The African Origin of Ancient Egyptian Civilization

[Border Patrol]

Oxford Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt

Two opposing theories for the origin of Dynastic Egyptians dominated scholarly debate over the last century: whether the ancient Egyptians were black Africans (historically referred to as Negroid) originating biologically and culturally in Saharo-Tropical Africa, or whether they originated as a Dynastic Race in the Mediterranean or western Asian regions (people historically categorized as White, or Caucasoid). Contemporary physical anthropologists recognize, however that race is not a useful biological concept when applied to humans. Although many people believe they can distinguish "races" on the basis of skin color, more of the variation in human genetic makeup can be attributed to differences between these so-called races than between them. Furthermore, the observable and unobservable (to the eye) physical variation is so great and complex that there are no criteria that can satisfactorily segregate all individuals into one race or another..[...]Unlike the classic typological approach, which interprets variation in physical form as resulting only from admixture of races, contemporary approaches to understanding variation takes into account genetic and physiological adaptations to local and regional environmental factors, such as the intensity of ultraviolet radiation, ambient temperature and humidity. Conceptually, biological affinity express a continuum of relationship that reflects genetic mixing (gene flow) from different local and regional areas in antiquity in addition to evolutionary factors, such as natural selection and genetic drift..[....]There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa. In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas..[...] Any interpretation of the biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians must be placed in the context of hypothesis informed by the archaeological, linguistic, geographic or other data. In this context the physical anthropological evidence indicates that the early Nile Valley populations can be identified as part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation. This variation represents the short and long term effects of evolutionary forces, such as gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection influenced by culture and geography(Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York Routledge, 1999) pp 328-332)

The Oxford Encyclopedia above has just confirmed that the ancient Egyptians were black Africans! The link to the text is in the title.

The fact that you have no counter evidence means that you have no logical basis to deny this fact!

Apparently I don't need any of my own, your own evidence seems to disprove you well enough. The ancient Egyptians didn't look like Will Smith, they looked a lot like modern Egyptians.

Now my question for you is why you are being so hostile when your "facts" are opposed.

[MKGlouisville]

Apparently I don't need any of my own, your own evidence seems to disprove you well enough.

The parts that you highlighted, was only showing that the racial categories defined earlier are merely social constructs and those not apply to human biology. The thing that it did do was place the ancient Egyptians within the confines of the black African/"Negroid" definition, as was clearly demonstrated (Sahara/tropical Africa).

The ancient Egyptians didn't look like Will Smith, they looked a lot like modern Egyptians.

More bulls*** denial on your part:


Brace et al. 2005


Somalis who group the closest to the ancient Egyptians

The early Egyptians (Naqada Bronze) group closest to Sub Saharan Africans (Somalis), and more distantly from the modern "Egypt" sample. So their overall phenotype more closely resembled Will Smith than Zidan.

Now my question for you is why you are being so hostile when your "facts" are opposed.

Why are you commenting on something that you do not even understand? My facts aren't opposed, all of the evidence proves that the ancient Egyptians looked like Sub Saharan Africans and you all have no evidence to counter this mainstream view:

Afrocentric critic Froment also notes:

"Black populations of the Horn of Africa (Tigré and Somalia) fit well into Egyptian variations." (Froment, Alain, Origines du peuplement de l’Égypte ancienne: l’apport de l’anthropobiologie, Archéo-Nil 2 (Octobre 1992), 79-98)

"Analysis of crania is the traditional approach to assessing ancient population origins, relationships, and diversity. In studies based on anatomical traits and measurements of crania, similarities have been found between Nile Valley crania from 30,000, 20,000 and 12,000 years ago and various African remains from more recent times (see Thoma 1984; Brauer and Rimbach 1990; Angel and Kelley 1986; Keita 1993). Studies of crania from southern predynastic Egypt, from the formative period (4000-3100 B.C.), show them usually to be more similar to the crania of ancient Nubians, Kushites, Saharans, or modern groups from the Horn of Africa than to those of dynastic northern Egyptians or ancient or modern southern Europeans." (S. O. Y and A.J. Boyce, "The Geographical Origins and Population Relationships of Early Ancient Egyptians", in Egypt in Africa, Theodore Celenko (ed), Indiana University Press, 1996, pp. 20-33)

You have no evidence to argue against the modern black Northeast African populations are the best living representative of the earliest ancient Egyptian. They were black stop being indenal and just accept it!

[Border Patrol]

I would say modern Egyptians are the group closest to Egyptians, but that's just me. Your own source claimed race is a non-issue, why keep bringing it up?

[Akrotatos]

MKLouis will you please stop responding with copy-pasting sources you've gathered from Afrocentric sites and write like a human being?

[ivan_the_terrible]

I think at the heart of this 'debate' is the question why some Afrocentrists feel the need to appropriate ancient Egypt as wholly 'African'. And not simply that, but as 'black African'.

Is it some kind of inferiority complex?

[MAXlMUS]

No YOU ALL are making this a White vs Black issue! One poster is routinely bringing up West and Central Africa's relationship with Egypt, when I had previously made no such insinuation. He is doing so because as I stated earlier some of you simply cannot fathom the thought that the people who created one of the longest lasting and most accomplished civilizations in world history, looked like the people who whites in America for centuries were taught to view as intellectually inferior. It's that simple and you know it!

and so the need to make up for it by making out the egyptians to be the ancestors of black americans?

None of you have any logical basis to dispute what has been presented, nor have you presented anything that argues against this fact or supports whatever you all support. This leaves the question, why are you even arguing? Why do you feel so strongly about this that you continue respond to my peer reviewed evidence with scuffs?

no one is arguing, you are. your theories to show the ancient egyptians were black are pathetically sad, as demonstrated by your out of context citations and the dozens of pictures of other african people to show their resemblance to them. i wonder who would 'peer review' your rubbish

The funniest thing is that all three of you who ironically respond to me at the same time can't even unanimously agree on what the ancient Egyptians looked like or came from. Some of you say Middle Eastern, others say Berbers, some even argue that the milleniums of different ethnic population mixings have not altered the phenotype of modern Egyptians. You all just seem to be in agreeance that they just simple CANNOT BE BLACK.

...


Are you sure of this? Can you cite one modern authorative statement that ascribes Dynastic Egypt's origins to a primarily non African source? I highly doubt that you will take up this challenge, because I've yet to see a scholar refute this fact.

why does african = black ? black africa only starts south of the sahara...




as for your so called evidence... it's quite easy taking things out of context and bending them to your theory

[removeduser_4536284751384]

Somalis who group the closest to the ancient Egyptians

no modern Egyptians are the closest to ancient Egyptians.

you "evidence" is out of context manipulated quotations.



It's pathetic how you feel the need to connect yourself to other people's history and cultural heritage. Do you have an inferiority complex or something?

[Xanthippus of Sparta]

My belief is that I don't understand why some feel like they have to over-emphasive the supposed "African-ness" (if you will) of the Egyptians.

When, you have two very important and advanced Empires in Kush and Aksum that are undisputeably African in origin and makeup.

Trying to shanghai the Egyptian legacy does a real disservice to these important peoples.

[MKGlouisville]

I would say modern Egyptians are the group closest to Egyptians

Do you know what this is called?

Denial is a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence.

You've not seen nor presented any evidence that the early ancient Egyptians group primarily with modern Egyptians. You've instead just been presented with a crania plot in which the only modern population to overlap with the early ancient Egyptians are Somalis. You've been presented with evidence that sugguest that the most probable reason that modern Egyptians (especially Northerners) don't group with their early Egyptian ancestors is due to signifigant admixture with populations from Europe and Asia that came later on in Egyptian history. You've been presented with numerous lines of evidence that confirm that the early ancient Egyptians come from the same general region of the modern populations that they overlap with biologically, yet you form the opinion that the ancient Egyptians most closely resemble the admixed modern populations of Egypt

Your own source claimed race is a non-issue, why keep bringing it up?

My source states that the concept of race is not applicable to science, and is instead a social construct which is I agree with. The concept of race pertains to our everyday life in society.

and so the need to make up for it by making out the egyptians to be the ancestors of black americans?

This is a desperate strawman argument! Please show me my specific quote in which I insinuate that African Americans are the descendants of the ancient Egyptians.

no one is arguing, you are. your theories to show the ancient egyptians were black are pathetically sad,

No what's "sad" is you all's ignorance in persisting Egypt's modern population who have experienced heavy admixture from non African populations still resemble their early Egyptian ancestors. You persist with this argument despite being presented with a of peer reviewed evidence that confirms that more southerly Northeast African populations are the only ones to overlap biologically with the ancient Egyptians.

as demonstrated by your out of context citations

Please tell me specifically which piece of evidence do you feel that I've distorted so that we can review it.

and the dozens of pictures of other african people to show their resemblance to them. i wonder who would 'peer review' your rubbish

I've presented pictures that coincide with the evidence that has been presented. Which is that modern Northeast African populations bare the closest resemblance to the ancient Egyptian population. As you all could clearly see on the previous page modern Northeast Africans suchas Ethiopians and Somalis not only share the same craniometric measurements, but even the same reddish brown skin that the Egyptians generally displayed themselves with and that some of you all were attempting to argue was not "black African".

Please read the underlined passage to see the research "peer reviewed" research that backs this fact

"Analysis of crania is the traditional approach to assessing ancient population origins, relationships, and diversity. In studies based on anatomical traits and measurements of crania, similarities have been found between Nile Valley crania from 30,000, 20,000 and 12,000 years ago and various African remains from more recent times (see Thoma 1984; Brauer and Rimbach 1990; Angel and Kelley 1986; Keita 1993). Studies of crania from southern predynastic Egypt, from the formative period (4000-3100 B.C.), show them usually to be more similar to the crania of ancient Nubians, Kushites, Saharans, or modern groups from the Horn of Africa than to those of dynastic northern Egyptians or ancient or modern southern Europeans." (S. O. Y and A.J. Boyce, "The Geographical Origins and Population Relationships of Early Ancient Egyptians", in Egypt in Africa, Theodore Celenko (ed), Indiana University Press, 1996, pp. 20-33)

why does african = black ? black africa only starts south of the sahara...

So I guess Sub Saharan Africa begins in Southern Egypt right? I did just present a video of self identified "black" Egyptians in the south who view Northerners as non Egyptians. I guess that the pitch black refugees of Darfar are also non black because they reside in the Saharan region of Sudan. I guess the Nubians who identify as black also are not black because they reside in the Sahara? Do a little more research before you spout BS!

as for your so called evidence... it's quite easy taking things out of context and bending them to your theory

Yet you cannot present a shred of counter evidence to disprove "my theory". NOT ONE SHRED!

no modern Egyptians are the closest to ancient Egyptians.

Who groups the closest to the Old and Middle Kingdom Egyptian samples?



Nubians and the Tigre of Ethiopia, not modern Egyptians as you can clearly see.

You "evidence" is out of context manipulated quotations.

Is that the new phrase for my peer reviewed evidence? Again show me what you feel is taken out of context so that we can for thoroughly examine it.

You do know that most historians are considering this famous German remake of the Egyptian queen a forgery don't you

It's pathetic how you feel the need to connect yourself to other people's history and cultural heritage. Do you have an inferiority complex or something?

It's pathetic how you people feel ignore clear scientific evidence to come to unfounded conclusions. I'm stating that the modern populations who bare the closest resemblance to the ancient Egyptians are modern East African populations, who just so happen to be black. Your apparent ignorance about the subject or racial bias will not allow you to fathom such a thought, despite hearing the words of world reknown historians and anthropologist who too feel this way.

This is what I find to be pathetic:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Talk about History stealing and people with an inferiority complex! Look who are the people coming into what continent to claim history for inhabitants who look nothing like the inhabitants of that continent. That is Pathetic Hypocrisy!

[Border Patrol]

It's clearly a bunch of people dressing up as one of the most distinguishable and famous ancient people. They aren't claiming the Egyptians looked like Northern Europeans. That's your assumption, which I find pathetic. Would you rather they did 'black-face'? Or would you freak out about that as well?

This is the history subforum, if you're looking for a scientific debate I suggest you take this to the science subforum.

[MKGlouisville]

My belief is that I don't understand why some feel like they have to over-emphasive the supposed "African-ness" (if you will) of the Egyptians.

The reason being is because during times prior to the 1970's Western scholars had made it a mission to deAfricanize ancient Egypt. This deliberate distortion of Egypt's African roots was called the Dynastic Race Theory:

The Dynastic Race Theory was the earliest thesis to attempt to explain how predynastic Egypt developed into the sophisticated monarchy of Dynastic Egypt. The Theory holds that the earliest roots of the Ancient Egyptian dynastic civilisation were imported by "invaders" from Mesopotamia

In the early 20th century Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie, one of the leading Egyptologists of his day, deduced that the skeletal remains found at pre-dynastic sites at Naqada (Upper Egypt) indicated the presence of two different races. He inferred that one of them was foreign to Egypt, and must have been an invader. Based on plentiful cultural evidence, such as architectural styles, pottery styles, cylinder seals and a few artworks, as well as numerous rock and tomb paintings, Petrie determined that the invader race had come from Mesopotamia, and had imposed themselves on the local Badarian (African) people and become their rulers. This came to be called the “Dynastic Race Theory”.[1][2] The theory further argued that the Mesopotamians then conquered both Upper and Lower Egypt and founded the First Dynasty.

This theory has been flipped on it's head thanks in part to modern unbiased research conducted in all relevant scientific fields from people of all races and colors. It's not just an "African American thing", it's simply about people who want to get to the truth of the matter on this subject! While it's quite clear that people who oppose this truth on the matter and it's relevance to America's highly (yet secretive) racialized social conscious, cannot logically dispute what I'm arguing, it's not entirely their fault. They have been taught by the media to view Egypt as non African (black):

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

These people likely never gave a damn enough about Egypt to do any research on it, so when topics like this come up in which a person is challenges all they know about ancient Egypt (what the media shows them) then that person is considered "fringe" (Afrocentric) for not going along with the ingorant (the know nothings).

The National Geographic has interviewed leading biologist S.O.Y Keita for his take on the issue of Egypt's origins:



Here he states that the mixed ancestry of Egypt's origins was already in place thousands of years prior to Egyptian culture taking place. The "mixed" ancestry that he is referring to is a mixture of different African populations as he most often stresses that Africa is not a monolithic entity. The mixture as he explains in another lecture (which consist of 6 parts) was of Afro-Asiactic speaking Africans and Nilo Saharan African populations. He follows this statement by there is no evidence to indicate that the Egypt's origins is not of local Northeast African origin. That is what he concludes about the origins of ancient Egypt.

Despite interviewing an/the expert on this matter the National Geographic has yet to reflect his or other mainstream research into their portrayals of ancient Egyptian society.

When, you have two very important and advanced Empires in Kush and Aksum that are undisputeably African in origin and makeup.

I find something hypocritical about this statement (not directed at you personally). Some people like Maximus emphasize that we African Americans stay in Western or Central Africa when we look at African history (as he most certainly has the authority to say ). You on the otherhand are saying that we can go to Northeast Africa to look at African civilizations like Kush, Aksum, Mereo, ect, but just keep our hands away from Egypt! It seems like no one gives a damn what we black Africans consider "African history", until we lump the all might Egypt into the African category. Why is that? There is no logical reason why we can't view or portray the ancient Egyptians as the black Africans that they were. The same way that the Greeks and Romans are portrayed as white Europeans, or the ancient Chinese as East Asians. Ancient Egypt is the product of "black Africans", so we view it as such!

Trying to shanghai the Egyptian legacy does a real disservice to these important peoples

I don't believe so. I study just about every ancient African civilization from the Songhai, Benin, ancient Ghana, Mali, Swahili:



I am aware that prior to the British rampage that the largest man made structure on Earth was in West Africa (Wall of Benin), I know about the Gold Coast and their trading routes that extended all the way to India and China, I know of the thousands upon thousands of ancient West African art pieces that were stolen by European during Colonialism (and still in Europe). I view this as my African history. I have a problem however when people who are neither from nor do they know a darn thing about African history feel that they have the authority to tell me that I can't view a part of Africa as "African history" particularly black African history. Why do these people suffer from a god complex so badly that they feel as though that they can section of Africa according to their own political motives or ill informed racial biased/prejudiced influenced opinions. In words of Keita (above):

"Studying early Egypt in its African context is not "Afrocentric," but simply correct"

It's clearly a bunch of people dressing up as one of the most distinguishable and famous ancient people.

Despite the fact that Cleopatra was of European descent the rest of the Egyptians populations (probably not even Southeastern European Cleaopatra) looked like this. Notice even the maids in the background are portrayed as white Europeans (probably Western). Here are portraits from the late Dynastic Greco Roman period of Northern Egypt:





These mixed people are about as "white" as the most admixed populations of Pharonic Egypt became!

They aren't claiming the Egyptians looked like Northern Europeans. That's your assumption, which I find pathetic. Would you rather they did 'black-face'? Or would you freak out about that as well?

If you want to see some people flip out you should have read the comments at the bottom of this youtube video (N-word this "history stealin that )

This is the history subforum, if you're looking for a scientific debate I suggest you take this to the science subforum.

I call BS on this statement. You all were attempting to make unsuppported scientific statements about the biological affinities of the early ancient Egyptians prior to the intro of real scientific evidence. Now that you can't really side step the evidene without looking silly you want this thread moved

I think at the heart of this 'debate' is the question why some Afrocentrists feel the need to appropriate ancient Egypt as wholly 'African'.

Why do some people of European descent insist on whitening Egypt's origins, despite not having a lick of evidence to support it? Why can't you people accept the fact that this civilization was the product of black Africans? Why do you all HAVE to inject some sort of non black influence into Egypt's origins. Why does it strike the fear of god in you people that Western blacks might view Egypt in the same light that they view other black African civilizations?

And not simply that, but as 'black African'.

Well colonial white Western for some reason or another were not contempt with Greece and Rome being "white European". When they traveled across Africa their jaws dropped when they came across Egypt and even Nubia. They felt that the black people surrounding the civilizations could not have produced them, and instantly Egypt became "white".

Is it some kind of inferiority complex?

Nope just trying to educate the ignorant:

"What a subject for meditation, just think that the race of black men today our slaves and the object of our scorn, is the very race to which we owe our arts, science and even the use of our speech." Anthropologist Count Constatin de Volney (1727-1820)

Gerald Massey, English writer and author of the book, Egypt the Light of the World, wrote, "The dignity is so ancient that the insignia of the Pharaoh evidently belonged to the time when Egyptians wore nothing but the girdle of the Negro."

This is irrelevant to the issue here, but how'd you end up here MKGlouisville? Do you play TW games?

A link to the previous thread on this topic, by someone I know. I was utterly disgusted by the ignorance that the people of this forum displayed about the topic, so I commented on this thread. I believe that the last post on that last thread was:

It seems that the vast majority agrees that the egyptians were not black. Case closed.

Again the ignorance disgusted me, is my posting in this thread somehow a problem?

MKLouis will you please stop responding with copy-pasting sources you've gathered from Afrocentric sites and write like a human being?

You don't even respond to the content of what I write, you just present worthless strawman arguments to try and knock down. If you are going to call my "fringe" then I will present enough peer reviewed evidence in support of this fact, to expose just what is truely the "fringe" argument. By the way I'm still waiting on evidence to back any of your claims. You've had over three pages to do so and you haven't.

[Border Patrol]

No, this is the history subforum, the people that post here are interested in history, you clearly want a scientific debate. The forum houses many people interested in this sort of thing, and they're in the science forum. I suggest you take this there.

And again you're simply copy/pasting sources from afrocentrist sites instead of having a discussion like a human being. As to why you're so incredibly hostile, I don't know. But you may want to save your rage for something that actually matters.

[MAXlMUS]

This is a desperate strawman argument! Please show me my specific quote in which I insinuate that African Americans are the descendants of the ancient Egyptians.

because so far every single one one of your posts on this forum have been about proving your lunatic afrocentric theory.

So I guess Sub Saharan Africa begins in Southern Egypt right? I did just present a video of self identified "black" Egyptians in the south who view Northerners as non Egyptians. I guess that the pitch black refugees of Darfar are also non black because they reside in the Saharan region of Sudan. I guess the Nubians who identify as black also are not black because they reside in the Sahara? Do a little more research before you spout BS!

yup. there are also black people in norway as well

You do know that most historians are considering this famous German remake of the Egyptian queen a forgery don't you

what are you talking about... numerous radiological tests have been done over the years the latest in 2006... and all show that the bust is genuine... by the way the person who originally proposed it being a fake was not even a historian

I find something hypocritical about this statement (not directed at you personally). Some people like Maximus emphasize that we African Americans stay in Western or Central Africa when we look at African history (as he most certainly has the authority to say ). You on the otherhand are saying that we can go to Northeast Africa to look at African civilizations like Kush, Aksum, Mereo, ect, but just keep our hands away from Egypt! It seems like no one gives a damn what we black Africans consider "African history", until we lump the all might Egypt into the African category. Why is that? There is no logical reason why we can't view or portray the ancient Egyptians as the black Africans that they were. The same way that the Greeks and Romans are portrayed as white Europeans, or the ancient Chinese as East Asians. Ancient Egypt is the product of "black Africans", so we view it as such!

i don't agree with your lumping of history into black or white history. only racists do this and it just doesn't work. axumite civilization, for example, bore much more ressemblance (language, religion) to it's semitic neighbors in south arabia then the other peoples in the african interior. (don't cry, i'm not saying they weren't black).

I am aware that prior to the British rampage that the largest man made structure on Earth was in West Africa (Wall of Benin), I know about the Gold Coast and their trading routes that extended all the way to India and China, I know of the thousands upon thousands of ancient West African art pieces that were stolen by European during Colonialism (and still in Europe). I view this as my African history. I have a problem however when people who are neither from nor do they know a darn thing about African history feel that they have the authority to tell me that I can't view a part of Africa as "African history" particularly black African history. Why do these people suffer from a god complex so badly that they feel as though that they can section of Africa according to their own political motives or ill informed racial biased/prejudiced influenced opinions. In words of Keita (above):

and by the same token an irish or a lativian person can look at roman or greek history and say it is 'his' history?

Well colonial white Western for some reason or another were not contempt with Greece and Rome being "white European". When they traveled across Africa their jaws dropped when they came across Egypt and even Nubia. They felt that the black people surrounding the civilizations could not have produced them, and instantly Egypt became "white".

no this does not apply to africans in particular. i remember when sir arthur evans was conducting excavations at konossos he wrote that the locals deserved to be exterminated for being primitive and un-(western)european like

Gerald Massey, English writer and author of the book, Egypt the Light of the World, wrote, "The dignity is so ancient that the insignia of the Pharaoh evidently belonged to the time when Egyptians wore nothing but the girdle of the Negro."

a book, if you even read it, which had nothing to do with history

You don't even respond to the content of what I write, you just present worthless strawman arguments to try and knock down. If you are going to call my "fringe" then I will present enough peer reviewed evidence in support of this fact, to expose just what is truely the "fringe" argument. By the way I'm still waiting on evidence to back any of your claims. You've had over three pages to do so and you haven't.

what the hell is a strawman argument anyways. and please stop being such an arrogant ***** this is just a goddamn internet forum, i'm not gonna write a ******* dissertation, go to university and see how they'll laugh at you there with your funny ideas and absurd reasoning

[Xanthippus of Sparta]

The reason being is because during times prior to the 1970's Western scholars had made it a mission to deAfricanize ancient Egypt. This deliberate distortion of Egypt's African roots was called the Dynastic Race Theory:

I'm aware of this.

The area between Egypt and Ethopia in the ancient times was a major crossroads of many peoples.

Everything that I have read indicates that the Egyptians were largely a Semitic people...with plenty of what we would call sub-saharan African influence as well. From reading this thread, I know that you are aware that Semitic peoples are in fact closely associated with Africa...seeing as Semitic languages originate from modern day Ethiopia.

What I am saying, is that race is more of a social construct than a scientific one.

The concept of race is very much an anachronism in the ancient world in general, and in two places in practicular, I would argue....Egypt, and the Steppe regions between modern Eastern Europe and China.

[Basil II the B.S]

Thank god Egyptians weren't morons:

[MKGlouisville]

No, this is the history subforum, the people that post here are interested in history, you clearly want a scientific debate.

Not neccissarily. I am simply asking that if you are going to make an assertion about the biological affinities of these ancient peoples that you have some type of scientific foundation for those assertions.

The forum houses many people interested in this sort of thing, and they're in the science forum. I suggest you take this there.

You are talking as if I created this thread or another thread! You also apparently had no problem with the scientific assertions being made proclaiming Egypt to be "caucasoid" by other members, but now that the shoes on the other foot you would just like to do away with the entire debate

And again you're simply copy/pasting sources from afrocentrist sites instead of having a discussion like a human being.

Prove that my sources are "Afrocentric"! Prove that Christopher Ehret, Nancy Lovell, Keita, ect are "Afrocentric".

As far as the content of my post is concerned, you could not even respond to that part. You seem to just be offended at the fact that I started by argument citing every assertion that I made with peer reviewed sources. Again if you feel that anything that I've presented is distorted by me in anyway just specifically ask for a link or the entire passage to the quote so that we can thoroughly examine it.

As to why you're so incredibly hostile, I don't know. But you may want to save your rage for something that actually matters.

I started to become hostile after my first post when people began to attack my motives for informing the ignorant.

yup. there are also black people in norway as well

Another BS statement to add to your huge pile.

what are you talking about... numerous radiological tests have been done over the years the latest in 2006... and all show that the bust is genuine

According to two Swiss archaeologist the bust was created in 1921 by a French Egyptologist. None the less it doesn't matter any way, what is it supposed to prove?

i don't agree with your lumping of history into black or white history. only racists do this and it just doesn't work.

History in the United States has always been lumped into racial categories, hence this month is "black history month". I guess it becomes to much to bare when it's proven that the ancient Egyptians were black as well. Here is what what Richard Poe one of the leading contenders of the "black athena" debates in the 90's wrotes about the matter after noting the works of mainstream anthropology:

Were the Ancient Egyptians black? That is entirely up to you. But were they biologically African? It would seem that they were. After considering the full range of anatomical, linguistic, cultural, archeological and genetic evidence, Shomarka Keita feels confident in concluding that the original Egyptians by which he means the pre-dynastic people of Southern Egypt, who founded Egyptian civilization evolved entirely in Africa. Both culturally and biologically, he says, they were more related to other Africans than they were to non-Africans from Europe or Asia.

Through the years, Keita believes, the Egyptians appear to have blended with many immigrants and invaders, many of whom were lighter-skinned and more Caucasoid in appearance than the original Egyptians. Libyans, Persians, Syro-Palestinians, Assyrians, Greeks, and Romans all left their imprint on the faces of Egypt. But Egyptian civilization remained profoundly African to the very end.

Keita himself rarely resorts to such crudely racial expressions as black and white. But if we might be forgiven a momentary lapse into everyday speech, it would probably not hurt to conceive of Keita's theory as the polar opposite of the Hamitic Hypothesis. Whereas the Hamitic theorists saw Egypt as a nation of white people that was gradually infiltrated by blacks, the biological evidence seems to suggest that it was more like a black nation that was gradually infiltrated by whites.

Black Spark White Fire: Did African Explorers Civilize Ancient Europe? - Chapter 77. Black, White or Biologically African? Pg. 471

Richard Poe by the way:

no this does not apply to africans in particular. i remember when sir arthur evans was conducting excavations at konossos he wrote that the locals deserved to be exterminated for being primitive and un-(western)european like

You're right, so I guess that blacks shouldn't really care about this distortion of African history that is still reflected today, simply because Europeans did it to everyone

what the hell is a strawman argument anyways

Google it!

go to university and see how they'll laugh at you there with your funny ideas and absurd reasoning

Really?

Here are S.O.Y Keita's lectures on the biocultural origins of Egypt at CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY. Realize that this is a mainstream concensus indicated by mainstream research of all relevant scientific practices and accept that you will not find one credible scientist to dispute these facts:

5 youtube videos

Everything that I have read indicates that the Egyptians were largely a Semitic people...with plenty of what we would call sub-saharan African influence as well.

Sorry, but semitic does not describe the ancient Egyptians. Semitic is a language of the Afro-Asiactic family. It is the only member of that branch that is spoken outside of Africa and came into existence AFTER the ancient Egyptian language was created. The early ancient Egyptians were solely the product of inner Africa, neither their language or culture came from the Near East.

From a biblicable perspective the ancient Egyptians could not have been Semitic, due to the fact that the bible list them under the acursed sons of Ham who's skin had been turned black with all other Africans.

What I am saying, is that race is more of a social construct than a scientific one.

Of course I am in 100% agreeance with this statement.

[ivan_the_terrible]

No one's "whitening" ancient Egyptian. No one claims they're 'white' and is taken seriously.

You still haven't produced a credible reason as to why ancient Egyptians would have looked substantially different from modern Egyptians, who are clearly not black. THey're not white either, but no one is claiming they are.

[MKGlouisville]

No one's "whitening" ancient Egyptian. No one claims they're 'white' and is taken seriously.

Then why can't you all accept the mainstream concensus, that the original ancient Egyptians were Africans that came from the south of Egypt? I am not aware of any "non black" tropical African populations (tropical Africa begins near the southern border of Egypt) and I highly doubt that you know of any. So please tell me why if they came from this region of Africa they wouldn't be considered black? You all have not produced a shred of scientific evidence to the contrary and some are just under the impression that their ignorance is all the truth that they need.

You still haven't produced a credible reason as to why ancient Egyptians would have looked substantially different from modern Egyptians, who are clearly not black.

Have you not read any of the content in my post? ADMIXTURE ADMIXTURE ADMIXTURE!!!!! This ADMIXTURE has been occuring and accumulating for thousands upon thousands of years since Egypt's middle to late pharonic times. The Persians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, ect admixture are responsible for the common mixed phenotype seen in most modern Egyptians. It's also notable that even modern Northern Egyptians do have a distinctly African phenotype that distinguishes them from their Middle Eastern neighbors. There Y-DNA profile is reflected by the high frequencies of European and Middle Eastern Haplotypes:



Haplogroup E , A and B are African. The largest chunk of Egyptian Y-DNA is still African reflecting it's earliest Egyptian population. The fact is there is no biological or archaeological evidence to indicate that those non African haplogroups were present or anywhere near as prevalent in early ancient Egypt.

Does it not ring a bell that modern Egyptians ARE NOT the closest populations to their early Egyptian ancestors when it comes to skeletal measurements? The closest populations to the ancient Egyptians skeletally are modern more southerly Northeast African populations (Somalis, Ethiopians, ect), which coincides with the fact that the ancient Egyptians were proven to have migrated from this general region of Africa. Arabs do not group close with the early ancient Egyptians either, just black African populations. It cannot be this complicated to see what the ancient Egyptians would have looked like prior to this admixture.

As far as the present population not being "black", did you not watch the video or view any of the pictures that I posted earlier of black southern Egyptians (who actually identify as such). These southern Egyptian populations were not anywhere near as affected by the invading populations listed earlier, which is why they still retain their prodominantly African characteristics (albeit somewhat substantial admixture from the Near East). These populations have always been black since the beginning of pharonic Egypt in the south. Even Zahi Hawass states that the southern Egyptians are the closest to their Egyptian ancestors.

Again you will understand Egypt's early population history if you take the time to watch the 6 clip lecture by S.O.Y. Keita at Cambridge that I posted earlier.

[Manco]

Then why can't you all accept the mainstream concensus

I told myself I'm not getting into this thread even more because these always turn ugly, but I'm sick of this mantra.

Yes, the data you give is mainstream. Your conclusions and interpretations derived from it though, are not necessarily so, actually quite a few of your sources simply don't state what you claim they do. (mostly because you're trying to prove something about 5000 year old Egypt using data whose accuracy is measured in millennia and pre-dates Egypt several thousands of years). In fact if you would have only delved a little deeper in all your sources you'd have noticed Eastern Africans are actually clustered with Europeans regarding various body proportions, and not other African groups. Guess why? Because Europeans (and everyone else non-African) all descend from Eastern Africans! Hell, this was even the base of calling Eastern Africans "Caucasian" in the 19th century racial theories.
For example Zahi Hawass (regardless of what an ass he is) is certainly very mainstream, and he's openly opposed to your theories.

As for all your haplogroup rantings. Do you even know what haplogroups are and how unreliable they are? They only show patrilinear ancestry, which after 200 generations (roughly 5000 years) ignores 99.99999999...% (1 / 1,6069380442589902755419620923412e+60 to be exact) of all possible ancestors. Couple that with "European" haplogroups only appearing after leaving Africa, the extremely small size of these migrations and the even smaller studied sample, and you'd know why genetic studies are still regarded with much trepidation in archaeology and palaeontology.

Furthermore this obsession with Ancient Egyptians origins is useless. Were they once African? Certainly, but EVERYONE was. Were they black, white, brown, grey, teal, pink or rainbow coloured with black polka dots? Nearly impossible to tell since superficial physical characteristics change very rapidly, even more so under stringent natural/sexual selection. Did they consider themselves the same as other Africans or as Mediterranean people? Probably depends on era and local, contemporary politics; regardless it's pretty much a given that every people see themselves as distinct from the rest, and quite often better too.

In the end Ancient Egypt belonged to a cultural continuum ranging from (roughly) Chaad to the Arabian peninsula; had extensive contacts with both Africa, Arabia and the entire Mediterranean; provided an early foundation for further Mediterranean civilization together with the various Mesopotamian powers.
Trying to "claim" Ancient Egypt for one group is childish and completely unscientific.

Ancient Egyptians were Ancient Egyptians.
/thread

[Border Patrol]

This thread is about to explode with pictures and videos that no one will watch. Along with no original input.