Judaean prisoners being deported into exile to other parts of the Assyrian empire. Wall relief from the South-West Palace at Nineveh (modern-day Ninawa Governorate, Iraq), Mesopotamia. Neo-Assyrian period, 700-692 BCE. The British Museum, London
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2878 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
Noiicee! Never saw that coin before! Totally a Hebrew nose lol
-------------------- Heyy Posts: 106 | From: Usa | Registered: Mar 2022
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Hebrew nose
You mean Hittite nose don't you?
========================
quote: Research has found that this nose type is as common in the general population as it is among Jews in countries where this type of nose is most prevalent, such as in the Mediterranean region.
Helmreich, William B (1982) The Things They Say Behind Your Back: Stereotypes and the Myths Behind Them Transaction Publishers, pp. 36–37 Holden, Harold Miller (1950) Noses World Publishing Company, p. 69
"A considerable study has been made on the 'Jewish' nose. It has been found that this nose is far less prevalent among Jews than popularly supposed. Furthermore, it is most prevalent among Jews when it is also prevalent among the general population, as among Mediterranean or Bavarian people."
Silbiger, Steve (2000) The Jewish Phenomenon: Seven Keys to the Enduring Wealth of a People Longstreet Press, p. 13
"Sociologists have shown that the 'Jewish nose' is no more common to Jews than to Mediterranean people."
.
quote: א וַיְהִי דְבַר-יְהוָה, אֵלַי לֵאמֹר. Again the word of the LORD came unto me, saying: ב בֶּן-אָדָם, הוֹדַע אֶת-יְרוּשָׁלִַם אֶת-תּוֹעֲבֹתֶיהָ. 'Son of man, cause Jerusalem to know her abominations,
. . .
מה בַּת-אִמֵּךְ אַתְּ, Thou art thy mother's daughter, גֹּעֶלֶת אִישָׁהּ וּבָנֶיהָ that loatheth her husband and her children; וַאֲחוֹת אֲחוֹתֵךְ אַתְּ and thou art the sister of thy sisters, אֲשֶׁר גָּעֲלוּ אַנְשֵׁיהֶן וּבְנֵיהֶן who loathed their husbands and their children; אִמְּכֶן חִתִּית, וַאֲבִיכֶן אֱמֹרִי. your mother was a Hittite, and your father an Amorite.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
That beardless helmeted porter is obviously not a Lachish captive.
So why not wisely chose the three highest Lachish officials on their knees submitting to their conqueror and captor?
and other captives from Judah's second largest city Is there something needing a coverup? Like physical variety from south to north? Images in history banned from your Family Bible?
Meanwhile I've posted an honest wide variety of Levantine skin from cola brown/black to caramel to faded white, eg
and even offered possible proto-Israels of two complexions, they fly ssiyssiyth --see the panels @ upper right--.
polemicists only offer one aspect of the whole and try to pull a fast one like hiding the bigger picture in an attempt to myopically distort the reality.
You must do like Sennacherib did. Focus on the Lachish Big Shots, forget foreign corvee underlings.
Lachish men wear their nappy hair short That's how to ID these 7th c BCE Jews [expelled to Iraq to become Price(2009) and Moorjani(2011)'s sample w/>3% W Afr ancestry ?]
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Judaean prisoners being deported into exile to other parts of the Assyrian empire. Wall relief from the South-West Palace at Nineveh (modern-day Ninawa Governorate, Iraq), Mesopotamia. Neo-Assyrian period, 700-692 BCE. The British Museum, London
.
Why did you dishonestly crop the bearded nappy haired Hebrew drover? Your interest isn't the knowledge, it's hateful melanophobic propaganda.
Judaean prisoners being deported into exile to other parts of the Assyrian empire. Wall relief from the South-West Palace at Nineveh (modern-day Ninawa Governorate, Iraq), Mesopotamia. Neo-Assyrian period, 700-692 BCE. The British Museum, London
.
.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
That beardless helmeted porter is obviously not a Lachish captive.
The man has a beard. I have only seen these figures described as Judeans or prisoners from Lachish
And there are also women and children here
But there are a lot of books and articles on it as I'm sure you know. Maybe you can find a text reference referring specifically to this
The Assyrians seem to have the much longer beards cut straight on the bottom
Also see the next post. These men with the ear flapped helmets or caps, they may be Lachish soldiers and the men with no head coverings and in the long gown type garments are regular Lachish non-military, same type people. Alternate theory, Assyrian booty collectors but they seem affiliated with these women and the wheeled carts
Posts: 43122 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
The defenders — Hebrew soldiers — are positioned on one of the city wall’s towers, trying to ward off the Assyrians. A solider is throwing an arrow, while his companions are throwing stones and rocks. The surrounding environment is bombarded with fire torches and stones. From Nineveh (modern-day Mosul Governorate, Iraq), Room XXXVI of the southwest palace, panel 7. The British Museum, London.
Museum number 124906 Description Gypsum wall panel relief: showing an assault on Lachish. Siege engines lead way up artificial ramps; inside, men with ladles pour water to prevent them being set alight by torches thrown from walls. A procession of men and women stream out of town, ready for exile.
Images from the top of this post and the post before it. We see stone thrower here in the center between two other comrades defending the tower form the Assyrians. Below him from a different part of the same reliefs one of the men who carries the box-like object on his shoulders, previous post, women in front of him. They appear to have the same cap or helmet The flap over the ears is there and in it's lower portion a fringe, if not some kind of pattern of thin parallel lines However with the stone thrower at the tower, other comrades who appear to be defending the tower also have those other cone shaped hats like Assyrians do. Not sure what all this adds up to. There could be some overlap between the garb of Lachish and Assyrian military
Posts: 43122 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Tukuler
Nice work... archeotypery has once again been caught and exposed for being pseudo. Ish Geber already called him out in the other thread for his incorrect usage of an image, yet he posted it again in this thread as if nobody saw him get called out.
He only created this thread because he's triggered by the fact that I've been sharing info about how Jews were black.
***** ***** ***** ***** *****
quote:Originally posted by Ish Geber:
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: This sculpture head is found in Israel and is about 2800 years old. It does not show a black person.
There is no tangible evidence that ancient Jews in the Levant were black. They looked like other Levantine peoples. Their descendants exist in the area still today.
quote: This Monday, June 4, 2018 photo shows a detailed figurine of a king's head on display at the Israel Museum, dating to biblical times, and found last year near Israel's northern border with Lebanon, in Jerusalem. A palm-sized enigmatic sculpture of a king's head dating back nearly 3,000 years has set off a modern-day mystery caper as scholars try to figure out whose face it depicts. The 5-centimeter (2-inch) head is an exceedingly rare example of figurative art from the Holy Land during the 9th century BC, a period associated with biblical kings. (AP Photo/Ilan Ben Zion)
The 5-centimeter (2-inch) sculpture is an exceedingly rare example of figurative art from the Holy Land during the 9th century B.C. — a period associated with biblical kings. Exquisitely preserved but for a bit of missing beard, nothing quite like it has been found before.
While scholars are certain the stern bearded figure wearing a golden crown represents royalty, they are less sure which king it symbolizes, or which kingdom he may have ruled.
quote: In 922 B.C., the nation of Israel was torn into two nations, Israel to the north and Judah to the south. Israel was racked by internal tribal differences and, subsequently, became susceptible to frequent invasions.
quote:King Hazael? A detailed figurine of a king's head on display at the Israel Museum, dating to biblical times, and found near Israel's northern border with Lebanon, in Jerusalem.
“The guy kind of represents the generic way Semitic people are described,” she said.
Because Carbon-14 dating cannot give a more exact date for the statue’s creation other than sometime in the 9th century, the field of potential candidates is large. Yahalom-Mack posited it could be kings Ben Hadad or Hazael of Damascus, Ahab or Jehu of Israel, or Ithobaal of Tyre, all characters appearing in the biblical narrative.
quote:In one biblical story, a traitor to King David seeks refuge in the town. King David’s army besieges it and demands the traitor be given up. In response, the people of Abel Beth Maacah cut off the traitor’s head and toss it over the walls. Getting what they wanted, the Israelites end the siege.
[…]
The sculpture itself is only two inches in size. It’s well preserved and mostly intact. The figure has a beard and is wearing a crown. It’s considered a rare example of figurative art during that time period. Figurative art is defined as representational art derived from real objects or people. The hairstyle of the figure with a beard gives some clues to his ethnic identity.
The hair is pulled back in thick locks that cover the ears and is held in place by a striped headband. The art form is similar to how ancient Egyptian artists portrayed Semitic peoples of the Near East.
It’s still not known who the head depicted is and from what nationality they were from, though it’s likely a royal figure. The man portrayed was certainly an important person in his community.
But they have no clue what king it may have been or from which kingdom. The time period of the sculpture is from the period of biblical kings. After the death of David’s son, King Solomon, the Kingdom of Israel split into two entities with separate kingships, Israel in the north and Judah in the south.
Scholars have guessed at some contemporary names the sculpture could represent. They include biblical figures such as King Ben Hadad or Hazael of Damascus, Ethbaal of Tyre, and King Ahab or Jehu of Israel, whose capital was Samaria.
Knowing what king it might be would answer some questions. However, there are no known references or sources to check outside of the Bible narrative.
Posts: 2696 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Thx 4 the beard precision.
I don't need co-sign of my take on Lachish. Have studied Sennacherib's slabs for decades and was the first to post any part of them on the internet 23 years ago.
Its time you hied yourself to composing original analysis instead of often regurgitating what's already published somewhere that can be shown often enough to be weak quasi-evidence.
Anyway we've discussed identitiies of various entities on the slabs before but I guess it's best to repost here now and update as needed.
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
* And in my previous post (the portion of the post where I quote Ish Geber calling archeotypery out), you can also see that archeotypery referenced this DNA study in an attempt to prove that modern inhabitants of the Levant are the same as the ancients.
But archeotypery was playing on peoples' ignorance and was hoping that no one was familiar with the study or had actually read it before. Because the study clearly says the DNA examined from the "canaanites" was actually a mixture of DNA from people who had migrated from the caucusus.
In other words, archeotypery completely misrepresented the study, because he is pseudo.
Posts: 2696 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Jehu, bows before Shalmaneser III. According to the text on Wiki This is "the only portrayal we have in ancient Near Eastern art of an Israelite or Judaean monarch". The source of the claim is said to be Cohen, Ada; Kangas, Steven E. (2010). Assyrian Reliefs from the Palace of Ashurnasirpal II: A Cultural Biography. UPNE. p. 127.
posted
About the sculpture head, of course it is contested exactly who it depicts since it did not came with a name tag, but nothing rule out it is a king. And it is still not a "negroid" head
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2878 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Note at top there are two pictures running together That is how it goes on the relief. I couldn't find a continuous picture of it but that is how it was on the actual relief, as one Also note that the upper right photo itself is often not seen whole. The museum displays that in separate sections. Look at the little girl in the front of the cart. Running right through her is actually a crack line that goes all the way across up and down but this photo was taken when they put to together. Now however it shown as two separate pieces. None of this however is important.
The man in the center part of the same much larger scene with fig and olive trees in the background is driving an ox. Similarly the man on the upper right is a man driving an ox and carrying a sack (same guy repeated larger at the bottom) Several of the figures are carrying sacks including the men on the upper left who also carry goblets of some sort. At the lower right women also carry sacks. The man at the top center carrying a box-like object has a beard that is hard to see but I showed it previously. He has one of those helmets or caps with ear flaps. Similarly the ox driver in the center has on of them also. The ox driver on the upper right is rare in these reliefs (same dude is shown again at the very bottom) He's rare due to the fact that he's carrying a sack. There are many other figures like him not carrying sacks and they have long gowns on. One Assyrian is at top middle with a spear . He has no sack or ox.
Anyway what is the point of this? The point is that all of these figures except the Assyrians seem to be in "pack your belongings and belongings and get out mode" This leads my to believe that the two ox carriers one with the cap and no beard and shaven maybe be the same ethnic type as the other ox driver with the beard but I'm not sure about it. My theory is that this group are people packing their bags and ox and carts forced to leave the city while the others, maybe they are being shown in some sort of religious mode and also some being tortured by the Assyrians, possibly a priest class. Or that this scene above is people already and outside of the city while in other scenes the other people are still inside the city and being confronted by the Assyrians.
Posts: 43122 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
About the article, it actually says that parts of ancient Levantine DNA lives on in modern Jews and Arabs. A certain mix is to be expected since the Levant has always been an area where many ancient cultures and peoples have met and interacted. The full article illustrates this in a graphic form. But some of the mixing took place already before and during the Bronze age, an age in which Judaism as we know it came to be. Which still means that DNA from that time lives on even in todays populations
But this thread is about depictions, not genetic studies. So stop spamming with a lot of stuff that do not belong in the thread.
I already know that some people always want to twist everything and try to prove that ancient Israelites were "negroids". Especially Tazarah. It seems he can not be interested in ancient cultures if he does not believe they were "negroid". He calls me "Nazi", but he seems to be a black-centric fanatic who spams the whole ES with his preconceived notions about ancient "black" peoples and other propaganda.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2878 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: About the sculpture head, of course it is contested exactly who it depicts since it did not came with a name tag, but nothing rule out it is a king. And it is still not a "negroid" head
According to scholars, this isn't even what you claim or try to imply it is. They have no idea if it was even an Israelite, or what kingdom he ruled, or if he even ruled one at all.
Nobody ever said that there wasn't caucasian people in the Levant. That's a strawman argument, because you're pseudo -- as multiple others have already pointed out. Posts: 2696 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: About the article, it actually says that parts of ancient Levantine DNA lives on in modern Jews and Arabs. A certain mix is to be expected since the Levant has always been an area where many ancient cultures and peoples have met and interacted. The full article illustrates this in a graphic form. But some of the mixing took place already before and during the Bronze age, an age in which Judaism as we know it came to be. Which still means that DNA from that time lives on even in todays populations
But this thread is about depictions, not genetic studies. So stop spamming with a lot of stuff that do not belong in the thread.
I already know that some people always want to twist everything and try to prove that ancient Israelites were "negroids". Especially Tazarah. It seems he can not be interested in ancient cultures if he does not believe they were "negroid". He calls me "Nazi", but he is a black-centric fanatic who spams the whole ES with his preconceived notions about ancient "black peoples".
You misrepresented that study, just like you're misrepresenting that caucasian "Israelite" head sculpture.
You can't use a DNA study that deals with mixed ancient populations as a way to claim modern inhabitants with some of that DNA are ancient Israelites.
All that study proves is that modern inhabitants of the Levant are likely descendants of ancient migrants from the caucusus who intermingled with the natives.
The Y-DNA of the majority of modern jewish people did not originate in the Levant, that is a genetic fact.
You are pseudo. Posts: 2696 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Some Israelites and other Semites during 2000 years
Your pics are small and low quality Upper left is a modern poorly done facsimile illustration of who are thought to be Hyksos circa 1900 BC. They cannot be proven to be "Israelites" or Hebrew speakers. Top right who researchers call either "Asiatics", "Syrians" or "Syro-Palestinians" Egyptian transliteration = Aamu Again, no evidence for being Israelites in particular. Semitic speakers ? That also may not be provable
I already made a thread about this, upper left a higher res version of yours
Unfortunately, there is no inscription on these tiles fixing the name of the peoples represented; we are forced to compare with the bas-reliefs of the temples or the paintings of the tombs to find a similar type and we are sometimes perplexed.
these tiles are at different museums and thus their identities have been guessed at sometimes differently. Upper left had been called "Shasu Bedouin", the bottom left a "Philistine", next to him, lower right a "Palestinian" All of these figures have some similarity in hairstyle and could all be the same ethnicity, thus any of these names could attributed to any one of them, it's guessing. I have never heard of any of them being called Israelites. One probably even couldn't say with confidence they are necessarily Levantine
Posts: 43122 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
^ Wow, even the lioness is calling out the blatant pseudoism. Posts: 2696 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
See? Unlike Sennacherib who indisputably depicts ancient Jews our melanophobe polemicist is forced to admit any Israelite identity of anyone on Shalmanessar's stone is questionable.
So why bring it on? It's weak quasi-evidence at best.
Prejudice bigotry bias and hate mainly inform our anti-black polemicist who still refuses to recognize much less accept the actual Lachish Jews.
Hatred of blacks prevents admission of Sennacherib's Lachish portraiture for what it is, the earliest authenticated imagery of Israelites. In this case of the tribes and Kingdom of Judah.
Hate hate hate. Shame shame shame.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: The identification of Jehu has been debated,
.
Because all we have there is transporters of tribute. More often than not tribute bearers are nationals of the tribute offering nation. In this instance the bearers of Yehu's Kingdom of Israel tribute are attired no different than certain other bearers on the primary document. Why do Gilzani's and Yehu's bowing tribute presenters dress identically?
Why do the Yehu tribute bearers dress no different than those of Patina Turkey?
Do you see the doubt comes from the above internal primary document examination? No assumptions about race or colour being the right, correct, or approved one
But if you'd been following this for over three decades starting with Pritchard's Ancient Near East volumes and all the other ancient civ art references I've posted you'd already know why the academic doubt prevails over wishology.
If I err in anyway in presenting this monument please provide precisions.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: [QB] See? Unlike Sennacherib who indisputably depicts ancient Jews our melanophobe polemicist is forced to admit any Israelite identity of anyone on Shalmanessar's stone is questionable.
you do the same thing, of all the numerous books and articles you have not produced any reference for your similar polemical-ish exclusions of those ear flap dudes as non-Lachishians.
Posts: 43122 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@the lioness
You have never had to correct or put into context any of the ancient images, murals, etc., that I've posted and shared. Posts: 2696 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
The study tells us that the DNA from the bronze age lives on in modern Jews and Arabs. As I said there are also intermixing with other peoples, but that took place already in the Bronze age, so when Judaism became a religion among certain Semites the mixing would already have taken place.
What is it about the concept "DNA from the Bible's Canaanites lives on in modern Arabs and Jews" you do not understand??
Also the head is found in what is today Israel and it even look rather like many other representations of the Semites of that time. Compare it with for example the picture of Jehu on the Black Obelisk. At least it shows that not everyone in that part of the world was "negroid" in the 9th century BC, as Tazarah wants us to believe.
Back to the images, I will from now ignore Tazarahs black-centric stupid spam and babble.
Here is some later pictures of people in what is today Israel, from the late 19th and early 20th centuries
Jews in Jerusalem 1860
One of the earliest photographs of Jews praying at the Western Wall of Herod's Temple, 1870s.
Jews from Ottoman time
The funeral of a rabbi in Jerusalem, 1903
Samaritan, 1905
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2878 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
How anyone could mistake these people for caucasians is completely beyond me. Look at that nappy hair and those nappy beards. Caucasian people do not have hair like this... at all...
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@archeotypery
1. You completely ignored how studies on Y-DNA of modern jewish populations does not support the conclusion you reach via that DNA article.
2. That head sculpture is not an Israelite, scholars do not know who he was, what is race was, or if he even ruled anything at all. It's just a random head. Posts: 2696 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
You have never had to correct or put into context any of the ancient images, murals, etc., that I've posted and shared.
To the contrary there is no basis to claim those brick maker figures at Rekhmire are Israelites Ask Tukuler about it Those are Christian archeologists trying to project
Posts: 43122 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@the lioness
The point is, I provide sources co-signed by actual scholars and professors with credentials in the relevant field(s). "Archeotypery/antalas" does not, and never does.
P.S., feel free to prove that those archaeologists are "christians". Posts: 2696 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
1. You completely ignored how studies on Y-DNA of modern jewish populations does not support the conclusion you reach via that DNA article.
2. That head sculpture is not an Israelite, scholars do not know who he was, what is race was, or if he even ruled anything at all. It's just a random head.
If no one knows who the sculpted head is how can you know it is not an Israelite? That is only your guess.
The study I referred to said that DNA from the bronze age lives on in modern Jews and Arabs. I believe more in them than any random black-centric fanatics on the Internet. But now this thread is not about genetics but about ancient depictions. Do not distort the thread. Create your own thread about ancient DNA if you like.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2878 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: How anyone could mistake these people for caucasians is completely beyond me. Look at that nappy hair and those nappy beards. Caucasian people do not have hair like this... at all...
So in trying to figure out if this is some sort of curly hair or the particular afro type most Africans have, look at the Assyrian at left the bottom of his hair looks exactly the same as the Lachish hair so does that represent larger scale curls, curly hair or does it represent afro type hair in particular ?
Posts: 43122 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@archeotypery
1. Rofl... "no one knows who/what it is so that means.. it's an israelite!!" -- archeotypery logic
2. Rofl, archeotypery does not know what Y-DNA is, or it's significance. Posts: 2696 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
The point is, I provide sources co-signed by actual scholars and professors with credentials in the relevant field(s). "Archeotypery/antalas" does not, and never does.
P.S., feel free to prove that those archaeologists are "christians".
They are part is what is called "biblical archaeology" that is not the the most typical type. It tends to be conducted by people who have a bias toward wanting to confirm what is written in a religious text, the bible (often are Christians although sometimes Jews)
Calling those figures "Israelite slaves" is a perfect example of what you like to call "pseudo"
Posts: 43122 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
2. Rofl, archeotypery does not know what Y-DNA is, or it's significance. [/b] [/QB]
stop bluffing he knows more than you
half the stuff about DNA you learned by me thrashing you around in other threads, forcing you to look up stuff You still don't understand how to evaluate sample sizes
Posts: 43122 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@the lioness
Biblical archaeology does not equal christian archaeologists.
That assertion is pseudo.
Who should people believe, you? Or them?
P.S., is this you originally arguing that J is a legitimate marker for Jews, only to then deny ever claiming this after I debunked you and showed that J did not even originate in the Levant, but came from the caucusus instead? Rofl
Posts: 2696 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: [QB] [b]@the lioness
Biblical archaeology does not equal christian archaeologists.
That assertion is pseudo.
Again you don't know anything about the field of "Biblical Archaeology" This is new to you and you are pretending again
Posts: 43122 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@the lioness
They all have more qualifications than you could ever dream of having. Stop splitting hairs. If they were saying white people were Israelites you would not be complaining at all. Posts: 2696 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
P.S., is this you originally arguing that J is a legitimate marker for Jews, only to then deny ever claiming this after I debunked you and showed that J did not even originate in the Levant, but came from the caucusus instead? Rofl
This is why I should not respond to you because you are constantly lying about what I say If you look at J, researchers are not certain it came from but you are so polemical the first thing one of them says you agree with you roll with, it's called "confirmation bias" you do it constantly Additionally J doesn't have to be native to Israel it only has to be present at the time of the Israelites for them to have potentially carried it but it is not known what they carried, Could have been E or T also
Third you ignored this in the other thread >>
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Talk of 'real' or 'true' peoples whether they be Jews or any other civilization, nation, or ethnic group is spurious nonsense by polemicists with a certain line of propaganda to push.
====================
There is no "ancient Hebrew" DNA available. There is Levantine ancDNA from various eras and sites. None can be identified as "Hebrew". ancDNA doesn't speak any language.
DNA of any variety is no guarantee of Jewishness. For over 1500 years and in every Jewish ethnic community with a thousand years of continuity a Jew is defined as:
one born of a Jewish mother
one who converts to Judaism per halakha.
Imma (mother) Sarah was the first female convert just as father Abraham was the first male convert. They converted to 'proto-Judaism' (list item 2). She mothered the seed of Abraham.
All seed fulfill the list item 1 requirement. Their mothers are 'Jewish' because converted by father or else born of a Jewish womb themselves.
Rebecca mothered her cousin Isaac's seed.
Jacob's cousins Rachel and Leah along with their handmaid kin Bilhah and Zilpah mothered his seed.
Jacob's sons' seed is of nuclear family 'sisters' else converted southeast Levantines, Egyptians, foreigners nationalized as Egyptian whether of Sudan, northern Africa, or Arabian Plate antecedents.
Pedigree to Sarah is an impossibility as her female line does not go down to the Tribes. Nor can any Jew trace mothers back to Ribh*qah. Same for Rahhel, Le'ah, Bil*hah and Zil*pah too. Nonetheless these are the Mothers of Israel we remember in our prayer service and lamentations.
After the Three Patriarchs Israels quit in-family marriage. But remember even Grandfather Abraham had an Egyptian pilegesh. Yosef son of Ya`aqob/Yisra'el married an Egyptian. Right there at Israel's beginnings, even before the Exodus it's seen Israelites weren't biological purity obsessed Nazis.
Upon Exodus an entourage known as the `ereb rab joined the descendants of Jacob/Israel and they too are among the first members of `Am Yisra'el the Nation/Peoplehood of Israel. No holy scripture record was kept as to which post-Exodus 'Members of the Tribe' i.e., Israelites/Jews, come from this so-called "Mixed Multitude" lineage.
Moishe Rabbeynu himself is censured by his sister Miriam because "he did marry a Kushite". Torah knows no other wife than Qeturah of Midian and Nakh twins Midian with Kushan.
The ancient Israelites, whether tribal or of the Kingdoms of Judah or Israel, mated with every people they met and the Levant is nexus for three continents. The Rabbi's say one reason for our Exile is to spread 'the Jewish Idea' --a concept/book of/by R Meir Kahane (z"l)-- among the nations of the World.
Consequently all ethnic Jewish communities, and especially those outside Eress, are composed of a core of former Judaean citizenry who made righteous converts and took them on as spouses. The Rabbis admonish not to oppress the convert or throw conversion up in converts' faces. They say those questioning others' Jewish identity and obsess over it "stigmatize others with one's own blemish."
====================
What HaShem, the Eternal One of Israel, wants of Israelites is Tiyqqun `Olam, making planet Earth a better place to live and implementing solutions for social ills. That is our mission.
Israel was told haMashiahhwill come in his time. Either haMashiahh will come because we K*lal Yisra'el compel him due to adhering to Torah Law, its Talmudhic interpretation and rulings, and the halakhoth determined by local temporal rabbis. Else in his time because the world has sunk into its lowest common denominator.
In every generation there is one worthy to be haMashiahh. It's that our inadequacies prevent his announcement. Knowing human nature it'll take the eschatology before he comes.
Israel's spiritual concern is not salvation. "All Israel have a share in The World to Come."
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@the lioness
We've been over this. You're playing dumb now. Proto-Semites had Haplogroup E, which logically means the Israelites would have had a subclade of E. Genetic fact.
J was NOT found in Levantine specimens during the neolithic transition, and J is not a subclade of E.
Genetecists say J is not afro-asiatic, and assimilated into afro-asiatic culture and adopted the customs.
This ain't rocket science, you just don't want to admit you are wrong.
Posts: 2696 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
stop spamming the thread with all those graphics. This is not a DNA thread. You have already posted that about 20 times in other threads. I already addressed it over and over again. You are the most repetitious poster ever in Egyptsearch. It shows lack of confidence relying on that much graphics and overbearing thick headed repetition and constantly ignoring valid argument
message to self: stop replying to TazarahPosts: 43122 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: [QB] See? Unlike Sennacherib who indisputably depicts ancient Jews our melanophobe polemicist is forced to admit any Israelite identity of anyone on Shalmanessar's stone is questionable.
you do the same thing, of all the numerous books and articles you have not produced any reference for your similar polemical-ish exclusions of those ear flap dudes as non-Lachishians.
.
NO no no
I'd polemical if I ignored the porters as one recognizable element of the overall picture of conquest and deport including all involved.
Surely you don't imagine material goods spoils like copper ingots weren't part of a conqueror's looting, that soldiers weren't expecting pillaged loot as a bonus on top of salary?
=======================
Aw c'mon.
I present unbiasedly from all ends others present their narrow ethnocentric stuff only they suppress ignore or wish away the obvious diversity
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: [QB] See? Unlike Sennacherib who indisputably depicts ancient Jews our melanophobe polemicist is forced to admit any Israelite identity of anyone on Shalmanessar's stone is questionable.
you do the same thing, of all the numerous books and articles you have not produced any reference for your similar polemical-ish exclusions of those ear flap dudes as non-Lachishians.
.
I do something I strongly urge you to do more of.
I examine the primary document and draw my conclusions therefrom and unlike your approved sources don't see-but-don't-see certain phenotypes and facial profiles and accoutrements for other than what they are.
The sooner you do that the sooner you can speak from experienced authority. Universities don't grant honorary degrees as a joke or for nothing.
Most important and what ethnocentric polemicists and amateur forum debaters don't understand but really need to is Even opposing views can be valid when supported by solid evidence.
Once understood, discussion can replace debate.
In a discussion evryone's a winner. Debates demand winners and losers determined solely by popularity.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: @the lioness
You have never had to correct or put into context any of the ancient images, murals, etc., that I've posted and shared.
To the contrary there is no basis to claim those brick maker figures at Rekhmire are Israelites Ask Tukuler about it Those are Christian archeologists trying to project
.
Nah, don't ask me. Compare Rekhmire's date against Israelite dates.
It's not about personality. It's about what I base myself on.
The importance of Rekhmire's tribute procession actually brought by the tribute peoples themselves is weightier than these masons who are abused by various parties pushing myopic ethnocentric views.
posted
Sometimes these debates about the eventual color and phenotype of ancient Israelites, Semites and Levantines turn into something like this. It seems some people are just hell bent on placing "negroids" not only in Africa but in the Levant and surrounding lands too. Some others go even further and wanting to place them in Europe, ancient America and nearly everywhere on Earth.
Obviously one or another black person would have sat his foot in the Levant, for example during Roman and Byzantine periods. There were always slaves and other foreigners present.
The picture depicts two workers at the building of Babels tower arguing about something, a representation of the splitting of languages and cultures the tower came to represent.
I can add that most other figures on the mosaics in this synagogue represent the lighter of the two
Maybe we just have to collect all pictures who can be said to represent ancient and old times Levantines, Semites or Jews and count how many look like Jews and other Levantines look today and how many can be regarded as "negroid". That combined with anthropological studies and DNA can maybe give us a hint.
It can also be noteworthy than in the areas (outside Africa) where those ancient negroids shall have lived today the majority population is not negroid. That must also be taken into consideration. All peoples did not suddenly change color at some arbitrary point in time.
I hope the thread can resume it´s subject about ancient and historical pictures of Israelites, Semites and Levantines.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2878 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
See there What's the first thing out the melanphobe polemicist's mouth
negroid
Anti-black raving can't bury less lone alter one fact presented in this thread as to Jewish identity of Sennacherib's Lachish captives versus the internal primary document evidence Shalmanessar's stone shows non-native reps bearing foreign tribute.
Who believes the people in row three are Egyptian? The same who believe Yehu's on the Black Obelisk. They believe (faith) they don't think (discipline).
For the above poster everything comes down to hatred toward Africa and black peoples.
We've looked at the docs with no mention of Africa or a black race stock or breed
For the race conscious we've presented the oldest known physical Jewish type citing Cassius Dio in Roman History 37.17.1 observing "... other men, who, although of a different race, have adopted the laws of the people." which explains why these centiuries later images look less like the oldest ones ie the Jews of Lachish Judah's 2nd largest city.
posted
I am rather sure that at least some posters (Tazarah) would have celebrated the sculpture head if it had been what he always calls "negroid", then there would have been no doubts in his mind. But because it is not black he doubts it.
The only thing we for certain knows that it is found in what is today Israel and is dated to 9th century. We also know it looks like many other depections of Semites including Jehu on the Black obelisk.
I am also quite sure that some posters would have more easily acknowledged the Jehu figure on the obelisk if it had looked stereotypical "negroid".
I smell some agenda by certain posters.
I do indeed not hate Africa or it´s peoples, I just see it as disingenuous to try to place black people in all sorts of ancient environments (outside Africa) where they never where in any sort of majority, or in some places where they never had any presence at all (as those who try to place black African in precolumbian Americas). It is like Eurocentrism in blackface.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2878 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Never saw that coin before! Totally a Hebrew nose lol
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic