Agriculture As Evidence of An African Egypt

[Cynovolans]

I see we've gotten to the point where you're accusing me of supporting some old rasist theory, so I'm going to tell you that this is going to be my last response as I'm getting tired of wasting time pointing out everything wrong with your Sudanocentric fringe theory.

Echoes of the Hamitic hypothesis. You are saying that the sophistication of A Group Nubians were the result somehow of outside influence from Egypt. Do you believe that Nubians or Africans to the south of Egypt simply lacked within themselves what it took to be sophisticated or create 'high culture'? Well Bruce Williams(1998) certainly does not think so. This is what he had to say in "A Prospectus For Exploring The Essence of Nubia" about cultural continuity and paralles between Egyptians and other Africans:

Here is what Robert Morkot said on Williams idea, in Empires: perspectives from archaeology and history:

In the late Predynastic phase, equivalent to the Nubian A Group, (3,000 B.C. - 5,000 B.C.) there were strong trading contacts between the two regions. These recently have been summarized by H.S. Smith. The radical hypothesis of Bruce Williams -that the pharaonic monarchy first appeared in Nubia during this period - has been rejected by the majority of Egyptologists and Nubian archaeologists.There is now more material from Abydos that predates the Nubian material Williams worked with. Indeed, the archaeological material from Abydos, Hierakonpolis, and other sites further north is forcing a complete reeavulation of the emergence of the pharaonic state.

You are essentially trying to redfine the very meaning of archaeology to suit your own convenience. Similar ceramics shared by Saharans, Sudanics and Nile vally peoples is not evidence of a common culture or reciprocal influence, however architectural similarities between the Northern cultures of Predynastic KMT and the Levant is? I call that a gymnastic kind of logic, or rather illogic.

Ceramics can be made, copied, and traded by anyone. I gave you an example earlier, but this may be a better one; a large amount of Levantine styled ceramics have been found in Nubian A-Group cemeteries, does this mean that the nubian A-Group can be considered part of a Levantine culture?

While i donot discount the importance of Northern cultures in egyptian history, are you trying to throw doubt on the idea that dynastic culture was a direct offshoot of the Southern Predynastic cultures?

I have not denied nor I have suggested that pre-dynastic Upper Egypt didn't create Pharaonic Egypt or weren't the largest contributor to the creation of Egyptian culture.

 

[Dachs]

Clearly the Etruscans were a bunch of Greeks, since the overwhelming majority of post-Villanovan material culture from northern Italy up to the middle Roman Republic is Greek in both stylistic criteria and in actual construction

 

[Lord Baal]

Clearly the people of Washington D.C. are descended from the Athenians. Just look at that architecture.

 

[Dachs]

DC's neoclassical buildings are a bit of a mishmash but take a helluva lot more from "Roman" architecture than they do of "Greek"

[/wetblanket]

 

[Mentuemhat]

I have not denied nor I have suggested that pre-dynastic Upper Egypt didn't create Pharaonic Egypt or weren't the largest contributor to the creation of Egyptian culture.

But are you sure that the Dynastic culture of Ancient Egypt arose from the Southern cultures of Predynastic Culture? Because after all i hardly think that the archaeological processes, conventions and procedures used to arrive at such a conclusion are somehow different from those used to arrive at the conclusiion that these same predynastic cultures such as the Tasian derived from the Sudan and the Sahara. Again Hendrickx and Vermeersch:

The existence of a still earlier culture, the Tasian has been claimed. This culture would have been characterized by the presence of round-based calciform beakers with incised designs filled with white pigmet, which are also known from contexts of similar date in Neolithic Sudan. However the existence of the Tasian as a chronologically or culturally separated unit has never been demonstrated beyond doubt. Although most scholars consider the Tasian to be simply part of the Badarian culture, it has also been argued that the Tasian represents the continuation of a lower Egyptian tradition, which would be the immediate predecessor of the Naqada I culture. This however seems rather implausible, first because similarities with the Lower Egyptian Neolithic cultures are not convincing, and secondly, because of the Tasian's obvious ceramic links with the Sudan. If the Tasian must be considered as a separate cultural entity, then it might represent a nomadic culture with a Sudanese background, which interacted with the Badarian culture.

Its one thing to have posters who just write as if they were inspired directly from God or some other Supernatural force , making no reference to scholarly sources or authorities; But in your case you seem quite keen on backing up your point of view with properly referenced sources. And therein lies the dillemma. On the one hand you use these sources to support your point of view and on the other hand you make an absolutely mockery of the archaeological conventions and accepted procedures upon which the very science of archaeology is based, each time you encounter an idea you dont agree with.

I dont mean to sound offensive, but to me that seems quite immature.