Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic Closedquestion about the Egyptians..?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 10111213>
Author
viola76 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 30-Jan-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 92
Direct Link To This Post Topic: question about the Egyptians..?
    Posted: 16-Feb-2007 at 21:13
 
i think pinguin you have got to start answering some of your own questions like
 
"Even more, some people believe that caucasians derivated from negroid peoples INSIDE Africa, not outside it."
 
so whats a negroid? you brought it up.
 
"Even if you were right, a dinasty is not a necesarily the same as the people. The mass. In many ocassions one people of different "race" has been in charge of large countries. So, that's not prove either"
 
Good, then we have to assume the romans and greeks didnt look like their leaders?
 
"
The only proof for that are genetical studies, and if you study the genographic maps it is CLEAR that people flew inside and outside Africa through through Egypt since paleolithic times. There is NO EVIDENCE of a pure pristine Black Egypt in any time of history."
 
Actually you have to produce a wide variety as proof. genetics,archaeology,anthropology,linguistics and so on,
 
The genographic is misleading:
E3B is from the horn of africa, it didnt start in the middle east unless the horn of africa is in the middle east now.
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Feb-2007 at 21:26
Originally posted by viola76

 so whats a negroid? you brought it up.
  
Good, then we have to assume the romans and greeks didnt look like their leaders?
  
Actually you have to produce a wide variety as proof. genetics,archaeology,anthropology,linguistics and so on,
 
The genographic is misleading:
E3B is from the horn of africa, it didnt start in the middle east unless the horn of africa is in the middle east now.
 
 
I don't know why I have the impression you come from EgyptSeach, anyways.
 
Negroid? Well, if you ask me personally I believe there is a continium between the populations of mankind and there IS NOT a clear cut barrier between any group. That's in constrast with the U.S. of slavery.
 
In the world, people changes slowly from one human form to the other: from Khoisan to Bantu, from Khoisan to Ethiopian, Sudanese, Egyptian, Arab, Palestinean, Greeks, Germans and Scandinavian. No frontiers but a slope that has the name of a cline. Egyptians look "in between" and they have always looked like that.
 
Now, the stereotype of a "negroid" person is a Congolesse. the stereotype of a "white" person is a scandinavian, but to tell you the true, very few people look like those stereotypes and most don't look even close.
 
Romans were not Egyptians. The later were more diverse in genetics than the former. But even in there you can see that things stand. Not many romans at all looked like Julius Cesar, who was blond.
 
I don't need to prove anything. The references are everywhere. You can look for them if you wish.
 
And, I believe the genographic project has a lot more information about that that just the E38 controversy so loved in EgyptSearch.
 
Pinguin
 
 
Back to Top
viola76 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 30-Jan-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 92
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Feb-2007 at 21:37
whats wrong with egyptsearch i agree it could be moderated better but you have a lot of people on their that know about african history in depth way more then any other forum ive been on. unless you know some whats better,  youre negroid explanation is what i would of said myself.Thumbs%20Up
 
now where is that es bih, i knew he wouldnt answerThumbs%20Down 
 
Back to Top
Penelope View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Alia Atreides

Joined: 26-Aug-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1042
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 01:41
I would just like to add that...in 714 BC, Piankhi The Great, King of Cush(Nubia) on the Upper Nile, began the conquest of Lower Egypt, eventually conquering the Whole of Egypt, which resulted in the establishment of the Twenty-fifth, or "Ethiopian," Dynasty of Pharaohs. Piankhi moved steadily down the Nile, conquering towns one by one. By 721 B.C. he was in possession of Heracleopolis, and finally he captured Heliopolis in the Delta. These peoples, the Nubians, were Black Africans, and it is said that they mixed with whatever supposedly inhabited Egypt at the time, since immigration began and persisted from the time that Piankhi captured his first Egyptian town and throughout the rest of his reign. His "successors" even let the process continue.
Back to Top
Joinville View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Sweden
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 353
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 07:47
First of all I'm going to chime in to support Penguin here. Good on you! I fully agree with your position.

For me one of the main problems of disucssing whether the ancient Egyptians were "black" or "white" hinges on the fact that the ancient Egyptiand would have been utterly perplexed by the question. It has absolutely nothing to do with their perceptions of things.

An Egyptian, a child of the land of kmt, would traditionally recognise as contrymen only those who also lived in the land of kmt. The ancient Egyptians were possibly the first to define for themselves a concept akin to a modern sense of nationality, speking of their land as "Ta-meri", "the beloved land".

Otoh everything and everyone outside of the Nile valley (excpet the Fayum) was considered foreign. That included the Aamu, the Asians to the east of the Delta, the tribes of Libu and Mashwash, the Libyans to the west, the Medja in the mountains to the east of the Nile valley, the people of the great oasi in the western dessert, and the Kush, the Nubians, to south.

Of course, from time to time Aamu, Libu and Kush would head for the valley, dominate for shorter or longer, and move in adding to the composition of society we know from recorded history.
The Medja were even invited in, acting as a form of ethnic police force within Egyptian society during the Middle Kingdom, but becoming entirely Egyptianised by the time of the New Kingdom.

Anyhow, it seems fair to assume that what we have on record can be assumed to have occurred repeatedly also in prehistory, but without leaving us written sources. I'll leave the genetic record for others to discuss, but there's really nothing there conflicting with the processes of conquest and migration in the historical record.

Just adding that the Nile vally is pretty long. The complexion of Egyptians vary as you move along it. They mostly look like people around the Med in the Delta, becoming several shades darker by the time you reach the first cataract at Aswan (Greek Syene, anc. Eg. Suny) the traditional southern border of ancient Egypt. Beyond it lay Kush. The distance is something like between the Med and Scandinavia, so that's hardly surprising. Since living along the Nile made you Egyptian in Egyptian eyes, your skin could be whatever shade.

All in all, the best evidence indicates that the Egyptian people was made up from contributions from the entire region surrounding the Nile valley. It was of course and African civilisation, in the sense that Africa is a handy geographical assignation. If one considers the people living in that part of the world "black", they were black. If one prefer calling the same people "white", they can certainly be called white, but the whole exercise is pointless as the Egyptians wouldn't have understood what either side was in fact talkling about.

And what they are talking about is the European 19th c. coopting of the ancient Egyptian civilisation as exclusively a European heritage. Never mind black people, the 19th c. Europeans denied ancient Egypt was the heritage even of the contemporary Egyptians.

Now, that was a really daft idea. But repeating it in mirror-image form by somehow trying to make it exclusively the heritage of "black" people looks only marginally better, and then simply because it's easy to see why this might have a gratifying compensatory function.

Ancient Egypt didn't work in any way in such a fashion that modern distinctions between African or European or black and white had any relevance. Historically it has left a legacy that has filtered through to Europe, the Mid East and Africa alike.

For most of its history ancient Egypt was turned towards the south and to the interior of Africa. That was where the wealth was and the powerful political rivals you had to look out for. That made Egypt a geographically African civilisation mostly concerned with other African societies.

And then, as the societies around the Med picked up steam, ancient Egypt gradually shifted its focus north, as this was now where most of the money and the threats materialised. That would make it a geographically African civilisation ending up mostly concerned with Mediterranean politics.

Egypt occupied an interesting intermediary position between geographies and traditions. It was involved in European affairs as much as it was in African. Where the emphasis fell depended on time an place.
One must not insult the future.
Back to Top
viola76 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 30-Jan-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 92
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 16:49
 
thats very politacally correct statement above. chuck in with some nonsense.
 
 .If one considers the people living in that part of the world "black", they were black. If one prefer calling the same people "white", they can certainly be called white,.
 
can we say the romans and greeks where black or white then?
 
 simple questions to you:
 
1.what part of the of the continent did the people in predynastic egypt. come from.
 
2.where did the majority of their culture come from.
 
3.The people who came to egypt i:e badarians /naqadans in the predynastic what skin colour did they have.
 
4.what physical difference did the people have that their nearest neighbours in the sudan  didnt have.
 
5.what was the difference in culture that the predynastic egyptians had that the people in the sudan didnt.
Back to Top
drill_skill_800 View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 17-Feb-2007
Location: Ontario, Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 18:15
Ahhhh..... interesting that you posed this question!
 
When you say "Black People" I'm going to assume you mean people originating from Africa.
 
It is important to understand skin pigments and the like....
 
I do have several friends in/from Egypt who of course have light-colored skin. The skin of Ancient Egyptians was of course quite dark.
 
Why? Climate change. The world is getting hotter, people. Global Warming is nothing new. And no, it shouldn't be regarded necessarily as a bad thing (yes, I have seen "An Inconvenient Truth", and as much as I find Al Gore's evidence to be alarming, I have arguements against that it will lead to the end of the world - which was implied). If I am not mistaken, Ancient Egypt was colder than modern-day Egypt.
 
ANYWAYS..... I won't get into that now....
 
To sum up how this relates to skin pigments (for those of you who do not know)....
Dark Skin = colder climates - so that heat from the sun may be absorbed better
Light Skin = warmer climates - so that the heat may be reflected
Or course diet (intake of Vitimin D and the level of Chloresterol in the system) plays a role in this too.
 
Evolution is brought about through a change in one's environment. Large or small scale. Its what makes us living organisims. (You can tell that I'm a biology student, no? )
 
Okay.... so how does this relate?
 
Before I exlain any further, has anyone here heard to "The Genographic Project"? See: 
 
Basically, Dr. Spencer Wells has a theory that states that we all have originated out of Africa. We're talking 200,000 B.C. Basically, there was a small population in Southern and Central Africa that migrated northward. Groups split off, and small klans were established in Asia and progressed into Europe. In Asia, they followed the coastline into India and continued down towards China, and then finally Austrailia (keep in mind, ocean sea levels were very different at the time, as were the shapes and composition of the continents). Another group, however, moved towards Russia as (the what is now) Europe also became occupied. The journey goes on, as the "Russians" crossed over into North America and populated modern-day Canada, USA and the Americas.
 
(Yes, I do actually study Geography, Geotechnologies and World Issues!)
 
The development of distinguishable features (such as skin color, asian eyes, eye color, hair color, nose shape, ear shape, height etc) were all the result of evolution.
 
I'll stick with skin color for now....
 
Basically, my point is this:
 
If the Ancient Egyptians did not possess black skin color, they certainly did at some point in time. Spanning from generations of ancestral development, genetic mutation and evolution.  
There is a fine line between gifted and retarded
Back to Top
viola76 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 30-Jan-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 92
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 18:58
 
thanks for the post above
 
"If the Ancient Egyptians did not possess black skin color, they certainly did at some point in time. Spanning from generations of ancestral development, genetic mutation and evolution."
 
in your opinion at what point in time do you think they had black skin colour?.
 
i  look at the national geographic as well, why do you think he reckons the E3B started in middle east instead of east africa?  
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 19:38

Viola76:

Why is so important to you the color of skin of Egyptians?
 
And let me ask you directly this question: are you Black?
 
And more important: are you a follower of Afrocentrism?
 
Thanks,
 
Omar
Back to Top
viola76 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 30-Jan-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 92
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 20:00
 1.because this is the topic? dohh
 
 2.yes im black, are you one of those light skinned south americans who  thinks they are white?
 
 3.no i dont follow afrocentrism, are you a follower of eurocentrism.?
Back to Top
Joinville View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Sweden
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 353
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 20:02
Originally posted by viola76


thats very politacally correct statement above. chuck in with some nonsense.


.If one considers the people living in that part of the world "black", they were black. If one prefer calling the same people "white", they can certainly be called white,.


can we say the romans and greekswhere black or whitethen?


simple questions to you:


1.what part of theof the continentdid the people in predynastic egypt. come from.


2.where did the majority of their culture come from.


3.The people who came to egypt i:e badarians /naqadans in the predynastic what skin colour did they have.


4.what physical difference did the people have that their nearest neighbours in the sudan didnt have.


5.what was the difference in culture that the predynastic egyptians had that the people in the sudan didnt.

1. Most likely from every direction except from the north. Which is what people here have been maintaining.
2. They developed it in place as far as one can tell. Anyone can make a hypothesis that the bulk of it was brought in from somewhere else, but I'd like to see some work being put into where that might have been before I buy it.
That's why it was the Egyptian civilisation, and fairly unique. Its religion does have some features that look specifically like those of cattle pastoralists like the modern Dinka and Nuer of Sudan that set it off from the cultures of the Middle East, if Henri Frankfort is to be believed.
3. Whatever it was. It really is of no consequence as the Egyptians weren't concerned with these things. They never divided themselves up along colour lines that's for damn sure, and the variation from south to north was and is considerable.
4. Their physical variation is continuous, and seems to have been continuous back then as well. The difference between the Kush*tes and the Egyptians was cultural, not physical anyway.
5. Possibly none at all at first. The Egyptian culture developed in Egypt. You might have to accept that things develop, hence change, and do not represent some form of unalterable essence.
As for the culture of the next doot Nubians, well the archaelogical record seems to indicate the Egyptians destroyed it, killed or drove these people away, as one of the first acts after unification in the first dynasty.

And the whole colour thing, it certainly is nonsense, if with a nasty history. "Pink" and "brown" races would work as well or as badly as "black" and "white" anyway. And have as little relevance on this issue.

As for black Romans, well, from a Scandinavian pov you could call then black. Thomas Henry Huxley suggested south Europeans bellonged to the "alluphoric race" back in the 19th c, alongside Africans, Indians and Australians.
That was fecking ridiculous of course, and so people told him, but that's what you get if you try to make arbitrary delimitations in a population with continous variation. The fact is that people in Egypt ware and are nicely placed intermediare between Africa and Europe, and it shows.
You can find ancient Egyptians looking very African, allowing some people to identify with them based on this kind of superficial similarity, and you can find objects of identfication for Europans just as easily. But it's got nothing to do with who the ancient Egyptians were, and everything with present day hangups about skintone and "race".

I'm trying to look out for the ancient Egyptians here.
One must not insult the future.
Back to Top
AfrikaJamaika View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 26-Dec-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 132
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 20:34
Originally posted by drill_skill_800

 
To sum up how this relates to skin pigments (for those of you who do not know)....
Dark Skin = colder climates - so that heat from the sun may be absorbed better
Light Skin = warmer climates - so that the heat may be reflected
Or course diet (i


No your wrong, if that was true then the Africans would all mostly have light skin, and the Europeans would all mostly have dark skin....

Dark skin= warmer climates

Light skin=colder climates
Back to Top
viola76 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 30-Jan-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 92
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 20:59
yeah your right afrika.
 
moving on:
 
drill skill wrote:
 
4. "Their physical variation is continuous, and seems to have been continuous back then as well. The difference between the Kush*tes and the Egyptians was cultural, not physical anyway"
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 21:08
Originally posted by viola76

 1.because this is the topic? dohh
 
 2.yes im black, are you one of those light skinned south americans who  thinks they are white?
 
 3.no i dont follow afrocentrism, are you a follower of eurocentrism.?
 
 
Hi Viola76:
 
1. Yes, I am afraid we lost the opportunity to pass
 
2. I am a light brown skinned South American, actually, more red than white LOL. If you ask me, I am not proud of the color of skin but more of the abundant body hair I have that make me look like a savage gorilla LOLLOL. And that fascinate ladies Big%20smile
 
I am South American, proud to be Chilean, descendent of Spaniards, Italians, French in the European side, and from Mapuches in the Amerindian side.
 
I am proud of that, and I don't need to ASK PERMISSION to "gringos" to be what I am. I don't need to identify with foreign cultures either. Not with Greece, Japan or Egypt, because for me to be CHILEAN is more than enough and I thank GOD for that, daily.
 
3. No, I am not a follower of Eurocentrism or any racist ideology. Actually, if you ask me, I am fascinated with the so called "primitive" cultures, particularly from the Americas, and specially from Chile: because these are my lands. This ground is our Mother Earth.
 
Pinguin
 
 


Edited by pinguin - 17-Feb-2007 at 21:13
Back to Top
viola76 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 30-Jan-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 92
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 21:11
 
Just for anyone who doubts that egyptology is eurocentric, and for people like some posters here who claims egypt was mixed and dosent exclude black skinned egyptians.
 
 
look at the colour of the characters shown.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 21:11
Originally posted by viola76

 1.because this is the topic? dohh
 
 2.yes im black, are you one of those light skinned south americans who  thinks they are white?
 
 3.no i dont follow afrocentrism, are you a follower of eurocentrism.?
 
He actually is Latino. Beside that, he nor I nor anyone else claimed a European origin for Ancient Egyptians, but that they are not black, but rather a fusion of peoples, with a semetic predominance, hence why they looked more middle eastern.
Back to Top
viola76 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 30-Jan-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 92
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 21:14
to es bih
 
from yesterday:
 
"the bust and mummy you are showing are over 1500 years after the first dynasty. we know it became more mixed as it went through its history so the above dosent prove anthing, i might be wasting my time repeating myself but here goes bring me evidence of the people who were living in the nile valley from 7000b.c to around 3000b.c, you have got to research the predynastic people who were living around egypt to know who they were. have you not been reading the thread. but as you have brought pictures ill play your game."
 
now show me a bust or a mummy in the first 4 dynastys of a pharoah that dosent look negroid.
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 21:23
Originally posted by viola76

 
who cares what afrocentrist think, not sure why people keep on going on about them, and say nothing about eurocentrics?
 
The original egyptians (predynasic to the 3rd dynasty" look a lot like this.
 
 
if not explain to me why?
 
es bih, pinguin your thoughts
 
Why do Black Americans have such an addiction to re-create history to make some type of lost cultural tradition, it started with the hijacking of Islam, (nation of islam), now Egypt, Hanibal...... the list never stops. Berbers were not black. Egyptians arent a black(sub saharan) civilization.
 
 
It's insecurity and a feeling of needing to create a past, I think that African Americans actually have a rich past inside this country, ranging from Kuta Kinte to MLK, to Malcolm X... one Black American that I look up to as an Idol, Douglas, etc. It's not necessary really to recreate a past that never was. There are plenty of actual Sub Saharan civlizations.
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 21:33
Originally posted by es_bih

... 
Why do Black Americans have such an addiction to re-create history to make some type of lost cultural tradition, it started with the hijacking of Islam, (nation of islam), now Egypt, Hanibal...... the list never stops. Berbers were not black. Egyptians arent a black(sub saharan) civilization.
 
 
It's insecurity and a feeling of needing to create a past, I think that African Americans actually have a rich past inside this country, ranging from Kuta Kinte to MLK, to Malcolm X... one Black American that I look up to as an Idol, Douglas, etc. It's not necessary really to recreate a past that never was. There are plenty of actual Sub Saharan civlizations.
 
 
 
Absolutely agree!
 
It is a complex of inferiority of SOME Black Americans.
 
People of West Africa get so upset because Black Americans keep looking to Egypt, forgetting theirs ancestors came from Ghana, Mali, Nigeria, Congo and other countries of Western subsaharan Africa.
 
The real past is there, waiting for them to study, recognize and be proud of it.
 
By constrast, when a Black Cuban or Brazilian think in Africa they do remember West Africa! Candomble, Santeria, Capoeira, and all the African heritage of some Latin Countries comes from there. Not from Egypt LOL
 
Afrocentrists should realize they are not fighting against Eurocentrism, like they like to say. They are fighting against the FACTS and rational thinking.
 
 
Pinguin
 


Edited by pinguin - 17-Feb-2007 at 21:34
Back to Top
viola76 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 30-Jan-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 92
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 21:37
that was the wrong question you looked at, im talking about your picture thread one.
 
1. im black but not american.
 
2.why do non black people have to distort african history?
 
3.i think you need to read up about berbers, not all berbers are amazigh there are different groups.
 
4.you dont have to be not subsaharan to be black. you have a eurocentric mentality. i could say all middle easterners are terrorists as a stereo type.
 
5.black americans are obviously related to africa which has a very rich history.
 
p:s. the reason black people argue about ancient egypt is because there is no need to argue about other african civilizations being black , we know they are already they are not in dispute , but the egyptian argument was created by racist, eurocentrics a few hundred years ago to white wash egypt,
 
modern example:
 
 
i dont see you or any non black on this forum complaining about eurocentrism?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 10111213>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.