posted
We've been going over the end of the New Kingdom in my Ancient Egypt class at UCSD, and my professor mentioned that during this period that the Sea Peoples whom the Egyptians fought were originally from the Aegean region, but dispersed throughout the Mediterranean after a famine afflicted their home country. What I found especially memorable from that lecture was that the Nile Delta and large hunks of the Levant were settled by Sea Peoples. Does anyone else wonder if this would have had a significant effect on these regions' gene pools?
cassiterides Member # 18409
posted
The Denyen tribe among the Sea Peoples are equated to the tribe of Dan. This identification was taken up by the archaeologist Yigael Yadin (1968) and the scholar Cyrus H. Gordon.
A Hittite report speaks of a Denyen (Dananiyim)leader called Muksus (Mopsos). Some scholars believe this is nome other than the Moses of Hebrew tradition.
Note that in the Old Testament the Danites are the only Hebrew people described as being maritime and associated with ships, so the theory is the Tribe of Dan was founded by the Denyan Sea Peoples intermixing with the local Jews.
typeZeiss Member # 18859
posted
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: We've been going over the end of the New Kingdom in my Ancient Egypt class at UCSD, and my professor mentioned that during this period that the Sea Peoples whom the Egyptians fought were originally from the Aegean region, but dispersed throughout the Mediterranean after a famine afflicted their home country. What I found especially memorable from that lecture was that the Nile Delta and large hunks of the Levant were settled by Sea Peoples. Does anyone else wonder if this would have had a significant effect on these regions' gene pools?
what dynasty was this?
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
quote:Originally posted by castrated: The Denyen tribe among the Sea Peoples are equated to the tribe of Dan. This identification was taken up by the archaeologist Yigael Yadin (1968) and the scholar Cyrus H. Gordon.
A Hittite report speaks of a Denyen (Dananiyim)leader called Muksus (Mopsos). Some scholars believe this is nome other than the Moses of Hebrew tradition.
Note that in the Old Testament the Danites are the only Hebrew people described as being maritime and associated with ships, so the theory is the Tribe of Dan was founded by the Denyan Sea Peoples intermixing with the local Jews.
Strange. This is the first intelligent thing you've posted thus far and with citing of valid sources. If only you'd act this way more often but sadly you're deranged white supremacy hinders you from doing so.
Truthcentric Member # 3735
posted
quote:Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: We've been going over the end of the New Kingdom in my Ancient Egypt class at UCSD, and my professor mentioned that during this period that the Sea Peoples whom the Egyptians fought were originally from the Aegean region, but dispersed throughout the Mediterranean after a famine afflicted their home country. What I found especially memorable from that lecture was that the Nile Delta and large hunks of the Levant were settled by Sea Peoples. Does anyone else wonder if this would have had a significant effect on these regions' gene pools?
what dynasty was this?
Dynasties 19-20 as I recall.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: We've been going over the end of the New Kingdom in my Ancient Egypt class at UCSD, and my professor mentioned that during this period that the Sea Peoples whom the Egyptians fought were originally from the Aegean region, but dispersed throughout the Mediterranean after a famine afflicted their home country. What I found especially memorable from that lecture was that the Nile Delta and large hunks of the Levant were settled by Sea Peoples. Does anyone else wonder if this would have had a significant effect on these regions' gene pools?
Let's be clear. The Sea Peoples as exemplified by the plural are not one but a multitude of groups of people. While the Aegean may have been the hotbed of Sea People habitation it is not the only one and there is evidence of Sea Peoples inhabiting other parts of the Mediterranean such as the Ionian Sea, the islands of the Tyrrhenian Sea off Italy and even the islands off Spain. Some of these Sea People enemies were co-opted by 20th and 21st dynasty pharaohs as mercenaries. Would they have had a significant effect on the Egyptian gene pool? Probably not because much of the Mediterranean already has African and southwest Asian ancestry! Maybe the southwest Asian ancestry might have some impact but again these settlements were small in comparison to the later Arab invasion. By the way, if you do research on the Sea Peoples like I have, you would notice that surviving portraits depict them as being darker and not as 'white' as many Westerners traditionally picture them. What's interesting is that some of the Sea People particularly those that allied themselves with the Libyans also have Libyan sounding names or words among their language, again showing a connection to Africa.
Here is one really good source on the Sea Peoples:
posted
Indeed Djehuti, you make a salient point that the Sea Peoples were an amalgamation of different groups. This needs to be kept in mind.
Regarding modifying the gene pool of the levant and nile delta, I think they would have to some degree. With ppl from the aegean and anatolia coming into the levant, and more "SW Asians" going into the delta. Many of those sw asians were not african so they would have added more non-african genetic elements to the african delta. Further, some of these "sw asians" were prob recent arrivals (within 100s of yrs prior)to sw asia from areas E and NE. Given the relative sizes of the big egyptian pop and the small Sea People pop, the overall genetic profile of egypt would've remained mainly as it was prior to the Sea Peoples--overwhelmingly african. Of course, the greatest input of non-african genes in Egypt seems to have occurred in the islamic period.
zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova Member # 15718
posted
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by castrated: The Denyen tribe among the Sea Peoples are equated to the tribe of Dan. This identification was taken up by the archaeologist Yigael Yadin (1968) and the scholar Cyrus H. Gordon.
A Hittite report speaks of a Denyen (Dananiyim)leader called Muksus (Mopsos). Some scholars believe this is nome other than the Moses of Hebrew tradition.
Note that in the Old Testament the Danites are the only Hebrew people described as being maritime and associated with ships, so the theory is the Tribe of Dan was founded by the Denyan Sea Peoples intermixing with the local Jews.
Strange. This is the first intelligent thing you've posted thus far and with citing of valid sources. If only you'd act this way more often but sadly you're deranged white supremacy hinders you from doing so.
^^Don't be too quick to give him credit. As always he asserts bogus claims, and true to pattern, presents YET ANOTHER above. Let's check it out.
------------------
A Hittite report speaks of a Denyen (Dananiyim)leader called Muksus (Mopsos). Some scholars believe this is nome other than the Moses of Hebrew tradition.
^WHy should anyone believe what he has to say based on his pattern of bogus claims? There is indeed a "Hittite report", and the name "Mopsos" does appear but credible scholars link the name with a Greek- alleged founding heroes of the famous oracle of Mallos in Cilicia. See: The orientalizing revolution: Near Eastern influence on Greek culture.. By Walter Burkert, Margaret E. Pinder, p 52.
But notice how CASSI-FAKEdes never names the alleged "scholars" who advance the Moses claim, nor does he provide any direct supporting quote. His shady modus operandi is to pick a book and provide a bogus page number with text that can't be verified. Who pray tell are these "scholars" that say specifically Muksus (Mopsos) is Moses? Provide a DIRECT QUOTE not a book with bogus page numbers or non-verifable text on claimed page numbers. LEt's see what CASSI-FAKEdes can do. Were is the DIRECT QUOTE of alleged "scholars"?
-----------------------------------------
Now on to CASSI-FAKEdes next fake claim: He says:
Note that in the Old Testament the Danites are the only Hebrew people described as being maritime and associated with ships
^^Complete Nonsense. In the Old Testament, the tribe of Zebulun is mentioned as specifically associated with ships and maritime elements. QUOTE:
Genesis 49:13 "Zebulun will dwell at the shore of the seas; Yea, he will be at the shore of the ships, And his side toucheth upon Sidon. "
As can be seen, he is yet AGAIN spinning false claims.
The source is Cavalli-Sforza's book on the Pygmies entitled 'African pygmies' (Academic Press, 1986).
This work shows that Negroids mutated from an ancestral pygmy population around 9,000 BC in West Africa. So the 'true' Black African today is a recent mutation. Caucasoids and Mongoloids predate them. [Wink] Negroids only migrated into other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion or slightly earlier. Prior to them, Caucasoids inhabited North Africa and Bushmen (Capoids) to the south who were displaced by the Caucasoids from the Mediterranean around 12,000 BC.
^^A fake reference. Why should anyone take your word for it given past bogus references? Quote where Cavalli-Sforza says these so-called "negroids" "mutated" from Pygmies. The burden of proof is on you, since you made the claim.
While you scurry to cover your tracks with yet more bogus claims, Cavali Sforza, in his well known The History and Geography of Human Genes, 1994 Cavalli-Sforza summarizes his 1986 work on Pygmies and specifically debunks the "Pygmy as ancestor" theory held by other older writings. QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
SO much for your lying claims of "mutations" from "Pygymy" ancestors. In short, you lied about Cavalli-Sforza, creating a falsified claim and a bogus "supporting" reference to a claim that is nowhere supported in his work. You are once again exposed as yet another racist, who relies on bogus "evidence" to advance, dubious and debunked claims. You are not fooling anyone.
------------------------
YOu then tried to cover up your lie with even more bogus nformation and STILL fail
You "modified" your Cavalli Sforza claim by including page numbers, and then changing some wording to "adaptive radiation" hoping to divert attention from your exposure.. lmao..
However pages 361-362 of Cavalli Sforza's 1986 book says absolutely nothing about any Negroes "mutating" from pygmies, nor any "adaptive radiation." It merely discusses Pygmy history and geography. You picked out a page at random, not knowing it can be verified via Google Books. You were asked to provide a direct quote but are still running. Now why is that?
""It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
--------------------------------------
And Your pathetic "modification" STILL turned out to be bogus. You then said:
[b]"True" Black Africans appear as a recent adaptive radiation apparently branching off from an ancestral Pygmy population — a line of ancestry also indicated by osteological data (Coon 1962:651-656; Watson et al. 1996).
^^But in fact, Watson 1996 has nothing to do with osteological data and does not even mention it. It has to do with mtDNA.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^ Nevermind. By the way, I didn't buy the whole Moksos being Moses thing but I have heard of a connection between the Danites to Denyen. It is a hypothesis, though I don't know how valid that is.
By the way, let's not forget how the Sea Peoples really looked.
Pelesti
^ The Pelesti people differed from the stereotypical Minoans in features and interestingly looked more like the Egyptians or Libyans.
posted
^ Yes there is still controversy in regards to the Philistine presence in the Levant (Canaan) due to the fact that Genesis identifies a 'Philistine' people living in Canaan during the time of Abraham during the Bronze Age (first mentioned in the Table of Nations) yet archaeology identifying 'Philistines' doesn't show up until late Iron Age. The common explanation given is that these were two different groups of people who were given an identical name based on some similarity perhaps that they were both seafaring. The same can be said about other peoples in the Bible in the Table of Nations where similar or sometimes the same name is used for different peoples living on different sides of the Red Sea.
quote:Originally posted by Jefferson Davis: Who are these Pelesti people?
The Pelesti are one group of Sea People who many scholars identify with the Biblical Philistines. They were also one of confederation of Sea Peoples who attacked Egypt during the 20th-21st dynasties.
cassiterides Member # 18409
posted
We need a new word to call Filipino people who want to be black.
Fligger sounds appropiate.
Djehuti the fligger probably in real life looks like the Filipino teen on the far right (he probably though wears black clothes like baggy pants and his hat put on sidewards):
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^ LMAO And what exactly makes you think I want to be black??!
Is it because I support the FACT that ancient Egyptians were black since they were indigenous Africans??
If you think this about me then what about Paul Kekai Manansala a Filipino writer who has written many articles about Egypt's African identity and even has a web ring about Egypt and Nubia?
Better yet, do the dozens of WHITE experts we cite want to be black as well? LOL
And what are we to make of YOU who as a white person is so pathetic that he wants to claim not only African cultures like Egypt and Nubia as the work of "caucasians" but various peoples in the Middle East and India. Unlike you, I am quite proud of my ethnic heritage and have no need to claim other peoples heritages and cultures as my own which is something you and other white losers do all the time!
zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova Member # 15718
posted Nevermind. By the way, I didn't buy the whole Moksos being Moses thing but I have heard of a connection between the Danites to Denyen. It is a hypothesis, though I don't know how valid that is.
^Some scholars dispute the connection as noted above.
What I like about this source is that the author puts more focus on western areas of the Mediterranean as oppose to other sources which only focus on the eastern Mediterranean in the Aegean. The author Baird points out a lot of evidence to show that these Sea Peoples in the western Mediterranean had a Minoan component and/or large Minoan influence as seen by the archaeology in Spain and in some islands of the western Mediterranean.
But again, what I like to point out is that some of the Sea Peoples that tried to invade Egypt from the west who were allied with the Libyan Meshwesh also had Libyan sounding names. These were the Ekwesh, Shekelesh, and Weshesh. Because of such, many scholars in the past from Petrie to Childe postulated Libyan origins for them. I too support this hypothesis and I believe that these peoples represent indigenous Maghrebians who not only inhabited the coasts of northwestern Libya, Tunisia, and Algeria, but that these peoples also colonized the Maltese islands, Sicily, Sardinia and perhaps the Balearic Islands as well.
What do you guys think of this?
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
...
dana marniche Member # 13149
posted
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: The Denyen tribe among the Sea Peoples are equated to the tribe of Dan. This identification was taken up by the archaeologist Yigael Yadin (1968) and the scholar Cyrus H. Gordon.
A Hittite report speaks of a Denyen (Dananiyim)leader called Muksus (Mopsos). Some scholars believe this is nome other than the Moses of Hebrew tradition.
Note that in the Old Testament the Danites are the only Hebrew people described as being maritime and associated with ships, so the theory is the Tribe of Dan was founded by the Denyan Sea Peoples intermixing with the local Jews.
The Dhanawiyn tribe of Azd in modern southwest Arabia were the most likely candidate for the Dan people. The name Dan means serpent. If the Danaan's were related to Dan or to the people called Adnan as others suspect (and who by tradition named Aden) that would have made them ancient Afrosemitic people.
Danaus was in mythology brother of Belus the Canaanite and African deity Ba'al or Upau later called Ubullon/Apollo. Among the Afrosemitic Mahra-related peoples Bali still means My Lord.
Cyrus Gordon if I remember correctly was Bernal's ancestor or grandfather. He believed a semitic people basically colonized the Aegean and influenced Greek culture, as does anyone with common sense.
dana marniche Member # 13149
posted
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ LMAO And what exactly makes you think I want to be black??!
Is it because I support the FACT that ancient Egyptians were black since they were indigenous Africans??
If you think this about me then what about Paul Kekai Manansala a Filipino writer who has written many articles about Egypt's African identity and even has a web ring about Egypt and Nubia?
Better yet, do the dozens of WHITE experts we cite want to be black as well? LOL
And what are we to make of YOU who as a white person is so pathetic that he wants to claim not only African cultures like Egypt and Nubia as the work of "caucasians" but various peoples in the Middle East and India. Unlike you, I am quite proud of my ethnic heritage and have no need to claim other peoples heritages and cultures as my own which is something you and other white losers do all the time!
Djehuti - funny thing is a while back I read on some Euronut blog that you were in fact Paul. I am sure many of them think you are him. They sounded so sure of themselves in fact they had me wondering if he was you. lol!
His site is very informative, BTW.
dana marniche Member # 13149
posted
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Uh getting back to the topic at hand...
What I like about this source is that the author puts more focus on western areas of the Mediterranean as oppose to other sources which only focus on the eastern Mediterranean in the Aegean. The author Baird points out a lot of evidence to show that these Sea Peoples in the western Mediterranean had a Minoan component and/or large Minoan influence as seen by the archaeology in Spain and in some islands of the western Mediterranean.
But again, what I like to point out is that some of the Sea Peoples that tried to invade Egypt from the west who were allied with the Libyan Meshwesh also had Libyan sounding names. These were the Ekwesh, Shekelesh, and Weshesh. Because of such, many scholars in the past from Petrie to Childe postulated Libyan origins for them. I too support this hypothesis and I believe that these peoples represent indigenous Maghrebians who not only inhabited the coasts of northwestern Libya, Tunisia, and Algeria, but that these peoples also colonized the Maltese islands, Sicily, Sardinia and perhaps the Balearic Islands as well.
What do you guys think of this?
I had always heard the "Sea peoples" were peoples of diverse ethnicities who combined with the Libyan groups against Egypt.
the lioness Member # 17353
posted
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: I had always heard the "Sea peoples" were peoples of diverse ethnicities who combined with the Libyan groups against Egypt. [/QB]
the Sea People were not homogeneous. They were people from Atlantis who lived under the sea and then went above water to mess with Egypt.
Brada-Anansi Member # 16371
posted
One tradition or theory was that one compnent the People of the Sea were some how connected to Trojan refugees which would make sense given the close dating of the Trojan war and Merneptah's rule see Micheal Woods.
cassiterides Member # 18409
posted
There is a theory that they had some more northern troops among them.
See viking type horned hat -
Brada-Anansi Member # 16371
posted
Vikings rarely did if ever wore such helmets,but there may very well be a connection to later Vikings http://www.osterholm.info/swedes.html See Micheal Woods on that also.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^ The Castrated's ignorance on his own European history is again exposed because there is no evidence of such horned helmets among vikings until the Medieval period! As such, how can one possibly attribute the horned helmets of early Iron Age Shardana to vikings?! LOL If anything it may very well be the other way around!
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: The Dhanawiyn tribe of Azd in modern southwest Arabia were the most likely candidate for the Dan people. The name Dan means serpent. If the Danaan's were related to Dan or to the people called Adnan as others suspect (and who by tradition named Aden) that would have made them ancient Afrosemitic people.
I don't know about all this, but I have heard of the theory connecting the tribe of Dan to the Sea Peoples of the Aegean though I admit such evidence seems to be only circumstantial and interestingly enough most of the handful of scholars who propose such a connection are Zionist Israelis.
quote:Danaus was in mythology brother of Belus the Canaanite and African deity Ba'al or Upau later called Ubullon/Apollo. Among the Afrosemitic Mahra-related peoples Bali still means My Lord.
The common Semitic word "Ba'al" or "Be'el" means 'owner' or 'master'. There are variations on the relations of Danaus but according to the most common myth, Danaus king of Libya was the twin brother of Aegyptus king of Egypt. Both were the sons of the nymph Achiroe [daughter of Nilus god of the Nile] and Belus [son of Libya (Africa) and Poseidon]. What's interesting is that Belus's domain stretched from his homeland in Africa all the way to Syria, while his brother Agenor was said to rule from Ethiopia south of Egypt to Arabia. Obviously the Greek myths speak of an expansion from Africa into southwest Asia.
quote:Cyrus Gordon if I remember correctly was Bernal's ancestor or grandfather. He believed a semitic people basically colonized the Aegean and influenced Greek culture, as does anyone with common sense.
Well we do know the Greek alphabet is derived from Phoenician and stated so from the Greek myth of the Phoenician Prince Cadmus son of Agenor founding the city of Thebes and introducing the alphabet. We also know that during the Archaic period of Greece there was an "orientalizing" phase. So obviously Bernal and his grandfather weren't far off in their claims.
quote:Djehuti - funny thing is a while back I read on some Euronut blog that you were in fact Paul. I am sure many of them think you are him. They sounded so sure of themselves in fact they had me wondering if he was you. lol!
His site is very informative, BTW.
LOL No I am not Paul Manansala. I actually first heard about the guy a few years ago when someone in this forum asked if I knew about him! I've contacted him a few times and he seems real nice. The main thing we have in common (other than our ethnicity) is that we share a love of history and writing the wrongs of past erroneous scholarship.
quote:I had always heard the "Sea peoples" were peoples of diverse ethnicities who combined with the Libyan groups against Egypt.
Actually not all of the Sea Peoples joined with the Libyans. Some attacked Egypt from the east and some from the east aided Egypt. It just so happened that those who attacked Egypt from the west were allied with the Libyans and it is interesting that most of those happened to have Libyan sounding names.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
quote:Originally posted by the Lyinass: the Sea People were not homogeneous. They were people from Atlantis who lived under the sea and then went above water to mess with Egypt.
The lyinass nonsense aside, it is interesting that Plato claims the people of Atlantis (wherever it was) was at war with both the Egyptians and Libyans who were closely allied peoples. I really do wonder if Atlantis was ancestral to the Sea Peoples but that seems to be the theory of W. Sheppard Baird, the author whose website I last cited.
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: One tradition or theory was that one compnent the People of the Sea were some how connected to Trojan refugees which would make sense given the close dating of the Trojan war and Merneptah's rule see Micheal Woods.
Yes this is another common hypothesis. Both the Iliad and Odyssey say that the Danaans/Greeks committed acts of piracy before and after the Trojan War, and there are those that link the Danuna Sea People with the Greek Danaans though the accuracy of this remains to be seen.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
My reasons to tie the Sea Peoples of the Western Mediterranean to Africa not only come from the names which sound Libyan but also the fact that early human remains in the area from the neolithic, particularly in the Islands of Malta show close affinities with Afalou and Tarofalt remains in North Africa. In fact, there are are some scholars who suggest the neolithic culture of Malta, Sicily, and perhaps Sardinia to be related to the Capsian culture of Tunisia.
Add to all of this the presence of Benin HBS...
Now this is not to say that all these peoples had African ancestry only as archaeology, particularly in Sardinia shows ties to the eastern Mediterranean and in the Balearic Islands ties to Europe.
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
I would think "ties" of any Sea Peoples to Africa come only after these folk of non-African origins settled in Africa. They were H3w Nbw not Tamehu.
Of all the Sea Peoples the Peleshet are the only ones I can see of possible African ancestry based on Hebrew records.
Similarities of Med isle and N. Med peoples with North Africa stem from Europe -> Africa movement not the reverse since the cultural similarities appear earlier outside of Africa rather than within Africa.
Only two "Libyans" with esh names * the Meshwesh nation * the Keykesh tribe
Four Sea Peoples with esh names * Ekwesh * Teresh * Shekelesh * Weshesh
Of particular notice are the Meshwesh nation and Weshesh H3W NBW tribe, especially when we note Graeco-Latin authors relating origins of some North African peoples as coming from the Aegean and even as far as Persia. The Meshwesh were unknown to Egypt before the Sea Peoples era and seem distinct from the either the Tehenu or Lebu, known at least from the 5th and 11th dynasties respectively.
Then the similar archaeology, like the bell shaped vessels c.2000 BCE of Cueta and Tetuan, came from Iberia. The copper/bronze arrowheads of c.1500 BCE North Africa were imported from Iberia and the NA obsidian manufactures of the same era are imports from Sicily and Pantellaria, the obsidan itself coming from the Lipari islands. Other "industrial" influences c.1500-1300 BCE stem from Cyprus & Asia Minor carried by Aegeans & Phoenicians via Malta, Pantellaria, and Sicily; and the dolmens of Algeria and Tunisia have their prototype in Malta just as the late bronze chamber tombs of Cap Bon are preceded by those of Sicily.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^ Yes I'm well aware that the Maghreb was settled by peoples from the North Mediterranean and that archaeology shows that the Balearic Islands and Corsica were settled by folk from mainland Europe while other peoples from the eastern Mediterranean settled there and especially Sicily and Malta as shown in the website I cited here. The author claims the Nuraghe culture of Sicily and those found as far as Spain show a Minoan connection. But didn't all this take place during the Bronze Age while Africans settled Malta and Sicily during the neolithic? I believe an African presence in Malta was discussed in this board some years ago. And what of so-called Iberomaurisian culture? Also, even some of these eastern Mediterranean settlers of the west Mediterranean may have African ancestry you suggest this as a possibility with the Peleset. I have also seen depictions of the Sherden who in physical appearance are not much different from the Peleset in that they are very dark in complexion and even in unpainted portraits like this they appear Egyptian-like.
Beautiful well preserved representation of captive Sea Peoples and other prisoners from Medinet Habu temple. These prisoners are related to the Ramesses III Libyan and Asiatic war campaign. From left to right they can be identify as: Labu, Shekelesh, two possible Canaanite or Syrian and a Peleset. This scene is a clear example of how the Egyptian sculptures and reliefs were colorfully decorated.
^ Notice the Shekelesh and Peleset both wear a very similar kilt with tassels. Note also the dark coloration of the Shekelesh is no different from the Labu and Peleset.
And then in this picture..
Another well preserved representation of captive Sea Peoples and other prisoners from Medinet Habu temple. These prisoners are related to the Ramesses III war campaign in Amor. From left to right they can be identify as: Meshwesh (or Labu), a possible Shekelesh, a possible Hittite/Chaldean, a Peleset and a possible Canaanite or Amorite warrior.
Note how the facial features of Meshwesh, Shekelesh, and Peleset are almost identical perhaps indicating a shared ancestry.
Another interesting well preserved representation of captive Sea Peoples and other prisoners from Medinet Habu temple. These prisoner are related to the Ramesses III war campaign in Amor. From left to right they can be identify as: Labu, Unknown prisoner (possible Shasu), a possible Canaanite, Unknown Asiatic prisoner and a possible Denyen.
I find the possible Shasu prisoner to be interesting considering that he too wears a kilt with tassels. By the way, the tassels is another reason why some scholars especially Jewish ones make a connection with the tribe of Dan or Jews. This and the fact that many of these Sea Peoples were circumcised as described in Egyptian texts.
Whether they were Jewish or even Semitic speaking is unclear but they definitely have some connection to Afrisian speakers.
Here is a reproduction of a tomb painting of Shardan warriors.
^ Note how dark they are in complexion and curly hair despite how the author himself tries to reconstruct them LOL.
You yourself speak of the African presence in the early eastern Mediterranean even in the Aegean with depictions of Thera and those in Mycenaean art. All these dark colored Sea People being circumcised has to be more than coincidence.
You said it yourself that for far too long the West has claimed the Mediterranean Basin to be the domain of Europeans and thus whites only, even though Africa makes up the majority of its southern coasts.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
And getting back to the Peleset and the Eastern Mediterranean. I have been fascinated by this passage from Biblical Genesis' Table of Nations:
Mizraim (Egypt) became the father of Ludim and Anamim and Lehabim and Naphtuhim and Pathrusim and Casluhim (from which came the Philistim) and Caphtorim.
According to the Bible, Egypt spawned the Philistim (Peleset?) through Casluhim, but what or where is Casluhim?? What about Caphtorim, of which I and others have assumed to be what Egyptians called Keftiu (Crete)?? What of the others?
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
Great post of defeated Sea Peoples images but I see no disconfirmation of any of the naming, cultural traits, and archaeology I presented.
Instead of generalizing, peripheralizing, and hopping all over time please address each of the points I raised one by one and disconfirm their validity. If undone they remain factual and strongly counter ideas of "Sea Peoples" having originating ties to Africa rather than invading and/or settling Africa post 18th Dyn.
=-=-=-=-=-=
You postulated names and colonization as supportive which I disconfirmed as below:
Only one set of "Libyans" with an esh name * the Meshwesh nation
Five Sea Peoples with esh names * Ekwesh * Teresh * Keykesh * Shekelesh * Weshesh
* c.2000BCE Ceuta&Tetuan bell shaped vessels from Iberia * c.1500BCE N.Africa copper/bronze arrowheads from Iberia * c.1500BCE N.Africa obsidian products from Sicily&Pantellaria via Lipari * c.1400BCE N.Africa industrial influences from Cyprus&Asia Minor via Malta&Pantellaria&Sicily
* Algeria&Tunisia dolmens from Malta prototypes * late bronze age Cap Bon chamber tombs style preceded in Sicily
=-=-=-=-=-=
All this evinces ancestry of their originators as not African. Overreaching claims about Africa are damaging to verifiable African historiography. The unknowledgeable will surmise it's all fluff with no solid core just what if's and could be's.
Is there firm support in favor of African ancestral ties for any of the following Sea Peoples (and if not, supposing so seemingly underlies a need that Africans must incorporate others to puff themselves up).
* Lukka (Lycia) * Sharden (Sardonians of Lydia) * Eqwesh (Kos) * Teresh (Tursenoi of Lydia) * Shekelesh (Sagalassos of Pisidia) * Qeyqesh (Caria) * Weshesh (Wassos of Caria) * Tjeker (Teucrians of the Troad)
The Libyan Meshwesh, if the Maxyes of Herodotus, have a legendary claim of being Trojan in ancestry and Egypt knew nothing of the Meswesh until the Sea Peoples invasion of Amenophis III's time. The Meshwesh are the funniest looking Africans.
Please give me solid evidence not meaningless suppositions such as they kind of all look alike.
I grant African ancestral ties for the Sea Peoples known as Peleset (whether "Cretan" or Illyrian) and some of the Danyen (Danaoi of Argos).
You invited comments so I responded with a critique.
But again, what I like to point out is that some of the Sea Peoples that tried to invade Egypt from the west who were allied with the Libyan Meshwesh also had Libyan sounding names. These were the Ekwesh, Shekelesh, and Weshesh. Because of such, many scholars in the past from Petrie to Childe postulated Libyan origins for them. I too support this hypothesis and I believe that these peoples represent indigenous Maghrebians who not only inhabited the coasts of northwestern Libya, Tunisia, and Algeria, but that these peoples also colonized the Maltese islands, Sicily, Sardinia and perhaps the Balearic Islands as well
SO you think these are returnees to Africa?? kind of like the Moors returning to Africa thousands of years later, never though of that before.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^ That is assuming these were peoples who were away from Africa for thousands of years, which is not what I'm saying.
To Takruri, I don't mean to sound wild or overreaching. I am merely speculating at the moment. In the past week or so I have been doing research on the Sea Peoples and I keep getting the same answers-- that their origins are unknown and are also speculative, perhaps no less speculative than my claims. You're right that the archaeology shows origins in the eastern Mediterranean but beyond that there is little else. We know that Africans were present in the eastern Mediterranean so again my African ancestry claims may not be far off. Also in terms of archaeology, it only gives you the material culture aspect not the actual population ancestry. The two main hypotheses of Sea People origins I've read are Anatolia and the Levant. Going by their features and dress styles I lean towards the latter.
Troll Patrol Member # 18264
posted
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Vikings rarely did if ever wore such helmets,but there may very well be a connection to later Vikings http://www.osterholm.info/swedes.html See Micheal Woods on that also.
Yep, I was listening to the radio a while ago. Where a Ph.D. in history said the samething. Vikings did not wear helmets with horns. Those are fantasies from cartoons and films he said.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^ From what I understand there were vikings who wore horned helmets but these were far and few. I believe the horn helmets represented some sort of status that most vikings were not able to achieve. That said, the horned helmets of the Shardan were common enough to not be the case.
Troll Patrol Member # 18264
posted
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ From what I understand there were vikings who wore horned helmets but these were far and few. I believe the horn helmets represented some sort of status that most vikings were not able to achieve. That said, the horned helmets of the Shardan were common enough to not be the case.
Unlike many people believe, there is no evidence that the Vikings wore horned or winged helmets. It's actually rather likely that they didn't have helmets at all or at least not the way we think of them today.
The Truth There is no evidence, archaeological or otherwise, that Viking warriors wore any type of horns or wings on their helmets. What we do have is one single piece of evidence, the ninth century Oseberg tapestry, suggesting a rare ceremonial use (the relevant figure on the tapestry may even be that of a god, rather than representative of real Vikings) and plenty of evidence for plain conical/domed helmets made mainly of leather.
Horns, Wings and Wagner I’m sure we’ve all seen them, pictures of large, hairy men with horns sticking proudly out of their helmets as they rush to rape and pillage. It’s so common it must be true surely? Well, no. Years of excavations, coupled with studies of images, have yielded no evidence for the common use of horned or winged Viking warrior helmets. So where has the idea come from? Roman and Greek writers referred to northerners who wore horns, wings and antlers, amongst other things, on their helmets. Like much contemporary writing about anyone non-Greek or Roman there appears to have already been a distortion here, with archaeology suggesting that while this horned headgear did exist, it was largely for ceremonial purposes and had largely faded out by the time of the Vikings, often considered to have started in the late eight century. This was unknown to the writers and artists of the early modern era, who began referencing the ancient authors, making misinformed jumps and depicting Viking warriors, en masse, with horns. This image grew in popularity until it was taken on by other forms of art and passed into common knowledge. The temporary mis-identification of a Bronze Age carving in Sweden with a horned helmet as Viking didn’t help matters, although this was corrected in 1874.
Perhaps the greatest step on the way to the ubiquity of the horn was in the late nineteenth century, when costume designers for Wagner’s Nibelungenlied created horned helmets because, as Roberta Frank puts it “humanist scholarship, misunderstood archaeological finds, heraldic origin fantasies and the Great God Wish...had worked their magic” (Frank, 'The Invention...', 2000). Within just a few decades the headwear had become synonymous with Vikings, enough to become shorthand for them in advertising.
Roberta Frank quotation cited from Frank, ‘The Invention of the Viking Horned Helmet’, International Scandinavian and Medieval Studies in Memory of Gerd Wolfgang Weber, 2000.
This corroborates the few sources I've read about the horned helmets being worn by elite only and in certain occasions but never in battle.
wooja Member # 19212
posted
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: We need a new word to call Filipino people who want to be black.
Fligger sounds appropiate.
Djehuti the fligger probably in real life looks like the Filipino teen on the far right (he probably though wears black clothes like baggy pants and his hat put on sidewards):
- Fligger? = Filipino Nigger = Blacks are Niggers
queer-rides from the front,
Fuk You racist...im not pulling my "race card" You are a clear racist beast. Stop saying you never say racist things when you just called blacks niggers .
posted ![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
And what exactly makes you think I want to be black??! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
