Ancient Sumeria (black or white)?
Anonymous

Phoenix, AZ

#767 Mar 14, 2013
Lol the question is ignorant in itself. Im sorry Africa is not black this is racial propaganda from years ago and has been brought back through liberal media. Black is not real it is a physical descriptor. There are 100's of shades and looks depending on the geography and latitudes they lived. For example the Egyptians long ago (for the most part geographically isolated) classified people around them by skin color long before the European racial classifications. To them the northern people were white, people south of them were black, people to the east were yellow, etc. Point is they were not black or white they were Sumerians and technically that is false. They were Homo sapien sapien that's it.
demhat

Wiesbaden, Germany

#769 Mar 15, 2013
Brainiac2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Green skin?
Olive skin reference to the skin color common for Near Eastern, North African and Southern European people.

http://photos2.demandstudios.com/DM-Resize/ph...

http://rinaz.net/images/2010/08/italians1.jpg
demhat

Wiesbaden, Germany

#770 Mar 15, 2013
African AE wrote:
<quoted text>None of the Middle Eastern people WERE EVER AFRICAN! Africans are only indigenous to Africa.
Thats not true at all, at some point they were Africans, but not Africans in modern sense more likely descend of a group similar to the Khoisan people, however according to scientists this was some several thousand years ago. Far too early that the Sumerians could have differed from present day Near Eastern people.

1 Korean American

“Ruling over East of Vegas(EOV)”

Level 2

Since: Dec 12

United States

#771 Apr 12, 2013
Kobena wrote:
Some say that Sumeria predates Egypt. Now I'd like to know if Sumeria was African or 'Caucasian'.
the sumerians were asian.
their language is similiar to mongolian and korean. also there is ancient songs in korean arirang that asks where did our sumerian brothers go? right after they left to settle in mesopotamia.
after they arrived it seems they mixed with the local surrounding peoples.
like abraham says... race doesnt matter

1 Korean American

“Ruling over East of Vegas(EOV)”

Level 2

Since: Dec 12

United States

#772 Apr 12, 2013
sumerian = altaic
altaic = mongol korean japanese
when babylonians invaded sumer... a lot of sumerians escaped to southern india. dravidians accepted them as brothers. thus the sumerian dravidian connection
abraham the most famous sumerian... clearly wished for race to not matter so u guys should accept that.
we are all sumerian via the 12 tribes of israel

1 Korean American

“Ruling over East of Vegas(EOV)”

Level 2

Since: Dec 12

United States

#773 Apr 12, 2013
Russian wrote:
I am fine with any origin or race they were. The matter of fact is that all they had was given to them - alphabet, writing, plough, even clothing and they referred to themselves as a slave species of the skydogs, had no understanding of the term freedom and lived in systematic slavery. The whole society then was a society of lords and slaves.
Skygods taught them everything from A to Z and they were genetically created to mine gold (perhaps the earlier race of biorobots)- study their religion.
How after all this can you attribute their advancement to them?
Yeah, carry on this idiotic racist slurr. The "winner race" now becomes "the race of dummies"!
Anyone wants to win? LOLOLOL.
my russian friend. u understand.
the white and blacks in america are strange. they have racial baggage that poisons the world.
Max

Temecula, CA

#774 May 7, 2013
William wrote:
Is the civilizaton gone. Was it destroyed. If so they were black for sure.
Do you know where the Caucasus mountains are? it's south of Russia and north of Iraq, it's unsure who the Sumerians were but they were least likely black. Caucasians descended from the Caucasus mountains and migrated their way up and down and a lot stayed in caucasus of course, Africans descended from Africa and Australia, Africa wasn't even involved with Sumeria, Egypt was their own version of Sumeria. They say that the Anunnaki had white hair and red eyes, these were probably how the first humans looked, I watched a video on youtube about it, anyway I'm not trying to go against your beliefs, think what you want, I just figured that I might as well post the most possible truth and that truth is that the Sumerians were probably a mix of Caucasian and Semite

1 Korean American

“Ruling over East of Vegas(EOV)”

Level 2

Since: Dec 12

Seoul, Korea

#775 May 7, 2013
Max wrote:
<quoted text>Do you know where the Caucasus mountains are? it's south of Russia and north of Iraq, it's unsure who the Sumerians were but they were least likely black. Caucasians descended from the Caucasus mountains and migrated their way up and down and a lot stayed in caucasus of course, Africans descended from Africa and Australia, Africa wasn't even involved with Sumeria, Egypt was their own version of Sumeria. They say that the Anunnaki had white hair and red eyes, these were probably how the first humans looked, I watched a video on youtube about it, anyway I'm not trying to go against your beliefs, think what you want, I just figured that I might as well post the most possible truth and that truth is that the Sumerians were probably a mix of Caucasian and Semite
By the time of Babylon, it was likely that Sumerians were Semitic.

But when they first moved to Sumer, they called themselves "black headed people from the east" and spoke an Asian language. There is also songs in Korean fables that speak of Sumerians from thousands of years ago leaving Lake Baikal in Siberia.

Most likely Sumerians were originally Asian, and later became Semitic as they mixed with the local population. Most top Sumerologists believe the same.

1 Korean American

“Ruling over East of Vegas(EOV)”

Level 2

Since: Dec 12

Seoul, Korea

#776 May 7, 2013
Sorry to rain on your guy's race fest. But yes, original Sumerians were most likley Asian. Just like Attila the Hun was Asian.

All these things are hidden in history for some reason. The "weak Asian man" is a myth perpetrated by Hollywood that discriminates against Asian Americans. It is a weakness for America to continue believing that.
mik

Burton-on-trent, UK

#777 Jun 9, 2013
sag-giga means black haired not black headed! More afrocentric propaganda!
Waxxstaxx

Bellflower, CA

#778 Jun 25, 2013
The ancient Sumerians were definitely of African origins. They were a cushitic people. Africans and people of African origins---from Africa, present day Middle-East, and India were called Ethiopians. Those in Africa, Israel, Canaan, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Palestine, Iraq, etc.---mostly with curly hairs---were called western Ethiopians. Those in India were called eastern Ethiopians. Over the past 300-500 years or so, there has been a mad and hostile drive to systematically write Africa and its people out of history. Some so-called intellectuals talk as if all black people are Africans with only curly hairs. People of African ancestry, straight and curly hairs, are found in and out of Africa. It was the same way even back in antiquity. Africans also come in assorted hues of color, too. Why some people are so determined to erase Africa from world history is beyond my comprehension. The Sumerians were not white people and no amout of silly spins can alter that fact. Please click on these links for real photos and relevant literature regarding the ancient Sumerians:

1. The Sumerians and who they were: http://bafsudralam.blogspot.com/2010/12/sumer...

2. The Sumerians and how they looked:
http://warlockasylum.wordpress.com/2009/12/09...

3. http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancien...

4. http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancien...

1 Korean American

“Ruling over East of Vegas(EOV)”

Level 2

Since: Dec 12

Seoul, Korea

#779 Jun 25, 2013
Waxxstaxx wrote:
The ancient Sumerians were definitely of African origins. They were a cushitic people. Africans and people of African origins---from Africa, present day Middle-East, and India were called Ethiopians. Those in Africa, Israel, Canaan, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Palestine, Iraq, etc.---mostly with curly hairs---were called western Ethiopians. Those in India were called eastern Ethiopians. Over the past 300-500 years or so, there has been a mad and hostile drive to systematically write Africa and its people out of history. Some so-called intellectuals talk as if all black people are Africans with only curly hairs. People of African ancestry, straight and curly hairs, are found in and out of Africa. It was the same way even back in antiquity. Africans also come in assorted hues of color, too. Why some people are so determined to erase Africa from world history is beyond my comprehension. The Sumerians were not white people and no amout of silly spins can alter that fact. Please click on these links for real photos and relevant literature regarding the ancient Sumerians:
1. The Sumerians and who they were: http://bafsudralam.blogspot.com/2010/12/sumer...
2. The Sumerians and how they looked:
http://warlockasylum.wordpress.com/2009/12/09...
3. http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancien...
4. http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancien...
Sumerians were DEFINITELY not white.

They were either black or asian. most likely, sumeria and egypt were good friends at the time and shared people and technology, so it didn't matter.

1 Korean American

“Ruling over East of Vegas(EOV)”

Level 2

Since: Dec 12

Seoul, Korea

#780 Jun 25, 2013
BTW, this excerpt:

"To support this idea Oppert pointed out that typological features between Sumerian and Altaic languages existed. This feature was agglutination.

The problem with identifying the Sumerians as descendants (i.e. ancestors) from contemporary Turanian speakers resulted from the fact that Sumerian and the Turkish languages are not genetically related"

Original turks used to look Asian. They headed west, and started to mix with their new territories until they look the way they do today.

Sumerians, were most likely a brother tribe to the ORIGINAL turks. Turks, Mongols, Huns, etc.... were all Central Asian nomadic steppe warriors.

Once turks mixed with their surroundings, it was only the legacy and history that they carried.

this is why many altaic languages are not genetically related if they moved west. they mixed with the locals, and formed the core center of a new group.
Waxxstaxx

Bellflower, CA

#781 Jun 25, 2013
The ancient Sumerians were unrelated to Turks.
THE SUMERIANS
We have to remember that the Sumerians called themselves the Sag-giga meaning the “black-headed ones.” However, it has become popular for some occultist and anthropologists to use artifacts from the “Mesopotamian period” in describing the Sumerian Civilization. You would think that racism would NOT find its way into such studies as the occult, but on some levels it has. I spoke about this briefly in our discussion about the ARRA Sign:
http://warlockasylum.wordpress.com/arra-sign/
The term Aryan is derived from the Sanskrit term arya meaning “noble” or “spiritual.” This term had nothing to due with physical characteristics as it is often misunderstood to represent. The following references are useful in further illustrating this point;
“(History of Ethiopia, Vol. I., Preface, by Sir E. A. Wallis Budge.) In addition Budge notes that,“Homer and Herodotus call all the peoples of the Sudan, Egypt, Arabia, Palestine and Western Asia and India Ethiopians.”(Ibid., p. 2.) Herodotus wrote in his celebrated History that both the Western Ethiopians, who lived in Africa, and the Eastern Ethiopians who dwelled in India, were black in complexion, but that the Africans had curly hair, while the Indians were straight-haired.”
“Before the Chaldean rule in Mesopotamia, there were the empires of the Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians and Assyrians. The earliest civilization of Mesopotamia was that of the Sumerians. They are designated in the Assyrio-Babylonian inscriptions as the black-heads or black-faced people, and they are shown on the monuments as beardless and with shaven heads. This easily distinguishes them from the Semitic Babylonians, who are shown with beards and long hair. From the myths and traditions of the Babylonians we learn that their culture came originally from the south. Sir Henry Rawlinson concluded from this and other evidence that the first civilized inhabitants of Sumer and Akkad were immigrants from the African Ethiopia. John D. Baldwin, the American Orientalist, on the other hand, claims that since ancient Arabia was also known as Ethiopia, they could have just as well come from that country.
These theories are rejected by Dr. II. R. Hall, of the Dept. Of Egyptian & Assyrian Antiquities of the British Museum, who contends that Mesopotamia was civilized by a migration from India?“The ethnic type of the Sumerians, so strongly marked in their statues and reliefs,” says Dr. Hall,“was as different from those of the races which surrounded them as was their language from those of the Semites, Aryans, or others; they were decidedly Indian in type. The face-type of the average Indian of today is no doubt much the same as that of his Dravidian race ancestors thousands of years ago.… And it is to this Dravidian ethnic type of India that the ancient Sumerian bears most resemblance, so far as we can judge from his monuments.
And it is by no means improbable that the Sumerians were an Indian race which passed, certainly by land, perhaps also by sea, through Persia to the valley of the Two Rivers. It was in the Indian home (perhaps the Indus valley) that we suppose for them that their culture developed.… On the way they left the seeds of their culture in Elam.… There is little doubt that India must have been one of the earliest centers of human civilization, and it seems natural to suppose that the strange un-Semitic, un-Aryan people who came from the East to civilize the West were of Indian origin, especially when we see with our own eyes how very Indian the Sumerians were in type.”(The Ancient History of the Near East, pp. 173–174, London, 1916.)”
Anonymous

Bellflower, CA

#782 Jun 25, 2013
THE ANCIENT SUMERIANS WERE OF AFRICAN ORIGINS !!

Another interesting point to consider is how modern-day scholars try to hide the identity of these people by using images and sculptures from other periods to describe the whole history of Ancient Sumeria. An example of this can be seen by looking at the history of the United States. It has been recorded and well documented that when the Europeans came to America, there were already an existing people here.

If we were to describe these people as Americans it would not be an accurate description, since these people did not call themselves American. Now imagine living 3,000 years into the future and you are doing research about the history of America, and the ancient Americans are described as having European features.

British relics are discovered along the coast of South Carolina, but the question remains; who were the original people of the Americas? Many scholars would point to them as being British and what we call Native American history today, would be represented by the face of U.S. Presidents. This is the same trick that modern-day scholars use to hide the characteristics of the people who inhabited many ancient lands, Ancient Sumeria included.

Since the people of Ancient Sumeria were similar in physical type, class distinctions were made. Later, invading peoples adopted only the most benevolent terms to describe themselves by, and recreated the gods of these people in their own image.

“The ancient gods of India are shown with Ethiopian crowns on their heads. According to the Old Testament, Moses first met Jehovah during his sojourn among the Midianites, who were an Ethiopian tribe. We learn from Hellenic tradition that Zeus, king of the Grecian gods, so cherished the friendship of the Ethiopians that he traveled to their country twice a year to attend banquets.“All the gods and goddesses of Greece were black,” asserts Sir Godfrey Higgins,“at least this was the case with Jupiter, Baccus, Hercules, Apollo, Ammon. The goddesses Benum, Isis, Hecate, Diana, Juno, Metis, Ceres, Cybele were black.”(Anacalypsis, Vol. I, Book IV, Chap. I.)”

Since there are many people iin the field of anthropology and occult studies who would like to hide the imagery of some of the most ancient depictions of the Sumerian and Elamite civilizations, we will provide these as seen below:

http://warlockasylum.wordpress.com/2009/12/09...
Anonymous

Bellflower, CA

#783 Jun 25, 2013
THE ANCIENT SUMERIANS WERE AFRICANS !!

Ancient African Writing Systems and Knowledge
Blog discussing the ancient writing systems created by Black/African people in ancient times throughout the world.

Dr. Clyde Winters Sunday, December 12, 2010

The Sumerians and Akkadians were Blacks

Controversy surrounding the Kushite/African/Black origins of the Elamites, Sumerians, Akkadians and “Assyrians” is simple and yet complicated. It involves both the racism exhibited toward the African slaves in the Western Hemisphere and Africans generally which led to the idea that Africans had no history; and the need of Julius Oppert to make Semites white, to accommodate the “white” ancestry of European Jews.

To understand this dichotomy we have to look at the history of scholarship surrounding the rise of Sumero-Akkadian studies. The study of the Sumerians, Akkadians, Assyrians and Elamites began with the decipherment of the cuneiform script by Henry Rawlinson (1851). Henry Rawlinson (1810-1895) had spent most of his career in the Orient. This appears to have given him an open mind in regards to history. He recognized the Ancient Model of History, the idea that civilization was founded by the Kushite or Hamitic people of the Bible.

As result, Rawlinson was surprised during his research to discover that the founders of the Mesopotamian civilization were of Kushite (Cushite) origin. He made it clear that the Semitic speakers of Akkad and the non-Semitic speakers of Sumer were both Black or Negro people who called themselves sag-gig-ga “Black Heads”. In Rawlinson’s day the (agglutinative Turanian speaking) Sumerian people were recognized as Akkadian or Chaldean, while the Semitic speaking blacks were called Assyrians.

Rawlinson identified these Akkadians as Turanian or Scythic people. But he made it clear that these ancient Scythic or Turanian speaking people were Kushites or Blacks.
A major supporter of Rawlinson was Edward Hincks (1792-1866). Hincks continued Rawlinson’s work and identified the ancient group as Chaldeans, and also called them Turanian speakers. Hincks, though, never discussed their ethnic origin.

A late comer to the study of the Sumerians and the Akkadians was Julius Oppert (1825-1905). Oppert was a German born of Jewish parents. He made it clear that the Chaldean and Akkadian people spoke different languages. He noted that the original founders of Mesopotamia civilization called themselves Ki-en-gi “land of the true lords”(Kang, Tr. "predecessors, pra-fathers", later also Kangars). It was the Semitic speakers who called themselves Akkadians.

Assyrians called the Ki-en-gi people Sumiritu “the sacred language”. Oppert popularized the Assyrian name Sumer, for the original founders of the civilization. Thus we have today the Akkadians and Sumerians of ancient Mesopotamia.

http://bafsudralam.blogspot.com/2010/12/sumer...
Anonymous

Bellflower, CA

#784 Jun 25, 2013
Dr. Clyde Winters

THE ANCIENT SUMERIANS WERE AFRICANS !!

Oppert began to popularize the idea that the Sumerians were related to the contemporary Altaic and Turanian speaking people, e.g., Turks and Magyar (Hungarian) speaking people. He made it clear that the Akkadians were Semites like himself (however, these Semitic people were using an agglutinative language, instead of a flexive Semitic language). To support this idea Oppert pointed out that typological features between Sumerian and Altaic languages existed. This feature was agglutination.

The problem with identifying the Sumerians as descendants (i.e. ancestors) from contemporary Turanian speakers resulted from the fact that Sumerian and the Turkish languages are not genetically related (however, the quantity of genetically related words constitutes a significant portion of Sumerian vocabulary). As a result Oppert began to criticize the work of Hincks (who was dead at the time) in relation to the identification of the Sumerian people as Turanian following the research of Rawlinson.

Oppert knew Rawlinson had used African languages to decipher cuneiform writing. But he did not compare the Sumerian to African languages, probably, due to the fact that he knew they were related given Rawlinson’s earlier research.

It is strange to some observers that Oppert never criticized Rawlinson who had proposed the Turanian origin of the Ki-en-gi (Sumerians, Kangars). But this was not strange at all. Oppert did not attack Rawlinson who was still alive at the time because he knew that Rawlinson said the Sumerians were the original Scythic and Turanian people he called Kushites.

Moreover, Rawlinson made it clear that both the Akkadians and Sumerians were Blacks. For Oppert to have debated this issue with Rawlinson, who deciphered the cuneiform script, would have meant that he would have had to accept the fact that Semites were Black. There was no way Oppert would have wanted to acknowledge his African heritage, given the Anti-Semitism experienced by Jews living in Europe.

http://bafsudralam.blogspot.com/2010/12/sumer...
Anonymous

Bellflower, CA

#785 Jun 25, 2013
Dr. CLYDE WINTERS

THE ANCIENT SUMERIANS WERE AFRICANS !!

Although Oppert successfully hid the recognition that the Akkadians and the Sumerians both referred to themselves as sag-gig-ga “black heads”, some researchers were unable to follow the status quo and ignore this reality. For example, Francois Lenormant (1837-1883) made it clear, following the research of Rawlinson, that the Elamite and Sumerians spoke genetically related languages. This idea was hard to reconcile with the depiction of people on the Persian monuments, especially the Behistun monument, which depicted Negroes (with curly hair and beards) representing the Assyrians, Jews and Elamites who ruled the area.

As a result, Oppert began the myth that the Sumerian languages was isolated from other languages spoken in the world even though it shared typological features with the Altaic languages. Oppert taught Akkadian-Sumerian in many of the leading Universities in France and Germany. Many of his students soon began to dominate the Academe, or held chairs in Sumerian and Akkadian studies, these researchers continued to perpetuate the (generally, contained only inside the Euro-centric academic school) myth that the Elamite and Sumerian languages were not related.

There was no way to keep from researchers who read the original Sumerian, Akkadian and Assyrian text that these people recognized that they were ethnically Blacks. This fact was made clear by Albert Terrien de LaCouperie (1845-1894). Born in France, de LaCouperie was a well known linguist and China expert. Although native of France, most of his writings are in English. In the journal he published called the Babylonian and Oriental Record, he outlined many aspects of ancient history.

In these pages he made it clear that the Sumerians, Akkadians and even the Assyrians who called themselves salmat kakkadi "black headed people”, were all Blacks of Kushite origin. Even though de LaCouperie taught at the University of London, the prestige of Oppert, and the fact that the main centers for Sumero-Akkadian studies in France and Germany were founded by Oppert and or his students, led to researchers ignoring the evidence that the Sumerians, Akkadians, and Assyrians were Black.

In summary, the cuneiform evidence makes it clear that the Sumerians, Akkadians, and Assyrians recognized themselves as Negroes:“black heads”. This fact was supported by the statues of Gudea, the Akkadians and Assyrians. Plus the Behistun monument made it clear that the Elamites were also Blacks.

The textual evidence also makes it clear that Oppert began the discussion of a typological relationship between Sumerian and Turkic languages (after Rawlinson identified the Sumerians-Akkadians as Turanian or Scythic people). He also manufactured the idea that the Semites of Mesopotamia and Iran, the Assyrians and Akkadians were “whites”, like himself (you can find a long and winding blurb on thCaucasoidness/Europeoidness of the N.Africans in most of the English-language popular materials.

But anybody who saw an Egyptian mummy, and a mummy of a tanned white-skinned corps, can tell that the Hamitic Egyptiand were not lily-white at all, and had a curly hair). Due to this brain washing, and whitening out of Blacks in history, many people today can look at depictions of Assyrians, Achamenians, and Akkadians and fail to see the Negro origin of these people.

To make the Sumerians “white”, the textbooks print pictures of artifacts dating to the Gutian rule of Lagash, to pass them off as the true originators of Sumerian civilization. No Gutian rulers of Lagash are recognized in the Sumerian King List.

http://bafsudralam.blogspot.com/2010/12/sumer...

1 Korean American

“Ruling over East of Vegas(EOV)”

Level 2

Since: Dec 12

Seoul, Korea

#786 Jun 25, 2013
^ sumerian was an altaic language dood. Mongols koreans turkish are altaic languages.

Sumerians were not caucasian. All linguistic evidence points towards mongolian.

Level 2

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#788 Jul 8, 2013
1 Korean American wrote:
^ sumerian was an altaic language dood. Mongols koreans turkish are altaic languages.
Sumerians were not caucasian. All linguistic evidence points towards mongolian.
I hate to burst your bubble but it's a know fact that the people of northern India had light skin, Caucasian features, different eye colors, hair colors and identical skulls to Caucasians. The Sumerians came from northern India. Many Sumerian statues have blue eyes and Caucasian features.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

African-American Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Stacey Dash and white guys 2 min Mick 15
News Dueling groups to rally at Confederate landmark 4 min True Judgement 2,142
is it POSSIBLE to find a beautiful black woman ... 7 min White and Forever 2
the moors were black africans not arabs!!! (Jun '08) 8 min KiloEcho 46,649
WARNING ! Loser Whiteys Deleted Thread: " Engli... 11 min T-BOS 7
Black Failure 12 min The Reality 32
Marcus: Would Selena Gomez date me? 14 min Jax 26
I need proof that the Ancient Egyptians Were No... (Oct '07) 2 hr thetruth 32,741
Eurafrica 3 hr enoch powell 101
Hebrew Israelite (Feb '11) 5 hr Moses 136,185
More from around the web