Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Middle Eastern and African History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Middle Eastern and African History Middle Eastern and African History Forum - Egypt, Syria, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and all nations of Africa and the Arabian Peninsula


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 14th, 2017, 06:54 AM   #51
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Jun 2017
From: al-Uqṣur
Posts: 429

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eryl Enki View Post
So much arrogance in this thread. Egypt, Rome etc were all great civilizations that contributed a lot for the advancement of mankind. But it is a fact that Sumer is mankind. No humanity without Sumer.
Sumer was a small village civilisation. How did Sumer influence China? How did it Influence the Maya? How did it influence the Celts? How did it influence Egypt?

It did not in any way. If Sumer had infleunced Egypt, we would live in mud bricks and have small city states.
Ranefer is offline  
Remove Ads
Old October 14th, 2017, 06:57 AM   #52

Todd Feinman's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2013
From: Planet Nine, Oregon
Posts: 4,401

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corvidius View Post
Some levity in what rapidly became a far too acrimonious thread to take serious part in, a pity...

Anyway, just as back in about 1999, or thereabouts, the game "Pharaoh" stimulated imaginations and interest in Ancient Egypt, this new installment of the Assassins Creed series should do the same, but on a far grander scale. It's not my type of game, but I'll buy it just to be able to walk, and fly around, an extraordinary rendition of Ancient Egypt, in this case at the time of Cleopatra VII. To the marsh I march for the reeds we need..







Edit: I found that a "discovery mode" will be added to the game that will enable the player to just explore the entire map without any missions and fighting. As well as temples, the inside of pyramids and tombs are also replicated.
Awesome! I used to play "Timelapse" beautiful (not very accurate), and also with set directions:
https://www.google.com/search?q=time...w=1292&bih=678

Still from "Origins":

Click the image to open in full size.

Last edited by Todd Feinman; October 14th, 2017 at 06:59 AM.
Todd Feinman is online now  
Old October 14th, 2017, 08:24 AM   #53
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2015
From: NYC
Posts: 153

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranefer View Post
Those rubbish statues your showed prove exactly my point. Each sumerian statue looks like a 3 year old had made them. The chiense stuff looks laughable as well.

Did you ever see a human beiing that looks like this?

Click the image to open in full size.

looks like heavy case of down syndrome.

What was their problem? Incapable for real projection?

You call sumerira a "civilisation"? They lived like animals in small city states. If you label this civilisation, then evry ant state is more structured. Sumeria was at its best time less structured than Egypt in the predynastic periods.


Did you ever visit the Maya pyramides? I did in 2015. Evry Mc Donalds is more impressive than this. Build wtith small stones. Without inner structure.

Egypt stands for perfection and the highest level a human society could reach at this time.
Once again, not only are you projecting your own bias towards other civilizations in favor of Egypt, you are also highly ignorant and suffer from a serious case of superiority complex.

"looks like heavy case of down syndrome.". Now all your doing is insulting with childish remarks with a hint of racism/prejudice calling Chinese statues down syndrome looking and saying Sumerians looked primitive compared to Egypt.

"highest level a human society could reach at this time". By whose standards, your standard. Once again, art and architecture are highly subjective. Many people may find the pyramids to look unattractive. Many people might not like the look Egyptian statues and artifacts. Just because you may find Egyptian art more beautiful doesn't mean everyone find it beautiful.

And again, I have not insulted Egyptians. I simply found them to be overrated, always getting the attention of ancient civilizations compared to other civilizations. You on the other hand, are just throwing immature comments saying "Sumerian statues look the 3 year olds" and chinese statues look like "down syndrome", and saying Sumerians were primitive and Egyptians were the highest level a human society can reach, which only says a lot about your superiority complex. Since that's your opinion, I won't even bother with your comments.
Ricster4455 is offline  
Old October 14th, 2017, 08:26 AM   #54
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2015
From: NYC
Posts: 153

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranefer View Post
Sumer was a small village civilisation. How did Sumer influence China? How did it Influence the Maya? How did it influence the Celts? How did it influence Egypt?

It did not in any way. If Sumer had infleunced Egypt, we would live in mud bricks and have small city states.
How did Egypt influence the rest of the world? How would the rest of the world be different if Egyptian influence spread across the world?

And yes, Sumer did influence Egypt through trade, look it up.
Ricster4455 is offline  
Old October 14th, 2017, 08:48 AM   #55
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2017
From: Connecticut
Posts: 2,083

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricster4455 View Post
Ancient Sumer is about the same age as Egyptians, if not slightly older. When you mean "All the biggest structures came out of Egypt", are you talking about the architecture and ancient buildings. If so, Egyptians were not the only ones with tall buildings, take a look at East Asia and Mesoamerica, they too had tall ancient structures. And the only thing tall in Egypt were the pyramids.




To be honest with you, the only time people talk mummies and pharaohs...is when it comes to what race they belonged to. Its a neverending battle between Afrocentrists and Eurocentrists as to, "were Ancient Egyptians white or black" that only ends up in more than 30+ pages or on Youtube, more than 100+ comments that goes nowhere. Can't we just admit that Ancient Egyptians have always been North Africans with minimal admixture from East Africa and Nubia, and from the Near East, and that phenotypically, they were "Caucasoid with N*groid admixture"? BTW before anyone goes crazy over what I just said, "Caucasoid" definitely does not mean white, but bone structure and these classifications such as "Caucasoid, Mongoloid, N*groid, although they are not used in modern anthropology, they are still used widely by many people (I see it all the time in anthro forums and even on yahoo and quora) to describe shared phenotype similarities between groups of people. And please, I don't want to start an argument on the "supposed racial background on Ancient Egyptians".

The point is, it does not matter their race, what matters is what they did and their contributions to society. And in my opinion, while Ancient Egyptians did contribute in many aspects to society, I feel like other civilizations, the Indians and Chinese and Mesopotamians, contributed more to society, and their contributions in ancient times, are often ignored or downplayed, and more spotlight if given to the Egyptians. It may not happen on these types of forums, but outside of forums, the first thing that comes to mind when talking about ancient civilization are: pyramids, sand, mummies and pharaohs.
1)I was talking about height, should have been more clear. The Pyramid of Giza and the Great Lighthouse of Alexandria were only topped in height by a handful of cathedrals into the industrial age(and many of these cathedrals were only taller because of their top spires, one or two of which were struck of by lightning).

2)I agree with your point to an extent. What many Afrocentrists don't realize is that Egypt was exposed to both lighter skinned middle easterners and north africans and darker skinned nubians and sub saharan africans because there was desert dividing Egypt from the Middle East same as Africa. The consensus should be that about 10% of the Ancient population was African and the rest were different shades of lighter skinned people. Of course the real debate is about the kings and mummies not about your general population breakdown. But yes, I agree I have no desire to talk about this ever again, last few threads were more than enough. I did not mention this in my post but since you brought it up, I felt the need to address my position on this matter. King Tut is talked about independent of his race though, the mystery of how he died when it was still a mystery was quite a pop culture obsession. We do not have the tombs of many other pharaohs(though I was reading on vintage news they discovered the tomb from an old kingdom pharaoh recently). King Tut was also important because he was Akheaten's son although this importance of merit isn't talked about as much IME.

3)Agreed. Egypt isn't unimportant at all. My assessment is that Egypt was really the first civilization that was anything resembling an empire and was the most advanced until the Middle East started being united by the Assyrians, Persians etc at which point the formerly most advanced civilization on earth could no longer compete. Likewise in more modern times when the Middle East was fractured, or even during the decline of the Seleucid Empire you see Egypt being more competitive in the region.

Culturally, I think the fact that it was the most advanced civilization to exist at that time is the fascination. Egypt was great at record keeping, and maintaining evidence of their civilization(Pyramid's being the most tangible example) that this will naturally attract historians and is the reason why "Egyptology is a thing". Sumer was around largely the same time but like Ranefar said(not that I agree with most of what Ranefar says) these were less advanced city states and Sumer is important for what Middle Eastern civilization eventually became. Ancient Egypt was already that millennia earlier. So I think the civilization gets much credit for being first. Of the three basins of civilization, the Indus, Mespotamia and the Nile, Egypt was initially the most successful.
Emperor of Wurttemburg 43 is online now  
Old October 14th, 2017, 08:56 AM   #56
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2015
From: NYC
Posts: 153

Quote:
I think you misunderstood me. I did not suggest that those other groups did not have fractions. I was referring to a specific type of decomposition of a rational number called an Egyptian fraction. I only brought it up to show that, even thousands of years after the ancient Egyptian state came to an end, something that they came up with was still having an influence on mathematics.
Im only saying that Indian fractions would probably be the closest to what we use today.

Quote:
I did not say "I think that number theorists study Egyptian fractions" or "Number theorists probably study Egyptian fractions", or "Perhaps number theorists study Egyptian fractions". What I said was "number theorists study Egyptian fractions". Because some of them do.
Okay. I would like to say is, I don't know number theorists study Egyptian fractions though, since it's all ancient stuff, but some do. But I think number theorists study Babylonian and especially Indian fractions as well.
https://www.mff.cuni.cz/veda/konfere...8_Sykorova.pdf

Quote:
Yes most groups had calendars of their own. What I was getting at however is that the calendar used by most people around the world today, the Roman calendar, ultimately derives from the ancient Egyptian calendar.
What about Greek calendars. I heard they ultimately derive from Babylonians? Before, I was thinking that Roman calendars were based off of Greek ones.

Quote:
But the Egyptian influence did spread beyond the Nile Valley.

For example, this is a sarcophagus of a Phoenician king, Eshmunazar II:

https://www.louvrebible.org.uk/index...-King-of-Sidon

Sarcophagus of Eshmunazar II, king of Sidon | Louvre Museum | Paris

He chose to use an Egyptian style coffin. . .
Yes, they had influences outside Egypt, primarily Greece and the Levant, but its mixed with other influences from surrounding areas

Quote:
What is "more interesting" or "less interesting" can be very subjective. I think people are aware that there are pyramids in other places. That does not stop them from appreciating the Egyptian ones.
I wish the user Ranefer would understand this and not dismiss civilizations outside Egypt as "primitive" and Ancient Egypt as "the highest peak of human civilization"
Ricster4455 is offline  
Old October 14th, 2017, 08:59 AM   #57
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2017
From: Connecticut
Posts: 2,083

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranefer View Post
What a stupid topic.

Let me elaborate this from an egyptians pointof view.

Egypt shines through time while all others simply reflect. We are a star. In evry aspect.

One just has to look at Nofrets eyes

Click the image to open in full size.

Nothring from Mesopotamia or China comes even close to that skills.

Mesopotamian art looks primitive and simple and at no time reached the perfection of our art.

You mock the great Pyramides?

No artificial structure in the world carries more weight as the great pyramide. The great pyramide of Khufu is extremly complex. Each stone made for its exact position. The organisation behind its construction propably can only be rivalled by the moon program. There is no building in the world which comes even close in its organisation and perfection. Mesoamerican pyramides are small and without great structure. Nothing in China or India exists, that comes even close to the great Pyramides. During construction of the great pyramide of Khufu, no place on earth used more copper. The infrastructure needed to make this possible is beyond imagination.

You say Egypt had no great philosophical influence? Beside its gargantuan influence even to today, it forged the 3 world religions. Jewish religion has most likely its foundation on the Aten cult. Christianity is a hybrid between this and the old egyptian religion. Jesus, Mary are basicly 1:1 Isis and Osiris. With this it also laid the base for Islam. Our entire today worldview is based on this.

The first stone architecture comes from Egypt. The great pyramide of Djoser.

Those gargantuan things aside, the small art was on a unique level unreached by any other.

Show me anything from this era that reaches that:

Click the image to open in full size.

Click the image to open in full size.

Click the image to open in full size.

Before you mock my ancestors you should be able to show something that rivals them.

You praise stuff from mesopotamia like this?

Click the image to open in full size.

Let me tell you something. My people were sourounded by primitives. For example Mesopotamia and it deeply saddened them. For our ancestors Egypt was the only civilized place. It creates a feeling of isolation.

You ask what China or India did think about us? Is this important? Its as important as what Bonobos or a state of termites think about us.
Well early on your first statement is accurate IMO. We are not trying to say(at least I'm not) that Ancient Egypt wasn't the most advanced for it's time, only if it's underrated or overrated by historians.

In terms of religion, I'm going to have to say you're largely wrong there. The Aten cult is often cited as being the first major monotheistic religion, preceding Judaism as one, but that doesn't mean it was an influence. Judaism was one of the many regional religions in Canaan. Yahweh was not a sun disk, he was one of the members of the Canaanite pantheon which took more from Mesopotamia than Egypt. In terms of Christianity, Jesus does share similarities with that aspect of Egyptian mythology but it is far from alone. Also shares similarities with the Romulus story for example. I think the Christians took their mythology from several places of which Egypt was one.
Emperor of Wurttemburg 43 is online now  
Old October 14th, 2017, 09:16 AM   #58
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Jun 2017
From: al-Uqṣur
Posts: 429

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricster4455 View Post
Once again, not only are you projecting your own bias towards other civilizations in favor of Egypt, you are also highly ignorant and suffer from a serious case of superiority complex.

"looks like heavy case of down syndrome.". Now all your doing is insulting with childish remarks with a hint of racism/prejudice calling Chinese statues down syndrome looking and saying Sumerians looked primitive compared to Egypt.

"highest level a human society could reach at this time". By whose standards, your standard. Once again, art and architecture are highly subjective. Many people may find the pyramids to look unattractive. Many people might not like the look Egyptian statues and artifacts. Just because you may find Egyptian art more beautiful doesn't mean everyone find it beautiful.

And again, I have not insulted Egyptians. I simply found them to be overrated, always getting the attention of ancient civilizations compared to other civilizations. You on the other hand, are just throwing immature comments saying "Sumerian statues look the 3 year olds" and chinese statues look like "down syndrome", and saying Sumerians were primitive and Egyptians were the highest level a human society can reach, which only says a lot about your superiority complex. Since that's your opinion, I won't even bother with your comments.
We are the sun. You can praise us. That does not mean you are not allowed to praise also a small rather ugly moon from Uranus like Miranda. Not evryone can reach our greatness. Harsher environments for example create different possibilities.
Ranefer is offline  
Old October 14th, 2017, 09:35 AM   #59

Eryl Enki's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Apr 2017
From: Lemuria
Posts: 475
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranefer View Post
We are the sun. You can praise us. That does not mean you are not allowed to praise also a small rather ugly moon from Uranus like Miranda. Not evryone can reach our greatness. Harsher environments for example create different possibilities.
Ancient Egyptians have nothing to do with the Arab invaders of nowadays. Completely different people. It's a similar case to Macedonia. The Ancient Macedonians were Greek of some kind while the modern Macedonians are of a different origin.

What this guy pop a vein in his head.

Last edited by Eryl Enki; October 14th, 2017 at 09:39 AM.
Eryl Enki is offline  
Old October 14th, 2017, 09:38 AM   #60
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2015
From: NYC
Posts: 153

Quote:
Originally Posted by EmperoroftheBavarians43 View Post
1)I was talking about height, should have been more clear. The Pyramid of Giza and the Great Lighthouse of Alexandria were only topped in height by a handful of cathedrals into the industrial age(and many of these cathedrals were only taller because of their top spires, one or two of which were struck of by lightning).
I would think the lighthouse of Alexandria is an extension of Ancient Greek civilization, not of Ancient Egypt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EmperoroftheBavarians43 View Post
2)I agree with your point to an extent. What many Afrocentrists don't realize is that Egypt was exposed to both lighter skinned middle easterners and north africans and darker skinned nubians and sub saharan africans because there was desert dividing Egypt from the Middle East same as Africa. The consensus should be that about 10% of the Ancient population was African and the rest were different shades of lighter skinned people. Of course the real debate is about the kings and mummies not about your general population breakdown. But yes, I agree I have no desire to talk about this ever again, last few threads were more than enough. I did not mention this in my post but since you brought it up, I felt the need to address my position on this matter. King Tut is talked about independent of his race though, the mystery of how he died when it was still a mystery was quite a pop culture obsession. We do not have the tombs of many other pharaohs(though I was reading on vintage news they discovered the tomb from an old kingdom pharaoh recently). King Tut was also important because he was Akheaten's son although this importance of merit isn't talked about as much IME.
The thing about Afrocentrists is that they cherrypick a bunch of statues (usually on kings and queens...) with prominant SSA features or present studies on Egyptian skulls/cranial size and whatnot, to prove Ancient Egyptian's had anything to do with black Africans. Also, Afrocentrists almost always mentions Southern Egypt rather than Egypt as a whole (I can argue that since Southern Egyptians are mixed and that SSA genes tend to be more predominant, that is why some Egyptian statues and mummies look black lol). But scientists and anthropologists have done so many DNA and genetic analysis on Egyptian mummies, which proves that Ancient Egyptians were, as you say, 10% African (black SSA that is if i'm not mistaken), and predominantly North Africans and closer to the populations of the Near East than to the rest of Africa (except East Africa). Yet, when trying to argue this to an Afrocentrist and presenting well published articles on actual scientific research on Ancient Egyptian mummies, she downplays it saying "it's fake" and that "my sources don't cut it you have to get information from museums, published scientists and doctors." Click the image to open in full size.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EmperoroftheBavarians43 View Post
3)Agreed. Egypt isn't unimportant at all. My assessment is that Egypt was really the first civilization that was anything resembling an empire and was the most advanced until the Middle East started being united by the Assyrians, Persians etc at which point the formerly most advanced civilization on earth could no longer compete. Likewise in more modern times when the Middle East was fractured, or even during the decline of the Seleucid Empire you see Egypt being more competitive in the region.

Culturally, I think the fact that it was the most advanced civilization to exist at that time is the fascination. Egypt was great at record keeping, and maintaining evidence of their civilization(Pyramid's being the most tangible example) that this will naturally attract historians and is the reason why "Egyptology is a thing". Sumer was around largely the same time but like Ranefar said(not that I agree with most of what Ranefar says) these were less advanced city states and Sumer is important for what Middle Eastern civilization eventually became. Ancient Egypt was already that millennia earlier. So I think the civilization gets much credit for being first. Of the three basins of civilization, the Indus, Mespotamia and the Nile, Egypt was initially the most successful.
Yes, Egypt is definitely not unimportant. It was the most longlasting out of the other civilizations (though it is questionable how much of Ancient Egypt's civilization and culture was intact following the Roman and Islamic conquests.) They did managed to preserve many of their arts, artifacts and architecture, mainly due to the dry climate. I think Egypt was more successful, because they didn't suffer from things like climate change and invasion compared to the Mesopotamians and Indus valley people.

As for Ranefar, ignore her. All she has done is insult other cultures/civilizations with babyish remarks like sumerian statues are primitive and look like a 3 year old built them and that Chinese statues look like down syndrome. She projects her own bias/superiority complex and ignorance on other civilizations in favor of Egypt and claims that Egypt was the highest civilization a human can attain, or something like that, all because of a few fancy looking statues and artifacts.

I mean Ancient Egypt definitely does have very beautiful art, but I do not appreciate someone insulting other civilizations and dismissing them as "primitive looking" in contrast to one civilization.

Last edited by Ricster4455; October 14th, 2017 at 09:49 AM.
Ricster4455 is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Middle Eastern and African History

Tags
ancient, egypt, overrated



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How European was Ancient Greece and how African was Ancient Egypt? Light Ancient History 9 June 3rd, 2017 02:45 PM
can one argue that Ancient Egypt was a more impressive society than Ancient Rome RemGrade Ancient History 112 March 14th, 2017 09:20 PM
Why are Ancient Civilizations are so overrated here? FrancaisP General History 33 June 17th, 2015 07:32 PM
Ancient Egypt versus ancient China Thessalonian Speculative History 16 February 16th, 2012 11:09 AM
Is ancient Athens overrated? Thessalonian Ancient History 45 December 30th, 2011 07:45 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.