Ancient and ArchaeologyÌý permalink
What race were the ancient Egyptians
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Ìý
Posted by Grumpyshakazulu (U6590497) on Tuesday, 16th January 2007
I am looking for eveidence of which ethnic group built the pyramids and sphinx.
I have looked at both white and black scholars and I am still not getting anywhere in terms of comprehensive proof.
Your help for sources would be most appreciated.
Kind Regards
Grumpy -
Message 2
Posted by stopmeandslapme (U1430972) on Tuesday, 16th January 2007
They were built by English knights during The Crusades.
-
Message 3
Posted by Grumpyshakazulu (U6590497) on Tuesday, 16th January 2007
Hehehehehe
-
Message 4
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Tuesday, 16th January 2007
The evidence suggests that the Egyptians were a genetically distinct population from fairly early in the Pharoanic period. moreover they were derisory towards the grouops of people that many modern scholars have tried to suggest provided the seedbed for the Pharoanic race that united the Nile be it the Asiatics or the Sudanese. You might try CL Brace, DP Tracer, LA Yaroch, J Robb K Brandt and AR Nelson "Clines and Clusters Verses "Race": A Tests in Ancient Egypt and the Case of a Death on the Nile" 1993 Yearbook of Physical Anthropology. This seems to suggest that Egyptians have been more or less the same since the end of the last Ice Age and they were most closely related to othe rpeople from the Eastern Mediterranean than those from Sub Saharan Africa. However the overall concluisions that the people of the Nile valley were the result of the blending of numerous population groups that came to rely on the Nile more heavily as the climatedried and the delineation between the desert (DST) and the black land (KMT) grew sharper.
All of which is by the by as it seems you just don't get the idea of race being a human construct. I cannot see how defining the race responsible for impressive remains deals with the fierce urgency of now addressing issues where genuine prejudice still exists. I have a dream that one day historical populations and personalitiers will be judged, not by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character. -
Message 5
Posted by Grumpyshakazulu (U6590497) on Wednesday, 17th January 2007
Hi Lol
Thanx for your input I really appreciate it. I would also like add some of my sources for you to consider.
WHEN GREEK WAS AN AFRICAN LANGUAGE
In regards to the title of my thread you are quite right it should have said What colour were the ancient Egyptians.
Kind Regards
Grumpy -
Message 6
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Wednesday, 17th January 2007
Well it is not really saying that the Greeks migrated from Sub-Saharan Africa and established civilisation as you have sugegsted, the nubians are a fair way from the Garamantes south of tripoli for that matter. It only covers the interaction between the Greek speaking world and Sub Saharan Africa from the establishment of the Successor Kingdoms after the death of Alexander III of Macedon. Further I don't think it really provides any insight inot who constructed the monuments of Old Kingdom Egypt.
What the article attempts to do is state that Hellenism was not a one way process whereby Greeks brought the delights of civilised culture and behaviour to a rude and barberous Africa as some commentators had suggested. If anything it seems to sugegst that Hellenising was at best minimal and though they may have used Greek as the language of international diplomacy as well trade in the Eastern Mediterranean and acquired objects made in a Hellnistic fashion by far the more powerful influences over the society were the model of government and nature that the monarchs arttempted to cement their rule and reduce the influence of a priesthood by emphasising indigenous deities above those derived from Egyptian practices. -
Message 7
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Wednesday, 17th January 2007
grumpy,
Im not sure you will ever get a straight answer either way. there arnt enough records of the time to be able to give a definative answer -
Message 8
Posted by Grumpyshakazulu (U6590497) on Wednesday, 17th January 2007
The Egyptians recorded that their ancestors came from the south led by King Horus. This is seen in the temple of Horus at Edfu.
Some historians claim seem to think that the original Egyptians came from Ethiopia. -
Message 9
Posted by Grumpyshakazulu (U6590497) on Wednesday, 17th January 2007
Sorry for my laziness but the following was pasted and copied from this link.
www.cwo.com/~lucumi/...
At this point Egypt continues to dominate the focus of our African oriented studies. These studies have clearly demonstrated that not only were early Egypt's origins African, but that through the whole of Egypt's Dynastic Era (the age of the Pharaohs), and during all of her many periods of national splendor, men and women with black skin complexions, broad noses, full lips, and tightly curled hair, were dominant in both the general population and governing elite.photo
In the intense and unrelenting struggle to establish scientifically the African foundations of Egyptian civilization, the late Senegalese scholar Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop remains a most fierce and ardent champion. Dr. Diop (1923-1986) was without a doubt the world's leading Egyptologist and held the position of Director of the Radiocarbon Laboratory at the Fundamental Institute of Black Africa in Dakar, Senegal. In stating the importance of the work, Diop noted emphatically and early on that, "The history of Black Africa will remain suspended in air and cannot be written correctly until African historians dare to connect it with the history of Egypt."
The solid range of methodologies employed by Dr. Diop in the course of his extensive Afro-Egyptian labors included: examinations of the epidermis of the mummies of Egyptian kings for verification of their melanin content; precise osteological measurements and meticulous studies in the various relevant areas of anatomy and physical anthropology; careful examinations and comparisons of modern Upper Egyptian and West African blood-types; detailed Afro-Egyptian linguistic studies and the corroboration of distinct Afro-Egyptian cultural traits; documents of racial designations employed by the early Africans themselves; Biblical testimonies and references that address the ancient Egyptian's ethnicity, race and culture; and the writings of early Greek and Roman travelers and scholars describing the physical characteristics of the ancient Egyptians.
There is no doubt that Ancient Egypt was an African civilization. -
Message 10
Posted by Buckskins (U4015830) on Thursday, 18th January 2007
will be judged, not by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character.Ìý
Thank you MLK. -
Message 11
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Thursday, 18th January 2007
I also half hinched the fierce urgency of now bit from the same speech if you're interested.
-
Message 12
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Thursday, 18th January 2007
Well the name is derived from hak up Ptah which is translated as House of Ptah although we get the name from the Greek redition of this as Aegyptos. Other than that I'm not entirely sure that one can so easily say that African automatically means black, exceopt under the one drop rule employed by certain nations but they were spouting cobblers at the best of times. Diop was just relying on cross referencing aretfacts found in sub Saharan Africa with the relatively secure dynastic chronology of the Nile Delta, much as archaeologists like Petrie had attempted to do for European prehistory. With the development of alternative means of dating material found on archaeological sites the reliance of central diffusion of technology and material goods from Egypt as an anchor for other European or African material assemblages has largley fallen by the wayside except on that repository of all that is unfounded, the internet. It might hold some water for the Kushite Kingdoms of the Upper Nile but I'm certain Egypt had no influence whatsoever on the Iron using societies that spread from West Africa never mind what Molefe Asante or Cheikh Anta Diop. Try looking up the Unesco Iron Roads of Africa research project and you might be pleasently surprised.
-
Message 13
Posted by Buckskins (U4015830) on Friday, 19th January 2007
Message 11 - posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) , 14 Hours Ago
I also half hinched the fierce urgency of now bit from the same speech if you're interested.Ìý
I know that. I know that you know it. You know that I know that you know it. We're a knowledgeable pair.
Matt. -
Message 14
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Friday, 19th January 2007
Possibly, mind you as I was skimming through your messages I thought you said you were backwards...
-
Message 15
Posted by henvell (U1781664) on Friday, 19th January 2007
Circa 5500 BCE there were communities on the Nile Delta and near present day Cairo.The original inhabitants may have come from the south.There is archaeological evidence of interaction with the populace of the Levant.About 4200 BCE the Badarians,who were a mixture of native Nile dwellers,immigrants from the eastern desert and newcomers from the Sedan established themselves furthur south on the Nile.They were semi-nomadic and traded with the people to th north.There was some people movement between the two regions.Circa 3500 BCE diminishing rain fall in the western desert forced people to move to the banks of the Nile to obtain fresh drinking water.The ancestors of many of these new arrivals had originally come from south of the Sahara.The sporadic flow of people from the Levant continued.
The people from the western desert made significant contributions to Early Egyptian culture and may have provided the concept for the sphinx.There are weathered rock features in the desert that have a distinct resemblance to the sphinx.The initial pyramid builders were located along the Nile south of Cairo near the old Badarian lands.So this concept came from the south.Egypt has a cosmopolitan population today and the same applies from circa 6000 BCE onwards. -
Message 16
Posted by Grumpyshakazulu (U6590497) on Friday, 19th January 2007
Lobellele your perspective on Diop is so indifferent it beggars belief!!!! The man has used several disciplines before reaching his conclusion and you have reffered to one and feel that justifies your dismissal.
I appreciate all you have said in the past but I cannot accept your refusal of a man like Diop.
Please read and understand his work before making your next response.
Thanx to the last poster Hen. At last I find someone that is willing to seek the truth. This really has nothing to do with colour from my perspective it is about finding and revealing the truth.
Regards
Grumpy -
Message 17
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Friday, 19th January 2007
I'm not refusing Diop, his attempts to highlight the social condition of pre colonial Africa in its own light as opposed to simply a precursor to the "progressive enlightenment" of colonialism is still valid. I am however placing a huge question mark over his whole methodology and the underlying presumptions of his conclusions in that he took modern desires for the creation of a pan African consciousness as part of the liberation movement and attempted to apply them to the past to create a fantasy, one that has been lapped up by North American Black emancipation. The constant focus on Egypt as a Black civilisation is primarily driven by non Africans and is as much based on familiarity with the claims of Blydon in the nineteenth century. Personally I think that Africans would be much better served if we outside the continent did not reduce all other civilsations to post scripts of Egypt as Diop's long discredited linguistic claims would suggest. Does the social experience of the inhabitants of the Nile Delta provide any insight into those of the corrals like Great Zimbabwe or even the !Kung?
-
Message 18
Posted by Grumpyshakazulu (U6590497) on Saturday, 20th January 2007
Frank M.
Snowden, Jr. and people like him do highlight other African nations. -
Message 19
Posted by Buckskins (U4015830) on Saturday, 20th January 2007
lol,
Did you have to pay the airlines for frequent flyer milage....
Matt. -
Message 20
Posted by henvell (U1781664) on Saturday, 20th January 2007
The inhabitants of the Nile Delta post-5500 BCE appear to have had their closest cultural links,with proximal Levant communities.
-
Message 21
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Saturday, 20th January 2007
Nah, the world comes to me, then leaves and attempts to avoid any further contact if it can possibly help it. Still despite my sniping I'm rather amused that so many posters have managed to get stuck in premoderation while I'm not.
-
Message 22
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Saturday, 20th January 2007
Yes but technically he is not attempting to suggest that Egypt is the root of all civilisation let alone infer that the race of the pyramid builders has any significance for the spread of civilisation by stating that black Africans began it in the Nile valley any more than there was a white race that inspired the creation of Great Zimbabwe as Cecil Rhodes tried to suggest. Inidentally he was rather keen on African unity although that was under the British crown but I digress. The southern part of Egypt, what would become the Upper Kingdom appears to have been establishged a centralised authority slightly earlier than the Delta area that made up the Lower Kingdom, as well as uniting the two under one dynasty. One would expect the population further south to be darker than those closer to the Mediterrranean in any case, however this hardly suggests that Africans then spread civilsation to the Middle East. The unification of the Nile Valley in the Old Kingdom is not really accompnied by much in the way of urban development such as increased population densities along with the cientralisation of power, unlike the communities of the Tigris Euphrates basin at around the same time.
-
Message 23
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Saturday, 20th January 2007
too many times talked on that:
Ancient Egyptians since living in a multinational kingdom were a mix of Ethiopian-affiliated (prevalent in the south) and Semitic-Mediterranean (prevalent in the north) - even their language hints that. Egyptian civilisation had absolutely nothing to do with the cultures of western Africa with which US "black" (that is in the layman's eye!) scholars relate themselves.
Indians are also dark but are not the same, tell an Ethiopian he is related to a Nigerian and he will look at you with shock and awe (Somalians who saw "black hack down" were laughing their hearts out... something like watching a film on France and Napoleon turned with an all-Chinese casting!
Please unstuck, there is more in the world than black and white (especially the latter does not exist, I am Greek and I am in no way related to Austrians or Polish, I am a race of my own, white skin, dark hair and lots of body hair - quite different from the aforementioned - the fact that Finnish live in Europe does not relate them to Portuguese, hence I cannot see the "Africanism" of Egyptian culture other than the interaction with Ethiopia and Libya none of which was habitated by western african anthropologic and/or cultural groups.
The article "when greek was an african language" says nothing new not to mention it cannot even define what is greek (poor writer is so
Why people like to emphasise too much on muddy texts and weird writers I do not know.
PS: On how Egyptians looked like please refer to the Kopts (10th time I have said this) -
Message 24
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Sunday, 21st January 2007
Nick, at some point in the past I could swear you tried telling us that Egyptians and Ethipians were related to Dravidian speakers in Southern India. Furthermore I'm not sure that one can define Copts as a specicic ethnicity, what with it being a religious denomination. It would seem that at some point there must have some interaction between Coptic Christians and Muslims in Egypt otherwise how did Islam become the religion of the majority of Egyptians?
-
Message 25
Posted by eleanor_cross (U7117397) on Monday, 22nd January 2007
As usual there have been many thoughtful (and lengthy) replies to this question. So, I shall just throw in a light-hearted comment:- didn't I read, or even see on Ö÷²¥´óÐã recently, that Rameses the Great had red hair? Not much of that in sub-Saharan Africa, I believe.
-
Message 26
Posted by Hossam-Aboulfotouh (U2914961) on Monday, 22nd January 2007
Why researchers want to know the race of the pyramids builders? No matter what their color was, e.g., White, black, Red, or Yellow, at the end they were Egyptians. Their color or their race has nothing to do with their mental abilities; many people with different colors and different races had lived, are living and will live in Egypt for last.
There is a difference between the color and the race of the royal family and the array of colors and races of the Egyptian populations at any period. Thus, the question should be: what was the color of the royal family during the old kingdom? And was there any semi-black royal family in ancient Egypt? The Egyptian WHITE race, like today's white Egyptians, is the answer for the first question; Hor-Mageddon or what you call him Sphinx was white man, and YES is the answer for the second question, particularly the famous seven semi-black Pherons. -
Message 27
Posted by Erik Lindsay (U231970) on Monday, 22nd January 2007
I don't know enough about Egypt or its people to comment on what colour or ''race'' the pyramid or sphinx builders may have been. However I do know physiology to some small extent, and I have to say that just because someone studying the mummies has demonstrated that in life Egyptians had skin heavily pigmented with melanin does not necessarily indicate a negroid background. All peoples living in the tropical sunbelts for generations will either develop heavy skin pigmentation or skin cancer. People from the Indian subcontinent and inhabitants of the middle eastern deserts show anatomical characteristics quite distinct from those we think of as being typical of African blacks --- in fact, their facial architecture more closely resembles caucasoid characteristics -- yet their skin is very heavily pigmented - easily as dark as any African.
Melanin protects from damaging wavelengths of sunlight -- it's a survival characteristic, not a ''racial'' characteristic.
Not trying to be confrontational -- just stating a pertinent fact. -
Message 28
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Monday, 22nd January 2007
So if the colour of their faces has nothing to do with the issue and the Nile valley was a racial melting pot why do you state with such certainlty that the Dynastic families of the old Kingdom were white? You're not going to rehash Petries Asiatic pharoanic race theory by any chance?
-
Message 29
Posted by Hossam-Aboulfotouh (U2914961) on Monday, 22nd January 2007
The meaning of the term "Pharoanic" is the answer of your question.
-
Message 30
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Monday, 22nd January 2007
"From the Great House" (or since the 18th dynasty, "From The House of Ra").
How does that answer any question about ethnicity or race? -
Message 31
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Monday, 22nd January 2007
Come off it lad, you're talking to a Republican. I don't beleive there is any inherant difference between royalty and the rest of society. Besides which how does that suggest that the great house must have been white?
-
Message 32
Posted by Hossam-Aboulfotouh (U2914961) on Monday, 22nd January 2007
As I have said, try to figure out the ancient meaning of the term "Pharoanic," if you succeeded to know its real meaning, then you can easily discover the rest, i.e., the difference between black and white.
-
Message 33
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Monday, 22nd January 2007
Instead of attempting to be ambiguous just come straight out with it. Personally I think you have said nothing about what the ancient Egyptians believed but just displayed your own modern prejudices.
-
Message 34
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Tuesday, 23rd January 2007
The word Pharaoh is one that has arrived in modern usage via Latin, Greek and Hebrew and (mainly with thanks to its use in religious scripture) has now been retrospectively applied to the kings, queens and other general rulers of ancient Egypt. There is no evidence that the Egyptians of any dynasty used the term as the official designation of the ruler, or indeed that the phrase was known, let alone used, by ordinary Egyptians to denote their monarch. It does seem likely however that the phrase was in use by the immigrant Jewish contingent at a time relevant to the recording of the Jewish scriptures, and it has thus been always accepted as a valid title, if something of a "nomen dubium", as a zoologist might say. Etymologically it has the provenance of being linked to the Egyptian "Per 'Aa" (English phonetics), which in its rawest meaning indicates simply the 'great house'. Roman and Greek classicists have preferred the semantic application of divinity to the term, and the practise has led to the convention of referring to the royal dynasties from the 18th on as "The House of Ra", though again this is based more on romatic allusion than fact.
However nowhere have I ever found an etymological derivation for the term that does not at least refer to magnitude and either the structure of a house or the divinity of its founder. And nowhere have I seen or heard of an etymology that will allow an inference to be drawn regarding the ethnicity or race to which its incumbent belonged.
As usual, Hossam-Aboulfotouh, you have made a claim to be privy to relevant information running counter to accepted logic and fact that you will not (or most likely cannot) divulge. How can we believe that your inferences are genuinely intended if they are never backed up by reference to hard information, but are simply glib allusions to analogous texts of a religious nature, coy rhetoric that leads nowhere, and in this case a question that apparently has no answer beyond the prosaic - and in which the answer flatly contradicts your own contention?
It seems a strangely antagonistic way to engage in discussion, and an even stranger method of imparting what one knows, let alone convincing another of its truth. -
Message 35
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Tuesday, 23rd January 2007
Nordmann,
great post as usual. Thank you for that and for your common sense. I envy your erudity, but I have nor the background, nor the knowledge, nor the excellent grasp of the English language as you. I wage my words now: Thank you for your adult behaviour. I don't know if I would have the same "guts" as you in the same case.
I can only say: With esteem.
Warm regards,
Paul. -
Message 36
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Tuesday, 23rd January 2007
"Common sense", as my granny was fond of quoting, "is a misnomer."
Mind you, she had no idea what a 'misnomer' was (she pronounced it 'misnumbered') but since her doctor when she was a young girl was fond of citing it she reckoned it must be a very clever thing to say!
But on the subject of the thread - didn't all this get thrashed out some months back? And wasn't the upshot of the exchange a general acceptance that it was the question itself that was flawed? 'Ancient Egyptian' is too general a description to imply continuity of race (too long in existence) and what constitutes racial separation in North Africa / Middle East / Arabia is contentiously subjective in any case. I even remember the subject of 'disappearing noses' putting a few 'noses' out of joint amongst that thread's contributors too! Very deja vu... -
Message 37
Posted by Hossam-Aboulfotouh (U2914961) on Wednesday, 24th January 2007
It is strange that those who believe that they are swimming in the divine sea of the Ancient Egyptian knowledge; are not able to read the term "Pheron" in Hieroglyphic texts, it is mentioned every where. The reason is that some have imagined wrongly that they can read and understand our Hieroglyphic texts. Accordingly, any information that was based on the wrong translation of the hieroglyphic texts, which you and others might think it is true are in fact false. For example, Zolma, the king that sunk during the Exodus was titled "Pheron." These kinds of books include nothing about what the race of this King was, or where exactly that king sunk with his military troops. Similarly, these books will not inform you about what is the meaning and the difference between the following terms: "Pheron", "Ptolemys", "Daren", "Imady", "Hormiss", "Jedar", and "Hor-Mageddon." If you like to search on and identify the races of the ancient Egyptians kings, in different periods, you must understand the language and the philosophy of the ancient Egyptian Architectonicains, i.e., the master philosophers that were living on earth nearly 5000 years ago, and Hor-Mageddon was the master of the masters.
Till this moment, it seems that Nordmann was unable to find any information about the lost tsunami of the Mediterranean, he did not run Google search on the subject to find out was it false or true story; he did not read the published researches on the subject. -
Message 38
Posted by Colquhoun (U3935535) on Wednesday, 24th January 2007
Surely the logical way of determining the ethnicity of the ancient Egyptians is to start with the present day Egyptians and work backwards?
Todays Egyptains are generally dark olive skinned e.g President Mubarak. To eliminate the Arab input and get back to the 7th century AD you can look at the Copts. The Copts are also dark live skinned and genetically similar to other Mediteranean people, especially the Muslim Egyptians. Thus the population in Roman times essentially looked like they do today.
In order for the Egyptians to have originally been black there has to have been a genocide carried out before the 7th century AD. Thus either the Persians, Greeks or Romans have to have wiped out the 'original' Egyptian population. This would be no mean task as Egypt would have been one of the most densely populated places in the world at the time - a lot of people to kill. Despite this period being reletively well documented from Egyptian, Persian, Greek and Roman sources I know of no record or any other evidence of any widespread slaughter and population replacement. Thus the only conclusion is that Egyptian population pre the invasions was of a similar makeup to what it is today. -
Message 39
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Wednesday, 24th January 2007
Hossam if, as you say, you have a greater insight into the meaning of hieroglyphics than modern day Egyptologists and other scholars then surely you are wasting your time arguing with a gullible little person like me who has fallen for the academic line (accumulated and perfected over many centuries) hook, line and proverbial sinker. It would strike me however that now might be as good a time as any to reveal the source of this superior knowledge of yours that reveals so much of today's accepted 'wisdom' to be mere folly, corroborates fantastically weird 'occurrences' such as the biblical flood and the parting of the Red Sea (or whichever sea), and affords you such clear and precise interpretative capabilities - even after so many millennia - with the "Architectonicains" whose philosophical views and records contain such truth and potency that even today they can defy the mighty Google search.
I rather stupidly went looking for your 'lost tsunami' after our last conversation. Not only did I not find it, I couldn't even find anyone other than yourself who'd missed it. Why do I suspect that the all-knowing, all-seeing Architectonicains will have managed to kick over their traces with the same thoroughness?
I look forward to the revelation when it comes (your revealing of your source - not that of John the Divine). But I fancy both share the same improbability factor... -
Message 40
Posted by Colquhoun (U3935535) on Wednesday, 24th January 2007
Actually Nordman if you 'yahoo' 'ancient tsunami mediteranean' you come up with a lot of links to a tsunami caused by an eruption at Mt Etna 8,000 years ago. Apparantly this devestaed the central Mediteranean coast and even reached Israel.
However I think 8,000 years makes it a bit too ancient for the Egyptians. -
Message 41
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Wednesday, 24th January 2007
There are at least three seismic events that I have read of which believers of 'the great flood' have seized on as the root of the biblical story. None of them are tsunamis (different kind of flooding, if you know what I mean) and none of them geologically recent enough in any case (by a few million years, no less). By the same score there is nothing that I know of in the Egyptian geological record that suggests sustained submersion since the arrival of humans (even by evolutionists' standards of counting the longevity of these things). But as I said, Hossam's views have been formed with reference, as he said, to a deep understanding of very ancient texts to which I have never had access, or of which I had not even been aware. It is exciting to wait, but I assume when he reveals the nature and content of these sources we old-timers (in the Egyptological sense) will all be put to shame by these VERY old-timers (in the Egyptian sense).
I hope they're not SECRET texts! That would ruin everything! -
Message 42
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Wednesday, 24th January 2007
Nordmann,
thanks for the reply. I think
that I see that you know, what I know. Saw your thanks to Arnald and thought that I had solved the puzzle. BTW: With "common sense" I wanted to translate my Dutch "gezond verstand", but to translate that "buchstäblich" would also be a "misnomer".
Yes, I think to remember also something about the noses...
Warm regards and with esteem,
Paul. -
Message 43
Posted by RainbowFfolly (U3345048) on Thursday, 25th January 2007
Hi eleanor_cross,
As usual there have been many thoughtful (and lengthy) replies to this question. So, I shall just throw in a light-hearted comment:- didn't I read, or even see on Ö÷²¥´óÐã recently, that Rameses the Great had red hair? Not much of that in sub-Saharan Africa, I believe.Ìý
The red hair actually gives credence to my theory that the ancient Egyptians were actually a wise tribe of Scots who had settled in Ireland, but then got lost on their way to Atlantis. For example, the etymological connections between the "Osiris" of the Egyptian Book of the Dead, and "Us Irish" are quite striking. Also, if you compare the buildings of the Great Pyramid and of Ben Nevis you will see many similarities - the most blatantly obvious being the pointy-ness of both these man-made objects.
These ancient Scots/Irish have appeared many times throughout history, and as I'm sure E_Nik will testify, were known by Alexander the Great as the people who put the "Mac" in Macedon.
Cheers,
Ra F -
Message 44
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Thursday, 25th January 2007
RF!!!! It is written in the good book that he that reveals the innermost secrets of Dannisim must remove the Gimp suit of Wisdom and be flogged by his bears to within an inch of pleasure AND NO FURTHER!!!!!!
I always thought that the red hair was due to the chemicals used in the mummification process? -
Message 45
Posted by RainbowFfolly (U3345048) on Thursday, 25th January 2007
Hi bttdp,
RF!!!! It is written in the good book that he that reveals the innermost secrets of Dannisim must remove the Gimp suit of Wisdom and be flogged by his bears to within an inch of pleasure AND NO FURTHER!!!!!!Ìý
I have now formed the splitter Cult of Sean who is truly wise and mysterious. He has never denied his own divinity like DL always did - but that may because he hasn't had a chance yet what with being in pre-mod and all that.
I always thought that the red hair was due to the chemicals used in the mummification process?Ìý
As far as red hair and the chemicals used in muffication are concerned, I have just three words for you:
IRN BRU SHAMPOO
Cheers,
Ra F -
Message 46
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Thursday, 25th January 2007
SPLITTER!!!!!!
hang on though.
Does Sean the true messiah aprove of the Gimp suit of Wisdom?
is the true role of the bear as mans partner in life acknowledged?
Will we be allowed to burn Heretics?
if these minor elemts of theology can be addressed I see no reason to split. Besides theres only me on my side its going to make for a small Xmas party. -
Message 47
Posted by Hossam-Aboulfotouh (U2914961) on Thursday, 25th January 2007
Egyptology is indeed a unique scientific field; many scholars of different disciplines contribute in its great researches, which not only clarify many ambiguous things that concern the true history of the ancient Egypt but also contribute in the development of modern societies. However, some of the conclusions that were based on wrong translations are false. On the contrary, there are perfect scientific researches in the field of Egyptology that were supported by other scientific disciplines, e.g., the translation of the Mathematical papyri; however, for example, the ancient technique for decomposing the harmonic fractions of the 2/n table of the so-called papyrus "Rehend" is not discovered yet. Any researcher cannot say that the array of previous researches has no value; they have value even if they contain multiple mistakes. From these mistakes we learn; at least we can identify why they stuck in the dead-end path, concerning the issue in question, and during this research trip we meet many other valuable information too.
I am very glad because people from around the world like to study, or at least read on Egyptology; however, the current curriculum of this specific field lacks the architectonic subjects, which were the core knowledge of the pyramids builders. The architectonic field concerns mainly the laws of creation of the supreme Geometer, based on the law of numbers and the law music. If one was able to enter into the amazing domain of the architectonic field, and passed all tests, i.e., becomes able to identify the true from the array of false images, he will observe the reality from different perspective. The criteria of the architectonic field are very different from the criteria of the field of Egyptology.
Some people like to hear strait answers, they do not like to search; this is against the criteria of the architectonic field. In this regard I would like to tell you one of our primary architectonic lessons that any one who would like to enter its amazing domain should understand it; it is the story of "JEDAR and BAHERs"
"Within the hall of the architectonic anonymity, where one cannot easily identify the true from the false unless he masters the architectonic event, two architectonic dreamers, but very old friends, and both hold the BAHER "Brilliant" scientific certificate, have met with a third architectonic dreamer who holds the JEDAR "Abler" scientific certificate of the ancient Egyptians, and that was called the AMEN of QOR-THEBA "The master priest of the city of Theba." The latter asked them, now you are facing two doors, either to continue as permanent member or to change your status to a follower, which door you would like to pass now? What do you mean? The first BAHER said. JEDAR replayed, if you became tired and you would like, from now on, to gain knowledge via only to listen to its musical melodies, you will remain as follower. But if you like to continue as reader, writer, and player of the eternal melodies, i.e., no one will write or play it for you, in this case only you may succeed to gain the JEDAR certificate and remain permanent. The second BAHER said: I do not see any difference between playing it by myself or listening to the plays of the others; because in both cases I will gain the knowledge at the end, and thus I do not see any logic behind differentiating between the two statuses based on this criterion. JEDAR said, the ability to read, write and play the eternal melodies indicates that the architectonic competent has become tuned with the cosmos, and he became able to observe the frequencies and the medium of, at least, one of the four cosmic links that you already know their names. The listening to only the melodies that others compose and play will hinder the process of initiating and developing your architectonic ability and thus you will remain as a follower. The first BAHER said to his friend; let us enter the first door. The second BAHER said another seven years of study is no problem in order to we become JEDARs. Then, JEDAR had smiled and said, the time of the first road is much longer than you have said, it consumes forty two years, and at the end, from among the array of JEDARs, his majesty HOR-MAGEDDON "the Falcon of the Mighty God" will give the title AMEN of QOR-THEBA to the best of the bests."
By the way, Nordmann, I did not mention the term "parting of the Red Sea," you added it. If you visited this place you will observe the natural mechanism behind the hyper changing of the water level at this specific place. Try to figure out where it is. -
Message 48
Posted by RainbowFfolly (U3345048) on Thursday, 25th January 2007
Hi bttdp,
³§±Ê³¢±õ°Õ°Õ·¡¸é!!!!!!Ìý
HERETIC!!!!!!
Does Sean the true messiah aprove of the Gimp suit of Wisdom?Ìý
He hasn't disapproved of it yet so as far as I'm concerned that means he approves of it wholeheartedly.
is the true role of the bear as mans partner in life acknowledged?Ìý
And lo, I had a vision where Sean spaketh these words:
"Pandering is not a crime, and nor is being 'In Panda'".
Will we be allowed to burn Heretics?Ìý
Course we can - we wouldn't be a proper religion if we couldn't torch non-believers.
if these minor elemts of theology can be addressed I see no reason to split. Besides theres only me on my side its going to make for a small Xmas party.Ìý
"Xmas" party - what happened to "Danmas"? I think your forgetfulness of the sacraments of Danism is a sure sign that you should join us (well me anyway) in the Cult of Sean. You can pick any pompous religious title for yourself AND if you sign up in the next 24 hours you get a free imitation of his holy gourd. As an indication of my own piety, I have been told on many occasions that I have been carrying an empty gourd on my shoulders for a long, long year.
Cheers,
RF -
Message 49
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Thursday, 25th January 2007
If you visited this place you will observe the natural mechanism behind the hyper changing of the water level at this specific place. Try to figure out where it is.
Ìý
Ok, let's get the old map book out, shall we. Right mates, what are we looking for here? "Hyper changing of water levels" is it? Ok! Hmmm... Ok, according to my dog-eared but very dependable Collins World Atlas, marked tidal surge and sea level fluctuation occurs with a variance in excess of 30% of the mean level in, let's see now, along between 15% and 25% of the world's coasts. Ok, that's narrowed it down to approximately 410,000 miles of coastline, bottom estimate.
Maybe "hyper changing" is just too broad a term. Let's see can we narrow it down further. Ok, now we're looking for a spot where the sea changes so hyperly that it exposes the seabed enough that it can be walked on by the combined weight of approximately 500,000 people and for the exact length of time it takes 1,000,000 feet to plod a distance of between 30 and 45 miles (plus the drying out time beforehand of course). Ok, Collins, how much of the world's coastlines is left after that variable has been thrown in?
Oops. Zero miles.
Hold on Hossam-Aboulfotouh, I think I can see what the problem is here. Given of course that when you said 'the exodus' you meant the exodus that I think you mean, then it's a fairy story isn't it? No wonder Collins couldn't find the place!
Oh you little terror you. You nearly got me going there, you did!
Loved your story by the way. Very poetic. What on earth had it do with anything though? -
Message 50
Posted by Hossam-Aboulfotouh (U2914961) on Thursday, 25th January 2007
Nordmann, you are very smart; but remember we are, now, deviating from the core issue of this thread; do the other participant agree? particularly the one who posted this thread, If they agree we can start, and before we start we should put some rules for our talk, I know that this is one of the most hotest subjects.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Ìýto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Ö÷²¥´óÐã iD
Ö÷²¥´óÐã navigation
Ö÷²¥´óÐã links
Ö÷²¥´óÐã © 2014 The Ö÷²¥´óÐã is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.