Top Egyptologist and Minister of Antiquities Criticizes Netflix’s “Cleopatra”
quote: Dr. Zahi Hawass, one of the most famous Egyptologists and the former Egyptian Minister of State for Antiquities Affairs, has criticized Netflix for its controversial decision to cast Cleopatra with a black actress in an upcoming docuseries. The new Netflix series, dubbed “Queen Cleopatra”, which is produced and narrated by the American actress Jada Pinkett Smith, has sparked fierce debate over the misrepresentation of history and representation in TV and media. Hawass, who is Egypt’s most recognizable archaeologist, decried the decision by Netflix to portray Cleopatra as being of black descent, pointing out that the historical figure “was Greek”. Zahi Hawass criticizes portrayal of Cleopatra by Netflix “I announced these days to the media that Cleopatra was not black,” Zahi posted on his Facebook account in response to the controversy surrounding the new Netflix series. “The film that is coming on Netflix is not accurate and gives wrong information on ancient Egypt,” the famous Egyptologist continued. “Cleopatra was Greek and she was similar to the queens and princesses of Macedonia,” wrote Zahi, alluding to the fact that Cleopatra was a member of the Ptolemaic Dynasty who ruled over Egypt between 305 BC and 30 BC. The Ptolemaic Dynasty was founded by Ptolemy I Soter, a Macedonian Greek who served Alexander the Great as a general, bodyguard, and historian. When Alexander died and his empire was split between his squabbling generals, Ptolemy established his own kingdom in Egypt. Misrepresentation of Egyptian history The Netflix series appears to have angered many Egyptians, as well as Greeks and people with a general interest in history who expressed their disappointment online. A petition started by two Egyptians calling on Netflix to cancel their upcoming Cleopatra documentary garnered well over 60,000 signatures until it was removed by Change.org for “violating community guidelines”. In his Facebook Zahi further discussed the historicity of the Netflix documentary vis-a-vis ancient Egypt even beyond the period of Ptolemaic rule. “If we look at the scenes on the Egyptian temples, we can see that the pharaohs are depicted and in front of them were Nubian, Libyan, and Asian captives; the king is always completely different from all of them,” he wrote. “During the 25th dynasty, the Kingdom of Kush ruled Egypt and those were Kushite pharaohs but they had nothing to do with ancient Egyptian civilization,” he continued. The Kingdom of Kush was an ancient Nubian civilization of the Nile Valley. Its territory spanned what is today northern Sudan and southern Egypt. At various points throughout their history, the Kushites were both ruled by and ruled over the ancient Egyptians. Like the Macedonian Greek Ptolemaic Dynasty, they were a foreign people who once ruled over the ancient Egyptians after the foundation of the 25th Dynasty by the Kushite King Piye in the 8th century BC. Zahi concluded the Facebook post by saying “I am not against black people at all but here I am just listing the evidence that Cleopatra was not black.”
Top Egyptologist and Minister of Antiquities Criticizes Netflix’s “Cleopatra” “The film that is coming on Netflix is not accurate and gives wrong information on ancient Egypt,” the famous Egyptologist continued. “Cleopatra was Greek and she was similar to the queens and princesses of Macedonia,” wrote Zahi, alluding to the fact that Cleopatra was a member of the Ptolemaic Dynasty who ruled over Egypt between 305 BC and 30 BC. The Ptolemaic Dynasty was founded by Ptolemy I Soter, a Macedonian Greek who served Alexander the Great as a general, bodyguard, and historian. When Alexander died and his empire was split between his squabbling generals, Ptolemy established his own kingdom in Egypt. Misrepresentation of Egyptian history The Netflix series appears to have angered many Egyptians, as well as Greeks and people with a general interest in history who expressed their disappointment online. GREEKS AND EGYPTIANS DEMAND AN END TO THE FALSIFICATION OF QUEEN CLEOPATRA'S HISTORY: ALMOST 60K SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP NETFLIX'S NEW DOCUMENTARY https://www.thearchaeologist.org/blog/greeks-and-egyptians-demand-an-end-to-the-falsification-of-queen-cleopatras-history-almost-60k-sign-the-petition-to-stop-netflixs-new-document ary
One can wonder what the Egyptans will say about an upcoming Cleopatra film with the Israeli actress Gal Gadot in the leading role? Sounds also like a touchy subject.
quote:Gal Gadot fans slam haters saying: ‘Cleopatra was Greek not black or Arab’
The casting decision has some social media users riled up, with journalist Sameera Khan calling Gal Gadot a 'bland' Israeli and others stating that she is ‘not Black enough’ to play Cleopatra’.
Supporters have scrambled to defend her amidst accusations by online trolls that casting Gadot as Cleopatra was another example of ‘hollywood whitewashing’ - the term used to refer to the growing debate about the occurrence of white actors portraying non-white roles.
Was Cleopatra Black? Gal Gadot's Cleopatra Film Controversy | Dr. Rebecca Futo Kennedy Study of Antiquity and the Middle Ages
quote: In this episode Dr. Rebecca Futo Kennedy takes us into another intense history debate and that is the question of "Was Cleopatra Black?"
In light of the upcoming movie and controversy surrounding Gal Gadot playing Cleopatra I felt like this was an excellent time to use this episode.
What was her ethnicity? Why is it controversial? Was she Macedonian? Are Macedonians even Greek? Was there an African in the Ptolemy family tree?
Is this argument merely people attempting to project their modern narratives and politics on the past?
Why does it even matter? Can we even answer the question?
In this talk Dr. Kennedy explains that until we stop attempting to remove black Africans from Egyptian history and until we stop using the modern and inaccurate term Sub-Saharan in our dialogue involving ancient Africa and Egypt it doesn't matter.
Again, in many ways this talk merely shows that this debate revolves more around modern politics and narratives rather than Cleopatra herself, the Ptolemies and how the ancient Egyptians saw them or themselves.
quote: Why is it that so many so-called conscious and Afrocentric people pay so much attention to Kemet, yet ignore the rest of Africa, especially the regions where their ancestors came from, which is Central and Western Africa?
Why is it they can talk to you for days on end about the blackness of Kemet, yet not be able to name you even one civilization in West Africa? Or if they can, they have the need to invent history and claim these people are Egyptian immigrants when there is absolutely no hard evidence to support such a notion?
Why is it so outrageous to accept the fact that Egypt was only one of many civilizations and cultures on the African Continent and that peoples in the other regions had their own unique cultures and achievements?
Why can't we as people of African descent have just as much reverence for the ancestors of our own bloodline as we do for people who are most likely not related to us at all?
Yes, they were fellow Africans, but they were not of our direct bloodline. Pay homage to your own house first before pat homage to your neighbor's. Take care of the children of your own house before you try to take care of some other child in the neighborhood.
by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova
quote: Sure. I've said the same thing for years, and disputed those who see Kemet as some sort of "central headquarters" of civilization or advanced culture in Africa. To the contrary, the opposite seems more appropriate- Africa itself is the "headquarters" and Egypt is a "branch office" thereof. To rework the title of Van Sertima's book- "Egypt- Child of Africa," Kemet is is a very important child to be sure, but ultimately just one of the many offspring Africa gave birth to.
I agree with many parts of the critique in the video but would point out that African people do not seem to be any more obsessed with Egypt compared to white people, who are the biggest appropriators and users of Kemet's cultural iconography, art and much else. Many white people are the biggest hypocrites in this area- they themselves being massively obsessed with Kemet while presumptuously lecturing black folk bout how they should "focus" on Nubia and elsewhere, as if only white people are "qualified" to study and comment on things in the field. White people even appropriated and consumed the dead flesh of Egyptian mummies at one time for their medicinal systems.
And black popular culture in the US on a whole is not that heavy into Kemet. Most cultural linkups focus on West Africa or East Africa (the Swahili cultural orbit) not Kemet. Kwanza is an example, as are black baby names. When the last time you run into some black kid named "Tutankhamen" compared to the much larger number of "sub-Saharan" or Islamic origin names? It was not Kareem Amenhotep, but Kareem Abdul Jabbar, or Malcolm El Shabazz.
In the 1960s the inspiration was mostly West African- with dashikis and NATURAL "Afro" hair styles not wigs as in popular Kemet. So-called "black militants" were not running much to Egypt compared to West Africa- as Stokely Carmichael, aka Kwame Ture can attest.
Do SOME black people go overboard with Kemet? YEs. Is there an almost cultish obsession with SOME "Afrocentric" types? Certainly. But viewed in larger context, let's not overplay things. White obsession is miles ahead of what black folk are doing. And Kemet does not really resonate in black popular culture, compared to West/East African/Islamic influences. Among a small minority? Sure but overall there does not appear to be an "Kemetic" movement. Hell its sometimes hard to get some among that small minority to update their knowledge with modern data. Some are still preaching Chancellor Williams 1970, or Diop 1964- good foundational background to be sure with the data available at the time, but the field has since moved on. And that plays into the hands of assorted dishonest enemies who go around acting as of every black student in the country is a "disciple" of George James circa 1959. My critique of the bogus strawman book "White Athena" on Amazon makes this very point. The same critique can be applied to the Arabist hypocrites desperately trying to "distance" themselves from "anything too African" when hard data shows that the foundation of Kemet is precisely that which is "African". The above being said there is a need to of course learn more about ALL parts of the continent.
by Nodnarb
quote:
Along with the obvious fact that ancient Egypt receives more mainstream media exposure than other African cultures, I believe it has a special attraction to "Afrocentric" types because it's perceived as a major influence on the development of so-called Western civilization (through the proxies of Greece and then Rome of course). Not to mention the irony of an advanced civilization thriving in Africa when most of northern Europe was still at a "tribal" level of organization. It would be the ultimate rebuttal to the white supremacist narrative that Africans are naturally less capable of civilization than Europeans. So that's probably why Egypt is more contentious territory than, say, Mali or Zimbabwe.
by Oshun
quote: Egypt given lots of attention cause the discoveries and science and math were the foundation for a lot of progress in those field for ancient Europe. Much of their ideas are still directly relevant today in technology, science and mathematics. While we know now by a few resources that West African civilizations contemporary to Egypt existed, it's not really known like it is with Egypt what they were like, let alone what they could've been accomplishin still relevant today (see Tichitt)
by Nodnarb
quote: I agree with this as well. The African quality of Kush, Mali, or Zimbabwe doesn't get ignored or denied as much as Egypt's. Instead it's pretty much taken for granted. So yeah, even people who don't necessarily gravitate towards Egypt more than other African civilizations might still find themselves arguing about it more since it's more contested territory.
Piers Morgan interviews Bassem Yousuff and Ernest Owen about Netflix Cleopatra
quote: Piers Morgan Uncensored is joined by Egyptian comedian Bassem Youssef and author Ernest Owens to debate Netflix hiring non-Egyptian actress Adele James to play Cleopatra in a new Netflix show about the Pharaoh Queen.
Bassem Yousuff is also opposed to Gal Gadot playing Cleopatra. He says
quote:... a couple of years ago they announced that Gal Gadot, an ex Israeli soldier who condones her government actions atrocities against Palestinian children she was going to play Cleopatra, for me this is even a bigger insult and Gal Gadot is not black .. it's not about black and white it's about this idea of Hollywood always stealing by the culture of my own people
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Bas relief fragment portraying Cleopatra VII CIRCA 1997: Egyptian civilization - Ptolemaic period - Bas relief fragment portraying Cleopatra (3rd-1st century b.C.). (Photo By DEA PICTURE LIBRARY/De Agostini via Getty Images)
Zendaya steals important role from Gal Gadot by Daniela Aguilera April 4, 2023
After her roles in “Spiderman” and “Euphoria,” Zendaya, a former Disney star, has managed to establish herself as one of the most significant actresses in the business. For this reason, Zendaya was considered to play Queen Cleopatra in a movie directed by Denis Villeneuve, who also oversaw “Dune.”
In an adaptation about the life of one of the most significant women in Egypt, the young Zendaya will reunite with Denis Villeneuve, with whom she previously collaborated on the film “Dune,” it was revealed this week.
believed that Gal Gadot had been chosen as the ideal candidate to portray the Egyptian woman, circumstances have since altered as it became difficult for the Israeli actress to handle two extremely demanding projects, such as Cleopatra and Wonder Woman.
Gal Gadot was left out by Denis Villeneuve long before he realized that Patty Jenkins’ firing and the cancellation of the projects she had been considered for would leave the DC cinematic universe actor without a job.
Film critic Jeff Sneider stated on the Hot Mic show that the project, which is based on the life of the last queen of Egypt, is still in the long pre-production stage. As a result, there may be additional changes to the cast of celebrities or the plot in the future.
t should be mentioned that, as of right now, neither the project nor the participation of the actresses Gal Gadot or Zendaya, nor the latter, have received any direct statements from director Denis Villeneuve.
Zendaya, also credited as Zendaya Coleman, is an American actress, singer, dancer, and model. She has starred in the films The Greatest Showman, Smallfoot, Malcolm & Marie, Dune, and, as MJ, the Spider-Man franchise; and on television’s Shake It Up, Frenemies, Zapped, K.C. Undercover, and Euphoria.
Her father, Kazembe Ajamu (born Samuel David Coleman), is African-American, from a family from Arkansas. Her mother, Claire Marie (Stoermer), who is white, has German, Irish, English, and Scottish ancestry.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Then we have the Syrian actress who played Cleopatra in an Egyptian - Syrian TV-series from 2010.
----------- Wonder what he would think about the cartoon Cleopatra in Space, where Cleopatra travels to the future and experiences a lot of adventures in a science fiction world? Cleopatra in Space is both a graphic novel series and an animated TV-series.
I'm aware of the debate surrounding Cleo's heritage and how she may or may not have looked.
Nonetheless, I'd like to show a contemporary Roman painting of Cleopatra dressed in Greco-Roman garb rather than white and Egyptian attire.
Besides, Macedonian Greeks appear to be less "Mediterranean" in appearance than Athenians, for example. They seem to be on the fairer side in their own ancient artworks.
Posted by mightywolf (Member # 23402) on :
To be honest, I feel a bit sorry for the actress, who is experiencing a lot of heat, smoke, and disdain. They also made her darker than she actually is in the photo. With that stated, many people were upset that Netflix insisted on their presentation of Cleopatra as a documentary rather than a film with a re-imagined Cleo, in which they could take artistic liberties with her ethnicity or appearance. This actress would, in my opinion, be a better option for the role of Hatshepsut than Cleopatra.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Now Egyptian authorities have issued a statement about the Netflix Cleopatra documentary.
I quote it here translated to English. In the link below the statement you can see the document in Arabic.
quote:Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities on Thursday
April 27, 2023
- The Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities confirms that Queen Cleopatra had light skin and Hellenistic (Greek) features.
- The effects and statues of Queen Cleopatra are the best evidence of her true features and her Macedonian origins
With reference to the series of documentaries that the “Netflix” platform announced its launch during the coming period, foremost of which is a screening of the movie “Queen Cleopatra” on the 10th of next May, in which its heroine, who plays the role of Queen “Cleopatra VII”, appears with African features and dark skin, he confirmed. Dr.. Mostafa Waziri, Secretary-General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, said that the appearance of the heroine in this body is a falsification of Egyptian history and a blatant historical fallacy, especially since the film is classified as a documentary film and not a dramatic work, which requires those in charge of its production to investigate accuracy and rely on historical and scientific facts to ensure that history and civilizations are not falsified. peoples.
He added that it was necessary to refer to specialists in archeology and anthropology when making this kind of documentaries and historical films, which will remain a witness to the civilizations and history of nations, pointing out that there are many antiquities of Queen Cleopatra, including statues and depictions on coins that confirm the shape and true features of her. All of which show the Hellenistic (Greek) features of Queen Cleopatra in terms of fair skin, drawn nose and thin lips.
Dr. confirmed. Mostafa Waziri said that the state of rejection witnessed by the film before its screening comes out of a sense of defending the history of Queen "Cleopatra VII", which is an important and authentic part of the ancient history of Egypt, and far from any ethnic racism, stressing full respect for African civilizations and our brothers in the African continent that unites us all. .
As Dr. added. Nasser Makkawi, Head of the Egyptian Antiquities Department at the Faculty of Archeology, Cairo University, said that the appearance of Queen Cleopatra in this film in this body contradicts the simplest historical facts and the writings of historians such as Plutarch and Diocassius, who recorded the events of Roman history in Egypt during the reign of Queen Cleopatra, who confirmed that she was light-skinned and that she had Pure Macedonian ancestry. He pointed out that Queen "Cleopatra VII" descends from an ancient Macedonian family that ruled Egypt for nearly 300 years, founded by King "Ptolemy I", one of the Macedonian leaders in the army of "Alexander the Great", to whom the state of Egypt devolved after the death of "Alexander" and the foundations of the Ptolemaic dynasty. Ptolemy I married Queen Berenice I of Macedonian origin as well, and they gave birth to King Ptolemy II, after whom his sons and grandchildren continued to marry their female sisters according to the customs of this era, until Queen Cleopatra VII and her brother Ptolemy 14 maintained The purity of their Macedonian race during all this time period.
On her part, Dr. said. Samia Al-Mirghani, former Director General of the Center for Research and Conservation of Antiquities at the Supreme Council of Antiquities, said that biological anthropology studies and DNA studies that were conducted on ancient Egyptian mummies and human bones confirmed that the Egyptians did not bear the features of sub-Saharan Africans, whether in the shape of the skull, the width of the cheeks and nose, the widening and advancement of the upper jaw, or the shape Al-Zahiri for hair, proportions of body parts, height, distribution and density of body hair. And what we see of a great diversity among the features of the Egyptians is due to the age of the ages of this land and the stability of its inhabitants and their melting of every stranger within their crucible.
She added that all the inscriptions and statues left for us by the ancient Egyptians on the temples and tombs depicted the Egyptians with features as close as possible to the contemporary Egyptians in terms of eye, hair and skin color, the degree of smoothness and density of hair for men and women, and even the color of the skin and the presence of a proportion of colored eyes, which are depicted in some statues of the Old Kingdom. Even when some mummification techniques changed in the 21st Dynasty and they began to paint the mummy's skin to make it look as it was in her first life, they painted the man's skin in brick color and painted the woman's skin in light yellow, which confirms that what was drawn and confirmed on the walls is the truth that the ancient Egyptian recorded about himself. .
As Dr. said. Catharina Martinez, the head of the Dominican mission and a worker at the Taposiris Magna temple in western Alexandria, said that despite the existence of conflicting opinions about her race, it is certain that she was born in Egypt in the year 69 BC of Macedonian origin, pointing out that with reference to the statues and coins left to us by the queen She confirms beyond any doubt her Hellenistic features, which is evident in the bust made of marble preserved in the Berlin Museum from the first century BC, in which she appears wearing a royal wreath, almond eyes, a drawn nose and thin lips, in addition to another bust preserved in the Vatican that shows her With soft features, and a marble head in which she appears wearing a headdress, as well as a number of coins that show her in the same Hellenistic form. ---- Ministry of Tourism
Queen Cleopatra’ Director Speaks Out: ‘What Bothers You So Much About a Black Cleopatra?’(EXCLUSIVE) "It is more likely that Cleopatra looked like our actor than Elizabeth Taylor ever did."
By Tina Gharavi
Tina Gharavi
Last summer, I was living in Venice Beach and had decided, due to a friend’s persistence, to visit a fortune teller. Me, ever the sceptic but game for a laugh, agreed to go along. What the fortune teller said made me roll my eyes: “I am not saying you are Cleopatra but somehow you share her story and are connected.”
Less than a month later, I got a call from a production company making Jada Pinkett Smith’s “African Queens” and was subsequently hired to direct four episodes of a drama-documentary on the life of the controversial leader. The joke was on me.
I remember as a kid seeing Elizabeth Taylor play Cleopatra. I was captivated, but even then, I felt the image was not right. Was her skin really that white? With this new production, could I find the answers about Cleopatra’s heritage and release her from the stranglehold that Hollywood had placed on her image?
Born in Iran, I am a Persian, and Cleopatra’s heritage has been attributed at one time or another to the Greeks, the Macedonians and the Persians. The known facts are that her Macedonian Greek family — the Ptolemaic lineage — intermarried with West Asian’s Seleucid dynasty and had been in Egypt for 300 years. Cleopatra was eight generations away from these Ptolemaic ancestors, making the chance of her being white somewhat unlikely. After 300 years, surely, we can safely say Cleopatra was Egyptian. She was no more Greek or Macedonian than Rita Wilson or Jennifer Aniston. Both are one generation from Greece.
Doing the research, I realized what a political act it would be to see Cleopatra portrayed by a Black actress. For me, the idea that people had gotten it so incredibly wrong before — historically, from Theda Bara to Monica Bellucci, and recently, with Angelina Jolie and Gal Gadot in the running to play her — meant we had to get it even more right. The hunt was on to find the right performer to bring Cleopatra into the 21st century.
Why shouldn’t Cleopatra be a melanated sister? And why do some people need Cleopatra to be white? Her proximity to whiteness seems to give her value, and for some Egyptians it seems to really matter.
After much hang-wringing and countless auditions, we found in Adele James an actor who could convey not only Cleopatra’s beauty, but also her strength. What the historians can confirm is that it is more likely that Cleopatra looked like Adele than Elizabeth Taylor ever did.
As production got nearer, I realized the magnitude and political nature of this job. It was important to get things right, but also to find a way of telling the story with humanism and nuance: The last thing we needed was another Cleopatra divorced from her womanhood and her power only sexualized. The HBO series “Rome” portrayed one of the most intelligent, sophisticated and powerful women in the world as a sleazy, dissipated drug addict, yet Egypt didn’t seem to mind. Where was the outrage then? But portraying her as Black? Well.
Perhaps, it’s not just that I’ve directed a series that portrays Cleopatra as Black, but that I have asked Egyptians to see themselves as Africans, and they are furious at me for that. I am okay with this.
While shooting, I became the target of a huge online hate campaign. Egyptians accused me of “blackwashing” and “stealing” their history. Some threatened to ruin my career — which I wanted to tell them was laughable. I was ruining it very well for myself, thank you very much! No amount of reasoning or reminders that Arab invasions had not yet happened in Cleopatra’s age seemed to stem the tide of ridiculous comments. Amir in his bedroom in Cairo wrote to me to earnestly appeal that “Cleopatra was Greek!” Oh, Lawd! Why would that be a good thing to you, Amir? You’re Egyptian.
So, was Cleopatra Black? We don’t know for sure, but we can be certain she wasn’t white like Elizabeth Taylor. We need to have a conversation with ourselves about our colorism, and the internalized white supremacy that Hollywood has indoctrinated us with.
Most of all, we need to realize that Cleopatra’s story is less about her than it is about who we are.
It’s almost as if we don’t realize that misogynoir still has an effect on us today. We need to liberate our imaginations, and boldly create a world in which we can explore our historical figures without fearing the complexity that comes with their depiction. I am proud to stand with “Queen Cleopatra” — a re-imagined Cleopatra — and with the team that made this. We re-imagined a world over 2,000 years ago where once there was an exceptional woman who ruled. I would like to draw a direct line from her to the women in Egypt who rose up in the Arab uprisings, and to my Persian sisters who are today rebelling against a brutal regime. Never before has it been more important to have women leaders: white or Black.
“Queen Cleopatra” debuts on Netflix on May 10. Gharavi is a BAFTA and Sundance-nominated filmmaker. Her debut, “I Am Nasrine” was nominated for a BAFTA in 2013. Her next feature documentary, “Tribalism is Killing Us,” which resulted from visiting Angola State Prison, will release later this year. Gharavi teaches filmmaking around the world, and was awarded an MIT Fellowship. She was elected into BAFTA in 2017. Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Ahmed Issa Minister of Tourism and Antiquities, Egypt
Posted by Karem (Member # 22585) on :
Not that I agree with trying to 'cancel' this show, but its interesting Bassem Youssef talks about disaproval of non-Black actors playing AE's too, links it to the political climate, and isnt automatically trying to claim 'Arab' either as some seem to say. It was either here or elsewhere that I heard the claim that the Sadat film was banned for the same reason, and despite the lack of evidence for it, now all this is unfolding its more beleivable, although still wouldnt rule out the primacy of politics in the decision given the nature of that films subject matter. Egyptians understandably feel touchy on the national culture, which theyve historically been blocked from, but energy would be better spent trying to improve the country.
Posted by Mighty Mack (Member # 17601) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Piers Morgan interviews Bassem Yousuff and Ernest Owen about Netflix Cleopatra
quote: Piers Morgan Uncensored is joined by Egyptian comedian Bassem Youssef and author Ernest Owens to debate Netflix hiring non-Egyptian actress Adele James to play Cleopatra in a new Netflix show about the Pharaoh Queen.
Bassem Yousuff is also opposed to Gal Gadot playing Cleopatra. He says
quote:... a couple of years ago they announced that Gal Gadot, an ex Israeli soldier who condones her government actions atrocities against Palestinian children she was going to play Cleopatra, for me this is even a bigger insult and Gal Gadot is not black .. it's not about black and white it's about this idea of Hollywood always stealing by the culture of my own people
This guy is insane. His culture? Im sure he doesn't even know a damn thing about black people let alone African culture. Also, he doesnt even look like any of the Pharoahs depicted during the dynastic period.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
@Archeopteryx. I know that those are all real Bassem Yousuff quotes but who made that into a poster? Can you go back in and put the link. I assume it's Egyptian History Defenders on Facebook or the other group listed on the lower right but I wonder if Bassem Yousuff endorses this as a poster or likes these groups
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mighty Mack: This guy is insane. His culture? Im sure he doesn't even know a damn thing about black people let alone African culture. Also, he doesnt even look like any of the Pharoahs depicted during the dynastic period.
Bassem Yousuff could be 90% Arab and 10% native Egyptian he could claim ancient Egyptian ancestors. But his Egyptian ancestry could be higher, it could be 60%, who knows or it could be none at all, zero
Somebody described as black who lives in Sudan or Chad or DRC for instance, who might have an ancestor who was an ancient Egyptian or they might have 0% Egyptian ancestry.
We can't tell by looking
It is peculiar for anybody to claim Ancient Egyptian culture since Egyptian culture has been dead for 2,000 years and many of these tombs have only been excavated in recent times. I doubt Bassem Yousuff practices Ancient Egyptian culture but I don't know much about him
Posted by mightywolf (Member # 23402) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mighty Mack:
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Piers Morgan interviews Bassem Yousuff and Ernest Owen about Netflix Cleopatra
quote: Piers Morgan Uncensored is joined by Egyptian comedian Bassem Youssef and author Ernest Owens to debate Netflix hiring non-Egyptian actress Adele James to play Cleopatra in a new Netflix show about the Pharaoh Queen.
Bassem Yousuff is also opposed to Gal Gadot playing Cleopatra. He says
quote:... a couple of years ago they announced that Gal Gadot, an ex Israeli soldier who condones her government actions atrocities against Palestinian children she was going to play Cleopatra, for me this is even a bigger insult and Gal Gadot is not black .. it's not about black and white it's about this idea of Hollywood always stealing by the culture of my own people
This guy is insane. His culture? Im sure he doesn't even know a damn thing about black people let alone African culture. Also, he doesnt even look like any of the Pharoahs depicted during the dynastic period.
Don't you agree with him that African Americans have their own wonderful ancestral culture in West Africa? Bassem, although critical, wasn't disrespectful toward black people, unlike many who oppose with Afrocentrism. He also made it clear that Egyptians are equally upset when white Europeans play Ancient Egyptians. And Gal Gadot also received a lot of backlash from the Egyptians for playing Cleopatra, and she is a Mediterranean-looking woman.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by mightywolf: He also made it clear that Egyptians are equally upset when white Europeans play Ancient Egyptians.
I am not sure if that is the case, would need to see evidence of such upset that is dated close to a release date (rather than years later saying "oh, yeah, we didn't like that either, we're fair")
quote:Originally posted by mightywolf: And Gal Gadot also received a lot of backlash from the Egyptians for playing Cleopatra, and she is a Mediterranean-looking woman.
yes but the reason >
Bassem Yousuff: "... a couple of years ago they announced that Gal Gadot, an ex Israeli soldier who condones her government actions atrocities against Palestinian children she was going to play Cleopatra, for me this is even a bigger insult and Gal Gadot is not black .. it's not about black and white it's about this idea of Hollywood always stealing by the culture of my own people"
^^ not complaining about her "whiteness", her Israeliness rather
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Actually, my citation of Hawass's claims are not about Tut or the Amarna family but go back to the late 90s in regards to DNA tests on Old Kingdom Giza mummies which have yet to be released. Again he claims it's because the results are misconstrued to be "Jewish" but many have noted such to be a load of pigcrap based on the simple reason that there is no DNA specific to "Jews" per say other than those associated with Southwest Asia ( paternal hg J) or Africa (paternal hg E). They've released the results on the Amarna family (though not entirely) and the same with the Ramessides (but again not entirely). Yet they haven't released the Giza results at all. No STRs or SNPs not one.
2014:
The editor of Archaeology magazine, Mark Rose, reported in 2002 that the work was cancelled “due to concern that the results might strengthen an association between the family of Tutankhamun and the Biblical Moses.” An Egyptologist with close links to the antiquities service, speaking to me on condition of anonymity, agreed: “There was a fear it would be said that the pharaohs were Jewish.”
Specifically, if the results showed that Tutankhamun shared DNA with Jewish groups, there was concern that this could be used by Israel to argue that Egypt was part of the Promised Land.
Comedian Bassem Yousuff is a buddy of John Stewart. John Stewart (born Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz) is probably having a hard time figuring out how he is going to react to this, if asked about Bassem's remarks on Cleo and more if Bassem's remarks on Gal Godot are brought up, sticky situation
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
REAL Egyptian DESTROYS Anti-Black Arab "Egyptians" (With RECEIPTS)
If Cleopatra was a Macedonian occupier why are all these Egyptians so concerned?
On the flip side why did Jada Pinket-Smith pick Cleopatra when she could have picked an Egyptian queen who was undisputedly Egyptian?
Posted by Karem (Member # 22585) on :
@Lioness - the Liz Taylor version was officially banned in Egypt at the time.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Also the choice of Gal Gadot for a role as Cleopatra was criticised, both by Egyptians (because she is an Israeli), and westerners (because she is white).
quote: Gal Gadot defends Cleopatra casting after 'whitewashing' controversy
Israeli film star Gal Gadot has defended her plan to play Cleopatra following accusations of whitewashing.
Critics say an Arab or African actress should play the ancient Egyptian queen.
"First of all if you want to be true to the facts then Cleopatra was Macedonian," the Wonder Woman actress told BBC Arabic's Sam Asi.
"We were looking for a Macedonian actress that could fit Cleopatra. She wasn't there, and I was very passionate about Cleopatra."
Controversy erupted in October after Gadot announced that she would star in and co-produce the film. The Guardian's Hanna Flint called it "a backwards step for Hollywood representation", while director Lexi Alexander said a black actress should be cast, citing a reconstruction of Cleopatra's face.
Gadot said: "I have friends from across the globe, whether they're Muslims or Christian or Catholic or atheist or Buddhist, or Jewish of course... People are people, and with me I want to celebrate the legacy of Cleopatra and honour this amazing historic icon that I admire so much."
She said other people were welcome to make their own films. "You know, anybody can make this movie and anybody can go ahead and do it. I'm very passionate that I'm going to do my own too."
Cleopatra, born in the ancient Egyptian capital Alexandria, was the last ruler in the dynasty founded by Alexander the Great's Macedonian general Ptolemy, whose descendants ruled Egypt for 300 years.
They have long been thought to have been white with a high degree of inbreeding. But there is mystery over the identity of her mother, leading to speculation that Cleopatra may have been of mixed heritage.
In 2008, Egyptologist Sally Ann Ashton from the Fitzwilliam Museum Cambridge created a reconstruction of her face from images on ancient artefacts. It showed her with mixed ethnicity.
"She probably wasn't just completely European," Dr Ashton told The Daily Mail at the time. "You've got to remember that her family had actually lived in Egypt for 300 years by the time she came to power."
The following year, a BBC documentary about the discovery of the possible skeleton of Cleopatra's sister Arsinoe suggested she may have had mixed ancestry.
But earlier this year, Kathryn Bard, Professor of Archaeology and Classical Studies at Boston University, told Newsweek: "Cleopatra VII was white - of Macedonian descent, as were all of the Ptolemy rulers, who lived in Egypt."
The celebrated queen has been played on screen by a string of white actresses, most famously Elizabeth Taylor in the big-budget 1963 film.
quote:Zack Galante 15 hours ago (edited) I love your videos … but im surprised u left out Strabo a Greek historian and the only person to see cleopatra & her family and he quoted "Three classes inhabited the city (Alexandria in Egypt): first the Aegyptian or native stock of people, who were quick-tempered and not inclined to civil life; and secondly the mercenary class, who were severe and numerous and intractable..; and, third, the tribe of the Alexandrians, who also were not distinctly inclined to civil life, and for the same reasons, but still they were better than those others, for even though they were a mixed people, still they were Greeks by origin and mindful of the customs common to the Greeks."
Starbo also stated that cleopatra was the only illegitimate child of Ptolemy XII Auletes.
quote:SignalHillTV 14 hours ago You are close Zach lol Strabo is reporting in the third person. He is saying the Egyptians are stating why she is ineligible to be queen and why Bernice Iv could rule. So he states he had three daughters with only Bernice Iv being legitimate and the rest of the kids, Cleopatra Vii, and Arisinoe Vi, are illegitimate, and the sons were too young to rule. They expelled Ptolemy Xii Auletes. So most scholars believe their mother/mothers were Egyptian because they could write in hieroglyphics. Then remember Alexander the Great married Roxanna. Not sure what happens to Cleopatra V she is not mentioned again after Bernice Vi's birth which was recorded. "Strabo Geography Book 1" Then Zack you can also see how they are represented in Hieroglyphics they both clearly have skin tone) Perfume Payparus. Getty Images
quote: SignalHillTV 14 hours ago Now Zach before I go cut and paste and it will take you to the scholarly article. "From the reconstruction, Thur and her colleagues concluded that Arsinoe had an African mother (the Ptolemies were an ethnically Greek dynasty). That conclusion led to splashy headlines suggesting that Cleopatra, too, was African" everything in parentheses, now her, and Cleopatra could have had a different mother. But when you get a chance in your free time notice how they were excited when they found her remains in Esphues, and how they try to challenge and dismiss them when they said her mother was African. So think about that when you see how Cleopatra is depicted in Hieroglyphics standing next to Arisinoe because they are the same complexion.
quote:Zack Galante 14 hours ago @SignalHillTV Duane W. Roller in his book Cleopatra: A Biography, published by Oxford University Press in 2010. Roller argues that Cleopatra’s mother may have been a 2nd wife of Ptolemaios XII & that she may have been a member of the Ptolemaic royal family named Berenike & her husband Psenptais, who was an Egyptian high priest. Concluding cleopatra having a black Egyptian mother.
quote: 13 hours ago @Zack Galante Yeah Zach if I had the present a case in Crimal court I would say her mother is unknown. However in Civil court more than likely I would agree with Duane Roller that her mother was Egyptian from a Memphis priestess family. Then I would argue that she and Arisnoe VI have the same African mother. It's a reason why Bernice VI could not read or write the Egyptian language but they both could. Now Elizabeth Taylor they actually copied her look from hieroglyphics braids etc So whenever you get a chance to check out the getting images the person she is always holding hands with is Arisnoe IV. They found Arsinoe IV remains but they have not found Cleopatra Vii's (yet) maybe they never will./QUOTE]
[QUOTE]SignalHillTV 13 hours ago @Zack Galante Yeah Zack he mentions Cleopatra she is one of the three daughters. He is talking about Bernice IV it appears you are saying Bernike. The other two daughters are Arisnoe IV and Cleopatra. If I picked someone to play Cleopatra I would go with Zendaya. So if you watch the channel in Egypt the Royal Wife Cleopatra's V offspring would be eligible to rule. Children by a lesser wife could not unless they were male, so that is why is stated they were too young. So Zach people may try to stump you and state what the Greek word for illegitimate is or state what Strabo meant. But he is just reporting, the Egyptians expelled him. Once Bernice VI is executed now they are eligible to be co-regent with one of the sons
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
In his article Zahi Hawass says this about some depictions of Cleopatra
quote: As one talking head in the film says, “I remember my grandmother saying to me, ‘I don’t care what they tell you in school, Cleopatra was black’.”
But, as all the evidence shows, she wasn’t.
One need only look at all the known statues of Cleopatra VII, such as the head of the queen that I and fellow archaeologist Kathleen Martinez found inside the Temple of Taposiris Magna, west of Alexandria, during our search for Cleopatra’s tomb.
None of these statues, including the one we found, which was made of alabaster, gives any indication that Cleopatra was black.
During our excavation inside the temple, we also found a large number of coins bearing the face and name of Cleopatra. Again, not one of the depictions supports the decision of the producers of the series to portray their queen as black.
quote:Originally posted by Karem: @Lioness - the Liz Taylor version was officially banned in Egypt at the time.
Taylor had converted to Judaism a few years earlier, before her marriage to singer Eddie Fisher, and had become outspokenly supportive of Israel. At the time, Egypt saw Israel as its enemy and banned any kind of relations with Jews and Israelis. So when the film first came out, Egypt banned the film. Taylor’s conversion to Judaism and her outspoken support of Israel made her persona non grata in Egypt, which later recanted once it realized the great publicity it was receiving.
In 1959, Taylor made her Zionist support public in a big way, buying $100,000 of Israel bonds at a fundraiser dinner in Los Angeles with her new husband Fisher (who bought $10,000 himself). She had already finished her conversion with a big ceremony at Hollywood’s Temple Israel and spoken to the press about her love of Judaism. She was not converting for her husband, she made clear — she claimed she had admired the religion “for a long time.”
Taylor’s big Israel bonds purchase made waves in the Arab world, and not long after, JTA reported that the US State Department had received some startling news: The United Arab Republic — what was then a unified state consisting of Egypt and Syria — “officially banned all motion pictures” featuring Taylor.
Filming for “Cleopatra” took place in 1962, mostly in Rome, but the crew planned to film some shots in Egypt, for authenticity’s sake. But Taylor was banned from even entering the country, so the crew didn’t travel to Egypt. Still, JTA noted at the time: “Officially, Miss Taylor’s movies have been on the Egyptian blacklist for a long time. However, some of her films are shown occasionally in Egypt, and receive enthusiastic support from Egyptian audiences.”
“Cleopatra” ended up doing just fine — it was released in 1963, became the most financially successful movie of the year and won four Academy Awards in 1964. Furthermore, Egyptian officials enjoyed it so much that they removed Taylor from the travel blacklist. As JTA reported: “The officials decided the film was good publicity for Egypt which is mentioned 122 times in the movie.”
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: In his article Zahi Hawass says this about some depictions of Cleopatra
quote: As one talking head in the film says, “I remember my grandmother saying to me, ‘I don’t care what they tell you in school, Cleopatra was black’.”
But, as all the evidence shows, she wasn’t.
One need only look at all the known statues of Cleopatra VII, such as the head of the queen that I and fellow archaeologist Kathleen Martinez found inside the Temple of Taposiris Magna, west of Alexandria, during our search for Cleopatra’s tomb.
None of these statues, including the one we found, which was made of alabaster, gives any indication that Cleopatra was black.
During our excavation inside the temple, we also found a large number of coins bearing the face and name of Cleopatra. Again, not one of the depictions supports the decision of the producers of the series to portray their queen as black.
All the remarks here pertain to unpainted artifacts
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Deleted.
why did you delete that video link?
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Deleted.
why did you delete that video link?
Here is another video. IT'S better and funny also. The Ancient Egyptians were BLACK: Proof!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BajW2ptj6_0 Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
In his article he mentions archaeologist Kathleen Martinez
quote:... such as the head of the queen that I and fellow archaeologist Kathleen Martinez found inside the Temple of Taposiris Magna...
It seems that she had to mail him many times before they could start to work together.
quote: Martinez first came to Egypt in search of Cleopatra’s tomb some 20 years ago, convinced after more than a decade of research that Taposiris Magna, located on outskirts of Alexandria and dedicated to Osiris, the god of the dead, was a leading candidate for the queen’s burial spot.
After hundreds of ignored emails, Martinez managed to secure a meeting in Cairo with archaeologist Zahi Hawass, then the country’s minister of Egypt’s antiquities affairs.
She convinced him to give her two months to conduct excavations on the site. Work has been ongoing since 2004—but the new find is the most compelling evidence to date that Martinez is on the right track.
After that the excavations have yielded very interesting results, among others a 1,2 Km long tunnel. Martinez still hopes they can find Cleopatras tomb. If there still is a body there it could give valuable clues to her looks and her family.
An alabaster statue of Cleopatra is shown to the press at the temple of Tasposiris Magna on the outskirts of Alexandria, on April 19, 2009. Archaeologists are now more convinced than ever that the tomb of Marc Anthony and Cleopatra lies nearby (From Artnet News)
They also found 22 coins with her image.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
The whole article of Zahi Hawass
quote:No Cleopatra was not black — here are the facts
The “docudrama” Queen Cleopatra, which purports to be a historically accurate account of the life and reign of the ruler of the Ptolemaic kingdom of Egypt in the first century BC, will be released on Netflix on May 10.
The series, produced by Jada Pinkett Smith, the wife of American actor Will Smith, has already attracted much controversy for the decision to cast the black British actress Adele James in the title role. Cleopatra was not black. As well documented history attests, she was the descendant of a Macedonian Greek general who was a contemporary of Alexander the Great. Her first language was Greek and in contemporary busts and portraits she is depicted clearly as being white.
The evidence for Cleopatra’s true heritage is overwhelming – and not, as Pinkett Smith has said in defense of the show, “highly debated.”
The actress playing Cleopatra has offered this advice to the show’s many critics: "If you don't like the casting, don't watch the show." It is advice that I, and I suspect countless Egyptians, intend to take.
There are many words that could be used to describe the falsehood at the heart of this series, and headlines in newspapers around the world – from the US to Egypt and Greece – have carried several of them, including “historical revisionism,” “cultural appropriation,” and “black-washing.”
The protests are not motivated by racism. As the Egyptian lawyer Mahmoud Al-Semary, who has launched a legal bid to have access to Netflix blocked in Egypt, has pointed out, this is outrage provoked by a form of cultural identity theft.
Al-Semary has accused Netflix of an attempt to "promote the Afrocentric thinking ... which includes slogans and writings aimed at distorting and erasing the Egyptian identity.” He makes a sound case.
I met Pinkett Smith in 2006. At the time I was the head of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities, and she and I were named by Time magazine as being among “the 100 men and women whose power, talent or moral example is transforming our world.”
I went to the ceremony at the Lincoln Center in New York and, at dinner, sat at a table with both Will and Jada Pinkett Smith. I invited Smith to come to Egypt and, 11 years later, in company with most of the members of his family, but not his wife, he did.
That, as it now turns out, was a pity. As one talking head in the film says, “I remember my grandmother saying to me, ‘I don’t care what they tell you in school, Cleopatra was black’.”
But, as all the evidence shows, she wasn’t.
One need only look at all the known statues of Cleopatra VII, such as the head of the queen that I and fellow archaeologist Kathleen Martinez found inside the Temple of Taposiris Magna, west of Alexandria, during our search for Cleopatra’s tomb.
None of these statues, including the one we found, which was made of alabaster, gives any indication that Cleopatra was black.
During our excavation inside the temple, we also found a large number of coins bearing the face and name of Cleopatra. Again, not one of the depictions supports the decision of the producers of the series to portray their queen as black.
There is a similar lack of evidence for Cleopatra having been black to be found in a depiction on the facade of the temple at Dendera, which shows her with the goddess Hathor and her child Caesarion, the son of Caesar.
Why is this series appearing now? It is, perhaps, timed to take commercial advantage of the current contention among some in the black American community that their origins lie in ancient Egypt.
I can’t say if this is true or not. If there were evidence to support this theory, I would accept it completely, but there is no such evidence.
The truth as we know it can be found in the many scenes depicted in temples throughout Egyptian history. Here we see the pharaohs smiting the enemies of Egypt and, in front of them, all of the people of the surrounding regions, including Nubia, Libya and Mesopotamia.
Luckily for historians and archaeologists, the ancient Egyptian artists were sticklers for detail – examine the faces, and the racial characteristics of each of the figures are clearly shown.
This can be seen in one of the great scenes that was found during our excavation and conservation inside the tomb of Ramses II in the Valley of the Kings. It shows the sun god Ra on his boat and, standing in front of him, people of four clearly identifiable races: Egyptians, Africans, Libyans and Asiatics.
In February it was announced that black American comedian Kevin Hart had cancelled an upcoming show in Egypt, because of controversy over Afrocentric remarks he had made previously, claiming that the kings of Egypt had been black Africans.
I was unhappy about the cancellation because dialogue between all of us is very important. If we could have met, I’d have explained to Hart that the people from the Nubian Kingdom of Kush did indeed come to Egypt as conquerors who ruled for about a century, from 744 to 656 BC, but they were not, as has been repeatedly and wrongly claimed, the originators of pharaonic civilization.
A few years ago, I went to Philadelphia to give a lecture at the University of Pennsylvania on the origins of the ancient Egyptians and, such is the interest in this subject, the lecture was sold out. I said there were three opinions on the subject.
Some scholars say that the first ancient Egyptians came from Asia and Africa. As evidence they cite the shape and color of the people in the Nile Delta today, who are white, while the color of the people in Upper Egypt is darker. They also suggest that the grammar in hieroglyphic script is similar to that in Arabic and Hebrew.
The second opinion was published by Cheikh Anta Diop, from Senegal, who claimed that the ancient Egyptians were of black origin, and pointed to statues of Tutankhamun and Ramses, which had been carved from dark stone. He also said that the grammar in hieroglyphic script was similar to some African languages, but a UNESCO conference in Paris attended by many Egyptologists dismissed the theory as lacking real evidence.
The third opinion is based on the excavation of Naqada in Upper Egypt by the British archaeologist Sir Flinders Petrie, who is regarded as the father of Egyptology and a pioneer in systematic archaeological investigation. After excavating a predynastic cemetery, Petrie concluded that the remains buried there were of the people who had made the Egyptian civilization.
If we look at the archaeological evidence from Asia and Africa, it is clear that this pharaonic civilization occurred only in Egypt. The ancient people of Africa, although blessed similarly with the bounty of the Nile and even better weather, left nothing behind them.
Cleopatra was not black, and I would welcome the opportunity to teach Pinkett Smith about a woman whose achievements and story were sufficiently dramatic not to require politically motivated embellishment in the retelling of them.
When Cleopatra took the throne in 51 BC after the death of her father, Egypt was severely damaged, significantly in debt and experiencing high inflation. The Nile had recently flooded more destructively than usual, political power lay in the hands of Rome and the feelings of anger and rebellion among the Alexandrians toward the pharaoh had reached fever pitch.
Cleopatra rose to the occasion, entering the political arena with a strong character, a sharp mind and, it has to be said, feminine charms that she did not hesitate to exploit, as witnessed by her relationships with and manipulation of the Romans Julius Caesar and Mark Antony.
Cleopatra had several private tutors who prepared her to rule Egypt, but she also pursued academic interests of her own, such as science and philosophy, and could be said to have been a pioneer in the field of women’s rights. Unlike her forebears, Cleopatra learned the native language of Egypt, as well as Greek and other tongues.
Cleopatra, then, was many things, and well deserving of having her story told to modern audiences, but one thing she most definitely was not was black.
It is a shame that Netflix has categorized this new series as a docudrama, rather than a pure drama, because no one who knows anything about ancient Egypt can possibly take it seriously.
Dr. Zahi Hawass is Honorary Chairman, Antiquities Coalition Advisory Council, Egyptologist and Former Minister of Antiquities of Egypt, a position he served twice. He is also the Director of Excavations at Giza, Saqqara, Bahariya Oasis, and the Valley of the Kings. He has been involved in several important archaeological projects. He led the search for the tomb of Cleopatra and Mark Antony on the premises of a Ptolemaic temple near Alexandria. (Source: Antiquities Coalition)
quote:Originally posted by Mighty Mack: This guy is insane. His culture? Im sure he doesn't even know a damn thing about black people let alone African culture. Also, he doesnt even look like any of the Pharoahs depicted during the dynastic period.
Bassem Yousuff could be 90% Arab and 10% native Egyptian he could claim ancient Egyptian ancestors. But his Egyptian ancestry could be higher, it could be 60%, who knows or it could be none at all, zero
Somebody described as black who lives in Sudan or Chad or DRC for instance, who might have an ancestor who was an ancient Egyptian or they might have 0% Egyptian ancestry.
We can't tell by looking
It is peculiar for anybody to claim Ancient Egyptian culture since Egyptian culture has been dead for 2,000 years and many of these tombs have only been excavated in recent times. I doubt Bassem Yousuff practices Ancient Egyptian culture but I don't know much about him
Ancient Egyptian culture is African.
Has Bassem Yousuff taken a genetic test to determine his african ancestry? Also, Assuming Bassem Yousuff is 10% dynastic egyptian, why is that enough for him to claim its his culture considering he doesn't know any damn thing about african people and african culture at all? Many black people across the globe are 10% non black this or that, is he cool with black people claiming white, arab, south west/asian culture as their heritable culture?
Adele James is black of mixed ancestry. She is most likely 30% non black yet to these people she cant even play an african egyptian because she look too black. Bassem Yousuffs claims on west africa is pointless. He doesn't know anything about africa or black people. For the record you have many meditteranean groups like the Greeks or Italians for example who are part African and they dont claim any african civilization.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mighty Mack: Ancient Egyptian culture is African.
Has Bassem Yousuff taken a genetic test to determine his african ancestry? Also, Assuming Bassem Yousuff is 10% dynastic egyptian, why is that enough for him to claim its his culture considering he doesn't know any damn thing about african people and african culture at all?
How do you know Bassem Yousuff knows nothing about ancient Egyptian culture?
quote:Originally posted by Mighty Mack: Ancient Egyptian culture is African.
Many black people across the globe are 10% non black this or that, is he cool with black people claiming white, arab, south west/asian culture as their heritable culture?
Suppose a black person who was born in Egypt said they were a native Egyptian and said "my culture goes back to the ancient Egyptians" would you consider this claim made by any living person acceptable?
quote:Originally posted by Mighty Mack:
Adele James is black of mixed ancestry. She is most likely 30% non black yet to these people she cant even play an african egyptian because she look too black.
She's not playing an African Egyptian. She's playing a Macedonian Greek
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mighty Mack: Ancient Egyptian culture is African.
Has Bassem Yousuff taken a genetic test to determine his african ancestry? Also, Assuming Bassem Yousuff is 10% dynastic egyptian, why is that enough for him to claim its his culture considering he doesn't know any damn thing about african people and african culture at all?
How do you know Bassem Yousuff knows nothing about ancient Egyptian culture?
quote:Originally posted by Mighty Mack: Ancient Egyptian culture is African.
Many black people across the globe are 10% non black this or that, is he cool with black people claiming white, arab, south west/asian culture as their heritable culture?
Suppose a black person who was born in Egypt said they were a native Egyptian and said "my culture goes back to the ancient Egyptians" would you consider this claim made by any living person acceptable?
quote:Originally posted by Mighty Mack:
Adele James is black of mixed ancestry. She is most likely 30% non black yet to these people she cant even play an african egyptian because she look too black.
[qb]She's not playing an African Egyptian. She's playing a Macedonian Greek
I didnt say he didnt know anything about Ancient Egyptian culture.
quote:Suppose a black person who was born in Egypt said they were a native Egyptian and said "my culture goes back to the ancient Egyptians" would you consider this claim made by any living person acceptable?
call me prejudiced but certainly more acceptable than the man who looks like he came right out of the caucaus region.
quote:She's not playing an African Egyptian. She's playing a Macedonian Greek
I forget this is a documentary, not a show. you are right she was macedonian greek. She may have been mixed ive not researched much into cleopatra considering im more concerned about other african female rulers like hatshepsut, tiye, sobnekferu etc
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
A couple of reconstructions of Cleopatra, the first one is made by Royalty now, the second one by Alessandro Tomasi and the two at the bottom by Sally Ann Ashton
Another rendering of Cleopatra from Royalty now, here depicted in modern clothing
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Another video where an Egyptian speaks against the Cleopatra documentary
This was posted in one of youtube video comment sections.
Sako Gekchyan quote-
quote: @Spitfire The Dragon TV Love And Positive Light But the Sahara did not prevent so-called Black people from traveling to North Africa.
First of all, the Sahara was not always a desert. As recent as 6000 years ago, large parts of it were lush, savanna, and even some tropical forests as well.
It only gradually became a desert. Over time it has gone through several cycles of Fertilization and desertification.
Second, what do you mean by black? Do you consider the people of Sudan black? If so, then clearly, there is no barrier to some groups of Black people.
They are literally right up the river. Do you think there was some magical forcefield keeping Black people in prehistoric times from migrating north into the lower Nile valley? This is the same question I ask hoteps who insist that Egypt was blackity black.
I asked them if they think there was some magical forcfield along the Sinai border, preventing prehistoric Middle Eastern populations from migrating into the Nile delta, and beyond? In both cases, the logic is pretty silly.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Ancient Egypt and Pre-history Egypt
Genetic history
quote: Beginning in the predynastic period, some differences between the populations of Upper and Lower Egypt were ascertained through their skeletal remains, suggesting a gradual clinal pattern north to south.
When Lower and Upper Egypt were unified c. 3200 BC, the distinction began to blur, resulting in a more homogeneous population in Egypt, though the distinction remains true to some degree to this day. Some biological anthropologists such as Shomarka Keita believe the range of variability to be primarily indigenous and not necessarily the result of significant intermingling of widely divergent peoples.
Keita describes the northern and southern patterns of the early predynastic period as "northern-Egyptian-Maghreb" and "tropical African variant" (overlapping with Nubia/Kush) respectively. He shows that a progressive change in Upper Egypt toward the northern Egyptian pattern takes place through the predynastic period. The southern pattern continues to predominate in Abydos, Upper Egypt by the First Dynasty, but "lower Egyptian, Maghrebian, and European patterns are observed also, thus making for great diversity."
A group of noted physical anthropologists conducted craniofacial studies of Egyptian skeletal remains and concluded similarly that "the Egyptians have been in place since back in the Pleistocene and have been largely unaffected by either invasions or migrations. As others have noted, Egyptians are Egyptians, and they were so in the past as well."
Genetic analysis of modern Egyptians reveals that they have paternal lineages common to indigenous North-East African populations primarily and to Near Eastern peoples to a lesser extent—these lineages would have spread during the Neolithic and were maintained by the predynastic period. University of Chicago Egyptologist Frank Yurco suggested a historical, regional and ethnolinguistic continuity, asserting that "the mummies and skeletons of ancient Egyptians indicate they were Africans of the Afro-Asiatic ethnic grouping".He writes:
"Certainly there was some foreign admixture [in Egypt], but basically a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times... [the] Badarian people, who developed the earliest Predynastic Egyptian culture, already exhibited the mix of North African and Sub-Saharan physical traits that have typified Egyptians ever since (Hassan 1985; Yurco 1989; Trigger 1978; Keita 1990; Brace et al., this volume)... The peoples of Egypt, the Sudan, and much of East Africa, Ethiopia and Somalia are now generally regarded as a [Nile Valley] continuity, with widely ranging physical features (complexions light to dark, various hair and craniofacial types) but with powerful common cultural traits, including cattle pastoralist traditions (Trigger 1978; Bard, Snowden, this volume). Language research suggests that this Saharan-[Nile Valley] population became speakers of the Afro-Asiatic languages... Semitic was evidently spoken by Saharans who crossed the Red Sea into Arabia and became ancestors of the Semitic speakers there, possibly around 7000 BC... In summary we may say that Egypt was a distinct Afro-Asiatic African culture rooted in the Nile Valley and on the Sahara." A 2006 bioarchaeological study on the dental morphology of ancient Egyptians by Prof. Joel Irish shows dental traits characteristic of indigenous North Africans and to a lesser extent Southwest Asian and southern European populations. Among the samples included in the study is skeletal material from the Hawara tombs of Fayum, which clustered very closely with the Badarian series of the predynastic period. All the samples, particularly those of the Dynastic period, were significantly divergent from a neolithic West Saharan sample from Lower Nubia. Biological continuity was also found intact from the dynastic to the post-pharaonic periods. According to Irish:
[The Egyptian] samples [996 mummies] exhibit morphologically simple, mass-reduced dentitions that are similar to those in populations from greater North Africa (Irish, 1993, 1998a–c, 2000) and, to a lesser extent, western Asia and Europe (Turner, 1985a; Turner and Markowitz, 1990; Roler, 1992; Lipschultz, 1996; Irish, 1998a). Similar craniofacial measurements among samples from these regions were reported as well (Brace et al., 1993)... an inspection of MMD values reveals no evidence of increasing phenetic distance between samples from the first and second halves of this almost 3,000-year-long period. For example, phenetic distances between First-Second Dynasty Abydos and samples from Fourth Dynasty Saqqara (MMD ¼ 0.050), 11–12th Dynasty Thebes (0.000), 12th Dynasty Lisht (0.072), 19th Dynasty Qurneh (0.053), and 26th–30th Dynasty Giza (0.027) do not exhibit a directional increase through time... Thus, despite increasing foreign influence after the Second Intermediate Period, not only did Egyptian culture remain intact (Lloyd, 2000a), but the people themselves, as represented by the dental samples, appear biologically constant as well... Gebel Ramlah [Neolithic Nubian/Western Desert sample] is, in fact, significantly different from Badari based on the 22-trait MMD (Table 4). For that matter, the Neolithic Western Desert sample is significantly different from all others [but] is closest to predynastic and early dynastic samples.
A study published in 2017 described the extraction and analysis of DNA from 151 mummified ancient Egyptian individuals, whose remains were recovered from Abusir. The study was able to measure the mitochondrial DNA of 90 individuals, and it showed that Ancient Egyptians had the greatest affinity for modern Middle Eastern (Arabs, Levantine and Anatolian) and North African populations and had significantly more affinity with south-eastern Europeans than with sub-Saharan Africans. Genome-wide data could only be successfully extracted from three of these individuals. Of these three, the Y-chromosome haplogroups of two individuals could be assigned to the Middle-Eastern haplogroup J, and one to haplogroup E1b1b1 common in North Africa. The absolute estimates of sub-Saharan African ancestry in these three individuals ranged from 6 to 15%, which is slightly lower than the level of sub-Saharan African ancestry in Egyptians from Abusir, who range from 14 to 21%. The study's authors cautioned that the Mummies may be unrepresentative of the whole Ancient Egyptian population, since they were recovered from the northern part of Egypt and that the Southern part might have more Sub-Saharan component being closer to Nubia. and that they only dated from the late New Kingdom to the Roman Period. As a result mummies from the earlier classical periods of Egyptian history such as the Old Kingdom and Middle Kingdom further to the south were omitted.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Another rendering of Cleopatra from Royalty now, here depicted in modern clothing [/QB]
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: [QB] Another video where an Egyptian speaks against the Cleopatra documentary
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Cleopatra Ancestry quote-
quote: Cleopatra belonged to the Macedonian Greek dynasty of the Ptolemies, their European origins tracing back to northern Greece. Through her father, Ptolemy XII Auletes, she was a descendant of two prominent companions of Alexander the Great of Macedon: the general Ptolemy I Soter, founder of the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt, and Seleucus I Nicator, the Macedonian Greek founder of the Seleucid Empire of West Asia. While Cleopatra's paternal line can be traced, the identity of her mother is unknown.She was presumably the daughter of Cleopatra VI Tryphaena (also known as Cleopatra V Tryphaena), the sister-wife of Ptolemy XII who had previously given birth to their daughter Berenice IV.
Cleopatra I Syra was the only member of the Ptolemaic dynasty known for certain to have introduced some non-Greek ancestry. Her mother Laodice III was a daughter born to King Mithridates II of Pontus, a Persian of the Mithridatic dynasty, and his wife Laodice who had a mixed Greek-Persian heritage.Cleopatra I Syra's father Antiochus III the Great was a descendant of Queen Apama, the Sogdian Iranian wife of Seleucus I Nicator.It is generally believed that the Ptolemies did not intermarry with native Egyptians.Michael Grant asserts that there is only one known Egyptian mistress of a Ptolemy and no known Egyptian wife of a Ptolemy, further arguing that Cleopatra probably did not have any Egyptian ancestry and "would have described herself as Greek."Stacy Schiff writes that Cleopatra was a Macedonian Greek with some Persian ancestry, arguing that it was rare for the Ptolemies to have an Egyptian mistress. Duane W. Roller speculates that Cleopatra could have been the daughter of a theoretical half-Macedonian-Greek, half-Egyptian woman from Memphis in northern Egypt belonging to a family of priests dedicated to Ptah (a hypothesis not generally accepted in scholarship), but contends that whatever Cleopatra's ancestry, she valued her Greek Ptolemaic heritage the most.Ernle Bradford writes that Cleopatra challenged Rome not as an Egyptian woman "but as a civilized Greek." _____________ Cleopatra race controversy The race of Cleopatra VII, the last active Hellenistic ruler of the Macedonian-led Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt, has caused some debate in scholarly and non-scholarly circles. For example, the article "Was Cleopatra Black?" was published in Ebony magazine in 2002. Mary Lefkowitz, Professor Emerita of Classical Studies at Wellesley College, traces the origins of the Black Cleopatra claim to the 1946 book by J.A. Rogers called "World's Great Men of Color." Lefkowitz refutes Rogers' hypothesis, on various scholarly grounds. The black Cleopatra claim was further revived in an essay by afrocentrist John Henrik Clarke, chair of African history at Hunter College, entitled "African Warrior Queens."Lefkowitz notes the essay includes the claim that Cleopatra described herself as black in the New Testament's Book of Acts – when in fact Cleopatra had died more than sixty years before the death of Jesus Christ.
Scholars identify Cleopatra as having been essentially of Greek ancestry with some Persian and Sogdian Iranian ancestry, based on the fact that her Macedonian Greek family (the Ptolemaic dynasty) had intermarried with the Seleucid dynasty. Michael Grant states that Cleopatra probably had not a drop of Egyptian blood and that she "would have described herself as Greek.Duane W. Roller notes that "there is absolutely no evidence" that Cleopatra was racially black African as claimed by what he dismisses as generally not "credible scholarly sources."
Cleopatra's official coinage (which she would have approved) and the three portrait busts of her considered authentic by scholars (which match her coins) portray Cleopatra as a Greek woman in style. Polo writes that Cleopatra's coinage present her image with certainty and asserts that the sculpted portrait of the "Berlin Cleopatra" head is confirmed as having a similar profile.Roman frescoes in Pompeii and Herculaneum similar to the Vatican and Berlin marble sculptures have been identified as possible portraits of the queen based on comparable facial features and royal iconography.
In 2009, a BBC documentary speculated that Cleopatra might have been part North African. This was based largely on the examination of a headless skeleton of a female child in a 20 BCE tomb in Ephesus (modern Turkey), together with the old notes and photographs of the now-missing skull. The remains were hypothesized to be those of Arsinoe IV, half-sister to Cleopatra, and conjecture based on discredited processes suggested that the remains belonged to a girl whose "race" may have been "North African". This claim is rejected by scholars, based on the remains being impossible to identify as Arsinoe, the race of the remains being impossible to identify at all, the fact that the remains belonged to a child much younger than Arsinoe when she died, and the fact that Arsinoe and Cleopatra shared the same father Ptolemy XII Auletes but had different mothers.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
By the way. HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks
quote: HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia by DNA typing and sequencing. HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQ allele frequencies and extended haplotypes have been for the first time determined and the results compared to those of other Mediterraneans, particularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances, neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed. The following conclusions have been reached: 1) Macedonians belong to the "older" Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians (including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese, Turks (Anatolians), Armenians and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with geographically close Greeks, who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum, 3) Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiopian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles, such as *0305, *0307, *0411, *0413, *0416, *0417, *0420, *1110, *1112, *1304 and *1310. Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharan groups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks cluster with Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The time period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in pharaonic Egypt.
That study by Arnaiz-Villenas et al seems to have been rather criticized. In this video the study is mentioned and also something about him as a researcher.
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: By the way. HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks 2001 Feb
quote: HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia by DNA typing and sequencing. HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQ allele frequencies and extended haplotypes have been for the first time determined and the results compared to those of other Mediterraneans, particularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances, neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed. The following conclusions have been reached: 1) Macedonians belong to the "older" Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians (including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese, Turks (Anatolians), Armenians and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with geographically close Greeks, who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum, 3) Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiopian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles, such as *0305, *0307, *0411, *0413, *0416, *0417, *0420, *1110, *1112, *1304 and *1310. Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharan groups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks cluster with Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The time period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in pharaonic Egypt.
Antonio Arnaiz-Villena is a Spanish immunologist noted for his controversial research into the genetic history of ethnic groups and fringe linguistic hypotheses.
Greeks and Sub-Saharans Arnaiz-Villena et al. published five scientific articles, where, among other claims, they concluded that the Greek population originates from Sub-Saharan Africa and do not cluster with other Mediterraneans.[8][14][15][16][17] The explanation they offered is that a large number of Sub-Saharans had migrated to Greece (but not to Crete) during Minoan times,[8][14][15][16] i.e. predating both Classical and Mycenaean Greece. Those conclusions were related to the "Black Athena" debate and became embroiled in disputes between Greek and ethnic Macedonian nationalists.[18]
They cited Dörk et al. for having found a marker on Chromosome 7 that is common to Black Africans and, among Caucasoid populations, is found only in Greeks.[14][19] Dörk et al. did find an African-type of cystic fibrosis mutation in Greeks, however this mutation was extremely rare; it was detected only in three Greek families.[19] The explanation they offered is quite different from Arnaiz-Villena's. Dörk et al. state: "Historical contacts—for example, under Alexander the Great or during the ancient Minoan civilization—may provide an explanation for the common ancestry of disease mutations in these ethnically diverse populations."[19]
Hajjej et al. claimed to have confirmed the genetic relatedness between Greeks and Sub-Saharans.[20][21] However they used the same methodology (same gene markers) and same data samples like Arnaiz-Villena et al.[8][15][20][21]
Other authors contradict Arnaiz-Villena's results. In The History and Geography of Human Genes (Princeton, 1994), Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi and Piazza grouped Greeks with other European and Mediterranean populations based on 120 loci (view MDS plot[22]). Then, Ayub et al. 2003[23] did the same thing using 182 loci (view dendrogram[24]).[25] Another study was conducted in 2004 at Skopje's University of Ss. Kiril and Metodij, using high-resolution typing of HLA-DRB1 according to Arnaiz-Villena's methodology. Contrary to Arnaiz-Villena's conclusion, no sub-Saharan admixture was detected in the Greek sample.[25]
In a sample of 125 Greeks from Thessaloniki and Sarakatsani, 2 Asian-specific mtDNA sequences (M and D) were detected (1.6%). No sub-Saharan African genes were observed in this population, therefore, non-Caucasoid maternal ancestry in Greece is very low, as elsewhere in Europe.[26] Additionally, in a sample of 366 Greeks from thirteen locations in continental Greece, Crete, Lesvos and Chios, a single African haplogroup A Y Chromosome was found (0.3%). This marks the only instance to date of sub-Saharan DNA being discovered in Greece. In another sample of 42 Greeks, one sequence of the Siberian Tat-C haplogroup turned up, while other studies with larger sample populations have failed to detect this paternal marker in the Greek gene pool[27][28] and while its frequencies are actually much higher in Scandinavian and Slavic populations.[29][30] Also, a paper has detected clades of haplogroups J and E3b that were likely not part of pre-historic migrations into Europe, but rather spread by later historical movements. Greeks possess none of the lineages denoting North African ancestry within the last 5000 years and have only 2% (3/148) of the marker J-M267, which may reflect more recent Middle Eastern admixture.[31]
Jobling et al., in their genetics textbook "Human Evolutionary Genetics: Origins, Peoples & Disease", state that Arnaiz-Villena's conclusions on the Sub-Saharan origin of Greeks, is an example of arbitrary interpretation and that the methodology used is not appropriate for this kind of research.[32] Karatzios C. et al., made a systematic review of genetics and historical documents, showing great flaws in Arnaiz-Villena's methodology and theory on the Greeks/Sub-Saharan genetic relationship.[33]
Three respected geneticists, Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Alberto Piazza and Neil Risch, criticised Arnaiz-Villena's methodology.[34] They stated that "Using results from the analysis of a single marker, particularly one likely to have undergone selection, for the purpose of reconstructing genealogies is unreliable and unacceptable practice in population genetics. The limitations are made evident by the authors' extraordinary observations that Greeks are very similar to Ethiopians and east Africans but very distant from other south Europeans; and that the Japanese are nearly identical to west and south Africans. It is surprising that the authors were not puzzled by these anomalous results, which contradict history, geography, anthropology and all prior population-genetic studies of these groups." Arnaiz-Villena et al. countered this criticism in a response, stating "single-locus studies, whether using HLA or other markers, are common in this field and are regularly published in the specialist literature".[35]
A 2017 archaeogenetic study concluded concerning the origin of both the Minoans and Mycenaeans, that:
Other proposed migrations, such as settlement by Egyptian or Phoenician colonists are not discernible in our data, as there is no measurable Levantine or African influence in the Minoans and Myceneans, thus rejecting the hypothesis that the cultures of the Aegean were seeded by migrants from the old civilizations of these regions.
The other proposed migrations that is mentioned and disproved by the paper pertain to Black Athena's positions that Arnaiz-Villena also tried to support with his work.[36]
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Interesting. Thanks for the update.
Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
Honestly, if the actress playing Cleopatra in the upcoming Netflix doc wore a red-haired wig, she wouldn't look much different from those Roman portraits that people claim represent the "real" Cleopatra (I notice none of said ancient artworks have labels in Latin identifying whom they're portraying though). The actress isn't even that dark-skinned.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
@Brandon, is this a picture made by you? I found it in a video about Egyptians reacting over Netflix Cleopatra film.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: @Brandon, is this a picture made by you? I found it in a video about Egyptians reacting over Netflix Cleopatra film.
Yes, that's my depiction of Sobekneferu.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
I posted this link again back on the first page. REAL Egyptian DESTROYS Anti-Black Arab "Egyptians" (With RECEIPTS)
Anyway here is another one.
BIack Egyptian TikToker Reveals The Hate She Receives From Egyptians Over Her Skin Color
Wongel Zelalem reports on a bIack Egyptian TikToker getting rejected for the color of her skin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pi3kne7_vDU Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
It's kind of off topic. Although people might question Adele James playing an Egyptian the situation here is that they are questioning her playing a Macedonian Greek, Cleopatra
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Molefi Kete Asante is talking about the Netflix film about Cleopatra. Among many things he mentions that he actually met Zahi Hawass once.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Molefi Kete Asante is talking about the Netflix film about Cleopatra. Among many things he mentions that he actually met Zahi Hawass once.
Malcolm X had a European grandfather
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: [QB] Another video where an Egyptian speaks against the Cleopatra documentary
Why Egyptians are mad about Cleopatra Netflix series
I thought this Egyptian was a black self hating Egyptian and anti-black at first but she is brown i think looking at pictures of her. By the way i saw her video a few days ago before the link was posted. She is anti-black. Of course she believes most ancient egyptians were not black,tut etc.. and they come from the mid-east etc..
DW Nerd quote-
quote: You are not an invader. You are a true egyptian! The Ancient Egyptians came from Middle East/Mesopotamia. The ancient egyptian language has similarities with semitic languages from Middle East and has nothing to do with subsaharan languages. The sculptures and paintings even look like you. You are a true Egyptian Princess❤
Nora Elzeiny quote-
quote: This made my day, Thank you🥰🥰
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Here she is back again with a video where she expands on the subject why Egyptians are mad at Netflix Cleopatra series
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: By the way. HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks
quote: HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia by DNA typing and sequencing. HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQ allele frequencies and extended haplotypes have been for the first time determined and the results compared to those of other Mediterraneans, particularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances, neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed. The following conclusions have been reached: 1) Macedonians belong to the "older" Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians (including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese, Turks (Anatolians), Armenians and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with geographically close Greeks, who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum, 3) Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiopian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles, such as *0305, *0307, *0411, *0413, *0416, *0417, *0420, *1110, *1112, *1304 and *1310. Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharan groups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks cluster with Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The time period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in pharaonic Egypt.
You are presenting a study that was very pseudo and aimed to troll the Greeks and their origin.
A group of top scholars addressed and comprehensively rejected the infamous Arnaiz-Villena study, which claimed Greek ancestry with Sub-Saharan Africans, as well as subsequent papers published by him and others employing the same flawed approach. They want all of the studies to be withdrawn.
Christos Karatzios, Stephen G. Miller, Costas D. Triantaphyllidis. January 10, 2011
ABSTRACT:
Arnaiz-Villena et al. published five papers making the claim of a Sub-Saharan African origin for Greeks. Hajjej et al. essentially published copies of Arnaiz-Villena's studies using the same methods, and data sets. World leading geneticists have rejected Arnaiz-Villena's methodology (the primary defect is that they relied on too few genetic markers to reliably compare populations). Numerous studies using proper methodology and multiple genetic markers are presented, showing that Greeks cluster genetically with the rest of the Europeans, disproving Arnaiz-Villena's claims. History, as well as genetics, have been misused by Arnaiz-Villena's (and by extension Hajjej's) unprofessional statements and by their omissions and misquotations of scientific and historical citations. The abuse of scientific methods has earned Arnaiz-Villena's research a citation in a genetics textbook as an example of arbitrary interpretation and a deletion of one of his papers from the scientific literature. In order to protect science from misuse, the related papers of Arnaiz-Villena et al. and Hajjej et al. should also be retracted from the scientific literature. Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by mightywolf: You are presenting a study that was very pseudo and aimed to troll the Greeks and their origin.
he already addressed that, he said:
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Interesting. Thanks for the update.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Nora also has a couple of short videos where she further discusses Netflix Cleopatra
U.S. made this Black North African Egyptian immigrant identify as "white" caucasian #shorts https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Xk6BgsEUvKA Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Black Egyptian woman addresses Racist North Africans #Northafrica #ancientegypt #egypt #africa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8kZai3mHCE Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Egyptian Woman has some words Kevin Hart about his statements about Egyptians being black https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWJvXFHAWqQ Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
I have not seen all of this video and i will check the whole video out the later but check it out.
How The Migratory Routes of Africans Prove Their Link to Egypt and Nubia | The Link - Part 1 KueliMika https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSZKvinHTc8 Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
An Egyptian lawyer filed a case against Netflix
quote: Egyptian lawyer Mahmoud al-Semary has filed a case with the Public Prosecutor to shut down the Netflix platform in Egypt, following the trailer release of “Queen Cleopatra. ” A new documentary depicting the historical figure as a black woman.
The Egyptian lawyer has demanded that serious legal action be taken against those responsible for the making of the documentary. He blamed the Netflix management team for its participation in “this crime”.
He also demanded a thorough investigation of the process as well as the overall discontinuity of Netflix’s streaming service in Egypt as a consequence.
The Egyptian lawyer has demanded that serious legal action be taken against those responsible for the making of the documentary. He blamed the Netflix management team for its participation in “this crime”.
He also demanded a thorough investigation of the process as well as the overall discontinuity of Netflix’s streaming service in Egypt as a consequence. It added that the movie trailer, which attracted millions of viewers across the globe, contradicts Egyptian history.
The case said that the documentary promotes Afrocentrism which aims at distorting and obliterating Egyptian identity.
The complaint, which was handed into the Public Prosecution, also stated that: “In order to preserve the Egyptian national and cultural identity among Egyptians all over the world there must be pride in the makings of such work.”
The complaint has also accused the makers of the documentary and platform management of “forgery”.
Former Egyptian Antiquities Minister Zahi Hawass described depicting Queen Cleopatra as a black woman as “falsifying facts”, adding that “This is completely fake. Cleopatra was Greek, meaning that she was blonde, not black.”
Queen Cleopatra, the last ruler of the Ptolemaic dynasty, was born in 69 BC and died in 30 BC in Alexandria.
Seems even the Russian embassy in Egypt got involved in the discussions about Netflix Cleopatra
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Arabs In Egypt Are Upset With Netflix's Cleopatra Because They Cast A Black Actress https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDS06V1UoSo Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
A Black woman about Netflix Cleopatra film. Short video
People are confused and Hollywood is just helping fan the flames by pretending to care about black history. They don't. Hollywood and the West only care about Cleopatra because she was legitimately a white Queen of Egypt who was part of the political intrigue of Rome, which was also white. That means, not African, not Arab or "brown" but white and colonial conquerors, which is the foundation of modern Western civilization.
It allows them to imagine a white Queen dressing up and acting like some indigenous Queen of the Nile Valley. This perception largely comes from the fictionalized account written by Shakespeare. But the reality is that the Greek Dynasty in Egypt promoted Greek culture, especially in Alexandria and among the elites. They did maintain and preserve the ancient culture, but changed it to deify the Ptolemies as gods annointed rulers of the Nile. And outside of religious ceremonies, they primarily dressed and acted according to Greek custom.
Netflix is only promoting this particular revision of the historical narrative because it actually puts black people on the spot to defend something they had nothing to do with. Black people did not really come up with this and it was likely white executives that promoted this farce, along with the Persian director and so forth. Jada Pinkett Smith seems to be nothing more than a figurehead because no sane person would say that the African roots of the Nile Valley starts with the Greeks. Of course it doesn't and no serious African scholar has been using Cleopatra as the basis for any argument in support of that. However, Netflix and their so called woke agenda is just another example of white leftists working against black people even while they claim to be trying to help. They know full dam well that this would trigger backlash and they know full well that there were legitimately black Queens of the Nile they could have portrayed. But they don't want to and actually want to promote the idea that for black people to have an ancient history, they must "race swap" some historical figures. Which is obviously propaganda against and not support for African history.
quote: The Macedonian-Greek character of the monarchy was vigorously preserved. There is no more emphatic sign of this than the growth and importance of the city of Alexandria. It had been founded, on a date traditionally given as April 7, 331 bce (but often cited as 332 bce), by Alexander the Great on the site of the insignificant Egyptian village of Rakotis in the northwestern Nile River delta, and it ranked as the most important city in the eastern Mediterranean until the foundation of Constantinople in the 4th century ce. The importance of the new Greek city was soon emphasized by contrast to its Egyptian surroundings when the royal capital was transferred, within a few years of Alexander’s death, from Memphis to Alexandria. The Ptolemaic court cultivated extravagant luxury in the Greek style in its magnificent and steadily expanding palace complex, which occupied as much as a third of the city by the early Roman period. Its grandeur was emphasized in the reign of Ptolemy II Philadelphus by the foundation of a quadrennial festival, the Ptolemaieia, which was intended to enjoy a status equal to that of the Olympic Games. The festival was marked by a procession of amazingly elaborate and ingeniously constructed floats, with scenarios illustrating Greek Religious cults.
Ptolemy II gave the dynasty another distinctive feature when he married his full sister, Arsinoe II, one of the most powerful and remarkable women of the Hellenistic age. They became, in effect, co-rulers, and both took the epithet Philadelphus (“Brother-Loving” and “Sister-Loving”). The practice of consanguineous marriage was followed by most of their successors and imitated by ordinary Egyptians too, even though it had not been a standard practice in the pharaonic royal houses and had been unknown in the rest of the native Egyptian population. Arsinoe played a prominent role in the formation of royal policy. She was displayed on the coinage and was eventually worshiped, perhaps even before her death, in the distinctively Greek style of ruler cult that developed in this reign.
...
Euergetes was succeeded by his son Ptolemy IV Philopator (221–205 bce), whom the Greek historians portray as a weak and corrupt ruler, dominated by a powerful circle of Alexandrian Greek courtiers. The reign was notable for another serious conflict with the Seleucids, which ended in 217 bce in a great Ptolemaic victory at Raphia in southern Palestine. The battle is notable for the fact that large numbers of native Egyptian soldiers fought alongside the Macedonian and Greek contingents. Events surrounding the death of Philopator and the succession of the youthful Ptolemy V Epiphanes (205–180 bce) are obscured by court intrigue. Before Epiphanes had completed his first decade of rule, serious difficulties arose. Native revolts in the south, which had been sporadic in the second half of the 3rd century bce, became serious and weakened the hold of the monarch on a vital part of the kingdom. These revolts, which produced native claimants to the kingship, are generally attributed to the native Egyptians’ realization, after their contribution to the victory at Raphia, of their potential power. Trouble continued to break out for several more decades. By about 196 bce a great portion of the Ptolemaic overseas empire had been permanently lost (though there may have been a brief revival in the Aegean islands in about 165–145 bce). To shore up and advertise the strength of the ruling house at home and abroad, the administration adopted a series of grandiloquent honorific titles for its officers. To conciliate Egyptian feelings, a religious synod that met in 196 bce to crown Epiphanes at Memphis (the first occasion on which a Ptolemy is certainly known to have been crowned at the traditional capital) decreed extensive privileges for the Egyptian temples, as recorded on the Rosetta Stone.
...
Physcon was able to rule in Egypt until 116 bce with his sister Cleopatra II (except for a period in 131–130 bce when she was in revolt) and her daughter Cleopatra III. His reign was marked by generous benefactions to the Egyptian temples, but he was detested as a tyrant by the Greeks, and the historical accounts of the reign emphasize his stormy relations with the Alexandrian populace.
During the last century of Ptolemaic rule, Egypt’s independence was exercised under Rome’s protection and at Rome’s discretion. For much of the period, Rome was content to support a dynasty that had no overseas possession except Cyprus after 96 bce (the year in which Cyrene was bequeathed to Rome by Ptolemy Apion) and no ambitions threatening Roman interests or security. After a series of brief and unstable reigns, Ptolemy XII Auletes acceded to the throne in 80 bce. He maintained his hold for 30 years, despite the attractions that Egypt’s legendary wealth held for avaricious Roman politicians. In fact, Auletes had to flee Egypt in 58 bce and was restored by Pompey’s friend Gabinius in 55 bce, no doubt after spending so much in bribes that he had to bring Rabirius Postumus, one of his Roman creditors, to Egypt with him to manage his financial affairs.
In 52 bce, the year before his death, Auletes associated with himself on the throne his daughter Cleopatra VII and his elder son Ptolemy XIII (who died in 47 bce). The reign of Cleopatra was that of a vigorous and exceptionally able queen who was ambitious, among other things, to revive the prestige of the dynasty by cultivating influence with powerful Roman commanders and using their capacity to aggrandize Roman clients and allies. Julius Caesar pursued Pompey to Egypt in 48 bce. After learning of Pompey’s murder at the hands of Egyptian courtiers, Caesar stayed long enough to enjoy a sightseeing tour up the Nile in the queen’s company in the summer of 47 bce. When he left for Rome, Cleopatra was pregnant with a child she claimed was Caesar’s. The child, a son, was named Caesarion (“Little Caesar”). Cleopatra and Caesarion later followed Caesar back to Rome, but, after his assassination in 44 bce, they returned hurriedly to Egypt, and she tried for a while to play a neutral role in the struggles between the Roman generals and their factions.
Her long liaison with Mark Antony began when she visited him at Tarsus in 41 bce and he returned to Egypt with her. Between 36 and 30 bce the famous romance between the Roman general and the eastern queen was exploited to great effect by Antony’s political rival Octavian (the future emperor Augustus). By 34 bce Caesarion was officially co-ruler with Cleopatra, but his rule clearly was an attempt to exploit the popularity of Caesar’s memory. In the autumn Cleopatra and Antony staged an extravagant display in which they made grandiose dispositions of territory in the east to their children, Alexander Helios, Ptolemy, and Cleopatra Selene. Cleopatra and Antony were portrayed to the Roman public as posing for artists in the guise of Dionysus and Isis or whiling away their evenings in rowdy and decadent banquets that kept the citizens of Alexandria awake all night. But this propaganda war was merely the prelude to armed conflict, and the issue was decided in September 31 bce in a naval battle at Actium in western Greece. When the battle was at its height, Cleopatra and her squadron withdrew, and Antony eventually followed suit. They fled to Alexandria but could do little more than await the arrival of the victorious Octavian 10 months later. Alexandria was captured, and Antony and Cleopatra committed suicide—he by falling on his sword, she probably by the bite of an asp—in August of 30 bce. It is reported that when Octavian reached the city, he visited and touched the preserved corpse of Alexander the Great, causing a piece of the nose to fall off. He refused to gaze upon the remains of the Ptolemies, saying “I wished to see a king, not corpses.”
The changes brought to Egypt by the Ptolemies were momentous; the land’s resources were harnessed with unparalleled efficiency, with the result that Egypt became the wealthiest of the Hellenistic kingdoms. Land under cultivation was increased, and new crops were introduced (especially important was the introduction of naked tetraploid wheat, Triticum durum, to replace the traditional husked emmer, Triticum dicoccum). The population, estimated at perhaps three to four million in the late Dynastic period, may have more than doubled by the early Roman period to a level not reached again until the late 19th century. Some of the increase was due to immigration; particularly during the 2nd and 3rd centuries, many settlers were attracted from cities in Anatolia (Asia Minor) and the Greek islands, and large numbers of Jews came from Palestine. The flow may have decreased later in the Ptolemaic period, and it is often suggested, on slender evidence, that there was a serious decline in prosperity in the 1st century bce. If so, there may have been some reversal of this trend under Cleopatra VII.
...
By the same token, rigid lines of separation between military, civil, legal, and administrative matters are difficult to perceive. The same official might perform duties in one or all of these areas. The military was inevitably integrated into civilian life because its soldiers were also farmers who enjoyed royal grants of land, either as Greek cleruchs (holders of allotments) with higher status and generous grants or as native Egyptian machimoi with small plots. Interlocking judiciary institutions, in the form of Greek and Egyptian courts (chrēmatistai and laokritai), provided the means for Greeks and Egyptians to regulate their legal relationships according to the language in which they conducted their business. The bureaucratic power was heavily weighted in favour of the Greek speakers, the dominant elite. Egyptians were nevertheless able to obtain official posts in the bureaucracy, gradually infiltrating to the highest levels, but in order to do so they had to Hellenize.
The basis of Egypt’s legendary wealth was the highly productive land, which technically remained in royal ownership. A considerable portion was kept under the control of temples, and the remainder was leased out on a theoretically revocable basis to tenant-farmers. A portion also was available to be granted as gifts to leading courtiers; one of these was Apollonius, the finance minister of Ptolemy II Philadelphus, who had an estate of 10,000 arourae (about 6,500 acres [2,630 hectares]) at Philadelphia in Al-Fayyūm. Tenants and beneficiaries were able to behave very much as if these leases and grants were private property. The revenues in cash and kind were enormous, and royal control extended to the manufacture and marketing of almost all important products, including papyrus, oil, linen, and beer. An extraordinarily detailed set of revenue laws, promulgated under Ptolemy II Philadelphus, laid down rules for the way in which officials were to monitor the production of such commodities. In fact, the Ptolemaic economy was very much a mixture of direct royal ownership and exploitation by private enterprise under regulated conditions.
One fundamental and far-reaching Ptolemaic innovation was the systematic monetarization of the economy. The monarchy also controlled this from top to bottom by operating a closed monetary system, which permitted only the royal coinage to circulate within Egypt. A sophisticated banking system underpinned this practice, operating again with a mixture of direct royal control and private enterprise and handling both private financial transactions and those that directed money into and out of the royal coffers. One important concomitant of this change was an enormous increase in the volume of trade, both within Egypt and abroad, which eventually reached its climax under the peaceful conditions of Roman rule. There the position and role of Alexandria as the major port and trading entrepôt was crucial: the city handled a great volume of Egypt’s domestic produce, as well as the import and export of luxury goods to and from the East and the cities of the eastern Mediterranean. It developed its own importance as an artistic centre, the products of which found ready markets throughout the Mediterranean. Alexandrian glassware and jewelry were particularly fine, Greek-style sculpture of the late Ptolemaic period shows especial excellence, and it is likely that the city was also the major production centre for high-quality mosaic work.
The Ptolemies were powerful supporters of the native Egyptian religious foundations, the economic and political power of which was, however, carefully controlled. A great deal of the late building and restoration work in many of the most important Egyptian temples is Ptolemaic, particularly from the period of about 150–50 bce, and the monarchs appear on temple reliefs in the traditional forms of the Egyptian kings. The native traditions persisted in village temples and local cults, many having particular associations with species of sacred animals or birds. At the same time, the Greeks created their own identifications of Egyptian deities, identifying Amon with Zeus, Horus with Apollo, Ptah with Hephaestus, and so on. They also gave some deities, such as Isis, a more universal significance that ultimately resulted in the spread of her mystery cult throughout the Mediterranean world. The impact of the Greeks is most obvious in two phenomena. One is the formalized royal cult of Alexander and the Ptolemies, which evidently served both a political and a religious purpose. The other is the creation of the cult of Sarapis, which at first was confined to Alexandria but soon became universal. The god was represented as a Hellenized deity and the form of cult is Greek, but its essence is the old Egyptian notion that the sacred Apis bull merged its divinity in some way with the god Osiris when it died.
The continuing vitality of the native Egyptian artistic tradition is clearly and abundantly expressed in the temple architecture and the sculpture of the Ptolemaic period. The Egyptian language continued to be used in its hieroglyphic and demotic forms until late in the Roman period, and it survived through the Byzantine period and beyond in the form of Coptic. The Egyptian literary tradition flourished vigorously in the Ptolemaic period and produced a large number of works in demotic. The genre most commonly represented is the romantic tale, exemplified by several story cycles, which are typically set in the native, Pharaonic milieu and involve the gods, royal figures, magic, romance, and the trials and combats of heroes. Another important category is the Instruction Text, the best known of the period being that of Ankhsheshonq, which consists of a list of moralizing maxims, composed, as the story goes, when Ankhsheshonq was imprisoned for having failed to inform the king (pharaoh) of an assassination plot. Another example, known as Papyrus Insinger, is a more narrowly moralizing text. But the arrival of a Greek-speaking elite had an enormous impact on cultural patterns. The Egyptian story cycles were probably affected by Greek influence, literary and technical works were translated into Greek, and under royal patronage an Egyptian priest named Manetho of Sebennytos wrote an account of the kings of Egypt in Greek. Most striking is the diffusion of the works of the poets and playwrights of classical Greece among the literate Greeks in the towns and villages of the Nile River valley.
Thus there are clear signs of the existence of two interacting but distinct cultural traditions in Ptolemaic Egypt. This was certainly reflected in a broader social context. The written sources offer little direct evidence of ethnic discrimination by Greeks against Egyptians, but Greek and Egyptian consciousness of the Greeks’ social and economic superiority comes through strongly from time to time; intermarriage was one means, though not the only one, by which Egyptians could better their status and Hellenize. Many native Egyptians learned to speak Greek, some to write it as well; some even went so far as to adopt Greek names in an attempt to assimilate themselves to the elite group.
Alexandria occupied a unique place in the history of literature, ideas, scholarship, and science for almost a millennium after the death of its founder. Under the royal patronage of the Ptolemies and in an environment almost oblivious to its Egyptian surroundings, Greek culture was preserved and developed. Early in the Ptolemaic period, probably in the reign of Ptolemy I Soter, the Alexandrian Museum (Greek: Mouseion, “Seat of the Muses”) was established within the palace complex. The geographer and historian Strabo, who saw it early in the Roman period, described it as having a covered walk, an arcade with recesses and seats, and a large house containing the dining hall of the members of the Museum, who lived a communal existence. The Library of Alexandria (together with its offshoot in the Sarapeum) was indispensable to the functioning of the scholarly community in the Museum. Books were collected voraciously under the Ptolemies, and at its height the library’s collection probably numbered 500,000 or more papyrus rolls, most of them containing more than one work.
The major poets of the Hellenistic period, Theocritus, Callimachus, and Apollonius of Rhodes, all took up residence and wrote there. Scholarship flourished, preserving and ordering the manuscript traditions of much of the classical literature from Homer onward. Librarian-scholars such as Aristophanes of Byzantium and his pupil Aristarchus made critical editions and wrote commentaries and works on grammar. Also notable was the cultural influence of Alexandria’s Jewish community, which is inferred from the fact that the Pentateuch was first translated into Greek at Alexandria during the Ptolemaic period. One by-product of this kind of activity was that Alexandria became the centre of the book trade, and the works of the classical authors were copied there and diffused among a literate Greek readership scattered in the towns and villages of the Nile valley.
The Alexandrian achievement in scientific fields was also enormous. Great advances were made in pure mathematics, mechanics, physics, geography, and medicine. Euclid worked in Alexandria about 300 bce and achieved the systematization of the whole existing corpus of mathematical knowledge and the development of the method of proof by deduction from axioms. Archimedes was there in the 3rd century bce and is said to have invented the Archimedean screw when he was in Egypt. Eratosthenes calculated Earth’s circumference and was the first to attempt a map of the world based on a system of lines of latitude and longitude. The school of medicine founded in the Ptolemaic period retained its leading reputation into the Byzantine era. Late in the Ptolemaic period Alexandria began to develop as a great centre of Greek philosophical studies as well. In fact, there was no field of literary, intellectual, or scientific activity to which Ptolemaic Alexandria failed to make an important contribution.
quote: he priestly family that became the High Priests of Ptah under the Ptolemies was already important in the Memphite temple hierarchy at the start of the Ptolemaic period. For all we know they may even be descended from the Memphite High Priests of an earlier period, although proof is lacking. Whatever their earlier status, they were transformed during the Ptolemaic era into the heads of the religious establishment in Egypt, controlling vast resources, and second only to the king. In essence, for much of the later part of the Ptolemaic era the High Priest of Ptah in Memphis was the head of the native Egyptian community.
This rise to prominence began under Ptolemy II. He engaged on a major series of religious reforms, most notably by introducing the dynastic cult, originally instituted as the cults of his deified sisters Philotera and Arsinoe II. These cults were not limited to the Greeks, but were also introduced to the Egyptians. The Egyptian head of the cult of Arsinoe II, Nesisti-Pedubast, appears to have revived the ancient title of Chief of Artificers (High Priest of Memphis) in the latter part of the reign. Although the cult of Arsinoe itself was transferred after three generations to a related line, the High Priests of Letopolis, the creation of the Memphite pontificate began a process of aggrandisement that eventually culminated in the pontificate of Psherenptah III. This High Priest was head of all the priesthoods in Egypt, and at the age of 14 personally crowned Ptolemy XII as king.
The last member of the main line, Imhotep-Pedubast, died in mysterious circumstances on the day of the fall of Alexandria to the forces of Octavian. His maternal uncle and cousin, Psherenamun I and Psherenamun II, attempted to maintain the pontificate under the Romans. The attempt was apparently unsuccessful and the last clear trace of the office is seen in 23 BC, only seven years after the Roman conquest of Egypt. Certain hierophantic positions that persisted until the rise of Christianity in the third century AD may be traceable to the Memphite pontificate. However, although the possibility cannot be excluded, there is no evidence that they continued to be held by the same family.
Netflix is only promoting this particular revision of the historical narrative because it actually puts black people on the spot to defend something they had nothing to do with. Black people did not really come up with this and it was likely white executives that promoted this farce, along with the Persian director and so forth. Jada Pinkett Smith seems to be nothing more than a figurehead
blame whitey for Jada being an idiot
Take some responsibility I say
Netflix does not care about putting black people on the spot to defend something they had nothing to do with, they simply know controversy sells and supported Jada's project
Do you know who Molefe Asante is? He supports Jada
" 1:26:21 as a historian philosopher I give her our total support "
Molefi Kete Asante is a leading figure in the fields of African-American studies, African studies, and communication studies.[1] He is currently a professor in the Department of Africology at Temple University,[2][3] where he founded the PhD program in African-American Studies. He is president of the Molefi Kete Asante Institute for Afrocentric Studies.[4][5][6]
Asante is known for his writings on Afrocentricity, a school of thought that has influenced the fields of sociology, intercultural communication, critical theory, political science, the history of Africa, and social work.[7][8] He is the author of more than 66 books and the founding editor of the Journal of Black Studies.[9][10] He is the father of author and filmmaker M. K. Asante.[4]
watch the video before yapping
Posted by mightywolf (Member # 23402) on :
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Black Egyptian woman addresses Racist North Africans #Northafrica #ancientegypt #egypt #africa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8kZai3mHCE
Btw, she is a very pretty lady. Anti-blackness is, unfortunately, a significant problem throughout Northern Africa. Having said that, there are certain so-called black Moroccans or Egyptians whose Moroccanness or Egyptianess is unquestioned though. The way this Egyptian woman dresses or appears and conducts herself may lead the Egyptians to believe she is not Egyptian too.
Posted by mightywolf (Member # 23402) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: People are confused and Hollywood is just helping fan the flames by pretending to care about black history. They don't. Hollywood and the West only care about Cleopatra because she was legitimately a white Queen of Egypt who was part of the political intrigue of Rome, which was also white. That means, not African, not Arab or "brown" but white and colonial conquerors, which is the foundation of modern Western civilization.
It allows them to imagine a white Queen dressing up and acting like some indigenous Queen of the Nile Valley........ Netflix is only promoting this particular revision of the historical narrative because it actually puts black people on the spot to defend something they had nothing to do with. Black people did not really come up with this and it was likely white executives that promoted this farce, along with the Persian director and so forth. Jada Pinkett Smith seems to be nothing more than a figurehead because no sane person would say that the African roots of the Nile Valley starts with the Greeks. Of course it doesn't and no serious African scholar has been using Cleopatra as the basis for any argument in support of that. However, Netflix and their so called woke agenda is just another example of white leftists working against black people even while they claim to be trying to help. They know full dam well that this would trigger backlash and they know full well that there were legitimately black Queens of the Nile they could have portrayed. But they don't want to and actually want to promote the idea that for black people to have an ancient history, they must "race swap" some historical figures. Which is obviously propaganda against and not support for African history.
[/b]
...
Exactly. People become irritated with blacks instead of Netflix and BBC when they choose to make Cleo, a Viking King, the Queen of England or BBC Achilles black. Currently, black people are being chastised and blamed. Additionally, many black people expressed their frustration with Netflix's constant race-swapping in instead of producing films about actual black leaders or historical figures.They could choose from hundreds of stories if Netflix and Pinkett-Smith really wanted to tell the tales of native African female leaders. Cleopatra is picked since most people have heard of her, which generates revenue.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Egyptians have been opposed also to other depictions of Egypt in foreign (mostly American) films:
quote: Egypt’s problem with “false” representations of its culture and history is, of course, not limited to the casting of Black African actors.
That sentiment was summarised in a recent debate hosted by British commentator Piers Morgan and featuring Egyptian comedian Bassem Youssef.
The latter clarified that Egyptian objections extended also to white actresses who had played Cleopatra, including the famous 1963 film starring Elizabeth Taylor.
“We’re not crazy about Elizabeth Taylor playing Cleopatra either. It was also inaccurate. I don’t know where you get the idea that we are happy that she played the role,” he said of the performance, adding that Taylor was banned from Egypt in the aftermath of the release for her pro-Israel stance.
For decades, Egyptian citizens and politicians alike have complained about how foreign media has portrayed their country.
The upcoming biopic, Cleopatra, has also been slammed for the decision to cast controversial Israeli actress Gal Gadot in the eponymous role. In that instance the film was criticised for “whitewashing”.
Such controversies are not limited to the character of Cleopatra. Ridley Scott’s 2014 epic Exodus: Gods and Kings starred Christian Bale as Moses and featured a main cast that was almost entirely white.
The movie was banned in Egypt for its alleged “Zionist” bias and “historical inaccuracies” and was ridiculed online for its Eurocentric casting.
According to the scholar Ahmed Diaa Dardir, the co-founder of the Institute for De-Colonising Theory, while anti-blackness may represent a small aspect of the response to the Netflix documentary, the main driving force for the Egyptian response is the idea of people who are not from Egypt excluding Egyptians from tellings of their own stories.
“Egyptian responses to representations of Cleopatra are multifold. While there were rare yet unfortunate expressions of anti-blackness, I believe the general frustration is with Netflix’s attempt to impose certain narratives as politically correct,” he told Middle East Eye.
“My understanding is that the Egyptian backlash is less about Afrocentrism - after all Egyptians are African - and more about a western trend that depicts modern Egyptians as outsiders to their own country and heritage,” he continued.
“It is indeed part and parcel of how Hollywood is ready to imagine that anyone (including aliens), but not the Egyptians, built the Egyptian civilisation.”
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: People are confused and Hollywood is just helping fan the flames by pretending to care about black history. They don't. Hollywood and the West only care about Cleopatra because she was legitimately a white Queen of Egypt who was part of the political intrigue of Rome, which was also white. That means, not African, not Arab or "brown" but white and colonial conquerors, which is the foundation of modern Western civilization.
It allows them to imagine a white Queen dressing up and acting like some indigenous Queen of the Nile Valley........ Netflix is only promoting this particular revision of the historical narrative because it actually puts black people on the spot to defend something they had nothing to do with. Black people did not really come up with this and it was likely white executives that promoted this farce, along with the Persian director and so forth. Jada Pinkett Smith seems to be nothing more than a figurehead because no sane person would say that the African roots of the Nile Valley starts with the Greeks. Of course it doesn't and no serious African scholar has been using Cleopatra as the basis for any argument in support of that. However, Netflix and their so called woke agenda is just another example of white leftists working against black people even while they claim to be trying to help. They know full dam well that this would trigger backlash and they know full well that there were legitimately black Queens of the Nile they could have portrayed. But they don't want to and actually want to promote the idea that for black people to have an ancient history, they must "race swap" some historical figures. Which is obviously propaganda against and not support for African history.
[/b]
...
Exactly. People become irritated with blacks instead of Netflix and BBC when they choose to make Cleo, a Viking King, the Queen of England or BBC Achilles black. Currently, black people are being chastised and blamed. Additionally, many black people expressed their frustration with Netflix's constant race-swapping in instead of producing films about actual black leaders or historical figures.They could choose from hundreds of stories if Netflix and Pinkett-Smith really wanted to tell the tales of native African female leaders. Cleopatra is picked since most people have heard of her, which generates revenue.
Part of the problem is a lot of this new generation of black artists have no integrity or desire to tell their own stories or visions for fictional worlds or characters that are black. They seem to only be in it for a check and don't care about whether what they are doing is actually good or helping promote the cause of black creators in media. Its as if Spike Lee and all these other black writers and movie makers never existed as role models for future black creators. So in their minds and according to "woke" Hollywood and the white left, the only way they can be in movies is if someone replaces a white character and puts them in it. Not only does that mean that the character itself is no longer unique and special as a character, but it also means that black simply becomes a superficial attribute with nothing more to it beyond that. All of which is cringe and goes against everything black scholars have been trying to do for the last 60 years in promoting black consciousness. And that is precisely the point. So instead of actually doing movies and stories about all the fabulous kingdoms and cultures in Africa, these people are making stories about fake black Queens in Europe, which is retarded. And this Cleopatra movie is nothing but more of the same.
And a lot of this goes back to the last 20 - 30 years of academia pushing these fake "social justice" agendas instead of focusing on blacks in arts education and training to create new generations of talented writers and artists. And at the end of the day what you get is 'paid activists' where all these graduates expect to be paid for their 'activism' instead of their talent and creativity. DEI is actually a paradigm of the white left and white corporations promoting this specific mentality, that you can be paid to be an "activist". This is why you cannot even get a good Blade movie made, which was originally made in the 90s by Wesley Snipes due to his passion for the project. But something like that cannot be made anymore because all these folks are following these white leftist talking points and putting activism before desire to actually tell good stories and create good authentic black characters. The last time this happened where black people had some desire to tell "grass roots" stories about black people and their every day lives was the 90s, albeit that was also flawed, but there was a true desire there. Now, there is absolutely zero desire to promote anything from the current generation of black youth in entertainment.
^Black Panther is a much better move than Blade
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
wiki
African Queens (TV series)
African Queens is a 2023 historical docu-series focusing on female monarchs from the African continent airing on the streaming service Netflix. The series is produced and narrated by Jada Pinkett Smith, and features dramatized historical re-enactments as well as interviews with experts.
The first season focused on Njinga, Queen of Ndongo and Matamba while the second season focused on Ptolemaic Egyptian Pharaoh Cleopatra VII. ________________________________
No Doug, this would not be happening in 1998
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
A NEW blade movie coming and it's too earlier to say if will be good or not and that will be subjective anyway like all the blade films and any other movie or show.
Dictionary Subjective
quote: based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.
I think the new blade film will be good.
I think it will be better story wise then any past blade movies(all rotten on rt from critics by the way) and i enjoyed all of them,even the 3rd one that is the weakest one.
I am not going to post all the info about the new mcu blade movie upcoming from mcu wiki but i will post some info.
Blade | Marvel Cinematic Universe Wiki - Fandom
quote: In July 2011, Joe Quesada revealed that Marvel Studios had regained the Blade film rights. On October 11, 2016, Kevin Feige expressed interest in eventually introducing Blade in the Marvel Cinematic Universe stating: "He’s a really fun character. We think this movie going into a different side of the universe would have the potential to have him pop up, but between the movies, the Netflix shows, the ABC shows there are so many opportunities for the character to pop up as you’re now seeing with Ghost Rider on Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.." On July 20, 2019, at San Diego Comic-Con 2019, Kevin Feige announced that a Blade film was in development and that Mahershala Ali would portray the title character.
On October 1, 2020, in an interview on the podcast The Tight Rope, Mahershala Ali revealed that when he first approached Marvel Studios about playing Blade, they were considering rebooting the character in a television series rather than a film and that it took "a couple of years" for them to come to a conclusion and cast him in the film.
On October 23, 2020, it was reported that Marvel Studios was searching for the writers for the film.
On February 5, 2021, The Hollywood Reporter reported that Stacy Osei-Kuffour had been tapped to pen the film's script.[15]
On March 1, 2021, it was reported that that the film would begin production in September and was expected to wrap in December in Atlanta.[16]
On May 5, 2021, The Hollywood Reporter reported that the film's production had pushed back from its initial start date to July 2022 so that Marvel Studios could spend time working on the film's script.[17]
quote: On November 21, 2022, Deadline reported that Yann Demange would be directing the film. It was also reported that Michael Starrbury would be writing the film's new script.[1]
quote:
On March 7, 2023, it was reported that Matthew Libatique had joined the film as the cinematographer, replacing Damián García.[29]
On March 15, 2023, it was reported that the film was scheduled to begin production in May.[30]
quote: On May 5, 2023, The Hollywood Reporter reported that the production of the film would be shut down due to the 2023 Writers Guild of America strike and that the film would resume production after the strike was resolved.[31]
Blade | Marvel Cinematic Universe Wiki - Fandom
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Check out this video and post what you think. Cleopatra-No longer hidden Secret haplogroup found in Greek Mac.. Was she black! New evidence. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZujgGwfS0VY Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
In some of the discussions it has been argumented that Cleopatra VII could have been mixed due to the features of a skeleton found in Ephesus which has been speculated to have been the remains of her sister Arsinoe.
Here is a summary (from Wikipedia) of the discussions about that skeleton
quote:Tomb at Ephesus In the 1990s an octagonal monument situated in the centre of Ephesus was hypothesized by Hilke Thür of the Austrian Academy of Sciences to be the tomb of Arsinoë.[16] Although no inscription remains on the tomb, it was dated to between 50 and 20 BC. In 1926 the skeleton of a female estimated to be between the ages of 15 and 18 years at the time of her death was found in the burial chamber. Thür's identification of the skeleton was based on the shape of the tomb, which was octagonal, like the second tier of the Lighthouse of Alexandria, the carbon dating of the bones (between 200 and 20 BC), the gender of the skeleton, and the age of the child at death. It was also claimed that the tomb boasts Egyptian motifs, such as "papyri-bundle" columns.
A DNA test was also attempted to determine the identity of the child. However, it was impossible to get an accurate reading since the bones had been handled too many times, and the skull had been lost in Germany during World War II. Hilke Thür examined the old notes and photographs of the now-missing skull, which was reconstructed using computer technology by forensic anthropologist Caroline Wilkinson to show what the woman may have looked like. Thür alleged that it shows signs of African ancestry mixed with classical Grecian features – despite the fact that Boas, Gravlee, Bernard and Leonard, and others have demonstrated that skull measurements are not a reliable indicator of race, and the measurements were jotted down in 1920 before modern forensic science took hold. Furthermore, Arsinoë and Cleopatra, shared the same father (Ptolemy XII Auletes) but may have had different mothers, with Thür claiming the alleged African ancestry came from the skeleton's mother.
Mary Beard wrote a dissenting essay criticizing the findings, pointing out that, first, there is no surviving name on the tomb and that the claim the tomb is alleged to invoke the shape of the Pharos Lighthouse "doesn't add up"; second, the skull doesn't survive intact and the age of the skeleton is too young to be Arsinoë's (the bones said to be that of a 15-18 year old, with Arsinoë being around her mid twenties at her death); and third, since Cleopatra and Arsinoë were not known to have the same mother, "the ethnic argument goes largely out of the window." Furthermore, craniometry as used by Thür to determine race is based in scientific racism that is now generally considered a pseudoscience that supported exploitation of groups of people to perpetuate racial oppression and distorted future views of the biological basis of race.
A writer from The Times described the identification of the skeleton as "a triumph of conjecture over certainty". If the monument is the tomb of Arsinoë, she would be the only member of the Ptolemaic dynasty whose remains have been recovered.[35] It has never been definitively proven the skeleton is that of Arsinoë IV.
Netflix and Jada Pinkett Smith would have saved themselves a lot of critique and conflict if they made a film about Amanirenas instead, a contemporary to Cleopatra, a woman who fought Rome and an exciting historical figure.
Maybe they later will do such film.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Here is another video. A Question for Africans from Any Country Lady Boule
quote: In my personal search for my African identity, I would like to cross certain questions off the list. Every time I speak on Egypt in any fashion, I get a barrage of hate from non-Black people telling me that I shouldn't speak on Egypt since enslaved people come from West Africa. So, an answer to my question will help me on my journey of self discovery.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Netflix and Jada Pinkett Smith would have saved themselves a lot of critique and conflict if they made a film about Amanirenas instead, a contemporary to Cleopatra, a woman who fought Rome and an exciting historical figure.
Maybe they later will do such film.
It is an *ss backward movie claiming to be part of a series about "black African Queens", but focusing on a Greek dynasty in Egypt. This is like doing a story on the natives of America and starting with George Washington. It is dumb and insulting that Netflix and Jada decided to promote this as if they had no other actual African Queens they could have used. Cleopatra was not an African Queen and someone who thought she could screw her way to power and it failed. There is nothing great about her as the indigenous Queens of the Nile would never allow themselves to be used as such by foreign powers.
The fact that they are putting so much energy and effort into this just shows how disingenuous they are. Because they are generating attention for a series that hardly anybody heard about was nothing more than another failed project from Will and Jada, just like Will's slave movie. At best they probably just went with this based on the fame of Cleopatra and at worst they went with this to intentionally generate attention due to the backlash. Either way neither of those represents any true desire to tell black history in the Nile Valley.
Not to mention this is the same network that is airing Bridgerton, which is promoting this fantasy of black Queens and black elites in England. Which is part of a pattern of Hollywood promoting Europe as somehow important for "representation" while not doing anything set in Africa or based on African culture. And this just shows how these people want to promote Europe as the only place with history, kings/queens and culture while ignoring Africa. And ultimately the blame for this goes to Africans as much as anybody else because most of these Africans coming to America only are chasing a check. They aren't writing, directing or producing anything set in, based on or revolving around Africa or African identity.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
One more video with Egyptian Nora
She thinks that Americans want to colonize her heritage, culture and history
Yet at the same token she is celebrating Greek and Roman colonizers as "her heritage". Egypt has been colonized in one form or another every since. Not to mention yes America and Europe have colonized the history of the Nile Valley, but that has nothing to do with this TV show.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Netflix also experienced some negative reactions when they chose to portrait a Viking Jarl (chieftain) as a black woman
Again according to white liberals in the media, Africa doesn't have a history or culture of its own so they are being brave and bold in changing history to insert black people where they didn't exist or don't belong. Yet when they have the opportunity to do actual black Queens or black stories they totally skip over them to instead focus on non Africans.
Case in point:
quote: Director Tina Gharavi has defended the casting for the docuseries stating "Doing the research, I realized what a political act it would be to see Cleopatra portrayed by a Black actress".[9]
en. wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Queens_(TV_series)
How backwards is it for a series about African Queens to pick a non African Queen and justify including her in the series as a political statement. Cleopatra wasn't African and should not be considered an African Queen, which shows how these liberals are actually working against black people. Yet they swear they are doing black people a favor in skipping over all the ancient black Queens on the Nile to include a Greek Woman as part of this series. It is totally ridiculous.
And you also see this in Bridgerton where almost all of the characters of the book are white, but changed for the TV show. So if you can change history to insert people into the racist European high society, how can you not include black Queens in a story set in Africa. Totally insidious in its patronizing attitude that black people can only charity donated from European culture and no history and identity of their own. When the fact is that the origin of most royal pomp and ceremony is in Africa. And that is a big reason why they don't want to show black Queens in the Nile Valley.
Not that the series didnt have some great visuals and production values as a fantasy story, but it still comes off as patronizing black people. As if there was no sophisticated culture in Africa that they can draw on for stories.
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
quote: Ethiopians were the first men that ever lived, the only truly autochthonous race and the first to institute the worship of the gods and the rites of sacrifice. Egypt itself was a colony of Ethiopia and the laws and script of both lands were naturally the same; but the hieroglyphic script was more widely known to the vulgar in Ethiopia than in Egypt. (Diodorus Siculus, bk. iii, ch. 3.) This knowledge of writing was universal in Ethiopia but was confined to the priestly classes alone in Egypt. This was because the Egyptian priesthood was Ethiopian.
quote: Ancient people from Greece and Rome showed the people from the Nile Valley in the same way the Egyptians had depicted themselves for thousands of years. Paintings from the Temple of Isis in Pompeii show Egyptian priests with a darker complexion (see below); their hair shaved for the purpose of purification during rituals. The priestesses and members of the cult who were depicted on the walls of the Roman temple are shown with a range of complexions. Italy under the Romans and Egypt in the Ptolemaic and Roman periods were multicultural societies and were not bound by modern concepts of racist hierarchies./QUOTE]
Roman wall painting from Pompeii showing an Egyptian priest
quote:Nor do we know the identity of her mother. It has been suggested, based on Cleopatra’s ability with the Egyptian language and her devotion to the Egyptian pantheon, that she may have been a member of the family that held the hereditary priesthood of Ptah . This influential ruling family held high-level positions in ancient Egyptian cities like Memphis.
We have no securely identified portraits of her other than those found on her coins, all of which vary considerably. So any claims as to the specifics of her appearance can be safely dismissed.
As can sweeping statements regarding her identity. Cleopatra was simultaneously Macedonian, Egyptian and Roman. In the habit of emphasizing different aspects of her identity to suit different audiences, she would not have considered herself either white or black, because modern concepts of race would have been unknown to her.
“Blackwashing” Cleopatra, you say? A case of moral panic?
quote:This isn’t the first time that such a response occurred. In 2008 I was involved in a project to digitally reconstruct Cleopatra. The process (described here) prompted an unfavourable response from some groups because the reconstruction showed a young woman with a darker complexion and African-type hair. It used to surprise me that so many people with no formal training in either classical archaeology/art history or Egyptology felt that their opinion was a reality. Fifteen years later and some people are responding in exactly the same way. Of course nobody can know for certain what Cleopatra looked like. We have representations of the ruler from during her lifetime, but the extent to which these reflected her true appearance remains uncertain. However, the point of contention for many has really been her perceived ancestry.
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey: “Blackwashing” Cleopatra, you say? A case of moral panic?
quote:This isn’t the first time that such a response occurred. In 2008 I was involved in a project to digitally reconstruct Cleopatra. The process (described here) prompted an unfavourable response from some groups because the reconstruction showed a young woman with a darker complexion and African-type hair. It used to surprise me that so many people with no formal training in either classical archaeology/art history or Egyptology felt that their opinion was a reality. Fifteen years later and some people are responding in exactly the same way. Of course nobody can know for certain what Cleopatra looked like. We have representations of the ruler from during her lifetime, but the extent to which these reflected her true appearance remains uncertain. However, the point of contention for many has really been her perceived ancestry.
Who cares? Why would anyone doing a series on African Queens START with the Greeks? That is completely and totally *ss backwards. What about all the indigenous black African Queens of the Nile for thousands of years before the Greeks? It doesn't matter if she had some African blood as this was a colonial Greek society that displaced and subjugated the local population.
If they wanted to do some black African Queens from the same time period they could have done:
Kandakes of Meroe Amenirdis I Nodjmet
None of whome whored themselves out to foreign power and actually in some cases fought against them.
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey: “Blackwashing” Cleopatra, you say? A case of moral panic?
quote:This isn’t the first time that such a response occurred. In 2008 I was involved in a project to digitally reconstruct Cleopatra. The process (described here) prompted an unfavourable response from some groups because the reconstruction showed a young woman with a darker complexion and African-type hair. It used to surprise me that so many people with no formal training in either classical archaeology/art history or Egyptology felt that their opinion was a reality. Fifteen years later and some people are responding in exactly the same way. Of course nobody can know for certain what Cleopatra looked like. We have representations of the ruler from during her lifetime, but the extent to which these reflected her true appearance remains uncertain. However, the point of contention for many has really been her perceived ancestry.
Who cares? Why would anyone doing a series on African Queens START with the Greeks? That is completely and totally *ss backwards. What about all the indigenous black African Queens of the Nile for thousands of years before the Greeks? It doesn't matter if she had some African blood as this was a colonial Greek society that displaced and subjugated the local population.
If they wanted to do some black African Queens from the same time period they could have done:
Kandakes of Meroe Amenirdis I Nodjmet
None of whome whored themselves out to foreign power and actually in some cases fought against them.
I agree with you 100% far more interesting Egyptian Queens and Candace's to tell stories about.
But, ultimately, Netflix like everything else is about ratings and money. And Europeans and the majority of people are more than likely going to pay attention to what is familiar than different. And if controversy brings eyes well this bruhaha has done the job!
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
The African Queens (TV series)started with Njinga first.
The African Queens (TV series) The first season focused on Njinga, Queen of Ndongo and Matamba while the second season focused on Ptolemaic Egyptian Pharaoh Cleopatra VII.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Guys, Calm yourselves
We don't know what Cleopatra looked like and we see that here sttatues has her with African Braids, so we need to stop acting like your giving europeans a bone,
The fact is that Cleopatra could be Black and I would believe that from the jump:
She has looked black inside more then just peoples imagination and you should not throw this aside as if you can look and see that she is not someone who is black when she could be.
why, its not hard to call Cleopatra Black
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: [qb] Netflix and Jada Pinkett Smith would have saved themselves a lot of critique and conflict if they made a film about Amanirenas instead, a contemporary to Cleopatra, a woman who fought Rome and an exciting historical figure.
Maybe they later will do such film.
It is an *ss backward movie claiming to be part of a series about "black African Queens", but focusing on a Greek dynasty in Egypt. This is like doing a story on the natives of America and starting with George Washington. It is dumb and insulting that Netflix and Jada decided to promote this as if they had no other actual African Queens they could have used. Cleopatra was not an African Queen and someone who thought she could screw her way to power and it failed. There is nothing great about her as the indigenous Queens of the Nile would never allow themselves to be used as such by foreign powers.
The fact that they are putting so much energy and effort into this just shows how disingenuous they are. Because they are generating attention for a series that hardly anybody heard about was nothing more than another failed project from Will and Jada, just like Will's slave movie. At best they probably just went with this based on the fame of Cleopatra and at worst they went with this to intentionally generate attention due to the backlash. Either way neither of those represents any true desire to tell black history in the Nile Valley.
yes, Jada was a dumb ass for this
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
wiki
African Queens (TV series)
African Queens is a 2023 historical docu-series focusing on female monarchs from the African continent airing on the streaming service Netflix. The series is produced and narrated by Jada Pinkett Smith, and features dramatized historical re-enactments as well as interviews with experts.
^But she gets credit for this
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Because they are generating attention for a series that hardly anybody heard about was nothing more than another failed project from Will and Jada, just like Will's slave movie.
The series just started, there are only 2 queens so far If people didn't watch Njinga whose fault is it?
I give her credit for Njinga
But the strategy with Cleopatra seems to have been to make a political statement, if Elizabeth Taylor ( Ethnicity: English, with one eighth Swiss-German, some Scots-Irish/Northern Irish and French, more distant Dutch, Welsh, and Danish)
if Elizabeth Taylor can play Cleopatra why can't Adele James, that seems to have been the priority in making this episode
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Director Tina Gharavi has defended the casting for the docuseries stating "Doing the research, I realized what a political act it would be to see Cleopatra portrayed by a Black actress".
I don't care if a Chinese person played Cleopatra but this was not presented just as a dramatization They knew there probably would be some controversy and that would generate views out of curiosity but didn't realize how much, They added a little too much fuel to the fire by calling it a documentary
I don't think they were expecting all this loud protests from Egyptians Some of that is legitimate but some is also racist But it's become a big political racial mess
I think we are going to see more of this
In another 5 years Netflix might do a or Black Aboriginals, Blacks Hebrews, the Story of Queen Charlotte etc Controversy sells So what they may do in the future is be a little more calculating as to how far to push the envelope by sprinkling in politics into history, just the right amount of MSG to sprinkle in
They seem to have gotten the recipe right with this one, change history a little to make it sexier and sell more to the designated market demographic
We have to be educated though and be able to discern what is a real documentary and what is "edutainment" Unfortunately shiny objects get more attention
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING:
why, its not hard to call Cleopatra Black
Because it was a foreign occupation of Egypt by Greeks and the way they maintained order was to dress up in wigs like Egyptians and usurp the culture This is the context, Ptolemaic Egypt rather than this unremarkable Queen and her relationships
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Foreign it was Ptolemaic dynasty and also did they somehow get the cleopatras from greece?? or were they born inside Egypt that means 300 years of race mixing with Black Egyptians has been going on unless you have proof that the ptolemaics strickly got wives from greece???
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: Foreign it was Ptolemaic dynasty and also did they somehow get the cleopatras from greece?? or were they born inside Egypt that means 300 years of race mixing with Black Egyptians has been going on unless you have proof that the ptolemaics strickly got wives from greece???
KING why is your writing ten times worse than anybody else who posts, I can barely read this I am going to translate your questions into English sentences so we can understand them:
quote: The Ptolemaic dynasty was foreign. How do we know Cleopatra was from Greece? If at that point members of the Ptolemaic royalty were born in Egypt had there been 300 years of race mixing with Egyptians or do you have proof that the Ptolemaic royals only married other Greeks
Well you have some homework to do, some reading. I can't give you all the answers. You have to research who her father and mother were and see if you can find evidence of specific members of of the Ptolemaic Greek dynasty marrying and having children with Egyptians.
quote: The Ptolemaic Greek dynasty was foreign. How do we know Cleopatra was from Greece?
well, you just said this >>
quote:Originally posted by KING: Foreign it was Ptolemaic dynasty
So how does your question make sense?
It was foreign so they would have to be from somewhere not Egypt but the big mystery is from where? Where they Kushites?
quote:Originally posted by KING: were they born inside Egypt that means 300 years of race mixing with Black Egyptians has been going on ?
Look into it. Find us one example of a member of the Ptolemaic royal family member marrying an Egyptian
__________________________________
The Ptolemies practiced another kind of exclusivity as well. Not only did they refrain from intermarriage with the native Egyptians; as time went on, the dynasty increasingly eschewed exogamous marriage altogether, at least for the reigning couple. Brother-sister marriage became the preferred model, though the family also presents examples of cousin and of uncle-niece marriage. Incest is therefore a striking feature of the Ptolemaic monarchy, a practice singular enough to draw comment from virtually all scholars who have written on the subject of Ptolemaic Egypt?yet so enigmatic a practice that a satisfactory explanation of it has still remained elusive ~ Ager, S. L. (2006). The Power of Excess: Royal Incest and the Ptolemaic Dynasty. Anthropologica, 48(2), 165. doi:10.2307/25605309
Greek influence had spread through the country and intermarriage had produced a large Greco-Egyptian educated class. Nevertheless, the Greeks always remained a privileged minority in Ptolemaic Egypt. They lived under Greek law, received a Greek education, were tried in Greek courts, and were citizens of Greek cities.
The royal family, however, maintained a closely related bloodline
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
What Kings of ptolemaic dynasty married there sisters this is what I am saying point to the incest that happened between ptolemaic kings and there sister, do they have evidence of this or are they saying because greeks were incestious that meant that the ptolemaic were incestious.
everyone seems to want to write off the ptolemaics as inbred so who caress? When I have not seen the evidence of this except for a few words from people of the Now, I have never heard Herodotus speak of inbred ptolemaics nor is there statues much different then the statues of Ancient Egyptians
Why would not they want to be an example to the Ancient Egyptians as there first heir is a greek but that does not mean that the rest of the dynasty is greek
I believe that the incest stuff is white peoples way of covering up that they claim the ptolemaics as white whats needed is diops melanin test the we would know for sure why they europeans are refusing to use diops test as an example of ethnicity.
the image of Ptolemy looks Black with a broad nose and wide lips so how are the ptolemaic dynasty white?
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: [QB] What Kings of ptolemaic dynasty married there sisters this is what I am saying point to the incest that happened between ptolemaic kings and there sister, do they have evidence of this or are they saying because greeks were incestious that meant that the ptolemaic were incestious.
everyone seems to want to write off the ptolemaics as inbred so who caress? When I have not seen the evidence of this except for a few words from people of the Now, I have never heard Herodotus speak of inbred ptolemaics nor is there statues much different then the statues of Ancient Egyptians
Why would not they want to be an example to the Ancient Egyptians as there first heir is a greek but that does not mean that the rest of the dynasty is greek
I believe that the incest stuff is white peoples way of covering up that they claim the ptolemaics as white whats needed is diops melanin test the we would know for sure why they europeans are refusing to use diops test as an example of ethnicity.
Some Greeks mixed with Egyptians yes BUT, royal families have strict rules about bloodlines
We don't even have to mention incest, that is a separate issue
You simply need one documented example of a member of the Ptolemaic royal family intermarrying with an Egyptian to eve begin assuming them some of them were mixed
,
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by KING: [QB] What Kings of ptolemaic dynasty married there sisters this is what I am saying point to the incest that happened between ptolemaic kings and there sister, do they have evidence of this or are they saying because greeks were incestious that meant that the ptolemaic were incestious.
everyone seems to want to write off the ptolemaics as inbred so who caress? When I have not seen the evidence of this except for a few words from people of the Now, I have never heard Herodotus speak of inbred ptolemaics nor is there statues much different then the statues of Ancient Egyptians
Why would not they want to be an example to the Ancient Egyptians as there first heir is a greek but that does not mean that the rest of the dynasty is greek
I believe that the incest stuff is white peoples way of covering up that they claim the ptolemaics as white whats needed is diops melanin test the we would know for sure why they europeans are refusing to use diops test as an example of ethnicity.
Some Greeks mixed with Egyptians yes BUT, royal families have strict rules about bloodlines
We don't even have to mention incest, that is a separate issue
You simply need one documented example of a member of the Ptolemaic royal family intermarrying with an Egyptian to eve begin assuming them some of them were mixed
,
Lioness, Why do I need evidence of that type.
the bloodline was part of New Kingdom Egypt thats all the evidence that is needed from me.
Show evidence of ptolemaic being incestious???
also show evidence of them marrying Greeks?
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: Lioness, Why do I need evidence of that type.
the bloodline was part of New Kingdom Egypt thats all the evidence that is needed from me.
Show evidence of ptolemaic being incestious???
also show evidence of them marrying Greeks?
No, there is zero overlap between the New Kingdom of Egypt and the Ptolemaic dynasty
The last pharaoh of the New Kingdom was Ramesses XI, This is before the Greeks took over and before the Kushite, Assyrian and Persian rule of Egypt
Your picking parts of the arguement and needling the dynasty stuff. Show the ptolemaics were incestious.
show Ptolemais married only greeks. like I said the statues makes me think that europeans may of lost there idea about that dynasty being white and inbred.
I see them as Part African and it comes out more once you see the statues.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
the statues are a trick by the Greeks to make Egyptians not rebel against them
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Cleopatras family history is rather intricate. Here is an introduction by the Lady of the Library
I hate how us Black Americans are being the main targets of this when we had nothing to do with this production(Netflix). And Cleopatra wasn't of African descent.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey: “Blackwashing” Cleopatra, you say? A case of moral panic?
quote:This isn’t the first time that such a response occurred. In 2008 I was involved in a project to digitally reconstruct Cleopatra. The process (described here) prompted an unfavourable response from some groups because the reconstruction showed a young woman with a darker complexion and African-type hair. It used to surprise me that so many people with no formal training in either classical archaeology/art history or Egyptology felt that their opinion was a reality. Fifteen years later and some people are responding in exactly the same way. Of course nobody can know for certain what Cleopatra looked like. We have representations of the ruler from during her lifetime, but the extent to which these reflected her true appearance remains uncertain. However, the point of contention for many has really been her perceived ancestry.
Who cares? Why would anyone doing a series on African Queens START with the Greeks? That is completely and totally *ss backwards. What about all the indigenous black African Queens of the Nile for thousands of years before the Greeks? It doesn't matter if she had some African blood as this was a colonial Greek society that displaced and subjugated the local population.
If they wanted to do some black African Queens from the same time period they could have done:
Kandakes of Meroe Amenirdis I Nodjmet
None of whome whored themselves out to foreign power and actually in some cases fought against them.
I agree with you 100% far more interesting Egyptian Queens and Candace's to tell stories about.
But, ultimately, Netflix like everything else is about ratings and money. And Europeans and the majority of people are more than likely going to pay attention to what is familiar than different. And if controversy brings eyes well this bruhaha has done the job!
I understand you, but to me it is propaganda. They skipped 4,000 years of black history in the Nile Valley and try and put sugar on a turd by making her black. There is no way this can be seen in any other way. If they are going to tell the story then tell the story, we don't need these spins and political statements. Another aspect of this is trying to address the backlash at all the reenactments of ancient dynastic Nile Valle history with non black people. They want black people to be so desperate to see themselves that they will cosign this so that it will look hypocritical if they complain about white washed reenactments. And I have always seen that as the ultimate goal of all these race swaps as a way to normalize and get you to accept this as part of popular media. So that when they race swap ancient Nile Valley Africans you will have to accept it as part of "diversity and inclusion" by muddying the water between what is real and what is fabricated.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Askia_The_Great: [QB] I hate how us Black Americans are being the main targets of this when we had nothing to do with this production(Netflix). And Cleopatra wasn't of African descent.
Don't be ridiculous. Jada Pinkett Smith is one of the producers, African Queens is her series, her net worth is $50 million without Will
She is not some poor woman she trying to get a loaf of bread for her hungry children and told that she must do Cleopatra, it's her goddamn idea She thought it was subversive
Pretending that Jada Pinkett Smith is has no agency is to make adult black people seem like children under compete control of white parent-figures
Posted by Askia_The_Great (Member # 22000) on :
@Lioness.
Once again NETFLIX are the ones who GREEN LIGHTED it and PRODUCED it. My point still stands.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Here is THE info.
African Queens (TV series)
quote: Jada Pinkett Smith Executive producer Producer
Production companies Dune Films Netflix Nutopia
Nutopia is a conceptual country, sometimes referred to as a micronation,founded by John Lennon and Yoko Ono.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Race Before “Whiteness”: Studying Identity in Ptolemaic Egypt DENISE EILEEN MCCOSKEY (Department of Classics, Miami University, Ohio)
ABSTRACT This paper examines the models classical historians and papyrologists use to study Greek and Egyptian identity during the period of Greek occupation of Egypt (332-30 B.C.E.). Employing the concept of ethnicity, some scholars have recently emphasized the uidity with which identity seems to operate in colonial documents from the Ptolemaic period. In particular, scholars argue that these documents attest to the increasing ability of certain “native Egyptians” to act as “Greek” in various administrative and legal contexts. While Ž nding this recent use of ethnicity productive in grappling with the complexity of identity as a form of social practice in Ptolemaic Egypt, I nonetheless caution against over-emphasizing the role of context and individual agency within this colonial framework. In contrast, I argue that the concept of race should be added to current models to allow historians of this period to situate certain performances within a larger colonial structure that continued to treat the categories of “Greek” and “Egyptian” as conceptually distinct and indeed representative of inverse positions of social power
After the storm of criticism against "African Queens: Cleopatra", the Egyptian channel Al Wathaeqya chooses to make its own documentary about the legendary queen.
quote: In response to what they claim is Netflix’s falsification of Egypt’s history, the Al Wathaeqya channel – which is a subsidiary of Egypt’s state-affiliated United Media Services – has announced start of production on a high-end doc about the true story of Queen Cleopatra, which it claims in a statement is based on the “utmost levels” of research and accuracy.
I am watching Now.. it is really good and balanced. All this hysteria over nothing
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey: I am watching Now.. it is really good and balanced. All this hysteria over nothing
What's balanced about it? I have only seen the trailer.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
It is a retarded show that only exists to ridicule black people even while claiming to promote black history. Cleopatra was not an "African Queen" and certainly not a black Queen of the Nile Valley. The fact that they are putting so much energy into promoting this and casting her as black makes them suspect, because they could have simply done an actual black African Queen of the Nile. Which means it is being deliberately pushed in order to promote outrage so that black people can be thrown under the bus. Even though Cleopatra has never been the basis for any discussion of black people in the ancient Nile Valley. On the other hand the fact that the Egyptian government and all these other Egyptans are going so hard on this also shows there is an agenda at play behind this show. It is almost like they are all operating from a script, where nobody wants to show the truth of black history on the Nile but don't want to look overtly racist. So they do this stunt in order to hide their racism behind 'liberal' talking points which is all a charade, when in reality this is nothing more than intentional race bait to draw hatred towards black people for the facts of the black origins of the ancient Nile valley. And it is obvious that both Netflix and the 'haters' are basically on the same page here. Not to mention, when have these Egyptians protested all white movies about the ancient Nile Valley. All of this is totally proving how racist all of these people actually are. How on earth could anyone have to go through all these lengths to promote a Greek woman as the epitome of an "African Queen" while skipping over thousands of years of actual African rulers? Its totally a fraud and all about the white liberal left doing what they do best, trying to control and misdirect the narratives of black people for their own purposes. And the worst part of all of this is black people actually participated in this, showing how full of sh*t some black people are when i comes to telling their own history. (Actually many Africans just believe in their own inferiority at this point and just accept whatever others give them.) How on earth is it that Africans would need "permission" from Netflix or the Egyptian government to tell African history. That is absolutely ridiculous.
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey: I am watching Now.. it is really good and balanced. All this hysteria over nothing
What's balanced about it? I have only seen the trailer.
Everyone should watch it then come back and discuss
It showed indigenous Egyptians as African people, it also showed that Alexandria had a mixed population of Greeks & Jews. After watching the whole thing and getting Cleopatra's whole story in context. I am personally convinced which was of mixed Greek & Egyptian heritage.
The actors that played the Ptolemies were all mixed African/European, according to some here these actors are not black so I don't know what everyone is getting all up in arms about, a complete mountain out of a mole hill. The Egyptians that raised a fuss are going to be EXTREMELY embarrassed. Since the Ptolemies look like average Egyptians on the street in Cairo TODAY
The Historians that narrated were TOP TIER
Dr. Shelley P. Haley is the Edward North Chair of Classics and Professor of Africana Studies at Hamilton College, New York, and President of the Society for Classical Studies.
Islam Issa is a British scholar and author,
Dr. Sally-Ann Ashton
Dr. Deborah Heard
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey: I am watching Now.. it is really good and balanced. All this hysteria over nothing
What's balanced about it? I have only seen the trailer.
Everyone should watch it then come back and discuss
She isn't an African Queen so why watch it? I don't understand how that qualifies as something someone should watch when it doesn't even meet the criteria of the show and is based on false pretenses. Do Europeans show Arabs and Muslims as "Kings of Europe" when they do European history? And I understand critiquing stuff, but this story has been done to death already, while many other more powerful and actual great Queens are being ignored.
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
Cleopatra's family had been ruling for 250 years before she was born...
by that time if you think she did not have Egyptian/African ancestors I don't know what to say
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey: Cleopatra's family had been ruling for 250 years before she was born...
by that time if you think she did not have Egyptian/African ancestors I don't know what to say
She was Greek and represented Greek colonization of the Mediterranean and Greek cultural theft of Nile Valley knowledge and traditions. No amount of partial ancestry from Africa changes that. Why should black people have to accept this versus an ACTUAL black Queen who was noble and honorable and not representing foreign powers. It makes no sense and is like white people dictating that this is the only black Queen of the Nile you folks will get and black folks are just supposed to be so happy just to get something even if it is based on deliberate falsehoods. Black people don't need white folks charity when it comes to African history. If you are going to tell African history, then tell it, but don't push bull sh*t masquerading as African history when it isn't.
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey: Cleopatra's family had been ruling for 250 years before she was born...
by that time if you think she did not have Egyptian/African ancestors I don't know what to say
She was Greek and represented Greek colonization of the Mediterranean and Greek cultural theft of Nile Valley knowledge and traditions. No amount of partial ancestry from Africa changes that. Why should black people have to accept this versus an ACTUAL black Queen who was noble and honorable and not representing foreign powers. It makes no sense and is like white people dictating that this is the only black Queen of the Nile you folks will get and black folks are just supposed to be so happy just to get something even if it is based on deliberate falsehoods. Black people don't need white folks charity when it comes to African history. If you are going to tell African history, then tell it, but don't push bull sh*t masquerading as African history when it isn't.
It is just as bad as Neflix promoting black people in colonial British high society so they can "see themselves" as the ones who were raping and slaving their ancestors all over the planet. These people are sick and disgusting.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
It is just as bad as Neflix promoting black people in colonial British high society so they can "see themselves" as the ones who were raping and slaving their ancestors all over the planet. These people are sick and disgusting.
This video has this cover of Newsweek, September 22, 1991
However if you deeper research you find out other things
This idea about Cleopatra goes back much further than Newsweek 1991. It goes back to African American authors. That's why that elder woman in the trailer can say her grandmother said Cleopatra was black. That is much earlier than Afrocentrics of the 90s. J.A. Rogers mentions Cleopatra 53 times in his 1947 book, Volume I of World's Great Men of Color However he credits George Wells Parker, 29 years earlier
end of pg 9-10, JA Rogers:
quote: "From two works by Negroes I received much perspective and valuable leads. These were George Wells Parker’s Children of the Sun (1918) and William H. Ferris’ two- volume work, The African Abroad. Later, I found three invaluable books by white authors on the Negro’s past: Godfrey Higgins’ Anacalypsis and Gerald Massey’s A Book of the Beginnings and Ancient Egypt, the Light of the World. From others, such as the late Arthur Schomburg, I also received some rare leads. With regard to Parker I must make a belated apology. I once disagreed with him in the Messenger for saying that Cleopatra and Mohammed were of Negro ancestry. The simple truth is I had never looked into the matter, but having so often heard that Cleopatra was “pure Greek” and knowing that her ancestor, Ptolemy, was Greek, I accepted it as fact, not knowing that the Egyptian Ptolemies were very much mixed, and furthermore that the Greeks were a nationality and not a so-called race, and that even as one can be “pure” American and be of mixed race, so was it with the Greeks. Later, I did find evidence to make me believe that Parker was right about Cleopatra and most certainly about Mohammed."
George Wells Parker (September 18, 1882 – July 28, 1931) was an African-American political activist, historian, public intellectual, and writer who co-founded the Hamitic League of the World.
The Hamitic League of the World was an African American nationalist organization. Its declared aims were:
To inspire the Negro with new hopes; to make him openly proud of his race and of its great contributions to the religious development and civilization of mankind and to place in the hands of every race man and woman and child the facts which support the League's claim that the Negro Race is the greatest race the world has ever known.
The word Hamitic derives from Ham the son of Noah in the Old Testament. The organization was founded in 1917 by George Wells Parker. In 1918 it published his pamphlet Children of the Sun. At this time Cyril Briggs also became the editor of their journal, The Crusader which subsequently became the journal of the African Blood Brotherhood.
n 1916 Parker started helping African Americans resettle in Omaha and, by 1917, he helped found the Hamitic League of the World to promote African pride and black economic progress. During this era, he was vice-president of the Omaha Philosophical Society, where he gave regular speeches about the history of African Americans.[4]
He was a regular contributor and editor for The Monitor, a Black newspaper in Omaha. After leaving that paper under duress in 1921, he edited a Black newspaper called The New Era, which was short-lived.[2]
In 1922, Parker moved to Chicago to pursue "Newspaper and magazine work" and died there almost a decade later.
As a Black nationalist and contemporary of Marcus Garvey, Parker's views on Africa as the cradle of civilization foreshadowed increased fascination with Egyptian imagery by African-Americans.
As a historian committed towards accelerating racial self-awareness, Parker's work called "for the revision of all textbooks that falsified and deleted the truth concerning Black folk". His lecture on "The African Origin of the Grecian Civilization" was delivered to supporters in Omaha and then published in the Journal of Negro History in 1917. Parker argued that new anthropological research had demonstrated that Mesopotamian and Greek civilization originated in Africa. In 1918 the League published his pamphlet "Children of the Sun", which further developed his arguments for the African origins presented in classical Egyptian, Asian and European civilizations. Author, journalist, and historian Joel Augustus Rogers named this publication as a valuable resource for his perspective.[11]
Parker had an ideological counterpart and disciple in Cyril Briggs, a Caribbean-born journalist based in New York City who founded the African Blood Brotherhood. The organizations created by these two men often clashed and collaborated, although the latter leaned decidedly towards [Communistic] content and values. Additionally, the Hamitic League of the World published The Crusader in September 1918, a publication actually edited by Briggs, furthering the involvement of these two groups.
______________________________________
^^ So this was Rogers, before Rogers, Diop before Diop, back in 1918
and the idea that Cleopatra was of "Negro ancestry" decades before Newsweek, Netflix and Pilcher
^^ here is John Henrick Clarke on TV, telling Tony Brown in 1973, right at the beginning of this video about JA Rogers:
quote:
" what rogers has done is gone back and taken hold out of the white away and showed you the original black faces of certain people in history um in this two-volume work world's great men of color volume one is devoted to the old world and volume two is devoted to the new world the first thing he does is to put egypt in proper context and to show egypt and the great personalities of ancient egypt as black people and it might be startling but he reveals that Cleopatra did not look like Elizabeth Taylor and wasn't a white woman at all "
So you can't blame Newsweek in 1991 for trying to push some agenda that black people should care about Cleopatra, this goes back to 1918
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
Educated black people in the mid 19th century read the bible and were well familiar with the classics. By 1850's during the rise of Scientific Racism & White Supremacy ideology African American's & Caribbeans started to push back with ideas about Black Egypt
1911 copy of The Crisis depicting "Ra-Maat-Neb, one of the black kings of the Upper Nile," a copy of the relief of Nebmaatre I on Meroe pyramid 17.
But the conversation of the race of the Egyptians in scientific circle did NOT begin with African Americans it began with the French, British and German explorers after the Napolean invasion. And the COGNITIVE DISSONANCE of finding black and negro pharoahs created a eurocentric mythology of white Egypt and a change in Ham being considered the Black African son of Noah, cursed to be a slave of slaves forever and the rationalization of at what at that point was 300 years of European kidnapping black africans to enslave them in the colonies. to HAM being white Aryans who invaded the nile valley creating a white civilization on African soil.
This COGNITIVE DISSONANCE also created the apologia called EGYPTOLOGY and SCIENTIFIC RACISM as a reaction to the facts on the ground of a Black Egypt.
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
NEW YORK TIMES OPINION GUEST ESSAY Fear of a Black Cleopatra May 10, 2023, 5:00 a.m. ET
quote:The new Netflix docudrama “Queen Cleopatra,” produced and narrated by Jada Pinkett Smith, has already elicited a passionate response, though perhaps not the kind that publicists hoped for. Since news broke that the series would star the British actress Adele James, fans, Egyptologists, scholars of Greco-Roman antiquity and Arab and Greek news outlets have been debating whether the series willfully distorts history. The reason? “Queen Cleopatra” depicts the legendary monarch as Black. Cleopatra, who died in 30 B.C., remains a source of pride for disparate communities. Many contemporary Egyptians view her as a key figure in the preservation of their history and even as a role model for contemporary Egyptian women. Greeks have also claimed her, noting that she was of Macedonian and Greek descent. Depictions of Cleopatra with darkly pigmented skin date back at least hundreds of years. A 14th-century chronicle depicts her in a kind of charcoal gray. Scholars have long debated whether certain references in Shakespeare’s “Antony and Cleopatra” suggest that the playwright believed she had dark skin. In contemporary American pop culture, the assertion is often stated as fact, with her characterized as a beautiful and powerful Black African queen, her name commonly referred to as such in hip-hop. “Queen Cleopatra,” however, has touched an international nerve. The debate around the docudrama escalated when an Egyptian lawyer called for Egyptian authorities to censure Netflix, accusing it of misrepresenting “Egyptian identity.” Zahi Hawass, a former minister of antiquities for Egypt, also entered the fray, claiming that a “falsehood” stands “at the heart of this series.” Cleopatra’s “first language was Greek,” he wrote in an essay for Arab News, “and in contemporary busts and portraits she is depicted clearly as being white.” What debates like this miss is that current notions of race are relatively recent inventions and do not necessarily speak to how people of Cleopatra’s day saw the world or themselves. Classicists tell us that although the Greeks and Romans did notice skin color, they did not regard it as the primary marker of racial difference. Other concepts — environment, geography, ancestral origin, language, religion, custom and culture — played bigger roles in delineating groups and identities. So regardless of the material a sculptor may have chosen with which to summon Cleopatra’s powerful visage, there is no meaningful sense in which she — or anyone else of her era — would have identified as white. The question that follows is: How, then, can anyone, including a Netflix dramatization, claim that Cleopatra was Black? Netflix’s casting was informed by the views of Shelley Haley, a renowned classicist and Cleopatra expert, who claims that, although evidence of her ancestry and physical attributes are inconclusive, Cleopatra was culturally Black.
quote:Netflix’s casting was informed by the views of Shelley Haley, a renowned classicist and Cleopatra expert, who claims that, although evidence of her ancestry and physical attributes are inconclusive, Cleopatra was culturally Black.
quote:Cleopatra’s father, Ptolemy XII, was a member of the family that conquered Egypt over 200 years earlier. He was routinely referred to as an illegitimate child. His mother is unknown, as is the identity of Cleopatra’s mother, though several clues suggest she may have been Egyptian, including Plutarch’s claim that Cleopatra was likely the first Ptolemaic ruler to speak that language. When the Roman poet Propertius famously called Cleopatra a whore queen (meretrix regina), he laced his misogynist tirade with allusions to Egypt, such as the poisonous city of Alexandria and the “yapping” Egyptian god Anubis. The intersection of Cleopatra’s race and gender resulted in a form of oppression that cast her heritage and sexuality as particularly dangerous. Regardless of her lineage or appearance, it’s clear that Cleopatra’s actions were not perceived as the typical behavior of a Greek or Roman woman. Throughout her reign, Cleopatra was also careful not to depict herself as a wife or consort but rather as Isis, the great Egyptian goddess who raised her son alone, without her slain husband, Osiris. Cleopatra was a pragmatist, doing what it took to survive, aligning herself first with Caesar, then with Mark Antony, before fleeing Actium when the tides turned. Finally, when it became clear to her that Octavian would let her live only in order to march her through Rome as a war captive, she took her own life by poison. Dr. Haley argues that Cleopatra’s experience was part of a history of oppression of Black women. Reclaiming Cleopatra as Black and choosing to portray her now as a Black woman highlights this history — and is consistent with contemporary Egyptians or Greeks identifying with Cleopatra on the grounds of their own shared culture. Unlike racial assignments based on physical characteristics, which seek to distill people into rigid and recognizable categories, shared cultural claims can easily coexist. To recognize Cleopatra as culturally Black is not to pretend that skin color is meaningless now — in the manner of recent figures like Rachel Dolezal and Jessica Krug, who claimed a cultural identity that was not theirs. In our society, race and racism are deeply entwined with skin color and other inherited physical traits. We cannot understand modern forms of oppression without understanding how phenotypical difference contributes to them, and we cannot legitimately claim a racial history without having lived it. Cleopatra lived it. And it’s that experience, not her physical attributes, that should determine how we imagine her life.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey: NEW YORK TIMES OPINION GUEST ESSAY Fear of a Black Cleopatra May 10, 2023, 5:00 a.m. ET
quote:The new Netflix docudrama “Queen Cleopatra,” produced and narrated by Jada Pinkett Smith, has already elicited a passionate response, though perhaps not the kind that publicists hoped for. Since news broke that the series would star the British actress Adele James, fans, Egyptologists, scholars of Greco-Roman antiquity and Arab and Greek news outlets have been debating whether the series willfully distorts history. The reason? “Queen Cleopatra” depicts the legendary monarch as Black. Cleopatra, who died in 30 B.C., remains a source of pride for disparate communities. Many contemporary Egyptians view her as a key figure in the preservation of their history and even as a role model for contemporary Egyptian women. Greeks have also claimed her, noting that she was of Macedonian and Greek descent. Depictions of Cleopatra with darkly pigmented skin date back at least hundreds of years. A 14th-century chronicle depicts her in a kind of charcoal gray. Scholars have long debated whether certain references in Shakespeare’s “Antony and Cleopatra” suggest that the playwright believed she had dark skin. In contemporary American pop culture, the assertion is often stated as fact, with her characterized as a beautiful and powerful Black African queen, her name commonly referred to as such in hip-hop. “Queen Cleopatra,” however, has touched an international nerve. The debate around the docudrama escalated when an Egyptian lawyer called for Egyptian authorities to censure Netflix, accusing it of misrepresenting “Egyptian identity.” Zahi Hawass, a former minister of antiquities for Egypt, also entered the fray, claiming that a “falsehood” stands “at the heart of this series.” Cleopatra’s “first language was Greek,” he wrote in an essay for Arab News, “and in contemporary busts and portraits she is depicted clearly as being white.” What debates like this miss is that current notions of race are relatively recent inventions and do not necessarily speak to how people of Cleopatra’s day saw the world or themselves. Classicists tell us that although the Greeks and Romans did notice skin color, they did not regard it as the primary marker of racial difference. Other concepts — environment, geography, ancestral origin, language, religion, custom and culture — played bigger roles in delineating groups and identities. So regardless of the material a sculptor may have chosen with which to summon Cleopatra’s powerful visage, there is no meaningful sense in which she — or anyone else of her era — would have identified as white. The question that follows is: How, then, can anyone, including a Netflix dramatization, claim that Cleopatra was Black? Netflix’s casting was informed by the views of Shelley Haley, a renowned classicist and Cleopatra expert, who claims that, although evidence of her ancestry and physical attributes are inconclusive, Cleopatra was culturally Black.
quote:Netflix’s casting was informed by the views of Shelley Haley, a renowned classicist and Cleopatra expert, who claims that, although evidence of her ancestry and physical attributes are inconclusive, Cleopatra was culturally Black.
quote:Cleopatra’s father, Ptolemy XII, was a member of the family that conquered Egypt over 200 years earlier. He was routinely referred to as an illegitimate child. His mother is unknown, as is the identity of Cleopatra’s mother, though several clues suggest she may have been Egyptian, including Plutarch’s claim that Cleopatra was likely the first Ptolemaic ruler to speak that language. When the Roman poet Propertius famously called Cleopatra a whore queen (meretrix regina), he laced his misogynist tirade with allusions to Egypt, such as the poisonous city of Alexandria and the “yapping” Egyptian god Anubis. The intersection of Cleopatra’s race and gender resulted in a form of oppression that cast her heritage and sexuality as particularly dangerous. Regardless of her lineage or appearance, it’s clear that Cleopatra’s actions were not perceived as the typical behavior of a Greek or Roman woman. Throughout her reign, Cleopatra was also careful not to depict herself as a wife or consort but rather as Isis, the great Egyptian goddess who raised her son alone, without her slain husband, Osiris. Cleopatra was a pragmatist, doing what it took to survive, aligning herself first with Caesar, then with Mark Antony, before fleeing Actium when the tides turned. Finally, when it became clear to her that Octavian would let her live only in order to march her through Rome as a war captive, she took her own life by poison. Dr. Haley argues that Cleopatra’s experience was part of a history of oppression of Black women. Reclaiming Cleopatra as Black and choosing to portray her now as a Black woman highlights this history — and is consistent with contemporary Egyptians or Greeks identifying with Cleopatra on the grounds of their own shared culture. Unlike racial assignments based on physical characteristics, which seek to distill people into rigid and recognizable categories, shared cultural claims can easily coexist. To recognize Cleopatra as culturally Black is not to pretend that skin color is meaningless now — in the manner of recent figures like Rachel Dolezal and Jessica Krug, who claimed a cultural identity that was not theirs. In our society, race and racism are deeply entwined with skin color and other inherited physical traits. We cannot understand modern forms of oppression without understanding how phenotypical difference contributes to them, and we cannot legitimately claim a racial history without having lived it. Cleopatra lived it. And it’s that experience, not her physical attributes, that should determine how we imagine her life.
And this is why I distrust liberals. In any other context, Cleopatra and the Greeks would be seen as a prime example of cultural appropriation and theft of black culture by Europeans. But here these so-called liberals are trying so hard to put a positive spin on this when there is nothing positive about the Greek conquest of the Nile. Cleopatra was not an indigenous Queen of the Nile and does not deserve to be put alongside the actual people who created the culture of the Nile valley. Yet this is what white people do, focus on Cleopatra because she is white or represents white colonial rule and cultural appropriation. And people should just be honest and admit that instead of trying to spin it otherwise. At the end of the day Africans should be telling their own stories and history and not need to be apologists for white colonial history in trying to put a black face on it. Not to mention the sinister subliminal message to black women that they need to see themselves as white women in order to feel empowered. Its asinine.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
The people thinking this is support for a black African Nile Valley history are sadly mistaken. It is as I said nothing but propaganda pushing an agenda that they can arbitrarily change history to suit whatever political or social purpose they see fit.
So from the producers themselves (they don't say who).
quote: Said the producers of the series: “The aim of African Queens has always been to uncover the hidden histories of powerful women from the past and what made them leaders that we still talk about today. Working with leading historians and experts including Shelley Haley (Professor of Classics and African Studies, Hamilton College) and Dr. Sally-Ann Ashton (Cleopatra scholar), we explore Cleopatra's story as a queen, strategist, ruler of formidable intellect as well as a woman whose heritage is the subject of great debate.
She wasn't strategist, she was a whore and the Romans called her that. If they wanted to do a story about a black African Queen who was a strategist they would have done the Kandakes of Sudan who actually fought the Romans. But no that is real history not this fake liberal nonsense.
quote: Her ethnicity is not the focus of Queen Cleopatra, but we did intentionally decide to depict her of mixed ethnicity to reflect theories about Cleopatra’s possible Egyptian ancestry and the multicultural nature of ancient Egypt.”
She was Greek. There are no other facts saying otherwise. These people are just really gasping at straws here. And then comes the key part, they claim Egypt was "multicultural" which is tacit admission that they don't necessarily see the ancient civilization prior to the Greeks as a black civilization. If they did, they would have put all the effort and energy into actually doing one of the native dynasties of the Nile Valley instead of this. But obviously they don't believe that and therefore would rather make up a fictional history using Greeks as the epitome of Nile Valley culture. When in reality this "charity history" is not necessary in f*cking Africa if they wanted to actually tell African history. And the fact that they try and promote the Greek dynasty as literally the same as the indigenous dynasties shows you how they are pushing nonsense under the guise of being progressive. This is why again it is so telling of them to harp on the skin color of a Greek Queen but ignore all the truly black ones that were actually the creators of Nile Valley Civilization. The Greeks weren't part of that, they were usurpers and to sit here and act like they were all part of the same culture equally as the native dynasties is total historical revisionism.
quote: “Given that Cleopatra represents herself as an Egyptian, it seems strange to insist on depicting her as wholly European,” says Dr. Ashton, an expert who was interviewed in the series.
https://www.netflix.com/tudum/articles/african-queens-release-date-cast-news So she cannot be shown as a tyrant and dictator who was part of the subjugation of the native population. No she has to be shown as somehow equally native and part of the culture which her people had nothing to do with creating. Pure historical revisionism and propaganda to suit the desires of Europeans to see white women doing cosplay as native Egyptian Queens. Because most of the time she dressed like a Greek, spoke Greek and practiced Greek culture even if they incorporated Nile Valley elements.
And the worst part of this is you got these white liberals giving themselves agency to set the black agenda in terms of representation and history. While black people sit in the back seat and just go along for the ride and a check. It is the most retarded mess I have ever seen. Black people are the ones who are supposed to "represent" their own history and agenda, not white liberals or white corporations pretending to be liberal. But some folks just don't want to do anything for themselves.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
The Fitzwilliam Museum: An African Approach to Egypt Welcome to the Fitzwilliam Museum’s Virtual Kemet Egypt in its African context The Fitzwilliam Museum
What is an African centred approach to Egypt?
African Centred Egyptology aims to look at Egypt as part of African culture. People mainly look at Ancient Egypt through a European bias. This is because the majority of books on Egyptology are written by researchers of European, or North-American backgrounds. There are also increasing numbers of Egyptian scholars also publishing in English as well as Arabic. However, there are comparatively few scholars of African origin or descent who work on the subject of Ancient Egypt. Their views, when African Centred, are often and wrongly dismissed by more mainstream Egyptologists.
Historians and archaeologists rarely disclose their cultural identities in the same way that someone working in sociology (the study of society and the people in it) or anthropology (the study of people and cultures) would automatically declare in their books and articles. The reason that some disciplines talk about the identity of the author is because how we view the world can influence how we interpret it. Our views can be influenced by where we grew up, where we received our education and to what extent we have been exposed to other cultures and groups of people. Where is Egypt and where was Kemet?
What does Kemet mean?
People in Egypt today call their country by the Arabic name of ‘Misr’. The word ‘Egypt’ is the name that the Ancient Greeks gave to the country and is still used in Europe today. Prior to Europe’s involvement with Egypt, the people of Ancient Egypt had many names for their country such as ‘Ta Mery’ (the beloved land), ‘Ta Sety’ (the land of the bow) which was used for the southern most regions of the country and Nubia (see below). Another name was 'Kemet', which means ‘the black land’. All of these names were originally spelt without vowels, so for example Kmt.
The meaning of Kemet has been much debated. The word was spelt with four hieroglyphs: a piece of crocodile skin with spines making the sound K; an owl making the sound M and a half loaf of bread making the sound T. The round symbol represents a crossroads and shows the reader that in this context this is a place name. There are parallels – Sudan for example comes from the Arabic Bilad-al-sudan meaning country of the blacks and Ethiopia derives from the Greek meaning ‘burnt-face’ in reference to the people and their black skin. The word kem means ‘black’. However, people have interpreted the reference to the colour black this in two different ways:
In reference to the colour of the silt of the Nile and so the fertile soil of Egypt In reference to the colour of the people What does Kemet mean?
Today, for obvious reasons, the name Kemet is associated with a more African-centred approach to looking at ‘Egypt’. For this reason the gallery that you are currently viewing is called Virtual Kemet. In adopting this name we hope to remind people that the ‘Ancient Egypt’ is an African civilization and that whilst the culture had contact with people from other civilizations, it was essentially African in its culture and well as its geographical placement.
There are many links between ancient Egyptian and modern African culture, ranging from objects such as headrests to hairstyles such as the side lock, and this and other evidence support the idea that it was an African culture in addition to being geographically in Africa. For these reasons Egypt is seen by people of African descent as part of their cultural heritage and history. The concept of Egypt as part of Africa is not a new one. Some of the earliest travellers to Egypt came from the ancient cultures of Greece and Rome, including Greek philosophers, mathematicians, scientists, writers and poets who came to learn from the priests. To the Greeks and Romans, Egypt was an African country, and their artists depicted the Egyptians as Africans, with black skin and tightly curled hair, described by the Greek historian Herodotos in the fifth century BC as 'woolly'. Were the people in Ancient Kemet the same groups of people who live Egypt today?
No. Throughout Egypt’s history it had traded and fought with people from other countries. From around 750 BC the Nubian rulers, often called ‘The Kushites’ controlled Kemet and became its Twenty-fifth Dynasty. During this time Kemet enjoyed a renaissance, or return to earlier culture, as indicated by the promotion of the cult of the god Amun and also copies of earlier statues that were made by officials and the rulers.
Later, the population was affected by the immigration of soldiers, traders and settlers from outside cultures, which included two Persian invasions in 525 BC and 343 BC; Macedonian Greeks who ruled Kemet from 332-30 BC; Romans, who took control of Kemet in 30 BC; and the Islamic settlement in AD 642. The Persians ruled Kemet from their own country. The Greek rulers, in contrast, lived in Kemet and adopted Egyptian culture and traditions; however, the language for administration was changed to Greek. The Romans, although absent rulers, had large numbers of their army in Kemet and were keen to promote Egyptian culture, albeit their own version of it. The last hieroglyphic inscription dates to AD 394, after this time Christianity, which had been present in Egypt from the first century AD, gradually became the dominant religion. Early Islamic rulers maintained cultural links with earlier Egypt, as seen by the minaret at the Mosque of Ibn Tulun in Cairo, which is in the form of the famous lighthouse of Alexandria and which dated to the third century BC. The language was changed to Arabic at this time and the religion to Islam. Were the people in Ancient Kemet the same groups of people who live Egypt today?
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
The Fitzwilliam Museum: An African Approach to Egypt Were the people in Ancient Kemet the same groups of people who live Egypt today? Today, many people forget that Egypt is part of the continent of Africa and only think of the modern state of Egypt, which has closer ties to the Islamic world and is often seen by people to be part of the ‘Middle East’. The ‘Middle East’ includes countries such as Syria, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Israel/Palestine, and the Arabian Peninsula.
Where was Nubia and who are the Nubians?
Nubian civilization pre-dates Egyptian. The earliest artefacts that were found in this region date to around 300,000 years ago, possibly earlier. Kemet and Nubia were closely linked from around 6000 years ago. Early pottery indicates that the Nubians were capable of making very thin, high quality bowls and jars from 7000 years ago; these skills were taken to Egypt as people moved northwards.
Nubia was originally called ‘Ta Sety’, the Land of the Bow. The Nubians were skilled warriors, famous also for their wrestling. The word Nubian comes from the Ancient Egyptian word ‘nbt’, meaning gold. The Nubians controlled the gold mines and were often shown in tomb paintings bringing gold as an offering. Geographically, Nubia is defined as the land between Dongola in northern Sudan and Aswan in southern Egypt. This region is home to people who are linked through dialects that belong to a distinct language that connects them linguistically to the Ancient Nubian language, but who are culturally diverse from each other and from the past. Nubians are divided into three main groups: the Danaqla and Mahas in Sudan and the Sikurta around Aswan is Egypt. Nubian, like Ancient Egyptian, belong to the African language family.
Modern Nubian culture was affected by the building of the Aswan dam in the 1960’s. This dam prevented the annual flooding of the river Nile but also meant that a huge lake was formed behind it. This lake flooded many ancient sites and modern Nubian communities. Some temples such as Abu Simbal, Kalabsha and Philae, were moved block by block in order to save them. However, many old Nubian settlements and people’s homes were lost.
Nubian identity has been more widely adopted by the African diaspora, most notably in the US. In Britain an increasing number of members of the Black British community have begun to seek to understand their African heritage and see a connection to Ancient Nubian culture as a means of self-empowerment.
Were the Ancient Egyptians Africans? What colour was their skin?
Yes. Egypt is in Africa and there are many cultural links to other African civilisations. If we look at the skin colour and also facial features on representations of Egyptians, many are what we would consider today to be Black African. Skin colours on temple and wall reliefs show ranges between dark brown and black, which is typical of what we see today with regard to people of Black African descent or origin. Furthermore, Nubians, a group who are accepted universally as Black Africans are, like their neighbours from Kemet, shown on reliefs with both jet black and red-brown skin and can be distinguished as Nubians by their short wigs. Many statues have lost their original skin colour. Sometimes colours were used by the Egyptians symbolically, so for example a statue of a god or royal person would painted gold to represent immortality. If we leave colour aside for a moment, we can also find out a great deal from looking at the facial features shown on Egyptian statues. Here, there can be no doubt that we are dealing with people who were African. Faces were broad with high cheekbones and the jaws are typically strong. The noses are also broad and the lips are generally full and fleshy in appearance.
How long ago was ‘Ancient Egypt’ or Kemet?
Kemet’s origins were small farming communities who lived in groups throughout the country. We can gage the development of this early culture through the kinds of objects that people were buried with. These objects were sophisticated and included items such as stone vases and some objects or materials that indicate trade with foreign lands. This period is called Pre-Dynastic, because it was before there was a single king and the country was unified. This period started around 4000 BC, which is over 6,000 years ago. Before this time there is evidence of a culture that we call Paleolithic and which dated in Kemet to around 100,000 BC, and which was centred around the southern part of the country. Objects from this phase were mainly in the form of flint tools and weapons.
The first rulers in Kemet lived around 3000 BC, which is 5000 years ago. If we compare Kemet to Greece and Rome we can see that Kemet is much older and developed ideas such as monumental buildings, religious beliefs and writing much earlier than European cultures. We know that many of the famous Greek philosophers, playwrights and mathematicians went to Kemet to learn and study. And we can also see Kemet’s early development through its mud-brick and monumental architecture. Greek civilisation and democracy falls into the so-called Late Period of Kemet, and Rome expanded later still.
Some people would like to see Kemet as an earlier civilisation. The problem with re-dating key monuments such as the sphinx is that everything else needs to be re-dated accordingly and in relation. We date archaeological sites and contexts through pottery, inscriptions and sequences. If you wish to use an alternative chronology, it is essential that you keep this in mind. When looking at Ancient Kemet it helps to remember that we are Before Christ (B.C.) or Before Common Era. This is any date before Year 0 of our calendar. The year 2009 is A.D., which stands for ‘Anno Domini’, a Latin phrase meaning ‘the Year of our Lord’. Some people find this easier to remember this as ‘After Death’. The term Common Era is also used to refer to anything after Year 0. When working out how many years ago objects were made add the current year to the B.C. date. For example if something dates to 3000 BC you add 3000 + 2009 (the current year) to get 5009 years old. Many dates in Kemet are estimates and so you may find in consulting books that different years are given for rulers.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
The Fitzwilliam Museum: An African Approach to Egypt
Who was Cleopatra? Was she African?
In the African-American oral tradition Cleopatra is often said to be an African woman. However, many academics who follow an African centred approach to Kemet ignore her. This is because Cleopatra’s family came to Kemet from Macedonia (region that is now part of northern Greece rather than the modern state with the same name). Her family had lived in Kemet for around 300 years before she was born and had enthusiastically adopted the traditional culture of Kemet and its religion and were proud to be shown as kings and queens of Kemet. Unlike earlier kings of Kemet, the Ptolemies (pronounced ‘Tolemees’) as they were known, usually took only one official wife but had many mistresses and concubines. These relationships often resulted in children who were illegitimate. Cleopatra and her father were born from such relationships and it has been suggested that both her mother and grandmother were native to Kemet and so Africans. This is because of the close ties between the royal family and the native elite in Kemet, and the fact that the Ptolemies had been in Kemet for so long at this time. Statues of Cleopatra suggest that the queen was part African and the Romans referred to her as an Egyptian, not as a Greek.
Why have many Egyptian statues lost their noses? Was this deliberate?
In asking this question many people suggest that the damage occurred to statues in order to hide their African features. The sphinx at Giza for example is often cited as the subject of target practice for French and British troops occupying Egypt. However, an etching by a Danish artist dating to 1737, before the French and British arrived, shows the monument without its nose. Later sketches show the nose restored, perhaps on account of artistic convention. There is a reference to the sphinx being damaged much earlier, in 1378 AD. The Arab historian al-Maqrizi wrote that a man named Muhammad Sa’im al-Dahr attacked the statue when he saw farmers making offerings in front of it, because this was not acceptable according to his view of Islamic tradition. In ancient times statues were also often reused in buildings and walls and were damaged as part of this process. Many of the temples in Kemet were damaged by later people of different religions, who were offended by the images of animals as gods. This was because as the traditional religion of Kemet was replaced firstly by Christianity and later by Islam, many of the old temples housed churches, monasteries and mosques. This would suggest that some damage to material from Kemet was deliberate.
Why are there objects from Kemet in the Fitzwilliam Museum?
Objects in British museums came by three different means. Firstly, objects were given to museums, often by private collectors who had lived in Egypt and purchased material there. Secondly some objects were given to the Museum through excavations. When British academics went to Egypt to excavate they were allowed by the authorities to bring object back to Britain for display and learning. This practise ended in 1976 and it is now illegal to bring even samples of pottery out of the country for archaeological research. Finally, the Museum purchased objects, although this is becoming increasingly less common because museums need to be certain that the objects were taken out of Egypt legally and that their history is documented. The documents here come from the Fitzwilliam Museum’s archives and show a list of objects from excavations at Abydos that were being given to the museum through the Egypt Exploration Fund, and a list of objects bought by the Egyptologist E. Wallis Budge on behalf of the Museum from dealers in Egypt in 1899. Note that the accounts show the price of packing and shipping the objects.
Why are there objects from Kemet in the Fitzwilliam Museum?
When using the Virtual Gallery you can see how objects came into the Museum’s collections because the labels state whether the object was purchased, given, or bequeathed (left in a will). Numbers appear for example as: E.34.1899, which means that an object is part of the Egyptian collection and was the 34th object to be registered in the year 1899. E.GA before an object number (for example E.GA.50.1943 means that the object was part of the Gayer-Anderson Collection and was given to the Museum in 1943. Objects labelled GR come from the Greek and Roman collections and were registered through their culture rather than their country of origin. A small number of objects have other letters such as ‘E.SS.70’, these are some of the earliest objects to come into the Museum’s collections and were not registered by year. E stands for Egypt and SS stands for stone stela (a type of relief).
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Interesting video with some comments about Jada Pinkett Smiths "Cleopatra". The video also tells about the Kushite queen Amanirenas and her war against Rome.The person who made the video thinks that making a documentary about Amanirenas would have been much better as a means of representing an African queen.
In the 90s one of the biggest points of the African scholars challenging Eurocentric history is that the Greeks stole a lot of their knowledge from Africa. But now these people have twisted that and are pushing the idea that the Greeks are the legitimate heirs of the African culture. And not only that they are promoted as champions of African history and some black people are eating it up. Totally absurd. Even with that, all of this actually supports the points made by those African scholars in that the Greeks promoted the culture of the Nile because they acknowledged they were the originators. The only problem is these Europeans have no desire to show that history in its full glory as a black civilization.
Instead of race swapping European royalty and nobility it would be better if they made films and TV-series about real "black" or African descended people who lived in Europe during different times.
At least in the British TV-series Downtown Abbey they portraid a figure inspired by a real person: West Indian cabaret singer and pianist, Leslie 'Hutch' Hutchinson, who is said to have had an affair with Edvina Mountbatten, a British countess. In Downtown Abbey the couple are called Jack Ross and Lady Rose Aldridge
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Interesting video with some comments about Jada Pinkett Smiths "Cleopatra". The video also tells about the Kushite queen Amanirenas and her war against Rome.The person who made the video thinks that making a documentary about Amanirenas would have been much better as a means of representing an African queen.
Here is something about that here as well. Here is more info about kush vs rome war that is more detailed. The One-Eyed African Queen Who Defeated the Roman Empire
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Here is a visual presentation with drawings and maps. Amanirenas life and war with the Romans would be an excellent subject for a documentary, or a movie.
Here is the geographer and historian Strabos recount of the events
quote: The Ethiopians, emboldened in consequence of a part of the forces in Egypt being drawn off by Ælius Gallus, who was engaged in war with the Arabs, invaded the Thebais, and attacked the garrison, consisting of three cohorts, near Syene; surprised and took Syene, Elephantina, and Philæ, by a sudden inroad; enslaved the inhabitants, and threw down the statues of Cæsar. But Petronius, marching with less than 10,000 infantry and 800 horse against an army of 30,000 men, first compelled them to retreat to Pselchis, an Ethiopian city. He then sent deputies to demand restitution of what they had taken, and the reasons which had induced them to begin the war. On their alleging that they had been ill treated by the nomarchs, he answered, that these were not the sovereigns of the country, but Cæsar. When they desired three days for consideration, and did nothing which they were bound to do, Petronius attacked and compelled them to fight. They soon fled, being badly commanded, and badly armed; for they carried large shields made of raw hides, and hatchets for offensive weapons; some, however, had pikes, and others swords. Part of the insurgents were driven into the city, others fled into the uninhabited country; and such as ventured upon the passage of the river escaped to a neighbouring island, where there were not many crocodiles on account of the current. Among the fugitives, were the generals of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians in our time, a masculine woman, and who had lost an eye. Petronius, pursuing them in rafts and ships, took them all and despatched them immediately to Alexandreia. He then attacked Pselchis1 and took it. If we add the number of those who fell in battle to the number of prisoners, few only could have escaped.
From Pselchis Petronius went to Premnis,2 a strong city, travelling over the hills of sand, beneath which the army of Cambyses was overwhelmed by the setting in of a whirlwind. He took the fortress at the first onset, and afterwards advanced to Napata.3 This was the royal seat of Candace ; and her son was there, but she herself was in a neighbouring stronghold. When she sent ambassadors to treat of peace, and to offer the restitution of the prisoners brought from Syene, and the statues, Petronius attacked and took Napata, from which her son had fled, and then razed it. He made prisoners of the inhabitants, and returned back again with the booty, as he judged any farther advance into the country impracticable on account of the roads. He strengthened, however, the fortifications of Premnis, and having placed a garrison there, with two years' provisions for four hundred men, returned to Alexandreia. Some of the prisoners were publicly sold as booty, and a thousand were sent to Cæsar, who had lately returned from the Cantabrians,4 others died of various diseases.
In the mean time Candace5 attacked the garrison with an army of many thousand men. Petronius came to its assistance, and entering the fortress before the approach of the enemy, secured the place by many expedients. The enemy sent ambassadors, but he ordered them to repair to Cæsar: on their replying, that they did not know who Cæsar was, nor where they were to find him, Petronius appointed persons to conduct them to his presence. They arrived at Samos, where Cæsar was at that time, and from whence he was on the point of proceeding into Syria, having already despatched Tiberius into Armenia. The ambassadors obtained all that they desired, and Cæsar even remitted the tribute which he had imposed.
I posted the link but post the whole thing here. The One-Eyed African Queen Who Defeated the Roman Empire
quote: Cocky male monarchs underestimated Queen Amanirenas for her gender, her race, and her disability. Each time, they did so at their own peril. The legendary Roman emperor Caesar Augustus was on the Greek island of Samos, preparing for an important expedition to Syria, when he received envoys from the Kingdom of Kush, in present-day Sudan. Journalist Selina O’Grady records in her book And Man Created God that the ambassadors presented Augustus with a bundle of golden arrows and relayed this message: “The Candace sends you these arrows.” (Candace was the Latinized spelling of Kandake, the Kushite term for “queen.”) They added that the emperor had two options for how to view the offering: “If you want peace, they are a token of her warmth and friendship. If you want war, you will need them.” For an African queen to give such an ultimatum to the most powerful man in the world would have been considered a serious insult. After all, Augustus had almost single-handedly transformed Rome from a republic to an empire, and the territory he now reigned over stretched from as far as northern Spain, through to parts of central Europe, and all the way to Egypt. His legions wore bronze breastplates and wielded spears, swords and javelins, all much superior to the hatchets the Kushites carried as weapons. In addition, Kush had many natural resources — such as gold mines, iron and ivory — that could have enriched the treasuries of Rome, enticing Augustus to attack, even without the insult. But this Kushite queen — whom the Greek geographer and historian Strabo of Amasia described as “a masculine sort of woman and blind in one eye” — had proved to be a formidable foe for the “son of god,” the title given to Caesar Augustus on Roman coins. He received the bundle of arrows from the envoys and promptly signed a peace treaty. In truth, this was not so much a treaty as it was a surrender. Augustus submitted to all of the demands made by Queen Amanirenas, including that the Romans withdraw from all Kushite territories they had occupied and pledge that they would never again seek to collect taxes or tributes from her kingdom. It was a remarkable concession for the world’s most powerful man, demonstrating just how feared and respected the one-eyed queen truly was.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Kush vs rome war that is more detailed and more accurate below. The One-Eyed African Queen Who Defeated the Roman Empire
Part I:WHERE WOMEN WERE WORSHIPED
quote: Kush was part of a region below Egypt known as Nubia. It was a place where, unlike most of the world at the time, women exercised significant control. In the Nubian valley, worship of the queen of all goddesses, Isis, was paramount, and Nubia had several female rulers during its history. Queen Amanirenas reigned over Nubia from 40 B.C. to 10 B.C. Her throne was in the city of Meroë, and from there she and her husband, King Teriteqas, presided over the wealthy kingdom. Janice Kamrin, curator of Egyptian art at the Metropolitan Museum, writes that “based on its position as an intermediary between the Mediterranean world and sub-Saharan Africa, Nubia was a key transit point for luxury goods such as ivory and exotic objects. Of great importance was gold, a commodity found in the Nubian deserts and greatly prized by the Egyptians.” To satisfy the demands of their luxury-loving populace, the Egyptians highly depended on trade with Meroë, which Queen Amanirenas controlled. Her labyrinthine palace, with massive brick-vaulted rooms lined with gold leaf, was a warehouse stocked with great blocks of gold and ivory tusks. She bartered her treasures for goods from Egypt, including cloth, corn, bronze bowls and glassware. But 10 years into the reign of Amanirenas, the political landscape changed when Augustus seized control of Egypt from the grasp of Mark Antony and Cleopatra. He proclaimed himself emperor and established Egypt as a Roman province. He was now on Queen Amanirenas’s doorstep. Before leaving Egypt to continue his quest to seize more territories, Augustus appointed a military colleague named Gaius Cornelius Gallus, a Roman poet and knight whom he had a close relationship with, giving him the title of praefectus Alexandreae et Aegypti, prefect of Alexandria and Egypt. Only a year after the conquest, the Egyptians in the south rebelled against Roman rule, causing Cornelius to lead his forces south to repress the dissidence. After regaining order, he crossed into Amanirenas’s Nubia and laid claim to the island of Philae. He brought a local ruler there under Roman control, and in return for paying homage to Rome, he gave this dynast the powerful title of tyrannus (tyrant). As a sign of intimidation and also his ego, Cornelius had his achievements inscribed on a large stone tablet that was erected in Philae. To publicize his fame, he listed the victories in Latin, Greek and hieroglyphic Egyptian. The monument, dated 16 April 29 B.C., read in part: “Gaius Cornelius Gallus son of Gnaius, the Roman cavalryman, first prefect of Alexandria and Egypt after the defeat of kings by Caesar son of the divine, and the vanquisher of Thebaid’s revolution in fifteen days.” Queen Amanirenas reluctantly accepted the annexation of a part of her kingdom. Recognizing the military supremacy of the Roman legions, she saw that it was not time to fight yet. Instead, she watched the enemy’s moves closely. Soon after, the Nubians in the annexed regions started complaining about the tyrannus. On the orders of Cornelius, he was imposing increased taxes on the traders who brought goods to the frontier and claiming tax rights over autonomous Nubian communities allied to Kush. Cornelius, for his part, continued to celebrate his exploits with grandiose monuments. Roman historian Cassius Dio, who lived from 155 to 235 A.D., described how “he set up images of himself practically everywhere in Egypt and inscribed a list of his achievements, even upon the very pyramids.” These extravagances were not looked upon kindly back in Rome, where the standard directive was to glorify the emperor, not his underlings. Cassius added that Cornelius “indulged in a great deal of disrespectful gossip about Augustus and was guilty of many reprehensible actions besides.” Suffice it to say, he was on the outs with Emperor Augustus, who ultimately disenfranchised Cornelius and issued many indictments against him. The Roman Senate unanimously voted that he should be convicted in the courts, exiled and deprived of his estate. Overwhelmed by his bleak prospects, Cornelius killed himself before the decrees took effect.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Part II:CLASH OF THE EMPIRES
quote: Both during and after the time of Cornelius, the massive Roman Empire kept expanding. This growing footprint made it difficult for Augustus to keep tabs on all corners of his kingdom at the same time — something Queen Amanirenas paid close attention to. In 26 B.C., Emperor Augustus appointed Aelius Gallus, another Roman knight, as the next prefect of Egypt. Gallus had hardly settled in when the emperor commanded him to undertake a military expedition to Arabia. Three complete legions, approximately 15,000 troops in all, had been posted in Egypt to secure the province, but at Augustus’s command, many were transferred to Arabia to help in securing this newly sought territory. This presented Queen Amanirenas with an opportunity to challenge Rome’s power. While the Roman troops were being removed from Egypt, Queen Amanirenas marshaled her army to liberate her people up north from Roman authority. Together with King Teriteqas, they commanded an army of 30,000 warriors from Kush, marching along the mudflats of the Nile and into Egypt. Historian Cassius Dio narrates in Roman History that the Meroitic army “advanced as far as the city called Elephantine, with Candace as their leader, ravaging everything they encountered.” They took the entire Triakontaschoinos region, including Syene, Philae and Elephantine, a terrain of 200 square miles. Strabo adds that in these cities, the Kushites “enslaved the inhabitants, and threw down the statues of Cæsar.” They then retreated south with loot, Roman prisoners and thousands of Egyptian captives. As a last insult, they lopped off and carried away the head of a statue of Augustus. Upon arriving back home in Meroë, Queen Amanirenas took the bronze head, with its neatly disarrayed hair, protuberant ears and startling open eyes of colored glass, and buried it beneath the entryway steps of a temple dedicated to the god Amun. David Francis, an interpretation officer at the British Museum, said in an interview with Culture24 that, “in burying the head, the Meroites ensured that everyone who entered the building would trample this image of the emperor Augustus beneath their feet — ritually perpetuating their victory over the Romans.” It was the queen’s daily reminder that she had triumphed over the most powerful man in the world. The Kushite victory did not last long. When the news reached Alexandria, the acting governor Gaius Petronius set out with a cavalry of 800, plus 10,000 Roman infantry. By then, the Kushite army had withdrawn to the city of Pselchis. Petronius pursued them, sending envoys ahead to demand the return of the captives. But the envoys were confused. They found that there was no leader in command of the warriors. By this, they meant no male leader. King Teriteqas had died suddenly of sickness or injury, and they simply could not comprehend that a queen alone ruled the Kushites. Yet Kush did have a leader, and she was not done fighting yet. The queen’s warriors, having assembled at Pselchis, came forward to battle, each carrying a large oblong shield made of raw ox hide and armed with an array of axes, pikes and swords. They outnumbered the Romans by almost three to one, but Strabo reported that they were “poorly marshaled and badly armed” compared with the heavily armored, well-drilled legionary ranks. The Romans drove them into retreat, and many of the Kushite warriors fled back to the city or into the desert. Some warriors escaped the battlefield by wading out into the Nile. They hoped to make a stand at a defensive position on a small island, but the Romans secured rafts and boats to capture the island and take them prisoner. This time, the emboldened Romans invaded much deeper into Kushite territory than before. Petronius also captured some of Queen Amanirenas’s generals, whom he questioned about their leadership structure. They told him that the Kandake was the ruler in their kingdom. But they also distracted his attention with tales of a male leader. The generals informed Petronius that Akinidad, son of Queen Amanirenas, was based in the northern city of Napata, their ancient capital and holy city, which housed important temples and royal cemeteries. Unbeknownst to Petronius, this was a ruse, as the Kushite rulers had deliberately left Napata hundreds of years earlier. Petronius confidently marched to Napata, sure that victory there would subdue the Kushites for good. He found that Prince Akinidad was in fact not there and that the actual capital, Meroë, was still more than 330 miles south. Angered at being misled, he burned the city and rounded up its occupants for transport back to Egypt as slaves. But the queen’s ruse had worked. Petronius had marched so far and now did not have the capacity to unleash his army on the kingdom’s true ruler. He had already traveled more than 570 miles from Syene, a distance almost as long as the entire length of Egypt. Strabo wrote that Petronius “decided that the regions beyond would be difficult to traverse.” Cassius Dio added that “there was no advantage to be gained by remaining where he was with his entire force, so he withdrew, taking the greater part of the army with him.” But Queen Amanirenas and her forces did not share his sense of exhaustion. She counterattacked with vigor, fiercely pursuing the retreating Romans back to the fortified hilltop city of Primis. The queen herself was a fearsome presence on the battlefield. Her “masculine character,” as Strabo described her, referred to her commanding presence as a war leader. She towered above her troops, sporting three facial scars on her cheeks; these were indicators of physical beauty for the Meroë queens, which some Sudanese women still wear today. In one battle, as she clashed with the Romans, an enemy soldier injured the queen, blinding her in one eye. Strabo’s description of the queen as “masculine” was in line with how Greco-Romans viewed powerful female rulers. Professor Brittany Wilson writes in Unmanly Men that the Greeks and Romans depicted foreign queens in a negative light and even viewed female leaders as a sign of a nation’s barbarity. These queens were often portrayed as “manly women” who went beyond the bounds of proper female behavior. Governor Petronius looked down on the queen’s new disability as well; from then on he referred to her derisively as “the One-Eyed Candace,” judging her “deficient” eyesight as mirroring her deficient insight as a ruler. Yet again, these men underestimated Queen Amanirenas. After her wound healed, she returned to the front line. Losing an eye in battle only made Amanirenas stronger and braver. But her suffering was not over. When her troops reached Dakka in 24 B.C., clashing with the Romans to ensure Kush’s sovereignty, her son Prince Akinidad was killed in the campaign. She had lost her husband, her eye and now her son. As a leader, many of her warriors had been killed in the fight, her generals and some of her people had been abducted, and her city of Napata sacked and razed. And still the war was far from over. But now she had but one thing left to fight for: her kingdom. Fueled by grief and anger, the Kandake, now blind in one eye, fought on.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Part III:SEALING THE DEAL
quote: Up until this point, Queen Amanirenas and her troops had been fighting a defensive war, aimed at keeping the Romans from permanently annexing any part of her kingdom. But after the destruction of Napata and the death of Prince Akinidad, they went on the attack. Over the next two years, she fought with all she had to offer. Her fearlessness even forced the admiration of Strabo, who said, “This queen has a courage above that of her gender.” In 22 B.C., she marshaled a second force of thousands of Kushite fighters and marched toward the Roman troops who had set up camp in Primis, now the border of the Roman Empire. It was a face-off of epic proportions. Based on the geography of Primis, it is nearly certain that the Kushite warriors entirely surrounded Petronius and his men. However, the Romans had a large array of ballista — ancient canons that, although less deadly than military weapons today, could still fire deadly darts over long distances. This made a frontal assault by Queen Amanirenas nearly impossible; she would have lost countless warriors. Yet Petronius was surrounded and had no way to escape. A stalemate. Petronius was extremely eager for a ceasefire. Since becoming prefect of Egypt, Queen Amanirenas had untiringly engaged him in war, not giving him a moment’s peace to officiate his administrative duties of supervising tax levies, or even enough time to take part in the celebratory festivals, chariot races and hunting parties that the more leisurely nobles in Alexandria enjoyed. And now he was trapped in a hilltop city, with seemingly no way out. Realizing there was no way forward, Petronius urged Queen Amanirenas to meet with Emperor Augustus himself and settle matters. The Meroë warriors offered a prideful response: They claimed in jest that they did not know who the “Caesar” was, or where they could find him. Petronius, surely not appreciating the joke but eager to escape his current predicament, responded by giving them escorts to the Greek island of Samos, where the emperor was preparing for an expedition to Syria. Dr. Robert Steven Bianchi, a renowned Egyptologist, writes in Daily Life of the Nubians that “this is believed to be the first recorded instance in the entire history of Africa when diplomats representing a Black African ruler independent of Egypt traveled to Europe to effect a diplomatic resolution.” By sending her envoys and not going personally, Amanirenas showed herself to be superior to the emperor and Rome. She would not deign to travel hundreds of miles just to negotiate; she had people who could do that for her. And the one-eyed queen indeed emerged victorious. The five-year war had cost the Romans many men and lots of money — a continued war with the tenacious Queen Amanirenas was not high on the imperial agenda. At the Treaty of Samos in 21 B.C., Caesar Augustus declared Kush to be sovereign and remitted all claims of tribute. Roman troops evacuated Primis and also ceded the areas in the southern portion of the Thirty-Mile Strip to the Kushites. They pulled back to Dodekaschoinos, which was established as the new border. Along with his signature on the official treaty, as one more step to appease the Nubian people, Augustus directed his administrators to collaborate with regional priests on the enlargement of a temple at Kalabsha, as well as the erection of another at Dendur.
In all honesty, a docu-series on Amanirenas would be a welcome follow-up to the Cleopatra one we got, especially since Cleo and Amani would have been contemporaries.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
This is a review off IMDB:
quote: It is hard to take this "documentary" seriously when there are errors is in just about every scene. Ancient Egypt existed for three and a half millennia, and the Ptolemaic period of Greek control and its involvement in Roman policies, especially the Roman civil wars is a very specific period. For example no Egyptian was spoken at the court, Greek was spoken.
But getting costumes wrong, getting basic timelines of battles (like Actium) wrong, placing Cleopatra at events we know she was not present at, mixing up things done by Anthony with those done by Octavian and an unending series of errors just makes this impossible to watch. It is clear no experts, or even anyone with a basic knowledge of the history of the time and place was involved, or if they were, their advise was inverted.
The dialogue is also laughably childish s is the acting.
And this is supposedly something supposed to "represent" black history by skipping over the entire history of the indigenous Nile Valley civilization. Black people who support this will be looking like idiots for a long time by allowing themselves to be used to look like clowns.
They had no interest and desire to stand behind a black Queen Tiye or Nefertiti but have no problem putting it all on the line for a black Cleopatra. What kind of retards are these people?
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: this is supposedly something supposed to "represent" black history by skipping over the entire history of the indigenous Nile Valley civilization.
Jada is doing a series. She is only up to the second Queen So unless you know for a fact she will not being doing any other Queen of Egypt you cannot argue something is being skipped over
Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
Somehow I think there would not be so much outrage at this documentary series had they speculated Cleopatra was, say, part Hebrew or Mesopotamian. Those aren't really more justified than portrayed her as mixed with Egyptian or other African ancestry, are they?
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: A video which criticizes Netflix Cleopatra and the eventual ideology behind it. The video include statements of Dr Zahi Hawass
quote: Netflix had a film made by the wife of Will Smith. She had... She is the one that has an agenda. She is the one that she want to proove that ancient Egypt were black but this is not true Because, look at Egypt. Egypt was controlled and ruled on dynasty 25. mean at the end of the Egyptian history. By Kush kingdom. The black kingdom. One dynasty. In that time they made pyramids. And the pyramids are like hills. There is no way to compere the pyramids of Meroe to the pyramids of Egypt, means that this dynasty did not make this civilzation of ancient Egypt. This dynasty has nothing to do with ancient Egypt.
At minimum when looking at Egyptian art, one can say some of the kings of Egypt prior to the 25th including some throughout the Old kingdom have stereotypic African features and this reddish brown color is very common rather than Zahi Hawass' lighter color. This is not to say it's not possible for him to have some ancient Egyptian ancestry (or none, we don't know) And this is not to some random dark skinned Egyptian living today does or does not have ancient Egyptian ancestry. This cannot be known just by looking
But Zahi Hawass is not an honest man if he does not acknowledge a significant amount of African features in much of Egyptian art and many ambiguous also. There is a wide variety of features depicted in the art if one is being honest and clearly he is not. Look the above Amenhotep III sculptures. Does Zahi Hawass resemble them? Then answer is no
And he says:
quote: The theory that made everyone to think that ancient Egypt was black civilization. It came from Cheikh Anta Diop from Senegal. He announced it because he saw a statue of Ramesses II black, a statue of Tutankhamun black. And he made a statement That the ancient Egyptian were black. Unesco in 1970 made a conference to discuss that, and they said: "We have no evidence to proof that the Egyptians were black."
This man is a hypocrite if we look at his teams' 2012 DNA analysis of two of the Ramesside mummies. He pretends this never happened>
and not impressive even in an intellectual level or as scholar, yet you keep posting about him like he's the ultimate authority
And he makes no claims as to being Greek, yet goes out of his way to keep commenting on this.
If the Greeks don't like Adele James as Cleopatra let them do their own documentary. How is this an Egyptian problem?
^ If the Egyptians do some new movie, then depict actual Egyptians and cast people of this color.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Well, one can probably say that he has more practical experience of Egyptian archaeology than anyone here on ES, and more than most American or European debaters. Then maybe he is not right in everything he says, that can be discussed, but he still has been one of the leading voices in Egypt regarding Egyptian archaeology and Egyptian heritage, during many years.
I think both he and several other Egyptians are irritated over foreigners trying to define Egyptian identity, telling them they are only Arab invaders of Egypt without any real ties to the ancient Egyptians.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
I think both he and several other Egyptians are irritated over foreigners trying to define Egyptian identity, telling them they are only Arab invaders of Egypt without any real ties to the ancient Egyptians.
It's not Egyptian identity, it's Greek identity!!!
This is ridiculous
And in realty they are in fact part Arab
(although I don't condone people calling them "fake" and then pretending they who say this are "real")
Zahi Hawass represents government affiliated nationalism and is his place in this issue is highly political
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Brits think Romans in some way are a part of their history and even identity, just as Egyptians can see Greeks as a part of Egyptian history and even identity. In Germany older history in older times where divided in "Römergeschichte" and "Germanengeschichte" (Roman history and Germanic history), and many Germans are highly interested in Roman sites and museums showing Roman history in what is now Germany. So different peoples who lived in an area can be incorporated in a national identity.
Egyptians of today have a heritage of ancient Egyptians, Persians, Greeks, Arabs, Turks and all sorts of people, they are all a part of Egyptian history. And you are right, history and politics are intertwined in Egypt, as it is in Europe, America, China and many other places. Just as Americans, or Chinese or Brits or Swedes, Egyptians do not like foreigners telling them about their history or trying to define who is a real Egyptian or not, or who they descend from or not.
They want the right to self define their history. It should be an inner debate in Egypt, but now all kinds of people from everywhere chime in on the debate.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Notice how Hawass makes sure to say "She is the one that she want to prove that ancient Egypt were black but this is not true"
He is not complaining that Americans are playing Egyptians he's specifying and validating the American racial term "black" and saying they were not black
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
To be honest, Egyptians have also complained over the choices of both Elisabeth Taylor and Gal Gadot as Cleopatra. But in their cases it was more a question of Elisabeth Taylor supporting Israel, and Gal Gadot being an Israelite.
Blackness has become some kind of buzz word and its use has spread everywhere. For some it has positive connotations for others negative.
Maybe one day there will be films about different parts of Egyptian history where Egyptians are played by Egyptians of different shades, Greeks by Greeks and Romans by Italians. Some Egyptians noticed the lack of Egyptians among the cast in Cleopatra (and there seem not have been many Greeks either).
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
The fundamental problem with this is that they used black people to set the precedent that a Netflix documentary on the ancient Nile valley can use "political" or "social justice" reasons as the basis for how ancient persons are portrayed. And in so doing, they established that it is justifiable for anybody who does a documentary to do the same thing. Meaning it is perfectly fine to ignore facts and evidence to pursue a purely feel good narrative with no basis in reality. So down the road, if Netflix or another studio does something similar on an indigenous Nile Valley dynasty, they will be justified making them white, Arab, Asian and anything but black African. It makes sense for the whites at Netflix to do something like this because almost all of the so-called documentaries produced by History Channel and other American media outlets have always done this. But now they are using and manipulating black people to try and make it seem legit, when it isn't legit and isnt necessary when talking about African history. They are just giving ammunition to the enemies of black people and black history and the so called white liberals are not on your side. It is all the more obvious that they are pushing an anti-black agenda when they skipped over thousands of years of black dynasties to do a documentary on the Greek dynasty as if anybody with half a brain would start any discussion of the black history of the Nile Valley with the Greeks. To me it is them saying that the Nile Valley was "multicultural" but not African, which means those native dynasties weren't African either.
Notice also that Adele James in her interviews list Cleopatra as the "Most iconic" person she could portray on screen. No mention of any actual black historical Queens or figures from history. So what is she representing? Because she isn't representing black people or culture. And this again goes to my point about these Afro British actors who seem to be more interested in portraying white characters or historical figures than actually representing actual black history and culture. Not that black American actors are much better, because the root of this is the fact that nobody is making black and African stories or history which would require black and African actors. So if all you have is mostly white shows and productions the only roles you will get are those changed from white characters. And Hollywood has been pushing this hard over the last few years.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: these Afro British actors who seem to be more interested in portraying white characters or historical figures than actually representing actual black history and culture.
That might be true but at the same time they could have the mentality that "we are Black actors and we have the right to portray anybody we want to, even people who are not black and we will even test that to show we can't be stopped, we will do want we want"
In addition this is a series on Queens of Africa and Jada Pinkett Smith is only up to two so far. Jada and Neflix produced Queen Njinga and you keep ignoring it, so you are not supporting what you proport to want them to do. You won't even mention Jada Pinkett Smith because you think she is just a hapless child being told what to do She may do another Queen of Egypt and it is highly unlikely there will be another Queen of Africa with the type of ancestry Cleopatra had, the next ones are likely to all be thoroughly African This is Jada's project, not a mysterious "they" She screwed up this time (although does get some trolling points) but the game is not over
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Roman Wall painting from the House of Giuseppe II, Pompeii, 1st century AD, death of Sophonisba, but more likely Cleopatra VII of Egypt consuming poison.
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
I think that is sophonisba, because the man behind her is NOT Cleopatra's son Ceasarion by Julius Cesar.
Cesarion if Cleopatra was 100% greek and Julius was white HE should be white.
The man behind sophonisba was Massanisa her husband
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
Let’s Just Call The Outrage Around Queen Cleopatra What It Is: Racism BY SAGAL MOHAMMED
quote:Cleopatra’s race has long been regarded as ambiguous by scholars and historians. What we do know is that her father, Ptolemy XII, was of Macedonian-Greek descent, a member of the family that conquered Egypt more than 200 years before Cleopatra’s birth in 69 BC. Her mother’s identity, on the other hand, is unknown – although she may well have been Egyptian – which is where things get a little more complex. “Cleopatra ruled in Egypt long before the Arab settlement in North Africa,” said Dr Sally Ann Ashton, a research scientist and author of Cleopatra and Egypt, who appears in the documentary. “If the maternal side of her family were indigenous women, they would’ve been African, and this should be reflected in contemporary representations of Cleopatra.”
To be clear, the docu-drama isn’t, in fact, arguing that Cleopatra was a dark-skinned Black woman with no Macedonian-Greek heritage at all, although the media storm around it might make you assume otherwise. Rather, its creators, including scholar Shelley Haley, professor of classics and African studies at Hamilton College, have asked us to imagine her as a woman of mixed heritage, hence the casting of a biracial actress. “Her ethnicity is not the focus of Queen Cleopatra, but we did intentionally decide to depict her of mixed ethnicity to reflect theories about Cleopatra’s possible Egyptian ancestry and the multicultural nature of ancient Egypt,” a statement from Netflix reads.
And assuming in the case of Cleopatra that it is only ambiguous due to missing evidence. That if there was more genealogical record available or human remains that could be analyzed, that her "race" could be definitively established and an article could be written "New Test Results Confirm Cleopatra's Race"
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey: Let’s Just Call The Outrage Around Queen Cleopatra What It Is: Racism BY SAGAL MOHAMMED
quote:Cleopatra’s race has long been regarded as ambiguous by scholars and historians. What we do know is that her father, Ptolemy XII, was of Macedonian-Greek descent, a member of the family that conquered Egypt more than 200 years before Cleopatra’s birth in 69 BC. Her mother’s identity, on the other hand, is unknown – although she may well have been Egyptian – which is where things get a little more complex. “Cleopatra ruled in Egypt long before the Arab settlement in North Africa,” said Dr Sally Ann Ashton, a research scientist and author of Cleopatra and Egypt, who appears in the documentary. “If the maternal side of her family were indigenous women, they would’ve been African, and this should be reflected in contemporary representations of Cleopatra.”
To be clear, the docu-drama isn’t, in fact, arguing that Cleopatra was a dark-skinned Black woman with no Macedonian-Greek heritage at all, although the media storm around it might make you assume otherwise. Rather, its creators, including scholar Shelley Haley, professor of classics and African studies at Hamilton College, have asked us to imagine her as a woman of mixed heritage, hence the casting of a biracial actress. “Her ethnicity is not the focus of Queen Cleopatra, but we did intentionally decide to depict her of mixed ethnicity to reflect theories about Cleopatra’s possible Egyptian ancestry and the multicultural nature of ancient Egypt,” a statement from Netflix reads.
So the whole underlying argument of this series is that her mother was "Egyptian" which does not mean black African, because her mother herself could have been mixed. To argue that this one mystery woman somehow was herself super dark enough to justify the portrayal of a dark skinned Cleopatra is beyond stretching the facts. After 300 years of Greek occupation much of Egypt at that time was mixed, especially in Alexandria. So they are trying to have it both ways with this argument where Cleopatra was mixed and "black" but her mother was just "native" and not herself mixed. And everybody that criticizes this is not white because again, they skipped all the native dynasties of the NIle Valley to focus on a Greek dynasty as their defense of black people in Egypt, which is dumb as hell. It is a controversy they created for themselves by deciding to do this based on so little actual proof and going out on a limb while ignoring much more well supported actual black dynasties in earlier eras (not just the 25th). And to be honest they admitted that they are embellishing the facts for political reasons which again is retarded as the Nile is in Africa and you don't need to embellish facts to establish black people in the history of he Nile Valley.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Mary Lefkowitz describes an incident which involves Yosef A. A. Ben-Jochannan in her book History Lesson from 2008
quote: In another incident described in her book, Yosef A. A. Ben-Jochannan, the author of Africa: The Mother of Western Civilization, gave the Martin Luther King lecture at Wellesley in 1993. Lefkowitz attended this lecture with her husband, Sir Hugh Lloyd-Jones. In that lecture, Ben-Jochannan stated that Aristotle stole his philosophy from the Library of Alexandria, Egypt. During the question and answer session following the lecture, Lefkowitz asked Ben-Jochannan, "How would that have been possible, when the library was not built until after his death?" Ben-Jochannan replied that the dates were uncertain. Sir Hugh responded, "Rubbish!" Lefkowitz writes that Ben-Jochannan proceeded to tell those present that "they could and should believe what black instructors told them" and "that although they might think that Jews were all 'hook-nosed and sallow faced,' there were other Jews who looked like himself
Was Cleopatra Black? Gal Gadot's Cleopatra Film Controversy | Dr. Rebecca Futo Kennedy Study of Antiquity and the Middle Ages In this episode Dr. Rebecca Futo Kennedy takes us into another intense history debate and that is the question of "Was Cleopatra Black?" In light of the upcoming movie and controversy surrounding Gal Gadot playing Cleopatra I felt like this was an excellent time to use this episode. What was her ethnicity? Why is it controversial? Was she Macedonian? Are Macedonians even Greek? Was there an African in the Ptolemy family tree? Is this argument merely people attempting to project their modern narratives and politics on the past? Why does it even matter? Can we even answer the question? In this talk Dr. Kennedy explains that until we stop attempting to remove black Africans from Egyptian history and until we stop using the modern and inaccurate term Sub-Saharan in our dialogue involving ancient Africa and Egypt it doesn't matter. Again, in many ways this talk merely shows that this debate revolves more around modern politics and narratives rather than Cleopatra herself, the Ptolemies and how the ancient Egyptians saw them or themselves. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DKyEUB8eXE Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Seems everyone discusses Cleopatra these days. And maybe we are to expect further documentaries and movies.
From an Egyptian standpoint the main problem with Gal Gadot was not so much her skin color but the fact she is an Israeli with a background in the military. She also, according to the Egyptians, made some statements about the Israeli - Palestinian conflict they did not like.
quote: During the 2021 Israel–Palestine crisis, Gadot called for peace between the two territories in a statement that drew backlash for expressing support for Israel and referring to the Palestinians as her "neighbours".
Seems the Gal Gadot film maybe will not materialize due to different causes, among them Gal Gadot being busy with the Wonder Woman franchise.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Do you have a source saying that production was stopped on Cleopatra that was to be directed by Kari Skogland with Gal Godot rumored to be replaced by Zendaya ?
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Seems it is not cancelled but belated. We will see if it ever materialize, and who will play the leading role. Seems Gal gadot left the project though
quote: The Euphoria actress will be reunited with Villeneuve thanks to Gal Gadot's departure from the film. That's right, Zendaya was not the first choice for the role. Instead, the former Wonder Woman is the one who was to star in the life of Cleopatra. It is not yet known who else will join her, but it is expected to be a cast of popular actors.
An article that touches upon the Egyptian reactions on Netflix Cleopatra
quote: Adele James vs. Gal Gadot and Zendaya: the difference in the reaction of Egyptians
However, the controversy surrounding the casting of Adele James as Cleopatra raises some important questions about racism and discrimination in the entertainment industry. Why are Egyptians more offended by a black actress playing Cleopatra than an Israeli soldier or a non-Egyptian black actress like Zendaya?
Why is there so much outrage over the casting of Adele James but relatively little over other similar, or plain offensive like Gadot’s, casting decisions?
The answer to these questions lies in the complex history of race relations in Egypt and the broader Middle East. Egypt has a long history of racial and ethnic diversity, with influences from Africa, the Middle East, and Europe.
However, despite this diversity, there is still a strong sense of nationalism in Egypt, with many people seeing themselves as primarily Egyptian rather than African or Arab.
Therefore, the casting of a black actress as many Egyptians see Cleopatra as a threat to their national identity and cultural heritage.
Many people feel that by casting a black actress as Cleopatra, Netflix is trying to rewrite history and erase the Macedonian-Greek heritage of one of Egypt’s most important historical figures. This perception is reinforced by the fact that Cleopatra is often seen as a symbol of Egyptian greatness and power, and many people feel that this symbol is being taken away from them by the casting of a black actress.
However, it is important to recognize that this sense of nationalism has often been used to exclude and discriminate against minorities in Egypt, including black Egyptians and other people of African descent. While the situation has improved in recent years, there is still a lot of discrimination against black people in Egypt, and many people still hold racist beliefs and attitudes.
And this is exactly why less people were upset over Gal Gadot’s casting. Ironically, Egyptians did not object to Gal Gadot’s casting as Cleopatra as much as they did to Adele James. Three years ago, plans for a new movie about the queen starring Israeli actress Gal Gadot caused a minor backlash, mostly on social media. Gadot stepped down from the film, and it was rumored that Zendaya would replace her. This was not met with as much controversy, possibly because Zendaya looks “less black” than Adele.
Ultimately, the debate over Adele James’ casting as Cleopatra highlights the ongoing struggles for representation and equality in the entertainment industry. It also underscores the need for greater education and understanding about history and culture, as well as the importance of engaging in respectful and productive dialogue around complex and sensitive issues. As we continue to grapple with these questions, it is important to remember that there is no single right answer, and that progress can only be made through open and honest communication and collaboration.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Seems it is not cancelled but belated. We will see if it ever materialize, and who will play the leading role. Seems Gal gadot left the project though
quote: The Euphoria actress will be reunited with Villeneuve thanks to Gal Gadot's departure from the film. That's right, Zendaya was not the first choice for the role. Instead, the former Wonder Woman is the one who was to star in the life of Cleopatra. It is not yet known who else will join her, but it is expected to be a cast of popular actors.
I would guess that the casting of Zendaya, father – African-American mother – German, Irish, English, Scottish
would cause the same controversy as the Adele James version
and that they knew it would controversial but not this controversial I don't see it happening any time soon
I wonder what would have happened if Neflix released the exact same Queen Cleopatra series with Adele James and simply left out "Documentary" or "Docu-Drama"
Here is a current Netflix series on Pablo Escobar They classify it as a Drama
However they would also have to make it (Cleopatra) all dramatized and leave out the experts clips and some of the narration to not have that documentary aspect
______________________________________________
Queen Cleopatra True Story: 5 Things Netflix's Controversial Show Leaves Out BY HENRY LADD
Netflix's controversial docu-series Queen Cleopatra leaves out five critical aspects of the real history of Cleopatra’s reign in ancient Egypt.
Cleopatra Was Not Very Impactful In The Broader History Of Egypt
Cleopatra's Motivations Are Romanticized
Cleopatra Did Not Plan Troop Movements In War
Cleopatra Did Not Participate In Swordplay
Cleopatra Ruthlessly Orchestrated The Deaths Of Her Siblings
Seems much to do about nothing, It seems that the Arabs inside Egypt are fully game to claim that they are Ancient Egyptians when the statues show black people.
I am seeing from a distance that this is a coverup of what they think the Ancient Egyptians look like. They keep talking about stay inside west african history actually not realizing the Ancient Egypt is part of African story
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
I wonder why the cleopatra arguement is so much an attack on Blackness when you can clearly that the statues show Blackness
Why do I feel that the statues were doctored by the Modern Egyptians and seemed to of tried to crush his face?
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
In the documentary they talk about Cleopatra maybe being mixed with Egyptian. If one would follow that line of thought maybe it would have been better with an actress like Athena Karkanis in the leading role. She is of both Greek and Egyptian descent. And she has actually been apart of another Netflix drama. But maybe such choice would have been too uncontroversial, and not in line with the filmmakers political intentions.
Athena Karkanis
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Speaking of cleopatra theres paintings of Greeks with reddish Brown skin that has been over looked:
This is why We don't know what greeks were , yet theres proof of Ancient Greeks being Reddish brown:
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
theres also these sculptors that look decidedly Black African from Greece:
if these people are Greek then how can cleopatra not be black
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
The Greeks knew about Black Africans and depicted them now and then. But the majority of Greek art do not depict Africans. Go to Greece and visit a couple of museums there, then you can see for yourself (I did).
Here is a video with some thoughts about the idea of Black Greeks
And when it concerns Minoan and Mycenaean art, there were also certain color codes with men mostly depicted darker than women. Cretans and other Greeks can also be rather brown, especially if they are tanned. Just compare the Minoan fisherman from Akrotiri with a Cretan fisherman of today. They are not Black Africans, but still rather brown.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: In the documentary they talk about Cleopatra maybe being mixed with Egyptian. If one would follow that line of thought maybe it would have been better with an actress like Athena Karkanis in the leading role. She is of both Greek and Egyptian descent. And she has actually been apart of another Netflix drama. But maybe such choice would have been too uncontroversial, and not in line with the filmmakers political intentions.
she would been good casting but she looks like any average african american mixed person. So the question you should ask is if the ancient indigenous population was not black africans then how a half egyptian half greek person looks like regular AA mulattos? Which reminds me of a reference from JA Rodgers nature knows no color line
quote:Page 57
Many American Negroes are indistinguishable from Arabs. The New York Times (Feb. 2, 1045) reports of the meeting between President Roosevelt and King Ibn Saud. “It was a matter of considerable astonishment of the King’s servants to discover American Negro cooks and messboys and it was more than difficult to persuade them that these were not also Arabs. The matter was never entirely cleared up.”
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Reconstruction of Cleopatra compared with Athena Karkanis, Nora Elzeiny and Adele James
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Reconstruction of Cleopatra compared with Athena Karkanis, Nora Elzeiny and Adele James
That is not a reconstruction.
Arisinoe's remains have been found and said to have mixed negro egyptian european ancestry
New Image Reveals The 'True Cleopatra' December 18, 20085:30 PM ET By
Geoffrey Gardner
quote:Researchers have unveiled a new composite image which they say more accurately portrays the ancient seductress.
quote: The computer-enhanced image takes into account her geography, family history, and various items bearing her likeness. Daily Mail has more:
Pieced together from images on ancient artifacts, including a ring dating from Cleopatra's reign 2,000 years ago, it is the culmination of more than a year of painstaking research.
The result is a beautiful young woman of mixed ethnicity - very different to the porcelain-skinned Westernised version portrayed by Elizabeth Taylor in the 1961 movie Cleopatra.
Dr Ashton, of Cambridge University, said the images, to be broadcast as part of a Five documentary on Cleopatra, reflect the monarch's Greek heritage as well as her Egyptian upbringing.
"She probably wasn't just completely European. You've got to remember that her family had actually lived in Egypt for 300 years by the time she came to power."
So, if Hollywood were to remake Cleopatra with this mixed-race image in mind, who would you like to see play the title role?
quote:This coin was minted during Antony and Cleopatra’s alliance. By pairing their faces on coinage, the rulers advertised their powerful partnership, which was so strong that Cleopatra’s profile is an exact copy of Antony’s portrait. Cleopatra’s image appears on the front of the coin, which identifies her as the more important of the two rulers. A crown circling her carefully braided hair symbolizes her status as a queen.
and a person in traditional attire photographed on the Eastern side of Africa
that you think has a hairstyle that is similar to the above coin
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Cleopatra was a Greek Queen ruling a Greek colony in Africa. She was not an "African Queen" ruling an African country. Whether or not she was mixed doesn't change that. Everything she did was to preserver her power as a Greek Queen as the last of the Greek colonies for the Mediterranean. She was not trying to "protect Africa" or any other such nonsense. Some people are just going way to far with this nonsense in promoting Hellenistic Greek culture and identity as African. Cleopatra in no way shape or form belongs along side Nzinga, Tiye, Ahmose-Nefertari, the Candakes or any other truly African Queens in history.
There are no physical remains for Cleopatra so any idea of what she looked like is purely guess work. And again, what does it matter? She was not an African Queen representing any kind of African Kingdom or Culture.
Same goes for her sister:
quote: In the 1990s an octagonal monument situated in the centre of Ephesus was hypothesized by Hilke Thur of the Austrian Academy of Sciences to be the tomb of Arsinoe.[16] Although no inscription remains on the tomb, it was dated to between 50 and 20 BC. In 1926 the skeleton of a female estimated to be between the ages of 15 and 18 years at the time of her death was found in the burial chamber.[24][4] Thür's identification of the skeleton was based on the shape of the tomb, which was octagonal, like the second tier of the Lighthouse of Alexandria, the carbon dating of the bones (between 200 and 20 BC), the gender of the skeleton, and the age of the child at death.[25][26] It was also claimed that the tomb boasts Egyptian motifs, such as "papyri-bundle" columns.[16]
A DNA test was also attempted to determine the identity of the child. However, it was impossible to get an accurate reading since the bones had been handled too many times,[27] and the skull had been lost in Germany during World War II. Hilke Thur examined the old notes and photographs of the now-missing skull,[28][29] which was reconstructed using computer technology by forensic anthropologist Caroline Wilkinson to show what the woman may have looked like.[30] Thür alleged that it shows signs of African ancestry mixed with classical Grecian features[16] – despite the fact that Boas, Gravlee, Bernard and Leonard, and others have demonstrated that skull measurements are not a reliable indicator of race,[31] and the measurements were jotted down in 1920 before modern forensic science took hold.[30] Furthermore, Arsinoe and Cleopatra, shared the same father (Ptolemy XII Auletes) but may have had different mothers,[32] with Thür claiming the alleged African ancestry came from the skeleton's mother.
Mary Beard wrote a dissenting essay criticizing the findings, pointing out that, first, there is no surviving name on the tomb and that the claim the tomb is alleged to invoke the shape of the Pharos Lighthouse "doesn't add up"; second, the skull doesn't survive intact and the age of the skeleton is too young to be Arsinoe's (the bones said to be that of a 15-18 year old, with Arsinoe being around her mid twenties at her death); and third, since Cleopatra and Arsinoe were not known to have the same mother, "the ethnic argument goes largely out of the window."[4] Furthermore, craniometry as used by Thür to determine race is based in scientific racism that is now generally considered a pseudoscience that supported exploitation of groups of people to perpetuate racial oppression and distorted future views of the biological basis of race.[33]
A writer from The Times described the identification of the skeleton as "a triumph of conjecture over certainty".[34] If the monument is the tomb of Arsinoe, she would be the only member of the Ptolemaic dynasty whose remains have been recovered.[35] It has never been definitively proven the skeleton is that of Arsinoë IV.
It doesn't make any sense to be grasping at straws to establish an African identity for these Greek people when there are plenty of African Queens long before them to base real history on that is on a much more solid foundation.
I find it really suspect that Netflix is going out of their way to promote this Queen but not doing the same for Queens like Tiye, Ahmose Nefertari, Nodjmet and so forth, that we have ACTUAL PROOF were black Africans.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey:
Arisinoe's remains have been found and said to have mixed negro egyptian european ancestry
what is your source
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey:
Arisinoe's remains have been found and said to have mixed negro egyptian european ancestry
^^^^^ SOURCE
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: In the documentary they talk about Cleopatra maybe being mixed with Egyptian. If one would follow that line of thought maybe it would have been better with an actress like Athena Karkanis in the leading role. She is of both Greek and Egyptian descent. And she has actually been apart of another Netflix drama. But maybe such choice would have been too uncontroversial, and not in line with the filmmakers political intentions.
Cleopatra is a 1917 American silent historical drama film based on H. Rider Haggard's 1889 novel Cleopatra, the 1890 play Cleopatre by Émile Moreau and Victorien Sardou, and the play Antony and Cleopatra by William Shakespeare.[1] The film starred Theda Bara in the title role, Fritz Leiber Sr. as Julius Caesar, and Thurston Hall as Mark Antony.
The film is now considered partially lost, as only small parts of the film remain.
Theda Bara (/ˈθiːdə ˈbærə/ THEE-də BARE-ə;[1] born Theodosia Burr Goodman; July 29, 1885 – April 7, 1955) was an American silent film and stage actress.[2]
Bara was one of the more popular actresses of the silent era and one of cinema's early sex symbols. Her femme fatale roles earned her the nickname "The Vamp" (short for vampire, here meaning a seductive woman),[a] later fueling the rising popularity in "vamp" roles based in exoticism and sexual domination.[5] The studios promoted a fictitious persona for Bara as an Egyptian-born woman interested in the occult.
Bara was born Theodosia Burr Goodman on July 29, 1885 in the Avondale section of Cincinnati, Ohio.[2] She was named after the daughter of U.S. Vice President Aaron Burr.[6] Her father was Bernard Goodman (1853–1936), a Jewish tailor from Poland. Her mother, Pauline Louise Françoise (née de Coppett; 1861–1957), was born in Switzerland.
2008 BOOK BY SALLY ANN ASHTON Amazon description: This beautifully illustrated new biography of Cleopatra draws on literary, archaeological, and art historical evidence to paint an intimate and compelling portrait of the most famous Queen of Egypt.
-Deconstructs the image of Cleopatra to uncover the complex historical figure behind the myth -Examines Greek, Roman, and Egyptian representations of Cleopatra -Considers how she was viewed by her contemporaries and how she presented herself -Incorporates the author's recent field work at a temple of Cleopatra in Alexandria -Beautifully illustrated with over 40 images
Sally-Ann Ashton Sally-Ann Ashton is Senior Assistant Keeper in the Department of Antiquities at the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge, where she looks after material from Ancient Egypt and Sudan. She studied Ancient Greek at the University of Manchester, and then Classical Archaeology at King’s College London, where she completed her PhD on Egyptian royal sculpture in 1999.
Since 2003 Sally-Ann has worked in a number of different prisons, teaching Black History. In 2008 she obtained an MPhil in Criminological Research from the University of Cambridge, studying the impact of accessing African and Caribbean cultural heritage in a prison environment.
Prior to working in Cambridge Sally-Ann worked at the British Museum and The Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology in London and has curated a number of special exhibitions: Cleopatra of Egypt: from history to myth (Rome, London and Chicago 2000-2001); Roman Egyptomania (Cambridge 2004), and Triumph Protection and Dreams: African headrests in context (Cambridge 2011). She has undertaken archaeological/anthropological fieldwork in Greece, Italy, Libya, Egypt, Sudan, and Jamaica.
Sally-Ann has published widely on subjects relating to identity, cross-cultural exchange and African-centred approaches to Ancient Egypt. She is currently writing two books: Black history, identity and culture in English Prisons, and Origins of the Afro Comb. Both will be published in 2013.
The idea that Cleopatra was black has been floating around in the Black community since at least 1918 when George Wells Parker wrote about it in Children of the Sun. It became more wide spread in the first volume of JA Rogers' Worlds' Great Men of Color, first published in 1947 but later re-published in the 70s with and introduction and commentary by John Henrik Clarke
But a picture speaks a thousand words. Sally Ann Ashton came out with a book in April 2008 (above) with a 1917 film image of a silent movie about Cleopatra In the book there many photos of art and artifacts representing different versions of Cleopatra which she comments on and argues Cleopatra considered herself to be an Egyptian
but this computer image she had made of Cleopatra which she had made later in the same year as the book, 2008 made a splash in the media, Cleopatra depicted with dark skin and cornrows. This image is one of the precursors to this new series on Netflix and Sally Ann Ashton also appears in the film in some of the commentary parts
Here is a 2020 thread in Egyptsearch where Egyptserach member and author Asar Imhotep interviews Ashton in a video posted to youtube:
at time 26:40 they discuss her book on Cleopatra (he name is mentioned 31 times in the video)
Sally-Ann Ashton, 28:05
quote: Ashton:
Cleopatra's family had been in Egypt for about 270 years the time she came on the throne she's descended from a Macedonian Greek family but we also know that her we don't know the identity of her grandmother so her father was illegitimate. We know that he was actually called a bastard in Greek not us and so it wasn't actually me who suggested this it was actually somebody else a Papyrologist suggested that, you know Cleopatra's grandmother, you know, could have been Egyptian and so if she's Egyptian then that means that Cleopatra it's partly Egyptian and I think it's really important I mean certainly I hadn't realized it was gonna be such a contentious kind of issue actually you know people seem to respond to this very badly but there's been other research elsewhere it was believed that the skeleton of Cleopatra's sister asked enemy and was also found in Turkey and that actually she was a mixed heritage mixed African in European heritage which actually ties in with the idea that so was was Cleopatra the final Cleopatra that one that we can clear country the seventh and I think I was very surprised that's just how strongly some people responded and reacted to that suggestion
Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on :
Lioness why aren't you a moderator anymore?
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey:
Arisinoe's remains have been found and said to have mixed negro egyptian european ancestry
I wonder what Doug thinks of this
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
About Arsinoe there are doubts that the found skeleton was hers. One who doubts that is Mary Beard, an English scholar of Ancient Rome. She is a trustee of the British Museum and formerly held a personal professorship of Classics at the University of Cambridge. She is a fellow of Newnham College, Cambridge, and Royal Academy of Arts Professor of Ancient Literature. (Biographical data from Wikipedia). She wrote this about the grave and the human remains:
quote: First, Arsinoe was indeed supposed to have been murdered on the steps of the temple of Diana in Ephesus, and the Octagon (which was found in the 1920s) is a rather grand tomb which can be dated stylistically to the first century BC. But there is nothing more than that to link the tomb and the princess. There is no surviving name on the tomb and the claims that the shape was meant to evoke the shape of the lighthouse of Alexandria (and so hint at an Egyptian occupant) don't add up for me.
Second, the skeleton itself doesn't survive intact. The crucial skull, on which the ethnic arguments are based, was lost in the second world war. The new conclusions (including a mock up of Arsinoe's face) rely on the measurements of the skull left by the first excavators. The remaining bones are said to be those of a 15-18 year old; Arsinoe may well have been in her mid-20s when she died.
Third, we don't actually know that Cleopatra and Arsinoe were full sisters. Their father was King Ptolemy, but they may well have had different mothers. In that case, the ethnic argument goes largely out of the window.
Interestingly Gina Torres was cast as Cleopatra in Zena Warrior princess but in a Sci-Fi show around the same time she is part a group of three women transported into the future. One is Cleopatra but it's a different actress Jennifer Sky
Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on :
Lioness is no longer a moderator
Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on :
!
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Sunscreen Dependant Egyptian dismantled by noble Nilotic brother | Netflix Cleopatra aftermath. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbRj75o8318 Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
A more crass, cynical and brutal Cleopatra in the TV series Rome
This from a populace where the majority of women need black american produced hair straighteners.
Someone make it make sense
These are pictures from the Curly Hair studio in Cairo Egypt of children from their website Map of Curly Hair Salon's around Cairo
Pics from Identity Magazine, an Egyptian Magazine
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
I am sorry but the Netflix Cleopatra had GOOD casting. It will stand the test of time and the racist North Africans will be embarrassed as they should be.
^^^^ ALERT THIS IS NOT AN AFRICAN AMERICAN SHE IS EGYPTIAN
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
Racist North Africans are like Dominicans I guess
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey:
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: [qb] Egyptian American girl calls Netflix Cleopatra cultural appropriation.
This from a populace where the majority of women need black american produced hair straighteners.
Someone make it make sense
The girl in the video has a hijab so it is hard to see what hairstyle she has.
And it is not so that Egyptian women get their hair straighteners for free, they pay for it. So they do not owe Black Americans anything in that regard.
And of course many Black American women also use hair straighteners and wigs, and extensions, and some dye their hair blonde (as do some women in Africa too).
Otherwise the girl is right in that many African Americans who claim ancient Egypt have not visited Egypt and have no relatives there or other connections there.
And in the end the whole matter is not only about skin color of one or another actor, it is about who owns the right to the Egyptian cultural heritage, and who is going to define who the ancient Egyptians were, Europeans and Americans or the Egyptians themselves. Seems many Egyptians see Netflix Cleopatra as a sort of cultural Imperialism and colonialism that even Black Americans take part in.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Young Egyptians have launched a viral campaign against Netflix Cleopatra
quote: Following the release of the controversial Netflix documentary series, Queen Cleopatra, Egyptian experts and youth were outraged, claiming that the show “falsifies Egyptian history” and “promotes Afrocentrism”. In the documentary, Cleopatra, one of Egypt’s most famous historical figures, is portrayed by Adele James, who is biracial. In the trailer, one of the talking heads says, “I remember my grandmother saying to me, ‘I don’t care what they tell you in school, Cleopatra was black’.”
The documentary sparked debate and received backlash from the moment the trailer was aired. Produced by Jada Pinkett Smith, the documentary falls under the African Queens docu series which aims to spotlight the life and reign of women leaders from Africa.
As a response, Egyptian youth launched a counter campaign with the hashtag #مصر_للمصريين (Egypt for Egyptians). In the campaign, young Egyptians shared their photos online with half of the picture including their face and the other half showing the face of kings, queens or everyday figures from ancient Egypt. Through these photos, the campaign aims to show the similarities between Egyptians today and ancient Egyptians.
Whether through online petitions, social media posts, or reports on Netflix, Egyptian youth have been keen on expressing their disapproval of the newly-released documentary and attempting to emphasize their lineage to ancient Egyptians.
This from a populace where the majority of women need black american produced hair straighteners.
Someone make it make sense
The girl in the video has a hijab so it is hard to see what hairstyle she has.
And it is not so that Egyptian women get their hair straighteners for free, they pay for it. So they do not owe Black Americans anything in that regard.
And of course many Black American women also use hair straighteners and wigs, and extensions, and some dye their hair blonde (as do some women in Africa too).
Otherwise the girl is right in that many African Americans who claim ancient Egypt have not visited Egypt and have no relatives there or other connections there.
And in the end the whole matter is not only about skin color of one or another actor, it is about who owns the right to the Egyptian cultural heritage, and who is going to define who the ancient Egyptians were, Europeans and Americans or the Egyptians themselves. Seems many Egyptians see Netflix Cleopatra as a sort of cultural Imperialism and colonialism that even Black Americans take part in.
So these activists only speak out now... no complaining of eurocentric MOSTLY British appropriation of ancient Egyptian culture?
Only light skin Egyptians are the ones complaining about netflix... ME THINKS it's RACISM is the real problem
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Young Egyptians have launched a viral campaign against Netflix Cleopatra
quote: Following the release of the controversial Netflix documentary series, Queen Cleopatra, Egyptian experts and youth were outraged, claiming that the show “falsifies Egyptian history” and “promotes Afrocentrism”. In the documentary, Cleopatra, one of Egypt’s most famous historical figures, is portrayed by Adele James, who is biracial. In the trailer, one of the talking heads says, “I remember my grandmother saying to me, ‘I don’t care what they tell you in school, Cleopatra was black’.”
The documentary sparked debate and received backlash from the moment the trailer was aired. Produced by Jada Pinkett Smith, the documentary falls under the African Queens docu series which aims to spotlight the life and reign of women leaders from Africa.
As a response, Egyptian youth launched a counter campaign with the hashtag #مصر_للمصريين (Egypt for Egyptians). In the campaign, young Egyptians shared their photos online with half of the picture including their face and the other half showing the face of kings, queens or everyday figures from ancient Egypt. Through these photos, the campaign aims to show the similarities between Egyptians today and ancient Egyptians.
Whether through online petitions, social media posts, or reports on Netflix, Egyptian youth have been keen on expressing their disapproval of the newly-released documentary and attempting to emphasize their lineage to ancient Egyptians.
This just reinforces my opinion that "woke hollywood" has always been a trojan horse to promote alternate history as fact. Meaning they keep pushing white characters and European fantasy as the basis of "diversity and inclusion" for black people to see themselves. But they never do any African fantasy or fiction based on actual African cultures, so they are promoting Europe and white characters as something black people need to "see themselves" in. But they aren't pushing African cultures and stories for black people to see themselves in which is disgusting. And I have always had the suspicion that the whole goal of this was to eventually lead up to a place where they could do the same in reverse to the ancient Nile. Meaning by casting such a dark skinned woman in this series and all these other dark skinned folks as Greeks, they are basically promoting multiculturalism, where everybody can see themselves in something even if it is not based on historical fact. And by setting this Cleopatra series up as an example of that, but not doing any of the indigenous dynasties of the NIle, they are deliberately planning to make the dynastic era multicultural. So if and when they do get around to some actual African history on the NIle, it will not be promoted as African, it will be promoted as multicultural, so everyone can see themselves. And how can black people argue if they supported the same being done for them elsewhere. And being aware of your African history and culture is the basis of promoting African identity, which is the direct opposite of the "woke hollywood" agenda. As most black children cant even name 10 African cultures from the continent. But they sure know about Europe and who Cleopatra was.
Not to mention this trend on social media is nothing but whitewashing as most of these images do not match the ancient portraits, especially in the hair, which is obviously African. But now because all these people are getting sympathy due to Netflix deciding to make a show about Black Greeks instead of African Queens, they can get away with it. But if Netflix had done a black Queen Tiye, which is supported by evidence and facts and Egypt came out as against it, they would be seen as blatantly racist.
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
There is NO Such thing as " WOKE HOLLYWOOD "
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Queen Cleopatra from Jada Pinkett-Smith, Arab Egyptian backlash & Anti-Blackness – Dr. Molefi Asante Michael Imhotep Queen Cleopatra from Jada Pinkett-Smith, Arab Egyptian backlash & Anti-Blackness – Dr. Molefi Kete Asante - TheAHNShow with Michael Imhotep 5-20-23 Dr. Molefi Kete Asante, coined the term ‘Afrocentricity’ and is the author of 100 books dealing with African and African American History. He discusses with Michael Imhotep host of ‘The African History Network Show’, the controversy over the depiction of a melanated Queen Cleopatra VII. The documentary is part of the ‘African Queens’ series from Executive Producer Jada Pinkett Smith. It premiered on May 10th, 2023 on Netflix. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kys7D7Gl-2s Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Excellent show very nuanced arguments but the internet and social media unfortunately are not the place for nuanced thinking.
Qoute from Asante
quote: my issue is not uh the the documentary per se I mean and I would like to see it I mean I'm not opposed to see it I want to see it yes not the issue the issue is for me a problem of racial hatred yes African people uh as expressed by the Arab indignation about uh African woman playing the role of Cleopatra yes that's the issue the issue is uh it is time for African people to resist uh the incredible uh encroachment of uh of Arab nationalism on African culture and the attempt to erase African people from Africa's own history particularly on the land of Africa itself so right the serious problem and it's not just a problem of uh a movie it is actually
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Ptolemy XIII in Netflix Cleopatra
Ptolemy XIII in HBOs Rome
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Cleopatra, film from 1999 with Leonor Varela in the leading Role
Leonor Varela as Cleopatra
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey: There is NO Such thing as " WOKE HOLLYWOOD "
Yes there is.
quote: We Power
Inclusive Storytelling
Amazon Studios and Prime Video is a home for talent of all backgrounds, and we are working to tell stories that represent the joy, depth, complexity, and drama that exists across our world. Join the Customer & Content: Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility team as we unite with our creative community to tell these stories more inclusively than ever before.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: This just reinforces my opinion that "woke hollywood" has always been a trojan horse to promote alternate history as fact. Meaning they keep pushing white characters and European fantasy as the basis of "diversity and inclusion" for black people to see themselves. But they never do any African fantasy or fiction based on actual African cultures, so they are promoting Europe and white characters as something black people need to "see themselves" in. But they aren't pushing African cultures and stories for black people to see themselves in which is disgusting.
your African history and culture is the basis of promoting African identity, which is the direct opposite of the "woke hollywood" agenda.
this is what these white execs are putting out, this woke stuff, lol at Doug's right wing take on wokeness
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Disney, Africa’s Kugali Reveal First Look at Sci-Fi Series ‘Iwaju’
quote: Walt Disney Animation Studios and the pan-African entertainment company Kugali revealed the first images of their hotly anticipated Disney Plus original series “Iwájú” during a presentation Wednesday night at the Annecy Animation Festival.
Set in a futuristic version of Lagos, Nigeria, the series offers what production designer Hamid Ibrahim described as a “Kugali-Disney mash-up.” “This is a true collaboration. It’s not Disney in some ways pushing our vision onto Kugali,” said Walt Disney Animation Studios’ chief creative officer Jennifer Lee. “It is a collaboration in that both companies are getting something out of it and supporting each other.”
Disney Announces Iwájú, Sci-fi Show Set In Wakanda-Like World Disney Animation Studios is teaming up with a pan-African comics publisher to create Iwaju, a long-form animated series set in a Wakanda-like world.
One of the "talking heads" in Netflix Cleopatra is Islam Issa. In 2019 he made his own documentary about Cleopatra, Cleopatra and me: in search of a lost queen.
quote: Was Cleopatra a seductress or a great politician? Shakespeare scholar Dr Islam Issa's exploration of why history and literature have recorded two very different Cleopatras.
The book Alexandria by Islam Issa
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: The Greeks knew about Black Africans and depicted them now and then. But the majority of Greek art do not depict Africans. Go to Greece and visit a couple of museums there, then you can see for yourself (I did).
Here is a video with some thoughts about the idea of Black Greeks
And when it concerns Minoan and Mycenaean art, there were also certain color codes with men mostly depicted darker than women. Cretans and other Greeks can also be rather brown, especially if they are tanned. Just compare the Minoan fisherman from Akrotiri with a Cretan fisherman of today. They are not Black Africans, but still rather brown.
The pictures of Black African Greeks has the hairstyles of the Greeks not of Africans.
What can be said is that the Black Africans were part of Greece back inside Ancient Greeks
you see clearly that the two figures have the same hairstyle that was something noted inside greece.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: One of the "talking heads" in Netflix Cleopatra is Islam Issa. In 2019 he made his own documentary about Cleopatra, Cleopatra and me: in search of a lost queen.
quote: Was Cleopatra a seductress or a great politician? Shakespeare scholar Dr Islam Issa's exploration of why history and literature have recorded two very different Cleopatras.
I see the trailer on the Alleycats film site but did not see the trailer or any clip of it on youtube, strange
Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Ptolemy XIII in Netflix Cleopatra
Ptolemy XIII in HBOs Rome
Which Ptolemy does Tut look the most like, netflix or the other version?
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey:
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Ptolemy XIII in Netflix Cleopatra
Ptolemy XIII in HBOs Rome
Which Ptolemy does Tut look the most like, netflix or the other version?
Since Tut was no Ptolemey the question is not really relevant.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
@Yatunde Lisa Bey what about the above Anthony and Cleopatra productions as a gimmick to make black people appear as part of the colonizer class We had seen that for years on Egyptsearch from another angle, stuff like trying to argue Charles V and various European royals was black or Hebrew Israelites saying King James was black.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote: Posted by KING The pictures of Black African Greeks has the hairstyles of the Greeks not of Africans. What can be said is that the Black Africans were part of Greece back inside Ancient Greeks
Hairstyles are not exclusive to one or another people. There are many peoples who had braids and locks and similar. It is nothing exclusive for Africa. Greeks knew about Africans but if you actually go to Greek museums (or museums in America or other European countries with ancient Greek art) most statues do not look like the ones you posted. Have you been in Greece?
When concerns Minoans and Mycaeneans, genetic studies show that they are related to todays Greeks and other South Europeans and not so much to Africans.
quote: DNA evidence proves that Greeks are indeed descendants of the Mycenaeans, who ruled mainland Greece and the Aegean Sea from 1,600 BC to 1,200 BC.
The evidence comes from a well-publicized 2017 study in which scientists analyzed the genes from the teeth of nineteen people across various archaeological sites within mainland Greece and Crete.
quote: For the first time, scientists have obtained genetic material and analyzed genome sequences from the ancient Minoans and Mycenaeans, who lived three to five thousand years ago.
The new analysis suggests that the Minoans and Mycenaeans share a great deal of their genetic heritage.
quote: Posted by KING The pictures of Black African Greeks has the hairstyles of the Greeks not of Africans. What can be said is that the Black Africans were part of Greece back inside Ancient Greeks
Hairstyles are not exclusive to one or another people. There are many peoples who had braids and locks and similar. It is nothing exclusive for Africa. Greeks knew about Africans but if you actually go to Greek museums (or museums in America or other European countries with ancient Greek art) most statues do not look like the ones you posted. Have you been in Greece?
When concerns Minoans and Mycaeneans, genetic studies show that they are related to todays Greeks and other South Europeans and not so much to Africans.
quote: DNA evidence proves that Greeks are indeed descendants of the Mycenaeans, who ruled mainland Greece and the Aegean Sea from 1,600 BC to 1,200 BC.
The evidence comes from a well-publicized 2017 study in which scientists analyzed the genes from the teeth of nineteen people across various archaeological sites within mainland Greece and Crete.
quote: For the first time, scientists have obtained genetic material and analyzed genome sequences from the ancient Minoans and Mycenaeans, who lived three to five thousand years ago.
The new analysis suggests that the Minoans and Mycenaeans share a great deal of their genetic heritage.
“Saffron Gatherer” from a Minoan fresco in Akrotiri, Santorini
Genetics is a Lie and does not make sense.
tHAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE, nOT ONLY ARE THE HAIRSTYLES GREEK ONE OF THE HEADS IS A MAJOR GREEK CALLED SILENOS
silenos looks purely Black and African
Heres some more Black Africans that are Greeks this time inside cups and jars
and here is a picture of Sokrates
Sokrates Looks very Black African yet he is a Greek.
and here is another Black African that is Greece
and heres a painting of a frescoe of Greeks holding animals looking decidedly Black looking.
not only is Greek being questioned as white, Cleopatra seems more Black everyday
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Dr Colleen Darnell is one of the "talking heads" in Netflix Cleopatra series. She is known for her YouTube Channel Vintage Egyptologist.
In an interview she claims that she did not know that they had casted a black Cleopatra, until she saw the trailer.
Interviewer: have you talked about the documentary Queen Cleopatra with any of Egyptian people during your staying
Dr Colleen Darnell: well I definitely have and I completely understand the amount of anger and upset and I just want to say yet again that I think it is incredibly important for people who study ancient Egypt to emphasize the fact that the modern Egyptians are the descendants of the ancient Egyptians Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
KING, this thread is about the Netflix documentary and the historical people depicted in the program
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: KING, this thread is about the Netflix documentary and the historical people depicted in the program
Lioness all the pictures of the Greeks is about Cleopatra, It shows that Greece being Black Country made the Ptolemy's Black and therefore this controversy is rather null and void. Dont tell me what to Post just refute or read and view and learn
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING:
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: [qb]
quote: Posted by KING The pictures of Black African Greeks has the hairstyles of the Greeks not of Africans. What can be said is that the Black Africans were part of Greece back inside Ancient Greeks
Hairstyles are not exclusive to one or another people. There are many peoples who had braids and locks and similar. It is nothing exclusive for Africa. Greeks knew about Africans but if you actually go to Greek museums (or museums in America or other European countries with ancient Greek art) most statues do not look like the ones you posted. Have you been in Greece?
When concerns Minoans and Mycaeneans, genetic studies show that they are related to todays Greeks and other South Europeans and not so much to Africans.
quote: DNA evidence proves that Greeks are indeed descendants of the Mycenaeans, who ruled mainland Greece and the Aegean Sea from 1,600 BC to 1,200 BC.
The evidence comes from a well-publicized 2017 study in which scientists analyzed the genes from the teeth of nineteen people across various archaeological sites within mainland Greece and Crete.
quote: For the first time, scientists have obtained genetic material and analyzed genome sequences from the ancient Minoans and Mycenaeans, who lived three to five thousand years ago.
The new analysis suggests that the Minoans and Mycenaeans share a great deal of their genetic heritage.
“Saffron Gatherer” from a Minoan fresco in Akrotiri, Santorini
Genetics is a Lie and does not make sense.
tHAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE, nOT ONLY ARE THE HAIRSTYLES GREEK ONE OF THE HEADS IS A MAJOR GREEK CALLED SILENOS
silenos looks purely Black and African
Heres some more Black Africans that are Greeks this time inside cups and jars
and here is a picture of Sokrates
Sokrates Looks very Black African yet he is a Greek.
and here is another Black African that is Greece
One can always cherry pick some ancient art and claim it looks like Black Africans. But again curly hair is not exclusive to Africans.
Most statues in Greek museums do not look like Black Africans. We have statues and paintings even here in Sweden from the 18th and 19th century depicting Black Africans, that does not mean that there were especially many Black Africans here in Sweden (from about 1750 to 1900 they were maybe around 100 people who can be traced in archives.
So a few Africans did not make the majority of Greeks Black African. There were Minoan visitors in Egypt too, still no one claim that all Egyptians in the Bronze age were Minoans or other Greeks.
I asked if you have been in Greece and visited any museums there? Then you will get a more fair picture of the proportions of art depicting Africans in ancient Greece, in relation to the art which depict ordinary Greeks. It is easy to get biased on internet.
When I was there the overwhelming amount of art I saw in the museums did not depict Black Africans.
Here is a person on Quora who can explain better than I why the ancient Greeks were not black Africans. Among other things he discusses the genetics of the Greeks
And to dismiss genetics as a lie shows a lack of knowledge about the subject.
And once again: have you been to Greece and looked at the actual art there, not only some cherry picked examples from Internet?
Maybe soon you will claim that the Vikings were black Africans too?
Here is a Swedish depiction of a so called "Morian" (Black African) from 1845. One can not take such statues as some kind of proof that most Swedes were Black Africans at that time. Same with a few Greek statues of Africans, they are no proof that most Greeks were black Africans.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
If you are seriously interested in Greek art, I can recommend this book. It is a good introcuction to ancient Greek art, used in university courses.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Dr Colleen Darnell is one of the "talking heads" in Netflix Cleopatra series. She is known for her YouTube Channel Vintage Egyptologist.
In an interview she claims that she did not know that they had casted a black Cleopatra, until she saw the trailer.
Interviewer: have you talked about the documentary Queen Cleopatra with any of Egyptian people during your staying
Dr Colleen Darnell: well I definitely have and I completely understand the amount of anger and upset and I just want to say yet again that I think it is incredibly important for people who study ancient Egypt to emphasize the fact that the modern Egyptians are the descendants of the ancient Egyptians
Interesting that the producers of Netflix Cleopatra did not tell Colleen Darnell that they cast a black actor in the role of Cleopatra, and overall they seem not to have told her so many details about the TV-series, more than it was about Cleopatras life.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by KING: [qb]
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: [qb] [QUOTE] Posted by KING [/URL]
Genetics is a Lie and does not make sense.
tHAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE, nOT ONLY ARE THE HAIRSTYLES GREEK ONE OF THE HEADS IS A MAJOR GREEK CALLED SILENOS
silenos looks purely Black and African
Heres some more Black Africans that are Greeks this time inside cups and jars
and here is a picture of Sokrates
Sokrates Looks very Black African yet he is a Greek.
and here is another Black African that is Greece
One can always cherry pick some ancient art and claim it looks like Black Africans. But again curly hair is not exclusive to Africans.
Most statues in Greek museums do not look like Black Africans. We have statues and paintings even here in Sweden from the 18th and 19th century depicting Black Africans, that does not mean that there were especially many Black Africans here in Sweden (from about 1750 to 1900 they were maybe around 100 people who can be traced in archives.
So a few Africans did not make the majority of Greeks Black African. There were Minoan visitors in Egypt too, still no one claim that all Egyptians in the Bronze age were Minoans or other Greeks.
I asked if you have been in Greece and visited any museums there? Then you will get a more fair picture of the proportions of art depicting Africans in ancient Greece, in relation to the art which depict ordinary Greeks. It is easy to get biased on internet.
When I was there the overwhelming amount of art I saw in the museums did not depict Black Africans.
Here is a person on Quora who can explain better than I why the ancient Greeks were not black Africans. Among other things he discusses the genetics of the Greeks [/URL]
And to dismiss genetics as a lie shows a lack of knowledge about the subject.
And once again: have you been to Greece and looked at the actual art there, not only some cherry picked examples from Internet?
Maybe soon you will claim that the Vikings were black Africans too?
Here is a Swedish depiction of a so called "Morian" (Black African) from 1845. One can not take such statues as some kind of proof that most Swedes were Black Africans at that time. Same with a few Greek statues of Africans, they are no proof that most Greeks were black Africans.
Theres no cherrypicking images if Greeks were white you would of showed them inside pictures of what it Means And I am not talking about Modern greece we see the scholars of Greece silenos and sokrates being Black.
the scholar silenos looks African and Black
and so does sokrates look African and Black.
this Greek picture shows why they would try and disfigure the statue.
The Athena Statue shows a Black person
This picture of crete shows an Broad nosed Black Man
Archeopteryx show me ancient pictures of Greeks before the coming of the modern era albinos that Prove that Greece was white. Not only did you say that Greece knew Africans it seemed that the scholars and the people were Black African looking and lived inside Greece.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Earlier in this thread Mightywolf posted a couple of examples of ancient Macedonian art, the people that Cleopatra descended from.
They ought to have some relevance concerning Cleopatra
quote:Originally posted by mightywolf: I'm aware of the debate surrounding Cleo's heritage and how she may or may not have looked.
Nonetheless, I'd like to show a contemporary Roman painting of Cleopatra dressed in Greco-Roman garb rather than white and Egyptian attire.
Besides, Macedonian Greeks appear to be less "Mediterranean" in appearance than Athenians, for example. They seem to be on the fairer side in their own ancient artworks.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Examples of Mycenean art
Warrior vase 12 th century BC
Mask in gold from Mycenae, 16th century BC, National Archaeological Museum of Athens
An example of Minoan art from Crete
"The Dancing Lady" A fragment of a Minoan frescoe of a female dancer or Goddess in an Epiphany scene, Knossos, Crete. 1400-1350 BC
An example from Archaic time in Greece
The Kroisos Kouros, in Parian marble, found in Anavyssos (Greece), dating from circa 530 BC, National Museum in Athens
Boeotian plank-shaped clay figurine. From Tanagra. 575-550 B.C, National Museum in Athens
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Portrait of Cleopatra VII; Marble; 30-40 BCE Altes Museum
This bronze coin, one of the best surviving examples of the rare portraits of Cleopatra.
_______________________________________
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Bas relief fragment portraying Cleopatra VII CIRCA 1997: Egyptian civilization - Ptolemaic period - Bas relief fragment portraying Cleopatra (3rd-1st century b.C.). (Photo By DEA PICTURE LIBRARY/De Agostini via Getty Images)
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Picture of a Black european Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Seems the news of Netflix Cleopatra goes around the world. Here is a video in Japanese about the TV-series
quote: This video is an overview of "African Queens: Cleopatra" distributed on Netflix from May 10th and a consideration of the uproar. Since the trailer was released in April, it has become a hot topic on the Internet.
By the way the african queen series is a Docudrama,not a documentary.Folks need to read more carefully on what it is.
Documentary vs Docudrama While documentaries primarily involve the formation of perceptual beliefs, docudramas invite us to form nonperceptual beliefs by primarily involving the formation of perceptual imaginings. That is why docudramas are not documentaries.
African Queens Expert interviews and other documentary content with premium scripted docudrama about different queens. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15305648/
African Queens is a 2023 docudrama focusing on female monarchs, airing on the streaming service Netflix. The series is produced and narrated by Jada Pinkett Smith and features dramatized fictional re-enactments as well as interviews with experts. The first season covers Njinga, Queen of Ndongo and Matamba, and is directed by Ethosheia Hylton. The second season focuses on Queen of the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt, Pharaoh Cleopatra VII Philopator, and is directed by Tina Gharavi. Wikipedia
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
One of the experts in the Netflix Cleopatra series was Colleen Darnell. Now she says that she did not know that they were to cast a black actress as Cleopatra. Also other aspects of the TV series she was not aware of until she saw the trailer.
One can wonder if any of the other experts also will take a step back now when the series have been so scolded and had very bad ratings.
For example Shelley Haley, who has become famous for telling the world that her grandmother considered Cleopatra as black. What has that done to her academic reputation?
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Coleen Darnell has earlier also felt criticism, because she and her husband like to dress up in 1920s clothing, which many see as a sort of homage to colonialism
quote: But the Darnells’ flamboyant style has rubbed some archeologists and historians the wrong way. One article penned by three academics for the website Hyperallergic described their Instagram as “narcissistic and ridiculously colonial” and accused the Darnells of peddling a “white-supremacist type of vintage Egyptology.”
“It’s very problematic,” said Monica Hanna, an Egyptian Egyptologist who teaches in the country. She finds the Darnells’ practice of cavorting through ancient temples in clothes from an era when Egypt was struggling to extricate itself from the violence of British colonial rule — and when Western nations scrambled to extricate as much of Egypt’s treasures and riches as possible — particularly disrespectful.
The Darnell’s defend their vintage clothes and say they’re practical for digging around in the desert. “It’s not only trying to reenact a historic period, it’s also [saying] that such colonialist times can come back and can be re-lived,” Hanna said. “It is a cheap photo opp that also has ethical implications. I think no one can pretend that it’s not. They should not be allowed in that space.”
“I think if you’re going to practice Egyptology in the year of our Lord 2022, you can’t pretend that it’s 1922,” said archeologist Sarah Parcak. “It’s harmful to our Egyptian colleagues. It’s harmful to the public. And also, we’ve moved on — 1922 was 100 years ago! Science and archaeology is about looking forward while you’re looking backwards. We’re using lasers and X-rays and cutting-edge technologies; I’m using satellite imagery. Why are we looking backwards as to the way the field was 100 years ago?”
The Darnells' Instagram account has more than 227, 000 followers.
The Darnells have defended their vintage garb; after all, pith helmets, spats and khakis are practical for digging around in the desert and avoiding creepy-crawlies. They said they collaborate closely with Egyptian colleagues and took care to highlight them in the epilogue for their new book. They applaud recent efforts to acknowledge the long-ignored Egyptians who have contributed — and still contribute — so much to the field of Egyptology.
As for their glamorous photo ops both among ruins and in the city of Cairo, the couple said that they collaborate with Egyptians photographers, videographers and artists on those, too.
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: By the way the african queen series is a Docudrama,not a documentary.Folks need to read more carefully on what it is.
Documentary vs Docudrama While documentaries primarily involve the formation of perceptual beliefs, docudramas invite us to form nonperceptual beliefs by primarily involving the formation of perceptual imaginings. That is why docudramas are not documentaries.
African Queens Expert interviews and other documentary content with premium scripted docudrama about different queens. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15305648/
African Queens is a 2023 docudrama focusing on female monarchs, airing on the streaming service Netflix. The series is produced and narrated by Jada Pinkett Smith and features dramatized fictional re-enactments as well as interviews with experts. The first season covers Njinga, Queen of Ndongo and Matamba, and is directed by Ethosheia Hylton. The second season focuses on Queen of the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt, Pharaoh Cleopatra VII Philopator, and is directed by Tina Gharavi. Wikipedia
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: By the way the african queen series is a Docudrama,not a documentary.Folks need to read more carefully on what it is.
Documentary vs Docudrama While documentaries primarily involve the formation of perceptual beliefs, docudramas invite us to form nonperceptual beliefs by primarily involving the formation of perceptual imaginings. That is why docudramas are not documentaries.
African Queens Expert interviews and other documentary content with premium scripted docudrama about different queens. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15305648/
African Queens (TV series) African Queens is a 2023 docudrama focusing on female monarchs, airing on the streaming service Netflix. The series is produced and narrated by Jada Pinkett Smith and features dramatized fictional re-enactments as well as interviews with experts. The first season covers Njinga, Queen of Ndongo and Matamba, and is directed by Ethosheia Hylton. The second season focuses on Queen of the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt, Pharaoh Cleopatra VII Philopator, and is directed by Tina Gharavi. Wikipedia
But the situation with IMDb and Netflix is the same They both classify and list Cleopatra and Njinga as documentaries that also have docudrama content
All the Netflix Cleopatra posters, say on them
"A NETFLIX DOCUMENTARY"
not even mentioning "docudrama"
in the video trailer, 15 seconds in, for Queen Njinga it says
"A NETFLIX DOCUMENTARY SERIES"
It says the same on the Cleopatra trailer, 6 seconds in
"A NETFLIX DOCUMENTARY SERIES"
________________________________
A documentary film or documentary is a non-fictional motion-picture intended to "document reality, primarily for the purposes of instruction, education or maintaining a historical record"
Docudrama (or documentary drama) is a genre of television and film, which features dramatized re-enactments of actual events.
A docuseries is a documentary in parts
_____________________________
Netflix is presenting and classifying AFRICAN QUEENS as documentary with narration and experts and others commenting in non-dramatized format
and these documentaries (according to them) also include docudrama with actors
Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on :
Lioness why are you no longer a mod
Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: Lioness why are you no longer a mod
I think you should ask the admins (e.g. Punos Rey or Askia the Great).
Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on :
@Brandon
True but they take forever to respond. And I'm sure Lioness knows the reason why, I'm assuming an explanation was given as to why they were stripped of their privileges 😁
Do you know the reason why? 👀
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
The careful answers by Colleen Darnell are not as inflammatory as the video title suggests > "unveils the lies of Netflix " it accusing tone is more on the part of the interviewer
Excerpt from lower VIDEO above
Exclusive Dr Colleen Darnell American Egyptologist unveils the lies of Netflix about Queen Cleopatra
Youm7: so doctor you participated in the documentary Queen Cleopatra the question here did you know that the figure they chose in the casting would be black skin
Colleen Darnell: when I was interviewed for the show it was on with the knowledge that it was going to be about Cleopatra I had no knowledge at any point until the trailer was released how any of the reenactments would be filmed or who would portray the history of figures
Youm7: okay and they didn't even tell you any details about that?
Colleen Darnell: no they did not
Youm7:and how did they contact you they didn't tell you before the movie all these details
Colleen Darnell: the details that I was given during the course of my interview were questions about the life of Cleopatra, when she was born, how she inherited the Kingdom of Egypt from her father Ptolemy the 12th, her participation in the Actium for example this, Marc Anthony, so my interview was related only to the known historical facts of Queen Cleopatra and nothing about the sensationalist portrayal of her family origins which I only learned when I saw the trailer
Youm7:yes exactly when you saw the trailer have you tried to reach them again
Colleen Darnell: I did and unfortunately once my interview is completed there was nothing else that I could do with regards to the show
Youm7: do you agree that this is an attempt to falsify history by the west or what do you think doctor?
Colleen Darnell: I really believe that placing modern racial categories [??..] in the trailer onto the ancient past is not historically accurate and there was speculation in the show and there is speculation among historians that Cleopatra's mother may have been Egyptian and there was an opportunity missed to [??..] Cleopatra well with an Egyptian actress that that was the perfect opportunity to highlight the potential origins of Cleopatra's family if her mother were Egyptian and half her portrayed by an Egyptian actress and I think what's most significant to empathize is that the descendants of the ancient Egyptians are people living in modern Egypt
Youm7: okay Doctor why do you think they insist and still insisting on showing Queen Cleopatra in the form of a black-skinned lady?
________________
Colleen Darnell: I think it is incredibly important for people who study ancient Egypt to emphasize the fact that the modern Egyptians are the descendants of the ancient Egyptians
m018264808888 quote- This is not uncommon. I'm Malian, but my DNA test also indicated a common ancestor with Pharoh Ramses III. From what I've read, many African men share this result.
Sparkles P quote- Oh? So Malians are tied to Egypt?
m018264808888 quote- @Sparkles P - No, not directly. Many men from various African nations share a common male ancestor with Pharoh Ramses III. Mali does have historical ties to Egypt, trade relationships, etc., in ancient times. But, we are not directly related to them.
Darkseid quote- It doesn't mean you are a direct descendant. It just means he was in the macrogroup E-M2 and ALL E-M2 people share a common ancestor from 40Kya. Every single E-M2 person gets the Ramses III thing. It means nothing in terms of direct descent though.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
One of the experts in the Netflix Cleopatra series was Colleen Darnell. Now she says that she did not know that they were to cast a black actress as Cleopatra. Also other aspects of the TV series she was not aware of until she saw the trailer.
One can wonder if any of the other experts also will take a step back now when the series have been so scolded and had very bad ratings.
For example Shelley Haley, who has become famous for telling the world that her grandmother considered Cleopatra as black. What has that done to her academic reputation?
Her grandmother said Cleopatra was black.
The fact that her grandmother said that could be 100% fact. Queen Cleopatra by Netflix is presented as a documentary but unless her grandmother was an historian, this is potentially an irrelevant comment from a non-expert.
This grandmother remark is in the trailer and in the first episode within the first 3 minutes
Assuming the edit was the director's idea this idea is presented early on as if it is an important statement and then they cut to Adele James (and her mother is a "white" European)
They could have used the Shelley Haley clip saying her grandmother said Cleopatra was black and then laid out an argument for it but they didn't It was a race based click bait gimmick. It has turned out to be a big mess
-but an interesting one sociologically because many people have come out of the woodwork showing their 'colors'
quote: Director Tina Gharavi has defended the casting for the docuseries stating "Doing the research, I realized what a political act it would be to see Cleopatra portrayed by a Black actress...
Doing the research, I realized what a political act it would be to see Cleopatra portrayed by a Black actress. For me, the idea that people had gotten it so incredibly wrong before — historically, from Theda Bara to Monica Bellucci, and recently, with Angelina Jolie and Gal Gadot in the running to play her — meant we had to get it even more right. The hunt was on to find the right performer to bring Cleopatra into the 21st century.
Blog: Women in Classics: A Conversation with Shelley Haley: Part II Claire Catenaccio January 13, 2020
CC: But you felt uncomfortable there?
I did. I felt a lot of cognitive dissonance. In a black environment with storied traditions and history, no one pushed against the whiteness of Classics. I was teaching a course of women in the ancient world and I said something about Cleopatra as an African ruler. A couple of days later, Frank Snowden caught me walking down the hall and he said, “Did you say Cleopatra was black?” And I said, “No, I didn’t say that.” Because I didn’t. I didn’t say that. I told him that I said she was an African ruler. He said, “That’s not true.” But I disagreed.
CC: When did you become interested in the issue of race in antiquity?
While I was at Howard. It started with Cleopatra. She haunted me. I had a dream where Cleopatra came to me and said, “Why aren’t you telling my story?” When I woke up, I answered her in my head, “There’s nothing to tell! What is there to say except what’s already been said?”
At Howard I taught a course on women in antiquity. We were talking about Cleopatra, and I explained that she was a Greek ruler by genealogy. I had checked out the Cambridge Ancient History and brought it to class, and I showed my students the genealogy that’s printed in the back of the book. One student, whose name was Roy, pointed to the question mark by Cleopatra’s grandmother in the genealogy. He asked me, “What does this mean?” I said, “That just means they don’t know her name.” But he pointed below the question mark, where they had put in parentheses “Egyptian concubine.” And Roy asked me, “What about that?” Honestly, until that student put his finger there, I had never seen it. That just goes to show how manipulative a master narrative can be. I never saw until that moment that even the Cambridge Ancient History can leave room for interpretation, can leave open a space for you to imagine the life of that Egyptian concubine who became the grandmother of Cleopatra.
In the early 1990’s, I had a serious midlife crisis. I think it was brought on by feeling rejected by my black students at Hamilton. I was not invited to celebrations. I was not asked to sit on panels about what it was like to be a black professor. I was not asked to teach in the summer bridge program for incoming students of color. All of these slights made me question myself. I thought, “Maybe I’m really not helping students of color. Maybe I’m not being an asset to them. Maybe I need to get out of this.” I tried other things. I taught Women’s Studies, I taught Africana Studies. But there was still something missing. I had a lot of long conversations about it with my husband, and I just knew that I couldn’t be the first person of African descent to have these doubts about the field. I started researching African American men who had studied Classics. The 19th century is full of them. I got very excited. I went around the country, lecturing about this one and that one. And then I had a further revelation and started doing research on women of African descent who had studied Classics. I learned about Fanny Jackson Coppin, Anna Julia Cooper, and Mary Terrell. These women went through the same thing I did. They had white men telling them they couldn’t do this, and white women telling them they couldn’t do this, and then they themselves questioned whether they could do it. But they kept going, and they did great things.
CC: How do you think the field is changing, both for people of color and for women?
I’m worried about it. In my experience, we’ve taken the old-boy network and replaced it with the old-girl network, where all the girls are white. These women do not understand intersectionality. When they think they understand it, they distort the concept so that race is always excluded. I’ve been angered by white women in Classics who co-opt progressive movements for their own benefit. I do not dismiss the pain or the injustice of what has happened to my white female colleagues, but there’s too much hypocrisy. But your question was about change, and some things have changed. I would say there’s more visibility for white women in Classics than there used to be. But more change is coming. How should I put it? Practicing Classicists of color are now reaching a critical mass, particularly in the SCS. Now you’re starting to see the pushback.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
A short animation where they blow life into an ancient bust of Cleopatra
Soon they can make fully computer animated films with the characters directly copied from ancient art, or from facial reconstructions.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
In an essay Shelley Haley tells about her grandmother:
quote: Questions of gender and sexism had never been an issue for me, even within my family. My family has followed our Iroquois and West African heritage: the woman sets policy and shares in decisions. My father, Charles (“”Pete””) Tracy Haley, turned his pay over to my mother, and after she died, to his mother. This isn’t to say my father didn’t assimilate certain patriarchal values. He was the first in his family to attend college; he did so during the depression, and racism drove him to alcoholism. He graduated from Syracuse University in 1937, “”thank the laudy,”” as he used to say. He wanted one of his sons to follow him to Syracuse. When I was admitted (neither of my brothers applied), he was proud but refused to pay my expenses. “”Women don’ t need a college education,”” he said. My reaction was “” I’ll show him,”” and I proceeded to get a Ph.D. in classics. I never did disabuse him of the notion that I didn’t need the education. In many ways, my father’s standpoint was framed by what he had experienced. The women in our family had always had jobs: my grandmother was a cook , my mother was a secretary. My aunts (my father’s sisters) had office and sales positions. None of these women had had a college education. So, to my father’s way of thinking, they didn’t need one. However, it was my grandmother who encouraged me to go as far as I could in education . She had always wanted to be a teacher, but had to leave school at the age of twelve to support her family. I don’t think my father ever knew how deeply my grandmother had wanted to go to a teacher’s training college.
Cleopatra: A Sourcebook (Volume 31) (Oklahoma Series in Classical Culture) Paperback – Illustrated, April 10, 2006 by Prudence J. Jones (Author) University of Oklahoma Press; Illustrated edition (April 10, 2006) 304 pages
Chapter 14 Afrocentric Cleopatra p 279 - 286
p 282-3 In an autobiographical response to the question of Cleopatra's ethnicity, self-identified Black feminist classicist Shelley Haley raises the crucial question, "What do we mean by 'black'?" when speaking of Cleopatra.
... in my second year at Howard, I found myself teaching "Women in the Ancient World." As I look back at the syllabus now, it was not particularly feminist; it was a classics survey, Homer, the tragedians, Livy, Vergil, with a few women thrown in. The feminist literature I assigned was not particularly current or radical. 10 1 didn't relate to it personally but found places for it in my course. The only women in Africa I dealt with were Dido and Cleopatra, but I didn't regard them as Black, or African.
It was Cleopatra who haunted me. In a "Women in the Ancient World" class, we were studying Cleopatra and Octavian's propaganda against her. Ray, a Black male student, asked me to cover again the arguments identifying Cleopatra as a Greek. I sighed and presented all the evidence. I pulled out the Cambridge Ancient History (CAH), and we pored over the genealogy. I brought in the research of my colleague Frank Snowden (1970). We reviewed other secondary sources: Volkmann (1958), Grant (1972, 1982), and Lindsay (1971). Ray, very politely but intently, repeated the question my grand- mother had posed years before: 11 "But Professor Haley, who wrote those books?" I was going through it all again (growing somewhat irate), when I stared at the CAH genealogy and saw — for the first time — question marks where Cleopatra's grandmother should be. As I stared, I heard Ray, again politely, say, "I understand, Professor Haley. You believe what you say is true, but you have bought a lie." The other students in the class were divided; some agreed with Ray, some with me, others were totally indifferent. I was shaken; what did those question marks mean? Why didn't all the students see the evidence as I did? What did they know that I didn't? In buying the lie, had I sold out my race?
At that point, I confronted Cleopatra, and I discovered that my Black students and indeed my grandmother read her on a different level. For them and for me, although I suppressed her, Cleopatra was the lost and found window where we could "claim an identity they taught us to despise" (Cliff 1988: 61). I had disliked discussing Cleopatra; I had been uncomfortable and ill at ease. Why? I began to see and am still arriving at seeing that Cleopatra is the crystallization of the tension between my yearning to fit in among classicists and my identity politics. I clouded this tension by professing that the Ptolemies of the first century B.c.e. were Greco-Egyptian. To me, "Egyptian", "Greco-Egyptian," "Greek," "Roman" had been cultural designations. I refused, rather self-righteously, I admit, to colorize the question as my grandmother had done, along with my students, and, most recently, Newsweek ("Was Cleopatra Black": September 23, 1991). What I resisted was the fact that my culture is colorized: Black literature, Black music, Black art, Black feminism. Gradually, by reading my history and Black feminist thought, I perceived that Cleopatra was a signifier on two levels. 12 She gives voice to our "anxiety about cultural disinheritance" (Sadoff 1990: 205), and she represents the contemporary Black woman's double history of oppression and survival.
In the Black oral tradition, Cleopatra becomes a symbolic construction voicing our Black African heritage so long suppressed by racism and the ideology of miscegenation. When we say, in general, that the ancient Egyptians were Black and, more specifically, that Cleopatra was Black, we claim them as part of a culture and history that has known oppression and triumph, exploitation and survival. Cleopatra reacted to the phenomenon of oppression and exploitation as a Black woman would. Hence we embrace her as sister; she is Black. Alice Walker (1989: 267) employs a similar symbolic construction with Medusa. Here, Medusa's decapitation by Perseus represents the rape and cultural suppression of Africa by Europeans.
My grandmother and students were also reading Cleopatra on the level of their experience with miscegenation and the law of miscegenation (Saks 1988). We had been told that if we have one Black ancestor, then we are Black. Films and plays have reinforced this idea. Our family histories and photographs proved this to us. My grandmother was white, had straight black hair, and the nose of her Onondagan grandmother, but she was "colored." Even as a "Greco-Egyptian," Cleopatra was a product of miscegenation. 13 How is she not Black? My grandmother and students were being logical; they were applying to Cleopatra the social decoding typically applied to them. It seemed to me that the Cleopatra I studied as the "true Cleopatra" was a construction of classical scholars and the Greek and Roman authors they consulted. 14 In this particular case, they were willing — eager — to erase the Black ancestor and claim the beautiful Cleopatra for Europe. Like the biracial family cited earlier, 15 classics has kept Cleopatra's Africanity and Blackness a secret and questionable. Many African-Americans did the same for themselves. My family claimed the West Indies as our point of origin. Shame arising from internalized racism never let us go further back until the rise of the Black pride movement. Sadoff's (1990) analysis and critique of misreading led me to apply this theory to classics and Cleopatra. 16 Classicists and historians have misread Cleopatra as a way of furthering ideas of racial purity and hegemony. Martin Bernal's work (1987) on the demise of ancient Egypt in classical scholarship brought him to the conclusion that we classicists still work within racist paradigms. 17
I applied the same critique to the ancient evidence; I began to wonder how the Romans and the Greeks misread Cleopatra. I did research on foreign women and their image in Roman history and literature. Here Cleopatra was the archetype of the temptress and she was transformed into other characters: Dido in poetry and Sophoniba in historiography 18 The Romans misread these women as exempla of the temptress who distracted men from their "manliness," virtus. As strong queens of African kingdoms, they also constituted a grave threat to the Roman concept of empire. Black feminists, especially King (1988) and Collins (1990), discuss in their work the controlling image of the jezebel/seductress and its impact on the perception and treatment of Black women. Palmer (1983) analyzes the symbolism of Black women in America as sexual enticers who could overthrow reason and social order. She relates this to the virgin/whore dualism in cultural imagery for White women, in existence at least since classical Greece (Palmer 1983: 157).
Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on :
Lioness I need to talk to u
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
It is an interesting phenomena that so many young Egyptian women online have protested against Netflix Cleopatra, and against Afrocentric claims of her, and of ancient Egypt. Seems a young generation Egyptians who strongly identifies with ancient Egypt.
Interesting that one of them claims that Nubians are not black Africans since their features are so different. According to her both Egyptians and Nubians are of the Egyptian race. Reminds me of also Zahi Hawass claiming that Egyptians are racially unique
Here is a Youtuber who thinks that people of West African descent should distance themselves from North Africans and Horners, since they are not welcome among them. Here he exemplifies with a Somali man who criticizes African Americans
What a dumb question. Not saying AA's have anything to do with Egypt. But that question proves nothing. She's just a hater who more than likely understands that she descends from colonizer populations who were not the same people as the ancient Egyptians of antiquity.
A lot of her own people even admit that. Plenty of those kind of videos all over the web
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Clearly when racist mean nubians they are not talking about these type of nubians and these types get ignored,more so in sudan,darfur,hill nubians.
Midobi, Tid-n-Aal in Sudan people group profile | Joshua Project
NUBIA Project المشروع النوبى - DO YOU KNOW????? The Nubian tribes in Darfur and Kurdofan: Midob tribe in northern Darfur is one of the Nubian tribes of Darfur The Midob language is
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
The racist who are egyptian and non egyptian like to cherry pick and talk about these types of nubians below.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
All those nubian pictures i posted above are black nubians,so Zahi Hawass or any other egyptian that say otherwise clearly don't know they talking about and are incorrect and racist. Now there are some nubians that look brown and some that look white but that's a minority with in the nubian ethnic group.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Seems like this young woman thinks that black Africans and African Americans want to steal Egypt itself, and she compares with the formation of the state of Israel.
quote: When me and my friends sat and talked about the situation in Palestine, there was always something I couldn´t understand, how were ppl just sitting in their country came foreigners and said: no this is our land and our country and the skeleton of idk who is under the ....... and they invaded it with force before the eyes of the whole world and ppl are silent, and there are people who helped them (Israel) I could understand how, but ...Allah it is happening again now Africans (Afrocentrics) woke up and decided that the pharaonic civilization is theirs and we (Egyptians) are the ones who stole it and they want it back and of course who would spread this idea and make it in a way so you would sympathise with them and make you think that they are actually right ofcourse it´s Netflix
When it concerns some Somalis recentment of being called Black, it seems not only to be about phenotype, even if they claim to look more "Caucasoid" than West Africans and African Americans. It seems when it comes to African Americans they just dislike the American culture and life style and they do not want to associate with that.
I can image that some of the Egyptians who scold Netflix Cleopatra see it as an attack from a society that they do not like. They see it as a form of cultural imperialism.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Edited above. Racist egyptians when they bring up nubians it's always egypt and certain types in egypt by the way and they normally don't show pictures of nile valley sudanese nubians,and clearly they don't bring up the ones in darfur and the ones in the nuba hills called hill nubians.
I guess to them those are were other africans who became nubianzed, so to them they are fake nubians.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Video with a Somali Imam talking about African Americans
In this case it is rather the perceived life style than the phenotype that the Imam dislikes
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Edited above/added info etc..
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote: Posted by KING The pictures of Black African Greeks has the hairstyles of the Greeks not of Africans. What can be said is that the Black Africans were part of Greece back inside Ancient Greeks
Hairstyles are not exclusive to one or another people. There are many peoples who had braids and locks and similar. It is nothing exclusive for Africa. Greeks knew about Africans but if you actually go to Greek museums (or museums in America or other European countries with ancient Greek art) most statues do not look like the ones you posted. Have you been in Greece?
When concerns Minoans and Mycaeneans, genetic studies show that they are related to todays Greeks and other South Europeans and not so much to Africans.
quote: DNA evidence proves that Greeks are indeed descendants of the Mycenaeans, who ruled mainland Greece and the Aegean Sea from 1,600 BC to 1,200 BC.
The evidence comes from a well-publicized 2017 study in which scientists analyzed the genes from the teeth of nineteen people across various archaeological sites within mainland Greece and Crete.
quote: For the first time, scientists have obtained genetic material and analyzed genome sequences from the ancient Minoans and Mycenaeans, who lived three to five thousand years ago.
The new analysis suggests that the Minoans and Mycenaeans share a great deal of their genetic heritage.
“Saffron Gatherer” from a Minoan fresco in Akrotiri, Santorini
Yes, the line of Alexander and his generals was white European and there is no doubt about that, however, the key here is that historically the Greek islands have had influence from Africa and the East. This is documented history. Note that the mythic tales of Homer include Africans in them as a testament to that influence. Not to mention that the early art of Greece shows direct influence from the Nile Valley. Not to mention the art from early Crete and the Minoans clearly shows Africans. This is also seen in the fact that they preserved and honored the monuments and culture of the Nile Valley after they conquered it. That itself is acknowledgement of the reverence of the history of the Nile as a precursor to that of Greece.....
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: It is an interesting phenomena that so many young Egyptian women online have protested against Netflix Cleopatra, and against Afrocentric claims of her, and of ancient Egypt. Seems a young generation Egyptians who strongly identifies with ancient Egypt.
Interesting that one of them claims that Nubians are not black Africans since their features are so different. According to her both Egyptians and Nubians are of the Egyptian race. Reminds me of also Zahi Hawass claiming that Egyptians are racially unique
Netflix is not Afrocentric and nobody involved in the production is either. African scholars study all aspects of African history going back hundreds of thousands of years and Cleopatra is not relevant to most of that history. This focus on Cleopatra has nothing to do with the actual history of the Nile Valley and the history of Africa overall.
Also, Cleopatra was Greek. So their argument that Cleopatra is "their" history misses the point that she was Greek and the Ptolemies were Greek and represented Greek Culture.
But at the root of this is the fact that these people in Egypt do not see themselves as Africans and will do everything they can to separate themselves from Africa. This is why they are coming out so hard claiming Cleopatra because she isn't African. And by extension they want the ancient Nile Valley not to be African either. All of which is inspired by Eurocentric scholarship more than anything else over the last 200 years.
quote: A recent Italian article asked, in its title, the (not entirely rhetorical) question, "Egyptian Alexandria - a myth?" 1 Wisely, the writer omitted a main verb. I f is evokes memories of E. M . Forster, Constantine Cavafy, and Lawrence Durrell, was takes us back to the Alexander Romance, to the grandiose dreams and processions of Ptolemy Philadelphos, to Cleopatra's suicide after Actium, to the Arian and Monophysite heresies. 3 Alexandria has always had a mythic quality about it. Cavafy, the poet of homosexual nostalgia ("Days of 1896 . . . " ) , reached back into the city's Hellenistic and Byzantine past for imagery and examples: Sophists and soldiers, political lies, dynastic fantasies, moments of memorable defeat,4 and always, unchanging down the ages, ephemeral yet eternal in their agonizing beauty, the young men for whom his heart and body hungered. Though Alexandria had had a reputation for goodlooking and available boys almost since its foundation Herodas in the early third century B.C. mentions them in the same breath as gaudies, philosophers, and gold it remains true that Cavafy (like Durrell after him, like Andre Gide in Algeria) was in effect shamelessly using another country as a name for his own obsessions. This habit has not been restricted to poets and novelists.
Another factor encouraging mythicization has always been Alexandria's more-than-symbolic separation from Egypt. Both in the Hellenistic and in the Roman periods it was officially known as "Alexandria by Egypt," seldom as "Alexandria in Egypt. This was appropriate in more than one sense. It distinguished the royal foundation of the Graeco-Macedonian ruling elite from the old pharaonic capitals of Memphis. It enshrined the concept of a government that regarded Egypt as alien "spear-won territory," fit for economic exploitation. It rubbed in the fact that no Ptolemy until the last representative of the dynasty, Cleopatra VII, ever bothered to learn Egyptian, preferring to operate through a corps of Greek-speaking Egyptian interpreters. Seers at its foundation had prophesied, accurately, that the city would be a melting pot of all nations, perhaps what Durrell's Nessim meant when he characterized Alexandria as "the great wine-press of love , " and this was to remain true throughout Alexandria's long and colorful history, except that the nations never, in any important sense, included Egypt itself until after the 1956 Suez War. Mohammed Ali was a nineteenth-century Turkish adventurer who operated much in the spirit of the Ptolemies or Alexander's governor, Kleomenes (of whom more later): "He exploited the fellahin by buying grain from them at his own price: the whole of Egypt became his private farm . " Neither Cavafy nor Durrell, we may note, cultivated Egyptian friends or made any serious attempt to integrate Egyptian realities into their Alexandrian myth . In this they were simply adhering to an age-old tradition.
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Edited above. Racist egyptians when they bring up nubians it's always egypt and certain types in egypt by the way and they normally don't show pictures of nile valley sudanese nubians,and clearly they don't bring up the ones in darfur and the ones in the nuba hills called hill nubians.
I guess to them those are were other africans who became nubianzed, so to them they are fake nubians.
Those features in those images are found all over North and North East Africa among black Africans, but Europeans have always called them "caucasoid" features. Therefore trying to separate those populations from Africa, primarily because it shows that the aboriginal Eurasian populations descend from these African types......
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Yes, the line of Alexander and his generals was white European and there is no doubt about that, however, the key here is that historically the Greek islands have had influence from Africa and the East. This is documented history. Note that the mythic tales of Homer include Africans in them as a testament to that influence. Not to mention that the early art of Greece shows direct influence from the Nile Valley. Not to mention the art from early Crete and the Minoans clearly shows Africans. This is also seen in the fact that they preserved and honored the monuments and culture of the Nile Valley after they conquered it. That itself is acknowledgement of the reverence of the history of the Nile as a precursor to that of Greece.....
Still DNA clearly shows that ancient Minoans and Mycenaeans were more related to todays Greeks than to Africans.
Art can be interpreted differently. Men were depicted dark, while women were often depicted very light skinned. Does that mean that men were Africans and women were North Europeans? Of course not. The different colors are just a reflection of symbolic ways to depict men and women. The true skin color may have been somewhere between the two extremes. Do not forget that for example Cretans can be rather dark skinned, especially those who work outdoors (like fishermen).
And curly hair one can still see in Greece, it does not mean African. Have you been to Greece and seen how people look there? It varies, in the south one can see rather dark skinned persons and in the north one can see rather light skinned people, even some with blonde hair (even Homer talks about blonde persons, so blonde hair seems also rather old in parts of Greece, even if one must be careful with Homer who wrote his eposes hundreds of years after the alleged events).
Otherwise there was contact between Minoans /Mycenaeans/ Greeks and Egypt, nobody denies that. But genetically ancient Minoans, Mycenaeans or Greeks were not Africans, there have been more than one genetic study showing that.
It is hard to make statistics over populations in the bronze age, but the amount of Africans living on Crete or at the mainland were hardly especially high. One can also wonder how many Minoans or other Greeks who lived in Egypt at that time.
And influences did not go only from Egypt to Minoans or Mycenaean, the opposite were also the case as in the in Egyptian palaces at Tell el-Dab‘a/‘Ezbet Helmi in the eastern Nile Delta (from 18th Dynasty).
So how would you interpret this scene, two Europeans and one African? Or just symbolic colors?
Or this lady from Minoan time, is she African?
Seems some people want to see Africans in all ancient art. Some even claim to see Africans in ancient Mexican art. But all brown people are not Africans.
Some genetics
quote: Abstract The origins of the Bronze Age Minoan and Mycenaean cultures have puzzled archaeologists for more than a century. We have assembled genome-wide data from 19 ancient individuals, including Minoans from Crete, Mycenaeans from mainland Greece, and their eastern neighbours from southwestern Anatolia. Here we show that Minoans and Mycenaeans were genetically similar, having at least three-quarters of their ancestry from the first Neolithic farmers of western Anatolia and the Aegean1,2, and most of the remainder from ancient populations related to those of the Caucasus3 and Iran4,5. However, the Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry from an ultimate source related to the hunter–gatherers of eastern Europe and Siberia6,7,8, introduced via a proximal source related to the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe1,6,9 or Armenia4,9. Modern Greeks resemble the Mycenaeans, but with some additional dilution of the Early Neolithic ancestry. Our results support the idea of continuity but not isolation in the history of populations of the Aegean, before and after the time of its earliest civilizations.
Lazridis et al, 2017: Genetic origins of the Minoans and Mycenaeans Nature Link to article
Reconstruction of the Griffin Warrior from Pylos. His skin tone is an average of Greek skin tones, with some inspiration from ancient art. He is relatively dark, with curly hair, but still not an African.
Here is a sealstone from his tomb, maybe it depicts himself slaying an enemy
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Yes, the line of Alexander and his generals was white European and there is no doubt about that, however, the key here is that historically the Greek islands have had influence from Africa and the East. This is documented history. Note that the mythic tales of Homer include Africans in them as a testament to that influence. Not to mention that the early art of Greece shows direct influence from the Nile Valley. Not to mention the art from early Crete and the Minoans clearly shows Africans. This is also seen in the fact that they preserved and honored the monuments and culture of the Nile Valley after they conquered it. That itself is acknowledgement of the reverence of the history of the Nile as a precursor to that of Greece.....
Still DNA clearly shows that ancient Minoans and Mycenaeans were more related to todays Greeks than to Africans.
Art can be interpreted differently. Men were depicted dark, while women were often depicted very light skinned. Does that mean that men were Africans and women were North Europeans? Of course not. The different colors are just a reflection of symbolic ways to depict men and women. The true skin color may have been somewhere between the two extremes. Do not forget that for example Cretans can be rather dark skinned, especially those who work outdoors (like fishermen).
And curly hair one can still see in Greece, it does not mean African. Have you been to Greece and seen how people look there? It varies, in the south one can see rather dark skinned persons and in the north one can see rather light skinned people, even some with blonde hair (even Homer talks about blonde persons, so blonde hair seems also rather old in parts of Greece, even if one must be careful with Homer who wrote his eposes hundreds of years after the alleged events).
Otherwise there was contact between Minoans /Mycenaeans/ Greeks and Egypt, nobody denies that. But genetically ancient Minoans, Mycenaeans or Greeks were not Africans, there have been more than one genetic study showing that.
It is hard to make statistics over populations in the bronze age, but the amount of Africans living on Crete or at the mainland were hardly especially high. One can also wonder how many Minoans or other Greeks who lived in Egypt at that time.
And influences did not go only from Egypt to Minoans or Mycenaean, the opposite were also the case as in the in Egyptian palaces at Tell el-Dab‘a/‘Ezbet Helmi in the eastern Nile Delta (from 18th Dynasty).
So how would you interpret this scene, two North Europeans and one African? Or just symbolic colors?
Or this lady from Minoan time, is she African?
Seems some people want to see Africans in all ancient art. Some even claim to see Africans in ancient Mexican art. But all brown people are not Africans.
Some genetics
quote: Abstract The origins of the Bronze Age Minoan and Mycenaean cultures have puzzled archaeologists for more than a century. We have assembled genome-wide data from 19 ancient individuals, including Minoans from Crete, Mycenaeans from mainland Greece, and their eastern neighbours from southwestern Anatolia. Here we show that Minoans and Mycenaeans were genetically similar, having at least three-quarters of their ancestry from the first Neolithic farmers of western Anatolia and the Aegean1,2, and most of the remainder from ancient populations related to those of the Caucasus3 and Iran4,5. However, the Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry from an ultimate source related to the hunter–gatherers of eastern Europe and Siberia6,7,8, introduced via a proximal source related to the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe1,6,9 or Armenia4,9. Modern Greeks resemble the Mycenaeans, but with some additional dilution of the Early Neolithic ancestry. Our results support the idea of continuity but not isolation in the history of populations of the Aegean, before and after the time of its earliest civilizations.
Lazridis et al, 2017: Genetic origins of the Minoans and Mycenaeans Nature Link to article
Reconstruction of the Griffin Warrior from Pylos. His skin tone is an average of Greek skin tones, with some inspiration from ancient art. He is relatively dark, with curly hair, but still not an African.
Here is a sealstone from his tomb, maybe it depicts himself slaying an enemy
You didn't read a word I said because I said the line of Alexander was white European. All that other stuff you mentioned came from King. My point was that Greece had influence from Africa and the art shows a diversity in the population, reflecting a clinal gradient of features. Meaning just like you got dark skinned populations in North and North East Africa with so called "caucasoid" features and straight hair, so too could they have existed in the Mediterranean and Levant. That doesn't mean they were Africans just having similar features to certain Africans. So all of that artwork is not symbolic as even art from the Nile Valley depicts the minoans and cretans the same way.
And all the females aren't depicted as white either in the art of the ancient Greek isles. But that does not mean they were all dark skinned or that they were Africans. Because clearly Africans were well known to the ancient Greeks, as they are also included in their mythology. This is seen in Memnon who is mentioned by Homer and once had his own Epic called Aethiopis.
Bottom line, the point was they respected the Nile for its antiquity when they invaded.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: [You didn't read a word I said because I said the line of Alexander was white European. All that other stuff you mentioned came from King. My point was that Greece had influence from Africa and the art shows a diversity in the population, reflecting a clinal gradient of features. Meaning just like you got dark skinned populations in North and North East Africa with so called "caucasoid" features and straight hair, so too could they have existed in the Mediterranean and Levant. That doesn't mean they were Africans just having similar features to certain Africans. So all of that artwork is not symbolic as even art from the Nile Valley depicts the minoans and cretans the same way.
I read what you wrote and I also agree there were influence. But to interpret Minoan and Mycenaean art as showing African features are a bit far fetched. They used symbolism in their choice of colors.
I am inclined to put more faith in DNA then ancient paintings with all of its symbolism and artistic conventions.
I understand your theory that ancient Greeks was darker than today. But at the same time one must remember that the paintings of ancient Minoans and Mycaeneans do fit in also in todays variation. There are people in Crete that still look like ancient paintings, at least when they are tanned.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
And still, is this women painted painted symbolically or realistically? Were only men painted realistically? Did every dark man have a very light woman? Or is it just a way to symbolically show differences between men and women?
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: [You didn't read a word I said because I said the line of Alexander was white European. All that other stuff you mentioned came from King. My point was that Greece had influence from Africa and the art shows a diversity in the population, reflecting a clinal gradient of features. Meaning just like you got dark skinned populations in North and North East Africa with so called "caucasoid" features and straight hair, so too could they have existed in the Mediterranean and Levant. That doesn't mean they were Africans just having similar features to certain Africans. So all of that artwork is not symbolic as even art from the Nile Valley depicts the minoans and cretans the same way.
I read what you wrote and I also agree there were influence. But to interpret Minoan and Mycenaean art as showing Africans are simply wrong. Most show themselves, but they used symbolism in their choice of colors. Those pictures are not Africans they just show south Europeans, who by the way also can be rather brown.
And my view is supported also by genetics.
Or if you take 100 Minoans, how many of them would have been Africans? Why does Minoan and Myceaenean DNA show much more similarities with todays Greeks than with Africans?
I am inclined to put more faith in DNA then ancient paintings with all of its symbolism and artistic conventions.
There are examples of the ancient art of Greece showing Africans.
However, the majority of the art from ancient Greece shows Greeks. My point was they were diverse. Seems you think that ancient Greece and Europe only had light skinned people. But obviously the art work says otherwise.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: And still, is this women painted painted symbolically or realistically? Were only men painted realistically? Did every dark man have a very light woman? Or is it just a way to symbolically show differences between men and women?
Like I said, the fact that the people of the Nile depicted them with dark skin is evidence that the dark skin wasn't symbolic. Obviously you just don't want to accept that possibility. That isn't my problem. I never said these people were Africans as opposed to them having features similar to some Africans as in dark skin and straight hair. Again, the evidence that Africans were present is shown in the mythology of the trojan war and Memnon. That isn't proof the Minoans were Africans. Totally not what I am saying.
I know that ancient Greeks could vary in skin tone since also todays Greeks can vary. They were hardly much different in those days. Today you can still see Cretans with the same color as in Minoan art.
But I still think the differences between men and women were accentuated. That is something that also later cultures in Greece, and Italy did in some of their art.
Cretan fisherman
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Posted by Doug M
Like I said, the fact that the people of the Nile depicted them with dark skin is evidence that the dark skin wasn't symbolic.
It does not prove so much since the Egyptians also used color symbolism.
But some sun tanned Aegeans could probably be perceived as rather dark, like the fisherman I posted.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Posted by Doug M
Like I said, the fact that the people of the Nile depicted them with dark skin is evidence that the dark skin wasn't symbolic.
It does not prove so much since the Egyptians also used color symbolism.
But some sun tanned Aegeans could probably be perceived as rather dark, like the fisherman I posted.
You keep repeating yourself and just avoiding the obivous that many Minoans and Greeks must have had dark skin no matter if the men were depicted one way and the women another. The facts suggest this and you seem to want to reject the possibility on ideological grounds. That is a you issue. Obviously this goes beyond mere tanning.
And here is one of the many females also depicted in dark skin tones. I guess the question for you is why this is only symbolic, when you have literal black Africans depicted alongside these brown Greeks. So is that also symbolic?
I just find it funny how you promote the idea of diversity in features in ancient North Africa and the Nile Valley but as soon as the idea comes up in Greece, you reject it out of hand, regardless of the evidence. Amazing how hypocritical that appears.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
No it is not mine issue since in their own paintings there are both lighter and darker individuals, just like it is today. Nothing says that they were darker or lighter in those days. I showed you a Cretan of today, he is obviously sun tanned and as dark as many Minoan and also Mycenaean paintings. Nothing in the paintings or their DNA prove that especially Cretans were darker than today.
Todays people are many times inclined to interpret ancient art too literal, as if it was photographic representations.
Have you been to Greece and seen how people there look like, with your own eyes, not only in pictures? There are people who could fit right into the ancient paintings, both the lighter ones and the darker ones.
This skin color you can also see in Greece today
And some Mycaeneans are depicted in lighter tones
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: No it is not mine issue since in their own paintings there are both lighter and darker individuals, just like it is today. Nothing says that they were darker or lighter in those days. I showed you a Cretan of today, he is obviously sun tanned and as dark as many Minoan and also Mycenaean paintings. Nothing in the paintings or their DNA prove that especially Cretans were darker than today.
Todays people are many times inclined to interpret ancient art too literal, as if it was photographic representations.
Have you been to Greece and seen how people there look like, with your own eyes, not only in pictures? There are people who could fit right into the ancient paintings, both the lighter ones and the darker ones.
This skin color you can also see in Greece today
And some Mycaeneans are depicted in lighter tones
Your issue is the very idea that there were darker skinned people present in ancient Greece. The art suggests it and there is no real argument against it other than just trying to ignore it because it disturbs you. That is ideology talking not any sort of objective interpretation of the facts. So of course the only art that matters to you is that which shows light skinned Europeans and that cannot be symbolic.
Again, the evidence is there for anyone to see. Whether you like the possibility it presents darker skinned (not tanned) Greeks doesn't change that.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
The Lyre player from Pylos are mostly interpreted as a man, so in that respekt he could fit into the symbolic way of painting men. Just as the many women´s colors are exaggerated white, his color could be exaggerated in the other way. There is no proof he is an African
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: No it is not mine issue since in their own paintings there are both lighter and darker individuals, just like it is today. Nothing says that they were darker or lighter in those days. I showed you a Cretan of today, he is obviously sun tanned and as dark as many Minoan and also Mycenaean paintings. Nothing in the paintings or their DNA prove that especially Cretans were darker than today.
Todays people are many times inclined to interpret ancient art too literal, as if it was photographic representations.
Have you been to Greece and seen how people there look like, with your own eyes, not only in pictures? There are people who could fit right into the ancient paintings, both the lighter ones and the darker ones.
This skin color you can also see in Greece today
And some Mycaeneans are depicted in lighter tones
Your issue is the very idea that there were darker skinned people present in ancient Greece. The art suggests it and there is no real argument against it other than just trying to ignore it because it disturbs you. That is ideology talking not any sort of objective interpretation of the facts. So of course the only art that matters to you is that which shows light skinned Europeans and that cannot be symbolic.
Again, the evidence is there for anyone to see. Whether you like the possibility it presents darker skinned (not tanned) Greeks doesn't change that.
yes doug M the pictures do not lie, and some of the greeks that look African is Sokrates and Silenos This would be perfect time for people to agree that even the scholars of Greece look Black African
silenos looks purely Black and African
Heres some more Black Africans that are Greeks this time inside cups and jars
and here is a picture of Sokrates
Sokrates Looks very Black African yet he is a Greek.
and here is another Black African that is Greece
and heres a painting of a frescoe of Greeks holding animals looking decidedly Black looking.
not only is Greek being questioned as white, Cleopatra seems more Black everyday
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
@ Doug M
Why should they be dark skinned when people with very similar DNA today is not all dark? You seem to disregard symbolism. If one is literal one must come to the conclusion that women (mostly) where lily white and men very dark. You have no proof at all that ancient Greeks (including Minoans) where darker than today. Their DNA does not prove so, and the color scale on the paintings, you can also today see people with that color.
Have you been to Greece?
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING:
King...have you been to Greece?
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by KING:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: No it is not mine issue since in their own paintings there are both lighter and darker individuals, just like it is today. Nothing says that they were darker or lighter in those days. I showed you a Cretan of today, he is obviously sun tanned and as dark as many Minoan and also Mycenaean paintings. Nothing in the paintings or their DNA prove that especially Cretans were darker than today.
Todays people are many times inclined to interpret ancient art too literal, as if it was photographic representations.
Have you been to Greece and seen how people there look like, with your own eyes, not only in pictures? There are people who could fit right into the ancient paintings, both the lighter ones and the darker ones.
This skin color you can also see in Greece today
And some Mycaeneans are depicted in lighter tones
Your issue is the very idea that there were darker skinned people present in ancient Greece. The art suggests it and there is no real argument against it other than just trying to ignore it because it disturbs you. That is ideology talking not any sort of objective interpretation of the facts. So of course the only art that matters to you is that which shows light skinned Europeans and that cannot be symbolic.
Again, the evidence is there for anyone to see. Whether you like the possibility it presents darker skinned (not tanned) Greeks doesn't change that.
yes doug M the pictures do not lie, and some of the greeks that look African is Sokrates and Silenos This would be perfect time for people to agree that even the scholars of Greece look Black African
silenos looks purely Black and African
Heres some more Black Africans that are Greeks this time inside cups and jars
and here is a picture of Sokrates
Sokrates Looks very Black African yet he is a Greek.
and here is another Black African that is Greece
and heres a painting of a frescoe of Greeks holding animals looking decidedly Black looking.
not only is Greek being questioned as white, Cleopatra seems more Black everyday
King...have you been to Greece?
Have you seen the statues Archeopteryx?? have you seen more then the paintings on the wall, not only have you spoken like somehow they should repaint the wall pictures, because to you they do not match modern people. It shows that Ancient Greece was a more Black place then modern Greece. The statues look Black African and atest to this:
Silenos and Sokrates two scholars of Greece that cant be denied there Black African Heritage, what Archeopteryx do you have to say to this
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
King, you never answered if you been to Greece. I have been there and I have also studied Greek and Roman history and archaeology at the university, and talked with lot of people who research those issues.
Read the DNA studies I posted, there is no prof ancient Greek were African and their art was not always hyper realistic. Those art works are not photos. If one thinks it is photos one must also believe in the lily white women, which would lead to further confusion.
So, have you been to Greece and seen the Greek ancient art and the people of today with your own eyes? Hard to be an expert of Greece if you have not even been there.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: King, you never answered if you been to Greece. I have been there and I have also studied Greek and Roman history and archaeology at the university, and talked to with lot of people who research those issues.
Read the DNA studies I posted, there is no prof ancient Greek were African and their art was not always hyper realistic. Those art works are not photos. If one thinks it is photos one must also believe in the lily white women, which would lead to further confusion.
So, have you been to Greece and seen the Greek ancient art and the people of today with your own eyes? Hard to be an expert on Greece if you have not even been there.
Silenos and Sokrates two scholars of Greece that cant be denied there Black African Heritage, what Archeopteryx do you have to say to this
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
It does not help you showing a couple of statues with racially ambigous faces (at best). As the Socrates statue, I even know Swedes who look like that.
And Silenes were mythological creatures with features that were consciously made broad and fleshy. Maybe they were inspired by someone who seen Africans in real life, who knows? Still no argument that ancient Greeks were Africans.
So once again have you been in Greece?
If you do not answer it is rather pointless to discuss with you.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: It does not help you showing a couple of statues with racially ambigous faces (at best). As the Socrates statue, I even know Swedes who look like that.
And Silenes were mythological creatures with features that were consciously made broad and fleshy. Maybe they were inspired by someone who seen Africans in real life, who knows? Still no argument that ancient Greeks were Africans.
So once again have you been in Greece?
If you do not answer it is rather pointless to discuss with you.
So now you think that the statues are racially ambiguious??? Bahahahahahahahaah.
Show the swedes that look like the sokrates and silenos picture
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
I see no point in discussing ancient Greek art with someone who can not even answer the simple question if you ever been in Greece? Or any other place in Southern Europe.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: I see no point in discussing ancient Greek art with someone who can not even answer the simple question if you ever been in Greece? Or any other place in Southern Europe.
Silenos and Sokrates two scholars of Greece that cant be denied there Black African Heritage, what Archeopteryx do you have to say to this
you not only trashed Silenos you stated that Sokrates was racially ambiguous and you know swedes that look like Sokrates, you have not shown them instead you asked me a personal question.
I ask you show the swedes that Look like Sokrates statue that is not paintings
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Silenos (pl Silenes, since they were more than one in the beginning) was a mythological figure who originally had ears of a horse and sometimes also the tail and legs of a horse. Gradually the perception changed and he came to more look like a human. He is often portraid with fleshy features. He was not a real scholar but a mythological one who was teacher to the wine God.
Yes there are Swedes and other Europeans that look a bit like the Socrates statue. All Swedes do not look alike, some have a bit fleshier features, others have thin features. If you come here you can see for yourself.
So, have you ever visited Greece and seen the artworks there with your own eyes? Is that a difficult question to answer?
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
SEILENOS (Silenus) was the old rustic god of wine-making and drunkenness.
He was the foster-father of the god Dionysos who was entrusted to his care by Hermes after his birth from the thigh of Zeus. The young god was raised by Seilenos and nursed by the Nysiad nymphs in a cave on Mount Nysa. https://www.theoi.com/Georgikos/Seilenos.html
See how I gave proof? That is what your supposed to do. Now talking about swedes that look like sokrates is not really what your supposed to do. You supposed to show pictures of Swedes that Look like Sokrates
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
so the statues of Silenos and Sokrates have not been refuted theres more then one statue and this is a statue of bigio morata that cannot be denied its African features:
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
What did you prove? That he was a mythological figure? I already said that, and that he was connected to Dionysos. That does not mean that he was a real person.
I can also Google
quote: In Greek mythology, Silenus (/saɪˈliːnəs/; Ancient Greek: Σειληνός, romanized: Seilēnós, IPA: [seːlɛːnós]) was a companion and tutor to the wine god Dionysus. He is typically older than the satyrs of the Dionysian retinue (thiasos), and sometimes considerably older, in which case he may be referred to as a Papposilenus.
The plural sileni refers to the mythological figure as a type that is sometimes thought to be differentiated from a satyr by having the attributes of a horse rather than a goat, though usage of the two words is not consistent enough to permit a sharp distinction.
Silenus presides over other daemones and is related to musical creativity, prophetic ecstasy, drunken joy, drunken dances and gestures.
Evolution The original Silenus resembled a folkloric man of the forest, with the ears of a horse and sometimes also the tail and legs of a horse. The later sileni were drunken followers of Dionysus, usually bald and fat with thick lips and squat noses, and having the legs of a human. Later still, the plural "sileni" went out of use and the only references were to one individual named Silenus, the teacher and faithful companion of the wine-god
But, back to the question, have you been in Greece? Or in any countries around the Mediterranean?
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: so the statues of Silenos and Sokrates have not been refuted theres more then one statue and this is a statue of bigio morata that cannot be denied its African features:
I have never denied that the ancient Greeks now and then portraid Africans. That does not mean that Greeks in general were Africans. There are old statues of Africans in Sweden too, that does not mean Swedes were Africans.
Here you can see an example of how they depicted an African in relation to themselves
Cantharos, ca 480-470 BC
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by KING: so the statues of Silenos and Sokrates have not been refuted theres more then one statue and this is a statue of bigio morata that cannot be denied its African features:
I have never denied that the ancient Greeks now and then portraid Africans. That does not mean that Greeks in general were Africans. There are old statues of Africans in Sweden too, that does not mean Swedes were Africans.
Here you can see an example of how they depicted an African in relation to themselves
Cantharos, ca 480-470 BC
You can see that the Greeks posted many pictures of African Greeks and you can see they are Black African Looking
Not only is that picture you show is a cup with both the Black and Bronze being Black is True Its a wonder that this picture is shown as both displays of Black and Black Ancient Greece.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Archeopteryx since you shown a bronze Greece man from the cup, we are not arguing this point.
Thats the type of Ancient Greeks I was talking about.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
I recently looked through a book about ancient Greek statues, vases and statuettes, with about 400 images and of them there were maybe 10 that depicted recognizable Africans.
In the museums in Greece statues or other depictions of Africans were also a very small part. They exist but are not common in comparison with depictions where the people look Greek (European).
The ones you posted are not many and they are also separated in time, one is from c 200 BC, another from c 400 BC, so they are not any high percent of the depictions that exists of people in ancient Greece.
The foreign and unusual have always attracted people, so of course they would have depicted foreigners, like Africans. But just go through any museum collection who has ancient Greek art and you will see that the percentage of art representing Africans are not high.
In another context I was once going through Phoenician scarabs. I looked through about 600 of them, and c 30 depicted recognizable Africans. Maybe 100 or so were in Egyptianizing style but with pictures of people with no clear African features.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: I recently looked through a book about ancient Greek statues, vases and statuettes, with about 400 images and of them there were maybe 10 that depicted recognizable Africans.
In the museums in Greece statues or other depictions of Africans were also a very small part. They exist but are not common in comparison with depictions where the people look Greek (European).
The ones you posted are not many and they are also separated in time, one is from c 200 BC, another from c 400 BC, so they are not any high percent of the depictions that exists of people in ancient Greece.
The foreign and unusual have always attracted people, so of course they would have depicted foreigners, like Africans. But just go through any museum collection who has ancient Greek art and you will see that the percentage of art representing Africans are not high.
In another context I was once going through Phoenician scarabs. I looked through about 600 of them, and c 30 depicted recognizable Africans. Maybe 100 or so were in Egyptianizing style but with pictures of people with no clear African features.
Show proof of these statues(Ancient greece statues), words do not work inside showing your Point of view
Heres another statue:
This statue may not be about Greece but is part of the Black African statues of Europe
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
I recommend you to open an introductory book about Greek art (as the one I already posted). I will not sit here and scan 400+ pictures to satisfy you. You can also look through Greek art in the collections of Museums, like these ones:
These are quite basic sites, so if you take some time there is a lot of material out there. Today you can find a lot of resources online, even if it is of course even better to travel to Greece, or at least visit museums with Greek art in your own country.
Remember if you will study a subject in deep, it will take some time and effort. Do not trust sites like "Real History" and similar.
If you are specially interested in depictions of Africans in Western art there are some books
One of the most well known is this one. The first book is about antiquity. But remember pictures of Africans are still a minority in Greek and Roman art.
Btw, you never answered the question if you been to Greece, but I suppose you have not been there, if you had you would not have to ask me for proof of how Greek art can look.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
You can see that the pictures show Black People and they are inside the majority, When they show pale skined people its shown.
now this is a Pale skinned image of Greeks:
You can see the colors of the two images show Black inside one and the other is shown as pale. It seems the pictures painted inside Black are numerous for certain time period then the ones painted inside pale
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Sigh...
Those are not black and pale people, those are two different art styles in ancient Greek pottery, called Black figure and Red figure. The depictions are not to be taken literally.
it is not that there is two styles, its that the style is shown as Black is reinforced as shown the pictures as Black and what modern people think is not to be pushed on the Ancients who shown cups with bronze and Black Greeks.
Shows the color of Greeks was not off from the Black figure vessels.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: it is not that there is two styles, its that the style is shown as Black is reinforced as shown the pictures as Black and what modern people think is not to be pushed on the Ancients who shown cups with bronze and Black Greeks.
Black figured pottery was made with black figures on lighter bottom, and red figured with reddish figures on black bottom. Just like in todays world art styles and techniques changed over time, it applied to pottery, sculpture, architecture and similar.
The reason was not that the people changed color but that the technique in making the pottery and thereby the style of the pottery changed.
Metropolitan have some words about the change
quote: The red-figure technique was invented around 530 B.C., quite possibly by the potter Andokides and his workshop. It gradually replaced the black-figure technique as innovators recognized the possibilities that came with drawing forms, rather than laboriously delineating them with incisions.
Take more time to read about ancient Greek art, I do not get paid for teaching you this stuff. I better get my pay check from the university teaching freshmen instead.
And if you can not go to Greece, so visit some good museums with Greek art. Or even ask the people there what the art depicts and the meaning of it.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
I believe that they were shown color of the Greeks and at that time there was more Black greeks and they shown them with the sculptors and paintings.
Edit: You have not shown white people that look like sokrates
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
OK, believe what you want. I will not stop you.
Someone who wants to discuss Netflix Cleopatra?
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: OK, believe what you want. I will not stop you.
Someone who wants to discuss Netflix Cleopatra?
Sokrates statue, you said theres swedes that look like him, can you please show them
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Back to the original subject
On a not so serious note
quote: Twitter responds to black actors playing historically white characters
Seems that there is no arguing that the paintings of the Greece pictures show Black figures so here is a statue that Shows these Black Greeks:
Shows that these Black greeks existed and the pottery was trying to show them.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: @ Doug M
Why should they be dark skinned when people with very similar DNA today is not all dark? You seem to disregard symbolism. If one is literal one must come to the conclusion that women (mostly) where lily white and men very dark. You have no proof at all that ancient Greeks (including Minoans) where darker than today. Their DNA does not prove so, and the color scale on the paintings, you can also today see people with that color.
Have you been to Greece?
You keep repeating yourself. I heard you the first time. Like I said before, you are rejecting the possibility that some ancient Greeks had dark skin (not tans). I never said that the art wasn't symbolic but that does not rule out the very real possibility of some elements of the population having dark skin. You don't agree. That is obvious. But that isn't changing my position that dark skin was a very real possibility in some elements of the population. Again, you just are against that possibility which just shows how you are against diversity when it comes to Europe and only believe in "purity" of Europeans, but everybody else can be diverse. I just find that stance to be highly hypocritical. DNA isn't the issue here, because like I said these people were Greeks. You just cannot believe that at one time any of these populations could have been diverse even while being still European.... Odd.
Again, I am not King. Nowhere did I say ancient Greeks were Africans, these images I am posting do not necessarily prove that.
However, that does not mean that Africans were not present which I already have shown clearly that they were.
Not to mention the island of Crete is not that far from Africa.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
and to show that Alexander the Great might be Black also is a coin from his time period
The coin is the only image of Alexander from his Lifetime. The rest of alexander statues is Fake and false
You can see the broad nose and thick lips of Alexander the Great on the coin.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Why should he be Black? Where did you read that?
He is a charioteer from Delphi, 5th century BC. I have heard no experts claim that he is black.
quote:Originally posted by KING: and to show that Alexander the Great might be Black also is a coin from his time period
The coin is the only image of Alexander from his Lifetime. The rest of alexander statues is Fake and false
You can see the broad nose and thick lips of Alexander the Great on the coin.
Come on man this is nonsense.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Bas relief fragment portraying Cleopatra VII CIRCA 1997: Egyptian civilization - Ptolemaic period - Bas relief fragment portraying Cleopatra (3rd-1st century b.C.). (Photo By DEA PICTURE LIBRARY/De Agostini via Getty Images)
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
heres another Coin from Greece that shows Black People:
Shows that Black people were part of the currency of Greece and they Were also part of Greece
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by KING: and to show that Alexander the Great might be Black also is a coin from his time period
The coin is the only image of Alexander from his Lifetime. The rest of alexander statues is Fake and false
You can see the broad nose and thick lips of Alexander the Great on the coin.
Come on man this is nonsense.
Hi DougM, Hope all is well with you.
Regarding the coin the coin proves that Alexander the Great had a Broad Nose and Thick Lips.
just like the coin of an African on greece coin:
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: @ Doug M
Why should they be dark skinned when people with very similar DNA today is not all dark? You seem to disregard symbolism. If one is literal one must come to the conclusion that women (mostly) where lily white and men very dark. You have no proof at all that ancient Greeks (including Minoans) where darker than today. Their DNA does not prove so, and the color scale on the paintings, you can also today see people with that color.
Have you been to Greece?
You keep repeating yourself. I heard you the first time. Like I said before, you are rejecting the possibility that some ancient Greeks had dark skin (not tans). I never said that the art wasn't symbolic but that does not rule out the very real possibility of some elements of the population having dark skin. You don't agree. That is obvious. But that isn't changing my position that dark skin was a very real possibility in some elements of the population. Again, you just are against that possibility which just shows how you are against diversity when it comes to Europe and only believe in "purity" of Europeans, but everybody else can be diverse. I just find that stance to be highly hypocritical. DNA isn't the issue here, because like I said these people were Greeks. You just cannot believe that at one time any of these populations could have been diverse even while being still European.... Odd.
Again, I am not King. Nowhere did I say ancient Greeks were Africans, these images I am posting do not necessarily prove that.
However, that does not mean that Africans were not present which I already have shown clearly that they were.
Not to mention the island of Crete is not that far from Africa.
I already acknowledged that some ancients were rather dark, just as some people in Crete can be today. The art does not disprove that. Art is no conclusive evidence. Maybe more autosomal DNA tests can bring more clarity.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Why should he be Black? Where did you read that?
He is a charioteer from Delphi, 5th century BC. I have heard no experts claim that he is black.
Its what he is from Ancient Greece a copy of the pictures on the pottery. Not onlyis he Black he is shown with a nose and thick lips that says he is a Black Greek.
Also the coins of Alexander the Great and the Black African on them shows that Greek society was more Black inside Ancient times then modern
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
About Alexander there are several coins from his time and shortly thereafter. He usually is depicted like this
We also have pictures in graves that hinted about how Macedonians during his time looked like
Tomb scene from Pella, 4th century BC
King, do you take most of your pictures from http://realhistoryww.com/? Do you considered it a good, reliable and serious source?
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: About Alexander there are several coins from his time and shortly thereafter. He usually is depicted like this
We also have pictures in graves that hinted about how Macedonians during his time looked like
Tomb scene from Pella, 4th century BC
Not only is that not true about the coins. There is no coins that survive from Alexanders lifetime except for this coin
and the other coin was Black African:
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
the views of Ancient Greece and AlEXANDER THE GREAT FITS INTO WHAT IT MEANS OF CLEOPATRA.
It shows how some people try and uncomplicate the situation and shows the possibility of cleopatra being Black from the coin of Alexander the Great to the Black African Coin:
quote:Not only is that not true about the coins. There is no coins that survive from Alexanders lifetime except for this coin
And what books and experts have you consulted to know that?
Actually there are coins that are dated to Alexanders time, but with some uncertainty. Some coins are debated by the experts,
Regarding the coin you posted it is found in Mesopotamia and probably depicting Alexander.
Even if it is Alexander the figure on the coin does not look African. Or did he change race between that coin and the hundreds of coins that are minted shortly after his time?
British museum do not write that it is the only coin from his time, and they do not at all describe the figure as black. One can not discern any racial traits on it.
Here is another coin, a tetradrachm, according to British Museum probably minted between 325 and 323 BC, ie during Alexanders life time.
So now I also want to go back to Cleopatra. Since you still only cite a pseudo historic site it is not anything more to discuss.
You seem to pluck most of your pics from that site. Try to read some books about ancient Greece by experts instead. Not from a banned member from ES.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
----
Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on :
King Tut's royal golden throne (found in his tomb) depicting him and his wife as black africans.
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Clearly when racist mean nubians they are not talking about these type of nubians and these types get ignored,more so in sudan,darfur,hill nubians.
Midobi, Tid-n-Aal in Sudan people group profile | Joshua Project
NUBIA Project المشروع النوبى - DO YOU KNOW????? The Nubian tribes in Darfur and Kurdofan: Midob tribe in northern Darfur is one of the Nubian tribes of Darfur The Midob language is
quote: Clearly when racist mean nubians they are not talking about these type of nubians and these types get ignored,more so in sudan,darfur,hill nubians.
Note- i should say certain racist when egyptian art shows certain nubians as slaves in egypt,or paying tribute,or when kush was conquered by egypt or to downplay nubian achievements. By way some of these same racist would contradict themselves and say nubians look like that when certain nubians are shown as slaves etc.. but nubians don't look those types of nubians or don't look black if they pointing out achievements or showing certain nubians in modern times.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Netflix's Queen Cleopatra; An Egyptian Contemplates the Controversy The Fat Culture Critic There's been a lot of talk about the casting of Adele James as Cleopatra and not just from the usual antidiversity trolls. Egyptians are unhappy, but I haven't seen a lot of nuanced discussion around why, or why certain people are willing to listen to Egyptians on this Cleopatra and not all the others. I tried to have some of that discussion here, it's a difficult discussion, but I have tried to hopefully contribute something useful. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUixTiaRHf4 Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Ancient Egypt is one of the most fascinating periods in our human history, and it has been studied for thousands of years. Although we have many surviving artefacts from this time period, there is still much speculation about what Ancient Egyptians actually looked like. In Western drama productions Egyptians are often portrayed with white or brown skin. But is this actually accurate? Or were ancient Egyptians black? Let’s look into the history of Ancient Egypt to find out more.
Historical evidence from Egyptian texts, artworks and mummies suggests ancient Egypt was always ethnically diverse, so could not be classed as belonging to any one racial category. But it is worth noting that the skin-colour distinctions we have today didn’t exist in ancient Egypt. Instead, they simply classified themselves by the regions where they lived. Scholarly research suggests there were many different skin colours across Egypt, including what we now call white, brown and black. But this is still a subject of much debate. Many believe skin colours varied between different regions of Egypt, such as Lower Egypt, Upper Egypt and Nubia. Because Ancient Egyptians were around for about 3,000 years, it is also highly likely that changes in ethnicity took place throughout this long timespan.
Some historians, archeologists and writers over the years have argued that ancient Egypt was a predominantly black civilization, populated by Sub-Saharan Africans. Their research shows how ancient Egyptians once called the land of Egypt and the entire African continent Kemet, meaning “land of the black people.” Some scholars even argue that all black people are descended from ancient Egypt – Michael Jackson’s 1991 music video for Remember the Time is one of the most popular and widespread allusions to this interpretation of history.
There is much evidence showing how ancient Egypt was ruled and governed by various prominent black leaders. One is the powerful nobleman Maiherpri, who was alive during the reign of Thutmose IV. After his death he was buried in the Valley of the Kings. We know of his skin colour from his mummy and from illustrated manuscripts, in which he appears darker skinned than the more widely circulated images of Egyptians. It is believed he may be Nubian or of Nubian descent. Queen Ahmose-Nefertari is also often identified as black, and according to contemporary Egyptologist Sigrid Hodel-Hoenes, her skin colour was worshipped because it echoed the “colour of both the fertile earth and the netherworld and death.” It is thought Lady Rai, a lady-in-waiting to Queen Nefertari was also black. Her mummy is in remarkably good condition and reveals her dark skin and braided hair.
In recent times, scientists have made a series of radical breakthroughs about ancient Egyptians by studying the DNA sequences of mummies. Their discoveries suggest many ancient Egyptians were closely related to the people of the Eastern Mediterranean and Near East, a land today covering Jordan, Israel, Turkey, Syria and Lebanon.
Wall paintings from King Tutankhamun’s tomb, showing the umber skin tone of ancient Egyptians, image courtesy of Smithsonian Magazine The suggestion that some Egyptians were of Eastern Mediterranean descent ties in with the brown skin colour in many surviving Egyptian artworks and artefacts. These include the wall paintings from Tutankhamun’s tomb, in which figures have skin with an umber tone, and the Book of the Dead of Hunefer, which features brown-toned skin colours. Of course, these skin colours were also the artistic fashion, and somewhat dictated to by the available pigments to hand.
Queen Nefertiti statue, image courtesy of Art Fix Daily Magazine It was fashionable in Ancient Egypt to paint women with paler skin, indicating how they spent more time indoors, while men were painted in darker colours to show how they were outside doing manual labour. A pair of limestone statues depicting Prince Rahotep and his wife Nofret reveal this marked distinction between the depiction of different skin colours in men and women. Another famous bust of Queen Nefertiti has been the subject of much debate. Many question its authenticity since the Queen’s skin is so pale, making her look like a white Westerner. But if indeed it is authentic, it is likely her pale skin is, in part, a symbolic reference to the lifestyle of this pampered queen, who probably spent much of her time being adored inside. https://www.thecollector.com/were-ancient-egyptians-black/ ____________________________________________ OLD MUMMIES AND DNA
quote: Ancient Egypt always fascinated people. The mystery of the pyramids, their mummies, the tombs and the treasure closed inside is something that everybody knows. Indeed, we can enjoy the view of these treasures in our modern museum or even directly visit them. However, something else is now attracting the attention of researchers: DNA. The DNA of mummies has already been extracted in the past but contamination of modern DNA, and technical limitations made the studies quite difficult and unreliable. Nowadays thanks to the improvement of the techniques of DNA sequencing and developing new statistical tools it is possible to study DNA from old mummies revealing interesting news: ancient Egyptians are much more closely related to ancient Middle Easterner populations than African populations.
In a recent study, a team of German researchers extracted DNA from mummies from the area of Abuser-el Meleq belonging to the pre-Ptolemaic, Ptolemaic and Roman Period. The researchers could obtain DNA from the bones, soft tissue and teeth of more than 90 different mummies. The mummies were preserved in their original mummified state and they are from anthropological collections at the University of Tubingen and from the Felix von Luschan skull collection.
From each mummy the researches either extracted mitochondrial DNA, that is inherited from the mother, or nuclear DNA, that is inherited from both parents. They then compared this DNA with DNA from modern Egyptians and old DNA from other geographical areas.
They discovered that ancient Egyptians are closely related to Neolithic and Bronze age individuals from Levant, as well as to Neolithic Anatolian and European populations. In contrast they share little DNA similarities with modern Egyptians, who instead share DNA similarities with sub-Sahara Africans.
The authors interrogate themselves as to why and how this can be possible. They suggest that the most probable reason is due to the increase of commerce between the Egypt and sub-Saharan region and they also cannot exclude slave trade over the centuries. Either way, for sure around 700 years ago sub-Saharan DNA got into old Egypt. However, the study is based on the mummies from the area of Abuser-el Meleq, and thus it could be not representative of all Egypt but only of a small fraction of the old Egyptians population.
Finally, new advances in DNA sequencing techniques opens new fields of research and it could help to dissect the mystery of ancient Egyptians, and why not also of other mysterious and old populations who still fascinate us.
Indeed, this is a notable example of how advanced technologies match with archaeology and how two different disciplines could work together to answer historical questions.
Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods.
Verena J. Schuenemann, Alexander Peltzer, Beatrix Welte, W. Paul van Pelt, Martyna Molak, Chuan-Chao Wang, Anja Furtwängler, Christian Urban, Ella Reiter, Kay Nieselt, Barbara Teßmann, Michael Francken, Katerina Harvati, Wolfgang Haak, Stephan Schiffels & Johannes Krause Nature Communications 8, Article number: 15694 (2017)
quote: Keita, Gourdine, and Anselin challenged the assertions in the 2017 study. They argue the study is missing 3000 years of Ancient Egypt's history, fails to include indigenous Nile valley Nubians as a comparison group, only includes New Kingdom and Northern Egyptian individuals, and incorrectly classifies "all mitochondrial M1 haplogroups as "Asian" which is problematic." Keita et al. states, "M1 has been postulated to have emerged in Africa; many M1 daughter haplogroups (M1a) are clearly African in origin and history." In conclusion, Keita/Gourdine say due to the small sample size (2.4% of Egypt's nomes), the Schuenemann et al. study while valuable in its endeavors, is best seen as a contribution to understanding a local population history in the North of Egypt as opposed to postulating a history of all Egypt from its inception.
quote: The Egyptian pharaohs Amenhotep III, Akhenaten and Tutankhamun.The specific clade of R1b was ultimately not determined.
quote: In 2010 Hawass et al. undertook detailed anthropological, radiological, and genetic studies as part of the King Tutankhamun Family Project. The objectives included attempting to determine familial relationships among 11 royal mummies of the New Kingdom, as well to research for pathological features including potential inherited disorders and infectious diseases.[211] In 2012, Hawass et al. undertook an anthropological, forensic, radiological, and genetic study of the 20th dynasty mummies of Ramesses III and an unknown man which were found together.[212] In 2022, S.O.Y. Keita analysed 8 Short Tandem loci (STR) data published as part of these studies by Hawass et al., using an algorithm that only has three choices: Eurasians, sub-Saharan Africans, and East Asians. Using these three options, Keita concluded that the majority of the samples which included Tutankhamun and Rameses III had a population "affinity with "sub-Saharan" Africans in one affinity analysis". However, Keita cautioned that this does not mean that the royal mummies “lacked other affiliations” which he argued had been obscured in typological thinking. Keita further added that different “data and algorithms might give different results” which reflects the complexity of biological heritage and the associated interpretation.[213]
quote: A 2020 DNA study by Gad, Hawass et al., analysed mitochondrial and Y-chromosomal haplogroups from Tutankhamun's family members of the 18th Dynasty, using comprehensive control procedures to ensure quality results. They found that the Y-chromosome haplogroup of the family was R1b, which originates in West Asia and which today makes up 50-60% of the genetic pool of modern Europeans. The mitochondrial haplogroup was K, which is most likely also part of a Near Eastern lineage. Because the profiles for Tutankhamun and Amenhotep III were incomplete, the analysis produced differing probability figures despite having concordant allele results. Because the relationships of these two mummies with the KV55 mummy had previously been confirmed in an earlier study, the haplogroup prediction of both mummies could be derived from the full profile of the KV55 data. The 20th Dynasty pair of Ramesses III and his son were found to have the haplogroup E1b1a, which has its highest frequencies in modern populations from West Africa and Central Africa, but which is rare among North Africans and nearly absent in East Africa. Genetic analysis indicated the following haplogroups:
Ancient Egyptian race controversy Some modern views on bias in Egyptology
quote: Genetic studies have been criticised by several scholars for a range of methodological problems and providing misleading, interpretations on racial classifications. Specifically, Keita and Kittles argue that DNA studies applied to the Nile Valley region have downplayed or excluded data on comparable, African populations in order to maintain certain racial models along with pre-selected data categories. Boyce and Keita in a later study, argue that certain studies have adopted a selective approach in sampling, such as using samples drawn mostly from northern (Lower) Egypt, which has historically had the presence of more foreigners from the Mediterranean and the Near East, and using those samples as representing the rest of Egypt. Thus, excluding the 'darker' south or Upper Egypt which presents a false impression of Egyptian variability. The authors also note that chromosonial patterns have featured inconsistent labelling such as Haplotype V as seen the with use of misleading terms like "Arabic" to describe it, implying this haplotype is of 'Middle Eastern' origins. However, when the hapotype V variant is looked at in context, it does have a very high prevalence in African countries above the Sahara and in Ethiopia.[66]
Ancient Egyptian race controversy
Ancient Egyptian art
quote: In their own art, "Egyptians are often represented in a color that is officially called dark red", according to Diop.Arguing against other theories, Diop quotes Champollion-Figeac, who states, "one distinguishes on Egyptian monuments several species of blacks, differing...with respect to complexion, which makes Negroes black or copper-colored." Regarding an expedition by King Sesostris, Cherubini states the following concerning captured southern Africans, "except for the panther skin about their loins, are distinguished by their color, some entirely black, others dark brown.University of Chicago scholars assert that Nubians are generally depicted with black paint, but the skin pigment used in Egyptian paintings to refer to Nubians can range "from dark red to brown to black". This can be observed in paintings from the tomb of the Egyptian Huy, as well as Ramses II's temple at Beit el-Wali. Also, Snowden indicates that Romans had accurate knowledge of "negroes of a red, copper-colored complexion ... among African tribes".
Wikipedia
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
African Greeks
quote: African Greeks are ethnic Greek people in Africa. Greek communities have existed in Africa since antiquity.
Ancient Egypt Further information: Egyptian Greeks Greeks have been present in Egypt since at least the 7th century BC. Herodotus visited ancient Egypt in the 5th century BC and claimed that the Greeks were one of the first groups of foreigners that ever lived there.[1] Diodorus Siculus claimed that Rhodian Actis, one of the Heliadae, built the city of Heliopolis before the cataclysm; likewise the Athenians built Sais. Siculus reports that all the Greek cities were destroyed during the cataclysm, but the Egyptian cities including Heliopolis and Sais survived.[2]
First historical colonies According to Herodotus (ii. 154), King Psammetichus I (664–610 BC) established a garrison of foreign mercenaries at Daphnae, mostly Carians and Ionian Greeks.
In 7th century BC, after the Greek Dark Ages from 1100 to 750 BC, the city of Naucratis was founded in Ancient Egypt. It was located on the Canopic branch of the Nile river, 45 mi (72 km) from the open sea. It was the first and, for much of its early history, the only permanent Greek colony in Egypt; acting as a symbiotic nexus for the interchange of Greek and Egyptian art and culture. At about the same time, the city of Heracleion, the closest to the sea, became an important port for Greek trade. It had a famous temple of Heracles. The city later sank into the sea, only to be rediscovered recently.
From the time of Psammetichus I onwards, Greek mercenary armies played an important role in some of the Egyptian wars. One such army was led by Mentor of Rhodes. Another such personage was Phanes of Halicarnassus.
Hellenistic times Rule of Alexander the Great (332–323 BC) Alexander the Great conquered Egypt at an early stage of his conquests. He respected the pharaonic religions and customs and he was proclaimed Pharaoh of Egypt. He established the city of Alexandria. After his death, in 323 BC, his empire was divided among his generals. Egypt was given to Ptolemy I Soter, whose descendants would give Egypt her final royal dynasty – a glittering one. The dynasty was composed solely by ethnic Greeks and produced dynasts such as the famous Cleopatra. Its capital was Alexandria. Ptolemy added legitimacy to his rule in Egypt by acquiring Alexander's body. He intercepted the embalmed corpse on its way to burial, brought it to Egypt, and placed it in a golden coffin in Alexandria. It would remain one of the famous sights of the town for many years, until probably destroyed in riots in the 3rd century AD.[3]
The Ptolemaic Empire (323–30 BC) The initial objective of Ptolemy's reign was to establish firm and broad boundaries to his newly acquired kingdom. That led to almost continuous warfare against other leading members of Alexander's circle. At times he held Cyprus and even parts of mainland Greece. When these conflicts were over, he was firmly in control of Egypt and had strong claims (disputed by the Seleucid dynasty) to Palestine. He called himself king of Egypt from 306 BC. By the time he abdicated in 285 BC, in favour of one of his sons, the Ptolemaic dynasty was secure. Ptolemy and his descendants showed respect to Egypt's most cherished traditions – those of religion – and turned them to their own advantage.
Alexandria became the centre of the Greek and Hellenistic world and the centre of international commerce, art and science. The Lighthouse of Alexandria was one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World while during the reign of Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the Library of Alexandria was the biggest library in the world until it was destroyed. The last Pharaoh was a Greek princess, Cleopatra VII, who took her own life in 30 BC, a year after the battle of Actium.[3]
Roman and Byzantine Egypt Further information: Egypt (Roman province) Under Greco-Roman rule, Egypt hosted several Greek settlements, mostly concentrated in Alexandria, but also in a few other cities, where Greek settlers lived alongside some seven to ten million native Egyptians.[4] Faiyum's earliest Greek inhabitants were soldier-veterans and cleruchs (elite military officials) who were settled by the Ptolemaic kings on reclaimed lands.[5][6] Native Egyptians also came to settle in Faiyum from all over the country, notably the Nile Delta, Upper Egypt, Oxyrhynchus and Memphis, to undertake the labor involved in the land reclamation process, as attested by personal names, local cults and recovered papyri.[7]
Coptic Greeks It is estimated that as much as 30 percent of the population of Faiyum was Greek during the Ptolemaic period, with the rest being native Egyptians;[8] the Faiyum mummy portraits reflect the complex synthesis of the predominant Egyptian culture and that of the elite Greek minority in Faiyum.[8]
By the Roman period, much of the "Greek" population of Faiyum was made up of either Hellenized Egyptians or people of mixed Egyptian-Greek origins,[9] and by the time of Roman emperor Caracalla in the 2nd century AD, ethnic Egyptians could be distinguished from Egyptian Greeks by their speech.[10] Egyptian Greek is the variety of Greek spoken in Egypt from antiquity until the Islamic conquest of Egypt in the 7th century. Egyptian Greek adopted many loanwords from Coptic Egyptian; there was a great deal of intracommunity bilingualism in Egypt.[11][12]
The following is an example of Egyptian Greek language, used in the Coptic Church: ⲇⲟⲝⲁ ⲡⲁⲧⲣⲓ ⲕⲉ ⲩⲓⲱ: ⲕⲉ ⲁ̀ⲅⲓⲱ ⲡⲛⲉⲩⲙⲁⲧⲓ: ⲕⲉ ⲛⲩⲛ ⲕⲉ ⲁ̀ⲓ̀ ⲕⲉ ⲓⲥ ⲧⲟⲩⲥ ⲉⲱⲛⲁⲥ ⲧⲱⲛ ⲉ̀ⲱ̀ⲛⲱⲛ ⲁ̀ⲙⲏⲛ Δόξα Πατρὶ κὲ Υἱῷ κὲ Ἁγίῳ Πνεύματι, κὲ νῦν κὲ ἀῒ κὲ ἰς τοὺς ἐῶνας τῶν ἐώνων. Ἀμήν. Glory to the Father, to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, both now and always, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
According to Walker, early Ptolemaic Greek colonists married local women and adopted Egyptian religious beliefs, and by Roman times, their descendants were viewed as Egyptians by the Roman rulers, despite their own self-perception of being Greek.[13] The dental morphology[14] of the Roman-period Faiyum mummies was also compared with that of earlier Egyptian populations, and was found to be "much more closely akin" to that of ancient Egyptians than to Greeks or other European populations.[15] Victor J. Katz notes that "research in papyri dating from the early centuries of the common era demonstrates that a significant amount of intermarriage took place between the Greek and Egyptian communities".[16]
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
African Greeks
quote: Ancient Ethiopia Further information: Ethiopian Greeks The name Ethiopia itself is Greek and means "of burned face".[17] It is first attested in the Homeric epics but it is unlikely to have referred to any particular nation, but rather, to people of African descent in general.[18][19]
Beginning in the Hellenistic age around the third century BC, Greek culture permeated the regions of ancient Ethiopia. Greeks established colonies in Ethiopia, with Ptolemais Theron and Axum becoming major capitals of Ethiopian Greek culture. In the second century BC, Ptolemy III Euergetes annexed several northern Ethiopian cities such as Tigray and the port of Adulis, which became major trading hubs for Ethiopian Greeks.[20]
Axumites of Ethiopia Further information: Axumite Empire
After the annexation of the Ptolemaic Empire by the Romans, the Axumite king Zoskales (Ancient Greek: Ζωσκάλης) established the Axumite Empire (Ancient Greek: Ἀξωμίτης) (c. 100 AD–c. 960 AD), which maintained Ethiopian Greek culture and used Greek as its lingua franca. In the city of Axum, many obelisks, statues, and architecture made in Egyptian Greek style still mark the landscape.[20][21]
As the Islamic conquest of North Africa severed Axum's link with the Greek world in the 7th century, Greek culture and knowledge waned; Muslim presence in the Red Sea also caused Axum to suffer economically and it declined in power. Axum's final three centuries are considered a dark age, in which Ethiopian Greek culture dissapeared; the Axumite Empire finally collapsed around 960 AD.[22] Despite its position as one of the foremost empires of late antiquity, Axum fell into obscurity as Ethiopia remained isolated throughout the Middle Ages.[23][24]
Abyssinian Greeks Later Abyssinian Greeks were attested in the 1700s, largely descending from Greek craftsmen and sailors residing in Abyssinia, who facilitated commerce between Abyssinia and Europe.[25][26] The explorer James Bruce reported that a number of Greek refugees from Smyrna had also arrived in Gondar during the reign of Emperor Iyasu II. The Smyrniot refugees included twelve silversmiths, whom the emperor put to work producing a variety of items for both his court and the churches of Gondar.[27]
Abyssinian Greeks held many of the highest positions in the Abyssinian Empire; the principal Abyssinian Greek community stayed with the Abyssinian Emperor in the capital, Gondar.[28] Emperor Theodore II specifically made known that he favored the Abyssinian Greeks, because of their virility and integrity of character.[29]
Ancient Libya Cyrenaica was colonized by the Greeks beginning in the 7th century BC. The first and most important colony was that of Cyrene, established in about 631 BC by colonists from the Greek island of Thera, which they had abandoned because of a severe famine.[30] Their commander, Aristoteles, took the Libyan name Battos.[31] His descendants, known as the Battiad dynasty, persisted in spite of severe conflict with Greeks in neighboring cities.
The eastern portion of the province, with no major population centers, was called Marmarica; the more important western portion was known as the Pentapolis, as it comprised five cities: Cyrene (near the modern village of Shahat) with its port of Apollonia (Marsa Susa), Arsinoe or Taucheira (Tocra), Euesperides or Berenice (near modern Benghazi), Balagrae (Bayda) and Barce (Marj) – of which the chief was the eponymous Cyrene.[30] The term "Pentapolis" continued to be used as a synonym for Cyrenaica. In the south, the Pentapolis faded into the Saharan tribal areas, including the pharaonic oracle of Ammonium.
The region produced barley, wheat, olive oil, wine, figs, apples, wool, sheep, cattle and silphium, a herb that grew only in Cyrenaica and was regarded as a medicinal cure and aphrodisiac.[32] Cyrene became one of the greatest intellectual and artistic centers of the Greek world, famous for its medical school, learned academies and architecture, which included some of the finest examples of the Hellenistic style. The Cyrenaics, a school of thinkers who expounded a doctrine of moral cheerfulness that defined happiness as the sum of human pleasures, were founded by Aristippus of Cyrene.[33] Other notable natives of Cyrene were the poet Callimachus and the mathematicians Theodorus and Eratosthenes.[32]
Libyan Greek culture The most influential of the Libyan Greeks were the Cyreneans. The Cyreneans invited Greek colonists from all over the Greek world to settle in Cyrene.[34][35]
The Cyrenean government was originally an absolute monarchy, but under Demonax, it became a constitutional monarchy with a senate. Demonax divided the Cyreneans into three groups to elect senators: first, the original Theran colonists and ethnic Libyans, second, Peloponnesians and Cretans, and third, Aegean islanders. Under the Cyrenean constitution, the king only had the authority to grant land to citizens, and held the role of chief priest, in charge of religious duties.[34][35]
Libyan Greek religion was directly influenced by Egyptian mythology. The Cyreneans assimilated the Egyptian god Amun with Zeus as "Ammon", embodying Zeus in his style and Amun in his nature, attributing the horns of a ram to his image.[34][35][36] Ammon had a wife, Ammonia, and a son, Parammon (Thoth-Hermes), considered Ammon's hypostasis (incarnation). Parammon was also the secretary of Osiris, one of the sons of Ammon.[34][35][36][37][38]
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
African Greeks
quote:
Ancient Nubia Further information: Sudanese Greeks Intercultural exchange between the Hellenic and Nubian civilizations started at least two and a half millennia ago. The Greek presence in the Nile Valley and its considerable impact on ancient Nubia have long been recognized by scholars.[39] The first recorded contact took place in 593 BC: graffiti at Abu Simbel reveal that large numbers of Greek mercenaries served under Psamtik II in his invasion of what is now Sudan.[40]
Vice versa, ancient Nubia also had an influence on Greek culture from those early times onwards, as it was well known by scholars throughout the Hellenic world, where several of the classical writers mentioned it. It evidently inspired curiosity about the exotic lands South of Egypt and particularly about the sources of the Nile river. Hence, the pioneering historian Herodotus (circa 484 – circa 425 BC) made references to Nubia as a land of "burned faces" (Ethiopians) and the source of the Nile.[41] Though he is assumed to have been personally familiar with the river only as far as Aswan, he did identify a "city of Ethiopians" at Meroë, apparently from reports by Psamtik II and Cambyses II.[42]
A new era of Greek-Nubian relations began in 332 BC, when Alexander the Great conquered Egypt and soon dispatched reconnaissance expeditions into Nubia, possibly to find the sources of the Nile. Scholars assume that the potential Ptolemaic threat contributed to the decision by the Kushitic king Nastasen to move the capital from Napata to Meroë. Greek language and culture were introduced to the Kushitic ruling classes, which may have triggered the creation of an alphabetic Meroitic writing. Hellenic influences are also evident from changes in art styles.[42]
Nubian contact with the Greek world remained sporadic until Ptolemy II's Nubian campaign for Meroë in the 270s BC. Ptolemy's interest in Nubia was to secure a source of war elephants from Meroë, and to gain access to Meroitic gold mines.[43] At the same time, Ergamenes (Arkamani II), a king of one of the nine Nubian kingdoms, studied Greek language and customs at the Alexandrian court in the Ptolemaic Empire.[42][44][45] Eratosthenes (circa 276–194 BC), the Greek geographer and librarian at Alexandria, sketched "with fair accuracy" the course of the Nile as far south as what is now Khartoum, based on the accounts of various travellers.[41] Pliny listed a number of Greeks who had travelled to Meroë and sometimes beyond: Dalion, Aristocreon, Bion, Basilis, and Simonides the Younger, who apparently lived at Meroe for five years.[46]
Relations between Kush and Ptolemaic Egypt thereafter remained tense, but stable.[43] By the time of Ptolemy VIII (170-163 BC), Greek ships regularly sailed on the Red Sea and to Meroitic ports.[42] The Nubian upper class traded with Greek merchants and adopted certain Hellenic styles of life.[47] However, following the death of Cleopatra VII in 30 BC and an unsuccessful attempt by the Romans to conquer the kingdom,[43] Greek influences withered in Nubia.[42] The account of Strabo, the geographer and historian of Greek descent, in his Geographia is one of the last references to Nubia from that time.[41]
Axumite subjugation of Nubia The Axumite Empire engaged in a series of invasions that culminated in the capture of the Nubian capital of Meroë in the middle of the 4th century AD, signaling the end of independent Nubian Pagan kingdoms. The Axumites then converted the Nubians to Christianity, establishing the authority of the Coptic Church in the area, and founded new Nubian Christian kingdoms, such as Nobatia, Alodia, and Makuria.[48][49][50] Tribal nomads like the Beja, Afar, and Saho managed to remain autonomous due to their uncentralized nomadic nature. These tribal peoples would sporadically inflict attacks and raids on Axumite communities. The Beja nomads eventually Hellenized and integrated into the Nubian Greek society that had already been present in Lower Nubia for three centuries.[48][49][50]
Nubian Greeks Nubian Greek culture followed the pattern of Egyptian Greek and Byzantine Greek civilization, expressed in Nubian Greek art and Nubian Greek literature. The earliest attestations of Nubian Greek literature come from the 5th century; the Nubian Greek language resembles Egyptian and Byzantine Greek; it served as a lingua franca throughout the Nubian Kingdoms, and had a creolized form for trade among the different peoples in Nubia.[51]
Nubian Greek was unique in that it adopted many words from both Coptic Egyptian and Nubian; Nubian Greek's syntax also evolved to establish a fixed word order.[52]
The following is an example of Nubian Greek language: ⲟⲩⲧⲟⲥ ⲉⲥⲧⲓⲛ ⲁⲇⲁⲩⲉⲗ ⲃⲁⲥⲓⲗⲉⲩ ⲙⲱⲥⲉⲥ ⲅⲉⲱⲣⲅⲓⲟⲩ, ⲃⲁⲥⲓⲗⲉⲩ ⲛⲟⲩⲃⲇⲏⲥ, ⲁⲣⲟⲩⲁ, ⲙⲁⲕⲣⲟ Οὗτός ἐστιν ἀδαύελ Βασιλεύ Μώσες Γεωργίου, Βασιλεύ Νουβδῆς, Ἀρουά, Μακρό This is the great King Moses Georgios, the King of Nobatia, Alodia, Makuria[53]
A plethora of frescoes created between 800–1200 AD in Nubian cities such as Faras depicted religious life in the courts of the Nubian Kingdoms; they were made in Byzantine art style.[54] Nubian Greek titles and government styles in Nubian Kingdoms were based on Byzantine models; even with Islamic encroachments and influence into Nubian territory, the Nubian Greeks saw Constantinople as their spiritual home.[54] Nubian Greek culture disappeared after the Muslim conquest of Nubia around 1450 AD.[54]
Wikipedia
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on :
Hey lioness
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
I just found something from before so let me post this now.
quote: quote- Many of today’s Egyptians are not necessarily representative of Ancients due to outside migration and admixture from European/Arab sources, particularly in Lower Egypt. Some Coptic claims to be pharanoic descendants not supported by DNA studies or cultural history showing heavy Arabization since 900 ADModern Copt genetic profile shows substantial Middle Eastern and European elements. Modern Egyptian population not necessarily representative of the ancients "Cosmopolitan northern Egypt is less likely to have a population representative of the core indigenous population of the most ancient times“ – Keita 2005. History in Africa, 2005, 32(1).221-246 "Outside influence and admixture with extraregional groups primarily occurred in Lower Egypt—perhaps during the later dynastic, but especially in Ptolmaic and Roman times (also Irish, 2006).” -Irish 2009. Dental_affinities_of_the_C-group_inhabitants.. Ec Hi Rev _____ Keita believes if I recall correctly that the best representation of the Ancient Egyptians are the Northern Sudanese and Upper Egyptians. Of Course it depends on what period is being studied, Keita makes it clear the Egyptian variation is a local adaptation without outside influence, I.E he disagrees with your Spamming rants about Admixture and racial mixing. Also we have to take into account other topics such as population density, Migrations, Immigration etc. For example during the Ancient Period Upper Egypt and the Nile Valley was more populated than the Delta, which is the complete opposite today. Again this goes against the notion that the Ancients are the same.
The above posts is tricky and kinda useless when certain afro-centrics say some or most non black egyptians are not egyptians or do not come from the ancient egyptians as well.
Nobody or most folks living in country since ancient times/early middles ages for example is going to say they are invaders.
Let's keep mind alot of non black egyptians were immigrants and came in during black and non black rule of egypt.
Heck there are numbers folks saying america and britain are multiracial/multicultural countries as well even if the majority are white,so it's useless they say someone who is a poc and families been thee for decades/centuries does not belong because they are not going anywhere either and see many see those countries has their too.
You know the saying they fought for those countries,die for them and nobody is telling them to leave or go back to where they came from.
New debates,no smarter debates/views must take place in the future but both sides of the debate could be very stubborn on these issues.
Examples
quote: Biological anthropologists Shomarka Keita and A.J. Boyce have stated that the "Studies of crania from southern predynastic Egypt, from the formative period (4000-3100 B.C.), show them usually to be more similar to the crania of ancient Nubians, Kushites, Saharans, or modern groups from the Horn of Africa than to those of dynastic northern Egyptians or ancient or modern southern Europeans."
Seqenenre Tao
quote: His mummy appears to have been hastily embalmed. X-rays that were taken of the mummy in the late 1960s show that no attempt had been made to remove the brain or to add linen inside the cranium or eyes, both normal embalming practice for the time. In the opinion of James E. Harris and Kent Weeks, who undertook the forensic examination at the time the X-rays were taken, his mummy is the worst preserved of all the royal mummies held at the Egyptian Museum, and they noted that a "foul, oily smell filled the room the moment the case in which his body was exhibited was opened," which is likely due to the poor embalming process and the absence of the use of absorbing natron salts, leaving some bodily fluids in the mummy at the time of burial. Also, Harris and Weeks noted "his entire facial complex, in fact, is so different from other pharaohs (it is closest in fact to his son Ahmose) that he could be fitted more easily into the series of Nubian and Old Kingdom Giza skulls than into that of later Egyptian kings. Various scholars in the past have proposed a Nubian- that is, non-Egyptian-origin for Sequenre and his family, and his facial features suggest that this might indeed be true." The analysis in general found strong similarities between the New Kingdom rulers of the Seventeenth Dynasty and early Eighteenth Dynasty dynasty and contemporary Nubians.
quote: "The ancient Egyptians were not 'white' in any European sense, nor were they 'Caucasian'... we can say that the earliest population of ancient Egypt included African people from the upper Nile, African people from the regions of the Sahara and modern Libya, and smaller numbers of people who had come from south-western Asia and perhaps the Arabian penisula." --Robert Morkot (2005). The Egyptians: An Introduction. pp. 12-13
quote: First of all there were white and brown types in egypt before the arab invasion but there were other invasions too,like the persians greeks,romans,turks etc..plus other invasions and those moving to live a better life in egypt etc.. from europe and south west asia even before the old kingdom so varied races live in egypt before the arabs,however the population remain mostly still black,not all black.
Overtime these groups( whites and browns combined) just became the major group for varied reason. It could be war,famine etc..so clearly the native black population overtime just became the minority plus the invasions from other races did not help.
These groups however became arabized overtime after the arabs invaded.
That's why most of these brown and whites in egypt could they say they were ancient egyptians too and that could or would be true but at the time of ancient egypt they were just the minority.
Think of the berbers.There were white and brown berbers before the arabs invasions.White and brown berbers did exist in ancient times even in early ancient times etc.. but the original berbers were black but overtime in ancient times etc..there were whites and brown ones that happen to become berberized.
Europe for example is right next door to north africa so it was only a matter of time and you have blacks going into europe as well. Of course the brown berbers are native since they are a mixture of black and white in north africa and some went to europe too.
quote:
There was race mixing in new kingdom royal families so let's keep that in mind and way this before the greeks and arabs invasions of egypt.You had black and bi-racial black kings and queens new kingdom at end there could been some brown types but most of egypt still remain black at that time. So egypt was not all black at that time and there were foreigners that enter the royal line from countries you know to to keep the peace etc..
Anyway nubians and other races intermarry into black ruling family of the new kingdom as well.
So anyway in new kingdom dynasties of egypt was predominate black,not all black. Most of THE population of the ancient egypt new kingdom was black. So anyway there were white and brown types who were kings and queens etc.. in ancient egypt before arabs but it depends on the dynasties and what time, so don't fall in the trap that all the ancient egyptian pharaohs or kings and queens were black because that's not true but many were black,and these ant-black types must reconger that many egyptian ancient and now were black as well.
Like i said i think before it's these earlier invasions and settler groups combined with race mixing that you had more brown types native to egypt as well combined with other invasions,war,famine etc.. that help make the combined races of brown and white to become the majority of egyptians today.
Let's keep mind white egyptians by themselves are still not as large as the native black egyptians today who are arabized too.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Wikipedia has a summary of genetic studies made in Egypt, both from ancient human remains, and from now living people. It seems that large parts of Egypt still are not studied enough when it comes to ancient DNA
"The ancient Egyptians were not 'white' in any European sense, nor were they 'Caucasian'... we can say that the earliest population of ancient Egypt included African people from the upper Nile, African people from the regions of the Sahara and modern Libya, and smaller numbers of people who had come from south-western Asia and perhaps the Arabian penisula." --Robert Morkot (2005). The Egyptians: An Introduction. pp. 12-13
This is from a youtube comment section i saved.
Sako Gekchyan quote- @Spitfire The Dragon TV Love And Positive Light
quote: But the Sahara did not prevent so-called Black people from traveling to North Africa. First of all, the Sahara was not always a desert. As recent as 6000 years ago, large parts of it were lush, savanna, and even some tropical forests as well. It only gradually became a desert. Over time it has gone through several cycles of Fertilization and desertification.
Second, what do you mean by black? Do you consider the people of Sudan black? If so, then clearly, there is no barrier to some groups of Black people. They are literally right up the river. Do you think there was some magical forcefield keeping Black people in prehistoric times from migrating north into the lower Nile valley? This is the same question I ask hoteps who insist that Egypt was blackity black.
I asked them if they think there was some magical forcfield along the Sinai border, preventing prehistoric Middle Eastern populations from migrating into the Nile delta, and beyond?
In both cases, the logic is pretty silly.
Note-now there were white/caucasian ancient egyptians and robert morkot knows this but what he really saying is that they were not the majority and even today they are not.
The first egyptians look black and over time there were some that were white and brown in ancient times and the middle ages but most remain black. Anyway most egyptians today look brown,but there are large number that still black looking. Some egyptians today are white looking as well.The civilization of the original native egyptians is black african origin with influences from asia,europe and the rest of africa,more so nubia/sudan and libya.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Edited/added info above.
By the way some of those prehistoric populations going in africa were really going back to africa and they were black.
Some examples.
Haplogroup R1b
quote: Studies in 2005–08 reported "R1b*" at high levels in Jordan, Egypt and Sudan.[71][65][72][note 1] Subsequent research by Myres et al. (2011) indicates that the samples concerned most likely belong to the subclade R-V88, which is now concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa. According to Myres et al. (2011), this may be explained by a back-migration from Asia into Africa by R1b-carrying people.[41][note 2] Gonzales et al. (2013), using more advanced techniques, indicate that it is equally probable that V88 originated in Central Africa and spread northward towards Asia. The patterns of diversity in African R1b-V88 did not seem to fit with a movement of Chadic-speaking people from the North, across the Sahara to West-Central Africa, but was compatible with the reverse. An origin of V88 lineages in Central Africa, followed by a migration to North Africa.[73] However, Shriner, D., & Rotimi, C. N. (2018), associate the introduction of R1b into Chad, with the more recent movements of Baggara Arabs.[74]
D'Atanasio et al. (2018) propose that R1b-V88 originated in Europe about 12 000 years ago and crossed to North Africa by about 8000 years ago; it may formerly have been common in southern Europe, where it has since been replaced by waves of other haplogroups, leaving remnant subclades almost exclusively in Sardinia. It first radiated within Africa likely between 7 and 8 000 years ago – at the same time as trans-Saharan expansions within the unrelated haplogroups E-M2 and A-M13 – possibly due to population growth allowed by humid conditions and the adoption of livestock herding in the Sahara. R1b-V1589, the main subclade within R1b-V88, underwent a further expansion around 5500 years ago, likely in the Lake Chad Basin region, from which some lines recrossed the Sahara to North Africa.[75]
Marcus et al. (2020) provide strong evidence for this proposed model of North to South trans-saharan movement: The earliest basal R1b-V88 haplogroups are found in several Eastern European Hunter Gatherers close to 10 000 years ago. The haplogroup then seemingly further spread with the Neolithic Cardial Ware expansion, which established agriculture in the Western Mediterranean around 7500 BP: R1b-V88 haplogroups were identified in ancient Neolithic individuals in central Italy, Iberia and, at a particularly high frequency, in Sardinia.[76] A part of the branch leading to present-day African haplogroups (V2197) is already derived in some of these ancient Neolithic European individuals, providing further support for a North to South trans-saharan movement.
Some of works his works are outdated but Chancellor Williams talks about there were whites that came into north africa in the pre-historic period but later before egyptian civilization for example.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Haplogroups are not always an indicator of skin color. To be fully sure about ancient peoples skin color it is better to look at the autosomal DNA, especially those genes that regulate skin color. A haplogroup can be carried by people of a certain skin color into another people with another skin color. Then the two people can be mixed in such a way that the haplogroup survives, even if the descendants of the first bearers will be mixed in such a way that they over time get another skin color. That must of course be examined in every case individually.
Just look at African Americans, some can have European haplogroups (especially on their male side) but still have dark skin after several generations mixing with other African Americans. That is why African ancestry in their analysis of paternal haplogroups among African Americans sometimes find that a certain person descends from Europeans in their paternal lineage Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Two articles about the same thing, a woman in Egypt claiming she has traced her DNA back to an ancient mummy. Some are sceptic, like the author of the second of the two articles I post here
quote: An Egyptian-Christian woman named Treveina Basily made the discovery of a lifetime when she found out that her DNA directly descends from an Ancient Egyptian mummy dating back to the Saite dynasty, the ninth period of ancient Egyptian history.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Seems the interest for ancient Egypt (and also Cleopatra) is increasing among modern Egyptians.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Nora change her youtube name to kemet queen. She did not use the words egyptian queen.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
One of Noras videos features a scene with Chief X. Here is another video with him. Maybe a warning is in place for some coarse language and allegations in the beginning of the video. After that though he gets to the subject of who is Egyptian or not.
Hey lioness
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Seems that some Afrocentrics, mostly from USA, have been able to piss off both Egyptians and Greeks; and even Native Americans (which has been discussed in other threads).
quote: I am sure the Afrocentrists won´t change their minds even after watching this video but there's one question I have for them: where have all these supposed blacks gone, because today they are not in Europe and the same goes for the rest of the world since Afrocentrists also claimed they created all civilizations from the Mexican to the Chinese one
Nora's a nobody as regard to expertise on Egypt. Does she even have any dynastic Egyptian ancestry ? That is unknown
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Nora's a nobody as regard to expertise on Egypt. Does she even have any dynastic Egyptian ancestry ? That is unknown
Hard to know, she has not presented any DNA result online. I do not know how knowledgeable she is of ancient Egypt. According to her she has visited museums since she was five years old and seen different monuments and sites.
But I do not know if she has studied any history or archaeology or similar in any university.
She said in one video that she will team up with some experts to make a video where she debunks Afrocentric claims regarding Egypt. Lets just see if she will post such a video.
But she is well spoken and she seems to get some attention. Even the New York Sun mentions her.
Unfortunately I can not read the whole article where she is mentioned
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Nora's a nobody as regard to expertise on Egypt. Does she even have any dynastic Egyptian ancestry ? That is unknown
hey, are you seeing my messages
we need to talk
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
In one of Noras videos Chief X shows Clarence E Walkers book We can´t go Home Again . Seems some Egyptians know about that book.
Clarence E Walker, 2001: We Can't Go Home Again: An Argument About Afrocentrism
On Amazon it is presented like this:
quote:Afrocentrism has been a controversial but popular movement in schools and universities across America, as well as in black communities. But in We Can't Go Home Again, historian Clarence E. Walker puts Afrocentrism to the acid test, in a thoughtful, passionate, and often blisteringly funny analysis that melts away the pretensions of this "therapeutic mythology." As expounded by Molefi Kete Asante, Yosef Ben-Jochannan, and others, Afrocentrism encourages black Americans to discard their recent history, with its inescapable white presence, and to embrace instead an empowering vision of their African (specifically Egyptian) ancestors as the source of western civilization. Walker marshals a phalanx of serious scholarship to rout these ideas. He shows, for instance, that ancient Egyptian society was not black but a melange of ethnic groups, and questions whether, in any case, the pharaonic regime offers a model for blacks today, asking "if everybody was a King, who built the pyramids?" But for Walker, Afrocentrism is more than simply bad history--it substitutes a feel-good myth of the past for an attempt to grapple with the problems that still confront blacks in a racist society. The modern American black identity is the product of centuries of real history, as Africans and their descendants created new, hybrid cultures--mixing many African ethnic influences with native and European elements. Afrocentrism replaces this complex history with a dubious claim to distant glory. "Afrocentrism offers not an empowering understanding of black Americans' past," Walker concludes, "but a pastiche of 'alien traditions' held together by simplistic fantasies." More to the point, this specious history denies to black Americans the dignity, and power, that springs from an honest understanding of their real history.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Seems that some Afrocentrics, mostly from USA, have been able to piss off both Egyptians and Greeks; and even Native Americans (which has been discussed in other threads).
quote: I am sure the Afrocentrists won´t change their minds even after watching this video but there's one question I have for them: where have all these supposed blacks gone, because today they are not in Europe and the same goes for the rest of the world since Afrocentrists also claimed they created all civilizations from the Mexican to the Chinese one
Because of Cleopatra? Please see the last 30 years of history going back to Black Athena. They are just using this nonsense Cleopatra series to attack African scholarship because Cleopatra wasnt African or very dark skinned if she did have "Egyptian" ancestry. They don't want to address the history of the Nile valley before the Greeks, nor do they want to address the origin of humans in Africa. Not to mention they don't want to talk about the hundreds of yeas of Europeans stealing artifacts, people, culture and history all over the world.
This show is just nothing but troll bait for white people to express their fake outrage over African history having black Africans in it.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
^^ I do not know so much about Chief X, but he also seems to be opposed to many Afrocentric claims, even if he is black.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: [qb] Seems that some Afrocentrics, mostly from USA, have been able to piss off both Egyptians and Greeks; and even Native Americans (which has been discussed in other threads).
quote: I am sure the Afrocentrists won´t change their minds even after watching this video but there's one question I have for them: where have all these supposed blacks gone, because today they are not in Europe and the same goes for the rest of the world since Afrocentrists also claimed they created all civilizations from the Mexican to the Chinese one
Because of Cleopatra? Please see the last 30 years of history going back to Black Athena. They are just using this nonsense Cleopatra series to attack African scholarship because Cleopatra wasnt African or very dark skinned if she did have "Egyptian" ancestry. They don't want to address the history of the Nile valley before the Greeks, nor do they want to address the origin of humans in Africa. Not to mention they don't want to talk about the hundreds of yeas of Europeans stealing artifacts, people, culture and history all over the world.
This show is just nothing but troll bait for white people to express their fake outrage over African history having black Africans in it.
@Archeopteryx Doug is referring to Martin Bernal a British scholar, Professor of Government and Near Eastern Studies at Cornell University.
You are referring to Chief X, a nobody on youtube
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
I know who Martin Bernal is, actually I posted a debate between him and Mary Lefkowitz in another thread about Cleopatra.
About Chief X: Many of these YouTube people influence ordinary people online, often young people, non academics who still spread their words over the net. Among non academics some of them are more well known than academics in the field. That is why I cited him, not because of any impact on the academic world.
Even in Egypt some people know about Chief X, regardless if he is a nobody. His videos have also become a tool to stir up people.
Let us take Nora, she is just a young girl who rides on the hype of the Cleopatra backlash, still she has managed to get more than 400 000 views since April on her first video about Cleopatra. She is also present on TikTok. So she reaches people. I would presume she affects at least some young Egyptians.
But probably this Cleopatra hype will fade. But it will probably saw some seeds.
Btw, how many Egyptians read, or are active on ES? Would be interesting to know,
I repost the debate between Bernal and Lefkowitz here in this thread too for all interested
Interesting, and intense discussion from 1996:
quote: Legendary discussion between Dr. John Henrik Clarke, Dr. Martin Gardiner Bernal (Black Athena), Professor Mary Lefkowitz (Not Out Of Africa) and Guy MacLean Rogers (Black Athena Revisited), moderated by Utrice Leid, They debate the Origins and Foundations of Western Civilization. Does Africa, Asia or Ancient Greece supply the foundation of the world we live in today?
One can think though that the leader of the debate Utrice Leid, was not totally neutral, she sometimes seemed a bit hostile against Mary Lefkowitz and Rogers. But she did not so much criticize Bernal or Clarke. Maybe it would have been better with a more neutral moderator.
About Chief X: Many of these YouTube people influence ordinary people online, often young people, non academics who still spread their words over the net.
That might be true but here on Egyptsearch we are mainly looking for expert opinion
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Seems many academics in these fields do not want to indulge in too heated debates about historical persons race or the skin color of ancient peoples. Maybe they think such questions are not so relevant, or maybe they are just uncomfortable.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Here are the experts who partook in the series. Seems that at least Coleen Darnell is not so happy about the result.
Shelley Haley: Classics Professor, Hamilton College
Deborah Herd: PhD Candidate, Nubian Archaeology and Egyptian
Islam Issa: Author, 'Alexandria: The City That Changed The World'
Colleen Darnell: Egyptologist
Sally-Ann Ashton: Author, 'Cleopatra and Egypt'
Jacquelyn Williamsom: Associate Professor, Art & Archaeology of the Ancient Mediterranean
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Sally Ann Ashton has a blog called Kemet Expert
In her latest blog she adresses the Cleopatra controversy
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Seems many academics in these fields do not want to indulge in too heated debates about historical persons race or the skin color of ancient peoples. Maybe they think such questions are not so relevant, or maybe they are just uncomfortable.
There are two sides to Egyptology as a discipline. One side promotes a version of the history of the Nile to the public which is deliberately distorted to promote the historic narrative of the ancient Nile North of Aswan not being part of African history This side of Egyptology promotes itself via showmen like Hawass and western television outlets like the BBC, Discovery Channel, History channel and so forth featuring an all white ancient Nile Valley. Those documentaries have been airing for the last 40 years or more and yet nobody in Egypt was complaining about white actors playing the ancients. The other side of Egyptology is about multidisciplinary research and study of the Nile, but that detailed knowledge is strictly controlled and historically limited to academic circles. Case in point many of the numerous tombs and art works from the Nile have not been fully published to this very day. With that in mind, Egyptology is all about controlled talking points and it all falls apart if someone challenges them in public based on actual knowledge of the facts and information that is available. So in order to keep working in the field they have to keep pushing the status quo which means reinforcing this idea that the ancient Nile North of Aswan magically separated itself from Africa. When all the facts say otherwise, that the culture and evolution came from the South and Sahara among black African populations.
And at this point, outside social media, there are few African scholars in outside the continent who are challenging these things in a serious way. Most of the heavy hitters are from the past. And what you have is a bunch of activity on social media, which promotes various levels of fact and detail, but a lot of it also contains misinformation on both sides. This Cleopatra documentary is part of that pattern of misinformation and is doing nothing to actually tell the true story of the ancient dynastic era as an African cultural paradigm.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
There are two sides to Egyptology as a discipline. One side promotes a version of the history of the Nile to the public which is deliberately distorted to promote the historic narrative of the ancient Nile North of Aswan not being part of African history
The other side of Egyptology is about multidisciplinary research and study of the Nile, but that detailed knowledge is strictly controlled and historically limited to academic circles.
If this is the case there are at least four solution options:
a) don't pay attention to Egyptology, it's an invalid field
b) change Egyptology to a better Egyptology
c) start and/or endorse a field with a different name
d) complain but not offer any solutions, it's futile
Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
There are two sides to Egyptology as a discipline. One side promotes a version of the history of the Nile to the public which is deliberately distorted to promote the historic narrative of the ancient Nile North of Aswan not being part of African history
The other side of Egyptology is about multidisciplinary research and study of the Nile, but that detailed knowledge is strictly controlled and historically limited to academic circles.
If this is the case there are at least four solutions
a) don't pay attention to Egyptology, it's an invalid field
b) change Egyptology to a better Egyptology
c) start and/or endorse a field with a different name
d) complain forever and not offer any solutions, nothing will work anyway
Hey
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Not only is that not true about the coins. There is no coins that survive from Alexanders lifetime except for this coin
And what books and experts have you consulted to know that?
Actually there are coins that are dated to Alexanders time, but with some uncertainty. Some coins are debated by the experts,
Regarding the coin you posted it is found in Mesopotamia and probably depicting Alexander.
Even if it is Alexander the figure on the coin does not look African. Or did he change race between that coin and the hundreds of coins that are minted shortly after his time?
British museum do not write that it is the only coin from his time, and they do not at all describe the figure as black. One can not discern any racial traits on it.
Here is another coin, a tetradrachm, according to British Museum probably minted between 325 and 323 BC, ie during Alexanders life time.
So now I also want to go back to Cleopatra. Since you still only cite a pseudo historic site it is not anything more to discuss.
You seem to pluck most of your pics from that site. Try to read some books about ancient Greece by experts instead. Not from a banned member from ES.
Thank You Lioness for proving the coin of Alexander was the only one with his face on it.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
There is no name engraved on the coin so we can not be 100% sure it is Alexander, even if it is probable.
The facial features are not specifically African, it is up to ones fantasy what kind of features it is. Big noses exist in the whole of Mediterranean and in the Middle East. How features look can also be dependent on the degree of abrasion on a coin and other factors.
One must remember these depictions are not photos. Some people seems to interpret ancient art as if it was photos.
There are several coins minted in Alexanders life time where he is depicted as Heracles. Those coins are rather consistent when it concern his face. And they are many more than this one coin.
Also we have coins minted during his fathers time and they have no African features either.
These coins do not in any way suggest that Alexander was an African or black.
Contemporary tomb paintings in Macedonia do not show Africans but rather light people, as one could still see in places like Thessaloniki.
Coins from Alexanders time. British museum
Coin from his fathers (Philip II) time.
A deer hunt, detail from the mosaic floor signed Gnosis in the 'House of the Abduction of Helen' at Pella, Greece (ancient Macedonia), late 4th century BC, Pella Archaeological Museum.
I will ignore KING from now since he only posts irrelevant nonsense.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Sally Ann Ashton blogs about Roman portraits of Cleopatra
Fragment of a wall painting found at Herculaneum. Naples National Museo Nazionale Archeologica 90778
Wall painting from the House of the Orchard Pompeii
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: There is no name engraved on the coin so we can not be 100% sure it is Alexander, even if it is probable.
The facial features are not specifically African, it is up to ones fantasy what kind of features it is. Big noses exist in the whole of Mediterranean and in the Middle East. How features look can also be dependent on the degree of abrasion on a coin and other factors.
One must remember these depictions are not photos. Some people seems to interpret ancient art as if it was photos.
There are several coins minted in Alexanders life time where he is depicted as Heracles. Those coins are rather consistent when it concern his face. And they are many more than this one coin.
Also we have coins minted during his fathers time and they have no African features either.
These coins do not in any way suggest that Alexander was an African or black.
Contemporary tomb paintings in Macedonia do not show Africans but rather light people, as one could still see in places like Thessaloniki.
Coins from Alexanders time. British museum
Coin from his fathers (Philip II) time.
A deer hunt, detail from the mosaic floor signed Gnosis in the 'House of the Abduction of Helen' at Pella, Greece (ancient Macedonia), late 4th century BC, Pella Archaeological Museum.
I will ignore KING from now since he only posts irrelevant nonsense.
dude I posted facts and you posted that the mullato face of te mediteranian is somehow not known.
All those people with broad noses have Color inside there skin.
You can be angry all you want, you still have not posted pictures of swedes that look like sokrates. and have ignored THE Black African Coin.
Alexander is someone who is depicted with a Face that is African, the other coins you shown does not refute this Strabo possibly called the Ptolemy's Northern Indian looking meaning they had color to their skin that speaks more to cleopatra then what you state is a light skinned cleopatra
and theres also the Black African Coin from greece:
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Here is a video where Gabriel Andrade interviews Mary Lefkowitz. Interesting to hear
C'mon, are we really arguing over whether Alexander III of Macedonia was a Black African dude? I can understand Cleopatra VII's ethnic heritage being up for debate considering the gaps in her genealogical record (i.e. unknown mother and paternal grandmother) and that she lived in Africa, but those caveats don't apply to Alexander as far as I know.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Tomb Of Cleopatra Just Discovered In Egypt Reveals Truth About The Pyramids
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: C'mon, are we really arguing over whether Alexander III of Macedonia was a Black African dude? I can understand Cleopatra VII's ethnic heritage being up for debate considering the gaps in her genealogical record (i.e. unknown mother and paternal grandmother) and that she lived in Africa, but those caveats don't apply to Alexander as far as I know.
This is the only Coin with his depiction during his Lifetime
Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: This is the only Coin with his depiction during his Lifetime
Honestly, the features on that coin are rather vaguely defined. Hard to determine his ethnicity given the quality of the image.
Anyway, this is a bust that reportedly depicts Alexander which dates to the 4th century BC, the very century in which Alexander was alive. I don't know for certain that it represents Alexander or if the sculptor (Lysippos) ever saw him in person, but it very likely came into being during Alexander's lifetime. If it's him, he doesn't look like the portraits of "Africoid" individuals on those coins you were posting earlier.
EDIT: Here is a fresco from a 4th century Macedonian tomb at the site of Aigai that reportedly depicts Alexander: Admittedly, he's not a blond Nordic type like some modern depictions, but he does look more like a typical Southern European than any Black African type.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP:
quote:Originally posted by KING: This is the only Coin with his depiction during his Lifetime
Honestly, the features on that coin are rather vaguely defined. Hard to determine his ethnicity given the quality of the image.
Anyway, this is a bust that reportedly depicts Alexander which dates to the 4th century BC, the very century in which Alexander was alive. I don't know for certain that it represents Alexander or if the sculptor (Lysippos) ever saw him in person, but it very likely came into being during Alexander's lifetime. If it's him, he doesn't look like the portraits of "Africoid" individuals on those coins you were posting earlier.
EDIT: Here is a fresco from a 4th century Macedonian tomb at the site of Aigai that reportedly depicts Alexander: Admittedly, he's not a blond Nordic type like some modern depictions, but he does look more like a typical Southern European than any Black African type.
We can Go by the coin that is from Alexanders life time.
The big nose and thick lips on the coin is what is more practical.
the statues and busts seem to be something of a coverup and claimed to be Alexander when it clearly is not him
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
There are actually ten known Alexander great coins believed to be produced during his lifetime They are called the Porus medallions
quote: The importance of the elephant for Alexander’s eastern campaign is vividly illustrated by 10 surviving examples of large-size silver coins known as the elephant or Porus medallions.28 The obverse features Alexander on horseback attacking Porus and his mahout on an elephant; the reverse immortalizes Alexander standing with a thunderbolt in one hand and holding a spear in the other as Nike hovers toward him with a wreath (Figure 2).29 In 1973, an Iraqi hoard (allegedly found in or near Babylon) included not only half a dozen of the 10 examples, but also added two more types: one featuring an archer standing with bow drawn (obv.) and a standing Indian elephant (rev.); the other showing an archer standing in or next to a chariot drawn by four horses (obv.) and two men wearing turbans riding an Indian elephant (Figure 3 and Figure 4).30 This is not the place to go into details of exact date, mint, and monograms, nor to dwell on the golden modern pastiches of the 1990s.31 Suffice it here to emphasize the importance of the elephant for Alexander’s military victory in India.
quote: This extremely rare coin, one of the so-called ”Porus medallions”, is thought to have been struck as a form of commemorative donative paid out to the army after the return from India.
quote: This portrait has been used to evidence that the coin was produced during Alexander's own lifetime, with a parallel drawn to the portrait of Alexander bearing a thunderbolt that Apelles painted in the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus (Pliny, Natural History 35.92).
quote: In the 1990s an octagonal monument situated in the centre of Ephesus was hypothesized by Hilke Thür of the Austrian Academy of Sciences to be the tomb of Arsinoë.[16] Although no inscription remains on the tomb, it was dated to between 50 and 20 BC. In 1926 the skeleton of a female estimated to be between the ages of 15 and 18 years at the time of her death was found in the burial chamber.[24][4] Thür's identification of the skeleton was based on the shape of the tomb, which was octagonal, like the second tier of the Lighthouse of Alexandria, the carbon dating of the bones (between 200 and 20 BC), the gender of the skeleton, and the age of the child at death.[25][26] It was also claimed that the tomb boasts Egyptian motifs, such as "papyri-bundle" columns.[16]
A DNA test was also attempted to determine the identity of the child. However, it was impossible to get an accurate reading since the bones had been handled too many times,[27] and the skull had been lost in Germany during World War II. Hilke Thür examined the old notes and photographs of the now-missing skull,[28][29] which was reconstructed using computer technology by forensic anthropologist Caroline Wilkinson to show what the woman may have looked like.[30] Thür alleged that it shows signs of African ancestry mixed with classical Grecian features[16] – despite the fact that Boas, Gravlee, Bernard and Leonard, and others have demonstrated that skull measurements are not a reliable indicator of race,[31] and the measurements were jotted down in 1920 before modern forensic science took hold.[30] Furthermore, Arsinoë and Cleopatra, shared the same father (Ptolemy XII Auletes) but may have had different mothers,[32] with Thür claiming the alleged African ancestry came from the skeleton's mother.
Mary Beard wrote a dissenting essay criticizing the findings, pointing out that, first, there is no surviving name on the tomb and that the claim the tomb is alleged to invoke the shape of the Pharos Lighthouse "doesn't add up"; second, the skull doesn't survive intact and the age of the skeleton is too young to be Arsinoë's (the bones said to be that of a 15-18 year old, with Arsinoë being around her mid twenties at her death); and third, since Cleopatra and Arsinoë were not known to have the same mother, "the ethnic argument goes largely out of the window."[4] Furthermore, craniometry as used by Thür to determine race is based in scientific racism that is now generally considered a pseudoscience that supported exploitation of groups of people to perpetuate racial oppression and distorted future views of the biological basis of race.[33]
A writer from The Times described the identification of the skeleton as "a triumph of conjecture over certainty".[34] If the monument is the tomb of Arsinoë, she would be the only member of the Ptolemaic dynasty whose remains have been recovered.[35] It has never been definitively proven the skeleton is that of Arsinoë IV.
Wikipedia
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
A family tree of the Ptolemaic Dynasty of Egypt (305-30 BCE) with coin images of the different members
quote: An illustration following the evolution of the Ptolemaic Dynasty (also called Lagides, for Lagos, the father of Ptolemy I Soter) in Egypt during the Hellenistic period. This family tree reveals one of the most important distinguishing features of the Ptolemies compared to the other monarchies of antiquity – the importance of the queen in the representation of the ruling family (from the 2nd century BCE onward, some queens even ruled alone). By chance and historical circumstance, the Ptolemies gave the world the last king of Egypt, ruling queens of Syria and the Seleucid Empire, and the last kings of Cyprus, Cyrene, and Mauretania.
This is more recent. Arab Egyptian tell the truth about ancient Egyptians being black Africans. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37pp4Sw0G0o Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
The culture wars continue. An exhibition in the Dutch National Museum of Antiquities about how black artists refer to ancient Egypt and Nubia in their work has provoked some Egyptians.
quote: A Dutch exhibition on Black culture and ancient Egypt faces social media backlash The National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden has reportedly been criticised for “portraying Tutankhamun as Black”
quote:The National Museum of Antiquities in the Netherlands organized an exhibition of Egyptian antiquities purportedly in support of the Afrocentric theory which states dark-skinned Africans were the actual rulers of ancient Egypt, according to antiquities expert Abd al-Rahim Rihan, who heads a campaign to defend the Egyptian civilization.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: The culture wars continue. An exhibition in the Dutch National Museum of Antiquities about how black artists refer to ancient Egypt and Nubia in their work has provoked some Egyptians.
quote: A Dutch exhibition on Black culture and ancient Egypt faces social media backlash The National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden has reportedly been criticised for “portraying Tutankhamun as Black”
quote:The National Museum of Antiquities in the Netherlands organized an exhibition of Egyptian antiquities purportedly in support of the Afrocentric theory which states dark-skinned Africans were the actual rulers of ancient Egypt, according to antiquities expert Abd al-Rahim Rihan, who heads a campaign to defend the Egyptian civilization.
There is no "culture war" other than Europeans in Europe and populations from outside of Africa doing their best to claim the ancient Nile Valley culture was not African. That is the only culture war that has existed and primarily revolves around colonization as the supreme form of cultural appropriation. All over the world cultures have been raped and destroyed by Europe and their artifacts stolen and put in private collections and European museums. Millions of artifacts were stolen from the Nile Valley and now sit in European museums. But nobody calls that cultural appropriation and theft, but when Africans identify these same artifacts as African and originating in Africa, all of a sudden there is this outrage. Outrage over what?
Recall that the Amarna period is the same era when they produced images like this:
But according to these morons, those images don't look like black people from Africa......
This Cleopatra TV show is just a trojan horse for them to hide behind in promoting their nonsensical history of the ancient Nile Valley.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Seems that at least some Egyptians have become involved in these debates.
But honestly some Egyptians also have demanded at least some of the most iconic ancient object back to Egypt from European museums. Even Zahi Hawass has been active in that fight.
And Egyptians seem to be the ones who protested most about the Dutch exhibition. Not Europeans.
quote: The National Museum of Antiquities in the Netherlands organized an exhibition of Egyptian antiquities purportedly in support of the Afrocentric theory which states dark-skinned Africans were the actual rulers of ancient Egypt, according to antiquities expert Abd al-Rahim Rihan, who heads a campaign to defend the Egyptian civilization.
The exhibition presented showed a restoration of Tutankhamun’s mask portraying King Tut with black features.
According to Rihan, the National Museum of Antiquities in the Netherlands committed two grave mistakes: the first was insulting Egyptian civilization by portraying Tutankhamun as black, and the second was cloning an Egyptian antiquity.
Article 39 of the Protection of Antiquities Law No. 117 of 1983 and its amendments, stipulates that only the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Egypt may produce modern models of antiquities, provided that it is stamped by it.
The council may license others or cooperate with any party it determines to produce these models according to specifications and conditions that the council determines, Rihan said.
It is prohibited to circulate any models produced in violation of these specifications, he added.
A member of the House of Representatives Ahmed Bilal al-Burlusy submitted a request for a briefing addressed to Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly, and Minister of Tourism and Antiquities Ahmed Issa, regarding the measures that were taken to confront the distortion of Egyptian civilization in the Amsterdam museum.
So in this debate Egyptians are actually involved, it is not only an European thing.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Seems that at least some Egyptians have become involved in these debates.
But honestly some Egyptians also have demanded at least some of the most iconic ancient object back to Egypt from European museums. Even Zahi Hawass has been active in that fight.
And Egyptians seem to be the ones who protested most about the Dutch exhibition. Not Europeans.
quote: The National Museum of Antiquities in the Netherlands organized an exhibition of Egyptian antiquities purportedly in support of the Afrocentric theory which states dark-skinned Africans were the actual rulers of ancient Egypt, according to antiquities expert Abd al-Rahim Rihan, who heads a campaign to defend the Egyptian civilization.
The exhibition presented showed a restoration of Tutankhamun’s mask portraying King Tut with black features.
According to Rihan, the National Museum of Antiquities in the Netherlands committed two grave mistakes: the first was insulting Egyptian civilization by portraying Tutankhamun as black, and the second was cloning an Egyptian antiquity.
Article 39 of the Protection of Antiquities Law No. 117 of 1983 and its amendments, stipulates that only the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Egypt may produce modern models of antiquities, provided that it is stamped by it.
The council may license others or cooperate with any party it determines to produce these models according to specifications and conditions that the council determines, Rihan said.
It is prohibited to circulate any models produced in violation of these specifications, he added.
A member of the House of Representatives Ahmed Bilal al-Burlusy submitted a request for a briefing addressed to Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly, and Minister of Tourism and Antiquities Ahmed Issa, regarding the measures that were taken to confront the distortion of Egyptian civilization in the Amsterdam museum.
So in this debate Egyptians are actually involved, it is not only an European thing.
Whether or not Egyptians are involved or not, the Golden Face Mask of King Tutankhamun is a black face mask and that was not invented by or created by anybody in America, Europe or anywhere else but the Nile Valley. The Nile Valley is in Africa, has always been in Africa and its history is always going to be part of African history.
Again, this is the same era of the images I previously posted which are also black African. This isn't something that people in America "made up". So whatever it is these people are "debating", it isn't facts.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
The curator of the exhibition in the Netherlands, Dr Daniel Soliman, reviews The prince of Egypt a film that was never released in Egypt
quote: The Egyptian government banned it for its portrayal of a prophet, often considered forbidden in Islam. But perhaps more significantly, the movie outraged several Egyptians who believed it misrepresented ancient Egyptian history. Similar concerns were the reason for the Egyptian ban of the 2014 motion picture “Exodus.” Nonetheless, “The Prince of Egypt” is, in many ways, demonstrably inspired by Egyptian material culture. Here’s an Egyptologist’s breakdown of selected aspects of the film.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: The curator of the exhibition in the Netherlands, Dr Daniel Soliman, reviews The prince of Egypt a film that was never released in Egypt
quote: The Egyptian government banned it for its portrayal of a prophet, often considered forbidden in Islam. But perhaps more significantly, the movie outraged several Egyptians who believed it misrepresented ancient Egyptian history. Similar concerns were the reason for the Egyptian ban of the 2014 motion picture “Exodus.” Nonetheless, “The Prince of Egypt” is, in many ways, demonstrably inspired by Egyptian material culture. Here’s an Egyptologist’s breakdown of selected aspects of the film.
Most of that controversy has to do with the fact that Egypt does not believe Ramses II is the pharaoh of the exodus.
quote: A temporary exhibition titled “Ramses the Great, the Gold of the Pharaohs” is taking place in Paris from April 7 to Sept. 6, showcasing the sarcophagus of Ramses II, aka Ramses the Great, third king of the 19th Dynasty whose reign (1279-1213 B.C.) was the second-longest in Egyptian history.
When many Western and Israeli media covered the exhibition, they allegedly claimed that Ramses was the “Pharaoh of the Exodus,” a notion that is strongly rejected by Egyptian archaeologists.
Mostafa Waziry, secretary-general of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, said that there is no archaeological or historical evidence in Egyptian antiquities that indicates at all that King Ramses II is the Pharaoh of the Exodus, or even any other Egyptian king.
“Ramses II has no relation either near nor far with the figure who was in power during the Exodus,” Waziry told Al-Monitor. “The one who was in power in the time of Moses was probably from the Hyksos,” in reference to the foreign dynasty that ruled parts of Egypt between 1638 and 1530 B.C.
He stressed that the Exodus has no relation with any ancient Egyptian king.
But beyond that, the problem modern Egypt has is there are 2500 years separating the end of the indigenous dynasties of the ancient Nile and modern Egypt. And in between that time, the country all but forgot about its ancient monuments and allowed the artifacts to be taken by Europe. That history cannot be denied. There is as much time between now and Cleopatra as there was between Cleopatra and the Old Kingdom. You can't just skip over that period of time and pretend nothing happened or changed.
quote: The Eyalet of Egypt operated as an administrative division of the Ottoman Empire from 1517 to 1867. It originated as a result of the conquest of Mamluk Egypt by the Ottomans in 1517, following the Ottoman–Mamluk War (1516–17) and the absorption of Syria into the Empire in 1516.[1] The Ottomans administered Egypt as an eyalet of their Empire from 1517 until 1867, with an interruption during the French occupation of 1798 to 1801.
Egypt always proved a difficult province for the Ottoman Sultans to control, due in part to the continuing power and influence of the Mamluks, the Egyptian military caste who had ruled the country for centuries. As such, Egypt remained semi-autonomous under the Mamluks until Napoleon Bonaparte's French forces invaded in 1798. After Anglo-Turkish forces expelled the French in 1801, Muhammad Ali Pasha, an Albanian military commander of the Ottoman army in Egypt, seized power in 1805, and de facto established the Khedivate of Egypt.
Egypt under the Muhammad Ali dynasty remained nominally an Ottoman province. In reality, the eyalet was practically independent, and actually went to war twice with the empire—in 1831–33 and 1839–41. Istanbul (Constantinople) granted Egypt the status of an autonomous vassal state or Khedivate in 1867. Isma'il Pasha (Khedive from 1863 to 1879) and Tewfik Pasha (Khedive from 1879 to 1892) governed Egypt as a quasi-independent state under Ottoman suzerainty until the British occupation of 1882. Nevertheless, the Khedivate of Egypt (1867–1914) remained a de jure Ottoman province until 5 November 1914, when it was declared by the British Empire a British protectorate in reaction to the Young Turks of the Ottoman Empire joining the First World War on the side of the Central Powers (October–November 1914).
quote: "Okuz" Mehmed Pasha ("Mehmed Pasha the Ox"; died 23 December 1619), also known as Kara Mehmed Pasha ("the Black") or "Kul Kıran" Mehmed Pasha ("the Slavebreaker"), was an Ottoman statesman, administrator and military figure of the early 17th century who held the office of Grand Vizier twice, the first time from 17 October 1614 to 17 November 1616 (during the reign of Ahmed I) and the second time from 18 January 1619 to 23 December 1619 (during the reign of Osman II the Young). He was also governor of Egypt from 1607 to 1611. Okuz Mehmed's nickname "Kul Kiran" (slavebreaker) came from his success in crushing the mutiny in Egypt during the early 1600s (soldiers were often known as kul or slave).
Someone started a petition against the exhibition. Interesting to see how many will sign it
Petition Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Young Egyptian Egyptology student (according to her video) talks about Netflix Cleopatra
quote: You can lie and spend money on cheap projects but my country's history and legacy will always shine and be appreciated by the world !and by us EGYPTIANS before anyone else stop falsifying my history for money or other goals
So Egypt has been a part of popular culture for a long time in the West, yet these Egyptians only get outraged when black people do it.
Again, they are only hiding behind this Cleopatra show because it is obviously a distortion of facts, but they don't want to address the volumes of evidence for the ancient Nile Valley being black African.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Now and then Egypt has protested against certain films. They already protested against Elisabeth Taylor as Cleopatra due to political reasons. Same with Gal Gadots Cleopatra (a film which never materialized). So they are not happy with all Western representations of her, or of Egyptian history.
Also their own films have gotten in trouble some times, like "The Emigrant" for showing certain Biblical figures.
But nowadays the protests got extra intensive, and they are also more visible because of internet. If some Egyptians in the old time was not satisfied not many outside Egypt learned about it.
It must also be acknowledged that the black and white thing obviously is a bit sensitive. But a film like "La Reine Soleil" where Egyptians are shown rather dark seem to have been mostly accepted (except for some rumblings from Zahi Hawass). Maybe it faired better because it was French. Seems some Egyptians today dislike any attempts of African Americans to use ancient Egypt as a symbol for their own culture and issues. Many Egyptians (at least online) seem to see it as cultural appropriation.
And it seems some of them have a dislike of seeing their culture in any way associated with Black American culture, and maybe with Black culture overall.
When it concerns the exhibition in the Netherlands, maybe also the idea of associating Tutankhamon and Ancient Egypt with American Hip Hop culture is considered extra insulting for some Egyptians.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
.
.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: White people have been making movies and tv shows about the Nile Valley for years, so why haven't these Egyptians had anything to say about that?
So Egypt has been a part of popular culture for a long time in the West, yet these Egyptians only get outraged when black people do it.
Again, they are only hiding behind this Cleopatra show because it is obviously a distortion of facts, but they don't want to address the volumes of evidence for the ancient Nile Valley being black African.
See if you can match some of these attributes in a production with Europeans playing Egyptians
1) a Documentary
2) produced by a one of the leading entertainment services worldwide (in this case Netflix)
3) Executive producer (or actor, etc some person associated with it) is very famous (ex. Jada Pinkett Smith)
4) A classics professor makes a racial statement about an historical person in the trailer (here, Cleopatra)
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
And it seems some of them have a dislike of seeing their culture in any way associated with Black American culture, and maybe with Black culture overall.
Adele James is British But suppose Queen Cleopatra was played by an African actor, neither Brutish or American, a woman living in Africa today with similar appearance to Adele James and like Adele James had one parent of European decent and another of African descent -and if this was produced by a major entertainment venue
Are we to believe those same Egyptian nationalists would not have a problem with it?
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
One can wonder what they would think of having Cleopatra, or maybe better some other person from older times, played by an Egyptian actor from Southern Egypt with dark skin?
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Interestingly they seem not to have minded an actress with Native American ancestry playing Ankhesenamun in The Mummy and in The Mummy Returns. Maybe she was not dark enough for them to protest.
Now you've got it
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
In the 2017 version of The Mummy the protagonist is played by Sofia Boutella, an Algerian actor and model. She is also rather light skinned so the Egyptians seem not to have protested. And in fact she is also an African, so at least she is from the right continent, and from the Northern part.
Sofia Boutella Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
One can also contemplate over if Jada Pinkett and Netflix had made only a fictional tale about Cleopatra and not a documentary, how it would have been received. Maybe there would not have been such a storm around it. And if they had skipped Shelley Haleys grandmother Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
This is a fragment from the Louvre from the wall of the tomb Amenhotep III The colossal head at the British museum has similar features
So if an Egyptian actor who resembled this played Amenhotep III, the Egyptian nationalists would have no ground to complain but some would probably not like like it
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
See I dont understand why they think that they can write off the coin as being from a mythological figure instead of people inside the land.
White people are not telling the truth of this and the Other Alexander coin is the only one from his lifetime, It did not say there were ten.
I do not believe that these coins was from mythological figure. It seems to be a way of writing off the black figures of Greece
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
For a deeper dive into the subject of Africans in Western art there is a book series consisting of 10 book. The first volume deals with the time from the Pharaohs to the Fall of the Roman Empire.
Here is the first volume
There is also an additional book named The Image of the Black in African and Asian Art
Heres another Greek statue from Greece that shows a Black Person:
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Heres another coin of a Black African, this time from lesbos.
To write them off as myth type figures is share looney bin nonsense and shows the bias and lies of the european person:
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
KING which of these coins did Cleopatra most resemble?
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
The young YouTuber Nora has a theory that the Netflix series is a kind of diversion created by the powers in charge, to draw Egypts attention away from the many stolen objects that are housed in European and American museums. Lately Egypt has campaigned to get at least some of those objects back. By making such a documentary black people would become the enemy instead. And people like Jada Pinkett Smith bought right into it and became pawns in the hands of certain interests.
Transcript from Noras video
quote: let me tell you my theory why all of this is happening right now Egyptians have been going rogue about their stolen artifacts they have been making a lot of movements there's a lot of riots recently in front of the British Museum and the Louvre really managed to get a few artifacts so now what they're doing like the Matrix leaders this is what they're doing they are trying to distract Egyptians they're trying to give us something new to be worried about giving us a new enemy this is a matrix leader mentality and they're basically throwing black people under the bus they're throwing you guys under the bus and you guys are falling for it and they're just giving us a new enemy they're like hey no no no we're not the racist ones they're the racist ones they're the bad ones hate them for a while so we can be a little bit distracted about our artifact situation with this whole Cleopatra stuff it's like killing two birds with one stone too because you
Maybe she has a point. The number of Ancient Egyptian artefacts and monuments in foreign museums are really staggering. Here is a short overview (and it is not complete, there are more museums with Egyptin artefacts)
quote:Egyptian monuments reside in over 39 museums worldwide
Egypt today 2019
The British Museum in London hosts over 100,000 artifacts (not including The Windorf collection, which was gifted to the museum in 2001. The collection includes over 6 million artifacts from prehistoric times in Egypt and Sudan.
The Egyptian Museum at the New Berlin Museum in Germany hosts about 80,000 artifacts. Petrie Museum in the UK hosts about 80,000 artifacts. In addition, the Louvre Museum in Paris, France displays about 50,000 Egyptian artifacts. Also, the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, USA displays around 45,000 artifacts.
Furthermore, 42,000 Egyptian artifacts reside in the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology in Ann Arbor USA, while the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, UK displays 40,000 Egyptian artifacts.
Furthermore, the Egyptian Museum in Torino, Italy displays 32500 ancient Egyptian artifacts. In addition, the Oriental Institute in Chicago USA hosts 30,000 artifacts. The Metropolitan Museum for Arts in New York, USA displays 26,000 artifacts.
The Royal Ontario Museum in Canada hosts 25,000 Egyptian artifacts. Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology in California displays around 17,000 Egyptian artifacts. The Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge, UK hosts nearly 16,000 ancient Egyptian pieces.
Moreover, the World Museum in Liverpool displays around 16,000 Egyptian monuments. Over 12,000 ancient Egyptian artifacts reside in the Kunsthistorisches Art Museum in Vienna, Austria.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Now and then Egypt has protested against certain films. They already protested against Elisabeth Taylor as Cleopatra due to political reasons. Same with Gal Gadots Cleopatra (a film which never materialized). So they are not happy with all Western representations of her, or of Egyptian history.
Also their own films have gotten in trouble some times, like "The Emigrant" for showing certain Biblical figures.
But nowadays the protests got extra intensive, and they are also more visible because of internet. If some Egyptians in the old time was not satisfied not many outside Egypt learned about it.
It must also be acknowledged that the black and white thing obviously is a bit sensitive. But a film like "La Reine Soleil" where Egyptians are shown rather dark seem to have been mostly accepted (except for some rumblings from Zahi Hawass). Maybe it faired better because it was French. Seems some Egyptians today dislike any attempts of African Americans to use ancient Egypt as a symbol for their own culture and issues. Many Egyptians (at least online) seem to see it as cultural appropriation.
And it seems some of them have a dislike of seeing their culture in any way associated with Black American culture, and maybe with Black culture overall.
When it concerns the exhibition in the Netherlands, maybe also the idea of associating Tutankhamon and Ancient Egypt with American Hip Hop culture is considered extra insulting for some Egyptians.
Again, what are they protesting about? There are thousands of images from the ancient Nile showing the people of Kemet as black Africans. And yes there are populations in Egypt today that have similar features, but for the most part those features are found across Africa. So again, why are they protesting African Americans using the ancient Nile in pop culture, but not Europeans? It is bull sh*t. Africans did not steal the antiquities from the Nile. And it was the Egyptians, under the Ottomans, who gave those artifacts away.
Again, the last 2000 years of history cannot be ignored like they never happened, but this is precisely what some of these people are trying to do. As in pretending the modern people and culture of Egypt is the same as it was 3,000 years ago, when it isn't. And the primary distinction is that most of the African elements of culture have been lost over that time. Which is why you have to look outside Egypt to see the remnants of those older cultural traditions. So all these protestations are just them trying to promote the fallacy of the ancient Nile not being African. Otherwise, there is nothing to protest about.
Pop culture is not 'history' and you the influence of the culture of the ancient Nile all over pop culture in fiction, movies, cartoons and video games. But when black people do it, all of a sudden it is a problem. Yet when Europeans do it, that generally isn't a problem, because to this day, Egyptology as a discipline, is controlled by Europe.
KING which of these coins did Cleopatra most resemble?
thats the thing Lioness white people is known to fabricate statues and coins that make them look as if they are white, yet its far from the case.
I would say Cleopatra could possibly of looked like the fourth coin going from let to right
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Many people do not know so much about history, and they maybe not care, but pop culture reaches out to people in another way with music, TV, films, computer games and more. It affects more people- And now in the days of internet pop culture has become more available than usual. So many will take notice about history first when it is depicted in pop culture. And if the images in pop culture in some way disturbs your view of the world, or challenges your National pride, prejudice or whatever then there will be a reaction. Obviously many Egyptians feel more disturbed by "black" pop culture than by "white" pop culture, at least when it comes to depictions of their history.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
It seems that the egyptians are sucking up to white people, For them to have a problem with adele James seems to be a part of arabic ego and there dream of all Africans being slaves.
Not only are egyptians forgetting the amount of invasion into egypt lower egypt was the place mostly affected and claimed as part of arabic hegemony.
Arabs seem rather quick to fight Black people on anything that has to do with egypt.
Arabs are people who entered egypt lastly yet had the biggest impact on the egyptian population with islam.
Upper egypt has been a place where the Black Egyptians were able to dwell inside peace and comfort from the many invasions.
remember Egypt is under islamic rule and is considered part of the Arab states.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
this is a Gold Coin of an Black greek I doubt these coins are myth:
Not only is more Black Greeks shown I doubt it comes from Greek myth.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
The French animated film La Reine Soleil from 2007 was allowed in Egypt, but under conditions that it was made clear that it was a fantasy.
Seems nothing was said about the dark skin of the protagonists.
quote: In order to allow the display of the film, the committee asked the Egyptian film distributor “Good News” group to write on the film, in English and Arabic, that the story of the film is a fantasy of his writer and has nothing in relation with the ancient Egyptian historical facts.
quote:Originally posted by KING: this is a Gold Coin of an Black greek I doubt these coins are myth:
Not only is more Black Greeks shown I doubt it comes from Greek myth.
We all can go and see there are Greek coins with heads looking like this There are many websites that sell ancient coins that have these They also have Greek coins that look like other types
It's no secret
So if this thread is about Cleopatra why do you keep spamming these random coins?
I have no problem with a different thread about these coins
But I think you are posting these random Greeks coins that you like because you don't like the subject of Cleopatra or the Netflix documentary You are just trying to mess up the thread
Why don't you just make a thread about Greek coins Why are you trying to mess up this thread?
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Kathleen Martinez is a Dominican archaeologist who is searching for Cleopatras tomb at Taposiris Magna. Seems like she likes to draw pictures too. Here is her take on Cleopatra
quote: My views on Cleopatra Netflix series, racial profiling, and American ideologies that make zero sense to me. As you all know Egyptians are very upset about the Cleopatra documentary for black washing Cleopatra, falsifying Egyptian history and incorrectly representing Egyptians. Here is why we are mad.
Here is a bit parodic take on Shelley Haleys statement that her grandmother said that Cleopatra was black.
Angry mother Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Deleted.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Many people do not know so much about history, and they maybe not care, but pop culture reaches out to people in another way with music, TV, films, computer games and more. It affects more people- And now in the days of internet pop culture has become more available than usual. So many will take notice about history first when it is depicted in pop culture. And if the images in pop culture in some way disturbs your view of the world, or challenges your National pride, prejudice or whatever then there will be a reaction. Obviously many Egyptians feel more disturbed by "black" pop culture than by "white" pop culture, at least when it comes to depictions of their history.
The actual issue is that modern Egypt as an independent country has only existed for about 100 years. Before that it was a domain of foreign powers with the people exploited as peasants and serfs. As such, in the early days of Egyptian independence, some have tried to pretend that 2,500 years since the last native dynasties have not passed. And in doing so have tried to act like modern Egypt is a direct continuation of the pharaonic era when it is not. Modern Egypt's identity and culture is Arab and has been oriented towards the Mediterranean, Levant, Turkey and Arabia since the Greek invasion. This is why the idea of a black woman playing Cleopatra offends them because they see themselves as Mediterranean and not African, with Cleopatra epitomizing Mediterranean people. Identifying this way is precisely why modern Egypt is so far separated from dynastic culture, because that culture was African, not Mediterranean or Arab. That is why they are taking such a stance against this series, even though the Greek conquest of Egypt is the beginning of 2,500 years of the country being systematically looted by foreign powers. The theft of artifacts and culture is just the tip of the iceberg in that looting as the entire country has had its wealth plundered over that time. And they will have to come to grips with that as part of the path forward, just like most African and formerly colonized countries. But nobody is trying to pretend that modern countries are direct continuations of ancient 4,000 year old cultures. The Greeks aren't doing it and neither are the Arabs (partly due to Islam).
quote:
Abstract
In the 1930s and 1940s, Hassan al-Banna's Muslim Brotherhood grew into a mass movement, but the retreat of pharaonism before Islam and Arabism was not the rout that is sometimes assumed. Some deplored the pitting of pharaonism against Islam and Arabism as a false dichotomy and embraced the entire Egyptian past. Saad Zaghlul's mausoleum and his statues in Cairo and Alexandria were steeped in pharaonism. Even those with little interest in ancient Egypt took pride in Selim Hassan's and Sami Gabra's discoveries and advancing careers. Journalist Salama Musa, who had named his own son Khufu for the builder of the Great Pyramid, stood by his earlier pharaonist nationalism. Among the younger generation, Ahmad Husayn confessed to “pharaonic mania” even as his Young Egypt movement took on a more Islamic tone, King Faruq avidly collected pharaonic antiquities, schoolboy Gamal Abdel Nasser thrilled to Tawfiq al-Hakim's pharaonist Return of the Spirit, and Naguib Mahfouz set his first three novels in ancient Egypt.
Always hard to find an own identity after so long time of foreign rule. Since it during so long time has been non African countries that colonized them their identity is still geared towards the Mediterranean and Middle East, not so much inwards against Africa. But their interest for their ancient history can be a way to find their own identity, somewhere between North and South, East and West. We will see how the new young generations will handle identity issues. It seems to bother some of them that foreigners in different ways try to define their history and identity, and at least some of them also dislike that foreign museums house parts of their cultural heritage. Seem that young people in different ways want to reclaim their heritage.
So maybe foreigners on social media should abstain from trying to tell them who their ancestors were. Especially people who never sat their foot in Egypt.
Some foreigners statements can sound quite abrasive, like this one by Dr Umar (I think he visited Egypt though (?)), which is commented by a young Egyptian woman:
Here is a graph illustrating the National Geographic results. It seems though that the original study can not be found online anymore
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by KING: this is a Gold Coin of an Black greek I doubt these coins are myth:
Not only is more Black Greeks shown I doubt it comes from Greek myth.
We all can go and see there are Greek coins with heads looking like this There are many websites that sell ancient coins that have these They also have Greek coins that look like other types
It's no secret
So if this thread is about Cleopatra why do you keep spamming these random coins?
I have no problem with a different thread about these coins
But I think you are posting these random Greeks coins that you like because you don't like the subject of Cleopatra or the Netflix documentary You are just trying to mess up the thread
Why don't you just make a thread about Greek coins Why are you trying to mess up this thread?
I am not trying to mess with the thread, I am trying to say that there is a Population of Greeks that Possibly lived in Greece back inside he Ancient Population of Greecs and were recorded with the population of greeks that looked Black African. Hence the Ptolmeys looking a bit quite Black and looking like they could of passed for Black inside Ancient Egypt. Hence the coin proves that Ancient greeks were committed to there Black African people of Ancient Greece.
Coins were minted as a way of knowing who was part of the Greek kingdom. And these coins proves that Black Africans were parts of Greece rule and inside the past was not a minority but a sizeable majority just like the pictures of Greeks inside Ancient Egypt portrayed a Black African link:
These are Greece looking Blacks that Look like the coins:
Hence the cleopatra could of Been from these families.
The Ancient Egyptians did not rebel against the Ptolemy's and that possibly could be the reason
Ptolemy himself looks decidedly Black:
cant ignore that they europeans scrape the color off the statues.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Always hard to find an own identity after so long time of foreign rule. Since it during so long time has been non African countries that colonized them their identity is still geared towards the Mediterranean and Middle East, not so much inwards against Africa. But their interest for their ancient history can be a way to find their own identity, somewhere between North and South, East and West. We will see how the new young generations will handle identity issues. It seems to bother some of them that foreigners in different ways try to define their history and identity, and at least some of them also dislike that foreign museums house parts of their cultural heritage. Seem that young people in different ways want to reclaim their heritage.
So maybe foreigners on social media should abstain from trying to tell them who their ancestors were. Especially people who never sat their foot in Egypt.
Some foreigners statements can sound quite abrasive, like this one by Dr Umar (I think he visited Egypt though (?)), which is commented by a young Egyptian woman:
How modern Egypt decides to evolve is surely their decision to make. But that does not change what as happened in the past. Islam, Arabs, Romans, Ottomans, Greeks and Persians are all part of that history just like the previous dynastic kingdoms. All of those groups are not the same and they each have a distinct historical culture and traditions. These are simple facts just like the fact that modern Greece is not "Hellenistic". Just like modern Sudan is not Kushite. Like I said, some people in modern Egypt want to pretend that they are a literal continuation of the ancient dynastic era which is absolutely false. In other words they want to have their cake and eat it too. Britain has a direct continuity with ancient Britain after the Norman invasion, through direct royal lineage and culture tied to that. These are differences in cultural, political, linguistic and religious traditions as much as phenotype. Almost no population on earth can claim direct continuity of culture and traditions going back 5,000 years. And even in Arabia they shun much of their history going back before Islam as the "age of ignorance". The only reason they are not doing this in Egypt is because of the money from tourism. Arabia has oil and therefore can afford other ways of promoting themselves and their culture other than relying on the ancient past.
And you see the various phases of the history of Egypt in the faces of the people. It isn't an either or issue. All of these periods are parts of that history, not just the dynastic era.
This coin, or one similar to it, is mentioned in a site where they sell coins. It was sold for 7000 GBP
It is one of about 500 Greek coins on that site, and the only one which depicts an unmistacable African.
quote: Ionia, Phokaia EL Hekte. Circa 560-545 BC. Head of African left, seal downward behind / Quadripartite incuse square punch. Bodenstedt 24; SNG Copenhagen -; BMC -; SNG von Aulock -; Boston MFA -. 2.56g, 10mm.
Near Extremely Fine. Extremely Rare.
Though Aethiopians - the Greek name for all Africans characterised by dark skin and short hair - feature regularly in Greek art, their depiction on coins is by contrast very infrequent.
We know that the Greeks were well acquainted with black Africans, since they appear often in Greek literature as mythical or semi-mythical characters and warriors; it appears that they were known in the Greek world as early as the Minoan period, where they were employed by Minoan commanders as auxiliary troops. Indeed, if we may believe Quintus of Smyrna, the Greeks encountered black Africans in the army of Memnon at Troy. Black African contingents also formed a part of Xerxes' army and according to some scholars fought at Marathon (see Frazer, J. G., 1913: Pausanias' Description of Greece, II. Macmillan, London, p 434; and Graindor, P., 1908: Les Vases au Nègre. Musée Belge, p 29).
Of the surviving art objects representing black Africans, many appear to be the work of artists who modelled from life. These depictions invariably display an astonishing degree of individuality, vitality, and energy, presenting scenes and designs that appealed to the craftsmen; one might surmise that the exotic appearance of such individuals presented the artist with a challenge to represent the distinctive features of blacks, whose aesthetic qualities are readily conveyed in pieces such as the present hekte. The closest parallels we find in the numismatic record for this portrait can be seen in the silver staters of an uncertain (possibly Karian) mint that have appeared in 2008 (Gemini IV, 195) and 2009 (NAC 52, 177) that bear an incuse head of a negroid man, and a small issue of silver fractions on Lesbos that also show a male head, this time in relief. Both however are highly stylised, and may not necessarily represent the features of a particular individual.
And you see the various phases of the history of Egypt in the faces of the people. It isn't an either or issue. All of these periods are parts of that history, not just the dynastic era.
I think it is not too uncommon that some countries populations want to try to tie themselves to ancient days of glory, Egyptians are hardly alone in doing so. But not all people are all the time challenged by foreigners about their identity.
But some of them may overreact. For example Black Americans (or Black Africans) are not likely to invade Egypt in the near future, despite some rhetoric on the net about Egyptians being invaders or foreigners.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING:
Ptolemy himself looks decidedly Black:
why are you posting about Ptolemy II who is not even female and not even the father of Cleopatra > when coins and sculptures of Cleopatra exist? She was female begin with that and was number VII
Bas relief fragment portraying Cleopatra VII CIRCA 1997: Egyptian civilization - Ptolemaic period - Bas relief fragment portraying Cleopatra (3rd-1st century b.C.). (Photo By DEA PICTURE LIBRARY/De Agostini via Getty Images)
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
^^ KING There's the link to coins for all the Ptolomies, the whole family in Egypt
When these Greeks portray themselves as Egyptians in sculptures that is done to try to make the native Egyptians accept them as part of their cultural tradition and see then as having god status. It's a hustle, look into it. Even then that bust of Ptolomy II does not resemble that gold coin head. Plus there's not even and color to know what it was.
If you show some coins from Lesbos Greece and pick out only the African looking ones that is is fine for coins from there but these are the coins from Egypt
The topic here is a female
named Cleopatra VII
Guess what? they made coins of her
If you want to see a lot of Ptolemaic art with females depicted look at Temple of Kom Ombo and the Temple of Dendera
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
And you see the various phases of the history of Egypt in the faces of the people. It isn't an either or issue. All of these periods are parts of that history, not just the dynastic era.
I think it is not too uncommon that some countries populations want to try to tie themselves to ancient days of glory, Egyptians are hardly alone in doing so. But not all people are all the time challenged by foreigners about their identity.
But some of them may overreact. For example Black Americans (or Black Africans) are not likely to invade Egypt in the near future, despite some rhetoric on the net about Egyptians being invaders or foreigners.
Acknowledging history is one thing, claiming literal direct continuity in culture and tradition is something else. Modern Italy does not claim to be a direct continuation of ancient Rome, neither does Greece, Syria, Iraq or Iran or anywhere else. Doesn't mean they don't identify with their ancient history.
And anti-black sentiment has always been part of the discussion of the ancient Nile Valley, regardless of the facts. Those facts did not come from "African Americans" and if people are offended or upset about facts, then it is their problem with those facts, no matter how they try and spin it otherwise. The same way they want to argue about Cleopatra being Mediterranean, can be used to argue for a black African King Tut, Akhenaton and so forth. But they don't want to discuss that and would rather focus on Cleopatra because she was Mediterranean and they want to act as if the history of the Nile was always Mediterranean oriented, when it was not. That is just a fact and no amount of whining will change that. If modern Egypt doesn't want to be African, then that is their issue. But honestly a lot of Africans have the same problem as well. Just look next door at Sudan and elsewhere. Ultimately many people in the third world have an inferiority complex and in Africa it is only made worse when it comes to the propaganda of Africans not having any history of culture or civilization.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Acknowledging history is one thing, claiming literal direct continuity in culture and tradition is something else.
where is some person of status or notability of some kind (as opposed to Ms. Anybody on youtube) saying that modern Egyptians have "direct continuity in culture and tradition" ?
That sounds like a straw man to me
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Maybe the conflicts in the area also can make some Egyptians becoming a bit sensitive. I heard one girl on the net say that she feared that the history of Israel being created could repeat itself in Egypt and that USA and other Western powers would plant African Americans there instead of Jews. It may sound rather conspiratorial and exaggerated, but sometimes history can leave some marks in peoples minds.
And videos like the ones I linked to do not make things better
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Maybe the conflicts in the area also can make some Egyptians becoming a bit sensitive. I heard one girl on the net say that she feared that the history of Israel being created could repeat itself in Egypt and that USA and other Western powers would plant African Americans there instead of Jews. It may sound rather conspiratorial and exaggerated, but sometimes history can leave some marks in peoples minds.
And videos like the ones I linked to do not make things better
You can find all kind of nonsense on social media. All of this is just a straw man to avoid the unavoidable facts of the black African history on the Nile that goes back to the beginning of humans in Africa. And this Netflix Cleopatra program is part of that propaganda by deliberately avoiding any actual black Queens on the Nile.
And this boils down to modern Egypt doesn't see itself as African and they are trying to extend that sentiment into the ancient past.
quote: As Omnia El Shakry has shown, another longtime European resident in Egypt—the Italian physician Onofrio Abbate—conducted a series of experiments around this time comparing the mummified remains of skeletons from the ancient necropolis of Kawamil with cadavers at the Qasr al-'Ayni hospital in Cairo. Through the observation of bodies in Egypt from 1845 to 1915, Abbate built up a complex and influential theory of Egyptian racial distinctiveness that drew heavily on European race science.
The heyday of Egyptian Pharaonic nationalism came in the 1920s and 30s—just as fascist movements were sweeping through Europe. It was spurred on by the discovery of the tomb of Tut Aknh Amun in 1922. When the leader of the anti-British revolution, Sa'd Zaghlul, passed away in 1926, his mausoleum was erected in grand Pharaonic style in the middle of Cairo's posh Garden City neighbourhood.
As Hussein Omar pointed out immediately in the wake of the Pharaohs' Golden Parade, it was 1931 when the dictatorial politician Ismail Sidqi set a precedent that would echo for nine decades by relocating 24 mummies from the Egyptian museum to Zaghlul's tomb.
By positing a link between the ancient Pharaohs from millennia ago and people living in Egypt today, Sisi's brand of neo-Pharaonism draws on this legacy of racial nationalism, even while jettisoning some of the pseudoscientific rhetoric that has fallen out of fashion.
We saw it among his supporters when he first took power, like the Antiquities Minister and famous Egyptologist Zahi Hawass, who likened Sisi to the Pharaoh Mentuhotep II. It cropped up at the inauguration of the New Suez Canal in 2015, when Sisi declared: "Egypt is a great country and has a civilization of 7,000 years," and special coins were minted with Pharaonic lotus designs. During the Pharaohs' Golden parade, First Lady Intisar el-Sisi expressed her pride in "belonging to an ancient civilization."
And I am not saying that the people of Egypt are not descendants of the pharaohs, but they are also partly descendants of Greeks, Syrians, Turks, Circassians, Arabs, Romans and so forth as well.
And yes, the Greeks, Romans, Arabs and Turks were invaders. But because these people want to identify as being "Mediterranean" they refuse to admit that Cleopatra and the Ptolomies were invaders along with the Romans.
And of course the history of the Ottoman invasion was written by Egyptians themselves:
Yes, social media have an ability to exaggerate conflicts and blow things out of proportion.
But maybe outsiders should try to abstain from provoking the Egyptians and call them invaders, or opportunist and similar. Academic debate is one thing, while such attacks do not make anything better.
And many young people today follow social media and get involved in these discussions.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: this Netflix Cleopatra program is part of that propaganda by deliberately avoiding any actual black Queens on the Nile.
That's a conspiracy theory you made up with zero evidence
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Yes, social media have an ability to exaggerate conflicts and blow things out of proportion.
But maybe outsiders should try to abstain from provoking the Egyptians and call them invaders, or opportunist and similar. Academic debate is one thing, while such attacks do not make anything better.
And many young people today follow social media and get involved in these discussions.
Again, the history of the invasions of Egypt are documented history. What is it with these facts that people are challenging? The Greeks invaded Egypt. The Romans invaded Egypt. The Mamluks Invaded Egypt. The Ottomans Invaded Egypt.
quote: Muhammad ibn Iyas (b. June 1448; d.1522/4) is one of the most important historians in modern Egyptian history. He was an eyewitness to the Ottoman invasion of Egypt.
Of Circassian origin, he was one of the Memluks and was entitled Bada'I al-Zuhur fi Waqa'I al-Duhur.
His quotes have been used in many references like his statement about Al-Nasir Muhammad: "His name was mentioned everywhere like no other king's name. All the kings wrote to him, sent gifts to him and feared him. The whole of Egypt was in his grasp."
quote: Ibn Iyas (also Ayas) was a chronicler of the late Mamluk and early Ottoman periods in Egypt. In the absence of any known biography, the information about I.I.’s life is limited to that provided by the few passing references in his principal historical work Bada’i al-zuhur. I.I. belonged to the fourth generation of a Mamluk military family, whose origins go back to the first quarter of the 8th/14th century. I.I. writes that his father, Shihabaddin Ahmad b. Iyas, was among the awlad al-nas (Sons of Mamluks), and therefore not eligible for military career. Yet, he associated with emirs and powerful men of the state.
According to his own account, I.I. was born on 6 Rabi I 852/8 June 1447 and performed the hajj in 882/1477. Not known to hold any official position, he seems to have devoted his time to study and writing. He had considerable income from revenues from land holdings (iqta) granted by the Mamluk state to its military personnel and their families. The date of his death is not known. Judging by the fact that the last (i.e. eleventh) part of Bada’i was completed at the end of 928/1522 and that I.I. intended to write the twelfth part, one can conclude that he must have died after this date.
According to I.I.’s account, the Ottoman conquest of Cairo was traumatic. He compares it to the invasion by Nebuchadnezzar in antiquity and to the Mongol conquest of Bagdad in 1258. Despite the shock of the invasion with such a huge army, by the chronicler’s own admission, the number of civilian casualties was low. Even though Selim I ordered the execution of the Mamluks at first, he later changed his decision and integrated the Mamluks into the Ottoman army as a separate unit. I.I. recounts how later the Sultan even used the Mamluks to discipline unruly janissaries.
As a member of a family of awlad al-nas, I.I.’s pain is understandable. He often expresses his anger at the injustice of the Mamluks, and even writes that their fall was God’s punishment for their crimes. But in his judgment, the new masters were much worse. He describes the Ottomans as bad and ignorant Muslims who disregard the injunctions of the sharia. This includes Selim I, his qadis and his troops, who are accused of being pederasts and drinkers, who do not pray and do not fast during Ramadan. Similar to many of his Arab contemporaries, I.I. considers Ottoman qanun (administrative law) as un-Islamic. He regards the yasaq tax on marriage contracts as particularly unjust and contravening the Prophet’s sunna. I.I. describes the Ottoman army as a rabble in which one could not tell an officer from a soldier.
The fifth volume of Bada’i is full of criticism of the innovations in the administration of Cairo that were introduced by the Ottomans. I.I. expresses the feelings of dismay in Cairo caused by the banishment to Istanbul of groups of people, notables and craftsmen, and relates that the exile of the last Abbasid caliph was seen as a symbolic blow to Cairo despite his political irrelevance. He also describes as oppressive and unjust the rule of Ha’ir Bey (d. Dhulqada 928/October 1522), the Mamluk governor of the Aleppo who had betrayed Sultan al-Ghawri and was awarded with the governorship of Egypt.
Maybe they do not always challenge facts if they get to hear the facts from their own experts and not by random people on social media who mostly have no ties to Egypt, and who more often than not never sat their foot in Egypt. Maybe they just do not trust such sources.
So in the end it is up to the schools and universities in Egypt to teach the latest research to young people. I am sure they would trust such sources more than foreigners on social media who call them invaders. Not a good way to get people to listen.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Maybe they do not always challenge facts if they get to hear the facts from their own experts and not by random people on social media who mostly have no ties to Egypt, and who more often than not never sat their foot in Egypt. Maybe they just do not trust such sources.
So in the end it is up to the schools and universities in Egypt to teach the latest research to young people. I am sure they would trust such sources more than foreigners on social media who call them invaders. Not a good way to get people to listen.
The Ptolemies were invaders of Egypt under Alexander. Are you seriously claiming that this is somehow not being taught in school? Cleopatra was one of them and represented a colonial power in Egypt. There is no other truth of Cleopatra. Just like Rome replaced Greece as the colonial power in Egypt. They weren't Egyptians.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Todays Egyptians are a mix of both the old Egyptians and later peoples like Persians, Greeks, Romans and Arabs. But since some of the ancient genetic material still exists in many now living Egyptians, they do not count themselves as invaders, just as the British of today do not see themselves as invaders even if many peoples have passed review in Great Britain since the land was first populated. Even many Americans today do not necessarily see themselves as invaders even if they have been in America much shorter time than for example Arabs have been in Egypt. Many people today are the result of invasions and migrations but they are seldom dogged on the net in the same fashion as Egyptians are.
Egyptians do not need African Americans or other foreigners telling them who they are. It is up to Egyptian schools and educators.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Nora, or Kemet Queen, has posted a new video, a small lesson about ancient Egypt. It seems she is rather suspicious against USA and Americans.
^Her youtube account started in 2014 I wonder how long she has been using the channel name "Kemet Queen"
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Painted limestone head of Hatshepsut, height 2 feet, Egyptian Museum, Cairo / Adele James
_____________________________
Go back in time Suppose Jada Pinkett Smith was beginning her African Queens series. The first one was Njinga but for the second Queen she had picked Hatshepsut instead of Cleopatra and with the same actress Adele James
What do you think the reaction would have been as compared to what actually occurred?
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^Her youtube account started in 2014 I wonder how long she has been using the channel name "Kemet Queen"
It is rather new. When I first saw her videos a couple of weeks ago she did not use that name.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
It seems jada wanted to focus on warrior queens that fought europeans but the kush queen would not get ratings like cleopatra plus there is talk from right wing youtubers that jada see herself like cleopatra and the actress playing her etc..
Her series should have not focus only on warrior queens.
Just imagine doing a episode about Queen Ahmose-Nefertari and the info that clearly backs it up plus it will focus on the early 18th dynasty and info they can not hide from, plus there is no dna info so far about it but there is art and other info.
Michel Gitton acknowledges Norman de Garis Davis' estimate that Ahmose-Nefertari is depicted with dark complexion (black) four times more often than light complexions (red and yellow).[25]: 74–5 He indicates that his own survey suggests a much lower figure although he could not provide a general figure as he could not himself verify the colors on site. He also noted there are other cases in which she is shown with a pink, golden, dark blue, or dark red skin color.[25]: 74–5 As observed by Gardiner, in some instances Ahmose-Nefertari's skin is blue,[27] a popular color symbolizing fertility, birth, rebirth and life and usually used to depict water and the heavens.[28]
In 1981 Gitton called the issue of Ahmose-Nefertari's black color "a serious gap in the Egyptological research, which allows approximations or untruths".[25]: 2 He pointed out that there is no known depiction of her painted during her lifetime (she is represented with the same light skin as other represented individuals in tomb TT15, before her deification); the earliest black skin depiction appears in tomb TT161, circa 150 years after her death.[25]: 11–12, 23, 74–5 [1]: 125 Barbara Lesko wrote in 1996 that Ahmose-Nefertari was "sometimes portrayed by later generations as having been black, although her coffin portrait gives her the typical light yellow skin of women."[29]
Highlighting Ahmose-Nefertari and her son's deification as patrons of Deir el-Medina as well her worship as 'Mistress of the Sky', 'Lady of the West' and goddess of resurrection, Joyce Tyldesley indicates in 2006 that frequently in this setting she was depicted with black skin which symbolizes "fertility and rebirth rather than decay".[9]: 90 Sigrid Hodel-Hoenes states in 2000 that her black skin color can be attributed to her role as deified patron of Deir el-Medina, the color black being a reflection of "fertile earth and of the Netherworld and death"[30]: 268 In 2011, Graciela Gestoso Singer states that her black or blue skin color is "a reference to her position as the mother of Egypt" and indicative of her role as a goddess of resurrection, since black is the color of death, the underworld, rebirth and fertility, as well as the fertile land of Egypt.[6] In 2003, Betsy Bryan wrote in The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt that "the factors linking Amenhotep I and his mother with the necropolis region, with deified rulers, and with rejuvenation generally was visually transmitted by representations of the pair with black or blue skin – both colours of resurrection."[31] In 2004 Aidan Dodson and Dyan Hilton recognized in a later depiction of the queen, "the black skin of a deity of resurrection" in connection to her role as a patron goddess of the Theban necropolis.[1]: 125 In 2009 Eleni Vassilika, noting that in a wooden statuette of the queen (now at the Museo Egizio) the face is painted black but the arms and feet are light in color, argued that the reason for the black coloring in that case was religious and not genetic.[32]: 78–9 In 2014, Margaret Bunson wrote that "the unusual depictions of Ahmose-Nefertari in blue-black tones of deification reflect her status and cult."[33] In a wooden votive statue of Ahmose-Nefertari, currently in the Louvre museum, her skin was painted red,[34] a color commonly seen symbolizing life or a higher being, or elevated status.[28]
Early 20th century archaeologists made observations on Ahmose-Nefertari's likely phenotype and genealogy, and also on the probable symbolic meaning of her most frequent representation in black or purplish black skin tones.[b] In 1974, Cheikh Anta Diop described her as "typically negroid."[42]: 17 In the controversial book Black Athena, Martin Bernal intimated that members of the royal family to which Ahmose-Nefertari belonged may have originated from Nubia, and, according to him, 18th dynasty pharaohs could generally be referred to as black.[c] Bernal's work has been embraced by Afrocentrists, but rejected by mainstream Egyptologists.[d]
I know some folks would debate the black color skin tone like they are doing to the word kemit. It looks like nora has made a recent video about that word and they will try to ignore the statue but the pictures showing her and husband with a dark brown skin tone and and other pictures showing egyptian art of this time period that gets ignored but must be pushed combined with the info below.
Ahmose-Nefertari
Mummy
quote:
According to Grafton Elliot Smith's description in 1912, the mummy's skin is blackened in the same manner as the majority of other contemporary mummies. He also associates the strands tied to her own hair with those of Nubian women's hair at the time of his writing. He adds that the shape of the cranium firmly supports her foreign origin.[18]: 13–14 Several authors highlight the significant prominence of Ahmose-Nefertari's front teeth as revealed in X-ray images, and also characterized as severe maxillary or dental-alveolar prognathism.[19]: 17 [8]: 31 [20]: 331–332, 341 The same authors bring attention to the presence of the same trait in Ahmose-Nefertari's grandmother Tetisheri, suggesting that it is genetically determined and inherited. Harris and Wente add that dental-alveolar prognathism is a common trait in both ancient and current Nubians at the time of their writing. It is stated that Ahmose-Nefertari shares the same pure genealogy as her mother, Ahhotep I.[21]: 229
quote: A short description of the mummy by Gaston Maspero sheds further light on familial resemblances:
...he was of medium height, as his body when mummified measured only 5 feet 6 inches (1.68 m) in length, but the development of the neck and chest indicates extraordinary strength. The head is small in proportion to the bust, the forehead low and narrow, the cheek-bones project and the hair is thick and wavy. The face exactly resembles that of Tiûâcrai [Seqenenre Tao] and the likeness alone would proclaim the affinity, even if we were ignorant of the close relationship which united these two Pharaohs.[59]
Seqenenre Tao
Mummy
quote: His mummy appears to have been hastily embalmed. X-rays that were taken of the mummy in the late 1960s show that no attempt had been made to remove the brain or to add linen inside the cranium or eyes, both normal embalming practice for the time. In the opinion of James E. Harris and Kent Weeks, who undertook the forensic examination at the time the X-rays were taken, his mummy is the worst preserved of all the royal mummies held at the Egyptian Museum, and they noted that a "foul, oily smell filled the room the moment the case in which his body was exhibited was opened," which is likely due to the poor embalming process and the absence of the use of absorbing natron salts, leaving some bodily fluids in the mummy at the time of burial.[11] Also, Harris and Weeks noted in 1973 that "his entire facial complex, in fact, is so different from other pharaohs (it is closest in fact to his son Ahmose) that he could be fitted more easily into the series of Nubian and Old Kingdom Giza skulls than into that of later Egyptian kings. Various scholars in the past have proposed a Nubian- that is, non-Egyptian-origin for Sequenre and his family, and his facial features suggest that this might indeed be true."[12]
In 1980, James Harris and Edward F. Wente conducted another series of X-ray examinations on New Kingdom Pharaoh's crania and skeletal remains, which included the mummified remains of Sequenre Tao. The analysis in general found strong similarities between the New Kingdom rulers of the Seventeenth Dynasty and Eighteenth Dynasty and contemporary Nubians with slight differences.[13]
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
ed limestone head of Hatshepsut, height 2 feet, Egyptian Museum, Cairo / Adele James
Go back in time Suppose Jada Pinkett Smith was beginning her African Queens series. The first one was Njinga but for the second Queen she had picked Hatshepsut instead of Cleopatra and with the same actress Adele James
What do you think the reaction would have been as compared to what actually occurred?
Hard to say. I did a search to see how Egyptians did perceive Hatshepsut and I among others found this picture on the FB site of an Egyptian travel agency
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Here is a graph illustrating the National Geographic results. It seems though that the original study can not be found online anymore
I believe the study is based on a sampling in Cairo. If that's the case, then I wouldn't be surprised if the percentages vary based on areas north of Cairo closer to the Mediterranean or areas further south in the valley.
Okay, I've been ignoring this topic long enough and I only have two cents to add.
My first cent is in regards to the historical reality of Cleopatra VII Thea Philopator of House Ptolemy. It is historical fact that she as a Ptolemy came from a Macedonian family where males practiced incestuous sibling marriage and occasionally married Macedonian noble women especially from Alexander's the Great's family, and even made their colonial city of Alexandria by and large segregated from the Egyptian populace with Egyptians only allowed in as servants, guards, and visiting officials. That said, Dr. Sally Ann-Ashton is correct that there is evidence suggesting Ptolemy men still had relations with native Egyptian women as concubines which is supported by the likes of Didyme. It's even probable we even have the remains of Cleopatra's sister Arsinöe IV showing her to be of mix of European and "black African" traits.
So it's likely Cleopatra wasn't the lily white queen some imagine her to be, but did she look like the Nexflix portrayal? I doubt it.
Perhaps Lioness had the right idea.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
My second cent is in regards to the situation with Netflix itself. As Lioness has elaborated in the first page of this thread, this wasn't the first time Cleopatra has been portrayed as 'black'. I believe a good reason for all this back-lash and blow-back has to do with the perfect or not so perfect timing of people being fed up with the GSE/DEI imposed black-painting in many production companies including Neflix. I mean we are talking about the same company that produced the sequel to the series Vikings, Vikings: Valhalla that featured this.
Of course the above is an extreme example. Egypt being an African country, it wouldn't be as outrageous but the once the political ball got rolling, it gave ample opportunity for the Egyptians to air their "grievance". The producer Jada Pinkett Smith is obviously a woman with serious psychological issues as expressed in her marriage to Will and the condition of their kids. But all personal issues aside, as my friends have pointed out her mistake is that of many black women in that she overplayed her hand. There is a smart way of doing what she wanted, which is portraying an Egyptian queen as a 'strong black woman', and a not so smart way. If you want an example of the smart way look no further than a guy who used to post in this forum nearly two decades ago who went by the name 'theborg'. He admits to the Egyptians being a black African people because he worked as a TV director for the Discovery Channel & BBC and filmed Egyptology series for them and so he was familiar with the Egyptian populace. I believe him to be Matthew Wortman who was known for hiring a black cast to portray ancient Egyptians. Because the blacks he used for his projects were authentic Egyptians and because these roles which usually went to the privileged Afrangi gave economic opportunities to the disadvantaged Baladi there was nothing the Egyptian government or its Afrangi constituents could complain about not even Zahi Hawass whom Wortman worked with. Of course that didn't stop the Euronut supremacists from complaining but it wasn't until later on that eventually Wortman's role was replaced in later projects by directors who re-established the status quo by using fair-skinned Afrangi to portray the ancestors of the Baladi. I wouldn't be surprised if the higher ups either in Discovery or the Egyptian government complained especially after finding out about his posts in this forum with so-called "Afrocentrics" but that is the speculation that we had here. Regardless my point is that if Jada P. Smith was smart she would have produced a film on a more pristine Egyptian queen like Hatshepsut, Sobeknefru, etc. and then used an actual Baladi Egyptian and as well as other Baladi folks in her cast and she would have killed 2 birds with one stone-- that is calling to attention that the Egyptians were/are still black AND shut up the Arab and other Afrangi Egyptians, and she could have also provided opportunities to all those black Baladi.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
In the TV series Rome Cleopatra is depicted as a light skinned woman, while at least some of the local Egyptians are depicted as dark skinned
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Todays Egyptians are a mix of both the old Egyptians and later peoples like Persians, Greeks, Romans and Arabs. But since some of the ancient genetic material still exists in many now living Egyptians, they do not count themselves as invaders, just as the British of today do not see themselves as invaders even if many peoples have passed review in Great Britain since the land was first populated. Even many Americans today do not necessarily see themselves as invaders even if they have been in America much shorter time than for example Arabs have been in Egypt. Many people today are the result of invasions and migrations but they are seldom dogged on the net in the same fashion as Egyptians are.
Egyptians do not need African Americans or other foreigners telling them who they are. It is up to Egyptian schools and educators.
The truth is the truth. And the facts of history are available for anybody interested in it. This isn't about random people on youtube or Netflix. I already posted the most well known historian of Egypt in the Mamluke and Ottoman Era. There is no debate on these facts. Trying to claim this somehow is an "attack" on someone in Egypt is absurd nonsense. Studying history is studying history not attacking anybody. That sounds like a straw man argument used to avoid the truth and promote pseudo historical nonsense.
This is a discussion of history and if people are determined to avoid the facts and truth in order to promote nonsense and lies then that is indefensible. If the Egyptians actually cared about that ancient history, they would not have allowed it to be taken away by Europeans. And oddly enough, you claim that they don't want "foreigners" telling them who they are, but most of the ancient history of the Nile is being told by Europeans. But somehow, when an African says the Nile is in Africa and the history of the Nile, especially the ancient history of the Nile over 2,500 years ago is African, people act like they are upset. And we know why. The only thing they are upset about is that the ancient dynastic kingdom was an African kingdom, not a Mediterranean or European kingdom. And so they are fine with foreign whites playing ancient dynastic kings and people, it is only when Africans play these roles that they suddenly get upset. That is because they don't see themselves today as African and they are trying to project that identity into ancient times. That also why they identify with the Greeks as "their" history even though the Greeks were colonizers, because they see themselves as Mediterranean, not African.
The ancient history of the Nile did not start with Cleopatra nor have anything to do with Cleopatra. She was a Greek invader in a dynasty who came in during the conquests of Alexander. She was not "native" to the Nile Valley and she was not a representative of the ancient dynasties of the Nile. That is the bottom line. She was definitely not an "African Queen" as this series is supposedly claiming. Anybody objecting to that is just objecting to facts.
As I have said before, this whole Netflix Cleopatra in telling half truths is emboldening people to promote further half truths. It isn't helping to tell the facts of African history on the Nile.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
I suppose the debate will go on. One must not forget though that African Americans mostly do not descend from ancient Egypt, they descend from another part of Africa so they have actually less to do with the Nile valley than the Egyptians. Still some African Americans seem to also identify with ancient Egypt, many of them without even having visited the country. That is also the truth that some of the most vocal of them need to hear.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: I suppose the debate will go on. One must not forget though that African Americans mostly do not descend from ancient Egypt, they descend from another part of Africa so they have actually less to do with the Nile valley than the Egyptians. Still some African Americans seem to also identify with ancient Egypt, many of them without even having visited the country. That is also the truth that some of the most vocal of them need to hear.
There is no debate. This isn't about African Americans because black history in Africa does not start with America. All of that is a distraction to avoid the facts that they would rather not discuss. The flow of the Nile goes from South to North and historically the populations followed the Nile, which means South to North. There no non black populations in the South. The culture and identity of these ancient populations was centered on the Nile and the South and not the Mediterranean. People are just hiding behind this Netflix series to use as justification for promoting anti-black propaganda. They don't want to discuss the facts of the 18th dynasty, the Middle Kingdom or any period of the ancient dynastic era before the Greeks because the evidence is against them. And the only reason Europeans care about Cleopatra is because she represents Greek Hellenistic culture as a colonial culture which is the foundation of "western" colonial civilization, along with Rome. And because she was white. It makes no sense for an Egyptian to be identifying with Cleopatra or Julius Caesar, unless they are admitting they are mixed with Greek and Roman blood.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Nora, or Kemet Queen, has posted a new video, a small lesson about ancient Egypt. It seems she is rather suspicious against USA and Americans.
And it seems you think highly of this person, so what do you think of her take that KMT means "the land of the black soil"?
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
The debates on the net is much about African Americans acting like they are more Egyptian than the Egyptians themselves. I know it is a small minority that vocals the most outrageous claims and harass Egyptians online, but even a small minority can be annoying I suppose.
There are Brits that more or less identify with the Romans even if the Romans were invaders also in their country. Other Brits identify with Vikings, other with ancient Celts. One man claimed to share his DNA with the Cheddar man and so on, so even there people choose identity among the many peoples who once have inhabited Britain. Still few Americans hounding Brits online claiming that todays Brits are not the original ones.
I do not suggest that African Americans, Euro Americans or Europeans shall stop studying Egyptian history, anyone can be interested in what they want. But they should stop calling todays Egyptians invaders, and they should stop claiming that they have any right to Egypt.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: The debates on the net is much about African Americans acting like they are more Egyptian than the Egyptians themselves. I know it is a small minority that vocals the most outrageous claims and harass Egyptians online, but even a small minority can be annoying I suppose.
Who specifically is doing this? Netflix is somehow "african american"? The actress isn't American. Why do you keep bringing up random anonymous "African Americans" which means nothing? What does that have to do with the facts of history?
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: There are Brits that more or less identify with the Romans even if the Romans were invaders also in their country. Other Brits identify with Vikings, other with ancient Celts. One man claimed to share his DNA with the Cheddar man and so on, so even there people choose identity among the many peoples who once have inhabited Britain. Still few Americans hounding Brits online claiming that todays Brits are not the original ones.
I do not suggest that African Americans, Euro Americans or Europeans shall stop studying Egyptian history, anyone can be interested in what they want. But they should stop calling todays Egyptians invaders, and they should stop claiming that they have any right to Egypt.
Again, who? I can run down a list of famous Greek, Roman and Mamluk authors who all called the Greeks, Ottomans and others 'invaders'. Not sure why you are stuck on pretending to defend something that doesn't exist. Egypt has been invaded multiple times right up to the French and British. Not sure why you are so stuck on denying that in order to "defend" Egypt.
The fact is that Egypt has not been an independent country since the Greeks colonized them. The Greeks were followed by the Romans, who were followed by various Islamic Arab kingdoms, leading up to the Kurdish Ayyubids. Then they were replaced by the Mamluks and finally by the Ottomans and Muhammad Ali. That is 2,500 years of history where Egypt was under the control of invaders. Egypt did not become independent until the 1920s as a kingdom and then as some form of an Arab republic.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Everyone knows those basic historical facts, that many peoples came to Egypt, just as most people know that most African Americans came from West and Central Africa and not from Egypt. Still some people call todays Egyptians invaders, opportunists and similar.
It is irrelevant if Greeks, Romans, Arabs and others were invaders. Todays Egyptians are a mix, and is a part of Egypt. It is not up to foreigners to hound them.
It seems to be similar trolls that for years hounded Native Americans online claiming that ancient Olmecs, Mayas, Aztecs, Anasazi and other Native American cultures were African or Black.
I can understand a young Egyptian of today that she rather believes in the words of a man like Zahi Hawass, a man with 50 years experience as an archaeologist in Egypt instead of a lot of anonymous people online whereof most have not even sat their foot in Egypt. Maybe they when they get older and read more they get a more nuanced view of ancient Egypt, but as it is today they see much of the foreign onslaught on social media and other outlets as just a new form of cultural imperialism.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Everyone knows those basic historical facts, that many peoples came to Egypt, just as most people know that most African Americans came from West and Central Africa and not from Egypt. Still some people call todays Egyptians invaders, opportunists and similar.
It is irrelevant if Greeks, Romans, Arabs and others were invaders. Todays Egyptians are a mix, and is a part of Egypt. It is not up to foreigners to hound them.
It seems to be similar trolls that for years hounded Native Americans online claiming that ancient Olmecs, Mayas, Aztecs, Anasazi and other Native American cultures were African or Black.
I can understand a young Egyptian of today that she rather believes in the words of a man like Zahi Hawass, a man with 50 years experience as an archaeologist in Egypt instead of a lot of anonymous people online whereof most have not even sat their foot in Egypt. Maybe they when they get older and read more they get a more nuanced view of ancient Egypt, but as it is today they see much of the foreign onslaught on social media and other outlets as just a new form of cultural imperialism.
Egypt was invaded and under the control of invaders for 2,500 years. What part of that are you debating? It seems you are stuck on this as if you don't want to accept these facts. How on earth can a country be under foreign domination for 2,500 years and not be genetically affected by that? You are just whining about facts you don't like. Not to mention since independence the country has strongly aligned itself with the Arab world. What part of that has anything to do with the ancient dynastic Nile Valley? Arab culture and identity is the result of invasions. Are you seriously questioning or debating this fact? It seems like you just don't like people calling out these facts because you want to be stuck on some fantasy that nothing has changed since 2500 years ago, which is obviously false. Doesn't mean that they don't descend from the ancient dynastic era, but there is a lot of other history, DNA and culture that has come along since then. And the fact is that a big reason that the ancient history was ignored in the past was because it was non Islamic and Islam treated anything pre-islamic as being "ignorant" or part of "the age of ignorance" and that includes pre-islamic Arab identity. The only reason the modern Arab state of Egypt is promoting ancient dynastic Nile Valley history is for the tourist money. All of these things are facts.
I do not debate that Egypt was invaded, I debate the fact that African Americans who have nothing to do with Egypt are interfering in their culture and trying to teach them their history. Better African Americans start to debate their own history online.
Seems some Americans are so blinded by their own self righteousness that they refuse to realize how it can look in other peoples eyes.
Why otherwise would some of them hound a young girl online just because she talks about her history as she sees it?
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: I do not debate that Egypt was invaded, I debate the fact that African Americans who have nothing to do with Egypt are interfering in their culture and trying to teach them their history. Better African Americans start to debate their own history online.
Seems some Americans are so blinded by their own self righteousness that they refuse to realize how it can look in other peoples eyes.
Why otherwise would some of them hound a young girl online just because she talks about her history as she sees it?
So you are invoking African Americans as a reason why the history of invasions into Egypt over 2000 years should be disregarded? How does that make any sense? Don't you know that when the Ottomans invaded Egypt there was no America? So what on earth are you talking about?
Again, a text talking of the actual invasion of Egypt by Muslims. 1500 years ago, nothing to do with African Americans at all:
I notice you keep ignoring all these authors and historians who documented these historical facts in order to keep bringing up random anonymous "African Americans" who have absolutely nothing to do with this history.
Again, the country of modern Egypt is called the "Arab Republic of Egypt". This is also a fact. You cannot be "Arab" and at the same time claim to be pharaonic. That doesn't even make sense.
Again, the fundamental issue is that the ancient dynastic kingdom was of African origin and fundamentally an African culture. It wasn't Islamic and it wasnt Mediterranean or Arab. And the fundamental identity of Egypt today is as part of the Islamic world or Arab world. None of that is based on African identity or culture. And this is the fundamental problem. So when someone says the ancient dynastic kingdoms were Africans they get upset because they do not see themselves as Africans, whether or not they identify as Arabs. That is the core problem. They want to distance themselves from Africa, while at the same time claiming that the ancient dynastic kingdom was not African, which is absolutely absurd. Again, this is common across Africa due to the inferiority complex resulting from foreign colonization, but given that Egypt is also on the Mediterranean that also becomes another factor.
I think the difference with britain's early invasions vs egypt's is that britain still remains majority white and most of thier invasions was white on white while egypt is not a majority black country anymore plus most of egypt's invasions was majority white.
So certain groups will compare what happen to the americas and egypt then what happen to britian.
There is a racial thing going on there with egypt and northern africa and even india and yemen overtime for example and the americas and that is not really there with britain.
The racial demographics did not change with britain but with egypt and these other places it did, like north africa,india,yemen and the americas so that why you will have folks saying most of the folks now in egypt are invaders because the racial thing added and sticks out like sore thumb unlike britain's after reading what happen to egypt,north africa,the americas etc..
Plus making easier for certain types top say that these places in north africa,egypt,india and yemen for example that they were never majority black to begin with.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Everyone knows those basic historical facts, that many peoples came to Egypt, just as most people know that most African Americans came from West and Central Africa and not from Egypt. Still some people call todays Egyptians invaders, opportunists and similar.
It is irrelevant if Greeks, Romans, Arabs and others were invaders. Todays Egyptians are a mix, and is a part of Egypt. It is not up to foreigners to hound them.
It seems to be similar trolls that for years hounded Native Americans online claiming that ancient Olmecs, Mayas, Aztecs, Anasazi and other Native American cultures were African or Black.
I can understand a young Egyptian of today that she rather believes in the words of a man like Zahi Hawass, a man with 50 years experience as an archaeologist in Egypt instead of a lot of anonymous people online whereof most have not even sat their foot in Egypt. Maybe they when they get older and read more they get a more nuanced view of ancient Egypt, but as it is today they see much of the foreign onslaught on social media and other outlets as just a new form of cultural imperialism.
Suppose a Hollywood movie company decided to spend $100 Million on a movie about the life of Tutankhamun and the title is simply " Tutankhamun"
It includes voiceover narration the comes in now and then talking about the events of his life at particular moments of his life but the movie is not called a documentary and does not have experts making interpretive comments.
So then the executives are talking about who to cast as Tutankhamun. People start suggesting names of known American and British actors.
Then someone says "let's use an Egyptian". None of the executives know Egyptian actors excerpt one of the executives who says "let's use an Egyptian" and she mentions a few. Then the other executives say "nice idea but we're spending a hundred million, we need name recognition this is not a documentary it's "based on true events".
So then what should they do?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ To show the hypocrisy, there was a miniseries about King Tut produced starring Canadian actor of Indian and British ancestry Avan Jogia. Yet I never heard any of the Egyptians complain.
Really?!
As I said, Jada Smith played the wrong cards. If she would have made a film about a full-blooded Egyptian queen starring a Baladi woman and had a full cast of Baladi, then all the light-skinned or non-black Afrangi would have no choice but to bite their tongues and Jada could have stuck it to them and their Eurocentric allies. Instead the movement against political "wokeness" via forced diversity was the ammo the Afrangi and their Eurocentric allies needed.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: As I said, Jada Smith played the wrong cards. If she would have made a film about a full-blooded Egyptian queen starring a Baladi woman and had a full cast of Baladi, then all the light-skinned or non-black Afrangi would have no choice but to bite their tongues and Jada could have stuck it to them and their Eurocentric allies. Instead the movement against political "wokeness" via forced diversity was the ammo the Afrangi and their Eurocentric allies needed.
Probably Jada Pinkett Smith does not know enough about Egyptian culture, Egyptian politics or the dynamics of different groups interactions in Egypt, to play her cards right. She seems to first and foremost cater to an American, or at least Western, audience, and the backlash from Egyptians she had maybe not foreseen. At least not to that extent.
On top of that the series has also ben accused of sloppy production, wrong clothes and props, factual errors, bad dialogue, bad acting and other problems.
But of course this is not the first time Hollywood got other peoples history wrong.
Btw I saw in HBO:s Tv series Rome (which was a British series) that they portraid many of the Egyptians as dark skinned as in the picture, but what I know of Egyptians did not protest (?). But Cleopatra herself was portraid as light skinned. And the portrait of her personality was not flattering.
But the producers did not went out with political statements or claiming that someones grandmother told them that Egyptians were black (or at least Cleopatra).
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: I think the difference with britain's early invasions vs egypt's is that britain still remains majority white and most of thier invasions was white on white while egypt is not a majority black country anymore plus most of egypt's invasions was majority white.
So certain groups will compare what happen to the americas and egypt then what happen to britian.
There is a racial thing going on there with egypt and northern africa and even india and yemen overtime for example and the americas and that is not really there with britain.
The racial demographics did not change with britain but with egypt and these other places it did, like north africa,india,yemen and the americas so that why you will have folks saying most of the folks now in egypt are invaders because the racial thing added and sticks out like sore thumb unlike britain's after reading what happen to egypt,north africa,the americas etc..
Plus making easier for certain types top say that these places in north africa,egypt,india and yemen for example that they were never majority black to begin with.
By the way i mention in the last page/s why egypt's racial demographics change happen from a majority black country to country that is not majority black anymore and it was a combination of invasions,immigrants,war,famine,faster/steadier population growth for certian egyptian types etc..benefiting the non black egyptians overtime.
This is something alot would like to deny as well but that is what happen,so it sticks out more then what happen to britain for example.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: So you are invoking African Americans as a reason why the history of invasions into Egypt over 2000 years should be disregarded? How does that make any sense? Don't you know that when the Ottomans invaded Egypt there was no America? So what on earth are you talking about?
Right now I talked about the dogging online that takes place right now, not what happend 2000 years ago or 1400 years ago. What drives people in USA to comment a lot of insults on an Egyptian girls YouTube account? What do they have with her history to do? Seems it is a western sickness overall to put their noses in other peoples business.
Whatever identity Egyptians chose to identify with it should not be any problems for Americans. It is Egypts business, not Americas.
Maybe people in Egypt, just as in other countries had enough of meddling?
Why do a lot of Americans bother about a country they have not even visited?
It is not Americas problem what happened in Egypts history, it is not American history. And if todays Egypts want to distance themselves from Africa or not, is nothing Americans shall bother about. Have not Americans enough of their own problems?
I remember many discussions when trolls online claimed they were Olmecs, Maya, Aztecs, Inca and similar. They also flung insults against Native Americans, calling them "invaders" (just as they call todays Egyptians), "Siberian immigrants ", "Filipino slaves" and other things. Seems there are same sort of trolls now attacking Egyptians online. One would think Americans had so many issues in their own society that they did not have to bother about others.
Academic research is one thing, so are academic discussions, that is acceptable, but much of the quarrels online are more political than scientific.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Firewall:
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: I think the difference with britain's early invasions vs egypt's is that britain still remains majority white and most of thier invasions was white on white while egypt is not a majority black country anymore plus most of egypt's invasions was majority white.
So certain groups will compare what happen to the americas and egypt then what happen to britian.
There is a racial thing going on there with egypt and northern africa and even india and yemen overtime for example and the americas and that is not really there with britain.
The racial demographics did not change with britain but with egypt and these other places it did, like north africa,india,yemen and the americas so that why you will have folks saying most of the folks now in egypt are invaders because the racial thing added and sticks out like sore thumb unlike britain's after reading what happen to egypt,north africa,the americas etc..
Plus making easier for certain types top say that these places in north africa,egypt,india and yemen for example that they were never majority black to begin with.
By the way i mention in the last page/s why egypt's racial demographics change happen from a majority black country to country that is not majority black anymore and it was a combination of invasions,immigrants,war,famine,faster/steadier population growth for certian egyptian types etc..benefiting the non black egyptians overtime.
This is something alot would like to deny as well but that is what happen,so it sticks out more then what happen to britain for example.
Yes in the end the whole debacle is due to modern people interpret antiquity through a racial lens. Seems most do not bother much if white people in ancient times invaded, and to some extent replaced other white people, because those changes can not be seen so clearly in the phenotype of the descendants.
In America the replacement was rather dramatic, due to epidemics and violence which made whole peoples disappear. In Egypt the invasions took place during a longer time, and there was not such total replacement, as there was in some parts of America.
Still we have much to learn about the genetic changes Egyptians went through due to all invasions. We just need more ancient DNA, from all over Egypt, and from all times to be able to study the changes in detail. As of now we have some few mummies which are studied in detail, but we need much more, to examine how todays Egyptians are related with Ancient Egyptians, and how the countrys demography has changed.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: What drives people in USA to comment a lot of insults on an Egyptian girls YouTube account? What do they have with her history to do? Seems it is a western sickness overall to put their noses in other peoples business.
Because she's dumb In her first youtube in the subject she says about Cleopatra:
"she was born and raised in Egypt or was she Macedonian Greek because of her ancestors that's the real question that's the debate it's between Greece and Egypt who brought blacks in the mix? it's like saying Mother Teresa was Asian or Mahatma Gandhi was Japanese or the Earth is flat even though we proved a thousand times that it's spherical it's absurd "
___________________
that is racial provocation
Similarly it was stupid for that clip of Professor Haley used in the trailer to be highlighted "“I don’t care what they tell you in school, Cleopatra was Black. "
What academic expert brings up what their untrained grandmother thinks? Although we might blame the director for clipping this. They would have been wiser not to use a political term to describe her (in addition to not knowing her skin color)
The modern Egyptians are very mixed, if they where smart they would have mounted a critique without using the simplistic American race paradigm terms, white, black, Asian
Egypt is in Africa and "black" Africans are part of the mix there, so she screwed up and then got a backlash
You can look at anybody on youtube making an opinionated comment on some hot topic and then find numerous anonymous nasty user reply comments (which are often deleted) This is routine
She choose to pick a fight and she got one
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: What drives people in USA to comment a lot of insults on an Egyptian girls YouTube account? What do they have with her history to do? Seems it is a western sickness overall to put their noses in other peoples business.
Because she's dumb In her first youtube in the subject she says about Cleopatra:
"she was born and raised in Egypt or was she Macedonian Greek because of her ancestors that's the real question that's the debate it's between Greece and Egypt who brought blacks in the mix? it's like saying Mother Teresa was Asian or Mahatma Gandhi was Japanese or the Earth is flat even though we proved a thousand times that it's spherical it's absurd "
___________________
that is racial provocation
Similarly it was stupid for that clip of Professor Haley used in the trailer to be highlighted "“I don’t care what they tell you in school, Cleopatra was Black. "
What academic expert brings up what their untrained grandmother thinks? Although we might blame the director for clipping this. They would have been wiser not to use a political term to describe her (in addition to not knowing her skin color)
The modern Egyptians are very mixed, if they where smart they would have mounted a critique without using the simplistic American race paradigm terms, white, black, Asian
Egypt is in Africa and "black" Africans are part of the mix there, so she screwed up and then got a backlash
You can look at anybody on youtube making an opinionated comment on some hot topic and then find numerous anonymous nasty user reply comments (which are often deleted) This is routine
She choose to pick a fight and she got one
Well it was her first video about the subject, maybe she was not used to the wars going on on the internet.
But one can still wonder what kind of people spending their time to attack others, calling them names, blaming her for 9/11 and so on? Seems there are too many unstable people out there.
I remember similar attacks against Native Americans who had the "audacity" to claim that Olmecs were not African.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
But as often on social media the tone will gradually sharpen, as this video shows.
Seems that sometimes social media brings people together so they can quarrel more
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
@Archeopteryx my post a few posts back with the Tut pics, my question there is what will have to be faced in the future.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: @Archeopteryx my post a few posts back with the Tut pics, my question there is what will have to be faced in the future.
A fictional film will probably not be as controversial as a documentary. But it can be hard to predict, especially now after many feeling are bit upset after the Netflix documentary.
An Egyptian would most probably be more accepted in Egypt, but for the Western market it would not matter so much. If the film was well done it would probably be seen by many.
If a black British or American actor should play him, it could also be more controversial. A darksinned Egyptian would perhaps be more accepted.
A light skinned Egyptian would probably be accepted by Egyptians but maybe provoke some protests in USA, or Europe, but not so much.
An example of some people disliking a light skinned Egyptian playing an ancient Egyptian occurred when Rami Malek played an Egyptian Pharaoh in Night at the Museum 2. This film was a fantasy/comedy and not a documentary so it did not awoke so many protests but there were some comments. Like this blogger:
So in the end maybe a somewhat dark skinned Egyptian should play the role. It would not upset the Egyptians too much, and Black people in the West maybe would also be happy with it.
But most important is that it is a good movie.
-------------------
B t w, talking about Netflix Cleopatra: I have seen many complain on clothes and props in the series.
Here is one example: Did ever women at the Ptolemaic court have hairstyles like this?
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] @Archeopteryx my post a few posts back with the Tut pics, my question there is what will have to be faced in the future.
A fictional film will probably not be as controversial as a documentary. But it can be hard to predict, especially now after many feeling are bit upset after the Netflix documentary.
The scenario would be a biographical movie on the life of Tutankhamun. It would be entirely dramatized, non-stop with occasional narration describing an event as it is unfolding, nothing interpretive, no experts commenting
Scenario #1
The movie in the beginning says "based on true events"
and remains pretty faithful to the actual biographical history without advertising "this is a biography" A description might be "the life of the Egyptian king Tutankhamun"
There is sure to be some future movie like this on some king of Egypt
So they are spending $100 Somebody suggests an Egyptian actor but as with any big budget American movie they are looking for an actor known to American audiences who will guarantee some ticket sales so they don't take a loss on that budget
Somebody might also say, o.k. we'll use this American actor but we will also hire a couple of Egyptians in supporting roles, even if unknown to audiences and a couple others who are known and non-Egyptians
Would you approve it?
Whoever is cast as the lead, somebody won't like
____________________________
Scenario #2
the same above Tutankhamun movie is planned The budget might be lower because they tell Zahi Hawass he can do all the casting. Maybe they do it for $35 million also saving money on top tier high paid actors, still a lot of money
And the movie is in English and distributed as a major feature with all their regular distribution America + worldwide
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Sounds funny with Zahi Hawass, at least if he chose the cast it would maybe go well in Egypt. How it would go here in the West is hard to say.
The first, more expensive alternative would probably go well here in the west, as long as the lead star is well known. Maybe one must chose, go for an Egyptian audience or a western one. Commercially speaking it is more money in a film with a well known western actor. But in both cases it must be well done, otherwise one would loose the audience. Like Netflix series which seem not to have pleased anyone (or at least rather few).
There have been films that were banned in Egypt but still made well in Europe and USA. Egyptian history seems a rather sensitive subject right now, which also the banning of the archaeologists from the Dutch museums shows. So maybe film makers will not touch Egypt for a while.
--
Once there was a Swedish author and director who wanted to do a movie out of a well known Swedish Viking novel. He managed to get hold of American and British sponsors. But they demanded that the leading roles should go to well known international actors and that the film should be made in English. The Swedish director abstained and the film were never done. It is hard to know how the result would have been, but it would not have been what the director wanted.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: So you are invoking African Americans as a reason why the history of invasions into Egypt over 2000 years should be disregarded? How does that make any sense? Don't you know that when the Ottomans invaded Egypt there was no America? So what on earth are you talking about?
Right now I talked about the dogging online that takes place right now, not what happend 2000 years ago or 1400 years ago. What drives people in USA to comment a lot of insults on an Egyptian girls YouTube account? What do they have with her history to do? Seems it is a western sickness overall to put their noses in other peoples business.
Whatever identity Egyptians chose to identify with it should not be any problems for Americans. It is Egypts business, not Americas.
Maybe people in Egypt, just as in other countries had enough of meddling?
Why do a lot of Americans bother about a country they have not even visited?
It is not Americas problem what happened in Egypts history, it is not American history. And if todays Egypts want to distance themselves from Africa or not, is nothing Americans shall bother about. Have not Americans enough of their own problems?
I remember many discussions when trolls online claimed they were Olmecs, Maya, Aztecs, Inca and similar. They also flung insults against Native Americans, calling them "invaders" (just as they call todays Egyptians), "Siberian immigrants ", "Filipino slaves" and other things. Seems there are same sort of trolls now attacking Egyptians online. One would think Americans had so many issues in their own society that they did not have to bother about others.
Academic research is one thing, so are academic discussions, that is acceptable, but much of the quarrels online are more political than scientific.
But you are contradicting yourself. You claim that anybody can engage in scholarly study but then claim Americans shouldn't study Nile Valley history. It sounds like what you want to say is that nobody should contradict whatever nonsense is being spouted about the history of the Nile no matter where they are from. And that is the crux of the issue. Certain groups want to promote a fantasy history of Africa that doesn't include Africans and then want to play the victim card as defense for it. If they don't want to deal with truth and facts, their opinions don't really count whether they are from Egypt or anywhere else.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Americans can study what they want, but they should abstain from dogging Egyptians online when they give their take on their own culture.
And it is hardly scholars who throw insults on the net calling Egyptians "Osama" or accusing them of being behind 9/11.
Right now it seems like a sensitive issue, and maybe the ban of the museum archaeologists from the Netherlands will be followed by banning artists and others who spread what the Egyptians consider Afrocentric history.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Americans can study what they want, but they should abstain from dogging Egyptians online when they give their take on their own culture.
And it is hardly scholars who throw insults on the net calling Egyptians "Osama" or accusing them of being behind 9/11.
Right now it seems like a sensitive issue, and maybe the ban of the museum archaeologists from the Netherlands will be followed by banning artists and others who spread what the Egyptians consider Afrocentric history.
Come on dude. This issue of black African history in the Nile Valley and North Africa goes back hundreds of years and did not start with this Netflix production of Cleopatra. The fact is that Europeans have been the ones promoting this historical narrative of "North African" history being devoid of Africans and as such a lot of modern populations in North Africa buy into it. This has nothing to do with online trolls in the modern era. The truth of the history of the Nile Valley in the Dynastic Era being African in origin is just a fact, as the Nile Valley completely is in Africa and always has been, while flowing South to North. There are no 'other facts' to this. Using online trolls or other anonymous folks online is not an excuse to deny the facts and actual scholarship because you don't like it.
I am still waiting for you to answer what you think about Nora claiming KMT means "Land of the Black Soil".
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Whoever populated Egypt in ancient time, still todays media and internet live its own life. And todays politics also govern matters around identity and nationalism. Scientific history and a peoples self image must not always accompany each other.
This thread is really about Egyptians reaction of the Netflix Cleopatra film, not so much about the ancient history itself.
Also, many young Egyptians take their information from for example Zahi Hawass, so mostly they will believe him more than foreigners on social media.
Probably even this storm will calm down and life go back to the normal both for Netflix and Egyptians. Some bickering will of course continue on social media.
What I have seen is that Egyptians obviously not want their ancient history to be associated with American black pop culture.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Whoever populated Egypt in ancient time, still todays media and internet live its own life. And todays politics also govern matters around identity and nationalism. Scientific history and a peoples self image must not always accompany each other.
This thread is really about Egyptians reaction of the Netflix Cleopatra film, not so much about the ancient history itself.
Also, many young Egyptians take their information from for example Zahi Hawass, so mostly they will believe him more than foreigners on social media.
Probably even this storm will calm down and life go back to the normal both for Netflix and Egyptians. Some bickering will of course continue on social media.
What I have seen is that Egyptians obviously not want their ancient history to be associated with American black pop culture.
The 5,000 year old black history of the Nile is not "Black American pop culture". You keep bringing this up as if somehow these Egyptians have "other facts" showing otherwise, when they don't. And as a matter of fact, somehow it is funny that modern Egyptian pop culture borrows so much from "black American pop culture" just like so much of the planet. And it is odd they don't complain about "white American pop culture" using Egyptian themes and symbols. Sorry there is no way to make this seem anything other than anti-black.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
This thread is about Netflix Cleopatra, and that could be included in American pop culture. The rest of Egypts history is up to the Egyptians to worry about.
Why do you care? Do you descend from Egypt? Have you been there? Have you relatives there?
Seems some people worry too much about Egypts history without themselves having any close ties to Egypt.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: This thread is about Netflix Cleopatra, and that could be included in American pop culture. The rest of Egypts history is up to the Egyptians to worry about.
Why do you care? Do you descend from Egypt? Have you been there? Have you relatives there?
Seems some people worry too much about Egypts history without themselves having any close ties to Egypt.
I know it is about Netflix Cleopatra. Like I said, what does Netflix Cleopatra have to do with the ancient black history of the Nile. And why are YOU so intent on hiding behind 'modern Egyptians' as some kind of excuse to tell black people what is and isn't African history? I just find it odd you keep using this pattern of talking about random anonymous folks on the internet as a reason to ignore black Africans views on African history. As if black Africans are stealing African history. It is backwards and absurd. Of course trolling people and insulting people online is bad, but Netflix is a white company and not run by black people. This is the same pattern of excuses and whining that people always use of all backgrounds to simply ignore facts that they don't like. And that is just how I see it and this did not start with Netflix.
And again, if modern Egyptians hate 'black pop culture' so much, why is it so popular in Egypt? Just saying that somehow this doesn't make sense, when pop culture is not ancient history and borrows from everybody and every culture around the world.
Like I said before, if that ancient history was so important to them why did it sit buried under the desert for thousands of years and why did they allow Europeans to take it? Again, facts.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
I do not care too much, I mostly notice the similarities with a bunch of trolls that earlier bullied Native Americans online (and some still do). Now many of them seem to concentrate on bullying Egyptians instead.
About pop culture, now and then Egyptians also protest against or ban films made by white people, as Cleopatra with Elisabeth Taylor, and of course some films with Biblical motifs, which is against their religion (at least concerning the muslims).
But still, why do so many Americans online bother about if anyone was white or black in ancient Egypt? Have Americans nothing to worry about in their own country? Most Black (or White) Americans do not descend from Egypt or having relatives there, or any close ties to Egypt.
I am glad I live in a country that are not claimed by a lot of Americans (some though claim Vikings) and as soon I would write about my countrys history online I would be bullied by trolls.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: I do not care too much, I mostly notice the similarities with a bunch of trolls that earlier bullied Native Americans online (and some still do). Now many of them seem to concentrate on bullying Egyptians instead.
About pop culture, now and then Egyptians also protest against or ban films made by white people, as Cleopatra with Elisabeth Taylor, and of course some films with Biblical motifs, which is against their religion (at least concerning the muslims).
But still, why do so many Americans online bother about if anyone was white or black in ancient Egypt? Have Americans nothing to worry about in their own country? Most Black (or White) Americans do not descend from Egypt or having relatives there, or any close ties to Egypt.
I am glad I live in a country that are not claimed by a lot of Americans (some though claim Vikings) and as soon I would write about my countrys history online I would be bullied by trolls.
You obviously care or you wouldn't be here complaining about some random internet trolls on this forum.
The point being that it is fine if someone doesn't like Netflix's Cleopatra. I have problems with it as well. But to sit there and lump all black people together with random online trolls as a way to say black people should not discuss black history in Africa, including the Nile Valley is something all together different. Or defend calling out black American pop culture for being influenced by Nile Valley African history as "appropriation" is also ridiculous. And I don't see that as anything other than another form of trolling and anti-black behavior to begin with, not a "defense" of anybody's identity.
Like I said, people are just using this Cleopatra program to just hide behind while spewing anti black propaganda.
Not to mention the issue is skin color and we know where this obsession with skin color came from and it didn't come from Africa.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
The issue is not black people discussing Egyptian history, the problems is the Internet trolls. And some media, like Netflix Cleopatra who puts out their own version of Egyptian history. Usually it does not seem like Egyptians bother too much about research or scientific papers published about Ancient Egypt. They seem to bother more about pop culture than about research. And in the Museum case it was the connection to American black pop culture that they obviously did not like. The research the museum conducted earlier has obviously not bothered them since the 1970s.
And if it is silly that Egypt care about American pop culture using Egyptian culture, then one can also think it is silly when some African Americans claim that having dreadlocks is cultural appropriation.
But as pointed out before they seem not overly enthusiastic of having Israeli actors playing ancient Egyptian people either, so it is not only about Black people. On top of that they are not fond of Hollywood or others portraying biblical figures. Several such films have been banned in Egypt.
But as I asked, what is ancient Egypt to you? Do you have any personal connection to Egypt? Have you relatives there? Have you at all been there? Why do so many Black Americans bother about a foreign country they have no ties to, and in most cases not even visited?
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Doug says the proper definition of black is the ancient definition of black which is simple : "a dark skinned person" Thus all the people above are black /case closed
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Well, then very many people are Black, so are many Greeks today, or Roma people, Middle Easterners and of course Indians, Pakistanis, Thai people, Indonesians, some Native Americans, most Pacific islanders. Such loose definitions become rather meaningless. Then one could lump together Europeans (at least North Europeans, Central Europeans and East Europeans) with East Asians like Chinese, Koreans and Japanese and call them all white.
And why hold on to the old designation Black, is not Brown more descriptive? But it is of course up to every people to call themselves what they want.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Well, then very many people are Black, so are many Greeks today, or Roma people, Middle Easterners and of course Indians, Pakistanis, Thai people, Indonesians, some Native Americans, most Pacific islanders. Such loose definitions become rather meaningless. Then one could lump together Europeans (at least North Europeans, Central Europeans and East Europeans) with East Asians like Chinese, Koreans and Japanese and call them all white.
And why hold on to the old designation Black, is not Brown more descriptive? But it is of course up to every people to call themselves what they want.
yes any of the brown skinned people you mention Doug would classify as black. He prefers the term black because in ancient text there often are not words for brown
So for the moment, as to not get caught up in semantics over terms when discussing other issues with Doug, just assume when he says black he means "a dark skinned person" That doesn't mean you have to use the term at all, just understand that's what he means and to avoid confusion if he says "black" about something, in your reply just switch to "dark skinned people" in case other people viewing are thinking he is implying facial features to that when he's not. He had a thread called "Asian Blacks..." a now deleted multi page thread
^ this was one of the photos Doug had posted there, certain Koreans he regards as black people
Yes, dark skinned sounds like a better term, more encompassing.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Yes, dark skinned sounds like a better term, more encompassing.
"black" is sexier and works as an answer to "white"
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Sexier but less descriptive if one shall be literal.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Sexier but less descriptive if one shall be literal.
well, Europeans are the largest majority and running America and Europe so they would have to take the lead dismantling "white" first, I suppose
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
EGYPTOLOGIST, DR. GALIT BEN TOVEL DISCUSSES DNA LINKS TO MUMMIES OF PHARAOH'S Emily Frances "Holy Land Uncovered" Interview with Egyptologist, Dr. Galit Ben Tovel, author of "Messiah Code." Galit talks about the differences between ancient Egyptians from Upper Egypt vs Lower Egypt. She also talks about Pharaoh Ramses III, of the 20th Dynasty and is considered the "Last Great Pharaoh." Because of Mummies and DNA, people like Dexter Caffey are discovering genetic links to these ancient rulers.
her website and book: https://www.oneness.site/about/ "Her training as a linguist helps her to decipher a cryptic code in the Book of Exodus, through which she sheds a new light on the Exodus and leads the reader through an exciting interpretation of the Biblical story and the identity of God."
Education
Georgetown University Executive Certificate Organizational Leadership 2001 - 2003
Activities and Societies: Member of WWANA, Worldwide Association of Notable Alumni www.thewana.com, Georgetown University
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Doctor of Philosophy - PhD Egyptology Cum Laude 1994 - 1998 _____________________
^ although I don't see her name on any articles unless she had a different name Seems a little fishy but I'm not sure It's possible she got a PhD (or almost) but then decided to pursue a different career
In her late 40s, Galit Avia Ben-Tovel has embarked on a personal and exciting journey that connects her personal experience with the Biblical Exodus in a unique and remarkable way.
Through her explorative personal journey, she has finally fulfilled her childhood dream, that is, to unravel the mystery of the story of Exodus.
Galit’s personal story, which is brought to you as an authentic dialogue with her lover, is inlayed with numerous exciting and extraordinary findings that she had unveiled throughout her journey. Her personal liberation brought to light clear answers to some of the questions that were bothering her, such as “What happened to Moses?”, “Where is Mount Sinai?”, and “Where is the Arc of the Covenant?” Her training as a linguist helps her to decipher a cryptic code in the Book of Exodus, through which she sheds a new light on the Exodus and leads the reader through an exciting interpretation of the Biblical story and the identity of God.
Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on :
Lioness, let's make a thread about how you got your moderator privileges taken away
And let's talk about how this has affected you personally
And also why it happened
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: The issue is not black people discussing Egyptian history, the problems is the Internet trolls. And some media, like Netflix Cleopatra who puts out their own version of Egyptian history. Usually it does not seem like Egyptians bother too much about research or scientific papers published about Ancient Egypt. They seem to bother more about pop culture than about research. And in the Museum case it was the connection to American black pop culture that they obviously did not like. The research the museum conducted earlier has obviously not bothered them since the 1970s.
And if it is silly that Egypt care about American pop culture using Egyptian culture, then one can also think it is silly when some African Americans claim that having dreadlocks is cultural appropriation.
But as pointed out before they seem not overly enthusiastic of having Israeli actors playing ancient Egyptian people either, so it is not only about Black people. On top of that they are not fond of Hollywood or others portraying biblical figures. Several such films have been banned in Egypt.
But as I asked, what is ancient Egypt to you? Do you have any personal connection to Egypt? Have you relatives there? Have you at all been there? Why do so many Black Americans bother about a foreign country they have no ties to, and in most cases not even visited?
Why are you asking me what ancient anything is to me? That is my point. You jump from Cleopatra to sitting here acting people have to explain to anybody why they are interested in what they are interested in. Like I said, discussing Cleopatra is one thing but going beyond that to tell people what they should or shouldn't be interested in is another and you just did it right there. That goes beyond simple discussing a "controversy" over a TV show and into territory of whining about facts of history you don't like. And that is precisely what I am talking about. This "controversy" is basically some people online whining and trolling black people about them studying history and exposing lies told by Egyptology. This has always been the issue and goes back long before this Cleopatra documentary.
And you often act like the issues with these historical debates is an issue of online trolling not facts. When someone presents you the facts, you skip right past that and keep going back to online trolling and ignoring anything else.
I asked you earlier what you thought of Nora saying that Kemet means "Land of the Black Soil" since you posted a link to it and yet no response.
You posted examples of these people objecting to black entertainers using cultural elements in the Nile Valley, but avoid making a conclusion on whether it is justified or simply harassment. You do this all the time and act like somehow this behavior is justified as if "black people" are simply doing something to deserve this. Or that their views on history and culture should not be respected in all cases. That is the part I am calling out. The fact that the controversy exists is one thing, but going beyond that to justify stereotyping all black people in one bucket is a problem, not to mention defending such anti-black propaganda.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
Doug says the proper definition of black is the ancient definition of black which is simple : "a dark skinned person" Thus all the people above are black /case closed
Stop trying to speak for me.......
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Why are you asking me what ancient anything is to me? That is my point. You jump from Cleopatra to sitting here acting people have to explain to anybody why they are interested in what they are interested in. Like I said, discussing Cleopatra is one thing but going beyond that to tell people what they should or shouldn't be interested in is another and you just did it right there. That goes beyond simple discussing a "controversy" over a TV show and into territory of whining about facts of history you don't like. And that is precisely what I am talking about. This "controversy" is basically some people online whining and trolling black people about them studying history and exposing lies told by Egyptology. This has always been the issue and goes back long before this Cleopatra documentary.
And you often act like the issues with these historical debates is an issue of online trolling not facts. When someone presents you the facts, you skip right past that and keep going back to online trolling and ignoring anything else.
I asked you earlier what you thought of Nora saying that Kemet means "Land of the Black Soil" since you posted a link to it and yet no response.
You posted examples of these people objecting to black entertainers using cultural elements in the Nile Valley, but avoid making a conclusion on whether it is justified or simply harassment. You do this all the time and act like somehow this behavior is justified as if "black people" are simply doing something to deserve this. Or that their views on history and culture should not be respected in all cases. That is the part I am calling out. The fact that the controversy exists is one thing, but going beyond that to justify stereotyping all black people in one bucket is a problem, not to mention defending such anti-black propaganda.
If someone is whining it is you. Let the Egyptians have their culture in peace, it is not up to you or any other American or westerner what Egyptians think or say about their own culture or history.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
No wonder some Egyptians get irritated when they hear people like this man. And this man, Dr Umar is rather well known and probably has a certain influence, even if some people think some of his opinions are too extreme.
Doug says the proper definition of black is the ancient definition of black which is simple : "a dark skinned person" Thus all the people above are black /case closed
Exactly, The proper definition is the original use of Black. Dark skin means evilskin, why call people dark skin thats evil. Black means what Black Means Black Skin individual.
Edit: If you want another term for Black skin, You should call Black skin rich skin.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Here where I live Black was the color of death and evil, like "the Black Death" (the plague), "Black like a Devil", "the Black one" (death), and so on. So the meaning of colors can be different depending on culture.
"The Black Death", old Norwegian picture
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Here where I live Black was the color of death and evil, like "the Black Death" (the plague), "Black like a Devil", "the Black one" (death), and so on. So the meaning of colors can be different depending on culture.
"The Black Death", old Norwegian picture
Notice you have death when calling Black. Its not within the word of Black alone. You have other words with Black Like Black and Power
What I mean is that Black like what the Holy Bible means Black means.
Just like white means leprosy and sickness like what The Holy Bible says>
And as Gehazi left his presence, he was leprous—as white as snow .
So white means sickness and disease while Black means strength and power and Beauty as the Holy Bible means meaning that White people are not normal to the Holy Bible and the Holy Bible is a Black Book
edit: Hence we can Know that Jesus Christ is Black because the Holy Bible looks down on White and Jesus Christ is the Son of God who was Born and he would of been Born of Blacks because Blacks were the Oldest People and The First People. So The Son of God would of Come in the Image of the First Man, Black Man.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Well, the authors of the Bible probably did not know about Scandinavia and the culture here. Black people were not often seen here, so up here it was not normal with black skin.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Well, the authors of the Bible probably did not know about Scandinavia and the culture here. Black people were not often seen here, so up here it was not normal with black skin.
Now that its settled that White skin is a sickness and not part of the Holy Bible.
Why would you call people dark skin when dark skin means evil and white skin means light skin. Cant have it both ways where the Light is part of White skin and Black a word used for power and beauty is linked more to rich skin then it is to dark because dark means evilskin
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Nobody owns Ancient Egyptian culture, it's been dead for 2,000 years
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Still people fight about it, so obviously it means a lot to people.
Here is an Egyptian guy playing an Ancient Egyptian in the comedy, Night at the Museum 2.
That film got accused of whitewashing Egyptian culture.
That film got accused of whitewashing Egyptian culture.
I haven't looked into what are your sources? It has to be something with some viewership, people with real names making claims, not random people making twitter comments, etc
Wikipedia often covers controversies but I dont see mention on their Night at the Museum page
Cast anybody as an Egyptian, soon you can find hundreds of disparaging comments on social media from every viewpoint, everybody has an opinion and can go post something
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
This is the key to the controversy level of Netflix Cleopatra
1) they went out of their way to mention race in the trailer, in this case "black" is mentioned
2) It was called it a documentary thus suggesting factual
3) it has wide distribution
btw what was the budget? Probably much higher than average for a documentary.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Yes, if they cast a white actor, some complain, if they cast a black actor some complain and if they cast a Jewish actor some will complain.
Seems many bother a lot about ancient Egypt and how it is represented.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Why are you asking me what ancient anything is to me? That is my point. You jump from Cleopatra to sitting here acting people have to explain to anybody why they are interested in what they are interested in. Like I said, discussing Cleopatra is one thing but going beyond that to tell people what they should or shouldn't be interested in is another and you just did it right there. That goes beyond simple discussing a "controversy" over a TV show and into territory of whining about facts of history you don't like. And that is precisely what I am talking about. This "controversy" is basically some people online whining and trolling black people about them studying history and exposing lies told by Egyptology. This has always been the issue and goes back long before this Cleopatra documentary.
And you often act like the issues with these historical debates is an issue of online trolling not facts. When someone presents you the facts, you skip right past that and keep going back to online trolling and ignoring anything else.
I asked you earlier what you thought of Nora saying that Kemet means "Land of the Black Soil" since you posted a link to it and yet no response.
You posted examples of these people objecting to black entertainers using cultural elements in the Nile Valley, but avoid making a conclusion on whether it is justified or simply harassment. You do this all the time and act like somehow this behavior is justified as if "black people" are simply doing something to deserve this. Or that their views on history and culture should not be respected in all cases. That is the part I am calling out. The fact that the controversy exists is one thing, but going beyond that to justify stereotyping all black people in one bucket is a problem, not to mention defending such anti-black propaganda.
If someone is whining it is you. Let the Egyptians have their culture in peace, it is not up to you or any other American or westerner what Egyptians think or say about their own culture or history.
Wasnt it you whining about African Americans on the internet as if they are the only ones who engage in abusive behavior online to suggest that anti-black propaganda is somehow justified?
You do this all the time. And then when facts and evidence are provided you skip over all that to keep going on this rant about "oh my gawd the Egyptians are being attacked by all these black folks online". Please. And of course the implied answer is that black people shouldn't have anything to say about African history as if they aren't Africans.
Please dude. I already said this before, criticizing the show is one thing, extending beyond that to try and tell black people what they should and shouldn't be interested in is something else.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
I think Doug is right in part, anybody has the right to be interested in studying a culture other than their own On the other hand there is a large culture of African Americans now making well produced videos on youtube and other social media claiming to be Aboriginal Americans, Moorish Americans, the real Israelites, the descendants of Egyptians if not saying modern Egyptians are all Arab or Greek with no ancient ancestry, the Greeks stole philosophy etc The Red Black and Green Pan-African movement of the 90s and interest in West African culture, much less popular, very much waning comparatively
And Doug acts like this does not exist because of racist legacy in some of Egyptology
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:I think Doug is right in part, anybody has the right to be interested in studying a culture other than their own On the other hand there is a large culture of African Americans now making well produced videos on youtube and other social media claiming to be Aboriginal Americans, Moorish Americans, the real Israelites, the descendants of Egyptians if not saying modern Egyptians are all Arab or Greek with no ancient ancestry, the Greeks stole philosophy etc The Red Black and Green Pan-African movement of the 90s and interest in West African culture, much less popular, very much waning comparatively
And Doug acts like this does not exist because of racist legacy in some of Egyptology
And unfortunately those people have a tail of more or less disturbed followers who troll the net, and many times harass people who criticize those who make those videos, books and similar.
I remember seeing such trolls harassing Native Americans online calling them "invaders" (interesting they use same choise of word concerning Egyptians), "Siberians", "Filipino slaves" and many other things. And they even sent hate mail to peoples private mailboxes. Now one can see this same behaviour repeted online against Egyptians. Claiming Egypt as theirs and hating on people who oppose that.
To be interested in other cultures is one thing, to insert oneself in those cultures is another. And to even insult the descendants of those cultures is even worse.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
So what do you all think, shall Egypt ban the Netflix series (if they have not already done that)?
Should Egypt also ban artists and celebrities who they think are spreading Afrocentrism from going there?
And did Egypt do right who banned archaeologists from the Dutch museum from working in Egypt?
And should they ban people who publicly call Egyptians invaders and similar?
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Probably Jada Pinkett Smith does not know enough about Egyptian culture, Egyptian politics or the dynamics of different groups interactions in Egypt, to play her cards right. She seems to first and foremost cater to an American, or at least Western, audience, and the backlash from Egyptians she had maybe not foreseen. At least not to that extent.
On top of that the series has also ben accused of sloppy production, wrong clothes and props, factual errors, bad dialogue, bad acting and other problems.
But of course this is not the first time Hollywood got other peoples history wrong.
Btw I saw in HBO:s Tv series Rome (which was a British series) that they portraid many of the Egyptians as dark skinned as in the picture, but what I know of Egyptians did not protest (?). But Cleopatra herself was portrayed as light skinned. And the portrait of her personality was not flattering.
But the producers did not went out with political statements or claiming that someone's grandmother told them that Egyptians were black (or at least Cleopatra).
I don't know what Jada Smith was thinking or what she knows about Egyptian history. A smart person would've done her research but I doubt that was the case. Jada is a Hollywood elitist and a black woman at that which entails a certain mentality.
Meanwhile Matthew Wortman, a white man, did it first.
He used a Moroccan actor to play Akhenaten in 'Nefertiti Resurrected'
And there's this gem who played Nefertari, wife of Rameses in 'Ramses: Wrath of God or Man'
^ She's a model who is either Egyptian or some country in the Maghreb.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
^^The Mummy from 2017 used an Algerian woman. The film is hardly a documentary but it seems they still wanted some kind of African connection with Sofia Boutella in the leading role as the ancient Egyptian Princess Ahmanet.
And as mentioned in the film Night at the Museum 2 (2009) they used an Egyptian American, Rami Malek as Pharaoh Ahkmenrah.
In the Vampire movie Queen of the Damned (2002) an African American actress, Aaliyah played the ancient Egyptian vampire queen Akasha
So you want them to suppress free speech? Why? That is a bit extreme isn't it?
Secondly, Egyptology and people like Hawass have no problem with "internet trolls" when it comes to supporting the status quo of the ancient Nile not being black African. Like I posted before, the "official response" to Netflix is on a youtube channel run by Curtis Ryan Woodside who promotes painting over literal mummies with white paint in photoshop. Not to mention most of the online trolls who promote this absurdist logic of the ancient Nile Valley are getting their talking points straight from mainstream Egyptology. I mean isn't it Hawass running all over the place claiming the ancient Nile Valley population wasnt black. And wasn't it Selima Ikram who recently said on a youtube stream that the colors in the ancient art of the Nile supported a skin color based caste system? So who is really trolling here. The whole underlying point here is these people don't like being challenged on their nonsense and they know that it isn't the "online trolls" that are hurting them, as opposed to the facts that are being exposed contradicting their claims. That is why they want to shut down any debate and discussion so their lies can go unchallenged, not because they are scared of trolls when they have been feeding their own trolls online for years.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Well there are trolls and trolls. I wonder if it is a coincidence that same kind of trolls who harass Native Americans online, who spoke out about cultural appropriation, also are doing the same with Egyptians who speak out online
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
On the other hand there is a large culture of African Americans now making well produced videos on youtube and other social media claiming to be Aboriginal Americans, Moorish Americans, the real Israelites, the descendants of Egyptians if not saying modern Egyptians are all Arab or Greek with no ancient ancestry, the Greeks stole philosophy etc
------------- And Doug acts like this does not exist because of racist legacy in some of Egyptology.
There is no denial that there are some extreme Afrocentrics who through books and films claim all sorts of other cultures, like Olmecs, ancient Minoans, Israelites. These persons have been around for years, some of them having posted also here on ES, without always being challenged except by a few posters.
And as I said, they have a tail of followers who for years have enthusiastically supported and spread their ideas online, but unfortunately also harassed people who tried to call out some of the worst BS.
About Egyptians banning films: They have been doing that for several reasons, not only because some actors being black. Many times it has been out of religious or political reasons. Some times it has been because there has been Israel actors or actors who supported Israel. Here is a couple of examples
Would be interesting to see if the controversy will affect any of hose scholars who are interviewed in Netflix Cleopatra.
Coleen Darnell has obviously claimed that she did not know how the film would look like when it was finished. If she knew the final result and the controversy she would maybe not have participated.
She also said:
quote: I really believe that placing modern racial categories that was emphasis in the trailer onto the ancient past is not historically accurate and there was speculation in the show and there is speculation among historians that Cleopatra's mother may have been Egyptian and there was an opportunity missed to cast Cleopatra well with an Egyptian actress that was the perfect opportunity to highlight the potential origins of Cleopatra's family if her mother were Egyptian and have her portrayed by an Egyptian actress and I think what's most significant to empathize is that the descendants of the ancient Egyptians are people living in modern Egypt
Banning films for reasons such as having an African American actor is nothing but extreme. There is nothing about it that is legitimate. But this has absolutely nothing to do with this Netflix program. You have to understand that MOST documentaries made about the ancient Nile Valley have been made by foreign studios for foreign audiences and Hawass and others mostly make their money participating in these foreign based films. Hardly any of these programs are made in Arabic for an audience in the Nile Valley speaking arabic. Just keep that in mind. So again, this has absolutely nothing to do with Afrocentric trolls as these documentaries have mostly been full of pseudoscience since the beginning mostly based on wild hype and speculation. And the Egyptian authorities have absolutely no problem with that as long as it promotes tourism. So when they see black people doing something in any way related to the ancient Nile Valley and become outraged or want to ban it, it just becomes obvious hypocrisy and anti-black propaganda.
Now if all of these documentaries were produced by Egyptians with Egyptians as actors and actresses that would be a different story. Even if they were still of pseudo science, but the fact is most of the narratives about the history of the Nile come from Europeans and the Eurocentric view is the dominant view of Nile Valley and that did not originate with Egyptians. And the Egyptians have absolutely been fine with that and Eurocentric trolls for a very long time. In fact they cater to those people.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Egyptians have said they want to do their own drama documentary about Cleopatra to counterbalance Netflix Cleopatra. Shall be interesting to see if they will make it and, if they make it, how they will depict her and Egypt during her time.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Egyptians made a TV series once about Cleopatra, but it was a drama and not a documentary. At that time they had a Syrian leading actress (the series was a joint production between Egypt and Syria).
Zahi Hawass did not like it, it was not historically correct he said.
The impression of the video is somewhat diminished by the videomakers inability to point out Finland on a map. The country highlighted in the map is not Finland, but Sweden.
Egypt was a major player in the intersection between Africa, Europe and Asia for thousands of years. Their net of contacts reached out in all directions, through trade, war and different cultural exchange. The location of Egypt is quite unique along a river that leads southwards to the inner parts of Africa, besides two seas and besides a landbridge towards Asia.
Here is an earlier tread about ancient contacts in different directions.
About the race of the ancient Egyptians: There has been a discussion going on since at least the 18th century. Wikipedia has a summary Ancient Egyptian race controversy
Seems that many scholars today avoid the subject, or make a kind of compromise
quote: Mainstream scholars reject the notion that Egypt was a white or black civilization; they maintain that applying modern notions of black or white races to ancient Egypt is anachronistic. In addition, scholars reject the notion, implicit in the notion of a black or white Egypt hypothesis, that Ancient Egypt was racially homogeneous; instead, skin color varied between the peoples of Lower Egypt, Upper Egypt, and Nubia, who in various eras rose to power in Ancient Egypt. Within Egyptian history, despite multiple foreign invasions, the demographics were not shifted substantially by large migrations
A map from a lecture illustrates the notion of a skin color gradient in Ancient Egypt
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: About the race of the ancient Egyptians: There has been a discussion going on since at least the 18th century. Wikipedia has a summary Ancient Egyptian race controversy
Seems that many scholars today avoid the subject, or make a kind of compromise
quote: Mainstream scholars reject the notion that Egypt was a white or black civilization; they maintain that applying modern notions of black or white races to ancient Egypt is anachronistic. In addition, scholars reject the notion, implicit in the notion of a black or white Egypt hypothesis, that Ancient Egypt was racially homogeneous; instead, skin color varied between the peoples of Lower Egypt, Upper Egypt, and Nubia, who in various eras rose to power in Ancient Egypt. Within Egyptian history, despite multiple foreign invasions, the demographics were not shifted substantially by large migrations
A map from a lecture illustrates the notion of a skin color gradient in Ancient Egypt
Seems people don't understand.
The answer to the race of the Egyptians have been answered. Egyptians are Black
The hieroglyph for Face is a Black African.
We Won the debate when this face hieroglyph showed a Black African.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
^^ So you think that all Ancient Egyptians, through all times, looked exactly like those hieroglyphs? No variation over time, or geographically?
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: ^^ So you think that all Ancient Egyptians, through all times, looked exactly like those hieroglyphs? No variation over time, or geographically?
THINK!
If the hieroglyph for Face is Black African, that means the original Egyptians are Black African, and the majority of Egyptians are Black African. And the outsiders were just that outsiders
The debate is over. Ancient Egyptians are Black African
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
It does not say so much more than that the inventor of the hieroglyph may have looked like that, or that he saw people around him looking like that. Maybe the sign later became a convention. It does not mean that all Egyptians in all times always looked like that hieroglyph. I suppose you seen a lot of statues and paintings from ancient Egypt. Does everyone look the same on those depictions? Does everyone have the same facial features or hair?
Showing a hieroglyph do not tell much. We must study all depictions, we must study human remains, we must study DNA, to get a full picture of Egyptian demography.
Still we have not so very much DNA from ancient Egypt. When we get more, we will also get a more realistic and balanced view of ancient demographics, beyond political slogans.
To show one sign and think that it represents all people in a geographic area for at least 3000 years is a bit simplistic.
There are thousands of ancient Egyptians depicted in art, and all do not look the same. Mostly they seem to have been brown in skin tone, but their facial features have varied a lot.
Have you yourself been to Egypt and looked at ancient art yourself? Have you looked at the people in todays Egypt and studied the variation among people living there?
I am of the opinion that no one can be an expert of Ancient Egypt without having been in Egypt and studied some of its monuments and art in person, or seen the people there.
I am no expert of ancient Egypt, but it seems there has been a certain variation among its people, at least as it is depicted in art.
I wish though they could produce more DNA studies from different periods and different geographical locals.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: It does not say so much more than that the inventor of the hieroglyph may have looked like that, or that he saw people around him looking like that. Maybe the sign later became a convention. It does not mean that all Egyptians in all times always looked like that hieroglyph. I suppose you seen a lot of statues and paintings from ancient Egypt. Does everyone look the same on those depictions? Does everyone have the same facial features or hair?
Showing a hieroglyph do not tell much. We must study all depictions, we must study human remains, we must study DNA, to get a full picture of Egyptian demography.
Still we have not so very much DNA from ancient Egypt. When we get more, we will also get a more realistic and balanced view of ancient demographics, beyond political slogans.
To show one sign and think that it represents all people in a geographic area for at least 3000 years is a bit simplistic.
There are thousands of ancient Egyptians depicted in art, and all do not look the same. Mostly they seem to have been brown in skin tone, but their facial features have varied a lot.
Have you yourself been to Egypt and looked at ancient art yourself? Have you looked at the people in todays Egypt and studied the variation among people living there?
I am of the opinion that no one can be an expert of Ancient Egypt without having been in Egypt and studied some of its monuments and art in person, or seen the people there.
I am no expert of ancient Egypt, but it seems there has been a certain variation among its people, at least as it is depicted in art.
I wish though they could produce more DNA studies from different periods and different geographical locals.
Buddy, Give it up.
The hieroglyph is the language of Ancient Egypt, and all signs of these hieroglphs for face shows a Black African.
DNA cannot prove a thing. The debate is Over.
Ancient Egypt is Black African inside all the language of egypt every hieroglyph of face shows a Black African.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Ancient Egyptian race controversy
quote:
Frank J. Yurco wrote in 1990: "When you talk about Egypt, it's just not right to talk about black or white .... To take the terminology here in the United States and graft it onto Africa is anthropologically inaccurate". Yurco added that "We are applying a racial divisiveness to Egypt that they would never have accepted, They would have considered this argument absurd, and that is something we could really learn from." Yurco wrote in 1996 that "the peoples of Egypt, the Sudan, and much of North-East Africa are generally regarded as a Nilotic continuity, with widely ranging physical features (complexions light to dark, various hair and craniofacial types)".In a 1989 article, he elaborated: "In short, ancient Egypt, like modern Egypt, consisted of a very heterogeneous population". Mary Lefkowitz in 1997 whilst criticising elements of Afrocentrism had acknowledged that the origins of the ancient Egyptians were more clear due to the "recent evidence on skeletons and DNA [which] suggests that the people who settled in the Nile valley, like all of humankind, came from somewhere south of the Sahara; they were not (as some nineteenth-century scholars had supposed) invaders from the North". Nancy Lovell wrote in 1999 that studies of skeletal remains indicate that the physical characteristics of ancient southern Egyptians and Nubians were "within the range of variation" for both ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa, and that the distribution of population characteristics "seems to follow a clinal pattern from south to north", which may be explained by natural selection as well as gene flow between neighboring populations. She also wrote that the archaeological and inscriptional evidence for contact between Egypt and Syro-Palestine "suggests that gene flow between these areas was very likely," and that the early Nile Valley populations were "part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation". Stuart Tyson Smith wrote in 2001: "Any characterization of race of the ancient Egyptians depends on modern cultural definitions, not on scientific study. Thus, by modern American standards it is reasonable to characterize the Egyptians as 'black', while acknowledging the scientific evidence for the physical diversity of Africans." and "Ancient Egyptian practices show strong similarities to modern African cultures including divine kingship, the use of headrests, body art, circumcision, and male coming of-age rituals, all suggesting an African substratum or foundation for Egyptian civilisation".Smith also wrote in 2004: "Egyptian art depicts Nubians with stereotypical dark skin, facial features, hairstyles, and dress, all very different from Egyptians and the other two ethnic groups, Asiatics and Libyans". Smith also noted in 2004 that: "no single material correlate, no matter how abundantly represented, unambiguously reflects ethnic group affilitation". Sonia Zakrzewski (2003) studied skeletal samples from the Badarian period to the Middle Kingdom in Upper Egypt. The raw data suggested that the Ancient Egyptians in general had "tropical body plans" but that their proportions were actually "super-negroid", i.e. the limb indices are relatively longer than in many “African” populations. She proposed that the apparent development of an increasingly African body plan over time may also be due to Nubian mercenaries being included in the sample, especially in the Middle Kingdom sample. Zakrzewski concluded that the "results must remain provisional due to the relatively small sample sizes and the lack of skeletal material that cross-cuts all social and economic groups within each time period." Barry J. Kemp wrote in 2007 that the black/white argument, though politically understandable, is an oversimplification that hinders an appropriate evaluation of the scientific data on the ancient Egyptians since it does not take into consideration the difficulty in ascertaining complexion from skeletal remains. It also ignores the fact that Africa is inhabited by many other populations besides Bantu-related ("Negroid") groups. He wrote that in reconstructions of life in ancient Egypt, modern Egyptians would therefore be the most logical and closest approximation to the ancient Egyptians. S. O. Y. Keita wrote in 2008 that "There is no scientific reason to believe that the primary ancestors of the Egyptian population emerged and evolved outside of northeast Africa.... The basic overall genetic profile of the modern population is consistent with the diversity of ancient populations that would have been indigenous to northeastern Africa and subject to the range of evolutionary influences over time, although researchers vary in the details of their explanations of those influences." Marc Van De Mieroop wrote in 2021: "Some scholars have tried to determine what Egyptians could have looked like by comparing their skeletal remains with those of recent populations, but the samples are so limited and the interpretations so fraught with uncertainties that this is an unreliable approach". He concluded that ancient Egypt's "location at the edge of northeast Africa and its geography as a corridor between that continent and Asia opened it up to influences from all directions, in terms of both culture and of demography." ___________ Some modern views on bias in Egyptology Sally-Ann Ashton wrote in 2011: "The fact that Ancient Egypt is forced to justify its African identity through its geographical location has not gone unnoticed....critics of the mainstream Eurocentric view of Ancient Egypt claim that not only is the connection between Egypt and Africa neglected, it is consciously denied". She later outlines "This is partly the legacy of the "rediscovery" of Egypt by Europe at the end of the 18th century. In addition to this historical context, Egyptology as a discipline is dominated by scholars who are White Europeans or North Americans". Keith Crawford in 2021 presented a critique of the "Black Pharaohs" narrative accepted among mainstream scholars in which the Twenty-fifth Dynasty rulers were the only dynasty of Black African origin and academic representation of Egyptian-Kushite interactions. He concludes "The separation of Egypt from Africa, beginning nearly two centuries ago, resulted from Egyptologists, historians, and anthropologists interpreting archaeological finds and physical remains through a prism blurred by the racism of the time. These views have persisted to this day, despite overwhelming evidence that refutes them". Genetic studies have been criticised by several scholars for a range of methodological problems and providing misleading, interpretations on racial classifications. Specifically, Keita and Kittles argue that DNA studies applied to the Nile Valley region have downplayed or excluded data on comparable, African populations in order to maintain certain racial models along with pre-selected data categories. Boyce and Keita in a later study, argue that certain studies have adopted a selective approach in sampling, such as using samples drawn mostly from northern (Lower) Egypt, which has historically had the presence of more foreigners from the Mediterranean and the Near East, and using those samples as representing the rest of Egypt. Thus, excluding the 'darker' south or Upper Egypt which presents a false impression of Egyptian variability. The authors also note that chromosonial patterns have featured inconsistent labelling such as Haplotype V as seen the with use of misleading terms like "Arabic" to describe it, implying this haplotype is of 'Middle Eastern' origins. However, when the hapotype V variant is looked at in context, it does have a very high prevalence in African countries above the Sahara and in Ethiopia.[66] ________________ Ancient Egyptian art In their own art, "Egyptians are often represented in a color that is officially called dark red", according to Diop.Arguing against other theories, Diop quotes Champollion-Figeac, who states, "one distinguishes on Egyptian monuments several species of blacks, differing...with respect to complexion, which makes Negroes black or copper-colored." Regarding an expedition by King Sesostris, Cherubini states the following concerning captured southern Africans, "except for the panther skin about their loins, are distinguished by their color, some entirely black, others dark brown.University of Chicago scholars assert that Nubians are generally depicted with black paint, but the skin pigment used in Egyptian paintings to refer to Nubians can range "from dark red to brown to black". This can be observed in paintings from the tomb of the Egyptian Huy, as well as Ramses II's temple at Beit el-Wali. Also, Snowden indicates that Romans had accurate knowledge of "negroes of a red, copper-colored complexion ... among African tribes".
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Position of modern scholarship
quote: S.O.Y. Keita wrote in 2022 on the origins and the identity of the Ancient Egyptians. He examined various forms of evidence which included archaeology, historical linguistics and biological data to determine the population affinities. He concluded that "various disciplines indicate the groundings of Egypt within Northeastern Africa" and the ancient Egyptians "were a people and society that emerged in the Saharo-Nilotic region of Northeast Africa".[69] Keita also reviewed studies on the biological affinities of the Ancient Egyptian population and wrote in 1993 that the original inhabitants of the Nile Valley were primarily a variety of indigenous Northeast Africans from the areas of the desiccating Sahara and more southerly areas. He also added that whilst Egyptian society became more socially complex and biologically varied, the "ethnicity of the Niloto-Saharo-Sudanese origins did not change".[70]
Ancient Egyptian race controversy Position of modern scholarship
quote: Modern scholars who have studied Ancient Egyptian culture and population history have responded to the controversy over the race of the Ancient Egyptians in different ways. Since the second half of the 20th century, most anthropologists have rejected the notion of race as having any validity in the study of human biology. Stuart Tyson Smith writes in the 2001 Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, "Any characterization of race of the ancient Egyptians depends on modern cultural definitions, not on scientific study. Thus, by modern American standards it is reasonable to characterize the Egyptians as 'black', while acknowledging the scientific evidence for the physical diversity of Africans."Frank M. Snowden asserts "Egyptians, Greeks and Romans attached no special stigma to the colour of the skin and developed no hierarchical notions of race whereby highest and lowest positions in the social pyramid were based on colour." Additionally, typological and hierarchical models of race have increasingly been rejected by scientists in favour of models of geographical origin.
It is now largely agreed that Dynastic Egyptians were indigenous to the Nile area. About 5,000 years ago, the Sahara area dried out, and part of the indigenous Saharan population retreated east towards the Nile Valley. In addition, peoples from the Middle East entered the Nile Valley, bringing with them wheat, barley, sheep, goats, and possibly cattle.Dynastic Egyptians referred to their country as "The Two Lands". During the Predynastic period (about 4800 to 4300BC), the Merimde culture flourished in the northern part of Egypt (Lower Egypt). This culture, among others, has links to the Levant in the Middle East.The pottery of the later Buto Maadi culture, best known from the site at Maadi near Cairo, also shows connections to the southern Levant as well. In the southern part of Egypt (Upper Egypt), the predynastic Badarian culture was followed by the Naqada culture. These people seem to be more closely related to the Nubians than with northern Egyptians.
Due to its geographical location at the crossroads of several major cultural areas, Egypt has experienced a number of foreign invasions during historical times, including by the Canaanites (Hyksos), the Ancient Libyans, the Nubians, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Persians, the Macedonian Greeks, the Romans (Byzantium in late antiquity/early Middle Ages), the Arabs, the Turks, and the British.
quote: The Black Africans nearest the Ancient Egyptians were Nubians who lived in the exact same geographic and environmental conditions as the Ancient Egyptians. Ancient Egypt was a Nilotic Saharan population indigenous to that region, in the same way that the NUbians were. The studies of the osteology of Ancient Egyptians show that so called Nubians and Ancient Egyptians were more similar to each other than anyone else. Here is the definitive study done by Keita: A brief review of studies and comments on ancient Egyptian biological relationships - Springer http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02444602#page-1 Here is a map of the population history of Ancient Egypt from the pre-dynastic age to the dynastic era. It shows the sources of population for Ancient Egypt:
quote: "The ancient Egyptians were not 'white' in any European sense, nor were they 'Caucasian'... we can say that the earliest population of ancient Egypt included African people from the upper Nile, African people from the regions of the Sahara and modern Libya, and smaller numbers of people who had come from south-western Asia and perhaps the Arabian penisula." --Robert Morkot (2005). The Egyptians: An Introduction. pp. 12-13
quote: The first egyptians look black and over time there were some that were white and brown in ancient times and the middle ages but most remain black. Anyway most egyptians today look brown,but there are large number that still black looking. Some egyptians today are white looking as well. By the way the civilization of the native egyptians is black and of african origin.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: Buddy, Give it up.
The hieroglyph is the language of Ancient Egypt, and all signs of these hieroglphs for face shows a Black African.
DNA cannot prove a thing. The debate is Over.
Ancient Egypt is Black African inside all the language of egypt every hieroglyph of face shows a Black African.
DNA says a lot about heritage and what other populations a population is related too. Egypts ancient DNA history is still poorly researched and in a future I am sure we will learn more about ancient Egypt and the variations of its population, over time and geographically.
By the way: Have you yourself been to Egypt and looked at ancient art yourself? Have you looked at the people in todays Egypt and studied the variation among people living there?
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Ancient Egyptian race controversy Position of modern scholarship
quote: Modern scholars who have studied Ancient Egyptian culture and population history have responded to the controversy over the race of the Ancient Egyptians in different ways. Since the second half of the 20th century, most anthropologists have rejected the notion of race as having any validity in the study of human biology. Stuart Tyson Smith writes in the 2001 Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, "Any characterization of race of the ancient Egyptians depends on modern cultural definitions, not on scientific study. Thus, by modern American standards it is reasonable to characterize the Egyptians as 'black', while acknowledging the scientific evidence for the physical diversity of Africans."Frank M. Snowden asserts "Egyptians, Greeks and Romans attached no special stigma to the colour of the skin and developed no hierarchical notions of race whereby highest and lowest positions in the social pyramid were based on colour." Additionally, typological and hierarchical models of race have increasingly been rejected by scientists in favour of models of geographical origin.
It is now largely agreed that Dynastic Egyptians were indigenous to the Nile area. About 5,000 years ago, the Sahara area dried out, and part of the indigenous Saharan population retreated east towards the Nile Valley. In addition, peoples from the Middle East entered the Nile Valley, bringing with them wheat, barley, sheep, goats, and possibly cattle.Dynastic Egyptians referred to their country as "The Two Lands". During the Predynastic period (about 4800 to 4300BC), the Merimde culture flourished in the northern part of Egypt (Lower Egypt). This culture, among others, has links to the Levant in the Middle East.The pottery of the later Buto Maadi culture, best known from the site at Maadi near Cairo, also shows connections to the southern Levant as well. In the southern part of Egypt (Upper Egypt), the predynastic Badarian culture was followed by the Naqada culture. These people seem to be more closely related to the Nubians than with northern Egyptians.
Due to its geographical location at the crossroads of several major cultural areas, Egypt has experienced a number of foreign invasions during historical times, including by the Canaanites (Hyksos), the Ancient Libyans, the Nubians, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Persians, the Macedonian Greeks, the Romans (Byzantium in late antiquity/early Middle Ages), the Arabs, the Turks, and the British.
quote: The Black Africans nearest the Ancient Egyptians were Nubians who lived in the exact same geographic and environmental conditions as the Ancient Egyptians. Ancient Egypt was a Nilotic Saharan population indigenous to that region, in the same way that the NUbians were. The studies of the osteology of Ancient Egyptians show that so called Nubians and Ancient Egyptians were more similar to each other than anyone else. Here is the definitive study done by Keita: A brief review of studies and comments on ancient Egyptian biological relationships - Springer http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02444602#page-1 Here is a map of the population history of Ancient Egypt from the pre-dynastic age to the dynastic era. It shows the sources of population for Ancient Egypt:
quote: "The ancient Egyptians were not 'white' in any European sense, nor were they 'Caucasian'... we can say that the earliest population of ancient Egypt included African people from the upper Nile, African people from the regions of the Sahara and modern Libya, and smaller numbers of people who had come from south-western Asia and perhaps the Arabian penisula." --Robert Morkot (2005). The Egyptians: An Introduction. pp. 12-13
quote: The first egyptians look black and over time there were some that were white and brown in ancient times and the middle ages but most remain black. Anyway most egyptians today look brown,but there are large number that still black looking. Some egyptians today are white looking as well. By the way the civilization of the native egyptians is black and of african origin.
Hi Firewall, The controversy is over.
The Ancient Egyptians themselves answered the question, With a hieroglyph for Face being Black African:
We Won the debate, Ancient Egypt is Black African
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
@KING
Have you yourself been to Egypt and looked at ancient art yourself? Have you looked at the people in todays Egypt and studied the variation among people living there?
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by KING: Buddy, Give it up.
The hieroglyph is the language of Ancient Egypt, and all signs of these hieroglphs for face shows a Black African.
DNA cannot prove a thing. The debate is Over.
Ancient Egypt is Black African inside all the language of egypt every hieroglyph of face shows a Black African.
DNA says a lot about heritage and what other populations a population is related too. Egypts ancient DNA history is still poorly researched and in a future I am sure we will learn more about ancient Egypt and the variations of its population, over time and geographically.
By the way: Have you yourself been to Egypt and looked at ancient art yourself? Have you looked at the people in todays Egypt and studied the variation among people living there? [/QB]
The people living there today is majority not linked to the Ancient Egyptians.
Modern Egypt is not linked to Ancient Egypt, only the southern aswan are linked.
AfroAmericans are linked to the Ancient Egypts because they fit the profile of the hieroglph for face:
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Have you yourself been to Egypt and looked at ancient art yourself? Have you looked at the people in todays Egypt and studied the variation among people living there?
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Have you yourself been to Egypt and looked at ancient art yourself? Have you looked at the people in todays Egypt and studied the variation among people living there?
The debate is over.
We won.
Ancient Egypt is related to Black Africans:
Hieroglyphs for Face is a Black African:
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Seems you not been in Egypt, otherwise you would have answered the question. Seems not to be any idea to discuss the subject with you. You are no expert. I rather listen to experts than someone who have not done any deeper studies of ancient Egypt.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Seems you not been in Egypt, otherwise you would have answered the question. Seems not to be any idea to discuss the subject with you. You are no expert. I rather listen to experts than someone who have not done any deeper studies of ancient Egypt.
The experts say that the Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphs for face is a Black African:
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Does that mean that ALL ancient Egyptians, during 3000 years looked like that hieroglyph?
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Does that mean that ALL ancient Egyptians, during 3000 years looked like that hieroglyph?
It Means that Ancient Egypt is a Black African Country and that was the face of the average Egyptian black African.
Ancient Egyptian hieroglphs language for faces is a Black African Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
So does that mean that all ancient Egyptians, always looked like that face?
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Well, you believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Well, you believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
The Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphs better be good enough for you, because that is The Ancient Egyptians own words.
THATS A SLAP INSIDE THE FACE TO ANCIENT EGYPTIANS
to think you can have DNA Tell you what to think when the Ancient Egyptians Told you they are Black Africans.
ALL ANCIENT EGYPTIAN HIEROGLPHS LANGUAGE FOR FACE IS A BLACK AFRICAN Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Well, you believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Well, you believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
You make no sense, what can modern people tell you THAT THE ANCIENT EGYPTIANS HAVE NOT ALREADY TOLD YOU THEY ARE BLACK AFRICAN:
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
You are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: You are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
What dont you understand, YOU AND YOUR CULTURE THIEFS WHITE PEOPLE HAVE LOST.
Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs for Face is a Black African: Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
As I said, you are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: As I said, you are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
No matter the time span of Egypt, the hieroglphs of face is a Black African:
the Egyptian Hieroglyphs is the Language of Egypt. its of the face where we see the hieroglyphs and it is Black African
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
You are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: You are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
No Need to wait, the Ancient Egyptians already explained and they said they are Black Africans:
The ancient Egyptians hieroglyphs for face is a Black African
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
You are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: You are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
This is Real News the Ancient Egyptians are linked with Black Africa and the hieroglyphs have spoken and showed a face of a Black African as the average Egyptian: Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
You are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: You are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
Hieroglyphs is what the Ancient Egyptians spoke inside, that was their language.
And inside their language they looked like Black Africans: Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
You are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
I prefer science before propaganda.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: You are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
I prefer science before propaganda.
Dude, face the facts Ancient Egyptians are Black African it is posted so much that none can forget.
Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphs for face is Black African Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Dude You are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
I prefer science before propaganda.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Maybe better to return to the subject of the thread. Any news about Netflix Cleopatra?
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Dude You are free to believe what you want. I will wait for more DNA results from different time periods before I try to assess the demographic composition of ancient Egypt. A hieroglyph is not good enough for me.
I prefer science before propaganda.
Propaganda?? I posted something that ended the debate on the controversy of Ancient egypt race. You blessed right I am going to post it as much times as I can to prove that Ancient Egypt was Black African.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Returning to the topic, all the complaints from native Egyptians about the actress (Adele James) who played the part yet one thing I forgot to point out is that she actually looks no different from a native Egyptian herself especially from the Coptic community.
Be honest if this woman was walking through the streets of Cairo or Minya, would she be mistaken for a khawaga (foreigner)??
^ I agree, Adele James wouldn't look that out of place in modern Lower Egypt. Plus, the orthodox position is that Cleopatra VII was of Macedonian rather than native Egyptian descent, so if anyone should be pissed about her casting, it would be the Macedonians rather than Egyptians.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ It's as I said, people being reactive due to certain ideologies. The only Egyptians who should've complained are the Greek Egyptians in Alexandria, but I've seen all the complaints coming from other Afrangi.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
First Dynasty of Egypt
quote: S.O.Y. Keita, a biological anthropologist, conducted a study on First Dynasty crania from the royal tombs in Abydos and noted the predominant pattern was "Southern" or a "tropical African variant" (although others were also observed) that had affinities with Kerma Kushites. The general results demonstrate greater affinity with Upper Nile Valley groups, but also suggest clear change from earlier craniometric trends. The gene flow and movement of northern officials to the important southern city may explain the findings.[10]
Source wikipedia
Kingdom of Kush
quote: Dental trait analysis of fossils dating from the Meroitic period in Semna, in northern Nubia near Egypt, found that they displayed traits similar to those of populations inhabiting the Nile, Horn of Africa, and Maghreb. Traits from mesolithic and southern Nubia around Meroe however indicated a closer affinity with other sub-Saharan dental records. It is indicative of a north–south gradient along the Nile river.[28]
Source wikipedia
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Article from The New Arab which adresses Hollywoods colorism and inability to separate different cultures and ethnicities. It also adresses lack of Arab and North African representation in Hollywood movies
quote:Between Afrocentrism and Arabness: Netflix's Queen Cleopatra and Hollywood's problem with colourism
Mahdi El Amin, June, 2023
Netflix's docuseries Queen Cleopatra has been met with criticism for casting a black actress as the Egyptian queen. The platform's decision to appease Afrocentric beliefs surrounding Cleopatra has brought the issue of colourism back into the fray.
On May 11 Netflix premiered the new docuseries Queen Cleopatra starring black actress Adele James as the Pharaonic Queen of Egypt.
The decision to cast a black actress has been met with large-scale criticism and accusations of falsifying history.
Furthermore, it shined a light on Hollywood's double standard on Arab representation, since Hollywood has become more culturally sensitive over the past decade but that same treatment hasn’t spread towards Arabs.
Conversely, some of the backlash the show received from Egyptian and Arab viewers calls into question whether there are in fact racial motivations behind their anger.
"Hollywood’s Afrocentric approach to African and African-American representation and its history of colourism has been put under the spotlight" The racial background of Cleopatra VII, the last queen of Egypt, remains a mystery to this day. However, what has been generally agreed upon by scholars is that she is of Greek ancestry with some Persian and Sogdian Iranian ancestry as a result of her Macedonian Greek family intermarrying with the Seleucid dynasty. It is unlikely that she was black.
Despite that, the interviewed individuals in Netflix’s docuseries confidently claimed that she was. And since the series also included dramatic recreations, Hollywood’s Afrocentric approach to African and African-American representation and its history of colourism has been put under the spotlight.
Afrocentrism
Afrocentrism is a pan-African approach to the study of African culture, philosophy, and history.
African American followers of this school of thought believe that their worldview should reflect African values. Criticisms of Hollywood’s applications of Afrocentrism are the generalisation of African cultures and regions.
During an interview with Piers Morgan, Egyptian journalist and satirist Bassem Youssef pointed out how Queen Cleopatra and the writing team behind it failed to distinguish between West African and North African history as well as ethnicity. He also emphasised the importance of respecting civilizations’ ethnicities and history in preserving relationships instead of lumping them into one big group.
In an interview with Variety magazine, Tina Gharavi, the director of Queen Cleopatra, claimed that the decision to cast a black actress was in an attempt to correct the course of whitewashing in Hollywood’s history and diversifying the image of history in current and future generations of viewers.
In the same interview, she said that her version of Cleopatra is a re-imagined one, which is misleading considering the series is labelled and filmed as a documentary.
Colourism
Afrocentrism is part of a broader case of Hollywood’s failure to distinguish between people of colour. Hollywood is quite often accused of “colourism”, the discrimination based on skin colour, specifically when they cast an actor of a certain race or ethnicity to play a character or a role that is of a different race.
This also applies to African-American actors of a lighter tone getting more roles than those with darker tones. Popular examples include the Marvel characters Storm, fictionally of Kenyan descent, with dark skin being portrayed by biracial actresses Halle Berry and Alexandra Shipp in the live-action X-Men movies, and The Ancient One who is fictionally from somewhere around the Himalayas portrayed by white actress Tilda Swinton.
What is called into question as a result of the Queen Cleopatra controversy is Hollywood casting actors of colour to play characters of a different “colour”, specifically Arabs.
An example of this is Oscar Isaac, a Latino actor, portraying the X-Men villain Apocalypse and the titular hero in Marvel’s Moon Knight. While both these characters’ fictional origins vary throughout their publication histories and are not necessarily or explicitly Arabs, it definitely makes canonical sense for them to be and would’ve been an appropriate place for Arab representation, an area in which Marvel has underperformed in so far, but they instead opted to hire Isaac despite neither character ever being depicted as Latino in either comics or live action.
In fact, depicting them as Arabs would’ve been an act of correcting whitewashing made in the past.
Arab misrepresentation
Despite not casting an Arab for the main role, Marvel’s Moon Knight did take many good steps in their attempt at Arab representation. They had a mainly Arab production team including Egyptian screenwriter and director Mohamed Diab and Egyptian-Palestinian actress May Calamawy as the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s first Arab superhero The Scarlet Scarab.
With that being said, for a show that is centred around Egyptology and takes place in Egypt for a good number of episodes, the main cast did desperately lack more Middle Eastern and North African actors.
Moreover, the entire show only had a handful of Arabic words and phrases being spoken, while much of the dialogue in Marvel’s Shang Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, which was released the year prior, was in Mandarin Chinese. This demonstrates that less effort was put into Arab representation.
quote: This also applies to African-American actors of a lighter tone getting more roles than those with darker tones.
This is not true by the way and it when they mean light skin african american actors clearly they are not talking about the men since clearly most roles go to dark skin black men and most roles go to men anyway. Here some talk anout this on cbr. Dark skin actresses
Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix Avatar View Post
quote: You're still not getting the issue, but I've said what I had to say. I'm done with this conversation because it just goes nowhere.
Quote Originally Posted by remydat View Post
quote: The fact is Hollywood movies are still largely dominated by dark skinned black actors and actresses when compared to their light skinned counterparts. You can see that in nominations for oscars, golden globes and sag awards.
Other talk
quote: Kayla Cole and Oyin Olubayo you both incorrect about what types of black families are shown on tv in america on average.There are more dark or darker skin families shown on tv in america then light skin blacks.Dark skin blacks are the majority of blacks in america.
Now over times light skin and bi-racial black light skin families have been shown more often then they were in the past but dark skin blacks have been shown more still in american beauty commercials and tv shows and are still shown more in america. Some of those american black families shows would show dark skin,medium tone or light skin family members,so there are black family shows that have shown dark and to light in the same family sometimes too. Black lightning is a recent black family superhero show by the way and all the family members are dark skin or let me put this way,none are light skin.
So there are plenty of dark skin actors in roles in Hollywood.You tend see more black medium tone and black light skin women more then medium tone and light skin black men but most of the black actresss are dark skin.You tend see more dark skin black men then dark skin women however in Hollywood roles.
Dark skin black american actresses still get most of THE roles in america. So yes there is still colorism to a certain extent in hollywood because hollywood is in america(this should be obvious because of america's race history problems and whites are still the major group, duh) and that needs still to be dealt with but don't go overboard to say it's in full effect because it's not.Most black actors are still dark skin,more so the men however.
Lighter and medium tone skin actresses are just happening to apply more for roles and more are being qualified for it but most of the actresses still in hollywood are dark skinned.By the way some actresses and actors you are calling light skin are not really light skin at all.Some are medium tone skin blacks.
quote: This also applies to African-American actors of a lighter tone getting more roles than those with darker tones. Popular examples include the Marvel characters Storm, fictionally of Kenyan descent, with dark skin being portrayed by biracial actresses Halle Berry and Alexandra Shipp in the live-action X-Men movies,
Hopefully that will change with the x-men reboot upcoming and i think it will.
quote: and The Ancient One who is fictionally from somewhere around the Himalayas portrayed by white actress Tilda Swinton.
This person forgets that whites were raceswapped too in the comicbook shows and movies with asians,blacks etc..
In fact in the eternals movies sersi was race swapped and in the comics she was original white,now she is eastasian looking in the mcu and east asian now in the comics.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
In response to what Archaeopteryx posted, the funny thing about "Arabness" as it pertains to ancient Egypt is that it doesn't exist. 'Arabs' one can argue only showed up during the Islamic Period. One can argue for an Asiatic presence well before that but not 'Arab' per say. As for 'North Africaness' that to me is the REAL issue. You have indigenous North Africans right there, yet in many of these movie and TV productions on ancient Egypt (including the BBC) they purposely go out of their way to hire fair-skinned Afrangi (Arab and otherwise) to portray the roles of ancient Egyptians when there are plenty of Baladi who can play the part.
It's like using Mestizas with Europeanized features to play the role of the Aztecs instead of the more pristine Indios in Mexico who still speak Nahuatl (Aztec language) and actually look the part. I've always found it ridiculous. And again, I don't know if he was the first but Discovery director Matthew Wortman deserves some credit for hiring actual dark-skinned North Africans for these parts.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Now they managed to drag also the Nazlet Khater man into the debate about Hollywoods casting of actors to play ancient Egyptians
quote: Hollywood need to change which actors play Ancient Egyptians
African Egyptians looked more like Lawrence Fishburne than Christian Bale
One commenter thinks it a stretch to let Nazlet Khater represent all ancient Egyptians
quote: Extremely deceptive article. This individual is not from the Nile valley, where the ancient Egyptian agricultural society began in the neolithic era. This is a hunter-gatherer from 30,000 years ago and was found in a totally different part of what is modern day Egypt. Having said that, ancient Egyptians did not look like Christian Bale either
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: In response to what Archaeopteryx posted, the funny thing about "Arabness" as it pertains to ancient Egypt is that it doesn't exist. 'Arabs' one can argue only showed up during the Islamic Period. One can argue for an Asiatic presence well before that but not 'Arab' per say. As for 'North Africaness' that to me is the REAL issue. You have indigenous North Africans right there, yet in many of these movie and TV productions on ancient Egypt (including the BBC) they purposely go out of their way to hire fair-skinned Afrangi (Arab and otherwise) to portray the roles of ancient Egyptians when there are plenty of Baladi who can play the part.
It's like using Mestizas with Europeanized features to play the role of the Aztecs instead of the more pristine Indios in Mexico who still speak Nahuatl (Aztec language) and actually look the part. I've always found it ridiculous. And again, I don't know if he was the first but Discovery director Matthew Wortman deserves some credit for hiring actual dark-skinned North Africans for these parts.
In the specific case of Cleopatra the makers of the TV series Rome maybe got it better by depicting Cleopatra as light skinned and the local Egyptians as more dark skinned
Edited above.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: This person forgets that whites were raceswapped too in the comicbook shows and movies with asians,blacks etc..
In fact in the eternals movies sersi was race swapped and in the comics she was original white,now she is eastasian looking in the mcu and east asian now in the comics.
Yes, some classic DC figures have also changed color, like Batwoman and Robin who originally were white
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: This person forgets that whites were raceswapped too in the comicbook shows and movies with asians,blacks etc..
In fact in the eternals movies sersi was race swapped and in the comics she was original white,now she is eastasian looking in the mcu and east asian now in the comics.
Yes, some classic DC figures have also changed color, like Batwoman and Robin who originally were white
The new batwoman was not raceswapped and the white one was still in the show. She is just a new batwoman character. The white one is Kate kane. The black one is Ryan Wilder and she is in the comics now because of the show.
There was another black batwoman years ago in a batman animated movie as well but she was not kate kane. Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman 2003.
Now the female robin shown in the picture above is a raceswapped Carrie Kelley. She is white in the comics,animation etc..but black in the live action dc show gotham knights.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ All this race-swapping which by the way only goes in one direction of black-painting is at best lazy. At worst it is a very subtle or subliminal form of white supremacy. That's because they don't think there is any value to original black characters of which there are plenty of. They only value black characters who derive their identity from white originals.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Now they managed to drag also the Nazlet Khater man into the debate about Hollywoods casting of actors to play ancient Egyptians
quote: Hollywood need to change which actors play Ancient Egyptians
African Egyptians looked more like Lawrence Fishburne than Christian Bale
One commenter thinks it a stretch to let Nazlet Khater represent all ancient Egyptians
quote: Extremely deceptive article. This individual is not from the Nile valley, where the ancient Egyptian agricultural society began in the neolithic era. This is a hunter-gatherer from 30,000 years ago and was found in a totally different part of what is modern day Egypt. Having said that, ancient Egyptians did not look like Christian Bale either
This is laughable considering that Nazlet Khater far predates anything remotely predynastic Egyptian let alone historical dynastic Egyptians. Considering that NK's skull (and not some imagined reconstruction) looks blatantly Sub-Saharan one could get an obviously black person to play the part but for what purpose??
quote: In the specific case of Cleopatra the makers of the TV series Rome maybe got it better by depicting Cleopatra as light skinned and the local Egyptians as more dark skinned
Look, regardless of whatever theories there may be of Cleopatra having mixed indigenous ancestry. The point was she as a Ptolemy was overall Macedonian so if they were to choose an outright white person for the role that wouldn't be an actual example of white-washing.
This is why I said if Jada Pinkett Smith had picked the actress Adele James to portray an actual indigenous queen instead of a Macedonian one, it would make more sense even if the Afrangi complain.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: he new batwoman was not raceswapped and the white one was still in the show. She is just a new batwoman characters. The white is Kate kane. The black one Ryan Wilder and she is in comics now because of the show.
Now the female Robin shown in the picture above is a raceswapped Carrie Kelley. She white in the comics,animation etc..but black in the live action dc show gotham knights.
Yes I saw the Batwoman TV series.
Seems they also changed the sexual preferences of Batwoman, both the white and black ones in the TV series Batwoman. There was a time long ago when her highest desire was to marry Batman. Times change.
Batwoman, Batman and Robin in Detective comics 1956
Ironically Batwoman was created to:
quote: She was created by writer Edmond Hamilton and artist Sheldon Moldoff under the direction of editor Jack Schiff, as part of an ongoing effort to expand Batman's cast of supporting characters. Batwoman began appearing in DC Comics stories beginning with Detective Comics #233 (1956), in which she was introduced as a love interest for Batman in order to combat the allegations of Batman's homosexuality arising from the controversial book Seduction of the Innocent (1954).
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ All this race-swapping which by the way only goes in one direction of black-painting is at best lazy. At worst it is a very subtle or subliminal form of white supremacy. That's because they don't think there is any value to original black characters of which there are plenty of. They only value black characters who derive their identity from white originals.
I agree to that, there are so many untold stories about Black people, both real and imagined, they could make films of. For example a film about Meroitic queen Amanirenas who fought the Romans. Or other films from "Nubia" (Kerma, Napata, Meroe). The Nile valley was not only ancient Egypt.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
I think the race swapping needs to slow down when comes to telling real stories like egypt,greece vikings etc..and even fantasy /sci-fi ones well but original characters are shown as well.
The problem is certain stories that were told had whites characters in mind so when those stories are told now(little mermaid,superman etc,) they feel they have to be diverse as much as possilbe to the point of even race swapping.
For example i saw in a chat a week ago when talking about the new cast for superman and lois in the new upcoming superman movie that someone was upset they got white actors again to play them and not only that if they will be straight or lgbt.
So you have certain folks who are not white that were pushing for race swapping etc..and i think that was original cause or mess in the first place. Either way even when the original poc characters or women are shown and push there will be folks upset as well.
The problem their are just folk who don't want poc or women push or to have any leading roles.
Here some talk about from cbr.
by KidStranglehold
quote: I OFFICIALLY take back everything I said about Marvel's diversity push. With them giving non-white characters titles that use to belong to white characters. For example the Hulk or Iron man. Before I thought it was lazy on Marvel's push when they should be pushing the minority characters they ALREADY HAVE But... JESUS CHRIST..... Reading through Comicvine that site has become the comicbook site for alt righters. I hope Marvel keeps doing what they are doing to make these clowns angry. Who needs readers like them? I'm sorry of this post is dramatic. Lastly you can tell its not just about white characters turning non-white. No they just dont wanna see non-white characters at all! With them constantly complaining about the Black Panther film. http://community.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?596-The-Minority-Report!-Diversity-In-The-MU/page257 _________________ Sutekh quote- Indeed, it was the early 'diversity push' that resulted in the creation of characters like Storm and Cyborg that led to the biggest sales numbers seen in my lifetime, and, I'm sure, there was some Archie Bunker-type complaining about why there had to be a black person shoved down their throat on the Teen Titans or X-Men. http://community.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?100159-Generations-The-Thunder-REVIEW-and-SPOILERS/page9 _________________ Quote Originally Posted by Johnny View Post Sure, MM totally didn't seem like an afterthought, that's why for 50 years he didn't get a single long-lasting standalone book. Compare MM's treatment over the years to the way even the "secondary" original members like Aquaman or Flash have been treated and he starts to looks like an afterthought very fast. You're correct about Marvel, as compared to DC's treatment of Cyborg, they absolutely treated minority characters like Sam or Miles much better, but often at the expense of their "classic" characters and alienated lots fans in the process. In any event, Cyborg could "fit" the JL just as good as J'onn did, as long as DC made the effort to do so. It's just a shame they seemingly didn't give it much thought sooner than they did. I'm also curious what would happen post-Rebirth. Is Vic still going to be a founding JL member, Wally did remember him when he was trapped in the speed force. If his TT past is restored, would they just put him in the Titans book and bring J'onn back to the JL. _______________ Quote Originally Posted by BradleyFan I prefer Marvel's way to DC's way any day of the week. Comic fans will always be upset about something being changed from the status quo. And if you add a nonwhite character to the mix, they'll get even more upset. When Cyborg was first brought onto the Justice League, people said over and over again that his inclusion was "forced" and "stupid" and DC was just trying to be PC, and those were the exact same comments that people said about Miles, and Sam Wilson and and Kamala Kahn, and all the other nonwhite heroes. The difference between Cyborg and the others? The others were pushed to the forefront and supported regardless of Comic fans' disapproval. People are going to have a problem with nonwhite heroes, no matter how you introduce them. And if you work to ensure that you're customer base is comfortable with these new nonwhite heroes, the property you're trying to support won't get any support at all. Marvel may have alienated some fans, but I like that they're working hard to make their property inclusive. Honestly, if those comic fans don't want these minority heroes taking the mantles of established white heroes, they should be the ones buying books like Cyborg... Cyborg a-k-a Vic Stone Appreciation Cyborg-(a-k-a-Vic-Stone)-Appreciation-REDUX!!!!!!/page159
The above goes for non comicbook stuff as well,but you get the point.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Some more talk.
quote-
quote: Let's keep mind there are eternals who are diverse(i seen the marvel wiki list) but most of the most known ones before the new recent comics and mcu movie were not poc and women.
The eternals who are diverse and less known before recent comics and the new movie could have replaced the more known ones who are not women and poc but they decide not to that and they change the race/gender swap some of more famous ones.
They did that for some of the inhumans royal family in the inhumans show but they are inhumans who are women and poc who are not in royal family in comics.
DC has done more race and gender swapping in comics and live action then marvel by the way(rebooting characters over and over again etc..)
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
I Edited my last two posts on the last page and Some more talk below.
quote: Quote Originally Posted by penthotal View Post Actually, the fact that they choose to use their biggest brands to tell these stories shows how serious they are about it. A Thor or Iron Man book will always sell more than a New Character one, so the run will last longer and more readers will be exposed to the character, helping it acquire a larger fanbase.
Also, media wouldn't care the same way for New Black / Female Character while they talk extensively about a black Cap or female Thor, this way the 259.700.000 americans that don't read comic books get to know of the existence of these characters, and someone maybe even start buying them. From a commercial and communication point of view it's the most solid plan they could have come up with, and no company is allowed to make their business plans without thinking about economics and communication, it's just how the world works.
It's not even true they don't believe in original diverse characters, there are pushing a lot of them. Black Panther, Power Man & Iron Fist, Nighthawk, Moongirl and Devil Dinosaur, Ms. Marvel, Squirrel Girl, Hellcat, Mockingbird etc. I think forum readers are a bit exaggerated in their reactions to this matter, honestly. So we had a year and half of Sam Cap before having both of them. We will have a couple of years of Jane as Thor before having both of them. Peter and Miles always coexisted and nobody has been left without their favorite hero. The same will happen with Tony Stark and Riri. The two Wolverine book have both good sales, while the original Wolverine was burn out as a character and failed three relaunch in a row, when it will come back it will it will probably able to make decent sales again.
In the long run, Marvel strategy seems to be more sensible than the one proposed by fans and it's not like it will take decades to have both original and legacy characters coexist, we are almost already there. And nobody is forcing anyone, everyone remains free of buying the book they like and ignore the others. _____________ Quote Originally Posted by nnelg View Post It is because it is? That is funny. So its okay to complain about a character being replaced as long as you don't mention the reason for the change? Considering the real problem is with the people complaining about the lack of diversity NOT BUYING the books they claim they want. Guess who are buying Wolverine, Thor, Hulk, Captain America and soon the new Ironman books? The fans of Logan, Thor, Bruce Banner, Steve Rogers and Tony Stark. Where was this support for diversity when Storm, Warmachine! Sif and all of the other "non white males" titles that Marvel kept trying to sell for years? It obviously wasn't there otherwise those books wouldn't have been canceled.
How many times did Warmachine get canceled? I guess if Marvel would've renamed him Ironman people would have been on the bandwagon. So if I am to understand you correctly we(fans of Marvels most popular characters) are supposed to prop the diversity agenda up with our wallets but not complain about things we do not like? Have you ever been to a comic shop? If you had you would know the people complaining are the ones buying the books they are complaining about. The only titles that I mentioned that I am not buying are Thor(shit writing) and Ironman(always hated Stark).
I said it before fans complained when Dick(white) replaced Bruce as Batman. They complained when Eric Masterson(white) replaced Thor. They complained when Bucky(white) replaced Steve as Captain America. Go to a Comic shop an look through the stack of the person complaining the most and loudest. 9 times out of 10 you'll find the books that he/she's complaining about. I stopped complaining about Thor when I stopped buying it. Go look at my post and you will see. I miss reading Thor.I think some Jurgens or Simonson is in order. So get off your high horse everything isn't about race. And there is obviously a diversity agenda. One of the best books Marvel is publishing is Sam Wilson: Captain America. Why can't it be called Falcon? I think it is so they can brag about a male black character in a ongoing.
I also think the book wouldn't last a year without the words Captain America on the cover. Oddly enough one of the worst books is Steve Rogers. Nazi-Cap? __________________ Quote Originally Posted by leo619 View Post And that's the entire point, the comic book readers have been having a stranglehold when it comes to minority representation. They were preventing new characters from being given success, which kept the comic book superhero appearing towards one demographic, like it was back to the 1940's. So marvel was stuck with a dilemna, have their comic book field continue to look like we were back in the 1940's, or do something about it to reflect modern society. Combine that with the fact that Marvel is making visual media of television and movies, where diversity is not only encourage, but almost expected, and you have the problem that marvel was is.
So Marvel found a loophole, they realized that legacy diverse characters based off of mainstream franchises has a greater degree of success then new characters, due to the familiarity of the franchise. So Marvel decided to use that loophole, and now we have the greatest degree of diversity in the MU since the MU debuted. This not only allows them to reflect the modern world like they want, it allows them to be more future proof as the American demographic landscape continues to shift to a non-white demographic. In the end, it's no different than any other company attempting to adapt to a quickly changing landscape.
So you can't say it isn't about race, and then say it's a diversity agenda. If it's a diversity agenda then it is about race (not just race but race is included), and if it isn't a diversity agenda then it isn't about race. But you can't have both. It's like saying isn't about race, but it's obviously a Affirmative Action. They are intertwined, and can't be separated.
With that said, no one is disputing that they are pushing towards diversity. But people want to put a negative spin on it as if only with "diversity" is it an agenda. Everything Marvel created is an Agenda, it's a marketing aspect to reach different audiences as much as possible to guarantee success as a business. I put it to you this way, if the MU was created just now, and not in 1940s plus you best believe all the characters would not be looking the way they do now. Why was pretty much all characters white males? Because the demographic of that time was primarily white males with many containing racist attitudes. The chance of Captain America being the success he is now if he was created at that time as a non white male would be slim to none. So what did Marvel do? Marvel had an "agenda" the agenda to reach the white demographic.
So everything marvel does, is pandering. Everything marvel does, is agenda based. They are a business. Period. So to be mad that the current agenda that they have doesn't fully reflect your taste shows the privilege that people enjoy. As the common statement goes "To those who are privilege, equality starts to look like oppression."
So as mentioned before, it's perfectly fine to be mad at your character being removed. That's understandable, but to be mad over the fact that Marvel is trying to even the playing field by not having almost all white characters literally dominating the mainstream marvel atmosphere shows it's bigotry. ________________________ by mathew101281 All superhero comics are pandering on some level, always have been. Pandering is why Batman has like ten books on the shelves at any given time. Pandering is why fishnets are suddenly adequate attire for crime fighting. https://i.pinimg.com/originals/bf/93/e9/bf93e924a4fefce44f4fdd8d81774808.jpg Pandering is how an ordinary human in a flying rodent costume can stand up to gods and demigods on a consistant basis and regularly come out on top. Pandering is why Hulk is a monster, but She-Hulk is a fitness model.
Like i said in other post the above goes for non comicbook stuff as well,but you get the point.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ No, the problem is rooted in the neo-marxist concept of inversion whether it be critical race theory and thus black-painting original white characters or critical gender theory thus turning original male characters female.
It's implied white supremacy as well as male supremacy.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Here are some other views by the way about raceswapping etc..
Why Race-Swapped Characters are Not the Whole Story | READUS 101
quote: Why Race-Swapped Characters are Not the Whole Story || The debate of race swapping popular characters, also known as racebending, and making an original character instead has been a hot debate among fandoms for years and has made it into modern media. However, what seems to be the main problem when it comes to race swapped and original characters is the amount of thought and concern from those who create them for film and television. And those race swapped characters in question are usually white creators.
Black Washing Ain’t a Thing but Whitewashing is Alive and Thriving
quote: The term “Blackwashing” has been floating around the internet as of late. “Blackwashing” is supposed to represent the erasure of a white character from a piece of fiction being cast as a Black character. When a white character is cast as Black there ain’t thing taken aware or erased from the character, there is no harm done. However, when a Black or Poc character gets whitewashed harm is most definitely being caused.
Tiffie Starchild breaks down the harm that whitewashing has done in media and Hollywood for years. Oh yes, Tiffie has got the time today to learn ya real quick while Blackwashing ain’t even a thing and how whitewashing is thriving and needs to be stopped cause it ain’t cute.
In this this article anthropologist Yasmin Moll proposes that Hollywood could make a film about one of the Nubian queens instead of Cleopatra, whose life has been filmed so many times already
quote: Ironically, however, the show misses an opportunity to educate both American and Egyptian audiences about the unambiguously Black queens of ancient Nubia, a civilization whose history is intertwined with Egypt’s. As an anthropologist of Egypt who has Nubian heritage, I research how the stories of these queens continue to inspire Nubians, who creatively retell them for new generations today.
^ The term "black-washing" is a nonsensical term by reactionary whites. You can't wash something "black". The accurate term is black-painting. And it is nothing more than white-supremacy in black-face parading as "diversity". Those responsible are actually saying blacks have no value in being original characters but have to be rip-offs or tokens of original white characters.
Notice, they don't do with with Asians at least not the extent they are doing with blacks. That's because these whites view blacks as their pets and pet projects.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Yes, it seems that Hollywood (and other western enterprises) see original black characters as not interesting, and maybe not profitable. Instead they black paint white figures like Ariel or Jarl Haakon instead.
Would be interesting if they would dare to make films and TV series about historical black characters like Piankhy, or black fantasy figures like the Nigerian super hero Power man.
For a long time one has heard rumours of a film about king Taharqa, or a film about Toussaint Louverture, but these films have not materialized, at least not in American version.
However the French actually made a film about Toussaint
There are folks that will believe it's about white supremacy and others that will not agree with that or that take. There are others that believe it could be combination of varied stuff and white supremacy could just happen to be mixed in there and others that do not agree with that either.
Here is my take.
There are still films with original poc and women characters and they are still being made and they have made the most money on average in the past and still do now.
Original black characters and other poc and women that are not gender bent are profitable and films with original poc and women characters are still being made by black,whites,women etc..
Gender swapping and race swapping more consistency more the other way is more recent,so it's not been happening that long and in the past it was once in awhile, to none.
Now in more recent times it's about increasing diversity but not being as risk taking as they need to be and still trying to make profit on characters that are the well known enough as well but risk does happen and original characters are still being shown.
Note- Little mermaid is flopping so it making a profit argument goes out the widow for the big screen.
Anyway will make it's money back down the road not on big screen because it's closer to breaking even.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Deleted.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Seems the French have a somewhat different approach to making films with African themes. As for example the animated childrens film about Kirikou, built on West African folklore.
They have also financed and supported African film makers.
Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ All this race-swapping which by the way only goes in one direction of black-painting is at best lazy. At worst it is a very subtle or subliminal form of white supremacy. That's because they don't think there is any value to original black characters of which there are plenty of. They only value black characters who derive their identity from white originals.
Honestly, as a White dude, it doesn't really hurt me at all when a fictional character who was originally portrayed as White gets race-swapped in a reboot or remake. It's not like we've ever had a dearth of heroes in Hollywood movies and other media representing us. I can understand being sick of Hollywood's current addiction to brand recognition, and of course we need more new stories with new characters. However, I can't say I necessarily give a damn if they decide to make an established character a person of color the next time they do decide to reboot a property.
For example, I have little interest whatsoever in the new Little Mermaid remake, as the live-action Disney remakes in general tend to be soulless, underwhelming cash grabs. But is it really that big a deal if they cast a Black woman as Ariel? Her being Black is hardly the main problem with that movie in my opinion.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ I know people in California who have connections to Hollywood types and they told me directly that their agenda is to just to black-paint characters because original black characters are not valuable (to them). They are not even interested in writing any stories about Africa because their views of African culture are uh let's say 'Tarzan' stereotypes.
If that isn't racist, then I don't know what is.
More to the topic, if Jada would have used the actress Adele James to portray any other Egyptian queen but Cleopatra and hired dark-skinned Baladi and Coptic women like in this Egyptian colorism ad there wouldn't be an issue.
Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I know people in California who have connections to Hollywood types and they told me directly that their agenda is to just to black-paint characters because original black characters are not valuable (to them). They are not even interested in writing any stories about Africa because their views of African culture are uh let's say 'Tarzan' stereotypes.
If that isn't racist, then I don't know what is.
Honestly, if that’s for real, then holy shit, it is pretty racist like you said.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Strangely enough those same white elitists who think that way claim to be pro-black and pro-diversity. LOL Posted by Askia_The_Great (Member # 22000) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I know people in California who have connections to Hollywood types and they told me directly that their agenda is to just to black-paint characters because original black characters are not valuable (to them). They are not even interested in writing any stories about Africa because their views of African culture are uh let's say 'Tarzan' stereotypes.
If that isn't racist, then I don't know what is.
More to the topic, if Jada would have used the actress Adele James to portray any other Egyptian queen but Cleopatra and hired dark-skinned Baladi and Coptic women like in this Egyptian colorism ad there wouldn't be an issue.
OMG I agree so much with this good post. I never liked "race swapping" in movies especially comics. Like making Spiderman Black(though Miles is a good character) because it always had racist undertones. They never promoted Black Marvel characters like Storm, Luke Cage and many others like that because like you said they don't see them as valuable. It took a VERY VERY long time for them to promote Black panther yet at the same time they WONT recast T'Challa!
More importantly they'll put Black characters in TV shows like Viking KNOWING it will bait racists and Black ppl will be the target but would NEVER make a movie or TV show based on an African civ.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Well they have shown movies about modern african civilization like south africa etc..but so we have not seen movies dealing with african civilizations in the past except certain selected one like egypt and carthage or made up ones.
Blade is being rebooted,sam wilson is having a movie and he might lead the avengers movies coming and the war-machine series will not be movie. So more original black lead mcu movies are coming out and shuir while now a black panther is still not a gender swap hero and she had her own movie.
When storm comes in to mcu she will get more of the push then she got at fox marvel.
T'Challa was kinda recast if watch post credits. It's simlie to how they did jimmy olsen in smallville when he was killed. His little brother was called jimmy olsen too plus nate moore a black man did not want a normal recast for varied reasons. Luke cage had a show and was shown in other other netflix mcu shows and had really big role,but that was shows were marvel entertainment, not marvel studios. Plus this happen only recently or past few years. Marvel Gets Punisher, Jessica Jones Rights Back from Netflix The last of The Defenders (and Punisher) are back at Marvel. https://www.ign.com/articles/marvel-gets-punisher-jessica-jones-rights-back-from-netflix
Ike Perlmutter's attempt to make Inhumans as MCU X-Men was pointless after all (My rant) (self.marvelstudios)
submitted 2 years ago by Vin13ish
You know, Inhumans was a pet project for Ike Perlmutter, he always wanted Inhumans to be MCU X-Men and he only greenlit both Black Panther and Captain Marvel under one condition that Inhumans be part of Phase 3 but he inference Marvel Studios too many time with Age of Ultron, Kevin Feige has enough of his shit and told Disney to removed Ike Perlmutter and his goons from being involved with any future MCU film and Ike took Inhumans to Marvel's TV Side so that show get made early before Black Panther and Captain Marvel and what happened?
Quote Originally Posted by HollowSage View Post I said Hollywood makes movies they think people want to see. I didn’t say they were always right. In fact they are often wrong and that’s why they have to look at what works and what doesn’t. If a movie exec thinks something is a good idea but audiences reject it then it’s killed and they try something else. Audiences have the final vote with their wallets. If audiences decided in large numbers that they wanted art house movies then studios would push out art house movies until people were sick of them.
ed2962 quote- Sure, but even at Marvel, it's no secret that the Black Panther and Black Widow movies were vetoed for years by Ike Pearlman and these weren't art house movies. Ike just thought they couldn't sell despite the fact that the general public were asking for them. It wasn't until Ike got moved to another position that we got BP and Captain Marvel and then BW. These movies were hits. Ike didn't want to make them because he didn't want to make them. Now think about how many other movies don't get greenlit because a studio head thinks, "Oh, this isn't interesting to me, therefore no one else is interested in it." The "let's run it up the flagpole and see who salutes" attitude ended long ago.
Jack The Tripper quote- Listen man, I'm just stating info that is readily available on the internet re Perlmutter. I'm making no illegitimate defences of Feige. The facts are that he wasn't in full control of Marvel Studios until around 2015, and even then he was answering to Bob Iger officially. It isn't fair to dump full blame on him for lack of diversity when he has infamously had to answer to notoriously problematic CEO Ike Perlmutter. The reason that Black Widow is only getting a solo film now is because of Perlmutter, the reason Iron man 3's main villain was Aldrich Killian and not Maya Hansen was because of Perlmutter. I'm literally giving you a timeline of when Feige stopped answering to Perlmutter. In 20152016, Perlmutter no longer had control over the movies - THAT is why Captain Marvel was announced after Wonder Woman. Stop ignoring comments just to fit your own narrative.
Marvel Studios' Black Widow Teaser {REACTION!!} Scott Daniels
quote: Disney CEO Ike Pulmutter blocked Kevin Feige from making Captain Marvel and Black Panther movies because he felt they wouldn't be successful. When Kevin Feige became president of Marvel studios he green-lighted Black Panther and Captain Marvel, Kevin feige recently went on record saying that he wanted to introduce other minority characters sooner but he was blocked. That's why we're just now getting a Black Widow movie.
quote- Scott Daniels Keep in mind women are not minorities and black panther is not a citizen of the u.s. in the mcu so he is not a minority.Just the word poc instead of minority since they are the majority worldwide anyway.
Miles will be having his own live action movie from sony and he is not black peter parker,so he is not race swapped just like i wilk not call race swapping if john green lantern gets a movie.
Of course IT will be a show with hal in the dcu. DC is even worse because so far no poc leads will be in dcu movies so far. It's batman,superman,supergirl etc all over again,so far.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Here is another take on race swapping.
Why It Seems Every New Black Character is Met With Controversy
quote: An essay about the challenges of introducing diversity in film How does living in a society monopolized by white characters impact someone's imagination? In literature, for instance, readers often assume that protagonists are White people. "Many authors take specific care to describe the skin tone of non-white characters while not doing the same for their white counterparts," a strategy that portrays black characters as unusual, out-of-the-ordinary, or exotic. Another impact on our imagination can be found in the film industry, where White audiences often react negatively to learning a Black person is selected to play a part initially played by a White person. Racism has a way of crippling the imagination and as a result, diversifying characters in a society where whiteness is seen as the default is often met with controversy.
Well-written stories are retold in different ways over time, and this has always been the case. For example, at least 36 films portraying Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet have been created, and at least 12 films depicting the Grimm brothers' Cinderella. Indeed, there are many differences among these portrayals. Still, when a casting director decides the actress should be Black, as opposed to White, there is a much different reaction than when a character's hair or eye color changes from one rendition to another. For instance, some critics "ridiculed" Brandy for playing Cinderella in a 97' film that featured Whitney Houston as her fairy godmother. Despite the film's success and lasting impact, many were initially resistant to accepting their diverse cast as legitimate.
“ Variety described Whitney Houston’s Fairy Godmother as “a frightening caricature, one certain to send the kids scurrying into Mom’s lap.” And the New York Times called it “a cobbled-together ‘Cinderella’ for the moment, not the ages.”
What critics of diversity often misunderstand is their obsession with "traditonal" is often rooted in anti-Black bias. Many characters were initially portrayed as white, not because they had to be, but because of the racial culture surrounding the production of a film. For instance, even though Disney started producing movies in the 1930s, they've only released one film featuring a Black princess so far, Princess Tiana, in the Princess and the Frog in 2009. Given the company's desire to reproduce many of its older films, they've added black characters to movies like the Little Mermaid and Peter Pan and Wendy because keeping the race of cast members "traditional" would only perpetuate the notion that white characters should be the default. Black people are undoubtedly capable of acting, singing, dancing, and playing fictional characters. So, why is there so much pearl-clutching every time a Black actor is cast for a role that a White person once played? Because white supremacy thrives by centering whiteness, and including diverse characters in previously whites-only storylines disrupts that narrative.
The suggestion that changing a character's race somehow diminishes that character is tinged with racism. For instance, when Disney announced that Yara Shahidi would play the role of Tinkerbell, the usual critiques came raining down. Some boycotted the movie altogether because they decided to cast a Black woman. In contrast, others called it "unnecessary." Still, others suggested swapping the race of characters is a way writers avoid originality, implying that casting a Black person was a lazy marketing strategy to get attention. In contrast, others swore their complaint had nothing to do with race; they were just upset the new Tinkerbell didn't have blonde hair. Finally, some gave examples of changing some of the few Black Disney characters, like Princess Tiana or T'Challa, from Black to White, seemingly trolling the post. While many supported a Black woman cast as Tinkerbell, others seemed to dread and anticipate some racist responses.
You can't say on the one hand, "we don't need to change the race of characters because race doesn't matter," and also try to assert that "it's offensive or nontraditional to include diverse characters," because, spoiler alert, if you didn't care about race, you wouldn't be obsessed with keeping white characters white or view non-white characters as nontraditional. If American society started with racial groups on an even footing, then race-swapping wouldn't be necessary because Black people would already be equitably represented in literature and films. However, including black characters in old stories is a way of changing the narrative. Some people want to know why they see more Black characters these days, why the new Little Mermaid and Tinkerbell characters will be played by Black actresses, or why Denzel Washington played Macbeth. The answer is simple — diversity is the best tonic for the white-dominated film industry.
Comic book writer Chuck Dixon complained about "race-swapping" in modern entertainment. "Aren't there any interesting African American characters on their own? Aren't there any characters who build upon that heritage? That build upon that history in a positive way?" Yes, Dixon, thanks for asking. There are many positive stories we can tell about Black Americans, and there are filmmakers who are in the process of creating those stories, and many more already exist. No one has to lecture Black people about the numerous stories we have and how valuable, engaging, and captivating they are. "Black folks come from a long line of storytellers, and we seek out the stories that shed light on who we are in this country." Dixon's upset that Black people are invested in telling their own stories and becoming part of stories they were previously omitted from.
Critics like Dixon also failed to consider that early Black Americans were systematically enslaved, stripped of their surnames and status, and prohibited from using their original African languages. Instead, they were required to learn and speak the language of their masters. Thus, successfully passing down pre-colonial stories amongst Black Americans is limited by the brutal racism they endured. So, claiming Black people don't have their own stories to tell is not only racist, but it also perpetuates the myth of white mediocrity.
How the abundance of white characters in the film industry impacts your imagination and expectations for what protagonists should look like really depends on your worldview. If you believe that previous filmmakers were right to select all-white casts and characters, you will likely protest any attempt to include Black characters now. But, if you believe that Black people should have always had a seat at the table, you're likely to celebrate the inclusion of Black characters in the modern era. Boycotting a movie because a Black character will be a protagonist is decidedly racist and exposes the way bigotry restricts and binds the imagination. Research conducted at the University of Southern California suggested that out of high-grossing films, very little progress has been made in terms of "portraying more characters from non-white racial and ethnic identities."
quote: Note- There are plenty of black characters under disney but if means few lead black movie roles,then will be true of the past but not now and upcoming,and more so for tv that will not be true.
She is incorrect to say/write that thier are few black characters under disney these days from tv to movies,comics,cartoons etc..(i think she might be talking about movies but even then she is wrong)of course she does say things are changing and becoming more diverse as well,from disney etc...
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Another take. The Incoherent Backlashes to Black Actors Playing 'White' Superheroes
FEBRUARY 20, 2014
quote: Comics have a history of altering characters' races and ethnicities, but outcry over Michael B. Jordan's next role illustrates that, in American racism, only certain differences matter.
Michael B. Jordan has been cast as Johnny Storm in the new Fantastic Four movie. For many prospective viewers, that announcement will raise the question that any announcement of a Michael B. Jordan movie raises: Will he be shirtless, and for how much screen time? Other superhero fans, though, are distracted by less wholesome concerns. Johnny Storm, they have noticed, is white. Michael B. Jordan is black. How, they wonder, can this be?
The outcry over interracial casting here appears to be much more muted than the stir over Idris Elba's role as Heimdall in the Thor franchise, which provoked boycott threats. Still, I've seen people on Twitter talking about how the casting will "ruin" the franchise. I'm not going to link because I'm leery of shaming people that way on a mainstream site, but if you look around you can find them without too much trouble. (Niki Cruz has rounded up some of the response, with names redacted, here.) This echoes earlier controversies in which a campaign to get Donald Glover cast as Spider-Man met with racially fraught backlash, while the casting of Amandla Stenberg as Rue in The Hunger Games provoked angry social media whining.
People say they object to black casting because it's untrue to the original source material, and a betrayal of the characters—a claim that seems particularly dicey in the case of The Hunger Games, where Rue is black in the original novel. But even in the case of the Fantastic Four, where Jack Kirby and Stan Lee did in fact make the team white, the plea to be faithful to the founding seems to raise a lot of questions.
After all, it's not like there's been one, true, unwavering Fantastic Four over the decades. The Thing was originally drawn by Jack Kirby as a lumpy mess; it took a while for him to settle down into the more-streamlined orange form fans know and love. Sue Storm at first could only turn invisible; it was some time before she developed the invisible force fields that made her useful in a fight. For that matter, She-Hulk replaced the Thing on the team for a while. And then there was a popular series where the Fantastic Four turned into zombies. Comics are serial soap-opera fantasies; people change costumes, grow blue fur, die, grow a third eye, come back to life, are replaced by a clone and turn to the dark side. Nothing stays the same. Why, then, is this particular, relatively minor alteration in canon seen as a betrayal?
You could argue that racial difference is more noticeable, or different in kind, than plot-driven death or blue fur or zombiefication. But then, how account for the fact that in the comics characters like Iron Man, Spider-Man, and Green Lantern have, at various times, been black? More, certain changes in racial background or casting seem to provoke little comment. No one, as far as I'm aware, has complained about Scarlett Johansson's casting as the Black Widow on ethnic grounds. Yet Johansson’s background is Jewish. The original Black Widow, Natalia Romanova, has what appears to be an ethnic Russian name; there was no indication that she was originally supposed to be Jewish. Given the anti-Semitism in Cold War Russia, a Jewish ethnic identity would in context be a significant alteration to the character. Why, then, do people care about Storm, but nobody cared about Romanov?
"Fans often seem to believe that if a character is changed from white to black, they will no longer be able to identify with that superhero."
The answer is obvious enough. American racism holds that only certain racial differences matter. Jews, Italians, Eastern Europeans, Irish—all those people are white and can play one another with nary an eyebrow raised. Nobody is worried about whether Sue Storm has exactly the mix of Irish, German, and French-Canadian ancestry as Kate Mara, who has been cast to play her. For that matter, no one would say a thing if the actors cast to play Sue and Johnny, sister and brother, came from different ethnic backgrounds and didn't look much alike. It's only when one is black and one is white that you need to start worrying about family logistics. (And yes, you can find folks doing that on Twitter as well—because getting turned into living fire by cosmic rays is an everyday thing, but adoption is weird.)
"Fans often seem to believe that if a character is changed from white to black, they will no longer be able to identify with that superhero" Aaron Kashtan, a postdoctoral fellow at Georgia Tech who teaches a course on transmedia storytelling, wrote in an email to me. Kashtan adds that this is an example of "unconscious or overt racism"—a point underlined by the fact that the barriers to identification are so clearly arbitrary. Certain different people—Jews, or Irish, or folks with a hide made of orange rock—can be points of identification. Others, especially African-Americans or anyone with dark skin, can't. The issue here isn't staying true to the original. The issue is racism.
Kashtan points out as well that staying true to the original is in itself not easily separable from racism. "Superhero comics were developed in the cultural context of '60s America," he says, "where it was just normal for all the characters to be white. When Stan Lee included a black character, Gabe Jones, in Sgt. Fury and the Howling Commandos, he actually had to tell the color separators that this character was supposed to be black, because the default assumption was that every character would be white." Kashtan adds that, "This default assumption of whiteness is no longer acceptable."
That's a good thing. Hopefully, Fantastic Four will be a hit in part because of Michael B. Jordan (shirtless or not); Hollywood will continue to put African-American superheroes on screen, and eventually folks won't feel any more need to grumble than they did when that non-Kryptonian Henry Cavill was cast as Superman.
Noah Berlatsky edits the online comics-and-culture website The Hooded Utilitarian and is the author of the book Wonder Woman: Bondage and Feminism in the Marston/Peter Comics, 1941-48.
quote: Here we get Rippa getting ripped apart. What is the difference between characters introduced back in the day and now? THE INTERNET, MARKETING. LOL
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Legacy, Mantles & Tokenization | When it WORKS & When it SUCKS!
Who Is the Sentry? Steven Yeun's Rumored Thunderbolts Role, Explained
quote:
Rumors suggest Steven Yeun's role in Marvel's Thunderbolts will be the Sentry, a relatively recent hero whose arrival often portends catastrophe. One of the biggest projects in the works for Phase Five of the Marvel Cinematic Universe is Thunderbolts, a loose adaptation of the comic series of the same name, which will see a handful of the MCU's previous villains team up under the leadership of unscrupulous CIA director Contessa Valentina Allegra de Fontaine. Details of the story are being kept under wraps thus far, but it has been confirmed that Harrison Ford will take over the role of Thaddeus Ross from the late William Hurt, while Ayo Edebiri and Steven Yeun have been cast in unknown but significant roles.
Added/edited info above.
Posted by Thereal (Member # 22452) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I know people in California who have connections to Hollywood types and they told me directly that their agenda is to just to black-paint characters because original black characters are not valuable (to them). They are not even interested in writing any stories about Africa because their views of African culture are uh let's say 'Tarzan' stereotypes.
If that isn't racist, then I don't know what is.
More to the topic, if Jada would have used the actress Adele James to portray any other Egyptian queen but Cleopatra and hired dark-skinned Baladi and Coptic women like in this Egyptian colorism ad there wouldn't be an issue.
Yeah,that doesn't make any sense. If Black race swapping is some master plan by elite whites,why not use Hispanics? If the numbers are accurate,they outnumber Black people in the U.S and the higher ups in Hollywood could select between Native, Black people, Mulatto/Mestizos and "spicy whites."
It makes no sense say Black people have no value so that's why would don't get African based movies then switch white characters to Black people. That's a conflicting statement. Also,the picture in your link sucks.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: Yeah,that doesn't make any sense. If Black race swapping is some master plan by elite whites,why not use Hispanics? If the numbers are accurate,they outnumber Black people in the U.S and the higher ups in Hollywood could select between Native, Black people, Mulatto/Mestizos and "spicy whites."
It makes no sense say Black people have no value so that's why would don't get African based movies then switch white characters to Black people. That's a conflicting statement. Also,the picture in your link sucks.
Its even worse than that, because 'black culture' is the face of popular entertainment from America all over the world. Yet black people don't get most of the money from it, as opposed to white owned studios. So the hypocrisy is literally all over the place. Not to mention some of the most popular modern artists in Egypt are rapping as well. Should black people call that cultural appropriation?
And as far as Africa goes, a lot of fantasy in games over the last few decades have been openly harvesting African cultural elements. Even though you may not be aware of this unless you actually know African history and are aware of these elements. I can name numerous examples but it is in many games from World of Warcraft weapons and attribute suffixes based on animal names (similar to African stafffs associated with animal spirit attributes) to Elden Ring with scarabs and others. So they have no problem harvesting African culture for ideas that "have value" such as any of the numerous collections of African weapons in European collections. Yet when it comes time to tell a fictional story directly using Africans as characters or characters based on African identity it is a problem.
So yes, these people are just racist and the bigger problem is most Africans in Hollywood and most African Americans are not doing much better. Most of them are in it for a check and have no problem being tokens as long as they get paid. They never promote or create any African based content or characters of their own even though they are supposedly in a "creative industry". Yet they will whine and complain about "lack of representation"..... even though that has existed for decades now. And lets not get into how rap has descended into the depths of coonery and vaudeville sambo acts. Totally sh*tting on the late 80s and early 90s conscious rap era, paid for and promoted by the industry.
The reality of "woke" Hollywood is that it is a PR stunt by white executives in Hollywood to pretend to care about black people. But it is all about fictional characters not actual real positions of authority behind the scenes. White executives and creators are allowed to lose hundreds of millions of dollars on movies and tv series nobody likes. Yet these same people are scared to give less money to fund new stories and characters created by black writers, artists and directors. The whole point of diversity is to have diverse people in positions throughout the company as writers, producers, showrunners, creative executives and so forth. It is not simply about changing the skin color of a fictional character. Yet again, most black actors who claim to be activists are only activists when they get paid to say whatever these studios tell them to say. They never actually push for true diversity where it counts and they never create their own Hollywood studios to make their own content. I mean there are multiple nascent movie/entertainment studios across Africa, they should be able to work with Americans to build their own fantasy and fictional characters and brands across the diaspora. But nope. They just want to be the black version of some white character.... which is pathetic. And certainly Africans should not have to get permission to do a story about ancient African history from Europeans or anybody else who does not identify as African, whether it be KMT, Sudan, the Sahara, West Africa, South Africa or anywhere else.
Some of the best films about African history have been made by African yet they are largely unknown in the west, such as Cheddo, by Ousmane Sembene:
Women, Actors of Color Better Represented in 2019 Films, Study Finds
quote:
In a study released Tuesday, the USC Annenberg Inclusion Initiative examined the 100 top-grossing films of 2019 and found that there was a notable improvement in the representation of both actors of color and females.
Despite the lack of actors of color nominated at the 2020 Oscars, 2019 was a year of positive change for inclusion in popular movies.
Research from the USC Annenberg Inclusion Initiative examined the 100 top-grossing films of 2019 and found that there was a notable improvement in the representation of both actors of color and females.
Last year, 31 of the top 100 films featured an underrepresented lead or co-lead, which is up from the 27 films in 2018 and 13 films in 2007. Meanwhile, 16 of those films had an underrepresented female as the lead or co-lead. The number is a drastic improvement from the 11 movies in 2018 and one film in 2007 led by underrepresented females.
Women and girls were also better represented in film during the past year. The report found that 43 of the top 100 films had a female lead or co-lead, which marks a 13-year high. In 2018, 39 films had a female lead or co-lead, while only 20 movies starred female characters back in 2007.
Despite the historic high, the percentage is still below the female population according to the U.S. Census, which is 51 percent, while 47 percent of movie tickets are sold to women in North America.
The stats prove that women of color are now better represented in films, though the inclusive stars are often overlooked during awards season. The 2020 BAFTA Awards nominated only white actors, while Cynthia Erivo is the only performer of color nominated at the upcoming Oscars.
“It is clear that Hollywood is taking steps to create more inclusive stories and that those films are connecting with audiences,” wrote Stacy L. Smith, founder of the USC Annenberg Inclusion Initiative, in the report. “Yet there is also a very obvious disconnect between what sells tickets and what garners awards, (and that) points to a systemic bias at cultural institutions like the BAFTAs or the Academy Awards.”
She continued, “After another year in which the major studios increased their output of films with female and underrepresented leads or co-leads, it is critical to recognize that talent is not limited by gender or race/ethnicity.”
Walt Disney Studios outperformed its competitors by earning $4.1 billion for its female-driven content, which is more than four times as much as the next highest-grossing distributor Universal Pictures with $893 million. Disney also earned $2.7 billion for its films with underrepresented leads. The number is almost twice as much as Universal’s earnings, which was $1.5 billion.
Universal championed women and underrepresented actors during 2019. The studio distributed nine movies starring females and eight featuring lead actors of color, which is more films with female or underrepresented lead actors than any other studio.
Smith found that “studios are putting money behind inclusion and the box office is responding in kind.”
Despite the increase of females onscreen, the report called for more female directors. Only 12 of 2019’s top-grossing films were helmed by women. The stat follows the criticism of female directors being shut out of major awards shows including the Oscars and Golden Globes.
Lulu Wang for The Farewell, Lorene Scafaria for Hustlers, Greta Gerwig for Little Women, Marielle Heller for A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood and Olivia Wilde for Booksmart were among the female directors who have been overlooked this awards season.
“As the number of films starring women continues to increase, it is critical that women get the opportunity to tell these stories — as well as those with male leads,” wrote Smith.
The report concluded by stating that film is on par with television in regards to the number of stories being told about girls and women for the first time in over a decade.
Par 1 UCLA’s “Hollywood Diversity Report 2022. UCLA’s Hollywood Diversity Report Documents “Enormous Gains” By Women & People Of Color, But Latinx Representation Still Lags
quote: Hollywood movies are more ethnically diverse than ever according to a new report from UCLA, which found that women and people of color “have made enormous gains” over the past decade in their share of leading roles in top-performing films.
UCLA’s “Hollywood Diversity Report 2022,” released Thursday, found that the percentage of leading roles played by people of color in last year’s top 200 films has nearly quadrupled since 2011; that their share of writing credits has more than quadrupled; and that their percentage of directing jobs has nearly tripled.
It also found that the percentage of women in leading roles has nearly doubled over the last decade; that their share of writing credits has more than doubled; and that the percentage of women directors has increased by more than fivefold over the past decade.
The report, co-authored by UCLA sociologists Dr. Darnell Hunt and Dr. Ana-Christina Ramón, is the latest indication that inclusion efforts by Hollywood’s unions and employers – with pressure from the Motion Picture Academy and the press – are working, though it notes that more work still needs to be done for women and minorities to achieve parity in front of and behind the camera.
See the full report here.
“Following the significant advances for people of color and women in 2020, both groups made small gains, or at least held their ground, relative to their white and male counterparts in 2021,” the report says. “As a result, both groups enjoyed proportionate representation among film leads and top film roles for the second year in a row.”
Even so, some minority groups fared better than others. The report notes that African Americans, who make up 13.4% of the U.S. population, were “slightly overrepresented” in leading film roles (15.5%) last year. Latinx creatives, on the other hand, who make up 18.7% of the population, “remain extremely underrepresented” in all the major film categories surveyed, accounting for just 7.1% of leads, 7.7% of overall cast, 5.6% of writers and 7.1% of directors.
Share of All Film Roles, by Race, 2021 (n=1,944)
The report found that multiracial persons, who make up 10.2% of the population, were at “proportionate representation” among film leads in 2021, constituting 10.3% of film leads.
Asian Americans, who account for 6% of the population, got 5.6% of the leading roles, while Native Americans, who make up 1.3% of the population, got only 0.4% of the leading roles. Native Americans, the report says, “remain virtually invisible in Hollywood, making up less than one percent of each job category tracked.”
People of Middle Eastern & North African (MENA) descent, who account for approximately 0.9% of the population, didn’t get any leading roles at all in the top-performing films last year, though they did make up 1.1% of overall cast, 2.8% of writers and 1.6% of directors.
Female actors, meanwhile, failed to reach parity with their male counterparts among white, Black, Asian and MENA actors in 2021, which the report says, “is likely related to the fact that decisions about which film projects will be greenlighted – and which stories will be told – are still overwhelming made by white men.”
Overall, however, women have made great strides over the past decade, according to the survey, which looked at the top 200 theatrical – and all major streaming – English-language films released in 2021.
“Like people of color, women have made enormous gains over the course of this report series in their share of top film leads,” the report says. “Women accounted for 47.2% of film leads in 2021, virtually unchanged from the 47.8% evident in 2020 but nearly double the share the group posted in 2011 (25.6%).”
Women also posted gains among the ranks of directors and writers, though they remain underrepresented despite significant progress in recent years. “Since the previous report, women have inched forward relative to their male counterparts among the directors of top Hollywood films,” the report says. “Women claimed 21.8% of these critical positions in 2021, up just slightly from 20.5% in 2020.
Between 2011, the first year examined in this report series, and 2021, women’s share of directors increased more than fivefold – from 4.1% to 21.8%. Despite these significant gains, women remained underrepresented by a factor of more than two-to-one in this employment arena in 2021.”
Women’s share of the writer credits rose to 33.5% in 2021, an increase of more than seven percentage points over the 26% they posted for 2020. “This increase continues an upward trend for women screenwriters evident over the course of this report series. Indeed, women’s share of screenwriters in 2021 was more than double the 14.1% figure observed in 2011. Still, women would have to increase their 2021 share by nearly 20 percentage points to reach parity with men in this employment arena.”
Hunt, dean of the social sciences at UCLA and co-author of the report, said that “In 2020, minorities reached proportionate representation for the first time when it comes to overall cast diversity in films, and that held true in 2021. We suspect this is at least somewhat due to the outsize impact of the number of films we analyzed that were released direct-to-streaming. We also think this dual-release strategy is probably here to stay and could have a lasting impact on diversity metrics in front of and behind the camera in the future as studios think about how to finance content for different platforms.”
Audiences are also becoming increasingly diverse. “The minority share of the U.S. population is growing by nearly half a percent each year,” the report notes. “Constituting nearly 43% of the U. S. population in 2021, people of color will become the majority within a couple of decades.”
The report found that eight of the top 10 theatrically released films in 2021 featured casts that were greater than 30% minority, and that for the first time since researchers began tracking, the majority of Oscar-winning films from 2020 were helmed by directors of color and featured minority leads.
“Looking at last year, every time there was a big movie that exceeded expectations or broke a record, we see that between 53%-60% of opening weekend audiences were people of color,” said co-author Ramón. “People essentially were risking their lives to go the movies during a pandemic. For people of color and especially for Latino families, theaters provided an excursion when mostly everything was shut down. In a sense, people of color really kept the studios afloat the past couple of years. Studios should consider them to be investors, and as an investor, they should get their return, in the form of representation.”
“In 2021, diversity in front of the camera did not equate to more opportunities behind the camera for filmmakers who are women and people of color,” Ramón said. “They continue to receive less financing, even when they make films with white leads. Most of these filmmakers are relegated to low-budget films. The chronic underinvestment in women and people of color creates limited opportunities for them to showcase their talents to a wider audience.”
Looking at directors from the top films of 2021, 21.8% were women and 30.2% were people of color. In writing roles, 33.5% were women and 32.3% people of color. These were both incrementally steady gains over 2020.
“The final frontier is really behind the camera for women of color,” Ramón said.
The report found that of the 76 minority directors of 2021’s top films, just 23 were women. Black, Latino and multiracial women were outpaced by at least 2-to-1 by men from those groups. Asian and Native American women directors achieved parity with Asian and Native American men, though their numbers remain very small. Just nine Asian American men and eight Asian American women directed top-performing films last year. One Native American woman and one Native American man were in the 2021 directing data.
White women are also still greatly outnumbered by white men in the directing category – 32 total women compared to 143 men last year. And there was only one trans woman director in 2021’s crop of top films.
And as the percentage of people of color in key areas has increased, so too has the white percentage decreased. The white share of all top film roles dropped to 56.9% in 2021, down from 58% in 2020. “As a result, whites were slightly underrepresented among featured film roles in 2021,” the report says.
FIGURE 5: Share of Film Directors, by Race, 2021 (n = 252)
FIGURE 3: Share of Film Writers, by Race, 2021 (n=251)
Considering each minority group separately, African Americans accounted for 9.5% of the directing jobs; Latinx 7.1%; Asian 6.7%, multiracial 4.4%, and Native Americans 0.8%. All were underrepresented compared to their share of the population.
The white share of writers of Hollywood’s top films also declined again since last year’s report, down from 74.1% in 2020 to 67.7% in 2021. The report notes that “almost all individual minority groups remained underrepresented last year, with African Americans receiving 10.4% of the writing credits; Latinx 5.6%; Asian 4%; multiracial 8.8%; and Native American 0.8%.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Part 2 UCLA’s Hollywood Diversity Report Documents “Enormous Gains” By Women & People Of Color, But Latinx Representation Still Lags
quote: The trend towards diversity is also being reflected at the Academy Awards in the wake of the #OscarsSoWhite campaign.
“Findings from this report document that the groundbreaking collection of diverse nominees for the 2021 Oscar ceremony also resulted in an unprecedented number of diverse award winners,” the report says. “Indeed, English-language films with relatively diverse casts, directors of color, and leads of color gained considerable ground at the 93rd annual Academy Awards compared to the year before. Most notably, the majority of Oscar-winning films from 2020 were helmed by directors of color and featured minority leads, both firsts over the course of this report series. For women, however, the picture was mixed. While women directors treaded water relative to their male counterparts in helming Oscar-winning films, films with women leads fell further behind among Oscar-winning films.”
In its conclusion, the report says that its findings “document that increasingly diverse audiences continued to flex their muscles at the box office and on streaming platforms in 2021, driving domestic ticket sales for the top 10 theatrical releases and accounting for a disproportionate share of the audiences for the top 10 streaming releases. Findings also show that diverse audiences, now market anchors in the film sector, clearly preferred diverse content. That is, the lion’s share of the most highly rated films among diverse households in 2021 – and increasingly among White households and viewers 18-49 – featured casts that were at least 30 percent minority.
“Following our conclusion in the previous report, Hollywood would benefit greatly from embracing 2021’s (re)affirmation of the bottom-line possibilities associated with major advances on the diversity front – particularly in a sector reordered by the ascendance of streaming platforms. People of color constituted nearly 43% of the U.S. population in 2021, and their share is increasing by about half a percent a year. This trend, combined with diverse audiences’ heavy engagement with original, streaming film content, underscores the importance of diversity as a first-order business imperative for the film industry.”
I was looking up pictures of Egyptian actors, and I came across this dude, Haitham Zaki. Damn shame he died back in 2019. He looks more like my image of a typical ancient Kemetian than a lot of the other people who get to be major actors in modern-day Egypt.
Posted by Thereal (Member # 22452) on :
That's Ahmed Zaki's son,his mother could be of Turkish decent.
Posted by Thereal (Member # 22452) on :
That's Ahmed Zaki's son,his mother could be of Turkish decent.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ No surprise there. The Egyptian movie industry is like other movie industries are run by the elites of that respective country that being the Afrangi. So while colorism is huge problem, even if there is an occasional dark skinned actor or actress most likely he or she still has Afrangi ancestry.
To Firewall.
The comic book industry today is more racist than it was back then. Instead of creating original black characters or other characters of color they would rather black-paint white characters. This is because the comic book industry has been hijacked by Hollywood who we know is racist. Even the new DEI (diversity) quotas are a joke. It's nothing more than affirmative action on steroids. They don't care about quality of work anymore and by the way, LGBTQIAS+ get more priority than any person of color. Whatever just happened to meritocracy and hiring crew based on their abilities. Unfortunately it's a fact that most people who work in filming and staging happened to be white it's not due to racism. As far as acting. Instead of black-painting, why not film movies based original black characters? I'm telling you black-painting is a form of white supremacy. They're simply saying black characters only have value if based on white ones.
As far as Hollywood's racism in general, this is why blacks and other people of color who are concerned about getting their stories told should go independent. as Hollywood is know suffering from their far-left communist 'woke' agenda. Independent movie companies can now make more money but spending less money than these major corporations. Look at the SAG strikes happening.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
I don't agree and i don't agree that Hollywood and comicbook industry is more racist today but racism is still there. This i do agree that more poc in america need to have more Independent movie companies and comicbook companies but so i don't see it as a either or and original characters are still being push. So like i said it's not a either or and race bend characters and original ones are being shown more.
In fact overall there still original characters still being created more then race bend white ones.
The Hollywood need to be push more to do the right things and more Independent companies need to be created,and both has been and is happening. Anyway my views and past posts still stand.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Some more other talk about this.
THE FLASH Second Week Box Office Is AWFUL! HUGE BOMB!
quote: androlibre9661 quote- Its a mix of Super Hero fatigue.....and wokeness fatigue. ...and the fans being shit on by the people making these movies. Its a mix of three....do the percentages any way you want but those are the factors as I see them.
shillbill1299 quote- Define WOKE...and please, take you time doing it
androlibre9661 quote- @shillbill1299 In general, Extreme liberal/progressive political and social ideology. More specifically, In the context of movies/TV, I'd define it as injecting the agenda of extreme liberal/progressive political and social ideological messaging into every project in the form of forced diversity casting and agenda based symbolism presented as the achievement and purpose of the projects in lieu of character development, plot development, story arc and overall entertainment.
shillbill1299 quote- @androlibre9661 actually it's a term used by Black Americans since the '60s basically meaning to "be aware"...being aware of your surroundings, being aware of your culture, being aware of people doing harm to you. Now that term has been so gentrified and bastardized to now it's a catch all phrase for anything someone doesn't like. And also now when that term is used is usually code speak for "Black". It has nothing to do with anything politically or any type of agenda. Remember it was only a few years ago when everyone was saying "SJW" when it was something that they didn't like, now it's "WOKE". Can't make this stuff up. Now not only does it sounds corny but also racist too.
quote: 1monki quote- Diversity is no more "forced" than a lack of diversity is forced. Case in point, the original Number 1 from the first Star Trek pilot. The first in command of the Enterprise was a woman. The suits in the mid-60s weren't having any of that, so they "forced" her off the bridge. So you could say that the diversity currently seen in films and TV represents the removal of the force that kept them out in the past
Quote Originally Posted by Huntsman Spider quote- "Forced diversity" is generally a term employed by people who can't spell out in clear, unambiguous terms what "natural diversity" would look like in the first place. Hell, if you wanna be cynical, in a sense, all diversity is forced because the people and demographics that still retain most of the sociopolitical, economic, and cultural power in America would rather not include or promote voices and perspectives from outside said demographics if they can get away with it. Even with that in mind, though, the reality is that entertainment studios have willfully walked away from billions of dollars in potential profits, simply because they saw stories that not only included, but centered voices and perspectives historically left out of the "mainstream" of American society and culture as "simply not marketable enough."
Quote Originally Posted by Redjack everyone who is using the term "forced diversity" (and not being ironic with it or using it the way i just did) is telling you they're a racist without having the balls to claim it. the end.
Men In Black and Dark Phoenix - Major Box Office Flops
quote:
Neil Philp8 hours ago The Woke Agenda has killed Star Wars cinematically and it WILL kill the MCU if they keep going with it
Schlock Jocks26 minutes ago @Neil Philp Marvel was always "woke", it's just that back then people weren't as thin skinned about nonwhites as they are now.
Jumanji Joe9 hours ago @Dani Implying, Disney had to pay for most of tickets to save poor Brie from being the flop queen.
Dani9 hours ago @Jumanji Joe LOL, you bought into that retarded conspiracy theory, huh. 😂
Jim Johnson4 hours ago @Dani why do you care? Are you getting paid for it? Lol if so then you should be kissing Disneys butts for buying all of those ghost theaters and ghost seats throughout the world for you.
Schlock Jocks26 minutes ago @Jim Johnson There weren't any ghost screenings.
Schlock Jocks25 minutes ago @Jim Johnson Nope, no ghost screenings. That's just Alt-Right propaganda.
quote: Quote Originally Posted by tliscord View Post The idea that referencing the woke agenda is somehow not racist, not misogyny, is incredibly disturbing. This cannot be said enough. And you can’t be on both sides of this issue. Many of us are sick of hearing such garbage.
Quote Originally Posted by tliscord View Post This should enlighten those predisposed to using the term wokeness as derivative
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
As far as Hollywood's racism in general, this is why blacks and other people of color who are concerned about getting their stories told should go independent. as Hollywood is know suffering from their far-left communist 'woke' agenda. Independent movie companies can now make more money but spending less money than these major corporations. Look at the SAG strikes happening.
If they need assistance financing such independent projects they could maybe ask the French to assist them, since France sometimes are making the films that Hollywood doesn´t. France has also many times helped sponsor African films.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Here’s where Hollywood’s efforts to improve diversity really stand in 2022
quote: Ahead of the annual Academy Awards ceremony, the attention in Hollywood turns to the lack of diversity in the entertainment industry. Ever since #Oscarssowhite trended in 2015 and 2016 when there were no people of color nominated for the 20 acting nominations each of those years, the industry has been reckoning with how a lack of diversity in front of and behind the camera is, among other things, a missed business opportunity. UCLA just released its annual Hollywood Diversity Report to address gender and racial diversity gaps, and efforts to close them.
The UCLA study found that women held the gains they’ve made on-screen, representing 47% of film leads and 42% of actors. Women and people of color have made progress in the key, powerful roles of director and film writer, but are still vastly underrepresented. Women are less than 22% of directors and 33% of film writers. And both male and female people of color represent 30% of directors and 32% of film writers.
“There’s a lot more work that needs to be done, particularly for women of color,” says Ana-Christina Ramon, UCLA’s director of research and civic engagement. “They again lag behind, in getting those major jobs as directors of top films.”
A ripple effect This lack of diversity at the top has a ripple effect across productions: the study found that films written or directed by women last year had casts that were significantly more diverse than those written or directed by white men. But the study also found that women and people of color have a harder time raising financing for a film, and when they do, raise less funding for their films – they’re more likely to helm a film with a budget of less than $20 million than white men are.
“There is definitely this inequitable system that’s working against women. When you have a higher budget, you can obviously do a lot more and [the film] is definitely going to get a lot more marketing, more backing from the studio,” says Ramon.
All this data, Ramon says, points to a massive opportunity for Hollywood: films with more diverse casts perform better at the box office. Eight of the top 10 theatrically-released films in 2021 featured casts that were greater than 30% minority, while films with less than 11% minority actors were the lowest box-office performers.
With attention to that data (and a 2021 McKinsey study about the $10 billion opportunity in addressing anti-Black bias), Hollywood’s been taking steps to address these gaps. Another factor driving change: The Academy set representation and inclusion standards for films to qualify for the 2024 awards.
These standards address on-screen representation, themes and narratives – films can qualify if they either have a lead actor from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group, 30% of secondary and minor roles from at least two underrepresented groups, or a storyline or subject matter centered on an underrepresented group. Films must also meet certain criteria in terms of the diversity of creative leadership and project teams, marketing, as well as the production company’s access to opportunities.
Studios are already starting the process of measurement to address the transparency disclosures, and working to ensure they already meet those standards. And they’re doing so by working with a number of nonprofits.
Creating a pipeline for diverse talent
One of those organizations, Free The Work, helps place diverse talent on movie sets, working with nearly 10,000 companies that hire and 13,500 creators. It also helps companies understand the diversity on their sets to accurately assess their representation, to be able to submit an independently-verified assessment of a production’s diversity.
“What we try to do is actually bring these underrepresented creators who are amazing storytellers and super talented to the forefront, and say, this is just somebody you haven’t discovered yet. This is somebody you haven’t met yet. You could be discovering the next Spike Jonze The next Spike Lee,” says Free The Work Executive Director Pamala Buzick.
One woman who has found jobs through Free The Work’s platform is writer and director Maureen Bharoocha. The film school graduate listed her availability on Free the Work’s platform when she wanted to get into the industry, and since then has directed a range of content, from “Jimmy Kimmel Live!”, to a Jonas Brothers special, to a thriller that aired on Lifetime — and is now directing features.
Studios, increasingly, seem to agree. Warner Media’s Chief Inclusion Officer Christy Haubegger said, “Diversity is not the moral thing to do. Diversity is going to be how we win, especially in a global marketplace. Where we’re trying to go directly to consumers and appeal to them around the world.”
The Academy explained its initiative to push the studios to embrace greater diversity in the next few years with this statement: “Our values at the Academy are based on the belief that arts and sciences, including the arts and sciences of filmmaking, thrive from diversity. This belief, coupled with our mission to recognize and uphold excellence in the motion picture arts and sciences, inspire imagination, and connect the world through the medium of motion pictures, requires a commitment to representation, inclusion and equity. There are so many stories that need to be told and have not yet been told – we want to encourage this across the industry.”
Anyway i do think we should get back on topic or more back on topic.
Gift of the Nile - History of Africa with Zeinab Badawi [Episode 3]
quote: Zeinab Badawi’s quest to uncover the history of Africa takes her to Egypt where she explores the most famous civilisation on the continent that of the ancient Egyptians.
Zeinab takes you beyond the usual coverage of the pharaohs, mummies and pyramids and examines the controversial question of who the ancient Egyptians actually were.
What was their ethnicity? What made such a great civilisation possible and how did the ancient Egyptians order their society? And she is also allowed to capture on film the mummy and treasures of the famous boy king Tutankhamun.
Btw, it seems not that the Egyptians protested against The Rock as King Scorpion in The Mummy Returns?
Especially the scenes in the beginning of the film, from the ancient war, were rather cool.
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: I add more views etc... above in my recent posts.
Anyway i do think we should get back on topic or more back on topic.
Gift of the Nile - History of Africa with Zeinab Badawi [Episode 3]
quote: Zeinab Badawi’s quest to uncover the history of Africa takes her to Egypt where she explores the most famous civilisation on the continent that of the ancient Egyptians.
Zeinab takes you beyond the usual coverage of the pharaohs, mummies and pyramids and examines the controversial question of who the ancient Egyptians actually were.
What was their ethnicity? What made such a great civilisation possible and how did the ancient Egyptians order their society? And she is also allowed to capture on film the mummy and treasures of the famous boy king Tutankhamun.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Btw, it seems not that the Egyptians protested against The Rock as King Scorpion in The Mummy Returns?
Especially the scenes in the beginning of the film, from the ancient war, were rather cool.
Did you see the video above link i posted? Gift of the Nile - History of Africa with Zeinab Badawi [Episode 3]
And what do you think if you did see it? and in the video black egyptians are being shown as well.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: I add more views etc... above in my recent posts.
Anyway i do think we should get back on topic or more back on topic.
Gift of the Nile - History of Africa with Zeinab Badawi [Episode 3]
quote: Zeinab Badawi’s quest to uncover the history of Africa takes her to Egypt where she explores the most famous civilisation on the continent that of the ancient Egyptians.
Zeinab takes you beyond the usual coverage of the pharaohs, mummies and pyramids and examines the controversial question of who the ancient Egyptians actually were.
What was their ethnicity? What made such a great civilisation possible and how did the ancient Egyptians order their society? And she is also allowed to capture on film the mummy and treasures of the famous boy king Tutankhamun.
I know. I saw watch the whole thing before i posted here. I am watching the egypt one right now and i will finish the axumite one after or later.
Speaking of the axumite civilization the amhara people were not the ones to create it. I was going talk about it in the new axumite thread earlier but i will talk about here.
I am learning more and more what happen to the axumites is what happen to the kushites, and other groups claiming those civilizations like the nubians,black arabs and some others in northeast and east africa claiming kush but most of the black arabs of sudan and the nubians are closet groups to people/civilization of kush.
Tigrayans,Tigrinyas and Tigre are the closest to the axumites, not the amhara but the amhara would be the next closest but none of them are ethnic axumites. They are gone just like kushites.
Tigrayans
quote:
The Tigrayans trace their origin to early Semitic-speaking peoples whose presence in the region may date back to at least 2000 BC.[8] According to Edward Ullendorff, the Tigrinya speakers in Eritrea and Tigray are the authentic carriers of the historical and cultural tradition of ancient Aksum.[9] He regards the contemporary Tigrayans to be the successors of the Aksumite Empire.[10]
Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
Zeinab Badawi is herself Sudanese. Her series is very interesting. I have not seen the whole series yet, just about Egypt and Kush, but I will watch the other episodes too.
I remember one time watching another series about African history on TV. It was made by Basil Davidson. I see it is also on YouTube. Here is part one:
Seems that Jada Pinkett Smiths daughter Willow Smith also annoyed some North Africans
quote: The 21-year-old, released a preview of her new novel, which she wrote with author Jess Hendel where she stated that, “the Amazigh are dangerous on their best day. They have little regard for anyone who doesn’t worship the Muslim god—and even their own tribes are always at war with one another.” The book follows two young women, an African warrior named Yafeu and a Viking princess, Freydis, who encounter both Muslim and Amazigh characters throughout the story. “The Amazighs aren’t some ancient mythical people, we’re very much real and alive and she’s basically portraying us as this harmful stereotype of barbaric savages,” wrote one Twitter user.” while another said: “Why do we get portrayed YET AGAIN as savages?”
The Amazigh people community as well as many social media users across the globe condemned the preview of the book, deeming it offensive and very defamatory for such a peaceful people like the indigenous Amazigh of North Africa, and urged for the book to be edited or re-written before its made available for purchase.
The Game
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
