Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Did ancient Huaxia ever have contact w/ Sumerians?


  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#1 kaixin

kaixin

    State Undersecretary (Shangshu Lang 尚书郎)

  • CHF Rookie Member
  • 618 posts

Posted 02 July 2005 - 01:41 PM

I don't buy into Western theory that Sumerians were Caucasoids. They may have been a transitional race between Mongoloids/Caucasoids. I believe most people of the Middle East were of this kind of race before the Aryan invasions.

Did the Chinese ever had contact with Sumerians? The horse chariots look similar and some say there were similar pottery designs too.

#2 DaMo

DaMo

    Prime Minister (Situ/Chengxiang 司徒/丞相)

  • Super Moderator
  • 1,755 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dubai
  • Interests:History, Philosophy, Law, Political Science, InfoTech
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Asian History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Prehistory, Early Imperial, Samguk

Posted 03 July 2005 - 10:08 AM

The Sumerians were Middle Eastern Caucasoids, as their statues clearly attest.

Now that you mention it, the 19th century French scholar Terrien LaCouperie claimed that the original ancestors of the Chinese migrated from Elam in the Middle East to the Yellow River, based on what he decided was a linguistic connection to Akkadian.
"If an archeologist calls something a finial, he usually he has no idea what it is"
"We Vandals get blamed for stuff that was actually done by some errant Lombard or Visigoth"
"Nationalism is much about forgetting as it is about remembering"

China historical vacation 2011 photos and videos: http://www.chinahist...na-trip-photos/

#3 The Bear's

The Bear's

    County Magistrate (Xianling 县令)

  • CHF Rookie Member
  • 6 posts

Posted 12 July 2005 - 12:51 PM

Huangdi tribe is the ancestor of Han-Chinese and Huangdi came from the western.
According to ancient history book, the Huangdi (黃帝) tribe came from Mount Kunlun(昆侖). But today no one exactly know where the Mount Kunlun is. Some scholar believe, the Mount Kunlun lie in western asia. In western asia myth, we can find a famous mountain very similar with Kunlun. That mountain called Khursag Kurkura, means mountain of all land...

Edited by The Bear's, 12 July 2005 - 01:01 PM.


#4 Tibet Libre

Tibet Libre

    Grand Marshal (Da Sima/Taiwei 大司马/太尉)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 1,428 posts
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History

Posted 12 July 2005 - 01:40 PM

I don't buy into Western theory that Sumerians were Caucasoids. 



What does "Caucasoid" mean anyway? This ridiculous term is beginning to get on my nerve.

As far as I know the Sumerian are neither of Semitic nor of Indo-European origin.

#5 DomaHwang

DomaHwang

    Commissioner (Shi Chijie 使持节)

  • CHF Rookie Member
  • 74 posts

Posted 13 July 2005 - 04:59 PM

What does "Caucasoid" mean anyway? This ridiculous term is beginning to get on my nerve.

As far as I know the Sumerian are neither of Semitic nor of Indo-European origin.

View Post

I suppose Caucasoid is used almost equivalently to Indo-European or broad term Semitic (Sem<> Jews here), well english is not my native so...anyway.

#6 DomaHwang

DomaHwang

    Commissioner (Shi Chijie 使持节)

  • CHF Rookie Member
  • 74 posts

Posted 13 July 2005 - 05:06 PM

The Sumerians were Middle Eastern Caucasoids, as their statues clearly attest.

Now that you mention it, the 19th century French scholar Terrien LaCouperie claimed that the original ancestors of the Chinese migrated from Elam in the Middle East to the Yellow River, based on what he decided was a linguistic connection to Akkadian.

View Post

Well Sumerian is not exactly Causasoid style, if you look at the head of statue - not long head - short skull wide as far as I remember?.

#7 Grand Genealogist

Grand Genealogist

    Commissioner (Shi Chijie 使持节)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 75 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Omaha, Nebraska, USA
  • Interests:Genealogy, History, Art History, Architectural History, Music History, Military History, Religious History, Economic History, History of Philosophy, Political History, Social History, Judaïsm, Classics, Poëtry, Prosopography, Geography, Murder Mysteries, Fantasy, Sci. Fi.
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Genealogy, Other Histories, (Ancient & Medieval)

Posted 18 July 2005 - 12:47 AM

I suppose Caucasoid is used almost equivalently to Indo-European or broad term Semitic (Sem<> Jews here), well english is not my native so...anyway.

View Post

'Caucasoid' can mean from the Caucasus Mountains, OR it can mean 'White'. It's a PC term, like 'African-American' for 'Black'. PC terms are not designed with convenience in mind, nor, usually, with accuracy. The Indo-Europeans are 'White', as are the Semites, (which race includes not only Jews, but Arabs, Assyrians, Pheonicians, Arameans and Amharic, [Etiopians]), and the Hamites, (Berbers, Egyptians, etc.).

The Sumerians' heads come closest to the 'Whites'', but are rounder. They may well be a transitional race, originating about the time of differentiation. Many of the statuary heads also portray the epicanthic fold of the 'Mongoloid', or 'Yellow' race(s), or whatever term one uses.

The ancient Mesopotamians did not have chariots. That was an inovation of the 'Aryans''. One of those attributed to them which they actually did develop. The chariot, introduced to Egypt by the 'Hyksos', is a reason why some think that the Hyksos had, at least some, Aryan components.

The Tocharians, (Yuëh Ji[sp.?]), were Aryan, and it has been suggested that they brought ancestor worship/veneration to China. I think that this last is too prevalent and wide-spread a phenomenon to say that the Indo-Europeans brought it/taught it to 'the Middle Kingdom'.
Grand Genealogist Oriental Royalty Ancient Genealogy

'The evil that men do lives after them,
The good is oft interréd with their bones’
- Wm. Shakespeare, Julius Cæsar


#8 DaMo

DaMo

    Prime Minister (Situ/Chengxiang 司徒/丞相)

  • Super Moderator
  • 1,755 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dubai
  • Interests:History, Philosophy, Law, Political Science, InfoTech
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Asian History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Prehistory, Early Imperial, Samguk

Posted 18 July 2005 - 02:44 AM

The Tocharians, (Yuëh Ji[sp.?]), were Aryan, and it has been suggested that they brought ancestor worship/veneration to China.

View Post

Suggested by whom? I've never heard of this one before.
"If an archeologist calls something a finial, he usually he has no idea what it is"
"We Vandals get blamed for stuff that was actually done by some errant Lombard or Visigoth"
"Nationalism is much about forgetting as it is about remembering"

China historical vacation 2011 photos and videos: http://www.chinahist...na-trip-photos/

#9 Grand Genealogist

Grand Genealogist

    Commissioner (Shi Chijie 使持节)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 75 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Omaha, Nebraska, USA
  • Interests:Genealogy, History, Art History, Architectural History, Music History, Military History, Religious History, Economic History, History of Philosophy, Political History, Social History, Judaïsm, Classics, Poëtry, Prosopography, Geography, Murder Mysteries, Fantasy, Sci. Fi.
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Genealogy, Other Histories, (Ancient & Medieval)

Posted 18 July 2005 - 04:14 AM

Suggested by whom? I've never heard of this one before.

View Post

If I remeber correctly, I first encountered it in C. D. Darlington's Evolution of Man & Society. Since, (as I mentioned), didn't/don't particularly believe it, I didn't make much note of this, nor of the sources whom he cites.
Grand Genealogist Oriental Royalty Ancient Genealogy

'The evil that men do lives after them,
The good is oft interréd with their bones’
- Wm. Shakespeare, Julius Cæsar


#10 somechineseperson

somechineseperson

    Prime Minister (Situ/Chengxiang 司徒/丞相)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 1,650 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Languages spoken:Mandarin Chinese, English
  • Ethnic Groups or Race:Han Chinese (Mainland Chinese)
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese Philosophy
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Chinese Philosophy, Marxism, Religious Philosophy (including Buddhism and Christianity), Chinese History, General World History, History and Philosophy of Science

Posted 21 September 2005 - 05:59 AM

The Tocharians, (Yuëh Ji[sp.?]), were Aryan, and it has been suggested that they brought ancestor worship/veneration to China.

Tocharian = To-huo-luo 吐火罗

Yueh Zhi = 月氏

Ancestor veneration is as old as the Chinese nation and civilisation itself. Is there any reason to suggest that it came from the outside?

But today no one exactly know where the Mount Kunlun is

AFAIK Mount Kunlun is the mountain range on the borders between Xinjiang (Chinese Turkestan) and Tibet.

Edited by somechineseperson, 21 September 2005 - 08:47 AM.


#11 moobie

moobie

    Imperial Inspector (Jianyushi 监御使)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 183 posts
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    None

Posted 08 November 2009 - 03:16 PM

Old thread but the Sumerians definitely were not Caucasoids of any kind. The Babylonians and Akkadians, on the other hand, were Caucasoid speakers of a Semitic language. People *often* confuse the two, and when asked to present "Sumerian art" Western "scholars" will often use Akkadian or Babylonians as an example. This would be like scientists from 5,000 AD digging up 3,500 AD America and concluding that the founding fathers of the United States were Afro-Hispanics. Much of that is based on 19th century Nordicist nonsense that is increasingly seen as a joke to the modern archaeological community.

The Sumerians were most likely related to Uralic peoples, who before intermarriage with Europeans, were essentially "Mongoloid". Many still exist in Russia, unmixed but in few numbers. These peoples arguably dominated the entire area spanning from East Central Europe to Northeast Asia before the Indo-European agrarian expansion from Southeast Europe.

I don't believe for a second Marija Gimbuta's nonsense theory of Aryan Invasion either. Indo-European is not a language centered around a horse culture, and sites of the nomad/chariot cultures of Eurasia reveal Uralic genetic influence- however the digs in Europe are simply the Westernmost reaches of a much larger cultural complex that spans into Northeast Asia where it most likely originated.

Edited by moobie, 08 November 2009 - 03:18 PM.


#12 Jaak

Jaak

    Grand Guardian (Taibao 太保)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 293 posts
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    none

Posted 09 November 2009 - 07:53 AM

Old thread but the Sumerians definitely were not Caucasoids of any kind. The Babylonians and Akkadians, on the other hand, were Caucasoid speakers of a Semitic language.
People *often* confuse the two, and when asked to present "Sumerian art" Western "scholars" will often use Akkadian or Babylonians as an example. This would be like scientists from 5,000 AD digging up 3,500 AD America and concluding that the founding fathers of the United States were Afro-Hispanics. Much of that is based on 19th century Nordicist nonsense that is increasingly seen as a joke to the modern archaeological community.

Do you have any evidence that Sumerians were not white?

The Egyptians did notice and remark on Nubians looking different. But Akkadians lived next to Sumerians a long time, and noted different language. Did they ever call Sumerians different in body?

The Sumerians were most likely related to Uralic peoples, who before intermarriage with Europeans, were essentially "Mongoloid".

There are yellow-looking Uralic people (Samoyeds and as far west as Lapps) and there are fair-skinned Uralic people (in Baltic area), but do you have any evidence which of them was older?

Many still exist in Russia, unmixed but in few numbers. These peoples arguably dominated the entire area spanning from East Central Europe to Northeast Asia

Only as far east as Yenisei, roughly.

I don't believe for a second Marija Gimbuta's nonsense theory of Aryan Invasion either. Indo-European is not a language centered around a horse culture, and sites of the nomad/chariot cultures of Eurasia reveal Uralic genetic influence- however the digs in Europe are simply the Westernmost reaches of a much larger cultural complex that spans into Northeast Asia where it most likely originated.

Look at the genetics of the horse.

Wild Przewalski horse and domestic horse can interbreed and give fertile offspring (unlike horse and a**), but they have different chromosome number. The domestic horse is rather related to the wild horse of southern Europaean steppes (extinct in 19th century).

Horse was domesticated in Europe, and all domestic horses of Mongolia and China are descended from wild horses of Europe rather than wild horses of Mongolia.

Now, the Sumerians rode carts and wagons before they had chariots - or horses. At first, they had carts pulled by oxen or asses. Horses unlike neat or asses were not wild in Mesopotamia - the Sumerians had no use for chariot before they received domesticated horse from North.

But horses were domesticated to pull chariots at first - both in Near East and in China, horses pulled chariots long before they could be ridden.

There are plenty of other things Huaxia clearly could only have got from the west. Wild cattle, wild goats, wild wheat do not occur in China - they were domesticated in Near East and brought to China at that form.

#13 DaMo

DaMo

    Prime Minister (Situ/Chengxiang 司徒/丞相)

  • Super Moderator
  • 1,755 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dubai
  • Interests:History, Philosophy, Law, Political Science, InfoTech
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Asian History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Prehistory, Early Imperial, Samguk

Posted 09 November 2009 - 12:05 PM

Do you have any evidence that Sumerians were not white?

Whether they were "white" and whether they were Caucasoid are slightly different issues.
"If an archeologist calls something a finial, he usually he has no idea what it is"
"We Vandals get blamed for stuff that was actually done by some errant Lombard or Visigoth"
"Nationalism is much about forgetting as it is about remembering"

China historical vacation 2011 photos and videos: http://www.chinahist...na-trip-photos/

#14 moobie

moobie

    Imperial Inspector (Jianyushi 监御使)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 183 posts
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    None

Posted 14 March 2010 - 08:30 AM

Do you have any evidence that Sumerians were not white?

The Egyptians did notice and remark on Nubians looking different. But Akkadians lived next to Sumerians a long time, and noted different language. Did they ever call Sumerians different in body?


1) They were not Indo-European speakers
2) They were not Semitic speakers
3) They called themselves "sag-giga" lit. black headed people
4) They called the Gutians "blonde/yellow haired" people
5) They made strong racial distinctions between themselves and the Akkadians
6) Their origin myths involve migrations from non-Caucasoid areas.

So far the overwhelming consensus is that they were not white or even Caucasoid. This is just a fantasy of Nordicists, who are just as laughable as the Afrocentrists who believe Ancient Egyptians were black.

There are yellow-looking Uralic people (Samoyeds and as far west as Lapps) and there are fair-skinned Uralic people (in Baltic area), but do you have any evidence which of them was older?


It is well known that European population transfer is what changed the "original" Uralic speakers into what they are in Baltic states and Scandinavia. This is simply because through genetic analysis you can see that the "Uralic" peoples in Europe have European genes superimposed on them. That is so say they predate Europeans in Northern Scandinavia and around the Urals and many parts of Eastern Europe.

Only as far east as Yenisei, roughly.


That is to say so-called "Mongoloids"- which is a pretty badly defined term.

Horse was domesticated in Europe, and all domestic horses of Mongolia and China are descended from wild horses of Europe rather than wild horses of Mongolia.


The horse is widely believed to have been domesticated in Ukraine. The neolithic culture associated with the site as argued by Gimbutas to be the Indo-European urheimat, but evidence is against it. It seems like more likely that the mythologized horse culture originated from Uralic or "Altaic" peoples, and they transferred this to Eastern Europe- which was absorbed by an Indo-European agrarian expansion from Southeast Europe.

Wild cattle, wild goats, wild wheat do not occur in China - they were domesticated in Near East and brought to China at that form.


This is currently under investigation. It's possible that Central Asia is where wheat was first domesticated- and contrary to common Nordicist myth, Central Asia was overwhelmingly populated by, once again, "Mongoloid" hunter-gatherers just as Eastern Europe, Northern Scandinavia and most of Siberia was.

Edited by moobie, 14 March 2010 - 08:33 AM.


#15 Borjigin Ayurbarwada

Borjigin Ayurbarwada

    Emperor (Huangdi 皇帝)

  • CHF Han Lin Scholar
  • 4,102 posts
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Chinese History, Chinese Military History, Qing dynasty history

Posted 15 January 2011 - 11:05 PM

Whether they were "white" and whether they were Caucasoid are slightly different issues.


Yes, except that all people who are "white" are included as part of the Caucasoid but not vice versa. Indians are not white, but they are still Caucasoid. There are a lot of different ways to label a people, but generally speaking people in the Middle East are all considered Caucasoid. Caucasoid is a much broader term than Indo-European and Semitic, it includes Tocharians and other people featuring similar phenotypes as well.




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users