This is topic "MURAL OF THE RACES" CORRECTED in forum Egyptology at EgyptSearch Forums.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=006797

---

Posted by the lion (Member # 17353) on :
 
.

MURAL OF THE RACES also known as
TABLE OF NATIONS
CORRECTED

tomb of Rameses III
valley of Biban-el-Moluk



I have to thank Wally for proving the following quote from Jean-Francois Champollion which corrects errors made in regard to a Mural called

"The Mural of The Races"

also known as

"The Table of Nations"

The picture often shown:



is incomplete. There are actual 8 figuers. The indications of nationality or in some people's opinion "race" by the Egyptians to this mural applies to none of the four figures shown here. It's the other four above those figures in the below complete illustration although the exact arrangement on the tomb wall may be different.
The indications of nationality or race by the Egyptians applies to a set of four figures (one is partial) that are slightly larger than the figures shown above. Champollion,the French Egyptologist who is acknowledged as the father of modern Egyptologybest known for his work on the Rosetta Stone resolves the identities of Mural of Races/Table of Nations in the remarks below. The illustration with all of the 8 figures is below.
His remarks apply to the top row only but the figures in the top row of the illustration are in in a slightly different order which will be indicated. The "races" or "nationalities" apply only to the top set of figures only as will become clear.


_______________________Egy.___Nam.___Nah.__Tam.


TOP ROW LEFT TO RIGHT
___EGYPTIAN, NAMOU, NAHASI, TAMHAU (head and torso)
___(Rome)

translation:
____EGYPTIAN, ASIATIC, AFRICAN Not of Egypt, CAUCASIAN

slightly smaller BOTTOM ROW FIGURES NOT MENTIONED
Another example that shows that these terms do not apply to the bottom row is that the last figure on the bottom row is not TAMHAU.
The TAMHAU is the partial figure on the top right


________________________________


Jean-Francois Champollion:
"Right in the valley of Biban-el-Moluk, we admired, like all previous visitors,
the astonishing freshness of the paintings and the fine sculptures on several tombs.
I had a copy made of the peoples represented on the bas-reliefs. At first I had thought,
from copies of these bas-reliefs published in England, that these peoples of different races
led by the god Horus holding his shepherd's staff, were indeed nations subject to the rule
of the Pharaohs. A study of the legends informed me that this tableau has a more general
meaning. It portrays the third hour of the day, when the sun is beginning to turn on its
burning rays, warming all the inhabited countries of our hemisphere. According to
the legend itself, they wished to represent the inhabitants of Egypt and those of foreign
lands. Thus we have before our eyes the image of the various races of man known to
the Egyptians and we learn at the same time the great geographical or ethnographical
divisions established during that early epoch. Men led by Horus, the shepherd of the
peoples, belong to four distinct families. The first, the one closest to the god, has a dark
red color, a well-proportioned body, kind face, nose slightly aquiline, long braided hair,
and is dressed in white. The legends designate this species as Rot-en-ne-Rome, the race
of men par excellence i.e., the Egyptians. There can be no uncertainty about the racial
identity of the man who comes next: he belongs to the Black race, designated under
the general term Nahasi. The third presents a very different aspect; his skin color borders
on yellow or tan; he has a strongly aquiline nose, thick, black pointed beard, and wears
a short garment of varied colors; these are called Namou. Finally, the last one is what we
call flesh-colored, a white skin of the most delicate shade, a nose straight or slightly arched,
blue eyes, blond or reddish beard, tall stature and very slender clad in a hairy ox-skin, a
veritable savage tattooed on various parts of his body; he is called Tamhou. I hastened to
seek the tableau corresponding to this one in the other royal tombs and, as a matter of fact,
I found it in several. The variations I observed fully convinced me that they had tried to
represent here the inhabitants of the four corners of the earth, according to the Egyptian
system, namely: 1. the inhabitants of Egypt which, by itself, formed one part of the world ...;
2. the inhabitants of Africa proper: Blacks; 3. Asians; 4. finally (and I am ashamed to say so,
since our race is the last and the most savage in the series), Europeans who, in those remote
epochs, frankly did not cut too fine a figure in the world. In this category we must include
all blonds and white-skinned people living not only in Europe, but Asia as well, their starting
point. This manner of viewing the tableau is all the more accurate because, on the other
tombs, the same generic names reappear, always in the same order. We find there Egyptians
and Africans represented in the same way, which could not be otherwise; but the Namou
(the Asians) and the Tamhou (Europeans) present significant and curious variants. Instead
of the Arab or the Jew, dressed simply and represented on one tomb, Asia's representatives
on other tombs (those of Ramses II, etc.) are three individuals, tanned complexion, aquiline
nose, black eyes, and thick beard, but clad in rare splendor. In one, they are evidently
Assyrians, their costume, down to the smallest detail, is identical with that of personages
engraved on Assyrian cylinders. In the other, are Medes or early inhabitants of some part
of Persia. Their physiognomy and dress resemble, feature for feature, those found on
monuments called Persepolitan. Thus, Asia was represented indiscriminately by any one of
the peoples who inhabited it. The same is true of our good old ancestors, the Tamhou. Their
attire is sometimes different; their heads are more or less hairy and adorned with various
ornaments; their savage dress varies somewhat in form, but their white complexion, their
eyes and beard all preserve the character of a race apart. I had this strange ethnographical
series copied and colored. I certainly did not expect, on arriving at Biban-el-Moluk, to find
sculptures that could serve as vignettes for the history of the primitive Europeans, if ever
one has the courage to attempt it. Nevertheless, there is something flattering and consoling
in seeing them, since they make us appreciate the progress we have subsequently achieved."

Categories of the Mural of Races/Table of Nationalities including Champollion's remarks


1) Romé(EGYPTIANS)
(abbreviated; Ret)
Ancient Egyptians: Men. We also have "romé na romé" or "Men above men (mankind)."
Champollion:
The The first, the one closest to the god, has a dark
red color, a well-proportioned body, kind face, nose slightly aquiline, long braided hair,
and is dressed in white. The legends designate this species as Rot-en-ne-Rome, the race
of men par excellence i.e., the Egyptians

________________________________________________

2.Namu(Namou) "Asiatic" may include Syria, elsewhere
Champollion:
presents a very different aspect; his skin color borders
on yellow or tan; he has a strongly aquiline nose, thick, black pointed beard, and wears
a short garment of varied colors; these are called Namou
_________________________________________________

3.Nahasu (Nahasi) - Other Africans foreign to Egypt incl. Kushites/Nubian Strangers or barbarians;
Champollion:
There can be no uncertainty about the racial
identity of the man who comes next: he belongs to the Black race, designated under
the general term Nahasi.

_________________________________________________

4. Tamhu - European: Red/pale yellow people
Champollion:
what we
call flesh-colored, a white skin of the most delicate shade, a nose straight or slightly arched,
blue eyes, blond or reddish beard, tall stature and very slender clad in a hairy ox-skin, a
veritable savage tattooed on various parts of his body; he is called Tamhou. .
 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
Hey Mike. Asia it is. . . . the starting point of Europeans . Seems like Jean-Francois Champollion also believed that Europeans came from Asia. Hammer also agrees.


======
quote:

finally (and I am ashamed to say so,
since our race is the last and the most savage in the series), Europeans who, in those remote
epochs, frankly did not cut too fine a figure in the world. In this category we must include
all blonds and white-skinned people living not only in Europe, but Asia as well, their starting
point.
 

---

Posted by the lion (Member # 17353) on :
 
repeat
 

---

Posted by the lion (Member # 17353) on :
 
repeat
 

---

Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
 
The so-called "dark red" color is nothing more than the complexion of blacks. Non-Egyptian blacks ("Other Africans foreign to Egypt") have this complexion too, like the San and Kushites. Are we to then conclude from this that the San are the product of multiracial mixtures? The idea that "black race" is equivalent to the "true negro" phenotype is a myth.
 

---

Posted by the lion (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
The so-called "dark red" color is nothing more than the complexion of blacks. Non-Egyptian blacks ("Other Africans foreign to Egypt") have this complexion too, like the San and Kushites. Are we to then conclude from this that the San are the product of multiracial mixtures? The idea that "black race" is equivalent to the "true negro" phenotype is a myth.

---

examples
some Arabs
American Indians

etc.
 

---

Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
 
"Arab" is not a racial designation but a linguistic term as they come in all colors - the original ones being black, i.e. those with the "dark red" skin tone of course.

And American Indians don't count in the context of ancient Egypt. Sorry.
 

---

Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lion:

quote:

---

Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
The so-called "dark red" color is nothing more than the complexion of blacks. Non-Egyptian blacks ("Other Africans foreign to Egypt") have this complexion too, like the San and Kushites. Are we to then conclude from this that the San are the product of multiracial mixtures? The idea that "black race" is equivalent to the "true negro" phenotype is a myth.

---

examples
some Arabs
American Indians

etc.

---

Here is an Egyptian with the Redish brown skin tone:


How can this man be Mixed when he clearly has the same Skin, and Facial shape of the Egyptian Artifacts left thousands of years ago. Look at the Mummy face to the Left, notice the Shape of the Head, the Nose, the Lips even are almost dead on the same.

A N.American

Totally different.

I mean you were'nt serious were you??
 

---

Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
 
^ also, it is interesting to note that those who use the American Indian example will argue that the red brown skin tone is native while the same tone on Egyptians is indicative of "admixture". LOL
 

---

Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
^ also, it is interesting to note that those who use the American Indian example will argue that the red brown skin tone is native while the same tone on Egyptians is indicative of "admixture". LOL

---

Exactly, Why is it that Egypt is the only Ancient Empire to be labeled either Mixed, Mediteranian, North African Caucasian..etc.

Rome and Greece-White

China-Asian

Mesopotamia-Middle Eastern

Why is China not "Far Eastern Mongoloid" and Mesopotamian Culture was WAY more Mixed than Egypt.

I mean would this even be a big deal if Egypt was in South of the Desert.???

How can people deny Egypt as Black when they left artifacts and art ike this...









Why with all the Art, Genetic, Limb, Cultural, Linguistic studies all pointing to an African Origin and Tropically Adapted body of the Egyptian..Why are these Euronuts still grasping at straws. This debate on the Egyptians race and skin ended like 2 yrs ago.
 

---

Posted by the lion (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
The so-called "dark red" color is nothing more than the complexion of blacks. Non-Egyptian blacks ("Other Africans foreign to Egypt") have this complexion too, like the San and Kushites. Are we to then conclude from this that the San are the product of multiracial mixtures? The idea that "black race" is equivalent to the "true negro" phenotype is a myth.

---

I am not disputing in this thread that there are various skin tones of black people. I am disputing the statement above

anguishofbeing:
"The so-called "dark red" color is nothing more than the complexion of blacks."

1)anguish didn't say there are a variety of skin tones. Here he makes it seem like all black people are dark red that the word is synonymous with "black"

2) why is the word "dark red" put in quotes? The color depicted is obviously reddish

3) the statement that dark red is "nothing more than the complexion of blacks" is incorrect. It is something more. It is a skin tone of many different types of people including people who are not black.

4) anguish says a "negro phenotype is a myth and then goes on to use a much less clearly defined term "black" and say that it is nothing more than a dark red skin tone.

For example:


Actor: George Hamilton .

Of course this has nothing to do with my main point, fact that the illustration of the so called "Mural or the Races" has been misinterpreted for years. Go ahead ignore that fact. There are a million posts about skin tones. reddish this, brown that yellowish this yellowish that.
However the unique thing about this thread is that I am showing for probably the very first time the correct (or much more correct) identities of the figures at the tomb of Rameses III "Mural of the Races" also known as "Table of Nations".
Go ahead, ignore this new information and re-tread
another skin, phenotype post we've all read a million times.

Shout outs to Wally who posted the Champollion quote which cleared up Lepsius' error
 

---

Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lion:
I am not disputing in this thread that there are various skin tones of black people. I am disputing the statement above

anguishofbeing:
"The so-called "dark red" color is nothing more than the complexion of blacks."

1)anguish didn't say there are a variety of skin tones. Here he makes it seem like all black people are dark red that the word is synonymous with "black"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lion:
a dark red skin tone.

For example:


Actor: George Hamilton

---

Come on, are you serious? This man above is supposed to be able to represent the brown reddish color of the ancient Egyptians?
 

---

Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
 

Hay muzungu !! you see the cat between the two lite-skinned dudes? check out the label it says Nahasu ..the other cat at the front dressed in the same manner is labeled Kmu..if you don't believe me go to a translation dictionary and look it up or ask Wally..and I also knew awhile back that this was no mural of races and posted as such

Confirming Truth???

quote:

---

you are finally coming around 'the lion.' Good for you. That idiot Afrocentrist from Japan tried to use the very image that you just clarified to claim the ancient Egyptians looked like Nubians. I am happy you did not swallow his monkey ass red pill. Keep it up! Very soon you will abandon Afrocentrism all

---

 

---

Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
 

Ancient Egyptian


LOL!
 

---

Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
 
anguishofbeing

Bahahhahahaha If that is what an Egyptian looks like, Then I have had it all wrong.

If people don't see how these people Forced themselves to look like this meanwhile the Egyptians were Naturally:



Brown, Reddish Brown. The sad thing about this is that the racists are trying to claim the lion as one of there own, instead of her being a Truthseeker. I hope she has a good reason for her ideas.

Peace
 

---

Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
 
Hey dyckward, you are a bigger fool if you think Egyptians ever depicted themselves in that kind of clothing. If that were an Egyptian, it obviously must have been a foreign one, during the time of foreign (Nubian) rule. She clobbered your bullsh*t claim and she deserves a kudos for that.

Do us all a solid and stay your ass in Japan, bottybwoi.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
Hay muzungu !! you see the cat between the two lite-skinned dudes? check out the label it says Nahasu ..the other cat at the front dressed in the same manner is labeled Kmu..if you don't believe me go to a translation dictionary and look it up or ask Wally..and I also knew awhile back that this was no mural of races and posted as such

Confirming Truth???

---

 

---

Posted by the lion (Member # 17353) on :
 
.


HOW DID THIS MISTAKE OR MISREPRESENTATION OCCUR?

SIMPLE WE HAVE THE COMPLETE:


_______________________Egy.___Nam.___Nah.__Tam.


TOP ROW LEFT TO RIGHT
1.EGYPTIAN 2. NAMOU 3.NAHASI 3.TAMHAU (head and torso)
___(Rome)

translation:
____EGYPTIAN, ASIATIC, AFRICAN Not of Egypt,CAUCASIAN

_____________________________________________

THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE TOP ROW

1.EGYPTIAN 2. NAMOU 3.NAHASI 3.TAMHAU

IT HAS SIMPLY BEEN TRANSFERRED TO THE BOTTOM ROW AND THE WHOLE TOP ROW THEN DELETED AS BELOW:

___________________________________________



SO YOU CAN SEE THE CORRUPTION AND CONFUSION CAUSED BY THIS. THE ORDER OF THE TOP ROW

1.EGYPTIAN 2. NAMOU 3.NAHASI 3.TAMHAU

DOES NOT APPLY TO THE BOTTOM ROW.

MISTAKES:

THE BOTTOM RIGHT FIGURE IS NOT TAMHAU HE'S NAMOU
THE FIRST FIGURE IS NOT ROME (EGYPTIAN) HE'S NAHASI. THE SECOND FIGURE IS NOT NAMU HE'S TAMHAU.
THE ONLY FIGURE THAT IS CORRECT IS THE THIRD FIGURE HE'S ALSO NAHASI LIKE THE FIRST FIGURE.
ONE OUT OF FOUR IS BAD.

There is another assumption that gets made, that glyphs to the right of a particular figure ARE talking about the figure they are to the right of.

Anybody with knowledge of how NAHASI are clothed in these types of painting scenes knows that they have a wide, straight sash going diagonally across their chest and sometimes have a leopard skin at the waist.

Why bother with all this detail? Any fool can see the top row (WHICH GOT DELETED) had an Egyptian of reddish skin at the top left of the COMPLETE eight figures picture and he does not not have the same skin tone or clothing as the brothers on the bottom row.
come on son.
 

---

Posted by Muhommed Abed (Member # 17412) on :
 
the lion, that was EXCELLENT research. I think the Afrocentrists need to own up to, what appears to have been, a deliberate fabrication and which I suspect was contrived by an Afrocentrist.
 

---

Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lion:
an Egyptian of reddish skin

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anguishofbeing:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lion:
an Egyptian of reddish skin

---

I see brown.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
This debate on the Egyptians race and skin ended like 2 yrs ago. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Muhommed Abed:
the lion, that was EXCELLENT research. I think the Afrocentrists need to own up to, what appears to have been, a deliberate fabrication and which I suspect was contrived by an Afrocentrist.

---

Salaaam my brother, Im so glad you are back.

I think I found Allah before the writing of the Koran.





Notice the Clothes, Pure white Robes, Notice the hand gestures?? Could that Goddess be Allah prior to Persian Mythology??( you know Allah Pu-Rah, the Moon Goddess that Muhammed delcared was the only goddess, I mean god.)

You see I have been researching the pagan roots of Islam...and to make a long story short...






I have found some peculiar stuff...
it gets bad...



REAL BAD!!!



So please stick around my Arabian brother so when I reveal my research you can be one of the victims I will thrash to pieces.

Peace be upon you....MY BROTHER
 

---

Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
 
I agree you are the one that tried to bring it back into this thread. This thread is about a mural called
the "Mural of the Races" or "Table of Nation" and the fact that people have been mislabeling the which of the following terms go with which figure:
Here is a quote from your very first post:

3.Nahasu (Nahasi) - Other Africans foreign to Egypt incl. Kushites/Nubian Strangers or barbarians;
Champollion:
There can be no uncertainty about the racial
identity of the man who comes next: he belongs to the Black race, designated under
the general term Nahasi.

You see how flawed your logic is. 1) You PUT RACE into the first Post you make. 2) You Eyeball what is and what is not "African Features" on another thread as proof that Khafre and Makura were "Not Africans". then when you are called out on it or made to own up to it you cover face by spin tactics.

Im not here to debate the race of the Egyptians. Read my posts Im showing you that the Reddish brown color of the Egyptians was and is the Skin color of Egyptians that border a Shad lighter on being so called Nubian.

Im simply showing you that the Darkest Egyptians HAVE the Reddish brown color to this day. Im not even attacking you, let alone trying to debate you.

Your post had that the Nubians were black while the Egyptians were red, Im showing you that is false.

Instead of Spinning and trying to come off as if you are Superwoman, why not lost the Ego and read what I am saying to you.

Romé
Namu
Nahasu
Tamhu

and about whether certain book images are accurate at all. O.K did I ever say you were wrong for this?

you are the culprit in trying to change the focus to skin Again let me quote your very 1st post:

3.Nahasu (Nahasi) - Other Africans foreign to Egypt incl. Kushites/Nubian Strangers or barbarians;
Champollion:
There can be no uncertainty about the racial
identity of the man who comes next: he belongs to the Black race, designated under
the general term Nahasi.

You're dismissed.
 

---

Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lion:
the color of the left most figure in the TOP row is not the color of the left most figure on the BOTTOM row.

---

quote:

---

you are the culprit in trying to change the focus to skin

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anguishofbeing:

Ancient Egyptian


LOL!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Muhommed Abed:
the lion, that was EXCELLENT research. I think the Afrocentrists need to own up to, what appears to have been, a deliberate fabrication and which I suspect was contrived by an Afrocentrist.

---

Salaaam my brother, Im so glad you are back.

I think I found Allah before the writing of the Koran.





Notice the Clothes, Pure white Robes, Notice the hand gestures?? Could that Goddess be Allah prior to Persian Mythology??( you know Allah Pu-Rah, the Moon Goddess that Muhammed delcared was the only goddess, I mean god.)

You see I have been researching the pagan roots of Islam...and to make a long story short...






I have found some peculiar stuff...
it gets bad...



REAL BAD!!!



So please stick around my Arabian brother so when I reveal my research you can be one of the victims I will thrash to pieces.

Peace be upon you....MY BROTHER

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
Your post had that the Nubians were black while the Egyptians were red, Im showing you that is false.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IronLion:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Muhommed Abed:
the lion, that was EXCELLENT research. I think the Afrocentrists need to own up to, what appears to have been, a deliberate fabrication and which I suspect was contrived by an Afrocentrist.

---

Salaaam my brother, Im so glad you are back.

I think I found Allah before the writing of the Koran.





Notice the Clothes, Pure white Robes, Notice the hand gestures?? Could that Goddess be Allah prior to Persian Mythology??( you know Allah Pu-Rah, the Moon Goddess that Muhammed delcared was the only goddess, I mean god.)

You see I have been researching the pagan roots of Islam...and to make a long story short...






I have found some peculiar stuff...
it gets bad...



REAL BAD!!!



So please stick around my Arabian brother so when I reveal my research you can be one of the victims I will thrash to pieces.

Peace be upon you....MY BROTHER

---

Excellent work Jari Ankamun..keep it up!

---

The Kaabaa should be replaced with Thebes, Aka Waset the ORIGINAL Center of the Universe, The original Holies of Holies.

The Hajj should go to Wa-Set, not Mecca. As Wa-Set is where the Arabians(Who were slaves) converted and Stole the religion of the Nile Valley. The clothes, the Prayers, etc.

Abeed FACE WASET when You PRAY!!!!


 

---

Posted by the lion (Member # 17353) on :
 


the left glyph to the right of the figure as it appears in the book (supposedly)



top to bottom*

* R (a mouth)

* T (a tow rope)

* RMT (man on one knee)

* the three smaller marks on the bottom (multiple)


actual photo of photo of the Valley of the Kings KV11 tomb of Rameses III:



so wee see that here the vertical stack of glyphs is laid out in the photo, each separately between the figures. We can also see that on the wall the figures are in a set of four not as in the book which has them alternating.


__________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________




Below we see a row of NAHASI



between them are glyphs for

* R (a mouth)

* T (a tow rope)

* RMT (man on one knee)

* the three smaller marks on the bottom (multiple)


Does this mean they are Egyptians ? NO

______________________________________________________

This matter will never be resolved until we see the complete photo which would have each type of person represented four times with the glyphs between each set.

One problem that is instantly noticeable is that



TOP ROW

1

2

3

4 (partial figure)


BOTTOM ROW

5

6

7

8


you will notice that the glyph next to the Egyptian (figure #1)

Does not match the glyph

of the first figure bottom row that is figure # 5

You have two identical figures #5 and #7 in the bottom row
that is why there is a debate.
We should be talking about figure # 1 in the top row, this is the row of four figures that always gets chopped out.
What is the glyph to the right of top row figure #1. I don't know. But obviously it is not the same glyph as the one to the right of #5, the first figure of the bottom row.

the glyphs for figure #3 top row, and the third figure of the bottom row, #7 DO match.

No issue about identitiy can be determined until there is full photo evidence of all the figures. Otherwise it's speculative scholarship.

hotep
 

---

Posted by Gigantic (Member # 17311) on :
 
damn girl! you givin them Afropussies a spanking.
 

---

Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
 
Unusual as it is the label still stands it reads Nahasu and Rmt..

And you really want me to cuss your ass out now don't you Confirming nonsense..btw ur moms said u should call her..I gave five bucks...she was arright!!
 

---

Posted by the lion (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gigantic:
damn girl! you givin them Afropussies a spanking.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lion:

quote:

---

Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
The so-called "dark red" color is nothing more than the complexion of blacks. Non-Egyptian blacks ("Other Africans foreign to Egypt") have this complexion too, like the San and Kushites. Are we to then conclude from this that the San are the product of multiracial mixtures? The idea that "black race" is equivalent to the "true negro" phenotype is a myth.

---

examples
some Arabs
American Indians

etc.

---

Here is an Egyptian with the Redish brown skin tone:


How can this man be Mixed when he clearly has the same Skin, and Facial shape of the Egyptian Artifacts left thousands of years ago. Look at the Mummy face to the Left, notice the Shape of the Head, the Nose, the Lips even are almost dead on the same.

A N.American

Totally different.

I mean you were'nt serious were you??

---

quote:

---

Peck was born in New York City, New York of Japanese, Irish, English, and Cherokee descent.[1][2] She is a 1995 graduate of Fiorello LaGuardia High School of Music & Art and Performing Arts and a 1999 graduate of SUNY Purchase, earning a BFA in Acting. Peck was a member of TADA! Children's Theater Company from age 11 to age 14. She currently lives in New York City. Her biggest role thus far was in the 2006 movie Night at the Museum where she played Sacagawea, a role she reprised in the sequel, Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian.

Peck was photographed by Bruce Weber for French Vogue in 1995 and for the cover of L'uomo Vogue in 1997. She performed 365 Days/365 Plays by award winning playwright Suzan-Lori Parks at the Joseph Papp Public Theater.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
Unusual as it is the label still stands it reads Nahasu and Rmt..

And you really want me to cuss your ass out now don't you Confirming nonsense..btw ur moms said u should call her..I gave five bucks...she was arright!!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lion:



the left glyph to the right of the figure as it appears in the book (supposedly)



top to bottom*

* R (a mouth)

* T (a tow rope)

* RMT (man on one knee)

* the three smaller marks on the bottom (multiple)


actual photo of photo of the Valley of the Kings KV11 tomb of Rameses III:



so wee see that here the vertical stack of glyphs is laid out in the photo, each separately between the figures. We can also see that on the wall the figures are in a set of four not as in the book which has them alternating.


__________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________




Below we see a row of NAHASI



between them are glyphs for

* R (a mouth)

* T (a tow rope)

* RMT (man on one knee)

* the three smaller marks on the bottom (multiple)


Does this mean they are Egyptians ? NO

______________________________________________________

This matter will never be resolved until we see the complete photo which would have each type of person represented four times with the glyphs between each set.

One problem that is instantly noticeable is that



TOP ROW

1

2

3

4 (partial figure)


BOTTOM ROW

5

6

7

8


you will notice that the glyph next to the Egyptian (figure #1)

Does not match the glyph

of the first figure bottom row that is figure # 5

You have two identical figures #5 and #7 in the bottom row
that is why there is a debate.
We should be talking about figure # 1 in the top row, this is the row of four figures that always gets chopped out.
What is the glyph to the right of top row figure #1. I don't know. But obviously it is not the same glyph as the one to the right of #5, the first figure of the bottom row.

the glyphs for figure #3 top row, and the third figure of the bottom row, #7 DO match.

No issue about identitiy can be determined until there is full photo evidence of all the figures. Otherwise it's speculative scholarship.

hotep

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Muhommed Abed:
the lion, that was EXCELLENT research. I think the Afrocentrists need to own up to, what appears to have been, a deliberate fabrication and which I suspect was contrived by an Afrocentrist.

---

Salaaam my brother, Im so glad you are back.

I think I found Allah before the writing of the Koran.





Notice the Clothes, Pure white Robes, Notice the hand gestures?? Could that Goddess be Allah prior to Persian Mythology??( you know Allah Pu-Rah, the Moon Goddess that Muhammed delcared was the only goddess, I mean god.)

You see I have been researching the pagan roots of Islam...and to make a long story short...






I have found some peculiar stuff...
it gets bad...



REAL BAD!!!



So please stick around my Arabian brother so when I reveal my research you can be one of the victims I will thrash to pieces.

Peace be upon you....MY BROTHER

---

LMAO

Actually Jari, Muslim rites and rituals are based on previous Arab pagan ones which like many Semitic religions are further derived from a common Afrasian origin. Egyptian of course is also derived from Afrasian which explains the similarities. Also, 'Allah' is not a goddess but a deity that is of neutral gender-- neither male nor female. The moon deity in Arab pagan belief was actually male while the Sun was female. 'Allah' was likely a creator deity that existed even before Islam's founding since there already existed names like 'Abdullah' during the time of Muhammad. You can read more about it here.
 

---

Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
 
Again, why are you calling it "Afrasian"? You already admitted it was African. And are you trying to sneak in Asia as a source for Nile valley culture? Prey tell, what part of "Asia", in your Afrasian, influenced Egyptian cultre? LOL!
 

---

Posted by the lion (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
Again, why are you calling it "Afrasian"? You already admitted it was African. And are you trying to sneak in Asia as a source for Nile valley culture? Prey tell, what part of "Asia", in your Afrasian, influenced Egyptian cultre? LOL!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anguishofbeinggay:

Again, why are you calling it "Afrasian"? You already admitted it was African. And are you trying to sneak in Asia as a source for Nile valley culture? Prey tell, what part of "Asia", in your Afrasian, influenced Egyptian cultre? LOL!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sundjata:

^I believe Ehret calls it "Afrasan" now (no 'I')..

---

quote:

---

@lion... My sister is a reddish-brown complexion and has no mixed ancestry as far as I know. Maybe far down the line but she clearly isn't mixed. It is also very dangerous to post artistic reproductions of tomb scenes and relying on them as accurate representations. Most Egyptian tomb scenes depict a dark-brown people with a reddish tinge. Nobody is literally red (Arabs, NAs, or otherwise)! That is such a ridiculous assumption.

You approach this debate rather sloppily. You come to your conclusions with out anything to back you up besides unscientific observations of art work. You cite Champollion's notes with out even mentioning or noticing that he got the order of precession wrong. You go on about how the glyphs from top and bottom rows representing AEs in the combined repro, don't match yet claim that #3 and #7 DO, when they clearly do not. They have different clothes and as you yourself noted, the glyphs look very different (more scribbled on the top row). You seem only to be obsessed with skin color which is very stupid.

I mean, you have dark-brown skinned people who are native to Africa that have the exact same reddish undertone. The burden of proof is on you to show that they, the ancient Egyptians that is, did not develop their skin complexions on the Africa continent, where they lived. No need to evoke Arabs (who didn't exist then and either way, it seems their Eurasian ancestors, as portrayed by Egyptians were not brown or reddish like today's Arabs, but very light--much lighter than the Egyptians) or native Americas who lived thousands and thousands of miles away. It makes much more sense to relate them to Horn, Saharan and other Nile valley Africans, who come in various shades of black (as no one s literally black). The Nehesi here depicted as pitch black are simply one variant. The east Africans of punt were portrayed identical to the Egyptians as were Nubians in the tomb of Huey. The African context here is unshakable.

In other words, you're arguing semantics, not biology. The meaning of "black". I'd say to that if AE were not black then neither are most African-Americans (including my sister). Another way to approach this would be to not label ancient populations with modern descriptors, yet acknowledge that if AE lived in the present, such descriptors would be applied to them without hesitation.... Egyptologist Marcy Ann Roth made this same point.

---

LOL Then one could say the same for the phrase 'white'. It is all a matter of semantics as well since even many of the so-called 'white' civilizations of Mediterranean Europe were produced and inhabited by folks of darker complexions and features than your typical white-bread Euros.

Also, the lion's obsession with admixture and his Arab-wannabe state is also a contradiction considering that even 'Arabs' of Arabia are by and large a mixed people. Even many light-skinned Arabs of the Near-East of ancient African admixture so who do you consider as 'pure' Arab??
 

---

Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
 
Quit trolling, you're not even good at it like Lion. Answer: what part of "Asia" in your Afrasian, influenced Egyptian culture?
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ LMAO You are like the dung-beetle calling the butterfly "dirty". How was I trolling? Because I called your anguished-ass out? LOL

And again, the NAME of the language phylum is Afrasian, that doesn't meant it originated in Asia you dimwit! I told you this in another thread, but apparently your mind has a hard time letting this sink in. Oh well. Both you and the dung-beetle have a lot in common- you're both full of sh|t.
 

---

Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
 

quote:

---

Egyptian [religion] of course is also derived from Afrasian which explains the similarities.

---

Troll, you said the above. So again I ask, what part of "Asia" in your "Afrasian" influenced Egyptian culture?

Never claimed it *originated* in Asia, the name however points to connections with "Asia" - duh! If it has no connection to Asia why say Afrasian? Answer question above or STFU.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ The only troll in here is YOU, since you are so quick to use ad-hominems when your intellctually (or lack there of) frustrated ass keeps stumbling.

Again I didn't say Egypt is Afrasian influenced but DERIVED. Because ancient Egyptian language and culture IS Afrasian.

But more importantly I never said anything about "Asian" that was YOU, you big dummy! It's not my fault that 'asian' happens to be in the name, but that's exactly what the name is! Afrasian. Christopher Ehret was the one who coined the word because he didn't like Afro-Asiatic. But because he still didn't like the the whole Asian origin misconception still being attached to the language phylum he further dropped the 'i' and calls it 'Afrasan', even though most scholars in Academia still call it Afrasian. Again, I'm not the one who invented the name. Why don't you take it up with the actual linguists and scholars, dumb-fag?! In the mean time you can kiss MY Asian ASS.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
Leaving the screwed-ass screw-lose blow-job giving nutjob and returning to the actual topic...

quote:

---

Originally posted by the toothless lion:
"MURAL OF THE RACES" CORRECTED..

---

There is nothing to "correct". The hieroglyphs are quite clear-- the first dark-skinned BLACK man in the front has Ret-na-Romet meaning he was Egyptian. If that bothers you than too bad.

Although Egyptians were typically depicted with reddish-dark brown complexions, they were still BLACK and not 'mixed' as such hues are found in other BLACK peoples in Africa both in the Horn as well as West Africa and has NOTHING to do with mixture with Eurasians. Interestingly, the ONLY color labels the Egyptians used for themselves was Kmtwy which means BLACKS and not 'red' or 'brown' or "green" or "blue" that the Arabashed brains northern Sudanese call themselves today.

Further, even though most Egyptians were depicted in art having reddish or dark brown complexions there were still exceptions besides the Ramses mural where Romet were depicted as much darker. A couple of examples would be the Egyptian royals Maiherpri and Tiye.

Maiherpri


Tiye


One Egyptian here has even said many times that such dark complexions are not uncommon in southern areas of Egypt. So get over it!
 

---

Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ The only troll in here is YOU, since you are so quick to use ad-hominems when your intellctually (or lack there of) frustrated ass keeps stumbling.

Again I didn't say Egypt is Afrasian influenced but DERIVED. Because ancient Egyptian language and culture IS Afrasian.

But more importantly I never said anything about "Asian" that was YOU, you big dummy! It's not my fault that 'asian' happens to be in the name, but that's exactly what the name is! Afrasian. Christopher Ehret was the one who coined the word because he didn't like Afro-Asiatic. But because he still didn't like the the whole Asian origin misconception still being attached to the language phylum he further dropped the 'i' and calls it 'Afrasan', even though most scholars in Academia still call it Afrasian. Again, I'm not the one who invented the name. Why don't you take it up with the actual linguists and scholars, dumb-fag?! In the mean time you can kiss MY Asian ASS.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anguishofbeingincrediblygayandstupid:

LOL! This just shows how much of a brainless parasite you are! You use a term simply because some liberal cracker uses it. You can't even explain why you use it. You said, amazing and brainlessly, that "ancient Egyptian language and culture IS Afrasian."

WTF?!?!

---

quote:

---

Troll, what part of Asia did Egyptian language and culture "derive" (to entertain your silly semantic game) from? Your Asian whoring mothers c@#t?

---

LOL No part of Asia, you moron and I never said or implied it did!!

Afrasian:

Noun 1. Afrasian - a large family of related languages spoken both in Asia and Africa.

Afroasiatic:

The term "Afroasiatic" (often now spelled as Afro-Asiatic) was coined by Maurice Delafosse (1914). It did not come into general use until it was adopted by Joseph Greenberg (1950) to replace the earlier term "Hamito-Semitic", following his demonstration that Hamitic is not a valid language family. The term "Hamito-Semitic" remains in use in the academic traditions of some European countries. Some authors now replace "Afro-Asiatic" with "Afrasian", or, reflecting an opinion that it is more African than Asian, "Afrasan". Individual scholars have called the family "Erythraean" (Tucker 1966) and "Lisramic" (Hodge 1972).

By the way YOU of all people should be the last person to speak of "whoring" since we all know what you and your boyfriends in jolly England like to do.
 

---

Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
 
The term is now Afrasan, taking Asia out of the
picture where it definitely does not belong since
Asia has absolutely nothing at all to do with these
languages.

Personally I prefer Afrisan to put even more of
the sound of Africa into the naming. But really
it names a completely new name altogether that
doesn't recall past misappropriations to mind.
 

---

Posted by the lion (Member # 17353) on :
 
. duplicate
 

---

Posted by the lion (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lion:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ptolemy:
For example in the song of solomon, solomon the king of the jews said he was black and handsome If he was black then the jews were black

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ptolemy:
They must have been familiar with AE culture and language to the extent that they had probably been there many a time. They must have been of the same people.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ptolemy:
Interestingly enough, if this family of 70men spent 400years in egypt and spawned the jewish nation, doesnt it seem strange that they would be 1)called a nation having been derived from one family 2)there were no women with them so they must have had AE wives 3)after 400 years they would have been ancient egyptians themselves? 4)they left with 600 000 men and a mixed multitude?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness (where it didn't belong):
alTakruri, despite what you think of me I think the following question is very relevant to this issue and it would benefit the readers for you to attempt to answer it. I don't know if you know the answer or not. Perhaps it has already been answered somewhere but I'm not sure about this.

Excerpt photo set from KV11, tomb of Ramesses III, Hornung


_______________A_________________________________B__________________________C________________

("A" "B" and C" not necessarily reflecting tomb sequence just random labeling of 3 divisions)

In the first of four problems you mentioned you said:

"Hornung's figure remains a distortion for the reasons cited
1 - presenting only 3 of the 4 "divisions" of the Herd of Ra"

__________________________________________

QUESTION on the appearance of the missing set:


On the actual wall of KV11, Herd of Ra, is the missing set a set different looking in clothing from any of the 3 in the above photo, a clothing type not shown in the above photo at all?...
or is the missing set an additional set of 4 figures, all looking exactly the same of the type marked as "B" above ?
yet labeled differently ? I assume the later

thank you

.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri wishes he was a moderator at ES


Originally posted by the lioness (where it didn't belong):

---

alTakruri, you are the only one in this forum, an open forum, with nose in the air, that would tell somone where a post belongs.
A post belongs where ever one feels like putting it.
No wonder your uptight ass is no longer moderating at ESR.
Your control freak nature can't even handle that much safer site.
There's no place for your snobbery and bunched panties.
Now you have come to my thread violating your own "doesn't belong" rule

In summation the following items from Rameses tomb clarify clothing charcteristics of Nubians(Kushites) as depicted in New Kingdom. These are not charactersitics of Egyptians:

Foreign prisoners of Ramesses III:



Nubian (Kushite) [NHHSW]
Clothing style:

1) leather belt that also crosses diagonally over chest as well as end piece hangs down below waist.

may also have:

2) hoop earrings

3) cap type hat, reddish brown or "dark red"

__________________

4) skin type: multiple people in groups jet black in color or an indvidual in jet black color who is not a representation of a god.
other scenes may also have reddish brown Nubians

Then we look here, from Seti I:


Bottom line

Herd of Ra,

persons in the center panel are Nubians not Egyptians becasue Egyptians don't dress like that, case closed, glyph error, read on:


[NUBIANS, term used slightly loosely can also mean in these examples Kushites, Nehesy, NHHSW)

More evidence?

-2)Syrians(Asiatic)_____3)Nehesey (Kusites)________4)Libyans

______Horus_____________1)Egyptians___________2)Syrians(Asiatic)


The Denkmaeler plate above illustrates tomb of Seti I (son of Ramesses I , father of Ramesses II)

labeling above is non controvesial

same pattern, as depicted in new Kingdom Pharonic Egyptian tombs:

Nubians:
leather belt also goes diagonally across chest,
a group of Nubians jet black in color

Egyptians:
no leather belt going diagonally across chest
skin: dark reddish brown, never jet black people in groups
facial hair: fake beard called postiche.
(nubians no beard)

But didn't Egyptians have a day called "dress like a Nubian day?"
No, they did not have such a day.
Nubians are theorized to have been influential and may have been integrated into Egyptians society around the 12th dynasty.
However we are talking about Ramesses of the 19th dynasty.
The Nubians, Syrians and Libyans are portrayed at this time as subjugated conquered by the Egyptians:


None of these people at this time, Nubians included would have been considered equal par to Egyptians



:

-2)Syrians(Asiatic)_____3)Nehesey (Kushites)________4)Libyans

______Horus_____________1)Egyptians___________2)Syrians(Asiatic)


KV17 tomb of Seti I, Book of Gates

Presenting all 4 "divisions" of the Herd of Ra
as follows
>> beginning with the bottom panel,
0) Horus leading the procession,

four of each
1) Egyptians
2) Syrians (Asiatics)
-continuing to the top panel, two more Syrians to complete the four
3) Nehesey (Kushites, or if you prefer foreign blacks)
4) Libyans (feather on the head)

^^^^^ This establishes the proper sequence

Now we go to the Rameses photo below which uses only two figures of each type. Yet still it is in the same sequence as the Seti.
Egyptians are not shown but the rest of the sequence in both Seti I and Ramesses III are the same:

2) Syrians (Asiatics)
3) Nehesey (Kushites) (aka Nubian)
4) Libyans

_____________SYRIANS_____________________NEHESEY (Kushites)____________________LIBYANS



Look at the illustration, note how each type is depicted.
Then look at the photo from Rameses III. Which type is missing?
Clearly it's the Egyptians. The four Egyptians in Seti 1 are dark brown.
The four "Nubians" (Kusihites if you prefer) are jet black and they have the typical leather belt/sash that ties around the waist and goes across the chest.

The two scenes correspond right? It's the traditional arragement right? Yes right.

The only problem is that thick headed literalists with an agenda have a problem with common sense. They have noiticed that the glyph in the photo next to the Nehesey (Kushite) is RMT a glyph usually reserved for Egyptians.
Well where are the Egyptians in the photo so we can compare?
They aren't in the photo. We only have a photo of three sets of two of the herd.

So how could this be? We had a full illustration of the Herd of Ra
that showed what the traditional order is supposed to be and the way Egyptian differentiated themselves from the Kushites
-yet the glyph in the photo seems to contradict this.
Well Hornung was no idiot. The figures in question are Kushites as llustated by their clothing, earrings and skin relatively darker in these types of scenes to Egyptians.
So why is this Ramesses III scene not conforming? What happened? The craftsmen made a mistake that's what happened. There are two different craftsman one who paints the figures, the other a scribe for the gylphs.
The scribe made a mistake.
Impossible! In a royal tomb ???
Yes it is possible and various errors in tomb paintings have been recorded, mistakes between the glyph and it's associated picture.
Before you say no, go and research what I'm saying - "mistakes in tomb paintings" "ancient Egypt"
Sometimes the scribe corrected a mistake by the painter and sometimes a painter corrected a mistake by the scribe.
And sometimes the error never got corrected as is the case here.
Keep in mind that tombs were sealed and there was no public around to notice any error.
This is the strongest theory in my opinion as to why labeling of these figures in this painting don't correspond to standard depictions of Egyptians yet do correspond to standard depictions of Kushites.
Perhaps if Hornung didn't mention the descrepancy with the glyph he should have. Did he? I don't know.
But by the same token people who know Egyptian art and proceedure should be honest enough to consider that the glyph may have been a mistake.
Why is this most likely possibility not mentioned? Because not to do so fits a racial agenda.
If I were writing a book about it I would explain the complete situation and say that the matter is uncertain. That is the only honest thing to do.
 

---

Posted by Young African & Cultured (Member # 19426) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
Leaving the screwed-ass screw-lose blow-job giving nutjob and returning to the actual topic...

quote:

---

Originally posted by the toothless lion:
"MURAL OF THE RACES" CORRECTED..

---

There is nothing to "correct". The hieroglyphs are quite clear-- the first dark-skinned BLACK man in the front has Ret-na-Romet meaning he was Egyptian. If that bothers you than too bad.

Although Egyptians were typically depicted with reddish-dark brown complexions, they were still BLACK and not 'mixed' as such hues are found in other BLACK peoples in Africa both in the Horn as well as West Africa and has NOTHING to do with mixture with Eurasians. Interestingly, the ONLY color labels the Egyptians used for themselves was Kmtwy which means BLACKS and not 'red' or 'brown' or "green" or "blue" that the Arabashed brains northern Sudanese call themselves today.

Further, even though most Egyptians were depicted in art having reddish or dark brown complexions there were still exceptions besides the Ramses mural where Romet were depicted as much darker. A couple of examples would be the Egyptian royals Maiherpri and Tiye.

Maiherpri


Tiye


One Egyptian here has even said many times that such dark complexions are not uncommon in southern areas of Egypt. So get over it!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness:
alTakruri, you are the only one in this forum, an open forum, with nose in the air,

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anguishofbeing:

Ancient Egyptian


LOL!

---

What a weirdo.lol

Was achieved by melanin pills or melanin spray?





 

---

Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lion:

MURAL OF THE RACES also known as
TABLE OF NATIONS
CORRECTED

tomb of Rameses III
valley of Biban-el-Moluk



I have to thank Wally for proving the following quote from Jean-Francois Champollion which corrects errors made in regard to a Mural called

"The Mural of The Races"

also known as

"The Table of Nations"

The picture often shown:



is incomplete. There are actual 8 figuers. The indications of nationality or in some people's opinion "race" by the Egyptians to this mural applies to none of the four figures shown here. It's the other four above those figures in the below complete illustration although the exact arrangement on the tomb wall may be different.
The indications of nationality or race by the Egyptians applies to a set of four figures (one is partial) that are slightly larger than the figures shown above. Champollion,the French Egyptologist who is acknowledged as the father of modern Egyptologybest known for his work on the Rosetta Stone resolves the identities of Mural of Races/Table of Nations in the remarks below. The illustration with all of the 8 figures is below.
His remarks apply to the top row only but the figures in the top row of the illustration are in in a slightly different order which will be indicated. The "races" or "nationalities" apply only to the top set of figures only as will become clear.


_______________________Egy.___Nam.___Nah.__Tam.


TOP ROW LEFT TO RIGHT
___EGYPTIAN, NAMOU, NAHASI, TAMHAU (head and torso)
___(Rome)

translation:
____EGYPTIAN, ASIATIC, AFRICAN Not of Egypt, CAUCASIAN

slightly smaller BOTTOM ROW FIGURES NOT MENTIONED
Another example that shows that these terms do not apply to the bottom row is that the last figure on the bottom row is not TAMHAU.
The TAMHAU is the partial figure on the top right

---