posted
This thread is to discuss the possibility of Tjemehu ancestry for the Fulani. This thread was made to avoid distraction from the Egyptian origin of the Fulani in the thread of that name
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
We have prehistoric paintings from the Sahara of dark skinned and light skinned individuals who seem to be of distinct ethnicity with separate cultures.
Among the dark skinned are those whom some posit as ancestral Fulani. They are painted like this.
Now a painting of the light skinned.
We also have a painting from Seti I's tomb depicting a light skinned people from west of Egypt. Here is the only one that was nearly left intact accompanied by the glyphs for Amenti the lands west of Egypt.
Finally a pic of the clothing Bororo wear only for the yaake and geerewol ceremonial dances held once a year.
Missing: Tehenu crossbands (since they were ancient Libyans too, and maybe preceded the Tjemehu by a few centuries).
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looks like it turned invisible above so here again is the unmarred TMHHy from Seti I's tomb both the Lepsius crew painting and a photo by Kent Weeks of the Theban Mapping Project
The tomb wall has deteriated even more since Lepsius' day.
posted
^ Are the rock-paintings of the white figures really contemporary to the others in Tassili if so, are they really depictions of 'white' people or are they symbolic?? Also, what is the earliest Egyptian depiction of white Tamahu?? Was it not the Middle Kingdom?? If so, then why do I constantly hear about white Libyans since predynastic times if not earlier??
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good questions. I'm researching their provenance to assure they're bovidian. Also to see whether they possible pre-date, post-date or if they're comtemoraneous in regards to Tjemehu of the BG vignette.
I think it unfair to suppose dark images are of blacks then propose light images are symbolic. We have to face the issue of lighter skinned North Africans head on instead of wishing them away to limbo.
Without seriously looking into it, I think the New Kingdom is when creamy Libyans enter the picture (ouch).
There's a Diop polemic about pre-dynastic whites in the delta. I don't know if they're supposed to be Tjemehu or what. Will have to reread African Origins for clarity. TTBOMK Tjemehu become a known entity not very long after the Tehenu but I need to refresh myself on this.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Are the rock-paintings of the white figures really contemporary to the others in Tassili if so, are they really depictions of 'white' people or are they symbolic?? Also, what is the earliest Egyptian depiction of white Tamahu?? Was it not the Middle Kingdom?? If so, then why do I constantly hear about white Libyans since predynastic times if not earlier??
An interesting note about the "Tale of Sinuhe" of the 12th Dynasty:
quote: Now His Majesty had despatched an army to the land of the Temhi , and his eldest son was the captain thereof, the good god Sesostris. Even now he was returning, having carried away captives of the Tehenu and cattle of all kinds beyond number .
Temhi being synonomous with Tjemehu. Thus, dispatching an army into the land of Tjemehu and returning with Tehenu captives? "Tehenu" have never been confused with "light skinnned" people, so we have them here as being "captives" in the middle kingdom. This might suggest that the appearance of "white" Tamahu coming at an even later date.
Posts: 455 | From: Tharsis Montes | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The single feather glyphs are reminiscent of Woodabe and of the rock art figures which also have the single feather -- but these rock art figures contrast (they are painted white) with figures in paintings said to present Fulani cultural traits.
I would like to know where the rock art image of the single feather-garbed people is from and when its dated to.
If it was Libyan it'd come as no cultural shock to me as its right next door to likely habitats of groups ancestral to modern West Sahelian folk.
quote:alTakruri: We have to face the issue of lighter skinned North Africans head on.
Of course.
Lighter skinned Africans exist in Mountainous regions, in Southern and Central regions, not to mention in North Africa 'proper' today.
Speaking of moderns, my educated guess is that they probably appear the way they do because of a combination of factors -- namely insitu evolution, demic diffusion and expansion [which likely occur sometime during and after the Dynastic era]. What makes things interesting is they are likely of Lower/Middle Nile Valley Origins and are paternally descendents of a marker that might be most common among Darfurians.
Some posts on the subject of the Tamahou, Fulani and rock art, from the aforementioned thread:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: It is the creamy colored TMHHW depicted in Seti I's tomb who are compared to Fulani not the dark THHNW. Those TMHHW do phenotypically resemble Zenaga iMazighen more than Bororo Fulani.
Points of phenotypical/physical similarity: * Facial profile - straight (orthognous) * Chin - tufted goatee beard * Hair - thick locks * Nose - thin nostrils, well defined bridge * Face - gaunt (narrow) * Body - slim wiry build
We could also examine the clothing of the TMHHW and the Bororo to unravel superficial resemblances. Note that Reynolds-Marniche didn't originate the idea of TMHHW-WoDaabe kinship. She should've closely compared the two on her own instead of repeating earlier pronouncements.
In any event Reynolds-Marniche doesn't support an Egyptian origin of the Fulani. She sees them as Gaitule descendants and thus of 'Libyan' antecedents. She point blank labels them black Berbers.
quote:Originally posted by Whatbox: Off topic but check out the head gear:
Are those feathers or what?
Tamahou?
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: The fact remains that Saharan rock art distinguishes the cattle herders by phenotype as well as culture from the 'white' hunters and militants who are feathered. The art with Fulani cultural traits portray brown skinned folk who in no way resemble the TMHHW of the pharaohs' tomb paintings unlike these 'whites' who do.
Bororo distinguish themselves from Berbers and do acknowledge a one time subservient position to them. Bororo men shy from taking Berber wives and chide Bororo women who marry Berber men as reverting to the position in former times as being subservient to Berbers.
Today variants of Pulaar/Fulfulde is the Fulani vernacular. Fulani legends say the first Fulbe ancestors didn't speak Fulfulde. One of the first Fulani groups of historical mention were the Banu Warith, a clan of the Godalla taMazight speakers. Some linguist claim a taMazight substratum is in Fulfulde that's absent from the Serere and Wolof Atlantic languages.
Those TMHHW who were creamy colored, because all of them weren't creamy colored, got the cream in their coffee from northern Mediterraneans both before and after the events of the Trojan War and the 'Sea People' migrations.
Since descriptions of Latin Rome and thereafter don't recognize the Maurs as white skinned the white Riffians colour must come from the trade in white women instituted and well noted after the rise of Islam. If not, then it may be from prehistory when the 'Beaker' trade and other trade was ongoing between the western half of littoral North Africa, Spain, and Mediterranean islanders.
Very many contemporay littoral North Africans are partially descended from Spaniards, Italians, and Greeks. It's these misegenated iMazighen who cry the most against 'black' Africans and take pains to remove themselves from any connections to blacks or to non-'Berber' Africans.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: The Tamahou and Tehenu need not be confused with one another. The former were generally featured as light-toned characters sporting double-feathered gear on their heads; whereas the latter were darker-toned characters, and did not sport a feathered head gear. The former wore a cape-like garment, whereas the latter were more bare in their dressing, entailing distinctive straps crossing one another across the chest area, neck gear or laces, and sheaths covering their frontal ends.
The aforementioned "strapped-gear" may be reminiscent of those occasionally seen on Wodaabe/Bororo dancers, generally white in color; however, this is a far cry from identifying the Tehenu as the Bororo. For one, such garment is by no means relegated to the Bororo; Intore dancers for instance, feature such garment. As a matter of an example, a wall-relief displays the Tehenu without a feathered head gear. The Bororo dancers typically have single-feathered head gears, with the feather right above the forehead...interestingly, reminiscent of the "white" toned figures in the rock art picture above [reposted below]. At any rate, the dress of the "white" toned figures is distinct from that associated with the Bororo...
Hard to make it out with precision due to the fairly low resolution, but some of the characters below, appear to be wearing head-gears, reminiscent of those "conical"-looking hats worn by the Bororo...
The aforementioned Tehenu wall-relief also displays domesticated fauna, like cattle, goats, donkeys/asses and possibly sheep. The cattle depicted here though, are not morphologically those of the established Fulani-variants. In a few words, there is nothing about Tehenu figures that is particularly characteristic of just the contemporary Bororo or Fulas in general.
posted
There's new stuff out on Saharan and related rock art. Look into it. The idea that styles represent periods is no longer en vogue. Styles like the economies they depict overlap. This insight does make dating of some peices harder.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri:
What is the source of these pictures?
The art of the Bovidian period is usually painted red.
Your so called "white" figures may be later additions to the rock art.
.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Good questions. I'm researching their provenance to assure they're bovidian. Also to see whether they possible pre-date, post-date or if they're comtemoraneous in regards to Tjemehu of the BG vignette.
I think it unfair to suppose dark images are of blacks then propose light images are symbolic. We have to face the issue of lighter skinned North Africans head on instead of wishing them away to limbo.
Without seriously looking into it, I think the New Kingdom is when creamy Libyans enter the picture (ouch).
There's a Diop polemic about pre-dynastic whites in the delta. I don't know if they're supposed to be Tjemehu or what. Will have to reread African Origins for clarity. TTBOMK Tjemehu become a known entity not very long after the Tehenu but I need to refresh myself on this.
You right that it is ufair to assume the white figures as symbolic while the dark figures are not, which is why I merely posed the question of it. Frankly, there are so many things unrealistic about some of the rock paintings including the dark images in terms of head and body shapes, that one could say all of the images are in one way or another symbolic. But since we can't ask the ones who painted them we may never know what they all mean. The reason why the white images may be symbolic is because I recall seeing one scene in Tassili where there was one white figure admist a group of dark figures with the white figure being somewhat seperated from the others. Some have argued that the white figure represents a ghost of spirit of somekind.
quote:Originally posted by The Gaul: http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/texts/sinuhe.htm Temhi being synonomous with Tjemehu. Thus, dispatching an army into the land of Tjemehu and returning with Tehenu captives? "Tehenu" have never been confused with "light skinnned" people, so we have them here as being "captives" in the middle kingdom. This might suggest that the appearance of "white" Tamahu coming at an even later date.
All the evidence shows that Tamahu appear only in the later periods of dynastic history. Before that, all Libyans were described as no different in physical appearance and complexion from the Egyptians. I believe a good candidate of early Libyans would be the people of the Siwa Oasis.
quote:Originally posted by Whatbox: The single feather glyphs are reminiscent of Woodabe and of the rock art figures which also have the single feather -- but these rock art figures contrast (they are painted white) with figures in paintings said to present Fulani cultural traits.
I would like to know where the rock art image of the single feather-garbed people is from and when its dated to.
If it was Libyan it'd come as no cultural shock to me as its right next door to likely habitats of groups ancestral to modern West Sahelian folk.
We shouldn't get focused on the single feather head adornments since such a feature is found in countless groups in Africa from Senegal to Eritrea and from the Sahara to Swaziland. We need to look for something more specific.
quote:Of course.
Lighter skinned Africans exist in Mountainous regions, in Southern and Central regions, not to mention in North Africa 'proper' today.
Speaking of moderns, my educated guess is that they probably appear the way they do because of a combination of factors -- namely insitu evolution, demic diffusion and expansion [which likely occur sometime during and after the Dynastic era]. What makes things interesting is they are likely of Lower/Middle Nile Valley Origins and are paternally descendents of a marker that might be most common among Darfurians.
Yes, but we know that North Africans especially those in the Mediterranean litoral carry maternal lineages from Southwest Europe and this likely explains the 'creamy' or white appearances of some Berber today like the Kabyle and the Rif. Is it not possible that the Tamahu are related to these folks??
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Much African art is done not in slavish imitation of nature, or to be like a photograph executed as a painting or a sculpture.
The African art is deliberately stylistic more so than symbolic.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ... there are so many things unrealistic about some of the rock paintings including the dark images in terms of head and body shapes, that one could say all of the images are in one way or another symbolic.
We've visited this notion before and showed TMHHW debut in documents dated to the 6th dynasty left by Harkhuf.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: All the evidence shows that Tamahu appear only in the later periods of dynastic history.
Tjemehu lived just west of the Nile. The Kabyle live in Algeria. You tell me what the relationship is. At best these modern extreme coastal types, being iMazighen, are descendents of Meshwesh the farthest west people known to the AEs (see the second link for more) who even in that remote time already were well in touch with the near whites of the the Mediterranean isles and the north Mediterranean shore. My best guess is that Tjemehu descendents are mainly still in Libya.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Yes, but we know that North Africans especially those in the Mediterranean litoral carry maternal lineages from Southwest Europe and this likely explains the 'creamy' or white appearances of some Berber today like the Kabyle and the Rif. Is it not possible that the Tamahu are related to these folks??
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: There's new stuff out on Saharan and related rock art. Look into it. The idea that styles represent periods is no longer en vogue. Styles like the economies they depict overlap. This insight does make dating of some peices harder.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri:
What is the source of these pictures?
The art of the Bovidian period is usually painted red.
Your so called "white" figures may be later additions to the rock art.
.
The style are still accepted by students of rock art. Please cite a source supporting your view.
The Tehenu are often associated with the C-Group people. The Fulani, Dravidians and other Niger-Congo speakers can trace their descent back to these groups.
Amratian Pottery
The Egyptians and West Africans formerly lived together in the highland areas of Africa, I call "The Fertile African Cresent", until they moved into the Nile delta (the Egyptians) and West Africa (Niger-Congo speakers). These Proto-Saharans were called Ta-Seti and Tehenu by the Egyptians. Farid(1985,p.82) noted that "We can notice that the beginning of the Neolithic stage in Egypt on the edge of the Western Desert corresponds with the expansion of the Saharian Neolithic culture and the growth of its population" (emphasis that of author).
A Tehenu personage is depicted on Amratian period pottery (Farid 1985 ,p. 84). The Tehenu wore pointed beard, phallic-sheath and feathers on their head.
Tehenu on Amratian Pottery
The red-and-black pottery was probably created by the C-Group people. They spread this ceramic style throughout Asia and Middle Africa.
The inhabitants of the Fezzan were round headed black Africans (Jelinek, 1985,p.273). The cultural characteristics of the Fezzanese were analogous to C-Group culture items and the people of Ta-Seti . The C-Group people occupied the Sudan and Fezzan regions between 3700-1300 BC (Jelinek 1985).
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).
The Temehus are called the C-Group people by archaeologists (Jelinek,1985; Quellec, 1985). The central Fezzan was a center of C-Group settlement.
Members of the C-Group probably entered Egypt and founded some of the Southern nomes associated with the Inyotefs.
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 especially the Fezzan. There are similarities between Egyptian and Saharan motifs (Farid,1985). It was in the Sahara that we find the first evidence of agriculture, animal domestication and weaving (Farid ,1985, p.82).
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know what you're specifically asking for or what relevance it holds as to the fact of humans painted white and displaying elements of ancient eastern Libyan culture.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: There's new stuff out on Saharan and related rock art. Look into it. The idea that styles represent periods is no longer en vogue. Styles like the economies they depict overlap. This insight does make dating of some peices harder.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri:
What is the source of these pictures?
The art of the Bovidian period is usually painted red.
Your so called "white" figures may be later additions to the rock art.
.
The style are still accepted by students of rock art. Please cite a source supporting your view.
.
.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The painting of the Libyan from the New kingdom tomb of Seti done by Lepsius appears to be another much later and perhaps whitewashed version of the dark brown skinned Tjehenu Libyans depicted in Old Kingdom tomb paintings, who are wearing the same hair styles and having the same designs on their cloaks as modern Wodabe Fulani. Some of the hairstyles of the modern Woodabe also are found on these early Libyans like the famous Libyan sidelock.
Anyone interested in this subject should seriously consider reading the text by the archeologist Oric Bates, The Eastern Libyans on'line and the obtaining recent book Nomads of the Niger by Carol Beckwith. Jelinek sounds like is is confirming Bates's work. I can't wait to look into it.
Thankfully one can still find in the works of the Egyptian art historian Nina Davies the paintings of the original Tjehenu. I know the book is very expensive now and see these paintings are not on this forum or on the internet at all.
Oric Bates also showed the strong cultural and archeological connection between the earliest Tjemehou (in the Kharga Oasis) and the C-group Nubians. Apparently in the New Kingdom the Sea People had already influenced people west of Egypt . The word Temehou as shown by Diop was also used for Europeans dressed in furs who had settled west of Egypt. Such names were apparently generally used for "westerners" by the late Pharoanic peoples. It is obvious from their earliest portrayals though that originally the Tjemehou, Tjehenou, Lebou were all one dark-skinned people affiliated with the Fulani.
I think once it was confirmed again by Loring Brace that the type of European-looking populations in the Kabyles today as at Tizi Ouzou, etc, were not present or at least not in the same regions they were today along the coasts west of Egypt until after the Bronze Age is support for the conclusion that the appearance of light skinned (mulatto and European looking) Africans began to appear along the coasts in the iron age with the Sea People (People of the Sea or Isles). Furthermore the fairer-skinned Kabyles are not necessarily derived from these early Sea Peoples who contributed to later Libyan populations but may be proto-Greeks as much iron age ware shows the Greek influence in the region and Kabyles still make Greek and even Balkan like pottery, jewelry and women's apparel. (See also Gabriel Campes Berberes: Aux marge De L'Histoire).
The word Imazighen is used in Roman times for "Ethiopians" as S. Gsell many years pointed out in La Tripolitaine. The name has been adopted by Berber-speakers in general recently. It is also probably the equivalent of Mauri Mazazeces mentioned as living in Mauritania whith other Mauri (Bacqautes and Bavares or Babar) who were settled amidst the Phrygians and Armeni and other peoples of Asia Minor in ancient Mauritania (the coastal region extending from western Tunisia to Morocco) according to the Greco Roman documents.
I agree with Dr. Winters and the idea that the Tehenu and Temehou were originally had the same African origin. On the other hand the Fulani and early many bovidian Libyans and C-group were usually found at least osteologically to have been long-headed dolichocephals. Other African types were present in the Sahara as well.
-------------------- D. Reynolds-Marniche Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
As for whites in the Delta, both early archeological contemporary anthropologists have conceded that lateral headed non-African elements entered and were present between the 2nd and 6th dynasties in some northern delta towns. They were supposed to have been absorbed in the predominants dolichocephalic gracile population of these localities by the 6th dynasty. I think both G. Elliot Smith and more recently Brace or Armelagos has spoken of this.
These people according to them were fairly easy to distinguish from the Nilotic originated population "hamitic" type there.
-------------------- D. Reynolds-Marniche Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nina has an extensive portfolio beginning before she married Norman. That being so I perused
Nina Davies & Alan Gardiner Ancient Egyptian Paintings (3 vols.) Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1936
which is a compendium of her previous works.
I could find no THHNW nor TMHHW in it just AAMW, NHHSW, and KFTYW. Since there are over 20 published works containing her material.
Can you hasten my research by citing where she painted THHNW?
Nonetheless, I'm happy I pored over AEP. The repros were generally larger (the two books themselves are as tall as the average person's trunk) than in the Egy art books I still own. I was able to see greater detail of some of the images posted and discussed here. Maybe I'll update them with my fresh observations.
posted
After reading Reisner on C-group being Libyans (read white not black) I'm a little wary about dated essays on that idea.
Even though we have Harkuf heading off a war instigated by NHHSW against TMHHW and the AEs making a clear cut ethnic distinction between those two, I'm willing to revisit the issue.
posted
The book of which I speak I'm pretty sure has the word "tomb" in it. That is what I was told by a Chuck in the 1980s at the Oriental Insitute Library at the University of Chicago. Nina Davies is the sole author. It might be Ancient Egyptian Tomb Art or Egyptian Tomb Paintings. Unfortunately I ordered the wrong book myself a few times. I am pretty sure that the book is found in the Magill University Library in Canada now and I've tried to get an interlibrary loan to get it from there with no success. It might still be in the Oriental Museum library at Chicago should be at the University of Chicago as well except that I think it is being sold on line for several hundred dollars and i'm very curious as to why.
I am also kind of worried about what might happen to this book and the Tehenu paintings if it falls into the wrong hands. You can also ask someone at the Oriental Institute Library at the University of Chicago where I first saw a large picture of them hanging over the entrance. There might be some people still there from the 80s who might know the painting. But last time I called them seemed a little irritated that I was trying to find out about it. It has also been sold they told me last year but they will be able to tell you they had it.
I might just have to end up paying $1000 dollars to get the book back but if i do have to it will be worth it. These men looked to be full blooded Wodabe Fulani in full color and in Fulani apparel and were undoubtedly the ancestral Libou-Tjehenou of the Fayum. Unfortunately at the time I hadn't known what they were called and that they were still a living people.
-------------------- D. Reynolds-Marniche Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also I do not want to confuse the Fayum of Tehenou population with the Kharga Temehou nor with the later New Kingdom peoples called Temehou or Meshwesh who appear in different fashion.
Libyans who wore long cloaks with similar and identical designs to that of the Wodaabe or Futa are shown also in the book Nomads of the Niger by photographer Carol Beckwith and another author.
-------------------- D. Reynolds-Marniche Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way, I'm sure Reisner thought C-group was white too but it doesn't change the fact that skeletal and archeological evidence suggested they were likely one people originally. All such groups were thought white by the European authors of 3 decades ago, even when they were painted near black as was the case of the Philistiu, Phoenicians and Medjayu. Nevertheless they were familiar with a lot more than many modern scholars who tend to focus on one particular anthropological arena.
All we have to do is look at what has happened to "genetics" and "haplotype studies" where research is being done mostly by people with little or no historical, linguistic, archeological background of the regions and populations they're dealing with.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even her work under her maiden name has Gardiner's commentary, she herself insisted on it. When it's not Gardiner then it's hubby Mr. de Garis Davies giving explanations of the paintings.
She has at least 13 books with 'tomb' in the title.
Her only solo work I can find is Picture writing in ancient Egypt. But maybe her final book Scenes from some Private Tombs may hit pay dirt.
I'm sure if we work together with discretion we'll uncover the paintings soon enough. My hobby assignment for next week will be perusing the two last named volumes.
quote:Originally posted by qoucela: The book of which I speak I'm pretty sure has the word "tomb" in it. That is what I was told by a Chuck in the 1980s at the Oriental Insitute Library at the University of Chicago. Nina Davies is the sole author. It might be Ancient Egyptian Tomb Art or Egyptian Tomb Paintings. Unfortunately I ordered the wrong book myself a few times. I am pretty sure that the book is found in the Magill University Library in Canada now and I've tried to get an interlibrary loan to get it from there with no success. It might still be in the Oriental Museum library at Chicago should be at the University of Chicago as well except that I think it is being sold on line for several hundred dollars and i'm very curious as to why.
I am also kind of worried about what might happen to this book and the Tehenu paintings if it falls into the wrong hands. You can also ask someone at the Oriental Institute Library at the University of Chicago where I first saw a large picture of them hanging over the entrance. There might be some people still there from the 80s who might know the painting. But last time I called them seemed a little irritated that I was trying to find out about it. It has also been sold they told me last year but they will be able to tell you they had it.
I might just have to end up paying $1000 dollars to get the book back but if i do have to it will be worth it. These men looked to be full blooded Wodabe Fulani in full color and in Fulani apparel and were undoubtedly the ancestral Libou-Tjehenou of the Fayum. Unfortunately at the time I hadn't known what they were called and that they were still a living people.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry Al Takruri your message box was full.
Egyptian tomb paintings, may be the one if its very hard to get. I'm assuming you haven't seen any brown Lebou or Tjehenou from the Nina Davies books you have since there aren't any up on the site. When you see them you will know immediately because they look like the Woodabe Fulani without their turbans on while at the same time looking very much like later portrayals of the Libyans. They are also in profile.
-------------------- D. Reynolds-Marniche Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since poring over Ancient Egyptian Paintings last week, I've perused the following volumes.
- Picture Writing - Scenes from some Theban Tombs (aka Scenes from some Private Tombs) - Tomb of Amenemhet - Four 18th Dynasty Tombs they all have line drawings, very few color plates and then mostly not depictions of people.
I can get Egyptian Tomb Paintings (1958) but only as a microform. I hope it's more than a re-issue of the 1936 Ancient Egyptian Paintings.
I must admit I'll be surprised to find THHNW who resemble Fulani. The THHNW images posted to our forums show naked or penistached men who are bald or sporting ureas headgear but no feathers though bandolier is worn..
posted
"I can get Egyptian Tomb Paintings (1958) but only as a microform. I hope it's more than a re-issue of the 1936 Ancient Egyptian Paintings.
I must admit I'll be surprised to find THHNW who resemble Fulani. The THHNW images posted to our forums show naked or penistached men who are bald or sporting ureas headgear but no feathers though bandolier is worn.. "
Actually if that's the right book I think you'll be more stunned than anything else just as I was, because these paintings are as full-to -life clear and detailed as are the Seti paintings of Libyans. They are not wearing the turbans either. You will also ve wondering why they haven't been displayed almost anywhere else - like the paintings Phoenicians in Donald Hardin's books.
I am thinking of calling my old advisor Bruce Williams at U of C again. He might know the name of the book as he used to work in the Oriental Institute and still does.
i am also on the lookout for the depictions of what I could swear were labeled Carthaginians portrayed a bit darker than the Egyptians. However, I am thinking since it was so long ago that I must have been seeing things or remembering wrong. this was in a coffee table sized book of ancient Egyptian or Near Eastern Art.
-------------------- D. Reynolds-Marniche Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I already posted about Davies oversize work published by the University of Chicago here.
Egyptian Tomb Paintings (1958) turned out to be no more than a brief review.
Since you say the Oriental Institute Library at the University of Chicago once displayed a large picture of THHNW hanging over the entrance, it seem they're the ones who should be contacted. I'd imagine they'd have some record of the librarian at the time and that person may have some recollection about the provenence of that hanging. If you fear bias on the library's part then have a white or aMazigh colleague do the foot work for you.
I'm currently going over the Metropolitan Museum of Art's Egyptian painting facsimile catalog. Accession number 30.4.95 looks promising but I have no access to The Tomb of Two Sculptors at Thebes where it's reproduced. It's from the hall of User's tomb (T 131) and depicts a delegation of foreigners.
Don't know where you're at in New Jersey but Princeton has the book and so does the U of Penn, the Philadelphia Free Library, Bryn Mawr College, the Met, Columbia, the Brooklyn Museum, and Queens College.
I used to own Heeren and never saw any notice of contact between Carthage and Egypt in his work Historical researches into the politics, intercourse, and trade of the Carthaginians, Ethiopians, and Egyptians.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hi - to tell you the truth. I've called the institute last week and the guy said that Chuck is no longer there but is in New York at some kind of International insitute of World History. I need to contact either him or Bruce Williams at the institue, who was there at the time.
I personally haven't seen the book myself and I am only sure that he said that Nina Davies was the sole author.
I will also check out Nomads of the Niger since she noticed costume similarities to modern Fulani to see whether the author mentions any of Nina's books.
I've read Heeren's book but if anyone ever talked about Carthaginian depictions it might have been Sergi. I'm not sure anyone ever did though. I am not certain at all the painting i saw in that art book was Carthaginians. I just remember they had used the word in the text and the men looked very strange darker and more prognathous than the Egyptians but wearing a similar hairstyle. They may have been some Nubian type. My mind may have been playing tricks on me but i've learned anything is possible.
Sergi is the one that mentions the Phoenicians as being portayed regularly like the Egyptians in tint which is what I have found as well.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
There may be a better place to post this but, since I've included Saharan rock art depicting Africa's native whites in this thread, I'll put an opinion of Keita on Amazight speakers' colour here.
Indigenous whites is something I never took too seriously even when posed by Sergi seeing Bates' countering of that position. I've supposed creamy coloured Libyans to be primarily the result of communications with the north shore and island Mediterraneans due initially to neolithic trade (which I surmise included females as trade items) and lastly the Trojan War refugees (whole families).
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Trojans were most likely closer related to Keftiu, Solymi and other "Pelasgic" Aegean and Mediterranean peoples than to later and modern Europeans.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The ancient "Mazikes" are called "Ethiopians" in Roman documents and texts according to S. Gsell and the writer of It Began in Babel, Herbert Wendt. The name if we are to believe the Encyclopedia of Islam was only recently adopted (in French colonial times) by people in North Africa other than the Tuareg tribes who called themselves Amazegzel and Imoshagh and is due to recent nationalism of Berber-speakers.
It is likely that whatever trade in Europeans or Eurasiatics did occur first happened in the Bronze age when they first begin to appear in significant numbers in the Aegean and Turkey which is also when they begin to appear in small numbers in delta towns whether as migrants or imports. These people however had nothing to do with the later Temehu and even less with modern "Amazigh" who are derived from various well-documented Eurasiatic and European populations and the original Tuareg or Berbers.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The beakers are attributed to the cusp of the late neolithic and the chalcolithic but trade in cardials and obsidian is neolithic.
But trade with Mediterranean isles and the lands of the north shore of the Meditteranean, is it too late to account for the white phenotypes depicted in the Saharan rock art?
There may be something to Keita's suggestion that the whites of North Africa developed in situ. It at the least deserves a serious lengthy investigation rather than a summary dismissal.
posted
Are the Roman documents supposedly equating Mazikes to Ethiopians citable for our perusal?
Claudian's De Bello Gildonico distinguishes Ethiopians and Nasamonians it doesn't conflate the two.
But this is not the thread to discuss things outside an ancient Libya origin or component for the Fulani from Saharan rock art and Egyptian tomb paintings of Tehhenu, Tamehhu, Rebu, and Meshwesh.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Good questions. I'm researching their provenance to assure they're bovidian. Also to see whether they possible pre-date, post-date or if they're comtemoraneous in regards to Tjemehu of the BG vignette.
I think it unfair to suppose dark images are of blacks then propose light images are symbolic. We have to face the issue of lighter skinned North Africans head on instead of wishing them away to limbo.
Without seriously looking into it, I think the New Kingdom is when creamy Libyans enter the picture (ouch).
There's a Diop polemic about pre-dynastic whites in the delta. I don't know if they're supposed to be Tjemehu or what. Will have to reread African Origins for clarity. TTBOMK Tjemehu become a known entity not very long after the Tehenu but I need to refresh myself on this.
Chancellor Williams (in 'Destruction of Black Civilisation') mentioned 'creamy' coloured Africans (could be classified as white) being in North Africa from very early times so no news there really.
But they clashed with the black Africans apparently. save for a few. Anyway, why would they have clashed back then? is there a fundamental difference between the majority black Africans and our creamy coloured Bros? and how were albinos isolated from the general black population in the first place given that albinism occurs very rarely enough to form a population from? And didn't C.Williams claim they were Asiatics?
Posts: 368 | From: Oxford | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't want to mess up your thread.. bro Altk
But you brothas got to stop that nonseensical belief that whites are an isloated albino African group.
quote:Originally posted by Shady Aftermath: [QUOTE] . . . . our creamy coloured Bros? and how were albinos isolated from the general black population in the first place given that albinism occurs very rarely enough to form a population from? And didn't C.Williams claim they were Asiatics?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Are the Roman documents supposedly equating Mazikes to Ethiopians citable for our perusal?
Claudian's De Bello Gildonico distinguishes Ethiopians and Nasamonians it doesn't conflate the two.
But this is not the thread to discuss things outside an ancient Libya origin or component for the Fulani from Saharan rock art and Egyptian tomb paintings of Tehhenu, Tamehhu, Rebu, and Meshwesh.
Sorry I didn't see this before AlTakruri Gsell , S. (1926). “La Tripolitaine et Le Sahara au IIIe Siecle de Notre Ere.” Memoires de L’Academie d’Inscriptiones et Belle Lettres, 1926, 43. quotes the book Expositio Totius Mundi et Gentium. I know the latter has been published since then in French as well.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also I don't know abou Nasamones but ancient "Berbers" in Algeria under Gildo are definitely "conflated" with Ethiopians in that work in saying Gildo "thrusts upon me a Ethiopian as a son-in law, a Berber as a husband...".
Gildo, a name from the title "Gallidi or "Aguellid" for Tuareg chiefs.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
I see * Mauris, whom I take to be Mauretanians (N.Morocco, W&C N.Algeria * Aethiopem, see here for my list of some (Algeria, SW Tunisia * Nasamona, obviously the Nasamonians (Libya
For me three distinct ethnies, two of which having ethnonymous polities, but no broad category of "Berbers" in Claudian whose Aethiopem could be any of the blacks of the Algerian/Tunisian chotts or in vicinity of the Nigris river where is Negrine.
Herodotus divided the continent into Aithiopia and Libya for the two general phenotypes there. He listed Nasamonians as Libyans not Aithiopians.
However, I do see how you could possibly take Aethiopem and Nasamona as a conflation due to the sentence about the cradle and supposing the son in law and husband to be one and the same.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
I see * Mauris, whom I take to be Mauretanians (N.Morocco, W&C N.Algeria * Aethiopem, see here for my list of some (Algeria, SW Tunisia * Nasamona, obviously the Nasamonians (Libya
For me three distinct ethnies, two of which having ethnonymous polities, but no broad category of "Berbers" in Claudian whose Aethiopem could be any of the blacks of the Algerian/Tunisian chotts or in vicinity of the Nigris river where is Negrine.
Herodotus divided the continent into Aithiopia and Libya for the two general phenotypes there. He listed Nasamonians as Libyans not Aithiopians.
However, I do see how you could possibly take Aethiopem and Nasamona as a conflation due to the sentence about the cradle and supposing the son in law and husband to be one and the same.
Mauris should not be taken as a country. The Mauris were a particular group of people called by various designations almost all of which were kept up until modern times by the Tuareg and Fulani.
Mauri included the Ilagwathes or Leuathae (Levathes) among whom were the Nasamones (Anu Saman), Pharusii (Iforas Tuareg), Mesoritae (Mazurah or Imazuragh Tuareg) and many other wandering tribes, Austuriani or Wasuri, Mezikes or Mauri Mazazeces i.e. Amazegzel - a group called "Ethiopians" as I mentioned in Roman documents. The Ausuriani, Astrikes or Astacures lived in both Libya and Ethiopia according to Bates. The Mauri Quinqegentiani were called so because the Cushites or Tuareg divided themselves into 5 clans. The Mauri Bavares or Babors and Bacqautes of the Atlas among whom were the Mucuteni, Micatenioi or Ketama (Imakitan Tuareg) were one of the three people mentioned by the Greek Agatharcides as resembling the Ethiopians on the coast of Tunisia when the general invaded.
All people with black or dark brown skin and braided, woolly hair who were pastoralists living in Libya were inclined to be called Mauri, while those who were agricultural like the Garamantians were sometimes refered to as Ethiopians. One Garamantian clan Tidamensii recalls the name of the Teda Krit or Ikaradan (Haratin). Thus, Ptolemy II writes of the latter as "more likely Ethiopians".
According to Roman documents there were also Armeni, Phrygi, Vandals, Alanii, besides Greeks and others in Mauretania living among the Mauri, and thus Mauretani the name of the country was not the equivalent of the name Mauri.
I think it was Rogers who wrote the Jerome knew three Ethiopian people - Moors, Nubians and pygmies.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
To understand Claudian's The War Against Gildo one must specifically adhere to the terminology current to Claudian, i.e., 4th century Roman usage. Claudian shows how the expanse of people and territories under Gildo's authority when he lists Mauris, Aethiopem, and Nasamona which from west to east alludes to N.Maroc, and W&C N.Algerie, C.Algerie, and Libye.
Mauris is our Mauretanians. Mauretania was a Roman province divided into Tingitana and Caeseriensis, the former from a city in N.Morocco and the latter from one in N.Algeria. Mauretania was located at what today is N.Morocco and N.Algeria's west and central regions.
Taking out the time to follow the previous links there is plenty of information detailing ethnies south of the Atlas and which ones were placed in the Aethiopian category, particularly Strabo who informs us that the Mauretanii resided north of the Western Aethiopians and that king Bogus of the Mauritanii mounted a major expedition against the Western Aethiopians. Strabo also tells us the Pharusii had next to nothing to do with Mauretanii, so Pharusii were not Mauretanii.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: To understand Claudian's The War Against Gildo one must specifically adhere to the terminology current to Claudian, i.e., 4th century Roman usage. Claudian shows how the expanse of people and territories under Gildo's authority when he lists Mauris, Aethiopem, and Nasamona which from west to east alludes to N.Maroc, and W&C N.Algerie, C.Algerie, and Libye.
Mauris is our Mauretanians. Mauretania was a Roman province divided into Tingitana and Caeseriensis, the former from a city in N.Morocco and the latter from one in N.Algeria. Mauretania was located at what today is N.Morocco and N.Algeria's west and central regions.
Taking out the time to follow the previous links there is plenty of information detailing ethnies south of the Atlas and which ones were placed in the Aethiopian category, particularly Strabo who informs us that the Mauretanii resided north of the Western Aethiopians and that king Bogus of the Mauritanii mounted a major expedition against the Western Aethiopians. Strabo also tells us the Pharusii had next to nothing to do with Mauretanii, so Pharusii were not Mauretanii.
The Mauris were a people and not a country. And of course the Ethiopia of Byzantine and Roman times also consisted of numerous tribes. Just as the Pharusii were a people and not a country, the country of Mauretania was occupied by Mauri or Maurusioi, Armeni, Phrygii and various non black people.
The Pharusii trogodytes in my opinion were correctly identified by Bovill and others as the later Iforas of the Syrtes also found in Corippus writings a name still applied to a portion of the Tuareg of Mali. (Corippus refers to Maures as black like Procpius and the earlier Roman world). Historians (i.e. D. J. Mattingly, J. Reynolds, Bovill, etc) specializing on the ancient writings on North African Maures know that the Levathes or Ilaguaten were the largest branch of the people known as Maures. They consisted of numerous tribes including the the Ifuraces or Iforas from the Syrtes, Makkorenes (Macares), Muctunia from the deserts of Tripolitania (modern Imakitan Tuareg otherwise called Ketama),Silcadenit (modern Kel Cadenit) and numerous other clans of Berber (Tuareg) originally found in areas stretching from Nubia and the eastern desert to Morocco at various times.
Regardless of what Claudian meant, it is for this reason (along with their color) I suppose that people like the Mazikes or Mauri Mazazeces (Amazegzel), Astrikes or Astacures and Makkhuritae are at times called "Ethiopians" by writers of his era at one time or another.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic