)tyw ra' nef deshret m'ab.f I think m'abf is literally as its horn or in its horn maybe they conquered until they reached the top of the delta where it starts to spread out or branch out like a horn
if the first part is anywhere in the ball park then it sounds like they came from a more southern location iin-n-f n-n it.tf ta-shemau surely we came or returned for ther was for us the taking of upper egypt
-------------------- لا اله الا الله و محمد الرسول الله Posts: 495 | From: anchorage, alaska | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by abdulkarem3: I think i messed up on line 3 ra' nf deshret(bird)(khast) could it mean borders of the desert meaning that if one goes up the nile there will be the desert wasteland on ones peripheals haq nef kmt.(rome)tyw ra' nef deshret m'ab.f .
Diop in french: A ce terme s’oppose celui de: “als Wesen die Thoth vernichtet" les rouges; les etres (malefiques) que Thoth a aneantis, c’est un nisbe forme a partir de dsret: le rouge, comme le premier est forme a partir de kmt: la noire; or, il serait de le traduire par les habitants du desert.
Tranlsation courtesy Calypso: This term is opposed to that of: "als Wesen die Thot vernichtet", (German language phrase), the reds: the (evil) beings that Thoth had destroyed, this (desretyw) is a nisbe (a grammatical device) formed from dsret: the red, as the first (kmtyw) is formed from kmt: the black; now, it would be ridiculous to translate this (desretyw) as inhabitants of the desert.Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Hymn to Senwosret is a literary work of poetry.
Transliterating it and assigning the Egyptic words literal English equivalents is much easier than an attempt at translation. Thus translations will vary per the skill of the translator. Even a strict transposing of the transliteration will slightly vary pending the overall knowledge of Egyptic and English vocabularies of the linguist doing the work.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Also, note that the OWL M is only a phonetic complement. It's unpronounced and only asserts that the CHARCOAL KM is really a biliteral whose ending sound is M.
Alktruri I am a little confused and don't understand this post.
Why is the owl(M) used in KM.T and not RM.T..can I get some help?
Posts: 271 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Bear in mind that owl is not always necessarily placed beside the sign that looks sort of like a half semi-circle, i.e. , or the 'charcoal' sign. This sign in itself denotes 'black'.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
As Supes has intimated, Pharoanic Egyptic words can have multiple spellings pending a scribes whim, literary skill, artistic talent, guide book instructions, etc.
A pictogram (picture of an object) may represent:
the word precisely meaning the very same depicted object;
the sound of the pictured word but not its meaning, i.e., a syllable of a multi-syllabic word -- a multi-literal phonogram;
the sound of the initial letter of the depicted object, i.e., a single alphabetic character phongram;
an abstract class concept, i.e., an unpronounced determinative;
a silent unpronounced phonetic complement emphasizing the initial or terminal letter of the adjacent multi-literal phonogram
any combination of the above
In our case, the OWL-M under question is explanation e.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I [think] I know how to pronounce kem.t now!!
Pending that explanation e. has to do with pronunciation.
So that half semi-circle lookin symbol, the charcoal one sounds like "Khem". That's imaginable{ to sound like charcoal hitting together], especially if the 'H' is not silent.
posted
I was listening to a recent report on Islam and the radical elements in Egypt and it was reported that the people who killed Sadat said "The Pharoah is now gone" or words to that effect! Just curious as to why that phrase would be used in that context to 'deify' Sadat with the word Pharoah!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
because pharoah in the islamic definition means tyrant. pharoah in the arabic language can mean crocodile but anyway yes this is from the battle of moses(as) and the existing king at the time. their is also a story of an egyptian queen names asiya who worshipped god alone without intermediaries or assigning partners or family members to god or anthropomorphising god and giving god characteristics that god or any authorized prophet gave to god. So she was tortured by her husband(pharoah) and was patient and became one of the woman of the earth to reach the status pf perfect. however the main #1 reason is because the pharoah at the time of moses(as) was the first human to deny the very existance of a creator for he told moses and bani israeel and the believing egyptians that he was their LORD THE MOST HIGH. and that he did not give permission for anybody to beleive like moses so therefore the name great house became a household name for tyrant just like if someone says that sadam is hitler.
-------------------- لا اله الا الله و محمد الرسول الله Posts: 495 | From: anchorage, alaska | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was also listening to a Christian preacher talk of pharoah and Egypt as symbolic of slavery and oppression. How funny this is coming from a white preacher in a culture that is built on oppression, genocide and slavery. Religion is propaganda and is designed to promote the interests of those who control it. It is in the interest of these people to cast Egyptians as vile and evil in order to further denigrate the history of Africans and their high culture.
All of which we know already.
Let's keep this on the level of linguistics and how the Egyptians wrote km.t....
If you want to start a thread on how Islam and Christianity has demonizes ancient, that would be interesting....
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This starting go into off topic chat. Please stary a new thread for that and move the last couple of messages there because I'm hereby requesting moderation to delete far off topic or irrelevant posts from this thread.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Of course doesn't matter what one shows the stubborn naysayer whose view is more akin to religious belief than objective factual observation, but anyway ...
This is what Diop and Obenga offered at the UNESCO symposium, that none of the Egyptologist/etc., could dispute, leaving the naysayers flabbergasted. It remains indisputable to this day, has always been such, will always be so.
[presented with thanks to Bonotchi Montgomery and Raymond Davis]
UP, up, up.....and 'in your face'.
For all the silent-frightened-phonies who can't deal with native Kemetic reference to Black People, who pretend not to see, who hope it will just go away.
Step out and step up....
What are you waiting for? Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
I submit that Khast can be properly conceived of as 'foreign'.
This might be evidenced by references to TA-Seti as both Ta-Seti Niwt and Ta-Seti Khast - meaning which part of the taSeti is controled by KM.t and which part is controled by Nsh.y which would also vary over time.
This is sensible.
Now consider:
Diop in french: A ce terme s’oppose celui de: “als Wesen die Thoth vernichtet" les rouges; les etres (malefiques) que Thoth a aneantis, c’est un nisbe forme a partir de dsret: le rouge, comme le premier est forme a partir de kmt: la noire; or, il serait de le traduire par les habitants du desert.
Tranlsation courtesy Calypso: This term is opposed to that of: "als Wesen die Thot vernichtet", (German language phrase), the reds: the (evil) beings that Thoth had destroyed, this (desretyw) is a nisbe (a grammatical device) formed from dsret: the red, as the first (kmtyw) is formed from kmt: the black; now, it would be ridiculous to translate this (desretyw) as inhabitants of the desert.
^ Diop is correct.
This term desetwy - literally RedOnes, is foreigners, Asiatics.
I don't -always- concur with Diop on anthropology because so much that is new has been learned pertaining genetics. [most of which reinforces Diops underlying points, whereas superficial recitation of Diop ver-batem fails to do his intellect justice].
However his mdw ntr seems flawless to me.
He shames inferiors such as Yurco and Vermille who flounder about from contradiction to contridiction trying to reconcile mdw ntr to ws.t slobber.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The only strange thing about Heka-Khast to me is..doesn't "heka" mean magic? Wasn't that the name of the God of magic?
Posts: 271 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do you think it means "foreign magic" because the AAMW were doing the wrong things by invoking "moon" dieties instead of sun dieties?
Posts: 271 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
One thing I forgot to ask is exactly what were the reactions from the other experts when Diop and Obenga presented this??
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The whole thing was published by UNESCO. Part of it is in their 1st unabridged volume on THE HISTORY OF AFRICA wherein can be found where to find the complete symposium seesions.
quote:Originally posted by rasol: The Egyptians, called these kings -> Heka-Khast, or "Rulers of the Foreign Lands." The Greeks later altered this word to “Hyksos
Minor correction rasol; The term is properly written "Heq Khasu.t" and means "Foreign kings" and was only applied to the non-Black (colonial) rulers but NEVER to the kings from beyond the southern border - ie, Ekushi, Ethaoshi, who were the original founders of the Nile Valley Civilization complex... Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by vidadavida: The only strange thing about Heka-Khast to me is..doesn't "heka" mean magic? Wasn't that the name of the God of magic?
You are confused because you seem to want to simplify the Mdu Ntr, here's how it really is:
Hek = Magic (Khik and Khako in Coptic) Hek = Ruler Khast/Khasu.t = Foreigner/Foreigners
It would help you if you simply studied the vocabulary of the language...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: The Egyptians, called these kings -> Heka-Khast, or "Rulers of the Foreign Lands." The Greeks later altered this word to “Hyksos
Minor correction rasol; The term is properly written "Heq Khasu.t" and means "Foreign kings" and was only applied to the non-Black (colonial) rulers but NEVER to the kings from beyond the southern border - ie, Ekushi, Ethaoshi, who were the original founders of the Nile Valley Civilization complex...
quote:Originally posted by rasol: The Egyptians, called these kings -> Heka-Khast, or "Rulers of the Foreign Lands." The Greeks later altered this word to “Hyksos
Minor correction rasol; The term is properly written "Heq Khasu.t" and means "Foreign kings" and was only applied to the non-Black (colonial) rulers but NEVER to the kings from beyond the southern border - ie, Ekushi, Ethaoshi, who were the original founders of the Nile Valley Civilization complex...
posted
^^Seconded.. I wonder why those who so vehemently dispute the African origin of AE not simply refer back to what the AE have to say about this.
Noteworthy as well is how (as Eurocentric deniers usually try to obscure, ignore, or are ignorant of) is that according to Timmothy Kendall, during the 25th dynasty Km't referred to both upper Egypt AND Kush, while excluding northern Egypt which at the time was under foreign domination. Now if Km't had always referred to the same geography (and not the people who inhabited it), then why the shift?
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Yes, more racist obfuscation of the truth. Linguists have long noted that the word KM means 'black' so it takes no stretch to figure out what the Egyptians own title means by having that root word in there. In the meantime they translate 'Nhsw' (nubians) to mean 'black'! LOLPosts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Of course doesn't matter what one shows the stubborn naysayer whose view is more akin to religious belief than objective factual observation, but anyway ...
This is what Diop and Obenga offered at the UNESCO symposium, that none of the Egyptologist/etc., could dispute, leaving the naysayers flabbergasted. It remains indisputable to this day, has always been such, will always be so.
[presented with thanks to Bonotchi Montgomery and Raymond Davis]
I clicked on those links, but they take me to the main website, not the pdf files. What do those papyri say?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
, or the 'charcoal' sign. This sign in itself denotes 'black'.
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic