ast Africans have the m78 Y chromse in them from the Egypt area, not the other way round (Cruciani 2008), and it dates back about 15,000 years. The the DNA link ound between Ethiopia and Egypt is actually a Eurasian one, M1, and that dates back as far as the Y chromosome. Modern Egyptians can trace most of their ancestry back to about 24k ago in the Nile valley. Historical immgration from Europeans and Arabs was pretty limited, to about 10% max. Not enough to change their appearance.
So far every anthropoogical study of the Egyptians has concluded they were the same essentially as modern Egyptians.
There have been three well documented Eurasian migrations into North Africa- one about 30k ago, one 10k ago and one 8k ago. These people make up a major part of the Egyptian population.
The Predynastic of Upper Egypt and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa,
The paper also has good summary of other studies on it.
Dr SOY Keita, a black American anthropologist of West African descent is on Nat Geo explaining how the phenotype (appearance)of Egyptians hasn't changed
If you want to make out that Egyptians were black Africans you have to explain away why the studies always place them as being like modern Egyptian, and why modern Egyptians show up about 70% for native African y chromosomes. How did they magically transform appearance? There's virtually no recent Arab or European ancestry in them. At least 90% of their DNA has been there for about 8,000 years or more.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
Actually, Brace' recent twig shows ancient Egyptians being more similar cranio-facially to northern Nubains than to modern Egyptians and Lucotte's Y-Chromosome data shows Southern Egyptians (who have the highest retention) to pool closer to northern Sudanese than to lower Egyptians ("Arabs"). Keita is speaking generally and generically as no one denies that to be true. He himself writes in one of his published papers however, that:
quote:The information from the living Egyptian population may not be as useful because historical records indicate substantial immigration into Egypt over the last several millennia, and it seems to have been far greater from the Near East and Europe than from areas far south of Egypt. "Substantial immigration" can actually mean a relatively small number of people in terms of population genetics theory. It has been determined that an average migration rate of one percent per generation into a region could result in a great change of the original gene frequencies in only several thousand years. (This assumes that all migrants marry natives and that all native-migrant offspring remain in the region.) It is obvious then that an ethnic group or nationality can change in average gene frequencies or physiognomy by intermarriage, unless social rules exclude the products of "mixed" unions from membership in the receiving group. More abstractly this means that geographically defined populations can undergo significant genetic change with a small percentage of steady assimilation of "foreign" genes. This is true even if natural selection does not favor the genes (and does not eliminate them). Examples of regions that have biologically absorbed genetically different immigrants are Sicily, Portugal, and Greece, where the frequencies of various genetic markers (and historical records) indicate sub-Saharan and supra-Saharan African migrants. This scenario is different from one in which a different population replaces another via colonization. Native Egyptians were variable. Foreigners added to this variability.
and he concludes the paper by stating:
quote:"Early Nile Valley populations were primarily coextensive with indigenous African populations. Linguistic and archaeological data provide key supporting evidence for a primarily African origin."
From Egypt in Africa, (1996), pp. 25-27
^A direct slap in the face of your "Arab origin".. Which is what you get for misrepresenting people's positions and paraphrasing out of context.
E-M78 is a sub-clade of e1b1b and by the time it emerged in upper northeast Africa it had never left Africa and thus, has nothing to do with historic Arabs. Arabs didn't even exist 15,000 years ago, especially in Africa.
M1 has no progenitor in Asia but all of its components can be seen in Africa as well as its highest rate of concentration/diversity and thus, there is no evidence that it originates elsewhere besides Africa..
Your "demonstrated Eurasian migrations" are not demonstrable nor has your hypothetical migration affected ancient Egypt:
quote:temporal relationships were assessed by Mantel and Partial Mantel tests. The results indicate overall population continuity over the Predynastic and early Dynastic, and high levels of genetic heterogeneity, thereby suggesting that state formation occurred as a mainly indigenous process.
- Zakrzewski
Give it up, your argument is weak and amateur..
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
Egypt IS an Arab state.
As far as the Pharaonic era goes, i didn't think the Arabs nor the Arab/Islamic expansion yet existed but whatever floats your boat dude.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
I was thinking the same thing Freehand.
I did not know Arabs were in Egypt before the Islamic Invasions. I did not know that Arabs even existed at this time.
If this is what makes this guy happy, who am I to ruin his fun.
Peace
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
People please don't fall into the trap of seeing Arabs as distinct from their southern (African) neighbors
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Racism is a constantly evolving entity. For example people had a harder time seeing so called "Negroes" as influential in the "Middle East" in the 19th century as they did in the 17th century but its at its worse point today. Keep in mind that the guy quoted bellow is a Pseudo racist!
quote: The Negro may be inferior in intellectual power to the Chinaman and the aboriginal American, yet the more the darkness lifts from African barbarism the less inclined are we to rate Negro culture below Bedouin and Berber civilizations....
The Negro might almost be characterized as a semi-civilized race. An extinct culture in Fezzan (South of Tripoli) has been justly credited to him. His native genius had already struck out a path of its own, even before the first immigrants into Africa—the Asian founders of Egypt and the Berber—arrived. The Egyptian civilization—in part, at least—was originally the work of Negroes cooperating with the Asiatic immigrants....
The average of Negro culture, though below that of Mexico, Peru and Yucatan, was higher than that of other aboriginal Americans. Many Negro tribes, untouched by any stimulus from outside, voluntarily rose above the level where Caesar found the Kelts of Britain , and, even from the European and the Christian point of view, had a measure of the factors and forces that initiate real civilization. The most useful of metallurgic discoveries or inventions consists of smelting and working iron. The American Indian, whether Aztec, Inca, Maya or other, never fell upon this art. The Negro, though mentally inferior to the Indian, found it independently.
quote: The lowest factors in the future development of Africa are the Abyssinian and the Arab, both Semitic in ancestry, both interbred with Hamites and Negroes.
To sum up my point look at these two lines from the 21st century
quote:As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa....
How did they magically transform appearance? There's virtually no recent Arab or European ancestry
Compared to these two lines from a century ago
quote:The Egyptian civilization—in part, at least—was originally the work of Negroes cooperating with the Asiatic immigrants....
Abyssinian and the Arab, both Semitic in ancestry, both interbred with Hamites and Negroes.
Posted by zarahan (Member # 15718) on :
Originally posted by arabegypt:
east Africans have the m78 Y chromse in them from the Egypt area, not the other way round (Cruciani 2008), and it dates back about 15,000 years. The the DNA link ound between Ethiopia and Egypt is actually a Eurasian one, M1, and that dates back as far as the Y chromosome.
Strike 1:
Dubious actually. But even accepting your claim, your so-called "Egypt area" would include the Sudan, Nubia and parts of the Sahara, full of troubling "black" types.. If you are hoping to airbrush them out of the picture you are already failing miserably from the first ball..
Modern Egyptians can trace most of their ancestry back to about 24k ago in the Nile valley. Historical immgration from Europeans and Arabs was pretty limited, to about 10% max. Not enough to change their appearance. So far every anthropoogical study of the Egyptians has concluded they were the same essentially as modern Egyptians. There have been three well documented Eurasian migrations into North Africa- one about 30k ago, one 10k ago and one 8k ago. These people make up a major part of the Egyptian population. The Predynastic of Upper Egypt and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa,The paper also has good summary of other studies on it.
Strike 2.
I notice you have provided little proof of so-called "well documented" migrations. Why no studies provided? But anyway taking your claim at face value, early "migrants" would be those LOOKING LIKE black Africans. You quoted from CL Brace 1993. The reason that Europeans are even close is because early Europeans looked like Africans, as did West Asians. CL Brace demonstrrated this in his 2005 paper, and numerous other scholars back this up. So if you are hoping to get those pesky blacks out and bring Europeans in, you still fail.
[/QB][/QUOTE]
If you want to make out that Egyptians were black Africans you have to explain away why the studies always place them as being like modern Egyptian, and why modern Egyptians show up about 70% for native African y chromosomes. How did they magically transform appearance? There's virtually no recent Arab or European ancestry in them. At least 90% of their DNA has been there for about 8,000 years or more.
Strike 3.
Your argument based on continuity fails. For one thing it assumes that all so-called black Africans look like one 'type" But "negro" or black Africans show widely varying features, from light yellow skin among the San, to curly or straightish hair in the Horn and Sahara, to narrow noses and jet black color on the cool slopes of high East African mountains. Africans are the most diverse people in the world. They dont need any "race mix" to vary in how they look. So looking for a "black" type on Egyptian tomb walls are declaring them to be "foreign" when found is bogus. Dark skin is a routine part of the Egyptian makeup. It can be seen across all eras and down to the present time. In the picture below for example, tell us who is "truly" black and who is not?
In fact the ancient Copts, held to be among the most representative of ancient Egyptians show definite DNA links with the "darker" peoples further south.
"Genetic continuum of the Nubians with their kin in southern Egypt is indicated by comparable frequencies of E-V12 the predominant M78 subclade among southern Egyptians."
"The Copt samples displayed a most interesting Y-profile, enough (as much as that of Gaalien in Sudan) to suggest that they actually represent a living record of the peopling of Egypt. The significant frequency of B-M60 in this group might be a relic of a history of colonization of southern Egypt probably by Nilotics in the early state formation, something that conforms both to recorded history and to Egyptian mythology." Source: (Hisham Y. Hassan 1, Peter A. Underhill 2, Luca L. Cavalli-Sforza 2, Muntaser E. Ibrahim 1. (2008). Y-chromosome variation among Sudanese: Restricted gene flow, concordance with language, geography, and history. Am J Phys Anthropology, 2008.)
Also as regards continuity, a heavy measure of continuity is shown in the "negroid" Badari, held by dental studies to be a very good representative of the ancient Egyptians. Now throw in the limb proportion studies showing the ancient Egyptians to have a tropical body plan and your claims fall flat, really flat. Indeed the ancient Egyptians cluster closer to tropical people like US blacks than southern or northern Europeans, or US whites.
Again, black Africans can have light skin or dark skin. Straight noses or broad noses. Tight hair or loose hair. It's all part of built in genetic variability of Africans. And all this diversity is found BELOW the Sahara by the way. You dont have to go to "north" Africa to find narrow noses in Africa or straightish hair, or light skin color..
You quote from Brace but here's the breakdown on Brace:
So that's 3 strikes: It's like baseball baby.. YOU OUT...
Posted by zarahan (Member # 15718) on :
Originally posted by markellion: Racism is a constantly evolving entity. For example people had a harder time seeing so called "Negroes" as influential in the "Middle East" in the 19th century as they did in the 17th century but its at its worse point today. Keep in mind that the guy quoted bellow is a Pseudo racist!
He was a product of his time, but even then he was willing to at least look at the evidence on the ground somewhat. Many "moderns" who followed him tried to airbrush blacks out of the picture entirely. Sometimes these older references yield a lot of surprises. Keita says that some older scholarship originally was a lot more balanced before the "Aryan" types took over. Keita went back and read the old excavation reports by some Egyptologists. Time after time you see field workers finding what in their day would clearly classify as "negroid" remains, only to have them relabeled as "Mediterranean" or excluded altogether when the final "offical" paperwork was issued and books written.
"Analyses of Egyptian crania are numerous. Vercoutter (1978) notes that ancient Egyptian crania have frequently all been lumped (implicitly or explicitly) as Mediterranean, although Negroid remains are recorded in substantial numbers by many workers... "Nutter (1958), using the Penrose statistic, demonstrated that Nagada I and Badari crania, both regarded as Negroid, were almost identical and that these were most similar to the Negroid Nubian series from Kerma studied by Collett (1933). [Collett, not accepting variability, excluded "clear negro" crania found in the Kerma series from her analysis, as did Morant (1925), implying that they were foreign..."
And Diop quoted Volney we know. Some of these folk did the best they could at the time, but they were products of their time. They got paid to fall in with the current thinking of the time. Some deserve props like Riesner in his Nubian research to the extent that they helped uncover a baseline of information. Its up to us today to make sure the distortions of the past don't reoccur, and that's what ES has been doing in spades.
As for ArabEgypt above, he keep trying to airbrush out those "darker" folk from Egypt in favor of alleged "Mediterranean" or "Middle eastern" migrants. But its the "darker" south that was more advanced and that unified the country to usher in the Dynasties. Must be hard for the Sheikh of Araby to stomach.. If only those pesky "bleks" would go away.. lol
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt:
The the DNA link ound between Ethiopia and Egypt is actually a Eurasian one, M1, and that dates back as far as the Y chromosome.
Please *take your time* and *carefully* go through this link on M1 and get yourself educated along the way: Link Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
You people are a bunch of fools to get played this latest sockpuppet. Its the same white guy with pink blisters on his penis who has a thousand nicks pretending to be everyone from wolof, to scicilian, to "berber", and now arab.
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: People please don't fall into the trap of seeing Arabs as distinct from their southern (African) neighbors
Thanks for the info, but i was referring to 'Arab' as both a culture and an ethnicity, and 'African' is right. There was no African ethnicity that referred to its self as 'negro' before Euros introduced the word.
Well actually ... Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
arabegypt Quote - There have been three well documented Eurasian migrations into North Africa- one about 30k ago, one 10k ago and one 8k ago. These people make up a major part of the Egyptian population.
I am not aware of these "IN" migrations to Africa. Can you please tell me who the people involved were?
Historical immgration from Europeans and Arabs was pretty limited, to about 10% max. Not enough to change their appearance.
Here again, you have me at a disadvantage. Who exactly were the people that you speak of (there were many European migrants to Africa), and how did you arrive at the number of 10%.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
No "Arabs" existed 30,000 years ago. Therefore, even if there were claims of "Eurasian" migrations into Africa, they certainly weren't "Arabs".
Likewise, 30,000 years ago, most humans on earth were not "white" as in looking like modern whites from Europe or Asia. The likelihood of this is minimal and therefore attaching movements of populations prior to 30,000 years ago, to movements of whites is simply nonsense. Prior to 30,000 years ago, most of the movements were of populations who still had strong African traits as a result of the fact that ALL HUMANS originate in Africa. This is the point that modern racists want to try and overcome by using terms like Eurasian and Caucasoid which have absolutely no bearing on the physical affinities of early humans outside of Africa.
But this does not stop European scientists from purposely propagating such racist nonsense in order to give "white" Eurasians or Caucasoids an ancient history that has no merit in fact.
quote: Attested presence of Caucasian people in Northern Africa goes up to Paleolithic times. From the archaeological record it has been proposed that, as early as 45,000 years ago (ya), anatomically modern humans, most probably expanded the Aterian stone industry from the Maghrib into most of the Sahara [1]. More evolved skeletal remains indicate that 20,000 years later the Iberomaurusian makers, replaced the Aterian culture in the coastal Maghrib. Several hypothesis have been forwarded concerning the Iberomaurusian origin. They can be resumed in those which propose an arrival, from the East, either from the Near East or Eastern Africa, and those which point to west Mediterranean Europe, either from the Iberian Peninsula, across the Gibraltar Strait, or from Italy, via Sicily, as their most probable homeland [2]. Between 10,000 and 6,000 ya the Neolithic Capsian industry flourished farther inland. The historic penetration in the area of classical Mediterranean cultures, ending with the Islamic domination, supposed a strong cultural influx. However, it seems that the demic impact was not strong enough to modify the prehistoric genetic pool.
First, 45,000 years ago, there were no modern humans in Europe. Therefore, whatever these "Eurasians" looked like, they did not look like modern humans.
Second, the paleolithic covers a huge span of time from prior to the existence of modern humans and therefore is a vague and irrelevant statement that means nothing. All hominids originate in Africa and modern homo sapien sapiens have been in Africa longer than any other place on earth. These modern humans have been in Africa for over 200,000 years, yet only moved out of Africa upwards of 60 to 70 thousand years ago.
Some of the oldest modern human remains found in Europe are those of Mladec and they are far younger than the proposed 45,000 year old date of the U6 lineage. Therefore, trying to put a European face on such a lineage is strictly a distortion of the facts.
quote: The dating results document that these samples are as old as we thought they should be, agree Maria Teschler-Nicola from the Natural History Museum in Vienna and Erik Trinkaus from the Washington University in St. Louis, the two anthropologists involved in this study. The Mladeč samples date to around 31,000 years ago, reports Eva Maria Wild from the VERA (Vienna Environmental Research Accelerator) Laboratory at University of Vienna, where the radiocarbon dating has been performed. This is the oldest assemblage of modern humans in Europe which retains many portions of the skeleton plus archaeological objects from the Aurignacian period. Only the two human specimen from a site in Romania are dated to ~35,000 years and are accordingly older. At Mladeč there are multiple individuals - at least 5 or 6 represented. The dating shows that the Mladeč assemblage is central to discussions of modern human emergence in Europe and the fate of the Neandertals as well as discussions of the association of early modern humans with the Aurignacian culture.
The Mladeč remains are universally accepted as those of early modern humans. However, there has been an ongoing debate as to whether they exhibit also distinctive archaic features, indicative of some degree of Neandertal ancestry, or are morphologically aligned solely with recent humans and therefore document only a dispersal of modern humans into Europe.
Because there are no modern humans in Europe, prior to 40,000 years ago at best, modern European scientists, who are stuck on trying to put a white European face on the first humans, play a lot of silly games in order to make it seem that early modern humans outside of Africa 50,000 years ago, looked more like "them" (modern Europeans), than archaic Africans/Aborigines, which is complete racist nonsense. But this is what they do, which is to try and reconstruct history in such a way that Europeans are given a predominance and importance that simply does not exist in order to substantiate their egos more than anything else.
Then to add insult to injury, they want to take North Africa out of Africa, because it is home to many ancient cultures and civilizations that were important to the development of European culture and civilization. But they don't simply go back 5,000 years or so, they want to go all the way back 50,000 years and claim that "Eurasian Caucasoids" were the first inhabitants of North Africa. All of which is to make black Africans out to be FOREIGNERS in North Africa, not withstanding the fact of SUBSTANTIAL black populations in North Africa today and evidence of a continuous black African presence throughout antiquity.
Again, U lineages go back to ancient populations recently migrating from Africa and therefore still carrying traits and some affinities with ancient African populations. Trying to put a "white" Eurasian Caucasoid face on such populations going back 50,000 -60,000 years ago is to try and obscure and cover up the fact that all humans originated in Africa, not Eurasia. But at the same time while trying to cover up and downplay the African origins of such populations, they try and play up the Eurasian "features" of such populations, which had not been present long enough in Eurasia to claim any Eurasian specific features that were distinct from their African forebears. But this is important because then they can use this as a way of making any downstream population into a Eurasian population, even though all humans are simply downstream Africans to begin with.
Posted by astenb (Member # 14524) on :
That is Mathilda. She came out with some of those same quotes. Exactly, Arabs didn't exist 35Kya, Haplotype J is not even that old. I pointed out the same thing we she said Eurasians came into Africa 45kya. R1a and R1b are not even that old. That is a crazy old lady.
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: 30,000 years ago most humans on Earth were not white
Actually, the deleterious mutations [to a few melanin related genes] predominant in Europeans and Central Asians, and fairly common in Near Easterners and North Africans only originate somewhere between 12,000-6,000 years ago in Northern Europe/Central Asia, directly in and after the time frame for when farming and pre-farming cultures emerged in the regions of the South Eastern Sahara, the Nile Valley, and Mediterranean Asia.
Meaning white skinned groups were non-existent or starting out. This doesn't make all non-Europeans then or everyone prior to the genisis of such groups the darkest shade humanly possible.
There are medium and light brown skinned people everywhere, so light and medium brown skinned people could have been fairly [or at least some what] common in the Sahara and Nile Valley regions too.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
When people like Matilda or other researchers say Eurasian Caucasoid, they are intentionally trying to deceive people into subconsciously visualizing white European looking people. Sure, such scientists would also call Ethiopians Caucasoids, but that again is to mask the fact that they are black African. So whatever range of complexions were in the Sahara or associated with the spread of agriculture, they are trying to pin it on white people, not brown, not medium and definitely not black. This then allows them to pretend that blacks were absent from the spread of agriculture and civilization in North Africa, which is the whole point. Of course if they were blacks then this allows for variations in color, including medium and light, but this is not their intent at all.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
Here we go with the conspiracy theories again.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^Go back to "whitehistory".com...
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: When people like Matilda or other researchers say Eurasian Caucasoid, they are intentionally trying to deceive people into subconsciously visualizing white European looking people.
Well, caucasoid doesn't mean shizz and "Eurasian" is its own enemy.
Think about it. Not only are Andaman Islanders "Eurasian"/non-African, but where does the earliest "Eurasian" civilization conveniantly start out at? --> Why?
that's why IMO white supremacy's best bet is telling the truth and trying to water certain things down, and i think they've caught on.
Of course, when they think their audience is no wiser things change - as with any unsophisticated entity they'll attempt to take a mile when they think they have an inch.
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
nothing to do with anyone's reply, just for clarification:
i'm sure everyone understands, but just in case, i meant to say '*functionally* deleterious' and '*coastal* north africans'.
quote:Originally posted by Freehand: Actually, the deleterious mutations [to a few melanin related genes] predominant in Europeans and Central Asians, and fairly common in Near Easterners and North Africans only originate somewhere between 12,000-6,000 years ago in Northern Europe/Central Asia
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
Please, join in on this conversation.
These people know a lot about Egypt and will debunk you all in spades.
I am not expert on genetics but they are.
They know that Egypt was Arab and White and will be more than willing to prove it to you.
we had to banned me because he was upset moderators weren't approving his post so he decided to spam their emails.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
This place gets more stupid everyday. Of course there were Arabs in pharaonic times. Of course ancient Arabs had nothing to do with AE civ.
Posted by thegaul (Member # 16198) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: In fact I came here because someone came on my turf and linked the website.
This is all you have to know about black history.
Actually, this would be all you WANT to know, not have to know.
Ignorance is bliss. You're quite scholarly by the way. Great research Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
I wasn't going to post, but I figured I would give this guy some "FACTS" to read:
Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues
A-M Mekota1, M Vermehren2
Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13
"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 (approximately 1550_/1080 BC)..... The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin."
You get one. Actually do some research instead of propaganda spreading.
Peace
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
... and to think, i ALMOST clicked on that website.
I actually consider that picture a blessing in part, it sums up all the distractions (logical fallacies of bias, red-herrings, non-sequitars, and straw-men) quite nicely.
Not to mention fallacies..
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Freehand:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: When people like Matilda or other researchers say Eurasian Caucasoid, they are intentionally trying to deceive people into subconsciously visualizing white European looking people.
Well, caucasoid doesn't mean shizz and "Eurasian" is its own enemy.
Think about it. Not only are Andaman Islanders "Eurasian"/non-African, but where does the earliest "Eurasian" civilization conveniantly start out at? --> Why?
that's why IMO white supremacy's best bet is telling the truth and trying to water certain things down, and i think they've caught on.
Of course, when they think their audience is no wiser things change - as with any unsophisticated entity they'll attempt to take a mile when they think they have an inch.
Absolutely I agree. But that is the point, they know full well that ancient Eurasian does not imply white, but they use it in that sense anyway. The point being that even IF you show conclusive evidence to the contrary, they will STILL whine and complain about how ancient "white" Eurasian Caucasoids are.....
Anyway, just to put things in proper perspective. The oldest modern human remains are all found in Africa up to 200,000 years ago. The oldest NON AFRICAN remains are found in East Asia:
quote: The remains of one of the earliest modern humans to inhabit eastern Asia have been unearthed in a cave in China.
The find could shed light on how our ancestors colonised the East, a movement that is only poorly understood by anthropologists.
Researchers found 34 bone fragments belonging to a single individual at the Tianyuan Cave, near Beijing.
Details of the discovery appear in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal.
Radiocarbon dates, obtained directly from the bones, show the person lived between 42,000 and 39,000 years ago.
"For this time period, which is critical for understanding the spread of modern humans around the world, we have two well-dated human fossils from eastern Asia," said co-author Professor Erik Trinkaus, from Washington University in St Louis, US.
"We have remains from the Niah Cave from Sarawak on Borneo, and now this specimen from China. As you go west, the next specimens are from Lebanon. There's nothing in between."
The fact that there is such a large gap in the record of human remains, along with the fact that such remains in Eurasia exhibit such "archaic" features not like modern Eurasians has caused some to even question whether humans mixed with Neanderthals. Although such features could quite likely be more similar to some Australian aboriginal populations along with Tasmanian types.
quote: Thirty-four elements of an early modern human (EMH) were found in Tianyuan Cave, Zhoukoudian, China in 2003. Dated to 42,000–39,000 calendrical years before present by using direct accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon, the Tianyuan 1 skeleton is among the oldest directly dated EMHs in eastern Eurasia. Morphological comparison shows Tianyuan 1 to have a series of derived modern human characteristics, including a projecting tuber symphyseos, a high anterior symphyseal angle, a broad scapular glenoid fossa, a reduced hamulus, a gluteal buttress, and a pilaster on the femora. Other features of Tianyuan 1 that are more common among EMHs are its modest humeral pectoralis major tuberosities, anteriorly rotated radial tuberosity, reduced radial curvature, and modest talar trochlea. It also lacks several mandibular features common among western Eurasian late archaic humans, including mandibular foramen bridging, mandibular notch asymmetry, and a large superior medial pterygoid tubercle. However, Tianyuan 1 exhibits several late archaic human features, such as its anterior to posterior dental proportions, a large hamulus length, and a broad and rounded distal phalangeal tuberosity. This morphological pattern implies that a simple spread of modern humans from Africa is unlikely.
Then came the skull in Africa called Hofmeyer skull from 36,000 years ago, which confirmed the Out of Africa hypothesis for many:
quote: NEW YORK: : From a new analysis of a human skull discovered in South Africa more than 50 years ago, scientists say they have obtained the first fossil evidence establishing the relatively recent time for the dispersal of modern Homo sapiens out of Africa.
The migrants appeared to have arrived at their new homes in Asia and Europe with the distinct and unmodified heads of Africans.
An international team of researchers reported Thursday that the age of the South African skull, which they dated at about 36,000 years old, coincided with the age of and closely resembled the skulls of humans who were then living in Europe and the far eastern parts of Asia, even Australia.
The timing, the scientists and other experts said, introduced independent evidence supporting archaeological finds and recent genetic studies showing that modern humans left sub-Saharan Africa for Eurasia between 65,000 and 25,000 years ago, probably closer to 45,000 to 35,000 years ago in Europe.
Until now, however, paleontologists had been frustrated by the absence of fossils to test the hypothesis of most geneticists that the people of sub-Saharan Africa and in Eurasia at this time were one and the same — modern humans. The human fossil record in Africa from 70,000 to 15,000 years ago had been virtually blank.
Of course this skull also shows that Africans do not look similar today to their ancestors 50,000 years ago, but it also shows a striking similarity to features found in Eurasia, which researchers claim as being "African" not "Eurasian". But that does not stop some from claiming that these remains are "Eurasian" and not "African".
quote: Another member of the team, Katerina Harvati of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, made a detailed examination of the shapes, sizes and contours of all parts of the skull. She compared these three-dimensional measurements with those of early human skulls from Europe and with skulls of living humans in Eurasia and southern Africa, including the Khoe-San, commonly known as the Bushmen.
Because the Bushmen are well represented in the more recent archaeological record, Harvati said, they were expected to bear a close resemblance to the Hofmeyr skull. Instead, the skull was found to be quite distinct from all recent Africans, including the Bushmen, she said, and it has "a very close affinity" with fossil specimens of Europeans living in the Upper Paleolithic, the period best known for advanced stone tools and cave art.
"Much to my amazement," Grine said in an interview, "the skull linked very closely with those from Europe at the time and not with South African remains 15,000 years on."
As for Arabs, the earliest references to populations North of Egypt who were seen as a threat were in the Middle Kingdom. These people were labeled as Hyksos and more generally Asiatics. These populations generally seemed to have come from the North of Egypt, in the Levant into Mesopotamia. These are not necessarily identified as populations from Arabia proper, making the claims that they were "Arabs" quite erroneous. If anything they quite likely represent the waves of populations who would ultimately come to dominate Arabia as "Arabs" in more recent times.
Two populations separated by thousands of miles. Who looks like who?
The way I see it, according to the ones "arabegypt" follows, that drawing is obviously of a caucasion.
The nose is too aqualine, skin not dark enough.
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
lol that's what i though when i scrolled down.
when i read those two posts at first glance i thought it was argyle (until i thought: "wtf - argyle??!")
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Of course there were Arabs in pharaonic times.
right; anyway you slice it, arabs are mentioned during pharaonic times:
The first written attestation of the ethnonym "Arab" occurs in an Assyrian inscription of 853 BCE, where Shalmaneser III lists a King Gindibu of mâtu arbâi (Arab land) as among the people he defeated at the Battle of Karkar. Some of the names given in these texts are Aramaic, while others are the first attestations of Proto-Arabic dialects. In fact several different ethnonyms are found in Assyrian texts that are conventionally translated "Arab": Arabi, Arubu, Aribi and Urbi. The Hebrew Bible occasionally refers to Arvi peoples (or variants thereof), translated as "Arab" or "Arabian." The scope of the term at that early stage is unclear, but it seems to have referred to various desert-dwelling Semitic tribes in the Syrian Desert and Arabia.
The above happened more than a millenium after Ishmael the alleged progenator of Arabs was allegedly born.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Well. I come back hoping to find a new thread in the Egyptology section that's at least scholarly and yet I find another troll-sh*t thread.
The very idea of ancient Egypt being "Arab" is hilarious enough considering that the Arab originates in Arabia and that the very ethnicity didn't even exist that far back in time.
But the distortions on genetic data is just as, if not even more hilarious.
M78 still originates in the African continent and NOT Eurasia and is therefore not surprising that the vast majority of its carriers are Africans. So how does it get labelled as an "Arab" lineage just because it happens to be found among some modern Arabs today.
^ Note significant percent of (African) E lineage present among so-called 'Arab' Egyptians alone.
^ Notice presence of M78 and other E lineages in Europe as well.
This brings us back to the fact that lineages do NOT reflect phenotype. A European could carry an African lineage and still look European or 'white'. The same for anyone else including so-called 'Arabs' who are ethnically dubious themselves. Even Arabs of Arabia have black ancestry both African and native Eurasian and are diverse in appearance. Yet we are speaking of Egyptian Arabs in the African continent!
But what do I expect from an idiot who is stupid enough to resort to ad-hominem white supremacist propaganda ads when he is proven wrong??
Posted by abdulkarem3 (Member # 12885) on :
arabegypt
ايش بك يا فصولي. فأما حكايتكم عن أم الدنيا فهي مسكت و غرور. ذو البشرة السود في المصر كانوا من البداية الي الأن. هدي صورة ممكن رئيتها حقيقا جسدا في المصر ليش؟ لاجل سواء لماذا هم موجودا في المغرب. لم يوقف التبادل انسي حتي المصريي بحري او الشماليين في السودان. أكنت بسيرة الصعيد الجو يعني الاقصور و أسوان( يبو) بوجود النوبيين و السودان(نحوي يعني القوم السود الشتي). العرب الانعمو في السين و البربر تمحو في الصحري و الشاطئ البحر و السودان النحاسي السودان في الجنوب " القبلي " المصر. الموقعة المملكة كوش. وإن المأرخ اليناني هرودوتس قائل بخبر حيث العلماء مصر قدماء ان كان في مصر 365 ملوكا واحد امراة و ثمانية العشرة سودانيين و البقية من البنكها. سل نفسك هدي فإن قال بل اعترف المصريون المأرخون بملوك سود ثمانية العشرة و نحن بعالم الستة المشهرة في الاهلي خاميس و العشرون خمسا فماذا بهادول السائر
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Yeah, whatever that says above MODERN Egypt is an Arab state ancient Egypt was NOT.
Posted by ackee (Member # 16371) on :
Abdulkarem3.could you please translate the above?
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I'm not talking to anyone in particular but to everyone when talking about Arab-Afro issues it might be best to not word sentences in a way that has "Arab" as rival or clashing with "African". People need to stop seeing history as a continuous race war at least as late as 150 years ago Arabs were still seen as dark skinned
For example calling Egypt an "Arabized" instead of "Arab" state makes it seem less like a race war between "Africans" and "Arabs" and more like Neo colonialism confusing identities...
Posted by ackee (Member # 16371) on :
Arabegypt,i have never seen Africans with bones thru the nose,and some Africans live in huts so what? how is a run of the mill tent better than a run of the mill hut?African art? see Nok,Kemet,Ashanti,Benin,Ethiopian,Kush,the soap stone carvings of Zimbabewe and tons more.without the spear you have no arrow,no arrow no missiles,no missiles,no space ships.African philosopher my drunk uncle Charlie. iam sure my mom could make whatever that is and hook it up with some scotsbonnett peppers and thyme a dash of allspice and rosemary,with some green and it's all good.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
"WHEN ARABIA WAS “EASTERN ETHIOPIA”
By Dana Marniche
quote: 1902 - Modern Arabians are described thusly - “Among ‘these Negroid features which may be counted normal in Arabs are the full,rather everted lips, shortness and width of nose, certain blanks in the bearded areas of the face between the lower lip and chin and on the cheeks; large, luscious,gazelle-like eyes, a dark brown complexion, and a tendency for the hair to grow in ringlets. Often the features of the more Negroid Arabs are derivatives of Dravidian India rather than inheritances of Hamitic Africa. Although the Arab of today is sharply differentiated from the Negro of Africa, yet there must have been a time when both were represented by a single ancestral stock; in no other way can the prevalence of certain Negroid features be accounted for in the natives of Arabia.” by Henry Field Anthropology, Memoirs Field Museum Press Anthropology, Memoirs Arabs of Central Iraq; Their History, Ethnology and Physical C haracters, Anthropology Memoirs Volume 4,
1923 “There is a considerable mass of evidence to show that there was a very close resemblance between the proto-Egyptians and the Arabs before either became intermingled with Armenoid racial elements.” Elliot Smith p. 54 The Ancient Egyptians and the Origins of Civilization, p.61 2007, earliest publication 1923.
The pure Arab (no longer in existance) did not descend from the biblical Ishmael. Qahtaan may be the mythical progenitor of the first Arabs -- al-'Arab ul-'Aribah (South Arabian "Kushites" of the oldest purest civilization and blood lines).
At best Ishmael ranks as al-'Arab ul-Muta'aribah -- mixed in upon the southerners.
Todays Arabs by and large are merely al-'Arab ul- Musta'ribah -- nothing more than foreign origin arabized settlers.
If anyone digs into this they will find that no people on earth are so dedicated to fabricating genealogies than are the Arabs. This is why so many conflicting origin mythos exist among them. The fact very well could be that the originals became extinct without admixture with those who embraced their culture, very poorly copied their language, and took on their name. Next to nothing is known about `Ad, Thamud, etc., who may have either preceded Qahtaan or have been the first of the Qahtaani.
BTW -- good work on researching the first written notice of the word arab as applied to a population.
quote:Originally posted by Freehand:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Of course there were Arabs in pharaonic times.
right; anyway you slice it, arabs are mentioned during pharaonic times:
The first written attestation of the ethnonym "Arab" occurs in an Assyrian inscription of 853 BCE, where Shalmaneser III lists a King Gindibu of mâtu arbâi (Arab land) as among the people he defeated at the Battle of Karkar. Some of the names given in these texts are Aramaic, while others are the first attestations of Proto-Arabic dialects. In fact several different ethnonyms are found in Assyrian texts that are conventionally translated "Arab": Arabi, Arubu, Aribi and Urbi. The Hebrew Bible occasionally refers to Arvi peoples (or variants thereof), translated as "Arab" or "Arabian." The scope of the term at that early stage is unclear, but it seems to have referred to various desert-dwelling Semitic tribes in the Syrian Desert and Arabia.
The above happened more than a millenium after Ishmael the alleged progenator of Arabs was allegedly born.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: If anyone digs into this they will find that no people on earth are so dedicated to fabricating genealogies than are the Arabs. This is why so many conflicting origin mythos exist among them.
I think it's a toss up between them and Jews, don't you think? Then again, the difference is you want to believe the Jewish ones! lol
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: As for Arabs, the earliest references to populations North of Egypt who were seen as a threat were in the Middle Kingdom. These people were labeled as Hyksos and more generally Asiatics. These populations generally seemed to have come from the North of Egypt, in the Levant into Mesopotamia. These are not necessarily identified as populations from Arabia proper, making the claims that they were "Arabs" quite erroneous. If anything they quite likely represent the waves of populations who would ultimately come to dominate Arabia as "Arabs" in more recent times.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: If anyone digs into this they will find that no people on earth are so dedicated to fabricating genealogies than are the Arabs.
Could that be an anachronism, the idea of Asiatics coming and completely replacing an indigenous Arabian population over a thousand years before European imperialism. There is a 4 part article by someone named Dana Marniche "When Arabia was “Eastern Ethiopia”" how much of it is accurate bellow is 3 passages from the first article:
1881 “ A third body of the Cushites went to the north of the Egypt and founded, on the east of the Delta, the kingdom of the so-called Hyksos , whom tradition designated sometimes as Phoenicians sometimes as Arabians, and in both cases rightly…Lepsius has proved by excellent reasons the Cushite origins of the Hyksos statues from San (Tanis) now in the museum of Boulaq and has made more than merely probable the immigration of the Cushites into the region of the Delta…” p. 402 Heinrich Karl Brugsh in A History of Egypt Under the Pharaohs Derived Entirely from the Monuments, published by John Murray 1881, Vol 2, 2nd edition...
1902 - Modern Arabians are described thusly - “Among ‘these Negroid features which may be counted normal in Arabs are the full,rather everted lips, shortness and width of nose, certain blanks in the bearded areas of the face between the lower lip and chin and on the cheeks; large, luscious,gazelle-like eyes, a dark brown complexion, and a tendency for the hair to grow in ringlets. Often the features of the more Negroid Arabs are derivatives of Dravidian India rather than inheritances of Hamitic Africa. Although the Arab of today is sharply differentiated from the Negro of Africa, yet there must have been a time when both were represented by a single ancestral stock; in no other way can the prevalence of certain Negroid features be accounted for in the natives of Arabia.” by Henry Field Anthropology, Memoirs Field Museum Press Anthropology, Memoirs Arabs of Central Iraq; Their History, Ethnology and Physical C haracters, Anthropology Memoirs Volume 4,...
By the middle of the 20th century, whether due to corresponding the withdrawal of European colonialists from many lands or the establishment foundations of modern Europeans in the Levant and consequent flourishing of Biblical archeology, it appears that many historians became less acquainted or familiar with the early documented history and genealogical traditions of the Arabian peoples. The notion of a race of “black Caucasoids” had already been established in the late 19th century and the idea that developed in the 1st centuries after Christ in Neareastern Muslim and Judaeo-Christian tradition of different colored children of Noah had come to permeate the interpretation of Afro-Asiatic or Arabian genealogy...
quote:Read about the plight of the dark-skinned Arabs throughout the Arab World. Notice how they have been "Africanized" because of their dark complexion. In many cases, even the dark-skinned Arabs have begun to believe that they are dark-skinned as the result of admixture with "Africans". Read about the dark-skinned Arabs of Iraq. Read about the dark-skinned Arabs of Yemen, the so-called "Al Akhdam". The idea that they are not Arabs, but of "African" origin has been forced upon them. Notice how they say that they are originally from Yemen while others say that they are from "Africa" because of their dark complexion. Read (in Arabic) what one Yemeni said to another Yemeni who spoke disparagingly about these dark-skinned Yemenis called "Al Akhdam". Here's part of what he said:
"They are nobler than you are. You don't equal one of their fingernails. Those whom you call 'Al Akhdam' are your masters. They are the true people of Hadramout. They are not something that the sea spit up like you are. You are from those whom the waves threw onto the shores of Mukalla."
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: As for Arabs, the earliest references to populations North of Egypt who were seen as a threat were in the Middle Kingdom. These people were labeled as Hyksos and more generally Asiatics. These populations generally seemed to have come from the North of Egypt, in the Levant into Mesopotamia. These are not necessarily identified as populations from Arabia proper, making the claims that they were "Arabs" quite erroneous. If anything they quite likely represent the waves of populations who would ultimately come to dominate Arabia as "Arabs" in more recent times.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: If anyone digs into this they will find that no people on earth are so dedicated to fabricating genealogies than are the Arabs.
Could that be an anachronism, the idea of Asiatics coming and completely replacing an indigenous Arabian population over a thousand years before European imperialism. There is a 4 part article by someone named Dana Marniche "When Arabia was “Eastern Ethiopia”" how much of it is accurate bellow is 3 passages from the first article:
1881 “ A third body of the Cushites went to the north of the Egypt and founded, on the east of the Delta, the kingdom of the so-called Hyksos , whom tradition designated sometimes as Phoenicians sometimes as Arabians, and in both cases rightly…Lepsius has proved by excellent reasons the Cushite origins of the Hyksos statues from San (Tanis) now in the museum of Boulaq and has made more than merely probable the immigration of the Cushites into the region of the Delta…” p. 402 Heinrich Karl Brugsh in A History of Egypt Under the Pharaohs Derived Entirely from the Monuments, published by John Murray 1881, Vol 2, 2nd edition...
1902 - Modern Arabians are described thusly - “Among ‘these Negroid features which may be counted normal in Arabs are the full,rather everted lips, shortness and width of nose, certain blanks in the bearded areas of the face between the lower lip and chin and on the cheeks; large, luscious,gazelle-like eyes, a dark brown complexion, and a tendency for the hair to grow in ringlets. Often the features of the more Negroid Arabs are derivatives of Dravidian India rather than inheritances of Hamitic Africa. Although the Arab of today is sharply differentiated from the Negro of Africa, yet there must have been a time when both were represented by a single ancestral stock; in no other way can the prevalence of certain Negroid features be accounted for in the natives of Arabia.” by Henry Field Anthropology, Memoirs Field Museum Press Anthropology, Memoirs Arabs of Central Iraq; Their History, Ethnology and Physical C haracters, Anthropology Memoirs Volume 4,...
By the middle of the 20th century, whether due to corresponding the withdrawal of European colonialists from many lands or the establishment foundations of modern Europeans in the Levant and consequent flourishing of Biblical archeology, it appears that many historians became less acquainted or familiar with the early documented history and genealogical traditions of the Arabian peoples. The notion of a race of “black Caucasoids” had already been established in the late 19th century and the idea that developed in the 1st centuries after Christ in Neareastern Muslim and Judaeo-Christian tradition of different colored children of Noah had come to permeate the interpretation of Afro-Asiatic or Arabian genealogy...
The "Asiatics" shown by the Egyptians do not necessarily represent "Arabs", but rather populations ancestral to modern Arabs, including people migrating from the Northern areas of the Levant into the South. These waves of migrations have left their impact on the people throughout the Levant from Mesopotamia to Arabia. That is not anachronistic, as these people were in place when the Europeans colonized Arabia.
As for the other anecdotes, they don't make any sense. The so-called evidence of Kushites founding the Hyksos dynasties is very much a misreading of the facts. The only Hyksos statues that you could be referring to are the ones created by Middle Kingdom kings and appropriated by the Hyksos and hence the reason for their African features. This has been commented on many times in this forum.
In my opinion, the waves of "Asiatic" invaders that threatened Egypt in the Middle to New Kingdom are the same waves of invaders that eventually became predominant in Arabia.
The website to me seems to be more of a propaganda ploy than anything else. Of course blacks were the first Arabs and there are indeed pockets of aboriginal black Arabian populations in the region. However, there have also been migrations of Africans as well as the African slave trade that has made its mark on Arabia, not to mention the movements of Turks and others.
There are plenty of old books and photo journals from "old" Arabia and the Levant showing that blacks were a fairly substantial part of the populations in some places there even 100 years ago. Taking the effort of identifying and cataloging all these sources is true scholarship that can be used to preserve the history of these regions as opposed to propagandistic sloganeering.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
I should point out that many Arabic translations are just horribly distorted. In "Negro land of the Arabs" For example Ibn Khaludn makes no mention of an introduction of architecture into the western Sudan but in other places they have Ibn Khaldun saying that
quote:Mansa Musa, on his return, conceived the idea of building himself a fine palace. Abu Ishak showed him a model, and erected the edifice, with plaster and all kinds of ornaments, for which he received 12,000 mithkals of gold. Mansa Musa maintained an intimate and friendly correspondence with Sultan Abu-l-Hasan, of Al-Maghreb, and reigned twenty-five years.
A prophesy that Arabia will once again fall into darkness
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 that they are destined to become masters of Yemen and all Arabia.
By anachronistically replacing Arabian population I mean the modern idea that the current population could be completely different from an "ancient one". As if the earlier population is extinct
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: By anachronistically replacing Arabian population I mean the modern idea that the current population could be completely different from an "ancient one". As if the earlier population is extinct
I don't think I ever said that anywhere.
If one really wants to be technical, there were large numbers of blacks stretching from the shores of the Mediterranean clear across Mesopotamia and into Arabia, Persia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India 5,000 years ago. These populations have steadily diminished due to the migrations of Northerners, but many pockets of these aboriginal types still exist in some places. Many of these darker skinned "Asiatics" were still in place during the early Islamic period as well.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: You all are stupid if you think blacks with their inferior IQ by genetics are capable of building a civilization as good as Egypt.
^^Covers your bullsh1t wishful thinking at length.. Have fun.. Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Did the average Arabs have the same skin tone as the Berbers in the Middle Ages
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Just in places I've read Arabs and Berbers like Ibn Battuta describing themselves as white as opposed to the color of most people south of the Sahara and opposed to red people in the north. Would the average Arab be lighter skinned than most so called "Moors"
My logic was what applies to Berbers also applies to Arabs.
quote: Ibn Mandour says that the expression The Red People applies to the non-Arabs because of their whiteness and because of the fact that most of them are fair-skinned. He says that the Arabs used to call the non-Arabs such as the Romans and the Persians and their neighbors, The Red People. He also says that when the Arabs say that someone is white, they mean that he has a noble character--they don't mean that he is white. He says that the Arabs call the slaves The Red People. This is because most of the slaves of the Arabs were white (red). Click below for original in Arabic.
Al Dhahabi says "Red, in the speech of the people from the Hijaz, means fair-complexioned and this color is rare amongst the Arabs. This is the meaning of the saying '...(He was) a red man as if he is one of the slaves'. The speaker meant that his color is like that of the slaves who were captured from the Christians of Syria, Rome, and Persia". So it must be understood that what people call "white" today was called "red" by the Arabs of the past. Click below for original in Arabic.
Beautiful picture!! Posted by unfinished thought. (Member # 16076) on :
Off topic:
THE WIDER VIEW: Towering skyscrapers in the 'Manhattan of the desert'
By Daily Mail Reporter Last updated at 11:35 PM on 21st March 2009
Rising from the valley floor like a mirage, the 450-year-old mud brick towers of Shibam in Yemen are the world’s first skyscrapers – dubbed the Manhattan of the Desert.
The 500 tower houses, made from mud mixed with chaff and hay, have withstood 113F (45C) heat, floods and, last Sunday, an explosion caused by suspected Islamic militants that killed four South Korean tourists and their local guide.
Inside the walled fortress, a Unesco World Heritage Site, the streets are eerily quiet in spite of the 7,000 residents.
The 450-year-old mud-built skyscrapers of the desert city of Shibam in Yemen
Families pass silently from building to building high up along connecting corridors – built to protect early inhabitants from attacks by Bedouin nomads.
To the right of the picture, a gateway is one of only two entrances cut through the city’s protective outer wall.
The mud walls of the tower houses – five to eight storeys and up to 130ft high – are thickest at the bottom for stability.
By law, any rebuilding must follow the shape of the original structure.
The arched window frames are made from the leafless nabaq tree and some towers are whitewashed with lime to slow down erosion by heat and rain – the crumbled house to the left shows why this is needed.
The city’s design serves as a giant air-conditioning unit, creating maximum shade.
Each building is usually used by one family. Food and cattle are kept on the ground and first floors.
The second storey upwards is a living area, with kitchens and entrances to the corridors on the fourth floor.
Mike Nelson took this picture at sunset from a vantage point 1,500ft above the city.
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
Another beautiful picture! Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
I have a lot of personal respect for Marniche but, as with every scholar out there, do not agree with all she writes.
From a cultural viewpoint yes Arabia was a Kush. Ancient societies like the Hebrews and Greeks saw a Kush where ever the Indian Ocean lapped a shore.
In Hebrew documents you find replication of names on either side of the Red Sea (see the 10th chapter of Genesis).
In Hellene documents Aithiopia extends from the Atlantic to the Bay of Bengal.
One has to separate Marniche from her sources and critically discern what remains valuable and what is no longer valuable from authors' interpretations of 100 years ago.
quote:Originally posted by markellion: There is a 4 part article by someone named Dana Marniche "When Arabia was “Eastern Ethiopia”" how much of it is accurate ...
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by ackee: Arabegypt,i have never seen Africans with bones thru the nose,and some Africans live in huts so what? how is a run of the mill tent better than a run of the mill hut?African art? see Nok,Kemet,Ashanti,Benin,Ethiopian,Kush,the soap stone carvings of Zimbabewe and tons more.without the spear you have no arrow,no arrow no missiles,no missiles,no space ships.African philosopher my drunk uncle Charlie. iam sure my mom could make whatever that is and hook it up with some scotsbonnett peppers and thyme a dash of allspice and rosemary,with some green and it's all good.
Dude's obviously a troll, why cast your pearls amongst swine?
For any lurkers: We have plenty of threads on African art, government, even naval projects here.
And plenty on Egyptian architecture and that of the rest of the continent:
One issue that might be important to address is "Negro" populations having contacts and relations with non "Negro" populations. If we say that Ethiopian means "Negro" (and it is just a cultural term) the above quote from the Greek writer Diodorus Siculus says the Egyptians are descended from "Negroes" but in a way 2,000 years ago the idea of a "Negro" Africa as opposed to a Non "Negro" Africa already existed. Ethiopia was the land south of Egypt
quote:the Ethiopians alone who dwell above Egypt
quote:And the larger part of the customs of the Egyptians are, they hold, Ethiopian, the colonists still preserving their ancient manners.
That would mean that the Egyptians were still practicing customs that go back to their ancient "Negro" heritage but they are not outright called "Negroes" or "Ethiopians".
Even if the above made no sense is their a problem that people see there has to be a rigid cultural barrier between "Negroes" or "Blacks" and everyone else
Posted by Nay-Sayer (Member # 10566) on :
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: Beautiful picture!!
I wonder what can we learn from the DNA of these Black "Arabs"?
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: On the subject of Egypt
quote:They say also that the Egyptians are colonists sent out by the Ethiopians
One issue that might be important to address is "Negro" populations having contacts and relations with non "Negro" populations. If we say that Ethiopian means "Negro" (and it is just a cultural term) the above quote from the Greek writer Diodorus Siculus says the Egyptians are descended from "Negroes" but in a way 2,000 years ago the idea of a "Negro" Africa as opposed to a Non "Negro" Africa already existed. Ethiopia was the land south of Egypt
quote:the Ethiopians alone who dwell above Egypt
quote:And the larger part of the customs of the Egyptians are, they hold, Ethiopian, the colonists still preserving their ancient manners.
That would mean that the Egyptians were still practicing customs that go back to their ancient "Negro" heritage but they are not outright called "Negroes" or "Ethiopians".
Even if the above made no sense is their a problem that people see there has to be a rigid cultural barrier between "Negroes" or "Blacks" and everyone else
Why are you using that word ["Negro"]?? It's just stupid and putting it in quotation marks does nothing to mitigate that..... I'm sorry, but some of you white posters get on my nerves with that sh1t.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I have a lot of personal respect for Marniche but, as with every scholar out there, do not agree with all she writes.
From a cultural viewpoint yes Arabia was a Kush. Ancient societies like the Hebrews and Greeks saw a Kush where ever the Indian Ocean lapped a shore.
In Hebrew documents you find replication of names on either side of the Red Sea (see the 10th chapter of Genesis).
In Hellene documents Aithiopia extends from the Atlantic to the Bay of Bengal.
One has to separate Marniche from her sources and critically discern what remains valuable and what is no longer valuable from authors' interpretations of 100 years ago.
quote:Originally posted by markellion: There is a 4 part article by someone named Dana Marniche "When Arabia was “Eastern Ethiopia”" how much of it is accurate ...
Most of these interpretations were based on visual contact and of what the locals told them. You have to remember, this was way before serious Christian archeological work set in as well as pan-Arabism led by guys like Nasser which began to take the black elements (even those with distant Africa roots) out of Arabia. This was before Arab=White. Before Meditterean caucasian.
Now, it would extremely hard to get any historian to admit to the majority of the stuff Marniche has copied from old sources. In my research, it seems older sources are more reliable when it comes to describing visual things and pure history (sort of like the things read in When Arabia was Eastern Ethiopia). It's when they tried to delve into science and anthropology that the staunch racism came out. They viewed people of Arabia no different than that of Africans. Both groups were tribal primitives to Europenas. But when Pan-Arabism set in strong and Arabs began to talk about the success of their history...that's when Africa and Arabia were separated when historically they never have been.
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata:
quote:Originally posted by markellion: On the subject of Egypt
quote:They say also that the Egyptians are colonists sent out by the Ethiopians
One issue that might be important to address is "Negro" populations having contacts and relations with non "Negro" populations. If we say that Ethiopian means "Negro" (and it is just a cultural term) the above quote from the Greek writer Diodorus Siculus says the Egyptians are descended from "Negroes" but in a way 2,000 years ago the idea of a "Negro" Africa as opposed to a Non "Negro" Africa already existed. Ethiopia was the land south of Egypt
quote:the Ethiopians alone who dwell above Egypt
quote:And the larger part of the customs of the Egyptians are, they hold, Ethiopian, the colonists still preserving their ancient manners.
That would mean that the Egyptians were still practicing customs that go back to their ancient "Negro" heritage but they are not outright called "Negroes" or "Ethiopians".
Even if the above made no sense is their a problem that people see there has to be a rigid cultural barrier between "Negroes" or "Blacks" and everyone else
Why are you using that word ["Negro"]?? It's just stupid and putting it in quotation marks does nothing to mitigate that..... I'm sorry, but some of you white posters get on my nerves with that sh1t.
I also don't appreciate the simplistic way of markelions thoughts, he thinks the world is divided between negroes and none-negroes. And anything that doesn't fit into the category of "negroes" means that it's non-negro that is automatically being European,LOL.
So when some author concludes that a particular individual does not reflect "negro" attributes the simplistic Markelion instantly translates this as meaning of being European.
His world is divided between "negroes" and "non-negroes|, pffh/. He represents the same thougts but placed on the opposite side of Marc washington and Clyde winters.
Posted by Narmer Menes (Member # 16122) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: [QUOTE]He represents the same thougts but placed on the opposite side of Marc washington and Clyde winters.
Why do you keep insulting Dr Clyde Winters when he has formal qualifications and decades of research to back his claims, and you have flimsy, poorly researched, shabby analysis of genetic studies that you don't even fully understand. If I were you, I'd concentrate on upping your personal knowledge, writing your own thesis and gaining some accreditation before you go firing insults at PhD graduates.
Word of advise, take it or leave it.
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
I just don't find "negro" an appropriate interpretation of the word Aethiopian.
Ancient Western "Ethiopia" is basically modern Africa South and West of "AEgypt" and there were "white Ethiopians".
What relevent culturally is that "Ethiopians" (i'm going to stop quoting now) allegedly said Egyptians were colonists and that the greater part of there culture was a transplant, but as an insight toward physical appearance what's important is that Egyptians and West Ethiopians were both considered possible source populations of the "black" people of Colchis because of physical attributes.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Ok I just wanted to use the Arab word Sudan and Greek word Ethiopian in English
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
I get it now; you just thought of negro as a good historical term. Why not just use aethiopian, sudan, and blacks?
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Originally posted by Narmer Menes:
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: [QUOTE]He represents the same thougts but placed on the opposite side of Marc washington and Clyde winters.
Why do you keep insulting Dr Clyde Winters when he has formal qualifications and decades of research to back his claims, and you have flimsy, poorly researched, shabby analysis of genetic studies that you don't even fully understand. If I were you, I'd concentrate on upping your personal knowledge, writing your own thesis and gaining some accreditation before you go firing insults at PhD graduates.
Word of advise, take it or leave it.
I have nothing personally against Clyde winters, I only judge people according to what they write. Clyde winters unfortunatly is a person I can't take seriously. For instance he does not recognize people who are not either European or West african. His world is divided between these two or a mixture between them, nothing else exist according to him. He thinks the ancient chinese were "blacks" who got killed by modern Chinese Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: also don't appreciate the simplistic way of markelions thoughts, he thinks the world is divided between negroes and none-negroes. And anything that doesn't fit into the category of "negroes" means that it's non-negro that is automatically being European,LOL.
So when some author concludes that a particular individual does not reflect "negro" attributes the simplistic Markelion instantly translates this as meaning of being European.
His world is divided between "negroes" and "non-negroes|, pffh/. He represents the same thougts but placed on the opposite side of Marc washington and Clyde winters.
Yonis why do whites see you as black?
"Well how can Black Africans from the war zones of Sudan and Somalia be allowed to fly into Northern Finland? Because the Finnish Jewish controlled government has been flying them in there at the expense of the hardworking White Finnish tax payers and they have installed so called ‘Hate’ Speech laws in Finland since 1995 and these laws mean that Blacks and Turks and every other minority can criticize the White Finnish native people who built up that beautiful, clean, honest, modern, sophisticated Scandinavian nation."
Well i guess the difference between me and you is that my identity is not confirmed or need to be realized by outsiders.
I've noticed that Europeans have more impact on Niger-congo speakers identity than they have on Afrasian speakers Identity. I don't know if this can be proven scientifically but through my own obesrvation it seems like that. There seems to be a higher barrier between European-Afrasian relationship and European Niger-Congo relationship.
Notice that all the bombings and warfare in africa during the last decades after the world wars have been in afrasian regions by the western world, mostly Somalia and Sudan in africa, no other countrie in africa has been as much bombed by the western world as Somalia and to lesser extent Sudan. Infact the first ever aerial bombardment done on the african soil was against the Mad mullah and his Dervish movement of northern Somalia by the British air force in 1918 and today the Americans continue to bomb Somalis. Eritrea despite being young and christian is another nation the western powers want to take out.
So regarding to your question, NO we Somalis do not identify according to labels such as "Black" neither do the Sudanese. We have our own identity, no need to import others, that's just how we are naturally.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
^ have you noticed too that the Europeans see you not as "somlaid" but black? lol
As for rejecting identities from others, who coined the term "Afrasian"?
What about "Horners"? Historically, did blacks in that region call themselves such? Same too "Somali", isn't it like most of African countries a colonial construct. Isn't "African" a Roman word and western construct too? And not to mention your surfing stormfront for your latest identity "somalid" or something.
Don't talk rubbish and pretend as if you don t accept outside identity constructs.
and who died and made you the somalid negro spokesperson for Somalis and Sudanese!?!! What chutzpah!!!
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
Well "horn african" makes sense to us since it is our region and we live at the horn so we accept it. And the term "Somali" is derived from the middle ages nomads in the horn who called them selves "Samaal" and were constant in war with Abyssinians and also later Portugues, which the British and Italians learned from. Has nothing to do with Europeans, Somalia is named after it's ethnicity not after the current opinion or wishes of Europeans.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
You prefer a construct from the crazies at Stormfront and one that identifies you living in a "horn", but have a problem with "black", which is arguably an indigenous identity construct anyways (KMT)...go figure.
Btw, "Abyssinia" is also a construct from outside maybe its better to call them "Ethoipids", yes? lol
Posted by thegaul (Member # 16198) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: Well "horn african" makes sense to us since it is our region and we live at the horn so we accept it. And the term "Somali" is derived from the middle ages nomads in the horn who called them selves "Samaal" and were constant in war with Abyssinians and also later Portugues, which the British and Italians learned from. Has nothing to do with Europeans, Somalia is named after it's ethnicity not after the current opinion or wishes of Europeans.
You can be prideful of your ethnicity, but I think people have a problem when you try to make it seem as if your ethny is completely different from others in this sense. Just as you call your people "somalids", yet the other nearly billion of Africans are ALL "negrids"? Really?
Dont you realize other Africans cluster with themselves also? All you say about "Somalids" can also be said about Hausas and Fulani. Ndebele and Shona. Tuareg and Berber.
You are promoting the same simplistic, elementary ideas of eurocentrists.
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben: You prefer a construct from the crazies at Stormfront and one that identifies you living in a "horn", but have a problem with "black", which is arguably an indigenous identity construct anyways (KMT)...go figure.
Btw, "Abyssinia" is also a construct from outside maybe its better to call them "Ethoipids", yes? lol
Abyssinia is a Portugues derivation of "Abesha", stop giving Europeans credit for everything that exist. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ LOL How could he stop, when he is European himself?! And worse, a white Euro posing as a person of African descent. Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
Where are those "pure" Asians you spoke about mary?
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2:
quote:Originally posted by akoben: You prefer a construct from the crazies at Stormfront and one that identifies you living in a "horn", but have a problem with "black", which is arguably an indigenous identity construct anyways (KMT)...go figure.
Btw, "Abyssinia" is also a construct from outside maybe its better to call them "Ethoipids", yes? lol
Abyssinia is a Portugues derivation of "Abesha", stop giving Europeans credit for everything that exist.
Portugese colonised Ethiopia? lol
I thought Abyssinia was a derivative of an Arab word for slave.
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Originally posted by thegaul:
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: Well "horn african" makes sense to us since it is our region and we live at the horn so we accept it. And the term "Somali" is derived from the middle ages nomads in the horn who called them selves "Samaal" and were constant in war with Abyssinians and also later Portugues, which the British and Italians learned from. Has nothing to do with Europeans, Somalia is named after it's ethnicity not after the current opinion or wishes of Europeans.
You can be prideful of your ethnicity, but I think people have a problem when you try to make it seem as if your ethny is completely different from others in this sense. Just as you call your people "somalids", yet the other nearly billion of Africans are ALL "negrids"? Really?
Dont you realize other Africans cluster with themselves also? All you say about "Somalids" can also be said about Hausas and Fulani. Ndebele and Shona. Tuareg and Berber.
You are promoting the same simplistic, elementary ideas of eurocentrists.
Our history is different from non-Somalid Africans, we have no history with them what so ever before europeans arrived. You want us to construct a false history?
I personally cant't dictate the course of the past, even today non-somalids africans are passive and being played around by western powers according to their interest so how do you think things look liked centuries ago? Most likely even more passive, that's just the truth. They have never supported us and will probably never do so. Since they got colonised they have deliberatly accepted the role of being bargain chips. I can understand them though why colloborate with poor people when you can get chronicaly sodomized by rich people eternally.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
^ you have history with Swedish whites instead yes? lol
And please spare us the "non somalid" bashing as a poster known as "horn" exposed your "tribe" for prostituting your daughters to the Italians and showed pictures of you carry Italians on your backs. You got so pissed you accused him of airing Somali dirty laundry in non Somali forums.
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben: Where are those "pure" Asians you spoke about mary?
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2:
quote:Originally posted by akoben: You prefer a construct from the crazies at Stormfront and one that identifies you living in a "horn", but have a problem with "black", which is arguably an indigenous identity construct anyways (KMT)...go figure.
Btw, "Abyssinia" is also a construct from outside maybe its better to call them "Ethoipids", yes? lol
Abyssinia is a Portugues derivation of "Abesha", stop giving Europeans credit for everything that exist.
Portugese colonised Ethiopia? lol
I thought Abyssinia was a derivative of an Arab word for slave.
I never said Portugese colonised Ethiopia.
I said Abyssinia is derived from Abesha that is the habesha people of the horn. And as for slaves i think you are confusing horn africans Habesha with SE Africans "Zanji". Arabia itself was once under Habesha rule.
Posted by thegaul (Member # 16198) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2:
quote:Originally posted by thegaul:
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: Well "horn african" makes sense to us since it is our region and we live at the horn so we accept it. And the term "Somali" is derived from the middle ages nomads in the horn who called them selves "Samaal" and were constant in war with Abyssinians and also later Portugues, which the British and Italians learned from. Has nothing to do with Europeans, Somalia is named after it's ethnicity not after the current opinion or wishes of Europeans.
You can be prideful of your ethnicity, but I think people have a problem when you try to make it seem as if your ethny is completely different from others in this sense. Just as you call your people "somalids", yet the other nearly billion of Africans are ALL "negrids"? Really?
Dont you realize other Africans cluster with themselves also? All you say about "Somalids" can also be said about Hausas and Fulani. Ndebele and Shona. Tuareg and Berber.
You are promoting the same simplistic, elementary ideas of eurocentrists.
Our history is different from non-Somalid Africans, we have no history with them what so ever before europeans arrived. You want us to construct a false history?
I personally cant't dictate the course of the past, even today non-somalids africans are passive and being played around by western powers according to their interest so how do you think things look liked centuries ago? Most likely even more passive, that's just the truth. They have never supported us and will probably never do so. Since they got colonised they have deliberatly accepted the role of being bargain chips. I can understand them though why colloborate with poor people when you can get chronicaly sodomized by rich people eternally.
And Hausas have no history with Zulus whatsoever. Wolof have no history with Lembas whatsoever. What is your point? Africa is quite a large continent you know?
And "somalid" africans were subjugated to european tyranny just as much as the rest of Africa. Just look at Eritrea and Somalia. 1935 Ethiopia. In that arena there is NO difference. Ghana is much better off than any "somalid" country today. Same for Botswana.
Again, what is your point because so far you have made none.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
His point is that fantasies about Somalid races are more therapeutic to the reality of advanced black African countries (he hates) compared to Somalia.
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben: ^ you have history with Swedish whites instead yes? lol
And please spare us the "non somalid" bashing as a poster known as "horn" exposed your "tribe" for prostituting your daughters to the Italians and showed pictures of you carry Italians on your backs. You got so pissed you accused him of airing Somali dirty laundry in non Somali forums.
That was not my "tribe" but the isaaqs of british somaliland i'm a Tarod like the clan of Mad mullah who fought both British and Italians at the same time. We signed peace treaty with the italians not the british. However i will always defend my somali brothers under british rulership.
Btw those peoples in the pic were "Midgaans" (Low cast somalis) so i don't care if the British used them as they used the pygmies, they have always been abused.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2:
quote:Originally posted by akoben: ^ you have history with Swedish whites instead yes? lol
And please spare us the "non somalid" bashing as a poster known as "horn" exposed your "tribe" for prostituting your daughters to the Italians and showed pictures of you carry Italians on your backs. You got so pissed you accused him of airing Somali dirty laundry in non Somali forums.
That was not my "tribe" but the isaaqs of british somaliland i'm a Tarod like the clan of Mad mullah who fought both British and Italians at the same time. We signed peace treaty with the italians not the british. However i will always defend my somali brothers under british rulership.
Btw those peoples in the pic were "Midgaans" (Low cast somalis) so i don't care if the British used them as they used the pygmies, they have always been abused.
Oh, so now it' no longer Somalids but which "tribe" and wether they were "low caste" Somalis? LOL
And don't be a fool. Neither British nor Italians differentiated much between "low caste" Somalis and others. Hence the same backward economic exploitation and laws against integration there as was case in other parts of black Africa. Somalia seems to have suffered more than other black Africans though. Maybe not enough of you qualified to go to universities abroad and come back to develop your country. You're a prime example.
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Originally posted by thegaul:
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2:
quote:Originally posted by thegaul:
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: Well "horn african" makes sense to us since it is our region and we live at the horn so we accept it. And the term "Somali" is derived from the middle ages nomads in the horn who called them selves "Samaal" and were constant in war with Abyssinians and also later Portugues, which the British and Italians learned from. Has nothing to do with Europeans, Somalia is named after it's ethnicity not after the current opinion or wishes of Europeans.
You can be prideful of your ethnicity, but I think people have a problem when you try to make it seem as if your ethny is completely different from others in this sense. Just as you call your people "somalids", yet the other nearly billion of Africans are ALL "negrids"? Really?
Dont you realize other Africans cluster with themselves also? All you say about "Somalids" can also be said about Hausas and Fulani. Ndebele and Shona. Tuareg and Berber.
You are promoting the same simplistic, elementary ideas of eurocentrists.
Our history is different from non-Somalid Africans, we have no history with them what so ever before europeans arrived. You want us to construct a false history?
I personally cant't dictate the course of the past, even today non-somalids africans are passive and being played around by western powers according to their interest so how do you think things look liked centuries ago? Most likely even more passive, that's just the truth. They have never supported us and will probably never do so. Since they got colonised they have deliberatly accepted the role of being bargain chips. I can understand them though why colloborate with poor people when you can get chronicaly sodomized by rich people eternally.
And Hausas have no history with Zulus whatsoever. Wolof have no history with Lembas whatsoever. What is your point? Africa is quite a large continent you know?
And "somalid" africans were subjugated to european tyranny just as much as the rest of Africa. Just look at Eritrea and Somalia. 1935 Ethiopia. In that arena there is NO difference. Ghana is much better off than any "somalid" country today. Same for Botswana.
Again, what is your point because so far you have made none.
Africa has 800 million to one billion people. yet the small countries of the horn are the ones western powers feel most threaten off. Sudan, Somalia and Eritrea together have less than 30 million people, but represent 90% of American military focus in Africa. United States has even established a military base in Djibouti just so to keep an eye on these small nations. We have no natural resources compared to the rest of africa, yet we are the ones being survailed, why is that? Maybe because they feel that they don't need to keep an eye on what they already own.
Why should we respect them? They have never supported us against western interests and aggression.
Posted by abdulkarem3 (Member # 12885) on :
quote:'ve noticed that Europeans have more impact on Niger-congo speakers identity than they have on Afrasian speakers Identity
The culture of the mashariqa(sumaal,ahbash,etc) is closer to islaam than the rest.meaning their political ties are more in allegiance with the islamic nations.
quote:I don't know if this can be proven scientifically but through my own obesrvation it seems like that.
Sudaanul maghrib(west africans) live in demographics of which one ever benefits the most so you may find those who are more islamically inclined and arabized and then you will find those who are staunchly etho-centric but allied with islaam and it's people. The same with those who lean towards the nasaara. Then there are those who are majoosi(the nation's perspective religion)From my experience with awlaadul gharb i have seen thjem witness the origins of africans being one however they remarked that they didnt care and that what makes the differene is what is inside the person, therefore if he is not feeling you culturally or ethnically the dont let the nice treatment fool you.
quote:There seems to be a higher barrier between European-Afrasian relationship and European Niger-Congo relationship.
islaam rulership threatens pseudo-western democracy and anybody close to islaam scares them
quote:Notice that all the bombings and warfare in africa during the last decades after the world wars have been in afrasian regions by the western world, mostly Somalia and Sudan in africa, no other countrie in africa has been as much bombed by the western world as Somalia and to lesser extent Sudan.
this is yehudi khabeeth. they believe these areas to be greater israel "from the Nile to the Euphrates" Genesis 15:18-21 Somalia being close to the nile, have muslims who love islaam and that is a no no for the yehood. just like iraaaq with al-furaat
quote:Infact the first ever aerial bombardment done on the african soil was against the Mad mullah and his Dervish movement of northern Somalia by the British air force in 1918 and today the Americans continue to bomb Somalis.
Agreed, these are the helpers, supporters, and allies of the yehood. the same who helped to fight your brothers in palestine as well as your brothers in somalia.
quote: Eritrea despite being young and christian is another nation the western powers want to take out.
they possess inhabitants who have strong islamic ties
quote:So regarding to your question, NO we Somalis do not identify according to labels such as "Black" neither do the Sudanese. We have our own identity, no need to import others, that's just how we are naturally.
this is typical of communities who are hur ibn hur(free spirited) for lack of better words. You can see this in some of the african americans when some prefer AA over black. This is merely his free spirit and unwillingness to imitate outside of his group.
Posted by abdulkarem3 (Member # 12885) on :
You can see the same feeling with europeans in their view of places like turkey and albania or any other country that have a threat to their religions or ways. Turkey is begging to be in the european union however public (euro) opinion is a straight hell no!! I'm not going to even mention albania. They try so hard to be euro but in reality are in light of euro-ways, rejects. They both noast christian populations however there is a group in there that just puts euros and their allies off off their rocker. it is all politics and whoever possess the rock can exhaust the clock to the final buzz to let loose the j.(sorry for the basketball term)
Posted by Narmer Menes (Member # 16122) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: [QUOTE]I have nothing personally against Clyde winters, I only judge people according to what they write. Clyde winters unfortunatly is a person I can't take seriously. For instance he does not recognize people who are not either European or West african. His world is divided between these two or a mixture between them, nothing else exist according to him. He thinks the ancient chinese were "blacks" who got killed by modern Chinese
Well, you can roll eyes all you want, but Dr Winters post's have infinitely more scholarly, journalistic and referential credibility than any of the racially and logically flawed tripe that you post. When you can present some original research, or field work that you've carried out, as opposed to copying, pasting and misinterpreting in an attempt to revive racist (and HIGHLY innacurate) viewpoints that are clearly derived from caste system mentality... perhaps then you can roll eyes at the doctor's theories.
As it stands, you and your poor excuse for scholarship are the only things worthy of being dismissed with a Posted by sudaniya (Member # 15779) on :
Yonis2:
quote: Africa has 800 million to one billion people. yet the small countries of the horn are the ones western powers feel most threaten off. Sudan, Somalia and Eritrea together have less than 30 million people, but represent 90% of American military focus in Africa. United States has even established a military base in Djibouti just so to keep an eye on these small nations. We have no natural resources compared to the rest of africa, yet we are the ones being survailed, why is that? Maybe because they feel that they don't need to keep an eye on what they already own.
Why should we respect them? They have never supported us against western interests and aggression.
Thats absolutely correct, we are not docile and amenable.
We have thoroughly demonstrated, just how intractable we are, the illegitimate embroilment of the ICC is a fresh case.
I [like all sovereign citizens of Sudan] intractably reject the intrusion of that capricious harlot into our internal affairs.
Posted by Henu (Member # 13490) on :
This discussion is off-topic and worsening by the minute. This forum is for Egyptology discussion. Thread closed.
Posted by Henu (Member # 13490) on :
I've opened the thread tenatively, on the assumption that it doesn't stray off-topic again. Insults and trolling won't be tolerated.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
Man you're like woman, so indecisive.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
[nevermind]
Posted by Nay-Sayer (Member # 10566) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: They have never supported us against western interests and aggression.
If that's true then perhaps the question we should ask is "Why?"
Posted by AbuAnu (Member # 16410) on :
Why because Every Country is a Corporation and only operating under maritime admirality only under Commerce Horn of Africa or Even Finland. The REason Why U will Never get Support against western interests and aggression because your country is not real its a fictious business name SOMALIA,SUDAN,ERITREA,UGANDA,ETC in all caps.
NO ONE CAN HELP U BUT YOUR OWN LEADERS BUT THEY HAVE NOTHING AND NEED SOMETHING FROM FORIEGNERS AND NOW YOUR BACK IN THE CHOKE HOLD.
ONLY WAY TO GET RID OF WESTERN INTERESTS AND AGGRESSION IS TO TERMINATE YOUR COUNTRIES CONTRACT WITH THE UNITED NATIONS CORPORATION, IMF CORPORATION, WORLD BANK CORPORATION, AND ALL OTHER CONTRACTS THAT YOUR CORPORATION{COUNTRY} HAS BEEN BOUND BY WHICH WAS DONE NOT IN GOOD FAITH CAN BE TERMINATED AT ANY TIME AND THEN THE HELL AND NIGHTMARE STOPS!
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by assopen: Man you're like woman, so indecisive.
This coming from the guy who loves getting penetrated by other males...
Anyway..
Henu, you might as well not only close this thread but delete it as the topic is insane. 'Arabs' did not even exist in ancient times let alone be responsible for Nile Valley civilization.
Posted by AbuAnu (Member # 16410) on :
I agree djehuti this thread is weak Arabs and ancient kmt light years away
Posted by Henu (Member # 13490) on :
It is a stupid thread, but Nay-Sayer thought there could be good taken from this thread. I'm skeptical, but if you guys can debate the topic civilly, then go ahead. Otherwise, the thread will end up closed again. And akoben is just sad that his pet thread wasn't the one re-opened or moved back to Egyptology, that's all. Eventually the tears will dry and he'll go back to ranting and raving.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
I would’ve thought on a site like this any thread that sparks a debate on controversial issues surrounding Egypt would be useful. But I guess for some people, a little power is a dangerous thing, hence corrupt dictatorships in third world countries like Egypt. Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^^lol... What a cry baby!
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Of course Arabs existed in ancient times and the proofs from ancient sources was posted in this very thread. All your pontification will not disintegrate the reliefs depicting Arabs.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Henu, you might as well not only close this thread but delete it as the topic is insane. 'Arabs' did not even exist in ancient times let alone be responsible for Nile Valley civilization.
Posted by unfinished thought. (Member # 16076) on :
The ancient Egyptians used three colours to depict human beings: a redish terracotta for themselves and near-by "Sea People" (Philistines), a pale ivory for Libyans and Bedouins, and black for the Kushites.
Tutankhamun was not black: Egypt antiquities chief
Sep 25, 2007
CAIRO (AFP) — Egyptian antiquities supremo Zahi Hawass insisted Tuesday that Tutankhamun was not black despite calls by US black activists to recognise the boy king's dark skin colour.
"Tutankhamun was not black, and the portrayal of ancient Egyptian civilisation as black has no element of truth to it," Hawass told reporters.
"Egyptians are not Arabs and are not Africans despite the fact that Egypt is in Africa," he said, quoted by the official MENA news agency.
Hawass said he was responding to several demonstrations in Philadelphia after a lecture he gave there on September 6 where he defended his theory.
Protestors also claimed images of King Tut were altered to show him with lighter skin at the "Tutankhamun and the Golden Age of the Pharaohs" exhibit which leaves Philadelphia for London on September 30.
The exhibition sparked an uproar when it kicked off in Los Angeles in June 2005 when black activists demanded that a bust of the boy king be removed because the statue portrays him as white.
The face of the legendary pharaoh, who died around 3,300 years ago at the age of just 19, was reconstructed in 2005 through images collected through CAT scans of his mummy.
The boy king's intact tomb caused an international sensation when it was discovered by Briton Howard Carter in 1922 near Luxor in southern Egypt.
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
This fool had the nerve to site a white supremacist forum as evidence of white Egyptians!!!
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Anyone who's spent half a minute here and perused the numerous threads with AE tomb painting photos knows beyond doubt that AEs used a full palette of colors for human flesh and that neither of the below named people was limited to any one colour.
Romitu complexions range from light yellow brown to literal black.
Tjemehu and A3mu range from light yellow brown to medium brown.
Nehhesu range from light brown to literal black.
The entire range of the AE colour palette is visible in today's black people. Using complexion only as an indicator will default all but the ivory and alabaster type skin tones to black people.
True, your thought is unfinished. Try again.
quote:Originally posted by unfinished thought.: The ancient Egyptians used three colours to depict human beings: a redish terracotta for themselves and near-by "Sea People" (Philistines), a pale ivory for Libyans and Bedouins, and black for the Kushites.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by unfinished thought.: Egyptian antiquities supremo Zahi Hawass insisted Tuesday that Tutankhamun was not black
Who cares what he thinks? He's a power hungry tyrant who isn't even qualified to make such an assertion. Read this:
quote: Within Egypt, Hawass has been brawling lately with critics who question the methodology of the CT scan of Tut's mummy, and the forensic re-creation of his face. Hawass curbed the authority and docked the pay of one persistent foe, Ahmed Saleh, an archeological inspector for the Supreme Council who complained, among other things, that the procedures used in the facial re-creation made Tut look Caucasian, disrespecting the nation's African roots.
Hawass insists he is not angry, vindictive or power mad; firm enforcement of the rules is essential to prevent chaos, he says, given the hundreds of ongoing archeological projects in Egypt and the continued threat of antiquities theft.
"Yes, it's inflammatory," Willeke Wendrich, a UCLA professor of Egyptian archeology, says of Hawass' willingness to attack perceived rule breakers in the press and ban them from excavating. "Maybe cooperation would be better served if he formulated things slightly differently. But it's counterbalancing what has been going on too long, a colonialist attitude that hasn't disappeared even now. I think the way he acts is partly his personality, but it's partly a reaction to a very arrogant treatment of Egyptians and Egyptian officials."
^ LOL Apparently not all in Hawass's crew (the SCA) are willing to buy into the big white-lie. Posted by osirion (Member # 7644) on :
Thanks Sundjata, what is the source of this?
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^^L.A. Times...
Posted by taibun (Member # 16487) on :
All of you are wrong egypt is in africa check out the paintings they are painted black the egyptians is an african civilazation find out what they use to call themselves kemet that is the word black arabia invaded egypt 639 bc now yall want to be ushave you seen the prince of egypt who do you think have woolie hair yall don't
Posted by taibun (Member # 16487) on :
and king tut was black its funny how the arabs claim to be egyptian i'm african american my ancestors are from african egyptian american and i'm brown skinned just like the paintings of the egyptians yall cant lie about the fact that egypt is in africa its no such thing called arabian african if so please consider yourself black ha!ha!
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
taibun everyone who commented on this thread knows the Egyptians were black. It's the person who started this thread, arabegypt who says otherwise.
Posted by MOHAMMEd 21 (Member # 16525) on :
first Egypt wasn`t an Arab civilization as you claimed. second there`s nothing called arab cilivization cause thats not exist.there`s islamic cilvization that built by muslims allover the world but what happened that the arabs steal that cultire and the glory and published lies about acilivization called arabian.HHHH who establish that cilivization was tge persians cause the arabs was just ignored when they get out from the arab island
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Egyptian antiquities supremo Zahi Hawass insisted Tuesday that Tutankhamun was not black...
Of course he wasn't..
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
The Egyptian pyramids were not built by slaves. Certainly not by Jews. It was considered a huge privilege for the Egyptians to build the pyramids. It seems they didn't particularly keep slaves either, as they had no slave market.
The Nubian ethnicity is Nilotid, and not Negro. There were no Negroes in North Africa in ancient times and no Negro skulls have ever been found there. And of course the Ancient Egyptians were white - until they got mongrelised beginning in 1860BC. Pharaoh Systostres III allowed Nubian princes to go to school with Egyptian Princes and this was recorded on hieroglyphs at the time.
Further wars and conquests allowed the leakage of Asian and Nubian blood into Egypt in the following centuries. Egypt became ruled by foreigners, Hyksos - “shepherd kings” who were Semites (1785BC). The Egyptians later (1580BC) successfully got rid of the Semites, but they had been fatally weakened. Then there followed raids by Indo-European Sea Peoples. These are represented on the rock carvings at Medinet Habu as having circular shields and horned helmets. Needless to say, the only people in the world at this time with this particular panoply were northern Europeans. The trail of Danish copper swords and amber all the way to Egypt suggest this was the first full migration of true Germanics southwards. Their descendents being the ruddy-skinned Achaens of Greece.
Eventually, the genetic diversity in Egypt became too great. With this, altruism withered, the spirit of self-sacrifice perished, and Egypt became ruled by aliens yet again. Its Golden Age was past, its building skills deteriorated.
Around the 7th century BC, Nubians ruled Egypt 728 to 656BC and around 750BC Egypt was ruled by Ethiopia. In 662BC, Egypt was conquered by Assyria and in 525BC Egypt became a Persian province. Two centuries later it become part of the territory conquered by Alexander the Great. The foreign blood in Egypt led to the inevitable decline of the civilization, and consequential rule as a vassal state, by ethnically homogeneous people who could more easily defeat them.
In fact true Negroes have never migrated to North Africa. I am not sure if the Afrocentrics make a distinction between the Nilotid and the Negro in their silly claims about ancient Egypt. It's like the difference between the Tutsi and Hutu in Rwanda for example and quite significant
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: The Nubian ethnicity is Nilotid, and not Negro. There were no Negroes in North Africa in ancient times and no Negro skulls have ever been found there...
ROTFLOL
Pray tell what is the difference between a 'Nilotid' and a 'Negro'??! Can you please define the two??
Also, do you realize that the earliest anatomical modern human found in Egypt-- Nazlet Khater-- was described as "very negroid" in appearance??!
quote:And of course the Ancient Egyptians were white - until they got mongrelised beginning in 1860BC. Pharaoh Systostres III allowed Nubian princes to go to school with Egyptian Princes and this was recorded on hieroglyphs at the time.
Any evidence of this?? All evidence shows the ancient Egyptians were indigenous Africans and last time I checked whites are not indigenous to Africa!
As for Sesostris III, here he is:
His father, Sesostris II
His great-grandfather, Sesostris I
Of course the very family of the Sesostrises, the 12th dynasty, is Nubian in origin anyway, but that won't help you because the many of the great dynasties of Egypt have 'Nubian' ancestry and even those that don't are still black.
Obviously the ancient Egyptians were never white but have always been black until after the fall of pharaonic civilization when they largely became mongrelized by invaders from Europe and Asia (your Arab ancestors)!
quote:In fact true Negroes have never migrated to North Africa. I am not sure if the Afrocentrics make a distinction between the Nilotid and the Negro in their silly claims about ancient Egypt. It's like the difference between the Tutsi and Hutu in Rwanda for example and quite significant
Really?!! Can YOU then, explain to us this distinction, please?! Again, define for us "true negroes" as opposed to 'false' ones, and are there any "true caucasians"??!
By the way, the origins of the Tutsi were discussed before!!-- Here are two clues: The Tutsi speak Bantu language no different from Hutus and they also share the exact same genetic lineages with Hutus. Obviously any 'racial' divide between them is insane as such a divide was created by Europeans to further their imperialist agenda.
Speaking of insane agendas... when are you going to give it up 'Arabegypt'? Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Why should he give it up when he's very successfully got you all so tied down running in circles chasing your tails not progressing beyond where he points
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Of course the very family of the Sesostrises, the 12th dynasty, is Nubian in origin anyway, but that won't help you because the many of the great dynasties of Egypt have 'Nubian' ancestry and even those that don't are still black.
And let's be careful. The 12th Dynasty came from the 'south', that is, Ta-seti which as we all have come to know, was very much a part of Egypt and actually Egypt's first nome. No need to give him and others more ammunition in order to explain away the physical appearance of these monarchs (which was very typically southern [Egyptian] anyways).
Noting the prophecy of Nefertiti:
quote: Then a king will come from the South, Ameny, the justified, my name, Son of a woman of Ta-Seti, child of Upper Egypt, He will take the white crown, he will join the Two Mighty Ones (the two crowns) Asiatics will fall to his sword, Libyans will fall to his flame, Rebels to his wrath, traitors to his might, As the serpent on his brow subdues the rebels for him, One will build the Walls-of-the-Ruler, to bar Asiatics from entering Egypt...
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ That's exactly what I meant by the 12th dynasty being 'Nubian' in origin.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Why should he give it up when he's very successfully got you all so tied down running in circles chasing your tails not progressing beyond where he points
Tied who down?? Not I. As for running in circles and chasing tails. We are talking about the same idiot who created this thread stating the ancient Egyptians were 'Arabs' and now reduced to ranting about a difference between 'Nilotids' and 'Negroes'!! So far I await on the definition of these two words.
But I doubt I'll get answers from the dumb canine who tries to get me to his/her situation...
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
Ok, I accept it. Ancient Egypt was nog. You have convinced me with utterly ridiculous, unfounded, grounded in fantasy not fact, copy and paste jobs from wacky afrocentrism websites. But for the sake of argument, I'm convinced.
Now go and repeat these great feats of antiquity. Please go, it's been 3000 years since the great and mighty afros have done anything of mention other than royally fucking up afreeka, so get to building those black chariots to the stars, you have a lot of catching up to do. It has been 3000 years, you're long overdue for something. In other words, what have you done for us lately? And please, no more pics of European built and designed cities in Nigeria. That be stealin inbenshuns an **** and we know how super duper against that **** you are.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^^Name ONE actual Arab civilization.. Just one (and not Islamic-inspired African ones like those of NW and W Africa, or Moorish and Turkish empires). For every non-answer I'll give you ten African ones spanning from 5200 BP - 1600 AD, all established and referenced in mainstream books. And please, no "utterly ridiculous, unfounded, grounded in fantasy not fact, copy and paste jobs from wacky Eurocentrism/racist loon websites", like the ones you reference for your red haired Egypt bullshit (as if your self-hating azz actually has red hair).
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
I am not an Arab I was lying. I am an Aryan and I am apart of the master race. Now answer me why does Africa suck today ?
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^^Fine.. Name ONE "Aryan" [which actually derives from Iran] civilization of historical precedence (one Nordic civilization).... Prove that the Greeks did not refer to your people as Barbarians while holding Blacks and their civilizations in high regard.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Don't do that. You might hurt his feelings.
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: Ok, I accept it. Ancient Egypt was nog. You have convinced me with utterly ridiculous, unfounded, grounded in fantasy not fact, copy and paste jobs from wacky afrocentrism websites. But for the sake of argument, I'm convinced.
What is "nog"?? Also what is so "ridiculous" or "unfounded" about everything I posted?? I and Sundiata merely point out the FACT that M-78 in the Y-chromosome as well as M1 are NOT Eurasian but are all indigenous to Africa and thus blacks! And that "Arabs" have NOTHING to do with pharaonic Egypt as they did not even exist as that time!
Which copy and paste jobs do you refer to as "fantasy"??
You mean all these authentic ancient portraits of pharaohs??
quote:Now go and repeat these great feats of antiquity. Please go, it's been 3000 years since the great and mighty afros have done anything of mention other than royally fucking up afreeka, so get to building those black chariots to the stars, you have a lot of catching up to do. It has been 3000 years, you're long overdue for something. In other words, what have you done for us lately? And please, no more pics of European built and designed cities in Nigeria. That be stealin inbenshuns an **** and we know how super duper against that **** you are.
LOL Don't hate because Africans have created more advanced civilizations than the Middle East or Europe.
The only reason why Africa is f*cked up today is because it was overrun by non-African foreigners the same way Egypt is by Afrangis like YOU!
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: ^^Fine.. Name ONE "Aryan" [which actually derives from Iran] civilization of historical precedence (one Nordic civilization).... Prove that the Greeks did not refer to your people as Barbarians while holding Blacks and their civilizations in high regard.
Greece and Rome were both great White civilizations. Sumer predates Egypt by 3,000 years. Sumer had a written language 400 years before white men colonized Egypt.
Hate to break it to you, but Sumer is the middle east. The architecture used to build the pyramids in Egypt was almost identical to those in Sumer. Aryans from the Indus valley traveled towards Africa, Asia, and Europe. These areas close to the Indus Valley were colonized first. Aryans even reached The Americas before Asiatic people. The Mayans, for example built the original Ziggurat/Pyramid structures through out the American continents, and the Aztecs and Mayans wiped them out and copied the designs.
he Sumerians were fair skinned, and had red, blonde, brown, and black hair. Blue, green, and brown eyes. It's even documented when the Arabs first traveled to Sumer. It was much like modern day. At first they allowed a few of them in, and tried to help them out. Compassion was their weakness though, and The Akkadians eventually invaded them.
you all built this crap Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt:
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: ^^Fine.. Name ONE "Aryan" [which actually derives from Iran] civilization of historical precedence (one Nordic civilization).... Prove that the Greeks did not refer to your people as Barbarians while holding Blacks and their civilizations in high regard.
Greece and Rome were both great White civilizations. Sumer predates Egypt by 3,000 years. Sumer had a written language 400 years before white men colonized Egypt.
Hate to break it to you, but Sumer is the middle east. The architecture used to build the pyramids in Egypt was almost identical to those in Sumer. Aryans from the Indus valley traveled towards Africa, Asia, and Europe. These areas close to the Indus Valley were colonized first. Aryans even reached The Americas before Asiatic people. The Mayans, for example built the original Ziggurat/Pyramid structures through out the American continents, and the Aztecs and Mayans wiped them out and copied the designs.
he Sumerians were fair skinned, and had red, blonde, brown, and black hair. Blue, green, and brown eyes. It's even documented when the Arabs first traveled to Sumer. It was much like modern day. At first they allowed a few of them in, and tried to help them out. Compassion was their weakness though, and The Akkadians eventually invaded them.
LMAO @ you having to latch on to other people's civilizations and trying to associate with them by proxy. Is a bunch of old crooked stones all that you Nordic weirdos have to show for your so-called classical civilization? Did the people you imitate (Arabs) not bring you out of the dark ages by introducing to you the Greek manuscripts? Is Nabta Playa not 1,000 years older than stone henge, found in Africa, and is it not the FIRST archaeoastronomy device?
Did the Greeks et al. not call your people Barbarians, claiming that you were stupid, but brave while blacks were intelligent, yet cowardly?
quote:The races that live in…. Europe are full of courage and passion but somewhat lacking in skill and brain power
- Aristotle
quote:"Now while the southern peoples are of acute intelligence and infinite resource, they give way when courage is demanded because their strength is drained away by the sun; but those who are born in colder regions by their fearless courage are better equipped for the clash of arms, yet by their slowness of mind they rush on without reflection, and through lack of tactics are balked of their purpose…Italy presents good qualities which are tempered by admixture from either side both north and south, and are consequently unsurpassed. And so, by its policy, it curbs the courage of the northern barbarians; by its strength, the imaginative south. Thus the divine mind has allotted to the Roman state an excellent and temperate region in order to rule the world.
- Vitruvius Polio
Try again little boy..
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
The word iran comes from the word Aryan not the other way around, just as the word Erin/Éirinn (Irish for Ireland).
Barbarian means foreigner or outlander, not primitave. All non greeks would be barbarians to greeks, just as all non chinese are barbarians to chinese. __________________
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: Greece and Rome were both great White civilizations. Sumer predates Egypt by 3,000 years. Sumer had a written language 400 years before white men colonized Egypt.
Actually the roots of Greek and Roman civilization were the Helladic and Etruscan civilizations respectively and both had roots in Asia and Africa. So of course the foundation of these civilizations definitely wasn't 'white'! Egyptian hieroglyphs predate Sumerian cunieform by centuries as evidenced by the proto-hierogyphs in Nubia and white men did not colonize Egypt until the conquest of Alexander the Great!
quote:Hate to break it to you, but Sumer is the middle east. The architecture used to build the pyramids in Egypt was almost identical to those in Sumer. Aryans from the Indus valley traveled towards Africa, Asia, and Europe. These areas close to the Indus Valley were colonized first. Aryans even reached The Americas before Asiatic people. The Mayans, for example built the original Ziggurat/Pyramid structures through out the American continents, and the Aztecs and Mayans wiped them out and copied the designs.
The Sumerians were fair skinned, and had red, blonde, brown, and black hair. Blue, green, and brown eyes. It's even documented when the Arabs first traveled to Sumer. It was much like modern day. At first they allowed a few of them in, and tried to help them out. Compassion was their weakness though, and The Akkadians eventually invaded them.
Now I know you're crazy!! Ausar is right. You likely aren't even Arab, but a nucase of European descent posing as one!! Which is why I won't even bother addressing the nonsense above.
quote:Anyways we nothern Europeans built this
So You ARE European!! You finally reveal yourself!
Well, East Africa's Nabta Playa below..
As well as West Africa's corresponding Adrar Madet are Megalithic monuments that predate Stone Henge by 1,000 years!
quote:you all built this crap
Correction.
Africans also built these:
Northern European dwelling during the Roman period Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
^ Who cares. African civilization was far older and more complex! Deal with it! Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
^ He told me to name something and Africa is primitive and young.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Northern European dwelling during the Roman period [/QB]
^^LMAO @ that European mud hut..
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
There is no black race, just a collection of mongrel primitive rabble incapable of the most rudimentary civilization.
I quote:
quote: Name ONE "Aryan" [which actually derives from Iran] civilization of historical precedence (one Nordic civilization).... Prove that the Greeks did not refer to your people as Barbarians while holding Blacks and their civilizations in high regard.
. The stone-builders that built the henges were more advanced than anything your vile "race" has ever accomplished. Ditto for the Celts. Egypt and Sumer were clearly populated by Caucasians according to the fossil evidence. "Blacks and their civilizations" is an oxymoron.
You live in the present Western civilization that was invented by Nordics. The Industrial Rev and the resulting technological space-age of today is the result of Nordic genius. Don't kid yourself: Electricity, rockets, machinery, lasers, food surpluses, long-distance communication, etc are the result of white genius. There's no point even debating it. You look like the imbecile you are by even denying that in the slightest bit.
Why debate a person who ignores any contrarian evidence? Debating blacks is always a case of chasing one's tail, because blacks are full of ****.
Posted by ausar (Member # 1797) on :
You forgot to mention that most modern innovations would not have been possible without Indian or Chinese technology.
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
What the hell is so great about Stonehenge? The Igbo structures in Nigeria are far superior. As for Sumerians they spoke an Afro-Asiatic language. How the hell does that make them white? And their civilization began around the same time as Egyptian civilization. Sumerian culture is completely different from the ancient Egyptians. Clothing, jewelry, religious and magical beliefs, the use of pyramids, and the architecture of the ancient Egyptians is very different from the Sumerians. You may be responsible for modern day contributions and inventions but in the past your civilizations in Europe were heavily influenced by East African and West Asian cultures.
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
Besides, Sumer (Uruk) was founded by Abraham of the Bible, who was a Hamite, which would make him and all of the Sumerians black. Many others on here may not believe it, but it is true.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
arabegypt, just out of curiosity, what is your response to the bellow? I want to compare your response to Mike111
quote:As a farmer, the Negro is more efficient than the Chinese and the Hindoo. In practising a new handicraft he quickly acquires dexterity. In book-learning his aptness is equally great. His capacity for endurance has proved exhaustless. Pestilence, slavery, spirituous liquors, war and the devastation of barbarism have not exhausted his vitality. He works willingly, even as a slave; and as a free man is capable of any degree or kind of industrial activity. Mother Nature made him one of her born diplomats, orators and traders. His inner life finds expression in a folk-lore not without poetry and power.
The Negro might almost be characterized as a semi-civilized race. An extinct culture in Fezzan (South of Tripoli) has been justly credited to him. His native genius had already struck out a path of its own, even before the first immigrants into Africa—the Asian founders of Egypt and the Berber—arrived. The Egyptian civilization—in part, at least—was originally the work of Negroes cooperating with the Asiatic immigrants. Negro Africans, even when uninfluenced by outside forces, have shown native ability for material advancement, self-elevation and state-building. They have done this in the teeth of adverse circumstances, isolation and unfortunate environment. The Ashanti and the Dahoman, though true Negroes, though typical Guinea Negroes, had spontaneously developed considerable culture even before Islam could possibly have affected them.
The average of Negro culture, though below that of Mexico, Peru and Yucatan, was higher than that of other aboriginal Americans. Many Negro tribes, untouched by any stimulus from outside, voluntarily rose above the level where Caesar found the Kelts of Britain, and, even from the European and the Christian point of view, had a measure of the factors and forces that initiate real civilization. The most useful of metallurgic discoveries or inventions consists of smelting and working iron. The American Indian, whether Aztec, Inca, Maya or other, never fell upon this art. The Negro, though mentally inferior to the Indian, found it independently. The Bongo Negroes, as well as other Africans, constructed furnaces of an ingenious type, and also minted money. Among the Fan Negroes, on Ogowai River, bits of iron have been current coin since before European currency appeared
The Negro also is more of a bridge-builder than the Teutons that Tacitus knew. Yet he has not devoted his native power solely to material progress. He has revealed natural ability to build states and govern himself. Ashanti and Dahome prove this; especially, too, as they were realms of woman's rights.
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
He's now admittid he's blinded by bias.
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: Now answer me why does Africa suck today ?
This is a non-sequitar. And a vague and subjective rhetorical tautology desguised in a question. Why not grow some balls and say what you were going to say later in the fist place?; "Africa" "sucks today" so it doesnot compute that Africa or people in it were ever great, they would have needed the help of non-existant Aryan Euro civilizations to their North West (Ejupped was transferred from Europe yous know).
If he's serious: in asking "why africa different now?" he's implicitly saying right now that just because the status-quo he sees infront of his _u___n face today is the way it is he projects this backwards and 'disbelieves' any deviation from it but accepts evidence for it. Very scientific of him ... NOT. (no surprise their, he belongs to the weak ass religion of 'me HATES blacks')
Hey aryan _u____: Rome ruled almost all of Europe, what happened to Italy today (in other words a______ why are some Italians even submissive acting to so-called Aryans)? And if Nazism is there to protect Europe from outsiders today, why weren't they there during the time of the Islamic invasions from the East and South?
Do you get how were talking about 5,000-2,000 years ago? If not, find the hell out!
And the answer to your post before that is because you're a morally inferior [pathological?] lying _______.
Posted by ackee (Member # 16371) on :
@ Ebony Allen,hey sista no need to knock stonehenge because some idiot low self esteem having mother fornicator choose that monument to make his bogus case about some nodics hairyann,who are the founders of all things great in Africa,the monument it self took a lot work and was proberly a multi generational project, not unlike the Zimbabwe complex the pyramid feilds of Kemet and Kush,the great wall of China,and the great earthen works of Nigeria.all needs to be respected in it's own right.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
I can't believe I missed this!...
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: I am not an Arab I was lying. I am an Aryan and I am apart of the master race...
ROTFLMAOH
So you finally admit you're a liar! If you lie about something as mundane as you own identity it's no big stretch for you to lie about African culture and history as well as yout 'Aryan' supremacy!
quote:...Now answer me why does Africa suck today ?
Because Africa was invaded by white Europeans who destroyed its economic and political infrastructures. It was white Euros like YOU who ruined Africa like a plague!
Now you want to deny Africa of its past greatness! But you CAN'T DENY REALITY!
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Freehand: He's now admittid he's blinded by bias.
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: Now answer me why does Africa suck today ?
This is a non-sequitar. And a vague and subjective rhetorical tautology desguised in a question. Why not grow some balls and say what you were going to say later in the fist place?; "Africa" "sucks today" so it doesnot compute that Africa or people in it were ever great, they would have needed the help of non-existant Aryan Euro civilizations to their North West (Ejupped was transferred from Europe yous know).
If he's serious: in asking "why africa different now?" he's implicitly saying right now that just because the status-quo he sees infront of his _u___n face today is the way it is he projects this backwards and 'disbelieves' any deviation from it but accepts evidence for it. Very scientific of him ... NOT. (no surprise their, he belongs to the weak ass religion of 'me HATES blacks')
Hey aryan _u____: Rome ruled almost all of Europe, what happened to Italy today (in other words a______ why are some Italians even submissive acting to so-called Aryans)? And if Nazism is there to protect Europe from outsiders today, why weren't they there during the time of the Islamic invasions from the East and South?
Do you get how were talking about 5,000-2,000 years ago? If not, find the hell out!
And the answer to your post before that is because you're a morally inferior [pathological?] lying _______.
The imposter has called himself out, but I must give credit to Ausar as a true (non-Arab black) native Egyptian, he called 'Arabegypt' out for what he truly is!! We should have known better when he created a thread that promoted red-haired ancient Egyptians.
So please don't even bother to call him by his screen-name; that would only insult real Arabs!!
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
archaeologists have never found a Negro skull in the whole of North Africa.
Are you aware that the sphynx in Giza is now considered to have originally been painted and had blue eyes?
Sumerian statues have blue eyes and the bust of Nefertiti, with distinctively white facial features, also has blue eyes (except only one remains).
Do you have an explanation for this?
How do you explain what happened to these black people you claim were the original ancient Egyptians? Why did they disappear? Why is there no black culture today that shows any sign of this genius?
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
quote: Because Africa was invaded by white Europeans
"White Europeans"? That's being redundant.
quote: who destroyed its economic and political infrastructures. It was white Euros like YOU who ruined Africa like a plague!
European colonization of Africa didn't begin in earnest until the late 19th century. Please show me evidence of sub-Saharan African "economic and political infrastructures".
Hell, just show me evidence of the wheel, masonry and writing being used in those parts before the arrival of Europeans and I'll be happy.
The Mayans and Incans left something behind them. How about those magical negroes of yours?
quote: Now while the southern peoples are of acute intelligence and infinite resource, they give way when courage is demanded because their strength is drained away by the sun; but those who are born in colder regions by their fearless courage are better equipped for the clash of arms, yet by their slowness of mind they rush on without reflection, and through lack of tactics are balked of their purpose…Italy presents good qualities which are tempered by admixture from either side both north and south, and are consequently unsurpassed. And so, by its policy, it curbs the courage of the northern barbarians; by its strength, the imaginative south. Thus the divine mind has allotted to the Roman state an excellent and temperate region in order to rule the world.
How is this is any way, shape or form about negroes? "Southern peoples", meaning the ancient people of North Africa and the Middle East.
Or are you suggesting that Aristotle believed that Romans were actually negroes? Come on! If negroes had really achieved so much you wouldn't be forced to cling to such ridiculous notions.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion: arabegypt, just out of curiosity, what is your response to the bellow? I want to compare your response to Mike111
quote:As a farmer, the Negro is more efficient than the Chinese and the Hindoo. In practising a new handicraft he quickly acquires dexterity. In book-learning his aptness is equally great. His capacity for endurance has proved exhaustless. Pestilence, slavery, spirituous liquors, war and the devastation of barbarism have not exhausted his vitality. He works willingly, even as a slave; and as a free man is capable of any degree or kind of industrial activity. Mother Nature made him one of her born diplomats, orators and traders. His inner life finds expression in a folk-lore not without poetry and power.
The Negro might almost be characterized as a semi-civilized race. An extinct culture in Fezzan (South of Tripoli) has been justly credited to him. His native genius had already struck out a path of its own, even before the first immigrants into Africa—the Asian founders of Egypt and the Berber—arrived. The Egyptian civilization—in part, at least—was originally the work of Negroes cooperating with the Asiatic immigrants. Negro Africans, even when uninfluenced by outside forces, have shown native ability for material advancement, self-elevation and state-building. They have done this in the teeth of adverse circumstances, isolation and unfortunate environment. The Ashanti and the Dahoman, though true Negroes, though typical Guinea Negroes, had spontaneously developed considerable culture even before Islam could possibly have affected them.
The average of Negro culture, though below that of Mexico, Peru and Yucatan, was higher than that of other aboriginal Americans. Many Negro tribes, untouched by any stimulus from outside, voluntarily rose above the level where Caesar found the Kelts of Britain, and, even from the European and the Christian point of view, had a measure of the factors and forces that initiate real civilization. The most useful of metallurgic discoveries or inventions consists of smelting and working iron. The American Indian, whether Aztec, Inca, Maya or other, never fell upon this art. The Negro, though mentally inferior to the Indian, found it independently. The Bongo Negroes, as well as other Africans, constructed furnaces of an ingenious type, and also minted money. Among the Fan Negroes, on Ogowai River, bits of iron have been current coin since before European currency appeared
The Negro also is more of a bridge-builder than the Teutons that Tacitus knew. Yet he has not devoted his native power solely to material progress. He has revealed natural ability to build states and govern himself. Ashanti and Dahome prove this; especially, too, as they were realms of woman's rights.
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by markellion: arabegypt, just out of curiosity, what is your response to the bellow? I want to compare your response to Mike111
quote:As a farmer, the Negro is more efficient than the Chinese and the Hindoo. In practising a new handicraft he quickly acquires dexterity. In book-learning his aptness is equally great. His capacity for endurance has proved exhaustless. Pestilence, slavery, spirituous liquors, war and the devastation of barbarism have not exhausted his vitality. He works willingly, even as a slave; and as a free man is capable of any degree or kind of industrial activity. Mother Nature made him one of her born diplomats, orators and traders. His inner life finds expression in a folk-lore not without poetry and power.
The Negro might almost be characterized as a semi-civilized race. An extinct culture in Fezzan (South of Tripoli) has been justly credited to him. His native genius had already struck out a path of its own, even before the first immigrants into Africa—the Asian founders of Egypt and the Berber—arrived. The Egyptian civilization—in part, at least—was originally the work of Negroes cooperating with the Asiatic immigrants. Negro Africans, even when uninfluenced by outside forces, have shown native ability for material advancement, self-elevation and state-building. They have done this in the teeth of adverse circumstances, isolation and unfortunate environment. The Ashanti and the Dahoman, though true Negroes, though typical Guinea Negroes, had spontaneously developed considerable culture even before Islam could possibly have affected them.
The average of Negro culture, though below that of Mexico, Peru and Yucatan, was higher than that of other aboriginal Americans. Many Negro tribes, untouched by any stimulus from outside, voluntarily rose above the level where Caesar found the Kelts of Britain, and, even from the European and the Christian point of view, had a measure of the factors and forces that initiate real civilization. The most useful of metallurgic discoveries or inventions consists of smelting and working iron. The American Indian, whether Aztec, Inca, Maya or other, never fell upon this art. The Negro, though mentally inferior to the Indian, found it independently. The Bongo Negroes, as well as other Africans, constructed furnaces of an ingenious type, and also minted money. Among the Fan Negroes, on Ogowai River, bits of iron have been current coin since before European currency appeared
The Negro also is more of a bridge-builder than the Teutons that Tacitus knew. Yet he has not devoted his native power solely to material progress. He has revealed natural ability to build states and govern himself. Ashanti and Dahome prove this; especially, too, as they were realms of woman's rights.
Its retarded and I have no opinion on it. I gave Nigglets credit their "civilizations" were less primitive than the aboriginals but that was because Arabs had to civilize the.m now refute my previous post
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^^Refute what? Why would anyone take some weirdo who lies about his own identity seriously? You are a joke. I guess you thought that acting Arab would give you more credibility yet exposing your self as a liar did what?
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
You are mentally incapable of refuting anything. You know Egypt was founded by Whites and you know NOT ONE negroid skull has ever been found in Egypt ! Hell, just show me evidence of the wheel, masonry and writing being used in those parts before the arrival of Europeans and I'll be happy to admit I have been wrong all about African History.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
arabegypt
Hey "Arab"Egypt what do you make of this study?
X-ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1980).
Courtesy of James Harris and Edward Wente:
In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads.The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults.
Can you understand what is being said in this Study, Or are you going to lie to yourself?
Peace
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: Hell, just show me evidence of the wheel, masonry and writing being used in those parts before the arrival of Europeans and I'll be happy to admit I have been wrong all about African History.
This also comes from Perry Noble the guy I quoted in my last post. It was common knowledge (to Europeans) that Africans had their own alphabet the Mande script was also talked about in old encyclepedias (I can post about that tomorrow). I'm sure more than the Mande script existed.
Perry Noble was a missionary of the late 19th century if anything you would think he would be biased toward saying Africans didn't have high culture don't you think?
quote: One of the Negro languages has singular interest, being the only native speech in Bantuland, or Sudan, that has a native alphabet, the sole alphabet ever created by the Negro. In West Africa, Mande is the most important and widely extended language. The Mandingo, an enterprising and intelligent race, are mainly Mohammedans, so far as the masses can be called Moslem: and constitute Islam's chief apostles in western Sudan, wielding wide influence as sowers of European ideas. Their fine language, genius for music, and rich folk-lore, unite their intellectual, practical and religious gifts to make them a most desirable conquest for Christianity.
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by markellion: arabegypt, just out of curiosity, what is your response to the bellow? I want to compare your response to Mike111
quote:As a farmer, the Negro is more efficient than the Chinese and the Hindoo. In practising a new handicraft he quickly acquires dexterity. In book-learning his aptness is equally great. His capacity for endurance has proved exhaustless. Pestilence, slavery, spirituous liquors, war and the devastation of barbarism have not exhausted his vitality. He works willingly, even as a slave; and as a free man is capable of any degree or kind of industrial activity. Mother Nature made him one of her born diplomats, orators and traders. His inner life finds expression in a folk-lore not without poetry and power.
The Negro might almost be characterized as a semi-civilized race. An extinct culture in Fezzan (South of Tripoli) has been justly credited to him. His native genius had already struck out a path of its own, even before the first immigrants into Africa—the Asian founders of Egypt and the Berber—arrived. The Egyptian civilization—in part, at least—was originally the work of Negroes cooperating with the Asiatic immigrants. Negro Africans, even when uninfluenced by outside forces, have shown native ability for material advancement, self-elevation and state-building. They have done this in the teeth of adverse circumstances, isolation and unfortunate environment. The Ashanti and the Dahoman, though true Negroes, though typical Guinea Negroes, had spontaneously developed considerable culture even before Islam could possibly have affected them.
The average of Negro culture, though below that of Mexico, Peru and Yucatan, was higher than that of other aboriginal Americans. Many Negro tribes, untouched by any stimulus from outside, voluntarily rose above the level where Caesar found the Kelts of Britain, and, even from the European and the Christian point of view, had a measure of the factors and forces that initiate real civilization. The most useful of metallurgic discoveries or inventions consists of smelting and working iron. The American Indian, whether Aztec, Inca, Maya or other, never fell upon this art. The Negro, though mentally inferior to the Indian, found it independently. The Bongo Negroes, as well as other Africans, constructed furnaces of an ingenious type, and also minted money. Among the Fan Negroes, on Ogowai River, bits of iron have been current coin since before European currency appeared
The Negro also is more of a bridge-builder than the Teutons that Tacitus knew. Yet he has not devoted his native power solely to material progress. He has revealed natural ability to build states and govern himself. Ashanti and Dahome prove this; especially, too, as they were realms of woman's rights.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: You are mentally incapable of refuting anything. You know Egypt was founded by Whites and you know NOT ONE negroid skull has ever been found in Egypt ! Hell, just show me evidence of the wheel, masonry and writing being used in those parts before the arrival of Europeans and I'll be happy to admit I have been wrong all about African History.
You are mentally incabable of understanding that none of those features were developed independently by your noridic ancestors before being introduced by a people (Romans) who considered you to be Barbarians. "White Egypt" is the most absurd, ridiculous nonsensical bullshit delusional lie I've ever heard in my life! Stop it, please, if you pride your self as a human to even posses a minimal amount of intelligence, just stop it. Trying to make up for your people's lack of ingenuity by traveling thousands of miles to Africa and trying to steal the civilizations rooted there is ridiculous. Why would white people travel thousands of miles across burning sand, stop randomly in NE Africa and create a civilization there when they could have done this at home, yet didn't until thousands of years later?
Go back to pretending to be Arab so that you can feel better about your self again. Here's what the medieval Arab/Muslim writers thought of you by the way:
"They (whites) lack keenness of understanding and clarity of intelligence, and are overcome by ignorance and dullness, lack of discernment, and stupidity." ---Sa'id al-Andalusi
No offense to markellion and T-rex by the way.. Just pointing out that his self-aggrandizement at the expense of others doesn't at all seem based on historical perceptions as opposed to his own delusions.
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
These symbols have been found on many of the artefacts excavated from sites in south-east Europe, in particular from Vinča near Belgrade, but also in Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, eastern Hungary, Moldova, southern Ukraine and the former Yugoslavia. The artefacts date from between the 7th and 4th millennia BC and those decorated with these symbols are between 8,000 and 6,500 years old.
Some scholars believe that the Vinča symbols represent the earliest form of writing ever found, predating ancient Egyptian and Sumerian writing by thousands of years. Since the inscriptions are all short and appear on objects found in burial sites, and the language represented is not known, it is highly unlikely they will ever be deciphered.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt:
Some scholars believe that the Vinča symbols represent the earliest form of writing ever found,
ROTFLMAO! I have nothing else to say. You and your Atlantis-inspired fantasies aren't even worth responding to anymore.
Posted by zarahan (Member # 15718) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: ast Africans have the m78 Y chromse in them from the Egypt area, not the other way round (Cruciani 2008), and it dates back about 15,000 years. The the DNA link ound between Ethiopia and Egypt is actually a Eurasian one, M1, and that dates back as far as the Y chromosome. Modern Egyptians can trace most of their ancestry back to about 24k ago in the Nile valley. Historical immgration from Europeans and Arabs was pretty limited, to about 10% max. Not enough to change their appearance.
So far every anthropoogical study of the Egyptians has concluded they were the same essentially as modern Egyptians.
There have been three well documented Eurasian migrations into North Africa- one about 30k ago, one 10k ago and one 8k ago. These people make up a major part of the Egyptian population.
The Predynastic of Upper Egypt and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa,
The paper also has good summary of other studies on it.
Dr SOY Keita, a black American anthropologist of West African descent is on Nat Geo explaining how the phenotype (appearance)of Egyptians hasn't changed
If you want to make out that Egyptians were black Africans you have to explain away why the studies always place them as being like modern Egyptian, and why modern Egyptians show up about 70% for native African y chromosomes. How did they magically transform appearance? There's virtually no recent Arab or European ancestry in them. At least 90% of their DNA has been there for about 8,000 years or more.
Sorry to bust your bubble but your argument is very weak. here's why:
1) East Africans dont have "the m78 Y chromse in them from the Egypt area, not the other way round (Cruciani 2008)." That is not what Cruciana said - right off the bat you are misrepresenting and distorting. If M-78 was from Northeast Africa that leaves Somalians, Ethiopians, Nubians and some Sudanics already in place, in that area. Your statement about so called "chromse in them from the Egypt area" doesnt make sense.
2) You assume that one has to look like a West African to be "truly black." Again complete nonsense. Africa is the most genetically diverse continent in the world- people can have narrow noses or broad, light skin or dark. It is all built-in, and does not depend on any "race mix". Your claim is simply recycling the discredited Aryan race percent model.
3) Thus ancient Egyptians had dark skin, broad noses, but also narrow noses and brown skin. That was part of the built-in way Egyptians looked. Implying than dark skin is "foreign" to Egypt is a totally erroneous and no one is being fooled.
4) You are contradicting yourself. if as you say: "modern Egyptians show up about 70% for native African y chromosomes" then by your own statement, you make them 70% African.
5) It is true that fundamentally modern Egyptians havent changed much from ancients- but here you shoot yourself in the foot. Modern Egyptians ALSO have dark skin, narrow and broad noses, loose and curly hair, just like other people in other parts of africa. Duh.... They retain the same African characteristics that they started out with.. lol.. don't you see, you are contradicting yourself again.
6) And the ancients were tropically adapted, that's why limb proportions tudies show them similar to other tropically African peoples.. lol.. They are even more related to black Americans than white Americans or Europeans.. read it and weep...
LIMB PROPORTION STUDIES
ANCIENT EGYPTIANS LINK CLOSER TO US BLACKS THAN WHITE AMERICANS OR EUROPEANS
6a) And the Egyotians link with other Sub-saharan" people more than Europeans or Middle Easterners as proved by scholarship quote:
"Certainly there was some foreign admixture [in Egypt], but basically a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times... [the] Badarian people, who developed the earliest Predynastic Egyptian culture, already exhibited the mix of North African and Sub-Saharan physical traits that have typified Egyptians ever since (Hassan 1985; Yurco 1989; Trigger 1978; Keita 1990.. et al.,)... The peoples of Egypt, the Sudan, and much of East African Ethiopia and Somalia are now generally regarded as a Nilotic continuity, with widely ranging physical features (complexions light to dark, various hair and craniofacial types) but with powerful common cultural traits, including cattle pastoralist traditions. (Trigger 1978; Bard, Snowden, this volume).(F. Yurco "An Egyptological Review," 1996)[11]
DNA of some modern Egyptians found a genetic ancestral heritage to East Africa: "The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) diversity of 58 individuals from Upper Egypt, more than half (34 individuals) from Gurna, whose population has an ancient cultural history, were studied by sequencing the control-region and screening diagnostic RFLP markers. This sedentary population presented similarities to the Ethiopian population by the L1 and L2 macrohaplogroup frequency (20.6%), by the West Eurasian component (defined by haplogroups H to K and T to X) and particularly by a high frequency (17.6%) of haplogroup M1. We statistically and phylogenetically analysed and compared the Gurna population with other Egyptian, Near East and sub-Saharan Africa populations; AMOVA and Minimum Spanning Network analysis showed that the Gurna population was not isolated from neighbouring populations. Our results suggest that the Gurna population has conserved the trace of an ancestral genetic structure from an ancestral East African population, characterized by a high M1 haplogroup frequency. The current structure of the Egyptian population may be the result of further influence of neighbouring populations on this ancestral population." (Stevanovitch A, Gilles A, Bouzaid E, et al. (2004) Mitochondrial DNA sequence diversity in a sedentary population from Egypt.Ann Hum Genet. 68(Pt 1):23-39.)
7) You quote the flawed brace 1993 study, but Brace found matches with Europeans only because he used OLDER Europeans who look like Africans, before they became fully adapted to the colder climes.
BRACE 1993 CLINES AND CLUSTERS DEBUNKED AS TO CERTAIN WEAKNESSES
BRACE 2005 ON WHY OLDER EUROPEANS SOMETIMES APPEAR TO MATCH AFRICANS -- THEY ACTUALLY LOOKE MORE IKE AFRICANS THAN MODERN EUROS DO
8) Finally you mention DNA, but the PN2 transition- Haplogroup E, links together numerous African peoples regardless of how they look. SO Egyptians are also tied to other African cousins that way. Sorry to bust your bubble..
QUOTE:
"But the Y-chromosome clade defined by the PN2 transition (PN2/M35, PN2/M2) shatters the boundaries of phenotypically defined races and true breeding populations across a great geographical expanse. African peoples with a range of skin colors, hair forms and physiognomies have substantial percentages of males whose Y chromosomes form closely related clades with each other, but not with others who are phenotypically similar. The individuals in the morphologically or geographically defined 'races' are not characterized by 'private' distinct lineages restricted to each of them." (S O Y Keita, R A Kittles, et al. "Conceptualizing human variation," Nature Genetics 36, S17 - S20 (2004)
TRY AS YOU MIGHT, YOU CANNOT DISASSOCIATE EGYPT FROM AFRICA, ITS PEOPLES AND ITS CULTURES. LOL EGYPTIANS ARE AFRICANS. Furthermore the generis of the pharaonic civilization is in the "darker" south not the north or middle east.
Also read it and weep: QUOTE
"Ancient Egyptian civilization was, in ways and to an extent usually not recognized, fundamentally African. The evidence of both language and culture reveals these African roots. The origins of Egyptian ethnicity lay in the areas south of Egypt. The ancient Egyptian language belonged to the Afrasian family (also called Afroasiatic or, formerly, Hamito-Semitic). The speakers of the earliest Afrasian languages, according to recent studies, were a set of peoples whose lands between 15,000 and 13,000 B.C. stretched from Nubia in the west to far northern Somalia in the east. They supported themselves by gathering wild grains. The first elements of Egyptian culture were laid down two thousand years later, between 12,000 and 10,000 B.C., when some of these Afrasian communities expanded northward into Egypt, bringing with them a language directly ancestral to ancient Egyptian. They also introduced to Egypt the idea of using wild grains as food." (Christopher Ehret (1996) "Ancient Egyptian as an African Language, Egypt as an African Culture." In Egypt in Africa Egypt in Africa, Theodore Celenko (ed), Indiana University Press)
"Ancient Egypt belongs to a language group known as 'Afroasiatic' (formerly called Hamito-Semitic) and its closest relatives are other north-east African languages from Somalia to Chad. Egypt's cultural features, both material and ideological and particularly in the earliest phases, show clear connections with that same broad area. In sum, ancient Egypt was an African culture, developed by African peoples, who had wide ranging contacts in north Africa and western Asia." (Morkot, Robert (2005) The Egyptians: An Introduction. Routledge. p. 10)
"There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.. In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas." (Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999) pp 328-332)
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QUOTE]Originally posted by arabegypt: [qb] The Nubian ethnicity is Nilotid, and not Negro. There were no Negroes in North Africa in ancient times and no Negro skulls have ever been found there...
ROTFLOL
Pray tell what is the difference between a 'Nilotid' and a 'Negro'??! Can you please define the two??
lol.. you are havihg too much fun dude ... What next, 'Swedeids"?
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
So according to this moron, Nilotics are not Negro or in other words not black? What next?
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
The Moors only invaded the Iberian Peninsula & Sicily, you idiot. And if they were so advanced and Europeans so backwards, why were they stopped by the "barbarian" Charles Martel? The advanced White Romans had made quick work of the Gauls. Seems your "advanced" Moors couldn't do the same, but they sure would have loved to.
By the way, if Moors had such uncanny educative powers ("making Europe what it is today"), if they could magically build huge cathedrals in nations they had never stepped foot in (eg "Moors built the Speyer Cathedral") then why didn't West Africa benefit from these magical Moors? Where are West Africa's cathedrals and master artists and philosophers and mathematicians and composers and everything else?
After all, West Africans were right next door to the Moors.
I'd like you to show me what Moors looked like in Moorish and African art. In fact, I'd just like you to show me some Moorish art, so I can learn from the real masters.
Show me a monument from Sub Saharah ALSO KNOWNS AS NIGGERLAND Black Africa NOT ETHIOPIA OR EGYPT
At least show me something that goes up against the Speyer Cathedral.
the Moors did very little to advance art and science. What the Spaniards gained during the Reconquista was ancient knowledge of the Greeks themselves as well as some new knowledge generated by Persians in the Eastern Caliphate. If you wanted to be an intellectual you had to know Persian, Persian was considered the language for both arts and science. Besides the fact that Persian was the higher tongue most who made advances in science/art/language were in fact racially Persian and judging by paintings of them quite clearly White.
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
quote:When the conquest of the West (by the Arabs) was completed, and merchants began to penetrate into the interior, they saw no nation of the Blacks so mighty as Ghanah, the dominions of which extended westward as far as the Ocean. The King's court was kept in the city of Ghanah, which, according to the author of the Book of Roger (El Idrisi), and the author of the Book of Roads and Realms (El Bekri), is divided into two parts, standing on both banks of the Nile, and ranks among the largest and most populous cities of the world.
Bellow from
“Views from Arab scholars and Merchants”
P. 40 quote from Yaqut
quote:The king of Zafun is stronger than the veiled people of the Maghreb and more versed in the art o kingship. The veiled people acknowledge his superiority over them, obey him and resort to him in all important matters of government… One year the king, on his way to the pilgrimage, came to the Maghreb to pay a visit to the commander of the Muslims, the veiled king of the Maghreb, of the tribe of Lamtuna. The Commander of the Muslims met him on foot, wheras the king of Zafun did not dismount for him.
P. 43 According to Ibn Sa’id,
quote:the authority of the sultan of Kanim extended over Kawar and Fazzan, and the Berbers were slaves of the king of Kanim. He confirmed that during period of strength Kanim expanded northward into the Sahara, rather than southward.
page 44
This sultan has authority there over kingdoms such as those of the Tajuwa, Kawar, and Fazzan. God has assisted him and he has many descendants and armies. His clothes are brought to him from the capital of Tunish. He has scholars around him… The region where Zaghawa wander is to the east of Manan. They are for the most part Muslims owing obedience to the sultan of Kanim. To the north of Manan are the terrirory of the Kanim the Akawwar wander. Their well-known towns are in the Second Clime and they are Muslims owing obedience to the sultan of Kanim.
page 45
There is no town worthy of mention in this section (second climate) except for Awdaghust. A mixture of Muslim Berbers inhabits it, but authority rests with the Sanhaja. There is an account of this town and its ruler in al-Bakri. It is on the line of the Second Clime in longitude 22 degrees. In the same latitude is Zafun, which belongs to pagan Sudan and whose ruler enjoys a good reputation among (other) kings of the Sudan.
Page 99 from Ibn Khaldun
Edit: Abu’l-Hasan is the king of Morocco
quote:Sultan Abu’l-Hasan was well known for his ostentatious ways and his presumption to vie with the mightiest monarchs and adopt their customs in exchanging gifts with their peers and counterparts and dispatching emissaries to distant kings and far frontiers. In his time the king of Mali was the greatest of the kings of the Sudan and the nearest to his kingdom in the Maghrib. Mali was 100 stages distant from the southern frontiers of his realms
quote:The scholars of Timbuctoo yielded in nothing to the saints and their miracles. During their sojourns in the foreign universities of Fez, Tunis, and Cairo, ' they astounded the most learned men of Islam by their erudition.' That these negroes were on a level with the Arabian savants is proved by the fact that they were installed as professors in Morocco and Egypt. In contrast to this we find that the Arabs were not always equal to the requirements of Sankore. ' A celebrated jurist of Hedjaz (Arabia), arriving in Timbuctoo with the intention of teaching, found the town full of Sudanese scholars. Observing them to be his superiors in knowledge, he withdrew to Fez, where he succeeded in obtaining employment.'
Bellow "Negroland of the Arabs" again quoting Ibn Khaldun. I need to point out don't let the word Berber confuse you he means Somali
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 that they are destined to become masters of Yemen and all Arabia.
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
Show me a monument from Sub Saharah ALSO KNOWNS AS NIGGERLAND Black Africa NOT ETHIOPIA OR EGYPT
At least show me something that goes up against the Speyer Cathedral.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Look at the bold text
quote: Bellow is “The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained”
When the conquest of the West (by the Arabs) was completed, and merchants began to penetrate into the interior, they saw no nation of the Blacks so mighty as Ghanah, the dominions of which extended westward as far as the Ocean. The King's court was kept in the city of Ghanah, which, according to the author of the Book of Roger (El Idrisi), and the author of the Book of Roads and Realms (El Bekri), is divided into two parts, standing on both banks of the Nile, and ranks among the largest and most populous cities of the world.
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: Show me a monument from Sub Saharah ALSO KNOWNS AS NIGGERLAND Black Africa NOT ETHIOPIA OR EGYPT
At least show me something that goes up against the Speyer Cathedral.
At least i saw your whore mother givin it up freely on the corner in the ghetto the other night.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by deranged-whitey: Show me a monument from Sub Saharan ALSO KNOWNS AS NIGGERLAND Black Africa NOT ETHIOPIA OR EGYPT
LMAO But indigenous Egyptians and Ethiopians ARE black Africans, and Ethiopia IS in Sub-Sahara, YOU MORON!!
(non-Arab) Egyptians
Ethiopians
^ I hope you realize how insane you are by even trying to claim Ethiopians as white! ROTFL
quote:At least show me something that goes up against the Speyer Cathedral.
Fine here ya go!:
Ruins of Great Zimbabwe
There's more if you want, but I'm afraid your poor demented little head can't take it.
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: So according to this moron, Nilotics are not Negro or in other words not black? What next?
That depends on what these lunatics mean by 'negro'! Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
You can't debate all you have is ad hodimien attacks. vThe ruin of Zimbabwe is no where near the Speyer Cathedral.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by arab-imposter white nazi idiot : owned
LOL Indeed, you got owned more than a West African slave in a Georgia plantation! I mean at least the African slave had more brains!
quote: admit your defeat
ROTFLOL
The only one here defeated is YOURSELF and apparently by your own idiocy and insanity. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:the white-idiot says: You can't debate all you have is ad hodimien attacks. vThe ruin of Zimbabwe is no where near the Speyer Cathedral.
LOL There is nothing to debate about. All you present is NONSENSE. All we present is EVIDENCE. And of course the 'ruin' of Zimbabwe is not as grand as the cathedral because it is ruin but I'm sure it was even more impressive when it was whole and intact. Especially considering the fact that it was built centuries before the Speyer!
Does this frustrate you? Then take a look at this:
"It is known as Sungbo Eredo pronounced "SOONG-BO | E-RED-O". It was an impressive find discovered back in 1999 and measuring 70ft high and 100 miles long (160km). Hidden deep within the Nigerian rain forest, the burial place of Bilikisu Sungbo (Queen of Sheba) indigenous insist is a discovery both amazing and frustrating mostly do to fraudulent attempts by Archeologists to erroneous date it later than it is and local government interventions. Rivaling Kemet’s Great Pyramids, it stands to make its mark with exclamations. The links below reveal live BBC interviews with an excited archaeologist, Dr Patrick Darling as well as other great sources especially link number ‘4’."
The Eredo ramparts: More earth than the pyramids
Many archaeologists believe this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to massive archaeological finds in Sub-Sahara.
Of course white idiots like you FEAR such findings, don't you?! Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Freehand: At least i saw your whore mother givin it up freely on the corner in the ghetto the other night.
What do you mean by "at least". We just obliterated the nitwit and you gotta say 'at least'? LOL
Speaking of which, perhaps that is the reason for the boy's negrophobia-- that he caught his mother prostituting to black men.
Perhaps the same thing happened to Akoben only he caught his mom with Jewish men.. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Fake 'Arab'Egypt you still there??
I guess not. Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
arabegypt
It seems "Arab"Egypt went off on a different path after his skull arguement was destroyed.
Again for A R A B Egypt Hey "Arab"Egypt what do you make of this study?
X-ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1980).
Courtesy of James Harris and Edward Wente:
In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads.The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults.
Peace
Posted by Freehand (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: What do you mean by "at least". We just obliterated the nitwit and you gotta say 'at least'? LOL
lol ya got me on that one.
quote:Speaking of which, perhaps that is the reason for the boy's negrophobia-- that he caught his mother prostituting to black men.
Perhaps the same thing happened to Akoben only he caught his mom with Jewish men..
LMAO, perhaps double trouble, a black jew.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Yes perhaps Takruri! LMAO
Maybe that's why he calls him the 'great Jew', because Takruri is the closest man he has to a 'father'. LOL Posted by zarahan (Member # 15718) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: You can't debate all you have is ad hodimien attacks. vThe ruin of Zimbabwe is no where near the Speyer Cathedral. [/qb]
LOL There is nothing to debate about. All you present is NONSENSE. All we present is EVIDENCE. And of course the 'ruin' of Zimbabwe is not as grand as the cathedral because it is ruin but I'm sure it was even more impressive when it was whole and intact.
Does this frustrate you? Then take a look at this:
"It is known as Sungbo Eredo pronounced "SOONG-BO | E-RED-O". It was an impressive find discovered back in 1999 and measuring 70ft high and 100 miles long (160km). Hidden deep within the Nigerian rain forest, the burial place of Bilikisu Sungbo (Queen of Sheba) indigenous insist is a discovery both amazing and frustrating mostly do to fraudulent attempts by Archeologists to erroneous date it later than it is and local government interventions. Rivaling Kemet’s Great Pyramids, it stands to make its mark with exclamations. The links below reveal live BBC interviews with an excited archaeologist, Dr Patrick Darling as well as other great sources especially link number ‘4’."
The Eredo ramparts: More earth than the pyramids
Many archaeologists believe this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to massive archaeological finds in Sub-Sahara. [/QUOTE]
On target again, I see.
lol, And why should we accept his holy grail of achievement- the Speyer Cathedral as some sort of talisman of achievement?
Since Egypt is an African civilization according to mainstream scholarship (see quotes below) the applicable comparison should be the pyramids of Egypt versus the "cathedral." Compared to centuries of massive building with accurate astornomical alignments, the little cathedral is small beer indeed. Since Egypt is the topic- lets stick with Egypt and make the comparisons there.
And why should we accept the exclusion of Egypt and Ethiopia in his childish ittle "comparison"? lol...But let's go with it for a moment- just to humor then destroy him. Outside of Egypt lets say, we still have Nubia and its great pyramids. Funny how that got missed. Zimbabwe is Well known and is already in the mix, but let's skip to West Africa for a moment.
Who built the greatest earthworks in the world bar none, as carefully documented by the Gunniess Book of World Records in 1974 and other subseuent editions? Aliens- via "chariots of the Gods?" Nope- it was West Africans. According to the official world records and as verified by extensive scholarship. The earthwork ramparts of 15th century Benin, West Africa, are the largest and most extensive in the world, AND the overall walls are the second largest man made structure on earth after the Great Wall of China. Compared to this the "cathedral" is chump change...
The defensive fortification of Benin City, the capital, consisted of ramparts and moats, call iya, enclosing a 4000 square kilometer (2485.5 miles) of community lands. In total, the Benin wall system encompasses over 10,000 kilometres (6213.7 miles) of earth boundaries. Patrick Darling, an archaeologist, estimates that the complex was built between 800 and 1000 up to the late fifteenth century (Keys 1994: 16). Advantageously situated, the moats were duged in such a manner that earthen banks provided outer walls that complemented deep ditches. According to Graham Connah, the ditch formed an integral part of the intended barrier but was also a quarry for the material to construct the wall or bank (Keys 1994: 594). The ramparts range in size from shallow traces to the immense 20-meter-high rampart (66 feet) around Benin City (Wesler 1998: 144). The Guinness Book of World Records describes the walls of Benin City as the world's second largest man-made structure after China's Great Wall), in terms of length, and the series of earthen ramparts as the most extensive earthwork in the world.
{Historical archaeology in Nigeria, By Kit W. Wesler, P. Allsworth-Jones, Africa World Press, 1998}
As for Egypt as an African civilization, here are those quotes from mainstream scholarship:
"The period when sub-Saharan Africa was most influential in Egypt was a time when neither Egypt, as we understand it culturally, nor the Sahara, as we understand it geographically, existed. Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant."(Egypt and Sub-Saharan Africa: Their Interaction. Encyclopedia of Precolonial Africa, by Joseph O. Vogel, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, California (1997), pp. 465-472 )[119]
"There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.. In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas." (Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999) pp 328-332)
The peoples of Egypt, the Sudan, and much of East African Ethiopia and Somalia are now generally regarded as a Nilotic continuity, with widely ranging physical features (complexions light to dark, various hair and craniofacial types) but with powerful common cultural traits, including cattle pastoralist traditions. (Frank Yurco, "An Egyptological Review," 1996 -in Mary R. Lefkowitz and Guy MacLean Rogers, Black Athena Revisited, 1996, The University of North Carolina Press, p. 62-100)
"..sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans." (Barry Kemp, "Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation. (2005) Routledge. p. 52-60)
---------------------- [I]QUOTE(s) FROM keita:[/]
S. O. Y. Keita, "Studies and Comments on Ancient Egyptian Biological Relationships," History in Africa 20 (1993) 129-54 "Overall, when the Egyptian crania are evaluated in a Near Eastern (Lachish) versus African (Kerma, Kebel Moya, Ashanti) context) the affinity is with the Africans. The Sudan and Palestine are the most appropriate comparative regions which would have 'donated' people, along with the Sahara and Maghreb. Archaeology validates looking to these regions for population flow (see Hassan 1988)... Egyptian groups showed less overall affinity to Palestinian and Byzantine remains than to other African series, especially Sudanese." (Keita 1993)
"When the unlikely relationships [Indian matches] and eliminated, the Egyptian series are more similar overall to other African series than to European or Near Eastern (Byzantine or Palestinian) series." (Keita 1993)
"Analysis of crania is the traditional approach to assessing ancient population origins, relationships, and diversity. In studies based on anatomical traits and measurements of crania, similarities have been found between Nile Valley crania from 30,000, 20,000 and 12,000 years ago and various African remains from more recent times (see Thoma 1984; Brauer and Rimbach 1990; Angel and Kelley 1986; Keita 1993). Studies of crania from southern predynastic Egypt, from the formative period (4000-3100 B.C.), show them usually to be more similar to the crania of ancient Nubians, Kushites, Saharans, or modern groups from the Horn of Africa than to those of dynastic northern Egyptians or ancient or modern southern Europeans." (S. O. Y and A.J. Boyce, "The Geographical Origins and Population Relationships of Early Ancient Egyptians", in Egypt in Africa, Theodore Celenko (ed), Indiana University Press, 1996, pp. 20-33)
"There is no archaeological, linguistic, or historical data which indicate a European or Asiatic invasion of, or migration to, the Nile Valley during First Dynasty times. Previous concepts about the origin of the First Dynasty Egyptians as being somehow external to the Nile Valley or less native are not supported by archaeology... In summary, the Abydos First Dynasty royal tomb contents reveal a notable craniometric heterogeneity. Southerners predominate. (Kieta, S. (1992) Further Studies of Crania From Ancient Northern Africa: An Analysis of Crania From First Dynasty Egyptian Tombs, Using Multiple Discriminant Functions. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 87:245-254)"
"The predominant craniometric pattern in the Abydos royal tombs is 'southern' (tropical African variant), and this is consistent with what would be expected based on the literature and other results (Keita, 1990). This pattern is seen in both group and unknown analyses... Archaeology and history seem to provide the most parsimonious explanation for the variation in the royal tombs at Abydos.. Tomb design suggests the presence of northerners in the south in late Nakada times (Hoffman, 1988) when the unification probably took place. Delta names are attached to some of the tombs at Abydos (Gardiner, 1961; Yurco, 1990, personal communication), thus perhaps supporting Petrie's (1939) and Gardiner's contention that north-south marriages were undertaken to legitimize the hegemony of the south. The courtiers of northern elites would have accompanied them. "
"Given all of the above, it is probably not possible to view the Abydos royal tomb sample as representative of the general southern Upper Egyptian population of the time. Southern elites and/or their descendants eventually came to be buried in the north (Hoffman, 1988). Hence early Second Dynasty kings and Djoser (Dynasty 111) (Hayes, 1953) and his descendants are not buried in Abydos. Petrie (1939) states that the Third Dynasty, buried in the north, was of Sudanese origin, but southern Egypt is equally likely. This perhaps explains Harris and Weeks' (1973) suggested findings of southern morphologies in some Old Kingdom Giza remains, also verified in portraiture (Drake, 1987). Further study would be required to ascertain trends in the general population of both regions. The strong Sudanese affinity noted in the unknown analyses may reflect the Nubian interactions with upper Egypt in predynastic times prior to Egyptian unification (Williams, 1980,1986)..." (S. Keita (1992) Further Studies of Crania From Ancient Northern Africa: An Analysis of Crania From First Dynasty Egyptian Tombs, Using Multiple Discriminant Functions. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 87:245-254)
"An examination of the distance hierarchies reveals the Badarian series to be more similar to the Teita in both analyses and always more similar to all of the African series than to the Norse and Berg groups (see Tables 3A & 3B and Figure 2). Essentially equal similarity is found with the Zalavar and Dogon series in the 11-variable analysis and with these and the Bushman in the one using 15 variables. The Badarian series clusters with the tropical African groups no matter which algorithm is employed (see Figures 3 and 4).. In none of them did the Badarian sample affiliate with the European series."(S.O.Y. Keita. Early Nile Valley Farmers from El-Badari: Aboriginals or "European" Agro-Nostratic Immigrants? Craniometric Affinities Considered With Other Data. Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 191-208 (2005) -------------------------------------
"Some have argued that various early Egyptians like the Badarians probably migrated northward from Nubia, while others see a wide-ranging movement of peoples across the breadth of the Sahara before the onset of desiccation. Whatever may be the origins of any particular people or civilization, however, it seems reasonably certain that the predynastic communities of the Nile valley were essentially indigenous in culture, drawing little inspiration from sources outside the continent during the several centuries directly preceding the onset of historical times..." (Robert July, Pre-Colonial Africa, 1975, p. 60-61)
"overall population continuity over the Predynastic and early Dynastic, and high levels of genetic heterogeneity, thereby suggesting that state formation occurred as a mainly indigenous process." (Zakrzewski, S.R. (2007). "Population continuity or population change: Formation of the ancient Egyptian state". American Journal of Physical Anthropology 132 (4): 501-509)
German Institute for Archaeology -excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. In several of the noble specimens: "The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin." (Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues", Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13)
QUOTE(s): Encyclopedia Britannica 1984 ed. Macropedia Article, Vol 6: "Egyptian Religion" , pg 506-508 "A large number of gods go back to prehistoric times. The images of a cow and star goddess (Hathor), the falcon (Horus), and the human-shaped figures of the fertility god (Min) can be traced back to that period. Some rites, such as the "running of the Apil-bull," the "hoeing of the ground," and other fertility and hunting rites (e.g., the hippopotamus hunt) presumably date from early times.. Connections with the religions in southwest Asia cannot be traced with certainty." "It is doubtful whether Osiris can be regarded as equal to Tammuz or Adonis, or whether Hathor is related to the "Great Mother." There are closer relations with northeast African religions. The numerous animal cults (especially bovine cults and panther gods) and details of ritual dresses (animal tails, masks, grass aprons, etc) probably are of African origin. The kinship in particular shows some African elements, such as the king as the head ritualist (i.e., medicine man), the limitations and renewal of the reign (jubilees, regicide), and the position of the king's mother (a matriarchal element). Some of them can be found among the Ethiopians in Napata and Meroe, others among the Prenilotic tribes (Shilluk)." (Encyclopedia Britannica 1984 ed. Macropedia Article, Vol 6: "Egyptian Religion" , pg 506-508)
"While communities such as Ma'adi appear to have played an important role in entrepots through which goods and ideas form south-west Asia filtered into the Nile Valley in later prehistoric times, the main cultural and political tradition that gave rise to the cultural pattern of Early Dynastic Egypt is to be found not in the north but in the south.": The Cambridge History of Africa: Volume 1, From the Earliest Times to c. 500 BC, (Cambridge University Press: 1982), Edited by J. Desmond Clark pp. 500-509
"..the early cultures of Merimde, the Fayum, Badari Naqada I and II are essentially African and early African social customs and religious beliefs were the root and foundation of the ancient Egyptian way of life." (Source: Shaw, Thurston (1976) Changes in African Archaeology in the Last Forty Years in African Studies since 1945. p. 156-68. London.)
"Ancient Egyptian civilization was, in ways and to an extent usually not recognized, fundamentally African. The evidence of both language and culture reveals these African roots. The origins of Egyptian ethnicity lay in the areas south of Egypt. The ancient Egyptian language belonged to the Afrasian family (also called Afroasiatic or, formerly, Hamito-Semitic). The speakers of the earliest Afrasian languages, according to recent studies, were a set of peoples whose lands between 15,000 and 13,000 B.C. stretched from Nubia in the west to far northern Somalia in the east. (Christopher Ehret (1996) "Ancient Egyptian as an African Language, Egypt as an African Culture." In Egypt in Africa Egypt in Africa, Theodore Celenko (ed), Indiana University Press)
"Ancient Egypt belongs to a language group known as 'Afro-Asiatic' (formerly called Hamito-Semitic) and its closest relatives are other north-east African languages from Somalia to Chad. Egypt's cultural features, both material and ideological and particularly in the earliest phases, show clear connections with that same broad area. In sum, ancient Egypt was an African culture, developed by African peoples, who had wide ranging contacts in north Africa and western Asia." (Morkot, Robert (2005) The Egyptians: An Introduction. Routledge. p. 10)
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
You want some pics of beautiful African art that were never influenced by other races? You got it, buddy.
Nice art- a lot of power in those figures. I am saving some of those.
We need to remember who th "originals" are, whether it be in art or in people. As far as people, too often many of the original stock of Egypt are airbrushed away to present a white or Arab picture. There were DARK-SKINNED people in Egypt throughtout its history, particularly in Upper Egypt. Dark skin in Egypt does not equal "Nubian" or "foreign". It was there from the beginning no matter how much whitewashing and airbrushing the Egyptology establishment tries to do.
ES is putting these forgotten people, back on the map:
I don't want quotes and articles. I want evidence, you know, photographic evidence.
So what do you give me? A big pile of 1000-year-old MUD (literally) in Nigeria that could "rival the pyramids"? More MUD "built" in the 15th century in Benin, West Africa? Mudworks that couldn't even survive 500 lousy years? Are you fucking kidding me? Mudworks at a time when Europeans were building some of the most beautiful and complex structures in the world, along with creating some of the most beautiful art? Get the **** out of here, nigger!
quote:Since Egypt is an African civilization according to mainstream scholarship (see quotes below) the applicable comparison should be the pyramids of Egypt versus the "cathedral." Compared to centuries of massive building with accurate astornomical alignments, the little cathedral is small beer indeed. Since Egypt is the topic- lets stick with Egypt and make the comparisons there.
The only problem is that Egypt wasn't a nigger civilization.
quote:And why should we accept the exclusion of Egypt and Ethiopia in his childish ittle "comparison"?
Keep on excluding Rome, Greece & Persia, and I'll keep on excluding Ethiopia and Nubia, which really do pale (or perhaps I should say "darken"? hah) in comparison to the former three WHITE civilizations anyway.
quote: Zimbabwe is Well known and is already in the mix, but let's skip to West Africa for a moment.
Zimbabwe is well-known for what, a little wall they somehow managed to build in 1000 AD (the same time the Speyer Cathedral was being built)? A "thriving metropolis" of--get this--10,000 inhabitants? Give me a break. And now you've added West Africa to the list as well, but for walls made of MUD? Come on!
quote:Compared to this the "cathedral" is chump change...
Compared to what? There's nothing left of your great mud wall!
And then to top it off, to show Benin's greatness, you present us with a European etching of little apemen! This is hilarious!
So once again, nigger:
Show me C.E. African art that can rival C.E. Western art.
Show me C.E. African literature and poetry that can rival C.E. Western literature and poetry.
Show me C.E. African science that can rival C.E. Western science.
Show me C.E. African music that can rival C.E. Western music.
I'm still waiting for solid, tangible evidence, you know, like the kind we have in Europe. And the supposed remains of mythical mudworks obviously don't count. (I thought that went without saying, but you Afrocentrists are more ridiculous than I could ever have imagined.)
In fact, here, nigger. I'll make this as simple as possible for you.
I'll post a tangible Western accomplishment for each century before the nigger made First Contact with the highly advanced species known as the White Man, and you post something made by niggers in the same century that can rival that accomplishment. What's more, I'll be sure to post accomplishments from regions that weren't at all under the influence of the swarthy Semitic Moors.
So then:
10th century:
Westminster Abbey
11th century:
Speyer Cathedral
And I'll stop right there, because then comes the Renaissance, and you don't want me to get into the Renaissance, trust me.
I'll add, as an aside, that the above structures surpass in beauty and intricacy anything the Ethiopians or Nubians ever built.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: You want some pics of beautiful African art that were never influenced by other races? You got it, buddy.
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
Show me C.E. African literature and poetry that can rival C.E. Western literature and poetry.
Show me C.E. African science that can rival C.E. Western science.
Show me C.E. African music that can rival C.E. Western music.
Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
Off topic but I want add the bellow quote from Ibn Battuta to my list because it shows pagan states of the far interior of Africa were not seen as primitive by the outside world. Removing the myth of Arab/Berber ect. prejudice (before colonialism)
“The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained”
quote:It goes thence to Yu.fi (Nufi), one of the greatest states in Negroland, and the Sultan of which is among the most powerful princes of that quarter of the earth. No white man can reach that country, for sure death awaits him from the natives before he penetrates so far.
Bellow shows friendly correspondence between pagan and Muslim
"Trans-Saharan Trade and the West African Discovery of the Mediterranean World"
Letter from governor of Sijilmasa to the pagan king of old Ghana
quote:We are neighbours in benevolence even if we differ in religion; we agree on right conduct and are one in leniency towards our subjects. It goes without saying that justice is an essential quality of kings in conducting sound policy; tyranny is the preoccupation of ignorant and evil minds. We have heard about the imprisonment of poor traders and their being prevented from going freely about their business. The coming to and fro of merchants to a country is of benefit to its inhabitants and a help to keeping it populous. If we wished we would imprison the people of that region who happen to be in our territory but we do not think it right to do that. We ought not to "forbid immorality while practising it ourselves". Peace be upon you.
To remove all doubt that Sudan (Negroes) were not despised but highly respected in the Arab world listen to this account of Sudan slaves
The Highly esteemed Sudan From “The anthropological treatises of Johann Friedrich Blumenbach”
quote: I say quite deliberately, taken altogether, and natural tenderness of heart, which has never been benumbed or extirpated on board the transport vessels or on the West India sugar plantations by the brutality of their white executioners. For these last must be nearly as much without head as without heart, if after such treatment they still expect to find true attachment and love from these poor mismanaged slaves.
(bellow is 3rd footnote on the same page)
quote: Listen to one guarantee for all, our own incomparable Niabuhr: "The principal characteristic of the negro is, especially when he is reasonably treated, honesty towards his masters and benefactors. Mohammedan merchants in Cairo, Jeddah, Surat, and other cities, are glad to buy boys of this kind; they have them taught writing and arithmetic, carry on their extensive business almost entirely through negro slaves, and send them to establish business places in foreign countries. I asked one of these merchants, How he could trust a slaves with whole cargoes of goods! and was told in reply, 'My negro is true to me; but if I were to conduct my business entirely by white men, I should have to take care that they did not run off with my property.'
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: why didn't West Africa benefit from these magical Moors?
Thanks for asking. I just thought of looking for evidence of "West Africans" benefiting the "magical Moores"
Bellow is “The Negroland of the Arabs examined and explained”
quote:When the conquest of the West (by the Arabs) was completed, and merchants began to penetrate into the interior, they saw no nation of the Blacks so mighty as Ghanah, the dominions of which extended westward as far as the Ocean. The King's court was kept in the city of Ghanah, which, according to the author of the Book of Roger (El Idrisi), and the author of the Book of Roads and Realms (El Bekri), is divided into two parts, standing on both banks of the Nile, and ranks among the largest and most populous cities of the world.
Bellow from
“Views from Arab scholars and Merchants”
P. 40 quote from Yaqut
quote:The king of Zafun is stronger than the veiled people of the Maghreb and more versed in the art o kingship. The veiled people acknowledge his superiority over them, obey him and resort to him in all important matters of government… One year the king, on his way to the pilgrimage, came to the Maghreb to pay a visit to the commander of the Muslims, the veiled king of the Maghreb, of the tribe of Lamtuna. The Commander of the Muslims met him on foot, wheras the king of Zafun did not dismount for him.
P. 43 According to Ibn Sa’id,
quote:the authority of the sultan of Kanim extended over Kawar and Fazzan, and the Berbers were slaves of the king of Kanim. He confirmed that during period of strength Kanim expanded northward into the Sahara, rather than southward.
page 44
This sultan has authority there over kingdoms such as those of the Tajuwa, Kawar, and Fazzan. God has assisted him and he has many descendants and armies. His clothes are brought to him from the capital of Tunish. He has scholars around him… The region where Zaghawa wander is to the east of Manan. They are for the most part Muslims owing obedience to the sultan of Kanim. To the north of Manan are the terrirory of the Kanim the Akawwar wander. Their well-known towns are in the Second Clime and they are Muslims owing obedience to the sultan of Kanim.
page 45
There is no town worthy of mention in this section (second climate) except for Awdaghust. A mixture of Muslim Berbers inhabits it, but authority rests with the Sanhaja. There is an account of this town and its ruler in al-Bakri. It is on the line of the Second Clime in longitude 22 degrees. In the same latitude is Zafun, which belongs to pagan Sudan and whose ruler enjoys a good reputation among (other) kings of the Sudan.
Page 99 from Ibn Khaldun
Edit: Abu’l-Hasan is the king of Morocco
quote:Sultan Abu’l-Hasan was well known for his ostentatious ways and his presumption to vie with the mightiest monarchs and adopt their customs in exchanging gifts with their peers and counterparts and dispatching emissaries to distant kings and far frontiers. In his time the king of Mali was the greatest of the kings of the Sudan and the nearest to his kingdom in the Maghrib. Mali was 100 stages distant from the southern frontiers of his realms
quote:The scholars of Timbuctoo yielded in nothing to the saints and their miracles. During their sojourns in the foreign universities of Fez, Tunis, and Cairo, ' they astounded the most learned men of Islam by their erudition.' That these negroes were on a level with the Arabian savants is proved by the fact that they were installed as professors in Morocco and Egypt. In contrast to this we find that the Arabs were not always equal to the requirements of Sankore. ' A celebrated jurist of Hedjaz (Arabia), arriving in Timbuctoo with the intention of teaching, found the town full of Sudanese scholars. Observing them to be his superiors in knowledge, he withdrew to Fez, where he succeeded in obtaining employment.'
Bellow "Negroland of the Arabs" again quoting Ibn Khaldun. I need to point out don't let the word Berber confuse you he means Somali
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 that they are destined to become masters of Yemen and all Arabia.
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
Ever heard of mbira music which predates the piano by a thousand years at least? The beautiful sound of the anthropomorphic Congolese harps? The musical bows that the Khoisan play? Beautiful whistles and indigenous flutes played by Africans all over the continent? Many of these instruments that were not even influenced by European nor Arabic music were played in orchestras.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^Don't forget the Kora, the Djembe drums and the "ngoni" (predecessor to the Banjo!). Or the Sosso-Bala/Balafon (early Xilophone) which is considered by UNESCO (2001) to be a Masterpiece of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity.. Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
quote: In Greek mythology, Ethiopia (or Aethiopia), literally meaning 'the land of burnt faces', was the name given to a kingdom based at Joppa in Phoenicia. Aethiopia also referred to an ancient Egyptian military colony in the Caucasus mountains on the river Alazani (now in modern-day Georgia)
In common use it had no connection to the contemporary land by that name in Africa south of Egypt,
Hyde Clarke "Egyptian Colony and Language in the Caucasus and its Anthropological Relations," 1874
quote: The exact location of Ethiopia was, at best, nebulous to the Greeks of Herodotus’ time; there seems to have been two conceptions of Ethiopia: one was the historical land coveted by the Persian Empire and the other was a mythical Ethiopia that Poseidon (lord of the Sea) favored with personal visits.
Herodotus also mentions Ethiopians from Asia and their tribute to the Persian Empire; the Asian Ethiopians who fought in the army of Xerxes had straight hair and were teamed with the Indians.
Same source as above
Here is your Greek Ethiopia, my nigger.
Herodotus also mentions another aspect of the Ethiopians which would make it seem that he regarded most of the non-Egyptian Africans to be “Ethiopians;” in describing the geography of Libya, Herodotus tells of the cave-dwelling Ethiopians; they ate snakes, lizards and other reptiles; they were fleet of foot and had voices like the squeaking of bats.
My source
Egyptian Colony and Language in the Caucasus and its Anthropological Relations," 1874
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
LMAO @ citing old pre-colonial garbage from 1874.. What a intellectual reject you are. First of all, Aethiopians to the early Greeks merely described those closest to the sun (burnt faces). Another thing Herodotus said:
""The Colchians, Ethiopians and Egyptians had thick lips, broad nose, woolly hair and they are burnt of skin."---Herodotus, 450 BCE
And concerning the Ethiopians specifically:
"The Ethiopians are said to be the tallest and best looking people in the world"--- Herodotus, 450 BCE
^^LOL.. So much for your 19th century journalism. Right from the horse's mouth and Herodotus' description of cave-dwellers were the Troglodytes and many fanciful accounts were attributed to them, placing many of them in the realm of myth. They were supposedly "hunted" by another African people called Garamantes. You once again prove your ignorance.
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
Ladies 'n Gentlemen, when a negro says this he means the following :
"Give me a source from a politically correct distorter of historical truth, then we can talk" Anything less is racist and false.
Was Leo Africanus also a racist when he noted how undeveloped your continent was? Was he also a racist, to note that the only time you resembled any civilization was during the reign of Arabic men? __________________
But in the yeere of the Hegeira 380, by the meanes of a certaine Mahumetan which came into Barbarie, the residue of the said land was found out, being as then inhabited by great numbers of people, which liued (lived) a brutish and sauage (savage) life, without any king, gouernour, common wealth, or knowledge of husbandrie. Clad they were in skins of beasts, neither had they any peculiar wiues : in the day time they kept their cattell ; and when night came they resorted ten or twelue both men and women into one cottage together, using hairie skins instead of beds, and each man choosing his leman which he had most fancy vnto. Warre they wage against no other nation, ne yet are desirous to trauell out of their owne countrie. Some of them performe great adoration vnto the sunne rising : others, namely the people of Gualata, worship the fir
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: [QB] Ladies 'n Gentlemen, when a negro says this he means the following :
"Give me a source from a politically correct distorter of historical truth, then we can talk" Anything less is racist and false.
Was Leo Africanus also a racist when he noted how undeveloped your continent was?
Are you fucking stupid?? Leo Africanus is a premiere source for medieval African achievement!
quote:The name of this kingdom is a modern one, after a city which was built by a king named Mansa Suleyman in the year 610 of the hegira [1232 CE] around twelve miles from a branch of the Niger River. (1)
The houses of Timbuktu are huts made of clay-covered wattles with thatched roofs. In the center of the city is a temple built of stone and mortar, built by an architect named Granata, (2) and in addition there is a large palace, constructed by the same architect, where the king lives. The shops of the artisans, the merchants, and especially weavers of cotton cloth are very numerous. Fabrics are also imported from Europe to Timbuktu, borne by Berber merchants. (3)
The women of the city maintain the custom of veiling their faces, except for the slaves who sell all the foodstuffs. The inhabitants are very rich, especially the strangers who have settled in the country; so much so that the current king (4) has given two of his daughters in marriage to two brothers, both businessmen, on account of their wealth. There are many wells containing sweet water in Timbuktu; and in addition, when the Niger is in flood canals deliver the water to the city. Grain and animals are abundant, so that the consumption of milk and butter is considerable. But salt is in very short supply because it is carried here from Tegaza, some 500 miles from Timbuktu. I happened to be in this city at a time when a load of salt sold for eighty ducats. The king has a rich treasure of coins and gold ingots. One of these ingots weighs 970 pounds. (5)
The royal court is magnificent and very well organized. When the king goes from one city to another with the people of his court, he rides a camel and the horses are led by hand by servants. If fighting becomes necessary, the servants mount the camels and all the soldiers mount on horseback. When someone wishes to speak to the king, he must kneel before him and bow down; but this is only required of those who have never before spoken to the king, or of ambassadors. The king has about 3,000 horsemen and infinity of foot-soldiers armed with bows made of wild fennel [?] which they use to shoot poisoned arrows. This king makes war only upon neighboring enemies and upon those who do not want to pay him tribute. When he has gained a victory, he has all of them--even the children--sold in the market at Timbuktu.
Only small, poor horses are born in this country. The merchants use them for their voyages and the courtiers to move about the city. But the good horses come from Barbary. They arrive in a caravan and, ten or twelve days later, they are led to the ruler, who takes as many as he likes and pays appropriately for them.
The king is a declared enemy of the Jews. He will not allow any to live in the city. If he hears it said that a Berber merchant frequents them or does business with them, he confiscates his goods. There are in Timbuktu numerous judges, teachers and priests, all properly appointed by the king. He greatly honors learning. Many hand-written books imported from Barbary are also sold. There is more profit made from this commerce than from all other merchandise.
Instead of coined money, pure gold nuggets are used; and for small purchases, cowrie shells which have been carried from Persia, (6) and of which 400 equal a ducat. Six and two-thirds of their ducats equal one Roman gold ounce. (7)
The people of Timbuktu are of a peaceful nature. They have a custom of almost continuously walking about the city in the evening (except for those that sell gold), between 10 PM and 1 AM, playing musical instruments and dancing. The citizens have at their service many slaves, both men and women.
The city is very much endangered by fire. At the time when I was there on my second voyage, (8) half the city burned in the space of five hours. But the wind was violent and the inhabitants of the other half of the city began to move their belongings for fear that the other half would burn.
There are no gardens or orchards in the area surrounding Timbuktu.
^^You are the biggest loon and liar I've ever encountered.
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
He also said this though
t in the yeere of the Hegeira 380, by the meanes of a certaine Mahumetan which came into Barbarie, the residue of the said land was found out, being as then inhabited by great numbers of people, which liued (lived) a brutish and sauage (savage) life, without any king, gouernour, common wealth, or knowledge of husbandrie. Clad they were in skins of beasts, neither had they any peculiar wiues : in the day time they kept their cattell ; and when night came they resorted ten or twelue both men and women into one cottage together, using hairie skins instead of beds, and each man choosing his leman which he had most fancy vnto.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Why do you guys even bother to take this nutcase seriously?? It's obvious he's an irrational nitwit. The fool was debunked on the first page of this thread and all the other threads he created, yet he keeps going! LOL
quote:Originally posted by zarahan: Nice art- a lot of power in those figures. I am saving some of those.
We need to remember who th "originals" are, whether it be in art or in people. As far as people, too often many of the original stock of Egypt are airbrushed away to present a white or Arab picture. There were DARK-SKINNED people in Egypt throughtout its history, particularly in Upper Egypt. Dark skin in Egypt does not equal "Nubian" or "foreign". It was there from the beginning no matter how much whitewashing and airbrushing the Egyptology establishment tries to do.
ES is putting these forgotten people, back on the map:
Actually Zarahan, the picture of the family in the upper right hand corner-- the one below..
These aren't Egyptians but indigenous Haratin people of Morocco.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: [QB] He also said this though
t in the yeere of the Hegeira 380, by the meanes of a certaine Mahumetan which came into Barbarie, the residue of the said land was found out
And where was "Barbarie"? My reference was to his experience in west Africa, in which he was seemingly impressed. There's no contradiction. Obviously your characterization of how he described the "continent" is false. These over sights and distortions are exactly why no one of respectable intellect will ever take you and your ilk seriously.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Of course! That comes to show just how bad a liar he is! Sheesh, at least trolls like Evil-Euro can come up with much better spins on the truth than this buffoon!
quote:Originally posted by pathetic-white-loser: I don't want quotes and articles. I want evidence, you know, photographic evidence..
Translation: I'm too illiterate and stupid to comprehend the various scholarly or scientific writings so show me some pictures!
Djehuti writes:
Fine. Here ya go!
Ancient Egyptian royals
quote:White-imbecilic-loser writes: The only problem is that Egypt wasn't a nigger civilization.
LOL You complain about others using ad-hominem attacks when every post you make uses racist slurs! Since 'nigger' is derogatory for black, if Egypt wasn't then what was it? A great white civilization? All those Egyptian royals above look pretty black to me. Are you saying if they were alive today they can join your white 'aryan' club??
So answer this question: Are you a liar or an idiot? Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^^ So which is it??! Pick your poison! Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata:
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: [QB] He also said this though
t in the yeere of the Hegeira 380, by the meanes of a certaine Mahumetan which came into Barbarie, the residue of the said land was found out
And where was "Barbarie"? My reference was to his experience in west Africa, in which he was seemingly impressed. There's no contradiction. Obviously your characterization of how he described the "continent" is false. These over sights and distortions are exactly why no one of respectable intellect will ever take you and your ilk seriously.
I made a mistake when posting it here is the full quote.
But in the yeere of the Hegeira 380, by the meanes of a certaine Mahumetan which came into Barbarie, the residue of the said land was found out, being as then inhabited by great numbers of people, which liued (lived) a brutish and sauage (savage) life, without any king, gouernour, common wealth, or knowledge of husbandrie. Clad they were in skins of beasts, neither had they any peculiar wiues : in the day time they kept their cattell ; and when night came they resorted ten or twelue both men and women into one cottage together, using hairie skins instead of beds, and each man choosing his leman which he had most fancy vnto. Warre they wage against no other nation, ne yet are desirous to trauell out of their owne countrie. Some of them performe great adoration vnto the sunne rising : others, namely the people of Galata, worship the fire.
Galata was used to refer to Africans.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: You complain about others using ad-hominem attacks when every post you make uses racist slurs! Since 'nigger' is derogatory for black, if Egypt wasn't then what was it? A great white civilization? All those Egyptian royals above look pretty black to me. Are you saying if they were alive today they can join your white 'aryan' club??
Reminds me of what Ibrahim Sundiata wrote:
Where "race" has been legally enforced for over nine generations, we must take it, however socially constructed, very seriously. And here is the both the hope and the warning. Lefkowitz, the scholar, acknowledges that "If you go by the American 'one-drop rule,' the Egyptians would be black." In spite of any craniofacial legerdemain, the Egyptians and their neighbors to the south were "people of color." Hopefully, the sterile debate on whether Northeastern Africa was really within or without Africa will soon be closed. In the late 1980s an Ethiopian student, Mulugeta Seraw, was stomped to death by a group of skinheads in Portland, Oregon. They crushed his skull. Dr. Brace's measurements were irrelevant."
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt:
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata:
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: [QB] He also said this though
t in the yeere of the Hegeira 380, by the meanes of a certaine Mahumetan which came into Barbarie, the residue of the said land was found out
And where was "Barbarie"? My reference was to his experience in west Africa, in which he was seemingly impressed. There's no contradiction. Obviously your characterization of how he described the "continent" is false. These over sights and distortions are exactly why no one of respectable intellect will ever take you and your ilk seriously.
I made a mistake when posting it here is the full quote.
But in the yeere of the Hegeira 380, by the meanes of a certaine Mahumetan which came into Barbarie, the residue of the said land was found out, being as then inhabited by great numbers of people, which liued (lived) a brutish and sauage (savage) life, without any king, gouernour, common wealth, or knowledge of husbandrie. Clad they were in skins of beasts, neither had they any peculiar wiues : in the day time they kept their cattell ; and when night came they resorted ten or twelue both men and women into one cottage together, using hairie skins instead of beds, and each man choosing his leman which he had most fancy vnto. Warre they wage against no other nation, ne yet are desirous to trauell out of their owne countrie. Some of them performe great adoration vnto the sunne rising : others, namely the people of Galata, worship the fire.
Galata was used to refer to Africans.
Man, shut up, nobody's buying that pathetic bullshit excuse for a face-save. You got caught and exposed for the loon bin fucktard that you are.
He is clearly describing the people of "Barbarie/Barbary", as in the Barbary coast that spanned the NW coast of Africa, and also a political reference to the countries straddling and surrounding those areas that now make up Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya.
And I have no idea where you got that Galata nonsense but I think it's been clearly established by now that you're a pathetic liar. In fact, in my citation he states that west Africans got a lot of their horses from Barbary.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: I made a mistake when posting it here is the full quote.
But in the yeere of the Hegeira 380, by the meanes of a certaine Mahumetan which came into Barbarie, the residue of the said land was found out, being as then inhabited by great numbers of people, which liued (lived) a brutish and sauage (savage) life, without any king, gouernour, common wealth, or knowledge of husbandrie. Clad they were in skins of beasts, neither had they any peculiar wiues : in the day time they kept their cattell ; and when night came they resorted ten or twelue both men and women into one cottage together, using hairie skins instead of beds, and each man choosing his leman which he had most fancy vnto. Warre they wage against no other nation, ne yet are desirous to trauell out of their owne countrie. Some of them performe great adoration vnto the sunne rising : others, namely the people of Galata, worship the fire.
Galata was used to refer to Africans.
LMAOH
Nope! You are STILL mistaken as ALWAYS!!
Galata was a district of Anatolia in modern day Turkey!!
The district or area was named after the Galatae (Galatians), the tribe of Celts who invaded Anatolia! In fact, the reference to fire worship that Africanus described was a common custom among Celtic peoples!-- Your ancestors who built the structure below:
YOU Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^^Again with the habitual lies! I haven't seen anyone this exposed since...since..well, it wasn't important enough to remember but it must have been a long time ago.
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: I made a mistake when posting it here is the full quote.
But in the yeere of the Hegeira 380, by the meanes of a certaine Mahumetan which came into Barbarie, the residue of the said land was found out, being as then inhabited by great numbers of people, which liued (lived) a brutish and sauage (savage) life, without any king, gouernour, common wealth, or knowledge of husbandrie. Clad they were in skins of beasts, neither had they any peculiar wiues : in the day time they kept their cattell ; and when night came they resorted ten or twelue both men and women into one cottage together, using hairie skins instead of beds, and each man choosing his leman which he had most fancy vnto. Warre they wage against no other nation, ne yet are desirous to trauell out of their owne countrie. Some of them performe great adoration vnto the sunne rising : others, namely the people of Galata, worship the fire.
Galata was used to refer to Africans.
LMAOH
Nope! You are STILL mistaken as ALWAYS!!
Galata was a district of Anatolia in modern day Turkey!!
The district or area was named after the Galatae (Galatians), the tribe of Celts who invaded Anatolia! In fact, the reference to fire worship that Africanus described was a common custom among Celtic peoples!-- Your ancestors who built the structure below:
You are one dumb nigger. Wikipedia is not a reliable source for information if you went to college ( don't expect to nigers aren't intelligent enough to go to college) you would know this.
anyone can edit wikipedia
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^^ ROTFLOL
Okay, okay!
First of all I'm not even black!
Second of all, you're right that wikipedia in general is not a fully accurate or scholarly sound source, but how does that refute the specific wiki page I cited?!! Are you saying that I and that particular page about Galata is wrong?! Are you saying that the Galata Africanus spoke of was not in Anatolia but in Africa let alone that the name meant 'Africans' in general??! If so, then the burden of proof is on YOU my mentally challenged, friend!
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
Sigh, what a stupid nigger. Timbuto (Timbuktu) was not all of Africa...but let us examine more closely the nature of Timbuktu.
It was founded by the Tuareg nomadic group.
They are described as being :
Tuareg skin color is darker than most Mediterranean Berbers, and lighter than most sub-Saharan populations. The Tuareg refer to themselves as "red-skinned"
And as being part of the berber group :
The Tuareg are classified as a Berber group
The acceptance of Islam and Islam as a faith in Timbuktu, is as a result of the Arabization of the region...showing once more, that the Arabs are indeed correct to state they have fed you swine.
Answer me this:
What is the colour of bronze?
Queen Tiye's mummy:
of course she could join the bust is fake
Zahi Hawass said BLACK EGYPT HAS NO TRUTH
Here are photos of Tutankhamun's tomb:
The King's painted box.
Valley of the Kings. KV 62, the tomb of Tutankhamun (1336-1327 BC). The Antechamber. This box has painted scenes showing Tutankhamun slaying foes and hunting lions and gazelle. On the right side of the box Tutankhamun in a chariot is charging Syrians, followed by three rows of soldiers. On the end of the box are the cartouches of Tutankhamun flanked by figures of the King as sphinx trampling Syrians and Nubians. Posted by markellion (Member # 14131) on :
quote:Originally posted white-idiot: Sigh, what a stupid nigger. Timbuto (Timbuktu) was not all of Africa...but let us examine more closely the nature of Timbuktu.
Of course Timbuktu was not all of Africa, yet you expect us to believe one reference to one group of people (which isn't even African) is suppose to represent all of Africa?! LOL
quote:It was founded by the Tuareg nomadic group.
But the land it was founded on was inhabited by the Songhai who were the first to urbanize and build the city in the first place as the Tuareg were nomads!
quote:They are described as being :
Tuareg skin color is darker than most Mediterranean Berbers, and lighter than most sub-Saharan populations. The Tuareg refer to themselves as "red-skinned"
"Mediterranean" is a vague racial term that includes many populations including blacks of Africa. The skin color of indigenous (black) Africans vary from 'ebony' to 'caramel' brown so of course even if they were 'red-skinned' as in reddish-brown that does not mean they are not considered black!
quote:And as being part of the berber group :
The Tuareg are classified as a Berber group
Berber is a language subfamily that is part of the Afrasian language phylum which originates and predominates in Africa!!
quote:The acceptance of Islam and Islam as a faith in Timbuktu, is as a result of the Arabization of the region...showing once more, that the Arabs are indeed correct to state they have fed you swine.
Nope. Islamization is NOT the same as 'Arabization' especially considering there were no Arabs in that area! And again, urbanization and city constructions in Sub-Sahara pre-date Timbuktu, Tuareg, or Arabs-- the latter two were largely nomads and as such had NO cities!!
quote:Answer me this:
What is the colour of bronze?
Dumb question. So dummy, YOU answer it!
quote:Queen Tiye's mummy:
And?? What does a several millennia old dried up corpse give a full picture of what she looked in life??!
quote:of course she could join the bust is fake
LMAO Fake by whose claims?! Any proof to back this up?!! What about all the other portraits??!
quote:Zahi Hawass said BLACK EGYPT HAS NO TRUTH
Zahi Hawass says A LOT of things like Fletcher's mummy being a man, then a woman, or saying it was too young and then too old. He also stated rural Upper Egyptian Fellahin (those black Egyptians) best represented the ancient Egyptians. Oh and he also said the bust of Tiye which you dismiss is perfect example of Tiye's appearance and dimeanor and never mentioned anything about it being fake!!
And here are a couple of portraits of King Tut:
Tut as child
throne image of Tut and his wife
main bust of Tut Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: Sigh, what a stupid nigger. Timbuto (Timbuktu) was not all of Africa...but let us examine more closely the nature of Timbuktu.
It was founded by the Tuareg nomadic group.
They are described as being :
Tuareg skin color is darker than most Mediterranean Berbers, and lighter than most sub-Saharan populations. The Tuareg refer to themselves as "red-skinned"
You idiot don't try to change the subject with more blabber and lies when you got caught lying about Leo Africanus! Anyways, idiot low IQ racist, Tamasheq speakers are diverse but indeed and as expected will share more characteristics with the people with whom they share habitation, as such most who live in or around Mali are at times, indistinguishable from other west Africans. In any event they're African and this is irrelevant anyways.
By the time Leo Africanus reached Timbuktu, he was describing a part of the Songhay empire, founded and ruled by the elite class Songhai people who are Nilo-Saharan speakers. Before that Mali ruled it. According to Al-Sadi in the Tarikh al-Sudan, "Tuaregs" only ruled Timbuktu for about 40 years and they founded it as a seasonal settlement, not a center of learning which was later established under the Mansas of Mali nor did they inspire the Architecture that was pioneered by merchants from Djenne, who also made Timbuktu a permanent settlement.
quote:Although the Tuaregs founded Timbuktu, it was merchants who set up markets and built fixed dwellings in the town to establish the site as a meeting place for people travelling by camel.
Just stop embarrassing your self as you know absolutely nothing about history, not to mention that no one is buying into your artificial color scheme.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Indeed, he tries to run away from his lie of Galatians by saing that the particular wiki page is fraudulent! LOL How so?? Is he saying that people would be so idiotic as to make up a whole essay including sources as to something so mundane as the identity and history of the area of Galata?!!
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: ^^Again with the habitual lies! I haven't seen anyone this exposed since...since..well, it wasn't important enough to remember but it must have been a long time ago.
The last question above answers itself, really! They are racist because they have low IQs, in that they try to compensate for their mental shortcomings by clinging on to false notions of 'racial' grandeur and supremacy. Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
And here is one of Tutankhamun's sandals. So he could metaphorically trample negroes and semites.
quote: Niger Tuaregs
Yes, they liked to take slaves to do donkey work, much like the rest of the developing world. Problem is boy...there is no more need for you...go back on there to Africa, we have no more need for your burrowy heads that can exceed the weights a donkey can carry.
quote:Your argument based on continuity fails. For one thing it assumes that all so-called black Africans look like one 'type" But "negro" or black Africans show widely varying features, from light yellow skin among the San, to curly or
Have you ever seen a SAN or commonly called Bushmen? They might be yellowish in skin tone, but I assure you, they look just like a dark nigger...only difference is they are a lighter nigger.
So again, why does the Egyptian not resemble this ?
You see all those black figures getting trampled and slaughtered? They're the niggers.
You see the light-brown-skinned figures doing the slaughtering? They're the Egyptians.
Quite simple, really.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Hey, Nazi-nitwit you still haven't proven the bust of Tiye to be a "fake" and you mentioned nothing about the others.
^ Are all these ancient Egyptian works of royals somehow all fake??
You didn't answer my main question: Are you a liar or an Idiot?!
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Hey, Nazi-nitwit you still haven't proven the bust of Tiye to be a "fake" and you mentioned nothing about the others.
^ Are all these ancient Egyptian works of royals somehow all fake??
You didn't answer my main question: Are you a liar or an Idiot?!
You were already caught lying about your identity and then lying about Leo Africanus. This is just a case of the racist who cried wolf. Nothing you say is credible and you're extremeley uneducated.
You're tring so hard because Otzi the Ice Man is the closest you'll ever come to having an ancient history.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:White nitwit writes: Have you ever seen a SAN or commonly called Bushmen? They might be yellowish in skin tone, but I assure you, they look just like a dark nigger...only difference is they are a lighter nigger.
So again, why does the Egyptian not resemble this ?
Do you realize how stupid you sound?? So you acknowledge that blacks range in a variety of complexions. So why do you deny then that the Tuareg who are lighter than other blacks their south and are described as "red-skinned" are still 'black'?!!
Here are more pics of 'red-skinned' black Africans:
I ask for evidence and the fool gives me a link to another forum!!
ROTFLOLH
Why do I even bother??
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
LMAO @ Tiye's bust being a "fake".. What will the loons think of next? Absolutely no evidence of this and in fact, there's "evidence" that the one he posted is a fake.
^ No doubt he will dismiss the evidence above since it comes from an African scholar, even though it's still scholarly.
I'm telling you it's the same mentality I see with the rednecks in rural GA. It doesn't matter how intelligent a black person is-- his IQ would be MENSA class, how educated he is-- he could have 4 phDs in science, he's still a "nigger" and white is right even if I'm retarded, and married to my sister!-- with the former situation of retardation being the case with our troll here. LMAO Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
quote: waaa teee teee boonga boonga
Notre Dame Cathedral, France, 12th century.
vs
The Great Wall of Nog (Zimbabwe), 11th century
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
^^First of all, that's a restoration that was designed in the 1800s by architect Eugène Viollet-le-Duc.
Secondly..
Meroe, Pyramids:
Yeha, Ethiopia (Askumite):
Alem Church, Ethiopia (largest monolith church)
Gondar, Ethiopia
Djenne, Mali:
Sankore University. Timbuktu, Mali (1325 A.D.)
Benin City, prior to British colonialism:
Al bakri on Ancient Ghana:
quote:The capital of Ghana is called Kumbi Saleh. The city consists of two towns lying on a plain, one of which is inhabited by Muslims and is large, possessing 12 mosques. The town also possesses a large number of judges and learned men.
Surrounding both towns are wells of sweet water from which they drink and near which they cultivate vegetables. The town inhabited by the king is six miles from the Muslim one and is called Al Ghana. The area between the two towns is covered with houses made of stone and wood. The king has a palace and conical huts, surrounded by a wall-like enclosure. In the king’s town, not far from the royal court of justice, is a mosque. The Muslims who come on missions to the king pray there. There is one great avenue, which crosses the town from east to west.
Ibn Battuta on the Swahili Coast:
quote:We stayed one night in this island [Mombasa], and then pursued our journey to Kulwa, which is a large town on the coast. The majority of its inhabitants are Zanj, jet-black in colour, and with tattoo marks on their faces. I was told by a merchant that the town of Sufala lies a fortnight's journey [south] from Kulwa and that gold dust is brought to Sufala from Yufi in the country of the Limis, which is a month's journey distant from it. Kulwa is a very fine and substantially built town, and all its buildings are of wood. Its inhabitants are constantly engaged in military expeditions, for their country is contiguous to the heathen Zanj.
And:
quote:"Ngazargamu, the capital city of Kanem-Borno, became one of the largest cities in the seventeenth century world. By 1658 AD, the metropolis, according to an architectural scholar housed “about quarter of a million people”. It had 660 streets. Many were wide and unbending, reflective of town planning."
- Robin Walker
And of course:
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
I will give you nogs verything. I give you nigs Egypt, I will give u nig Greece, I gave you nigs teaching Whites everything at timbuktu. Helicopters, pyramids, black chariots to Jupiter, levitation, time travel..every fuckin thing. REPEAT these great feats of ancient times. Tell me or show me a nog country, nation, aerospace business, group of scientists anything that is 100% nig(no White guys helping) that is reproducing this former "greatness" of days old.
And if YOU lil nigs kid can't do that then at least give me a time frame for future negro genius achievements. 10 years? 20?...a hundred? How long will it take before..umm say.. you super smart negros are going to build a base on the planet Mars? Surely former pyramid builders are capable of that in the near future. Or a satellite probe to the far reaches of the galaxy? Surely you teachers of Greek culture and science can handle that? How about a cure for aids? The nogs invented medicine didn't they? A perfect opportunity for the woolly heads to shine, ridding afreeka of aids.
Comon black boy, show us evil White guys how it's done.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
Nobody cares about Greece, or Mars for that matter. The only thing that you have to know about is while west Africans were living in fixed dwellings and towns like this:
Around 1,000 BC in and near Dahr Tichitt. Northern Nordics were, well, ya know, just hangin:
Otzi the Ice man again:
Jeeze. Why didn't the poor guy just build a cathedral to live in. Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
Yes, because Europeans like to restore and preserve culture, unlike niggers.
Do you know who restored the Sphinx? That's right, Europeans.
Do you know who rebuilt your crummy mud mosque in Jenna? That's right, Europeans.
And stop showing me ancient structures, you stupid groid! The accomplishments of WHITE Rome and Greece decimate those of ancient nogs, so just stop it.
I want to see something that was built in the Common Era! And no--I don't want to see the Evil White Man's etchings of mudworks, Zimbabwe's shitty wall, Ethiopia's shitty obelisk, or Timbuktu's shitty mud mosques again.
Show me something GREAT! I can post pictures of a million GREAT EUROPEAN cathedrals, sculptures, monuments, castles, paintings, chateaux, etc, etc
Yet thus far you haven't even posted ONE picture of anything COMMON ERA NEGRO that could EVEN REMOTELY rival the splendour of COMMON ERA Europe.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt:
Do you know who restored the Sphinx? That's right, Europeans.
There is actually reason to believe that Europeans partly destroyed certain aspects of it. Restoration projects are under the control of modern Egyptians. I guess Europeans invented air also. Well, you should have invented a blanket for Otzi the Ice Man (your only link to an ancient past). LOL!
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
I want to see something that was built in the Common Era! And no--I don't want to see the Evil White Man's etchings of mudworks, Zimbabwe's shitty wall, Ethiopia's shitty obelisk, or Timbuktu's shitty mud mosques again.
Show me something GREAT!
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: I want to see something that was built in the Common Era!
I did. Hey Otzi! Show me something before the common era. Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
Fasil Ghebbi in Gondar. Finally something worth mentioning! I won't take that away from you. Now let's see something else.
But you must understand, sudjanita, that that's just ONE structure. Right?
And what's more--built in the 17th century. Would you like me to show you what Europeans had built by the 17th century? o understand that?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by dumb-white-imposter: I will give you nogs verything. I give you nigs Egypt,...
And exactly how can you give us something YOU NEVER HAD???
^ LMAOH
You see? Crazy, stupid, WAPs (white ass punks) like YOU never had any of this ancient greatness but appropriated it and pretended you had it. But that's the great thing about the world of pretend is that anything is possible including "white" Ethiopians! LMAO Posted by ackee (Member # 16371) on :
MY "GOD" I havn'T withness a beatdown like that...well since last week Not Arab not egypt,just close the door behind you don't let it hit you in the A..ss it's kinda heavy Please show one Euro/white invention that didn't have atlease one of it's building blocks in either Asia or Africa?
Posted by ackee (Member # 16371) on :
Hey Guys,I can't post images yet can someone throw up a Pic of the Hypostile Hall of coloums next to Notre Dame Cathedral. Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
1) If Blacks built the pyramids 5000 years ago, why have they gone backwards so that today they live in shacks and mud huts
2) where the Egyptian language came from in Sub-saharan Africa, since if the Egyptians were Black they would have brought it from Black sub-Saharan Africa with them into Egypt. The only Black language widely spoken is Swahili, which was not a written language since it does not have any letters or numerals of its own.
3) how advanced Blacks can be when the only official language of African origin capable of being used in the modern times by the African Union is Swahili. A third of the words used in Swahili are Arabic, and even though it also includes French, English and Portuguese words, the entire language still has only around 60 000 words, with no scientific terms of its own. English contains more than a million words. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swahili
The users did not advance to the stage of having a written language with their own own letters and numerals, but have to use Arabic and/or Latin letters and numerals http://www.omniglot.com/writing/swahili.htm
4) Most other Black languages average 20 000 words or less, whilst most White languages average 750 000 words or more
7) why the average African IQ in Africa is so low. The argument that IQ tests are culturally biased doesn't hold water since the same tests show East Asians, mainly Japanese, to have a higher average IQ than Whites, and no one argues about that
quote:Originally posted by arabegypt: 5) why Blacks can't feed themselves, although they live on the most fertile lands in the world
IIRC, land surveys have shown that only 20% of African land is fertile.
As for African poverty, you do realize the continent was pillaged by Europeans within the last two centuries?
Posted by arabegypt (Member # 16469) on :
You can only debunk one point ? HAHAHAHHA
Posted by ackee (Member # 16371) on :
Why are you a racist red neck ? whｙ ＤＯ ｙｏｕ ｃａｒｅ ａｂｏｕｔ ｈｏｗ A 313;ｆｒｉｃａ ｄｅｖｅｌｏｐｅ？ ｗｈｙ Ｗｉｌｌ Ａｆｒｉｃａｎｓ ｍａｋｅ 288; 353;ｎｇ ｔｏ ｇｅｔ ｙａ．
[/QB][/QUOTE]
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
that's why IMO white supremacy's best bet is telling the truth and trying to water certain things down, and i think they've caught on.![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
lol![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
