Writing in an easy to read narrative literary style while respecting the norms of Egyptological scholarship, the author examines the contradictory opinions of major Egyptologists (and the major loonies), and brings us closer to Egypt's core meaning and influence. Along the way, he illuminates the enchanting, imaginative beauty of the Egyptian saga. Ancient Egypt built a society on a remarkable mixture of the new, the useful and the beautiful, while retaining primitive magic, obscurantism, and the infantile but extraordinarily poetic. Egypt was also one of the most optimistic nations ever founded, inventing optimistic answers to many of man's fundamental questions. Volume I surveys the religious underpinnings of the society, including the founding of the first nation - and the first nation to proclaim its sacred nature. Divine kingship, the holy city and capital city were invented here.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
Egypt, Trunk of the Tree: The Contexts based on 0 ratings. 2 reviews.
Najovits has written a 2 volume fantasy about ancient Black African culture. Najovits remains captive to the standard Euro-centic intellectual paradigm which places Black Africans outside of human ... More history. This is the UNSTATED PREMISE of Najovit's 2 volume fantasy. According to this intellectual paradigm(asserted with absolutely no evidence) , the series of ancient African cultures, commonly called "Ancient Egypt", had its origin in the "East". It further claims that the Egyptians were , unique and mysterious. In the first few pages, Mr. Najovits struggles desperately to fabricate an origin for the Egyptians that is divorced from the Great Lakes area in the heart of Africa. Ultimately, his pseudo-scholarships fails....MR.NAJOVITS OFFERS NO EVIDENCE. ONLY UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION AFTER UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION. The Egyptians looked to the south as the land of their ancestors. The world's first Holy Land was far south of Egypt in the heart of Africa. The first rulers came from the south. Any African, or anyone familiar with African culture would know that the religion of the Egyptians is very much like the African religions of today. For example, the concepts of the ka and the ba can be found almost every where in Black Africa today!The cosmology of black Africa and ancient Egypt are essentially the same. Any African would instantly know that the hair styles of the Egyptians were totemic. The head rest is found almost everywhere in Africa today! The farm instruments are the the same or very similar, so are the musical instruments. Any reader who doubts this can simply study seriously African culture. See C. A. Diop, T.Obenga or A.M. Lam. Anyone who can read the writings of the ancient Egyptians in the original will quickly come to the conclusion that the South was their place of origin, and that the culture was purely African! The last native African pharaoh Nectanebo ll fled to NUBIA to escape the Persian invasion. The language of ancient Egypt was a Black African language,genetically related to African languages spoken today!! Theophile Obenga and C. A. Diop have demonstrated that the language spoken by the ancient Egyptians is related wolof, Dinka,Nuer,and many other modern day languages. In fact, many unclear points concerning ancient Egyptian grammar can be clarified by refering to modern Black African languages and cultures. The same is true of word meanings. No linguist, using modern scientific linguistic methods, can demonstrate that the language of the ancient Egyptians is genetically related to the Semitic family;it has not been done because it can not be done. In fact, the ancient Egyptian language agrees with the black African language Wolof(spoken in Senegal)on just about every level of the grammatical structure! Najovits carefully avoids tackling the massive and solid scholarly linguistic and cultural evidence produced by African scholars such as Dr. C. A. Diop. Instead he engages in ad hominem attacks, suggesting that Dr. Diop may be "a little racist". This is poor scholarship. But if you have no evidence to support your speculations.....name calling is better than nothing.
I found Mr. Najovits's book extremely interesting. His knowledge in this field is thorough and his analysis penetrating. His conclusions are disarmingly simple. If it is true that knowledge is the understanding of relationships, and conversely that understanding is the knowledge of relationships, Mr. Najovits stands out on both counts. He draws connections I had not seen before and gives me a deeper understanding of this most important history. I look forward to volume two.