posted
Go back and read what I said again. I said the preponderance of evidence indicates that he was not black. That term simply indicates the way the evidence 'leans.' Doug, there are not many things we can say about ancient history that are sure. the problem is often not what we know but rather what we 'don't know.' Actually we know very little about ancient civilizations. We get a kernel here and a grain there and try to put it together in some coherent form but its always risky business. I am now reading Ernest Furgurson's book, 'Chancellorsville 1863.' That battle was fought 150 years ago, not 3,500 and still historians have many views as to what happened and why and often disagree.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
^ No, but apparently the 3000 year old corpse of a man who died at at least 78 years of age, did have some red hairs, that's all that can be said without applying wishful thinking.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doesn't anyone here do a search to see if a topic hasn't already been discussed previously?
When Rameses died, he was well over the age of 90. So whatever the color of his hair when he was 19 years old, it most likely wasn't the same color as when the brother was old. Maspero's observation seems the more plausible (he was the first to see the mummy unwrapped). White hair that was chemically dyed (on purpose or not).
Sir Gaston Maspero who unwrapped the mummy of Rameses II, one of the first to see the face of the Pharaoh writes:
quote: "on the temples there are a few sparse hairs, but at the poll the hair is quite thick, forming smooth, straight locks about five centimeters in length. White at the time of death, they have been dyed a light yellow by the spices used in the embalm-ment...the moustache and beard are thin...The hairs are white, like those of the head and eyebrows...the skin is of earthy brown, splotched with black...the face of the mummy gives a fair idea of the face of the living king." Valley of the Kings by John Romer, Castle Books, p184
-The Ancient Egyptians used a variety of methods to eliminate Gray hair. Henna dyed the natural black hair an auburn color, while turning the unpigmented gray hairs a bright orange. Hair would sometimes be dyed after death. Rameses II is an example. Examine this photo of the Afar elder... http://www.geocities.com/wally_mo/people.htmlPosts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wally, The hair was examined in Paris below the scalp with the latest technology.
Wishful thinking rasol is ignoring every piece of logical evidence that interferes with preconcieved notions. He may have been black but based on what we have that is highly unlikely.
Nay-Sayer- varied means that not all of his art looked like the same person.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, people forget quickly; so to help jog our memory...
X-ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1980).
Courtesy of James Harris and Edward Wente:
The XVIV Dynasty is higher in ANB and SN-M Plane than the XX Dynasty. Ramesses IV is the only one in these two dynasties with strong alveolar prognathism, at least, as indicated by SNA. However, dental alveolar prognathism is quite common in both dynasties. Also, both have ANB and SN- M Plane at mean angles higher than even African Americans.
In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads. The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults. Merenptah, Siptah and Ramesses V all have pronounced glabellae. Ramesses IV has a bulging occiput similar to the "Elder Lady." Ramesses II and his son, Merenptah, both have rather weakly inclined mandibles with long ramus. Ramesses II's father, Seti I, does not possess this feature, though, suggesting that this was inherited from Ramesses II's mother, Queen Mut-Tuy. The gonial angle of Seti I is 116.3 compared to 107.9 and 109 for Ramesses II and Merenptah respectively.
The XVIV and XX dynasty heads do not have steep foreheads, receding zygomatic arches or prominent chins. Generally, both glabella and occiput are rounded and projecting to varying degrees. The sagittal contour is usually flattened, at least to some degree, although this sometimes begins before the bregma rather than in post-bregmatic position. The whole mandible is rarely squarish, although the body sometimes has a wavy edge. The latter feature, though, is very common in both ancient and modern Nubians. According to Gill (1986), an undulating mandible is a characteristic of Negroids.
The difference between late XVII and XVIII dynasty royal mummies and contemporary Nubians is slight. During the XVIV and XX dynasties we see possibly some mixing between a Nubian element that is more similar to Mesolithic Nubians (low vaults, sloping frontal bone, etc.), with an orthognathous population.
Since the Ramessides were of northern extraction, this could represent miscegenation with modern Mediterraneans of Levantine type. The projecting zygomatic arches of Seti I suggest remnants of the old Natufian/Tasian types of the Holocene period.
If the heads of Queens Nodjme and Esemkhebe are any indication, there may have been a new influx of southern blood during the XXI Dynasty.
In summation, the New Kingdom Pharaohs and Queens whose mummies have been recovered bear strong similarity to either contemporary Nubians, as with the XVII and XVIII dynasties,
or with **Mesolithic-Holocene Nubians, as with the XVIV and XX dynasties.**
The former dynasties seem to have a strong southern affinity, while the latter possessed evidence of mixing with modern Mediterranean types and also, possibly, with remnants of the old Tasian and Natufian populations. From the few sample available from the XXI Dynasty, there may have been a new infusion from the south at this period.
So, putting information on bone morphology together with the various microscopic tests done on the hair, preponderance of evidence clearly reveals, that Rameses couldn’t be a Nordics cousin by any stretch of imagination. This says it all:
**Mesolithic-Holocene NUBIANS, as with the XVIV and XX dynasties.**
But then again, we might find Greeks who look like "Mesolithic-Holocene Nubians", and then, extrapolate that these folks could have been blonde "whites". LOL.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: Well, people forget quickly; so to help jog our memory...
X-ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1980).
Courtesy of James Harris and Edward Wente:
The XVIV Dynasty is higher in ANB and SN-M Plane than the XX Dynasty. Ramesses IV is the only one in these two dynasties with strong alveolar prognathism, at least, as indicated by SNA. However, dental alveolar prognathism is quite common in both dynasties. Also, both have ANB and SN- M Plane at mean angles higher than even African Americans.
In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads. The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults. Merenptah, Siptah and Ramesses V all have pronounced glabellae. Ramesses IV has a bulging occiput similar to the "Elder Lady." Ramesses II and his son, Merenptah, both have rather weakly inclined mandibles with long ramus. Ramesses II's father, Seti I, does not possess this feature, though, suggesting that this was inherited from Ramesses II's mother, Queen Mut-Tuy. The gonial angle of Seti I is 116.3 compared to 107.9 and 109 for Ramesses II and Merenptah respectively.
The XVIV and XX dynasty heads do not have steep foreheads, receding zygomatic arches or prominent chins. Generally, both glabella and occiput are rounded and projecting to varying degrees. The sagittal contour is usually flattened, at least to some degree, although this sometimes begins before the bregma rather than in post-bregmatic position. The whole mandible is rarely squarish, although the body sometimes has a wavy edge. The latter feature, though, is very common in both ancient and modern Nubians. According to Gill (1986), an undulating mandible is a characteristic of Negroids.
The difference between late XVII and XVIII dynasty royal mummies and contemporary Nubians is slight. During the XVIV and XX dynasties we see possibly some mixing between a Nubian element that is more similar to Mesolithic Nubians (low vaults, sloping frontal bone, etc.), with an orthognathous population.
Since the Ramessides were of northern extraction, this could represent miscegenation with modern Mediterraneans of Levantine type. The projecting zygomatic arches of Seti I suggest remnants of the old Natufian/Tasian types of the Holocene period.
If the heads of Queens Nodjme and Esemkhebe are any indication, there may have been a new influx of southern blood during the XXI Dynasty.
In summation, the New Kingdom Pharaohs and Queens whose mummies have been recovered bear strong similarity to either contemporary Nubians, as with the XVII and XVIII dynasties,
or with **Mesolithic-Holocene Nubians, as with the XVIV and XX dynasties.**
The former dynasties seem to have a strong southern affinity, while the latter possessed evidence of mixing with modern Mediterranean types and also, possibly, with remnants of the old Tasian and Natufian populations. From the few sample available from the XXI Dynasty, there may have been a new infusion from the south at this period.
So, putting information on bone morphology together with the various microscopic tests done on the hair, preponderance of evidence clearly reveals, that Rameses couldn’t be a Nordics cousin by any stretch of imagination. This says it all:
**Mesolithic-Holocene NUBIANS, as with the XVIV and XX dynasties.**
But then again, we might find Greeks who look like "Mesolithic-Holocene Nubians", and then, extrapolate that these folks could have been blonde "whites". LOL.
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: well actually they can now tell the hair color and Ramses II did have red hair, as did Queen Tiye. In fact hers was described as reddish - blonde. I posted the article on this board some time ago...
Considering the physical appearances of both Ramases and especially Tiye, this really isn't the case.
Why?
quote:Ausar says:
You cannot tell hair color by the color of the hair found on the mummy alone. Most of the time the embalming material turns or salts in the Sahara bleach the hair to unatural colors. To establish the original hair color you need electron miscroscopic analysis. The only published report I saw on the original hair color of Rameses II was by a group of French scientist. According to the results his hair was red. All the depictions of Rameses II show him with reddish-brown skin.
Correct.
quote:Hore:
..Many of the forensic medicine advances of the past few years have been very helpful in looking at ancient remains.
...We are informed by Afro Hair - A Salon Book, that chemicals for bleaching, penning and straightening hair must reach the cortex to be effective. For hair to be permed or straightened the disulphide bonds in the cortex must be broken. The anthropologist Daniel Hardy writing in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, tells us that keratin is stable owing to disulphide bonds. However, when hair is exposed to harsh conditions it can lead to oxidation of protein molecules in the cortex, which leads to the alteration of hair texture, such as straightening.
Two British anthropologists, Brothwell and Spearman, have found evidence of cortex keratin oxidation in ancient Egyptian hair. They held that the mummification process was responsible, because of the strong alkaline substance used. This resulted in the yellowing and browning of hair as well as the straightening effect. This means that visual appearance of the hair on mummies cannot disguise their racial affinities.
The presence of blonde and brown hair on ancient Egyptian mummies has nothing to do with their racial identity and everything to do with mummification and the passage of time. As the studies have shown, when you put the evidence under a microscope the truth comes out... Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: No, but apparently the 3000 year old corpse of a man who died at at least 78 years of age, did have some red hairs, that's all that can be said without applying wishful thinking.
And why is this??
Because the Egyptians, like many Northeast Africans practiced the custom of dyeing their gray hairs red, especially during old age.
Afar elder with henna dyed hair
Somali elder with henna dyed beard
Many people mistakenly get the impression that this reddish color is their natural color; it is NOT.
Again, the dyeing of gray hair is a widespread custom in Northeast Africa and I may also add that henna is a very strong dye that may take weeks to wash off. With constant application, the color may be permanent.
Ramases was 78 when he died, not just old but extremely old considering the life expectancy during that time.
You do the math! Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ You apparently read nothing I said, did you? And if you did read what I said, your bias selective amnesia must have set in.
Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
We post pictures of Modern Africans because they and upper egyptians are close to what the Ancient Egyptians looked like. So people know that the Ancient Egyptians were Africans and not like people from the Near East. Hope this helps Also Africans are the people who dye their hair with reddish dye.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read it Dhehuti but is was so misguided that I decided to comment on the pictures. Why do we have modern pictures on a board that deals with people who lived 3000 or more years ago? Again, I would ask, why do we have an entire board dedicated to defending a position if you were sure of it? i think that you are not sure of it and thats why we have 5000 threads that go on forever defending this so called 'black' Egyptian point of view. What I will not get is a rational answer to this question.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think Horemheb is saying that Ramses II was Nordic, he is just saying he wasn't black(probably mixed).
His nose is very similar to that of yuya(who was a foreigner) but the rest of him is egyptian(skin,skull size ....).
Posts: 94 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: I read it Dhehuti but is was so misguided that I decided to comment on the pictures...
And would you care to explain what was so "misguided" about it?!!
quote:Why do we have modern pictures on a board that deals with people who lived 3000 or more years ago?
Those pictures were examples of an ancient Egyptian(actually African) custom that is still in practice and which proves my point.
quote:Again, I would ask, why do we have an entire board dedicated to defending a position if you were sure of it?
To educate ignorant folk like you.
quote: i think that you are not sure of it and thats why we have 5000 threads that go on forever defending this so called 'black' Egyptian point of view.
Nope. I'm pretty sure! Again, we repeat this stuff to educate the new members and/or visitors to this board.
quote:What I will not get is a rational answer to this question.
LOL All you have been getting from I and others is rational answers, but it is not our fault that you refuse to accept them! Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KING: We post pictures of Modern Africans because they and upper egyptians are close to what the Ancient Egyptians looked like. So people know that the Ancient Egyptians were Africans and not like people from the Near East. Hope this helps Also Africans are the people who dye their hair with reddish dye.
Peace
Even a kid like King understands. Sad that a grown man claiming to be a professor can't.
Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Every time the forum is rolling either some newbie or Blatella Germanica comes along and railroads folk into race dee-bait. Then it has the audacity to ask why.
posted
I wonder if Rameses II's nose shape has anything to do with the pepper corns or a boner being used to prop up his nose?
Most people fail to mention this. See the following details:
Peppercorns were placed in his broken nose to restore its shape and his sense of smell in the after life. His nose may have been broken during the mummification process when his brain was removed through his nose
Ramses II?s nose was propped up with a bone to enhance his kingly profile and filled with peppercorns, to reawaken his sense of smell. Both of these tidbits of information was revealed via x-rays of his head and are very visible in the accompanying photographs.
quote:Originally posted by MichaelFromQuebec: I don't think Horemheb is saying that Ramses II was Nordic,..
uhh, you are new here and don't know Hore very well; so let me tell you that that is exactly what the guy is saying!
quote:he is just saying he wasn't black(probably mixed).
So you consider folks of mixed black ancestry to not be black?? Better yet, do you consider this to be the case with all Egyptians even though the evidence speaks the contrary??
quote: His nose is very similar to that of yuya(who was a foreigner) but the rest of him is egyptian(skin,skull size ....).
Tutsi man with hooked nose, but the rest appear to be Egyptian. I suppose he is also "mixed" with foreign ancestry??
Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Peppercorns were placed in his broken nose to restore its shape and his sense of smell in the after life. His nose may have been broken during the mummification process when his brain was removed through his nose
I take back my comments if this is the case.
quote:Tutsi man with hooked nose, but the rest appear to be Egyptian. I suppose he is also "mixed" with foreign ancestry??
quote:Originally posted by ausar: I wonder if Rameses II's nose shape has anything to do with the pepper corns or a boner being used to prop up his nose?
Most people fail to mention this. See the following details:
Peppercorns were placed in his broken nose to restore its shape and his sense of smell in the after life. His nose may have been broken during the mummification process when his brain was removed through his nose
Ramses II?s nose was propped up with a bone to enhance his kingly profile and filled with peppercorns, to reawaken his sense of smell. Both of these tidbits of information was revealed via x-rays of his head and are very visible in the accompanying photographs.
quote: Peppercorns were placed in his broken nose to restore its shape and his sense of smell in the after life. His nose may have been broken during the mummification process when his brain was removed through his nose
I take back my comments if this is the case.
quote:Tutsi man with hooked nose, but the rest appear to be Egyptian. I suppose he is also "mixed" with foreign ancestry??
Interesting.
There is nothing "interesting" about it. You need to get your head out of the sand of ignorance, Mike.
All of this attributing Egyptians to foreign admixture is nonsense. Why can't you accept the fact that they were just African and that indigenous Africans come in a diversity of features??
I'm sure you accept that whites or "caucasians" of Europe vary in features also but you never think twice about Europeans having any "mixture", even though this does seem to be the case with southern Europeans!!
quote:All of this attributing Egyptians to foreign admixture is nonsense
This is why we can't be terrified into silence/or fibbing, when it comes to the topic of African ancestry in Europeans.
"Europeans show a genetic mixture of 2/3rds Asian, 1/3 African". - Cavelli Sforza.
Thus Europeans *cannot* be allowed to continue the charade of setting themselves up as template from which to measure "mixture" in other peoples.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:There is nothing "interesting" about it. You need to get your head out of the sand of ignorance, Mike.
You misunderstood me. I said "interesting" because I learnt something new. I'm not as closed minded as you may think, until a few months ago I thought the ruling class of meroe was caucasoid, but then I was proved wrong. I didn't go into a state of denial, I was given the proof and I believed it.
quote:I think we agree on that masonic. My statement was that the hair, combined with his facial features make it unlikely that he was black.One of them may not make the case, both of them together does.
Very well put.
Posts: 94 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hi, I am new here and have been reading the forums for about a month before I wanted to post a message and I hope that I can share some Ancient Egyptian/African thought/wisdom/info aswell as learn. One thing that I have noticed that I like about this forum is the genetic discussions which I have always been interested in learning and if some of you could help me with that I would be much appreciative. Now on this particular subject I have to say that Rameses II was in no way white/nordic or southern European, but I will agree with the white racists on this site that he was more asiatic than anything(sorry brothas lol). This in turn says nothing against the racial complexion of Ancient Egypt being black Africans so I don't see what the big fuss is about. Altakuri is correct in the fact that red haired people were killed on sight..why? Because red was considered an evil color to the Egyptians. Now if Ramses hair was naturally red I seriously doubt he wouldn't have died it another color, but if he died it red then he probably did this to put fear in other Egyptians considering his dynasty was a bunch of "set/baal" worshipers. Ramses II was NOT a royal by blood although he had a royal "seat", but considering his daughter's name was Bint-Anath(which is a canaanite name) I'm sure his dynasty of the akhmin(which went through her line) were more asiatic than black AFTER Ramses I in which WAS a royal by blood and mostly black so I guess both the Afrocentrics and Eurocentrics on this forum are incorrect . btw the one drop USA rule that I see on this forum shouldn't be used in determining race because it is rediculous white racism and has nothing to do with Egypt. If ancient Egypt is African then you should look at this from an African perspective..but considering most Afrocentrics are African American(who aren't the least bit African lol) they are still living their lives in whitey/massa's eyes lol. Unscholarly to say the least.
Posts: 54 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^You are correct that the Egyptians feared natural red hair which they associated with Set. But as you know there are many Africans who artifically dye their hair red. Henna is just one example. There are many peoples who use ochre to dye their hair red.
Ramses's origins have been discussed in this board numerous times already. And while there is doubt about whether or not he was a native because of ascension through military ranks, anthropology as well as artistic depictions put all of these doubts to rest.
Welcome to the forum, by the way! Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
You are correct that the Egyptians feared natural red hair which they associated with Set. But as you know there are many Africans who artifically dye their hair red. Henna is just one example. There are many peoples who use ochre to dye their hair red.
Ramses's origins have been discussed in this board numerous times already. And while there is doubt about whether or not he was a native because of ascension through military ranks, anthropology as well as artistic depictions put all of these doubts to rest.
Welcome to the forum, by the way!
quote:
Well, I don't see how anthropology has put anything to rest about Rameses II and his dynasty being black and I am not trying to be contrary I'm totally sincere.
Posts: 54 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The image of Tutsi person, is of course just an example; if this person's skull were to be examined, i.e. minus skin, its nasal bone structure would give an impression similar to that claimed to be of Rameses II, the rest would simply be an extrapolation, since soft parts cannot be accurately reproduced, as we have seen in the case of the nose tip of the recent Tutankhamun facial reconstruction.
Ausar's point about the nose stuffing is taken, but would x-ray inspection not be able to detect this?
Bottom line: "Hooked" nose doesn't equal/prove 'whiteness'
Now on this particular subject I have to say that Rameses II was in no way white/nordic or southern European, but I will agree with the white racists on this site that he was more asiatic than anything(sorry brothas lol).
What qualifiers do you use to define "Asiatic", and how do you determine what quantifies being "Asiatic" more than "African"? I am interested in knowing, because the personality you are referring to was not an "Asiatic", but an Egyptian.
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
This in turn says nothing against the racial complexion of Ancient Egypt being black Africans so I don't see what the big fuss is about.
Of course it doesn't. The "fuss" is about setting facts straight. Nothing has been presented to suggest that Rameses II stood out from Nile Valley inhabitants, physically or culturally.
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
Ramses II was NOT a royal by blood although he had a royal "seat",
He was a royalty by blood. His father was the person who got the "royal seat".
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
but considering his daughter's name was Bint-Anath(which is a canaanite name) I'm sure his dynasty of the akhmin(which went through her line) were more asiatic than black AFTER Ramses I in which WAS a royal by blood and mostly black
Not sure what you are getting at here, but just to clarify: would "Bint-Anath" be Rameses II's daughter or Rameses I's daughter?
Even if "Bint-Anath" were the daughter of either, and the name sounds "Asiatic", how does this make Rameses II more "Asiatic" than "black"? Rameses era wouldn't mark the first time Egyptian royalty have taken foreign females from their eastern neighbours, even though heir to the throne in such cases, would not come from the "foreign" mother's end, but based on the offspring's ties to the father who has the royal seat.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Nay-Sayer asks: How was Rameses depicted in AE art?
Like this:
Well, I guess that answers the question. No need to speculate about red or blond hair any further...
Posts: 13 | From: Chicago | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by African_Bible_Expert: Hi, I am new here and have been reading the forums for about a month before I wanted to post a message and I hope that I can share some Ancient Egyptian/African thought/wisdom/info aswell as learn. One thing that I have noticed that I like about this forum is the genetic discussions which I have always been interested in learning and if some of you could help me with that I would be much appreciative. Now on this particular subject I have to say that Rameses II was in no way white/nordic or southern European, but I will agree with the white racists on this site that he was more asiatic than anything(sorry brothas lol). This in turn says nothing against the racial complexion of Ancient Egypt being black Africans so I don't see what the big fuss is about. Altakuri is correct in the fact that red haired people were killed on sight..why? Because red was considered an evil color to the Egyptians. Now if Ramses hair was naturally red I seriously doubt he wouldn't have died it another color, but if he died it red then he probably did this to put fear in other Egyptians considering his dynasty was a bunch of "set/baal" worshipers. Ramses II was NOT a royal by blood although he had a royal "seat", but considering his daughter's name was Bint-Anath(which is a canaanite name) I'm sure his dynasty of the akhmin(which went through her line) were more asiatic than black AFTER Ramses I in which WAS a royal by blood and mostly black so I guess both the Afrocentrics and Eurocentrics on this forum are incorrect . btw the one drop USA rule that I see on this forum shouldn't be used in determining race because it is rediculous white racism and has nothing to do with Egypt. If ancient Egypt is African then you should look at this from an African perspective..but considering most Afrocentrics are African American(who aren't the least bit African lol) they are still living their lives in whitey/massa's eyes lol. Unscholarly to say the least.
Sorry, wrong. Set worship ORIGINATED in the SOUTH of Egypt at the town called Nubt("Golden City"), hint: "Nubian". Set is OFTEN referred to as being a Nubti hint:"Nubian". The association with Baal and Set came AFTER the expansions and various incursions of Asiatics into Egypt, when they saw the attributes of Set and linked them with their gods. This does NOT, however, make RAMESSES a Asiatic because he worshipped Set. Set is one of THE ORIGINAL gods of ancient Kmt. Therefore, it is only FITTING that Set worship would be a sign of KINGSHIP, since it traces to the SOUTH where Egyptian culture and civilization CAME from. It is funny how people get HALF the facts and then TWIST them to make their theories SOUND good. HOw about telling the WHOLE story and not PART of it. Ramesses and his dynasty staged many campaigns in foreign lands and as part of his worship of Set it was easy to extend his alliances with certain near eastern neigbors because of their previous associations of set with local dieties. HOWEVER, one should NOT see this as saying that Ramesses HIMSELF was a foreigner. It would be IMPOSSIBLE for Ramesses, the great king AGAINST the incursion of foreign blood INTO the ancient Egyptian bloodline to BE a person of FOREIGN blood. That would be like an american president BARRING Mexicans from entering the U.S. and BEING a Mexican. Either way, what people are DOING is taking history of Set worship, separating it from its ROOTS in the South of Egypt and then trying to present it as some sort of "foreign" god, when it WASNT. Any associations with foreigners came during the first and second intermediate periods when FOREIGNERS (canaanites, etc) were in control. But that does NOT make Set worship by the Ramessids the worship of a FOREIGN god, since SEt is one of the OLDEST dieties in Egypt and the ORIGINAL contender in mysteries of Heru. Therefore, to say that the Ramessids are celebrating FOREIGN influence, by worshipping set, is to speak PURE NONSENSE, especially since the Ramessid dynasty was the LAST of the NATIVE Egyptian dynasties to RESIST foreign invasions. Therefore, you should look at Set worship by the RAMESSIDS as celebrating the ROOTS of their culture in the south and the TRIUMPH of NATIVE Egyptian bloodlines, over FOREIGN enemies who were becoming increasingly powerful. Anything else is a PURE distortion of facts.
Here is a perfect example of how the story of Set and his origins get twisted:
Note how they START by trying to REINFORCE Set as some kind of "foreign" diety.
quote: Set (Seth, Setekh, Sut, Sutekh, Suty) was one of ancient Egypt's earliest gods, a god of chaos, confusion, storms, wind, the desert and foreign lands
Then they say this:
quote: He was also believed to have white skin and red hair, with the Egyptians comparing his hair to the pelt of a donkey. Due to his association with red (dshrr dshr - adding a t makes the word for desert, dshrrtdesert determinative dshrt), red animals and even people with red hair were thought to be his followers. These animals were sometimes sacrificed, while the link between Set and red-heads - usually foreigners - gave him godhood over foreign lands. With the relationship to foreign peoples, Set was also a god of overseas trade of oils, wood and metals from over the sea and through desert routes. He was given lordship over western Asia because of this.
But all of this association of Set with foreigners and the desert only appeared LATER, LONG AFTER the predynastic period when SET and HERU worship and the MYSTERIES of the contendings of Set and Horus were ORIGINATED. But they conveniently overlook THAT point in order to reinforce Set as somehow being associated with Desert dwellers. How is that when he was BORN in the city of Nubt, in the SOUTH and associated with people from Nubt, in other words "Nubians"? See how they twist the story to make it seem that Set was some kinda FOREIGN god and symbolic of "white" people. NO. Set was a GOLDEN god, like ALL other gods, especially with his association with NUBT (the city of GOLD), ie a NUBIAN "GOLDEN ONE". Like I said the fear of red heads and the association of set with the desert storms all came AFTER the disastrous events of the FIRST and SECOND intermediate periods when CHAOS ruled Egypt, due to the INVASIONS of FOREIGNERS into Egypt.
NOTE how they CONVENIENTLY leave that IMPORTANT fact to the very end, downplaying the ORIGINS of Set worship as a POSITIVE and GOLDEN diety of the SOUTH (Upper Egypt), after the Hyksos took over.
quote: It is likely that the cult of Horus overtook the cult of Set in ancient times, and started to remove his positive sides to give the god Horus more status. The two gods, Horus the Elder and Horus the son of Osiris and Isis were confused, so Set changed from being an equal to his brother, Horus the Elder, to the enemy of Isis's son. It was only after the Hyksos took Set as their main god, after the Egyptians god rid of the foreigners, he stopped symbolizing Lower Egypt and his name was erased and his statues destroyed.
See how they TWIST the story and take what happened AFTER the Hyksos and replace what was a symbol of UPPER EGYPT and twist it into a symbol of FOREIGNERS. In my opinion the Ramessids worship of Set had more to do with going back to the SOUTH and RESTORING the ancient ROOTS of Set worship and TIES to the SOUTH, which was the TRADITIONAL home of LEGITIMATE Egyptian royalty, especially in the times of TROUBLE from ASIATICS. Look at the papyrus of Neferti and you will see that. But of course, if you want to TWIST the facts to suit your own BIASED opinions you will see what you WANT to see.
Just remember that Set was TRANSFORMED in Egypt, and he was GOOD or BAD depending on what DYNASTY he was associated with. THerefore as a DIETY of a FORIEGN DYNASTY and the age of CHAOS, he would be a DIETY Of destruction and BAD things "a symbol of FOREIGNERS". HOwever, under a NATIVE dynasty in PROSPEROUS times, he was a GOOD diety, a symbol of POWER and STRENGTH, a symbol of UPPER Egypt and THE ORIGINAL FOUNDING BLOODLINE from the SOUTH.
quote: The Egyptian deity Set is traditionally held to be an all-round 'baddie' who was the evil murderer of his brother Osiris and was, at one time, blamed for every misfortune that occurred. This study comprises a series of articles written by the late Billie Walker John, which together form a detailed study of Set, his origins, characteristics and his role in the Mysteries of the Shadows. Known as the ruling deity of Nubt in Upper Egypt and associated with a beast that took a number of different forms, Set was at one time the chosen god for the common people of Egypt who perhaps understood rather than feared his dark powers. 107p, b/w illus (Ignotus 2003)
quote:dshrr dshr - adding a t makes the word for desert
Adding on to what Doug correctly notes....
Dshr is red, but adding a .t, per se, only makes the word into a noun - Red [noun = person, place or thing]
As such it referred to red lands - "deserts" when used with the land determinative.
Otherwise it might refer to any number of different red things.
For example, the crown of lower Egypt - the Red Crown is called the Dshr.t in mdw ntr.
What is 'red is the crown itself' - literally:
The red crown, or deshret, may very well have originated in Upper Egypt, although it eventually became associated as the symbol of Lower Egypt. A sherd from a large vessel dated to late Naqada I, near the town of Nubt, the city of Set, has a representation in relief of the red crown, and on both the Narmer palette (one side) and macehead the king’s figure is shown wearing the red crown. - touregypt.net
.
Deshr.t[u] - red people is a euphemism for the Aamu asiatics. Red here is and ethnic reference. When the Km.t complained of Deshretu over-running the delta - they are not referencing red land, they are not referencing the red crown - obviously - they are referencing the red people.
Beyound that, red and black were a part of Kemetian color dialectics in which black symbolised 'good' and red symbolised 'evil'.
Note, the modern English language may have derived much from this.
What qualifiers do you use to define "Asiatic", and how do you determine what quantifies being "Asiatic" more than "African"? I am interested in knowing, because the personality you are referring to was not an "Asiatic", but an Egyptian.
Features, family lines, history and names. As far as you saying he was not Asiatic because he fought them; that would be the same argument that whites use to say Nubians and Egyptians aren't black because they fought lol<--slow down cowboy. Ramses II was an Asiatic Egyptian and that is no different than an African American fighting Somali's in the early 90's being in the U.S military.
quote:
Of course it doesn't. The "fuss" is about setting facts straight. Nothing has been presented to suggest that Rameses II stood out from Nile Valley inhabitants, physically or culturally.
Who said anything about Ramses II standing out? Egypt didn't have a racist culture like the United States only a CLASS culture so stop applying your lowly African American perspective to Ancient Egypt. There were tons of Asiatic with high official authority in Egypt btw even thought that might hurt your feelings but it's true. *shrugs* Maybe you should learn from Egyptians to not be as racist as the people who have been racist to you....those emotions tend to rub off ya know
quote:
He was a royalty by blood. His father was the person who got the "royal seat".
He was a royal seat descendant but he was NOT a royal by blood. I think you should investigate what I mean by the difference between "blood" royal and "seat" royal. Horemheb gave Ramses I the royal seat indeed but Ramses II was not royal by blood and neither was Horemheb. The royals of the eighteenth dynasty went through "Ahmose nefertari"...the female side not the male so if he is continuing in a later dynasty right after the 18th it would still apply considering Horemheb is the one that appointed his father. Now here is something you probably don't know, but alot of Egyptians who are listed as fathers or mothers are not their real father or mother but rather appointed to them(adopted)...I know this makes things more difficult, but it's just how their culture was. The Jews carried on this tradition of adoption by the way.
quote:
Not sure what you are getting at here, but just to clarify: would "Bint-Anath" be Rameses II's daughter or Rameses I's daughter?
Ramses II's daughter I already stated that Ramses I was black just not the rest of them I am sorry if I did not make that clear.
quote:
Even if "Bint-Anath" were the daughter of either, and the name sounds "Asiatic", how does this make Rameses II more "Asiatic" than "black"? Rameses era wouldn't mark the first time Egyptian royalty have taken foreign females from their eastern neighbours, even though heir to the throne in such cases, would not come from the "foreign" mother's end, but based on the offspring's ties to the father who has the royal seat
Why would a black Egyptian name their daughter a canaanite name lol? Especially after your reasoning of Ramses being so ANTI ASIATIC lol!!That's really all I have to say about that bro. The "AKHMIN" was an asiatic line and he came from this. *shrugs* This is no different then 3000 years from now white people questioning whether or not Condelisa Rice was black because she had such a high postiion in white America and has a "primarily cuacasoid" skull LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posts: 54 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
Sorry, wrong. Set worship ORIGINATED in the SOUTH of Egypt at the town called Nubt("Golden City"), hint: "Nubian". Set is OFTEN referred to as being a Nubti hint:"Nubian". The association with Baal and Set came AFTER the expansions and various incursions of Asiatics into Egypt, when they saw the attributes of Set and linked them with their gods. This does NOT, however, make RAMESSES a Asiatic because he worshipped Set. Set is one of THE ORIGINAL gods of ancient Kmt. Therefore, it is only FITTING that Set worship would be a sign of KINGSHIP, since it traces to the SOUTH where Egyptian culture and civilization CAME from. It is funny how people get HALF the facts and then TWIST them to make their theories SOUND good. HOw about telling the WHOLE story and not PART of it. Ramesses and his dynasty staged many campaigns in foreign lands and as part of his worship of Set it was easy to extend his alliances with certain near eastern neigbors because of their previous associations of set with local dieties. HOWEVER, one should NOT see this as saying that Ramesses HIMSELF was a foreigner. It would be IMPOSSIBLE for Ramesses, the great king AGAINST the incursion of foreign blood INTO the ancient Egyptian bloodline to BE a person of FOREIGN blood. That would be like an american president BARRING Mexicans from entering the U.S. and BEING a Mexican. Either way, what people are DOING is taking history of Set worship, separating it from its ROOTS in the South of Egypt and then trying to present it as some sort of "foreign" god, when it WASNT. Any associations with foreigners came during the first and second intermediate periods when FOREIGNERS (canaanites, etc) were in control. But that does NOT make Set worship by the Ramessids the worship of a FOREIGN god, since SEt is one of the OLDEST dieties in Egypt and the ORIGINAL contender in mysteries of Heru. Therefore, to say that the Ramessids are celebrating FOREIGN influence, by worshipping set, is to speak PURE NONSENSE, especially since the Ramessid dynasty was the LAST of the NATIVE Egyptian dynasties to RESIST foreign invasions. Therefore, you should look at Set worship by the RAMESSIDS as celebrating the ROOTS of their culture in the south and the TRIUMPH of NATIVE Egyptian bloodlines, over FOREIGN enemies who were becoming increasingly powerful. Anything else is a PURE distortion of facts.
quote:
That was a rather nice post, but it was quite a waste of time considering that by me saying that Ramses dynasty worshiping Set is not the sole reason for me saying they were asiatic. Also, saying Set originated in the South means nothing!! Set's cult was well established in the north during the Rameside era *sigh* and most of the worshipers of Set/baal were Asiatic. You are the one claiming that I am calling Ramses a FOREIGNER I have never made that claim. An African American is not a FOREIGNER and neither is an Asiatic Egyptian like Ramses II Posts: 54 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doug is correct that the god Set was Egyptian and in fact originates from the south.
Evidence strongly shows that Set was associated with the desert and thus a god of the deserts and desert wilderness. Many scholars agree that the evidence points to Set most likely being a patron god of desert nomads who were ancestors of the Egyptians, and the struggle with his brother Useri (Osiris) makes perfect sense considering that Useri was patron god of settled agriculturalists who also were ancestral to the Egyptians. What's interesting is that the Egyptian icon of leadership-- the was scepter is modeled after the Set animal with head of the scepter in the shape of his head and the bottom in the shape of his forked tail. The was scepter is also found among desert nomads in East Africa as far as Ethiopia and Somalia!
Doug is correct, that many Asiatics who settled in the Delta identified Set with their own patron gods who presided over the desert and nomads. That Set is depicted with red hair has nothing to do with 'race' or Tamahu (white Libyans). The red color merely represented dshrt (desert). As we all know, in the struggle between the cults of Set and his brother Osiris, Osiris ends up being dominated. And as with many cults who lose out Set became somewhat demonized. With Osiris and his representation of settled agricultural life being favored and idealized as harmony and order, Set represented not only the deserts and nomads but of chaos and any threat to the ideals of Osiris. This along with the identification of Set with Asiatic gods made it easy to associate Set with foreigners also.
For a while now, many people have associated Ramases with foreigners because of his hair color and his nose. But considering what we now know of his so-called hair color as well as the unreliability of so-called 'hooked-nose', adding all this together with craniological studies done on Kent Weeks, and we can get the picture that if Ramses was really a foreigner he was one of African descent. Considering his association with Set it wouldn't be surprising if he descended from one of the desert nomad groups like the Medjay or the Antawy. But Bible Expert is correct that among those included in Ramses many children were from Asiatic women in his harem whom he gained through political marriage, which would explain princesses with the name of 'Bint' which is the Semitic common word for 'daughter'.
Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MichaelFromQuebec: I don't think Horemheb is saying that Ramses II was Nordic,..
uhh, you are new here and don't know Hore very well; so let me tell you that that is exactly what the guy is saying!
quote:he is just saying he wasn't black(probably mixed).
So you consider folks of mixed black ancestry to not be black?? Better yet, do you consider this to be the case with all Egyptians even though the evidence speaks the contrary??
quote: His nose is very similar to that of yuya(who was a foreigner) but the rest of him is egyptian(skin,skull size ....).
Tutsi man with hooked nose, but the rest appear to be Egyptian. I suppose he is also "mixed" with foreign ancestry??
all i can say is: the mummy many speculate to be of ramses 2 even while it was not found in the ramses 2 tomb ......has a very.......very......low sloping frontal lobe!
no way in a hot antartic day.......is the mummy caucasoid.........
Posts: 35 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
What are those features that are so unique to "Asiatics" and absent in indigenous Nile Valley inhabitants?
Tell us more about the history and family lines, that speaks of what you are implying.
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
As far as you saying he was not Asiatic because he fought them; that would be the same argument that whites use to say Nubians and Egyptians aren't black because they fought lol<--slow down cowboy.
Please provide the citation you claim I had said the above, cowboy.
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
Ramses II was an Asiatic Egyptian and that is no different than an African American fighting Somali's in the early 90's being in the U.S military.
...based on what? You have yet to still clarify that issue, cowboy.
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
Who said anything about Ramses II standing out?
You implied so, when you said that the man was "more Asiatic than African", which would undoubtedly imply he stood out from an African. As such, we would like to know how, cowboy.
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
Egypt didn't have a racist culture like the United States only a CLASS culture so stop applying your lowly African American perspective to Ancient Egypt.
Has no bearings on the point that physically or culturally, Rameses II was not out of place in the Nile Valley. Matter of fact, I had provided info from the "an x-ray Atlas of mummies" that tells us how so. I would like to see your objective scientific source, that tells us to the contrary, and what qualifiers the responsible author(s) use do to so.
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
There were tons of Asiatic with high official authority in Egypt btw even thought that might hurt your feelings but it's true.
...and that has anything to do with Rameses II being an indigenous Egyptian how? Nothing untrue hurts my feelings, not even lame attempts of psycho analysis, unless you feel that like Miss Cleo, you can get a way with it - see where that attitude got her.
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
*shrugs* Maybe you should learn from Egyptians to not be as racist as the people who have been racist to you....those emotions tend to rub off ya know
Nothing in my post speaks of "racism", other than getting at the bottom of what you base your assertions on, which at this point, seems to be nothing. Your language tells us that the frustrated fool here, is actually yourself.
quote: African_Bible_Expert:
He was a royal seat descendant but he was NOT a royal by blood.
...and how do you become royalty by "blood", if not by becoming heir to the throne, because your ancestor had the throne? LOL.
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
I think you should investigate what I mean by the difference between "blood" royal and "seat" royal.
What do you think I'm doing. See post above.
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
Horemheb gave Ramses I the royal seat indeed but Ramses II was not royal by blood and neither was Horemheb.
This is got to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Yes, Rameses was given the seat, and hence, got the throne to rulership. Rameses II is the inheritor of that throne; why should Rameses not be considered "royalty by blood" then? Apparently, the ancient Egyptians had disagreed with your point of view, as the Rameses line was "legitimized".
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
The royals of the eighteenth dynasty went through "Ahmose nefertari"...the female side not the male so if he is continuing in a later dynasty right after the 18th it would still apply considering Horemheb is the one that appointed his father. Now here is something you probably don't know, but alot of Egyptians who are listed as fathers or mothers are not their real father or mother but rather appointed to them(adopted)...
...and you wonder why it might be in your best interest to search the archives, to see what we've already discussed, so that you can realize what you are bringing up, is no newsflash to anyone but yourself?
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
...I know this makes things more difficult, but it's just how their culture was. The Jews carried on this tradition of adoption by the way.
Only thing I can see difficult here, is getting answers from you, and sensible ones at that.
quote: African_Bible_Expert:
Ramses II's daughter I already stated that Ramses I was black just not the rest of them I am sorry if I did not make that clear.
Interesting; Rameses I was "black", but his "son" is somehow supposed to be more "Asiatic than African". So, does this mean that "black" and "African" here are separated; moreover, how does this play out with "Asiatic"?
quote: African_Bible_Expert: Why would a black Egyptian name their daughter a canaanite name lol?
Why would any Egyptian royalty take in an "Asiatic" woman? Not that it is of anything significant to warrent the yet to be founded idea that Rameses was more "Asiatic than African", but what source tells us that his daughter's name was "canaanite" in origin, or the said personality is his daughter to begin with?
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
Especially after your reasoning of Ramses being so ANTI ASIATIC lol!!
What is clear, is that your reasonings seem to be ANTI INTELLECT, because you never provide basis for your claims. With that said, please provide a citation for what you are crediting me for here, if you can handle it.
quote:African_Bible_Expert:
That's really all I have to say about that bro.
So you don't have much to say then, bro?!
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I always stress the importance of understanding what terms mean.
leucoderm - from leuco - milky - white, and derm - skin, a white or pale skinned person.
ex: leucoderma -a skin abnormality that is characterized by a usually congenital lack of pigment in spots or bands and produces a patchy whiteness.
antonym/opposite:
melanoderm: an individual with a dark skin; specifically : a black-skinned or brown-skinned person
source/websters-dictionary.
If you understand the meanings of these terms then we can say that by the textual evidence Ramses II was melanoderm.
Most important, we understand that the attempt to make Rameses into a leucoderm by referencing a hooked nose [broken and reset or not], or red hairs [dyed and faded with age, or not]...is a total non-sequitur and in fact quite ridiculous.
To repeat: Anyone who disagrees, feel free to produce the following relevant evidence:
* test results showing a lack of melanin in Rameses II corpse and so falsifying the existing melanodermic iconographic evidence.
* a BELIEVABLE explanation of why Rameses is consistently portrayed by the Kemetians as melanoderm - *not* leucoderm.
posted
Bible Expert is moving to fast he has not provided anything new that has not been discussed about Ramses. Rasol makes a good point all of what we know about Ramses shows him as melanoderm. Dark Skinned. I wish people would stop coming on this forum pretending like they are saying something new when in fact they are not saying anything new. I ask what valid proof is their that Ramses was a leucoderm. Bible Expert show us valid proof so we can discuss.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Another reason that Ramessu is said to be foreign is because he and his family were Lower Egyptians.
There are plenty of indigenous Lower Egyptians today like the man below:
(notice the shape of his nose)
I'm sure there were even more back then. He and his family were said to be from Avaris which had a substantial Asiatic community but again, this doesn't mean that Ramessu's family was part of this community.
Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Another reason that Ramessu is said to be foreign is because he and his family were Lower Egyptians.
There are plenty of indigenous Lower Egyptians today like the man below:
(notice the shape of his nose)
I'm sure there were even more back then. He and his family were said to be from Avaris which had a substantial Asiatic community but again, this doesn't mean that Ramessu's family was part of this community.
I was looking for this particular image; it was also in a link posted in our 2004 discussion of Rameses's "red hair" much like this one. The link was on a forensic facial reconstruction of Rameses II, where Rameses was shown in dark tone, much like this fellow here. This person is not "leucoderm" by any stretch of the imagination, though his skull minus skin, would lead Eurocentrists to make such deductions.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
What are those features that are so unique to "Asiatics" and absent in indigenous Nile Valley inhabitants?
quote:
Nose, cheeks, facial structure..if you want to make everyone "possibly" black then there is no way for me to stop you. If a statue looked like George Clooney in Egypt you would say they were black and no different than Nile valley people lol. You have an Agenda so there is no need for me to get into that with you I would prefer to talk to people like Rasol or Aktruri they seem to be more mature and more intelligent sorry . It really makes no sense for someone to get so upset about a culture that has nothing to do with them especially when we are talking about one man and one man only lol.
quote:
Tell us more about the history and family lines, that speaks of what you are implying.
quote:
What I mean by this is that I agree with the people on this site about multiple disciplines in studying ancient Egypt..genetics, anthropology, linguistics, archeology and most importantly their own history(family lines etc.)
quote:
Please provide the citation you claim I had said the above, cowboy
quote:
When you made the statement about the personality is very "Egyptian" and not "Asiatic" maybe you need to clarify what you mean by that statement because that is what I was refering to.
quote:
based on what? You have yet to still clarify that issue, cowboy
quote:
Based on my testimony!!! This is all egyptology is man, it's more guess work than anything, nothing is in STONE and your claims are no more valid than anyone elses mr. PHD professor lol. Why don't you make a time machine since you are so brilliant and we can all go see for ourselves.
quote:
You implied so, when you said that the man was "more Asiatic than African", which would undoubtedly imply he stood out from an African. As such, we would like to know how, cowboy.
quote:
I don't see how me saying he is an Asiatic Egyptian = "he stands out from other Egyptians" especially in the north. Now I am a Bible and Quran expert and even though I know the books are full of crap there is still some truth to it and when it says that the isrealites looked like "mizrayim" that means they looked like "northern egyptians"(the delta) so I'm sure there wasn't much difference between levant Asiatics and northern Egyptians in appearance(at a glance).
quote:
Has no bearings on the point that physically or culturally, Rameses II was not out of place in the Nile Valley. Matter of fact, I had provided info from the "an x-ray Atlas of mummies" that tells us how so. I would like to see your objective scientific source, that tells us to the contrary, and what qualifiers the responsible author(s) use do to so.
quote:
Again what is YOUR qualifier for being "out of place" was "Bey" out of place? Was "Yuya" out of place? What on earth do you mean by this?!?!? Again you are applying your lowly African American standards in the U.S to Egypt by assuming an Asiatic Egyptian stands out from others just because racism in America makes African Americans stand out. That rationale doesn't work here dude. Keep that negro American crap in negro America and not in ancient Egypt, have some freekin' respect!
quote:
and that has anything to do with Rameses II being an indigenous Egyptian how? Nothing untrue hurts my feelings, not even lame attempts of psycho analysis, unless you feel that like Miss Cleo, you can get a way with it - see where that attitude got her
quote:
I already said Ramses was an Asiatic "Egyptian" There is no telling how long his family line has been in Egypt so as far as using the word "indigenous" that would be a relative term that YOU would need to define and not I. I mean African Americans have been in the U.S.A for up to 400 years...are they indigenous?
quote:
Nothing in my post speaks of "racism", other than getting at the bottom of what you base your assertions on, which at this point, seems to be nothing. Your language tells us that the frustrated fool here, is actually yourself.
quote:
Yes you are VERY racist and most racists never see it which is the whole point of racism in the first place *shrugs*.
quote:
and how do you become royalty by "blood", if not by becoming heir to the throne, because your ancestor had the throne? LOL.
quote:
Example...Abraham Lincoln was not apart of the royal lineage of Euro-American blood lines that control America and he became president after many attempts because of this and then was of course shot!! lol
quote:
This is got to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Yes, Rameses was given the seat, and hence, got the throne to rulership. Rameses II is the inheritor of that throne; why should Rameses not be considered "royalty by blood" then? Apparently, the ancient Egyptians had disagreed with your point of view, as the Rameses line was "legitimized".
quote:
This is even dumber than what you claim is dumb lol basically you are saying you can only rule Egypt if you are a royal..so I guess the Greeks, Romans and Persians were Egyptian royals huh smfh lmao!!!!!!!!
quote:
and you wonder why it might be in your best interest to search the archives, to see what we've already discussed, so that you can realize what you are bringing up, is no newsflash to anyone but yourself?
quote:
If it is no newsflash then GREAT!!
quote:
Interesting; Rameses I was "black", but his "son" is somehow supposed to be more "Asiatic than African". So, does this mean that "black" and "African" here are separated; moreover, how does this play out with "Asiatic"?
quote:
Prove to me that Ramses I was Ramses II's "biological" father and not appointed(adopted) father. And when you come back with "prove to me that Ramses I was not Ramses II's "biological" father I will say "see; now you are using your head" lol which proves my point in that nothing is in stone in Egyptology, BUT being as though Ramses I had no Asiatic named offspring and Ramses II did that's a very good reason for my claim of him being Asiatic and I am not the only one saying this and in actuality others have brought this to my attention because of course I like you ASSUMED that Ramses II and the Rameside era were blacks too *shrugs*.
quote:
Why would any Egyptian royalty take in an "Asiatic" woman? Not that it is of anything significant to warrent the yet to be founded idea that Rameses was more "Asiatic than African", but what source tells us that his daughter's name was "canaanite" in origin, or the said personality is his daughter to begin with?
quote:
Umm "Bint-Anath" is canaanite dude lol. This is like me saying what source tells us that Heru/hor the elder is an Egyptian name lmao!!!!!! And speaking of Heru/hor why the hell didn't he name his daughter "daughter" "SITHOR" considering HOR/Heru is the correspondant god of ANATH in Canaan!!!!!!!!! jeeez lol think man think
quote:
What is clear, is that your reasonings seem to be ANTI INTELLECT, because you never provide basis for your claims. With that said, please provide a citation for what you are crediting me for here, if you can handle it.
quote:
I have provided my basis you just choose to not accept them which is FINE and the whole point of discussion *shrugs*
Even though this has been fun I will have to ask you not to respond supercar you are too emotional about a culture that has nothing to do with you and I would rather speak to people like Rasol and Aktruri on this. I assume they don't agree with what I say, but they are much more knowledgable about Egypt than you are and much more intelligent, mature and less emotional. So good luck bro no hard feelings.
Posts: 54 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
I have already stated that Ramses II was in no way white/nordic/souther european so why do you say I say he was a "leucoderm"? Is Saddam Hussein a "leudoderm"..no..is he black..NO!!! Posts: 54 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Contrary to A.B.E.'s claim I don't postulate Kmtyw applied lynch law to strawberry blondes or whichever kind of red heads they encountered. My precise wording:
quote: Then we have to wonder why Greek authors invented the tale of Egyptians murdering strawberry blonds on sight.
By that its clear I feel that reports of anti-redhead lynching are fantasy without basis unlike what A.B.E. thinks I was saying:
quote:Originally posted by African_Bible_Expert: Altakuri is correct in the fact that red haired people were killed on sight ...
When, where, and by whom did this myth arise? Well I was wrong to lay it at the feet of the Greeks. It appears in many books that assume it was a Greek observation. The fact appears that Montesquieu (Spirit of Laws XV.5, 1748) fabricates "they put to death all the red-haired men who fell into their hands" without citing any reference, and this has been repeated and amplified ever since.
But what do we actually have from the Greco-Latin authors? Nothing backing that ALL redheads were lynched on sight nor that ALL redheads in KM.t were put to death.
quote: "Now Osiris and Isis changed from good minor deities into gods. But the power of Typhon, weakened and crushed, but still fighting and struggling against extinction, they try to console and mollify by certain sacrifices; but again there are times when, at certain festivals, they humiliate and insult him by assailing red-headed men with jeering, and by throwing an ass over the edge of a precipice, as the people of Kopto do, because Typhon had red hair and in color resembled an ass"
. . . .
The fact is that in the city of Elethya they used to burn men alive, as Manetho has recorded; they called them Typhonians, and by means of winnowing fans they dissipated and scattered their ashes. But this was performed publicly and at a special time in the dog-days.
Plutarch De Iside et Osiride, § 30 & 73
quote: Men also, if they were the same colour as Typhon, were sacrificed, they say, in ancient times by the kings at the tomb of Osiris; however only a few Egyptians are now found red in colour, but the majority of such are non-Egyptians.
Diodorus Siculus Bibliotheke 1.88.5
These are as about as primary a source as can be found on the practice of dispatching reds in KM.t. Instead of any notion of redheads' immediate lynching in the streets, patient persistent research reveals the possibility of regulated occasional sacrifice of the particularly ruddy and strawberry blond elements among the Reds (and these may have probably been condemned criminals). No racist inspired lawlessness as in the USA not so very long ago.
Topic Closed
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Doesn't anyone here do a search to see if a topic hasn't already been discussed previously?
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
All you have been getting from I and others is rational answers, but it is not our fault that you refuse to accept them! 
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
. btw the one drop USA rule that I see on this forum shouldn't be used in determining race because it is rediculous white racism and has nothing to do with Egypt. If ancient Egypt is African then you should look at this from an African perspective..but considering most Afrocentrics are African American(who aren't the least bit African lol) they are still living their lives in whitey/massa's eyes lol. Unscholarly to say the least.
Printer-friendly view of this topic