The rulers of the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Romans were
contemporaries with the Meroitic Period. In the third century BC, they
maintained friendly relations.
From the end of the 3rd century to the middle of the 2nd century BC,
the Ptolemies occupied a part of Nubia that they called
Dodekaschoinos, which was in the Northern part of Lower Nubia (from
Aswan to Maharaqa). In this area they built many important temples
such as Philae, Kalabsha, Dakka, etc.
In 30 BC, the Ptolemies were replaced by the Romans.
Mummy Koshtamna, Nubia
Statue of Roman Soldier , Philae, Nubia http://www.numibia.net/nubia/ptolemies.asp
===================================================
>"Jewish Life in Ancient Egypt: A Family Archive from the Nile Valley"
>Edward Bleiberg, PhD, Brooklyn Museum of Art
>Thursday, April 29, 2004, 6:30pm
>Mary Gates Hall, Room 389, University of Washington campus
>Admission: FREE.
>
>About the Presentation
>
>This presentation focuses on the private lives of the Jewish temple
official Ananiah, son of Azariah, and his Egyptian wife, Tamut, who
both lived on Elephantine Island in the late 5th century BCE during
Persian rule. Included in the discussion are the arrival of Jews in
Egypt after the destruction of Solomons Temple and the type of
Judaism they practiced.
>Ananiah and Tamuts family life is discussed from their marriage in
447 BCE to the final payment on their daughters bride gift in 402
BCE. In-between these events we learn about marriage, labor
conditions, real estate, and burial in a multi-cultural community of
Egyptians, Jews and Persians.
>
>About the Speaker
>
>Edward Bleiberg is Associate Curator in the Department of Egyptian,
Classical and Ancient Middle Eastern Art at the Brooklyn Museum of
Art. He earned his PhD from the University of Toronto in Egyptology.
He is organizing the tour for the exhibition Jewish Life in Ancient
Egypt and is the author of The Official Gift in Ancient Egypt,
Ancient Egypt 2615-332 BCE, and the exhibition catalog Jewish Life in
Ancient Egypt.
>
>Cosponsors
>The Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilization, the Jewish
Studies Program, the Comparative Religion Program, and the Burke
Museum of Natural History and Culture.
>
>
>For further information contact:
>
>Scott Noegel
>Dept. Near Eastern Languages & Civilizations
>University of Washington
>Box 353120
>Seattle, WA 98195
>
>Office: 206-543-3606
>Dept: 206-543-6033
>FAX: 206-685-7936
>http://faculty.washington.edu/snoegel/
===================================================
Bahri Mamluks
A succession of strong Mamluk sultans, originally Mamluk slaves
based on barracks in Rhoda Island and hence named Bahri (Arabic for
river), who took over control of Egypt and Syria from 1250 to 1382
A.D. Their reign was characterized by relative stability and
prosperity on the internal arena and powerful military control on
the external level defeating enemy threats.
http://www.aucegypt.edu/walking_tours/cairo/glossary/glossary.html
===================================================
From the cemetary at Mallawi [near Beni Suef] which was once the
location of a Roman garrison.
Page 45
Rosalie David Handbook to Life in Ancient Egypt
==================================================
Minshah (Ptolemais)
In Graeco-Roman times the city of Ptolemais, in Middle Egypt, was the
second or third most important city in Egypt. The remain of Ptolemais
are now buried under the modern town of Minshah, but even on the
modern rubbish dump remains of the ancient city can be found, like
this pillar fragment: Not only on the rubbish dump, but
everywhere in Minshah remnants of its former glory can be seen poking
through the surface, as is true for many places in Egypt. Here two
different types of grinding-stones can be seen laying in one of the
squares of the town with a decorated pillar capital lurking in the
background:
Objective of visit: To evaluate the possibilities for
archaeological fieldwork in Minshah (Ptolemais).
Date of visit: February 2002.
Fellow visitors: Willeke Wendrich.
Results: A concise report and photo-CD.
Approximate position and date of the site: Minshah is
located in Middle Egypt, on the west bank of the Nile about 15 km.
south of Sohag and 120 km. north of Luxor. The remains of Ptolemais,
once one of the most important cities in Egypt, are covered
completely by this modern village. Literary sources indicate that the
ancient city must date to at least the Ptolemaic period (3rd century
BC - 1st century AD), but it was probably also active before and
after that.
Short description of the site: Minshah is a small town with
narrow, unpaved streets. Most older buildings are nicely designed and
well maintained and the streets are kept very clean. The higher,
central parts of the town (the kom or tell) are littered with ancient
worked stones, often moved to the corners of buildings to protect
them from the traffic in the street. In other places ancient remains
can still be seen in situ.
Additional remarks: This work would not have been
possible without the indirect support of the Berenike Project http://www.archbase.com/berenike/index.html and the help of several
individuals, among which Joe Manning.
HOME http://www.barnard.nl/fotos.html http://www.barnard.nl/egypt/index.html http://www.barnard.nl/egypt/index.html http://www.barnard.nl/fotos.html http://www.barnard.nl/fotos.html BACK http://www.barnard.nl/egypt/index.html http://www.barnard.nl/egypt/minshah.htm
===================================================
Minshah (Ptolemais]
====================================================
The mile-wide necropolis falls mostly within the present village of
Qurna,inhabited by the desendants of Horobat warrior who have
arrived to settle there in the thirteenth century as tomb robbers,an
occupation many still follow.
page XXIII
Shahhat,an Egyptian by Richard Critchfield
==================================================
In addition to roman high officals,occupying the important
administrative posts in Alexzandria and in the larger towns,and to
more numerous mirrior functionannes,one must also distinguish from
the indigenous populations the Greeks,established in Egypt before the
Ptolomies,and the war veterns. often of diverse origins to whom lands
had been granted . Some of these latter,at Faiyum or Antione,may have
been Romans;others ---as for example ;at Ahnas El medinehin Upper
Egypt--originally came from Palmyra. All brought with them their own
customs ,and doubtless their own relgions,which can be
idenitfied ,even when became intergrated with the relgions of the
country,as is evident at Ahnas El Medineh;
1. E. Drioton 'Art syrien et art copte;B.S.A.C. III 1937 ,pp 29-40
page 72
Du Bourguet, Pierre M., The Art of the Copts. Art of the World
series, New York, Crown Publishers, 1971.
===================================================
Arab colonization began with the conquest ,and was encouraged by the
Ummayyad Caliphs,notably by Hisham[reigned 724-43],who in 727
authorized the planned migration and settlement of several thousand
Arabs of the Yemenite tribe of Qays in the Nile Valley. During the
eight century and ninth century large numbers of Arab
tribesmen,mainly of Yemenite origin,migrate to Egypt,where many of
them settled on land.
page 457
Harris, J R, ed. (1971) The legacy of Egypt. Oxford
===================================================
One old man with long hair and a white beard ,who had been a member
of the local community of foreign Christains which had established
itself near the temple of Philae,is the oldest example and one of the
best illustrations of a case of gout;enormous whitish concretions of
urate of lime had gathered on his feet,especially round his big toe
and also at the ankle ,while chalky ,masses could still be seen
deforming his knee-caps and ankles.
page 43
Ange-Pierre Leca: The Egyptian Way of Death: Mummies and the Cult of
the Immortal
Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, 1981. Reveals the beliefs,
techniques and rituals comprising the elaborate process of
mummification. 292 pages
===================================================
But more importantly he was able to idenity at Nebeira the site of
the ancient city of Naucratis ,which in the reign of Amasis in the
Twenty-six Dyansty[570-526 B.C.] had been granted a monopoly of Greek
trading in Egypt.
page 33
Ancient Egypt
The Land and Legacy
T.G.H. James
copyright @ 1988
First Unversity of Texas Press Paperback Printing,1990
==================================================
Glazed from the decorative scheme used probabaly in the throne room
of the palace of King Rameses III at Tell el-Yahudiya. It shows a
bound Libyan captive.
page 30
Ancient Egypt
The Land and Legacy
T.G.H. James
copyright @ 1988
First Unversity of Texas Press Paperback Printing,1990
==================================================
There is another good reason for pausing at Kom Aushim;it is the site
of one of the many towns founded in the Faiyum province during the
Ptolemaic Period. here at Karanis it is still possible to walk along
streets,to step into houses,to saunter in squares,as one can never do
in the Nile valley itself. For this was a town which fell into disuse
and was abandoned in the later Roman Period,to be revealed in modern
times by excavations of the Unversity of Michigan.Like its
foundation here and elsewhere in Egypt,Karanis was essentially a
Greek-speaking towns. On its hieght at Kom Aushim,Karanis lies
approximatley at sea-leavel,but when it was founded,like man of its
fellow,it lay on the edge of the lake ,which at that time was about
six feet below sea-level. it
page 61
Ancient Egypt
The Land and Legacy
T.G.H. James
copyright @ 1988
First Unversity of Texas Press Paperback Printing,1990
===================================================
A substantial Greek-speaking community exised in Men-nefer,and a
number of mummies incorporating potraits and of portraits taken
from mummies have been found at Saqqara;they probably present us with
the closest we may ever get to the likeness of Memphites.
page
58
Ancient Egypt
The Land and Legacy
T.G.H. James
copyright @ 1988
First Unversity of Texas Press Paperback Printing,1990
==================================================
Although at the end of the Dyanstic period and in Graeco-Roman times
Saqarra was a bustling place throughout the year with constant
pilgrimages to many shrines ,were troubled souls sought comfort from
the mysteries and incubation treatments available and processions and
very occasionally an Apis funeral as special entertainment,the
district was also probably rather ran down suffering from the
excessive usage of almost three thousand years. To some extent its
bustle its bustle reflected the busy life of the city of Men-
nefer,which remained the most important centre of commerce and
administration untill it was supersededby Alexzandria. It was
huge,amorphus,rambling place,with large ''ghettoes'' made over for
foregin communities---for Greeks,for Jews,for Carians,for
Phonecians.Apart from itws temples it probabaly had few imposing
buildings,and was mostly made up of warren-like districts of narrow
streets and three-storey houses where collapse and rebuilding went
on continuously:unsanitary,smelly,dusty or muddy according to the
season,but full of life and interest.
page 46
Ancient Egypt
The Land and Legacy
T.G.H. James
copyright @ 1988
First Unversity of Texas Press Paperback Printing,1990
===================================================
Al-Qahira
Literally meaning "the Victorious" , al-Qahira was Egypt's fourth
Islamic capital after al-Fustat, al-Askar and al-Qataii. Al-Qahira
is today called Cairo among English speakers. The fortified princely
city built by the Fatimids in 969 A.D. and completed in 971 A.D. was
divided in four quarters by the Fatimid army, and encompassing
communities of Greeks, ethnic Europeans, Armenians, Berbers, Sudanese
and Turks. The core of the city Bayn al-Qasrayn ("Between the Two
Palaces") was a square separating the Eastern and Western palace that
was halfway along its main street (Now Sharia al-Muizz - Walk 1) that
stretched from Bab al-Futuh North to Bab Zuwayla South.
http://www.aucegypt.edu/walking_tours/cairo/glossary/glossary.html
===================================================
Ottomans
Western Asian tribes of Turkomen who besieged Costantinople and
established themselves as a powerful empire in present day Turkey
during the 15th century. The Ottoman Regime in Egypt went on from
1517 to 1800 A.D. Egypt, governed by a succession of appointed
viceroys who bore the title "Pasha", became a dependent province on
the greater Turkish empire in Istanbul.
http://www.aucegypt.edu/walking_tours/cairo/glossary/glossary.html
===================================================
Burgi Mamluks (Circassian)
The turbulent Circassian Mamluk regime that took over the Bahri
Mamluks from 1382 to 1517 A.D. was also known as Burgi Mamluk since
they were based in the towers (Burg) of the Citadel. The reign was
characterized by epidemic outbreaks, heavy taxation to make up for
the decline in revenues that followed the discovery of a new trade
route to India.
===================================================
James Wellard, in _Lost Worlds of Africa_ believes that "millions" of
European slaves were brought into N. Egyptian and other N. African
ports during the Muslim period. Add to this the migrations of Greeks,
Latins, Vandals, etc., and you get a very mixed lot
===================================================
''.......The equation of 'Copt' with 'Christain' is only valid in Egypt after the Arab conquest. Up to that time many monuments were of Christain inspiration,but on one hand numerous Coptic Fellaheen and other Egyptians were still pagans,and on the other hand many Greek residents ,for example,perhaps pagans themselves,had become assimilated to the autochtthonous population,especially in Middle and Upper Egypt........'''
page 20
Art of the World
P.M. Du Bourghet
The Art of the Copts
[This message has been edited by ausar (edited 27 June 2004).]
quote:
Originally posted by neo*geo:
Egyptians have always managed to absorb foriegners. Do you know why this is ausur?
This is one of the things that have set AE apart from other Civilizations of time, accepting foreigners even as rulers. As has been said previously on this board, Egyptians saw themselves superior (in a socio-political sense rather than physical) to others, which means the code of conduct. As long as foreigners adopted their law of the land, they were welcomed. In other words, whatever your nationality, as long as you converted to Egyptian and followed their customs, you were seen Egyptian. This in some ways, was done to strengthen the empire or dynasty, because now you have more people on your side, conducting themselves as Egyptians, and seeing Egyptian enemies as their enemies!
[This message has been edited by supercar (edited 26 June 2004).]
I seriously doubt the Egyptians "converted" the Arab conquerers to Islam, or "converted" the Roman Conquerers to Christianity. They were seen as Egyptians because they colonized Egypt. The same way European are seen as South Africans, instead of Europeans, and the same for the Austrailians, and Americans..you get the point.
quote:
I seriously doubt the Egyptians "converted" the Arab conquerers to Islam, or "converted" the Roman Conquerers to Christianity. They were seen as Egyptians because they colonized Egypt. The same way European are seen as South Africans, instead of Europeans, and the same for the Austrailians, and Americans..you get the point.
Supercar,was talking about prior to the Arabic invasion into Egypt.
Most historians would have you believe the indigenous Upper Egyptians just allowed everybody to invade them without much resistance. The Upper Egyptians especially around the area of modern Luxor fought the Ptolomeics to the point that many pharoahs independtly ruled from modern day Luxor in Upper Egypt. The resistance to rebel invaders is well documented in the texts of the Demotic Chroncile and the Potter's Oracle.
Previously,a rogue pharoah named Khabash from Upper Egypt over threw the Persian rule for about a year. Persians soon seized his throne and resumed rulership.
The Christain population in Egypt which consituted mostly of foreginers easily gave up to the invading Arabs. The indigenous Fellahin in the countryside continued for ages doing the same thing most have up even untill today.Most of the Arabs ruled from Al-Fustat while the peasents were nearly taxed to death. Some had to sell their children into slavery the taxiation was so terrible. Many revolts occured in Upper and Lower Egypt in the rural countryside.
quote:
Originally posted by homeylu:
This is like saying West Africans accepted colonization, because they foreign rulers and hence appreciated them for adapting their African customs.
Egypt was conquered, and that took place namely by military force. And I'm sure the average Egyptian had no choice other than to surrender to their authority, like it or not.
Actually you totally missed my point. In fact, I was implying the opposite. In my comment, when I said Egyptians accepted foreign people who converted to Egyptian and adopted the Egyptian customs, I was talking about mainly captives or foreign slaves, and to some extent foreign traders. In those times, in Egypt if those foreigners followed Egyptian code of conduct, and worked their way up to high level positions (perhaps even as a Pharaoh), they were respected as "Egyptians". This was the point I was trying to make, without going into detail. As you know, after some time Egyptians integrated captives into the society and even on occasions granted them land. This is different from the comparison you made of South Africa, Australia, and so forth. In those countries, the conquerors became rulers, but they never adopted the customs of the defeated people. In fact, they forced the defeated population to adopt to their rules, not the other way around. In Egypt, before the decline of the dynastic period, like Ausur correctly observed, the foreign leader was only welcomed so long as he/she was Egyptian not only in name, but also in his/her beliefs and customs.
[This message has been edited by homeylu (edited 27 June 2004).]
quote:I think he did a pretty good job of explaining things.
Originally posted by neo*geo:
Egyptians have always managed to absorb foriegners. Do you know why this is ausur?
quote:To conquer this fraud discourse you *must* stop repeating the fallacious terms of Eurocentrists.
It's always interesting to me how the darker Egyptians with the so-called "kinky" hair are always referred to as Nubian, whilst the lighter "white" or almost white Egyptians are never referred to as Libyan or anything foreign, even though the Egyptians clearly depict the differences between foreigners and themselves.
quote:They might say something to the tune of "well sure, there were of course plenty of nubians in, but Egyptians weren't nubians, the majority of nubians were concentrated in the South of Egypt, and to the South of Egypt."
Originally posted by rasol:
There is no *nubian* people in Kemetic history.
In Eurocentric pseudo-history Nubian is an apolegia term for anything undeniably Black African.
If you doubt the purely racist nature of this - ask Nubian-ologists to identify the Black African Egyptians.
For them, there are *not any*, not one, nor can there be any - since to identify Black - is to identify Nubian and therefore *disqualify Egyptian.*
quote:^In this reguard Eurcentrism has lost all credibility. I could post citations concerning their affinities with their Southern neighbors to this reguard.
to identify Nubian and therefore *disqualify Egyptian.*
quote:
Originally posted by Alive-(What Box):
quote:Dude are you sure about that?
Originally posted by AMR1:
Egypt for the last 10000 years is the same Egypt, today and the past.
quote:2 million to 7 million? But that's not all ..
The population of ancient Egypt varied greatly during its history. Some scholars estimate that only a few hundred thousand people lived in Egypt during the Predynastic period (about 5000-3000 bc). Others believe, based on archaeological evidence and reevaluations of how many people the floodplains could support at the time, that the area had a much higher population. In any case, the population had probably risen to close to 2 million during the Old Kingdom (about 2575-2134 bc). It increased during the Middle Kingdom (about 2040-1640 bc), and by the New Kingdom (about 1550-1070 bc) the population had grown to between 3 and 4 million. This figure almost doubled under Hellenistic rule (332-30 bc), with perhaps as many as 7 million people inhabiting the country at the time it was annexed to the Roman Empire.
quote:http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/794/sc6.htm
The most obvious feature of Egypt's population problem is the continued increase in the population growth rate. Our numbers have doubled from 2.5 million in 1800 to 5 million in 1850, then to 10 million in 1900, and again to 20 million in 1947. This means that the Egyptian population has doubled once every fifty years over one and half centuries (1800-1950). It took a mere 30 years for the number to double the fourth time around: from 20 million in 1950 to 40 million in 1978. The increase resumed again until the population reached nearly sixty million, according to the 1996 census. Finally by January, 2006, Egypt`s population had reached nearly 71.348 million inhabitants and is expected to continue rising throughout the 21st century.
Egypt's current population, at least as of 1996, is over 58.5 million.
The majority of Kmtwy were upper Egyptians.
The majority of Egypt's population today are in Lower Egypt.
The people are still there, but their language and culture have been replaced.
quote:Bad comment. (
Originally posted by AMR1:
Egypt for the last 10000 years is the same Egypt, today and the past.)
Especially if Egypt's population really did double under Hellenistic rule.
The Greeks even barred native Egyptians from going in certain areas and palaces in the Delta, and this is around the same time that Alexander the Great's army is pillaging and raping.
quote:I am somewhat cautious of these claims. It sounds like another excuse for people to explain away the Upper Egyptians black looks as being 'foreign'. Although I don't doubt the possiblity, I do question the numbers of these immigrants you cite and I especially question your claims that some of these were slaves!
Originally posted by Khadary:
Ausar, I just came to know last year that some Egyptians have originated from Somalia as recently as at the time of Sultan Barquq.
According to Coptic historical document, these Somalis are member of great Darod clan of Somalia and their number is between 3 to 5 million.
They are known as Jabartis.
There are also some Aswanians who have been identified as Somalis of the Hawiye clan, through DNA test and they seem to have been brought to Egypt as slaves. Their arrival there might not be before the 15th century and I have no idea their number.
What do you know about these people?.specially the last group the Aswanian Somalis?.Do you know any books that have been written about them?.
quote:It's interesting that this is noted. There is a distinction made between the typical "Middle Eastern" person (aka Turk and their analogs) and the native inhabitants.
1879 - “If you have no wind you lie in the river and watch the idle flapping of the sail and the crowd of black and brown fellahs howling for baksheesh…” from Around the World with General Grant : A Narrative of the Visit of General U.S. Grant, Ex-President of the United States to Various Countries in Europe , Asia and Africa in 1877, 1878, 1879 published by John Russell Young, Volume I 1879.
1899 - About the city of Cairo and it’s fair-skinned Turks and its native Arab fellaheen “east of this line 500,000 brown skinned Arabs are living in the quaintest and most delightful, but at the same time dirtiest and most dilapidated streets.. Cairo has a population of some 600,000 inhabitants” p. 74 from The Redemption fo Egypt by William Basil Worsfold published in 1899 by G. Allen.
quote:Egypt was not needed by the Greeks for anything else other than wheat. The mainland of Greece is rocky land that doesn't have large areas that can be used for growing wheat or other grains. The Italian peninsula is very similar hence why the Romans needed Egypt.
Dubious. Egypt was not "Hellenised" by selling wheat to Greece.
quote:Random authors and articles. Religious articles describing Sodom think some major environmental event happened around 1200BC.
Who are these "some" that supposedly "say"?
quote:Ptolemy was only one of many Generals. Yes they did have absolute power hence monarchs. But Ptolemy and most of the others ran city affairs similar to the way Constitutional Monarchies are run today. Beneath the monarch is a system of Democracy dealing with day to day issues. Or should I say bureaucracy rather than democracy? In any case it was more a system of bureaucracy that was part of the previous Democracies.
More dubious. If Greece was "different" why did the Greek Ptolemies declare themselves pharaohs? They ran no "polis state".. They ran a full-fledged monarchy not a Greek style democracy..
quote:Nationalisation means One Race, Religion and Culture. When you look at all the Nations around the period of 1800-1900 most of them had formed borders based on their Race, Religion and Culture. That norm of Nationalising did not occur in many places where populations were mixed but usually such places focused on Religious unity eg Islamic states, Christian states etc. Egypt for example did not Nationalise because it was always a meeting point between Africa, Europe and Asia. The Nationalisation of Egypt occured late in the 1955-1970's when it was declared an Islamic Arabic State.
Egypt was a national entity for thousands of years. How exactly would them "nationalising" mean they were not "true" Egyptian?
quote:Wiki Greek Egyptians
The exodus of Greeks from Egypt started during and after the revolution of 1952. With the establishment of the new sovereign regime of Gamal Abdel Nasser and the subsequent nationalisation of many industries from 1957 and afterwards, thousands Greeks had to abandon the country. Many of them have immigrated to Australia, the United States and Greece. Many Greek schools, churches, small communities and institutions have subsequently closed. The Nasser regime was a major disaster for the Greek diaspora which afterwards has dwindled from many thousands to a handful. The dangerous situation in the Middle East has also deteriorated the conditions for the Greeks that stayed back in Egypt. It is estimated that between 1957 - 1962 almost 70% of the Egyptiot Greeks have left the country.
quote:
Originally posted by alTakruri:
Nationalized foreigners in ancient Egypt on tomb paintings?
http://thenile.phpbb-host.com/ftopic394.php
quote:?
Originally posted by qiuyeanwen:
The past the egyptians is
quote:
Originally posted by userman:
Stanley Crouch
The Afrocentric Hustle
Though their claims have little intellectual substance, advocates of Afrocentrism press their agenda by appealing to resentment and guilt.
Our democracy is founded in tragic optimism, an acceptance of human frailty that is not defeatist. Like the blues singer, our American job is to address the universal limitations of life and the foibles of human character while asserting a lyrical but unsentimental high-mindedness. Like the doctor, our democracy must face the unavoidable varieties of disease, decay, and death, yet maintain
commitment to birth, to health, to the infinite possibilities and freedoms that can result from successful research and experimentation.
It is, therefore, our democratic duty to cast a cold eye on the life of our policies. We have to weed out corruption whenever we encounter it and redeem ourselves from bad or naive policy, either by making fresh experiments or by returning to things that once worked but were set aside for new approaches that promised to do the job better. If we don’t accept these democratic duties, we will continue to allow intellectual con artists and quacks to raise their tents and hang their shingles on our campuses.
The emergence of Afrocentrism has revealed a continuing crisis in the intellectual assessment of race, history, and culture in our nation. It is another example of how quickly we will submit to visions that are at odds with the heroic imperative of uniting our society. Quite obviously, when it comes to skin tone and complaint, we remain ever gullible, willing to sponsor almost any set of conceptions that makes fresh accusations against our society. In that sense, Afrocentrism is also a commentary on the infinite career possibilities of our time. Just as almost anything can be sold as art, almost any idea capable of finding a constituency can make its way onto our campuses and into our discussions of policy.
In the interest of doing penance, we will accept a shaky system of thought if it makes use of the linguistic pressure points that allow us to experience the sadomasochistic rituals we accept in place of the hard study and responsible precision that should be brought to the continuing assessment of new claims and new ideas. Our desperate good will pushes us to pretend that these flagellation rituals have something to do with facing the facts about injustice in our country and in the history of the world. The refusal to accept the tragic fundamentals of human life has led to our bending before a politics of blame in which all evil can be traced to the devil’s address, which is, in some way, the address of the privileged and the successful. We have borrowed from the realm of therapy the idea that our parents are to blame for our problems, and projected it onto the larger society, absolving the so-called oppressed from responsibility for their actions. We don’t understand—as did the geniuses who shaped the Constitution—that we must always be so cynical about new ways of abusing power that we remain ever wary of intellectual and political pollution.
As a movement, Afrocentrism is another of the clever but essentially simple-minded hustles that have come about over the last 25 years, promoted by what was once called “the professional Negro”—a person whose “identity” and “struggle” constituted a commodity. James Baldwin was a master of the genre, as a writer, public speaker, and television guest, but he arrived before his brand of engagement by harangue was institutionalized. Now, as for most specious American ideas claiming to “get the story straight,” the best market for this commodity is our universities, where it sells like pancakes, buttered by the naive indignation of students and sweetened by gushes of pitying or self-pitying syrup.
Though at its core Afrocentrism has little intellectual substance, it has benefited from the overall decline of faith that has caused intellectuals to fumble the heroic demands of our time. The discontinuity of ideals and actions and the long list of atrocities committed in the name of God and country have convinced many Western intellectuals that the only sensible postures are those of the defeatist and the cynic. Like the tenured Marxist, the Afrocentrist will use the contradiction to define the whole; he or she asserts that Western civilization, for all its pretty ideas, is no more than the work of imperialists and racists who seek an invincible order of geopolitical domination, inextricably connected to profit and exploitation of white over black. The ideals of Western democracies that have struggled to push their policies closer to the universal humanism of the Enlightenment are scoffed at. Where the Marxist looks forward to a sentimental paradise of workers uber alles, the Afrocentrist speaks of a paradise lost and the possibility of a paradise regained—if only black people will rediscover the essentials of their African identity.
For all its pretensions to expanding our vision, the Afrocentrist movement is not propelled by a desire to bring about any significant enrichment of our American culture. What Afrocentrists almost always want is power—the power to be the final arbiter of historical truth, no matter how flimsy their case might be. Like most conspiracy theorists, Afrocentrists accept only their own sources of argument and “proof”; all else is defined as either willfully flawed or brought to debate solely to maintain a vision of history and ideas in which Europe is preeminent. Thus, the worst insult is that critics are “Eurocentric.” Further, when charged with shoddy scholarship, the Afrocentrist retorts that his purportedly revolutionary work uses means of research and assessment outside “European methodology.” However superficial that defense might seem, an important tradition in our country’s history makes it seem at least plausible at first glance. Americans have, from the sciences to the arts, as often as not had to invent the forms that allowed for the purest expressions of our political imagination, national sensibility, and multiethnic history. The Gettysburg
Address, the Second Inaugural of March 1865, the electric fight, the phonograph, the motion picture camera, the grammar of film, and the improvisational riches of jazz are the creations of homegrown geniuses such as Lincoln, Edison, Griffith, and Armstrong, who made it abundantly clear that the academy isn’t the only path to grand accomplishment.
Jazz is one of the most important examples of this. It is a perfectly democratic music that reached its peaks outside of “European methodology. “ It has both intuitive geniuses like Louis Armstrong and Billie Holiday and unarguable intellectuals like Duke Ellington and Dizzy Gillespie. Both were rejected by the academy once upon a twentieth-century time. Those with a simple explanation attribute it all to race, which can by no means be left out of the discussion. But we must remember that white jazz musicians were not embraced either, no matter how popular, and that most major aesthetic movements of this century were controversial worldwide. In short, the academic and critical resistance met by jazz musicians was also met by Picasso, Joyce, and Stravinsky.
Jazz musicians weren’t initially accepted in academic circles because, though they could hear harmonic structures perfectly, the intuitives didn’t use theoretical terminology. The intellectuals could, but it took both to make jazz. The intuitives and the intellectuals had one thing in common, however—the ability to achieve objective aesthetic logic. That is why the music grew with such speed and drew depth and breadth from every kind of talent.
So when Afrocentrists defend low-quality work with assertions about the limitations of “European methodology,” they arc drawing upon the American tradition of achievements in political thought, technology, cinema, and jazz that were developed outside the academy to defend themselves. They ignore, however, the objective quality of those achievements. As Gerald Early points out, Afrocentrists have bootlegged the deconstructionist idea that there is no such thing as objective value; a thing’s “value” is merely the reflection of a cultural consensus.
Afrocentrists also reject education as “Eurocentric indoctrination.” They maintain that Western history as written is an unrelenting cultural war that aims to justify and maintain the subjugation of African peoples, and, when literal subjugation is not the goal, to impose upon them a self-hating idolatry of all that is European or European-derived. Afrocentrism, then, presents itself as ethnic liberation, a circling of the wagons within the academy, a bringing down of Eurocentric authority by black intellectual rebellion.
At the same time, Afrocentrists—like those who promote other protest versions of study—want the respect given to traditional disciplines without having to measure up to the standards of traditional research. Though ever scoffing at the academy, they want the prestige and the benefits that come of being there. Thus, Afrocentrism is the career path of a purported radical who seeks tenure. Its proponents justify this on the grounds that the campaign is at least partially one of evangelizing black people about their African heritage. What better battlegrounds than the campuses of tenuring institutions?
A central tenet of Afrocentrism is that Egypt was black and that Greco-Roman civilization was the result of its influence. The foundation of Western civilization, therefore, is African. This is a relatively sophisticated version of Elijah Muhammad’s Yacub myth in which the white man is invented by a mad black scientist determined to destroy the world through an innately evil creature. Why this obsession with Egypt being African and black? Firstly, monuments. There is no significant African architecture capable of rivaling the grand wonders of the world, European or not. Secondly, Africa has no body of thought comparable to that upon which Western civilization has developed its morality, governmental structures, technology, economic systems, and its literary, dramatic, plastic, and musical arts. None of these facts bespeaks an innate black inferiority, but they were used to justify the barbaric treatment of subject peoples by colonial powers waging ruthless campaigns for chattel labor and natural resources.
In fact, the Afrocentrist argument is not with the Western tradition of inquiry, not with the democratic belief that greatness can arise from any point on the social spectrum, and not with the ideas of the Enlightenment that led to the abolition of slavery. Afrocentrism is a debate with the colonial vision of non-Europeans as inferior that has long been under attack from within Western democracies themselves. The Afrocentrist arguments, which are rooted in nationalism, pluralism, and cultural relativity, have their origins in the Western tradition of critical discourse. Afrocentrism is absolutely Western, despite the name changes and African costumes of its advocates.
Afrocentrism benefits from the obsession with “authenticity” of this mongrel nation of ours. More than a few of us yearn for an aristocratic pedigree. If family won’t do, then we might snatch the unwieldy crown of race to distinguish ourselves. This has been the appeal of both the Ku Klux Man and the Nation of Islam. Membership allows one to rise from the bottom and suddenly become part of an elite. Poor “white trash” become “real” white men when performing violent acts in defense of “white civilization.” Negro criminals, embracing a distorted version of Islam, come to understand that the white man is “the devil” and that the black race is the original parent of humankind. College students swallow Afrocentrism and conclude that all their problems are the result of not possessing an “African-centered” worldview.
These are also responses to humiliation. That humiliation is the source of the hysteria that gives such a terrible aspect to the desire to be done with all niceties, to utterly destroy the structure that has engendered the feeling of inferiority or of helplessly being had from the first encounter up to the present. Such response is an expression of having taken the insults of the opposition too seriously, a retreat from engagement, a dismissal of complexity in favor of the home team, a racial isolationist policy.
To justify the myopic vision that emerges requires a list of atrocities—real, exaggerated, and invented. The great tragedies of the white South were the loss of the Civil War and the humiliations of Reconstruction; for the black nationalist, the great tragedies were slavery, the colonial exploitation of Africa, and the European denial of the moral superiority of African culture and civilization, beginning with Egypt.
Our list of grievances may be specific to our particular ethnic or regional history, but the ideas that lie beneath our response evolved from the conflicts between the French and the Germans following the Thirty Years War. When Frederick the Great invited the French into Germany in the eighteenth century, French culture was the most admired in Europe, while Germany had contributed very little to the Renaissance. In today’s terminology, Germany was “underdeveloped.” Eventually, a whole school of rebellious German thought came into being, attacking the French worship of reason and the idea that there was one cultural standard by which all good, mediocrity, and baseness could be judged. When Isaiah Berlin describes outraged German thinking in The Crooked Timber of Humanity, he could be speaking as easily of Afrocentrism and the cultural relativism that has been absorbed by Western society in general from the discipline of anthropology:
The sages of Paris reduce both knowledge and life to systems of contrived rules, the pursuit of external goods, for which men prostitute themselves, and sell their inner freedom, their authenticity; men, Germans, should seek to be themselves, instead of imitating—aping—strangers who have no connection with their own real natures and memories and ways of life. A man’s powers of creation can only be exercised fully on his own native heath, living among men who are akin to him, physically and spiritually, those who speak his language, amongst whom he feels at home, with whom he feels that he belongs. Only so can true cultures be generated, each unique, each making its own peculiar contribution to human civilization, each pursuing its own values its own way, not to be submerged in some general cosmopolitan ocean which robs all native cultures of their particular substance and colour, of their national spirit and genius, which can only flourish on its own soil, from its own roots, stretching back into a common past.
Afrocentrism’s success is due to the fact that it reiterates those arguments, which have become central to the Western cultural debate. But we fail ourselves if we give in to the idea that because all human communities have equal access to greatness all cultures are equal. They are not, and the ignorance, squalor, and disease of the Third World make that quite obvious, just as the rise of the Third Reich and the recent slide into overt tribalism in Eastern Europe prove that no ideas or traditions make us forever invincible to the barbarian call of the wild. Yet if there were not something intrinsically superior about the way in which the West has gathered and ordered knowledge, other cultures wouldn’t so easily fall under the sway of what André Malraux called “The Temptation of the West.” The West has put together the largest and richest repository of human culture, primarily because the vision of universal humanism and the tradition of scientific inquiry have led to the most impressive investigations into human life and the natural world. It is Western curiosity and the conscience of democracy that have made so many inroads against barbarism within and without.
This is obvious to Afrocentrists, but it is not in their career interests to look with equal critical vision at the West and the rest of the world; it would make things less reducible to soap opera politics, to the maudlin elevation of simplistic good and evil. Then the real question of bringing together one’s ethnic heritage with one’s human heritage would need to be addressed. It wouldn’t be so easy to manipulate the emotions of administrators and insecure students. Embracing a circumscribed ethnic identity wouldn’t be seen as a form of therapy, a born-again experience enabling one to cease being an American shackled by feelings of inferiority and to become a confident, wise African.
The Afrocentrist goal is quite similar to that of the white South in the wake of Reconstruction. Having lost the shooting war, white racists won the policy war, establishing a segregated society in which racial interests took precedence over the national vision of democratic rights. The result was nearly a century of struggle before the Constitution—through blood, thunder, and jurisprudence—took its rightful place as the law of the land, with no states’ rights arguments accepted. Knowingly or not, the Afrocentrist responds to the fact that black nationalists and their “revolutionary” counterparts lost the struggle for the black community in the Sixties. In the wake of submission at a latter-day Appomattox—the dissolution of black nationalism and groups like the Black Panthers—the Afrocentrist wishes to replicate the success of white segregationists. Like the segregationist, the Afrocentrist wants to benefit from the power and prosperity of the country while holding at arm’s length anything incompatible with a vision of race as a social absolute. The Afrocentrist is waging a policy war through a curriculum that preaches perpetual alienation of black and white, no matter how far removed from the truth it may be. By attempting to win the souls of black college students and to fundamentally influence what is taught to black children in public schools, the Afrocentrist seeks a large enough constituency to bring about what white segregationists once promised—a society that is “separate but equal.”
Yet the central failure of Afrocentrism is that it doesn’t recognize what Afro-Americans have done, which is to realize over and over, and often against imposing obstacles, the possibilities inherent in democratic society. Lincoln recognized this when he told his secretary that, given his point of social origin, Frederick Douglass was probably the most meritorious man in the entire United States. Originating in tribes whose levels of sophistication were laughable compared to the best of Europe, black Americans have risen to the top of every profession in our society—as scientists, educators, aviators, politicians, artists, lawyers, judges, athletes, military leaders, and so on.
This achievement was hard-won. At its root was a cultural phenomenon. Instead of expressing their submission to white people by embracing Christianity, as black nationalists always claim, Afro-Americans recognized the extraordinary insights into human frailty that run throughout the Old Testament, and the fact that the New Testament contains perhaps the greatest blues line of all time—”Father, why hast thou forsaken me?” In essence, the harsh insights of the Bible were perfectly compatible with the cold-eyed affirmation of the blues, and from those spiritual and secular foundations an indelibly American sensibility evolved, one perfectly suited to the demands of this society. The result is an incredibly long line of achievements that predate the narrow black nationalism that would segregate the world and its culture into the Eurocentric or Afrocentric, and which are the very best arguments against all forms of prejudice.
We all deny that tradition of hard-won achievement whenever our conciliatory cowardice gets the best of us and we treat black people like spoiled children who shouldn’t be asked to meet the standards that the best of all Americans have met. When the records need to be set straight, set them straight. When there is new information that will enrich our understanding of human grandeur and human folly, make that information part of the ongoing dialogue that has shaped Western civilization’s conscience and will. But we can never forget that our fate as Americans is, finally, collective, and that we fail our mission as a democratic nation whenever we remake the rules or distort the truth in the interest of satisfying a constituency unwilling to assert the tragic optimism so intrinsic to the blues and to the Constitution.
quote:Barry Kemp, "Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation. (2005) Routledge. p. 52-60
Northern Egypt near the Mediterranean shows the same pattern- limb length data puts its peoples closer to tropically adapted Africans that cold climate Europeans
"...sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine.
The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans."
quote:Barry Kemp. (2006) Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization. p. 54
"When the Elephantine results were added to a broader pooling of the physical characteristics drawn from a wide geographic region which includes Africa, the Mediterranean and the Near East quite strong affinities emerge between Elephantine and populations from Nubia, supporting a strong south-north cline."
quote:---Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements
"From the Mesolithic to the early Neolithic period different lines of evidence support an out-of-Africa Mesolithic migration to the Levant by northeastern African groups that had biological affinities with sub-Saharan populations. From a genetic point of view, several recent genetic studies have shown that sub-Sabaran genetic lineages (affiliated with the Y-chromosome PN2 clade; Underhill et al. 2001) have spread through Egypt into the Near East, the Mediterranean area, and, for some lineages, as far north as Turkey (E3b-M35 Y lineage; Cinniogclu et al. 2004; Luis et al. 2004), probably during several dispersal episodes since the Mesolithic (Cinniogelu et al. 2004; King et al. 2008; Lucotte and Mercier 2003; Luis et al. 2004; Quintana-Murci et al. 1999; Semino et al. 2004; Underhill et al. 2001). This finding is in agreement with morphological data that suggest that populations with sub-Saharan morphological elements were present in northeastern Africa, from the Paleolithic to at least the early Holocene, and diffused northward to the Levant and Anatolia beginning in the Mesolithic.
Indeed, the rare and incomplete Paleolithic to early Neolithic skeletal specimens found in Egypt - such as the 33,000-year-old Nazlet Khater specimen (Pinhasi and Semai 2000), the Wadi Kubbaniya skeleton from the late Paleolithic site in the upper Nile valley (Wendorf et al. 1986), the Qarunian (Faiyum) early Neolithic crania (Henneberg et al. 1989; Midant-Reynes 2000), and the Nabta specimen from the Neolithic Nabta Playa site in the western desert of Egypt (Henneberg et al. 1980) - show, with regard to the great African biological diversity, similarities with some of the sub-Saharan middle Paleolithic and modern sub-Saharan specimens.
This affinity pattern between ancient Egyptians and sub-Saharans has also been noticed by several other investigators (Angel 1972; Berry and Berry 1967, 1972; Keita 1995) and has been recently reinforced by the study of Brace et al. (2005), which clearly shows that the cranial morphology of prehistoric and recent northeast African populations is linked to sub-Saharan populations (Niger-Congo populations). These results support the hypothesis that some of the Paleolithic-early Holocene populations from northeast Africa were probably descendents of sub-Saharan ancestral populations...... This northward migration of northeastern African populations carrying sub-Saharan biological elements is concordant with the morphological homogeneity of the Natufian populations (Bocquentin 2003), which present morphological affinity with sub-Saharan populations (Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005).
In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005), in concordance with a process of demie diffusion accompanying the
extension of the Neolithic revolution (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994)."
quote:Authors: Leplongeon, Alice1; Pleurdeau, David2
The Upper Palaeolithic Lithic Industry of Nazlet Khater 4 (Egypt): Implications for the Stone Age/Palaeolithic of Northeastern Africa
Abstract:
Between Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 4 and 2, Northeast Africa witnessed migrations of Homo sapiens into Eurasia. Within the context of the aridification of the Sahara, the Nile Valley probably offered a very attractive corridor into Eurasia. This region and this period are therefore central for the (pre)history of the out-of-Africa peopling of modern humans. However, there are very few sites from the beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic that document these migration events. In Egypt, the site of Nazlet Khater 4 (NK4), which is related to ancient H. sapiens quarrying activities, is one of them. Its lithic assemblage shows an important laminar component, and this, associated with its chronological position (ca. 33 ka), means that the site is the most ancient Upper Palaeolithic sites of this region. The detailed study of the Nazlet Khater 4 lithic material shows that blade production (volumetric reduction) is also associated with flake production (surface reduction). This technological duality addresses the issue of direct attribution of NK4 to the Upper Palaeolithic.
quote:Here is a woman from North Egypt, Cairo who happens to be a trained tour guide in Egyptology.
Originally posted by Hersi_Yusuf:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvJ0F299kFQ&feature=player_embedded
^^
that is video from a Nubian from Egypt saying they were black who is a actual Egyptologist, not some copt who fancies herself a scholar because she doesn't want to be a Arab because their muslim. Besides copts don't have tropical body plans nor a african skull cavity
quote:I feel completed, the rounding up is complete.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
LOL Such overkill for such a little pest like Usedman.
BTW, I'm so glad that the ad spam threads are gone!![]()