Traceless migration? - The archaeological visibility of pastoral nomads in the southern Libyan Desert
Large scale survey and excavations in the southern Libyan Desert carried out since 1980 by multi-disciplinary research projects of the University of Cologne made it possible to register about 2300 sites in an hitherto nearly unknown area. The results allowed for the establishment of a 5000 year long cultural sequence beginning in the 6th millennium BC. Identification of pastoral nomadic activities was possible through the analysis of the excavated sites combined with the results of the large scale surveys. On the site level, structures like fireplaces or watering troughs for animals and of course the archaeological material (pottery, lithics and animal bones) give hints for spatial layout, camp organization and seasonality. On the regional scale, especially the mapping of different pottery design styles provides information about the extension of areas of transhumance. Combined with geoscientific evidence concerning the climatic evolution and the archaeozoological and archaeobotanical data, a rather clear picture of pastoral adaptations in the southern Libyan Desert can be traced. A pastoral way of life started at the end of the 5th millennium BC; cattle herding largely dominated. Increasing aridity then led to a diversification of the herds, small livestock, sheep and goat, were added. During the Handessi Horizon (ca. 2200-1100 BC) a very mobile way of life with large transhumance cycles can be supposed. The pottery indicates not only North-South relations but also contact with the Nubian Nile Valley. Following the symbiosis model, the groups thriving west of the Nile may have been part of the pastoral section of the state of Kerma.
F. Jesse, S. Kröpelin, M. Lange, N. Pöllath & H. Berke On the Periphery of Kerma - The Handessi Horizon in Wadi Hariq, Northwestern Sudan
Abstract Wadi Hariq is a complex valley system in the Northwest Sudan about 400 km west of the Nile. Stratigraphic investigations provide new data on the environmental and climatic history of the present-day hyperarid centre of the southeastern Sahara. Archaeological work there only started at the end of the 1990s, with a survey and excavations carried out as part of the multidisciplinary research project ACACIA of the University of Cologne. To date, 104 sites are known in the Wadi Hariq. Based on the pottery found at these sites, most can be attributed to the Handessi Horizon, the former Geometric Pottery Horizon, of the eastern Sahara. Geometric patterns, and also mat impressions, are characteristic of the Handessi Horizon (ca 2200 – 1100 BC). The subsistence of these prehistoric inhabitants was based on the herding of cattle and small livestock. Transhumance cycles included areas further north (Laqiya region) and south (Wadi Howar), and perhaps even the Nile Valley has to be considered. Similar decorative patterns have been found in all these areas. Evidence of an even earlier human presence in the Wadi Hariq during the Holocene is provided by several sherds decorated with Dotted Wavy Line and Laqiya-type patterns as well as some fragments of rippled-ware pottery.
[This message has been edited by Thought2 (edited 21 April 2005).]
posted
What do you think about the Eastern Libyans (of the Egyptian records) and the Maghrebi Imazighen being related by language but more loosely related as far as geneaology?
Could the Tehenu be the Saharo-Sudanese that Briggs says brought neolithic culture to the coastal Africans?
Something that puzzles me is that the later light complexioned Tamehu first enter the record deep in Nehesu territory well before the arrival of the northeast Mediteranean Sea Peoples who know doubt altered the coastal stock and even filtered into the northern Sahara if we're reading the rock art correctly? And there were myths about the "army of Heracles" and other NW Meds settling the Maghreb.
How much does the genetic record patially confirm the myths? Do the mtDNA haplotypes bear out a western expansion of the Sea People whom we know brought their women with them? Does Herodotus actually describe a westward venturing of "planted" Sea Peoples intermingled with their Lebou hosts?
What do you think about the Eastern Libyans (of the Egyptian records) and the Maghrebi Imazighen being related by language but more loosely related as far as geneaology?
Thought Writes:
That seems to be the case based upon the mtDNA evidence. They share a common paternal lineage, but the Maghrebi Imazighen share in a predominantly Western European maternal gene pool.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri~:
Could the Tehenu be the Saharo-Sudanese that Briggs says brought neolithic culture to the coastal Africans?
Thought Writes:
Most definitely. Food production and specifically the herding of domestic Caprines spread from the central Sahara to the Maghreb.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri~:
Something that puzzles me is that the later light complexioned Tamehu first enter the record deep in Nehesu territory well before the arrival of the northeast Mediteranean Sea Peoples who know doubt altered the coastal stock and even filtered into the northern Sahara if we're reading the rock art correctly? And there were myths about the "army of Heracles" and other NW Meds settling the Maghreb.
Thought Writes:
There may have been a prehistoric connection between NW Africa and SW Europe as BB claims. Yet the window for such a diffusion is between ~10 KY (TMRCA of H1 mtDNA lineage) and ~ 6 KY (earliest settled agricultural and megalithic culture in SW Europe). After ~6 KY the two regions have VERY different cultural characteristics.
[This message has been edited by Thought2 (edited 21 April 2005).]
posted
I've seen many Egyptian depictions of Tamahou ('white' Libyans) but non of the Tehenu. Does anyone know of any sites or books that have depictions of the Tehenu people?
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Try a book called the Eastern Libyans by Oric Bates. I believe there are some more books written by Egyptologist on this subject.
alTakruri,check out the following link about the Labu. The archaeological record seems to indicate an intrusive element that displaced the earlier populations.
quote:Originally posted by ausar: Try a book called the Eastern Libyans by Oric Bates. I believe there are some more books written by Egyptologist on this subject.
alTakruri,check out the following link about the Labu. The archaeological record seems to indicate an intrusive element that displaced the earlier populations.
It's pretty much a given that the original coastal population was augumented by seafarers from across the Mediterranean. The funny thing is that they seemed to have lost their culture and adapted to that of the North Africans.
You know, when I look at those paintings of the Tamahu in the Gate of Teka Hra vignettes (and there are several from different tombs)I don't see blue eyes or blonde hair. Is it just me or are there authenicated wall paintings with unmistakeable blondes and blues?
No doubt though, some of those Tamahu hardly resemble other African peoples in as far as their facial profiles. But their locks, head feathers, cicatrices or henna tattooings, and leather clothing does match African sensibilities some of which still found today.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I've seen many Egyptian depictions of Tamahou ('white' Libyans) but non of the Tehenu. Does anyone know of any sites or books that have depictions of the Tehenu people?
THHNW show up as early as the Vth Dynasty on the reliefs of Neuserre and Sahure who defeated them.
As Ausar wrote, there are line drawings of Tehenu in Bates. I don't have a flatbed scanner and so cannot post them, sorry. Try interlibrary loan.
posted
My own personal observation on this subject from Dec 2004...
quote: According to the ancients, the portion of Africa to the west of Egypt was called Libya but according to the Moudu ro en Kemet, the region to the west of Kemet would be called Khasut Amenti ("foreign territories in the west"), and like "Nubia" to the south, it was only referred to vis-a-vis the tribes or peoples in that region. Here is the chronology of Kemetian names for what the ancients referred to as "Libya" :
1) predynastic;early dynastic period (2920-2575bc);also in the Book of the Dead, one of the oldest Kemetian texts. Tehenu: ("The 'blue' people") Note: their name was often written with the ideogram for "sparkle, shine, coruscate, lightning, blue-glazed faience. (EWB) These people were portrayed by the Kemetian as being very similar to themselves, and probably were closely related. Tehen: dazzling;sparkling; to dye something blue; faience or a glazed blue earthenware that was often used for amulets and some vessels.
In my opinion, these were the ancestors of the present day Taureg people, who even today some of them are referred to as the blue people because some wear fabrics dyed by a process which involves pounding indigo powder into the cloth with a stone. So, if you were to use the Kemetian language to describe these Taureg people you would call them Tehenu...
2) 12th Dynasty onwards... While the Tehenu were still present and also used, we had an addition: Tamhu: "The Red people" This was an ethnic term based upon Kemetian ethnographic classifications (IE, *"the mural of the races") to indicate a white race of people. These were the blue-eyed 'Berbers' and were to become the favorites of modern Egyptology, as their presence allowed the creation of an erroneous association with the civilization of Kemet, even though their existence was only acknowledge during the 12th Kemetian dynasty...
3) 20th Dynasty M'shawaasha: (?; "meshwesh") This was a Libyan people who appear to be self-named, as there doesn't appear to be a Kemetian correspondence (at least I couldn't find any). We do have the name of one of their kings; M'shaken.
4) Indeterminate Rebu/Lebu: I couldn't find any direct correspondence with "Reb" or "Leb" but we can perhaps find help from Diop on this one; Diop informs us that there are a people living in Senegal called the Lebou and whose name means "fishermen or people who live by the sea." So what do we have in Kemetian? "r" or "l" is a preposition meaning for example - to;against;at "bo" in Kemetian and in Coptic means "canal" or "stream" "l_bo" means "at the stream" "l_bou" means "those at the stream" Thus it is accurate to state that Lebou in the Kemetian language would mean and be consistent with "people who live by the sea (water)." Would the Lebu then be tribes living along the coast of northern Africa? I think so...
posted
The inhabitants of Libya were called Tmhw (Temehus). The Temehus were organized into two groups the Thnw (Tehenu) in the North and the Nhsj (Nehesy) in the South(Diop 1986). A Tehenu personage is depicted on Amratian period pottery. Some Tehenu wore a pointed beard, phallic-sheath and feathers on their head. But , if you look at the second figure in the Table of Nations you will notice that his dress is Middle Eastern he represents an ancestor of the Arabs, no way he can be associated with the C-Group peoples ( which included Proto-Dravidians , Mande speakers Fulani and etc.).
The Temehus are called the C-Group people by archaeologists (Jelinek, 1985; Quellec, 1985). The central Fezzan was a center of C-Group settlement. Quellec (1985, p.373) discussed in detail the presence of C-Group culture traits in the Central Fezzan along with their cattle during the middle of the Third millennium BC.
The Temehus or C-Group people began to settle Kush around 2200 BC. The kings of Kush had their capital at Kerma, in Dongola and a sedentary center on Sai Island. The same pottery found at Kerma is also present in Libya (and even India) especially the Fezzan the ancient homeland of the Mande speaking people. The C-Group founded the Kerma dynasty of Kush. Diop (1986, p.72) noted that the "earliest substratum of the Libyan population was a black population from the south Sahara". Kerma was first inhabited in the 4th millennium BC (Bonnet 1986). By the 2nd millennium BC Kushites at Kerma were already worshippers of Amon/Amun and they used a distinctive black-and-red ware (Bonnet 1986). Amon, later became a major god of the Egyptians during the 18th Dynasty.
Bonnet,C. (1986). Kerma: Territoire et Metropole. Cairo: Instut Francais D'Archeologie Orientale du Caire.
Anta Diop.(1986). "Formation of the Berber Branch". In Libya Antiqua. (ed.) by Unesco,(Paris: UNESCO) pp.69-73.
Jelinek,J. (1985). "Tillizahren,the Key Site of the Fezzanese Rock Art". Anthropologie (Brno),23(3):223-275.
Quellec,J-L le. (1985). "Les Gravures Rupestres Du Fezzan (Libye)". L'Anthropologie, 89 (3):365-383.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Some of the Tehenu or Kushites settled Anatolia. Some of the major Anatolian Kushite tribes were the Kaska and Hatti speakers who spoke non-IE languages called Khattili. The gods of the Hattic people were Kasku and Kusuh (< Kush).
The Hattic people, may be related to the[b] Hatiu, one of the Delta Tehenu tribes. Many archaeologist believe that the Tehenu people were related to the C-Group people. The Hattic language is closely related to African and Dravidian languages for example:
English ……Hattic …..Egyptian…….. Malinke (Mande language)
powerful ……ur………. wr'great,big' ………fara
protect…….. $uh……… swh …………………solo-
head …………tup ………tp ……………tu 'strike the head'
up,upper….. tufa ………..tp……………… dya, tu 'raising ground'
to stretch put… pd ………pe,……………….. bamba
o prosper …….falfat …..-- …………………..find'ya
pour ……………duq …….---………………….. du 'to dispense'
child …………..pin………,pinu………………… den
Mother ………..na-a ………--…………………….. na
lord …………….sa ………..--………………………. sa
place ………….-ka………… -ka
The languages have similar syntax Hattic le fil 'his house'; Mande a falu 'his father's house'. This suggest that the first Anatolians were Kushites, a view supported by the Hattic name for themselves: Kashka.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
The use of different names to describe the Tehenu and Asian in the Ramses III Table of Nations is understood in relation to the political and ethnic conditions in Egypt and Western Asia during this period. The research appears to indicate that the physiognomy of the Libyans had changed by this time . This resulted , for the most part from the invasion of Egypt by Sea Peoples in association with the Libu (Libyans).
The figures on Ramses III Table of nations are associated with the nations Ramses was dealing with iduring his reign. The Libyans attacked Egypt during the 5th and 11th years of Ramses III's reign. Beginning around 1230 Sea People began to attack Egypt. In 1180 Ramses III had his decisive battle with the Libyans. Among the warriors fighting with the Libu were Sea People.
Ramses III made multiple versions of his campaigns against the Libyans. To understand the naming method for Ramses III Table of Nations you have to understand that the term Tehenu was a generic term applied to the Libyans, who by this time were mixed with Palestinian-Syrian people (who were descendants of the Gutians), and People of the Sea (Indo-Europeans).
The attack against Egypt in 1188 was a coalition of tribal groups led by the Meshwesh, who are believed to be a Tamehu nationality. As a result, we find that the Meshwesh were referred to as Tehenu\Tamehu. This may not be correct because the Meshwesh are not mention in Egyptian text until the 14th Century BC.
The members of the coalition were led by Meshesher the wr 'ruler' of the coalition.Each group was led by a "great one" or a magnate. The Meshwesh were semi-nomads that lived both in villages and dmi'w 'towns'.The Tehenu lived in the Delta between the Temehu and the Egyptians. The Egyptians referred to all of the people in this area most often by the generic tern "Tehenu".
The TjemhuTemehu which included the Meshwesh controled an area from Cyrenaica to Syria. As a result, in textual material from the reign of Ramses II, there is mention of Temehu towns in Syria. David O'Connor makes it clear that Ramses III referred to these Temehu by the term Tehenu/Tjehnyu (p.64).
The Temehu were very hostile to the Tehenu/Tjehnya. In fact, the first mention of the Meshwesh in Ramses III inscriptions relating to 1188, was the attack of the Tehenu, by the Meshwqesh, Soped and Sea People . David O'Connor makes it clear that the the records of Ramses III make it clear that the Meshweshy "savagely" attacked the Tehenu and looted their cities during their advance to Egypt (p.35 & 105).
The coalition of the Meshweshy had each unit of the army organized into "family or tribal ' units under the leadership of a "great one". As result to understand why the fAsian and Tehenu figures on the Table of Nations are identified differently you have use both the pictorical and textual material from the reign of Ramses III to understand the representations. As a result, Palestianian -Syrian personage or figure D, is labled Tehenu because he was probably a member of one Meshwesh units, thus he was labled Tehenu. The personage that is second from the Egyptians which is labled an Asian, eventhough he is clearly a Tehenu, was probably a member of a Syrian Palestinian unit when he was captured by the Egyptians thusly he was labled Asian. You can find out more about this reality if you check out: David O'Connor, "The nature of Tjemhu (Libyan) society in later New Kingdom; in Libya and Egypt c1300-750 BC, (Ed.) by Athony Leahy (pp.29-113), SOAS Centre of Near and Middle Eastern Studies and the Society for Libyan Studies, 1990.
In the Table of Nation figure B we see the traditional depiction of a Tehenu, the sidelock, shoulder cape and clean face. The Temehu, called Meshwesh are different from the Tehenu and the original Tamehu recorded by the Egyptians prior to the New Kingdom. Below is a Meshwesh
The Meshwesh wore Tehenu traditional costumes but they are not believed to be real Tehenu. The Tehenu and the Temehu usually wore different costumes. In the New Kingdom depictions of the Temehu, the Meshwesh have "long chin beards", like the Syrian-Palestinians and Peoples of the Sea. They wear kilts, sheaths and capes open at the front tied at one shoulder. Like the earlier Tehenu they wore feathers as a sign of High Status.
David O'Connor makes it clear that there was "marked hetergeneity of the Tjemhu" (p.41). The first attack by Libyans on Egypt were led by the Libu during the 5th year of Ramses III's reign. Diop has provided convincing evidence that the Libu, later migrated into Senegal, where they presenly live near Cape Verde
The difference in dress among the Meshwesh and their hostility toward the Tehenu, have led many researchers to see the Temehu of the New Kingdom as a different group from the original Temehu of Egyptian traditions. O'Connor (p.74) in the work cited above makes it clear that the Temehu in Ramses III day--"[have] hairstyles, dress and apparently ethnic type [that] are markedly different from the Tjehnyu/tjemhu of the Old Kingdom (Osing, 1980,1018-19). Various explanations have been offered: Wainwright, for example, concluded that 'Meshwesh was a mixed tribe of Libu like tribesmen with their native chiefs who become subject to a family of Tjehnu origin'(1962,p.92), while Osing suggested that the New Kingdowm Tjemhu had displaced or absorbed the earlier Tjehnyu but had selectively taken over or retained some Tjehnyu traits, in the case of the rulers for Meshwesh (1980,1019-1020). Dr. O'Connor is of the opinion "that some rulers of the later New Kingdom Tjemhu deliberately adopted traits they discovered from the Egyptians to be charcteristic of ancient Tjehnyu/Tjemhu, so as to increase there prestige, or in some way had these traits imposed upon them by the Egyptians" (p.74).
It is my opinion that given the organiztion of the Libyans into mhwt "family or tribal groups', sometime prior to 1230 BC over an extended period of time Indo-European speaking people later to be known as Peoples of the Sea entered Western Asia and Libya and were adopted by Tehenu families. This adoption of the new immigrants by Tehenu/Tamehu probably led to the Meshwesh and Soped adopting Tehenu customs but maintaining their traditional beards,. The original Temehu, like the Libu probably saw the integration of Sea Peoples into Temehu society as a way to increase their number and possibily conquer Egypt. It is interesting to note that the Meshwesh were very sure they might be able to conquor the Egyptians because they brought their cattle and other animals with them when they invaded the country. Moreover whereas the Meshwesh, were semi-nomadic, the Sea Peoples: Akawashu, Lukki, Tursha., Sheklesh, and Sherden remained nomadic. and used the spear and round shield.
The Nehasyu were ancient members of the Tehenu/Temehu. This would explain the reason why the Meshwesh and Nehasyu were mainly bowman.
In conclusion, the names for the personages in the Table of Nations from Ramses III tomb were labled correctly. These personages were recorded in the the Tables based on the military and family units were attached too, not the country identifiable by their dress.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The document is spiritual in nature and has nothing at all to do with family units of military envoys.
All the depicted are dead in the Tuat/Dwat and have just been resurrected and are about to have their time in the next world allotted to them.
The artists had a standard guide book for their samples. No models stood and posed before them.
The attire of the men labeled Tjemehu is the national garb of Syria.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The mdw ntr associated with the first cartoon image labels him Tjemehu not Meshwesh. Nor does the word Tehenu appear anywhere in the second image. The word is, again, Tjemehu
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The Tehenu and the Meshwesh
Meshwesh
Tehenu Second Personage from the Left
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: The mdw ntr associated with the first cartoon image labels him Tjemehu not Meshwesh. Nor does the word Tehenu appear anywhere in the second image. The word is, again, Tjemehu
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The Tehenu and the Meshwesh
Meshwesh
Tehenu Second Personage from the Left
Agreed. The term is Tjemehu , which replaced the term for Tehenu as I discussed above. It is the braid which makes it clear this personage was a Tehenu. It is the feathers that identify the first personage as a Meshwesh.
The use of different names to describe the Tehenu and Asian in the Ramses III Table of Nations is understood in relation to the political and ethnic conditions in Egypt and Western Asia during this period. The research appears to indicate that the physiognomy of the Libyans had changed by this time . This resulted , for the most part from the invasion of Egypt by Sea Peoples in association with the Libu (Libyans).
The figures on Ramses III Table of nations are associated with the nations Ramses was dealing with iduring his reign. The Libyans attacked Egypt during the 5th and 11th years of Ramses III's reign. Beginning around 1230 Sea People began to attack Egypt. In 1180 Ramses III had his decisive battle with the Libyans. Among the warriors fighting with the Libu were Sea People.
Ramses III made multiple versions of his campaigns against the Libyans. To understand the naming method for Ramses III Table of Nations you have to understand that the term Tehenu was a generic term applied to the Libyans, who by this time were mixed with Palestinian-Syrian people (who were descendants of the Gutians), and People of the Sea (Indo-Europeans).
The attack against Egypt in 1188 was a coalition of tribal groups led by the Meshwesh, who are believed to be a Tamehu nationality. As a result, we find that the Meshwesh were referred to as Tehenu\Tamehu. This may not be correct because the Meshwesh are not mention in Egyptian text until the 14th Century BC.
The members of the coalition were led by Meshesher the wr 'ruler' of the coalition.Each group was led by a "great one" or a magnate. The Meshwesh were semi-nomads that lived both in villages and dmi'w 'towns'.The Tehenu lived in the Delta between the Temehu and the Egyptians. The Egyptians referred to all of the people in this area most often by the generic tern "Tehenu".
The TjemhuTemehu which included the Meshwesh controled an area from Cyrenaica to Syria. As a result, in textual material from the reign of Ramses II, there is mention of Temehu towns in Syria. David O'Connor makes it clear that Ramses III referred to these Temehu by the term Tehenu/Tjehnyu (p.64).
The Temehu were very hostile to the Tehenu/Tjehnya. In fact, the first mention of the Meshwesh in Ramses III inscriptions relating to 1188, was the attack of the Tehenu, by the Meshwqesh, Soped and Sea People . David O'Connor makes it clear that the the records of Ramses III make it claim that the Meshweshy "savagely" attacked the Tehenu and looted their cities during their advance to Egypt (p.35 & 105).
posted
Given that by this time and for the purpose of the vignette all the major ethnies could be represented by any one of their subgroups.
Also it's true we know the war along the littoral progressed west to east with each easternmost group succumbing to the march of the Meshwesh. However, the plume is not particularly "Meshweshy" Tjemehu adjacent to Nehesi polities had it before the wars.
posted
^Indeed, the Tehenu and Kushites were two entirely different ethnicities and there is no evidence to suggest either settled Anatolia or link the Hatti languages with them as there is no accurate linguistics to suggest a relationship with any of these languages with "Mande" let alone the Hatti language.
More Winters psuedo nonsense.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's important to note that unlike ours, AE usage of the word Tehenu was always toponymic, not ethnonymic TMK, while Tmhhw was the other way around. Tehenu's inhabitants were called Hh3tyw "princes". I'm curious about this appellation though... Why princes? Could this be attributed to a social stratification dating from a common life with Egyptians?
Also alTakruri, if you have already seen it more clearly before, could you describe the hairdress on the head of the first character from the left?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^Indeed, the Tehenu and Kushites were two entirely different ethnicities and there is no evidence to suggest either settled Anatolia or link the Hatti languages with them as there is no accurate linguistics to suggest a relationship with any of these languages with "Mande" let alone the Hatti language.
More Winters psuedo nonsense.
Happy to see you're here troll. Its good to have a personal flunky. Thanks for your assistance Troll.
posted
Assistance in what? Pointing out your obviously ridiculous assertions as usual? Sure, no problem Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Damnit quit this kiddie hop and try to for once keep a thread on some kind of quasi pseudo scholarly academic level without all this ad hominem shish.
Disagree? Sure. Just do it without mockery.
Disagreement happens all the time in all fields but the professionals try to be a little non-personal about it all.
Raise this forum, why can't we?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looks like a ureaus(sp?) of some sort. There are others here much more familiar with headgear than I am. Hopefully they'll fill you in with more precise specifics.
quote:Originally posted by Please call me MIDOGBE:
Also alTakruri, if you have already seen it more clearly before, could you describe the hairdress on the head of the first character from the left?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
^It seems a blow up or zoom in of the picture is in order for us to see the finer details.
From left to right, the first figure does look like he is wearing the uraeus, while the second and fifth figures wear fillet headbands.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri~: What do you think about the Eastern Libyans (of the Egyptian records) and the Maghrebi Imazighen being related by language but more loosely related as far as geneaology?
Is there actually substantial evidence supporting the claim of a linguistic relationship between the two? Are these conclusions only based on sound similarities of ethnonyms and anthroponyms? If yes do they share a meaning? Perhaps could they only be explained by phonological distribution and are not any more relevant than BAIYE(?)'s Yoruba & Japanese toponyms.
Posts: 307 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
As opposed to staring at a computer screen and crawling forums all day....
Another thing that is interesting to note is the dress. While many call it Middle Eastern or Muslim, a lot of it can also be found in Egypt. There are many fancier examples of clothing found in Egypt from art or actual textiles that are not often mentioned in modern history books. The thing to remember is that white was a ceremonial and sacred color for the dead, akin to the pure white of Christian and Muslim apocrypha. But everyday wear was much more varied than that. Also, note the shoes from the Maghreb, the precursors of todays modern leather sneaker and such....
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
My god man, Yorubaland and Japan are separated by 1000's of miles. Of course any similarities by that example is just wishful thinking.
In North Africa we have this continuity in the M-Z-GH root in writings extending from Herodotus right up to now.
In North Africa we have obvious related peoples whereas that far fetched comparison is between two peoples not remotely related in the least.
quote:Originally posted by Please call me MIDOGBE:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri~: What do you think about the Eastern Libyans (of the Egyptian records) and the Maghrebi Imazighen being related by language but more loosely related as far as geneaology?
Is there actually substantial evidence supporting the claim of a linguistic relationship between the two? Are these conclusions only based on sound similarities of ethnonyms and anthroponyms? If yes do they share a meaning? Perhaps could they only be explained by phonological distribution and are not any more relevant than BAIYE(?)'s Yoruba & Japanese toponyms.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
At least figs 1 & 4 are "Libyan" judging by their penistache and chest bands. 2 & 5 may be from T3 Mhhw (delta) rather than being Tjemehu (Libyan). 3 & 6, I don't know, do I see Levantine affiliations?
In general looks like a conquest of the delta showing the three factions that inhabited it to me.
The image is just as grainy in Baines & Malek. Zooming the jpeg or magnifying the book doesn't help much (unless some photoshop wizard wants to tighten up the zoom for us).
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^It seems a blow up or zoom in of the picture is in order for us to see the finer details.
From left to right, the first figure does look like he is wearing the uraeus, while the second and fifth figures wear fillet headbands.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, that's not how I'm looking at things. If I want to find a genetic relationship between two languages, then I'll first start looking at linguistic facts only (vs extra-linguistic) and look for genetic features (vs typological features).
If I find genetic features between language and that this can be supported by other disciplines (as I did so far), then it's fine, but if it definitely cannot, I'll have to take a new look at genetic/typological features (hasn't happened to me yet). The only factor I considered here to claim that Japanese/Yoruba toponyms isn't proof of anything is linguistics.
Now, my question was about what you actually mentioned, namely the Eastern Libyans of Egyptian records, the Mshwsh, Lbw, Spd, Osorkon, Shoshenq, etc. Do these names have actually been shown to be related to modern Berber languages? I'm asking that because while I don't deny that those people are among the ancestors of modern North Africans, I wonder how "Africanized" were those people at the time, if they still had an Euro-like culture like Babacar SALL claimed relying only on archeology.
BTW, do you agree that the pics I posted from BATES in another thread were actually of "Tehenu"?
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: My god man, Yorubaland and Japan are separated by 1000's of miles. Of course any similarities by that example is just wishful thinking.
In North Africa we have this continuity in the M-Z-GH root in writings extending from Herodotus right up to now.
In North Africa we have obvious related peoples whereas that far fetched comparison is between two peoples not remotely related in the least.
quote:Originally posted by Please call me MIDOGBE:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri~: What do you think about the Eastern Libyans (of the Egyptian records) and the Maghrebi Imazighen being related by language but more loosely related as far as geneaology?
Is there actually substantial evidence supporting the claim of a linguistic relationship between the two? Are these conclusions only based on sound similarities of ethnonyms and anthroponyms? If yes do they share a meaning? Perhaps could they only be explained by phonological distribution and are not any more relevant than BAIYE(?)'s Yoruba & Japanese toponyms.
posted
You're talking about something completely different than what I commented on. We have some idea of when taMazight branched into its own from proto-Afrisan, or whatever, and where on the continent it happened, and the direction of its expansion, and the TMRCA population genetics en route. Added to that is the old physical and cultural genetics as well as the rock art. We know who bought the neolithic to the Sahara and further northward.
The best of what we have in primary texts seems to show the beginning of aMazigh identity with the coming of the Meshwesh (from somewhere west of Syrtis where they have already taken Euro wives from Sicily or whereever. This supposed Euro connection would explain their facile integration with the Sea Peoples). In taMazgha, year one is the initial year of Shoshenq's reign.
But as far as Euro mommies and Euro alliances, the Libu (situated between the Meshwesh and the THHNW) precede the Meshwesh at that and at attacking T3Mry.
More to the point Bates includes a chapter on language and writing complete with a chart of Egyptic/taMazight cognates on pages 81-83 for whatever value it may be to you.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
I don't need to co-sign on your selection of THHNW images since Bates indeed identified them as such, even if I may or may not have personal reasons that vary from his learned opinion.
But I do have requests for more scans if you please.
Fig 89
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just wish someone would post color photos of Bates' paintings of Thnw.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bates (1912) isn't in color. He only paints a verbal picture of black and "brun" Tehhenu.
quote: ... it is only reasonable to suppose that the xanthochroids of the Egyptian monuments and classical notices were invaders in a country primarily peopled with "autochthonous" blacks and bruns. One may, as did de Quatrefages, say truly that the origin of the African blonds is as ye unknown, but it is, [] safe to say they were immigrants.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: You're talking about something completely different than what I commented on.
I think I was since I was explaining that Egyptian records'Eastern Libyans may have been as much linguistically "related" to modern Berbers as Yoruba are to Japanese, exclusively from a linguistic standpoint. Sorry for the misunderstanding, and back to the topic.
quote: In taMazgha, year one is the initial year of Shoshenq's reign.
I thought this commemoration was a modern creation by Berber activists. If you know it is, what relevance does this has to my question?
quote:I don't need to co-sign on your selection of THHNW images since Bates indeed identified them as such, even if I may or may not have personal reasons that vary from his learned opinion.
That's not the point, that's just as I was actually wondering if the plumes & locks were actually worn by Tehenu (because the ornaments of those I posted look very different from those of the Tehenu from Sahure's tomb) or if it was a NK Tmhhw/Lbw/Mshwsh (i.e. a pale skinned, and maybe Euro) innovation. Maybe it would show that those Egyptian paintings of NK Libyans weren't depicting the Ancient Times' Wiggers some people are making them out to be.
quote:But I do have requests for more scans if you please.
Fig 89
I have go to the library next week, and I'll post here then.
Posts: 307 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ Hmm...Sorry if it is a stupid question, but as my library's book is a 1914, not a 1912 edition, could you please tell me what does your fig.89 depict?
Posts: 307 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can but opine that time (and fashion) didn't stop with Sahure. I can't see plumes & locks as aEuro innovation because I don't which Euros went around like that and immigrated to Africa. Besides the evidence that the Eurasians who moved to Africa acculturated to "Libyan" norms. NHHSW in the vicinity of the TMHHW wore plumes (clickable link) and the "Libyans" in that Aegean mural I posted have their hair in matted locks.
It's your choice but I don't see the need for using wigger in our discussion. For me the Mediterranean littoral Africans en masse are not white/European. They are indigenous dark Africans who established links with the folk across the sea and heavily "marrying" those folks' women (thus lightening up or further lightening their complexion).
North Mediterranean, the truly white peoples, though noting occasional blonds amongst Libyans constantly classify them with the other dark peoples known to them. This assessment remains true clear up to Islamic times when al~Jahiz likewise classes Berbers as a black people.
I think even before the Sea Peoples some whites trickled into North Africa and they explain any mentions of minority people of pallour in the Maghreb and the Sahara adjoining it.
quote:Originally posted by Please call me MIDOGBE: ...I was actually wondering if the plumes & locks were actually worn by Tehenu (because the ornaments of those I posted look very different from those of the Tehenu from Sahure's tomb) or if it was a NK Tmhhw/Lbw/Mshwsh (i.e. a pale skinned, and maybe Euro) innovation. Maybe it would show that those Egyptian paintings of NK Libyans weren't depicting the Ancient Times' Wiggers some people are making them out to be.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:89. Revamped Head (changed from Syrian to Libyan). Beyt el-Waly. After a tracing of the original made by G. Roeder
My description: Very prognathous, wide-nosed, thick-lipped Libyan with thin, non-curling side locks and 'tattooed mustache'(?) exemplary of the indigenous type of North African black.
quote:Originally posted by Please call me MIDOGBE: ^^ Hmm...Sorry if it is a stupid question, but as my library's book is a 1914, not a 1912 edition, could you please tell me what does your fig.89 depict?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Bates (1912) isn't in color. He only paints a verbal picture of black and "brun" Tehhenu.
... it is only reasonable to suppose that the xanthochroids of the Egyptian monuments and classical notices were invaders in a country primarily peopled with "autochthonous" blacks and bruns. One may, as did de Quatrefages, say truly that the origin of the African blonds is as ye unknown, but it is, [] safe to say they were immigrants.
What are "Bruns"?? I have heard of the term before and it sounds like a 'racial' classification by Coon.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Brun is an antiquated non-English language way of saying brown.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ That may be, but I seriously recall Coon making a racial category of a "Mediterranean caucasoid" population in North Africa by that same name!
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Coon made up a bunch of -oid suffixed races like Congoid Capoid etc which his successor, Baker, continued to use and backward folk still loosely sling around, as I believe, as a way to be pejorative without blatantly appearing to be so.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anyway, forget the Coon racial-peusdo-science of the past. These archaeological finds in southern Libya prove to be very interesting. If these people do represent early Berber speakers, is there any evidence of connection to Egyptian speaking peoples of the Nile Valley?
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I can but opine that time (and fashion) didn't stop with Sahure. I can't see plumes & locks as aEuro innovation because I don't which Euros went around like that and immigrated to Africa. Besides the evidence that the Eurasians who moved to Africa acculturated to "Libyan" norms. NHHSW in the vicinity of the TMHHW wore plumes (clickable link) and the "Libyans" in that Aegean mural I posted have their hair in matted locks.
Interesting because there is an attested Egyptian phrasal construction "T3y Mhhw" applied to Nhhsiw in HANNIG that means "who wear the feathers".
What is your opinion on the origin and the application of this ethnonym? Do you think it was a reference to only one people?
My original opinion about it was that of SALL, i.e. that the term had a cultural value and was used to describe different people (those close to Yam, those from the MK's and the others from NK's painting) having a nomad way of life and living in desertic regions.
Robert DREWS (2000) pointed out that there exist NK scenes depicting Asiatic warriors wearing helmet feathers as well and Babacar SALL reported that late Predynastic "Invaders from the East" were depicted with feathers, so I remain suspicious about the feathers of NK's EL being a cultural African trait.
Also:
As you can see, the open robe is found among Hittites as well as NK Libyans. Maybe it is an Eurasian import?
quote:It's your choice but I don't see the need for using wigger in our discussion. For me the Mediterranean littoral Africans en masse are not white/European. They are indigenous dark Africans who established links with the folk across the sea and heavily "marrying" those folks' women (thus lightening up or further lightening their complexion).
North Mediterranean, the truly white peoples, though noting occasional blonds amongst Libyans constantly classify them with the other dark peoples known to them. This assessment remains true clear up to Islamic times when al~Jahiz likewise classes Berbers as a black people.
I think even before the Sea Peoples some whites trickled into North Africa and they explain any mentions of minority people of pallour in the Maghreb and the Sahara adjoining it.
This may be an assessment due to the later than NK Berbers interbreeding of with some Eurasians", right? WILSON's chart below seems to be consistent with the theory of Mshwsh being the first recorded Berbers and Libu being usually not mixed with Africans. Perhaps it could be supported by the absence of penis sheath (African trait)among the latter. Posts: 307 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Coon made up a bunch of -oid suffixed races like Congoid Capoid etc which his successor, Baker, continued to use and backward folk still loosely sling around, as I believe, as a way to be pejorative without blatantly appearing to be so.
I often wonder if Coon wasn't motivated partly by some sort of overcompensation against his own name?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^LMFO I have often wondered about that also, Rasol.
quote:Originally posted by Please call me MIDOGBE:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I can but opine that time (and fashion) didn't stop with Sahure. I can't see plumes & locks as aEuro innovation because I don't which Euros went around like that and immigrated to Africa. Besides the evidence that the Eurasians who moved to Africa acculturated to "Libyan" norms. NHHSW in the vicinity of the TMHHW wore plumes (clickable link) and the "Libyans" in that Aegean mural I posted have their hair in matted locks.
Interesting because there is an attested Egyptian phrasal construction "T3y Mhhw" applied to Nhhsiw in HANNIG that means "who wear the feathers".
What is your opinion on the origin and the application of this ethnonym? Do you think it was a reference to only one people?
My original opinion about it was that of SALL, i.e. that the term had a cultural value and was used to describe different people (those close to Yam, those from the MK's and the others from NK's painting) having a nomad way of life and living in desertic regions.
Robert DREWS (2000) pointed out that there exist NK scenes depicting Asiatic warriors wearing helmet feathers as well and Babacar SALL reported that late Predynastic "Invaders from the East" were depicted with feathers, so I remain suspicious about the feathers of NK's EL being a cultural African trait.
Adornment of feathers is by far not a custom associated with one culture or cultures of a certain geographic group or region. Of course the custom is practiced around the world with peoples in Asia and the Americas.
It is not so much the fact that the Tamahu wore feathers or anyone else, but exactly how they wore it or in what style. The actual style of plumage very much resembles those of African peoples, especially in Sub-Sahara. As for your reference on Asiatics note that they wore helmets with plumes on them. Similar could be said about the various peoples in the Aegean including the Greeks themselves who wore feathered helmets and even the Romans. I believe that the plumed helmets that Greco-Romans wore had a great connection to the early Sea Peoples who also wore such helmets including the Philistines.
quote:Also:
As you can see, the open robe is found among Hittites as well as NK Libyans. Maybe it is an Eurasian import?
It could be, or it could be just coincidence as such a simple style garment could be worn by about any people in Africa or Asia.
quote:
quote:It's your choice but I don't see the need for using wigger in our discussion. For me the Mediterranean littoral Africans en masse are not white/European. They are indigenous dark Africans who established links with the folk across the sea and heavily "marrying" those folks' women (thus lightening up or further lightening their complexion).
North Mediterranean, the truly white peoples, though noting occasional blonds amongst Libyans constantly classify them with the other dark peoples known to them. This assessment remains true clear up to Islamic times when al~Jahiz likewise classes Berbers as a black people.
I think even before the Sea Peoples some whites trickled into North Africa and they explain any mentions of minority people of pallour in the Maghreb and the Sahara adjoining it.
This may be an assessment due to the later than NK Berbers interbreeding of with some Eurasians", right? WILSON's chart below seems to be consistent with the theory of Mshwsh being the first recorded Berbers and Libu being usually not mixed with Africans. Perhaps it could be supported by the absence of penis sheath (African trait)among the latter.
I am weary of such claims of 'blonde' Berbers being present that far back in history. The earliest depiction of light-colored haired Libyans dates to the late Middle Kingdom to New Kingdom periods.
Also the claims of white blondes intermarrying or having anything to do with Egyptians let alone the royal families of the Pyramid Age has been addressed before also, particular here: The so-called blonde Hetephephres and Meresankh III. So much for that theory!
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
At one time the far right figure was labeled "Libyan" but is now, more often than not, labeled Hittite. And true I've seen siege scenes where Hittites do wear woven garments similar to the leather garments of Libyans.
Yet, that rightmost figure is strikingly recollective of Meshmesh (except missing beard).
Does anyone why the rightmost figure is definitively Hittite?
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic