This is topic Manilius Astronomica Book IV 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=008446

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
.


.
Manilius Astronomica Book IV ( 4.724
translated by G.P. Goold
Harvard University Press 1977


https://www.scribd.com/document/527702234/Loeb-Classical-Library-Manilius-Auth-G-P-Goold-Ed-Trans-Astronomica-1977-Heinemann-Libgen-lc

the human race is so arranged that its practices and features vary: nations are fashioned with their own particular complexion;
____________________

.....The Ethiopians stain the world and depict a race of men steeped in darkness; less sun-burnt are the natives of India; the land of Egypt, flooded by the Nile, darkens bodies more mildly owing to the inundation of its fields: it it a country nearer to us and its moderate climate imparts a medium tone. The Sun-God dries up with dust the tribes of Africans amid their desert lands; the Moors derive their name from their faces, and their identity is proclaimed by the colour of their skins.


 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^^ LMAOH @ this desperate fool!

B|tch didn't you start a thread on this very topic before??! You might as well have bumped the older thread up. Not that it would make a difference since we can just debunk your lyinass here like we did in there. It's just a waste of bandspace.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
this complete English translation of the lines in question was not available for free on the internet until this thread. The older thread did not have this full translation.
No commentary necessary people can read the whole segment and judge for themsleves


For this reason the human race is so arranged that its practices and features vary: nations are fashioned with their own particular complexions; and each stamps with a character of it's own like nature and anatomy of the human body which all share. Germany, towering high with tall off-spring, is blond: Gaul is tinged to a less degree with a near related redness; hardier Spain breeds close knit, sturdy limbs. The Father of the city endows the Romans with the features of Mars, and Venus joining the War-God fashions them with well-proportioned limbs. Quick witted Greece proclaims in the tanned faces of it's people the gymnasium and the manly wrestling schools. Curly hair about the temples betrays the Syrian.
The Ethiopians stain the world and depict a race of men steeped in darkness; less sun-burnt are the natives of India; the land of Egypt, flooded by the Nile, darkens bodies more mildly owing to the inundation of its fields: it it a country nearer to us and its moderate climate imparts a medium tone. The Sun-God dries up with dust the tribes of Africans amid their desert lands; the Moors derive their name from their faces, and their identity is proclaimed by the colour of their skins.
 

---

Posted by mena7 (Member # 20555) on :
 
Manilius is another ancient historian like Herodotus, Aristotle, Heliodore, Diodorus Sicilus, Strabon, Lycinus, Appolodore, Eschyle, Achille Tatius, Ammien Marcelin, Diogene Laerce to described the Ancient Egyptian aka Kamite as Black African people.Because of those ancient testimonies the USA schools, colleges, universities, movies industry, publishing industry, TV documentaries should describes and portrait the Egyptian as black peoples in their books, classrooms, movies, documentaries etc.If they dont do it despite the overwhelming evidences they are racist.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
the Lioness didn't post to bump the previous thread
because not wanting all to see the logic behind the
interpretations given there.

At least the Lioness has finally accessed the Loeb.

Now clearly, despite previous statements to the same,
the Lioness can see the cosmic significance re Manilius'
two sided major grouping of nations per colour.


Do note that Goold could not avoid inserting interpretation
wording into the translation that does not appear in the
Latin original. This is unavoidable when translating otherwise
meaning is lost.


However, Goold deliberately hid the meaning of Mauros
in his footnote. Even today the word means black in Greek.


μαύρος

noun
μαύρος => black, raven, Negro, nigger
αράπης => nigger, black, Arab, Negro
Νέγρος => Negro, nigger, black

adjective
μαύρος => black, colored, sable, pitchy, coloured
σκοτεινός => dark, obscure, dingy, murky, shady, black
μαυρισμένος => black
άσχημος => ugly, nasty, unsightly, seamy, homely, black
άγριος => wild, feral, fierce, savage, ferocious, black
δυσοίωνος => sinister, ominous, inauspicious, portentous, pessimistic, black

verb
μουτζουρώνω => black, smudge, smut
αμαυρώνω => darken, tarnish, stain, black
δυσφημώ =>disparage, discredit, vilify, defame, denigrate, black
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Now clearly, despite previous statements to the same,
the Lioness can see the cosmic significance re Manilius'
two sided major grouping of nations per colour. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
The book is Astronomica and you see no cosmic significance?
The forms and colours of peoples of the human race are due
to the Zodiac's influence. This is clear from the phrase "For this reason..."

Stop being obtuse it ill becomes you.

Mauretanians at the end of the "dark" listing are noted
as being self-named by the colour of their skin μαύρος
i.e., black, and they were the lightest of the darks.

There's no escaping it and you can't cover it up.

---

You are correct there is no escaping it.
Below examples of 'darks' as you call them or 'blacks'
people of 'medium tone' as Manilius described the Egyptians

the land of Egypt, flooded by the Nile, darkens bodies more mildly
owing to the inundation of its fields: it it a country nearer to us and its
moderate climate imparts a medium tone.






As we see Will Smith is slightly lighter, he might correspond to the people Manilius described as lighter in skin complexion than the "medium tone" Egyptians, the 'Moors' or Mauri

(Credit to Doug for Black Korean)
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ LMAO

Typical Lyinass tactic. When words fail her-- as they usually do-- she tries to spin using picture spam.

Note that she does not answer any of the valid points Tukuler raised, which were only a few.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
"Another frequent misconception in some discussions of the populations of the ancient world is the assumption that words or expressions describing people as dark--or black--skinned were always in classical usage the equivalents of "Ethiopians" i.e. Negroes, or, in twentieth century usage, blacks. Greeks and Romans, well acquainted with their contemporaries, differentiated between the various gradations of color in Mediterranean populations and made it clear that only some of the black- or dark-skinned peoples, those coming from the south of Egypt and the southern fringes of northwest Africa, were Ethiopians, i.e. Negroes. Ethiopians, known as the blackest peoples on earth, became the yardstick by which classical authors measured the color of others. In first century AD, Manilius described Ethiopians as the blackest; Indians, less sunburnt; Egyptians, mildly dark; with Moors the lightest in this color scheme. In other words, to all these peoples--Ethiopians, Indians, Egyptians, and Moors--who were darker than the Greeks and Romans, classical authors applied color-words but it should be emphasized that in general the ancients described only one of these--Ethiopians--as unmistakably Negroid. To summarize this point, there is no justification to equate Egyptians, Moors or any other north Africans, with Ethiopians, even when a color-word is applied to them, unless details are given as to other physical traits such as color, hair, nose, or lips, or unless there is additional evidence to support an equivalence with Ethiopian."

Frank M. Snowden, Jr.
Professor Emeritus, Department of Classics
Howard University



http://www.howard.edu/library/special/excellence@howard/snowden/Blacks.htm
 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
[quote]You are correct there is no escaping it.
Below examples of 'darks' as you call them or 'blacks'
people of 'medium tone' as Manilius described the Egyptians[quote]

Manilius was Roman and lived in the Roman era. Did he ever travel to Egypt? Hegel, the German philosopher never traveled to Africa yet he wrote about Africa as if he were there. So question again: Did Manilius ever travel to Egypt and Kush?

Ammianus Marcellinus--also a Roman-- wrote: "Aegypti plerique[most] subfusculus[ below(sub), fusculus(dark)] et atrati[wearers of dark clothing].

At that time Egypt has already been colonised by the Greeks who settled in Northern Egypt and set up the city of Alexandria. Then the Romans came and intermingled with the Northerners many of whom were West Asian settlers from Persian and other places. In fact, at that time Egypt had long had its name changed from KMT to Egypt. The Greeks controlled Egypt under the Ptolemies for some 300 years then the Romans took over for another 600 years.

So let's go back to an eyewitness from before Roman times, Herodotus. His observations were up close hence more authentic. Unless Manilius had traveled to Egypt his claims are less credible than those of Herodotus. He was most likely referring the people who lived in Alexandria and the Mediterranean litoral.

But again, the best evidence is how the AEs portrayed themselves. And the sly ones keep averting their eyes. The Amarna realistic[that was the age of Egyptian artistic realism] busts of Akhenaten and his family is there for all to see. The artists painted them in the generic African mahagony brown. which covers about 50% of Africa's population. The other 50%, the darker portion is found in places like Sudan, Senegambia, much of the South Sahel area, etc.

And again, the AEs set up a 4 part colour scheme for themselves and other populations they knew. They portrayed themselves as mahogony brown, those in the Southern desert[today's South Sudanese] as dark/black, those from West Asia as heavily bearded with very fair/olive complexioned, and those from Europe proper as very fair and even pink in complexion.

Manilius's point about climate and complexion is interesting because in Southern Africa individuals with the same brown colour as Mandela and his wife Graca Machel are normal. In fact, when there were xenophobic riots in South Africa in 2008 people who were seen as "too dark to be South African" were singled out for beatings and other crimes. Ironically, that included some bona fide South Africans too.
 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
Snowden was perceived as a brainwashed mulatto by students at Howard University in the U.S. where he taught classics for many years. The story is that he was overjoyed when his daughter married an Italian.
 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
Again, the national biography of Manilius--according to Wikipedia--is uncertain. He is not cited by any of the known Roman writers but is assumed to have lived during the era of Augustus and Tiberius.
 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
That translation from Manilius is problematic in parts.

Consider: "Aethiopes maculant orbem tenebrisque figurant perfusas hominum gentes".

The meaning of this is that Aethiopians--i.e. Africans who live far away from Roman Egypt--live in world unknown to others--i.e. in a world of darkness.

The Latin verb "maculo--maculare" also means to taint, or to spot. Thus the proper translation is something like: "The Ethiopians taint the world because they live in an [unknown] world--a dark world.

I say this because "tenebris" is a term the Romans used to describe skin colour. "Tenebris" can refer either to night-time or a dark place like the interior of a cave. For dark skin colour Latin uses "fusculus"(dark) or "sub-fusculus"(very dark).

"Populos" does not translate into the Eurocentric "tribe" at all. "Populos" means "people". The Latin word for "tribe" is "tribus".

We bear in mind too that Manilius was writing about Roman Egypt--not KMT.
 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
Correction above: "I say this because 'tenebris' is NOT a term the Romans used to describe skin colour. Tenebris is a word about the environment not people.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
To each his own but ...

Wiki is just another opinion.

All words have other than primary meaning
and double that when poetry's involved.

Stain's not necessarily derogatory.
To beautify a wood product stain it.

Snowden and alternate meanings and a word
for word "translation" and two interprative
translations of the text are covered in the
old thread.

Check it (though I'll repost so much of it here).
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Typical Lyin' Arse distraction totally unrelated to the topic.
So I'll repost this ode to the wench which despite my hiatus
I should've known better.

quote:

---

Originally posted 17 February, 2012 08:20 PM by Tukuler:

Education was given to all and rejected by Snaky.

There is no reasoning with a Lyin' Ass reptile
for whom questions are nothing but a pretense.

Let all who would enter into dialog be ware all your effort will eventually be met with inanity!



On her way to work one morning
Down the path along side the lake
A tender hearted woman saw
a poor half frozen snake
His pretty colored skin
had been all frosted with the dew
"Poor thing," she cried, "I'll take you in
and I'll take care of you"

"Take me in tender woman
Take me in, for heaven's sake
Take me in, tender woman," sighed the snake


She wrapped him all cozy
in a comforter of silk
And laid him by her fireside
with some honey and some milk
She hurried home from work that night
and soon as she arrived
She found that pretty snake
she'd taken to had revived

"Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven's sake
Take me in, tender woman," sighed the snake


She clutched him to her bosom,
"You're so beautiful," she cried
"But if I hadn't brought you in
by now you might have died"
She stroked his pretty skin again
and kissed and held him tight
Instead of saying thanks,
the snake gave her a vicious bite

"Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven's sake
Take me in, tender woman," sighed the snake


"I saved you," cried the woman
"And you've bitten me, but why?
You know your bite is poisonous
and now I'm going to die"
"Oh shut up, silly woman,"
said the reptile with a grin
"You knew damn well I was a snake
before you took me in

"Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven's sake
Take me in, tender woman," sighed the snake

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
The book is Astronomica and you see no cosmic significance?
The forms and colours of peoples of the human race are due
to the Zodiac's influence. This is clear from the phrase "For this reason..."

Stop being obtuse it ill becomes you.

Mauretanians at the end of the "dark" listing are noted
as being self-named by the colour of their skin μαύρος
i.e., black, and they were the lightest of the darks.

There's no escaping it and you can't cover it up.

---

You are correct there is no escaping it.
Below examples of 'darks' as you call them or 'blacks'
people of 'medium tone' as Manilius described the Egyptians

the land of Egypt, flooded by the Nile, darkens bodies more mildly
owing to the inundation of its fields: it it a country nearer to us and its
moderate climate imparts a medium tone.






As we see Will Smith is slightly lighter, he might correspond to the people Manilius described as lighter in skin complexion than the "medium tone" Egyptians, the 'Moors' or Mauri

(Credit to Doug for Black Korean)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
[QB] [quote]You are correct there is no escaping it.
Below examples of 'darks' as you call them or 'blacks'
people of 'medium tone' as Manilius described the Egyptians[quote]

Manilius was Roman and lived in the Roman era. Did he ever travel to Egypt?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:

But again, the best evidence is how the AEs portrayed themselves. And the sly ones keep averting their eyes. The Amarna realistic[that was the age of Egyptian artistic realism] busts of Akhenaten and his family is there for all to see. The artists painted them in the generic African mahagony brown. which covers about 50% of Africa's population. The other 50%, the darker portion is found in places like Sudan, Senegambia, much of the South Sahel area, etc.

---

Ramesses II Relief Brooklyn Museum


Tutamkhamun, wooden bust, black background

Above, the "medium tone" as described by Manilius
He said the Moors or Mauritanians
were a bit lighter than this and the Indians were a bit blacker
 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
Yes, the medium tone is mahogony brown. No doubt, you are one of the sly ones because you didn't jump to post that exquisite bust of Akhenaten's daughter--"Amarna Princess". LOL.

And you keep denying your post re the Moors. A footnote clarified things for you saying that the Moors--i.e. the Mauri were dark. Now, I will say its slowly: "Dark--is--not--light".
 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
I queried whether Manilius ever traveled to Egypt. You answered by dredging up some comment whereby he assumedly traveled to Africa. But where? Was it Egypt or not?
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
I queried whether Manilius ever traveled to Egypt. You answered by dredging up some comment whereby he assumedly traveled to Africa. But where? Was it Egypt or not?

---

Egypt is enroute to Carthage but what does it matter at this point?He said the Egyptians were medium tone. I put up artifacts showing that medium tone. You confirmed " Yes, the medium tone is mahogony brown"
So what is your point?
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
The reliability of Herodotus is particularly criticized when writing about Egypt. Alan B. Lloyd author of 'Herodotus' states that as a historical document, the writings of Herodotus are seriously defective, and that he was working from "inadequate sources". Nielsen, author of The Tragedy in History: Herodotus and the Deuteronomistic History,writes that: "Though we cannot entirely rule out the possibility of Herodotus having been in Egypt, it must be said that his narrative bears little witness to it."Fehling states that Herodotus never traveled up the Nile River, and that almost everything he says about Egypt and Ethiopia is doubtful. About the claim of Herodotus that the Pharaoh Sesostris campaigned in Europe, and that he left a colony in Colchia, Fehling states that "there is not the slightest bit of history behind the whole story". Fehling concludes that the works of Herodotus are intended as fiction. Depew and Obbink concur that much of the content of the works of Herodotus are literary devices.
Although the factual accuracy of the works of Herodotus is defended by some,] others regard his works as being unreliable as historical sources. Fehling writes of "a problem recognized by everybody", namely that much of what Herodotus tells us cannot be taken at face value.

The accuracy of the works of Herodotus have been criticized since his own era. Sparks writes that "In antiquity, Herodotus had acquired the reputation of being unreliable, biased, parsimonious in his praise of heroes, and mendacious". His ancient critics included Cicero, Aristotle, Josephus and Plutarch.Cicero said the works of Herodotus were full of legends or “fables”, and Harpocration wrote a book on "the lies of Herodotus". Duris of Samos called Herodotus a myth-monger.Voltaire described Herodotus as both "the father of history" and the "father of lies", and Hartog more recently also called him "The father of all liars".
 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
Same old BS. Alex Haley was accused of plagiarism and fabricating the Kunta Kinte story, ergo the transportation of Africans from the Gambia to the U.S. didn't really occur.

Grow a brain and learn to think critically instead of just spamming, cutting and pasting.

Herodotus may be wrong on some things--as those who just dislike his observations that the AEs were African blacks, claim--as if the massive Sphinx and thousands of murals don't calmly make the same point. Even a mad man runs for shelter when it's raining. Herodotus saw the Egyptians and Ethiopians(Nubians) and noted their blackness. Nothing strange about blacks being in Africa.

But, as Diop pointed out, many are peeved that Herodotus should write that sort of thing. So the racist strategy kicks in: claim that Herodotus is a liar and fabricator. Bring in also Greek writers who criticised his works, as if that would mean anything re the real authenticity of his observations.

In the end only the gullible and the racists will doubt what Herodotus claimed about the Egyptians. LOL. It hasn't worked, and it can't work.

But not just Herodotus. Aristotle, Lucian, and a host of other Greeks all noted that the AEs were Africans and were close kin with the Kushites/Nubians. Confirmed much later by the man who deciphered the Rosetta Stone. Jean-Francois Champollion.
 

---

Posted by mena7 (Member # 20555) on :
 
Western Academia is saying Herodotus is unreliable because he described the Egyptian and Colchian as having black skin, wooly hair, and large mouth.Western Academia want the Egyptian to be white or semite/mulato/metis.Herodotus was reliable on Egypt because 11 ancient historians described the Egyptian as being a black skin people with wooly hair.Those historians are Aristotle, Herodotus, Heliodore, Diodorus Sicilus, Strabon, Lucian the navigator, Apollodore,Eschyle, Achille Tatius, Ammien Marcellin, Diogene Laerce.

Some Egyptian had dark black skin, other Egyptian had brown skin.Egypt was made up of different African tribes.Different tribes rule at different period in Egyptian history.Predynastic AEgypt was ruled by the brown skin Twa/Anu people.The old kingdom and middle kingdom was ruled by dark black skin tribes like Ibo,Yoruba, Akan, Kongo, Mande etc.For exemple the statues of Khufu, Uni,Mentuhotep I and Amenemhet III.The new kingdom of Egypt was ruled by brown skin African like the Amhara, Tigre, Somalian, Oromo,Fulani etc.Exemple the statues of Ramses II,Tuthmosis III, Hatshepsut etc.

The tribes of lower Egypt had brown skin,the tribes of upper Egypt had black skin during the time of Roman occupation.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
The Ethiopians stain the world and depict a race of men steeped in darkness; less sun-burnt are the natives of India; the land of Egypt, flooded by the Nile, darkens bodies more mildly owing to the inundation of its fields: it it a country nearer to us and its moderate climate imparts a medium tone. The Sun-God dries up with dust the tribes of Africans amid their desert lands; the Moors derive their name from their faces, and their identity is proclaimed by the colour of their skins.
- Manilius Astronomica Book IV

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
Yes, the medium tone is mahogony brown.

---

code:

---

tellusque   natans     Aegyptia  Nilo   lenius    irriguis    infuscat   corpora   campis
the earth   inundate   Egypt     Nile   gradual   irrigated   darkens    bodies    field

---

code:

---

iam   propior   mediumque    facit     moderata               tenorem.
now   nearer    the middle   produce   observing moderate     tenor

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:


In Manilius' order black complexions from the most
dark to the least dark are
- Aethiopes
- India
- Aegyptia
- Afrorum
- Mauretania

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:


My interpretation of that is just as inundation moves
from south to north darkening the fields so Egyptian
colour is darkest in the south gradually getting less dark
heading toward the delta. (Of course the silt is darkest
next to the Nile and less dark as the field stretches away
from the Nile but the river moved the silt up from Abyssinia.)

Once at the delta the middle zone (Mediterranean)
is reached. It's this middle which moderates tones.

code:

---

tellusque   natans     Aegyptia  Nilo   lenius    irriguis    infuscat   corpora   campis
the earth   inundate   Egypt     Nile   gradual   irrigated   darkens    bodies    field

---

Egypt's Nile inundates the earth, darkens bodies in grades, like the irrigated field

code:

---

iam   propior   mediumque    facit     moderata               tenorem.
now   nearer    the middle   produce   observing moderate     tenor

---

now nearer the middle which produces a tone observing moderation.


After now at the middle --delta Egypt on the Mediterranean--
Manilius goes on to Afrorum and Mauretania which both
have Mediterranean borders. [/QB]

---

what you are saying doesn't make sense. If he was breaking the pattern of gradation to side bar that the Egyptians have all tones he would not concluded the thought>
" nearer the middle which produces a tone observing moderation"

If he was pointing to a range he would not conclude the thought pointing to just the middle tone. It is stretching to ignore that.
The poetic language of the first part of the thought is unclear. It is made clear by the conclusion of the thought Egyptians are "the middle which produces a tone observing moderation".
And after arriving at the middle tone we proceed to the next step Moors (blacks) and you say it's even two steps further than the Egyptians who you say are followed by "Afrorum". So 'black" in this sense, "Moor" is one to two steps lighter than "the middle" .

But we don't need Manilius we have thosands of artworks and as in the examples I gave many of them have a medium tone.
 

---

Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
 
Snowden knew what he was talking about. He rejected Afrolunacy. His work shows with many sources that Egyptians are never described as Negroid or "Black" by the ancient Greeks, but instead are portrayed as lighter skinned, with wavy hair (not woolly).

"Among the most blatant examples of methodological weakness is the claim that the inhabitants of Africa in antiquity were pre
dominantly black?a claim not supported by linguistic, archaeological, or historical evidence. Afrocentrists have assumed that the word "African" and color adjectives used by ancient writers were always the equivalents of words such as "Negroes" and "blacks" in twentieth-century usage. The only Greek or Latin word, and I emphasize only, that most frequently referred to a black or Negroid type from the sixth century BC onward is Aithiops or Aethiops (Ethiopian), literally a person with a burnt face. These Negroid peoples, who exhibited various shades of pigmentation and whose facial features encompassed a variety of types, came
from either the south of Egypt (Kush, Ethiopia, Nubia) or the interior of northwest Africa. Ancient sources also differentiate clearly between people who lived along the coastal areas of northwest Africa (i.e., modern Libya to Morocco) and those who inhabited the interior. "Aethiops," it should be emphasized, with few exceptions, was applied neither to Egyptians nor to inhabitants of northwest Africa, such as Moors, Numidians, or Carthaginians.

"As to the physical characteristics of the ancient Egyptians, both iconographie and written evidence differentiated between the physical traits of Egyptians and the populations south of Egypt. The art of ancient Egypt frequently painted Egyptian men as reddish brown, women as yellow, and people to the south as black...
[A]s the Egyptologist David O'Connor has pointed out, "Thousands of sculpted and painted representatives from Egypt as well as hundreds of well preserved bodies from its cemeteries [n]show that the typical physical type was
neither Negro nor Negroid."[/b]

Misconceptions about African Blacks in the Ancient Mediterranean World: Specialists and Afrocentrists
Frank M. Snowden Jr.
Arion: A Journal of Humanities and the Classics
Third Series, Vol. 4, No. 3 (Winter, 1997) (pp. 28-50)


 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
"the people of Colchis must be Egyptians
because like them they are black-skinned and wooly-haired." -Herodotus



Amenhotep III

some ancient Egyptians probably had wooly hair
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ LOL @ "some". It is a FACT pointed out by Ausar that MANY Egyptians, particularly those in the north in the Delta area had kinky hair. Wavy hair is actually more common in the south, but the Delta is the area the Greco-Romans were most familiar with.

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass,:

The Ethiopians stain the world and depict a race of men steeped in darkness; less sun-burnt are the natives of India; the land of** Egypt, flooded by the Nile, darkens bodies more mildly owing to the inundation of its fields: it it a country nearer to us and its moderate climate imparts a medium tone.** The Sun-God dries up with dust the tribes of Africans amid their desert lands; the Moors derive their name from their faces, and their identity is proclaimed by the colour of their skins.
- Manilius Astronomica Book IV

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
Yes, the medium tone is mahogony brown.

---

---

An even better photo of Tut's bust.



Of course the Lyinass would paint a smaller more obscure version but oh well.

Tut and his wife's throne image.



Also, as Tukuler pointed out the Egyptians' medium tone is NOT medium among all the populations listed but medium ONLY among the dark/black races of people.

Thus from darkest to lightest among the black peoples:

1. Aethiopians
2. Indians
3. Egyptians
4. Afori
5. Moors

^ Note Egyptians are smack in between with two peoples darker and two peoples lighter. The Afori and Moors inhabit the Maghreb which are at a higher latitude than Egypt and are actually closer to Romans geographically.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 


DJ asshole, if I put up examples of a medium skin tone what it's in relation to doesn't matter we are looking at it, it's self explanatory dimwit -it does not effect the example which clarifies

and "Mauri' "Moor", "black" is one to two discernable steps lighter than this according to Manilius

The Latin has been shown
An English translation by a scholar has been shown
Literal word for word translation has been shown

Your interpretation does not need to be added
you may leave now
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ LMAOH But of course it matters you dumbass! Words like 'medium' are relative terms that depend on context! One cannot use such terms without specifying the exact context! The TRUTH (which you so desperately try to deny) is that the Egyptians are medium tone among BLACK peoples. Note that the examples of Egyptians you provide all have a milk chocolate type of complexion. That there are people one or two grades lighter than this does NOT change the fact that they are still dark/black compared to Romans like Manilius himself who makes this observation, twit.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ LMAOH Words like 'medium' are relative terms that depend on context! One cannot use such terms without specifying the exact context! The TRUTH (which you so desperately try to deny) is that the Egyptians are medium tone among BLACK peoples. Note that the examples of Egyptians you provide all have a milk chocolate type of complexion. That there are people one or two grades lighter than this does NOT change the fact that they are still dark/black compared to Romans like Manilius himself who makes this observation, twit.

---

quote:

---

some ancient Egyptians probably had wooly hair

---

.

Probability estimates run from zero to 1. So what is it?

In Aristotle's Physiognomica we find the following(Book 14, Paragraph 4)

Why are Ethiopians(Nubians/Kushites, etc.) and Egyptians bandy-legged? Is it because the bodies of living creatures become distorted by the heat, like logs of wood when they become dry? The condition of their hair supports this theory, for it is curlier than that of other nations, and curliness is as it were, crookedness of the hair..

Again, Herodotus's observations about the "wooliness" of the hair of AEs is confirmed.

And then, of course, we have the well-known comparative statement(Physiognomica, Chp. 6, 812a) on skin colour: "Too black a hue as you see with Egyptians and Ethiopians(Nubians, Kushites, etc.) marks a coward[In our PC age that would be considered "racist"]. Or too white a hue as you see with women. A tawny colour signifies courage as you see with lions. It is the intermediate colour. A colour that is too ruddy marks a rogue as you see with foxes"

Racist fools have commented on this passage saying that it is doubtful Aristotle wrote such a thing. Same ole[sic] "believe me or your lying eyes" story. Pitiful!

Since these facts cannot be denied the trick these days is to cement "the sub-Saharan Africa" ideological firewall and come up with obfuscatory BS about "Eurasian haplogroups entering Africa deep in Paleolithic". Recall too in all this the old saying about supposedly hard data: "lies, damned lies, and statistics".

With uncheckable data for the posters on ES who don't have access to labs and the data gathering methodology of the mostly--there are some though who are committed more to science than to ideology--Eurocentric researchers hope to extend to the whole of North Africa these new-fangled theories about African archeology and anthropological genetics.

Again, pitiful
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
what does the anthropolgy say on the predominant hair type of the ancient Egyptians and also Kushites?

Here's some stuff on Semna South in Sudan:

http://wysinger.homestead.com/hair_semma.pdf

____________________________________

also see post 2,3,4 below link

charts:

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=007496

__________________________________________

some believe un-wooly hair evolved in Africa and is indigenous to Africa, particulary in certain regions for certain reasons
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 

quote:

---

some believe un-wooly hair evolved in Africa and is indigenous to Africa, particulary in certain regions for certain reasons

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
[QB]

quote:

---

some believe un-wooly hair evolved in Africa and is indigenous to Africa, particulary in certain regions for certain reasons

---

.

The subject is the AEs and others according to Manilius.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
[QUOTE]some believe un-wooly hair evolved in Africa and is indigenous to Africa, particulary in certain regions for certain reasons /QUOTE].

LOL. Goalpost on wheels. The subject is the AEs and others according to Manilius. Specifically now, on the AEs.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:

The Greeks were the eyewitnesses and the Greeks were closer in time to Pharaonic Egypt than the Romans.

Analogically, Conquistador Hernan Cortes is closer in time to what Mexico's original populations looked like than someone visiting Mexico some 500 years later. The Greeks colonised Egypt for about 300 years then the Romans entered and stayed for approx. 600 years. [/qb]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass b|tch:

---

Even your idiotic picture spam betrays you for Tut's complexion is much darker than your ridiculous collage of North Asians, a mixed Maghrebi, and light-skinned African American! You are pathetic as you are dumb! LOL

quote:

---

asshole. I have shown the medium tone. I have put up the full text for context:

---

quote:

---

The Ethiopians stain the world and depict a race of men steeped in darkness; less sun-burnt are the natives of India; the land of Egypt, flooded by the Nile, darkens bodies more mildly owing to the inundation of its fields: it it a country nearer to us and its moderate climate imparts a medium tone. The Sun-God dries up with dust the tribes of Africans amid their desert lands; the Moors derive their name from their faces, and their identity is proclaimed by the colour of their skins.

your interpretation is not needed. It's not relative at this point. The examples are there, a group of people with similar medium of the dark set of people skin tone as per Manilus. It's time for you to shut up.

---

quote:

---

Whether I say the medium tone is of blacks or not is irrelevant
what the text says is relevant

---

quote:

---

" it it a country nearer to us and its moderate climate imparts a medium tone."

---

quote:

---

^^^ this is the quote. In the initial thread I have the whole two pages for context. If you want Manilus to say it your way take it up with him.

---

quote:

---

AlTak said "the middle" which in case you hadn't noticed is the same thing as medium
People in the middle of the dark people as the photos show

---

LOL Which photos? The ones of the north Asians you spam who live farther north and at higher latitudes than Rome yet was never described by Manilius?? Or the modern mixed-Maghrebi and light-skinned African American?? LOL B|tch either you dumb act is too good or you are really that dumb!
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass worm:

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:

quote:

---

some ancient Egyptians probably had wooly hair

---

.

Probability estimates run from zero to 1. So what is it?

In Aristotle's Physiognomica we find the following(Book 14, Paragraph 4)

Why are Ethiopians(Nubians/Kushites, etc.) and Egyptians bandy-legged? Is it because the bodies of living creatures become distorted by the heat, like logs of wood when they become dry? The condition of their hair supports this theory, for it is curlier than that of other nations, and curliness is as it were, crookedness of the hair..

Again, Herodotus's observations about the "wooliness" of the hair of AEs is confirmed.

And then, of course, we have the well-known comparative statement(Physiognomica, Chp. 6, 812a) on skin colour: "Too black a hue as you see with Egyptians and Ethiopians(Nubians, Kushites, etc.) marks a coward[In our PC age that would be considered "racist"]. Or too white a hue as you see with women. A tawny colour signifies courage as you see with lions. It is the intermediate colour. A colour that is too ruddy marks a rogue as you see with foxes"

Racist fools have commented on this passage saying that it is doubtful Aristotle wrote such a thing. Same ole[sic] "believe me or your lying eyes" story. Pitiful!

Since these facts cannot be denied the trick these days is to cement "the sub-Saharan Africa" ideological firewall and come up with obfuscatory BS about "Eurasian haplogroups entering Africa deep in Paleolithic". Recall too in all this the old saying about supposedly hard data: "lies, damned lies, and statistics".

With uncheckable data for the posters on ES who don't have access to labs and the data gathering methodology of the mostly--there are some though who are committed more to science than to ideology--Eurocentric researchers hope to extend to the whole of North Africa these new-fangled theories about African archeology and anthropological genetics.

Again, pitiful

---

what does the anthropology say on the predominant hair type of the ancient Egyptians and also Kushites?

Here's some stuff on Semna South in Sudan:

http://wysinger.homestead.com/hair_semma.pdf

____________________________________

also see post 2,3,4 below link

charts:

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=007496

__________________________________________

some believe un-wooly hair evolved in Africa and is indigenous to Africa, particulary in certain regions for certain reasons

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness :
[qb]

---

Even your idiotic picture spam betrays you for Tut's complexion is much darker than your ridiculous collage of North Asians, a mixed Maghrebi, and light-skinned African American! You are pathetic as you are dumb! LOL

---

As we can see Djehutie now resorts to outright lies as we can easily see that all the people shown here have the same skin tone as the Egyptian some even darker and this despite the fact that the Tutankhamun bust is shown in dark gallery lighting.
And if one were to follow through his logic Will Smith is not black.
But furthermore. Manilus descibed 'Moors' i.e . "Mauri" ie " black skinned people" as one to two decirnably lighter tones than the above medium dark toned people including Egyptian
"Tut's complexion is much darker" < the kid is stupid, see for yourself folks

 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^^
ROTFLMAOH


So after your pathetic and ridiculous picture spam fails, you now up the anti on your spin by making them all black-and-white!

I swear, sometimes I wonder if you're really here to spread some anti-black agenda or here just to entertain the hell out of us! LOL
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
^^^^ you're the only one it fails, normal people can see these people have the same skin tone. It becomes even more obvious when made in black and white.

You have an unspoken racial theory that certain ethnicities cannot have the same skin tone as Tut. No matter how many times shown otherwise you won't admit it.
So even whenyour theory is disproven so many times, like looking at a naked emerpor, you still insist he wears clothes.
This is why you are incapabale of being objective and honest, instead patronizing and True Blacksist. Will Smith according to your concepts is not black.
Your cute cartoons and LOL's can't save you
 

---

Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
 
We already know what Tut's skin tone was and who has the closest in appearance to him..



Like I said I don't even understand why this subject is being debated, when this idiocracy was debunked long ago.

As Altakruri said, You repeat a Lie often enough one will start to believe it.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Moderate is not medium.
Moderate is relative to extreme.

Manilius wrote that Egyptians
have grades of colour varying
as does the inundated fields
which are nearly black at the
Nile lessening in blackness
the further inland. Also
blackest in the south where
the silt is freshest from
Abyssinia and less black
moving northwards away from
Abyssinia and approaching the
delta which is at Mid Earth
(Medi terran ean) the zone of
moderation where black isn't
as extreme as in the tropics
nor white as extreme as in
Hyperborea or Utlima Thule.

Of course a background in
Greco-Latin literature is
necessary to understand
this. So let the fools
foam at the mouth in
ignorance.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Anyone beyond basic African studies knows the term
"Africa" was originally only appled to Tunisia and
its hinterland.


Even an idiot knows Mauretania was not the desert.
But of course that won't stop those who are full of
**** from fouling the unknowing and so once again:

Originally posted October 23, 2011 09:38 PM by alTakruri:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Whatbox:
Afrorum? @ alTakruri, where'd you get that from, who were they?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Whatbox:
From page 1 of this thread, we have:

quote:

---

..Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris
exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen
oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.

Bright (sunny) African and sandy dust of the earth drieth up the people,
and the name of Mauritania, a label his mouth bears has the very color.

---

---

Besides unintelligible machine "translation" that
Wally and Lyin'Arse posted, there are other poor
attempts at English translation of the Latin like
the one done back in the 17th century. DJ's cumpà,
whom you quote, did do a decent job and I'd like
to collaborate with him. Meanwhile, here's mine

quote:

---

Originally posted by Whatbox:
So does Afrorum even refer to a people here? Doesn't really look like it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

The theory is relating to a location's distance to the equator,
the closer to the equator the darker due to higher UV sunlight.

You see a general pattern of this with some exceptions.

---

So you see it knows and agrees with facts
as in Manilius' peoples and color keywords

(proprioque colore formantur gentes)


- Germania ____ flava
- Gallia _______ rubore
- Hispania
- Romanis
- Graecia _____ coloratas subtilis

- Syriam


- Mauretania
- Afrorum
- Aegyptia ____ infuscat
- India _______ tostos
- Aethiopes ___ tenebrisque

E Q U A T O R


Lyin' Arse is just trolling for replies revisiting
old stuff for new surfers and keeping the ES hit counter
ticking. Nothing more. Nothing less.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Indeed. What else is new?

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass idiot:

you're the only one it fails, normal people can see these people have the same skin tone. It becomes even more obvious when made in black and white.

---

Correction. Normal people with at least average intelligence can see that Tut with his chocolate complexion is NOT the same as the north Asian men which is not the same as the modern mixed Maghrebi man and modern high-yellow complected African American. And your attempt to black-and-white the photos is another idiotic obfuscation.

quote:

---

You have an unspoken racial theory that certain ethnicities cannot have the same skin tone as Tut. No matter how many times shown otherwise you won't admit it.
So even when your theory is disproven so many times, like looking at a naked emerpor, you still insist he wears clothes.
This is why you are incapabale of being objective and honest, instead patronizing and True Blacksist. Will Smith according to your concepts is not black.
Your cute cartoons and LOL's can't save you

---

Strawman idiocy. I don't have any racial theories because I don't subscribe to race and I am not stupid enough to believe no two groups cannot share the same complexion. What I'm pointing out is the groups YOU use as examples do NOT! And everyone in here knows it.

You are dismissed as the liar you are and nobody in here takes you seriously, worm.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Moderate is not medium.
Moderate is relative to extreme.

Manilius wrote that Egyptians
have grades of colour varying
as does the inundated fields
which are nearly black at the
Nile lessening in blackness
the further inland. Also
blackest in the south where
the silt is freshest from
Abyssinia and less black
moving northwards away from
Abyssinia and approaching the
delta which is at Mid Earth
(Medi terran ean) the zone of
moderation where black isn't
as extreme as in the tropics
nor white as extreme as in
Hyperborea or Utlima Thule.

Of course a background in
Greco-Latin literature is
necessary to understand
this. So let the fools
foam at the mouth in
ignorance.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Anyone beyond basic African studies knows the term
"Africa" was originally only appled to Tunisia and
its hinterland.


Even an idiot knows Mauretania was not the desert.
But of course that won't stop those who are full of
**** from fouling the unknowing and so once again:

Originally posted October 23, 2011 09:38 PM by alTakruri:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Whatbox:
Afrorum? @ alTakruri, where'd you get that from, who were they?

---

Manilius Astromomica 4.728 those between Egypt and
Mauretania, including the Aourigha, who were the ones
who at first rented land to the Phoenician founders of
Carthage. No longer inhabiting that area, the Afer did
continue to dwell south of it and far into the desert.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Whatbox:
From page 1 of this thread, we have:

quote:

---

..Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris
exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen
oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.

Bright (sunny) African and sandy dust of the earth drieth up the people,
and the name of Mauritania, a label his mouth bears has the very color.

---

---

Besides unintelligible machine "translation" that
Wally and Lyin'Arse posted, there are other poor
attempts at English translation of the Latin like
the one done back in the 17th century. DJ's cumpà,
whom you quote, did do a decent job and I'd like
to collaborate with him. Meanwhile, here's mine

quote:

---

Originally posted by Whatbox:
So does Afrorum even refer to a people here? Doesn't really look like it.

---

The name we use for the continent Africa ultimately
derives from a word that entered the Indo-European
languages as a borrowing from Punic or the indigenees
themselves. Afrorum is the Latin plural of Afer (African),
the folk Phoenicians bargained with at what's now far NE
Tunisia (see this TNV thread on the Etymology of Africa).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
At least Fartheadbonkers who studied the Classics knows as much which is why he kept quiet when I brought up the Phaeton myth which debunks his whole assertion that Egyptians and Indians were not considered 'black' by the Greeks when they obviously were! [/QB]

---

Back from 2010:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=003891

I've used this myth to debunk Afrocentrism e.g. Mike's claim the ancient Greeks were "Black", when in actual fact they believed dark skin was a deviation from the original form, or was abnormal.

We are getting into semantics again here. The Indians are not called Aethiops. As Snowden shows, the Aethiops are Negroid (woolly haired, wide nosed, thick lips). The Indians are not reported to have had any of these features by the ancient Greeks. The fact they were described as dark/black doesn't mean they were "Black" (capital)... It's only Afrocentrics who play these word games as their agenda is to lump anyone with dark skin with people with Negroid physiognomy, despite the former lack the latter.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 




 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 

quote:

---

Back to reality folks:

"Ancient sources also differentiate clearly between people who lived along the coastal areas of northwest Africa (i.e., modern Libya to Morocco) and those who inhabited the interior. "Aethiops," it should be emphasized, with few exceptions, was applied neither to Egyptians nor to inhabitants of northwest Africa, such as Moors, Numidians, or Carthaginians." (Snowden, 1997)

Aethiops/black was not applied to the Egyptians or Libyans. Only the inhabitants of Sub-Sahara Africa. The ancient Greeks did not believe the egyptians were "black" [note though that they are generalizing entire populations which is inaccurate from the start].

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fartheadbonkers:

Back from 2010:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=003891

I've used this myth to debunk Afrocentrism e.g. Mike's claim the ancient Greeks were "Black", when in actual fact they believed dark skin was a deviation from the original form, or was abnormal.

We are getting into semantics again here. The Indians are not called Aethiops. As Snowden shows, the Aethiops are Negroid (woolly haired, wide nosed, thick lips). The Indians are not reported to have had any of these features by the ancient Greeks. The fact they were described as dark/black doesn't mean they were "Black" (capital)... It's only Afrocentrics who play these word games as their agenda is to lump anyone with dark skin with people with Negroid physiognomy, despite the former lack the latter.

---

WRONG again.

The Egyptians were indeed described as black and were constantly grouped with Ethiopians. How many times must I repeat the examples already cited in this thread?

Also, Indians, specifically southern Indians, were called eastern Aethiopes by the Greeks in distinction from the Western Aethiopes of Africa.

Therefore either you are a f*cking liar or a f*cking retard who knows not his own field of study-- 'Classics'.
 

---

Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
 
"If we accept the ordinary identification of the Negro on the basis of color of the skin, shape of the nose, and quality of the hair it is certain that the Greeks were well acquainted with the racial type which anthropologists designate today as Negroid.

In view of the Greek usage of the word Aethiops (Ethiopian) it is safe to assume that a given passage refers to a Negro in the following
instances:

1. Whenever a passage mentions two or more of the physical characteristics accepted by modern anthropologists.

2. Whenever the word Aethiops is used in conjunction with one or more of the
physical characteristics accepted by modern anthropologists.

3. Whenever contextual or other evidence indicates that Aethiops, even in the
absence of any other racial characteristic, refers to a Negroid type.

Rather detailed classifications of an anthropological type answering to the
Negroid type appear in several Greek authors."

- Snowden

The eastern ethiops are not Negroid. They are described as having straight hair, and not flat/wide noses.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faheemdunkers:


The eastern ethiops are not Negroid. They are described as having straight hair, and not flat/wide noses. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
That translation from Manilius is problematic in parts.

Consider: "Aethiopes maculant orbem tenebrisque figurant perfusas hominum gentes".

The meaning of this is that Aethiopians--i.e. Africans who live far away from Roman Egypt--live in world unknown to others--i.e. in a world of darkness.

The Latin verb "maculo--maculare" also means to taint, or to spot. Thus the proper translation is something like: "The Ethiopians taint the world because they live in an [unknown] world--a dark world.

I say this because "tenebris" is not a term the Romans used to describe skin colour. "Tenebris" can refer either to night-time or a dark place like the interior of a cave. For dark skin colour Latin uses "fusculus"(dark) or "sub-fusculus"(very dark).

"Populos" does not translate into the Eurocentric "tribe" at all. "Populos" means "people". The Latin word for "tribe" is "tribus".

We bear in mind too that Manilius was writing about Roman Egypt--not KMT.

---

code:

---

Aethiopes   maculant         orbem  tenebrisque  figurant   perfusas  hominum gentes;
Ethiopians  they stains  the orb    deeply dark  they form  drenched  humanity

---

Ethiopians stain the orb deeply dark drenching humanity's forms.


This explicitly posits all others
mating Aethiopes breed children
undeniable as Aethiop offspring.

This is how they stain --as in wood
staining, a beautifying agent-- the
world deeply drenching other lesser
dark human forms when intermarrying.


Another thing you mention I agree to
is the lost meaning of Aithiop. Burnt
face is only a best guess.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Who has any idea what a cline is?
At one end is the quantified extreme.
At the other is its least expression.



No discrete abutted monocolor blocks.
That would be a clineless bar graph.

I don't take Manilius to mean India
had no one of Aethiopian darkness or
vice versa but that there is always
some interlap with some exclusion.

A cluster approach showing overlap



as best my tool allows no egg shape
ovals or slanted ovals and no ovals
I did make are absolute just a visual
way to perceive Manilius' data.

Notice the Mauretania and Afrorum ovals
and the delta part of the Egypt oval can
be seen as a southern side of Mid-Earth
cluster.

The Indian oval shows the Greco-Latin
notion of south India like Aethiopia
and north India like Egypt in complexion.

Overlap of Aethiopia and Egypt ovals
reflects known settlement of "Nubians"
in Egypt and Egyptians in Kerma.

One cluster including all the ovals
would be the Tropical-MidEarth or
dark/black section 4.724-4.730 of
Manilius.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
in psychology they call it projection
 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
Arrian (Indica 6.9) on Egyptians:

Arrian was of Greek background and was born during Roman times somewhere in Turkey. I doubt he ever traveled to Egypt.

In any case KMT whose name was changed to Egypt by Greek invaders had already ceased to exist for 600 years--longer than the Spanish occupation of Mexico. After 600 years with multitudes of settlers into Egypt the population structure of Egypt began to change.

When describing population structures you should pay attention to dates of invasions, etc.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
Arrian (Indica 6.9) on Egyptians:

The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
Arrian (Indica 6.9) on Egyptians:

Arrian was of Greek background and was born during Roman times somewhere in Turkey. I doubt he ever traveled to Egypt.

In any case KMT whose name was changed to Egypt by Greek invaders had already ceased to exist for 600 years--longer than the Spanish occupation of Mexico. After 600 years with multitudes of settlers into Egypt the population structure of Egypt began to change.

When describing population structures you should pay attention to dates of invasions, etc.

---

quote:

---

When Napoleon invaded Egypt a number of French archaeologists were free to enter Egypt. Denon, Volney, Champollion, and others peered over thousands of murals, sculptures, hieroglyphs, etc. Since they had no idea that Africans would later read what they wrote and surmised it is interesting to note that they generally came to the conclusion that the AEs were indigenous blacks

---

"The art of ancient Egypt frequently painted Egyptian men as reddish brown, women as yellow, and people to the south as black... [A]s the Egyptologist David O'Connor has pointed out, "Thousands of sculpted and painted representatives from Egypt as well as hundreds of well preserved bodies from its cemeteries show that the typical physical type was neither Negro nor Negroid." (Snowden, 1997)



Is this meant to be a "Black" woman?
 

---

Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
 
Fool, have you ever taken a course in statistics? "Outliers" are just that---totally away from the norm but they exist. Since you have never studies statistics you would not that.

Why do you post the plump face of some Asiatic border-jumper into the promised land of KMT as being a bonafide woman from KMT?

The chubby faced courtesan you post is not an African woman. LOL. What else?

Sani Abacha, late President of Nigeria used to have Indian whores up in his chambers to keep him relaxed. Same with the Egyptians. You truck in some harlots from West Asia for tea and comfort.
 

---

Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faheemdunkers:
[QUOTE] The fact they were described as dark/black doesn't mean they were "Black" (capital)...

---

Just because they were called black does'nt mean they were black..


 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
there we go taking the bait
 

---

Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
 
No this whole stupid thread is a bait thread as we already proved your stupid ranting as being wrong. Manilius saw the Egyptians as part of a cline of Black people. No Roman/Greek writer would have given the inhabitants of Egypt their "Moderate white-tan" Tone of the Greeks and Romans Meddish Climate unless they lived in the Delta and were mixed with Immigrants from Southern Europe.
 

---

Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
 

quote:

---

Just because they were called black does'nt mean they were black..

---

quote:

---

Just because they were called black does'nt mean they were black..

---

It's all comic relief. Some laughter for a slow day. This guy is a character straight out of "Alice in Wonderland". He should stay. Just comic fodder for the troops.
 

---

Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
 
Reverse the Afrocentric Trojan horse, and 'whites' become the most physically diverse on the planet.

'white people':













- 'whites' have the most diverse features in the world. See now they have epicanthic fold, facial flatness, wooly, jet straight black hair, and wider noses. 'whites' are the original humans [just look above they have all phyical features] since they have the most physical diversity, 'black' must have evolved off them.

Remember all the people above are 'white' according to Afrocentric logic.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Again with the stupid strawmen and presumptuous lies. You are getting worse than Lyinass.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fartheadbonkers:

"The art of ancient Egypt frequently painted Egyptian men as reddish brown, women as yellow, and people to the south as black... [A]s the Egyptologist David O'Connor has pointed out, "Thousands of sculpted and painted representatives from Egypt as well as hundreds of well preserved bodies from its cemeteries show that the typical physical type was neither Negro nor Negroid." (Snowden, 1997)

---

quote:

---

Is this meant to be a "Black" woman?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass:

in psychology they call it projection

---

Indeed. This is when someone projects or puts off their own neuroses onto others. In YOUR case, you project your own ridiculous notions of 'race' or color onto Manilius when you suggest the "medium" hue of the Egyptians is that of the people in your photoshop collage below!



LOL
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
[qb] Arrian (Indica 6.9) on Egyptians:

Arrian was of Greek background and was born during Roman times somewhere in Turkey. I doubt he ever traveled to Egypt.

In any case KMT whose name was changed to Egypt by Greek invaders had already ceased to exist for 600 years--longer than the Spanish occupation of Mexico. After 600 years with multitudes of settlers into Egypt the population structure of Egypt began to change.

When describing population structures you should pay attention to dates of invasions, etc.

---

Arrian (Indica 6.9) on Egyptians:

The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.

But the Ethiopians from the sun’s risings up-for two kinds indeed were advancing with the army-were assigned to the Indians and were differing in no looks from the others except in speech and hair only; for the Ethiopians from the sun’s direction are straight-haired and those from Libya have the wooliest hair of all human beings.

-Inquiries by Herodotus
Book 7


some in the forum are of the opinion that wavy straight hair and narrow noses are indigenous to Africa and that some of the ancient Egyptians had wavy straight hair and narrow noses. An example of this is Swenet's thread called:

Is Kmtian wavy and straight hair the only trait not shared with Ancient Nubians?

There he posted 1907-1908 documenation of ancient Nubians remains having various type of hair lncluding hair described as curly, straight (inluding going back to predynatsic times) and "Negro peppercorn" . There's also the Semna study

many threads have been made arguing that narrower noses and straightish-esque hair are indigenous to Africa in places like , the Horn and North Africa. I think it would be fair to say Swenet, Deshiti, Jari and alTurki 'the Pompous Sage' are in this camp

I'm not certain about these issues, there can be various causation possibilities. lyinass productions all day

---

LOL Indeed your lyinass produces sh*t all day. Arrian makes it clear the main difference between Indians and Libyans (Africans) is that the former had straighter hair while the latter had woolier hair. Libyans also included Egyptians, you dummy! Arrian clearly stated that northern Indians looked very similar to Egyptians except in speech and HAIR, because Egyptians had wooly hair while Indians had straighter hair. The same comparison he makes with Ethiopians proper (of Libya) and then eastern Ethiopians (that of southern India)! By the way, the wavy hair of some Egyptians and Nubians is not the same as the long straighter hair of Indians.

From Herdotus' Histories: The Persian Wars

All the tribes (northern Indians) which I have mentioned live together like the brute beasts: they have also all the same tint of skin, which approaches that of the Ethiopians. Their country is a long way from Persia towards the south, nor had king Darius ever any authority over them.

So you see the distinction between Ethiopian (southern Nile Valley) and Egyptian (north Nile Valley) was the same as Eastern Ethiopian (south Indian) and Indian (Indus Valley/north Indian). Where Ethiopians were very black while those to there north not as much but still approached them in color!
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
That is not projecting it's showing that the skin tone as indicated by Manilius can be found in many places from the Near East to Central Asia and the Americas.
What is project is assuming extra categories that are not in the translation and making self conceived charts that are not in the text

You attempt to limit 'black' as per Manilius and suggest he goes beyond skin color and limits to only specific ethnicties he mentions for reasons other than skin color, a person who had a similar skin tone to an Egyptian or Maure would not have a similar skin tone to an Egyptian or Maure because they they are not from a region that he specifically mentioned.
You are attempting to racialize what he said and assume that he limited 'black' to not only dark skinned persons but dark skinned persons only of a certain ethnicity, basically Africans only American definition but since he mentioned Indians we have to throw them in and the fact that they are supposedly darkeer than Egyptians compensates for there other unspoken deficits.
A Kurd region person for example could not have the skin tone of an Egyptian or Maure for the sole reason that Manilius mentioned Indians but he didn't mention the region in particular where the people we call Kurds today live. That is why you are so narrow and robotic, dishonest actually, trying to patronize black folk with a less than objective eye.
And ironic the idea we need Greeks and Romans for definitions, that that is some kind of yardstick or approval for Africanists. And if setting up these Greco Roman authors this way other parts of Africa would not be considered black because in the quote so and son Greek or Roman didn't specifically mention said peoples as qualifying in the ethnic black list.
And is notable these authors don't use this stand alone color identity 'blacks' as Americans do. They might say someone has black skin but they don't call them 'a black'

Anybody can read the Manilius and see how people like the below Kirgiz Turk and Inuit do indeed fit into the range of who Manilius if looking at them would say that their skin tone is black and within the range he outlined, a range where the Maure (BLACK) people are at lightest end of a graded spectrum of dark skinned people.





I'm sure Tukuler will take the fifth but if he had to give an honest answer I would bet money that he would not say the above persons do not fall within the range of dark skinned people that Manilius mentions begining with Ethiopians and ending with Maure (later: Moors).
And that is beyond obvious in considering these persons and other examples

Anybody who doesn't admit to it is a believer in racial concepts.
That is why you're afrocentrics, you are trying to correct by reversing and intentional omission
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
Notice line 728

Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris 728
exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen
oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.

G.P. Goold translation

The Sun-God dries up with dust the tribes of Africans amid their desert lands; the Moors derive their name from their faces, and their identity is proclaimed by the colour of their skins.

Literal translation is similar>
________________________________________

LITERAL TRANSLATION

Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris
Sun-God sandy African dust lands
exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen
dries up the people, and the name of Mauritania
oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.
expressed has title brought itself color

_______________________________________________

Similar to the Goold it says the Sun God of the sandy African lands dries up the people and the name Mauritania expresses it's color

As we can see in AlTurki 2005 he has bolded the 4 regions mentioned below, no problem:




-but these days he has pulled a fast one:

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri: 2012


In Manilius' order black complexions from the most
dark to the least dark are
- Aethiopes
- India
- Aegyptia
- Afrorum
- Mauretania

---

he as added "Afrorum" which means African as a separate category of person. Now instead of 4 categories as per the bolded he lists 5 in this newer quote

He claims that the Roman Africa at the time only referred Tunisa.
Manilius was born in the 1st century AD
What the Romans called Africa changed in various periods:


________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________

.



^^^ As you can see changing terminology. As we know the Roman province Mauretania spelled with an 'e' after 'r' is not in the same location as modern day Mauritania spelled with an 'i'
and in the ancient period it's borders change as well as what is called 'Africa". Roman "Africa" was expanded in 46 AD.


Without getting bogged down it what was called what when the point is that in the Manilius the Mauretanians are described as Africans.
"Afrorum" is not a people separte from the Mauretanians. It's one and the same. Goold confirms this, the literal transaltion confirms this and alTurki 2005 confirms this as per the text he bolded above

_________________________________________________

Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris
Sun-God sandy African dust lands
exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen
dries up the people, and the name of Mauritania
oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.
expressed has title brought itself color
_________________________________________________


lioness productions 2013
commander C
 

---

Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
 
I honestly don't understand how he even gets attention at this point, its almost like he's trolling now.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:

quote:

---

Just because they were called black does'nt mean they were black..

---

It's all comic relief. Some laughter for a slow day. This guy is a character straight out of "Alice in Wonderland". He should stay. Just comic fodder for the troops.

---

 

---

Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
 
^ Are you calling yourself a troll?

I'll i'm doing is reversing your logic.

If "Black" = someone with dark skin only.

The "White" =



These are "White" people.

Race is just skin colour remember?
 

---

Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
 
What the f-ck matter does it make if you have some asiatic barbarian who's skin matches that of Indigenous Africans, You can Find Africans in every region of the Continent with Skin tone of the Egyptians Yet you want to spam some F-king Kurd or Arab as if they had anything to do with Egypt or any African civilization.

Like I asked you on another thread, show me a scrap of Archeological evidence that has Europeans or Asiatics involved in Km.t outside of the average Slave Raid, Concubine, Subject Tribute Nation or Immigrant. We already know where the Egyptians came from, they had nothing to do with your Indo-European Ancestors.

Why does'nt your lot spend all the Energy and time you do on the Hitites, your own Indo-Euro culture. Why do you want to steal African Culture. You Jealous..??

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

That is why you're afrocentrics, you are trying to correct by reversing and intentional omission

---

 

---

Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
 
Just call me Jari claims Septimus was "Black":



So by the same logic these are "white":





Are you at least going to be consistent? If Septimus is "Black", these are "White" people.
 

---

Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
[QB] ^ Again with the stupid strawmen and presumptuous lies. You are getting worse than Lyinass.

---

Where is the strawman?

You claim dark skinned people are "Black".

So why aren't these "white people" (?):







"white people"
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
^^^ You should lead the way and consider white and black skin color only. Lets see you post on metapedia doing that

yet you still attach them to your Caucasoid and Negroid concepts, Practice what you preach for the sake of clarity

As per your terminology you should realize some Egyptians were "Negroids". But do you have the honesty to admit it or are you just a propagandist?
 

---

Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
 
Other Quotes the Lyin-ass avoids like the plague..

quote:

---

Herodotus: "..Still the Egyptians said that they believed the Colchians to be descended from the army of Sesostris. My own conjectures were founded, first, on the fact that they are black-skinned and have woolly hair, which certainly amounts to but little, since several other nations are so too. But further and more especially, on the circumstance that the Colchians, the Egyptians, and the Ethiopians, are the only nations who have practised circumcision from the earliest times..."

---

quote:

---

"...the men of Egypt are mostly brown or black with a
skinny desiccated look."

---

quote:

---

Those who are very black are cowards as, for example, the Egyptians and Ethiopians. But the excessively white ones also are cowards, as we can see, for the example, in the women; the coloration of the courage is between the black and the white.

---

quote:

---

Why are the Ethiopians and Egyptians bandy-legged? Is it because of that the body of itself creates, because of disturbance by heat, like
loss of wood when they become dry? The condition of their hair supports his theory; for it is curlier than that of other nations..."

---

quote:

---

Lycinus (describing an Egyptian): 'this boy is not merely black; he
has thick lips and his legs are too thin...his
hair worn in a plait shows that he is not a freeman.'

Timolaus: 'but that is a sign of really distinguished birth in Egypt,
Lycinus. All freeborn children plait their
hair until they reach manhood...'

---

quote:

---

"Aegyptos conquered the country of the black-footed ones and called it
Egypt after himself

---

quote:

---

Danaos (describing the Aegyptiads): 'I can see the crew with their black limbs and white tunics.'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

That is why you're afrocentrics, you are trying to correct by reversing and intentional omission

---

 

---

Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
 
More




-Zanj, Ethiopians, the people of Fazzan, the Berbers, the
Copts, and Nubians, the people of Zaghawa, Marw, Sind and India, Qamar and Dabila, China,
and Masin... the islands in the seas between China and Africa are full of blacks, such as
Ceylon, Kalah, Amal, Zabij, and their islands, as far as India, China, Kabul, and those
shores.-Al Jahiz(Describing the black Nations funny how he makes a similar report like that of Manilius and other Romans whom the Arabs took their Climate science from)

____

‏‏‏‏‏"الله الله في أهل الذمة، أهل المدرة السوداء السحم الجعاد ، فإن لهم نسبا وصهرا "

(oh)god (oh)god (there is) within a people of protection(dhimmies), people of black towns or communities (with) dark skin and curly hair, for surely we have relations with them by blood tie and in-laws.

____________


"Fear Allah - Fear Allah concerning the black-skinned, kinky-haired People of the Black Soil (People of Kemet) who are under your protection! Verily they are your relatives."

الله الله في أهل الذمة ، أهل المدرة السوداء السحم الجعاد فإن لهم نسبا وصهرا
-
in the Seerat of ibn hisham vol.1
 

---

Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
 
I realize this could be said for the vast majority of the discussions we hold here, but I will say it anyway:




Given this, why are we still arguing over the proper definition of black skin or the Negroid race? All that should be invalid at this point.
 

---

Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
 
More

quote:

---

The black people will come out of Egypt, Kush will stretch its hands to God"

---

quote:

---

Rabbi Yuda ben Simon in a Midrashic text: Abraham says to his wife Sarah, "Now we are about to enter a place (Egypt) of ugly and black people"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
[QB] Just so we don't get it twisted, the Greek vases
with black colored characters don't show ethnic
blacks in most cases. It's just a style called
"black figure."

In the case of mythological Herakles, he was
of known African ancestry per the mythos.


http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=005212#000016

quote:

---

[i]
the Greeks, however (those I mean who gave the son of Amphitryon that name),
took the name from the Egyptians, and not the Egyptians from the Greeks, is I
think clearly proved, among other arguments, by the fact that both the parents
of Heracles, Amphitryon as well as Alcmena, were of Egyptian origin.


Herodotus
Histories 2.48

---

Unlike the hydrias in an earlier post, there are examples which do depict ethnic blacks.



________ AMASIS ____________________________ KIRKE DRUGGING ODYSSEUS

---

Eturuscans depiction of Egyptians



Greek
Herakles V. Egyptians


Large Image

http://www.cirp.org/library/history/hodges2/hodges29.jpg





Byzantine


 

---

Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
 
More


^^^^
Check mate, Case Closed

More Images of King Busiris and Nile Valley Africans..



Kantharos (cup) of Herakles and African man (possibly Egyptian King Busiris); Greek, Attic; circa 470 BCE; terracotta


The Pharaoh as portrayed in Phoenician art...

From Jordan




Like I said this Manilus subject has been debunked along time ago, but stupid is as stupid does. Yet the Lyin ass Still trying after all these years, getting her arse handed to her time and time again...

Now..

shut this stupid ass thread down...let the lyin'ass lick her wounded carcass...



Then his majesty prevailed against them at the head of his army, and when they saw his majesty prevailing against them they fled headlong to Megiddo in fear, abandoning their horses and their chariots of gold and silver. The people hauled them up, pulling them by their clothing
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:

quote:

---

"...the men of Egypt are mostly brown or black with a
skinny desiccated look."

---

(Ammianus Marcellinus, Book XXII para 16)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:

quote:

---

"...the men of Egypt are mostly brown or black with a
skinny desiccated look."

---

(Ammianus Marcellinus, Book XXII para 16)

---

same passage:

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Ammian/22*.html

chapter 16
Of the five provinces of Egypt and their famous cities.
at right the page # 297-309


" Now the men of Egypt are, as a rule, somewhat swarthy and dark of complexion, and rather gloomy-looking,268 slender and hardy, excitable in all their movements, quarrelsome, and most persistent duns. "

line 23, p 309

---

Actually the correct translation is just gloomy, I posted this 3 years back. There is no mention of skin colour in the original. The egyptians are described as gloomy which has nothing to do with their skin hue.

The quote from Lucian is also invalid, he's describing a slave.
 

---

Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
 
beating a dead horse at this point...

"In Manilius' order complexions from the most
dark to the least dark are
- Aethiopes
- India
- Aegyptia
- Afrorum
- Mauretania"

So why should I believe there was some drastic change??

[/qb][/QUOTE]east dark are
(a)- Aethiopes
(b)- India
(c)- Aegyptia
(d)- Afrorum
(d)- Mauretania"


A


B


C


D(Saharan Type)




D(Coastal Type)/(mixture with European Migrants)




 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truthcentric:
I realize this could be said for the vast majority of the discussions we hold here, but I will say it anyway:




Given this, why are we still arguing over the proper definition of black skin or the Negroid race? All that should be invalid at this point.

---

^^^The big problem with this is that modern Egyptians are lumped as "Levantines"
Further because the study was about Egyptians, Egypt should have broken down into Copt, Muslim, Siwa etc.
It's not very useful. One wonders if it was a marketing plan to AAs. -although there is a strong African component

__________________________________________________________



^^^Greek black figure pottery.
Do we assume this represents skin color of the Greeks?
The terms "red figure" and "black figure" pottery, look it up



^^^the identities of these are specualted, Experts are not sure about who they are -need better back up follow through, emotion showing. African man at left obviously

.



The madness of Heracles, side A of the so-called “Madrid Krater”. Paestan
red-figure
calyx-krater,
ca. 340 BC.
From Salerno, Campania.
 

---

Posted by mena7 (Member # 20555) on :
 
Jari great pictures of Egyptian and Greeks.A picture is worth a thousand words.The beautiful vase showing brown Greek Herakles beating the black and brown Egyptian is one of the greatest proof that the Egyptian were black people.The cup showing the head of black Egyptian King Busiris and metis Heracles is another proof of black Egypt.Even Byzantine Icon show the Egyptian as blue meaning the blue aka black blood of the Egyptian.

The Bible describe the Egyptian, Kushite, Canaanite and Puntite as black people aka son of Ham/Kam.

Arab writers Mas Udi and Al Jahiz described the Egyptian as black in their books.
 

---

Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
Lets see you post on metapedia doing that

---

Charlie

Click first link.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
one of our premier picture spammers in on the loose trying to get off the subject of Manilius
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 


 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faheemdunkers:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
Lets see you post on metapedia doing that

---

Charlie

Click first link.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass,:

That is not projecting it's showing that the skin tone as indicated by Manilius can be found in many places from the Near East to Central Asia and the Americas.
What is project is assuming extra categories that are not in the translation and making self conceived charts that are not in the text.

---

quote:

---

You attempt to limit 'black' as per Manilius and suggest he goes beyond skin color and limits to only specific ethnicities he mentions for reasons other than skin color, a person who had a similar skin tone to an Egyptian or Maure would not have a similar skin tone to an Egyptian or Maure because they they are not from a region that he specifically mentioned.
You are attempting to racialize what he said and assume that he limited 'black' to not only dark skinned persons but dark skinned persons only of a certain ethnicity, basically Africans only American definition but since he mentioned Indians we have to throw them in and the fact that they are supposedly darkeer than Egyptians compensates for there other unspoken deficits.
A Kurd region person for example could not have the skin tone of an Egyptian or Maure for the sole reason that Manilius mentioned Indians but he didn't mention the region in particular where the people we call Kurds today live. That is why you are so narrow and robotic, dishonest actually, trying to patronize black folk with a less than objective eye.
And ironic the idea we need Greeks and Romans for definitions, that that is some kind of yardstick or approval for Africanists. And if setting up these Greco Roman authors this way other parts of Africa would not be considered black because in the quote so and son Greek or Roman didn't specifically mention said peoples as qualifying in the ethnic black list.
And is notable these authors don't use this stand alone color identity 'blacks' as Americans do. They might say someone has black skin but they don't call them 'a black'

---

quote:

---

Anybody can read the Manilius and see how people like the below Kirgiz Turk and Inuit do indeed fit into the range of who Manilius if looking at them would say that their skin tone is black and within the range he outlined, a range where the Maure (BLACK) people are at lightest end of a graded spectrum of dark skinned people.





I'm sure Tukuler will take the fifth but if he had to give an honest answer I would bet money that he would not say the above persons do not fall within the range of dark skinned people that Manilius mentions begining with Ethiopians and ending with Maure (later: Moors).
And that is beyond obvious in considering these persons and other examples

Anybody who doesn't admit to it is a believer in racial concepts.
That is why you're afrocentrics, you are trying to correct by reversing and intentional omission

---

Again NO. You are lying either consciously or unconsciously which includes yourself as well! These people above are dark yes but you CANNOT say they represent the complexions he speaks of let alone the Egyptians, you dumbf*ck! LOL

Really their complexions are no different from many tanned Mediterraneans yet these same Mediterraneans called the Maure and Egyptians who lived to the south as 'black'!

tanned Italians




tanned Greeks


As Takruri says, you are projecting your own anti-black insecurities onto Manilius when he like his fellow Greco-Romans had a world view based on the gentes (races) di natios (of nations) septentrionalis (northern) i.e. north of the Mediterranean vs. gentes (races) di natios (of nations) meridianus (southern). The Mediterranean divides them but they use the myth of Phaeton nearly crashing the sun in the south and permanently burning the skins of the peoples there as a reason for black skin!

Northern Asians with complexions darker than white or yellow don't count!
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:

beating a dead horse at this point...

"In Manilius' order complexions from the most
dark to the least dark are
- Aethiopes
- India
- Aegyptia
- Afrorum
- Mauretania"

So why should I believe there was some drastic change??

---

You are correct. But I disagree with a few things in your picture spam. Particularly, your last category where you include modern mixed-types as representative of Maure. Remember, the Maure at least as originally described by Manilius and his Roman peers were not of the 'tawny' or 'yellowish' kind described often in later times but the Maure were described as adusti (dusky) and nigri (black)

Here is my version which is likely more accurate.

1. Aethiope


2. Indian (North Indian--Balochistan)


3. Egyptian (indigenous non-Arab Giza, Lower Egyptian man) [medium hue]


Afer (Libyans)


Maure (Tunisians)


^ Before lyinass or similar complain about the lighting, since they are in shade, take note of the areas of the skin where the sun light hits (the same is true with all the others). This should provide us with somewhat of an idea of the differences of complexions and how they grade from dark to light.


Lyinass 'produced' strawsh|t of dark north Asians like this Mongolian NOT included in Manilius list! LOL


 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

^ Before lioness or similar complain about the lighting, since they are in shade, take note of the areas of the skin where the sun light hits (the same is true with all the others). This should provide us with somewhat of an idea of the differences of complexions and how they grade from dark to light.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
beating a dead horse at this point...

"In Manilius' order complexions from the most
dark to the least dark are
- Aethiopes
- India
- Aegyptia
- Afrorum
- Mauretania"

So why should I believe there was some drastic change??

---

east dark are
(a)- Aethiopes
(b)- India
(c)- Aegyptia
(d)- Afrorum
(d)- Mauretania"


A


B


C


D(Saharan Type)




D(Coastal Type)/(mixture with European Migrants)



[/QB][/QUOTE]
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass b|tch:

Guy is a fvcking idiot of all the thousands of pictures available he deliberately picks people in shade.

then he even says " Before lioness or similar complain about the lighting"

^^^^ in other words>" I'm hustling you with lighting and because I say I'm hustling you with lighting, therefore I'm not hustling you with lighting"

---

quote:

---

Djeshootme's special instructions necessary:>" take note of the areas of the skin where the sun light hits "......

idiotic

special instructions to Djeshootie:

find pics of people not in shade, there are thousands on the internet, FAIL

---

quote:

---

no need, Jari had it right:

---

Yea, Jari had it right except for his Maure example which do NOT match the Roman descriptions. High-yellow 'mulatto' types do not match the adusti or nigri descriptions by Manilius and other Romans.

LOL @ "deliberately choosing" pictures of them in poor lighting. As if the "shade" gives them black appearance!

You are so pathetic it is both hilarious at it sad.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
I got your lyinass, trick. And don't think I'm ever letting go!

Your dumbass complains about "lighting", well wait until I find photos with better lighting. What will you say then, you whining sore whore loser!
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
I got your lyinass, trick. And don't think I'm ever letting go!

Your dumbass complains about "lighting", well wait until I find photos with better lighting. What will you say then, you whining sore whore loser!

---

and of course Ethiopians are all pitch Dinka black
and the darkest Indians you an find
-also make sure all the dark skinned people have afro type hair to keep everyone happy (excspt Indian, can't change that)


let me know when you get your shade-y issues together
also keep in mind the Mauretanians are Africans ( in latin "Afrorum" )
There are 4 Manilius categories of dark, not 5
get rid of the interpreter


LITERAL TRANSLATION

Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris
Sun-God sandy African dust lands
exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen
dries up the people, and the name of Mauritania
oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.
expressed has title brought itself color

_______________________________________________

Similar to the Goold it says the Sun God of the sandy African lands dries up the people and the name Mauritania expresses it's color
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 




^^^ in a thread he actually called this guy mixed


Dejhutie our resident expert on black says the above Nigerian men are mixed. They don't fit into his True Blackest theory.
He thinks the yellowish skin tone is not entirely indigenous.
Don't take my word for it just observe what he says.

This is the problem with antiquated skin color oriented identities, "black' "white" as opposed to genetics and to some extent biomorphics.

If you go by skin color you find people all over the world, some Central Asians and Native Americans can have the same level of darkness as some pure Africans and Africans even darker than the above.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass dummy:

and of course Ethiopians are all pitch Dinka black
and the darkest Indians you can find
-also make sure all the dark skinned people have afro type hair to keep everyone happy (excspt Indian, can't change that)

---

quote:

---

let me know when you get your shade-y issues together
also keep in mind the Mauretanians are Africans ( in latin "Afrorum" )
There are 4 Manilius categories of dark, not 5
get rid of the interpreter

---

LOL Unlike you have no issues at all! Your complaints about "shade" are idiotic! Anybody with eyes can see these people are still BLACK even with better lighting. Your excuses are the dumbest I've ever heard in the internet! hahahaha LOL As for the Aforum, again your ignorant ass still doesn't know (despite Takruri and I telling you) that they are a particular ethnic group of Africans and NOT Africans in general! The Aforum were a people who lived in the Maghreb specifically western Libya up to Tunisia. And Manilius did NOT say there were any categories of 'dark'. He just lists dark [black] peoples from darkest to lightest. Even the lightest-- the Maure were called nigri by the Romans and we all know what nigri means!

quote:

---

LITERAL TRANSLATION

Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris
Sun-God sandy African dust lands
exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen
dries up the people, and the name of Mauritania
oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.
expressed has title brought itself color

_______________________________________________

Similar to the Gold it says the Sun God of the sandy African lands dries up the people and the name Mauritania expresses it's color

---

LOL No where does is say the people are the same color as the sand! And the accurate translation is the title of the people reflects their color. What is the title? Maure We already went over what maure means-- BLACK. GTFOH
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass sh*t:





Dejhutie our resident expert on black says the above Nigerian men are mixed. They don't fit into his True Blackest theory.
He thinks the yellowish skin tone is not entirely indigenous.
Don't take my word for it just observe what he says.

This is the problem with antiquated skin color oriented identities, "black' "white" as opposed to genetics and to some extent biomorphics.

If you go by skin color you find people all over the world, some Central Asians and Native Americans can have the same level of darkness as some pure Africans and Africans even darker than the above.

---

More strawsh|t. I never said the above Nigerian men were mixed, you lying dummy! LOL I said the Nigerian actress with fair-skin likely was. The men in the above photos by the way are NOT even 'yellow' in complexion. The first man in the picture is actually darker but his photo flooded with light! -- And yes lighting works both ways--

Nigerian actor Chidi Mokeme









http://www.nigeriamovienetwork.com/uploads/articles/9cb4df9a.jpg

Will the 'real' Chidi Mokeme be revealed?! LMAOH

I got this lyinass b|tch!
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
duplicate
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^^ I answered your strawsh|t nonsense already.

Note you are going off tangent about some random cherry-picked light-skinned Nigerian men, because I already busted your lyinass.

Your obviously losing it.

Cracking from the pressure.


 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:


Nigerian actor Chidi Mokeme









http://www.nigeriamovienetwork.com/uploads/articles/9cb4df9a.jpg

Will the 'real' Chidi Mokeme be revealed?! LMAOH

I got this lyinass b|tch! [/QB]

---

'

what this fool doesn't understand is that they all are real Chidi Mokeme Medium light toned Africans vary significantly as per how much outdoor exposure they get at a given time.



(^^WARNING skin tone not black according to Djeshootme)

.




^^^hence both are honest real photos of Wole Solinka taken at different times when his skin looked different in actuality
It's called tanning and African people are also cappable of it
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Nah, lying b|tch. What I proved is that lighting works both ways. A person can look much lighter than he/she really is when flooded with light the same way a person can look darker if in the shade.

You're just cracking from desperation.



^^

 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 


this is what the Tut bust looks like when it's not in a dark museum gallery
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
LITERAL TRANSLATION

Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris
Sun-God sandy African dust lands
exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen
dries up the people, and the name of Mauritania
oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.
expressed has title brought itself color

_______________________________________________

Similar to the Goold translation it says the Sun God of the sandy African lands dries up the people and the name Mauritania expresses it's color

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:LOL No where does is say the people are the same color as the sand! And the accurate translation is the title of the people reflects their color. What is the title? Maure We already went over what maure means-- BLACK. GTFOH

---

the quote and two pages surrounding it doesn't have the word black or white in it. Waht does that tell you? Could it be your are trying to insert modern concepts?
Deal with what Manilus said not additional interpretation. much context has been provided in the intital post page 1
latin word for black "niger"
So why isin't it called Nigertania?
the definition of maure is "inhabitant of Noth Africa"
Mauretanina.
Mauretanina is land of the blacks? Then Numidia and Egypt are not Maure blacks?

Supposing the word means black as opposed to dark
thus this definition of black by your Roman race expert would be a discernable shade lighter than this Tut bust photgraphed with dramatic lighting in a dark gallery


 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass:



this is what the Tut bust looks like when it's not in a dark museum gallery

---

Yeah, still with chocolate brown complexion which Manilius said was 'medium' in tone to other dark/black peoples.

This photo of the bust was taken in adequate lighting and NOT in some dim museum lighting.


 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass,:

the quote and two pages surrounding it doesn't have the word black or white in it. What does that tell you? Could it be your are trying to insert modern concepts?
Deal with what Manilus said not additional interpretation. much context has been provided in the intital post page 1
latin word for black "niger"
So why isin't it called Nigertania?
the definition of maure is "inhabitant of Noth Africa"
Mauretanina.
Mauretanina is land of the blacks? Then Numidia and Egypt are not Maure blacks?

Supposing the word means black as opposed to dark
thus this definition of black by your Roman race expert would be a discernible shade lighter than this Tut bust photographed with dramatic lighting in a dark gallery

---

Maure means black in GREEK, dummy! How many times more must we tell you that?! Also, the Romans did label a people in Libya "Nigritai" who were the Garamantes or related to them! And 'dark' and 'black' were used interchangeably, stupid twit!!

Another image of Tut.


 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

From Tukuler:

However, Goold deliberately hid the meaning of Mauros
in his footnote. Even today the word means black in Greek.


μαύρος

noun
μαύρος => black, raven, Negro, nigger
αράπης => nigger, black, Arab, Negro
Νέγρος => Negro, nigger, black

adjective
μαύρος => black, colored, sable, pitchy, coloured
σκοτεινός => dark, obscure, dingy, murky, shady, black
μαυρισμένος => black
άσχημος => ugly, nasty, unsightly, seamy, homely, black
άγριος => wild, feral, fierce, savage, ferocious, black
δυσοίωνος => sinister, ominous, inauspicious, portentous, pessimistic, black

verb
μουτζουρώνω => black, smudge, smut
αμαυρώνω => darken, tarnish, stain, black
δυσφημώ =>disparage, discredit, vilify, defame, denigrate, black

---

From Snowden:
The Mauri, another northwest African people whose color received frequent notice, were at times described as 'nigri' (black) and 'adusti' (scorched).
 

---

Posted by Faheemdunkers (Member # 20844) on :
 
Djehuti will you explain what your definition of "Black" is.

If it is someone with dark skin, then:

(a) Why not call them dark?
(b) Are the following by the same criteria "white"? -



Answer yes or no.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ YES. Labels such as 'black' and 'white' are descriptive of COLOR and are no more 'racial' than say other features like narrow noses vs. wide noses. This is why very dark South Asians (Indians) are still called 'black' not only by Westerners but by fellow Indians hence the label 'kalu'. Even in the Philippines we call fair-skinned people especially northeast Asians 'puti' which means white even though they are not 'caucasian'. Skin color is independent of other features and definitely independent of ancestry. A pale person whether European or northeast Asian could still be labeled 'white' the same way a dark person could still be called 'black' regardless if the person is African or aboriginal Southeast Asian.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
[QB] ^ YES. Labels such as 'black' and 'white' are descriptive of COLOR and are no more 'racial' than say other features like narrow noses vs. wide noses. This is why very dark South Asians (Indians) are still called 'black'

---

and you can detect the bullshyt
Asians are only black if they are very dark.

In other words this guy is black


but this guy is not black


because if you're Asian


you are required to be very dark to be black

-Dejootie's world

There's a difference between what people claim to believe and how they actually act
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass,:

and you can detect the bullshyt
Asians are only black if they are very dark.

In other words this guy is black


but this guy is not black

---

quote:

---

because if you're Asian


you are required to be very dark to be black

-Dejootie's world

There's a difference between what people claim to believe and how they actually act

---

^ There sure IS a difference and in your case it's called hypocrisy!

You have southern Euros like Romans such as Manilius who themselves can be very dark from exposure to the sun.



Yet they don't call themselves 'black'. They reserve that label for people who live to the south of them in Africa, including the North African coasts.

This north Indian man is quite dark also...



..though to many Indians including himself he is not dark enough to be called 'black'..

like these north Indians.



But again, it is all relative. Even among blacks there are variations in shade and complexion where color or shade terms are used to discern such differences. But then again the same is true for Europeans. Have you heard of the 'Black Irish'?? Interestingly the phrase is a figure of speech for Irish who have dark features. Funny how you have no problem with that term.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^^^ (lyinass)

 

---

Posted by Son of Ra (Member # 20401) on :
 
^^Lol...
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 


We can see a prime example of the hypocritical double standard moving of the goal posts for those Djehootie deems black.
Above a perfectly legit picture of great Nigerian writer Wole Soyinka.
Djehootie can't deal with that picture.
To him Wole Soyinka is not black in the above picture.
Djehootie actually has to resort to using a different picture of Wole Soyinka in which he appears more tanned:

pathetic

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:




[

---

enough games, enough switcheroo tricks

Below a picture of Nigerian writer Wole Soyinka, you just have to deal with it



Wole Soyinka



Kirgiz Turk

Nigerian
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faheem's Donkey:


'white people':










Remember all the people above are 'white' according to Afrocentric logic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
[quote]You are correct there is no escaping it.
Below examples of 'darks' as you call them or 'blacks'
people of 'medium tone' as Manilius described the Egyptians[quote]

Manilius was Roman and lived in the Roman era. Did he ever travel to Egypt?

---

When the senate called a meeting to consider the matter, Scipio Nasica advised receiving the Carthaginian embassy and making a truce with them, but Marcus Cato declared that no truce ought to be made nor the declaration of war rescinded. Nevertheless, the senators listened to the entreaties of the envoys, promised to grant them a truce, and demanded hostages for the fulfilment of the conditions. These hostages were sent to Sicily, and Lucius Marcius and Marcus Manilius went there, took charge of them, and sent them on to Rome, while they themselves made haste to reach Africa. After encamping they summoned the magistrates of Carthage to appear before them.

Casssius Dio Book XXI

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

also keep in mind the Mauretanians are Africans ( in latin "Afrorum" )
There are 4 Manilius categories of dark, not 5
get rid of the interpreter


LITERAL TRANSLATION

Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris
Sun-God sandy African dust lands
exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen
dries up the people, and the name of Mauritania
oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.
expressed has title brought itself color

_______________________________________________

Similar to the Goold it says the Sun God of the sandy African lands dries up the people and the name Mauritania expresses it's color

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
As for the Af[r]orum, again your ignorant ass still doesn't know (despite Takruri and I telling you) that they are a particular ethnic group of Africans and NOT Africans in general! The Af[r]orum were a people who lived in the Maghreb specifically western Libya up to Tunisia. And Manilius did NOT say there were any categories of 'dark'. He just lists dark [black] peoples from darkest to lightest. Even the lightest-- the Maure were called nigri by the Romans and we all know what nigri means!

quote:

---

LITERAL TRANSLATION

Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris
Sun-God sandy African dust lands
exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen
dries up the people, and the name of Mauritania
oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.
expressed has title brought itself color

_______________________________________________

Similar to the Gold it says the Sun God of the sandy African lands dries up the people and the name Mauritania expresses it's color

---

LOL No where does is say the people are the same color as the sand! And the accurate translation is the title of the people reflects their color. What is the title? Maure We already went over what maure means-- BLACK. GTFOH

---

INTERLINEAR TRANSLATION



Those really wanting to know will ask
to clarify or expand on what they're
unsure. Lyin'Ass snakes will hiss
venom as they intentionally distort
with their cockmaimee projections.

As stated in the old thread Manilius
doesn't always use a peculiar colour
description when delineating nations
despite its feature primacy in listed
human race characteristics or variety.

Such is the case with Hispania, Romanis,
Syrium, and Afrorum, and so reflected
inverse equator nearness order in this
Manilius 4.715-30 keyword skeletal layout:

quote:

---

(proprioque colore formantur gentes)


- Germania ____ flava
- Gallia _______ rubore
- Hispania
- Romanis
- Graecia _____ coloratas subtilis

- Syriam


- Mauretania
- Afrorum
- Aegyptia ____ infuscat
- India _______ tostos
- Aethiopes ___ tenebrisque

---

Colore is in the Mauretania description
but no one particular colour. The direct
explication is mauros i.e., black person
as in "nigger."


Here is a family portrait of a
woman of the Syrium (torti per tempora crines)
and a man of the Afrorum
and their offspring who according to Claudian
is so hideous as to frighten its own cradle.

 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
[quote]You are correct there is no escaping it.
Below examples of 'darks' as you call them or 'blacks'
people of 'medium tone' as Manilius described the Egyptians[quote]

Manilius was Roman and lived in the Roman era. Did he ever travel to Egypt?

---

When the senate called a meeting to consider the matter, Scipio Nasica advised receiving the Carthaginian embassy and making a truce with them, but Marcus Cato declared that no truce ought to be made nor the declaration of war rescinded. Nevertheless, the senators listened to the entreaties of the envoys, promised to grant them a truce, and demanded hostages for the fulfilment of the conditions. These hostages were sent to Sicily, and Lucius Marcius and Marcus Manilius went there, took charge of them, and sent them on to Rome, while they themselves made haste to reach Africa. After encamping they summoned the magistrates of Carthage to appear before them.

Casssius Dio Book XXI

---

Oh my gosh, who tossed the timeline
out the window? Internal evidence
noted by Goold places our Manilius
in an Augustan/Tiberian time cusp.

This other Manilius guy is some two
centuries earlier when Carthage still
existed and was a challenge to Rome.

Ya see what GOOGLE scholarship does?
It causes (ouch) LyinAssFuckuptions.
You just can't scissors and paste
your way to valid knowledge. You
have to (l)earn it toiling in study.

---

one point for alTurki here
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
For some reason couldn't edit my last post so here


Here is a family portrait of a woman of the
Syrium (torti per tempora crines)and a man of the Afrorum with their offspring who according
to Claudian is so hideous as to frighten its own cradle.


Claudian from his The War Against Gildo vv175


When tired of each noblest matron Gildo hands her over to the Moors.
Married in Carthage city these Sidonian mothers needs must mate with
barbarians. He thrusts upon me an Ethiopian as a son-in‑law, a Berber
as a husband. The hideous half-breed child affrights its cradle.

Mauris clarissima quaeque
fastidita datur. media Carthagine ductae
barbara Sidoniae subeunt conubia matres;
Aethiopem nobis generum, Nasamona maritum
ingerit; exterret cunabula discolor infans.


alTakruri's note:
Per Claudian when matched with a "white Syrian" both
Aethiops and Nasamonians plant mulato bearing seed.

See http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=006432#000049
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:




- Mauretania
- Afrorum
- Aegyptia
- India
- Aethiopes

---

Goold lists 4 peoples in this section,
Ethiopians, Egyptians, Indians, and Moors
and in 2005 you had the same 4 in bolded type on NVF

- Mauretania
- Aegyptia
- India
- Aethiopes

But now have your own alternate translation adding "Afrorum"
here where you have inserted the word "while" and you have re-squenced your own "interlinear translation". Also your line breaks don't correspond to my source. I'm not sure they are correct.

"while" latin : dum, dulcitudo dulcitudinis, cum, donec

_________________^^^ not in text

"et"

^^^ is in text meaning "and" or "both"



let's look at again using the literal order and as we know you have words can have multiple meanings. So your traslations of particular words are your personal selections of options available.
I will use some of your word meaning selections for a literla translation basically very close to the one I had shown earlier


Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris
Apollo sandy African dusts lands

exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen
dries nations Mauretania name

oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.
mouth he wears label there they bear color (hue, tint)


The professonal world reknowned Yale scholar G.P Goold says the above represents one people, Mauretanians and "Afrorum" is referring to them. Your alternative theory is that Manilius is speaking of two peoples. You say Afrorum is strictly Tunisians and they, as per the order, are darker than the Mauretanians (later "Moors" )

The passage may seem a little ambiguous. I would like to hear a classics professor in latin comment on your alternative to Goold added category theory.

The text can be left in actual sequence using your word meanaings

Sol sandy African dust lands
dries nations Mauretania name
mouth he wears label there they bear color (hue, tint)

^^^^ folks look at this. This is alturk's basically. From this he assumes two separate nations

1) "Africans" (Tunisians =Roman 'Africa")
2) Mauretanians

I had already demonstrated that the actual terrritory of these Roman Province names changes in different periods. Also this is a poem and not clinical historical prose

we can take this


Sol sandy African dust lands
dries nations Mauretania name
mouth he wears label there they bear color (hue, tint)

^^^ and and arrive at this:

(note: "Sol" = Son God, ancient Rome)

Sol dusts the African sands
and dries nations, Mauretania, a name,
mouths it's label by color

NOTE where the word African appears in the text (Afrorum) it is not followed by people (or nations) as alTurki has it in his Turkized version

harenosis Afrorum pulvere
sandy Africans dusts

the word populos (people or nations) is not next to Afrorum it's not even on the same line, but the next:

exsiccat populos, et Mauretania
dries nations Mauretania name

^^^^^ the nations (people) are dried by the Sun God
alTurki has cut and pasted Afrorum and pasted it to "populos" and translated it as African people
therfore giving the illusion of 'Afican nation' as a thing unto itself as meaning Tunisia.
But that is not how it appears in the text. Afrorum is separated by three whole words from "populos".


lioness productions
everyday like a vitamin
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^^^

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass lunatic:



We can see a prime example of the hypocritical double standard moving of the goal posts for those Djehootie deems black.
Above a perfectly legit picture of great Nigerian writer Wole Soyinka.
Djehootie can't deal with that picture.
To him Wole Soyinka is not black in the above picture.
Djehootie actually has to resort to using a different picture of Wole Soyinka in which he appears more tanned.

pathetic

---

Yeah, you're right. I'm lying. Wole Soyinka and his Nigerian brethren all have chocolate dark complexions due to tans. Their real complexions are really not that dark. I promise!



ROTFLMAOH

 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
duplicate
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^^^


Anyway, I believe there is no point in arguing with something so stupid as what is and what is not 'black'. Nigerians like Wole Soynika are obviously black. Manilius like his fellow Romans and Greeks held the world view that the native 'gentes' (races) of people to the south i.e the Mediterranean were black peoples. The mythological basis being Phaeton who nearly crashed the sun in the southern lands scorching the lands into deserts i.e. the Saharan, Arabian, and Thar deserts of Africa, Arabia, and India respectively. This same mythology says the natives of these lands were burnt black.

Manilius lists the people from darkest to lightest starting with the Aethiopes (Sudanese) as the blackest to the Maure of Tunisia as the least black but STILL black. As I cited from Snowden, even the least dark Maure were called 'adusti' and 'nigri' which means scorched and black respectively.

My only qualm now is with the word 'Afrorum'. What lyinass does not realize is that this is another gente or ethnicity and NOT the word for Africa which is actually derived from the ethnicity. Where is Dana when you need her? I believe Dana has made references to the Afrorum or Afer tribes that inhabited the Maghreb and were also described as 'nigri' just as other Africans.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
wiki:

Afri (singular Afer) was a Latin name for the Carthaginians It was received by the Romans from the Carthaginians, as a native term for their country Afer was at first used as an adjective, meaning "of Carthage", "of Africa". As a substantive, it denoted a native of Africa, i. e., a Carthaginian.

The ultimate etymology of the Punic term for the country is uncertain. It is possible that it is derived from a Punic term for an indigenous population of the area surrounding Carthage.[citation needed] See Terence#Biography for discussion. The name may be connected with Phoenician `afar, dust[1] (also found in other Semitic languages), or with Berber ifri, cave (see Tataouine). The classical historian Flavius Josephus asserted that the region had been invaded by descendants of Abraham's grandson Epher, who gave it their name.

During the Roman Empire period, Afer came to be a cognomen for people from the Africa Province.

This ethnonym is the source of the term Africa. The Romans referred to the region as Africa terra (land of the Afri), based on the stem Afr- with the adjective suffix -ic- (giving Africus, Africa, Africum in the nominative singular of the three Latin genders). Following the defeat of Carthage in the Third Punic War, Rome set up the province of Africa.

The Roman Diocese of Africa was conquered by the Vandals in the 5th century, and re-conquered by the empire as the Praetorian prefecture of Africa in AD 534. The Latin name Africa was received in Arabic after the Islamic conquest, as Ifriqiya.[2]

The name is still extant today as Ifira and Ifri-n-Dellal in Greater Kabylie (Algeria). A Berber tribe was called Banu Ifran in the Middle Ages, and Ifurace was the name of a Tripolitan people in the 6th century. Troglodytism was frequent in northern Africa and still occurs today in southern Tunisia. Herodotus wrote that the Garamantes, a North African people, used to live in caves. The Greeks also called an African people who lived in caves Troglodytae.
The Roman province of Africa (named for a people who lived there) was established after the Romans defeated Carthage in the Third Punic War. It roughly comprised the territory of present-day northern Tunisia, and the small Mediterranean Sea coast of modern-day western Libya along the Syrtis Minor. The Arabs later named roughly the same region as the original province Ifriqiya, a rendering of Africa.

The African provinces were amongst the wealthiest regions in the Empire (rivaled only by Egypt, Syria and Italy itself) and as a consequence people from all over the Empire migrated into the Roman Africa Province, most importantly veterans in early retirement who settled in Africa on farming plots promised for their military service. Historian Theodore Mommsen estimated that under Hadrian nearly 1/3 of the eastern Numidia population (roughly modern Tunisia) was descended from Roman veterans. Even so, the Roman military presence of North Africa was relatively small, consisting of about 28,000 troops and auxiliaries in Numidia and the two Mauretanian provinces. Starting in the 2nd century AD, these garrisons were manned mostly by local inhabitants. A sizable Latin speaking population developed that was multinational in background, sharing the north African region with those speaking Punic and Berber languages.Imperial security forces began to be drawn from the local population, including the Berbers.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Yawn

The latest Lyin'Ass Fuckuption behind Afrorum is
not worth a reply (singular vs plural and semi-
colon separating Afrorum-Africans and Mauretania-
a non-desert nation in Goold's translation which
leaves et untranslated not to mention poetry often
neglects strict rules of grammar and so on).

Anybody need clarification of what I last posted
or would like me to expand on what I've written?

By the way I use the Perseus Digital Library tools,
the university standard in dictionaries and gazeteers
for classical Greek and Latin like

Charlton T. Lewis.
An Elementary Latin Dictionary.

Charlton T. Lewis, Charles Short.
A Latin Dictionary.

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott
1) A Greek-English Lexicon.
2) An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon.


This is my latest take of Manilius on the blacks/
darks/southerners/euator-tropics-subtropics peoples.


Line1 = original Latin.
Line2 = My interlinear word for word of the Latin.

Line3 = My translation in non-poetical grammar.


As most know this is the standard transposition
in books supplying interlinear translation like
Budge's Egyptian language books for instance.



I invite any and all who seriously want to collaberate on a translation.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
one point for alTurki here

---

Points eh? Admitting to just playing a game
distracting others after authentic knowledge.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^^ I'd rather take YOUR translation via the Perseus Digital Library used by scholars any day than some wiki-translated gobbledy-gook and then distorted further by lyinass agenda.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^^ I'd rather take YOUR translation via the Perseus Digital Library used by scholars any day than some wiki-translated gobbledy-gook and then distorted further by lyinass agenda.

---

Djehutie,you thick dimwit I put up the Goold which is the world standard for English translation of the text. Look at post 1
please enough with the idiotic cheerleading.
Alturki is not using the standard English translation by Goold. Try to think for yourself instead of dick riding big Al.
He is simply using dictionary tools and then choosing one word from several options given for a word's meaning and then rearranging as to what he thinks it mean grammatcially.


In typical fashion AlTurki complicates things by using three different words for the Sun God, Phoebus, Apollo and Sol.
He often looks for the most obscure version of what is being talked about. He is hoping you won't recognize it give up your own look at what is being talked about and just accept his pompous ivory-toweresque word for it

Let me simplify matters.

This is AlTack's translation exactly as he stated:

"Sol dries the African people's dusty desert lands
while Mauretania's own mouth has labeled it's appellation by the color they bear"

^^^^ He is proposing an alternative meaning to the standard English translation and suggesting this means two peoples are being talked about rather than just Mauretanians.
Notice how he uses the word "appellation" instead of "name" for the latin word "nomen" which is cleary more similar to "name"
No big deal it means the same thing yet he will always try to enhance the pretentiousness.

The trick he has pulled is to take the latin word "et" meaning "and" and replace it the "while"

So here is a correct version:

"Sol dries the African people's dusty desert lands
and Mauretania's own mouth has labeled it's name by color "

this is the alTurkerized version


"Sol dries the African people's dusty desert lands
while Mauretania's own mouth has labeled it's appellation by the color they bear"


While pretentious-izing "name" into one of his favortios "appellation" is no problem he has inserted this word "while" to imply that at the beginning of the thought Manilius was talking about "Africans" while on the other hand there are Mauretanians.

Look at the latin "et" = and or both

and that is one of the most elementary words

I propose that the standard English translation is correct that only Mauretanians are being discussed here.
And what he is proposing as two categories are at the same latitude anyway, Roman provinces
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Aw, don't be a jealous hater you can learn from me too.

For the love of heaven consult contemporaneous geographers will ya.


Dionysius c120BCE above and Ptolemy c150CE below are the most detailed.
Each has Æthiopes/Æthiopia and Ægyptus/Ægyptum in the east and at far
northwest Maurusii/Mauretania. At Carthago, the original home of the
Aourigha/Afri/Afer and in the desert to its south Gætuli/Melanogætuli
Nigretes/Nigritæ Pharusii/Pharausi. They are the major Afrorum/Africans
of the dry dusty sandy lands of Africa. Mauretania is not desert.

Please zoom maps as necessary. Ptolemy explicitly writes at Book4 chapter3
"The west side of Africa is terminated by Mauretania Caesariensis ..."

Here, have a peek at another ancient geographer based map.


Unlike Mauretania Afrorum, Phoebus Apollo is one and the same two part name.

BTW he's Phaeton's daddy and that's his chariot and team of horses.

Sol is the obvious contemporary choice for English speakers. It's
the choice of scientists as the nickname for the sun, Ol' Sol
as most were taught and learned in elementary school.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Affirmative. 'Afrorum' and 'Mauretania' are two different regions and thus inhabited by two different ethnikoi/gentes/races. If 'Afrorum' was the general term for all of Africa then why are Egyptians and Aethiopians excluded as well even though they share the same continent?

By the way, Phoebus (Greek: Phoibos) means 'bright one' and was used as an epithet for several deities having such a quality especially the sun. Apollo was originally not a sun god-- the actual sun deity being called 'Helios' in Greek and 'Sol' in Latin/Roman. Apollo was a god of prophecy, divine judgement and retribution, and art and inspiration. It was only later that his epithet of 'phoibos' took on solar qualities which is why after the death of Phaeton, his father the sun (Helio/Sol) forbade anyone else to drive his chariot except Apollo who could control his celestial steeds as well as he could.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 


These maps all vary greatly.

here we see Africa Vitale under the M and E of "Mediterranevm" around what is now Tunisia.
But low and behold the continent is labeled "Africa" at the same time.

These highly inaccurate and varying maps are not going to prove the case for Afrorum as a distinct people.

All of these Roman Provinces are on the same latitude. Tunisia is even slightly higher. This was the site of Carthage. It is there in fact where the most foreigners had settled, Phoenicians and then thousands of Roman soldiers all mixing in with indigenous peoples and these city building foreigners probably greatly outnumbering indigenous people by then. This after Carthage of the Phoenicians was already razed to the ground.
And the proposed Afrorum in the Manilius order are supposedly darker than the Maure.
OK if that's they want you want it.
If you want to prove such a case these maps aren't going to do it you will have to begin (not the cherleader the other guy) by first producing examples of "Afrorum" being used in Roman texts spelled in that exact way and shown in context to be used to describe a particular ethnic group.
I can save you the effort with this very long multi-chapter Astronomica poem the word is only used once
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Xlation of the above

"When I posted maps it was OK but when you post 'em no good."

"Oh boo hoo neither my maps or these ones support
Mauretania = Afrorum and Ptolemy even wrote down
Africa ends where Mauretania begins, oh boo hoo."
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Interesting thing is this Greco-Latin idea of
black-white south north dichotomy is pervasive.

I think the janiform ceramics introduces the
concept and in a sense is seen in Manilius:


_____________________________ Aethiopes Germania
_________________________________ India Gallia
______________________________ Aegyptia Hispania
_______________________________ Afrorum Romanis
_____________________________ Mauretani Graecia

_____________________________________ Syriam


View the parabola of the Mediterranean lands with Syriam
at the vertex, southerns facing left, northerns facing right.

Manilius lists Syriam among whites/lights/northerners and
comments on the character of Syriam's hair so unlike the others.

Black-white dichotomy also appears more directly in other literary sources.
It's usually done with any one people from each of the two major colours.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
^^^ the modern desire for a "Black-white dichotomy"

sought to be approved of in ancient Greco-Roman thought

_________________________________________
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ Affirmative. 'Afrorum' and 'Mauretania' are two different regions and thus inhabited by two different ethnikoi/gentes/races. If 'Afrorum' was the general term for all of Africa then why are Egyptians and Aethiopians excluded as well even though they share the same continent?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Xlation of the above

"When I posted maps it was OK but when you post 'em no good."

"Oh boo hoo neither my maps or these ones support
Mauretania = Afrorum and Ptolemy even wrote down
Africa ends where Mauretania begins, oh boo hoo."

---

LOL Lyinass is just a sore child tired of being spanked and scolded, yet she never learns her lesson.

Whininass

 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass,:

the modern desire for a "Black-white dichotomy"

sought to be approved of in ancient Greco-Roman thought

---

Dumb twit things black-white dichotomy is a "modern" concept that Greco-Romans never had.

It was Manilius who divided the gentes (races) into light/white and dark/black. His view is actually typical of Greco-Romans as per their own mythology of Phaeton burning the races of the southern lands below the Mediterranean black! Again the dumb trick has no idea about what Greco-Romans thought because she is an ignoramus who knows nothing about 'Classics'. Even the Anglo-farthead acknowledges the Phaeton myth as a Greco-Roman explanation for black peoples. This in it of itself is proof for this view of whites vs. blacks in the Greco-Roman world! The lyinass hates to admit it though because it goes against her blackphobic notions! LOL

This b|tch is so crazy she tries to 'lighten' up Nigerians and say they are the same color as Mongolians! LMAO
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Interesting thing is this Greco-Latin idea of
black-white south north dichotomy is pervasive.

I think the janiform ceramics introduces the
concept and in a sense is seen in Manilius:

---

quote:

---

_____________________________ Aethiopes Germania
_________________________________ India Gallia
______________________________ Aegyptia Hispania
_______________________________ Afrorum Romanis
_____________________________ Mauretani Graecia

_____________________________________ Syriam


View the parabola of the Mediterranean lands with Syriam
at the vertex, southerns facing left, northerners facing right.

Manilius lists Syriam among whites/lights/northerners and
comments on the character of Syriam's hair so unlike the others.

---

quote:

---

Black-white dichotomy also appears more directly in other literary sources.
It's usually done with any one people from each of the two major colours.

---

Indeed, much to the despair of the lyinass. LOL
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:


this is what the Tut bust looks like when it's not in a dark museum gallery

---

Your image is altered with over expossed light effects.


This is what his throne looks like at the Cairo Museum!




 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness :
[qb]

---

Even your idiotic picture spam betrays you for Tut's complexion is much darker than your ridiculous collage of North Asians, a mixed Maghrebi, and light-skinned African American! You are pathetic as you are dumb! LOL

---

As we can see Djehutie now resorts to outright lies as we can easily see that all the people shown here have the same skin tone as the Egyptian some even darker and this despite the fact that the Tutankhamun bust is shown in dark gallery lighting.
And if one were to follow through his logic Will Smith is not black.
But furthermore. Manilus descibed 'Moors' i.e . "Mauri" ie " black skinned people" as one to two decirnably lighter tones than the above medium dark toned people including Egyptian
"Tut's complexion is much darker" < the kid is stupid, see for yourself folks

---

Again!!!




Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and
staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues

A-M Mekota1, M Vermehren
Department of Biology I, Biodiversity Research/Anthropology1and Department of Veterinary Anatomy II2,

Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Germany
Submitted January 8, 2002; revised May 4, 2004; accepted August 12, 2004

Abstract

During an excavation headed by the German Institute for Archaeology, Cairo, at the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt, three types of tissues from different mummies were sampled to compare 13 well known rehydration methods for mummified tissue with three newly
developed methods. Furthermore, three fixatives were tested with each of the rehydration fluids.

Meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and a placenta were used for this study. The rehydration and fixation procedures were uniform for all methods.

Materials and methods

In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology
headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles
in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three
types of tissues were sampled from different
mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and
placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the
mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approxi-
mately 1550-1080 BC).

Skin
Skin sections showed particularly good tissue
preservation, although cellular outlines were never distinct. Although much of the epidermis had already separated from the dermis, the remaining epidermis often was preserved well (Fig. 1).

The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin.

In the dermis, the hair follicles, hair, and sebaceous and sweat glands were readily apparent (Fig. 2). Blood vessels, but no red blood cells, and small peripheral nerves were identified unambiguously (Fig. 3). The subcutaneous layer showed loose connective tissue fibers attached to the dermis, and fat cell remnants were observed.

To evaluate the influence of postmortum tissue
decay by micro-organisms, the samples were
tested for the presence of fungi using silver
staining.

Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7Á/13
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Interesting thing is this Greco-Latin idea of
black-white south north dichotomy is pervasive.

I think the janiform ceramics introduces the
concept and in a sense is seen in Manilius:


____________________________ Aethiopes Germania
________________________________ India Gallia
_____________________________ Aegyptia Hispania
______________________________ Afrorum Romanis
____________________________ Mauretani Graecia

____________________________________ Syriam


View the parabola of the Mediterranean lands with Syriam
at the vertex, southerns facing left, northerners facing right.

Manilius lists Syriam among whites/lights/northerners and
comments on the character of Syriam's hair so unlike the others

---

Indeed the janiform vases are a perfect example of this dichotomy. The Greeks especially love to portray (white) European vs. (black) African faces. I believe Dr. Sally Ann-Ashton wrote a paper on this and features such vases in the Manchester Museum.

quote:

---

.

---

Perhaps this reflects Syria's mixed status. Recall that the Greeks originally included Levantine people under 'Aethiopia' until Iron Age times when they recorded the immigration in the region of what they called 'Leuko-Syrians'. No doubt these Leuko-Syrians mixed with black indigenes producing the 'whites' with the darkest skin and curliest hairs.

quote:

---

Black-white dichotomy also appears more directly in other literary sources.
It's usually done with any one people from each of the two major colours.

---

Indeed, much to the despair of the lyinass. LOL

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:


Manilius lists Syriam among whites/lights/northerners and
comments on the character of Syriam's hair so unlike the others.

---

Perhaps this reflects Syria's mixed status. Recall that the Greeks originally included Levantine people under 'Aethiopia' until Iron Age times when they recorded the immigration in the region of what they called 'Leuko-Syrians'. No doubt these Leuko-Syrians mixed with black indigenes producing the 'whites' with the darkest skin and curliest hairs.

quote:

---

Black-white dichotomy also appears more directly in other literary sources.
It's usually done with any one people from each of the two major colours.

---

Indeed, much to the despair of the lyinass. LOL

---

HI. This question is addressed to anyone, but more specifically Tukuler or Djehuti who raised this topic. So which indigenous Black peoples populated Syria before the invasion of the white turks? I thought the Natufians were more of a Neolothic period people, and were long gone by the Iron Age.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
The oldest remains found in Syria date from the Palaeolithic era (c.800,000 BC). On 23 August 1993 a joint Japan-Syria excavation team discovered fossilized Paleolithic human remains at the Dederiyeh Cave some 400 km north of Damascus. The bones found in this massive cave were those of a Black Neanderthal child, estimated to have been about two years old, who lived in the Middle Palaeolithic era (ca. 200,000 to 40,000 years ago). Although many Black Neanderthal bones had been discovered already, this was practically the first time that an almost complete child's skeleton had been found in its original burial state.



Archaeologists have demonstrated that civilization in Syria was one of the most ancient on earth. Syria is part of the Fertile Crescent, and since approximately 10,000 BC it was one of the centers of Neolithic culture (PPNA) where agriculture and cattle breeding appeared for the first time in the world. The Neolithic period (PPNB) is represented by rectangular houses of the Mureybet culture.

The excavations have revealed four occupation phases I–IV, ranging from the Natufian up to the Middle Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) and dating to 10,200–8,000 BC, based on AMS radiocarbon dates.[9] Phase IA (10,200–9,700 BC) represents the Natufian occupation of Mureybet.

Ebla

The ruins of Ebla, near Idlib in northern Syria, were discovered and excavated in 1975. Ebla appears to have been an East Semitic speaking city-state founded around 3000 BC. At its zenith, from about 2500 to 2400 BC, it may have controlled an empire reaching north to Anatolia, east to Mesopotamia and south to the Red Sea. Ebla traded with the Mesopotamian states of Sumer Akkad and Assyria, as well as with peoples to the northwest. Gifts from Pharaohs, found during excavations, confirm Ebla's contact with Egypt. Scholars believe the language of Ebla was closely related to the fellow East Semitic Akkadian language of Mesopotamia and to be among the oldest known written languages.



Black facial featured Seated Ruler, 2000-1700 BC, North Syria, possibly area of Ebla, limestone
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by [b]matu[/]:

So which indigenous Black peoples populated Syria before the invasion of the white turks?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:
[QB] HI! No worries, I appreciate the clarification.
Again, I read somewhere (on this board and the sister board) on the Natufians populating the Levant. Otherwise, who do you suppose the Greeks referred to in this area as "Aethiopians"?

---

quote:

---

Aethiopia first appears as a geographical term in classical sources, in reference to the Upper Nile region, as well as all the regions south of the Sahara desert. Its earliest mention is in the works of Homer: twice in the Iliad, and three times in the Odyssey. The Greek historian Herodotus specifically uses it to refer to such parts of Sub-Saharan Africa as were then known parts of the inhabitable world.

---

• * Andromeda (Greek mythology):
  in Greek mythology, beautiful daughter of King
  Cepheus and Queen Cassiope of Joppa in Palestine
  (called Ethiopia) and wife of Perseus.
  
  from Encyclopædia Britannica Online

• The majority of people say the Judaeans were
  those Ethiopians whom fear and hatred obliged
  to change their habitations, in the reign of king
  Cepheus.
  
  Tacitus -- The Histories Book V.2

This was last presented (again) on ES just this
past May in the Earliest Israelite img thread.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Correct. Other than the Andromeda myth, I recall reading about another myth about how the gods (again) cursed Aethiopia this time to be plagued by harpies which caused famine. Again, it had to be the Levant because it the land was described as ruled by descendants of Kepheus and many fled to nearby Egypt.

I also read of old sources which you Tukuler pointed out which openly admit that the Levant was inhabited by very dark i.e. black skinned peoples and one source even speculates that the Egyptian queen Tiye judging by her bust may probably be of 'Syrian' descent.

And here again are Egyptian depictions of black Levantine/Canaanites:







What's funny is that even today there are black Bedouin in both the Sinai and Gaza area who are NOT of recent African descent but have noted since pre-Islamic times.

the Euronut troll Manu is correct when he says the genetic difference between Egyptians and Palestinians is very small, but what he doesn't say is that Palestinians themselves show recent African ancestry from the neolithic and earlier.

To answer your question Matu as to which indigenous black group lived in Syria. It is difficult to say. There were the Natufians but then there were their predecessors the Kebarans. One could even go back as far back as 80,000 years ago to the earliest Out-of-African Skhul and Qafzeh remains as representative of the first black people of the area.
 

---

Posted by matu (Member # 22002) on :
 
Finally finished reading that thread from the link you posted, Lioness. Thanks. Any idea who later moved into these areas previously occupied by the Natufians? It may have been addressed in those posts, but I didn't see it. Lots of back and forth on Mushabeans and Kebarans instead.
 

---

Posted by matu (Member # 22002) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
The Greeks' Aithiopia was never limited to
continental Africa. That is solely a modern
interpretation as is force fitting or trying
to alter Joppa (Tel Aviv) from Canaan to
some place not the Levant.

The Aithiopia of the Andromeda story is
clearly the south Levant without a doubt.
Black people were not and are not limited
to continental Africa.

Many people are adverse to the fact
of black ancient Israelites and Judahites
and their Judaean descendents because
it offends their religious sentiments that
Paul, John the Baptist, and most of all
Holy Mother Mary Mother of God and
therefore Jesus the Christ could even
remotely possibly be from even a hybrid black people.

As taught numerous times here, the Gaza
Strip was one place ancient Greek authors
called Aithiopia (any land whose main
population were very dark skinned).

The Levant contained the Aithiopia of the
Andromeda myths' famous and still standing
city Jaffa, aka Joppa / Tel Aviv / Yaffa.

• * Andromeda (Greek mythology):
  in Greek mythology, beautiful daughter of King
  Cepheus and Queen Cassiope of Joppa in Palestine
  (called Ethiopia) and wife of Perseus.
  
  from Encyclopædia Britannica Online

Please read the Joppa (Yaffa/Tel Aviv) = a Greek Aithiopia thead


Later Latin authors used that myth
reference to support the fact of
dark skinned Judaeans being thought
of by most Romans as of Æthiopian
descent.

• The majority of people say the Judaeans were
  those Ethiopians whom fear and hatred obliged
  to change their habitations, in the reign of king
  Cepheus.
  
  Tacitus -- The Histories Book V.2

This was last presented (again) on ES just this
past May in the Earliest Israelite img thread.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ Correct. Other than the Andromeda myth, I recall reading about another myth about how the gods (again) cursed Aethiopia this time to be plagued by harpies which caused famine. Again, it had to be the Levant because it the land was described as ruled by descendants of Kepheus and many fled to nearby Egypt.

I also read of old sources which you Tukuler pointed out which openly admit that the Levant was inhabited by very dark i.e. black skinned peoples and one source even speculates that the Egyptian queen Tiye judging by her bust may probably be of 'Syrian' descent.

And here again are Egyptian depictions of black Levantine/Canaanites:







What's funny is that even today there are black Bedouin in both the Sinai and Gaza area who are NOT of recent African descent but have noted since pre-Islamic times.

the Euronut troll Manu is correct when he says the genetic difference between Egyptians and Palestinians is very small, but what he doesn't say is that Palestinians themselves show recent African ancestry from the neolithic and earlier.

To answer your question Matu as to which indigenous black group lived in Syria. It is difficult to say. There were the Natufians but then there were their predecessors the Kebarans. One could even go back as far back as 80,000 years ago to the earliest Out-of-African Skhul and Qafzeh remains as representative of the first black people of the area.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:
Finally finished reading that thread from the link you posted, Lioness. Thanks. Any idea who later moved into these areas previously occupied by the Natufians? It may have been addressed in those posts, but I didn't see it. Lots of back and forth on Mushabeans and Kebarans instead.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

The majority of people say the Judaeans were
those Ethiopians whom fear and hatred obliged
to change their habitations, in the reign of king
Cepheus.

Tacitus -- The Histories Book V.2
[/list]

This was last presented (again) on ES just this
past May in the Earliest Israelite img thread. [/qb]

---

Thank you. I'm aware that the term "Ethiopian" was used for dark-skinned peoples outside continental Africa, notably Arabia, India and even parts of Eurasia (Turkey, Greece, Crete, Cyprus, etc). Thanks for that link on Greek Aethiopia, I was aware of Tacitus linking the Hebrews to Ethiopians, but not of Strabo linking them to Egyptians. Nice - I added that to my notes. That second link I'll finish up on it tomorrow.

---

http://classics.mit.edu/Herodotus/history.7.vii.html

Herodotus, The Persian Wars

Translated by George Rawlinson (1858–60)

Book VII

[7.70] The eastern Ethiopians -
for two nations of this name served in the army - were marshalled with the Indians.
They differed in nothing
from the other Ethiopians,
save in their language, and the character of their hair.
For the eastern Ethiopians have straight hair,
while they of Libya are more woolly-haired than any other people in the world.

____________________________________________________________


Shasu Bedouin






wikipedia

Objections exist that state that the proposed link between the Yahweh of the Israelites and the Shasu is uncertain, given that in the Merneptah reliefs, the group later known as the Israelites are not described or depicted as Shasu. The Shasu are usually depicted hieroglyphically with a determinative indicating a land not a people. Frank J. Yurco and Michael G. Hasel would distinguish the Shasu in Merneptah's Karnak reliefs from the people of Israel since they wear different clothing, hairstyles, and are determined differently by Egyptian scribes. Moreover, Israel is determined as a people, though not necessarily as a socioethnic group.Egyptian scribes tended to bundle up rather disparate groups of people under one 'artificial unifying rubric.' The most frequent designation for the "foes of Shasu" is the hill-country determinative.Thus they are differentiated from the Canaanites, who are defending the fortified cities of Ashkelon, Gezer, and Yenoam. At the same time, the hill-country determinative is not always used for Shasu, as is the case in the "Shasu of Yhw" name rings from Soleb and Amarah-West. Gösta Werner Ahlström argued that the reason Shasu and Israelites are differentiated from each other in the Merneptah Stele is because these Shasu were nomads while the Israelites were a sedentary subset of the Shasu.

___________________________________

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2010/03/08/The-Name-Yahweh-in-Egyptian-Hieroglyphic-Texts.aspx

One of the most intriguing of the Nineteenth Dynasty documents referring to the Shasu is a letter, dated 1192 B.C., which states in part:

Another communication to my Lord: We have finished letting the Shasu tribes of Edom pass the fortress of Merneptah Hotep-hir-Maat…which is in Tjeku, to the pools of Per Atum of Merneptah Hotep-hir-Maat, which are in Tkeku, to keep them alive and to keep their cattle alive…

the German scholar Siegfried Herrmann, who translated the above text, has identified the area of Tjeku, where the Shasu Edomites were settled

There are a few references in Egyptian texts to Shasu nomads living in the area of Nubia south of Egypt, but the vast majority of references are to Shasu living north of Egypt, and it is these Shasu who are the focus of this paper.


The term Shasu is almost exclusively used in New Kingdom texts for semi-nomadic peoples living in parts of Lebanon, Syria, Sinai, Canaan, and Transjordan. When used for nomads living in these areas, the term Shasu seems to have been used by the Egyptians almost exclusively for people groups that can clearly be identified as Semitic herders.

It is clear from New Kingdom texts that the Shasu were rarely if ever under the control of the Egyptian government and were almost always looked upon as enemies of the Egyptians. For example, at the famous Battle of Kadesh in ca. 1275 BC, there were Shasu soldiers who were allies of the Hitites against Rameses II.

It is likely that the Egyptians of the New Kingdom Period classified all of the Edomites, Ammonites, Moabites, Amalekites, Midianites, Kenites, Hapiru, and Israelites as Shasu. This list should also probably include the Amorites and the Arameans. There is even a reference dating to ca. 1250 BC in Papyrus Anastasi I to a group of giant Shasu living in Canaan who could be identified with the giants encountered by the Israelites at the time of the Exodus.7

there is no evidence that the Shasu of Yahweh were Edomites. If they were Edomites, then it must be explained why the Edomites are strangely mentioned twice in the list at Amarah West since Redford translates the phrase t3 sh3sw sa-a-r-ar on this list as the "land of the Shasu of Se’ir"

____________________________________


These are who scholars call Syrians (or Syro-Palestinians) , one of the four ethnic groups in Book of Gates Scenes.
They may have overlap with where the Shasu were
illustration below based on wall painting from tomb of Seti I, Syrians top two left, also bottom two far right



Tomb of Merenptah, Syrian, left



Most of Egypt's conflicts with the Asiatic enemies revolved around Egypt's attempted control the Syrian area of Canaan, and the various city states of that region along the Mediterranean coast north of the Sinai. At first, it would seem that the conflicts within Syria with these various enemies of Egypt were to provide a buffer zone for Egypt's defense. However, like Mitanni and Hittites, Egypt's prolonged interest in the region derived from their desire to dominate and exploit the economic resources and trade. During the New Kingdom, Syria was the crossroads of world commerce, with goods from the Aegean and beyond entering the Near East by way of ports such as Ugarit. When one considers the inherent fertility and richness in natural resources, Syria obviously offered much to the predatory powers who sought to use this wealth for their own purposes. Hence, some thirty-thee centuries ago, "world power" was synonymous with the control of Syria, so it is not surprising that for nearly two hundred years, the great powers of Egypt, Mitanni and Hatti expended much blood and treasure in wars designed to ensure their respective control of this vitally strategic region.

Read more: http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/enemies.htm#ixzz3EKyggAKr



http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-collection-online/search/544720


Block from a relief depicting a battle
Period: New Kingdom
Dynasty: Dynasty 18
Reign: possibly reign of Amenhotep II
Date: ca. 1427–1400 B.C.
Geography: From Egypt, Upper Egypt; Thebes, el-Asasif, Temple of Ramesses IV, foundation (reused), MMA 1912–1913
Medium: Sandstone, paint
Dimensions: H. 61 cm (24 in); w. 115 cm (45 1/4 in)


Builders reused this painted relief block in the foundation of Ramesses IV's mortuary temple, subsequently excavated by the Metropolitan Museum. In the relief, western Asian soldiers are shown being trampled under the horses that pull the royal chariot, signaling the foreigners' defeat in battle by the might of the Egyptian pharaoh. When the piece was excavated, this and another fragment of a battle scene (13.180.22) were dated to the reign of Ramesses II. A recent study of their stylistic and iconographic features, however, has caused scholars to redate them earlier, probably to the reign of Amenhotep II. This redating indicates that by the middle of the Eighteenth Dynasty, monumental battle scenes had become part of the decorative scheme of a temple's exterior walls.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Lioness, nothing you posted refutes what I or Tukuler said. We aren't saying that all ancient Levantine peoples were black only that there were black people that existed among them. The pictures of Asiatics or Levantines you posted are proof of this. In fact from what I've seen MOST of the Levantine depictions are of non-black people which also explains why anthropologists have noted a disconnect between Egyptians and Levantine people in skeletal affinities.

You posted a picture of a light-skinned Shasu Bedouin along side the black one I posted (assuming that the paint was not faded)

And again a scene of Tutankhamun receiving tribute from Retenu (Canaan)



^ There are fair-skinned Retenu alongside the black ones.

Our point was simply there was indeed a black presence despite the chagrin of many including yourself.

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

Thanks Djehuti. My observations:

-These are great images. I've seen that Canaanite tile before -- among other artifacts clearly showing Black Canaanites. I still can't fathom why certain groups want to label the Canaanites or Amorites White.

---

quote:

---

- I wish I could see the actual wall painting of that hieroglyph -- I've come to distrust renditions.

---

quote:

---

- And wasn't Queen Tiye Ethiopian (Nubian)?

---

quote:

---

- Per the Bible and Josephus, the Hamathites (and Hittites) were a Canaanite tribe occupying Syria. I'm more of a student of the Bible than a scientist/historian, so I have no idea what those groups translate to in archeological terms.

- "The children of Ham possessed the land of Syria and Amanus, and the mountains of Libanus; seizing upon all that was on its sea-coasts, and as far as the ocean, and keeping it as their own. Some indeed of its names are utterly vanished away; others of them being changed, and another sound given them, are hardly to be discovered; yet a few there are which have kept their denominations entire." ( Josephus' 1st century, Antiquities of the Jews, Book I, Chapter 6 )

---

The 'Hittites' of the Bible are NOT the same as the Hittites of Anatolia but rather Hethites or descendants of Heth who are a Canaanite group. The problem with the Bible is that while the Book of Nations may make ethnic distinctions and even relations between such ethnicities the relations are not always clear. For example Elam is included along with the children of Shem even though the vast majority of Shemites speak Semitic languages while the Elamites did not and in fact the Elamites were a black Asiatic people themselves. Tukuler and others have pointed out that the Shemites were originally an all black people along with the Hamites. And there are others who even go as far as to say the original Shemites and Japhethites were all black. What is clear is that blacks were present in Western Asia and not just Africa (which includes Egypt)

I will say that if history using Biblical texts is your thing then this would be a good book:



The above book is good but it's not excellent based on the fact that the author Goldenberg still falls into the trap of using debunked notions of "true negro" or "true black" and applying it to only Kushites but not the other 'brothers' of Ham namely Egyptians and Canaanites. Strangely he admits that Kushites lived on both sides of the Red Sea i.e. Sudan and modern Ethiopia as well as Arabia but then says Egyptians were not 'truly black' but merely darker than the Israelites even though the Hebrew text he uses clearly refutes his assertion. Interestingly and just as strange, in regards to the Canaanites, he does cite Hebrew passages showing that Cushim or blacks did exist in the southern Levant in the Negev desert and around areas of Judaea as well as Midian and Sinai. So why he denies the Egyptians as blacks is bizarre.
 

---

Posted by matu (Member # 22002) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ Lioness, nothing you posted refutes what I or Tukuler said. We aren't saying that all ancient Levantine peoples were black only that there were black people that existed among them. The pictures of Asiatics or Levantines you posted are proof of this. In fact from what I've seen MOST of the Levantine depictions are of non-black people which also explains why anthropologists have noted a disconnect between Egyptians and Levantine people in skeletal affinities.

You posted a picture of a light-skinned Shasu Bedouin along side the black one I posted (assuming that the paint was not faded)

And again a scene of Tutankhamun receiving tribute from Retenu (Canaan)



^ There are fair-skinned Retenu alongside the black ones.

Our point was simply there was indeed a black presence despite the chagrin of many including yourself.

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

Thanks Djehuti. My observations:

-These are great images. I've seen that Canaanite tile before -- among other artifacts clearly showing Black Canaanites. I still can't fathom why certain groups want to label the Canaanites or Amorites White.

---

Again, this comes from the fact that many people in the Levant were not black and so there is some confusion as to the identity of Canaanites as an ethnic group to those who inhabit the land of Canaan in general let alone the whole Levant region.

quote:

---

- I wish I could see the actual wall painting of that hieroglyph -- I've come to distrust renditions.

---

Actually for the most part renditions tend to be accurate in regards to color at least for those murals where the coloring is well preserved.

quote:

---

- And wasn't Queen Tiye Ethiopian (Nubian)?

---

No. She and he family were ethnic Egyptians who come from the Akhmim area of Upper Egypt. The whole premise that she was Nubian is a false one obviously stemming from the very dark complexion of her bust yet such a complexion is not uncommon in Upper Egypt especially southern Upper Egypt. There is obviously racial bias as most folks have know of Nefertiti's bust but have never seen that of Tiye or even heard of her. FYI I believe the original paint of Nefertiti's skin tone for her bust is also faded (whether deliberate or not) since I've seen old photos and even some recent ones showing traces of darker paint.

quote:

---

- Per the Bible and Josephus, the Hamathites (and Hittites) were a Canaanite tribe occupying Syria. I'm more of a student of the Bible than a scientist/historian, so I have no idea what those groups translate to in archeological terms.

- "The children of Ham possessed the land of Syria and Amanus, and the mountains of Libanus; seizing upon all that was on its sea-coasts, and as far as the ocean, and keeping it as their own. Some indeed of its names are utterly vanished away; others of them being changed, and another sound given them, are hardly to be discovered; yet a few there are which have kept their denominations entire." ( Josephus' 1st century, Antiquities of the Jews, Book I, Chapter 6 )

---

The 'Hittites' of the Bible are NOT the same as the Hittites of Anatolia but rather Hethites or descendants of Heth who are a Canaanite group. The problem with the Bible is that while the Book of Nations may make ethnic distinctions and even relations between such ethnicities the relations are not always clear. For example Elam is included along with the children of Shem even though the vast majority of Shemites speak Semitic languages while the Elamites did not and in fact the Elamites were a black Asiatic people themselves. Tukuler and others have pointed out that the Shemites were originally an all black people along with the Hamites. And there are others who even go as far as to say the original Shemites and Japhethites were all black. What is clear is that blacks were present in Western Asia and not just Africa (which includes Egypt)

I will say that if history using Biblical texts is your thing then this would be a good book:



The above book is good but it's not excellent based on the fact that the author Goldenberg still falls into the trap of using debunked notions of "true negro" or "true black" and applying it to only Kushites but not the other 'brothers' of Ham namely Egyptians and Canaanites. Strangely he admits that Kushites lived on both sides of the Red Sea i.e. Sudan and modern Ethiopia as well as Arabia but then says Egyptians were not 'truly black' but merely darker than the Israelites even though the Hebrew text he uses clearly refutes his assertion. Interestingly and just as strange, in regards to the Canaanites, he does cite Hebrew passages showing that Cushim or blacks did exist in the southern Levant in the Negev desert and around areas of Judaea as well as Midian and Sinai. So why he denies the Egyptians as blacks is bizarre.

---

Very interesting. So going back full circle: who were the non-Black groups that existed among the Hebrews in the Levant/Mesopotamia? I know the Egyptians, Ethiopians and Elam were Black. From their depictions, I also believe the ancient Canaanites and indigenous Arab clans were Black; and from the earliest historical Rabbinic and ARab records, Shem is described as Black as well. Black Shem and Black Ham's progeny populated Mesopotamia and Africa respectively -- as well as intermixed extensively. So who were these non-Black populations in your estimation?

Regarding the Hittites - I've often wondered if the great Hittites of Turkey were the progeny of Heth. Depending on who you ask, I've heard cases for both. I'm inclined to believe what the Bible says - which repeatedly refers to Heth as Hittites (not Hethites).
 

---

Posted by matu (Member # 22002) on :
 
The Hittites are mentioned more than 50 times in the Bible. They were descended from Heth, the son of Canaan (and great-grandson of Noah, Genesis 10:15). They ruled the area of Syria and eastern Turkey and battled with Egypt and Babylon for territory. Babylonian and Assyrian records refer to Syria and Palestine as "Hatti-land," and Joshua 1:4 includes their territory as a great part of the Promised Land for Israel. Abraham was well acquainted with the Hittites, and he bought the burial cave for Sarah from them in Genesis 23. Esau took wives from among the Hittites (Genesis 26:34), and Uriah the Hittite was one of David's mighty men (2 Samuel 11:3). The Hittites are mentioned throughout the kingdom years and even after the Jews’ return from captivity (Ezra 9:1). It is assumed that the Hittites were eventually absorbed into the surrounding cultures and lost their distinctive identity.
http://www.gotquestions.org/Hittites.html#ixzz3EP281ECL

- Gen 23:10 And Ephron dwelt among the children of Heth: and Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the audience of the children of Heth..

- Gen 26:34 And Esau was forty years old when he took to wife Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and Bashemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite

- Gen 10:15 And Canaan begat Sidon his firstborn, and Heth (father of the Hittites)

- Josh 1:4 From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites

- 2 Sam 11:3 And David sent and inquired after the woman. And one said, Is not this Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Hittite?

- Ezra 9:1 Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ No, the Hittites of the Bible (Hethites) are not the same as the historically prominent Hittites of Anatolia (Asia Minor). These were two completely different people who became mixed up because of the similarity in names.

As for your question as to the origin of non-black people in Southwest Asia, I believe these were people that migrated into the area from further north and northeast during prehistoric times and were present by the Bronze Age.
 

---

Posted by matu (Member # 22002) on :
 
- Hm, what are the odds? That the book of Joshua positions the land of the (Biblical) Hittites to be near that of the Hittites of Anatolia. Per the Bible, the Hittites weren't indigenous to Anatolia, Gomer/Togormah was. The Hittites whoever they were, were invaders. Per Joshua 1:4, they were indigenous to the lands around Lebanon and the Euphrates -- which bordered Togormah.

I'm curious to see what sources you have stating the Hittites of the Bible didn't become the Hittites of Anatolia.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
Matu, how would the ancients classify these modern Syrian soccer players?
Black or white?





 

---

Posted by matu (Member # 22002) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
Matu, how would the ancients classify these modern Syrian soccer players?
Black or white?

---

• The eastern Mediterranean is a nexus of three
  continents. Semitic speakers were among the
  first but weren't the only inhabitants of the region.
  Indo-Europeans, Caucasics, Altaics, etc., came
  after them probably via Daryal Gorge through the
  Caucasus.
  
  "Semites" are partially North East Africans
  who migrated into the Arabian peninsula and
  moved northward (as far as up to Turkey)
  where they met and mingled with and were maybe
  blocked from further spread by southward invading
  Eurasian peoples (Altaic and Indo-European speakers)
  in pre-historic times. Upon the eclipse of the
  southerners the hybrids and assimilated settlers
  (beginning circa -1800 with the maryannu caste)
  became heir to the names and languages of the
  original people they married into and whose
  culture they emulated and lexicon enriched.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
As DJ wrote, the b*nei Hheth are neither the Hatti
nor the Hittites of Anatolia. B*nei Hheth are local
south Levantines (Canaanite Hhamites) whereas
the central Anatolians are Meshech and Tubal
(Yaphethites).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
From something I wrote c.1998

• The eastern Mediterranean is a nexus of three
  continents. Semitic speakers were among the
  first but weren't the only inhabitants of the region.
  Indo-Europeans, Caucasics, Altaics, etc., came
  after them probably via Daryal Gorge through the
  Caucasus. Ok
  
  "Semites" are partially North East Africans who migrated into the Arabian peninsula and moved northward (as far as up to Turkey) where they met and mingled with and were maybe blocked from further spread by southward invading
  Eurasian peoples (Altaic and Indo-European speakers) in pre-historic times. Do you know appx when this was? 15K BC? 5K BC? Or more recently? Upon the eclipse of the
  southerners the hybrids and assimilated settlers
  (beginning circa -1800 with the maryannu caste)
  became heir to the names and languages of the
  original people they married into and whose
  culture they emulated and lexicon enriched.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

As DJ wrote, the b*nei Hheth are neither the Hatti
nor the Hittites of Anatolia. B*nei Hheth are local
south Levantines (Canaanite Hhamites) whereas
the central Anatolians are Meshech and Tubal
(Yaphethites).

However I'd like DJ to expand on Greek God cursed
Aithiopia. I have it Aithiopia was where Greek Gods
vacationed and gorged themselves at Aithiop hosted
festivals.

Cassiopeia's punishment naturally effected her people but
Yaffa Aithiopia was not the direct object only consequential.

Also this is the first I've heard of Harpies and Aithiopia. You've helped me out on Greek myths before, please do it again.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

Your summary sounds 'generally' similar to what's said here on realhistoryww.com: "How Race is Made": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk4SdqmDISg

I'm curious to know your thoughts on the vid.

---

I should warn you that Mike and his website which you cite holds many (though not all) inaccuracies. Mike is pretty much an Afrocentric nutcase who tends to paint black various ancient peoples who never were and is the polar opposite of Euronuts who white-wash ancient peoples.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
@ DJ

I had checked Graves with no luck.
Keep trying to remember where you
read it. After all you are my Greek
"classical" mythology teacher.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

It wasn't the point under
consideration when I wrote
that piece but besides NE
Afr and "Caucasus" there
were of course the people
who already inhabited the
land whom the first NE Afrs
to the Levant met and mixed
with in the early Holocene.

---

quote:

---

There is no such thing as an
"Afro-Asiatic common Semitic
type." Semites appear more
caucasoid toward the north
(eg. Paddan Aram), more inner
africoid in the south (eg. Amharas),
and more like Indians in the east
(eg. Kuwaitis & Omanis) for obvious
reasons. Yet the majority of Arabian
Peninsula Semites are distinguishable
from either Asian Caucasians, Eastern
Africans, or Indian (Dravidian) sub-
continentals for the most part.

---

quote:

---

You asked me for dates for
the introgression of non-
Semitic speakers from the
north. I will have to look
into that but shooting from
the hip I'd say it was spread
out over time during the middle
Holocene mostly.

---

quote:

---

Whenever it started, this blending
continues today with types from western
Europe, West Africa and southeast Asia
entering in the mix.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
As DJ wrote, the b*nei Hheth are neither the Hatti
nor the Hittites of Anatolia. B*nei Hheth are local
south Levantines (Canaanite Hhamites) whereas
the central Anatolians are Meshech and Tubal
(Yaphethites).

---

I'm inclined to think otherwise ONLY b/c of the Biblical/Historical record of Josephus which places the land of Hheth right next to the land of Hatti. I'm not dogmatic about it either way though -- what supporting evidence do you have to the contrary?

---

• Here's something I wrote a few years ago. Hope it's of some help.
  
  In the Hebrew book B*reshiyth, Hhittiy (hhet-thaw-yodh) may not
  mean the Hittites of Anatolia. Hhittiy derives from Hheth. The
  Hhittiy are more commonly designated by b*nei Hheth. These
  Hhittiy are located far south at Hebron in Canaan circa 1750 BCE.
  They have authority to transfer land ownership through a council
  of equals.
  
  Though it's possible these Hhittiy are connected somehow to the
  Anatolian Hittites, they are clearly Canaanites to the Author
  of B*reshiyth. Whenever a Hhittiy is given a name in B*reshiyth,
  it's always a name in the language of Canaan. They are Hhamites.
  
  The Anatolian Hittites with their major city Khattushash (Hattusa)
  are the Khatti in their own Indo-European language Khattili. They
  also had a language Neshili.
  
  These are identified as Yaphetites in the Table of Nations.
  Meshech is the Hebrew homonym for the Hatti name Mosokh -- founder
  of their city Massukh or Massukhanda. Togarmah (son of Gomer)
  and Tubal are the other Anatolian Hittite representatives in the
  Table of Nations, residing opposite the Taurus mountains in the
  Hatti heartland. There is a relief near Ivriz depicting the
  Hatti king Warpalawa of Tubal worshipping his fertility god
  Tarhund. Togarmah is the Tegarma (of cuneiform
  inscriptions.
  
  The Indo-European and presumed Europid/white/Caucasian Hatti
  gave their name to the confederacy of peoples forming the Hittite
  empire. Both Egyptian and Hatti iconography of Hittites shows
  them of no one conforming phenotype. Presumably, the non-Europid
  looking Hittites belong to the people conquered by the invading
  Hatti at the middle of the 2nd millenium BCE. They appear to have
  some affinities with Mongol types.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

Your summary sounds 'generally' similar to what's said here on realhistoryww.com: "How Race is Made": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk4SdqmDISg

I'm curious to know your thoughts on the vid.

---

I should warn you that Mike and his website which you cite holds many (though not all) inaccuracies. Mike is pretty much an Afrocentric nutcase who tends to paint black various ancient peoples who never were and is the polar opposite of Euronuts who white-wash ancient peoples.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
As DJ wrote, the b*nei Hheth are neither the Hatti nor the Hittites of Anatolia. B*nei Hheth are local south Levantines (Canaanite Hhamites) whereas the central Anatolians are Meshech and Tubal
(Yaphethites).

Wrote this in '98 or so. Tho I didn't list references the post abounds with internet searchable keywords and terms compounded in standard lexicons like Gesenius, Jastrow, or Brown Driver Briggs.


Originally posted 11 April, 2005 by alTakruri~:

• Here's something I wrote a few years ago. Hope it's of some help.
  
  In the Hebrew book B*reshiyth, Hhittiy (hhet-thaw-yodh) may not mean the Hittites of Anatolia. Hhittiy derives from Hheth. The
  Hhittiy are more commonly designated by b*nei Hheth. These
  Hhittiy are located far south at Hebron in Canaan circa 1750 BCE.
  They have authority to transfer land ownership through a council
  of equals.
  
  The Bible indicates that the Land of the Hittites was concentrated closer to the Euphrates River. While I agree that the bible supports *some* Hittites present in South Canaan, (Ephron, Elon, Zohar the Hittites), the land of their fathers was north of Canaan. Look at any Table of Nations map, they all place Heth next to Anatolia. Josh 1:4 From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites
  
  Though it's possible these Hhittiy are connected somehow to the Anatolian Hittites, they are clearly Canaanites to the Author of B*reshiyth. Agreed Whenever a Hhittiy is given a name in B*reshiyth, it's always a name in the language of Canaan. They are Hhamites.
  
  The Anatolian Hittites with their major city Khattushash (Hattusa)
  are the Khatti in their own Indo-European language Khattili. They
  also had a language Neshili. From my understanding of the Table of Nations, none of Japhet's descendants are ever given the name (or nickname) "Hittites". There was no such thing as an Anatolian HIttite, those HIttites were Canaanites (like you said earlier) who invaded the Land of Hatti. They were not indigenes to the Land of Hatti, therefore they weren't Anatolian. Japhet was.
  
  These are identified as Yaphetites in the Table of Nations. Yep Meshech is the Hebrew homonym for the Hatti name Mosokh -- founder of their city Massukh or Massukhanda. Togarmah (son of Gomer) and Tubal are the other Anatolian Hittite representatives in the Table of Nations, residing opposite the Taurus mountains in the Hatti heartland. There is a relief near Ivriz depicting the Hatti king Warpalawa of Tubal worshipping his fertility god Tarhund. Togarmah is the Tegarma (of cuneiform inscriptions.
  
  The Indo-European and presumed Europid/white/Caucasian Hatti gave their name to the confederacy of peoples forming the Hittite empire. Both Egyptian and Hatti iconography of Hittites shows them of no one conforming phenotype. Doesn't this support an invasion/conquest of some sort in the Land of Hatti? Presumably, the non-Europid looking Hittites belong to the people conquered by the invading Hatti at the middle of the 2nd millenium BCE. They appear to have some affinities with Mongol types.

According the following verses, the Hamitic Hittites of the Bible were a strong and mighty people (as well as cave dealers )

2 Kings 7:6: "For the Lord had made the host of the Syrians to hear a noise of chariots, and a noise of horses, even the noise of a great host: and they said one to another, Lo, the king of Israel hath hired against us the kings of the Hittites, and the kings of the Egyptians, to come upon us."

2 Chronicles 1:17: "And they fetched up, and brought forth out of Egypt a chariot for six hundred shekels of silver, and a horse for a hundred and fifty: and so brought they out horses for all the kings of the Hittites, and for the kings of Syria, by their means."

Per the Concordance the Hittites (H2850) during Abraham's time are the same Hittites (2850) of military valor. Per Concordance:
Hittite = "descendant of Heth"
the nation descended from Heth, the 2nd son of Canaan; once inhabitants of central Anatolia (modern Turkey), later in north Lebanon

Please critique.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ A few cents to the above info.

First, because the Hittite polity was an empire, it is no surprise that Egyptian depictions of national 'Hittites' were heterogeneous and differ in both physical features and clothing. Exactly

Second, the Hattians who did represent the core or main populace of the empire were an indigenous non-Indo-European speaking people who were ruled by the IE speaking Hittite/Nesili. And here I thought that per the Table of Nations in Gen 10, the Hattians were Japhetites (Europeans), and the Semetic speaking Hittites were the invading Canaanites to the Land of Hatti. Judging from all descriptions and depictions of them from other peoples in the ancient world as well as skeletal remains, the Hattians were traditionally described by scholars to be a brachycephalic (broad-headed) 'Armenoid' people with prominent hooked noses and was a type common from Asia Minor, the Caucasus, and the northern areas of Assyria and Syria. It is because of this many scholars suggest the region to be the home of the so-called 'Jewish-type' which was actually Hurrian and differed from the 'original Semitic type' of other parts of the Levant, Assyria, and northern Arabia. And though I haven't seen it first hand, I have read that there were Egyptian depictions of actual Hittite/Nasili elites who looked more European i.e. small aquiline noses with blue eyes and even blonde hair. Could those blonde hair blue eyed people be the indigenous people of Land of Hatti, even though they were pejoratively called Hittites?

Lastly the 'mongol' type is actually a mis-characterization of some of the early Hittite and other IE remains of northeastern Anatolia and the Caucasus as they were brachycephalic people with horse-riding culture that is similar to though not identical to Mongol nomads of the steppes. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

Your summary sounds 'generally' similar to what's said here on realhistoryww.com: "How Race is Made": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk4SdqmDISg

I'm curious to know your thoughts on the vid.

---

I should warn you that Mike and his website which you cite holds many (though not all) inaccuracies. Mike is pretty much an Afrocentric nutcase who tends to paint black various ancient peoples who never were and is the polar opposite of Euronuts who white-wash ancient peoples.

---

That's too bad. I really like his work. That site is a VERY comprehensive body of work! Can you briefly list which groups he paints Black? I don't want to repeat misinformation because I rely a lot on his website to gain historical knowledge, and share said knowledge with my Bible study class.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

^ Don't confuse actual language group with genealogy or you'll run into trouble.

For example, Elam is considered to descend from Shem yet the Elamites did not speak Semitic languages.

The Table of Nations is generally speaking accurate that Anatolia was inhabited by and large by 'Japhethites' i.e. fair-skinned northerners regardless of whether they spoke Indo-European or not.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

---

I should warn you that Mike and his website [...]

---

That's too bad. I really like his work. That site is a VERY comprehensive body of work! [...]

---

[...]

Mike is not an Afrocentric at all

Mike hates Africa, Africans and white Europeans
[...]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ Don't confuse actual language group with genealogy or you'll run into trouble.

For example, Elam is considered to descend from Shem yet the Elamites did not speak Semitic languages.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

^ Don't confuse actual language group with genealogy or you'll run into trouble.

For example, Elam is considered to descend from Shem yet the Elamites did not speak Semitic languages.

The Table of Nations is generally speaking accurate that Anatolia was inhabited by and large by 'Japhethites' i.e. fair-skinned northerners regardless of whether they spoke Indo-European or not.

---

.

This is why I use Shemite and Hhamite
when writing about Hebrew literature
instead of the linguists' Semite and
Hamite.

The b*nei Hheth in TaNaKH of Hebron
at the extreme south of the Levant
adjacent to the Gaza Strip are not
the Hittites, who subordinated the
earlier Hatti of central Anatolia,
known as Meshech and Tubal in the
Hebrew books.

There are plenty modern archaeology
articles and books outlining Indo-European
speaking Hittite migrants from somewhere
north and east of Anatolia. They were literate,
their writings are extant.

Connecting them to far south Palestine
b*nei Hheth, though still perpetuated,
is an unfortunate misidentification by
translators not having the archaeology
and linguist material we have today.

---

I hear you. But I think b*nei Hheth being in Hebron is only PART of the story as can be seen on map below:


Per the Bible, and any Table of Nations map, the land of b*nei Hheth must have also included land north of Canaan, near the Euphrates. I've seen maps depicting both regions (Hebron and Lebanon). While I couldn't find any ANCIENT map of northern Hittites prior to their invasion of Hatti, this bible verse still proves TRICKY. Because the below verse doesn't support the indigenous land of b*nei Hheth to be Hebron OR the Caucus, but of Lebanon near the Euphrates.

Josh 1:4 "From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and unto the great sea toward the going down of the sun, shall be your coast."


 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
The Y*hoshu`a quote outlines within the
Levant and Mesopotamia the extent of
the 'Am Yisra'el land claim.

As Canaanites the b*nei Hheth are just
one Semitic speaking Canaanite group
of that region. There home was in the
environs of Hebron as shown on the big
map. Where is the recorded historical
or archaeological evidence for a mass
migration either to or from Hebron and
central Anatolia?


My goal is not to convince you and I
guess most grasp both of our points
but if you won't go and reference
archaeology science instead of
nothing but religious "so the Bible
say" kind of stuff then I leave this
sub-topic to you because what more
can I say without repeating myself.
 

---

Posted by matu (Member # 22002) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
The Y*hoshu`a quote outlines within the
Levant and Mesopotamia the extent of
the 'Am Yisra'el land claim.

As Canaanites the b*nei Hheth are just
one Semitic speaking Canaanite group
of that region. There home was in the
environs of Hebron as shown on the big
map.

My goal is not to convince you and I
guess most grasp both of our points
but if you won't go and reference
the science of archaeology instead
of nothing but religious "so the
Bible say" kind of stuff then I
am done because what more can I say.

---

I know you're not trying to convince me, nor I you. I have no problem searching the archeological record outside the Bible, now that you just provided it. And no, I don't speak like that. Thanks.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Sorry, I didn't mean you speak
that way however that mentality
does exist and is pervasive in
a set of believers while other
of the faithful integrate the
two or set them side by side
both as truths but different
truths.

Also sorry I can't list you
some current books but one
nice old one you may like
but do not follow the link
its just part of the image

James B Pritchard
The ancient Near East. 2 vols:
an anthology of texts and pictures.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, ©1958, 1973.

PS at one time I owned the
BR set and the BAR up to
2002.

Why not take advantage of the
trial issue? It works without
filling out the plasticash info.

I'm betting you'll love it. And if
not, write CANCEL when returning
the invoice. Whattaya got to loose?
(no I'm not an ad man )
 

---

Posted by matu (Member # 22002) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Sorry, I didn't mean you speak
that way however that mentality
does exist and is pervasive in
a set of believers while other
of the faithful integrate the
two or set them side by side
both as truths but different
truths.

Also sorry I can't list you
some current books but one
nice old one you may like
but do not follow the link
its just part of the image

James B Pritchard
The ancient Near East. 2 vols:
an anthology of texts and pictures.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, ©1958, 1973.

PS at one time I owned the
BR set and the BAR up to
2002.

Why not take advantage of the
trial issue? It works without
filling out the plasticash info.

I'm betting you'll love it. And if
not, write CANCEL when returning
the invoice. Whattaya got to loose?
(no I'm not an ad man )

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

PS at one time I owned the
BR set and the BAR up to
2002.

---

Um, what do you mean, when you say you used to own the "BR set and the BAR"?

---

quote:

---

That's a good question. I'm not sure. I know from reading the links sent by Tukuler, that an ancient Greek historian identified Syrians by their curly hair. Quite frankly, I believe the indigenous peoples of this area were "Black". I'm still trying to figure out how these modern "middle eastern peoples" got their light skins. Djehuti alluded earlier that European populations migrated into Mesopotamia. But who these groups were and when they migrated is something I need to research further.

Proving the indigenous peoples of Canaan, stretching south to Arabia and east into Elam having Black skin isn't all that difficult. Figuring the ethnic makeup of the northern areas of the Hittite kingdom, Assyria, Bablyon, etc in ancient times is a bit more daunting.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

PS at one time I owned the
BR set and the BAR up to
2002.

---

Um, what do you mean, when you say you used to own the "BR set and the BAR"?

---

.


BAS Biblical Archaeology Society

BR Bible Review

BAR Biblical Archaeology Review

---

quote:

---

I'm curious to know how far you've gotten in your research because I'd also like to know how and when modern middle easterners became lighter/light skinned. [/QB]

---

Well, I know a lot of it has to do with the arab invasion. But I've come to learn recently that the indigenous Arabs were a Black people. So how did THEY become so lightskinned, and subsequently conquer the so-called Middle East, to include Egypt and North Africa?

In a BROAD NUTSHELL, from some research I've done on this board, realhistoryww.com, among others, all these places were essentially "Black". From the Black Berbers and Bedouins of North Africa and Canaan, to the indigenous Arab groups throughout the Arabian peninsula, to the Levant ie. Judah/Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Moab, Ammon, Edom, to Elam.

Things get fuzzy for me when I get to Babylon, Assyria, Persia the Hittite empire, etc. From what I understand, EVERYONE here was Black until the 'Aryans' swooped down from the Caucuses, and created the present day mulatto Iranians and Indians we see to this day, even creating brown Turks, etc. Another wave of miscegenation happened with the Ancient Romans and Greeks and (mixed) Turks
and the dark-skinned people of Arabia, North Africa the Levant, subsequently creating the mulatto Arabs.

Many Arabs in ancient times remained Black (hence Moors), but many were mixed as well, but they were all called 'Arabs'. These were the first group of people to really make a big deal about 'color' which was soon to be ingrained in their newfound religion of Islam which they began to spread rapidly around 600AD. They make a big deal about 'black' and 'white' but I'm not sure how much that is due to plagiarism. I say that because Mohammed from all accounts was Black or at least a mulatto, but he's frequently quoted saying horribly racist things about the Black race in the Koran. Makes no sense to me. Well, that's the extent of my understanding. I'm sure I've made some huge, erm, 'generalizations' though, so hopefully someone here can provide a more accurate account
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 









 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Earth to Lyinass, the above picture spam of modern people do not reflect what ancient the ancient Greco-Romans described. LOL
 

---

Posted by Somner (Member # 22034) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

quote:

---

I'm curious to know how far you've gotten in your research because I'd also like to know how and when modern middle easterners became lighter/light skinned.

---

Well, I know a lot of it has to do with the arab invasion. But I've come to learn recently that the indigenous Arabs were a Black people. So how did THEY become so lightskinned, and subsequently conquer the so-called Middle East, to include Egypt and North Africa?

In a BROAD NUTSHELL, from some research I've done on this board, realhistoryww.com, among others, all these places were essentially "Black". From the Black Berbers and Bedouins of North Africa and Canaan, to the indigenous Arab groups throughout the Arabian peninsula, to the Levant ie. Judah/Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Moab, Ammon, Edom, to Elam.

Things get fuzzy for me when I get to Babylon, Assyria, Persia the Hittite empire, etc. From what I understand, EVERYONE here was Black until the 'Aryans' swooped down from the Caucuses, and created the present day mulatto Iranians and Indians we see to this day, even creating brown Turks, etc. Another wave of miscegenation happened with the Ancient Romans and Greeks and (mixed) Turks
and the dark-skinned people of Arabia, North Africa the Levant, subsequently creating the mulatto Arabs.

Many Arabs in ancient times remained Black (hence Moors), but many were mixed as well, but they were all called 'Arabs'. These were the first group of people to really make a big deal about 'color' which was soon to be ingrained in their newfound religion of Islam which they began to spread rapidly around 600AD. They make a big deal about 'black' and 'white' but I'm not sure how much that is due to plagiarism. I say that because Mohammed from all accounts was Black or at least a mulatto, but he's frequently quoted saying horribly racist things about the Black race in the Koran. Makes no sense to me. Well, that's the extent of my understanding. I'm sure I've made some huge, erm, 'generalizations' though, so hopefully someone here can provide a more accurate account [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Somner:
I think I saw a few pictures of indigenous black Arabs on this site, although I can't remember which thread the pictures were in. I'm not sure if they were authentic pictures but it isn't hard to believe that Arabs were black until relatively recently. I'm somewhat surprised to learn about the anti-black racism inherent in Islam. Is this completely true? I know very little about Islam.

---

quote:

---

Also called Mobarrad, full name Abu Al-‘Abbas Muhammad Ibn Yazid, is a book on grammar

What he (Fadl ibn al Abas) meant by: I am the green one; is the dark one, the black one. The Arabs used to take pride in their darkness and blackness and they had a distaste for a light complexion and they used to say that a light complexion was the complexion of the non-Arabs.

---

quote:

---

Al Marvazi: Kitab Taba’i al Hayawan (1120) (Book on Animals) from Persia.

—————————————————–

Taken from: Marvazi on China, the Turks and India 1942

Complete name: Sharaf al-Zaman Tahir MarvaziAlso called: Al Marwazi

He took his information from a missing geographical work from Al-Jayhani

On the Habasha:

The Habasha (Ethiopians) are a category under which come different classes of people such as the Nubians, Zanj, etc.. Their territories consist of extensive countries with a wide-stretching periphery the extremity of which ends where habitation ends and cultivation and procreation ceases…..

As for the heat in the lands of Habasha and Zanj, it reaches the extreme limit in scorching. They find beauty in the intensity of blackness and abhor whiteness and hold that a white man cannot be healthy...

...It is said in the Tawarikh (Histories) that one of the kings of Khorasan crossed the Oxus in order to fight the Turks. In his troops there were some Zanj. When the Turks sallied forth to meet them, they saw the Zanj,

---

quote:

---

The Blacks continue: coming from Abyssinia, we were Masters of the country of Arabia up to Mecca, and on all the country our law reigned. We put to rout Du Nuwas, killed by the ‘Aqyal Himyarites. You, you never dominated our country.

---

quote:

---

The Zanj say to the Arabs: You are so ignorant that during the jahiliyya (the times of ignorance ) you regarded us as your equals when it came to marrying Arab women, but with the advent of the justice of Islam you decided this practice was bad. Yet the desert is full of Zanj married to Arab wives, and they have been princes and kings and have safeguarded your rights and sheltered you against your enemies.

You even have sayings in your language which vaunt the deeds of our kings–deeds which you often placed above your own; this you would not have done had you not considered them superior to your own.

---

quote:

---

Labid ibn Radi’a recited the following:

If a person could reach eternity during his lifetime, Abu Yaksum would be among those.

This kind of virtue has never been ascribed to anyone before.

The (Zanj) also say: from Labid’s verses it becomes also clear that you put our kings higher then your own. Darkness came over those who survived from Muharriq’s family. Darkness that had done its work with Tubba and Heraclius, Darkness that had vanquished Abraha, who was living in the palace of Mawkal. So he prefers Abraha , but he would like the other kings to be his equals.

---

quote:

---

A hadith of the Prophet says : Follow the great black color.

---

quote:

---

Adjoining the Berber are the Abyssinians, the most numerous and powerful of the Blacks. From their country Yemen once had its kings. The king of the Abyssinians was entitled Al Negashi and the capital of his kingdom was the city of Kaber. The Abyssinians are Christians but it is said that one of their kings embraced the true faith when Mohammed visited their country in the Hijra. They believe they are destined to become masters of Yemen and all Arabia 93

---

The Negroland of Arabs Examined and Explained


It should be similar to Ancient Egypt and Ancient Nubia. We assume that Zanj and Nubia are just in the shadow of Egypt and Arabs, but the Egyptians were influenced by the Nubians and often intermaried with Nubians...
 

---

Posted by matu (Member # 22002) on :
 
[/QB][/QUOTE]I think I saw a few pictures of indigenous black Arabs on this site, although I can't remember which thread the pictures were in. I'm not sure if they were authentic pictures but it isn't hard to believe that Arabs were black until relatively recently. I'm somewhat surprised to learn about the anti-black racism inherent in Islam. Is this completely true? I know very little about Islam. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Here are the earliest images of ARabs that I know of, circa 600BC






These guys are clearly Black. No other people are drawn with locks and can afford to ride around bareback under the intense heat of the Arabian sun. I've included the link below which gives some detail to the origins of the indigenous peoples of Arabia and how they came to become the "modern" Arabs scattered throughout N. Africa and the so-called Middle East.

Real History World Wide (Arabs)
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
I don't recommend anyone interested
in "real" history not visit Mike's
website. It's a radical cultural
history type place. Visit it for
that, but not for "mainstream"
history.
 

---

Posted by Somner (Member # 22034) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
@Somner


I think I find some sources on how the early Arabs viewed themselves and how they were not always racist against blacks but looked up to them. I think you will find them interesting. From an article (note they cite their sources).

quote:

---

Also called Mobarrad, full name Abu Al-‘Abbas Muhammad Ibn Yazid, is a book on grammar

What he (Fadl ibn al Abas) meant by: I am the green one; is the dark one, the black one. The Arabs used to take pride in their darkness and blackness and they had a distaste for a light complexion and they used to say that a light complexion was the complexion of the non-Arabs.

---

^^^So the early Arabs were proud of their blackness and had a distate for lighter skin complexion? How did Islam become so anti-black later on when the early Arabs were fond of their blackness? But note "light skin complexion is that if non-Arab".

quote:

---

Al Marvazi: Kitab Taba’i al Hayawan (1120) (Book on Animals) from Persia.

—————————————————–

Taken from: Marvazi on China, the Turks and India 1942

Complete name: Sharaf al-Zaman Tahir MarvaziAlso called: Al Marwazi

He took his information from a missing geographical work from Al-Jayhani

On the Habasha:

The Habasha (Ethiopians) are a category under which come different classes of people such as the Nubians, Zanj, etc.. Their territories consist of extensive countries with a wide-stretching periphery the extremity of which ends where habitation ends and cultivation and procreation ceases…..

As for the heat in the lands of Habasha and Zanj, it reaches the extreme limit in scorching. They find beauty in the intensity of blackness and abhor whiteness and hold that a white man cannot be healthy...

...It is said in the Tawarikh (Histories) that one of the kings of Khorasan crossed the Oxus in order to fight the Turks. In his troops there were some Zanj. When the Turks sallied forth to meet them, they saw the Zanj,

---

^^^If I'm reading this correctly, it seems "blackness" was not looked upon negative, but something of beauty? Not only that but it appears Zanj were probably a mix of free and enslave men.


But lets see what Africans thought about the Arabs:

quote:

---

The Blacks continue: coming from Abyssinia, we were Masters of the country of Arabia up to Mecca, and on all the country our law reigned. We put to rout Du Nuwas, killed by the ‘Aqyal Himyarites. You, you never dominated our country.

---

Its over-exaggerrated that blacks were always enslaved in Arabia. Blacks came as conquerors, and Abyssinia(modern day Ethiopia) ruled over Yemen and had kings over there. The text also reveals there were free Zanj amongst the Arabs and that the Zanj married Arab women. The Arabs use to look up to the Zanj. The Zanj were highly advanced even before Islam. Male Zanj also use to marry Arab women and the Arabs use to look up to Zanj kings.

quote:

---

The Zanj say to the Arabs: You are so ignorant that during the jahiliyya (the times of ignorance ) you regarded us as your equals when it came to marrying Arab women, but with the advent of the justice of Islam you decided this practice was bad. Yet the desert is full of Zanj married to Arab wives, and they have been princes and kings and have safeguarded your rights and sheltered you against your enemies.

You even have sayings in your language which vaunt the deeds of our kings–deeds which you often placed above your own; this you would not have done had you not considered them superior to your own.

---

quote:

---

Labid ibn Radi’a recited the following:

If a person could reach eternity during his lifetime, Abu Yaksum would be among those.

This kind of virtue has never been ascribed to anyone before.

The (Zanj) also say: from Labid’s verses it becomes also clear that you put our kings higher then your own. Darkness came over those who survived from Muharriq’s family. Darkness that had done its work with Tubba and Heraclius, Darkness that had vanquished Abraha, who was living in the palace of Mawkal. So he prefers Abraha , but he would like the other kings to be his equals.

---

quote:

---

A hadith of the Prophet says : Follow the great black color.

---

So again there was a different view of blacks in general back then.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by matu:

---

I think I saw a few pictures of indigenous black Arabs on this site, although I can't remember which thread the pictures were in. I'm not sure if they were authentic pictures but it isn't hard to believe that Arabs were black until relatively recently. I'm somewhat surprised to learn about the anti-black racism inherent in Islam. Is this completely true? I know very little about Islam. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Here are the earliest images of ARabs that I know of, circa 600BC






These guys are clearly Black. No other people are drawn with locks and can afford to ride around bareback under the intense heat of the Arabian sun. I've included the link below which gives some detail to the origins of the indigenous peoples of Arabia and how they came to become the "modern" Arabs scattered throughout N. Africa and the so-called Middle East.

Real History World Wide (Arabs) [/QB][/QUOTE]

These are really great pictures and they really illustrate the point. Thanks for sharing.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Somner:

quote:

---

These guys are clearly Black. No other people are drawn with locks and can afford to ride around bareback under the intense heat of the Arabian sun. I've included the link below which gives some detail to the origins of the indigenous peoples of Arabia and how they came to become the "modern" Arabs scattered throughout N. Africa and the so-called Middle East.

Real History World Wide (Arabs)

---

These are really great pictures and they really illustrate the point. Thanks for sharing.

---

Clearly black you kiddin me?

^^^ Taking the above photo, zooming iin for a closer look, call me crazy but he doesn't look African to me nor has dredlocks






It is part of this large scene which may take place within the Assyrian empire where some Arabs had migrated to




Look at this bedouin from Jordon



Not that the above man is a match for the sculpture but he's of the region and appears dark skinned, as dark as many regarded as black people.
If you assume he is tanned to a large extent it doesn't matter. If he were to go shirtless all the time he would be capable of have that same tan all over his body. That browned color protects you from getting burned.

So a lot of assumptions are being made.
realhistory.com carefully selects images in order to try to limit possibilities
The above sculpture is not clealry anything. The firgures on it could be alot of Middle Eastern types. I suspect not as likely rastas
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ Actually there is no way to tell for sure since the Assyrian murals show these Arabian in profile while the modern Arab man is in frontal view. Other than that I don't necessarily agree that the Arabs depicted in the murals are 'black' since no color is shown so their color is inconclusive. The difference with the mural depicting ancient Judites was that we have actual skeletal remains of the Judites showing African affinities.

By lyinass logic the Elamite man below couldn't be black due to his features.



Thankfully we have painted murals to show otherwise.

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ Earth to Lyinass, the above picture spam of modern people do not reflect what ancient the ancient Greco-Romans described. LOL

---

Fvck your mother and your whole family

---

LMAO I expect nothing less from an intellectually frustrated fool who cannot comprehend the simple concept of population change over time.

Again this is like saying modern Egyptians are how ancient Egyptians looked when ALL the evidence says otherwise.

Lyinass productions flushed down the toilet.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
.
 

---

Posted by BlessedbyHorus (Member # 22000) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Somner:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
@Somner


I think I find some sources on how the early Arabs viewed themselves and how they were not always racist against blacks but looked up to them. I think you will find them interesting. From an article (note they cite their sources).

quote:

---

Also called Mobarrad, full name Abu Al-‘Abbas Muhammad Ibn Yazid, is a book on grammar

What he (Fadl ibn al Abas) meant by: I am the green one; is the dark one, the black one. The Arabs used to take pride in their darkness and blackness and they had a distaste for a light complexion and they used to say that a light complexion was the complexion of the non-Arabs.

---

^^^So the early Arabs were proud of their blackness and had a distate for lighter skin complexion? How did Islam become so anti-black later on when the early Arabs were fond of their blackness? But note "light skin complexion is that if non-Arab".

quote:

---

Al Marvazi: Kitab Taba’i al Hayawan (1120) (Book on Animals) from Persia.

—————————————————–

Taken from: Marvazi on China, the Turks and India 1942

Complete name: Sharaf al-Zaman Tahir MarvaziAlso called: Al Marwazi

He took his information from a missing geographical work from Al-Jayhani

On the Habasha:

The Habasha (Ethiopians) are a category under which come different classes of people such as the Nubians, Zanj, etc.. Their territories consist of extensive countries with a wide-stretching periphery the extremity of which ends where habitation ends and cultivation and procreation ceases…..

As for the heat in the lands of Habasha and Zanj, it reaches the extreme limit in scorching. They find beauty in the intensity of blackness and abhor whiteness and hold that a white man cannot be healthy...

...It is said in the Tawarikh (Histories) that one of the kings of Khorasan crossed the Oxus in order to fight the Turks. In his troops there were some Zanj. When the Turks sallied forth to meet them, they saw the Zanj,

---

^^^If I'm reading this correctly, it seems "blackness" was not looked upon negative, but something of beauty? Not only that but it appears Zanj were probably a mix of free and enslave men.


But lets see what Africans thought about the Arabs:

quote:

---

The Blacks continue: coming from Abyssinia, we were Masters of the country of Arabia up to Mecca, and on all the country our law reigned. We put to rout Du Nuwas, killed by the ‘Aqyal Himyarites. You, you never dominated our country.

---

Its over-exaggerrated that blacks were always enslaved in Arabia. Blacks came as conquerors, and Abyssinia(modern day Ethiopia) ruled over Yemen and had kings over there. The text also reveals there were free Zanj amongst the Arabs and that the Zanj married Arab women. The Arabs use to look up to the Zanj. The Zanj were highly advanced even before Islam. Male Zanj also use to marry Arab women and the Arabs use to look up to Zanj kings.

quote:

---

The Zanj say to the Arabs: You are so ignorant that during the jahiliyya (the times of ignorance ) you regarded us as your equals when it came to marrying Arab women, but with the advent of the justice of Islam you decided this practice was bad. Yet the desert is full of Zanj married to Arab wives, and they have been princes and kings and have safeguarded your rights and sheltered you against your enemies.

You even have sayings in your language which vaunt the deeds of our kings–deeds which you often placed above your own; this you would not have done had you not considered them superior to your own.

---

quote:

---

Labid ibn Radi’a recited the following:

If a person could reach eternity during his lifetime, Abu Yaksum would be among those.

This kind of virtue has never been ascribed to anyone before.

The (Zanj) also say: from Labid’s verses it becomes also clear that you put our kings higher then your own. Darkness came over those who survived from Muharriq’s family. Darkness that had done its work with Tubba and Heraclius, Darkness that had vanquished Abraha, who was living in the palace of Mawkal. So he prefers Abraha , but he would like the other kings to be his equals.

---

quote:

---

A hadith of the Prophet says : Follow the great black color.

---

So again there was a different view of blacks in general back then.

---

Wow! This is some excellent information, Blessedbhorus.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass,:

You are a fucking asshole

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lyinass,:

You are a fucking asshole

---

No dear, that would by YOU. As an asshole is where sh*t falls out. Get it?

Anyway, to BlessedbyHorus I should caution you about the whole 'Arab' identity as it can be confusing. Note that there are indigenous black Arabians thus there were blacks among the Arabs and in some myths these were considered to be the original 'Arabs' while others say the Arab ethnicity lay else where.

Whatever the case may be it is interesting that the Hadiths or legends about Muhammad describe how Muhammad's apostle Khalid bin Al-Walid slayed the three great goddesses of the Arabs called 'demons' described as black women!

---

Can someone here please verify whether or not these photographs are authentic depictions of indigenous Arabs? These photographs were posted in another thread on this site. I'm not doubting the credibility of the person who originally posted these photographs in any way ( I don't mean any disrespect), it's just that I'm new to this site and there are a few things that have been posted here that I'm unfamiliar with. I would like to share these photographs with a friend of mine, however, I'd like to verify that they are indeed genuine depictions of indigenous Arabs before I do so. Also, is the original source for the photographs "Hebrew Life and Times"?


Thanks in advance









 

---

Posted by Somner (Member # 22034) on :
 
I'm not sure why my last post specifically replied to Djehuti (which is fine as he's quite knowledgeable) but the question is for anyone who has knowledge in this area.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ To answer your question, black-and-white photos can be tricky because in certain lighting and especially if it's sunny, a person's complexion can look much darker than it really is. But I will say they photos are fairly accurate in portraying black Arabians as some of those tribes are still black today.

I take it you got those photos from Mike's website.

Here are a couple of Mahra men:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MveGx8o0csw/Tzhg7qQYj0I/AAAAAAAAAFw/VJfNbfsJ3m0/s1600/Black+Arab+2.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2XYBZzVoUOM/Tzhgx8ReoDI/AAAAAAAAAFo/kESIJa9aVnY/s1600/Black+Arab+1.jpg
 

---

Posted by Somner (Member # 22034) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ To answer your question, black-and-white photos can be tricky because in certain lighting and especially if it's sunny, a person's complexion can look much darker than it really is. But I will say they photos are fairly accurate in portraying black Arabians as some of those tribes are still black today.

I take it you got those photos from Mike's website.

Here are a couple of Mahra men:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MveGx8o0csw/Tzhg7qQYj0I/AAAAAAAAAFw/VJfNbfsJ3m0/s1600/Black+Arab+2.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2XYBZzVoUOM/Tzhgx8ReoDI/AAAAAAAAAFo/kESIJa9aVnY/s1600/Black+Arab+1.jpg

---

• * Andromeda (Greek mythology):
  in Greek mythology, beautiful daughter of King
  Cepheus and Queen Cassiope of Joppa in Palestine
  (called Ethiopia) and wife of Perseus.
  
  from Encyclopædia Britannica Online

• The majority of people say the Judaeans were
  those Ethiopians whom fear and hatred obliged
  to change their habitations, in the reign of king
  Cepheus.
  
  Tacitus -- The Histories Book V.2