posted 08 September 2003 11:24 PM            

6,000-year-old human remains place birth of civilization in the Delta

Egyptian civilization is one of the oldest in history. It is a civilization created by the minds, efforts and religious beliefs of an ancient people who were eager to observe religious rituals in the burial of their dead prompted by a strong belief in the afterlife.

Archaeologists however widely disagree on the birthplace of Egyptian civilization, although they mainly refer to Upper Egypt as the land from which it emerged.

Relatively speaking, information and antiquities found in the Delta are inferior to those from Upper Egypt.

But that is perhaps owing to problems such as the dominance of farmland in the Delta and rising underground water.

However, recently archeologists including members of a French team, have unearthed the oldest human remains dating back to 3,800 BC (around 6,000 years old), in the Delta.

The find was made at Kom Al Khilgan in Mansura where the complete male skeleton relates to a 6,00-year period preceding the first Pharaonic dynasties.

Director of Upper Egypt Antiquities Dr Mohamed Abdul Maqsoud said that the site of the find includes antiquities from the Predynastic civilization of Naqada, which later formed the cultural base for ancient Egyptian civilization.

The site also includes antiquities from the time of the Hyksos, a dark age of foreign occupation, yet which brought things like horse-driven chariots which were unknown up to then.

Unfortunately, not much has been found from this period because the site is primarily within a zone of agricultural land.

However, there are incomplete structures which show that the houses were big, which indicates that the community itself was large.

He added that each archaeological site has its characterizing stamp which affects and is affected by neighbouring sites.

For instance the areas of Buto and Maadi which are from a period preceding that of Kom Al Khilgan, had a cultural effect on the latter.

However, the new find raises questions as the whereabouts of the houses and town which should be close to the site of the collection of tombs found there, said Dr Abdul Maqsoud.

Certainly the community in Kom Al Khilgan is a large one, which requires the re-mapping of the area so that excavations can continue on a sound basis, he added.

Some archaeologists identify Kom Al Khilgan as the oldest cultural place in the Delta.

The types and the way of moulding the earthenware utensils found beside the unearthed body indicate that they date back to the 4th millennium BC, noted Dr Abdul Maqsoud.

posted 09 September 2003 04:38 PM            

What the article fails to mention is that burials in Naquda,Badari,and other regions of Upper Egypt all date to 5000-4500 B.C.,which is older than any of the Delta cultures. In the Nubian desert exist an even older culture than both the Badari,and that is Nabta Playa. Playa is date to around 10,000-6,700 years old.

Upper Egypt,by far,is still the oldest culture in the Nile Valley. The crown in Kemetian motifs also shows up in early Qustal burials in the A-group Nubian culture.

Accordin of the Palamore stone,a Kemetian text,talks about kings both in Upper Kmt[Ta-Shemu],and Lower KMT[Ta-Mehu],but remeber this text is a semi-mythiological text dated to around the 4th dyansty.

posted 09 September 2003 06:14 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
''However, recently archeologists including members of a French team, have unearthed the oldest human remains dating back to 3,800 BC (around 6,000 years old), in the Delta.
''

What the article fails to mention is that burials in Naquda,Badari,and other regions of Upper Egypt all date to 5000-4500 B.C.,which is older than any of the Delta cultures. In the Nubian desert exist an even older culture than both the Badari,and that is Nabta Playa. Playa is date to around 10,000-6,700 years old.

Upper Egypt,by far,is still the oldest culture in the Nile Valley. The crown in Kemetian motifs also shows up in early Qustal burials in the A-group Nubian culture.

Accordin of the Palamore stone,a Kemetian text,talks about kings both in Upper Kmt[Ta-Shemu],and Lower KMT[Ta-Mehu],but remeber this text is a semi-mythiological text dated to around the 4th dyansty.

---

posted 09 September 2003 06:26 PM            

This is not conclusive evidence that the Delta was the foundation for Kemetian civlizartion. The people who wrote the article are not telling ther entire side of the story but only making interpretations from limitied evidencem,as you have pointed out.

posted 04 February 2004 06:14 PM            

Blacks live in Southern Egypt to Algeria. Go to Rural Upper Egypt and see for yourself. The population is still black. Not to mention the Haratin that live in the Saharan Oasis.

By the way,I want an academic source not geocities. Show me archeological data that agrees with your statements. We are not talking about modern Northern Africa but in the Neolithic period when the Sahara was once more moist than it is today.

Explain the negriod Crania found in the Southern and Central Sahara. Explain the Negriod crania to Badarian,Naqada and other sites. Explain why crania at Nabta Playa show traces of Sub-Saharan characteristics. Explain why Mtdna in Egyptians shows sub-Saharan admixture in them. Explain why the Yap ++ halpotype shows in Egyptian samples where in other studies Yap is used to determine the Sub-Saharan marker.

CHANNEL 5, FRIDAY MAY 2ND AT 9PM
DISCOVERY NETWORK USA, FEB 17 2003

hi low
hi low

The programme explores the enigmatic central Saharan society which once spanned the entire north African continent. We unravel their tale through the story of the discovery of the black mummy, Uan Muhuggiag. It soon becomes obvious that these people were responsible for an extraordinary array of innovations which later became famous under the Egyptians. Their presence re-writes the history of Egypt and of the entire continent of Africa.

The background: the lost society of the central Sahara and the rise of ancient Egypt
The origins of ancient Egypt are archaeology’s greatest unsolved mystery. What prompted this remarkable culture to develop such distinctive rituals as mummification? Where did they get their ideas? As far as we know, Egypt was only preceded by one great civilisation: Mesopotamia. Although Mesopotamia is a far older culture – there is no evidence to suggest that these people had developed any similar funerary practises. But if Egyptian innovations did not come from earlier known civilisations – where did they come from?

The answer has come from an unlikely quarter – the barren Sahara desert. In the last few decades evidence has been mounting that the Egyptian civilisation was not the first advanced society in Africa. At the same time as Mesopotamia rose in the near east, another culture thrived in Africa. Although few people have heard of it – this central Saharan culture is providing evidence for the invention of ritual activity which had previously been attributed to the Egyptians.


The first clue for archaeologists was the abundant rock art found all over the central Sahara from Libya to Egypt to Mali. The rock art depicts animals like crocodiles and rhinos – which do not live in deserts. It also shows scenes of hunting and rituals involving men wearing animal masks. All of this art was a firm clue that this area was once a hive of activity. It spurred archaeologists to dig and over the past fifty years they’ve uncovered an entire unknown society.

The society was nomadic – groups of animal herders wandered all over the region and eventually spread their uniform culture throughout the continent of north Africa. They lived in huts and had time to make art and invent rituals. By the time the culture reached its pinnacle around 6ooo years ago these people had invented rituals which indicate a fairly complex world view. They were communicating with the heavens and using funerary rituals like mummification to treat their dead.


But all of this evidence indicated an Eden-like place – one with trees, grasses and abundant running waters. And yet nothing could be further from this picture than the Sahara today. Although archaeologists had already assembled the clues, the science of climatology solidly confirmed what all had suspected: this area was once a lush savannah landscape. Changes in the tilt of the earth’s axis had caused drought in the Sahara and brought this thriving society to an end. But with the demise of the central Saharan culture, people wandered all over northern Africa in search of greener pastures. The Nile valley was an obvious destination. Around 6000 years ago central Saharan ideas arrived in the Nile valley – adding mummification and other rituals to the potent mix which was to become the Egyptian civilisation.

The mummy and archaeology in Libya:
An Italian team of archaeologists first explored the Libyan Sahara almost fifty years ago. In 1958 they struck gold. Professor Fabrizio Mori discovered the black mummy at the Uan Muhuggiag rockshelter. The mummy of a young boy, Uan Muhuggiag was destined for controversy. He was older than any comparable Egyptian mummy and his mere existence challenged the very idea that Egyptians were the first in the region to mummify their dead. Although the Italian team from the university of Rome “La Sapienza”, has since discovered other mummified tissue, they have not yet discovered another complete mummy in the region. But Uan Muhuggiag was no one off. The sophistication of his mummification suggested he was the result of a long tradition of mummification. Investigations in the area continue under the direction of Dr Savino di Lernia and Professor Mario Liverani.


Climatology:
Professor Mauro Cremaschi of CIRSA (University of Milan and University of Rome “La Sapienza”) heads the Italian Climatology team which focuses on the Acacus area of Libya. Dr Kevin White (Reading University) heads an English team focussing on the nearby Fezzan region. Both teams are using the latest satellite technology to clarify our picture of climate in the central Sahara over the past several hundred thousand years.

Another lost Libyan civilisation:
The Fezzan project, headed by Professor David Mattingly (University of Leicester) focuses on the Garamantes civilisation which thrived from 1500bc-500ad. The Garamantes were known by the Romans as barbarians but evidence from the Sahara shows a large, sophisticated civilisation. Remains show substantial architecture and a complex society replete with numerous luxuries. Almost 100,000 tombs litter the Fezzan escarpment – to date these bodies are the most concrete testimony to this little-known people.

further reading
Mummies, Disease and Ancient Cultures by A and E Cockburn & T Reyman l Ancient Egypt: Life, Myth and Art by J Fletcher l Rock Art of the Sahara by H Hugor & M Bruggman l Holocene Settlement of the Egyptian Sahara by F Wendorf l Archaeology of Sub Saharan Africa by J Vogel l Archaeology and Environment in the Libyan Sahara by B Barich l Garamantes of the Fezzan by Charles Daniels

interesting links Www.cru.uea.ac.uk Http://i-cias.com/e.o/fezzan.htm Www.countryreports.org/history/libhist.htm Www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/herod-Libya.htm

credits l narrator: kerry shale l exec prod: tracey gardiner l prod: gillian mosely l dir: chris hooke l ed: benedict jackson & sue outlaw l research: sophie mautner l head of prod: martin long l prod manager: sandra leeming l prod co-ord: donna blackburn l

sales enquiries l please contact martin long, head of production l t 020 7689 4248 l f 020 7490 0206 l e info@fulcrumtv.com
http://www.fulcrumtv.com/blackmummy.htm

posted 05 February 2004 10:23 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
www.geocities.com/enbp/Physanth.html

Try this site. It shows quite clearly that AE had little if any connection to Africa but were more clearly related to people who came from north and east of Egypt. You guys may be going too far back and looking at people who had little to do with AE. Clearly most of the Nubians in southern Egypt today arrived much after Pharonic times.

---

Your link doesn't work. Either way, you have to come up with something better than a geocities website to debunk what is becoming the mainstream view of modern Egyptology. As far as I know, Petrie was the leading Egyptologist on the out of Africa origin of Egyptian civilization but his theories are not consistent with the many archaeological sites around Upper Egypt, near the ancient border of Nubia.

As far as Nubians coming to Egypt in later periods, this is inconsistent with what has been discovered about pre-dynastic Upper Egyptian crania.

posted 05 February 2004 10:57 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
Neo check my post on dental studies. AE as an African Civ is not main stream by any standard. AE had little to do with Africa and only people pusching some kind of political Afrocentric view point promote the idea.

---

I don't understand what you mean when you say "little to do with Africa." Where did half of the men in ancient Egyptian armies come from? Nubia. Where did most of Egypt's gold come from? Nubia. There are no giraffes or leopards in Egypt, where did the ancient Egyptians get those things from? Probably Somalia or Kenya. For a country that had little to do with Africa, they sure liked a lot of African things.

There is no border between Egypt and the rest of Africa. I disagree with Afrocentric views of an all black ancient Egypt because it is has a racist undertone to it but it seems equally racist to write off "black" Egyptians as Nubians. Both the black African types and coastal North African types have inhabited Egypt for several millenia before 3000 BC. We may have to agree to disagree but for the last time, Egyptians are not and have never been homogeneous.

posted 05 February 2004 11:01 AM            

Then why does Frank Joseph Yurco say ancient Egypt was an African civlization? Why have anthropologist even during the 60's admitted a negriod element in the Egyptian population?

posted 05 February 2004 11:31 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
I think there was an element but a very small one indeed. I have a great study on mummy hair which shows beyond a doubt that AE hair was decidely not negroid.

---

What is negroid hair? I have met fair-skinned caucasion Egyptians with broad noses and kinky hair like Sadat and I have seen dark-skinned negro Egyptians and Nubians with aqualine noses and wavy hair like Nasser.

I could easily post genetic studies which show Egyptians to cluster closer to sub-Saharan Africans than Europeans. But all these genetic studies on a heterogeneous population like Egypt are worthless for everything except a political argument like this because it matters where the sample is taken and who is sampled. For example, I could easily prove that Americans are genetically closer to Africans than Europeans if I sampled mostly people from Washington DC, which is 75-80% black. The results of such a study would be considered irrelevant and biased based on how diverse the US is. I believe Egyptians feel the same about studies that compare them to central Africans or Europeans. They don't need outsiders to tell them what they are. So I dismiss any study that samples a handfull of people to and uses it to compare the entire population of a diverse country like Egypt to other diverse countries and continents.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:

This afrocentric viewpoint has really picked up steam in the last 15 or 20 years. In my view it is very political and attempts to create an alternate orthodoxy.

---

I'm not sure where you're from but the Afro-centric view has been around for over a century in the US. However, since the 60's, mainstream Egyptology has been moving in the direction of all but generally accepting the indigenous African origins of ancient Egypt. This is not because Afrocentricism is succeeding, it's because all the archaeological evidence points to it.

posted 05 February 2004 12:44 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
Mainstream thought does not accept the view you have proposed. It accepts an element but even dr. hawass states that AE had little connection to Africa. I'll get a hair study up for you in a few minutes.

---

Then Hawass is out of the mainstream. He's pushing views that are no longer widely accepted.

You still have yet to define what you mean by "little connection to Africa." That's a loaded statement. It's the equivalent of saying you can grow up in a house full of spanish speaking people and not know some spanish.