I think we all are aware that fair-skinned people are found in Yemen where they settled as Iranians, Turks, Syrians and other people who mixed with the settled inhabitants.
I think we all are aware that fair-skinned people are found in Yemen where they settled as Iranians, Turks, Syrians and other people who mixed with the settled inhabitants.
This is true. But where did they come from. Remember, the white Syrians or Gutians were in Mesopotamia 1000 years before the Aryans invaded India, and the People of the Sea began to invade Southern Europe and the Nile Valley..
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Syrians are not Arabs but since the Crusades they got whiter and whiter but in real life crowds you will find dark Syrians.
_--------------
No we are not Arabs
Father Theodoros David pastor of St. Mary's Greek Orthodox, Baltimore - Maryland
No we are not Arabs. Enough lies, fraud, deficit and fear. We are not Arabs thank God.
The Syrian is not an Arab, the Iraqi is not an Arab, the Egyptian is not an Arab, the Lebanese is not an Arab neither the Jordanian nor the Palestinian are Arabs.
We are Levantines, we are Rooms and Syrians and Chaldeans and Assyrians and Copts, we are descendants of Mesopotamians, Phoenicians and Pharaohs, we are the people of the Levant and we are its indigenous population. We are not Arabs, enough rape and forgery of history and geography and the truth and the reality.
Sons of Arabia are the Arabs - and for the historical facts we say that there are some Arab tribes who became Christian but the Arab identity of the minority cannot apply to the Levantine majority which was never Arab.
Even if we spoke Arabic, it does not mean that we are Arabs. An American who speaks English is not an Englishman, a Brazilian who speaks Portuguese is not a Portuguese and the Argentinian who speaks Spanish is not Spanish, these are the languages of occupation. Although we speak Arabic, we are not Arabs and do not resemble the Arabs in any way, shape or form, nor in ideology, in taste or in civilization; they are people of the desert whereas as we are the people of civilization. Their land is the desert but ours is the land of milk and honey, figs, almonds, apples and grapes. Our ancestors had planted their land and originated in it so they became "the original children of the land".
But you are nomads, you never cultivated or established in your land. Our fathers had planted the vine and made wine; and created the music so they rejoiced and danced; they built civilizations and wrote books; your grandfathers drank blood and still do, they danced over some of their bodies and slaughtered some of them for their joy and still do. They destroyed civilizations; they burned books and still do. We do not resemble you neither in ancient nor in contemporary history. Our history is epics, science, and glory; your past history is betrayal your present is betrayal and your future will also be betrayal and treason. We do not resemble you in anything, not in our humanitarian nor Christian nor Islamic history. Muslims of my country differ from Muslims in your country; the Muslims of my country are humane, fans and lovers of life and science. But you produced peoples filled with hatred, complexes and sicknesses; and lovers of death. Our history is civilization, culture, science and literature; music and poetry. Your history is blood and invasions, hatreds and lusts.
People in my country who became Muslim after the Arab invasion remained noble socially, kept customs and traditions; even those who dwelt among us became like us socially, we ate together, danced together, we laughed together and cried together, but you did not change. In over one thousand four hundred years you did not change; and when you failed to change us, you are destroying our country and our heritage and our coexistence and humanity. The Levantine Muslim disbelieves you and is disgusted with you more than the Levantine Christian.
We educated you and built your cities, hospitals and universities and protected your language. We wish we did not do, if only we had left you to God’s destiny and to your own destiny which is darker than the color of your oil.
We were a bridge between you and the West but you became a tool in their hands for the destruction of our Levantine origin. We knew you from your fruits; you are a history of barbarism, humiliation and defeat. Remind us of one triumph or one glory?
Your triumphs are the annihilation of each other, the brother to his brother and the son to his father for the sake of governing or for a woman or a camel or a donkey. You leapt on the West, which you call infidel, while you lick their feet to preserve your thrones, so that you ponder in robbingthe poor’s funds and filled out its banks.
We’ve had enough and we will not cover this farce from now on. O you shepherds, Arabists and lovers of Arabism, if you would like to speak it out and sing it do it about yourselves and your cowardice and not for the people slaughtered, raped and kidnapped and whose history and present are destroyed, and perhaps its future as well in the name of Arabism.
posted
Ebla (Arabic: إبلا, modern: تل مرديخ, Tell Mardikh), was one of the earliest kingdoms in Syria. Its remains constitute a tell located about 55 km (34 mi) southwest of Aleppo near the village of Mardikh. Ebla was an important center throughout the third millennium BC and in the first half of the second millennium BC. Its discovery proved the Levant was a center of ancient, centralized civilization equal to Egypt and Mesopotamia, and ruled out the view that the latter two were the only important centers in the Near East during the early Bronze Age. Karl Moore described the first Eblaite kingdom as the first recorded world power.[1]
Mesopotamian Bronze Relief Plaque - Origin: Ebla, Syria Circa: 1500 BC to 800 BC Collection: Near Eastern Medium:
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE: EBLA, SYRIA SCULPTURE 2ND-1ST MILL.BCE Two warriors embrace before a deity with horned crown and a stern face. Relief (17th BCE) from the long side of a basalt sacrificial basin. See also 08-02-02/27 From Temple N, Ebla, Syria (Middle Bronze Age) National Museum, Aleppo, Syria
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Syrian thing is somewhat frantic, since loads of saqaliba and mamluks were transported to that region and shifted the populations demographic.
quote:This volume consists of 19 studies by leading historians of the Mamluks. Drawing on primary Arabic sources, the studies discuss central political, military, urban, social, administrative, economic, financial and religious aspects of the Mamluk Empire that was established in 1250 by Mamluks (manumitted military slaves, mostly Turks and Circassians). It was a Sunni orthodox state that had a formidable military, a developed and sophisticated economy, a centralized Arab bureaucracy and prestigious religious and educational institutions.
There are special articles about Cairo, Damascus, Jerusalem, Safed and Acre. The last part of the volume describes the Mamluk military class that survived in Egypt (although in a transformed form) under the Ottoman suzerainty after the Empire annexed Egypt and Syria in 1517.
--With contributions by Reuven Aharoni, Reuven Amitai, Frederic Bauden, Jonathan Berkey, Daniel Crecelius, Joseph Drory, Jane Hathaway, Robert Irwin, Donald Little, Nimrod Luz, Carl Petry, Thomas Philipp, Yossef Rapoport, André Raymond, Donald S. Richards, Warren Schultz and Hannah Taragan.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Ebla (Arabic: إبلا, modern: تل مرديخ, Tell Mardikh), was one of the earliest kingdoms in Syria. Its remains constitute a tell located about 55 km (34 mi) southwest of Aleppo near the village of Mardikh. Ebla was an important center throughout the third millennium BC and in the first half of the second millennium BC. Its discovery proved the Levant was a center of ancient, centralized civilization equal to Egypt and Mesopotamia, and ruled out the view that the latter two were the only important centers in the Near East during the early Bronze Age. Karl Moore described the first Eblaite kingdom as the first recorded world power.[1]
Mesopotamian Bronze Relief Plaque - Origin: Ebla, Syria Circa: 1500 BC to 800 BC Collection: Near Eastern Medium:
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE: EBLA, SYRIA SCULPTURE 2ND-1ST MILL.BCE Two warriors embrace before a deity with horned crown and a stern face. Relief (17th BCE) from the long side of a basalt sacrificial basin. See also 08-02-02/27 From Temple N, Ebla, Syria (Middle Bronze Age) National Museum, Aleppo, Syria
Repost,
1186–1155 BC
Head of a Syrian KhM 3896a TILE; RAMESSES III/USERMAATRE-MERIAMUN
posted
History as written today is nothing but falsehood. For example, here is a Sumerian:
But instead of showing Sumerians in textbooks scholars provide pictures of Gutians from Lagash:
Without the concept of race the lie being taught that the Sumerians were non-Blacks--Gutians-- will exist forever, since text book publishers only publish what they want us to believe.You can continue to follow the Eurocentrists propaganda that erases Blacks from ancient history--I would rather stick to reality.
The Gutians were Southern whites. They did not look like the Sumerians, who were Blacks. .
Gutians '
. To understand the whites you have to realize that there are a number of white populations. The European whites can be divided into at least two groups the Northern and Southern Europeans. The Northern Europeans mated with the Black Europeans, but for the most part they were able to maintain a much lighter complexion.
The Southern Euopeans were less numerous so they retain a much darker complexions than the Northern Europeans.
The Northern Europeans originated in the caves of Europe. As a result, they hate surface people and the environment especially trees. Defoestation is a trade mark of their expansion. They expanded during the migration of the Sea People after 1200 BC.
The second Sub- group of whites are the Syrians, Turks and Indo-Aryan speakers. The ancestors of these whites are the Gutians. They are Mountain people that originated in the Highlands of Central Asia and Mesopotamia. First mention of these whites go back to Sumerian and Akkadian times.
The Niger-Congo speakers introduced R1a and R1b to Europe during the Kushite expansion. The Semitic speaking Africans followed the Kushites into Europe. First mention of these Semites are in Egyptian and Sumerian documents as Puntites and Meluhites. Another Semite tribe was the Akkadians of Mesopotamia. The Ethiopian Semites spread haplogroups G, I and J to Eurasia.
I am beginning to believe that after the Hittites defeated the Hatti and Kaska and other peoples belonging to the Hurrian and Mitanni kingdoms, these people were uprooted and forced into Iran.The lost of Anatolia to the Hittites, probably forced these people to become nomads.
In Iran they probably formed a significant portion of the Proto-Arya population. Here they may have met Indo-Iranian speaking people,who may have practiced a hunter-gatherer existence, that adopted aspects of their culture especially the religion and use of Mitanni religious terms and chariot culture.
Joining forces with the Mitannian-Hurrian exiles they probably attacked Dravidian and Austronesian speaking people who probably lived in walled cities. The Austronesian and Dravidian people probably came in intimate contact during the Xia and Shang periods of China.
I have to reject the Afghanistan origin for the Indo-Iranian speaking people because the cultures there in ancient times show no affinity to Indo-European civilization. Given the Austronesian and Dravidian elements in Sanskrit and etc., I would have to date the expansion of the Indo-Aryan people sometime after 800 BC, across Iran, India down into Afghanistan, since the Austronesia people probably did not begin to enter India until after the fall of the Anyang Shang Dynasty sometime after 1000 BC.
This would explain why "the Vedic and Avestan mantras are not carbon copies of each other",they may have had a similar genesis, but they were nativised by different groups of Indic and Iranian speakers after the settlement of nomadic Hurrian and Mitanni people in Iran. .
[ 06. April 2021, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: the lioness, ]
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Note the difference in handshake between the Gutian and the Sumerian.
Sumerians noted that the Gutians:
"They are not classed among people, not reckoned as part of the land Gutian people who know no inhibitions, With human intelligence but canine instinct and monkey's features"
.
Note the different handshake of the Sumerian and the Gutians. Much of the art published relating to Sumerians, are often pictures of the Gutians when they ruled Lagash.
No Gutian kings of Lagash are mentioned in the Sumerian King List.
Kushites of Sumer and Akkad
Controversy surrounding the Kushite/African/Black origins of the Elamites, Sumerians, Akkadians and “Assyrians” is simple and yet complicated. It involves both the racism exhibited toward the African slaves in the Western Hemisphere and Africans generally which led to the idea that Africans had no history ; and the need of Julius Oppert to make Semites white, to accommodate the “white” ancestry of European Jews.
To understand this dichotomy we have to look at the history of scholarship surrounding the rise of Sumero-Akkadian studies. The study of the Sumerians, Akkadians. Assyrians and Elamites began with the decipherment of the cuneiform script by Henry Rawlinson. Henry Rawlinson had spent most of his career in the Orient. This appears to have gave him an open mind in regards to history. He recognized the Ancient Model of History, the idea that civilization was founded by the Kushite or Hamitic people of the Bible.
As result, Rawlinson was surprised during his research to discover that the founders of the Mesopotamian civilization were of Kushite origin. He made it clear that the Semitic speakers of Akkad and the non-Semitic speakers of Sumer were both Black or Negro people who called themselves[b] sag-gig-ga “Black Heads”. In Rawlinson’s day the Sumerian people were recognized as Akkadian or Chaldean, while the Semitic speaking blacks were called Assyrians.
Rawlinson identified these Akkadians as Turanian or Scythic people. But he made it clear that these ancient Scythic or Turanian speaking people were Kushites or Blacks.
A major supporter of Rawlinson was Edward Hincks. Hincks continued Rawlinson’s work and identified the ancient group as Chaldeans, and also called them Turanian speakers. Hincks, though, never dicussed their ethnic origin.
A late comer to the study of the Sumerians and the Akkadians was Julius Oppert. Oppert was a German born of Jewish parents. He made it clear that the Chaldean and Akkadian people spoke different languages. He noted that the original founders of Mesopotamia civilization called themselves Ki-en-gi “land of the true lords”. It was the Semitic speakers who called themselves Akkadians.
Assyrians called the Ki-en-gi people Sumiritu “the sacred language”. Oppert popularized the Assyrian name Sumer, for the original founders of the civilization. Thus we have today the Akkadians and Sumerians of ancient Mesopotamia.
Oppert began to popularize the idea that the Sumerians were related to the contemporary Altaic and Turanian speaking people, e.g., Turks and Magyar (Hungarian) speaking people. He made it clear that the Akkadians were Semites like himself . To support this idea Oppert pointed out that typological features between Sumerian and Altaic languages existed. This feature was agglutination.
The problem with identifying the Sumerians as descendants from contemporary Turanian speakers resulted from the fact that Sumerian and the Turkish languages are not genetically related. As a result Oppert began to criticize the work of Hincks (who was dead at the time) in relation to the identification of the Sumerian people as Turanian following the research of Rawlinson.
Oppert knew Rawlinson had used African languages to decipher cuneiform writing. But he did not compare the Sumerian to African languages, probably, due to the fact that he knew they were related given Rawlinson's earlier research.
It is strange to some observers that Oppert,never criticized Rawlinson who had proposed the Turanian origin of the Ki-en-gi (Sumerians). But this was not strange at all. Oppert did not attack Rawlinson who was still alive at the time because he knew that Rawlinson said the Sumerians were the original Scythic and Turanian people he called Kushites. Moreover, Rawlinson made it clear that both the Akkadians and Sumerians were Blacks. For Oppert to have debated this issue with Rawlinson, who deciphered the cuneiform script, would have meant that he would have had to accept the fact that Semites were Black. There was no way Oppert would have wanted to acknowledge his African heritage, given the Anti-Semitism experienced by Jews living in Europe.
Although Oppert successfully hid the recognition that the Akkadians and the Sumerians both refered to themselves as sag-gig-ga “black heads”, some researchers were unable to follow the status quo and ignore this reality. For example, Francois Lenormant, made it clear, following the research of Rawlinson, that the Elamite and Sumerians spoke genetically related languages. This idea was hard to reconcile with the depiction of people on the monuments of Iran, especially the Behistun monument, which depicted Negroes (with curly hair and beards) representing the Assyrians, Jews and Elamites who ruled the area. As a result, Oppert began the myth that the Sumerian languages was isolated from other languages spoken in the world evethough it shared typological features with the Altaic languages. Oppert taught Akkadian-Sumerian in many of the leading Universities in France and Germany. Many of his students soon began to dominate the Academe, or held chairs in Sumerian and Akkadian studies these researchers continued to perpetuate the myth that the Elamite and Sumerian languages were not related.
There was no way to keep from researchers who read the original Sumerian, Akkadian and Assyrian text that these people recognized that they were ethnically Blacks. This fact was made clear by Albert Terrien de LaCouperie. Born in France, de LaCouperie was a well known linguist and China expert. Although native of France most of his writings are in English. In the journal he published called the Babylonian and Oriental Record, he outlined many aspects of ancient history. In these pages he made it clear that the Sumerians, Akkadians and even the Assyrians who called themselves almat kakkadi ‘black headed people”, were all Blacks of Kushite origin. Eventhough de LaCouperie taught at the University of London, the prestige of Oppert, and the fact that the main centers for Sumero-Akkadian studies in France and Germany were founded by Oppert and or his students led to researchers ignoring the evidence that the Sumerians , Akkadians and Assyrians were Black.
In summary, the cuneiform evidence makes it clear that the Sumerians, Akkadians and Assyrians recognized themselves as Negroes: “black heads”. This fact was supported by the statues of Gudea, the Akkadians and Assyrians. Plus the Behistun monument made it clear that the Elamites were also Blacks.
The textual evidence also makes it clear that Oppert began the discussion of a typological relationship between Sumerian and Turkic languages. He also manufactured the idea that the Semites of Mesopotamia and Iran, the Assyrians and Akkadians were “whites”, like himself. Due to this brain washing, and whitening out of Blacks in history, many people today can look at depictions of Assyrians, Achamenians, and Akkadians and fail to see the Negro origin of these people.
Gutian....Sumerian
To make the Sumerians “white” textbooks print pictures of artifacts dating to the Gutian rule of Lagash, to pass them off as the true originators of Sumerian civilization. No Gutian rulers of Lagash are recognized in the Sumerian King List.
The Standard of Ur.
The Standard of Ur was found in PG779 one of the largest graves in the Royal Cemetery at Ur by Leonard Woolley (1920s), the excavator at Ur. It was lying in the corner of a chamber above the right shoulder of a soldier whom Woolley thought had carried it on a long pole as a standard, the royal emblem of a king: hence its common name. It is essentially a hollow wooden box measuring 8.5 inches high and 19.5 inch long, inlaid with a mosaic of shell, red limestone, and lapis lazuli set in bitumen. Its original function is not yet understood, although it is more likely to have been the sound box for a musical instrument. The main panels are known as 'War' and 'Peace'. 'War' shows one of the earliest representations of a Sumerian army. Chariots, each pulled by four donkeys, trample enemies; infantry with cloaks carry spears; enemy soldiers are killed with axes, others are paraded naked and presented to the king who holds a spear. The 'Peace' panel depicts animals, fish and other goods brought in procession to a banquet. Seated figures, wearing woollen fleeces or fringed skirts, drink to the accompaniment of a musician playing a lyre. Banquet scenes such as this are common on cylinder seals of the period, such as on the seal of the 'Queen' Pu-abi. Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
The Sumerians were Black. The Gutians were Southern whites.
Gutians
.
Physical appearance - Wiki;
According to the historian Henry Hoyle Howorth (1901), Assyriologist Theophilus Pinches (1908), renowned archaeologist Leonard Woolley (1929) and Assyriologist Ignace Gelb (1944) the Gutians were pale skinned and blonde haired. This identification of the Gutians as fair haired first came to light when Julius Oppert (1877) published a set of tablets he had discovered which described Gutian (and Subarian) slaves as namrum or namrűtum, meaning "light colored" or "fair-skinned".
This racial character of the Gutians as blondes or being light skinned was also taken up by Georges Vacher de Lapouge in 1899 and later by historian Sidney Smith in his Early history of Assyria (1928). Ephraim Avigdor Speiser however criticised the translation of "namrum" as "light colored". An article was published by Speiser in the Journal of the American Oriental Society attacking Gelb's translation. Gelb in response accused Speiser of circular reasoning. In response Speiser claimed the scholarship regarding the translation of "namrum" or "namrűtum" is unresolved.
The art supports the view they were "light skin".
.
quote:Originally posted November 8,2013 by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor: Gutium: Gutian People, Gutian Dynasty of Sumer, Gutian Language
quote: Excerpt:
The Gutians (also Guteans or Guti) were a tribe that overran southern Mesopotamia when the Akkadian empire collapsed in approximately 2183 BC (short chronology). Sumerian sources portray the Gutians as a barbarous, ravenous people from Gutium or Qutium in the mountains, presumably the central Zagros. The Sumerian king list represents them as ruling over Sumer for a time, and paints a picture of chaos within the Gutian administration. Next to nothing is known about their origins, as no "Gutian" artifacts have surfaced from that time; little information is gleaned from the contemporary sources. Nothing is known of their language either, apart from those Sumerian king names, and that it was distinct from other major languages of the region (such as Akkadian, Hurrian, and Elamite). The Guti appear in Old Babylonian copies of inscriptions ascribed to Lugal-Anne-Mundu of Adab as among the nations providing his empire tribute. These inscriptions locate them between Subartu in the north, and Marhashe and Elam in the south. They were a prominent nomadic tribe who lived in the Zagros mountains in the time of the Akkadian Empire. Sargon the Great also mentions them among his subject lands, listing them between Lullubi, Armanu and Akkad to the north, and Nikku and Der to the south. The epic Cuthaean Legend of Naram-Sin of a later millennium mentions Gutium among the lands around Mesopotamia raided by Annubanini of Lulubum during Naram-Sin's reign in Akkad. As Akkadian might went into a decline, the Gutians began to practice hit-and-run tactics on Mesopotamia; they would be long gone by the time forces could arrive to deal with the situation. Their raids crippled the economy of Sumer.
The Standard of Ur was found in PG779 one of the largest graves in the Royal Cemetery at Ur by Leonard Woolley (1920s), the excavator at Ur. It was lying in the corner of a chamber above the right shoulder of a soldier whom Woolley thought had carried it on a long pole as a standard, the royal emblem of a king: hence its common name. It is essentially a hollow wooden box measuring 8.5 inches high and 19.5 inch long, inlaid with a mosaic of shell, red limestone, and lapis lazuli set in bitumen. Its original function is not yet understood, although it is more likely to have been the sound box for a musical instrument. The main panels are known as 'War' and 'Peace'. 'War' shows one of the earliest representations of a Sumerian army. Chariots, each pulled by four donkeys, trample enemies; infantry with cloaks carry spears; enemy soldiers are killed with axes, others are paraded naked and presented to the king who holds a spear. The 'Peace' panel depicts animals, fish and other goods brought in procession to a banquet. Seated figures, wearing woollen fleeces or fringed skirts, drink to the accompaniment of a musician playing a lyre. Banquet scenes such as this are common on cylinder seals of the period, such as on the seal of the 'Queen' Pu-abi. [/QB]
Clyde all of these pictures including the standard of Ur ones you put up are from realhistoryww.com
According to realhistorww.com there are no sculptures or reliefs of Gutians. They say that all of the above are black Sumerians and these pictures are in the Original Black Civilizations section. So since they are unpainted couldn't they be black people with Ethiopian features?
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Enthroned Goddess, King and Date Palm Stele of Ur-Nammu, Ur, 2050-1950 B.C. The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
Clyde these Sumerians look like a bunch of Hassidic Jews sitting around, what's up with that?
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Clyde Gudea looks like an Italian kid I once knew named Caesar who had a bowl hair cut. If all the other Sumerian kings have beards what's going on with dude? Gudea is not on the Sumerian kings list
Also what are the beginning and ending dates of the Sumerian civilization?
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tamil Dravidians, Australoids and ancient Sumerians:
Quote: "The second study concerns physical examination of Sumerian skulls. Buxton and Rice have found that of 26 Sumerian crania they examined 22 were Australoid or Austrics. Further According to Penniman who studied skulls from other Sumerian sites, the Australoid Eurafrican, Austric and Armenoid were the "racial" types associated with the Sumerians.
Here is Penniman's description of the Austric type found at Sumer: "These people are of medium stature, with complexion and hair like those of the Eurafrican, to which race they are allied with dark eyes, and oval faces, broad noses, rather feeble jaws, and slight sinewy bodies."
Perhaps most similar to Australian languages are the Dravidian languages of southern India. Tamil, for example, has five places of articulation in a single series of stops, paralleled by a series of nasals, and no fricatives (thus approaching the Australian proportion of sonorants to obstruents of 70% to 30%).
Approaching the question from the opposite direction: according to the latest WHO data on the prevalence of chronic otitis media (Acuin 2004:14ff), Aboriginal Australians have the highest prevalence in the world – 10-54%, according to Coates & al (2002), up to 36% with perforations of the eardrum. They are followed – at some distance – by the Tamil of southern India (7.8%, down from previous estimates of 16- 34%), … (from http://www.flinders.edu.au/speechpath/Manly%20final.pdf ) Dr Rao and his colleagues sequenced the mitochondrial genomes of 966 people from traditional tribes in India. They reported several of the Indian people studied had two regions of their mitochondrial DNA that were identical to those found in modern day Australian Aboriginal people. (http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/topic/2011921/1/) Also – http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/9/173/abstract/ Then there is the Human Genome Project and here is what that has to say: During his own journey in pursuit of the Y chromosome story in the late 1990s, Wells took blood samples from males of Dravidian ancestry in southern India. The Dravidians were among India’s earliest colonists; they now live among the descendants of a later wave of Sanskrit speakers — like Latin and ancient Greek, Sanskrit is an a branch of the Indo- European ‘mother tongue’, more closely related to modern English and French than to Dravidian. Wells was looking for a genetic marker called M130, the most ancient, non-African, Y-chromosome marker. It is rare in Dravidians, but quite common in Australian Aboriginal males — and, intriguingly, in the Na Dene peoples of the Pacific north-west of North America. The Na Dene peoples are descended from a second, later wave of immigrants into North America, who were ultimately of Sino-Tibetan stock — M130 is both the oldest non-African Y-chromosome marker, and the most travelled. Wells’ suspicion that M130 might have survived, at very low frequency, in southern coastal regions of India, was proven correct the first African emigres left a durable calling card on the coastal migratory route between Africa and Australia. (http://www.lifescientist.com.au/article/131860/dr_wells_genetic_crusade)
(Tamil) Dravidians ARE the classical Sumerians: The Mediterraneans (Eurafrican) or Dravidians were associated with the ancient Sumerian civilizations of Mesopotamia and of Elam (southern Iran).
Authors have pointed out ethnic, linguistic and cultural affinities between the Sumerians (Mesopotamians) and the Dravidians of South India, and concluded that both probably belonged to the same ethnic stock. HR Hall writes: "The ethnic type of the Sumerians, so strongly marked in their statues and reliefs was as different from those of the races which surrounded them as was their language from those of the Semites, Aryans and others; they were decidedly Indian in type. The face-type of the average Indian today is no doubt much the same as that of the Dravidian race ancestors thousands of years ago...And it is to this Dravidian ethnic type of India that the ancient Sumerian bears most resemblance, so far as we can judge from his monuments. He was very like a Southern Hindu of the Deccan (who still speaks Dravidian languages). And it is by no means improbable that the Sumerians were an Indian tribe which passed, certainly by land, perhaps also by sea, through Persia to the valley of the Two Rivers." Hall is of the opinion that Dravidian people must have migrated to Mesopotamia from India, whereas others think Dravidians came from Mediterranean regions, which was their earlier home.
KP Padmanabha Menon writes about their close relationship: Orientalists, many of them, are prepared to concede that the Sumerians, the Mediterranean race, are branches of the early Dravidians. Others have traced the origins of the Sumerians, Elamites and so on back to Proto-Saharan civilization back in Africa, anthropologist and linguist Dr. Clyde Winters etc. are of this opinion.
quote: is of considerable interest to trace where the ancient Sumerians emerged from because of their primary contribution to human civilization. It was suggested that Sumerians appeared in Southern Mesopotamia around five and half thousand years ago carrying with them the seeds of civilization. It was also suggested that they migrated from the west coast of India.
The fact that they were not a local people is suggested by the fact that their language belongs to a completely different and isolated group. There are two further lines of investigation one may adopt to confirm this hypothesis. The first is to explore for other groups in India with a similar language and the second is to carry out a physical examination of the Sumerian skeletons as available at the present time to detect racial similarities.
In western India there are a number of tribal groups that have existed from ancient times. Today many live on the fringes of mainstream communities as exist in India today. The mainstream communities belong to either the Indo-Aryan or Dravidian linguistic groups. Sumerian does not belong to either.
As regards the tribal, it is now fruitless to look for any similarities between Sumerian and present tribal languages in India because over thousands of years their original languages have disappeared because of the overwhelming influence of other languages.
The western tribal communities of India now speak modified versions or mixtures of the mainstream languages. However, all is not lost because although the tribal in India such as kols and Bheels have been overly influenced, it is not so with some of their branches that migrated further east towards Australia in ancient times, and form a branch of the same human groups. One may then look for similarities between Sumerian and Austric languages.
This study has in fact been already done and the consensus is a resounding, yes. The austric languages are indeed similar to ancient Sumerian. The similarities are so numerous and clear that they are beyond doubt or a result of any chance coincidence. (The Austric Origin of the Sumerian Language, Language Form, vol. 22, no.1-2, Jan.-Dec. 1996.)
Therefore now it may be said with confidence that ancient Sumerian is not a linguistic isolate. It belongs to the australoid/ austric group of languages. They belong to this group because the ancient tribal people of Indian west coast also belonged to the same group of people, and it is from here that they must have migrated to Mesopotamia.
Both the Australoid and Austric type are found in India. There are clear reasons to rule out any other location for the Sumerian migration: Western India is geographically close to Southern Mesopotamia as compared to south East Asia and Australia and there are no know instances of civilization east of the Indus valley around five thousand years ago. Such evidence has been found in the Indus valley.
The second study concerns physical examination of Sumerian skulls. Buxton and Rice have found that of 26 Sumerian crania they examined 22 were Australoid or Austrics. Further According to Penniman who studied skulls from other Sumerian sites, the Australoid Eurafrican, Austric and Armenoid were the "racial" types associated with the Sumerians. Here is Penniman's description of the Austric type found at Sumer:
"These people are of medium stature, with complexion and hair like those of the Eurafrican, to which race they are allied with dark eyes, and oval faces, broad noses, rather feeble jaws, and slight sinewy bodies."
This description also closely describes the regal person seen on a famous clay tablet from the Indus Valley. This same tribe in an evolved version undoubtedly established the Indus civilization as well as the Sumerian one after the submergence of their coastal cities. In North-western India they would have encountered Neolithic people of Indo-European origin with which manpower they established the Indus cities. An analysis of skeletal remains from Indus valley confirms this mixture.
Both the IndoSumerian-austric language must then have persisted side by side as in Mesopotamia with the official language of the rulers being IndoSumerian-austric. Just as in Mesopotamia, ancient Sumerian was replaced by the language of the majority(Akkadians) in the Indus valley it would have been replaced eventually by an Indo-Aryan language. At what precise moment in history this occurred is not certain but most probably the Sumerian language disappeared from India by 2000 BC. In this latter case there was no question of preserving it for ritual purposes either.
This is because the IndoSumerian-Austric language never developed as a fully written language in India to inscribe full texts. In any case, a better Indo-Aryan language with its own full-fledged script soom emerged probably because of Hittite influences in the Indian sub-continent around that time.
Contribution of Armenians to ancient civilization
In the Indus valley from which the Sumerians emerged there were other tribes that lived in close proximity of the Austric Sumerians. These were prehistoric indo-Aryan tribes of an Armenian origin - followers of the God Ara.
The indo Aryans were fair skinned and light haired. Hence the reason for the indo-Sumerians to label themselves as dark headed in comparison to the Ara people who were shining. Sumerians also began using the word Ara for fair and bright and eventually they labeled all indo-Aryan people as Ara or Arya. The word Armenian has its origin in AR-MA, i.e. the children of Ara and Ma the fertility Goddess.
Later indo-Aryan migrations of around 1500BC into the Indus regions were apparently of Hittite origin. Apparently, some intermarriage also took place between these indo-Sumerians and Armenians probably leading to a more vigorous community then would have been possible otherwise. A physical marriage also resulted in a marriage of the religious traditions of the Sumerian and Armenian tribes as well as the Sumerian language being influenced by Armenian.
Such influences can be found by comparisons between the Armenian (or even Hungarian that emerged from ancient Armenian) and Sumerian language. Are was the Sun God and the roots of sun worship in the world appear to have an Aryan origin rather than a Sumerian one.
Archaeologists refer to Transcaucasus region, including modern Armenia, as the earliest known prehistoric culture in the area, carbon-dated to roughly 6000 - 4000 BC. A recently discovered tomb has been dated to 9000 BC. Another early culture in the Armenian Highland and surrounding areas, the Kura-Araxes culture, is assigned the period of ca. 4000 - 2200 BC. Armenians are one of the oldest Indo-European subgroups.
Therefore, it is not surprising that from amongst the Aryans it was the Armenians who spread around the ancient world of Mesopatomia and Indus valley first. The Hittite Aryans that became more powerful than the Armenians by 1500 BC were close neighbors and racial cousins of the Armenians, at times clashing with them and at times co-existing, yet probably gaining form the interaction at all times.
Buxton and Rice have found that of 26 Sumerian crania they examined 22 were Australoid or Austrics and four armennoid.
Further According to Penniman who studied skulls from other Sumerian sites, the Australoid Eurafrican, Austric and Armenoid were the "racial" types associated with the Sumerians. Certainly it cannot be confirmed without further investigation if the Sumerian-Armenian alliance took place on Sumerian or Indian soil. It is also not certain if it was a forced or voluntary one. The fair skinned Armenian ladies are likely to have regarded the dark broad nosed Sumerians as ugly. Nevertheless, it may be deduced that the earliest Sumerians who introduced civilization in our world were around 85% Austric and 15% Armenian Aryans.
It is surprising that one of the most significant contributions to mankind should come from the Austric/australoid races. Elsewhere their contribution has not been remarkable. However, apparently a small genetic change is all that is necessary for this achievement. Similar races have illustrated that this can happen elsewhere as well. An example of that is Angkor Vat of Cambodia that illustrates technical mastery on an unprecedented scale, noted for its architectural and artistic perfection, not to mention its sheer size, Angkor Vat is the most famous and no doubt the most remarkable of all of ancient temples with extraordinary architectural and artistic innovations, one of the grandest achievements of mankind.
Study Reveals Genetic Link between Indian Subcontinent and Mesopotamia (Read the article on one page)
A new study published in the journal PLoS ONE, has added to the debate regarding the origins of people inhabiting ancient Mesopotamia during the region’s long history. Results showed that the remains of individuals uncovered in Mesopotamia belonged to people with a genetic affinity to the Indian subcontinent and, in particular the region near Tibet (Trans-Himalaya).
This suggests that the individuals are descendants of migrants from much earlier times (Palaeolithic) who spread through Eurasia founding regional Mesopotamian groups, or they are from merchants moving along trade routes passing near or through the region. Mesopotamia is considered to be the cradle of civilization in the West and corresponds to modern-day Iraq, the north-eastern section of Syria and to a much lesser extent south-eastern Turkey, smaller parts of south-western Iran and Kuwait.
The researchers analysed DNA sequences extracted from the unearthed remains (teeth) of over 350 individuals buried in Tell Ashara (ancient Terqa) and Tell Masaikh (ancient Kar-Assurnasirpal) – Syrian archaeological sites in the middle of Euphrates valley. The remains were dated between the Early Bronze Age and the Late Roman period (between 2500 BC and 500 AD). These were used for comparison with remains obtained on the Indian subcontinent.
The Euphrates valley region showed a stable population until after the Mongolian invasion which resulted in a large depopulation of northern Mesopotamia in the 13 th Century AD. The final major change occurred during the 17th century with Bedouin tribes arriving from the Arabian Peninsula.
Using DNA methodology, the scientists were able to gain information about the ancestry of the individuals.
The studied individuals carried specific mtDNA haplotypes, which are believed to have arisen in the area of the Indian subcontinent during the Upper Palaeolithic and are absent in people living today in Syria.
However, these same haplogroups are present in people inhabiting today’s Tibet, Himalayas, India and Pakistan.
The obtained data has enriched the modest database of Mesopotamian ancient DNA and suggests a possible genetic link of the region with the Indian subcontinent in the past. There are no traces in the modern Syrian population, which is explainable by later depopulation and recolonisation.
By April Holloway
Then there is also this:
Head of a Syrian Bedouin KhM 3896a TILE; RAMESSES III/USERMAATRE-MERIAMUN
Head of a Beduin from Syria KhM 3896c TILE; NEW KINGDOM
Head of an Ancient Syrian prisoner, Ancient Egypt:
a Libyan, a Canaanite, a Syrian and a Nubian bow XVIIIth Dynasty - Cairo Museum:
Yeah these above "Syrians", do not look like "white people" or "White Turkic/Arabic" people to me!
Yeah Liarness and all the idiotic eurocentrics reading this, THESE PEOPLE REALLY DO NOT SOUND OR LOOK LIKE THEY ARE WHITE EURASIANS OR EUROPEANS OR "MIDDLE EASTERN PEOPLE" AT ALL!
Please stop trying to mislead, play tricks and being just a general ignorant idiot, who is not creating or generating any constructive or informative discussions and debates on this topic, or posting anything that is cognitively enriching!
BTW terms like "Caucasoid" and "Australoid" are also false and based on flimsy skeletal analysis, and flawed logic and medical analysis; it's not based on any real hard core scientific analysis and criterion and thus are pseudo-scientific terminologies. When people mention "australoid" or "austric", what they really mean is "black/brown" person found in Asia....
The answer as to why various numbers of Syrians are white today, is because modern Syrians are Turkish+Turkic+Italic+Roman+Germanic Gothic+French/Frankish+Persian+Scythian+Mongol+Ottoman+Cimmerian+Kipchak+Tartar+Slavic+Latin mongrel mutts, WHO DISPLACED AND OVERWHELMED THE ORIGINAL BLACK/BROWN PEOPLES OF THE SYRIA AREA, JUST AS IT HAPPENED IN EUROPE!
So the answer as to why modern Syrians are "White", is pretty easy as indicated above! And "White Arab" is an oxymoron, BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL ARABS OF THE ARABIAN PENINSULA WERE BLACKS! Modern "White Arabs" are Turkic/Eurasian white impostor mongrel mutts and mixed peoples, like "white Syrians", who are claiming a false bastardized "pseudo-Arab fake cultural identity" for their own benefits and lies!
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
You must be the **** out your mind call yourself come schooling me about colour in the Levant and the white influx into the region?
Leucosyri, to distinguish them from the people from beyond Taurus, which bear also the name of Syrians, but who, compared to the cistauric populations, are to have the dye browned by the heat of the sun, while those do not have it, difference which gave place to the denomination of Leucosyri.
Strabo Geography 12:3:9
quote: ... the populations of the one and other Cappadoce, Cappadoce Taurique and Cappadoce Pontique, even nowadays, are often called Leucosyri or Syrian white, by opposition apparently to other Syrians known as Melanosyri or Black Syrians, who can be only the Syrians established across Taurus, and, when I say Taurus, I give to this name his greater extension, I prolong the chain until Amanus.[Antioch]."
Strabo Geography 16:1:2
quote: The Cha'ab Arabs, the present possessors of the more southern parts of Babylonia, are nearly black; and the "black Syrians," of whom Strabo speaks, seem intended to represent the Babylonians.
George Rawlinson The Seven Great Monarchies Of The Ancient Eastern World, Vol 4
quote: Sayce has identified the Hittites with the "White Syrians" of Strabo as contrasted with "the Black Syrians or Semitic Aramaeans, east of the Amanus"
Henry George Tomkins Remarks on Mr. Flinders Petrie's Collection of Ethnographic Types from the Monuments of Egypt The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Vol. 18.
quote: LEUCOSYRI, the ancient name of the Syrians inhabiting Cappadocia, by which they were distinguished from the more southern Syrians, who were of a darker complexion. (Herod. i.72, vii.72; Strabo, xvi. p.737; Pliny, H.N. vi.3; Eustath. ad Dionys. 772,970.)
A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, Volume II, Pages 171-172
quote: At the time of the appearance of the Greeks, the land between the rivers Halys and Iris belonged to the Leucosyrians, who were also called Cappadocians.
Lâtife Summerer University of Munich, Germany
quote: ... the term "Leucosyrian" (White-syrian) was not exclusive of Pontus, and so we could think that this word was used by the Greeks to name different autochtonous peoples of Anatolia. Furthermore, our sources do not make clear if those Leucosyrians can be identified with those peoples who are called Cappadocians in a general sense: in fact, Strabo describes the Cappadocians of Pontus as descendants from former Scythian migrations. Solinus, probably quoting Plinius, tells that the Eastern part of Cappadocia (I think that he is alluding to Pontic Cappadocia) is situated in Scythia. Strabo said also that the wall of Zela was built to defend the place from the Scythian invaders. And finally, in a general sense, we must regard that the Euxinus was consered as an Scythian sea.
Luis Ballesteros-Pastor (Universidad de Sevilla)
[/QUOTE]
Why you were quietly plagiarizing me for your yet unreleased FakeassHistory site.
Mmm hmm. And about white influx
quote:Originally posted on Robin Walker's Yahoo group 2003:
Below are some musings I had before joining ES. Please critique it heavily -- it is rather chauvinistic.
=-=-=-=-=
Semitic speakers partially originated from African people. They didn't originate soley in "Asia" as imagined by old school historians, anthropologists, and linguists, or as new wave Nostratists postulate.
Southern Arabia was Kushite Arabia and was in the Arab mind foremost 'Arab ul-'Aribah. 'Arab ul-Muta'aribah and 'Arab ul-Musta'ribah are acknowledged as northerners mixing with the Kushites or as unmixeds who merely adopted Arab culture.
The eastern Mediterranean is a nexus of three continents. It and the Arabian Peninsula were peopled by other migrant invaders who didn't originally speak in Afrisian. Semitic speakers were among the first but weren't the only inhabitants of the region. Chadic and/or Nilo-Saharan speakers likely preceded them. Indo-Europeans, Caucasics, Altaics, etc., came after them probably via Daryal Gorge through the Caucasus.
From this can be gathered, if anything, that "Semites" are partially North East Africans who migrated into the Arabian peninsula and moved northward (as far as up to Turkey) where they met and mingled with and were maybe blocked from further spread by southward invading Eurasian peoples (Altaic and Indo-European speakers) in pre-historic times. Upon the eclipse of the southerners the hybrids and assimilated settlers (beginning circa -1800 with the maryannu caste) became heir to the names and languages of the original people they married into and whose culture they emulated and lexicon enriched.
Mainstream linguistics reveals Semitic as just an Afrisian language and proto-Afrisian dates to origins of 12KYA somewhere in the vicinity of the border between present day Sudan and Ethiopia or perhaps the Kordofanian area. Semitic along with Tamazight are thought to be the last families to diverge from a parent stock hardly allowing either to be older than Cushitic or Egyptian.
Unless Gurage is oldest and they entered the Arabian peninsula via Bab el Mandel then the pre-Semitic speakers worked their way up from the Sinai peninsula crossing over from the Nile Valley to the Arabian peninsula and from there moved northward ending their trek at the foot of the mountains of Turkey. If anything, Caucasic, Altaic, and Indo-European speakers moving southbound across the Caucasus met and mingled with the Semitic speakers giving then a much lighter color than their southern ancestors had and some still have today.
So go on and laugh jackass, laugh at your own damn fool self.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Tukuler - I couldn't help laughing:
You're quoting a priest????
An ignorant lying priest (Father Theodoros David) at that!
Then playing dumb as to who the pale people in the Levant are.
You're obviously running some kind of a con: what did lioness pull you over to the dark side?
Anyway, what the ancient Syrians looked like is no secret, here, take a gander.
posted
Tukuler - Gee, I'm so sorry that I riled you, just trying to keep you from making mistakes.
Btw - Strabo (63 BC – 24 AD), was a Greek geographer, philosopher, and historian.
He lived at about the time of Jesus, so it's really "MODERN" or "current era" history. The year (0) being the demarcation point.
Persian relief at Apadana.
(I got this from Realhistoryww.com the Anatolia section).
Relief from the ruins of Apadana, the Persian capital at Persepolis, about 500 B.C.
This relief provides a good example of how Whites twist facts and just plain lie in their telling of history. The encyclopedia Wikipedia has this quote: "Herodotus tells us that the name of the Cappadocians was applied to them by the Persians, while they were termed by the Greeks as "Syrians" or "White Syrians" (Leucosyri).
This term "Leucosyri" was coined by Strabo, a Greek writer who lived from 64 B.C. to 24 A.D. Almost 500 years AFTER the period under discussion. The purpose of the quote can only be to suggest that the ancient Anatolians were White people - as the relief above, and the other artifacts clearly show, they were not!
However by Strabo's time, there may well have been White Cappadocians. With Alexander's defeat of the Persians, millions of Whites poured into the former Persian territories.
But Blacks remained an important part of the Anatolian population, well into the current era.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
WTF, are you talking about? Nordic people aka Germanic people don't have broad noses, they are known for having very long,narrow,pointy noses. If you think their noses are broad, you must think my nose is really broad lol.
Posts: 3257 | From: Madisonville, KY USA | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
A guy with no lips a sharp pointy nose and curly hair. What are you trying to say here?
. That it's your Mama - vile stupid bitch.
Lioness, no one really needs or wants your input. That because you have demonstrated yourself to be a degenerate liar and general falsifier over many years. So please do, get lost!
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Syrians Bringing Vessels and Weapons, Tomb of Rekhmire
code:
Artist:Nina de Garis Davies (1881–1965) Period:New Kingdom Dynasty:Dynasty 18 Reign:reign of Thutmose III–early Amenhotep II Date:ca. 1479–1425 B.C. Geography:Original from Egypt, Upper Egypt, Thebes, Sheikh Abd el-Qurna, Tomb of Rekhmire (TT 100) Medium:Tempera on Paper Dimensions:facsimile: h. 46 cm (18 1/8 in); w. 35 cm (13 3/4 in) scale 1:1 framed: h. 48.9 cm (19 1/4 in); w. 38.1 cm (15 in) Credit Line:Rogers Fund, 1930 Accession Number:30.4.83
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Why not be honest and say you got it from yourself
Why you keep acting like wwrealhistory isn't you. You ain't find **** there. Fact is you put it on wwrealbistory and no I'm not going the rounds with you on the inaccurate identity your source labeled certain artifacts.
I guess 'white man lies' only applies when you want it to, otherwise you got no beef with white man info.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
(I got this from Realhistoryww.com the Anatolia section).
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Syrians Bringing Vessels and Weapons, Tomb of Rekhmire
code:
Artist:Nina de Garis Davies (1881–1965) Period:New Kingdom Dynasty:Dynasty 18 Reign:reign of Thutmose III–early Amenhotep II Date:ca. 1479–1425 B.C. Geography:Original from Egypt, Upper Egypt, Thebes, Sheikh Abd el-Qurna, Tomb of Rekhmire (TT 100) Medium:Tempera on Paper Dimensions:facsimile: h. 46 cm (18 1/8 in); w. 35 cm (13 3/4 in) scale 1:1 framed: h. 48.9 cm (19 1/4 in); w. 38.1 cm (15 in) Credit Line:Rogers Fund, 1930 Accession Number:30.4.83
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: [QB] Bandar Abbas.
This thread is about Syrians not Iraqis
Was it not you who posted on ancient Iran in the first place? SMH LOL Where and when did I say anything about Iraq? All I did was show a population likely indignious to Southern Iran, who happen to look similar to ancient people of that region.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde said " the white Syrians or Gutians" It's Clyde's fault.
What is your take on this?
I don't know much about it but if If you read about the history of Syria they don't talk about the Gutians. There is not much known about the Gutians besides that they invaded parts of Sumer
quote:The period following the fall of the Akkadian Empire is traditionally seen as a period of darkness and anarchy by historians. While the perceived darkness is due to the rarity of Gutian artefacts and text material, the anarchy is an impression formed by the historians gained from the Sumerian and Babylonian historical and literary compositions describing Gutian rule. In fact these compositions were mostly compiled later than the Gutian period itself. Later in this chapter we shall attempt to answer the question whether the Gutian period was really so dark and fruitless, and to interpret the related evidence.
The Gutian Arrival
Some historical allusions in the texts of the Akkadian period indicate that early on there was Gutian infiltration into Mesopotamian lowlands. One of these allusions is to the probable presence of Gutians as soldiers in the Akkadian army.1 The archives of Adab from the Akkadian period mention Gutians who received rations,2 some of them described as ‘travellers’3 and others term residents, that the local governor had to use a Gutian interpreter to communicate with them.
[...]
This acquaintance with Mesopotamian practices as well as other pertinent circumstances helped the Gutians overthrow the Akkadian Dynasty and seize power in the land.
[...]
Whatever the background, the Gutians finally dominated the land of Akkad and “carried off the kingship of Sumer to the mountains/foreign land.”17 This metaphor clearly implies that the fate of the land and its sovereignty passed into the hands of a foreigner, specifically the great Gutian king.18 The Gutians were probably supported by other peoples and groups in the region, perhaps even the Sumerians,19 who looked for liberation from the Akkadian yoke. The neighbouring peoples had together formed an alliance against Narām-Sîn years before, and so it would have been natural to do the same this time. Among the probable allies one may expect the Elamites who were always ready to benefit from any weakness of their western neighbour, the Lullubians, the Hurrians and other mountain peoples and groups who had raided Akkadian territories earlier or who had suffered from campaigns of the kings of Agade.(20) It appears that the Gutians did not (or perhaps they were not able to) spread their hegemony over the whole land of Sumer and Akkad. This is suggested by the presence of the influential Second Lagaš Dynasty and the Uruk Dynasty at the end of the period of Gutian rule. The inscriptions of Ur-Namma refer to at least three independent political entities in Sumer at that period: the Uruk city-state with its ruler Utu‹eg̃al, Lagaš, and the region under the Gutians. There is a suggestion that the two royal names Dudu and Šudurul, mentioned in the SKL as kings of Agade, were in fact rulers of the region centred on the city of Agade (21) during the Gutian rule.
--Ahmed, Kozad Mohamed Title: The beginnings of ancient Kurdistan (c. 2500-1500 BC) : a historical and cultural synthesis
posted
Some experts suggest that this relief could be of a Gutian king instead of Naram Sin.
If so, then note that he is an ordinary looking Black man. .
Erridu-Pizir (Erridupizir) was a Gutian ruler in Sumer from ca. 2141 B.C. to 2138 B.C. His reign is attested by a royal inscription at Nippur where he calls himself "King of Guti, King of the Four Quarters." His inscriptions indicate that after the Akkadian Empire fell to the Gutians, the Lullubi rebelled against Erridupizir. Note similarities with Naram Sin's Lullubi stele found in Susa.
The Naram Sin stele was taken out of Sumer by the Elamite King Shutruck-Nahhunte in the 12th century B.C, he was a decedent of the Lullubi people and claimed to carry the stele there himself. The already ancient inscription was kept showing that the King respected Naram-Sin’s victory and wanted to keep the connection that this stele had. He did however add an inscription declaring his own glory and tells how the stele was carried out of the city after the pillage of the city of Sippar.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I can only suggest you do you, and just one other thing, own up to your authorship of RealHistoryWW and citing it just a reference to yourself.
Remember I upped you for introducing the properly coloured image of the man leading the ox that previous to you I'd only him blanche (yes, a white man lie, as you say) in Views of the Biblical World book, where used to rep Shem.
Carry on Sir.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
[ 06. April 2021, 02:10 PM: Message edited by: the lioness, ]
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Just a nitpicking precision if you don't mind.
Rekmire's scribe identifies that guy's row as Retenu and peoples going as far north as known by AEs.
Hopefully you, Ish, or Putty Tat can find an online Davies facs detailing the dark bushy haired more familiar looking Syrians of the south vs those red head north (of ?) Retenu images posted above.
quote:Here posted by Mike111 but Originally posted 03 October 2013 by Ish Gebor
Syrians Bringing Horses, Tomb of Rekhmire
Are they pre-Turk southeast Anatolian Syrians white and a LeukSyrian subset circa 1490 BCE?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
" The whites at most consist of the people of Persia, Jibal, and Khurasan, the Greeks, Slavs, Franks, and Avars, and some few others, not very numerous" --Al Jahiz
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: " The whites at most consist of the people of Persia, Jibal, and Khurasan, the Greeks, Slavs, Franks, and Avars, and some few others, not very numerous" --Al Jahiz
What is the timing of this?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: " The whites at most consist of the people of Persia, Jibal, and Khurasan, the Greeks, Slavs, Franks, and Avars, and some few others, not very numerous" --Al Jahiz
What is the timing of this?
Ish Gebor - You should not take "ARAB" meaning Turk, Bacterian, Scythian, etc, etc, texts seriously. They are mostly nonsense.
But if you are curious, you might try reading these texts.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Rekmire's artists confirm the 'tricolour' reality of the Levant (E Med) with black, white, and red tribute bearers
quote: Coming in peace by the chiefs of Retjenu and all northern countries of Further Asia
Bottom register left to right: a black offering a handled vase and a metal ingot a white bringing a bar of wood (?) and a jar a red tendering a bow and a bar of wood (?)
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: " The whites at most consist of the people of Persia, Jibal, and Khurasan, the Greeks, Slavs, Franks, and Avars, and some few others, not very numerous" --Al Jahiz
What is the timing of this?
Ish Gebor - You should not take "ARAB" meaning Turk, Bacterian, Scythian, etc, etc, texts seriously. They are mostly nonsense.
But if you are curious, you might try reading these texts.
Nowhere did I write any of such. Or made a claim of such. Neither do I understand how you came to that conclusion.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Rekmire's artists confirm the 'tricolour' reality of the Levant (E Med) with black, white, and red tribute bearers
quote: Coming in peace by the chiefs of Retjenu and all northern countries of Further Asia
Bottom register cut offs
[IMG]
How does it confirm the tri-color of the Levant? From what I see, it confirms migration into Northeast Africa. Trade or whatever. But does this mean the origin is from the Levant?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic