|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on May 23, 2019 18:51:07 GMT -5
Here is a condensation of Lepsius though Minutoli's racist caricature is the version preferred on the 'net. Horus ____ Egyptian _ Levantine _ Sudani _ LibyanPlease buck it everywhere, thx. Ignore the hieroglyphics. Because its condensed they're inapplicable. Hornung prefers Minutoli, both obviously hate Blacks. But this by so-called objective academia not low self-esteem ytes pushing their fantasy Eurocentric sloppy 'scholarship'. The order is altogether wrong. It violates the sun's path. Euro ytes want to see themselves as the Libyan African. Minutoli went so far as to alter the Libyan and Sudani faces and of course his proxy Euro ytes had to be first. SMH From 1820 to 2020, how long will this bullshit go on?
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jan 22, 2020 11:00:03 GMT -5
@sage or anyone can you repost the original image? From OP. Apparently, it is gone. Anywho..
Question:
1. What is the literal translation for Aamu, Nshy and Tamahu?
These designations did not exist at the time ie Asiatic, Libyan? Right?
Quote:
“It actually specifies left to right Rm.t, Aamu, Nshy, and Tamahu.
This translates to Men [above] Men, Asiatic, Southerns, and "Libyan".
The book of gates catalogues groups of people whose souls will be ressurected in the afterlife, not 'races' of men.
AlTakruri makes the sentient observation that 'European' [sea] peoples are never listed in the book of Gates, because they are seen as essentially 'souless' and thus inelligible for resurrection.
The book of Gates further denotes two families of men, or lineages.
They are, the offspring of Heru [Horus, son of
Isis and Osirus], and the children of Seketh.
Both the Rm.t and Nshy are offspring of Heru.
Both the Aaamu and Tamahu are offspring of Seketh.
The groups are further denoted by skin color differences, in both the iconography and the text.
The Rm.t and Nshy are denoted as Km.t nw.t.
The Aamu and Tamahu are denoted as Dsrh.t nwt.
Km.t nw.t is "Black Community".
Dshrt. nw.t is "Red Community".
Therefore the Book of Gates shows that ancient Nile Valley Africans considered themselves Blacks, and distinguished themselves from Asiatics whom they considered Reds.
It also shows that AE considered themselves to be of the same lineage [of Heru] as more southerly Nile Valley Africans, and distinct from Asiatic and Libyans to whom they assigned a different lineage [via Seketh].”
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Jan 22, 2020 12:06:47 GMT -5
Tell ya what In the spirit of the Cheikh who made a new work when updates happened I'll restart, soon. OK @sage or anyone can you repost the original image? From OP. Apparently, it is gone. Anywho.. Question: 1. What is the literal translation for Aamu, Nshy and Tamahu? These designations did not exist at the time ie Asiatic, Libyan? Right? No. No, English words existed 3000 years ago. They're translations. Aamw may as well be translated 'Asiatic', Nehesu 'Nubian', and Tjemehu Libyan. The arrangement, in keeping w/t text, is a Solar ordering. Naturally it's geographic. The foreign generic ethnic headings have no day to day AE language use. Aamw is apparently a loan from Semitic designating 'people'. That's based on Hebrew usage of the word `am = people(hood)/'nationality' Nehesu may apply to muttering, as in sotto voce prayer. Nothing sure about that. Tjemehu probably comes from the Tjemhi stone abundant in their territory SIDEBAR: The ethnies correspond to the later Hebrew book B*reshiyth 4 sons of Hham; Misr Knaan Kush Phut. The entire Book of Gates text is a narrative of the Sun's nighttime movement. At the given hour, everybody under the sun who died that day is resurrected (for judgement). The scene is relative to AE perspectives, Rometu(sp), the People of People, thus prime before Hor. Imagine yourself on the Nile at dawn, midday, and dusk tracking the sun. `Aamw are 1st because, by AE orientation, the eastern sunrise is over them. Nehesu are 2nd because at noon the sun stands southward over them. Tjemehu are 3rd because the daylight sun sinks west over them. I worked that out like 2 decades ago. Manu Ampim saw its validity. I stand on surer ground today saying Aegeans and north Mediterraneans and maybe other sub- Alpine Euros were left out because the sun never appears in the sky to the north of Egypt. I think you need to be south of the equator to ever the sun in the sky to the north.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jan 22, 2020 12:36:10 GMT -5
I am trying to understand how ancient Egyptians viewed themselves not through European eyes.
Trying understand the geographic boundaries also. I would think upper Egypt and the Levant contained virtually the same people. So who really are the "red" people?. Seketh. Sides photos need updating. Tinypic is virtually gone. Same happened to many of my images.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jan 22, 2020 15:39:15 GMT -5
I remember someone posted an actual photo. I think it was tomb of Rameses III. Not a Artist impression.
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Jan 22, 2020 17:29:38 GMT -5
There are several full figure renditions of that scene in various tombs within 200 yrs iirc of each other. Hold tight while I get a worthwhile presentation to post up. Yes photos are out now that weren't then. Even today there're black sreggin and red sreggin in the vernacular. Blk/red is the basic complexion split. Latin Euro ytes have something similar with Obscura and Clara. Far north it's ruddy and blanche, I think.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jan 22, 2020 18:35:37 GMT -5
I can't see any fundamental difference between peoples of the levant and Upper Egypt....>3000 years ago. Even the peoples just West of them(AE). In fact latitudinally, the only people that may differ from Upper Egypt are Tunisians(not Libyans)...taking Geography into consideration. In fact the "Asiatics" like indigenous Arabians and Yemeneses may be as dark as Nehesi. No? So again I ask who decided these translation were Asiatics and Libyans...even Nehesi?
As for Solar ordering? hmmm. Even if what you say is true. Horus followed by "men"....there is only 2 other permutation Aamu vs Tamahu or Tamahu vs Aamu. That means we can be 50% right. ...or 50% wrong.
Aamu=people Rmt=people of people, Nehesi=not sure, Tamahu=Stones? I don't know. Not a strong case...
" No. No, English words existed 3000 years ago. They're translations. Aamw may as well be translated 'Asiatic', Nehesu 'Nubian', and Tjemehu Libyan. The arrangement, in keeping w/t text, is a Solar ordering. Naturally it's geographic.
The foreign generic ethnic headings have no day to day AE language use. Aamw is apparently a loan from Semitic designating 'people'. That's based on Hebrew usage of the word `am = people(hood)/'nationality' Nehesu may apply to muttering, as in sotto voce prayer. Nothing sure about that. Tjemehu probably comes from the Tjemhi stone abundant in their territory
SIDEBAR: The ethnies correspond to the later Hebrew book B*reshiyth 4 sons of Hham; Misr Knaan Kush Phut.
The entire Book of Gates text is a narrative of the Sun's nighttime movement. At the given hour everybody under the sun who died that day is resurrected (for judgement). The scene is relative to AEs, Romitu(sp), the People of People, thus prime before Hor. Imagine yourself on the Nile at dawn, midday, and dusk tracking the sun. `Aamw are 1st because, by AE orientation, the eastern sunrise is over them. Nehesu are 2nd because at noon the sun stands southward over them. Tjemehu are 3rd because the daylight sun sinks west over them.
I worked that out like 2 decades ago. Manu Ampim saw its validity."
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Jan 22, 2020 22:12:40 GMT -5
Have it your way.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jan 23, 2020 12:51:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jan 23, 2020 12:53:00 GMT -5
Used my cell for this. But from Rameses III? They all look the same. No?
What does the glyph say?
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Jan 23, 2020 17:42:40 GMT -5
I began explaining but it seemed you know more about it than I do. Alternate views, sidelines, and precisions are appreciated only with "data". Who has time to walk thru random skeptical snap assessment opinions? We know the one and only instance of RM.t with exact NHS phenotype and garb. Think u catching me sleep @/t wheel? Really? This too boring to repeat again and again ... . One reason we now have the nice clean image you posted above is because of Manu Ampim in vanSertima's JAC. Shouting "sloppy afrocentric", yte academia Egyptologists in concensus lied on Prof Ampim saying there're no such painting. I had Ampim critique my hypothesis on BG 4.5 s30 on, iirc, Walker & Fari's old Classical African Civilization yahoogroup ~20 yrs ago. Diop was not slip shod. Ampim is not trippin. When I came to ES in 2004 I brought all that with me and challenged those lying academicians who had not yet died. They failed to meet the challenge but even better recently honest researchers began posting pre-conservation, professional photos, museum acceptable, and now even mainstream Almamy offers commercial copies. Anybody recall Sahel Siptah asking ESR haven for this back in Jan 2012? ES was mighty in its pre-'afrocentric' day. 2006 BG 4:5 vg30 as in KV11 tomb of Rameses III www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=004067;p=1#0000142007 Yurco & Hornung vs. Ampim & Lepsius (Again?? Yes, again!) www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=006463[. . . .] 2018 deshret's Race of the Ancient Egyptians www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=010053#000014
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jan 24, 2020 7:02:10 GMT -5
Thanks for the link on ES. Reading it now. So this is the 'actual' image from tomb of Rameses III
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Jan 24, 2020 11:32:49 GMT -5
OK I see your focus is on Egys and Kushis rendered 97% exactly the same. Your interest is not in the meaning of scene or vignette 30 painting. The only reason the painting exists is to illustrate the text. That's where all the misinterpretation comes from. The text in question appears on the sarcophagi of pharaohs. All illustration was reduced to stick figures there on the 'casket'. With your focus in mind here're the rescinded imgs from link 1. Enjoy. 1. Condensations of KV11 - repro Lepsius 1859 2. Condensation of KV11 - after Lepsius 1913 3. "Tjmhhw," Rt, "A3mw" - rearranged photo 1990 Hornung misidentified Rt as a Nhhsw (photo proves he knew it was real) 4. Rt, "Tjmhhw," "A3mw" - photo Yurco 1996 (Rt misidentified as a Nhhsw) he knew painting was in the tomb --link5. Rt Rmtw - photo 1994 Ampin 6. Rt - photo Dzikowski misidentified Rt as a Nhhsy (photo proves Theban Mapping Project knew painting was real 7. Rt & Nhhsy - photos Ampim 1994 8. Nhhsw - photo Ampin 1994 Labeling of peoples follows that inscribed on the tomb wall. Misidentifications are by those credited for their photos.
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Jan 24, 2020 18:08:07 GMT -5
I like to give gredit where credit is due. Can't recall who made this but that person is a Master At Work The Libyan exemplar may be a tad much on the pinkish side, though. Should be more manila.
|
|
|
Post by imhotep06 on Feb 26, 2020 1:38:51 GMT -5
For the record Aam.w is a term for cattle and describes a people who essentially lived a nomadic life-style. The word TmH.w simply refers to a group of foreigners who settled in in the delta. The T- prefix is a grammatical morpheme used to make abstract nouns. It is sometimes prefixed or suffixed to words. We know this morpheme from the word rmT.
|
|