posted
I'm searching for some links or information on the parallels between ancient egyptians and native americans. So far what I have is:
Both the Native Americans and Egypt have: • Pyramids aligned to the cardinal points. • Temples made of large stone blocks with precise mortarless joints. • Royal headdress of the same design. • Unique style of L shaped stone blocks at corners • Same style and shape of metal clamps used as staples to hold stones in place • Both practiced mummification. • Could this be because both cultures share a common very ancient source?
Any help is appreciated, thank you.
Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mayan and Egyptian pyramids were constructed so differently that modern anthropologists don't even class them as the same style of architecture, . . . [Setting the Record Straight About Native Peoples]
Mayan and Egyptian cultures have a lot in common. However, some major differences can be found. Mayan religion was not obsessed with an afterlife beliefs as Egyptians were. Their pyramids were built either for Gods or as a memorial to the dead ruler or priest. Egyptians built their pyramids for the dead. Their buildings were meant to be used in the other life by the great spirits buried in them. Some visual differences also occur.
Mayan pyramid
Most of the Mayan pyramids are shorter then the ones at Giza site. They are not sealed forever but has an access for the priests and authorized people. The major difference is that Maya put the shrine right on top of the pyramid. The stairs led from the ground to the top of the pyramid. This way people thought they would be closer to God. In Egypt only pharaoh was considered to be closer to God therefore an enormous buildings reaching the sky was meant to be the stairway to the heaven only for the pharaoh.
Mummification
In Mayan culture we find no evidences that any techniques of mummification were used. In the humid climate of Central America it is very hard to preserve a dead body for such a long time that is needed for the mummification process. [Source]
.
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Myra Wysinger: In Egypt only pharaoh was considered to be closer to God therefore an enormous buildings reaching the sky was meant to be the stairway to the heaven only for the pharaoh.
Evergreen Writes:
Myra, respectfully what is the assessment above based upon?
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know of any serious modern scholarship that still proposes the hyperdiffusionist model of the origins and spread of culture, but from the old, old school of the early 20th century I'd recommend
Grafton Elliot Smith
The influence of ancient Egyptian civilization the East and in America: a lecture. London: Manchester University Press, 1916
The ancient Egyptians and the origin of civilization New York : Harper & Bros., 1923
The diffusion of culture London: Watts & Co., 1933
Albert Churchward
The signs and symbols of primordial man being an explanation of the evolution of religious doctrines from the eschatology of the ancient Egyptians London: G. Allen, 1913
The origin and evolution of freemasonry connected with the origin and evolution of the human race London: G. Allen & Unwin, ltd., 1920
Origin & evolution of the human race London: G. Allen & Unwin, ltd., 1921
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Myra Wysinger: In Egypt only pharaoh was considered to be closer to God therefore an enormous buildings reaching the sky was meant to be the stairway to the heaven only for the pharaoh.
Evergreen Writes:
Myra, respectfully what is the assessment above based upon?
Pyramids Seen as Stairways to Heaven
Pharoahs used monuments as launch pads to the afterlife, says scientist
Tim Radford, science editor Monday May 14, 2001 The Guardian
The pyramids of Egypt could be explained as symbolic stairways to the stars, according to a British scientist. And - in a twist that will delight New Age believers in mysterious energies and alien spacecraft - the inspiration for the pyramids might indeed have arrived from outer space, in the form of a meteorite.
Toby Wilkinson, an Egyptologist based at Cambridge University, told a conference over the weekend that some of his theory was "deliberately controversial, provocative, but tantalising".
He argued, from evidence of the orientation of the pyramids - always to the northern pole star - and from the names given to estates to finance funerary cults, and the shape of the pyramids themselves, that they could be seen as launch pads for the pharaoh's journey to the afterlife among the stars.
"Circumpolar stars are a very good metaphor for the afterlife because when viewed, they never seem to set: they simply rotate around the pole star. They are the undying stars, or in Egyptian terminology, the Indestructibles, a perfect destination for the soul of the dead king," he told a Bloomsbury archaeological summer school at University College London.
Pyramid structures extend from the north of Egypt to the Sudan, and they were built over thousands of years. "Where are all the steps that led up to pyramid building?" he asked. "We stand marvelling at these monuments and they seem to have appeared almost from nowhere, but clearly something like that cannot be put up overnight without the infrastructure in place."
This infrastructure included royal command of the economy, systematic taxation, a body of experience in public works and increasing mastery of stone as a building material. There had also to be religious or political motivation. Dr. Wilkinson traced the rise of a professional civil service in seals, documents and grave inscriptions dating back almost to 3,000 BC, and the continuing evidence of Egyptian belief not only in an afterlife, but in death itself as a journey.
Kate Spence, a Cambridge colleague, had demonstrated in a paper last year that from the first, the pyramids were all precisely oriented towards the northern stars. There were further clues in the names, which were crucially important in ancient Egyptian culture. One pyramid was explicitly called "the gleaming". Another was called "the pyramid that is a star". From the 1st dynasty onwards - long before the pyramids were built - kings had founded estates to finance their tomb cults: one of these was explicitly called "Horus (that is, the king) rises as a star".
"What clearer exposition could we have of the ideology surrounding a king's afterlife than that?" Dr. Wilkinson asked.
Tombs of the first dynasties were concealed by mounds of earth, seen as symbols of rebirth or resurrection. The first pyramid - the step pyramid at Saqqara, built in the 3rd dynasty - had its altar to the north, and the ramp down into its subterranean chambers started from the north face.
"It can also be seen as a ramp from the burial chamber," he said. "Because if you stand in the burial chamber underneath, and look up this entrance ramp, you are looking at the northern sky. And this is perhaps a launch pad for the king's spirit, to eject him straight to the northern stars where he hopes to spend his afterlife."
Fourth dynasty pyramids - including the Great Pyramid and others on the Giza plateau - were very carefully oriented towards the stars. Could they have been modelled on stars?
"What does a star look like in three dimensions? We could only know that if we had a star that has fallen to Earth for us to look at. A meteorite, perhaps, a shooting star that has literally come down to Earth."
He had a candidate: a stone - long since lost - that had been revered at the temple of Heliopolis in the fourth dynasty. It was known as the Benben stone, and it was represented in inscriptions as conical or pyramid-shaped. Significantly, the Egyptian word for the capstone, the uppermost stone on a pyramid, was "benbenet" or little benben. The high priest at Heliopolis was called "greatest of observers", a title that had astronomical links.
"Could it have been that the Benben stone itself was a meteorite? A signal from the celestial realm to the earthly realm, something that is worshipped as a sign from the heavens? Well, it is a rather tantalising suggestion," Dr. Wilkinson said.
"I'm not a geologist, and wouldn't claim to be, but there is a particular kind of meteorite, a rare kind of meteorite, which as it enters the atmosphere, is formed into a shape that startlingly resembles a pyramid. Could the benben stone have been such a stone? Could it have been a shooting star that had fallen to earth and been worshipped as a sign from the heavens?"
bnbn [Benben]
Most believe that the Pyramid was symbolic of the Benben, a mound that rose from the waters during the creation of the earth, in ancient Egyptian mythology, which was closely associated with Re as the creator god.
Kingship
The cult of the king was one of the most prominent features of ancient Egyptian religion. The Egyptian ruler, because of his status as a ntr, or god, received both a cult during his life and after his death. He (or she) acquired and maintained his divinity as a result of specific kingship rituals, of which, the coronation was clearly the most important. In this ceremony, the king was transformed into a god by means of his union with the royal ka, or soul. All previous kings of Egypt had possessed the royal ka, and at his or her coronation, the king became divine as "one with the royal ka when his human form was overtaken by his immortal element, which flows through his whole being and dwells in it".
As a god, the King became the son of Re, the sun god, and he was a manifestation of Horus, the falcon god, as well as the son of Osiris. Also, from the Middle Kingdom, there was increasing emphasis placed on his relationship with Amun-Re, and he was described as the son of Amun, the king of the gods.
Thus, the king became an intermediary between mankind and the divine, responsible for sustaining the balance of the universe through maintaining ma'at, or divine order. Upon his death, the ancient Egyptians believed that he became fully divine and assimilated with Osiris and Re. -- Tour Egypt
.
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is no such thing as coincidence, ancient egyptians and native americans most probably do share a "common very ancient source". Sure, there may not be substantial information/evidence to prove this p.o.v., yet it still could be an accurate p.o.v.
It is what it is.
Posts: 3423 | From: the jungle - when y'all stop playing games, call me. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by G.O.D: There is no such thing as coincidence, ancient egyptians and native americans most probably do share a "common very ancient source". Sure, there may not be substantial information/evidence to prove this p.o.v., yet it still could be an accurate p.o.v.
It is what it is.
Science and especially the statistical study of probability show that there is coincidence.
There is NO evidence of a direct connection between indigenous peoples of Meso-America and indigenous peoples of Northeast Africa (Egyptians).
You'd have more luck finding connections between Meso-Americans and West Africans (who are just across the Atlantic). Although we have no evidence for that either, that hasn't stopped folks like Clyde Winters Posts: 26311 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by With a name like Smuckers: Both the Native Americans and Egypt have:
• Pyramids aligned to the cardinal points.
And there are various other cultures with advanced mathematics which also knew of cardinal points other than the Egyptians and Native Americans (of Central America to be specific).
quote:• Temples made of large stone blocks with precise mortarless joints.
Such temples are also known in India and Southeast Asia.
quote:• Royal headdress of the same design.
And what design is this? Last time I checked, the feathered royal headdresses of ancient Meso-Americans resembled alot closely those worn by chieftains of Native American peoples of North America. Whereas the ornate hat-like royal headdresses of Pharaohs look similar to many other kings in Africa.
quote:• Unique style of L shaped stone blocks at corners
Nothing special, and I'm pretty sure is found in some other culture.
quote:• Same style and shape of metal clamps used as staples to hold stones in place
Again an architectural feat that doesn't sound so unique.
quote:• Both practiced mummification.
LOL And so did peoples of Papua New Guinea and Siberia!
quote:• Could this be because both cultures share a common very ancient source?
I seriously doubt it!
Posts: 26311 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by G.O.D: There is no such thing as coincidence, ancient egyptians and native americans most probably do share a "common very ancient source". Sure, there may not be substantial information/evidence to prove this p.o.v., yet it still could be an accurate p.o.v.
posted
Though he makes no racial connectivity claims, what's your take on Van Sertima's theory of contact between Keshli ruled KM.t and "Olmeca?"
And what of his evidence (and that of several others) on the voyage of Mansa Abu Bakari II and the Mali empire's impact on Meso-American civilization?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: There is NO evidence of a direct connection between indigenous peoples of Meso-America and indigenous peoples of Northeast Africa (Egyptians).
You'd have more luck finding connections between Meso-Americans and West Africans (who are just across the Atlantic). Although we have no evidence for that either,
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Though he makes no racial connectivity claims, what's your take on Van Sertima's theory of contact between Keshli ruled KM.t and "Olmeca?"
And what of his evidence (and that of several others) on the voyage of Mansa Abu Bakari II and the Mali empire's impact on Meso-American civilization?
That depends? Can you cite me any evidence of those claims or any valid sources? So far I haven't heard anything from mainstream scholarship that supports those claims...
Only from Sertima and Winters.
Posts: 26311 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let's not twist it. My views on that topic are all over this forum's archive.
I asked you for your analysis of Van Sertima's theories. If you don't recognize him as a valid source it appears you're playing Simon Says i.e., only white approved scholarship equals valid scholarship. You must tell me when and why Van Sertima ceased to be mainstream and who made him so.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^All I have to say about Sertima is that he is correct about things that pertain to Africa. I do not agree with his opinions on African influence in India and pre-Columbian America. Besides that, I do find his points about racist historical suppression to be valid.
Posts: 26311 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The only "connection" between Africa and America concerning the ancient cultures is possibly the Olmec. Olmec culture flourished on the coasts of Central America. The first monumental stone architecture was built at La Venta. NO other civilizations in the region have shown ANY sort of structures leading towards those at La Venta. Many of the giant heads of La Venta (Olmecs) are NOT repeated anywhere else in Meso American civilization. HOWEVER, the blueprint for the style of Mesoamerican architecture and city planning ARE found at La Venta. The time frame of the Olmecs/La Venta is exactly at the same time period when Kerma/Meroe were great and powerful civilizations.
I am not saying that La Venta and the Olmecs were foreign. HOwever, given what I have said above, I would not rule out CONTACT as far fetched or absurd either.
I'm unaware of any book or article on India written by Van Sertima.
Do you know the difference between material authored by Van Sertima versus the material authored by others that appear under Ivan Van Sertima's (clickable link) editorship in the Journal of African Civilizations?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^All I have to say about Sertima is that he is correct about things that pertain to Africa. I do not agree with his opinions on African influence in India and pre-Columbian America. Besides that, I do find his points about racist historical suppression to be valid.
Can you summarize his "opinions on African influence in ... pre-Columbian America?"
I want to get to the bottom of your statement
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: There is NO evidence of a direct connection between indigenous peoples of Meso-America and indigenous peoples of Northeast Africa (Egyptians).
to see what it is based on and if Van Sertima's presentation to the contrary can be sucessfully refuted. I also want to know what makes his academic stance on Mansa Bubacar II's voyage and Malian cultural infusions into Meso-America outside of the mainstream.
quote: Van Sertima's work is a summary of six or seven years of meticulous research based upon
archaeology,
egyptology,
African history,
oceanography,
astronomy,
botany,
rare Arabic and Chinese manuscripts,
the letters and journals of early American explorers,
and the observations of physical anthropologists...
As one who has been immersed in Mexican archaeology for some forty years, and who participated in the excavation of the first giant heads, I must confess, I am thoroughly convinced of the soundness of Van Sertima’s conclusions.”
Clarence Weiant [i]Letter to the New York Times, May 1, 1977
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by With a name like Smuckers: I'm searching for some links or information on the parallels between ancient egyptians and native americans. So far what I have is:
Both the Native Americans and Egypt have: • Pyramids aligned to the cardinal points. • Temples made of large stone blocks with precise mortarless joints. • Royal headdress of the same design. • Unique style of L shaped stone blocks at corners • Same style and shape of metal clamps used as staples to hold stones in place • Both practiced mummification. • Could this be because both cultures share a common very ancient source?
Any help is appreciated, thank you.
C'mon, cut native Americans some slack. They've already experienced the loss of their lands, the subsequent disintergration of their cultures, and racism by non-natives, so they need people claiming that blacks built their civilization like they need holes in their skulls.
Posts: 7096 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let's be careful not to put words into Van Sertima's mouth. He never claimed Africans to be the father of civilization in the Americas.
quote: "I think it necessary to make it clear -- since partisan and ethnocentric scholarship is the order of the day -- that the emergence of the Negroid face, which the archeaological and cultural data overwhelmingly confirm, in no way presupposes the lack of a native originality the absence of other influences or the automatic eclipse of other faces"
-- Journal of African Civilizations, V8#2, 1986 p. 16
quote: "Not all of these heads are African. I have said that over and over again. I have never claimed that Africans carved these heads or that they were the only models for them. What I have claimed, . . . is
that the skull and skeletal evidence examined in certain Olmec settlements show a distinct African physical prescence AMONG THEM
that this alien prescence is displayed not only in bones but in the features of SOME of the Olmec stones . . .
-- Early America Revisited, 1998, p. 52
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Van Sertima's work is a summary of six or seven years of meticulous research based upon
archaeology,
egyptology,
African history,
oceanography,
astronomy,
botany,
rare Arabic and Chinese manuscripts,
the letters and journals of early American explorers,
and the observations of physical anthropologists...
As one who has been immersed in Mexican archaeology for some forty years, and who participated in the excavation of the first giant heads, I must confess, I am thoroughly convinced of the soundness of Van Sertima’s conclusions.”
Clarence Weiant Letter to the New York Times, May 1, 1977
While I certainly do not dismiss the possibility, I must review the said evidence at hand for me to make a final judgement.
Frankly, if all of this is true I don't understand why I haven't heard a peep from mainstream academia or even peer-reviewed cirlces.
Posts: 26311 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Underpants Man: C'mon, cut native Americans some slack. They've already experienced the loss of their lands, the subsequent disintergration of their cultures, and racism by non-natives, so they need people claiming that blacks built their civilization like they need holes in their skulls.
So while Native Americans may not need holes in their heads, some of them sure wanted some! LOLPosts: 26311 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
The New York Times carried on a debate about They Came Before Columbus for quite some issues just after the book was published. Also if you'd have read America Revisited you'd see critiques of Van Sertima's theories and his responses to his critics.
Have you fingered Van Sertima without actually having perused his works yourself?
Did you lump him with Winters based on nothing more than your "mainstream" hearsay?
Those two men's ideas are as far from saying the same thing about preColumbian Afro-Americas relations as night is from day. And it's a disservice to both to mention them in the same breath as one is a professor of Africana studies and the other is an Afrocentric Africalogist.
I invite you to read Van Sertima's two books on the subject, then present your personally informed and thus trustworthy critical analysis. Until then ...
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Van Sertima's work is a summary of six or seven years of meticulous research based upon
archaeology,
egyptology,
African history,
oceanography,
astronomy,
botany,
rare Arabic and Chinese manuscripts,
the letters and journals of early American explorers,
and the observations of physical anthropologists...
As one who has been immersed in Mexican archaeology for some forty years, and who participated in the excavation of the first giant heads, I must confess, I am thoroughly convinced of the soundness of Van Sertima’s conclusions.”
Clarence Weiant Letter to the New York Times, May 1, 1977
While I certainly do not dismiss the possibility, I must review the said evidence at hand for me to make a final judgement.
Frankly, if all of this is true I don't understand why I haven't heard a peep from mainstream academia or even peer-reviewed cirlces.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I admit, that while I have read some of Sertima's work concerning Egypt and Africa in antiquity, I haven't read those on pre-Colubian contacts.
However, if his findings prove to be so valid why have there not been many reports to the public about it? I have heard very few scholars on Meso-American culture to actually agree with this theory.
Posts: 26311 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes just as "very few 'scholars' on" Africa/Egypt "actually agree" that AE is whole soul African. Does that then mean if such "findings prove to be so valid why have there not been many reports to the public about it?"
That kind of argument is a logical fallacy. Go read then come back with an informed critical analysis.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Please list his works on Egypt and Africa in antiquity.
Again, outside of pre-Columbian contact Van Sertima doesn't write on Egypt and Africa in antiquity.
You still don't understand the difference between authoring a book (or article) and editing a journal (that features works by everyone but the editor).
Hence your confusion over what Van Sertima says vs what you imagine he says, leading you to spread misinformation about his contact theories (I refuse to comment on what drives you to reject scholarship unless it's approved by white authority, i.e., your "mainstream."
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I admit, that while I have read some of Sertima's work concerning Egypt and Africa in antiquity, I haven't read those on pre-Colubian contacts.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Please list his works on Egypt and Africa in antiquity.
Again, outside of pre-Columbian contact Van Sertima doesn't write on Egypt and Africa in antiquity.
You still don't understand the difference between authoring a book (or article) and editing a journal (that features works by everyone but the editor).
Hence your confusion over what Van Sertima says vs what you imagine he says, leading you to spread misinformation about his contact theories (I refuse to comment on what drives you to reject scholarship unless it's approved by white authority, i.e., your "mainstream."
(Sorry for the late response, but I've been kind of busy-- holidays and all).
The only works I am aware of are what he states in his Journal of African Civilization. He pretty much agrees with the likes of Diop and others that Africans did develop civilization in antiquity such as Egypt. What I do disagree with are his claims which are cited by the likes of Winters in which Africans founded Harappan civilization in India. As for his book, They Came Before Columbus, I admit that even though I haven't read it, I heard he pretty much cites circumstantial evidence or rather coincidences in similarity between Meso-American civilization and Africans. That said, again I haven't heard any break-through discoveries that openly settle the case that Meso-American civilization was founded by Africans!
Posts: 26311 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Damn, I'm trying to tell you all he does is editorialize in the journal. That means he writes a rambling preamble introducing nearly each article of each individual appearing in the journal. THE IDEAS AREN'T HIS NOR DO THEY STEM FROM HIS OWN RESEARCH AND WRITING. For instance the Moor issue features articles by Reynolds and Chandler that are diametrically opposed on the matter of North Africans and colour. Van Sertima capsulizes both authors in that issue's introductory piece. That's what editors do, they sometimes publish stuff from researchers regardless of how much they may side against it.
And you still don't understand after my repeating it several times including posting quotes from the man himself that VAN SERTIMA DOES NOT POSIT ANY AFRICAN ORIGIN OF MESO-AMERICAN CIVILIZATION nor has he himself written anything about Indus Valley civs, in fact he didn't even edit the editions that cover Asia, it was the well-traveled Runoko Rashidi who edited the issues of the journal focusing on Asia.
All you've done is villify a man's work based on no reasoning under your own power but simply falling for the Simon Says game.
I haven't read it myself BUT Simon Says it's no good SO it must not be any good.
And just about everyone on the planet knows Winters has no use for Van Sertima and actively disavows any connection between himself and Van Sertima, vehemently claiming to outrank Van Sertima in all things, even claimng to have founded the journal for Van Sertima.
You should just admit that in this instance you were caught with your pants down instead of trying to justify the untruths you've spread about Van Sertima's work and ideas.
(Anyways, hope your holidays are happy and filled with joy, cheers and sip of rummed up egg nog to drink down after munching on those rum balls!)
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Science and especially the statistical study of probability show that there is coincidence.![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic