The Moorish writer,Al Edrisi, of Andalusia,Spain, wrote in the early part of the 20th century about the powerful Israelite colony of Lamlam. Lamlam was situated about 2000 miles west of Timbuktu.
Markellion
Edrisi also said the Israelite merchants were then monopolizing the trade that was concentrated at Timbuktu.
And that there only two towns south of The Kingdom of Ghana and says that non-hebrew people of Ghana state dthat the inhabitants are Israelites.
Markellion
The Moorish writer ,Leo Africanus, stated that there was an Medieval Hebrew state called Kamnuria or Kanuria. It's two main cities were Kamnuri & Naghira. & this state was located north of the Senegal River.
Markellion
Also, Our ancestors was singing songs about YHWH,Canaan(Israel),Exodus before being introduced to Christianity by the white slavemasters.
One of these songs called Kumbayah. Kumbayah in Hebrew means Come by here Yahweh. And the word massa was not an ebonic substitute for master. Massa is an Hebrew word & it means burden & oppressor.
In AD 1009, an Israelite Prince named Za Kasi of the Za Dynasty of Ghana became King. And was persuaded to convert to Islam by merchants from the city of Gao. that was already weatlthy & economically powerful.
The reason Za Kasi & some of his people converted to Islam was the Muslims dominated Ghana vital trade links in North Africa & the Sahara & itwas good for Ghana's security to be recognized as having an Muslim king.
That's what somone has been telling me
I'm open minded so my question is, what does anyone here know about lost Hebrew tribes in Africa? Everything I've read says they were pagans or Muslims in west Africa (which is common sense). Are there any girots that claim they come from Israel, how about in the books of Timbuktu. Did any those scholars say any of those things that talk about them being Hebrews lol. Also I thought the rulers of Ghana refused to accept Islam. Ibn Battuta says many in Mali were pagans.
Mabye there were a small minority of Hebrews taken as slaves, we know from genitic tests that the Lemba have genitic influence from the middle east and they claim to be Hebrews. But to think west Africans were all Hebrews, it sounds like pure nonsence and an insult to their African ancestors
So did the guy just make up those quotes
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am wondering did the Lemba always claimed to be Hebrews, even before the genetic test was done to them?
Posts: 53 | From: Iran | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Lemba like many other African natives, didn't wait for European geneticists to come along, to speak of their heritage through oral traditions handed out from one generation to another. If molecular genetics happens to confirm their saying, then it is doing just that - confirming.
Outside expert endeavors and scholarly discourse, molecular geneticis doesn't exactly influence socio-cultural perceptions at large in most societies. In fact, many folks around the globe are oblivious to the workings and hence, significance of molecular genetics. It may modify the perceptions of a few of us in the know, but outside that, there is little it does in that regard to those who aren't.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hebrewisraelites.org tells you everything. After all Moses was mistaken for an Egyptian. Everyone here knows Egyptians were black. So Moses couldn't have been an Arab, white, or a modern Jewish-looking man. It would be impossible. He had to be black if the pharaoh mistook him for his son.
Posts: 603 | From: Mobile, Alabama | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The hebrewisraelite.org is still up ... I haven't been to the site since 2001.
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for the information everyone, but one thing
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: Hebrewisraelites.org tells you everything. After all Moses was mistaken for an Egyptian. Everyone here knows Egyptians were black. So Moses couldn't have been an Arab, white, or a modern Jewish-looking man. It would be impossible. He had to be black if the pharaoh mistook him for his son.
On that it is very logical that the Hebrews were black I suppose. But this guy I was talking to believes the majority of slaves taken were Hebrew, but Hebrews being black doesn't mean all blacks are Hebrew.
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read some of the stuff on that site on west African Hebrews and things like circumcision and rituals for a boy becoming a man are found throughout Africa. I'll have to read more about this tomorrow
I've always believed the Jews (I guess I should say Hebrews) learned African traditions in Egypt though
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I personally question every Jewish view of other people. One must keep their eye open and square on the most basic facts when dealing with such questionable subjects.
What determines legitimate? The CHM (Cohanim Haplotype theory)? Absolutely not!
Posts: 213 | From: New York City, USA | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The more apt question is how do those who have called themselves Hebrew over the last 2500 - 3000 years define Hebrew not how those outside the group do.
posted
Don't forget about the Jewish Berbers of North Africa, like the Aures.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: Hebrewisraelites.org tells you everything. After all Moses was mistaken for an Egyptian. Everyone here knows Egyptians were black. So Moses couldn't have been an Arab, white, or a modern Jewish-looking man. It would be impossible. He had to be black if the pharaoh mistook him for his son.
Rubbish. First, Moses was never mistaken for an Egyptian and was actually raised by Hebrews. It was Joseph that was mistaken or disguised himself in such a way that his own brothers thought he was an Egyptian. The Egyptians were ruled by a Semitic people during the time period of the Joseph story. Basically the Pharoah of Egypt was a Eurasian just like Joseph. The Hebrews would not have none that the Pharoah was a foreigner.
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Willing Thinker {What Box}:
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: Evergreen Writes:
How does one define a Hebrew?
Always you with the legitamit and fundamental question.
Definition, please?
A Hebrew? Anyone who adheres to Hebrew traditions? Or speaks Hebrew?
I am of Jewish descent. Hebrew essentially means nomadic and use to actually be derogatory like calling someone a gypsy. However, the patriach Abraham in Jewish tradition is the first Hebrew so called because he left his homeland of Ur of the Chaldeans. Hebrews are essentially nomadic Sumerian people that moved Westward.
posted
And there was no such thing as Jews or Jewish during the time of Ancient Kemetic civilization. Like other modern day organized religion, Judaism is extremely young.
It may take a while before people actually decide to wake up and see clearly that:
Ancient Kemetians (Egyptians) = Ancient Hebrews = Black Africans.
and
Origin of original ideas behind Christianity = African/Ancient Egyptians spiritual systems (in addition to Islam, Judaism and others).
Traditional African Belief Systems = actual Ancient Hebraic practices unmodified and lacking interference by Europeans and falsely branded pagan practices in attempts to introduce European paganism (read the Anglican row section below (#x)).
The existence of the European version of Christianity is so through the process of modification and perversion of original African idea of Christianity (which was probably not even called Christianity). Perhaps the hundreds of thousands or millions of Black African libraries proudly destroyed by Europeans contained much we don’t know and may have forced Africans to reply heavily on their memories and orally passing on as much knowledge as the possibly can. After all, what more efficient and secured methods exist for passing on priceless experiences and knowledge’s after all your physically recorded documents have constantly been targeted for destruction by “new people” lacking any sense of equal co-existence.
The church entities, resulting from a split between original Orthodox African (Ethiopian) Christianity and the copy-cat version, the Roman/European Christianity, exemplifies some of my points above.
"Traditional African Spiritual belief" is another generic term used to further obscure the identity and the continuation of the original sources of modern day religions.
(#x) Personally, I view it as a complete joke to watch Western church leaders and Rabbis overly attempting to re-colonize the belief systems of Black Africans (who have kept their belief systems since the very distant ancient times). Particularly Jewish Rabbis who are mostly oblivious to the intellectual and spiritual depth of Black Africans fueled by the arrogant in their warped confidence and Talmudic wet dream of bringing Black African tribes like the Igbo, Lemba and others under their so-called religious control. In addition, the row and bitter conflict between African Anglican communities and their Western counterparts perfectly highlights the limits White arrogance and perverted Western practices in church can go especially with the Western ambitious and sneaky attempts to exploit trust and bring devoted religious people and churches under homosexual/pedophile control leadership which I personally deem as a complete abomination and evil from all angles. I’m sure many homosexuals/pedophiles/rapists dwell in the churches in great numbers practicing unforgivable deeds of inhumanities and most remain in their underworld.
Drawing again from my beloved “Black folks talk” or “Ebonics”:
“I lives on the high with da Mos High. Dat homo s*** need to stay far, b-cuz you bring dat s*** around me, you bound to catch a holy scar.”
I can think of no other piece of backing reference at the moment to support my views above, on the internet, than a wonderful piece of article recently published by the “International Herald Tribune” entitled ”Nigerians meld Christianity, Islam with ancient practices”.
Posts: 213 | From: New York City, USA | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: And there was no such thing as Jews or Jewish during the time of Ancient Kemetic civilization. Like other modern day organized religion, Judaism is extremely young.
It may take a while before people actually decide to wake up and see clearly that:
Ancient Kemetians (Egyptians) = Ancient Hebrews = Black Africans.
and
Origin of original ideas behind Christianity = African/Ancient Egyptians spiritual systems (in addition to Islam, Judaism and others).
Traditional African Belief Systems = actual Ancient Hebraic practices unmodified and lacking interference by Europeans and falsely branded pagan practices in attempts to introduce European paganism (read the Anglican row section below (#x)).
The existence of the European version of Christianity is so through the process of modification and perversion of original African idea of Christianity (which was probably not even called Christianity). Perhaps the hundreds of thousands or millions of Black African libraries proudly destroyed by Europeans contained much we don’t know and may have forced Africans to reply heavily on their memories and orally passing on as much knowledge as the possibly can. After all, what more efficient and secured methods exist for passing on priceless experiences and knowledge’s after all your physically recorded documents have constantly been targeted for destruction by “new people” lacking any sense of equal co-existence.
The church entities, resulting from a split between original Orthodox African (Ethiopian) Christianity and the copy-cat version, the Roman/European Christianity, exemplifies some of my points above.
"Traditional African Spiritual belief" is another generic term used to further obscure the identity and the continuation of the original sources of modern day religions.
(#x) Personally, I view it as a complete joke to watch Western church leaders and Rabbis overly attempting to re-colonize the belief systems of Black Africans (who have kept their belief systems since the very distant ancient times). Particularly Jewish Rabbis who are mostly oblivious to the intellectual and spiritual depth of Black Africans fueled by the arrogant in their warped confidence and Talmudic wet dream of bringing Black African tribes like the Igbo, Lemba and others under their so-called religious control. In addition, the row and bitter conflict between African Anglican communities and their Western counterparts perfectly highlights the limits White arrogance and perverted Western practices in church can go especially with the Western ambitious and sneaky attempts to exploit trust and bring devoted religious people and churches under homosexual/pedophile control leadership which I personally deem as a complete abomination and evil from all angles. I’m sure many homosexuals/pedophiles/rapists dwell in the churches in great numbers practicing unforgivable deeds of inhumanities and most remain in their underworld.
Drawing again from my beloved “Black folks talk” or “Ebonics”:
“I lives on the high with da Mos High. Dat homo s*** need to stay far, b-cuz you bring dat s*** around me, you bound to catch a holy scar.”
I can think of no other piece of backing reference at the moment to support my views above, on the internet, than a wonderful piece of article recently published by the “International Herald Tribune” entitled ”Nigerians meld Christianity, Islam with ancient practices”.
Okay, based on this argument then Egyptians originated in Mesopatamia because that is where Hebrews come from.
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osiriun: Okay, based on this argument then Egyptians originated in Mesopatamia because that is where Hebrews come from.
If you'd follow his argument completely, that would also mean Mesopotamians were black then, so why be selective? Neither equation holds merit imo, though the first Sumerians may have indeed been Dravic/non-semitic (click here).. Aside from that, we all know that your insistence on promoting your Egypt/Mesopotamian connection has more to do with desperate wishful thinking than objectivity.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osiriun: Okay, based on this argument then Egyptians originated in Mesopatamia because that is where Hebrews come from.
If you'd follow his argument completely, that would also mean Mesopotamians were black then, so why be selective? Neither equation holds merit imo, though the first Sumerians may have indeed been Dravic/non-semitic (click here).. Aside from that, we all know that your insistence on promoting your Egypt/Mesopotamian connection has more to do with desperate wishful thinking than objectivity.
Again you miss the SARCASM!!!
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
These kind of threads border on being comic book or graphic novel since contributors usually know nothing about the subject other than their own cherished fantasies.
Case in point.
Of course Moshe was taken as Egyptian and by none other than Midyani (Midianite) -- Yithro's daughters.
Yosef was vizier under a Rm.t.w pharaoh not a Hyksos (A3mw) pharaoh. Being as much from the Levant, just as Yosef was, they'd've had no taboo against dining with a Hebrew.
quote:Originally posted by osiriun: ... Moses was never mistaken for an Egyptian ...
... Joseph ... his own brothers thought he was an Egyptian.
The Egyptians were ruled by a Semitic people during the time period of the Joseph story. Basically the Pharoah of Egypt was a Eurasian just like Joseph. The Hebrews would not have none that the Pharoah was a foreigner.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: These kind of threads border on being comic book or graphic novel since contributors usually know nothing about the subject other than their own cherished fantasies..
LOL That depends on the comic book or graphic novel. What kinds do YOU read, Takruri?
quote:Case in point.
Of course Moshe was taken as Egyptian and by none other than Midyani (Midianite) -- Yithro's daughters.
Yosef was vizier under a Rm.t.w pharaoh not a Hyksos (A3mw) pharaoh. Being as much from the Levant, just as Yosef was, they'd've had no taboo against dining with a Hebrew.
^ It makes perfect sense.
But I must ask, now that Osirion is back, do I sense another conflict of black Jew vs. white Jew again?? Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, recently I reread Aya, and I recommend Cartoon History of the Universe to any and all.
I don't know what kind of Jew (perhaps a No Jew) who ranks the Christian KJV Bible over any Jewish TaNaKh.
So, no such implied bout is possible between the suggested opponents.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: These kind of threads border on being comic book or graphic novel ...
LOL That depends on the comic book or graphic novel. What kinds do YOU read, Takruri? . . . . ... Osirion is back, do I sense another conflict of black Jew vs. white Jew again??
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Willing Thinker {What Box}:
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: Evergreen Writes:
How does one define a Hebrew?
Always you with the legitamit and fundamental question.
Definition, please?
A Hebrew? Anyone who adheres to Hebrew traditions? Or speaks Hebrew?
I am of Jewish descent. Hebrew essentially means nomadic and use to actually be derogatory like calling someone a gypsy. However, the patriach Abraham in Jewish tradition is the first Hebrew so called because he left his homeland of Ur of the Chaldeans. Hebrews are essentially nomadic Sumerian people that moved Westward.
The question was about the Hebrews, not the Jewish religion. How can you be a decendant of a religion? Where talking about people who were from the Hebrew nation ... Not the Jewish religion which is newer then Islam.
So please stay on topic please ... and please remember there is a real difference between religion and nationality.
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Well, recently I reread Aya, and I recommend Cartoon History of the Universe to any and all.
I don't know what kind of Jew (perhaps a No Jew) who ranks the Christian KJV Bible over any Jewish TaNaKh.
So, no such implied bout is possible between the suggested opponents.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: These kind of threads border on being comic book or graphic novel ...
LOL That depends on the comic book or graphic novel. What kinds do YOU read, Takruri? . . . . ... Osirion is back, do I sense another conflict of black Jew vs. white Jew again??
I prefer the Jewish historian Josephus over either the KJV or the Tankah.
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Willing Thinker {What Box}:
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: Evergreen Writes:
How does one define a Hebrew?
Always you with the legitamit and fundamental question.
Definition, please?
A Hebrew? Anyone who adheres to Hebrew traditions? Or speaks Hebrew?
I am of Jewish descent. Hebrew essentially means nomadic and use to actually be derogatory like calling someone a gypsy. However, the patriach Abraham in Jewish tradition is the first Hebrew so called because he left his homeland of Ur of the Chaldeans. Hebrews are essentially nomadic Sumerian people that moved Westward.
The question was about the Hebrews, not the Jewish religion. How can you be a decendant of a religion? Where talking about people who were from the Hebrew nation ... Not the Jewish religion which is newer then Islam.
So please stay on topic please ... and please remember there is a real difference between religion and nationality.
You question was still answered.
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Well, recently I reread Aya, and I recommend Cartoon History of the Universe to any and all.
I don't know what kind of Jew (perhaps a No Jew) who ranks the Christian KJV Bible over any Jewish TaNaKh.
So, no such implied bout is possible between the suggested opponents.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: These kind of threads border on being comic book or graphic novel ...
LOL That depends on the comic book or graphic novel. What kinds do YOU read, Takruri? . . . . ... Osirion is back, do I sense another conflict of black Jew vs. white Jew again??
Intriguing, who is the so called Black Jew? Am I the supposed White Jew? I am not White or Black. I am Jewish by heritage only.
My theory is that the Exodus occurred during the fall of the Hyksos dynasties, however, I am open to additional theories.
What is this:
Yosef was vizier under a Rm.t.w pharaoh not a Hyksos (A3mw) pharaoh.
How is this Pharoah and what Dynasty?
Yes, indeed Jethro's daughter mistook Moses as an Egyptian. There's a good explaination for that besides Moses being Black. It doesn't appear that the Hebrews had an issue with identifying Moses as an Hebrew. Besides, the fall of the Hyksos dynasty would have left a significant number of mixed race Egyptians (likely royalty as well). Also, the Hyksos ruled Egypt for well over a century and adopted Egyptian ways quite thoroughly. Perhaps the Eastern Midianites/proto-Sabean people were simply misinformed.
Even the Classic writers that describe Egyptians seem to be conflicted. Some say that they look Black w/ Curly hair and then other say that they were more like Norther Indians (in comparison to Ethiopian looking Southern Indians). Is this not explained by foreign rule and subsequent mixing of the populations?
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by R U 2 religious: The question was about the Hebrews, not the Jewish religion. How can you be a decendant of a religion? Where talking about people who were from the Hebrew nation ... Not the Jewish religion which is newer then Islam.
So please stay on topic please ... and please remember there is a real difference between religion and nationality.
I believe your question was answered already. I also forgot to say that Markellion's topic title sounds like the nonsense that is the main tenant of belief of the black cult known as the Black Hebrew Israelites!
quote:Originally posted by osiriun: I prefer the Jewish historian Josephus over either the KJV or the Tankah.
Is there even a difference or conflict specifically between the writings of Josephus and the scripture of his people, the Tanakh? Also, how are the writings of Josephus more reliable in regards to the Exodus since Josephus was born millennia after that event?
quote: Intriguing, who is the so called Black Jew? Am I the supposed White Jew? I am not White or Black. I am Jewish by heritage only.
I regarded Al Takruri as the black Jew and you as the 'white' Jew. I don't know how you look like or how 'white' you are. It was just a presumption based on my observation of your "Eurasian" emphasis on your Jewish heritage.
quote:My theory is that the Exodus occurred during the fall of the Hyksos dynasties, however, I am open to additional theories.
And your theory may be right, but you seem to be going about it the wrong way.
quote:What is this:
Yosef was vizier under a Rm.t.w pharaoh not a Hyksos (A3mw) pharaoh.
Rm.t.w is the Egyptian word for 'man' or native (Egyptian). A3mw or Aamu is the Egyptian word for Asiatic.
quote:How is this Pharoah and what Dynasty?
Takruri meant there was nothing in Hebrew scripture to suggest the Pharaoh of the exodus was Asiatic himself and not a native Egyptian.
quote:Yes, indeed Jethro's daughter mistook Moses as an Egyptian. There's a good explaination for that besides Moses being Black. It doesn't appear that the Hebrews had an issue with identifying Moses as an Hebrew. Besides, the fall of the Hyksos dynasty would have left a significant number of mixed race Egyptians (likely royalty as well). Also, the Hyksos ruled Egypt for well over a century and adopted Egyptian ways quite thoroughly. Perhaps the Eastern Midianites/proto-Sabean people were simply misinformed.
The problem is that you assume all Hebrews of that time looked a certain way as to appear different from African looking Egyptians, even though such Hebrews were living in Egypt/Africa for quite some time according to Hebrew scripture. I find it funny how you note admixture from Asiatics among the Egyptians even among the royals yet you don't acknowledge Egyptian admixture among the Hebrews even when native Egyptians were the majority whereas Asiatics like the Hebrews were a minority.
Another problem is you assume that Egyptian royals of foreign ancestry could inherit the throne or have any significant part in successio or rule when there is evidence that suggests Egyptians maintained a system to ensure the pharaonic institute lay in the hands of 'pure' natives only.
Also, what did the Midianites have to do with Sabaeans or even proto-Sabaeans??
quote:Even the Classic writers that describe Egyptians seem to be conflicted. Some say that they look Black w/ Curly hair and then other say that they were more like Norther Indians (in comparison to Ethiopian looking Southern Indians). Is this not explained by foreign rule and subsequent mixing of the populations?
You must be mistaken because Classical Greek writers never even ventured into southern India, and described the people of northern India as being Aethiopian! Hence, Classical authors labeled Africans as 'Western Aethiopies' while black Asiatics like Indians were called 'Eastern Aethiopies'.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
[/QUOTE]You must be mistaken because Classical Greek writers never even ventured into southern India, and described the people of northern India as being Aethiopian! Hence, Classical authors labeled Africans as 'Western Aethiopies' while black Asiatics like Indians were called 'Eastern Aethiopies'. [/QUOTE]
According to Arrian (Indica 6.9):
The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.
If you'd notice, those authors that describe Egyptians as Black and whoolly haired are the oldest accounts, while Arrian and Malinus are relatively newer (during the roman era). Yet and still, the Indians, according to the later color scheme were only slightly lighter than Western Aitheopians, with Egyptians being described as mildly lighter, with those at the border being a bit darker than the rest; all of this according to Snowden. Funny enough, even later writers still describe them as black, such as Marcellinus, al-Jahiz, and even the Kebra Negast.. As for "appearance", I'd say that this reference is rather subjective and obscure. But yes, there is a bit of conflicting but the overwhelming theme remains the same. They were darked skinned and whooly haired, no matter if their complexion was described as somewhat lighter by others a bit later on, and both the earliest and latest writers have described the native population as black..
9th century A.D.
The Negroes also have the sweetest breath and the greatest amount of saliva being in this respect like the dog as compared with other animals. As we said the Blacks are more numerous than the Whites since they are made up of the Ethiopians, the Fezzans, Berbers, Copts, Nubians, Faghwans, the people of Meroe, Ceylon, India, Quamar and Indo-China. The isles between Africa and China are all peopled with Blacks, that is Ceylon, Kalah, Zabig.................The Copts natives of Egypt are also a black race. Abraham wished to have a child by one of their race and thus Ishmael the ancestor of the Arabs was born. The Prophet Mohammet also had a child by Mary the Copt. - Al-Jahiz, (Superiority Of The Blacks To The Whites)
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.
If you'd notice, those authors that describe Egyptians as Black and whoolly haired are the oldest accounts, while Arrian and Malinus are relatively newer (during the roman era). Yet and still, the Indians, according to the later color scheme were only slightly lighter than Western Aitheopians, with Egyptians being described as mildly lighter, with those at the border being a bit darker than the rest; all of this according to Snowden. Funny enough, even later writers still describe them as black, such as Marcellinus, al-Jahiz, and even the Kebra Negast.. As for "appearance", I'd say that this reference is rather subjective and obscure. But yes, there is a bit of conflicting but the overwhelming theme remains the same. They were darked skinned and whooly haired, no matter if their complexion was described as somewhat lighter by others a bit later on, and both the earliest and latest writers have described the native population as black..
9th century A.D.
The Negroes also have the sweetest breath and the greatest amount of saliva being in this respect like the dog as compared with other animals. As we said the Blacks are more numerous than the Whites since they are made up of the Ethiopians, the Fezzans, Berbers, Copts, Nubians, Faghwans, the people of Meroe, Ceylon, India, Quamar and Indo-China. The isles between Africa and China are all peopled with Blacks, that is Ceylon, Kalah, Zabig.................The Copts natives of Egypt are also a black race. Abraham wished to have a child by one of their race and thus Ishmael the ancestor of the Arabs was born. The Prophet Mohammet also had a child by Mary the Copt. - Al-Jahiz, (Superiority Of The Blacks To The Whites)
No need to educate me on this, I was just making a point that Egyptians have been described in many ways. Perhaps due to the increased multi-ethnic make up of the Egyptian population over time.
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sundiata: If you'd notice, those authors that describe Egyptians as Black and whoolly haired are the oldest accounts, while Arrian and Malinus are relatively newer (during the roman era). Yet and still, the Indians, according to the later color scheme were only slightly lighter than Western Aitheopians, with Egyptians being described as mildly lighter, with those at the border being a bit darker than the rest; all of this according to Snowden. Funny enough, even later writers still describe them as black, such as Marcellinus, al-Jahiz, and even the Kebra Negast.. As for "appearance", I'd say that this reference is rather subjective and obscure. But yes, there is a bit of conflicting but the overwhelming theme remains the same. They were darked skinned and whooly haired, no matter if their complexion was described as somewhat lighter by others a bit later on, and both the earliest and latest writers have described the native population as black..
So the author he quotes is Arrian. Ah, that explains it. By 'Classical' author, I thought Osiriun meant Classical Greek, but it was an author from the Roman period as no Greek or any European has travelled to south India until Roman times.
But notice how Arrian's account is one of those few accounts cited most often by Eurocentrics and white racists in an attempt to refute that ancient Egyptians were black.
quote:9th century A.D.
The Negroes also have the sweetest breath and the greatest amount of saliva being in this respect like the dog as compared with other animals. As we said the Blacks are more numerous than the Whites since they are made up of the Ethiopians, the Fezzans, Berbers, Copts, Nubians, Faghwans, the people of Meroe, Ceylon, India, Quamar and Indo-China. The isles between Africa and China are all peopled with Blacks, that is Ceylon, Kalah, Zabig.................The Copts natives of Egypt are also a black race. Abraham wished to have a child by one of their race and thus Ishmael the ancestor of the Arabs was born. The Prophet Mohammet also had a child by Mary the Copt. - Al-Jahiz, (Superiority Of The Blacks To The Whites)
Of course.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
I call them proto-Sabean people because the Mineans come to control the Midian territories and subsequently the Midianites are somewhat absorbed into this group.
This is from:
The Arabs in Antiquity: Their History from the Assyrians to the Umayyads By Jan RetsoĚ
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ But the Minaeans are different from proto-Sabaeans. Also, the Minaeans mainly occupied the Arabah territory of the Midianites located in the area south of the Dead Sea and the Gulf of Aqaba. Midianite territory was more much more extensive, stretching from north of the Dead Sea in Western Jordan to western part of Sinai according to Hebrew texts.
Also, there are scholars who identify the Midianites with the Hyksos who were expelled from Egypt! Many scholars also identify the Midianites with a people Egyptians called 'Shasu' which is another term for nomads. Some scholars think the Isrealites were part of this group but the Merneptah Stele makes a distinction between the Shasu and Isrealites.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here are scenes from those well known paintings from the Middle Kingdom tomb of nobleman Knumhotep in modern Beni Hassan depicting an Asiatic group entering Egypt:
men
women
^ These people have been identified by many to be early Hebrews.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Here are scenes from those well known paintings from the Middle Kingdom tomb of nobleman Knumhotep in modern Beni Hassan depicting an Asiatic group entering Egypt:
...^ These people have been identified by many to be early Hebrews.
Those are not actual photographs of the physical paintings from Ancient Kemet, but artist illustrations of the original eroded wall arts (again, the use commonsense is very uncommon these days). The artist’s expressions were most likely done by a European or an Arab artist. Therefore, the artist repaints badly eroded Black African image artworks and makes it look like him or herself. Now the correct thing for the poster to do is to find the actual photograph of reference used by artists to illustrate the images. If none exists, debaters should make note of this when they post images like that. This simple method of presentation makes it easy to discover and track lies and errors.
This is why there is confusion where people refer to Ancient Black Africans, who were Ancient Hebrews and exist in the hundreds of millions all over Africa and worldwide today.
As I said before, it may take a while, but eventually all the b.sing will run out of fuel and the truth will come out.
Posts: 213 | From: New York City, USA | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: Those are not actual photographs of the physical paintings from Ancient Kemet, but artist illustrations of the original eroded wall arts (again, the use commonsense is very uncommon these days). The artist’s expressions were most likely done by a European or an Arab artist. Therefore, the artist repaints badly eroded Black African image artworks and makes it look like him or herself.
Which is why the Egyptians in the reconstruction don't look like black Africans---er, wait...
Why do so many people here believe the Ancient Hebrews were black? Why couldn't they just have been tawny like the other north Arabians?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Those illustrations are based on original surviving paint from the murals. As you can see the Egyptians are painted in a dark brown complexions while the Asiatics are depicted in yellowish complexion.
I don't know what you mean by the Egyptians not looking like black Africans. Are you saying there are no Africans with that complexion and with those features?
As for Hebrews, they obviously weren't African since they obviously supposedly originated in Asia but as to whether they were black or not is whole other issue. There is no doubt however that the Hebrews as well as other Semitic speaking people of the Levant did have African influence as can be seen not only among their languages and culture but from anthropology and genetics.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Those illustrations are based on original surviving paint from the murals.
Again, the point is why do we need a second hand, foriegn re-dipictions of Ancient works to percieve what Ancient Black Africans looked like?
Where are the photographs showing the original mural dipictions unmodified whether erorded or not ("original surviving paint from the murals")? Are they now totally destroyed leaving us with Euro-Arab second-hand ideas of what ancient people in Africa looked like?
quote:As for Hebrews, they obviously weren't African since they obviously supposedly originated in Asia but as to whether they were black or not is whole other issue.
The images provided makes nothing obvious except they “suppose” and are second hand works supposedly based on original Ancient works which we have no way of seeing, effectively rendering any claims of Ancient Hebrews not being Black Africans completely pointless, inadmissible and straw man hunting.
Playing the geographical shifting game and attribute these Ancient Hebrews to Asia while leaving the color of their skin open for debate doesn't help those against the Black African origin of ancient Hebrews. Are we to believe these Ancient Hebrews left Asia, bringing everything to Africa and leaving nothing in Asia to be discovered? If I’m supposed to believe this, then I have to say such hypothesis may be possible attempts at insulting my intelligence. This tired damage control technique is redundant and insufficient at denting the obvious truth. I know it's a hard pill to swallow just as the pill containing the truth that Ancient Kemetians were Black Africans; Ancient Hebrews were also Black Africans and in time, extensive academic works done on the persistent customs and heritage of "Traditional African Spiritual Beliefs" will prove this to be truth and an axiom in purity; and not some Arab or European modification and/or destruction of Ancient works.
Since there are many people on EgyptSearch who may live in Egypt advantaging over those who live here in the U.S., maybe some should volunteer and make the trip with a digital camera and take some pictures for the sake of enhancing points of objectivity.
Posts: 213 | From: New York City, USA | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: Again, the point is why do we need a second hand, foriegn re-dipictions of Ancient works to percieve what Ancient Black Africans looked like?
Where are the photographs showing the original mural dipictions unmodified whether erorded or not ("original surviving paint from the murals")? Are they now totally destroyed leaving us with Euro-Arab second-hand ideas of what ancient people in Africa looked like?
Nope. They are right here:
There is no Eurocentric deceit about it. Do you deny the Egyptians depicted these Aamu as light skinned with yellowish complexion??
quote:The images provided makes nothing obvious except they “suppose” and are second hand works supposedly based on original Ancient works which we have no way of seeing, effectively rendering any claims of Ancient Hebrews not being Black Africans completely pointless, inadmissible and straw man hunting.
Playing the geographical shifting game and attribute these Ancient Hebrews to Asia while leaving the color of their skin open for debate doesn't help those against the Black African origin of ancient Hebrews. Are we to believe these Ancient Hebrews left Asia, bringing everything to Africa and leaving nothing in Asia to be discovered? If I’m supposed to believe this, then I have to say such hypothesis may be possible attempts at insulting my intelligence. This tired damage control technique is redundant and insufficient at denting the obvious truth. I know it's a hard pill to swallow just as the pill containing the truth that Ancient Kemetians were Black Africans; Ancient Hebrews were also Black Africans and in time, extensive academic works done on the persistent customs and heritage of "Traditional African Spiritual Beliefs" will prove this to be truth and an axiom in purity; and not some Arab or European modification and/or destruction of Ancient works.
Since there are many people on EgyptSearch who may live in Egypt advantaging over those who live here in the U.S., maybe some should volunteer and make the trip with a digital camera and take some pictures for the sake of enhancing points of objectivity.
LOL YOU are the last one to speak of objectivity when you dismiss Classical Greek artwork as whiteman's frauds because they look, well European! Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry, but these images further amount to insufficiencies and are unsatisfactory in convincing or shaking the firmness of those stubbornly locked onto the truth. Since whole academic arguments have been, and still are, built on Eurocentric myths arguing Black African history, it is perfectly legal under the laws of the universe and human birthright for myself or any other Black African intellect to build solid academic materials completely based on their own view of the world supported by their own research results and what they know or feel to be truthful facts while disregarding Eurocentric views all together if they choose to. After all, multiple ideas can co-exist and most debates centered on ancient Black African histories are constructed with tons of mythical fact but very little truth; even though the people in focus are well and alive in Africa today and carrying on their traditions as they’ve always have.
Basic questions like why the Lemba, Igbo, Ewe, Ashanti, Yoruba, Luo, Wolof and many others Black African groups maintain massive amounts of Ancient Kemetian language structures in their present day languages have not been answered by detractors of the obvious and clear reasons. Or why many of these same Black African groups practice spiritual customs strikingly similar and eerily authentic in their forms and order to that of Ancient Hebraic ones with persistent resistance against foreign attempts to eliminate them. At the same time, melding any adopted foreign religion with their Ancient practices without any feelings of contradictions whatsoever (ex: ”Nigerians meld Christianity, Islam with ancient practices”).
Unfortunately many of these unanswered questions officially remain on the status of “subject of heated debates” and yet, un-sourced images and mythical hypothesis are accepted in arguments with deliberate attempts of further obscuring the true identity of Ancient Hebrews as Black Africans who exist today in fruitful sizes all over Black Africa and out. Myths and creative fantasy stories are good for an entertaining night in front of the big screen displaying cool Disney and Pixar logos, but in reality and in the presence of truthful academic and scientific research, and under the pressures intellectual scrutiny, myths and fantasies in place of reality hold weights equivalent to zero lbs just like the “supposed” images above.
Posts: 213 | From: New York City, USA | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Canaanitic is essentially Hebrew, as far as the language itself goes, but the identity of the traders is given in the text above the dark oryx's head.
What's that funny looking hook thing? And what about that that three humped thing directly behind it?
What do they spell?
Anything familiar sounding?
Hmmm?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ These people have been identified by many to be early Hebrews.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why is it so hard for Euros like you to accept the fact that the basis of your own religious morality that raised you up out of the worship of Tiwaz, Wotan, Tor, Freyr, Freia, Frigga -- all whom your people so lovingly retained in the names of the days of the week -- alongside a bloody Valhalla eternal battlefield & beerhall heaven as the best of afterlifes, came from a people who penned themselves in no uncertain terms; sh*hhora ani w*na'wa (black am I and comely)?
Your wishology -- oh how I wish how I wish the Children of Israel were tawny, not black. Oh pretty please god don't let them be (gasp) black -- is a lie.
posted
Like the Macrobians ran it down to Persian Cambyses' Ichthyphagi spies:
Asian hands off what's mine not yours (and be glad I don't covet what's yours).
The Levant is no part of any Asia. I'll be dead and damned before I sit still and allow old Greek misnomers be today's fact when we all know better, that neither the Levant/Mesopotamia/Arabian Peninsula nor the subcontinent of India were ever geologically birthed as, or part of, the geological entity EurAsia.
And I will fight to the death for the land rights of this stolen part of my continent most recently misnomered Middle East.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: As for Hebrews, they obviously weren't African since they obviously supposedly originated in Asia ...
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even funnier is the fact that many anthropologists and ancient arts specialists are fully aware of the detailed, painstaking rules Ancient Kemetian artists were required to follow, similar to those exercised in creating the artworks of Ife, Igbo-Ukwu, Benin and so on. Yet, those arguing against the Black African origin of Ancient Hebrews and Ancient Kemet and attempting to post questionable images, post images of the poorest artistic quality criminally breaking all the complex rules of required by Ancient royal artists of the civilizations in focus. As a results, we have images, like the ones above were body proportions are completely misaligned and some even looking physically disabled with one arm abnormally larger than the other. Or, pointy nose looking Arabs trying to rock an afro as replacement of Black Africans only adds to the amusements of such fraudulent attempts.
The fine arts of Ancient Kemet, similar to those of Ife, Igbo-Ukwu and Benin, with the aim of constructing ultra realistic representations of objects, human and animal figures (not abstract, ceremonial ones), were contracted with great care and mastery of proportions and the artists understood opposite sides of the body were never perfectly symmetrical; that one ear was always, minutely bigger than the other and they represented these delicate subtleties in their arts. Even in bas-reliefs/original paintings, though harder to control in some aspects, featured such careful approach in proportioning artworks. In contrast to original ancient Black African artworks, the fraudulent images above reveal second-hand works of a hasty incorrect by foreigners racing to replace Black African images with their racial types and so such lies are marred with hilarious and extreme alien-like disfigures.
For those who may not know, ancient Black Africans, as many of them still do today, overwhelmingly carved and constructed whole structures out of rocks, wood, brass, gold and so on, rather than paint. This practice of great physical labor was and still is one of Black Africa’s ways of showing devotion, respect while expressing the African proverb of: “good things come with hard work”. Europeans are mostly know for painting throughout their short history of, gradually coming of age (say 550 years or less), and some Black Africans viewed this as a sign of laziness. From my experience in studying and documenting the redundant patterns of European lies, whenever Eurocentric minds start posting images of paintings in relation to Black African histories, it usually a complete lie, a fabrication and a fraud and should be dismissed immediately until proven otherwise.
It is a shame when people feel they need to hide or destroy original artifacts only the present suggested second-hand replication and then trying to sell them to the public as authentic.
Posts: 213 | From: New York City, USA | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: Sorry, but these images further amount to insufficiencies and are unsatisfactory in convincing or shaking the firmness of those stubbornly locked onto the truth. Since whole academic arguments have been, and still are, built on Eurocentric myths arguing Black African history, it is perfectly legal under the laws of the universe and human birthright for myself or any other Black African intellect to build solid academic materials completely based on their own view of the world supported by their own research results and what they know or feel to be truthful facts while disregarding Eurocentric views all together if they choose to. After all, multiple ideas can co-exist and most debates centered on ancient Black African histories are constructed with tons of mythical fact but very little truth; even though the people in focus are well and alive in Africa today and carrying on their traditions as they’ve always have.
Basic questions like why the Lemba, Igbo, Ewe, Ashanti, Yoruba, Luo, Wolof and many others Black African groups maintain massive amounts of Ancient Kemetian language structures in their present day languages have not been answered by detractors of the obvious and clear reasons. Or why many of these same Black African groups practice spiritual customs strikingly similar and eerily authentic in their forms and order to that of Ancient Hebraic ones with persistent resistance against foreign attempts to eliminate them. At the same time, melding any adopted foreign religion with their Ancient practices without any feelings of contradictions whatsoever (ex: ”Nigerians meld Christianity, Islam with ancient practices”).
Unfortunately many of these unanswered questions officially remain on the status of “subject of heated debates” and yet, un-sourced images and mythical hypothesis are accepted in arguments with deliberate attempts of further obscuring the true identity of Ancient Hebrews as Black Africans who exist today in fruitful sizes all over Black Africa and out. Myths and creative fantasy stories are good for an entertaining night in front of the big screen displaying cool Disney and Pixar logos, but in reality and in the presence of truthful academic and scientific research, and under the pressures intellectual scrutiny, myths and fantasies in place of reality hold weights equivalent to zero lbs just like the “supposed” images above.
No need for a long-winded post about Eurocentric myth-making. I already know about that and never denied it, but you are no different if you deny authentic Classical Greek statues are Greek just because they look European.
Moving on...
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Canaanitic is essentially Hebrew, as far as the language itself goes, but the identity of the traders is given in the text above the dark oryx's head.
What's that funny looking hook thing? And what about that that three humped thing directly behind it?
What do they spell?
Anything familiar sounding?
Hmmm?
I don't know, since I don't know Mdu-Neter but as I said some people identify those Asiatics as Hebrew. Not I since I never claimed to know their identity.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Like the Macrobians ran it down to Persian Cambyses' Ichthyphagi spies:
Asian hands off what's mine not yours (and be glad I don't covet what's yours).
The Levant is no part of any Asia. I'll be dead and damned before I sit still and allow old Greek misnomers be today's fact when we all know better, that neither the Levant/Mesopotamia/Arabian Peninsula nor the subcontinent of India were ever geologically birthed as, or part of, the geological entity EurAsia.
And I will fight to the death for the land rights of this stolen part of my continent most recently misnomered Middle East.
LOL You have a point there. And I think you made it already in your thread S.W.A.N.E.A. (SW Asia NE Africa). So call me caught up in 'da tradition' and sue me. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.
To which Sundiata replied:
quote:Originally posted by Sundiata: If you'd notice, those authors that describe Egyptians as Black and whoolly haired are the oldest accounts, while Arrian and Malinus are relatively newer (during the roman era). Yet and still, the Indians, according to the later color scheme were only slightly lighter than Western Aitheopians, with Egyptians being described as mildly lighter, with those at the border being a bit darker than the rest; all of this according to Snowden. Funny enough, even later writers still describe them as black, such as Marcellinus, al-Jahiz, and even the Kebra Negast.. As for "appearance", I'd say that this reference is rather subjective and obscure. But yes, there is a bit of conflicting but the overwhelming theme remains the same. They were darked skinned and whooly haired, no matter if their complexion was described as somewhat lighter by others a bit later on, and both the earliest and latest writers have described the native population as black..
...In addition, does anyone notice they way the words were worded?
Look:
"The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia:"
Hmm, ok, but more...
" the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians;"
^Ok.
"the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically."
^^^Most like, perhaps, as in closer to the Egyptians than other Aithiopians which would still make sense assuming [i]Northern Indians being lighter than the two.
So I ask: So what?
quote:9th century A.D.
The Copts natives of Egypt are also a black race. Abraham wished to have a child by one of their race and thus Ishmael the ancestor of the Arabs was born. The Prophet Mohammet also had a child by Mary the Copt. - Al-Jahiz, (Superiority Of The Blacks To The Whites)
Hmmm... interesting. Since when have ancient writers stopped regarding Israel as black? I have this funny feeling that the dis-association of their progenator (that is, for 'Jews' and 'Arabs' both) with black probably [b]began somewhere, out of Levantine bias or wishful thinking (NOT saying Arabs always and only hated blacks, or anything).
Please don't give me any of that 'Semite' crapony, as, aside from its plain out faultiness, it comes from a word meaning half, and is usially associated with Shem although he is the brother of Ham, all mythical characters.
I'm not dealing in mythology. Yes, we can use texts like the Bible as historical text, but my main concern is the Arabs. It's whether or not they wanted to dis-associate themselves with anything black, which is likely if you aks me...
quote:Originally posted by osiriun: I am of Jewish descent. Hebrew essentially means nomadic and use to actually be derogatory like calling someone a gypsy.
Disregarding you're previous post, I'd like to know how one comes up with this concoction..
quote:However, the patriach Abraham in Jewish tradition is the first Hebrew so called because he left his homeland of Ur of the Chaldeans.
O.
quote: Hebrews are essentially nomadic Sumerian people that moved Westward.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Well, recently I reread Aya, and I recommend Cartoon History of the Universe to any and all.
Good to know.
quote:I don't know what kind of Jew (perhaps a No Jew) who ranks the Christian KJV Bible over any Jewish TaNaKh.
So, no such implied bout is possible between the suggested opponents.
I know a Jew, or supposed Jew who follows the Bible. Well, I don't know him personally or how closely he follows the Bible. I do aggree that that is a bit strange.
quote:Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: Those are not actual photographs of the physical paintings from Ancient Kemet, but artist illustrations of the original eroded wall arts
Interesting...but given your track record [with the 'black african ancient Greeks'] and all, I'd say that whether or not the repro is accurate, I'mma be keepin ma eye on you buddy...
EDIT:
quote:alTakruri: Why is it so hard for Euros like you to accept the fact that the basis of your own religious morality that raised you up out of the worship of Tiwaz, Wotan, Tor, Freyr, Freia, Frigga -- all whom your people so lovingly retained in the names of the days of the week -- alongside a bloody Valhalla eternal battlefield & beerhall heaven as the best of afterlifes, came from a people who penned themselves in no uncertain terms; sh*hhora ani w*na'wa (black am I and comely)?
Ever so nicely put, alTakruri.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: LOL You have a point there. And I think you made it already in your thread S.W.A.N.E.A. (SW Asia NE Africa). So call me caught up in 'da tradition' and sue me.
^Lmao, He does have a point there about 'da tradition'.
quote:AlTakruri:
As gentlemen, let's duel!
Pistols at twenty paces, OK.
Brrrrrrraaaaaaaappppppppppp. Ooops sorry my machine gun accidently went off as soon as you turned to count paces.
posted
If Any7thing the ancient Hebrews were a mixed people of Migrating Northeast africans (probably horn or Egypt) and indigenous population of Anatolia/Levant.
The E3b haplogroup has been observed in all Jewish groups world wide. It is considered to be the 2nd most prevelent haplogroup amoung the Jewish population.
According to one major paper,
E-M35 is considered to be the second highest, next to J, for "Founding Jewish Lineages" in Europe.
Also the ancient hebrews would have been similar in phenotype to the palestinians not like these plastic Jews (majority today) who parade their "jewishness" like there is no tomorrow, and are mainly derived of German, polish and other east european ancestry who occupied this religion during the "middle ages".
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
No need for a long-winded post about Eurocentric myth-making. I already know about that and never denied it, but you are no different if you deny authentic Classical Greek statues are Greek just because they look European.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic