|
Post by Ilmatar on Jan 16, 2006 13:14:50 GMT -5
This is effective only if one truely believes that his/her face is ugly.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Jan 16, 2006 13:18:17 GMT -5
Also the original use of "Africa" via Greeks & Romans,was only limited to the Berber lands of North Africa from Mauritania in the West to Libya in the East,sometimes including Egypt. Asia was also used to for Egypt.
Sure was a Mediterranean and Asian Civilization both racially and culturally.
Africa should have never been mis-used by Colonial Europeans to describe the entire continent.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Jan 16, 2006 13:18:38 GMT -5
No way. Almost nobody is able to give a non contradictory definition of what he means for racist. I invite you to give one. 1 He loves racists messageboards 2 do you honestly in your heart of hearts believe him not be racist? Just because he wont make himself public like say a david duke doesnt mean anything other than he likes to stay in the cloest. I expected at least an attempt at a definition.
|
|
|
Post by ratrace on Jan 16, 2006 13:31:26 GMT -5
1 He loves racists messageboards 2 do you honestly in your heart of hearts believe him not be racist? Just because he wont make himself public like say a david duke doesnt mean anything other than he likes to stay in the cloest. I expected at least an attempt at a definition. Nock c'mon
|
|
|
Post by nordicyouth on Jan 16, 2006 19:56:54 GMT -5
Africa is a huge continent with many races and cultures. It is clear that Egyptian civilization is a local phenomenon that shared cultural ties with other civilizations of the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean region and no ties at all with the vast majority of Africa. It is downright bizarre when West Africans imagine a connection with Ancient Egypt just because both are African: first of all, "Africa" is a European concept, and there was no African consciousness before European colonialism; second, West Africans had zero cultural or racial ties with Ancient Egypt which was racially Mediterranean (Caucasoid) and culturally an indigenous Egyptian phenomenon influenced and influencing other civilizations of the Mediterranean and Near East region. A West African Negroid considering Egypt as an "African" civilization akin to him is roughly equivalent to a Chinese taking pride in English civilization, or a Plains Indian taking pride in Inca civilization. 'Nuff Said
|
|
|
Post by gambin on Jan 16, 2006 20:19:35 GMT -5
No way. Almost nobody is able to give a non contradictory definition of what he means for racist. I invite you to give one. 1 He loves racists messageboards 2 do you honestly in your heart of hearts believe him not be racist? Just because he wont make himself public like say a david duke doesnt mean anything other than he likes to stay in the cloest. LOL @ ratrace.
|
|
|
Post by gambin on Jan 16, 2006 20:22:36 GMT -5
Racism is.....when someone makes a prejudicial judgment on a person or a group's character, intelligence, ability based solely on that person's ethnic background or the physical and cultural manifestations thereof.
|
|
|
Post by greatness on Jan 17, 2006 0:56:53 GMT -5
Mediterranean doesnt equate Southern European only, therefore Egypt could be considered being a Mediterranean civilisation, racially it was for sure. Though more centered along the Nile than the sea. African doesnt mean that much anyway since there are at least 3, or better minimum 5 different African complexes. Egypt wasn't racially Medit, those are lies and the facts have been shown. LOL another Egyptian thing. Everyone tries to claim Egypt as their own. I've even heard Asians say Asians migrated to Africa and started the Egyptian civilization!! I think its obvious that Egypt was majority mediterranean. But also u cannot deny their was negroid influences in their race and culture. Dont forget the Nubians who they fought with and against, who influenced Egypt.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Jan 17, 2006 4:13:21 GMT -5
Racism is.....when someone makes a prejudicial judgment on a person or a group's character, intelligence, ability based solely on that person's ethnic background or the physical and cultural manifestations thereof. Under this definition being racist would be very reasonable and surely not to be condemned. I highlighted the word "group" as I think if you would have limited the statement to the individuals it would have been a more useful definition. Groups have a history and some data about them. A judgement on a ethnic group is not a "prejudicial judgement", is a judgement
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Jan 17, 2006 4:17:21 GMT -5
Egypt wasn't racially Medit, those are lies and the facts have been shown. LOL another Egyptian thing. Everyone tries to claim Egypt as their own. I've even heard Asians say Asians migrated to Africa and started the Egyptian civilization!! I think its obvious that Egypt was majority mediterranean. But also u cannot deny their was negroid influences in their race and culture. Dont forget the Nubians who they fought with and against, who influenced Egypt. Obvious? Majority Medit? ?? How so? Please further elaborate....
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Jan 17, 2006 4:43:03 GMT -5
Egyptian civilization is *NOT* a "Medit" civilization culturally, define what is a Medit civilization. Egypt was an African civilization. Rome simply copied the Greeks and Etruscans and Egyptians civilization was already thousands of years old when Greek civilization came into play. Africa is a huge continent with many races and cultures. It is clear that Egyptian civilization is a local phenomenon that shared cultural ties with other civilizations of the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean region and no ties at all with the vast majority of Africa. Please post proof because all you're doing is blowing hot air. I have proof: "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(Ehret 1995; Ehret forthcoming)..... One of the exciting archeological events of the past twenty years was the discovery that the peoples of the steppes and grasslands to the immediate south of Egypt domesticated these cattle, as early as 9000 to 8000 B.C. The socities involved in this momentous development included Afrasians and neighboring peoples whose languages belonged to a second major African language family, Nilo-Saharan(Wendorf, Schild, Close 1984; Wendorf, et tal. 1982). The earliest domestic cattle came to Egypt apparently from these southern neighbors, probably before 6000 B.C., not, as we used to think, from the Middle East. One major technological advance, pottery-making, was also initiated as early as 9000 B.C. by the Nilo-Saharans and Afrasians who lived to the south of Egypt. Soon thereafter, pots spread to Egyptian sites, almost 2000 years before the first pottery was made in the Middle East......" Ancient Egyptian as an African Language, Egypt as an African Culture Christopher Ehret Professor of History, African Studies Chair University of California at Los Angeles Taken from Egypt in Africa, by Theodore Celenko "There were probable influences between Saharan people and ancient Egypt. For example, engravings assigned to the Bubaline Period representing rams with spheres on their heads moght be linked to the symbol of the god Amun of the Nile Valley(Gillon 1984:55), which appeared in much later times around 3000 B.C. Similarities between tailed garments portrayed in the rock art and that of Egyptian Kings suggest that the ancient Nile Valley population included immigrants from the Sahara as it began to become a desert. Saharan Rock Art Mohamed Sanouni Assistant Professor, Institute of Archaeology University of Algiers, Algeria" Need I post more because you have posted nothing but hot air. this entire paragraph is useless garbage and a strawman, because no one and I repeat *NO ONE HERE* has ever stated any connection between West Africans and ancient Egyptians, so you're beating on lame strawman. the point was whether Ancient Egyptians more related to East Africans and other groups of the Nile Valley Horn of Africa, its bizarre that you're using that strawman about west Africans[which west Africans made that claim?] and talking about "Medits" once again when the evidence is against it. You can fool the majority of people in here with that strawman, but even the new study by Brace debunks your nonsense about Egyptians being racially Medits, unless you want to say Nubians and Somalis are also Medits, which they aren't.
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Jan 17, 2006 4:59:04 GMT -5
More proof of cultural relationships between ancient egypt and the rest of Africa:
Ceremonialism in Predynastic and Old Kingdom Egypt
One of the interesting aspects of the Nabta center is its possible role as a contact point between the early Nilotic Neolithic groups with their agricultural economy and the cattle pastoralists in the Egyptian Sahara. The functional separation of these two different economies may have played a significant part in the emer-gence of complexity among both groups. The evidence for Nilotic Egyptian influence on Saharan pastoralists is not extensive and is presently limited to Late Neolithic ceramic technology, occasional shells of Nile species, and rare stones from the Nile gravels. Another way of exploring this is by examining those aspects of political and ceremonial life in the Predynastic and Old Kingdom that might reflect impact from the Saharan cattle pastoralists. In this we have been preceeded by Frankfort (1978: 3–12) who, in his major study of Egyptian and Mesopotamian religions and political systems, argued that the Egyptian belief system arose from an East African substratum and was not introduced from Mesopotamia. To support his position Frankfort pointed to the similarities in religious beliefs the early Egyptians shared with Nilotic cattle pastoralists. During the Old Kingdom, cattle were a central focus of their belief system. They were deified and regarded as earthly representatives of the gods. A cow was also seen as the mother of the sun, who is sometimes referred to as the ‘‘Bull of Heaven.’’ The Egyptian pharaoh was a god (similar to the Shillok king, and not an intermediary to the gods as in Mesopotamia). He was the embodiment of two gods, Horus, for Upper Egypt, and Seth, for Lower Egypt, but he was primarily Horus, son of Hathor, who was a cow. Horus is often depicted as a strong bull, and images of cattle are prominent in Predynastic and Old Kingdom art; in some instances the images of bulls occur with depictions of stars, a concept that goes back to the Predynastic (Frankfort 1978:172). Dead pharaohs were sometimes described as the Bull in Heaven. Another important Old Kingdom concept was Min, the god of rain, who is associated with a white bull, and to whom the annual harvest festival was dedicated. It is interesting to note that the emphasis on cattle in the belief system of the Old Kingdom is not reflected in the economy. While cattle were known and were the major measure of wealth, the economy was based primarily on agriculture and small livestock—sheep and goats. Frankfort saw this emphasis on cattle as an indication that the Old Kingdom beliefs were part of an older stratum of East African concepts. It seems likely, however, that had Frankfort known that cattle pastoralists were in the adjacent Sahara several thousands years before the Predynastic, he would have seen the Western Desert cattle pastoralists as the more likely source for the Old Kingdom religious beliefs than the East African pastoralists. Moreover, that cattle were not important among the preceding Neolithic in the Nile Valley suggests that the Old Kingdom belief system was imposed from outside, perhaps in the traditional fashion, a conquest by pastoralists who periodically come in from their ‘‘lands of insolence’’ to conquer farmers (Coon 1958: 295–323; Khazanov 1994). It is tempting to suggest that the impressive cattle burials at the A-Group site of Qustul (Williams 1986), in Egypt south of Abu Simbel, may relate to just such an event.
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 17, 97–123 (1998)
Nabta Playa and Its Role in Northeastern African Prehistory Fred Wendorf Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas 75275 and Romuald Schild Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland
Thats only a taste Pontikos, now post your evidence, I'm waiting!
|
|
|
Post by Dienekes on Jan 17, 2006 5:04:00 GMT -5
NOT the same race.
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Jan 17, 2006 5:17:06 GMT -5
Egyptian along side a Nubian and other so-called Medits. Who does the Egyptian look closest to? By the way, you beating on another strawman, because no one has stated that ancient Egyptians looked like West Africans.
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Jan 17, 2006 5:21:20 GMT -5
|
|