posted
Recently Tjehenu relations to or with Egyptians was brought up in a Fulani thread. This thread is for further consideration of the notion brought up there that
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Let's not forget that the Egyptians themselves are close relatives of the Tjehenu if not of direct Tjehenu descent. We know that Libyan influence and ancestry is prominent in the Delta and even farther up the Nile during predynastic times. Mainstream academia acknowledges that many important customs among the Egyptians, specifically mummification came from Libya as is shown by the so-called 'Black Mummy' Uan Muhuggiag of Libya.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Of course some Egyptians, primarily delta ones, are of partial Tjehenu descent. I doubt Egyptians, as an absolute, are of "direct Tjehenu descent." What we know of the peopling of the lower Nile valley precludes that conclusion.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: What tells us about this partial ancestry?
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: An assumption from their living in close proximity.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Yes, along with many cultural characteristics. I say 'partial' in the sense that the ancient Egyptian populace was a result of the intermingling of Western desert Libyan/Tehenu folk with Sudanic Nile folk and probably even Red Sea hills folk.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Okay, the close proximity presents a plausible case, but when one uses ethnonyms or possibly national-monikers like "Tehenu", one is giving an impression that these, as already established social entities, were the contributing source groups. Djehuti, can you share the "many cultural characteristics" we are supposed to be looking at here.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Yes, I understand your point about using ethnic monikers to describe a relation that preceeds the existence of such ethnicities. As far as shared cultural characteristics, well for starters there is mummification as per Uan Muhuggiag as well as uniquely preserved miniature statuettes of animal-headed deities. There is also pottery and other materials that were discovered recently in the Western desert linking the predynastic Libyans to the Egyptians. A thread about these findings was discussed before. Too bad I can't find it now.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, what if the delta originally was Tjehenu territory and various palletes (like Narmer's) records Egyptian conquest, occupation, and incorporation of Tjehenu land?
What about the above in light of far western "Libyans" and "Libyans" in proximity to the delta waging war against Egypt?
Were the more easterly "Libyans" forced by the further westward "Libyans" or were they eager to take back what they considered once as a homeland?
So, what if the delta originally was Tjehenu territory and various palletes (like Narmer's) records Egyptian conquest, occupation, and incorporation of Tjehenu land?
Mdu Ntr on Namer's palette tells us this, or is it from certain unequivocal physical characteristics about the figures depicted?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Another question relating to the theme: It's postulated here that the Tjehenu were virtually physically unidentifiable from the Egyptians in pre- 6th dynasty times. If so how do we distinguish the two on pre-dynastic palettes and in early dynastic art?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
What makes it Libyan? Is the throw stick peculiar to any one ethny? Aren't the listed towns in the western delta? Who's towns were they? Who originally settled the towns?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
If we were examining the artifacts of a pre-literate culture, the presentation of 'cave' images would be rather quaint, affording us an opportunity for speculation and conjecture. The Kememou, however, were extremely literate and provided posterity with pictures to go with the words that they expressed:
The appellation which the Kememou applied to the Western Sudanic peoples on their northwestern borders was Tihenou or "magnificent (dazzling) Blue people", an appellation which still is used to describe the Tuareg people...if one can read what is written, there is no need for conjecture or speculation...
What makes it Libyan? Is the throw stick peculiar to any one ethny? Aren't the listed towns in the western delta? Who's towns were they? Who originally settled the towns?
I tend to not use 'Tjehenu' interchangeably with 'Libyan', notwithstanding territorial association. Why? There were more than a single ethnic entity implicated in the regions neighboring Egypt's western boundaries, going by primary texts translated.
As for the remaining questions, pertaining to names of localities; [if it pertains to the Narmer Palette] are we given specificities on this, and their corresponding inhabitants?
Ps - It could be just my computer, but the link to the image posted appears to be broken.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Another palette with Libyans(?). Why or why not are they Libyans?
Good questions. I suppose short of one specifying unequivocally either way, and/or specified in the said palette, there is no way of knowing for certain -- either way.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Managed to come across reference to Alexandre Moret's and Margaret Murray's interpretation of that "throw strick"/stick sign to the right of the plants-i.e. on the side of the "Tjehenu Palette" bearing the animals and plants--as "Thn", and therefore read it as "Tehenu" or "Libyans". But as far as I know, the "stick" is generally an ideogram for something "foreign" or a "foreigner", and not relegated to any one specific ethnicity or locality. On the other hand, Jean Capart put forth the case that the said plants are "Libyan", reportedly from having made comparisons to "a bas-relief depicting Libyan spoils in Sahure's temple".
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
So, what if the delta originally was Tjehenu territory and various palletes (like Narmer's) records Egyptian conquest, occupation, and incorporation of Tjehenu land?
Mdu Ntr on Namer's palette tells us this, or is it from certain unequivocal physical characteristics about the figures depicted?
quote:Originally posted by Wally:
Narmer's tablet The Front Side:
A) The first word is at the very top, inside the ideograph of the palace, and contains the name Narmer:
Nar(catfish) mer (chisel). And NO, it does not mean that he was a chiseling catfish! You can get Jan Assman's interpretation of the name in his book...
B) The figure to the right of the conquering king-wearing the white crown of Upper Egypt-, the one where Horus is astride and doing exactly what Diop suggests, as Assman points out, represents the conquest of the Delta or Lower Egypt.
C) The king's servant is identified as "Sashat"-the goddess of writing, and I presume, the one who is chronicling all of this. (No, the sandle-bearer wasn't a servant god but merely a scribe.)
The people being subdued as well as the ones shown fleeing the land have sudani hairstyles, and many Egyptologists suggest that they represent the original sudani Anu ethnic rulers of the Two Lands.
D) the two figures below Ethosh - the border of Egypt - represent the determinative "Kher" which means "fall, defeat, slaughter" and is preceded by another glyph which means "Uhan" or "overthrown, throwdown" (Coptic: Ouwdjn/Ouwgan)(also Sdjen).
The Back Side:
A) The first important word on this side is the word Tht;or Tjt; or Tet which means "to assemble" and is obviously referring to the assembled group of four figures bearing sudani totems, as Diop points out.
B) Above the slain enemies- I imagine those who opposed political unification - are the images of
1) a boat with its sails down, which means a journey down river
and
2) of Horus in front of an emblem which Assman interprets as meaning 'gate' - These conquerors would later be identified as the "Shemsu Hor" or the followers of Horus, the Mesnitu ('blacksmiths') and who later claimed that they were from the land of Punt (IE, "The Existence; Origination") This is evidence of the existance of at least two ruling African ethnic groups; Anu from Upper Egypt/Sudan and later, the Mesnitu from the Horn...
C) The next word, a very large version at that, of two creatures with the twisting long necks is "Kaes" or "Kasu" which means 'to bind or fetter,' Qes/Kes - restrain, bind
which I think indicates the obvious, that the union of the two lands was carried out through armed struggle.
--It has been suggested that the 'formal' union was firmly establish by another warrior king, Aha.
D) the last image is the one that confirms Diops assessment...
1) The bull breaking down the walled city's fortified wall and stomping the Asiatic represents the king. The word inside the wall "Abominable" (IE, "city of the abominables") is a term the Kememu used to describe the Asian or White peoples, especially.
It seems obvious that the kememou did not regard these peoples as a legitimate part of their ethnic population. It's Kememu ideology...
quote: ref: --The Mind of Egypt: History and Meaning in the Time of the Pharaohs by Jan Assmann, Andrew Jenkins (Translator)
What makes it Libyan? Is the throw stick peculiar to any one ethny? Aren't the listed towns in the western delta? Who's towns were they? Who originally settled the towns?
Not the subject of your inquiry above, but perhaps if there is any indication that the side of the so-called "Tehenu Palette" bearing registers of animals and plants describes a locality, then perhaps the donkey or ass figures therein could suggest that it is on the African continent.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Is it possible to locate and name those depicted fortified inhabitations?
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri:
The so-called Libyan/Tjehenu Palette. What makes it Libyan? Is the throw stick peculiar to any one ethny? Aren't the listed towns in the western delta? Who's towns were they? Who originally settled the towns?
I tend to not use 'Tjehenu' interchangeably with 'Libyan', notwithstanding territorial association. Why? There were more than a single ethnic entity implicated in the regions neighboring Egypt's western boundaries, going by primary texts translated.
As for the remaining questions, pertaining to names of localities; [if it pertains to the Narmer Palette] are we given specificities on this, and their corresponding inhabitants?
Ps - It could be just my computer, but the link to the image posted appears to be broken.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, earlier the link appeared broken on my screen, but that was resolved. I already gave you feedback with regard to names of cities or towns or localities above.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay! This response is long overdue. I didn't have the time to respond several years ago when Takruri first created this thread. And when I did, I didn't have all the data.
My initial point wasn't that the Delta folk were Tjehenu per-say but that they do share the same Libyan origins as them rather than the Asiatic origins postulated by early Western scholars. My contention is based on three grounds of evidence: bio-anthropology, archaeology (culture), and history.
The bio-anthropological data of course is something everyone in here should be familiar with by now.
Moving to the opposite geographic extremity, the very small sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty(Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline of variation along the Nile Valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into Palestine. The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans.--Barry Kemp, Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation
It's clear that early Delta people were NOT of Asiatic origin but very much African biologically.
Here's what archaeology shows of their cultural origins.
Neolithic Period to Egypt's Dynasty 1 by Bruce B. Williams, Research Associate Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago Cultures of Northern Egypt
From the western delta to south of the Fayum, the cultures of northern Egypt occur largely in single sites or restricted areas, rather than extensive horizons. The emergence of distinct cultural traditions in northern Egypt has often been connected to the later canonical division between Upper and Lower Egypt, although these early cultures were actually located in large part south of the Delta in areas assigned to Upper Egypt. In order of appearance, the site phases are Merimda (early and main) at the western edge of the delta; Fayum A; sites near the northern shore of Lake Oarun el-Omani and Maadi just south of modern Cairo; and possibly Buto, in the northwest delta.
1. Domestic Economies. The domestic economies of northern Egypt were substantially supported by agriculture which concentrated on the cultivation of cereals. Animals such as sheep, goats, cattle, and dogs were kept; fish and a wide range of animals were taken. Even hippopotamus bones occur in the settlements (Hayes 1965: 93, 112). Hunting this dangerous animal requires the coordinated tactics of bands or crews (but see Eiwanger 1988; 44).
2. Structures and Settlements. Like earlier playa settlements, most habitations were light, irregular or oval structures made of posts and reeds, sometimes plastered with mud. Many had hearths and circular storage pits nearby, some of which were lined with baskets or mud. At Maadi, some light structures were rectangular. The settlements had no regular plan, but part of a ditch and palisade were found at Maadi, in addition to large communal storage areas. Merimda contained a number of oval structures about two meters long, built of mud or mud slabs with floors below ground level. Sometimes a small jar would be imbedded in the floor near one end of the oval, and a stick or hippopotamus tibia would be plastered against the wall near the opposite end (Hayes 1965: 105). The buildings, some arranged as though on a lane (Hayes 1965: 105), were built only in restricted areas, probably for a special purpose (Eiwanger 1982: 68). They may be related to structures at Maadi that were sunk into the ground over two meters and approached by steps. One very large (10 x 6 x 2 m) and elaborate brick-lined sunken structure had a special entry and a niche. It was found with a cemetery and large deposits of fish and pottery vessels, many containing grain. These structures at Merimda and Maadi, especially the large building, may represent a tradition of religious architecture (Anonymous 1986).
3. Religious Practice. Other evidence of religious practice includes burials, deposits, and possibly structural features. Early Merimda contained a small cemetery of contracted burials, mostly placed with the heads south, on the right side. Later, burials in the Merimda levels were oriented irregularly (Eiwanger 1982; Hayes 1965: 112-13). In the el-Omari and Maadi phases, burials were made in cemeteries, some of them very large. Grave goods were deposited with later burials, and some later graves have simple dolmen-like superstructures. Even some goats were buried at Heliopolis with grave goods (Debono and Mortenson 1988: 39, 46-48). Female figurines and an eggshaped terra-cotta head from Merimda are not readily connected to known traditions, but a deposit with axes and a hippopotamus figurine (Eiwanger 1982: 76-80; 1988; 46) and the hippopotamus tibia used as steps may be forerunners of Egyptian magical practices.
4. Manufactured Goods. The handmade pottery of earliest Merimda was relatively fine, but apart from some stands, the mostly ovoid shapes were simpler than later pottery. Many vessels were pattern burnished with a pebble. Some vessels have a band of incised herringbone decoration, a feature that occurs both in Palestine and elsewhere in northern Africa (Eiwanger 1984: 61). The pottery of later Merimda was coarser, with vegetable temper. Shapes remained simple, but knobs and lugs were sometimes applied (Hayes 1965: 106-107; Eiwanger 1979: 28-38, 56; 1988: 15-33, pls, 1-32). Most vessels were burnished, with a dark surface color. This simple pottery continued at Maadi. Only a few pieces were decorated in red paint on a light ground, and the finer red and black burnished vessels were accompanied by much coarse dark pottery, and some very large storage jars (Ibrahim and Seeher 1987: pls. 2,2 and 28,2). In other industries, the stone vessels of Maadi were more elaborate than those found at Merinda (Hayes 1965:126). Copper was also worked at Maadi from imported ores.
5. Trade. Trade and contacts expanded greatly between the time of Merimda and Maadi, but imports from the East primarily consisted of raw materials such as copper ore and asphalt, or oils; most objects were made locally or regionally, although wavy-handled jars were imported from southwest Asia and some vessels and other objects were imported or imitated from Upper Egypt (Kaiser 1985: 70; Ibrahim and Seeher 1984; vorr der Way 1987; 242-247, 256-257).
6. End of Northern Egypt. Maadi ended early in the second phase (II) of Upper Egypt's Naqada culture; Kaiser 1985: fig.10). The settlement seems to have been finally destroyed by fire (Hayes 1965: 123). Maadi was the last of Lower Egypt's cultures in the area, although Buto in the Delta where a settlement with a cemetery has recently been found may continue (von der Way 1986; 1987: 242-247, including Naqada II pottery; Kaiser 1985: fig.10).
7. Summary. In northern Egypt, a large number of small, shifting villages probably sustained a few more permanent large settlements (Eiwanger 1987: fig.9). Consolidated in the area of Helwan and Maadi, these centers transcended the shifting earlier habitations without eliminating cultural variations (Kaiser 1985: 67), a contrast with the more uniform Naqada culture of Upper Egypt.
The archaeological data is also clear. The early Delta culture was that of an African people who domesticated Asiatic crops like wheat and barley as well as Asiatic livestock like pigs and sheep along with their native African cattle. They also maintained economic trade relations with Asia but the rest of their culture was African. Even the names of their Asian domesticates which are later recorded in dynastic times are native and not derived from Asia or any Semitic language. While the earliest graves had no goods (likely because they were interred in the homes of the living), later graves showed items like carved wands of hippo bones. The pottery was similar to those found in mesolithic Sahara as well as the Levant (Natufians). Also, the various settlements were not as uniform as those in the Valley, again indicating that Upper Egypt was unified by a centralized polity or administration unlike the Delta.
Most importantly, the earliest known permanent settlements in Lower Egypt were made in the southwest with the first one being in the Fayum!
If the Delta was settled by Asiatics then why are there no early settlements in the eastern parts of the Delta? In fact, among the traditional 20 sepati (nomes) of Lower Egypt, the first great 7 sepati occur in the western part of the delta beginning in the south. The sepati of the eastern areas were established later on.
The 1st sepat of Lower Egypt, Mennefer (Memphis) was the Egyptian capital first established by Narmer after his alleged conquest of the Delta, yet the predynastic culture of that sepat as well as the last two sepati of Upper Egypt (the 21st and 22nd) all show strong cultural connections to the neolithic Fayum A culture which in turn descends from the Sahara.
Here are a couple more sources confirming Saharan origins.
"The initial movements westwards across the Sahara and, almost a millennium later, are likely to have been caused by the succession of drought episodes at 7600, 6800-6500, 6100, 5800, and 5500-5400 cal BC (8.6, 7.9-7.7, 7.26, 7, 6.6-6.5 kyr bp)…"-- Fekri Hassan, Droughts, Food, and Culture: Ecological Change and Food Security in Africa’s Prehistory
"..the early cultures of Merimde, the Fayum, Badari Naqada I and II are essentially African and early African social customs and religious beliefs were the root and foundation of the ancient Egyptian way of life." Shaw, Thurston (1976) Changes in African Archaeology in the Last Forty Years in African Studies since 1945
Even archaeologist Barbara Barich in her work Archaeology and Environment in the Libyan Sahara commented on similarities between Capsian culture farther west in Libya and the neolithic cultures of Egyptian oases like the Fayum such as oval shaped reed huts, the hearths and storage pits, and even the bodies interred in the homes. Fekri Hassan cites other material evidence like ground axes, tabular flint tools, lens-shaped bifacial arrowheads, concave-based arrowheads, ostrich shells, amazonite beads, and bone points.
More more info on the archaeology you can read The Archaeology of the Faiyum and Western Delta.
In regards to history, most of the historical texts come from foreign neighbors of the Egyptians who stressed their relationship with Libya. Though Egyptian texts give hints to western origins.
The Bible for example states that Phut (Libya) is brother of Mizraim (Egypt)-- both sons of Ham, and even some of Mizraim's sons were non other than the names of Libyan tribes like the Ludim, Anamim, and Lehabim (Lubu, Anami, Lehabu).
Greek texts are more extensive in showing the relationship. Plato records that Egypt and Libya were long standing allies against Atlantis. The Argive Cycle states Aegyptus (the founder and king of Egypt) and Danaus (the founder and king of Libya) were brothers even twins who were both the sons of the goddess Libya (Africa proper). Greek legends say that Libya was once ruled by Amazons the most prominent of which was a queen named Myrina. The name may be a Greek corruption of the name Merinit (Merineith) which was a popular name in Lower Egypt and was in fact the name of the Delta princess who became Narmer's queen after his conquest of the Delta.
Egyptian texts associate the western desert with the land of the dead or of the ancestors, which may not have been as popular as the south since the west was largely a wasteland. Many of the monuments of the dead royals were traditionally built in the western side of the Nile towards the west. The west was often associated with the goddess Amentet who presided over the western lands and the dead. The goddess Nit was also associated with the west and may be connected with the Berber goddess of Carthage Tanit who was also associated with weaving, war, and fertility just like Nit. Even in the homes of some Berber groups today they use a cross-arrows and shield symbol similar to Nit as well as an ankh like symbol of Tanit.
Again, all this proves that the Delta peoples were of Libyan descent, but that does not mean they were actually Tjehenu. As to whether they were Romitu, perhaps they were, but they were obviously a different type of Romitu than those further south in the Valley. For example in the Tale of Sinuhe, Sinuhe himself who is a Delta man says when he traveled to Upper Egypt he thought he was in an entirely different country since the customs and looks of the people were different and he could barely understand their speech! Perhaps 'barely' is the key word here. That the Delta and Valley folk spoke dialects of the same language is the likely guess many Egyptologists make.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
There are two main questions concerning the origins of the Neolithic: where the people came from and where the domesticates were acquired from.
Arguments against a Qarunian origin for the Neolithic Population
Some writers believe that the Qarunian and Faiyum Neolithic are not related. The drying up of the lake and increasing aridification of the area would be consistent with that theory suggesting that populations were driven out of the Faiyum over this period. Wendorf and Schild (1976, p.225) speculate that the lake may have dried up completely. Even if the depression did not dry up completely, the surrounding environment may have become difficult to exploit: “even if the lake remained a stable resource, declining precipitation rates may have made the adjacent deserts as scarce in animal resources as they are today” (Wenke et al 1989, p.38).
There are big differences between the Qarunian and the Faiyum Neolithic – as well as differences in the lithic assemblages (for example a high percentage at Qarunian sites of backed bladelets), there are no ground stone artefacts or pottery in the Qarunian.
There is also the matter of the time gap between the two industries: There is a big gap in radiocarbon dates between the Qarunian and Faiyum Neolithic (8220/7140BP – 6350BP: Hassan 1988) which is consistent with a view that the Faiyum was abandoned for several centuries. While it is worth bearing in mind that some sites within this time range have simply not yet come to light, there are observable and conspicuous differences between the lithic toolkits which suggest a lack of continuity between the two: “A gap of 1200 years separates the latest dated Terminal Palaeolithic site from the earliest Neolithic Community, but this seems to be for too little time for this basic transformation of lithic industries to occur. The appearance of a new population seems to be the best explanation. If so, the new population and not its Palaeolithic predecessors was responsible for the development of Egyptian civilization” (Wendorf and Schild 1976, p. 319).
The Western Desert and the Sahara
Some writers see a Western Desert origin for the Faiyum Neolithic: “Technological and typological differences between the Qarunian and the Faiyum Neolithic are so significant that there can be no question of the Faiyum Neolithic having developed out of the Qarunian. The Faiyum Neolithic lithic technology is clearly related to that of the late Neolithic in the Western Desert” (Hendrickx and Vermeersch 2000, p.37). Hoffman also points to a possible Western Desert origin for the Faiyum Neolithic: “there are hints of other contacts between the Fayumis and contemporary desert peoples at this time.
Since at least one theory of agricultural/pastoral origins in Egypt sees these economic innovations as introductions from the Sahara, the possibility that the Fayum, itself a kind of oasis, received early stimulation from this quarter cannot be ignored” (Hoffman 1979, p.185). Forde-Johnson sees very strong links between Saharan African lithic industries (particularly the Aterian) and those of the Faiyum and western Delta, saying that there is “a very distinct possibility of an Aterian origin for the Nile valley bifacial technique” (Forde-Johnon 1959, p.77). Butzer (1976) considered the Faiyum Neolithic to be intrusive from North Africa, Northern Libyan Desert Oases, Western Sahara or Mediterranean littoral, contrasting the macrolithic tool types and technology with the Nile microlithic traditions.
Bir Kiseiba and Nabta
There is evidence from Bir Kiseiba and Nabta in south east Egypt that societies adopted domesticated animals (particularly cattle) at a very early stage, using pottery and other elements that are often associated with the adoption of a fully agricultural lifestyle. The Faiyum was certainly occupied during similar time periods to these, but in spite of similarities in the lithic assemblage, the Faiyum Neolithic groups had no pottery, cultivated plants, and the society does not appear to have favoured cattle over any other breed. In addition, in the Faiyum extensive use was made of natural resources, and the animal domesticates appear to have had a different origin. This may be accounted for by substantially different environmental conditions, but may also have other explanations. Dating is consistent with a possible southeast origin for the Faiyum groups and suggest that “the Fayyum sites and those at Bir Kiseiba and Nabta were occupied in some of the same period, but the earlier dates from the Bir-Kiseiba-Nabta region raise the possibility that the earliest occupants of the Fayyum came from the same cultural traditions” (Wenke et al 1989, p.37).
Without further data from both southeast Egyptian and NE African areas and the areas between (both the Nile Valley and the Oases), it is difficult to be clear about whether either the people originated in the southeast of Egypt; however it seems increasingly unlikely that the domesticates come from the southeast.
A Near Eastern Origin for Faiyum Neolithic Agriculture
Midant-Reynes sees a Near Eastern origin for the Faiyum Neolithic industry, citing a number of aspects as evidence: polished stone techniques are the same as used in the Natufian, and the custom of polishing cutting edges of chipped stone axes is the same as in Palestine’s Yamukian (Midant Reynes 1992/2000, p.101). Other indications are domesticated sheep and goat and bifacial flint knapping on the basis of the lithics Caneva says that: “Both the Merimda and the Fayumian Neolithic cultures are thought to have derived from a Near Eastern common tradition, and more specifically the Jordan Valley” (Caneva 1992, p.224). The main focus for this thinking is the lithic component: the presence of core and biface technology is not present in Africa before this time, whereas it is in the Near East in the pre-Neolithic. “the simultaneous development of the agricultural communities in the Faiyum and the southern Delta shows that a strong influence from the Levant at this time interested the northeastern part of the valley, replacing the previous Epipalaeolithic cultures (Caneva 1992, p.223).
However, there are dislocations of the evidence suggesting that even if there was a Near Eastern origin for the Neolithic it took on a very localised form: “The most obvious contrast between SW Asian agriculturalists and those of the Fayyum Neolithic is in architecture: if one were to judge from the distribution of artefacts and floral and faunal remains, one could easily conclude that the supposed agriculturalists of the Fayyum Neolithic were mobile groups that maintained considerable dependence on seasonally-available fish, fowl and perhaps the resources of the deserts surrounding the Fayyum” (Wenke et al 1988, p.45). Dates for an origin in the Levant are entirely compatible: “Given the data currently available it can be proposed that the complex of southwest Asian domesticates was introduced into Egypt between 6000BC and 5000BC or possibly earlier but probably not before 7000BC . . . The process by which domesticates were transferred and adopted is far more difficult to explain and cannot be resolved without present knowledge” (Wetterson 1993/1995 p.201).
Bard points to the gap between the beginning of food production in the Levant and that in Egypt as something of a mystery (Bard 1994) because in spite of the proximity of Egypt to the Levant, full-scale agricultural activities arrived late: “The Neolithic phenomenon, in which gathering and, later, hunting were gradually replaced by the cultivation of domesticated plants and animal husbandry, began in the Near East perhaps as early as 10,000 years ago. The most recent hypothesis of Neolithic origins is that agriculture was first practiced in the southern Levant at late Natufian sites and is only found late in other regions of the Near East . . . . What is unusual about this . . . is the still later development of the Neolithic in Egypt, where the transition to an agrarian way of life occurred only after ca.5500BC” (Bard 1994, p.1). It made its appearance for the first time (as far as we know) in the Faiyum.
2.5.4 A Qarunian Origin for the Neolithic
Some writers point to the similarities between the Qarunian and the Neolithic - like the very distinctive concave-based stone arrowheads (Hoffman 1979 p.185) and the importance of Clarias in the diet (Cagle 1994), ceramics, domesticated cattle and blade technology. “The Nabta Neolithic sites . . . show the presence of several concave-based arrowheads similar to those found in the Fayoum A Neolithic” (Wendorf and Hassan 1980). Hayes (1964, 1965) saw a distinctly new occupation in the Neolithic.
Casini sees a slow cultural adaptation to farming, and believes that this is partly brought on by environmental conditions. “The studies on the archaeological assemblages found in the course of the Italian survey indicate the presence of a substrate of hunters-fishers-gatherers which preceded the groups of farmers in the Fayum. This, and the changing environmental conditions, which certainly affected the development of the Fayum human groups, lead to the following conclusion: the Fayum A culture can no longer be considered the result of the immigration of alien peoples, but as a process of local evolution and gradual cultural specialisation in the course of which the indigenous food-gathering social groups were adapting to the new environmental conditions” (Casini 1984, p.202).
Wilkinson (2003) sees a slightly more complex model of adaptation from his studies of the Badarian and the Eastern Desert: The climatic deterioration theory suggest that at around c.4000BC cattle herders merged with Nile social, bringing a social organisation. “Attractive as this may seem, there are difficulties with this theory. For a start the Badarian . . . arouse within the Nile valley many centuries before the final desiccation of the neighbouring savannahs” (p.178). Wilkinson believes that the ‘Badarians’ were influenced before immigration and evolved their own cultural response to it; by the time this still supposed immigration took place, Egyptians of Nile Valley were already culturally established.
A Mixed Origin
Anne Stemler sees a possible combination of Asian and African origins for the Egyptian pattern of agricultural activity: “It is generally accepted that the plant and animal remains were introduced from Asia, not only because they appear in the archaeological record in southwestern Asia at least two millennia earlier, but also because extensive wild populations of emmer, wheat, barley, and sheep probably were not present in Africa at this time (Zohary 1969,:54; Clark 1971). It is still not clear whether cattle could have been domesticated in Africa where two kinds of wild cattle occur (Clark 1971). The mixture of African and Asian elements in early agricultural settlements in Egypt strongly suggests that people who grew the crops were not all migrants from Asia” (Stemler 1980, p.505).
Hassan sees an origin of farming knowledge from the south west of Egypt. Evidence from the southwest Western Desert (Bir Kiseiba-Nabta), Siwa and Bahariya provides evidence of a phase of moister conditions from around 9,500 to around 6,700BP (Wendorf and Hassan 1980). This period was associated with human occupation in most of the Egyptian oases by Epipalaeolithic hunters and gatherers. In the South herders of cattle and sheep/goats were early cultivators of plants, taking advantage of savannah-like conditions. “The moist phase was followed by a period of severe aridity which has most likely led to the gradual depopulation of the desert and an infiltration of the Nile Valley by individuals and families . . . . Similar aridification seems to have affected the Sinai and the Negev, and a similar movement of population towards the Nile is plausible. This is no mass invasion but a gradual infiltration by drifters and refuges over a span of about 500 years or more” (Hassan 1984, p.222). Hassan sees these drifters mixing with the indigenous hunter-gatherer groups in the Nile valley, bringing agricultural practises, which supplemented the existing food-acquiring traditions: “The change in subsistence was almost imperceptible, peaceful and gradual” (1984, p.222). He summarises: “the emergence of agriculture in Predynastic Egypt was a result of demographic fusion between the inhabitants of the Nile Valley and refugees from the desert regions adjacent to the Nile Valley from ca.7000-6000BP and the subsequent diffusion of agricultural practises along the Nile” (Hassan 1984, p.224).
It is quite clear that insufficient information exists for all writers to agree an origin for agriculture in the Faiyum, or the relationship between the Qarunian and the Faiyum Neolithic. It is worth bearing in mind a warning from Wenke based on his survey and his belief that much information still lies beneath lacustrine silts or current farming settlements: “It is still possible that we shall find that the ‘mysterious gap’ of 1500 years between the Fayum B and Fayum A cultures involved considerable indigenous domestication and development of agricultural strategies” (Wenke 1984, p.196). It is equally possible that other sites will be found that offer alternative suggestions
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
By the way, for those who don't know (including obviously lyingass), the Qarunian culture is a mesolithic culture based around Lake Qarun in the Faiyum region. Lake Qarun was called Lake Moeris by the Greco Romans and is the third largest lake in Egypt. You can see it here as the dark blue area in the Faiyum. It's a saltwater lake that receives drainage in the Faiyum but in prehistoric times it had freshwater and was the center of the oases.
I personally am in favor of the 'Mixed Origin' for the Faiyum neolithic, however contrary to what some (desperately) want to believe the Asiatic input in the form of domesticates need NOT come from an Asiatic people persay but from the Natufians and their Mushabian forebears who were already present in the Delta area proper.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I personally am in favor of the 'Mixed Origin' for the Faiyum neolithic, however contrary to what some (desperately) want to believe the Asiatic input in the form of domesticates need NOT come from an Asiatic people persay but from the Natufians and their Mushabian forebears who were already present in the Delta area proper.
^GOod point. The Natufian peoples with their clear links to sub-Saharan tropical types would be right next door in Palestine. And as one study notes about some ancient Qarunian remains- they resemble tropical Africans: QUOTE:
"The body was that of a forty-year old woman with a height of about 1.6 meters, who was of a more modern racial type than the classic 'Mechtoid' of the Fakhurian culture (see pp. 65-6), being generally more gracile, having large teeth and thick jaws bearing some resemblance to the modern 'negroid' type." -- (Beatrix Midant-Reynes, Ian Shaw (2000). The Prehistory of Egypt. Wiley-Blackwell. pg. 82)
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Thanks to you monkeys chasing the weasel for taking my thread off-topic and ruining it. You guys are **** worse than the trolls. You're all race loons all of you. You just can't ignore the gutter snipe but gleefully destroy peoples threads right along with 'em.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
What makes it Libyan? Is the throw stick peculiar to any one ethny? Aren't the listed towns in the western delta? Who's towns were they? Who originally settled the towns?
I don't know, and I have the exact same questions myself! The reason why the palette was called Libyan/Tjehenu in the first place was because of the hieroglyph of the throwing stick on an oval which was commonly used to convey Libya.
Explorer goes into the palette more in greater detail in his blog here.
I also wonder if the 7 cities shown in the palette being conquered by the Upper Egyptian totems somehow represent the 7 nomes of the Delta or something else. The totems of the 7 cities are different from the those of the 7 Delta nomes, though could it be possible there was a change in symbols after conquest.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Now the palette above is labeled as the 'Battlefield Palette'. They are not called Libyans because there is no indication at all as to where these enemies are from. It's possible they too could be of Libyan origin but they are obviously of different type from the Tjehenu or Delta folks depicted with straighter, longer hair. These enemies have short, curly, indeed afro-type hair. I recall reading somewhere a Classical Greek text that describes Libyans of the northern areas and coasts as having longer and looser hair but those further south having very curly hair. Such variation is not atypical of populations in any given region of Africa, but still who are these people? If they are indeed Libyan, I'd have to go by the stereotype of their look and say they Libyans of further south.
Speaking of which, recall this ancient map you posted before.
Note that Tjehenu territory is adjacent to the Delta, while Temehu farther south is adjacent to the Valley.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: the curls don't look like small tightly curled afro type hair
There are many types of Afro hair, "black woman". Even in "tightly curled Afro type", go and google it. Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Ignore the lyingass and her stupid strawman protests. Takruri hates seeing his threads ruined by such frivolous crap from trolls, but hopefully Ausar will delete it like he did the others. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggghhhhhhhhh
Don't say that!
Last time I tried that not only did off-topic post NOT get deleted but the whole thread was moved to Ancient Egypt and therby excused from all responsibility.
Moderation is not honoring the assurances it gave us when the forums split and moderators were voted into place.
Want to know the result of me following your advice and asking moderator to delete off topic?
Complaining to moderator(s) is how my thread on the veracity of KV11 Book of Gates scene 30 thread, an obviously Egyptology subject matter thread, got moved to the free for all forum.
I can't see why legitimate non-Egyptology topics in the multiple discipline fields associated with modern Egyptology or even why African Studies subjects should be in a forum catering to mindless racism and racialisms. And so my Dark Aegeans thread was also moved to the Race Central oops I mean the anything but "Ancient Egypt" forum.
I guess it's done so that African Studies will have a tarnished reputation, so that no one will it see African Studies as other than a branch of racialist thought.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wally: If we were examining the artifacts of a pre-literate culture, the presentation of 'cave' images would be rather quaint, affording us an opportunity for speculation and conjecture. The Kememou, however, were extremely literate and provided posterity with pictures to go with the words that they expressed:
The appellation which the Kememou applied to the Western Sudanic peoples on their northwestern borders was Tihenou or "magnificent (dazzling) Blue people", an appellation which still is used to describe the Tuareg people...if one can read what is written, there is no need for conjecture or speculation...
THE TIHENOU
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri:
It's postulated here that the Tjehenu were virtually physically unidentifiable from the Egyptians in pre- 6th dynasty times. If so how do we distinguish the two on pre-dynastic palettes and in early dynastic art?
It's the Temehu rather than the Tehenu (Tjehenu) that more physically resemble the Egyptians.
LIBYANS of two major types The Temehu and the Tehenu (Tjehenu)
differences in clothing:
Temehu: naked chest with crossing bands, long hair with longer piece of hair hanging down behind ear (non braided) brick reddish brown skin
Tehenu: often wearing long gown hanging from one shoulder the other bare. Hair has braided sidelock hanging in front of ear. Often with feathers in hair, one or two pale skin or brick reddish brown skin
The Ancient Egyptians called the land and the people west of the Nile Valley the Tehenu, whom appear to have been a numerous group, as attested by Egyptian references, such as "the countries of the Tehenu" and "the chiefs of the Tehenu". But since the Temehu were also referred to as "the Westerners", those who inhabited the area immediately west of the Nile, it becomes difficult to separate between the two Berber groups. Hence, according to Oric Bates, the ancient Egyptians often did not always discriminate between the Temehu (Tmh') and the Tehenu (Th'n).
Those writers who claimed that the Temehu tribes were comprised of two groups: the Tehenu in the north and the Nehesu in the south, were often confused and definitely misinformed, since according to the Egyptians themselves the Nehesu are a distinctive group, and in all probability what they meant to say was that the Libyans comprised two groups: the Tehenu in the north and the Temehu tribes in the south, and thus the Tehenu were rightly identified with Lower Egypt, and the Temehu with Middle-Nubia. This makes sound sense when one refers to the ancient Egyptian's classification of humankind: The Egyptians divided the human race into four classes, namely the Egyptians, the A’mu (Semites), the Neh’esu (Nubians) and the Temeh’u (Temehu) in the country Tmh’ (Libyans). The Neh'esu refers to all Africans bordering Egypt from the south, like the Ethiopians; the Temehu covers all Africans bordering Egypt from the west; and the A'mu are obviously the Semites bordering Egypt from the east (of the Middle East), like the Akkadians and the Phoenicians, whom originally were Saharan groups, split from the Afro-Asiatic family around the 5th millennium BC. Of course, modern genetic, anthropological and linguistic evidence conclusively relates both the Egyptians and the Libyans (and all the ancient Mediterranean peoples) to the Sahara and therefore this kind of genealogy is politically motivated and serves no purpose to our present enquiry, except in that it clearly shows the Nehesu as a separate group from the Temehu, and that the Temehu designates the whole of the Libyan peoples west of the Nile - that is all the Berbers or Imazighen including the Tehenu, the Ribu, the Nasamons, the Garamantes, etc, all of whom the Egyptians were aware of as Berber groups and collectively mentioned as Temehu. This is also apparent from the extent of the Temehu's territories, which, according to Bates, appears to have been comprised of various communities and tribes, occupying much of the Sudan and possibly all the way to Fezzan; and hence several scholars, starting from Oric Bates, have openly discussed the possibility of the Temehu being the distant ancestors of the present day Tuareg tribes of the great Sahara Desert (The Speakers of Tamaheqt), which now became Temezeght via *Temehaght > Temejeght > Temesheght > Temezeght > Tamazight (the language of the entire Berber population of North Africa, currently spanning across 10 countries, from the Red Sea to the Atlantic Ocean and from the Mediterranean Sea to Lake Chad). Few years after the publication of Bates' unique book, The Times (20 March 1928) published a study drawing similarities between the Temehu and the images of prehistoric drawings found in the Air Mountain in the southern Sahara desert. This begs a simple question no one dared to ask, let alone answer: if the Temehu were recent sea-people invaders of Egypt (or of Libya, as it was known then), then how come the ancient Egyptians considered them the natives of both Egypt and Libya and why did they include them in their genealogy of humankind long before the arrival of the sea-people?
Surely the Egyptians knew enough about their neighbours not to confuse natives with foreign pirates as to include the latter in their classification of the human race! Like I have said, the Egyptian classification of the human race serves no scientific purpose other than show the Temehu as a massive group inhabiting the whole of Libya (that is the whole of Africa west of Egypt), and thus this by itself is more than enough to put all other theories concerning the European origin of the Temehu tribes out of their miseries. In speaking of the Biblical genealogy, the Biblical HAM (the African divinely-cursed son of Noah - see Genesis for more on this), appears to be no more than a metatheses of the older TMH. It is apparent here that both the Egyptians and their later students must have based their written traditions on earlier and much older oral lore and as such the original classification myth must have been much older than the written version of the later pharaohs. This also means that " Internet chat experts " , who feverishly confuse the recent sea-people with the Libyan Tehenu and Temehu and subsequently made the Temehu a foreign blond group, are not only inaccurate "crackpots" but also committing a grave mistake simply because we have plenty of evidence, most of which is prehistoric, to the fact that these Berber groups were natives to the area since pre-dynastic times. And to ignore this monumental evidence, or, like other scholars had pointed out, to make it intentionally obscure, serves no purpose other than illustrate Amen-like motives!
The pre-dynastic existence of the Temehu and the Tehenu is ascertained from several facts, the most important of which is the Palermo Stone, the oldest document in the world, which preserves a long list of pre-Dynastic Libyan kings & queens of Lower Egypt before its invasion by the pharaohs. The Delta city of Sais was the centre of the worship of the Libyan Goddess Neith and most scholars generally agree that the inhabitants of Sais were mostly of Libyan Berber origin. Other Libyan Delta cults included those of the Libyan Cat-Goddess Bast at Bubastis, and Osiris & Isis at Buziris, who went on to dominate the Egyptian and Roman pantheons, and even survive to the present day in Europe as the secret cults of Isis & Osiris. It is therefore generally concluded that the Berber Tehenu tribes were the natives of the Egyptian Delta long before the menace of Menes, who forcibly unified Egypt and invaded the Tehenu territories in the north and the Temehu's and Nubian's in the south about 3100 BC (or 3400 BC according to other sources Then we have the Egyptian pre-dynastic records such as the inscriptions found in Neith's temples, showing the usual Libyan signs and Neith's tattoos as well as the names of queens and princesses, which usually contained the element Net or Nit; Narmer's ivory cylinder commemorating his so called victory over the Libyans; the pre-dynastic Kerki knife bearing similar representations of pre-dynastic Libyans as those of the later Egyptians; and, of course, the name " Tehenu " itself, found on King Scorpion's statue (ca. 3300 BC), from which respected Egyptologists convincingly deduced that the struggle between the ancient Libyans and the Egyptians goes back to pre-dynastic times, as pointed out by both Breasted (1906) and Bates (1914), and also to the beginning of the Northern Kingdom of the Delta when the invading pharaohs were forcibly trying to unify the two kingdoms: the northern Libyan Lower Egypt and the southern Nubian Upper Egypt. This means that if the wars of the Tehenu-Temehu and the Egyptians were pre-dynastic, then the existence of the Tehenu and the Temehu people in Egypt surely goes even farther back in time. In addition to the Delta, the Tehenu of Lower Egypt were also the inhabitant of the Fayyum and the other oases of the region. In fact, these Berber oases were not invaded by the pharaohs until the time of the New Empire, and were not totally colonised by the pharaohs until the time of Ramses III, against whom the Libyans became known for their attacks on Egypt. Breasted asserts that these oases dwellers, from which the Egyptians of Hatshepsut extracted much tribute, were none other than the Libyan Tehenu of the Delta. The Temehu's territories, however, began immediately south of the Tehenu's and extended all the way down to Middle Nubia - an area where Oric Bates, during his short life, conducted an extensive study of its cemeteries and came to conclude that the Nubians and the Libyans were more related than previously thought, and thus the Temehu Berbers were also known to archaeologists as " the C-Group of Nubia " . Even today, the Arabs of modern Egypt call the Nubians " Barabera " As one is often forced by historians to talk of 'colour' and 'race' when the whole of humankind is found to be of one type, genetically sharing 99.8% of its DNA material with chimpanzees and 58% with bananas, one can only say that (some of) the Temehu people were said to be 'fair skinned' and 'blue eyed'. They wore single hair locks on each side of the head and pointed beards, and had a headdress of two ostrich plumes as those of the Libyan Goddess Ament. According to some sources, one feather symbolises 'chieftain status', while two feathers are generally worn by everyone else. But in other representations of Libyans we see chieftains with two feathers and their subjects wearing only one feather. Also Libyan goddesses of ancient Libya were portrayed by the ancient Egyptians with one feather, like the Libyan Goddess Ament, the consort of Libyan Amen, whom some know as Amon. One of the most important temples illustrating the description of the Tehenu people is the temple of the King Sahu-Ra (of the fifth dynasty). The Tehenu were portrayed as tall people, dark skinned (or bronze-skinned), with long black hair, short pointed beards, slender faces and thick lips; features which closely relate them to their relatives from East Africa, such as the Ethiopians, whose languages both were of the same group and both were of East African origin: the Hamito-Semitic family which is now known as Afro-Asiatic. Unlike the Temehu and other Libyan groups, the Tehenu wore no feathers on their hair. Their dress consisted mainly of two leather strips worn across the chest and held with a belt along the waist, which terminated in a penistache. They also wore animal tails as a sign of royalty. In historic times, only Berber children wore side-locks; with grown-up men, it indicated either royalty, or the exercise of high priestly functions, rightly identified with the rites of the Libyan Goddess Neith. The long, lock-like beard, is very similar to the beard of Osiris, which the pharaohs also adopted as a sign of royalty. The Libyan pointed-beard and the side-lock may shed more light on the origin of the present-day Jewish side-lock, which they could have picked up in Egypt among Other things!
The missing top edge should perhaps be reconstructed like the top of the Narmer Palette to display "heraldic" animal heads, a "royal"-palace-facade emblem (serekh ), and hieroglyphs giving the ruler's name. But excluding this symbolic border—on the Narmer Palette it is related to, not directly part of, the narrative image—the Battlefield, like the Hunter's Palette, presents four principal groups of figures, each including four agents or actors (Fig. 34). On the Battlefield Palette, however, the textual positions of the groups are reversed. Rather than appearing at the top and bottom of the image, the two episodes closest to the moment of the blow are brought together into the center
Masking the Blow: The Scene of Representation in Late Prehistoric Egyptian Art (California Studies in the History of Art) [Hardcover] Whitney Davis (Author
______________________________________________
^^^However there is nothing to indicate that these men are Libyans, either Temehu or Tehenu (Tjehenu). (why do we need this obscure spelling Tjehenu? Everybody else says Tehenu)
1) The penis sheath was an essential element of men's costume in ancient Egypt. So you can't say because they have a penis sheath, which the Libyans also had, that they are therfore Libyan
2) The figures do not have either the crossing chest bands of the Temehu or the feather and sidelock of the Tehenu
3) The hair of these figures is markedly different than straight haired figures thought to be Libyan in the Narmer palette. Here in the Narmer palette:
^^^^^ this hair corresponds to the Temehu below
With the Temehu the hair does not have a sidelock but it does have a longer piece of hair which hangs down lower than the rest of the hair behind the hair.
So are the prisoners on the Battlefield palette Romitu? Maybe. But in my opinion they don't seem to be Libyan
posted
They best resemble the Serpopard Handlers on Narmer's Palette.
Pre and proto dynastic works with these characters may well represent consolidations of the Nile Valley proper where the populations was mainly comprised of down migrant Sudanese (whether directly or recalled from their swiftly drying "Western Desert" expanded territory) and native Egyptians who had been settled in the valley itself since the epipaleolithic.
But, is that someone on the Carrion Birds Palette wearing a Libyan robe?
BTW that previous posts confuses the Tjemehu and Tjehenu.
Tjehenu are the oldest AE recorded Libyans. They were the ones with long tress in back of ear crossband dressers.
Tjemehu begin to appear a bit later in the documents and sterotyped with bangs, dreadlocks, and sidelock in front of ear.
Thing is, the word Tjemehu became generic including all Libyans whether Tjehenu, Tjemehu, Libu, and Meshwesh.
Since then I've found out the Qeyqesh were not native Libyan. They were originally foreigners of the Haw Nebu of the Sea Peoples.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Since then I've found out the Qeyqesh were not native Libyan. They were originally foreigners of the Haw Nebu of the Sea Peoples.
right, I had the terms switched, basically reponding to this:
quote:Originally posted by Wally: [QB] If we were examining the artifacts of a pre-literate culture, the presentation of 'cave' images would be rather quaint, affording us an opportunity for speculation and conjecture. The Kememou, however, were extremely literate and provided posterity with pictures to go with the words that they expressed:
The appellation which the Kememou applied to the Western Sudanic peoples on their northwestern borders was Tihenou or "magnificent (dazzling) Blue people", an appellation which still is used to describe the Tuareg people...if one can read what is written, there is no need for conjecture or speculation...
[/QB[
Unless is missed it on http://www.temehu.com/Libyan-People.htm I don't see listed for Libyan tribes. I assume it's either because they didn't think they were indigenous or that they ( temehu.com) are using a differnt spelling. I don't know what your point was about Qeyqesh being Sea People, I guess just to show temehu.com may have had it wrong when they made the overall statement: " Internet chat experts " , who feverishly confuse the recent sea-people with the Libyan Tehenu and Temehu "
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
It's because in the goto thread I list Qeyqesh as one of the Libyan ethnies but since then found them to originate from the Sea Peoples who are H3W NBW (i.e., N Med/Aegean/NE Med) foreigners. I was noting a precision and updating my own previous downlevel assessment.
Qeyqesh (Keykesh) does appear on your tourism site, Temehu. That site has progressed over the years from following the narrow and biased bio-determinism of the Amazigh activists to simply presenting the wider facts of N. African identities.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: It's because in the goto thread I list Qeyqesh as one of the Libyan ethnies but since then found them to originate from the Sea Peoples who are H3W NBW (i.e., N Med/Aegean/NE Med) foreigners. I was noting a precision and updating my own previous downlevel assessment.
Qeyqesh (Keykesh) does appear on your tourism site, Temehu. That site has progressed over the years from following the narrow and biased bio-determinism of the Amazigh activists to simply presenting the wider facts of N. African identities.
This seems to mean that you may agree with Temehu.com's not listing Keykesh as Libyan because they were Sea people.
Much later, Ramsess III Papyrus Harris J. H. Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt, Part Four, §405
Behold, I will inform you of other things, done in Egypt since my reign. The Libyans and the Meshwesh (mSAwASA) were dwelling in Egypt, having plundered the cities of the western shore, from Memphis to Kerben (qArAbAnA) . They had reached the great river on both its banks. They it was who plundered the cities of Egwowe (gwtwt) during very many years, while they were in Egypt. Behold, I destroyed them, slain at one time. I laid low the
Meshwesh,
the Libyans,
the Esbet (AsAbAtA),
the Keykesh (qAjqASA),
the Shai (SAj),
the Hes (hAsA)
and the Beken (bAqAnA)
; they were overthrown in their blood and made heaps. I turned them back from trampling the border of Egypt. I carried away those whom my sword spared, as numerous captives, pinioned like birds before my horses, their wives and their children, by the ten-thousand, their cattle in number like hundred-thousand. I settled their leaders in strongholds in my name. I gave to them captains (Hrj.w) of archers, and chief men of the tribes, branded and made into slaves, impressed with my name; their wives and children were made likewise. I led their cattle into the house (pr) ] of Amon; they were made into herds, forever
Many of the Sea Peoples, to whom the Libyans are counted, were settled in the Delta
Sherden and Kehek live in their cities, at rest, lying on their backs. They are not afraid anymore, they have no enemies not from Kush not from Syria. Their bows and spears are in their arsenals. They are satisfied and drunk with joy. Their wives are with them and their children... For I am their defender. I give life to the whole land, strangers as well as peasants and citizens.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri:
Not having learned their lesson well, more North Africans, the Esbet, Shai or Shaitep, Beken, Keykesh, and Hes, along with the Meshwesh mount another attack to occupy Egypt which again fails and leads to their occupying military and agricultural posts after being branded.
in this old NV post you mention these tribes as a collective to attack Egypt
quote:Originally posted by ausar
The Saharan rock art goes in various phases from Bubaline,Cattle,Horse,and Camel periods. The Horse period {about 1,200 B.C -lioness} is consistent with the emerging pressence of the Sea People in ancient Egyptian records. Many archaeologist talk about the replacement of the original Libyans with newer immigrants tracing somewhere in the Northern Mediterranean islands. Most likely this had an effect on Eastern Mediterranean countries like Palestine and other regions.
this UNESCO pdf has some interesting detail in it, may or may not agree with it, didn't read it all yet
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: It's because in the goto thread I list Qeyqesh as one of the Libyan ethnies but since then found them to originate from the Sea Peoples who are H3W NBW (i.e., N Med/Aegean/NE Med) foreigners. I was noting a precision and updating my own previous downlevel assessment.
Qeyqesh (Keykesh) does appear on your tourism site, Temehu. That site has progressed over the years from following the narrow and biased bio-determinism of the Amazigh activists to simply presenting the wider facts of N. African identities.
This seems to mean that you may agree with Temehu.com's not listing Keykesh as Libyan because they were Sea people.
Much later, Ramsess III Papyrus Harris J. H. Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt, Part Four, §405
Behold, I will inform you of other things, done in Egypt since my reign. The Libyans and the Meshwesh (mSAwASA) were dwelling in Egypt, having plundered the cities of the western shore, from Memphis to Kerben (qArAbAnA) . They had reached the great river on both its banks. They it was who plundered the cities of Egwowe (gwtwt) during very many years, while they were in Egypt. Behold, I destroyed them, slain at one time. I laid low the
Meshwesh,
the Libyans,
the Esbet (AsAbAtA),
the Keykesh (qAjqASA),
the Shai (SAj),
the Hes (hAsA)
and the Beken (bAqAnA)
; they were overthrown in their blood and made heaps. I turned them back from trampling the border of Egypt. I carried away those whom my sword spared, as numerous captives, pinioned like birds before my horses, their wives and their children, by the ten-thousand, their cattle in number like hundred-thousand. I settled their leaders in strongholds in my name. I gave to them captains (Hrj.w) of archers, and chief men of the tribes, branded and made into slaves, impressed with my name; their wives and children were made likewise. I led their cattle into the house (pr) ] of Amon; they were made into herds, forever
Many of the Sea Peoples, to whom the Libyans are counted, were settled in the Delta
Sherden and Kehek live in their cities, at rest, lying on their backs. They are not afraid anymore, they have no enemies not from Kush not from Syria. Their bows and spears are in their arsenals. They are satisfied and drunk with joy. Their wives are with them and their children... For I am their defender. I give life to the whole land, strangers as well as peasants and citizens.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri:
Not having learned their lesson well, more North Africans, the Esbet, Shai or Shaitep, Beken, Keykesh, and Hes, along with the Meshwesh mount another attack to occupy Egypt which again fails and leads to their occupying military and agricultural posts after being branded.
in this old NV post you mention these tribes as a collective to attack Egypt
quote:Originally posted by ausar
The Saharan rock art goes in various phases from Bubaline,Cattle,Horse,and Camel periods. The Horse period {about 1,200 B.C -lioness} is consistent with the emerging pressence of the Sea People in ancient Egyptian records. Many archaeologist talk about the replacement of the original Libyans with newer immigrants tracing somewhere in the Northern Mediterranean islands. Most likely this had an effect on Eastern Mediterranean countries like Palestine and other regions.
this UNESCO pdf has some interesting detail in it, may or may not agree with it, didn't read it all yet
That .pdf takes liberties with history.
Posts: 1296 | From: the planet | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
It's because in the goto thread I list Qeyqesh as one of the Libyan ethnies but since then found them to originate from the Sea Peoples who are H3W NBW (i.e., N Med/Aegean/NE Med) foreigners. I was noting a precision and updating my own previous downlevel assessment.
Qeyqesh (Keykesh) does appear on your tourism site, Temehu. That site has progressed over the years from following the narrow and biased bio-determinism of the Amazigh activists to simply presenting the wider facts of N. African identities.
This seems to mean that you may agree with Temehu.com's not listing Keykesh as Libyan because they were Sea people.
No it doesn't seem to mean any such thing in the least.
Why do you act as if you don't understand what is presented to you and then go on to twist what's said?
Again Temehu.com lists Qeyqesh as one of the ancient Libyans. They are following Bates (1914) as I once did until finding out from up to date sources they were more likely the Karkisa of Caria, i.e., the Qarqisha/Qayqisha of Ramesses II/Ramesses III.
Had you followed my 2nd link you'd've seen I placed the Qeyqesh in with Sea Peoples in correction to an earlier post in Centric's Sea Peoples thread late last year.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: They best resemble the Serpopard Handlers on Narmer's Palette.
does that then mean they were not Tjehenu
If the serpopards represent the "halves" of a united Egypt and their handlers symbolize the folk holding them in governance then the Serpopard Handlers may very well be of Narmer's stock but in any event they are the 2nd cataract to at least Men`at-Khufu in the 16th upper nome typical population.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Yes, and I acknowledge that the origin of some Sea Peoples are from the Aegean islands and Anatolia, though I still maintain that those of the western areas of the Mediterranean are of African descent due to evidence I will provide in the Sea Peoples thread sometime soon.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: ..BTW that previous posts confuses the Tjemehu and Tjehenu.
Tjehenu are the oldest AE recorded Libyans. They were the ones with long tress in back of ear crossband dressers.
Yes and the Tjehenu territory is adjacent to the Delta.
As far as the hairstyle...
it's very similar to the fallen enemies on the palette.
It's true the only thing missing are the cross bandoliers, but again my proposal is that the Delta are related to the Tjenehu not that they were them exactly.
By the way, cross bandoliers are worn by many groups not only across the Sahara but also in east Africa from Sudan, to Ethiopian and Somalia.
I have even seen a few pictures of Egyptians wearing cross bandoliers of white linen strips and more often are portraits of the pharaoh in war attire with large metallic cross bandoliers in the shape of hawk's wings as armor.
Tjehenu tributaries woman and children men, women, and children
Another interesting feature that Cotonou a.k.a. Sabalour pointed out was that Tehenu elite both men and women appear to have worn some kind of adornment on their brows. It's very small and obscure due to paint wear, but the shape is strikingly similar to the wadjet (cobra) ornament that Egyptian royals wear. Wadjet the cobra goddess is the Lady of Lower Egypt the same way Nekhbet the vulture goddess is the Lady of Upper Egypt. Wadjet's cult center was Per-Wadjet (called Buto by Greeks) the capital city of the 5th nome of Lower Egypt in the northwest Delta. The high-priestess and oracle of Wadjet was called by the Greeks the most ancient of oracle centers.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Tjemehu begin to appear a bit later in the documents and sterotyped with bangs, dreadlocks, and sidelock in front of ear.
Same features as this modern Moor minus the side lock.
The same facial features as this young Tuareg boy.
quote:Thing is, the word Tjemehu became generic including all Libyans whether Tjehenu, Tjemehu, Libu, and Meshwesh.
Indeed. The same way Nehesu became generic including all peoples south of Egypt.
And speaking of short curly hair before, I'm reminded that there are also a few portrayals of Libyans with short curly hair, particularly those with multiple feathers in their hair..
..like this repro from the Middle Kingdom that Midogbe originally posted:
And this small repro of Libyans dancing.
They bear a striking resemblance to predynastic (Badarian) portraits.
With this good variance of Libyan groups, then comes a question of ethnic or linguistic relativity. Many people tend to identify Libyans with Berber or even proto-Berber and while that may be the case with some of them I doubt it applies to them all.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: [qb] Tjemehu begin to appear a bit later in the documents and sterotyped with bangs, dreadlocks, and sidelock in front of ear.
Same features as this modern Moor minus the side lock.
However the topic of the thread question is Tehenu (Tjehenu) not Temehu (Tjemehu )
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I know that, worm. I just brought up the related point that other Libyan groups also had significant influence in Upper Egypt as well.
Getting back to the Tjehenu, notice that the back of the Libyan/Tjehenu palette shows tribute animals of three species-- cattle, donkeys, and antelopes.
This same pattern of species is repeated in later dynastic murals of Tjehenu tribute, as pointed out by Explorer in his blog, though the mural below also includes goats.
It's not only that the hairstyle is the same in Old Kingdom and New Kingdom as on the palette that allows for a Tjehenu most likely identity. They lack penis-stache and crossbands because they have been despoiled. Looking at some of the other Narmer artifacts the throwstick and pot glyphs (next to men of the this same hair style) is proof positive that they are [Tjehenu].
The other Narmer artifacts I alluded to are a label and a cylinder with either pot or throwstick and pot, proving enemies on them are positively ethnic Tjemehu. I posted them later as:
The pot and the throwstick w/pot glyphs positively identifies the enemies as Tjehenu. The label and the cylinder enemies in simplist reduction resemble the palette's bottom registers enemies. Parsimony suggests identity of similar characters across artifacts.
Notice the label enemy has the pot at his left and sprouts papyrus from his head, recalling Marshman of the palette. On the cylinder, below left of Narmer bopping three rows of enemies there are the throwstick and pot together with a lozenge.
Tjehenu may have been a major ethny in far north Egypt resisting southern political control but Ta Mehhu had other ethnic components as I postulated.
Ta Mehh is a place name not an ethnic name. It designates the northern/papyrus region of the Nile Delta. It is the word translated as Lower Egypt.
Anybody could've been living there. Apparently, folk always lived just south of the delta since the middle stone age. Many folk originating west of the delta and the Fayum settled near the delta. A smattering of folk migrated back and forth from the Levant to east of the delta for livestock fodder and trade but were never so much permanent settlers.
It's my take that the Narmer Palette shows all three of these major ethnies and maybe even one unguessed ethny.
They consider the side with the big circle as the front of the palette. On the other side and from top to bottom I see the enemies as originating [from]
* Sinai or Levant: (Breath-grasped-by-Falcon) * Fayum or immediately south of delta: (Grasped-by-the-Hair) * west of delta or west of Fayum: (Naked-Long-Haired-"Runners")
I don't hazard to guess from where the enemy all the way at the bottom of the front side originated.
Mind you, I have no definitive proof of any of that and they could all be originated from far north Nile dwellers going back to the stone ages. But other pieces of Dynasty 0 commemorative art do show the pot, or the throwstick and pot, near men who resemble the enemies at bottom of Narmer Palette.
In using the term 'originating' I mean at some point in past time their ancestors were from the listed places though inhabiting far north Egypt and thus being pre-unification "Lower Egyptians" (which is really an anachronism since there was no polity or state Lower Egypt before the unification).
I later explicitly tied the enemies' likenesses to an "old country" source while not denying any of them as being "pre-unification Lower Egyptians" which they apparently all were.
So Tukuler agrees that the Tjehenu were a significant component among the Delta people but that they were not the only ones, and that there were probably eastern folk from the Sinai present.
Again, I don't deny the presence of peoples from the east, but where exactly is the evidence for them exactly? Most of the evidence we have on predynastic to protodynastic Delta folks shows connections to the west specifically to Tjehenu. All the early major centers of the Delta corresponding to its 7 great sepati (nomes) are found in the western to southwestern areas.
If there are any peoples or cultures in the eastern areas, I really would love to know. By the way, the early people of the Sinai were known to the Egyptians as Mntw or 'Monitu'.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
The archaeological data is also clear. The early Delta culture was that of an African people who domesticated Asiatic crops like wheat and barley as well as Asiatic livestock like pigs and sheep along with their native African cattle. They also maintained economic trade relations with Asia but the rest of their culture was African. Even the names of their Asian domesticates which are later recorded in dynastic times are native and not derived from Asia or any Semitic language. While the earliest graves had no goods (likely because they were interred in the homes of the living), later graves showed items like carved wands of hippo bones. The pottery was similar to those found in mesolithic Sahara as well as the Levant (Natufians). Also, the various settlements were not as uniform as those in the Valley, again indicating that Upper Egypt was unified by a centralized polity or administration unlike the Delta.
I see nothing unreasonable in there.
quote: Most importantly, the earliest known permanent settlements in Lower Egypt were made in the southwest with the first one being in the Fayum!
If the Delta was settled by Asiatics then why are there no early settlements in the eastern parts of the Delta? In fact, among the traditional 20 sepati (nomes) of Lower Egypt, the first great 7 sepati occur in the western part of the delta beginning in the south. The sepati of the eastern areas were established later on.
You raise a good question.
quote:Even archaeologist Barbara Barich in her work Archaeology and Environment in the Libyan Sahara commented on similarities between Capsian culture farther west in Libya and the neolithic cultures of Egyptian oases like the Fayum such as oval shaped reed huts, the hearths and storage pits, and even the bodies interred in the homes. Fekri Hassan cites other material evidence like ground axes, tabular flint tools, lens-shaped bifacial arrowheads, concave-based arrowheads, ostrich shells, amazonite beads, and bone points.
Indeed, some parallels have been drawn between archeological specimens from the EpiPaleolithic Maghreb and those from up the Nile Valley. This may either speak to common recent Saharan origins of the associated settlements, or possible indication of demographic shifts from the Nile Valley onto the Maghreb.
quote:In regards to history, most of the historical texts come from foreign neighbors of the Egyptians who stressed their relationship with Libya. Though Egyptian texts give hints to western origins.
A "relationship" between the two entities does not necessarily mean monophyletic genealogical origins. It can mean political, and/or cultural relationships without any direct genealogical relationship.
Can you identify which Egyptian texts hint to "western origins"?
quote:The Bible for example states that Phut (Libya) is brother of Mizraim (Egypt)-- both sons of Ham, and even some of Mizraim's sons were non other than the names of Libyan tribes like the Ludim, Anamim, and Lehabim (Lubu, Anami, Lehabu).
Yeah, but Bible traditions render many African groups the "sons of Ham", going by the then limited understanding of outsiders, with regards to the African continent.
quote:Greek texts are more extensive in showing the relationship. Plato records that Egypt and Libya were long standing allies against Atlantis. The Argive Cycle states Aegyptus (the founder and king of Egypt) and Danaus (the founder and king of Libya) were brothers even twins who were both the sons of the goddess Libya (Africa proper). Greek legends say that Libya was once ruled by Amazons the most prominent of which was a queen named Myrina. The name may be a Greek corruption of the name Merinit (Merineith) which was a popular name in Lower Egypt and was in fact the name of the Delta princess who became Narmer's queen after his conquest of the Delta.
Not a bad reference to a more specific example. One question comes to mind though, with reference to "Libya" in your post: How does one discern what context the Greek text is placing "Libya", when in one context, it presumably implies a localized region west of the Nile Valley, but in the other, it supposedly implies the greater "Africa"? How does one determine these distinctions from Greek texts?
The connection between the Greek "Myrina" and the ancient Egyptian "Merinit" is compelling, but also characteristically tenuous.
quote: Egyptian texts associate the western desert with the land of the dead or of the ancestors, which may not have been as popular as the south since the west was largely a wasteland.
Can you name a few?
quote: Many of the monuments of the dead royals were traditionally built in the western side of the Nile towards the west. The west was often associated with the goddess Amentet who presided over the western lands and the dead. The goddess Nit was also associated with the west and may be connected with the Berber goddess of Carthage Tanit who was also associated with weaving, war, and fertility just like Nit. Even in the homes of some Berber groups today they use a cross-arrows and shield symbol similar to Nit as well as an ankh like symbol of Tanit.
The "western side" of the Nile need not be in what is now Libyan territory. The connection between Nit and Tanit however, is another compelling one, especially given the nominal attributes and emblems.
quote:Again, all this proves that the Delta peoples were of Libyan descent, but that does not mean they were actually Tjehenu. As to whether they were Romitu, perhaps they were, but they were obviously a different type of Romitu than those further south in the Valley. For example in the Tale of Sinuhe, Sinuhe himself who is a Delta man says when he traveled to Upper Egypt he thought he was in an entirely different country since the customs and looks of the people were different and he could barely understand their speech! Perhaps 'barely' is the key word here. That the Delta and Valley folk spoke dialects of the same language is the likely guess many Egyptologists make.
I'm not sure that you quite made a solid case for a Libyan-descent for the predynastic Delta inhabitants. Much of what you pointed out does speak to an African origin, but not necessarily proves that predynastic indigenous Delta inhabitants were of "Libyan origin". Some of your references though, do kinda make a compelling case for considering "Libyan" connections, like say that around Nit of the Nile Valley and Tanit of the Tamazight groups.
PS: I may be mistaking one for the other, but as far as "Romitu" goes, is that not the same thing as "Rmt"; the latter is another term for citizens of the ancient Egyptian dynastic complex.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
map interpretation of on Herodotus' geographic commentaries
Libya to the Egyptians and Greeks meant all of North Africa. He names the Libyan people as the Nasamones, and interestingly, the Nile was believed to originated in the Atlas mountains instead of it’s real origin , a straight line southwards.
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Egyptian monuments show that there already existed "negroid" Libyans by New Empire times...Types of negroid Libyans are shown in Figs. 3 and 4...The fusion which produced this type probably took place in Nubia or in the Southern Egyptian Oases, as it will, be pointed out that the Temehu probably occupied both these districts.
p43-44
quote:The Eastern Libyans of the Egyptian period were known to the inhabitants of the Nile vailley under a variety of names. These names were in some cases those of tribes, in others they were those of regional groups of tribes. It is, unfortunately, on the given data, not always possible to distinguish between the tribes and the regional groups, but a provisional division has been made in the following list :
Groups:
Tehenu.
Temehu.
Rebu.
Meshwesh.
Tribes:
Imukehek(?).
Kehek.
Keykesh.
Seped.
Esbet.
Ekbet.
Shal.
Hes.
Beken.
Tehenu
Both the ethnic and the geographical names were employed by the Egyptians until the time of the great invasions in a very loose manner to designate the people and the habitable countries to the west of the Nile Valley, north of the "Negro" zone. Therefore the Tehenu are mentioned in a general way, together with other foreign nations, as with Nubians and Asiatics.
Temehu
The Temehu appear to have been a more clearly defined branch of the Tehenu." That they were themselves made up of more than one tribe is clear from the extent of their territories. That the Temehu appeared to the Egyptians to have been a well-defined group is shown by their being listed with such ethnic groups as the Irtet, Mazoi, Yam, Wawat, and Kau of the south.
Rebu
This group, seated in the north, comprised a number of tribes, just as in classical times. This is borne out by the fact that the Rebu were so extensive a people that their importance led the Greeks into bestowing the generic term Libyans upon the indigenous North Africans as a whole. The Egyptian records, moreover, speak of the Rebu as of a powerful people at the time of the invasions. The Imukehek may have been a tribe of the Rebu, since they dwelt in the north,'- and since the tribe called the Kehek was associated with the Libyans at the time of the invasions." The Esbet also, for the reasons given below, may have been a tribe of the Rebu.
Meshwesh
The Meshwesh were a great and powerful group of allied tribes, who were able to overpower their eastern neighbours, and even eventually to obtain the Egyptian throne.' It is unreasonable to suppose that they were merely a single tribe, since their numbers and force point to a different conclusion...
p45-47
- Oric Bates, The Eastern Libyans, 1914
Posts: 200 | From: Nibiru | Registered: Mar 2023
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Here is a map below that illustrates what you posted above.
As you can see, the Tehenu were a group that was adjacent to the Faiyum and the Delta (Lower Egypt), and my argument in this thread is that they were closely related to the Delta people themselves. Meanwhile, the Temehu were those adjacent to the Valley area (Upper Egypt) extending well into Nubia, since Old Kingdom records record the rulers of Yam waging war against them. Interestingly, most of the western oases (except the Faiyum) fall directly within Temehu territory which makes me wonder if the Weheti (Oasis folk) were synonymous with the Temehu if not closely related to them. Throughout dynastic times, the Egyptians had to ensure the Weheti's loyalty to them if not pacify them.
The Ribu/Libu are west of the Tehenu are the basis of the Greek name for the entire continent (Libya) and west of them around Cyrenaic coast were the other tribes.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Wawat were a 'negro' or 'negroid' people- well to the south, but not probably much above the Second Cataract.The name " Timhy stone " at once suggests, as it did long ago to Brugsch,' Temehu. The stones would naturally be called Temehu stones if purveyed to the Egyptians by the people of that name, just as Carchedonian stones were so called because, though found in the interior of Libya, they reached the Greeks through the medium of the Carthaginians. And that the Temehu were in reality the northern neighbours of the Wawat is clear from the Harkhuf inscription (Vlth Dynasty). Harkhuf, going for the third time on a trading journey into the Sudan, encountered " the chief of Yam going to the land of Temeh, to smite Temeh as far as the western corner of Heaven. I went after him," adds Harkhuf, "and I pacified him."-' Since the Yam were close neighbours of the Wawat, and it is not probable that the negro chief designed to attack the Temehu in the distant Egyptian oases, it is plain that his enemies were either in Kurkur or Selimah—both so small as to be very unlikely objectives for such an expedition—or else on the Nile. If it be supposed that from Beris, the southernmost of the Egyptian oases, the Libyans followed the S.S.E. depression which leads thence to the Nile about Derr, and that, when they arrived at the river, and found no such strong opposition as they would have encountered below the First Cataract, they established themselves among the Nubians^ in groups principally on the west bank, a simple hypothesis is arrived at which fulfils all the data, both archaeological and textual. This hypothesis becomes something more than theory when it is found that, in classical times, the Libyans were established, though still as intruders, farther to the South. Strabo, the best classical authority on the Sudan, who was himself as far south as Philae at a time when, because of the recent punitive expedition of Petronius,' much new information was to be had, makes the following remarkable statement : " Above Meroe is Psebo, a large lake, containing a well-inhabited island. As the Libyans occupy the western bank of the Nile, and the Aethiopians the country on the other side of the river, they thus dispute by turns the possession of the islands, and the banks of the river, one party repulsing the other, or yielding to the superiority of its opponent. It would thus appear that the Temehu of the time of Harkhuf, the traders in " Timhy stones," had moved southwards, finding in that direction less resistance to their expansion than in the other, but still remaining an unabsorbed and foreign element among the older population. Under these circumstances, it is not strange that there should occasionally be found on the Egyptian monuments Libyans of slightly negroid aspect.
P 49-50
Oric Bates, The Eastern Libyans, 1914
If the Temehu groups were in the Kurkur or Selimah oasis, what people are likely their descendants?
If the Temehu groups were further west, as maybe likely for Yam
posted
^ Wawat is the Egyptian name for Lower Nubia so I don't think the Temehu were located directly north but rather to the west (northwest). Temehu were clearly located west of the Nile. As far as who they are related to today ethnically or genetically is a different question.
I personally theorize that all or most of these peoples who were neighbors of the Egyptians were Afroasiatic speakers though I believe that Nilo-Saharans weren't far off. We can see in the depictions of Kushites that many of their warriors were no different in appearance and dress from modern day Nilotes of South Sudan.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Do you have any sources linking the Nilotics in South Sudan to the Kushites? I haven't been able to find any although I have read that the Nara language is closely related to the later Meroitic.
Posts: 200 | From: Nibiru | Registered: Mar 2023
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ The only link I know of are that Nilotes served in Nubia's army as seen in the New Kingdom murals and epigraphs which is no surprise because Kerman Nubia was an empire. If you're suggesting that the Nubians themselves were Nilo-Saharan speaking there is no indication of that. Present day Nubians speak Nilo-Saharan languages but there is a substratum of Afroasiatic that is Beja-like or Cushitic-like. There is even a genetic difference between modern Nubians and South Sudanese/Nilotes.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic