Black African Origins for the Ancient Egyptians

[Asante]

I agree, it seems like its thrown at us, and the message seems, BELIEVE.

The message isn't to be a gullible "sucker", but this information is clearly alien to most of you all. I'm willing to bet that prior to your introduction to this evidence that many of you sensible people were compelled to believe what you constantly see on television (hence "BELIEVE" because we put it on T.V.) which is a Southern European/Middle Eastern/mixed race looking population. From the evidence presented many people can see that that is not the case and that these ancient Africans were in fact black people.

[youtube]s5wLCVpBjhk&[/youtube]

 

[psychoslice]

You mean do I need to guess what color he may be?

Are you implying OP is somehow biased? :jester3:

I knowww Nothinggg, well i'm not going to say anyway.:sw:

 

[outhouse]

Here is more.



Ancient Egyptian race controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The findings from the UNESCO conference debated the points of agreement and disagreement concerning the Black hypothesis and other theories, and concluded that the ancient Egyptians were not black.[181] The current position of modern scholarship is that the Egyptian civilization was an indigenous Nile Valley development (see population history of Egypt

 

[Poeticus]

Can anyone help me learn what the skin color of the Ancient Eygptians was then? Because, one dude is saying it was black, while some are saying it wasn't black. I'm so confused. :sad4:

 

[Asante]

Here is where OP fails miserably, and he knows this information.

Ancient Egyptian race controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

UNESCO convened the "Symposium on the Peopling of Ancient Egypt and the Deciphering of the Meroitic Script" in Cairo in 1974. At that forum the "Black Egyptian" theory was rejected by 90% of delegates and the symposium concluded that Ancient Egyptians were much the same as modern Egyptians.

:no: Come on now man...this is plain ignorance! Put your thinking cap on.

In 2008, S. O. Y. Keita wrote that "There is no scientific reason to believe that the primary ancestors of the Egyptian population emerged and evolved outside of northeast Africa.... The basic overall genetic profile of the modern population is consistent with the diversity of ancient populations that would have been indigenous to northeastern Africa and subject to the range of evolutionary influences over time, although researchers vary in the details of their explanations of those influences."

Ah yes my mane man the great S.O.Y. Keita....Here is some more of his work where he goes into detail on this subject:

This review has addressed several issues regarding the biological affinities of the ancient inhabitants of the northern Nile valley. The morphological metric, morphometric, and non metric studies demonstrate immense overlap with tropical variants. General scholars must understand that a "shift in paradigm" from "Negro"-only-as-African has occurred, just as Nordic-only-as-European was never accepted.

Actually, it was always biologically wrong to view the Broad phenotype as representative of the only authentic "African," something understood by some nineteenth century writers. Early Nile valley populations are best viewed as part of an African descent group or lineage with tropical adaptations and relationships. This group is highly variable, as would be expected. Archaeological data also support this position, which is not new.

Over time, gene flow (admixture) did occur in the Nile valley from Europe and the Near East, thus also giving "Egyptians" relationship with those groups. This admixture, if it had occurred by Dynasty I, little affected the major affinity of southern predynastic peoples as illustrated here. As indicated by the analysis of the data in the studies reviewed here, the southern predynastic peoples were Saharo-tropical variants.


SOURCE: S. O. Y. Keita, "Studies and Comments on Ancient Egyptian Biological Relationships," History in Africa 20 (1993) 129-54

So according to Dr. S.O.Y. Keita and most others who have studied this, the original ancient Egyptians were a highly variable group of tropically adapted (black skin and long limbs..think black NBA players) of Saharan-tropical African origins and over time due to late European and Middle Eastern migration and subsequent admixture and they began to lose affinity with black Africans. The Greco Roman period is often cited as the time when great biological changes began to occur in the Egyptian population:

[FONT=Verdana, Arial]

[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial]The results of our analyses suggest that the formation of the ancient Egyptian state likely included a substantial in situ process, with some level of contribution by outside migrants probable. The higher level of population structure in Lower Egypt, relative to Upper Egypt, suggests that such influence and migration by outsiders may not have been widespread geographically.

[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial][FONT=Verdana, Arial]Still, it appears that the process of state formation involved a large indigenous component. Outside influence and admixture with extraregional groups primarily occurred in Lower Egypt—perhaps during the later dynastic, but especially in Ptolmaic and Roman times (also Irish, 2006). [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial][FONT=Verdana, Arial]Further analysis of the population history of ancient Egyptians.
Schillaci MA, Irish JD, Wood CC.[/FONT]

[/FONT]

So the ancient Egyptians were in fact tropically adapted black Africans until the late period when Southern Europeans began to invade (many left Egypt as well).

Anything else is complete rubbish

People like this are the reason why this information in my thread needs to be presented.They are NOT interested in the truth, but rather maintaining an obsolete Western ideology (hence blacks could not have created ancient Egypt or any major civilization and I won't accept this fact no matter what evidence you present). #Keepit100

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Can anyone help me learn what the skin color of the Ancient Eygptians was then? Because, one dude is saying it was black, while some are saying it wasn't black. I'm so confused. :sad4:

They were blue and looked like cat-men, I believe.

 

[psychoslice]

Can anyone help me learn what the skin color of the Ancient Eygptians was then? Because, one dude is saying it was black, while some are saying it wasn't black. I'm so confused. :sad4:

Its only skin, who cares ?.

 

[Asante]

Can anyone help me learn what the skin color of the Ancient Eygptians was then? Because, one dude is saying it was black, while some are saying it wasn't black. I'm so confused. :sad4:

It shouldn't be that hard...Direct copy paste of the interpretative text from a notoriously disputed Wikipedia page vs various lines of peer reviewed studies and even clear visual evidence.

 

[Poeticus]

They were blue and looked like cat-men, I believe.

Lol.

Its only skin, who cares ?.

And, therein lies the problem. People are still affected by the superficial.

 

[Poeticus]

It shouldn't be that hard...Direct copy paste of the interpretative text from a notoriously disputed Wikipedia page vs various lines of peer reviewed studies and even clear visual evidence.

I'm horrible when it comes to history that is not about Ancient Indian history. So, I'll take your word for it that they were of dark hue. However, I earlier posted Snowden's comments from the page you and Outhouse mentioned which I believe deserve merit and consideration.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Africa has a very wide range of genetic variability, you'll find blacks with all ranging of skin tone, eye color, and hair type. SO the skin tone of the ancient Egyptians would have probably fallen somewhere in the middle.

 

[outhouse]

This is not disputed.

Ancient Egyptian race controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the ancient Egyptians were not black

 

[outhouse]

Africa has a very wide range of genetic variability, you'll find blacks with all ranging of skin tone, eye color, and hair type. SO the skin tone of the ancient Egyptians would have probably fallen somewhere in the middle.

Exactly, just as they are today.

 

[Asante]

Can anyone help me learn what the skin color of the Ancient Eygptians was then? Because, one dude is saying it was black, while some are saying it wasn't black. I'm so confused. :sad4:

None the less:

"The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the "super-Negroid" body plan described by Robins (1983).. This pattern is supported by Figure 7 (a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994), which indicates that the Egyptians generally have tropical body plans. Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. Despite these differences, all samples lie relatively clustered together as compared to the other populations." (Zakrzewski, S.R. (2003). "Variation in ancient Egyptian stature and body proportions". American Journal of Physical Anthropology 121 (3): 219-229.

What does this indicate about skin color:

"In this regard it is interesting to note that limb proportions of Predynastic Naqada people in Upper Egypt are reported to be "Super-Negroid," meaning that the distal segments are elongated in the fashion of tropical Africans.....skin color intensification and distal limb elongation are apparent wherever people have been long-term residents of the tropics." (C.L. Brace, 1993. Clines and clusters..")

By ecological principal if you're tropically adapted like a "Negroe" then you will melanin levels just like a Negroe. What do you call you a black-brown skinned person whose ancestry originated in Africa...a "Negro" or black person.

Here is a recent melanin dosage test by the German Institute on royal Egyptian officials:

[FONT=Verdana, Arial]In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three types of tissues were sampled from different mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approxi-mately 1550-1080 BC)..[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial]Skin sections showed particularly good tissue preservation, although cellular outlines were never distinct. Although much of the epidermis had already separated from the dermis, the remaining epidermis often was preserved well (Fig. 1).[/FONT]..[FONT=Verdana, Arial] The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin. [/FONT](Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues", Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13)

[FONT=Verdana, Arial]Eurocentrics have been trying to obfuscate this issue for 200+ years and counting...They are trying to create some mysterious phantom "Caucasoid" population to credit Egypt with and in their minds the Greek, Roman, Arab, Turk invasions contributed nothing (or just miniscule amounts) to Egyptian genepool...I guess they just came to watch no touching lol. This phantom "Caucasoid" Egyptian race has been impervious to any mixture... and to this day the mulatto looking Egyptian populace have maintained their "Caucasoidness".....:

Yep their "Caucaoidness"

[/FONT]THOSE ARE WIGS BY THE WAY! lol

 

[Asante]

Africa has a very wide range of genetic variability, you'll find blacks with all ranging of skin tone, eye color, and hair type. SO the skin tone of the ancient Egyptians would have probably fallen somewhere in the middle.

What are you basing your assumption on?

 

[Asante]

And, therein lies the problem. People are still affected by the superficial.

Thank you.

 

[Curious George]

You are completely wrong my brother:



If there was no race mixing in Egypt prior to the times of Jesus (a statement which is very telling about your level of knowledge of ancient history) then how the Egyptians go from grouping with black Africans in the early period to generally having a lack of affinity with their black African ancestors during the Late periods and instead with Mediterranean populations? Greeks and Roman admixture doesn't count or something?

The picture below is showing the phenotypes of people in the modern northern Egyptian mega city of Cairo. Now what what does genetic evidence (and anthropology above) say about their relationship with the original ancient Egyptians:

So basically you're saying that you don't want to acknowledge the validity of the research, because of what it might imply socio-politically?

No, I am saying with the development of two great civilizations it would be foolish to think that diversity was not present. I think you are too obsessed with color. While I agree that the portrayal of Egyptians and Jews lacks historic diversity that was likely present, flipping the portrayal so that the groups are depicted as exclusively "black" is just as ridiculous. Bottom line, whenever you have a major civilization with established trade throughout vast lands you will see admixture of all types. I think that suggesting the people of a land lack a historic connection to a land is not fair given all of the information people posted during the last time these discussions came up.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

What are you basing your assumption on?

Africa now?

 

[Asante]

No, I am saying with the development of two great civilizations it would be foolish to think that diversity was not present.

"Diversity"...Yes Kemet was an ethnically diverse civilization from it's beginning. These ethnicities were various different blacks African tribes who mostly settled in the Sudan and Upper Egypt (some went to the difficult terrain of northern Egypt as well). Black Africans are the most physically and genetically diverse people on Earth and the physical remains (skulls) of the ancient Egyptians reflect this indigenous black African diversity. That is why my source presently by Keita on the previous page described the population as "variable", tropically adapted and undeniably African...African diversity.

While I agree that the portrayal of Egyptians and Jews lacks historic diversity that was likely present

lol Yeah you're right the Hebrews who came out of ancient Egypt are always shown as Anglo-Saxons. Hell the Bible even gives them English names (John, Luke, Matthew, Peter ect lol) even though Indo-European languages (especially Western European branches) never reached Israel or a close region:

So I don't know when Western Europeans came into the picture but...yeah they (Western Europeans) are portrayed as being the center of the ancient world for some odd reason.

, flipping the portrayal so that the groups are depicted as exclusively "black" is just as ridiculous.

No it's not it's the truth and something many people clearly aren't ready to accept. My evidence is sound...where is yours?

Bottom line, whenever you have a major civilization with established trade throughout vast lands you will see admixture of all types.

The Greek and Roman empire...of course their was their mixture since the origins. The ancient Egyptians....of black African (the Sudan is there homeland).

I think that suggesting the people of a land lack a historic connection to a land is not fair given all of the information people posted during the last time these discussions came up.

What you talking about? The Arabs have been there for over 1,000 years, the Greek and Roman admixture goes back even further (though late in Egyptian history). That's a long time to me...Now I'm not saying that all modern Egyptians have a lack of connection to the land or the original civilization in fact:

[youtube]ZvJ0F299kFQ[/youtube]

 

[psychoslice]

Lol.



And, therein lies the problem. People are still affected by the superficial.

Yes your right, as long as we are ignorant the problem wont ever go away.