posted
I notice we get a lot of light-skinned (I presume) Arab Egyptians like Ayazid and Perfect Egyptian who argue, quite wrongly, that pharaonic Egyptians looked phenotypically like themselves. Why do they do this? I've asked this question once before, and the answer I got was that they did it out of pride and prejudice. However, do you see white people in the US claiming that the Maya and Aztecs were white? No, you don't. So what is it with these Arab Egyptians who want to associate ancient Egypt with olive-skinned Cairene Egyptians like themselves? Is Egypt's Arab community suffering a strange identity crisis?
Posts: 7103 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:So what is it with these Arab Egyptians who want to associate ancient Egypt with olive-skinned Cairene Egyptians like themselves? Is Egypt's Arab community suffering a strange identity crisis?
It's extremely ironic, because the Arabs invaded Km.t and Nubia, and considered them alien and "inferior" African cultures because they did not practise Islam.
They, and the Christian Copts, both sought the destruction of Native Nile Valley cultures.
To understand the Arab mentality you have to proceed to the 17th-19th century domination of the "Arab world" [what a remarkable and aggressive term that is, when you think that it refers mostly to Africa!] by Europe.
Europeans completely disrespected the Arabs, made them feel inferior....to this day.
However the Europeans WORSHIPPED the ancient Egyptians almost as Gods. The term for this in Britain was Egyptomania.
It is intereesting to note that there was never any such fascination in England with ancient British history.
Of course because Europeans worshipped the AE, they needed to whiten them, or at least - de-kemeticize [de-blacken] them.
But it is only within the past couple decades that Arabs have felt a need to 'claim' Km.t, in order to gain respect from w.s.t.
quote:Originally posted by Underpants Man: I notice we get a lot of light-skinned (I presume) Arab Egyptians like Ayazid and Perfect Egyptian who argue, quite wrongly, that pharaonic Egyptians looked phenotypically like themselves. Why do they do this? I've asked this question once before, and the answer I got was that they did it out of pride and prejudice. However, do you see white people in the US claiming that the Maya and Aztecs were white? No, you don't. So what is it with these Arab Egyptians who want to associate ancient Egypt with olive-skinned Cairene Egyptians like themselves? Is Egypt's Arab community suffering a strange identity crisis?
I am getting mad ... I am not Egyptian, neither Arab nor any else. And I am not light-skinned, have you ever seen my pick before ? Actually, I think that you would be quite happy if the pharaonic Egyptians really all looked like myself Unfortunately, most of your thoughts contained in your post are total garbage. Modern Egyptians, no matter if they live in Cairo (where live people from all parts of Egypt) or somewhere else are arabised descendants of pharaonic people (the people of Km.t), this is an undoubtfull fact. There is also no doubt that Ancient Egyptians were phenotypically diverse population like their descendants, modern Masreyeen. I donīt know why you think that all Cairene Egyptians are "olive-skinned" since a lot of them are also dark-skined or practically white. Itīs possible that an average person from Tanta or Mansoura is actually lighter than an average Cairene but who knows? As for that "identity crisis", an overwhelming majority of modern Egyptians donīt care about this meaningless topic, unlike you, racially obsessed Americans.
Posts: 653 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Modern Egyptians, no matter if they live in Cairo (where live people from all parts of Egypt) or somewhere else are arabised descendants of pharaonic people (the people of Km.t), this is an undoubtfull fact
translation: this is doubtful and not a fact, and I know it, which is why you write:
quote:I am getting mad
also.....
quote:As for that "identity crisis", an overwhelming majority of modern Egyptians donīt care about this meaningless topic
then why are you mad?
let's see: you are not egyptian, so that can't be it.
perhaps you suffer from and identity crisis and UP man struck a nerve? is that possible?
if so, why would that be?
hypothesis: usually arabised but non "ethnic arabs" are the ones who get most upset in these kinds of threads, because they know it's true and don't like to be reminded of it. their identity crisis as pseudo-arabs explains itself.
see sudan - current events- for an example of what happens when confused pseudo-arabs begin a rampage of self hatred.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: then why are you mad?
let's see: you are not egyptian, so that can't be it.
perhaps you suffer from and identity crisis and UP man struck a nerve? is that possible?
if so, why would that be?
hypothesis: usually arabised but non "ethnic arabs" are the ones who get most upset in these kinds of threads, because they know it's true and don't like to be reminded of it. their identity crisis as pseudo-arabs explains itself.
see sudan - current events- for an example of what happens when confused pseudo-arabs begin a rampage of self hatred.
I am getting mad because of people like you my dear prophet pretender, who dispute a claim of modern Egyptians on their pharaonic origin, despite the fact that the blood of an average olive-skinned Egyptian from Delta is 1000 times more Kemetian than yours (a mix of West African and Anglo-Saxon). The heck these people might be mixed with some neighbouring populations, such as Syrians, Nubians, Arabs or Berbers, but their origin is still basically Kemetian. They have right to trace their origin back to Kemetians as nobody else in Africa, including Ethiopians and Somalis. Whatīs your problem then ?
Posts: 653 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I am getting mad because of people like you my dear prophet pretender
now your rage is my fault is it? lol.
anything to avoid looking at the man in the mirror i suppose.
quote:who dispute a claim of modern Egyptians on their pharaonic origin
fact: some egyptians are largely descendant from ancient natives of the nile valley, some are not.
empty claims are meaningless and so dismissed. as is angry posturing.
quote:despite the fact that the blood of an average olive-skinned Egyptian from Delta is 1000 times more Kemetian than yours
my blood is irrelevant. non-sequitors and ad hominem venting won't help you.
quote:(a mix of West African and Anglo-Saxon).
lol. wrong and wrong. but that's ok, i understand your need to lash out.
quote:The heck these people might be mixed with some neighbouring populations, such as Syrians, Nubians, Arabs or Berbers, but their origin is still basically Kemetian.
Some are and some aren't. Along the Upper Egyptian and Nubian Nile native Nile Valley lineages predominant.
However in some studies of Lower Egypt, Asiatic Arab markers are predominent, by definition these markers are NOT native to Egypt.
Fact: by the time of the Arab invasion, almost 1500 years ago, and after long periods of foreign incursion, Egypts population had been reduced to a only a few million.
Fact: Today there are almost 80 million people in Egypt.
Fact: most of the population expansion having occured within the last 100 years and....
Fact: most of these people live in lower Egypt which is precisely from where the foreign incursions have always stemmed from and is in CONTRAST to Km.t.
Fact: mOST Km.t lived in Ta Shemu and Ta Seti....Upper Egypt and Nubia, not in the delta regions where the largely FOREIGN population is concentrated presently.
Fact: in their own writings of their history Km.t constantly complained about foreign incursions into the delta - particularly from Aamu Asiatics pretending to be Km.t when they are, in fact, not.
quote: Whatīs your problem then ?
I don't have one. I'm pleased as punch.
You're the one that's angry and venting.
We know you're not Egyptian, and yet you are angry?
[QUOTE]The heck these people might be mixed with some neighbouring populations, such as Syrians, Nubians, Arabs or Berbers, but their origin is still basically Kemetian.
Some are and some aren't. Along the Upper Egyptian and Nubian Nile native Nile Valley lineages predominant.
However in some studies of Lower Egypt, Asiatic Arab markers are predominent, by definition these markers are NOT native to Egypt.
Fact: by the time of the Arab invasion, almost 1500 years ago, and after long periods of foreign incursion, Egypts population had been reduced to a only a few million.
Fact: Today there are almost 80 million people in Egypt.
Fact: most of the population expansion having occured within the last 100 years and....
Fact: most of these people live in lower Egypt which is precisely from where the foreign incursions have always stemmed from and is in CONTRAST to Km.t.
Fact: mOST Km.t lived in Ta Shemu and Ta Seti....Upper Egypt and Nubia, not in the delta regions where the largely FOREIGN population is concentrated presently.
Fact: in their own writings of their history Km.t constantly complained about foreign incursions into the delta - particularly from Aamu Asiatics pretending to be Km.t when they are, in fact, not.
What is so difficult about understanding these FACTS? Posts: 26321 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: then why are you mad?
let's see: you are not egyptian, so that can't be it.
perhaps you suffer from and identity crisis and UP man struck a nerve? is that possible?
if so, why would that be?
hypothesis: usually arabised but non "ethnic arabs" are the ones who get most upset in these kinds of threads, because they know it's true and don't like to be reminded of it. their identity crisis as pseudo-arabs explains itself.
see sudan - current events- for an example of what happens when confused pseudo-arabs begin a rampage of self hatred.
I am getting mad because of people like you my dear prophet pretender, who dispute a claim of modern Egyptians on their pharaonic origin, despite the fact that the blood of an average olive-skinned Egyptian from Delta is 1000 times more Kemetian than yours (a mix of West African and Anglo-Saxon). The heck these people might be mixed with some neighbouring populations, such as Syrians, Nubians, Arabs or Berbers, but their origin is still basically Kemetian. They have right to trace their origin back to Kemetians as nobody else in Africa, including Ethiopians and Somalis. Whatīs your problem then ?
some modern Egyptians are genetically of the same stock as the ancients, some aren't. it's the same way some Americans are genetically of the same ethnic stock as the Native Americans, some aren't.
Posts: 752 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by walklikeanegyptian: some modern Egyptians are genetically of the same stock as the ancients, some aren't. it's the same way some Americans are genetically of the same ethnic stock as the Native Americans, some aren't.
I don't think it a good comparison between Egypt and America. The reason being is that the population change in America is due almost entirely to displacement i.e. Natives being wiped out by diseases or relocated, while Egypt's situation was that of absorption and assimilation. The native Egyptians were not displaced but merely absorbed by waves of immigrants, which is why the African genetic component is still strong among Egyptians (even some Arab-Egyptians) while Native American genetic component comparatively low.
Posts: 26321 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
i do agree Djehuti, i used the example more to show that the inhabitants of both Egypt and America today may or may not be genetically related to the original natives of the country.
Posts: 752 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
from experience, you have the ones who are ethnically both Arab and black African, but choose to identify as Arab. then you have the ones who are almost all ethnically Arab and basically celebrate it. then, there are the ones who are clearly predominantly black, but STILL identify as Arab. and then there's the minority who accept being black and embrace it. those are the main situations i have known Egyptians i know to feel.
my cousin even once said "if any country could win an Uncle Tom Award, Egypt would be a good candidate". Uncle Tom is a nasty term for black people who do all they can to deny being black. i don't agree with her on this one but the idea is there.
Posts: 752 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
anything to avoid looking at the man in the mirror i suppose.
Hmmm ... ad hominem attacks ? Rasol, it wont helps you.
quote:fact: some egyptians are largely descendant from ancient natives of the nile valley, some are not.
Really ? And can you present any detailed studies which submit your claims and explicitly say that contemporary Delta Egyptians are descendants of foreigners without substantial amount of Kemetian genes therefore canīt claim Kemetian culture as their own ? I am really curious.
quote:empty claims are meaningless and so dismissed. as is angry posturing.
Actually, you are talking about your own argumentation. General statements won help you.
quote: my blood is irrelevant. non-sequitors and ad hominem venting won't help you.
Of course, your blood (and not only blood) is completely irrelevant. As for that ad hominem venting, I would be glad if you followed the same conventions.
quote:lol. wrong and wrong. but that's ok, i understand your need to lash out.
Hmmm, despite of irrelevancy of your person, I presume that you are African-American, am I right or it is a secret? If you donīt know who are African-Americans and what is their origin, I recommand you to read this article:
quote: Some are and some aren't. Along the Upper Egyptian and Nubian Nile native Nile Valley lineages predominant.
However in some studies of Lower Egypt, Asiatic Arab markers are predominent, by definition these markers are NOT native to Egypt.
Fact: by the time of the Arab invasion, almost 1500 years ago, and after long periods of foreign incursion, Egypts population had been reduced to a only a few million.
Fact: Today there are almost 80 million people in Egypt.
Fact: most of the population expansion having occured within the last 100 years and....
Fact: most of these people live in lower Egypt which is precisely from where the foreign incursions have always stemmed from and is in CONTRAST to Km.t.
Fact: mOST Km.t lived in Ta Shemu and Ta Seti....Upper Egypt and Nubia, not in the delta regions where the largely FOREIGN population is concentrated presently.
Fact: in their own writings of their history Km.t constantly complained about foreign incursions into the delta - particularly from Aamu Asiatics pretending to be Km.t when they are, in fact, not.
You seem to have big problem with presentation of factual evidence. I will repeat my question: can you present any detailed studies which submit your claims and explicitly say that contemporary Delta Egyptians are descendants of Asiatic foreigners without substantial amount of Kemetian genes and therefore canīt claim Kemetian culture as their own? Wasnīt Lower Egypt and its inhabitants a part of Km.t?? How can you tell a person of Asiatic origin and that of Kemetian one in contemporary Egypt?
quote: I don't have one. I'm pleased as punch.
You're the one that's angry and venting.
We know you're not Egyptian, and yet you are angry?
Why is that?
Generally, I am angry when I read or hear any ignorant statements, such as yours for example. But on the other hand, reading of such things can be also quite funny and amusing. As I said, 99% of conteporary Kemetians donīt care about this topic and live their lives with their famous stiff upper lip Posts: 653 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: No, I merely suggest that instead of hating on others, that you look within. That you regard that as and attack is telling and sad.
It's not meant to. It's meant to help you help yourself. Then perhaps you won't be so angry.
peace......
LOL, rasol I think that you spent too much time in front of computer Posts: 653 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:fact: some egyptians are largely descendant from ancient natives of the nile valley, some are not.
quote:ayazid writes: Really ? And can you present any detailed studies which submit your claims
Yes really, all day in fact,
Let's start with latest -
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 000:000000 (2006)
"However, as it stands, the lone Greek Egyptian (GEG) sample from Lower Egypt significantly differs from all but the small Roman-period Kharga sample (Table 4). In fact, it was shown to be a major outlier that is divergent from all others (Figs. 2, 3, 5).....this trait combination is reminiscent of that in Europeans and western Asians (Turner, 1985a; Turner and Markowitz, 1990; Roler, 1992; Lipschultz, 1996; Irish, 1998a). Thus, if the present heterogeneous sample is at all representative of peoples during Ptolemaic times, it may suggest some measure of foreign admixture, at least in Lower Egypt near Saqqara and Manfalut. Another possibility is that the sample consists of actual Greeks." - J. Irish, 2006
Need more?
"Howells global data set [Gize E series - 30th dynasty] are morphologically distinct from the Predynastic and Early Dynastic Nile Valley samples (especially in cranial vault shape and height), and thus show that this sample CANNOT BE CONSIDERED to be a typical Egyptian series." - Dr. Sonia Zakrzewski, 2003
This is my position on modern Lower Egypt visa vi Ancient Lower Egypt.
posted
These studies only suggest some degree of admixture in late dynastic and Greek-Roman Egypt. They unfortunately donīt support your claim that modern Lower Egyptians are largely descendants of Asiatic foreigners and therefore canīt claim Kemetian civilisation as their own. Can you give me any explicit and undoubtfull evidence for such conclusion?
Posts: 653 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:These studies only suggest some degree of admixture in late dynastic and Greek-Roman Egypt.
WRONG.
Evidently you need have specifics broken down in baby bites.
In fact, it was shown to be a major outlier that is divergent from all others. - J. Irish. Major outlier in anthropology means radically different from.
Another possibility is that the sample consists of actual Greeks. - J. Irish Some "Lower Egyptians" are actually descendant from Greeks living in Egypt - who differ markedly from Km.t.
and thus show that this sample CANNOT BE CONSIDERED to be a typical Egyptian series - S. Zakrezewsi. Howells late Lower Egyptians cannot be considered representative of Km.t
That is my position and those are the facts, AS STATED:
quote:fact: some egyptians are largely descendant from ancient natives of the nile valley, some are not.
Please deal with the facts presented. Don't try to evade by rewriting them.
quote:Can you give me any explicit and undoubtfull evidence for such conclusion
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: What is so difficult about understanding these FACTS?
Perhaps it's because for some arabised peoples, in their minds being arabs gives them a connection to modern Egypt, and they would like to believe by proxy - to ancient Egypt.
When facts are pointed out that correctly state the distinction between modern Arab Egypt and ancient Km.t, they feel that illusory connection is broken.
And that's what makes them angry.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Sorry to burst your bubble but you didnīt. As I said these studies only indicate some admixture in Lower Egypt, however donīt suggest that modern Lower Kemetians are "descendants of foreigners". Show me any evidence that any Delta Egyptians are actually descendants of Asiatics or Europeans and canīt trace their origin back to Kemetian population.
Posts: 653 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: As I said these studies only indicate some admixture in Lower Egypt
Wrong, the finding was that they were Major Outliers. Perhaps your problem is that you don't know what that means? This is important because it is precisely what I am saying.
Ayazid, define "major outlier" please.
quote:however donīt suggest that modern Lower Kemetians are "descendants of foreigners".
In this study sample of late period lower Egyptians that is EXACTLY what is suggested - Another possibility is that the sample consists of ACTUAL GREEKS. - J. Irish
quote: Show me any evidence......
I've provided evidence of exactly what was stated, which was......
quote:fact: some egyptians are largely descendant from ancient natives of the nile valley, some are not
That is exactly what Dr's Irish and Zakrezewski's findings have shown.
Still waiting for you to refute them as opposed to pretending not to hear what they're saying because you don't like it.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
While we wait for Ayazid's answers, let's provide historical context:
Persian rule and foreign settlement of Km.t.
There came to Egypt the great chief of every foreign land Cambyses, the foreigners of every country being with him. When he had taken possession of this entire land they settled down there in order that he might be the great ruler of Egypt and the great chief of every foreign land. His Majesty commanded me to be the chief physician and caused me to be at his side as companion and director of the palace, and I made his titulary in his name of King of Upper and Lower Egypt Mesutire. And I caused him to know the greatness of Sais which is the seat of Neith the great, the mother who gave birth to Re and who was the initiator of birth after there had been no birth. ... Great trouble had come about the entire land of Egypt. ... all those foreigners who had settled down in the temple of Neith. - Udje's Inscription
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: While we wait for Ayazid's answers, let's provide historical context:
Persian rule and foreign settlement of Km.t.
There came to Egypt the great chief of every foreign land Cambyses, the foreigners of every country being with him. When he had taken possession of this entire land they settled down there in order that he might be the great ruler of Egypt and the great chief of every foreign land. His Majesty commanded me to be the chief physician and caused me to be at his side as companion and director of the palace, and I made his titulary in his name of King of Upper and Lower Egypt Mesutire. And I caused him to know the greatness of Sais which is the seat of Neith the great, the mother who gave birth to Re and who was the initiator of birth after there had been no birth. ... Great trouble had come about the entire land of Egypt. ... all those foreigners who had settled down in the temple of Neith. - Udje's Inscription
As usually you didnīt provide any clear and explicit evidence of your claims. Some degree of foreign admixture is undeniable, however it doesnīt mean that moden Egyptians in Delta are completely of foregn stock. They are descendants of Kemetians with some foreign admixture. Khalas
Posts: 653 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
Ayazid, turn that some admixture into substantial admixture and you are on the right track to what Rasol and many others have been saying all along.
YOU are the only one in this thread that seems to be suggesting that if Modern Lower Egyptians have significant foreign admixture then they have no place identifying with the Ancient civilization.
I am an American who has some Ancient indegenious American ancestry, that makes them my ancestors and I their descendants but it doesn't mean my physical appearance is representative of what the average Ancient American looked like, where as for some Modern Americans they do resemble the ancients.
The same applies to Egypt.
What part of that do you not understand?
Posts: 1203 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
As usual Ayazid, you can't answer the question.
quote:Ayazid, define "major outlier" please.
Or address the evidence.
quote:all those foreigners who had settled down in the temple of Neith.
Or refute the fact at issue:
quote:fact: some egyptians are largely descendant from ancient natives of the nile valley, some are not
So you address strawman comments made by no-one but you....
quote:Ayazid writes: however it doesnīt mean that moden Egyptians in Delta are completely of foregn stock
no one ever said this but you. you debate yourself because you can't debate anyone else. sad really. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Ayazid, turn that some admixture into substantial admixture and you are on the right track to what Rasol and many others have been saying all along.
YOU are the only one in this thread that seems to be suggesting that if Modern Lower Egyptians have significant foreign admixture then they have no place identifying with the Ancient civilization.
I am an American who has some Ancient indegenious American ancestry, that makes them my ancestors and I their descendants but it doesn't mean my physical appearance is representative of what the average Ancient American looked like, where as for some Modern Americans they do resemble the ancients.
The same applies to Egypt.
What part of that do you not understand?
The problem is definition of the word "substantial". Modern Lower Egyptian might have some foreign admixture, yet they may claim Kemetian as their heritage as nobody in Ethiopia or Sudan, alike in mentioned Mexico, the overwhelming majority of population is largely of Amerindian and not Spanish origin and look very much like their Aztec or Maya ancestors.
Posts: 653 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:The problem is definition of the word "substantial".
No, the problem is only that you didn't answer the question, so let us help you.
In anthropology, substantial = MAJOR OUTLIER.
quote:Modern Lower Egyptian might have significant foreign admixture.
of course they do. if you admit this then you are not disputing anything stated. you are only generating fake arguments with your own straman comments.
Are there any other facts you object to, and would like documented?
The choice of WIlkepedia shows a bias that is typical of Anglo-Saxon rewriting of historical ignorance.
The article is informative and the facts correct but the designation of African-American is bogus in intent and deception.
Let's see: A Europeau-American is anyone with with roots in Europe regardless of country, from Nordic North to Southern Europe (Spain).
Following the same syllogistic pattern. An African-American is one who inhabits Algeria to Zambia. But no! It only targets some people but leave the others out. There is a plot here don't uou think?
I personally do not beileve the hype but again everything is suspect (that's me)! The miseducation of many to suit the few!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: No, the problem is only that you didn't answer the question, so let us help you.
In anthropology, substantial = MAJOR OUTLIER.
of course they do. if you admit this then you are not disputing anything stated. you are only generating fake arguments with your own straman comments.
Are there any other facts you object to, and would like documented?
Yes or no?
I see that you still havenīt solved your main problem rasol, which is the fact that Lower Egyptians are (together with Middle and Upper Egyptians) direct descendants of Kemetians, despite the fact that they have some Asiatic and south European admixture and resemble their ancestors much like most Mexicans still resemble original native populations of Mexico, despite the fact that they have various degree of Spanish admixture.
Posts: 653 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
The signficance of Dr. Sonia Zakrezewski's findings on late Lower Egyptian remains.
Howells skeletal remains from late period Giza are a part of and international dataset used to correctly classify different populations.
This data for years has been used to show that the Ancient Egyptians were distinct from Africans related instead to Europeans.
Dr. Zakrezewski compared this remains to 11 consecutive populations from time periods ranging from the pre-dynastic to the new kingdom.
The most substantial conclusion she drew was as follows:
Most dramatically, the results also indicate that the Egyptian series from Howells global data set are morphologically distinct from the Predynastic and Early Dynastic Nile Valley samples (especially in cranial vault shape and height), and thus show that this sample CANNOT BE CONSIDERED to be a typical Egyptian seriesPosts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ayazid give it up, either refute what Rasol has just said or call it a day. You cannot compare Modern lower egypt and ancient lower egypt. You have to know what you are talking about to get into an arguement. If you don't know what your talking about then give up and admit defeat. This debate has already been won.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KING: Ayazid give it up, either refute what Rasol has just said or call it a day. You cannot compare Modern lower egypt and ancient lower egypt. You have to know what you are talking about to get into an arguement. If you don't know what your talking about then give up and admit defeat. This debate has already been won.
Unfortunately some trolls can't help themselves. Posts: 26321 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KING: Ayazid give it up, either refute what Rasol has just said or call it a day. You cannot compare Modern lower egypt and ancient lower egypt. You have to know what you are talking about to get into an arguement. If you don't know what your talking about then give up and admit defeat. This debate has already been won.
Contemporary Lower Egyptians are descendants of Ancient Lower Egyptians, just like contemporary Mexicans are descendants of their Ancient ancestors. Rasol showed arguments about foreign admixture in Lower Egypt, however he still hasnīt proved that population of this area was replaced by Asiatic and European immigrants and therefore canīt claim Kemetian ancestry. I didn īt say that Lower Egyptian population has remained somehow "pure" without outside admixture up to this day, however I certainly donīt agree with foolish conclusion that modern Delta Egyptians are descendants of foreigners.
Posts: 653 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KING: Ayazid give it up, either refute what Rasol has just said or call it a day. You cannot compare Modern lower egypt and ancient lower egypt. You have to know what you are talking about to get into an arguement. If you don't know what your talking about then give up and admit defeat. This debate has already been won.
Unfortunately some trolls can't help themselves.
Calling me "troll" wonīt help you buddy Posts: 653 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Ayazid thoughts are not completely wrong!
Its a fact the modern Egyptians are not pure, that can maybe be said of Somalis and Beja. But they definately are descendents of the Ancients.
The Arabs and Berbers have always been heavily intermattying with the Afro-asiatic people. This is why you will find so many Arabs with (Qibdi) ancestors, (Ayazid will know what im talking about)
-------------------- Hello! Posts: 265 | From: UK | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Arabs and Berbers have always been heavily intermattying with the Afro-asiatic people.
Take care Prince, Afroasiatic, or Afrasan as linguist Christopher Ehret refers to it, is a language group.
Berber and Arab are Afrasan languages.
The manner in which you used the term might be seen as suggesting that Berber, Arab and Afro-asiatic are three distinct race groups....which is not the case.
Just wanted to clarify.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let get somthing straight here. First off lower egypt, during the ottamen times was one of the places many rich turks, syrians, europeans, etc... would move too to start new lives with thier families. These ppl never intermixed with the egyptian, maybe a small percentage did, but not all. They usually mixed within thier little group(Meaning the father would want his daughter/son to marry somone from a more prestigous family; and this still goes on today). Thise is why we see a differance between the elite class and rest of the ppl in egypt. These egyptians can not be said to have decant to the anciant kemets, because they never intermarried with egyptians, they always married ppl of the same class with the same skin color.
The elite class i would consider a minority in egypt but hold most of the power in egypt, they dominate the art industry from the movies to music.
The rest of the modern day egyptians are distinguishable from these ppl(elite), they are either brown, mullauto(brown,lighskinned,etc.. can be considered under the black lable in the US), or black(meaning appear east african). These ppl no matter lower, middle, or upper egypt have AE ancestry. Because those ppl have intermixed through out time together, some might have a dominant arab phenotype but will have AE blood running through their viens (this does not include the bedions tribes that still remain in egypt,those ppl kept to themselves). That does not mean that the AE appeared as todays modern day stock, it just means the the AE blood still runs in most of the poor class of egypt(which is majority of egypt these ppl are ofcoarse are the felahien and saidee ppl of both lower, middle, and upper egypt.)
Posts: 671 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ayazid: Contemporary Lower Egyptians are descendants of Ancient Lower Egyptians, just like contemporary Mexicans are descendants of their Ancient ancestors. Rasol showed arguments about foreign admixture in Lower Egypt, however he still hasnīt proved that population of this area was replaced by Asiatic and European immigrants and therefore canīt claim Kemetian ancestry. I didn īt say that Lower Egyptian population has remained somehow "pure" without outside admixture up to this day, however I certainly donīt agree with foolish conclusion that modern Delta Egyptians are descendants of foreigners.
Can you provide the quote where Rasol EVER supported this contention?
It seems to me that he has never made this statement and that it is merely your interpretation that he did.
The evidence from the Howells study clearly indicates that the Egyptians living at that time period were largely unrelated to the Ancient Lower Egyptians prior to the Late Period.
That does not mean that this population replaced the original Lower Egyptians and created some sort of broken link between the Ancient and the Modern. It is clear from genetic studies that the foreigners MIXED with the original Lower Egyptians and that Modern Egyptians are of MIXED heritage being both related to the foreign influx and the original population.
Seriously, it's not rocket science. In the same way Modern Mexicans are related to the Ancient Aztecs who are indegenious to their land but they are a MIXTURE of the Spanish Conquistadors and other groups that immigrated to Mexico over the years along with that original Aztec ancestry. Some Modern Mexicans are more closely related genetically and physically to the Aztecs and some to the Spanish and other foreigners. It is that simple.
The right to claim civilizations is a petty argument that is irrelavent to the study of history and anthropology.
When you focus on heritage claims the facts elude you and your responses will continue to be full of misinterpretations and non-sequiturs.
Posts: 1203 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Ancient Egyptians and the Arabised people of the delta have little in common. The inhabitants of the Delta had been since the time of the Hysoks the most diluted of Egyptians, and by the end of the Roman period there remained little of the old Egyptian stock or blood.
In lower Egypt, the rule was exclusion of the original people and the appropriation of their heritage. This policy denuded those parts of the most vigorous and authentic of the stocks from the old, middle and New kingdom period.
The demography of the Delta was composed mostly of foreign usurpers who always sought to insinuate themselves into the glorious legacies of Ancient Egypt.
By the end of Roman period, there were many immigrants from Greece, Persia, Assyria, Italy and Bedouins who had displaced the original Egyptians.
Then following the fall of the Roman period Egypt, there was this huge influx of Bedouin tribes into the Delta and therefrom into Tunisia, Algiers, Maghreb events which Ibn Batutta the classical African Berber writer recorded .
This migration witnessed some of the greatest shifts in human population as virtually the entire Bedouin nation streamed into Africa (fleeing hunger and immisiration), the favourite destination was the Delta.
This huge migration did not foster frequent intermarriage between the Bedouins and the Africans. The Bedouin nation moved from Arabia deserta into the Egyptian delta ... with their women, children and camels. It was an entire nation, a different culture that had no need of friendship or intermarriage with the conquered African pagans and christians.
Rather this invasion was accompanied by plunder, murder, rape, robbery, displacement of the original peoples and enslavement. The template for what the Europeans later did in North America, was set by the Bedouin Arab invasion of Africa, especially Egypt. Ibn Batutta, and Ibn Khaldun mentioned some of the heart rending depredations that took place at this time.
Churches, temples, tombs and pyramids were routinely desecrated. Thousands were slaugthered, millions were sold as slaves and million more sought refuge towards the south of the nile, the original homeland of the Ancient Egyptians.
Incidentally, the original Egyptians that still inhabited the land during these upheveals had moved (in different series) to safer climes in Sudan, Ethiopia, Old Ghana, Benin, Oyo, even as far south as South Africa. Chancellor Williams has a great work on this dispersion.
Some scholars would want to ignore this great migration under the so called discredited Hamitic theory. I will address that issue another time. But suffice to say that those who understand African history, realize that migration, and population displacement were its major theme.
The steady flow of population from interior Africa to Egypt and vice versa was a common occurrence, borne out by common sense, archeology, linguistics, culture, genetics, and morphology.
The displacement and usurpation of Africa's heritage continue even today. There is still a steady stream of those same Bedouin tribes and other Arabised people into Egypt till date.
Then there was the Turkish period during which the Turks designated Egypt as one of their principal power bases. The Turks lived in Egypt for many centuries and became the ruling class. They are an Asiatic people who rarely intermarried with the Africans.
Only a liar without shame, without pedigree nor any culture of note could wish to obfuscate this historical fact.
Africa belongs to Black people historically and geographically. The original ancient Egyptians were Black people, period.
The Arabs should go seek their history from their Koran. The Koran clearly stated that the Bedouin Arabs had never had a part in the great ancient civilizations.
The Koran also tells us that the Bedouin Arabs were always the least developed and the most barbaric of nations, forever looting and raping and pillaging until the advent of Prophet Mohammed.
It was the inspiration of Islam that liberated the Bedouin Arabs from their chained positions in the sewer filled gutters of human backwardness.
So why does the Lion! hear some Bedouin making claims about Ancient Egypt.
If you knew anything about the so called original Egyptians, then you would know that these people, including modern day Bejas, Somalis, Afar etc actually consider themselves to have more in common with the Arabs!
The original Bedouin Arabs you also mention are actually not the white people you see(such as the white Berbers) . Bediouns are actually dark skinned people who look quite similar to the East Africans in many ways.
If you knew anything about Egypt and its people or even the horn of Africa then you would not make such false claims.
These Bediouns indeed did not build the pyramids, neither did the Berbers, but remember also that the nubians of the South also did not build the Pyramids. It was the modern day Cushetic like people of the horn of Africa who are the culprits!
Its always very confusing when people who have maybe less to do with ancient Egypt than even the Bedouins (who have intermarried with the Original Egyptians who remained and did not move into the horn) try to distort the image just because the Egyptians have brown skin!!!
-------------------- Hello! Posts: 265 | From: UK | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you knew anything about the so called original Egyptians, then you would know that these people, including modern day Bejas, Somalis, Afar etc actually consider themselves to have more in common with the Arabs!
Not really. Some Beja, Nubian and Berber groups hate the Arabs and Arabisation, and everything it stands for and has wrought.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
The Beja people of eastern Sudan have been the victims of the racist, discriminatory policies of the central government. They are being systematically displaced from their traditional grazing lands, their nomadic way of life is being eroded, they are forced to seek refuge in the shanty towns of large cities and no provision is being made for their educational, social, medical and cultural requirements.
The Beja people are the original inhabitants of Eastern Sudan and one of the oldest nations in Africa. They are the largest ethnic group in Sudan (although they represent 13% of the population their share in power is less than 1%). They live in an area of 110,000 sq miles. The Beja Congress is the political party of this ethnic group.
The ethnic problem concerns the Beja, and the regional problem concerns the other ethnic groups who are living with them in this region e.g. Rashayda, Shukrya, Nubians, Fulani, Houssa, Riverian(from the north region), Nuba and people from Kordofan, Darfur and the South, as they are also suffering like the Beja from marginalization, underdevelopment and shortage of public services and welfare e.g. schools, hospitals and jobs.
..........by pursuing a policy of double standards and discrimination by supporting the South and not supporting the Beja who have the same problems. We, the Beja people, are suffering more than the south, but we get no support from the west
Teaching Beja in the Arabic language is a big mistake as they are not Arabs and it is not their mothers tongue. They are taught English and French but not their own language. That is why Beja children hate going to school.
In February 2005, General Abdul Rahim Hussein spoke on Alarabia TV encouraging the security forces to kill Beja people in Port Sudan. - disagree? write to -> Suliman Salih Dirar - Beja Congress
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
I take it you have no answers. Of course, racist Afrangi historical revisionists never do.
So now I am "racist Afrangi historical revisionist"? Do you understand what I wrote? Do you speak arabic ?
Posts: 653 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Unfortunately, most of your thoughts contained in your post are total garbage. Modern Egyptians, no matter if they live in Cairo (where live people from all parts of Egypt) or somewhere else are arabised descendants of pharaonic people (the people of Km.t), this is an undoubtfull fact. There is also no doubt that Ancient Egyptians were phenotypically diverse population like their descendants, modern Masreyeen. I donīt know why you think that all Cairene Egyptians are "olive-skinned" since a lot of them are also dark-skined or practically white. Itīs possible that an average person from Tanta or Mansoura is actually lighter than an average Cairene but who knows? As for that "identity crisis", an overwhelming majority of modern Egyptians donīt care about this meaningless topic, unlike you, racially obsessed Americans.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic