If you are asking me my opinion of what Herodotus was thinking, I would say this:
What we call “Africa” today, was called “Libya” at the time of Herodotus.
He claimed that the Nile River flowed thru Libya into Egypt. Therefore, the Northern Libyans were basically native white Africans and the Southern Ethiopians were basically native black Africans. (But not Kushites)
Mizriam (Egypt) as being the delta and Kush being Libya proper.
“But due to N-tier architecture each group was given a unique color that related to something about them, yet colors were also a multi-tier architecture. Client architecture is executed by more than one distinct racial agent, locality or technology.”
A white African could be red and a black African could be brown.
1. Ron = Does he consider that Egypt was settled in the N. by Libyans and in its southern part by Ethiopians?
(Yes and No because the river was really mixed up.)
2. Ron = Do we recognize that the Greek and Phoenician influence in the area was mostly confined to the coastal areas of both because their very existence there as well as their trading backgrounds.
(OK, but you also sail up the river too!) (Look at the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers)
3. Ron = Maybe we should all just try and forget anything that is claimed to be from the mouths of Herodotus and Manetheo?
4. Ron = Move all of the descriptions up to the time of Alexander or better yet to the Middle Ages, and later, and certain things might become more clear?
5. Ron = After all; "most of these cared little then, and indeed care little now, for the king of the Medes."
(By Medes, he meant the Persians or the sons of Cyrus).
In our ever increasing evolution and considering all the wonderful recourses (trick word) in Africa; why has not the “Greatest Military” force on Earth not seen fit exploited this “Gold Mine”?
Oops...I let out a secret!
Responses To This Message
(There are no responses to this message.)
© Charles N. Pope, US Library of Congress. All rights reserved.