How to stop whitewash of Ancient Egypt and other myths?

EgyptSearch Forums

Ancient Egypt and Egyptology

How to stop whitewash of Ancient Egypt and other myths? (Page 4)

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 5 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: How to stop whitewash of Ancient Egypt and other myths?
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 27 June 2004 01:50 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: homeylu,Beja people donot have naturally blonde hair. You don't seem to understand that the chemicals in the mummfication process straightens and turns hair into blonidsh and reddish colors. Most black hair turns brown after time and loses it's elasticity. You need to read the article before jumping to conclusions. The abstract said the mummy hair was hetrogenous meaning spread out upon the head. The picture you posted has no relavence to the topic since it's a picture of an aboriginal not of anybody within the Nile Valley. The articles were done by archaeoloical hair experts. Read it more carefully please!!!! Homeylu already defended herself with the beginning portion of your comment, so I'll skip that. But what I understand from this article, and upon reading the links you provided, is that the archeologists are simply saying that the blonde color hair of the mummy doesn't mean that the hair was actually blonde. They simply mention that in the dry conditions of sand or certain wet conditions, through oxidation, brown or black hair can turn to red-yellowish hair, making it look blonde due to melanin content. According to them, to determine further the true nature or color of the hair, further studies would be needed. In other words, as Homeylu put it, it is inconclusive at that point! This is where I believe homeylu's reference comes in handy. It explains how this blonde color comes about, but doesn't stop there. It analyzes the hair much deeper, and then gives us a conclusion of the hair nature. Until, I see something that gives a more convincing explanation, I would have to say that Homeylu's reference is still reasonably quite valid. IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 2060 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 27 June 2004 02:04 PM Homeylu you made a statement about how you can tell hair texture from simply looking at the mummy. This is definatley not the case with mummy hair which loses it's text after death. The way specialist measure hair is with eletrcon microscope and the tricometer you mentioned which measures the spiral of hair. The early pre-dyanstic hair found in Upper Egypt had a spiral that conforms to what we might call negriod hair. Here is an excerpt for you: From: Rogers, Spencer Lee, _Personal identification from human remains_ 1987, "Hair often survives for a considerable time after death and can be recognized as to color and to some extent texture. A study in which hair was buried experimentally in the soil for a two year period revealed that there was no appreciable change until after one month, but it became streaked and brittle after one year. Two years was found to be the maximum duration of Caucasian hair buried underground." (p.8) On the same page it reads: "The color o feyes during life cannot be determined from their appearance on a cadaver since all eyes become a greenish brown shortly after death." IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 27 June 2004 03:16 PM quote: Originally posted by homeylu: And here are so photos of 2 mummies, from the Niagra Falls Museum, although you can not see very much difference in the hair color- the hair texture is quite obvious-considering the braided hairstyle. "Mummy from Ptolemic period" I almost overlooked this. Doesn't the Ptolemic period mark the Pharaonic rule by the "Greek" family of Cleopatra VI...if this is a royal mummy, wouldn't it be perhaps that of a member of this family? If it isn't a royal mummy, then perhaps you make a better case! IP: Logged
homeylu Member Posts: 333 Registered: May 2004	posted 27 June 2004 03:31 PM Yes Supercar, the Ptolemic period was greek, which is why I intentionally chose this "european" looking mummy, and intentionally contrasted it with the "African" (hair style) mummy to show that the color is the same. And you're correct, neither of these mummies are "royal". I'm not sure if "royal" mummies are allowed outside of Egypt anymore, Ausur would probably know for sure. Ausur were any of those articles you posted to support the ethnicity of the mummies, or to change the focus, because I know how much you like to avoid race based topics. IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 2060 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 27 June 2004 03:54 PM quote: Ausur were any of those articles you posted to support the ethnicity of the mummies, or to change the focus, because I know how much you like to avoid race based topics.. The articles pertain only to hair color and texture of mummies during the dyanstic period. Hair color and texture is but one determining factor one can use in ethnicity. X-rays have been done on various royal mummies showing their bone structure. Kent R. Weeks and Edward Wente wrote a book entitled X-raying the Pharoahs. [This message has been edited by ausar (edited 27 June 2004).] IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 27 June 2004 04:33 PM quote: Originally posted by homeylu: Yes Supercar, the Ptolemic period was greek, which is why I intentionally chose this "european" looking mummy, and intentionally contrasted it with the "African" (hair style) mummy to show that the color is the same. And you're correct, neither of these mummies are "royal". I'm not sure if "royal" mummies are allowed outside of Egypt anymore, Ausur would probably know for sure. Thanks for making your point clear. Ausur, you bring an interesting point regarding the experiment on the Caucasian hair. So I guess it doesn't survive as long as that of a Negriod hair. How about that! One thing though, if this holds true, it should definitely shed new light on the ethnic question of the mummy involved. [This message has been edited by supercar (edited 27 June 2004).] IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 28 June 2004 07:20 PM First Egyptians, Now it's the Nubians... I thought I had to carry on this discussion from another thread because it amounts to what is the beginning of the whitewash of the Nubians. I now hear claims that Nubians weren't "Sub-Saharan" looking Negroes but 'blacks' with Mediterranean features, or flat out that Nubians are Arabs! Actually Ayazid (member of this board) sparked this, and then I surfed through the net. While I found most sites who acknowledged that Nubians were Negro, there were a few sites that claim that they were Africans with "Mediterranean" or "Arab" features. This is one whitewash that needs to perish before it blossoms! Here is an example of a website that attempts to avoid viewing Nubians as "black people": http://www.nubianet.org/about/index.html [This message has been edited by supercar (edited 28 June 2004).] IP: Logged
rasol Member Posts: 227 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 28 June 2004 09:55 PM Homeylu: Do you have any more information concerning the University of Chicago's reseach on A-Group Nubia with reference to its possible anteriority to Kemet and Mesopotamia? IP: Logged
Keino Member Posts: 262 Registered: Apr 2003	posted 28 June 2004 10:46 PM quote: Originally posted by supercar: [b]First Egyptians, Now it's the Nubians... I thought I had to carry on this discussion from another thread because it amounts to what is the beginning of the whitewash of the Nubians. I now hear claims that Nubians weren't "Sub-Saharan" looking Negroes but 'blacks' with Mediterranean features, or flat out that Nubians are Arabs! Actually Ayazid (member of this board) sparked this, and then I surfed through the net. While I found most sites who acknowledged that Nubians were Negro, there were a few sites that claim that they were Africans with "Mediterranean" or "Arab" features. This is one whitewash that needs to perish before it blossoms! Here is an example of a website that attempts to avoid viewing Nubians as "black people": http://www.nubianet.org/about/index.html [This message has been edited by supercar (edited 28 June 2004).][/B] I am not surprised. This is no coincidence. With the blossming evidence that AE and Nubians came from Group A and Group c Nubians now there will be a focus and movement on how these people too were somehow "white/caucasian". When will this stop? That article tries to manipulatively and deviously imply that these people were "non-black". How can supposedly educated people honestly look at history and the information at hand and delude themself to believe things that are obviously not just false but illogical and irrational. ------------------ Time Will Tell!- Bob Marley IP: Logged
homeylu Member Posts: 333 Registered: May 2004	posted 28 June 2004 11:01 PM Supercar those are not scientific sites that make these claims, racial categories have been basically abandoned by the scientific community. Keep in mind Ancient Nubia is the near the area where all races of man descended, so you would clearly expect them to have a variety of physical features, and the several tribes there differ significantly in terms of physical features. I.e. members of the Dinka tribe do not look anything like members of the Beja tribe, are they both black from the American social standpoint? Of course. So ignore if you can, those so-called racial categories as they only prove the obvious, Blacks have a variety of features from the gigantic Dinkas down to the miniature Pygmies. Otherwise, how could they be responsible for giving birth to the world??? I beg anyone to differ. IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 2060 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 28 June 2004 11:02 PM The owner of this site is a Nubian himself. However,I think the lighter skinned Nubians today are probabaly from intermixing with Arabs and even Mamelukes. Modern Nubians are not homogenous. The earliest Nubian culture is Khartoum Mesolithic which is clearly negriod. Scholars have often interjected that C-group Nubians were different from their predessors. Most recent anthropological work has shown that A-group and C-group are basically the same people. IP: Logged
rasol Member Posts: 227 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 28 June 2004 11:10 PM Ultimately the entire race classifcation system has to be exposed for what it is. Africa is the birthplace and near exclusive home of modern homo-sapiens for most of its existence. Africa is the location of much of humanities genetic diversity. Yet race classification is catagorically de-Africanized with races named after Western Asia (caucasia), and eastern Asia (Mongolia/Mongoloid), but no catagories for Africans. Adding insult to injury, Africans are then placed in Asian phenotypical catagories. Whitewash indeed. The most progressive historians are challenging the root assumptions of this game, rather than playing the racial "shell game" that Africa can only lose. IP: Logged
homeylu Member Posts: 333 Registered: May 2004	posted 28 June 2004 11:16 PM Rasol: Here are a few websites you can check out on the "A" group that I found interesting: http://www.archaeology.org/interactive/hierakonpolis/nubia.html and of couse the chicago oriental institute link posted earlier. You may also want to check out the Nubia Museum online-which is near Ausur's lovely town :-). http://www.numibia.net/nubia/intro.htm IP: Logged
homeylu Member Posts: 333 Registered: May 2004	posted 28 June 2004 11:20 PM Well put Rasol! IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 2060 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 28 June 2004 11:48 PM http://www.metimes.com/issue99-43/cultent/play_examines_the.htm Play examines the 'Nubian Issue' Hazem Azmy Special to the Middle East Times Al Talia Theater's Hekayat Nas Al Nahr (Tales of the River Dwellers), is set to reopen on October 20 with a number of modifications to the script, and will probably be one of the first Egyptian plays to deal with the so-called "Nubian issue." This issue concerns the sufferings of Nubians who were gradually forced out of their homeland in southern Egypt, and away from the Nile that defined their existence, when Nubia was flooded due to the construction and successive enlargements of the Aswan Dam. The final blow came with the construction and completion of the High Dam under Nasser's regime. Originally designed to be an adaptation of the Nubian writer hajjaj Adul's play Nas Al Nahr (The River Dwellers), the production evolved into an interrogation of Adul's world as a whole, with dramaturge Hazem Shehata and director Nasser Abdel Moneim supplementing their adaptation of the play with characters and motifs from four other non-dramatic works by the same author. Mokhtar, a thirty-something Cairene government employee, stands out as dramaturge Shehata's original addition to Adul's characters. Yet it would be wrong to read him, or any other character, as the production's "official voice." About Adul's five works, Shehata writes in the English section of the program notes, "one can trace a certain ideological voice commenting on the Nubian issue. This voice we kept intact here but also included other, conflicting ideological voices. The rationale is to allow each voice its moment of realization without favoring any particular voice over the others." As such, the production is neither an elegy for a lost Nubian paradise nor an apology for the officials who brought about the enlargement project. It is perhaps both, depending on which side of the fence one would like to come down on. In July 1999, almost halfway through the rehearsal process, Shehata traveled to the US to attend a training program. During his stay, he was repeatedly bombarded with slogans of "Free Nubia" and offers from Nubian "activists" of the "free world" to help Nubia gain independence from its Egyptian "colonizers." In the process of responding to such comments, the Egyptian director, naturally, had to speak about his latest work and the topic soon attracted attention. "Negotiations are now underway to have the play translated into English so that it may be presented in the US, in cooperation with an American troupe, as an example of the Egyptian 'black theater,'" Abdel Moneim says. Not unlike people of color in the US and elsewhere, Nubians have over the years been subjected to ideological manipulation and marginalization. This has resulted in the creation of a number of misconceptions, on both sides, that HekayatNas Al Nahr sets itself to challenge and deconstruct. For instance, Mokhtar takes it for granted that his friend Salama cannot be Nubian because of his fair complexion, only to discover that his intellectual friend belongs to a group called the Megraab, the local term for Nubians who are of Hungarian origin (during the Mameluke period many people from Eastern Europe, the Balkans and Cacasus were brought to Egypt, some of whom assimilated with the Egyptian population in the area known as Nubia). As the southern intellectual tells his Cairene friend, the people that are lumped together as Nubians are in fact a mixture of different ethnic groups (African, Arab, Hungarian, and Turkish) united, perhaps, by a common spirit. In this way Mokhtar stops believing in one more stereotype about Nubia - and so do we. But herein lies another challenge: "when dished out bluntly, the abundance of information included out of necessity in the play, may eventually reduce the drama to an unsolicited history lesson," says Shehata recalling the reservations of some critics who attended the production's trial run shortly before and during the Cairo International Festival for Experimental Theater. "We were particularly conscious of this pitfall while working on the revised version of the play," Abdel Moneim added without giving details. IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 29 June 2004 12:30 AM Egyptian colonizers? So the Nubians still have beef with the Egyptian government, because of continuous displacement by the Aswan dam construction. Or are they speaking of Arab groups coming from Egypt? By the way which ethnic group represents the majority of Sudanese population today, is it the decendants of the original Nubians or Sudanese, or the Arabized people? [This message has been edited by supercar (edited 29 June 2004).] IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 2060 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 29 June 2004 12:56 AM Sudan is a very hetrogenous population. Most people I believe are probabaly Nilotic types. There's different Nubian languages that are divided. IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 29 June 2004 03:07 AM quote: Originally posted by ausar: Sudan is a very hetrogenous population. Most people I believe are probabaly Nilotic types. There's different Nubian languages that are divided. I realize Sudan has a heterogeneous society. My question was in terms of percentage of ethnicity. Surely, there has to be a dominant group (not politically but in size) in the country. IP: Logged
rasol Member Posts: 227 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 29 June 2004 09:40 AM http://countrystudies.us/sudan/37.htm IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 01 July 2004 01:44 PM Whitewash of the Ancient Egyptian culture is slowly but surely loosing momentum, as more discoveries are made that connect the origins of some aspects of AE from within Africa. This makes it increasingly difficult to refute the role played by black Africans in bringing about this civilization. Most of these discoveries are now taking place in areas south of Egypt, such as the central Sahara, and the Egyptian-Nubian border. The excavations in these areas have just began! There is no telling what else is going to pop up. Here is an article that talks about a very aged 'black' mummy discovered in central Sahara, indicating that even mummification didn't originate in Egypt, but incorporated into the culture: http://www.fulcrumtv.com/blackmummy.htm IP: Logged
homeylu Member Posts: 333 Registered: May 2004	posted 01 July 2004 01:54 PM Supercar that as an excellent article. This is exactly the type of thing we have to do to help eliminate this "white-washing" let the evidence keep coming! IP: Logged
homeylu Member Posts: 333 Registered: May 2004	posted 01 July 2004 01:55 PM Supercar that as an excellent article. This is exactly the type of thing we have to do to help eliminate this "white-washing" let the evidence keep coming! IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 01 July 2004 02:40 PM quote: Originally posted by homeylu: Supercar that as an excellent article. This is exactly the type of thing we have to do to help eliminate this "white-washing" let the evidence keep coming! It is what I call "just the tip of the ice-berg". It would be encouraging to see posters provide more references on new discoveries that wipe out AE myths, because believe it or not, there are members and non-members who simply stay on the sidelines to view posts on this forum just for the fun of it, and to enjoy others exchange opinions. So you could be influencing more people than you think! IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 2060 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 01 July 2004 02:49 PM The ''black'' mummy being found in Fezzan Libya is very old news. The mummy was originally found around in the 50's but I never heard of it myself untill I read a book called African Beginnings by Oliva Vahlomos[sp]. The archaeologist who found the mummy was named Fabinzo Mori. You might also read their book on the early life in the Sahara. IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 01 July 2004 03:05 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: The ''black'' mummy being found in Fezzan Libya is very old news. The mummy was originally found around in the 50's but I never heard of it myself untill I read a book called African Beginnings by Oliva Vahlomos[sp]. The archaeologist who found the mummy was named Fabinzo Mori. You might also read their book on the early life in the Sahara. This is precisely one of the reasons that references should be brought to attention. This is old news, but I bet not many people know about it. Discoveries like these are downplayed, and only people with a drive are willing to do some research in order to re-surface such events. This mummy is part of an on-going archeological process still in it's infancy, and more stories are yet to be told. Who would have dreamed that the Sahara in the remote past was able to host a complex society on it's way to a bigger civilization. As this mummy indicated, it wasn't the first one either, because of the complexity with which it was undertaken. We know that members of this society came from within Africa, because their dwelling places showed artwork of animals, such as the crocodile, hippo, and so forth, which are mainly present in the interior of the content, and aren't found in the Northern African regions! [This message has been edited by supercar (edited 01 July 2004).] IP: Logged
S.Mohammad Member Posts: 157 Registered: Apr 2004	posted 02 July 2004 02:37 AM quote: Originally posted by ausar: Sudan is a very hetrogenous population. Most people I believe are probabaly Nilotic types. There's different Nubian languages that are divided. Lower Nubians are somewhat heterogenous along with SOME of the Sudanese Upperclass who mixed with some Arabs, but Sudanese are mostly homogenous IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 02 July 2004 06:15 PM What is going on with the SCA (Supreme Council of Antiquities)? Their attitude is an indication of the attempt to restrict new findings on AE. Here is a quote from an Egyptian news website on the "Nefertiti mummy" findings: "British and American Egyptologists also criticise Fletcher for breaking professional protocol by broadcasting the finding to corporate media rather than first writing about it in an academic journal. In response to Fletcher's alleged violations of SCA rules, Hawass has written a letter of complaint to both Brothwell and the Discovery Channel, also accusing Fletcher of circulating spurious evidence. "I am sorry to see a scholar who has earned a PhD deceive the world in this way, and flout the rules of a country that has respected scholars and opened the archaeological sites of Egypt to more than 300 foreign missions," said Hawass in his letter to Brothwell. Before taking the allegations against Fletcher to the permanent committee, which, according to the SCA's code of ethics, would deprive the expedition or Fletcher from carrying out further research in Egypt, Hawass is waiting for Brothwell's response to his request for an urgent and complete justification of what happened and why the York expedition did not follow the rules. Meanwhile, on 22 August The Times of London on-line published the opinion that "Fletcher was a victim of a collusion between international politics and the world of archaeology, glamorized in Hollywood films such as Indiana Jones." "All these [accusations] are a pack of lies," Hawass told the Weekly. "We have put restrictions on future work in Egypt not only for foreign missions but for Egyptians as well, in order to pay attention more to conservation, preservation and documentation work in sites threatened by modern development." Restrictions on potential Egyptologists to uncover previously neglected findings, or new ones, and perhaps to come up with new theories based on new findings, is another way of hampering public scrutinity on current AE theories fed through standard national curricula. The controversial nature of findings such as the "Nefertiti mummy", should generate enough public interest to push for more findings, in order to substantiate claims of such findings. Who knows, due to new controversial AE findings, public interest is going to speed up further studies that might end up debunking old/present theories. But it seems like some people have a vested interested in keeping things the way they are! IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 2060 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 02 July 2004 06:51 PM Don't know why you are defending Fletcher when she made the claim of finding red/blonde mummy hairs in pre-dyanstic Egyptian burials. One minute she said they were straight and the next minute she said they were curly. She made these claims without any sunstanial proof except her own slef proclaimed scholarship. She took hair from rural Upper Egyptian people which varies from kinky to wavy but both textures are equally very course in texture to claim it was caucasian. Makes no sense to me really. Hawass I agree is very restructive on the remains of AE soceity to the point it's almost ridicule. Hawass is very narrow minded and arrogant but I will have to take Hawass side on Joanne Fletcher who is twice as worse as Hawass. IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 02 July 2004 07:15 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: Don't know why you are defending Fletcher when she made the claim of finding red/blonde mummy hairs in pre-dyanstic Egyptian burials. One minute she said they were straight and the next minute she said they were curly. She made these claims without any sunstanial proof except her own slef proclaimed scholarship. She took hair from rural Upper Egyptian people which varies from kinky to wavy but both textures are equally very course in texture to claim it was caucasian. Makes no sense to me really. Hawass I agree is very restructive on the remains of AE soceity to the point it's almost ridicule. Hawass is very narrow minded and arrogant but I will have to take Hawass side on Joanne Fletcher who is twice as worse as Hawass. I have to clarify that I don't endorse any one particular Egyptologist or Anthropologist, except a few like S.O.Y Keita, Obenga and C.A. Diop. Certainly not defending Joanne Fletcher. What I am saying is that, Egyptologists whether we agree with them or not, we shouldn't restrict their efforts to uncover new historical artifacts, and other stuff. You see, Fletcher's findings, just by being controversial allows the public to want to know more. Now people have a bigger desire to find out the truth about Nefertiti, for which there will have to be more findings. Plus, students will now question some of the things they used to take for granted in the standard curricula. The idea of allowing more findings is what I am defending, not Fletcher herself! [This message has been edited by supercar (edited 02 July 2004).] IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 2060 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 02 July 2004 07:26 PM Fletcher is not an anthropologist nor has any degree in this particular field. She made claims she could not support so know her rights to excavate are revoked. People in the scholarly community publish results with a critique of their peers which is something Fletcher never bothered to adhere to. Even within Egyptological circles there are written rules a person must go by. Even Diop when he was alive he sense enough to publish some of his findings in peer reviewed journals. Not one article of Fletcher's exists in any peer review journal. IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 02 July 2004 07:37 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: Fletcher is not an anthropologist nor has any degree in this particular field. She made claims she could not support so know her rights to excavate are revoked. People in the scholarly community publish results with a critique of their peers which is something Fletcher never bothered to adhere to. Even within Egyptological circles there are written rules a person must go by. Even Diop when he was alive he sense enough to publish some of his findings in peer reviewed journals. Not one article of Fletcher's exists in any peer review journal. Once again, I have to stress that I am not defending Fletcher! I am only defending the removal of too many restrictions that hinder the prospect of finding new crucial archeological evidence. By the way, I never said she was an anthropologist. I was talking about Egyptologists, archeologists, and anthropologists in general. Is Fletcher not an Egyptologist, whether you agree with her or not? IP: Logged
kifaru Junior Member Posts: 4 Registered: Jul 2004	posted 05 July 2004 09:41 AM Hi, I'm new to posting on this forum but I have been reading for quite some time. But to the question of stopping the white wash: I know this is somewhat difficult when Arts and Entertainment channel, History Channel, and Discovery Channel show programs about AE but only show people from later Ptolemeic period. It would be simple to just show more color photographs of royal AE's from all of the known Dynasties. http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/tuthmosisIII.html Who can argue with this? It would also take training objective scientists of other than caucasian and caucasian ethinicites to work together. Eliminating afrocentric pseudo-scientist crackpots would help too You also have to dismantle the racial framework of the science because people for the most part are not ready to give up their preconcieved notions of racial superiority. IP: Logged
kifaru Junior Member Posts: 4 Registered: Jul 2004	posted 05 July 2004 09:43 AM Hi, I'm new to posting on this forum but I have been reading for quite some time. But to the question of stopping the white wash: I know this is somewhat difficult when Arts and Entertainment channel, History Channel, and Discovery Channel show programs about AE but only show people from later Ptolemeic period. It would be simple to just show more color photographs of royal AE's from all of the known Dynasties. http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/tuthmosisIII.html Who can argue with this? It would also take training objective scientists of other than caucasian and caucasian ethinicites to work together. Eliminating afrocentric pseudo-scientist crackpots would help too You also have to dismantle the racial framework of the science because people for the most part are not ready to give up their preconcieved notions of racial superiority. IP: Logged
kifaru Junior Member Posts: 4 Registered: Jul 2004	posted 05 July 2004 09:45 AM Hi, I'm new to posting on this forum but I have been reading for quite some time. But to the question of stopping the white wash: I know this is somewhat difficult when Arts and Entertainment channel, History Channel, and Discovery Channel show programs about AE but only show people from later Ptolemeic period. It would be simple to just show more color photographs of royal AE's from all of the known Dynasties. http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/tuthmosisIII.html Who can argue with this? It would also take training objective scientists of other than caucasian and caucasian ethinicites to work together. Eliminating afrocentric pseudo-scientist crackpots would help too You also have to dismantle the racial framework of the science because people for the most part are not ready to give up their preconcieved notions of racial superiority. IP: Logged
kifaru Junior Member Posts: 4 Registered: Jul 2004	posted 05 July 2004 09:47 AM Hi, I'm new to posting on this forum but I have been reading for quite some time. But to the question of stopping the white wash: I know this is somewhat difficult when Arts and Entertainment channel, History Channel, and Discovery Channel show programs about AE but only show people from later Ptolemeic period. It would be simple to just show more color photographs of royal AE's from all of the known Dynasties. http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/tuthmosisIII.html Who can argue with this? It would also take training objective scientists of other than caucasian and caucasian ethinicites to work together. Eliminating afrocentric pseudo-scientist crackpots would help too You also have to dismantle the racial framework of the science because people for the most part are not ready to give up their preconcieved notions of racial superiority. IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 05 July 2004 02:11 PM quote: Originally posted by kifaru: Hi, I'm new to posting on this forum but I have been reading for quite some time. But to the question of stopping the white wash: I know this is somewhat difficult when Arts and Entertainment channel, History Channel, and Discovery Channel show programs about AE but only show people from later Ptolemeic period. It would be simple to just show more color photographs of royal AE's from all of the known Dynasties. http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/tuthmosisIII.html Who can argue with this? It would also take training objective scientists of other than caucasian and caucasian ethinicites to work together. Eliminating afrocentric pseudo-scientist crackpots would help too You also have to dismantle the racial framework of the science because people for the most part are not ready to give up their preconcieved notions of racial superiority. Kifaru, welcome to the board. You've made the right decision to interact and share your opinion, rather than remaining on the sidelines. As far as the "pseudo-scientist crackpot" Afrocentrics go, who are these people? I imagine there are people who share the same opinion as Afrocentric "scholars" and are sympathetic to their cause, but these scholars are certified people (with degrees in the field). Naturally other scholars will disagree with them for political reasons, and do their best to discredit them as much as possible. Usually other scholars and classicists like Lefkowitz pick "fans" or "admirers" of Afrocentric scholars, and take their amateurish arguments with other people on discussion boards, as the work of the real Afrocentric scholars in order to refute them. This is precisely what Afrocentric Scholar Asante pointed out in his counter response to Lefkowitz's "Not out of Africa". I don't take the words of amateurs or uncertified people who call themselves "Afrocentric", even though I listen to what they have to say. I do further research to accept only facts. I refer to established and certified scholars and scientists like C.A. Diop, Shomarka Keita, Rick Kittles, and so on. These people never based their findings on what other people said, but based them on proven scientific research and made their cases to peer scientists and scholars. I have yet to hear classics authors and scholars successfully refute these scientists and scholars. In fact more evidence is mounting to support them. For the most part, in the scientific circles, it is becoming increasingly known that AE was a Black African culture, and not some imported European or far East culture. More findings show that certain practices originated south of Egypt, as opposed to the Northern coastal region. It is the academics that fail to reflect new discoveries. You know who control these academics...I hope I don't have to elaborate on that! IP: Logged
homeylu Member Posts: 333 Registered: May 2004	posted 05 July 2004 02:34 PM Welcome Kifaru, If you click on the paper and pencil icon, you should be able to edit your multiple entries, which were somehow duplicated by mistake. I also see that you visit one of my favorite online sites-there's a wealth of information there. But its unfortunate that our kids have to view a westernized version of the AE, rather than the true depiction of how they view themselves. If you think no one could argue with what you posted, then you will really have fun with this site: (It's Wally's a regular on this board) Please be sure to scroll your mouse over the photos and get a good laugh like I did. ESPECIALLY the washed up version of Queen_Tiye, I nearly fell over laughing off that one. (Be warned that Wally doesn't hold his tongue in the event that you decide to read the contents next to the photos, but I love that about him)http://www.geocities.com/wally_mo/egypt_mad.html [This message has been edited by homeylu (edited 05 July 2004).] IP: Logged
homeylu Member Posts: 333 Registered: May 2004	posted 05 July 2004 02:41 PM Supercar I have witnessed a few frivolous attacks on C.A. Diop, nothing worth noting of course. My god how I wish he was still alive today to counter some of his critics. The most interesting and objective part of his book "The African Origin of Civilization" was in the last chapters "Reply to a critic", Diop tore that critic apart piece by piece. Not to mention he was fair enough to publish the critics opinions so that no one would get a one-sided argument, like some of these other scholars. IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 05 July 2004 02:52 PM quote: Originally posted by homeylu: Supercar I have witnessed a few frivolous attacks on C.A. Diop, nothing worth noting of course. My god how I wish he was still alive today to counter some of his critics. The most interesting and objective part of his book "The African Origin of Civilization" was in the last chapters "Reply to a critic", Diop tore that critic apart piece by piece. Not to mention he was fair enough to publish the critics opinions so that no one would get a one-sided argument, like some of these other scholars. You are right. It is an unfortunate thing, but there will always be someone trying to fill in the gap, in order to rebuttal his critics. Some of the people I mentioned earlier, like Shomarka Keita, have turned out to be reliable successors to what C.A.Diop was trying to prove all along! I am sure there will be other candidates in the future, who will continue to work from where C.A. Diop stopped. His efforts were not in vain. [This message has been edited by supercar (edited 05 July 2004).] IP: Logged
ausar Moderator Posts: 2060 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 05 July 2004 03:55 PM I believe the crackpots he is talking about are the melaninist who talk of magic melanin or other unecessary things. I agree that one must avoid the pitfalls of such scholarship. IP: Logged
homeylu Member Posts: 333 Registered: May 2004	posted 05 July 2004 04:35 PM quote: Originally posted by ausar: I believe the crackpots he is talking about are the melaninist who talk of magic melanin or other unecessary things. I agree that one must avoid the pitfalls of such scholarship. Or maybe pseudo-science as in Francis Welsing's "The Isis Papers", who on the back cover claims "its destined to change history". But I have to admit some of these works make for good entertainement IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 05 July 2004 06:33 PM quote: Originally posted by homeylu: Or maybe pseudo-science as in Francis Welsing's "The Isis Papers", who on the back cover claims "its destined to change history". But I have to admit some of these works make for good entertainement It is true that one has to use good judgement when looking for reliable sources. It makes no sense to just rely on a few, when there are multiple sources out there. Almost anyone has an instinct for truth when they see one. It is the question of whether he/she wants to acknowledge it! IP: Logged
multisphinx Member Posts: 102 Registered: Feb 2004	posted 06 July 2004 03:36 PM One way of stopping the white washing of AE is to go on other forums and debate with the ignorent and prove to them that the information they have is false and lay out the truth. Their are alot of ignorent ppl these days, that will give u the weakest arguments in return. Their are so many race forums i visited and alot of ppl just lay out things out of their minds. I was once like that, but not until i started searching and reading to find the truth that i am able to know my self who the AE were really. IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 06 July 2004 05:45 PM quote: Originally posted by multisphinx: One way of stopping the white washing of AE is to go on other forums and debate with the ignorent and prove to them that the information they have is false and lay out the truth. Their are alot of ignorent ppl these days, that will give u the weakest arguments in return. Their are so many race forums i visited and alot of ppl just lay out things out of their minds. I was once like that, but not until i started searching and reading to find the truth that i am able to know my self who the AE were really. You make a good point. It is certainly one of the effective ways to influence minds. But I think the biggest impact would be made by the change in Academia. Current standard curricula fail to address the new findings in Egyptology. Here are some links that I have found in the web. They certainly make a good reading! Clyde Winters writes about the Proto-Sahara culture and it's impact on pre-dynastic Egypt: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/8919/theory2.htm There seems to also be an argument about as to whether the A-Group Nubians influenced pre-dynastic Egypt or not. In order words, it is being argued that AE had miraculously developed itself without influenced from south of Egypt, including Nubia: Here are some other twists to Nubian A-group story: http://www.arkamani.org/vol_5/archaeology_5/a_group_variation.htm#Conclusion One from an Egyptian website: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2000/508/fo3.htm The same website issued the following: Underneath this picture, was the following comment: The discovery of this incense burner dating to the dawn of history (3100 BC, or even earlier) at Qustul, in Nubia, raised tremendous interest among scholars. Uncovered by a mission from the Oriental Institute of Chicago in the1960s, the piece depicts a seated ruler, a palace portal, a crown and a hawk -- all motifs that would later become symbols of Pharaonic rule in Egypt. The question thus arose whether the piece was a predynastic artefact that happened to be taken to Nubia by Egyptians (the interpretation of most Egyptologists), or evidence that the kingship ideal actually originated in Nubia (as is claimed by some African and Afro-American scholars). [This message has been edited by supercar (edited 06 July 2004).] IP: Logged
rasol Member Posts: 227 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 06 July 2004 06:42 PM Sweet links supercar. IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 06 July 2004 07:07 PM quote: Originally posted by rasol: Sweet links supercar. Thanks Rasol. Here is another interesting link developed by one of those rare "White men" who openly acknowledge the black roots of Ancient Egypt. The guy's name is Dr. Joel Freeman. When I first came across it, I had not associated the website with a white man. Any way here goes... http://www.freemaninstitute.com/RTGhistory.htm [This message has been edited by supercar (edited 06 July 2004).] IP: Logged
Kysos Junior Member Posts: 4 Registered: Jul 2004	posted 08 July 2004 11:01 AM Please re post the abstract on the Somali that was published in Denmark I think. I want the full reference. Thank you. IP: Logged
blackman Member Posts: 107 Registered: Feb 2003	posted 08 July 2004 04:05 PM supercar, I used that site before. It has good information and a good photo gallery. quote: Originally posted by supercar: Thanks Rasol. Here is another interesting link developed by one of those rare "White men" who openly acknowledge the black roots of Ancient Egypt. The guy's name is Dr. Joel Freeman. When I first came across it, I had not associated the website with a white man. Any way here goes... http://www.freemaninstitute.com/RTGhistory.htm [This message has been edited by supercar (edited 06 July 2004).] IP: Logged
supercar Member Posts: 449 Registered: Jun 2004	posted 08 July 2004 04:26 PM quote: Originally posted by Kysos: Please re post the abstract on the Somali that was published in Denmark I think. I want the full reference. Thank you. Kysos, who are you referring to? quote: Posted by blackman: supercar, I used that site before. It has good information and a good photo gallery. No doubt! What is more remarkable, is that the webmaster is a "white" guy. [This message has been edited by supercar (edited 08 July 2004).] IP: Logged
kenndo Junior Member Posts: 20 Registered: Jul 2004	posted 22 July 2004 01:17 PM