Makheru Bradley said...
The first recorded homosexual couple in history is commonly regarded as Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum, an Egyptian male couple, who lived around the 2400 BCE. -- CasperCasper makes this statement as if he’s referring to J. Edgar Hoover and Clyde Tolson, when in reality he has no historical evidence to prove his statement.
I have no proof that homosexuality did or did not exist in Ancient KMT, and as far as I’m concerned it does not matter. Was it a major feature of Kemetic culture, as it was in Ancient Greece? Absolutely not! Clearly the architects of Kemetic spirituality identified the practice of homosexuality as undesirable which is indicated by their declarations of virtue.
The 27th of the “42 Confessions of Innocence” states: “Hail Maat, I have not done iniquity, neither have I lain with man.”
I am concerned with historical accuracy, because the character of Afrikan people is always under assault. In that context Casper is running the Greg Reeder line on this issue which is both a gross demonstration of fragmentation and a gross misunderstanding of the complexities of KMT culture.
First of all as regards the Reeder line, Professor John Baines points out, "The gay-couple idea is essentially derived from imposing modern preoccupations on ancient materials and not attending to the cultural context."
As regards fragmentation and understanding Kemetic culture Alan Winston points out: “However, others have speculated as to their relationship, even suggesting that they may have been gay companions, though this hardly seems likely given the depictions of their wives and family within the tomb.”
The fragmentizers and those with ulterior politico-cultural objectives conveniently ignore or dismiss the family scenes inside the burial tomb.
For the record Niankhkhnum and his wife Khentkaus had three sons and three daughters.
Khnumhotep and his wife Khenut had five sons and one daughter.
Alan Winston identifies some of the other scenes inside the tomb:
[On the north wall, the brothers are shown once again in a scene that argues against the two men having an alternate relationship. Here, we find Khnumhotep and a boy describes as his son, Ptahshepses on the right, and on the left, Niankhkhnum with his son.
On the inner lintel the owners are shown with men bringing cattle for their inspection. The wall on the left-hand side of the doorway (east) shows Khnumhotep with his wife, Khenut, who was 'Prophetess of Hathor, Mistress of the Sycamore'. On the right (west) Niankhkhnum is seen with his wife Khentkaus, of the same title. On the south wall we also find a depiction of the deceased standing with their sons.]
Casper if you think that you can refute any of this, have at it.
3 comments:
Here we read both Casper and Bradley, whether consciously or unconconsciously, arguing for the centrality of homosexuality in our respective early civilizations. The implication is clear. While we may squabble on the degree to which homosexuality played a role in early civilization, ITS VERY EXISTENCE since our beginnings is evidence of its normalcy. Casper and Bradley are accessories to this false and destructive idea. The reality is that if our ancient ancestors did accept and normalize homosexuality IT WAS BECAUSE they were very primitive sexually.
And very primitive spiritually...
Here we read both Casper and Bradley, whether consciously or unconsciously, arguing for the centrality of homosexuality in our respective early civilizations. –Thor-Child
Arguing for the CENTRALITY of homosexuality in our respective early civilizations???? I’m trying hard to imagine the degree of delusional thinking and historical ignorance that would lead one to make such a statement.
The implication is clear. While we may squabble on the degree to which homosexuality played a role in early civilization, ITS VERY EXISTENCE since our beginnings is evidence of its normalcy. Casper and Bradley are accessories to this false and destructive idea. – Thor-Child
“Accessories to this false and destructive idea?” I can’t speak for Casper, but as far as Bradley is concerned this is a statement of slanderous propaganda which reflects deep-seated flaws in the reading comprehension of Thor-Child.
[The research base shows that reading is a "transaction" in which the reader brings purposes and life experiences to bear to converse with the text. This meeting of the reader and the text results in the meaning that is comprehension. Comprehension always attends to what is coded or written in the text, but it also depends upon the reader's background experiences, purposes, feelings, and needs of the moment.]
The reality is that if our ancient ancestors did accept and normalize homosexuality IT WAS BECAUSE they were very primitive sexually. And very primitive spiritually... Thor-Child
“Our ancient ancestors?” Are you saying that you are an Afrikan who has undergone extensive morphological changes?
It’s true “Your Ancestors” did normalize homosexuality (and pederasty for that matter) in Ancient Greece. If you want to call “Your Ancestors” very primitive sexually and spiritually that’s your prerogative.
As regards KMT, it’s absolutely guaranteed that Thor-Child knows nothing about the axiology, eschatology, and spirituality of antiquarian Nile Valley Afrikans.
Infantile Disorder + Imbecilic Incantations = Thor-Child, Yurugu in the flesh.
Post a Comment