posted 26 December 2004 07:37 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
Supercar
You did initially plainly state the Copts truly are of nonEgyptian
origin and used Gadalla to back you up. Of late you did modify your
initial statement to allow primeval Egyptian origins for Copts.

---

I don't how many times I have to explain myself. Yes, I did say Copts have "NON-Egyptian" origins, and I still stand by that. I based the topic on Gadalla's excerpts, I haven't wavered from that. You might want to re-read previous posts of the thread, before you come to another wrong conclusion. You claimed to have read the link, and felt that Gadalla was wrong, and didn't make sense. I am not sure, but now it seems that you are implying that you aren't questioning Gadalla's excerpt per se, but my wording. I will state again; the premises has NOT shifted and it is still the same: Of all Egyptians, Copts can't be considered the "True" descendants of indigenous Ancient Egyptians. They have "non-Egyptian" origins. I hope this embodies my stance on this issue! I provided the link that explains the statement; how you interpret the enclosed message, is entirely on you.

posted 26 December 2004 08:21 PM            

But I am now more honestly confused than ever as to what your
own opinion is. Is it A or B? And forgive me for being unable to see
anything other than the one statement flatly contradicts the other.

A non-Egyptian origins of Copts

B "Copts" tracing their lineage back to pre-dynastic and dynastic Ancient Egyptians.

But can you chose A or B?

Do you believe Copts are foreign invaders who stole Egyptian
identity and ever afterwards opposed the culture of their
supposedly true nationality Syrian or Greek? If so, why arent they
Syrian Orthodox or Greek Orthodox, why a distinct Egyptian identity
and mentality inimical to the Christianity of Syria or Greece?

posted 26 December 2004 08:45 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

Do you believe Copts are foreign invaders who stole Egyptian
identity and ever afterwards opposed the culture of their
supposedly true nationality Syrian or Greek? If so, why arent they
Syrian Orthodox or Greek Orthodox, why a distinct Egyptian identity
and mentality inimical to the Christianity of Syria or Greece?

---

Let it be emphasized that both of the main religions of Egypt have foreign originators but both Islam and Christianity in Egypt also have indigenous elements added to them that make both distinctly Egyptian.

posted 26 December 2004 08:48 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

Ive extensively given my view of Gadallas work, I find it biased
whenever people of biblical religions are his topic.

But I am now more honestly confused than ever as to what your
own opinion is. Is it A or B? And forgive me for being unable to see
anything other than the one statement flatly contradicts the other.

A non-Egyptian origins of Copts

B "Copts" tracing their lineage back to pre-dynastic and dynastic Ancient Egyptians.

But can you chose A or B?

Do you believe Copts are foreign invaders who stole Egyptian
identity and ever afterwards opposed the culture of their
supposedly true nationality Syrian or Greek? If so, why arent they
Syrian Orthodox or Greek Orthodox, why a distinct Egyptian identity
and mentality inimical to the Christianity of Syria or Greece?

---

Based on the case evidence I choose A.

It can be demonstrated as a matter of historical record, genetics and linguistics that Copt's have some Greco Syrian Origins....this does not negate also the possibility that some Copt's have some indiginous origins, but you give me no choice between A and B so.....

Meanwhile, no counter argument presented herein actually demonstrates premise B.

The fact that Native Kemetic language is still spoken in in Christian liturgy does not prove the lineage of the Copts.

It is actually easy to demonstrate how and individual could be a member of the Coptic Christian Church, live in Alexandria, speak Coptic and be entirely of Syro-Greek extraction with no kmt[rome] blood whatsover.

Point of Irony: Consider Egyptgurl's comments about Black Egyptians being Sudanese and Nubian. Well...Ancient Egyptian language originates in Sudan and Nubia. If you are using language to prove lineage then you are saying that the Copts originate in Sudan and Nubia. (?)
This will come as quite a shock to Egyptgurl.

Doubtless some of them in fact do.....but many are clearly descendant from Eurasian immigrants from Greco-Roman times. It seems like you are using the liturgical language to deny that, but it's somewhat of a non-sequitor no?

posted 26 December 2004 08:53 PM            

quote:

---

The Copts are no more the "true descendants" of the Pharoahs than the other 90% of Egyptians.

---

I agree, and actually think that is the point of Gadalla's article.

posted 26 December 2004 09:08 PM            

H. V. Morton views on the evolution of incepient Coptic Christianity
Read past his Eurocentric Christian bias to see the native Egyptian
nationalism in the founding of the Coptic Christianity.

I had not come to Egypt to see the familiar land of the Pharaohs,
but the almost unknown Egypt of St. Mark. Egypt has been a Moslem
country for so long that many people are surprised to learn she was
once one of the cornerstones of Christianity. Even those who know
this are sometimes unaware that Christianity has never died out in
Egypt, and that nearly a million Egyptians, who regard themselves as
the true descendants of the ancient Egyptians, still owe spiritual
allegiance to an Egyptian Pope, the ii3th successor of St. Mark.

The present head of the Egyptian Church is Yuannes (John) XIX, who is
now eighty years old. His splendid title is: " The Most Holy Pope and
Patriarch of the Great City of Alexandria and of all the Land of Egypt,
of Jerusalem the Holy City, of Nubia, Abyssinia and Pentapolis, and of
all the Preaching of St. Mark."

St. Mark the Evangelist is said to have been the founder of the
Egyptian Church and to have been martyred and buried in Alexandria,
where his relics were venerated until the Moslem Conquest. His first
converts were Greeks, and Greek was the language of the Church. Second
only in authority to Rome, and at one period her superior in intellect,
the Patriarchate of Alexandria was one of the pillars of the Universal
Church until the Fifth Century. Such names as St. Clement of Alexandria,
St. Athanasius, Origen, and St. Anthony, the founder of Monasticism,
indicate the contribution made by Egypt to Christianity during the first
great period of her Church.

In order to understand how this intellectual equal of Rome crashed
down in schism and heresy, it is necessary to know that Egypt was
ruled from Constantinople by a Greek minority. This was nothing new
in itself. For centuries Egypt had endured foreign masters, but so
long as the Egyptians worshipped Amen-Re and the old gods, they were
a race apart and lived in a different world from that of Alexandria,
always the centre of Greek influence in Egypt. When the whole country
became Christian, however, and millions of men and women up and down
the Nile deserted the ancient temples and went to church, they found
themselves in the spiritual world of their masters; and the result was
the demand for a national church. Intense racial and other differences
boiled up and took the form of a theological definition known as
Monophysism, which concerns the nature of our Lord. The Monophysites
declared that Christ was not Man, but only God, and that His earthly
life was therefore only an apparition. This heresy was condemned by
the Council of Chalcedon in 451 A.D., and from that moment the national
church of Egypt separated itself from the rest of Christendom and went
its own way in heresy.

Morton wrote in the late 30s . Heres his biblio http://www.coptic.org/language/morton/bibliography.html

posted 26 December 2004 09:21 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:

The Copts are no more the "true descendants" of the Pharoahs than the other 90% of Egyptians.

---

And neither are they any less a "true descendant" of the
Pharoahs than the other 90% of Egyptians, which some deny them
solely because of their miscegenation.

posted 26 December 2004 09:23 PM            

We have no evidence that the Nile Valley embraced either Christianity or Islam in record numbers. Many early Egyptians were forced into Christianty by the manhandling of figures like St. Shenute,St. Cyril,and you name it. The following figures brag about destoying temples,and killing priests.

The Egyptians embracing Christianity against the Greeks and Romans is a myth,and something that western historians falsely rely upon when telling the history of the Late Anttique Egyptian history.

One book I recommend on this subject is Religion in Roman Egypt by David Frankfurther. He breaks down how indigenous Egyptians kept the ancient Egyptian traditions,and resisted against Christianity.

posted 26 December 2004 09:25 PM            

quote:

---

surprised to learn she was
once one of the cornerstones of Christianity. Even those who know
this are sometimes unaware that Christianity has never died out in
Egypt, and that nearly a million Egyptians, who regard themselves as
the true descendants of the ancient Egyptians, still owe spiritual
allegiance to an Egyptian Pope, the ii3th successor of St. Mark

---

Sounds like a classic tale of religious imperialism to me.

Perhaps the problem is that I look at it from a secular point of view.

Are you a devout Christian alTakuri?

quote:

---

And neither are they any less a "true descendant" of the
Pharoahs than the other 90% of Egyptians,

---

Actually I think we all agree on this point

quote:

---

which some deny them
solely because of their miscegenation.

---

posted 26 December 2004 09:43 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
alTakruri,I still don't understand why people who claim direct desendants of the ancient Egyptians would destoy the temples and kill the priests. Are you aware that Philae in Southern Egypt was the last temple in Egypt to be closed? Are you aware that the temple still continued to play a vital role in the rural Egyptians lifestyle, so then why would they destoy the temples and kill the priests if this is so.]

---

Religious rivalry as in the days of Akenaten and his so called heresy
where he tried to blot out the old religion and in turn the old
religion tried to blot out Akenaton and Atenism. Werent they all true Kmtyw?

It shouldnt be hard to find instances in most every country where
indigenee converts destroyed as many vestiges of the old religion as
they could. That fact doesnt make them any less of the bloodlines
than the those of the religion they sought to obliterate.

posted 26 December 2004 09:44 PM            

As Lianius of Antioch describeds the rampages during the 380's, their ''black-robbed tribes'' would hasten to attack the temples with sticks and bars of iron........ Then utter desolation follows, with the stripping of roofs; demolition of walls, the tearing down of statues and the overthrow of altars, and the priests must keep quiet or die. After demolishing one, the scurry to another and to a third, and trophy is pilled on trophy. Such out rages occur even in the cities but they are most common in the countryside[37]

By the middle of the fifth century monastic leaders like Shenoute,Makarious of Tkow, and Moses of Abydos were gaining modest fame of burning temples,killing priests,and invading homes to destroy private shrines. And indeed, the impetus for such havoc came not from Roman eddicts against ''paganism'' but rather from the whims and machinations of bishops. It was a matter of charismatic leadership,mobilization, and systematic iconoclastism,occuring outside govermental direction. [38]

page 278

The main participants both outsiders and insiders seem to agree, were monks-hardly suprising in that they led lives somewhat greater application to that polarizing idealogy than thsoe outside the monasteries. And in many,perhaps most, aspect of the active invovlment of monks indestruction of sacred things in understandable of these ideaological grounds: in their rampages they were extrpating heathenism according to biblical precepts, waging a kind of Holy war, purifying the landscape for the presence of Christ. Perhaps too they were avenging those bygone martyrs, the lurid accounts of whose tortures were avidly read in the monasteries.[39]

page 278

Dakhla oases the central temples of Kellis and Kysis were functioning well into the fourth century. The Vita and sermons of Shenoute of Atripe describe his battles with native piety in the region of his monastery; and crediable description of traditional local religion[surrounding a god obsurleynamed ''Kothos'' at the time of his own crusades.[29] Eunapius,Rufinus, and Zachariah of Myhtilene all describe a fairly thriving cult center within fifty kilometers of Alexzandria that could only be replaced--forcibly near the end of the fifth century.[30] A great number of papyri make reference to priests,festivals and temple operations through the fourth century. And in the middle of the fourth century an anonymous Syrian merchant visiting Alexzandria gathered the following about the regions up the Nile that he was not himself able to visit : [Here the people are] eminently reverent towards the gods. At no other place are the mysteries of the gods , thus celebrated as they wre from ancient times through today..... For truly there we know that the gods have lived and still live .....[In Egypt] the worshippers offer the gods most particulary representations[historias]. And there are all sorts of sacred objects and temples decorated every manner; they are full of sacred custodians,priests, attendants,diviners,adoratores and the best holy men. Everything is done according to custom. And thus you find the altars always illuminated with fire and fall of sacrifices and incense, the altar cloths emiting a divine odor as the aromic fill censers.[31]

page 19

How should we balance these various testimonies against the even more extensive images of an entrenched and even multiform Christian instituion in fourth century Egypt?[32] The perpective increasingly embrace by historians of late antiquity and taken in book argues the collective nature of a religion in late antique rural cultures, that it was not individuals, but small societies-entire villages that embraced or rejected Christianization or responded to its imperial or monastic agents and thus that ''conversion'' was slow and patchwork process,dependent upon the singular charismaof motivated bishop or abbot rather than some pagan decline or ''spirtual vacum''[32]

page 20

In the story of the monk Moses of Abydos, who does battle with a ''demon'' named Bes in an Egyptian temple, the anonymous author explicitly invoke Elijah and Daniel but gives crediable information about native piety that could depend on no literary sources: the specific ranks of Egyptian priests he encounters,local concern for temples,and the name of iconography of Bes,who was the most popular deities among ordinary Egyptians of the Roman period[40]. Even Shenoute breaks polemical caricature occasionally to give a ''demon'' local names [Min,Petebe,Shai all gods attested in the third and latter centuries or a detail of popular religious piety[figurines,amulets] of which we have an immense corpus for the Roman period.[41] Besa's description of a village's attempts to repel Shenute and his monks using ritual substances conform to what we know of offical execration rites praticed in Egypt in the temples from ancient times.[42]

page 22

Zachariah of Mytilene eyewitness account of the desutrction of the Isis temple at Menouthis can be dated quite precisely ,around 484 C.E.[44]

One finds,especially in Egypt, that the vanguard in destoying native religion consisted of the holy men,the charismatic bishops, and the monks that followed them. And, generally partaking in the same culture as the devotes of temples and traditional images, these forces cared little for the nuances or even the existence of the imperial codes, instead rampaging freely and homicidally throughout the countryside with the distinct sensation of extripating demons, ''Anti paganism'' in this mode becomes a king of native iconoclastic movement whose religious and social roots are perhaps more acurately sought in studies of comparable cases in modern soceities, than in putative or professed links with scripture or laws[as I shall explore in chapter 6.[75]

page 27

The imperial religious eddicts had only s msrginal effect on the traditional pratice of religion in the late empire, certainly contributing an atmosphere of persecution and eroding the civil authority of cults and their personel,but hardly affecting local praticein village or city. Indeed, an eddict of 423 levels strict penalities against any Christians, who like the Coptic monks, ransacked the homes[and by extension,private shrines] of pagans who are living quietly and attempting nothing disorderly or contrary to the law''[16.10.24]

page 27

A far more compelling proposition for the crippling of Egyptian religion over the course of the Roman empire has focused on the economic state of its infacstructe.[58] Agustus's Egyptian program consisted of placing a Roman offical as ''High Priest of Alexzandria and Egypt'' and consolidating priestly authority ,tradition,lifestyle,and economic livelihood according to a Gnoman,or manual of a imperial administrative office, the Idios Logos. The religious infacstructure was thus more closely monitored in Egypt than in any other province, a fact visable in the outpouring of offical papyri concerning circumcision ,temple land holdings and inventories,and oaths of priestly office,delivered in Greek for Roman administration purposes.[59]

page 21

And it is this kind of piety which the temple is the symbolic or projected center. Not the alleged ''passive'' piety that might continue or die with temples, that we find still continuing in the fifth century ,according to an anonymous Coptic homily whose author wanted to channel those active sentiments toward the Christian cult of martyrs;[There are among us today whose worship the ''poetic'' form of demons--[forms] contrived from the beginning in their deceitfulness and deluding people of healing cults........

....some of them pratice abominations in city and village. For it is said that some of them ablute their children in polluted water and water from the arena, from the theather, and moreover they pour all over themselves water with incantations[spoken over it], and they break their clay pots claiming it repels the evil eye. Some tie amulets by men---those men [men] who provide a place for the dwelling of demons----while other annoint themselves with oil that is evil and incontations and such things that they tie on their hands and necks[164]

page 29

Priests in early fifth century Panopolis had enough political acumen and self cofidence to haul Abbot Shenoute before a magistrate in Antinopolis [two hundread kilometers down the Nile].17] The culture of the priestly family is still in the memory of a Theban monk of the late fourth or early fifth century:' I was the son of a priest of the pagans. When I was a child I would sit and watch my father proceeding many times to offer sacrifice to the image.''[118] A contemporaneous legend recalls the purity of the priestly family : when a monk asked a village priest replied,'' I cannot give her to you unless I learn [its appropriateness] from my god.[19] The position of priest in Egyptian soceity still fell into partcular ranks and functions through the fourth and fifth centuries. We find the ''sealer of the sacred calves'', traditionally vital role of the temple's animals, seeking another priest's arrest in the late third or early -fourth century Oxyhrhynchus.[20]

the fifth century hagiographer of Moses of Abydos counts the saint'smurderious accomplishmentsin terms of oueed-priests[twenty-three dead] and hont priests[the higher ranking hm ntr priests,commonly translated 'prophets'',[seven dead].[21] In 373 C.E. the priesthood includes functions of ''first and second hm-ntr'' and a high priest[eng wb'3]; cheif baker E.E. g. 'mr3'3]'' ,scribe of the sacred book[Eg sh mtd -ntr]'', who is responsible for gilding an image of Cleopatra; and other obsure titles. In 407 C.E. we find a master of secrets[Eg [hry sst].'',and in 452 a ''cheif adorner of images[proto to listes] [22] The priest in ritual processionseem still to have been a typical sight in the Egyptian landscape wheither in the massive processions of the boat of Khunum through the regiuon of third-century Esna or the small group observed by Apa Apollo in fourth century Hermopolis [Ashmunein], whose ''priest in a Bacchic frenzy together with the people would carry [a divine image] in procession through the villages.''[23]

pages 201-202

All of this excerpts are from:

Religion in Roman Egypt

David Frankfurther

posted 26 December 2004 09:52 PM            

quote:

---

Religious rivalry as in the days of Akenaten and his so called heresy
where he tried to blot out the old religion and in turn the old
religion tried to blot out Akenaton and Atenism. Werent they all true Kmtyw?

---

posted 26 December 2004 09:54 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
alTakruri,I still don't understand why people who claim direct desendants of the ancient Egyptians would destoy the temples and kill the priests.

---

Akhenaten closed temples and forced people to practice traditional Egyptian religion in secret. One or two renegade priests don't represent the Copts in general.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

Are you aware that Philae in Southern Egypt was the last temple in Egypt to be closed? Are you aware that the temple still continued to play a vital role in the rural Egyptians lifestyle,so then why would they destoy the temples and kill the priests if this is so.

---

Who specifically was responsible for killing the priests and closing the temples? It was always my understanding that the last temples were closed by the Romans.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

One book I recommend on this subject is Religion in Roman Egypt by David Frankfurther. He breaks down how indigenous Egyptians kept the ancient Egyptian traditions,and resisted against Christianity.

---

While its quite likely that there were conflicts between Christians and practioners of the traditional Egyptian religion early on, that doesn't explain why Egyptian Christianity went on to embrace indigenous traditions and the native language rather than Greek or Latin. It has always seemed to me that Christianity was spread through compromise. Pagan/indigenous traditions have always been added to add wider appeal.

posted 26 December 2004 09:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[QUOTE]You're jesting no? 18th Dynasty Kemet was not conquered and ruled by foriegners, unlike Ptolemic Egypt. You are seriously comparing Christianity or Islam to Atenism in terms of autochthony?[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 26 December 2004).]

---

Thought Writes:

posted 26 December 2004 10:03 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

[QUOTE] which some deny them
solely because of their miscegenation.

---

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 26 December 2004).][/QUOTE]

Ho hum. You have no instances on my part of any such thing and you know it.

Once again you have selectively read my posts, as from the start I spoke
of their miscegenation. I think theres an old boy network and
groupthink going on here of exactly the same type often complained
about in reference to Eurocentrists.

My religion or lack thereof is my business. Bringing up my religious
preference or deference is as you well know shows a debaters bankruptcy
of evidence pertaining to the matter at hand,
ad homenim attack and also
as you like to say so often a non sequitor.

Why are you going there? You are too brainy for that. Save it for
the flakes.

posted 26 December 2004 10:07 PM            

quote:

---

Africans always recognized the unity in diversity and held the ancestors in high reverence.

---

I agree, Kemet itself was a victim in this respect of a tactic of conquest religous conversion (by BOTH Christians and Muslims) that it seldom wholeheartedly engaged in, even when in a position (of power) to do so. Interesting irony that.

posted 26 December 2004 10:09 PM            

quote:

---

Akhenaten closed temples and forced people to practice traditional Egyptian religion in secret. One or two renegade priests don't represent the Copts in general.

---

These were not renegade priests,but prominent church leaders like Cyril,Shenute,and others.

The Serapeum around Saqqara was burned down,and other occurances such as destoying of temples went across parts of Egypt.

quote:

---

Who specifically was responsible for killing the priests and closing the temples? It was always my understanding that the last temples were closed by the Romans.

---

Yes, the last temple at Philae was closed by Byzantines,but we have evidence that pratices continued in this region untill the Arab invasion and probably beyond. The Beja people were strong defenders of the indigenous pratices of the ancient Egyptians,and pettioned the Byzantine emperor to keep the Auset statue in Philae.

Many eddicts by Theodosius and other Roman emperors did not stop the indigenous religious pratices. Infact there were eddicts protecting the indigenous pratices from overzealous Christians,but Christians did not follow through on their promise.

quote:

---

While its quite likely that there were conflicts between Christians and practioners of the traditional Egyptian religion early on, that doesn't explain why Egyptian Christianity went on to embrace indigenous traditions and the native language rather than Greek or Latin. It has always seemed to me that Christianity was spread through compromise. Pagan/indigenous traditions have always been added to add wider appeal.

---

It seems that Christianity spread through Upper Egypt through the Monastic movements. Reading the first hand accounts of St. Shenoute it appears that the Sai'idi Egyptians took up Christianity while kicking and screaming instead of through peaceful means.

Christianity into Egypt was a slow process seeing that not many churches exist around the Late period except for places like Karanis and Ptolomeis which are two cities filled with foreigners.

quote:

---

Without a doubt, Christianity in general, has borrowed much from ancient Egyptian tradition so somewhere at some point you have to wonder why they even bothered to incorporate those traditions if there was hostility towards ancient Egypt.

---

This is true. The iconography of auset/heru[Isis and Horus] was adopted by the early Christians. Many concepts were similar such as Ausar granting enternal life and etc. However, it appears that Christianity in Upper Egypt and parts of the rural Delta was spread through a rather violent mean.

posted 26 December 2004 10:12 PM            

quote:

---

I thought you were denying this fact...ie - their mixed origins. It seems to be a sore point. If this being aknowledged then what are we debating?

---

quote:

---

Ho hum. You have no instances on my part of any such thing and you know it.

---

posted 26 December 2004 10:20 PM            

quote:

---

My religion or lack thereof is my business. Bringing up my religious
preference or deference is as you well know shows a debaters bankruptcy

---

posted 26 December 2004 10:22 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
This is true. The iconography of auset/heru[Isis and Horus] was adopted by the early Christians. Many concepts were similar such as Ausar granting enternal life and etc. However, it appears that Christianity in Upper Egypt and parts of the rural Delta was spread through a rather violent mean.

---

I was never aware that the early Copts had the means to spread Christianity violently. However, the Romans were violent and imposed Christianity throughout Egypt at times through violence as they had in other parts of their empire. Even today there are two seperate branches of the Coptic faith. One is part of the Eastern Orthodox Church and the other is a branch of the Roman Catholic church. I believe these divisions in the Coptic church were formed by Egyptians who either opposed or allied themselves with Roman Christians. Some Egyptians were pleased when the Arabs came with Islam because they wanted to get rid of the Romans.

posted 26 December 2004 10:28 PM            

quote:

---

Some Egyptians were pleased when the Arabs came with Islam because they wanted to get rid of the Romans.

---

Ah, and that is an argument used by the Islamist Arabs...We got rid of the Romans!

posted 26 December 2004 10:38 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
Ive extensively given my view of Gadallas work, I find it biased whenever people of biblical religions are his topic.

---

Which shows to me, that you still don't get his message!

quote:

---

But I am now more honestly confused than ever as to what your
own opinion is. Is it A or B? And forgive me for being unable to see
anything other than the one statement flatly contradicts the other.

---

I am glad you are now admitting your confusion, and hence the fault being on your end; not mine:

From experience, I find that repetition has been the key to these discussions. For some, a point has to be hammered several times, before it sinks in. Therefore, I'll try to make this plain and simple:

I wrote:

1. "Comments about the Muslim population (90%) being Arab settlers from the Arabian peninsula, while the remaining 10% is made up of Copts, referred to as the “true” Egyptian descendants of Ancient Egypt."

2. As for the true non-Egyptian origins of Copts, here is the link the explains it:
   http://www.egypt-tehuti.org/articles/copts.html
   

The Second point is connected to the first. It is not like they stand alone. The link is also connected to the first and second point. The link and the points are based on excerpts from Gadalla's book.

quote:

---

alTakruri:
A non-Egyptian origins of Copts

B "Copts" tracing their lineage back to pre-dynastic and dynastic Ancient Egyptians.

---

If it means by going through these petty games of multiple choice questions, that I'll somehow enable you to grasp the message I have been trying to get through to you, then I'll do so.

"A" is my stance:

That doesn't mean I am not aware of the idea that racially some "Christianized" folks may trace some percentage of their lineage to "indigenous" Ancient Egyptians.

quote:

---

alTakruri:
Do you believe Copts are foreign invaders who stole Egyptian identity and ever afterwards opposed the culture of their
supposedly true nationality Syrian or Greek?

---

Again, this question underlines the lack of your understanding of Gadalla's point. By the so-called Copts, Gadalla and I are referring to Christians. I'll try to make you understand by asking a question: Do you think early Christians in Egypt, were for the most part indigenous Egyptians?

quote:

---

alTakruri:
If so, why arent they Syrian Orthodox or Greek Orthodox, why a distinct Egyptian identity and mentality inimical to the Christianity of Syria or Greece?

---

...because, foreigners who lived in Egypt and were given land, were treated as citizens as long as they adopted Egyptian customs. For instance, the Greeks, hellenized Jews and Syrians, who spent the rest of their lives in Kemet, learned to view themselves as Kemetians. You are once again ignoring the fact that Coptic is actually Egyptian language. Foreign priests who wanted to spread the religion, had to adopt Coptic, because the foreign missionaries couldn't speak Native Egyptian language, while on the other hand, many Native Egyptians couldn't write in Greek. So for the foreign Missionaries who could read Greek, it was easier to teach them Native Egyptian language using Greek characters. After learning Native Egyptian language in Greek characters, those missionaries could then go and preach to Native Egyptians, in the Native Egyptian language. Foreign priests and missionaries alike, had worked with some "indigenous" Egyptian missionaries and priests, with whom they could communicate via "Coptic" script. Time and again, "Coptic" was actually used by Arabs, in an attempt to use the Greek word for "Egyptian". The Arabs called "all" non-Muslims "Coptic". But in contemporary times, it evolved into a reference to Christians. This is why Gadalla kept saying "so-called" Copts, while preferring to refer to them as Christians. Now, of course the Greeks also referred to Egyptian language as "Egyptian" in Greek, and that "word" is what the Arab invaders referred to as "Coptic", as applied to non-Muslim Egyptians.

I hope I won't have to go through childish multiple choice questions again, to make a point that has been reiterated for several times now...but only time will tell!

posted 26 December 2004 10:39 PM            

quote:

---

I was never aware that the early Copts had the means to spread Christianity violently. However, the Romans were violent and imposed Christianity throughout Egypt at times through violence as they had in other parts of their empire. Even today there are two seperate branches of the Coptic faith. One is part of the Eastern Orthodox Church and the other is a branch of the Roman Catholic church. I believe these divisions in the Coptic church were formed by Egyptians who either opposed or allied themselves with Roman Christians. Some Egyptians were pleased when the Arabs came with Islam because they wanted to get rid of the Romans.

---

Well, did you read the excerpt from the book I posted by David Frankfurther? I suggest you read the excerpt from the book,and understand it fully. These violent attacks on non-Christians was fully recorded by the Coptic monks themselves. In vivid detail about destoying priests,temples,and private worship centers.

See the following in case you did not read it before:

As Lianius of Antioch describeds the rampages during the 380's, their ''black-robbed tribes'' would hasten to attack the temples with sticks and bars of iron........ Then utter desolation follows, with the stripping of roofs; demolition of walls, the tearing down of statues and the overthrow of altars, and the priests must keep quiet or die. After demolishing one, the scurry to another and to a third, and trophy is pilled on trophy. Such out rages occur even in the cities but they are most common in the countryside[37]

By the middle of the fifth century monastic leaders like Shenoute,Makarious of Tkow, and Moses of Abydos were gaining modest fame of burning temples,killing priests,and invading homes to destroy private shrines. And indeed, the impetus for such havoc came not from Roman eddicts against ''paganism'' but rather from the whims and machinations of bishops. It was a matter of charismatic leadership,mobilization, and systematic iconoclastism,occuring outside govermental direction. [38]

page 278

The main participants both outsiders and insiders seem to agree, were monks-hardly suprising in that they led lives somewhat greater application to that polarizing idealogy than thsoe outside the monasteries. And in many,perhaps most, aspect of the active invovlment of monks indestruction of sacred things in understandable of these ideaological grounds: in their rampages they were extrpating heathenism according to biblical precepts, waging a kind of Holy war, purifying the landscape for the presence of Christ. Perhaps too they were avenging those bygone martyrs, the lurid accounts of whose tortures were avidly read in the monasteries.[39]

page 278

Dakhla oases the central temples of Kellis and Kysis were functioning well into the fourth century. The Vita and sermons of Shenoute of Atripe describe his battles with native piety in the region of his monastery; and crediable description of traditional local religion[surrounding a god obsurleynamed ''Kothos'' at the time of his own crusades.[29] Eunapius,Rufinus, and Zachariah of Myhtilene all describe a fairly thriving cult center within fifty kilometers of Alexzandria that could only be replaced--forcibly near the end of the fifth century.[30] A great number of papyri make reference to priests,festivals and temple operations through the fourth century. And in the middle of the fourth century an anonymous Syrian merchant visiting Alexzandria gathered the following about the regions up the Nile that he was not himself able to visit : [Here the people are] eminently reverent towards the gods. At no other place are the mysteries of the gods , thus celebrated as they wre from ancient times through today..... For truly there we know that the gods have lived and still live .....[In Egypt] the worshippers offer the gods most particulary representations[historias]. And there are all sorts of sacred objects and temples decorated every manner; they are full of sacred custodians,priests, attendants,diviners,adoratores and the best holy men. Everything is done according to custom. And thus you find the altars always illuminated with fire and fall of sacrifices and incense, the altar cloths emiting a divine odor as the aromic fill censers.[31]

page 19

How should we balance these various testimonies against the even more extensive images of an entrenched and even multiform Christian instituion in fourth century Egypt?[32] The perpective increasingly embrace by historians of late antiquity and taken in book argues the collective nature of a religion in late antique rural cultures, that it was not individuals, but small societies-entire villages that embraced or rejected Christianization or responded to its imperial or monastic agents and thus that ''conversion'' was slow and patchwork process,dependent upon the singular charismaof motivated bishop or abbot rather than some pagan decline or ''spirtual vacum''[32]

page 20

In the story of the monk Moses of Abydos, who does battle with a ''demon'' named Bes in an Egyptian temple, the anonymous author explicitly invoke Elijah and Daniel but gives crediable information about native piety that could depend on no literary sources: the specific ranks of Egyptian priests he encounters,local concern for temples,and the name of iconography of Bes,who was the most popular deities among ordinary Egyptians of the Roman period[40]. Even Shenoute breaks polemical caricature occasionally to give a ''demon'' local names [Min,Petebe,Shai all gods attested in the third and latter centuries or a detail of popular religious piety[figurines,amulets] of which we have an immense corpus for the Roman period.[41] Besa's description of a village's attempts to repel Shenute and his monks using ritual substances conform to what we know of offical execration rites praticed in Egypt in the temples from ancient times.[42]

page 22

Zachariah of Mytilene eyewitness account of the desutrction of the Isis temple at Menouthis can be dated quite precisely ,around 484 C.E.[44]

One finds,especially in Egypt, that the vanguard in destoying native religion consisted of the holy men,the charismatic bishops, and the monks that followed them. And, generally partaking in the same culture as the devotes of temples and traditional images, these forces cared little for the nuances or even the existence of the imperial codes, instead rampaging freely and homicidally throughout the countryside with the distinct sensation of extripating demons, ''Anti paganism'' in this mode becomes a king of native iconoclastic movement whose religious and social roots are perhaps more acurately sought in studies of comparable cases in modern soceities, than in putative or professed links with scripture or laws[as I shall explore in chapter 6.[75]

page 27

The imperial religious eddicts had only s msrginal effect on the traditional pratice of religion in the late empire, certainly contributing an atmosphere of persecution and eroding the civil authority of cults and their personel,but hardly affecting local praticein village or city. Indeed, an eddict of 423 levels strict penalities against any Christians, who like the Coptic monks, ransacked the homes[and by extension,private shrines] of pagans who are living quietly and attempting nothing disorderly or contrary to the law''[16.10.24]

page 27

A far more compelling proposition for the crippling of Egyptian religion over the course of the Roman empire has focused on the economic state of its infacstructe.[58] Agustus's Egyptian program consisted of placing a Roman offical as ''High Priest of Alexzandria and Egypt'' and consolidating priestly authority ,tradition,lifestyle,and economic livelihood according to a Gnoman,or manual of a imperial administrative office, the Idios Logos. The religious infacstructure was thus more closely monitored in Egypt than in any other province, a fact visable in the outpouring of offical papyri concerning circumcision ,temple land holdings and inventories,and oaths of priestly office,delivered in Greek for Roman administration purposes.[59]

page 21

And it is this kind of piety which the temple is the symbolic or projected center. Not the alleged ''passive'' piety that might continue or die with temples, that we find still continuing in the fifth century ,according to an anonymous Coptic homily whose author wanted to channel those active sentiments toward the Christian cult of martyrs;[There are among us today whose worship the ''poetic'' form of demons--[forms] contrived from the beginning in their deceitfulness and deluding people of healing cults........

....some of them pratice abominations in city and village. For it is said that some of them ablute their children in polluted water and water from the arena, from the theather, and moreover they pour all over themselves water with incantations[spoken over it], and they break their clay pots claiming it repels the evil eye. Some tie amulets by men---those men [men] who provide a place for the dwelling of demons----while other annoint themselves with oil that is evil and incontations and such things that they tie on their hands and necks[164]

page 29

Priests in early fifth century Panopolis had enough political acumen and self cofidence to haul Abbot Shenoute before a magistrate in Antinopolis [two hundread kilometers down the Nile].17] The culture of the priestly family is still in the memory of a Theban monk of the late fourth or early fifth century:' I was the son of a priest of the pagans. When I was a child I would sit and watch my father proceeding many times to offer sacrifice to the image.''[118] A contemporaneous legend recalls the purity of the priestly family : when a monk asked a village priest replied,'' I cannot give her to you unless I learn [its appropriateness] from my god.[19] The position of priest in Egyptian soceity still fell into partcular ranks and functions through the fourth and fifth centuries. We find the ''sealer of the sacred calves'', traditionally vital role of the temple's animals, seeking another priest's arrest in the late third or early -fourth century Oxyhrhynchus.[20]

the fifth century hagiographer of Moses of Abydos counts the saint'smurderious accomplishmentsin terms of oueed-priests[twenty-three dead] and hont priests[the higher ranking hm ntr priests,commonly translated 'prophets'',[seven dead].[21] In 373 C.E. the priesthood includes functions of ''first and second hm-ntr'' and a high priest[eng wb'3]; cheif baker E.E. g. 'mr3'3]'' ,scribe of the sacred book[Eg sh mtd -ntr]'', who is responsible for gilding an image of Cleopatra; and other obsure titles. In 407 C.E. we find a master of secrets[Eg [hry sst].'',and in 452 a ''cheif adorner of images[proto to listes] [22] The priest in ritual processionseem still to have been a typical sight in the Egyptian landscape wheither in the massive processions of the boat of Khunum through the regiuon of third-century Esna or the small group observed by Apa Apollo in fourth century Hermopolis [Ashmunein], whose ''priest in a Bacchic frenzy together with the people would carry [a divine image] in procession through the villages.''[23]

pages 201-202

All of this excerpts are from:

Religion in Roman Egypt

posted 26 December 2004 10:42 PM            

quote:

---

rasol:

Based on the case evidence I choose A.

It can be demonstrated as a matter of historical record, genetics and linguistics that Copt's have some Greco Syrian Origins....this does not negate also the possibility that some Copt's have some indiginous origins, but you give me no choice between A and B so.....

Meanwhile, no counter argument presented herein actually demonstrates premise B.

The fact that Native Kemetic language is still spoken in in Christian liturgy does not prove the lineage of the Copts.

It is actually easy to demonstrate how and individual could be a member of the Coptic Christian Church, live in Alexandria, speak Coptic and be entirely of Syro-Greek extraction with no kmt[rome] blood whatsover.

Point of Irony: Consider Egyptgurl's comments about Black Egyptians being Sudanese and Nubian. Well...Ancient Egyptian language originates in Sudan and Nubia. If you are using language to prove lineage then you are saying that the Copts originate in Sudan and Nubia. (?)
This will come as quite a shock to Egyptgurl.

Doubtless some of them in fact do.....but many are clearly descendant from Eurasian immigrants from Greco-Roman times. It seems like you are using the liturgical language to deny that, but it's somewhat of a non-sequitor no?

---

I am glad that there are some, who actually understand what Gadalla was getting at.

posted 26 December 2004 10:47 PM            

I take it you no longer hold to the following or maybe I am mistaken that you wrote the following?

--------------------------------------------------------------

*The Distribution of Human Blood Groups*
by A.E. Mourant and A.C. Kopec
(1976)

Page 85 shows that the Copts had no significant differences from the Muslim Egyptians in blood group frequencies, which confirms my belief that the majority of Muslim Egyptians are converted Copts. In other words, they did not mix with the invading Arabs.

posted 26 December 2004 10:57 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
I am glad that there are some, who actually understand what Gadalla was getting at.

---

I enjoy reading Gadalla but he provides no proof that Copts in general are not native Egyptians. No one disputes that they mixed with the foreignors who made up Egypt's early Christian community. But culturally and ethnically they are little different from non-Christian Egyptians.

What aspects of Coptic Christianity are non-Egyptian or prove a non-Egyptian origin for Coptic Christianity? This is probably a question best answered by Ausar...

posted 26 December 2004 10:58 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[QUOTE]Ho hum. You have no instances on my part of any such thing and you know it.

---

Ooops! Base is something to build on. I dont have a good analogy to give.
The closest would be the First Nations peoples few of whom are of
51% or greater original Americas people descent but dont let that stop
someone with as little as 1/32 ancestry from claiming tribal identity
provided they have the culture.

posted 26 December 2004 11:05 PM            

quote:

---

Ausar, can you post that quote where Frank Yurco speaks about the Copts? I remeber you posting it a while back..

---

Here are the quotes from Yurco and also of a European who lived in Egypt named Edward Willam Lane in his Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians. Edward Lane was a contemporary of Count Volney and described fairly the same thing that Yurco validates:

In many individuals among them we find this resemblence to be strikingly exact, though more frequently in Copts and in Nubians and in the Muslim Egyptians[ as well as the Copts] it is generally most observable in Middle and Upper Egypt

page 26

In Cairo , and throughout the northern provinces , where immigrants from more temperate climates have been most numerous, those who have not been much exposed to the sun have a yellowish , but very clear complexion and soft skin; the test are considerably darker and coarser complexion. The poeople of Middle Egypt are more tawny color;and those of more southern provinces are of a deep bronze or brown complexion,darkest towards Nubia, where the climate is hotest and where Egyptians gradually give place to Nubians.

page 27

Most of the females of the higher parts of Upper Egypt[who are of a very dark complexion], for the purpose of making their teeth glisten, tattoo their Lips instead of the parts mentioned; thus converting their natural color to a dull bluish hue,which, to the eyes of a stranger is extremely displeasing.

page 41

The boatmen employ , as an accomnpaniment to their earthern drum, a double reed pipe, called ''zummarah.'' There is another kind of double reed pipe , called ''arghol'' of which one of the reeds is much longer than the other , and serves as a drone.

page 367

The Copts, at present, compose less than one fourteenth part of the population of Egypt; their numbers being not more than about one hundread and fifty thousand About ten thousand of them reside in the metropolis. In some parts of Upper Egypt are villages exclusively inhabited by persons of this race; and the districts of the Fayyium particulary abounds with them. The vast numbhers of ruined convents and churches exising in variou parts of Egypt shows that the Copts were very numerous a few centuries ago.

page 524

The Copts are undoubtably desendants of the ancient Egyptians, but not an unmixed race, their ancestors in the earlier ages of Christainty having intermarried with Greeks, Nubians, Abyssinians , and other foreginers.

page 530

With some respect to their personal chracteristics, we observe some striking paints of resemblence, and yet, upon the whole, a considerable difference, between the Copts and the ancient Egyptians , juding off the latter from the paintings and sculptures in their tombs and temples. The differences is ,however, easily accounted for by the fact of the intermarriages of the ancestors of the modern Copts with foreginers , above mentioned. The people who bear the greatest resemblence to the ancient Egyptians, at present, are they Nubians; and next are the Abyssinians; and the Copts who are, not withstanding , much unlike each other.

page 530

I find it difficult , sometimes , to perceive any differences between a Copt and a Muslim Egyptian, beyond a certain downcast and sullen expression which generally marks the former; and the Muslims themselves are often deceived when they see a Copt in a white turban. We observe in the latter, the same shades of complexionuntry, as in the former; varying from a pale yellowish color to a deep bronze or brown.

The eyes of the Copt are generally large and elongated, slightly inclining from the nose upwards, and always black: the nose is straight, except at the end where it is rounded, and wide: the lips are rather thick; and the hair is black and curly.

page 530

The Egyptians have long been famous for the art of hatching fowl's eggs by artifical heat. This pratice, through obscurely described ancient authors, appears to have been common in Egypt in very remote times. The building in which the process is preformed is called in Lower Egypt,''maamal el-firakh; and in upper Egypt,''mammal el-farroog;''.

page 532

Frank Joseph Yurco Jan 3 1997, 12:00 am show options
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,alt.archaeology,soc.culture.egyptian,alt.culture.egyptian
From: fjyu...@midway.uchicago.edu (Frank Joseph Yurco)
Date: 1997/01/03
Subject: Re: Are Egyptologists Interested In Ethnicity (was "A Question For Marc Line)
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

Some observations on the subject: Volney, who described the Copts as
black, perhaps was using the same descriptive paradigm as exists in the
United States today, namely, if you have a darkish complexion and are
from Africa, you are labelled "black". As I have mentioned before, Copts
are found in all parts of Egypt, and those in Luxor to Aswan area are
indeed very brown complexioned, just as are their Muslim compatriots in
that part of Egypt. Farther north, you will find lighter complexioned
Copts, and again Muslims also. In the Cairo area, they tend to be very
light complexioned. That, as with the rest of the Egyptian population
has led to the confusing remarks.

Frank Joseph Yurco Dec 30 1996, 12:00 am show options
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,alt.archaeology,soc.culture.egyptian,alt.culture.egyptian
From: fjyu...@midway.uchicago.edu (Frank Joseph Yurco)
Date: 1996/12/30
Subject: Re: Are Egyptologists Interested In Ethnicity (was "A Question For Marc Line)
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

Finally, the posters have lurched into the truth on the issue of who the
ancient Egyptians were. Yes, Upper Egyptians, Copts and Muslims alike are
dark complexioned, and their hair varies from wavy to kinky. Certainly,
in the ante-bellum American South, they would have been classed with the
other Africans who were enslaved. That ante-bellum southern image is still
common in the United States, where if you have any African ancestors you
are classed as "b;ack". Yet, how screwed up the Americans are is evident
by how the census bureau deals with Egyptians who migrate to the United
States. They are classed as "white" no matter how brown they appear!!!

Frank Joseph Yurco Dec 26 1996, 12:00 am show options
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
From: fjyu...@midway.uchicago.edu (Frank Joseph Yurco)
Date: 1996/12/26
Subject: Re: Are Egyptologists Interested In Ethnicity (was
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

Yes, Egyptologists do consider the ethnicity of the Egyptians, but in
a rational way without the flaming that is seen in many postings in this
issue. To the Egyptian who considered any dark complexioned Egyptians
as descendants of Nubians or Sudanese, have you ever travelled from
Luxor to Aswan? There the entire population is dark brown in complexion.
Yet can you write them all off as descendants of Sudanese? Hardly. They
are Egyptians and that they have been that complexion for thousands of
years is demonstrated by New Kingdom paintings of the Theban population,
then just as dark brown as now, for instance, in Sennedjem's tomb at
Deir el-Medinah. So, what we have is a very diverse population in Egypt,
light complexioned in the north, and gradually darkening as you proceed
south. Another myth that needs exploding is that all Copts are light
complexioned. Ever meet a Copt from Luxor or Aswan? They are as brown
as the rest of the population there. I lived three years in Luxor and
have travelled extensively in Egypt, so I speak from experience.

Know most of the first Coptic migrants to America tended to be those from the Cairo area and more affluent Copts as opposed to Coptics that live in more rural areas in Middle and Upper Egypt. Christians in Egypt are very rich and affluent,but many are also as poor as their Muslim compatriots,and have suffered as much. Many villages in Saeed have Christian and Muslim populations. Most Christians in Egypt tend to live around Saeed in regions like Asyut,Minya,Girga,and even parts of Luxor. I know of a Coptic village in the East Bank around berat not far from the Valley of the Kings.

I wish I had a scanner to scan some pictures I found of thise Coptic procession in Upper Egypt,but unofrtunately I have no such way to do this.

I think the problem is most Westerners only see Egyptian immigrants in America from northern areas instead of southern areas,and they get a bad conception of the various phenotypes within the Christian and Muslim Egyptian population. Most Upper Egyptians or baladi Egyptians from poor neighboorhoods cannot afford to come to America.

One thing I can tell you that has been overlooked in this coversation is the pressence e of Jews across Lower,Middle,and Upper Egypt. During the time of Nebcanezer sack of Jerusalem they fled to Egypt,and in later periods they settled in Alexzandria and parts of Middle and Upper Egypt.

Many of these settlements were in various places across Egypt,and these people live right alongside indigenous Egyptians alongside other migrants into Egypt such as Syrians,Greeks,and others. Often during the Ptolemic period many came as mercenaries,and were betowed a piece of land of their own.

posted 26 December 2004 11:07 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
...because, foreigners who lived in Egypt and were given land, were treated as citizens as long as they adopted Egyptian customs. For instance, the Greeks, hellenized Jews and Syrians, who spent the rest of their lives in Kemet, learned to view themselves as Kemetians. You are once again ignoring the fact that Coptic is actually Egyptian language. Foreign priests who wanted to spread the religion, had to adopt Coptic, because the foreign missionaries couldn't speak Native Egyptian language, while on the other hand, many Native Egyptians couldn't write in Greek. So for the foreign Missionaries who could read Greek, it was easier to teach them Native Egyptian language using Greek characters. After learning Native Egyptian language in Greek characters, those missionaries could then go and preach to Native Egyptians, in the Native Egyptian language. Foreign priests and missionaries alike, had worked with some "indigenous" Egyptian missionaries and priests, with whom they could communicate via "Coptic" script. Time and again, "Coptic" was actually used by Arabs, in an attempt to use the Greek word for "Egyptian". The Arabs called "all" non-Muslims "Coptic". But in contemporary times, it evolved into a reference to Christians. This is why Gadalla kept saying "so-called" Copts, while preferring to refer to them as Christians. Now, of course the Greeks also referred to Egyptian language as "Egyptian" in Greek, and that "word" is what the Arab invaders referred to as "Coptic", as applied to non-Muslim Egyptians.

I hope I won't have to go through childish multiple choice questions again, to make a point that has been reiterated for several times now...but only time will tell!

[This message has been edited by supercar (edited 26 December 2004).]

---

Relax, I am trying to understand you since A & B are both direct
qiotes from you. Its not silly or childish to attempt understanding
instead of leaning upon misunderstanding, or is it?

posted 26 December 2004 11:13 PM            

quote:

---

Ausar, your quotes are a bit confusing but I read them and it seems to validate my point that it was the Romans, not the Copts who violently imposed Christianity in Egypt. These events began in the 4th century when the Roman empire adopted Christianity.

---

You did not read all of the quotes from the publication I referenced. It was not so much the Romans but the Christian monks who went around destorying the indigenous culture:

By the middle of the fifth century monastic leaders like Shenoute,Makarious of Tkow, and Moses of Abydos were gaining modest fame of burning temples,killing priests,and invading homes to destroy private shrines. And indeed, the impetus for such havoc came not from Roman eddicts against ''paganism'' but rather from the whims and machinations of bishops. It was a matter of charismatic leadership,mobilization, and systematic iconoclastism,occuring outside govermental direction. [38]

page 278

Religion in Roman Egypt
by David Frankfurther

posted 26 December 2004 11:13 PM            

quote:

---

alTakruri:
And neither are they any less a "true descendant" of the Pharoahs than the other 90% of Egyptians, which some deny them solely because of their miscegenation.

---

...Not that this point applies to Gadalla, for he has made his case it terms of origins of Christianity in Egypt, their track record, their popularity, their traditions, their racial origins and demographics. Thus, he has tackled this issue from multiple perspectives!

posted 26 December 2004 11:17 PM            

quote:

---

The closest would be the First Nations peoples few of whom are of
51% or greater original Americas people descent but dont let that stop
someone with as little as 1/32 ancestry from claiming tribal identity
provided they have the culture.

---

posted 26 December 2004 11:20 PM            

quote:

---

Another myth that needs exploding is that all Copts are light
complexioned. Ever meet a Copt from Luxor or Aswan? They are as brown
as the rest of the population there. I lived three years in Luxor and
have travelled extensively in Egypt, so I speak from experience.

---

posted 26 December 2004 11:22 PM            

quote:

---

Ausar

I take it you no longer hold to the following or maybe I am mistaken that you wrote the following?

--------------------------------------------------------------

*The Distribution of Human Blood Groups*
by A.E. Mourant and A.C. Kopec
(1976)

Page 85 shows that the Copts had no significant differences from the Muslim Egyptians in blood group frequencies, which confirms my belief that the majority of Muslim Egyptians are converted Copts. In other words, they did not mix with the invading Arabs.

---

Yes, I did hold the following. However, my further reading of historical events leading up to the Arab invasion of Egypt has lead me to requestion the following throught. I am not so sure about this point anymore,and hopefully through more scientific study will lead to a better understanding.

This came also from a personal chat with Coptics on paltalk claiming that the Muslim Egyptians were nothing more than invaders into Egypt,and that they had no relation to the Coptic population. You must understand this is a sensitive subject in Egypt and most foreigners don't fully understand it.

The right-winged Christians in America are making false claims that the Muslim Egyptians are Arab invaders that stole the land from the poor indigenous Coptics. Don't believe then visit rooms on Pal talk to see what I mean. The Coptic activist named Joseph Sedak even got a Republican congressman to visit Egypt to explain the terrible treatment the Coptics get.

Coptics are by far richer than the Muslims. The British gave the Coptics better treatment than the Muslims,and many Coptics like Butros Butros Ghali's grandfather hung innocent Muslim peasents to death. Understand also that when the French came they made a speacil Coptic battilion to personally kill their fellow Sai'idi Egyptians. Read about General Yacub and the onslaught of his rampage on inocennt Fellahin in Upper Egypt.

posted 26 December 2004 11:25 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[QUOTE]My religion or lack thereof is my business. Bringing up my religious
preference or deference is as you well know shows a debaters bankruptcy

---

I am not upset and I am not revealing my religion or lack
thereof. This is, or so I thought, a more or less academic forum.
As such, so is my approach to it.

Gadallas approach on the other hand is self admittedly antiChristianity,
antiJudaism, and antiIslam.

In my writing I do not want to offend Christian, Jew, Muslim, Orishan,
Atheist, Agnostic, etc., and am careful not to inflame antipathy toward
any of them using historiagraphy as an excuse as Gadalla does
with terminology like fanatic, terrorist, and gangster.

posted 26 December 2004 11:35 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
I am not upset and I am not revealing my religion or lack thereof. This is, or so I thought, a more or less academic forum. As such, so is my approach to it.

Gadallas approach on the other hand is self admittedly antiChristianity, antiJudaism, and antiIslam.

In my writing I do not want to offend Christian, Jew, Muslim, Orishan, Atheist, Agnostic, etc., and am careful not to inflame antipathy toward any of them using historiagraphy as an excuse asGadalla does with terminology like fanatic, terrorist, and gangster.

---

posted 26 December 2004 11:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
Again, this question underlines the lack of your understanding of Gadalla's point. By the so-called Copts, Gadalla and I are referring to Christians. I'll try to make you understand by asking a question: Do you think early Christians in Egypt, were for the most part indigenous Egyptians?

[This message has been edited by supercar (edited 26 December 2004).]

---

I understand Gadalla quite well. Thats why I disagree with him on the Copts.
I dont have to agree with someone to understand where they are coming from.

Yes I am of the opinion that the early Christians in Egypt were for the
most part indigenous Egyptians. It shows in the language, music, festivals,
food, theology, etc., none of which are Syrian or Greek, peoples who are
also Orthodox Christians but who each have their own distinct language,
music, festivals, food, theology, etc.

posted 26 December 2004 11:44 PM            

quote:

---

neo*geo:
I can speak from experience and say that I've met several Copts in the US who weren't dark complexioned but had kinky hair and/or prognathism. I haven't met any that look like Pope Shenouda...

---

posted 26 December 2004 11:48 PM            

quote:

---

I am not upset and I am not revealing my religion or lack
thereof. This is, or so I thought, a more or less academic forum.
As such, so is my approach to it.

Gadallas approach on the other hand is self admittedly antiChristianity,
antiJudaism, and antiIslam.

---

posted 26 December 2004 11:52 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
I understand Gadalla quite well. Thats why I disagree with him on the Copts.I dont have to agree with someone to understand where they are coming from.

Yes I am of the opinion that the early Christians in Egypt were for the most part indigenous Egyptians. It shows in the language, music, festivals, food, theology, etc.

---

Specifically, how do you know that the early Christian converts were for the most part indigenous Egyptians, as opposed to Hellenized foreign settlements? Just because someone adopts a language, and adopts certain traditions in itself doesn't prove what you are claiming here. Early "pure" Greek priests spoke Egyptian (from Coptic script), but I don't know how that proves that they are indigenous Egyptians! But I await your specifics on the point you just made.

Might I add that Coptic script actually pre-dates origins of Christianity in Egypt. Just something to think about.

posted 26 December 2004 11:53 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
This came also from a personal chat with Coptics on paltalk claiming that the Muslim Egyptians were nothing more than invaders into Egypt,and that they had no relation to the Coptic population. You must understand this is a sensitive subject in Egypt and most foreigners don't fully understand it.

---

Ausar, I understand your point however, as foriegnors we may be in a better position to analyze the situation without as much bias because we're not emotionally attached to it. I know Egyptian Copts and Muslims so I'm aware of the politics of the situation. Many Copts feel that they are or have been oppressed by the Egyptian government. The growth of radical Islam in Egypt has affected the Copts as well. For the most part, Egyptian Copts and Muslims get along fine but marriage between Copts and Muslims is almost non-existant..

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

The right-winged Christians in America are making false claims that the Muslim Egyptians are Arab invaders that stole the land from the poor indigenous Coptics.

---

These views are extremely revisionist made up by Eurocentric/anti-Islamic historians who want to justify the Crusades. They talk about how the Crusaders mission was to take back Christian lands seized by the Arab Muslims but they exclude the fact that the Crusaders mass murdered both Copts and Muslims in Egypt.

With many Copts believing they are the "purest" descendants of the ancient Egyptians, it's not surprising how some can be so ignorant of Western history.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

Coptics are by far richer than the Muslims. The British gave the Coptics better treatment than the Muslims,and many Coptics like Butros Butros Ghali's grandfather hung innocent Muslim peasents to death. Understand also that when the French came they made a speacil Coptic battilion to personally kill their fellow Sai'idi Egyptians. Read about General Yacub and the onslaught of his rampage on inocennt Fellahin in Upper Egypt.

---

Ausar, there is example after example of Western imperialists using ethnic/political/religious divisions of indigenous peoples to their political advantage. It's called "divide and conquer." The British and French were masters at this technique and the US is doing this today in Iraq by playing the Shia against the Sunnis. In the name of Egyptian national unity, your countrymen must overcome those divisions.

[This message has been edited by neo*geo (edited 26 December 2004).]

posted 26 December 2004 11:56 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
What percentage of "Copts" would say look like that, or have that description?

---

Look like what? Pope Shenouda or Mulattoes?

I would say that atleast 2/3 of the Copts I've known looked mulatto.

posted 27 December 2004 12:01 AM            

quote:

---

because, foreigners who lived in Egypt and were given land, were treated as citizens as long as they adopted Egyptian customs. For instance, the Greeks, hellenized Jews and Syrians, who spent the rest of their lives in Kemet, learned to view themselves as Kemetians. You are once again ignoring the fact that Coptic is actually Egyptian language. Foreign priests who wanted to spread the religion, had to adopt Coptic, because the foreign missionaries couldn't speak Native Egyptian language, while on the other hand, many Native Egyptians couldn't write in Greek. So for the foreign Missionaries who could read Greek, it was easier to teach them Native Egyptian language using Greek characters. After learning Native Egyptian language in Greek characters, those missionaries could then go and preach to Native Egyptians, in the Native Egyptian language. Foreign priests and missionaries alike, had worked with some "indigenous" Egyptian missionaries and priests, with whom they could communicate via "Coptic" script. Time and again, "Coptic" was actually used by Arabs, in an attempt to use the Greek word for "Egyptian". The Arabs called "all" non-Muslims "Coptic". But in contemporary times, it evolved into a reference to Christians. This is why Gadalla kept saying "so-called" Copts, while preferring to refer to them as Christians. Now, of course the Greeks also referred to Egyptian language as "Egyptian" in Greek, and that "word" is what the Arab invaders referred to as "Coptic", as applied to non-Muslim Egyptians.

---

posted 27 December 2004 12:01 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
Look like what? Pope Shenouda or Mulattoes?

I would say that atleast 2/3 of the Copts I've known looked mulatto.

---

Like This:

quote:

---

neo*geo:
I can speak from experience and say that I've met several Copts in the US who weren't dark complexioned but had kinky hair and/or prognathism.

---

posted 27 December 2004 12:03 AM            

In light of the fact that it hasn't been disputed that Egyptian Copts and Muslims ethnically and culturally mirror each other, I don't know what is being debated...

posted 27 December 2004 12:11 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
Supercar, what other sources have you read besides Gadalla on early Christianity in Egypt? Are you basing your entire argument on his opinion?

---

The argument is on Gadalla's observations. Why would I want to refer to somebody else, unless I want to reinforce his comments. We are talking about the validity of Gadalla's points, just in case you missed it somewhere in the discussions!

quote:

---

noe*geo:
In light of the fact that it hasn't been disputed that Egyptian Copts and Muslims ethnically and culturally mirror each other, I don't know what is being debated...

---

We are talking about non-Egyptian or un-Egyptian origins of Christians in Egypt. Which makes sense, because the indigenous Kemetians weren't Christians. Christianity came to Egypt from foreigners to first foreign settlements, and the process to spread the religion was initiated from these areas. Christian customs, like Gadalla pointed out, were incompatible to Egyptian customs and traditions. He made the same point for Muslim origins in Egypt. The point is that, how can one, given the foreign origins of traditions and cultural identity, and well as diverse racial background, claim to be the "True" Egyptians amongst all Egyptians. On that note, I believe that it is the misunderstanding on this point, that is fueling this "argument". This isn't just about race; there is more to it than that. Gadalla's notes make that clear, if it is understood!