This is topic they look different in forum Egyptology at EgyptSearch Forums.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=010610

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Yatunde Lisa (Member # 22253) on :
 

 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Thereal (Member # 22452) on :
 
What are you getting at? I'm sure the images are stylized and not super realistic in profile.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

---

And what is your point?

The two men are obviously not related. They not only come from different generations but hail from different parts of the country.

By the way, if you're going to do a more realistic comparison you might as well use their mummies instead of idealized portraits.

Amenhotep III


Seti I

 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
my point is the heterogeneity of the kings,
and they are only one dynasty apart
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ You mean to tell me that all the years you've been posting in an Egyptology forum, and you didn't know that even within the same dynasty there are different paternal lineages much less between dynasties??

Perhaps you should read up more that topic or better yet lay out here.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:


By the way, if you're going to do a more realistic comparison you might as well use their mummies instead of idealized portraits.

---

for argument's sake if that panting is accurate to his facial features (except eye)
do you think structurally, it closely resembles this skull?
tell me what you think before reading what other researchers think
 

---

Posted by Antalas (Member # 23506) on :
 
The skull has not a single ssa trait and is perfectly caucasoid
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
The skull has not a single ssa trait and is perfectly caucasoid

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
The skull has not a single ssa trait and is perfectly caucasoid

---

If you look at art depicting Amenhotep III
a lot of it

https://images2.imgbox.com/4f/4c/uBMBBbf6_o.png

resembles that painting, stereotypic African features

This leads me to believe that this skull might not be Amenhotep III
although he may still may be part of the Amenhotep lineage.
The identification of this mummy has been historically disputed although recent DNA extraction has proved kinship

However I am not completely certain the features of that painting could not correspond to that skull

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

The skull has not a single ssa trait and is perfectly caucasoid

---

First off you can't make conjectures about what traits a skull has or doesn't have just on a view of a profile picture.

Second, that you use outdated racial notions like "caucasoid" and the Sub-Saharan fallacy is another reason why you are not taken seriously.

About one-third of Sub-Saharans would also fall into the "caucasoid" category based on your outdated premises as noted by Yatunde-Lisa's example of the Mhima man.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

for argument's sake if that panting is accurate to his facial features (except eye)
do you think structurally, it closely resembles this skull?
tell me what you think before reading what other researchers think

---

I thought you learned from before that portraits are idealistic than they are realistic. How accurate a portrait is depends on the provenance of the manufacturer as well as owner. Custom made portraits were actually quite expensive and usually the elites especially royals had the privilege of accurate portraits. Even then, the royal portraits were idealized versions of themselves and not necessarily photographically realistic.

The more consistent portrayals are, the more likely they had basis on reality. Amenhotep III and Tiye are good examples of this. In regards to Amenhotep III, I don't think his portraits are 100% but they have some accuracy to them.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 





[IMG]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

for argument's sake if that panting is accurate to his facial features (except eye)
do you think structurally, it closely resembles this skull?
tell me what you think before reading what other researchers think

---

I thought you learned from before that portraits are idealistic than they are realistic. How accurate a portrait is depends on the provenance of the manufacturer as well as owner. Custom made portraits were actually quite expensive and usually the elites especially royals had the privilege of accurate portraits. Even then, the royal portraits were idealized versions of themselves and not necessarily photographically realistic.

The more consistent portrayals are, the more likely they had basis on reality. Amenhotep III and Tiye are good examples of this. In regards to Amenhotep III, I don't think his portraits are 100% but they have some accuracy to them.

---

Disregarding the eye, if that painting was a phono of someone we are looking at a profile realistic in human proportions
Do you believe such a profile could derive from that skull?
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 


looks incompatible to me
either:

a) the art is stylized, not close to what he actually looked like

b) that might be an 18th dynasty royal but it's NOT Amenhotep III's skull

My view is that that painting is typical of renditions of Amenhotep including some colossal sculptures but I would not call it generic 18th dynasty. I get the feeling he looked somewhat like that painting
___________________________________________

here's an article that talks about this skull

http://www.kmtjournal.com/musicalchairs2.htm

Addendum to APPENDIX THREE of TOMBS.TREASURES.MUMMIES.
“Royal Mummies Musical Chairs: Cases of Mistaken Identities”
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
But getting back to Lioness's query, there was heterogeneity even within a single dynasty such as the 18th.

The Identification of the Eighteenth Dynasty Royal Mummies: A Biological Perspective by James E. Harris & Fawzia Hussein

Methods

..When the craniofacial skeleton of first degree relatives (father, mother, brother, sister) is recorded by a cephalogram, traced and measured, the resulting variables should approach a 0.5 correlation. These same variables when measured between non-related individuals should approach 0. This was shown to be true in the study of a large series of nuclear families included in clinical studies at the University of Michigan. It must be emphasized here that soft tissue features such as shape and size of nose, lips and ears may well be inherited as sex-linked, recessive, dominant characters or traits.

Where Smith made expert scholarly judgements of similarity-dissimilarity between members of the Egyptian Royal Family, our approach utilized quantification and statistical analysis of the shape and position of the components of the craniofacial skeleton. Specifically, the mandible, maxilla, dentition and cranial base were traced and measured for every mummy and then compared by computer-generated overlays (Figure I), angular measurements and ratios (Table 1) and cluster analyses (Figure 2). The overlays are particularly useful in visualizing similarities and differences in the shapes and position of the bones of the craniofacial skeleton of the royal mummies. At the same time the set of variables representing the craniofacial skeleton can be interpreted better by utilizing the overlays...

Discussion

For a group of investigators concerned with human craniofacial variation and malocclusion, the differences in the faces and skulls in the New Kingdom Pharaohs and Queens were especially intriguing. This was hardly a homogeneous sample, and there were great differences both within and between the dynastic periods. **The most heterogeneous grouping was that of the XVIII dynasty.** What all of these mummies have in common is a tong head or cranium (dolichocephalic) and a relatively delicate face, compared with the mummies of the XIX and XX dynasties and Old Kingdom mummies that our group has examined. This study in fact will be limited to the XVIII dynasty (Table 2).

Some of these mummies were obviously different from their predecessors or their successors. Thutmose I has all those craniofacial characters common to the Nubian people, i.e. skeletal-dental-alveolar prognathism. X-ray cephalograms indicate for the first time that there is little craniofacial similarity between the still unwrapped mummy of Amenhotep I and Thutmose I. Further X-rays reveal that the epiphyses of Thutmose I's knees are still patent, suggesting an individual not yet in his twenties. These biological parameters strongly contradict the identification of the mummy as Thutmose I. Further, the X-rays reveal that the arms of Amenhotep I were crossed at the time of burial, whereas the arms of Thutmose I are in a pudendal position, a question proposed by Elliot Smith to be solved by X-rays in 1912 and noted by Derry in 1932.4
Ahmose has little resemblance to either Seqenenre Tao II or Amenhotep I and is not circumcised, unusual for the XVIII dynasty. Amenhotep II has a long ovoid face compared with the very short face of Thutmose III. Thutmose IV has a very fine featured delicate face compared with that of Amenhotep III. Smith states that, "There is a most striking resemblance in face and cranial form between Amenthos II and Thutmosis IV, in spite of the fact that the general appearance of strength and decision of character in the face of the former are in marked contrast to the effeminate weakness of the latter. The shape of the head, with its curious sloping forehead and slender but prominent nose, is identical in these two pharaohs." In fact, Amenhotep III has a facial skeleton quite unlike all other Royal Mummies and resembles most closely that of the Statuary of Amenhotep IV. One of us (FH) has recorded that Amenhotep III's skull (maximum head length 195 mm) is two standard deviations too large for his body
(slightly less than 5 ft or 149.64 cm).6

 

---

Posted by Antalas (Member # 23506) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
First off you can't make conjectures about what traits a skull has or doesn't have just on a view of a profile picture.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti: Second, that you use outdated racial notions like "caucasoid" and the Sub-Saharan fallacy is another reason why you are not taken seriously.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti: About one-third of Sub-Saharans would also fall into the "caucasoid" category based

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
But getting back to Lioness's query, there was heterogeneity even within a single dynasty such as the 18th.

The Identification of the Eighteenth Dynasty Royal Mummies: A Biological Perspective by James E. Harris & Fawzia Hussein

Methods

..When the craniofacial skeleton of first degree relatives (father, mother, brother, sister) is recorded by a cephalogram, traced and measured, the resulting variables should approach a 0.5 correlation. These same variables when measured between non-related individuals should approach 0. This was shown to be true in the study of a large series of nuclear families included in clinical studies at the University of Michigan. It must be emphasized here that soft tissue features such as shape and size of nose, lips and ears may well be inherited as sex-linked, recessive, dominant characters or traits.

Where Smith made expert scholarly judgements of similarity-dissimilarity between members of the Egyptian Royal Family, our approach utilized quantification and statistical analysis of the shape and position of the components of the craniofacial skeleton. Specifically, the mandible, maxilla, dentition and cranial base were traced and measured for every mummy and then compared by computer-generated overlays (Figure I), angular measurements and ratios (Table 1) and cluster analyses (Figure 2). The overlays are particularly useful in visualizing similarities and differences in the shapes and position of the bones of the craniofacial skeleton of the royal mummies. At the same time the set of variables representing the craniofacial skeleton can be interpreted better by utilizing the overlays...

Discussion

For a group of investigators concerned with human craniofacial variation and malocclusion, the differences in the faces and skulls in the New Kingdom Pharaohs and Queens were especially intriguing. This was hardly a homogeneous sample, and there were great differences both within and between the dynastic periods. **The most heterogeneous grouping was that of the XVIII dynasty.** What all of these mummies have in common is a tong head or cranium (dolichocephalic) and a relatively delicate face, compared with the mummies of the XIX and XX dynasties and Old Kingdom mummies that our group has examined. This study in fact will be limited to the XVIII dynasty (Table 2).

Some of these mummies were obviously different from their predecessors or their successors. Thutmose I has all those craniofacial characters common to the Nubian people, i.e. skeletal-dental-alveolar prognathism. X-ray cephalograms indicate for the first time that there is little craniofacial similarity between the still unwrapped mummy of Amenhotep I and Thutmose I. Further X-rays reveal that the epiphyses of Thutmose I's knees are still patent, suggesting an individual not yet in his twenties. These biological parameters strongly contradict the identification of the mummy as Thutmose I. Further, the X-rays reveal that the arms of Amenhotep I were crossed at the time of burial, whereas the arms of Thutmose I are in a pudendal position, a question proposed by Elliot Smith to be solved by X-rays in 1912 and noted by Derry in 1932.4
Ahmose has little resemblance to either Seqenenre Tao II or Amenhotep I and is not circumcised, unusual for the XVIII dynasty. Amenhotep II has a long ovoid face compared with the very short face of Thutmose III. Thutmose IV has a very fine featured delicate face compared with that of Amenhotep III. Smith states that, "There is a most striking resemblance in face and cranial form between Amenthos II and Thutmosis IV, in spite of the fact that the general appearance of strength and decision of character in the face of the former are in marked contrast to the effeminate weakness of the latter. The shape of the head, with its curious sloping forehead and slender but prominent nose, is identical in these two pharaohs." In fact, Amenhotep III has a facial skeleton quite unlike all other Royal Mummies and resembles most closely that of the Statuary of Amenhotep IV. One of us (FH) has recorded that Amenhotep III's skull (maximum head length 195 mm) is two standard deviations too large for his body
(slightly less than 5 ft or 149.64 cm).6

---

quote:

---

Thutmose I has all those craniofacial characters common to the Nubian people , i.e. skeletal-dental-alveolar prognathism. X-ray cephalograms indicate for the first time that there is little craniofacial similarity between the still unwrapped mummy of Amenhotep I and Thutmose I

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
The skull has not a single ssa trait and is perfectly caucasoid

---

You are a complete nutcase.
 

---

Posted by Thereal (Member # 22452) on :
 
Yeah. If I'm not mistaken,the dolichocephalic nature of the head looks more Africanand when it does occur in the Euros, it's established differently in most instances.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
why do you use that term "Euros" ?
Are Africans Afros?
 

---

Posted by Yatunde Lisa (Member # 22253) on :
 




The Mummy of King Ramses 1, Seti 1’s father below.



The completely Negro father of Seti 1 Ra messes



Stone head carving of Paramessu (Ramesses I), originally part of a statue depicting him as a scribe; on display at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

Originally called Pa-ra-mes-su , Ramesses I was of non-royal birth, being born into a noble military family from the Nile Delta region, perhaps near the former Hyksos capital of Avaris. He was a son of a troop commander called Seti . His uncle Khaemwaset, an army officer, married Tamwadjesy, the matron of Tutankhamun's Harem of Amun, who was a relative of Huy, the viceroy of Kush, an important state post. This shows the high status of Ramesses' family. Ramesses I found favor with Horemheb, the last pharaoh of the tumultuous Eighteenth Dynasty, who appointed the former as his vizier. Ramesses also served as the High Priest of Set – as such, he would have played an important role in the restoration of the old religion following the Amarna heresy of a generation earlier, under Akhenaten.
 

---

Posted by Thereal (Member # 22452) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
why do you use that term "Euros" ?
Are Africans Afros?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
@yatunde stop with your childish comparisons and collages. I'm talking about more serious things which you don't know much about.

---

What I don't know about? You obviously didn't know about Seti I's NEGRO Daddy did you?

Also, if you look at his eye orbits what shape would you deem them to be?

SETI I



Limb length is interesting

SETI I



Think Kevin Garnett..



Look at Hollywood WHITEWASHING this black pharaoh, John Tuturro... well at least he is Sicilian



The 10 Commandments version of Seti 1


 

---

Posted by Antalas (Member # 23506) on :
 
They were not "negro" no data support this and these european actors are actually closer in look and genetically to these ancient pharaohs than AAs like you.
 

---

Posted by Yatunde Lisa (Member # 22253) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
They were not "negro" no data support this and these european actors are actually closer in look and genetically to these ancient pharaohs than AAs like you.

---

What you say means nothing. This argument is OVER. OVER.





Can't you see LIONESS has left the battlefield in this thread to go create a new one? Because She knows it's over
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa:


The Mummy of King Ramses 1, Seti 1’s father below.


The completely Negro father of Seti 1, Ra messes

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seti_II#/media/File:Seti_II_mummy_head.png

https://archive.org/details/royalmummies0000smit/page/184/mode/1up
plate LXVI, pg 184


__________________________________________

https://ancientegypt.fandom.com/wiki/Seti_II

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/seti2.htm

_______________________________


your mistake here inspired me to make on new thread, Rammeses I's mummy is rarely seen and the above is Seti II
Somebody may have posted it but I don't remember seeing it on Egyptsearch.
You seem to be angry, what's going on?
 

---

Posted by Yatunde Lisa (Member # 22253) on :
 
Ok.. a little error... but that does not change that Ramses I was NEGROID..


So go ahead... deflect and distract.

Meanwhile...
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
thnx
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

You actually can even though it's not perfectly reliable but you can quickly check things like nasal spine, alveolar prognathism, zygomatics, occipital bun, frontal profile, nasal bridge, etc. etc.

---

quote:

---

These are not outdated "racial notions" but are still used in forensic anthropology. Moreover you don't see any problem when you labelled many of those skulls "negroid" or as having "negroid traits"

---

quote:

---

one-third? source? And I already acknowledge the presence of caucasoid types in SSA especially in the Horn but that's because they have substantial amount of west Eurasian ancestry.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
my point is the heterogeneity of the kings,
and they are only one dynasty apart

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
my point is the heterogeneity of the kings,
and they are only one dynasty apart

---

As DJ pointed out, the 19th dynasty originated from a different region of Egypt than the preceding one. The 18th dynasty developed in Waset (aka Thebes or Luxor) in Upper Egypt whereas Ramses I, the founder of the 19th, came from the Nile Delta in Lower Egypt. So a phenotypic difference between members of the two dynasties would make sense.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa:

---

LOL

Unfortunately, Antalas considers such "caucasoid" features to be the result of "Eurasian" ancestry. In other words, he subscribes to the debunked 'Hamitic Theory' of Africans.

Too bad genetics has refuted this decades ago.

Yatunde, I recommend P. K. Manansala's Short Primer on Physical Anthropology. It exposes the fallacy of racial stereotypes which is something that physical anthropology has shown decades ago from Blumenbach to Boaz etc. etc.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

Interesting this further confirms my assumptions in regards to this dynasty and its mixed heritage.

---

quote:

---

from the same paper:

quote:

---

Thutmose I has all those craniofacial characters common to the Nubian people , i.e. skeletal-dental-alveolar prognathism. X-ray cephalograms indicate for the first time that there is little craniofacial similarity between the still unwrapped mummy of Amenhotep I and Thutmose I

---

I knew that there was something strange about all these SSA looking depictions of the XVIIIth *dynasty* which contrast with what the preceding dynasties produced and I'm not talking about the art itself since I know amarnian art was quite unique but I'm talking about the realistic busts and so I suspected that this dynasty might have assimilated some nubians.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

Interesting this further confirms my assumptions in regards to this dynasty and its mixed heritage.

---

This is a common presumption but can you offer any proof that while this dynasty is comprised of different lineages that is from different families, that these lineages are somehow Nubian?

Also didn't you in another thread say Nubians are not black? LOL

quote:

---

from the same paper:

quote:

---

Thutmose I has all those craniofacial characters common to the Nubian people , i.e. skeletal-dental-alveolar prognathism. X-ray cephalograms indicate for the first time that there is little craniofacial similarity between the still unwrapped mummy of Amenhotep I and Thutmose I

---

I knew that there was something strange about all these SSA looking depictions of the XVIIIth *dynasty* which contrast with what the preceding dynasties produced and I'm not talking about the art itself since I know amarnian art was quite unique but I'm talking about the realistic busts and so I suspected that this dynasty might have assimilated some nubians.

---

LOL You obviously don't know that so-called "Nubian" features were present among Egyptian dynasties well before the 18th dynasty going back to the Middle Kingdom, Old Kingdom, and even earlier!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

Interesting this further confirms my assumptions in regards to this dynasty and its mixed heritage.

---

This is a common presumption but can you offer any proof that while this dynasty is comprised of different lineages that is from different families, that these lineages are somehow Nubian?

Also didn't you in another thread say Nubians are not black? LOL

quote:

---

from the same paper:

quote:

---

Thutmose I has all those craniofacial characters common to the Nubian people , i.e. skeletal-dental-alveolar prognathism. X-ray cephalograms indicate for the first time that there is little craniofacial similarity between the still unwrapped mummy of Amenhotep I and Thutmose I

---

I knew that there was something strange about all these SSA looking depictions of the XVIIIth *dynasty* which contrast with what the preceding dynasties produced and I'm not talking about the art itself since I know amarnian art was quite unique but I'm talking about the realistic busts and so I suspected that this dynasty might have assimilated some nubians.

---

LOL You obviously don't know that so-called "Nubian" features were present among Egyptian dynasties well before the 18th dynasty going back to the Middle Kingdom, Old Kingdom, and even earlier!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
It depends on who Nassa is debating on which position he takes, He'll go on endlessly that Nubians are not black but turn around and use them as the black true negoid slaves of the Egyptians when it suits him.

He tries to equate Egyptians with his Coastal NA Berber ancestors(despite the fact that the A. Egyptians clearly distinguished them as being lighter skinned than them) and DNA as tactic to impose a Neo-Hamite classification on African people.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

Interesting this further confirms my assumptions in regards to this dynasty and its mixed heritage.

---

This is a common presumption but can you offer any proof that while this dynasty is comprised of different lineages that is from different families, that these lineages are somehow Nubian?

Also didn't you in another thread say Nubians are not black? LOL

quote:

---

from the same paper:

quote:

---

Thutmose I has all those craniofacial characters common to the Nubian people , i.e. skeletal-dental-alveolar prognathism. X-ray cephalograms indicate for the first time that there is little craniofacial similarity between the still unwrapped mummy of Amenhotep I and Thutmose I

---

I knew that there was something strange about all these SSA looking depictions of the XVIIIth *dynasty* which contrast with what the preceding dynasties produced and I'm not talking about the art itself since I know amarnian art was quite unique but I'm talking about the realistic busts and so I suspected that this dynasty might have assimilated some nubians.

---

LOL You obviously don't know that so-called "Nubian" features were present among Egyptian dynasties well before the 18th dynasty going back to the Middle Kingdom, Old Kingdom, and even earlier!

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
[QB] It depends on who Nassa is debating on which position he takes, He'll go on endlessly that Nubians are not black but turn around and use them as the black true negoid slaves of the Egyptians when it suits him.

He tries to equate Egyptians with his Coastal NA Berber ancestors(despite the fact that the A. Egyptians clearly distinguished them as being lighter skinned than them) and DNA as tactic to impose a Neo-Hamite classification on African people.

---

quote:

---

We find that the Kulubnarti Nubians were admixed with ~43% Nilotic-related ancestry on average (individual proportions varied between ~36-54%) and the remaining ancestry reflecting a West Eurasian-related gene pool likely introduced into Nubia through Egypt, but ultimately deriving from an ancestry pool like that found in the Bronze and Iron Age Levant.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa:
Interesting that Antalas said that Seti I was a perfect "Caucasian specimen"

But, I thought he was a proud north African? and the ancient Egyptians were north African as opposed to sub Saharan African...

Now which is it... is Seti I a perfect North African specimen or Caucasian specimen? Because he surely cannot be both.

I tell you the Freudian slips that Antalas gives are so so telling. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
[QB] [Are you implying that nubians were not already diverse and depicted differently ? Are you implying that the nubians of Kush and Wawat were depicted the same way ? Lower nubians had eurasian ancestry and were roughly similar to upper egyptians meanwhile further south nubians have always been depicted as similar to modern day dinkas.

---

quote:

---

They were and are actually closer to people in the Middle east whether culturally or genetically.

---

quote:

---

Also make up your mind at one point libyans were lighter skinned but on the other you don't have any problem with posting very dark skinned modern berbers and try to pass them as representative of all the ancient ones...

---

Produce one quote of mine Post 2019 where I claim that the Saharan berbers represent all Berbers.

How many times do I have to agree with you?

Then again Mr. Toomy gonna do Mr. Toomy things..
 

---

Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
 
Its really just a matter of Neo-True Negro anthropology, which to be fair to Nassa, the modern day Bio-diversity movement/Anti-Afrocentrism is really all about. So its no just Nassa, he really can't help himself.

To them anything below the Barrier of SSA is a black, every thing above that line can be called anything under the sun.

If a person whose ancestry stems from below that magical barrier dares to play anything above it in movies or historical re-enactments, watch out all hell breaks loose. Anything above that barrier can do what or play what/who he or she pleases even folks below their magical barrier....then they'll just post evidence of some infamous Afrocentris Cabal and say "Two WroNgS DoNt MaKe It RiGhT"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
It depends on who Nassa is debating on which position he takes, He'll go on endlessly that Nubians are not black but turn around and use them as the black true negoid slaves of the Egyptians when it suits him.

He tries to equate Egyptians with his Coastal NA Berber ancestors(despite the fact that the A. Egyptians clearly distinguished them as being lighter skinned than them) and DNA as tactic to impose a Neo-Hamite classification on African people.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

Interesting this further confirms my assumptions in regards to this dynasty and its mixed heritage.

---

This is a common presumption but can you offer any proof that while this dynasty is comprised of different lineages that is from different families, that these lineages are somehow Nubian?

Also didn't you in another thread say Nubians are not black? LOL

quote:

---

from the same paper:

quote:

---

Thutmose I has all those craniofacial characters common to the Nubian people , i.e. skeletal-dental-alveolar prognathism. X-ray cephalograms indicate for the first time that there is little craniofacial similarity between the still unwrapped mummy of Amenhotep I and Thutmose I

---

I knew that there was something strange about all these SSA looking depictions of the XVIIIth *dynasty* which contrast with what the preceding dynasties produced and I'm not talking about the art itself since I know amarnian art was quite unique but I'm talking about the realistic busts and so I suspected that this dynasty might have assimilated some nubians.

---

LOL You obviously don't know that so-called "Nubian" features were present among Egyptian dynasties well before the 18th dynasty going back to the Middle Kingdom, Old Kingdom, and even earlier!

---

---

He isn't really flip flopping because he actually believes that ancient "North Africans" were always Eurasian looking going back 20,000 years and therefore could be considered caucasian.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
[QB] Its really just a matter of Neo-True Negro anthropology, which to be fair to Nassa, the modern day Bio-diversity movement/Anti-Afrocentrism is really all about. So its no just Nassa, he really can't help himself.

To them anything below the Barrier of SSA is a black, every thing above that line can be called anything under the sun.

If a person whose ancestry stems from below that magical barrier dares to play anything above it in movies or historical re-enactments, watch out all hell breaks loose. Anything above that barrier can do what or play what/who he or she pleases even folks below their magical barrier....then they'll just post evidence of some infamous Afrocentris Cabal and say "Two WroNgS DoNt MaKe It RiGhT"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
Mr. Toomy please, you should know by now that you can't play your smoke and mirror games with me. We both know you have (Still)use Nubian interchagibly from a True Nigro to a Mixed Tolken Black Abid for your "Perfectly Caca-Zoid NAs" when it suits you.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:

Lower Egyptians maybe, but Upper Egypt had closer ties to those Blubbery Lipped True Negros in Nubia.

Your lot can post every DNA study under the sun, you can post every "Ca-Ca-Zoid" statue and quote every racialist Bio-diversity scholar you want...
You can spam We Wuz Kangs and Call people Hoteps all you want

It WONT EVER

E V E R

Change the Historical FACT that Egyptian Culture stemmed from Africans further South, and that BLACK skinned what you all call Nubians In Ta Seti were incorporated as Egyptians as Early as the 1st Dynasty, Produced Sutens as early as 4-5th( Definitive by 12th), Were the Aristocracy/Kings Sons of Kush through Middle and New Kingdom and were the last to write Mdu-Ntr on the Temple walls of Kmt.

They were there 3,000 year history of Dynastic Egyptian history and are still there today...

You'll Never take that away from them, you can hide it and pretend its not real, but you can't take that away.

---

quote:

---

Ancient Egypt was no exception, with state ideology portraying Nubians and other foreigners as barbaric, uncivilized, and likened to animals (see the text that follows, and also Loprieno 1988; Liverani 1990; Smith 2003).

---

quote:

---

The evidence clearly shows that those Greco-Roman authors who refer to skin color and other physical traits distinguish sharply between Ethiopians (Nubians) and Egyptians, and rarely do they refer to the Egyptians, even though they were described as darker than themselves. No Greek doubted that the Egyptians were darker than the Greeks, but not as dark as black Africans

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Produce one quote of mine Post 2019 where I claim that the Saharan berbers represent all Berbers.

How many times do I have to agree with you?

Then again Mr. Toomy gonna do Mr. Toomy things.. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
[QB] hahaha I admit you made me laugh you seem to be a genuine good guy what a pity you fall into this pseudo-scientific afrocentrist mess

---

quote:

---

Obviously blacks playing european or north african figures would bother me more than any other people because they're the only one who constantly harass us and try to push their afrocentrist narrative. You don't see asians or europeans obsessing over my history or claiming our ancestors. How many times have they called us fake africans, invaders, arabs (in the sense of being a recent population), etc and you want me to accept this ? I will never tolerate this and I will defend my heritage and ancestors as any sane individual would.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
[QB] Anyway it won't change anything of what I said ; Egypt as a whole still had more ties with the middle east than any other regions and the presence of levantines in the history of this region is also well attested and as old as the nubian one.

---

quote:

---

Nubians are nubians and were depicted as eternal ennemies of Egypt in the official iconography no matter how much they used to interact with Egypt they still are not egyptians.

stick to facts pls :

---

quote:

---

The evidence clearly shows that those Greco-Roman authors who refer to skin color and other physical traits distinguish sharply between Ethiopians (Nubians) and Egyptians, and rarely do they refer to the Egyptians, even though they were described as darker than themselves. No Greek doubted that the Egyptians were darker than the Greeks, but not as dark as black Africans

---

quote:

---

You literally used to post pictures of black tunisians and implied they were representative of the ancient ones.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
Its really just a matter of Neo-True Negro anthropology, which to be fair to Nassa, the modern day Bio-diversity movement/Anti-Afrocentrism is really all about. So its no just Nassa, he really can't help himself.

To them anything below the Barrier of SSA is a black, every thing above that line can be called anything under the sun.

If a person whose ancestry stems from below that magical barrier dares to play anything above it in movies or historical re-enactments, watch out all hell breaks loose. Anything above that barrier can do what or play what/who he or she pleases even folks below their magical barrier....then they'll just post evidence of some infamous Afrocentris Cabal and say "Two WroNgS DoNt MaKe It RiGhT"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
What positions do I hold that are Afrocentrist? BTW I also think you're a good guy, you just have a chip on your shoulder. I get it but it makes you quick to fight where you don't need to.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Being upset by that is understandable, I've never promoted that kind of behavior except against Berbers who initiate disrespect to me, then the gloves are off and Im willing to roll in the mud with a fellow pig.

Ive always agreed that you and your people are native to Africa going back to the depictions on the walls of Kmt.(and beyond that obviously)

what I don't get is trying to pretend like there s only one type of "black" in the world. This is why I don't like arguing what is black because its subjective to ones culture and ultimately leads to no where. Africans are Africans, they come in many different looks.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
[QB]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
[QB] Anyway it won't change anything of what I said ; Egypt as a whole still had more ties with the middle east than any other regions and the presence of levantines in the history of this region is also well attested and as old as the nubian one.

---

So what, who cares? Every Egyptologist,

EVERY

SINGLE

ONE

Knows where the Dynastic Culture came from, they know were the people lived that pioneered what became Ancient Egypt.

The South, Upper Egypt, AFRICA etc.

Its not Afrocentrism, its 100% bonafied accepted fact because thats what the evidence shows.

Post 20 Sensationalist Dog Whistling DNA studies, Post 100, Post 1 Million

It will Never Ever change that established fact.

5,000 years from now Egyptology texts will still say Dynastic Egyptian culture came from the Nile Valley.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: There was not one mention of a single united entity called Nubia in 3,000 years of Dynastic Egypt.

People falling under your umbrella of Nubians were incorporated by 1sy Dynasty as Egyptians, while some kept Neheshy names they still played a vital role within Egypt for all its Dynastic history and beyond, No other ethnicity can claim that, esp. any Middle Eastern one.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: What is the point of this quote?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: I posted those images to show there's a such thing as a black Tunisian, not that they're the only type of Tunisian there is.

---

And I told you that they were most likely descendent of slaves and for no reason you got triggered by this and implied I was racist.
 

---

Posted by Yatunde Lisa (Member # 22253) on :
 
Antalas has had his feelings hurt and is on here crying like a baby...


Antalas, if all of these hypothesis hurt your feelings so much, I can't imagine what it must be like for you, a small dark "caucasian", to live among all those tall manly Aryan Caucasian superiors...

According to blumenbach et al.. you are a sub race of Caucasian, who is degraded by climate and admixture.. to bad for you..





Cry you big baby, the Aryans are never going to accept you! Embrace your inner AFROCENTRICST
 

---

Posted by Antalas (Member # 23506) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa:
[QB] Antalas has had his feelings hurt and is on here crying like a baby...


Antalas, if all of these hypothesis hurt your feelings so much, I can't imagine what it must be like for you, a small dark "caucasian", to live among all those tall manly Aryan Caucasian superiors...

According to blumenbach et al.. you are a sub race of Caucasian, who is degraded by climate and admixture.. to bad for you..





Cry you big baby, the Aryans are never going to accept you! Embrace your inner AFROCENTRICST

---

Stop projecting and most people where I live aren't "aryan caucasian". North africans being targeted by europeans doesn't mean they have to feel "black".

My ancestors already used to make the difference :

quote:

---

He compared his victory of the Battle of Three Kings—‘triumph over the yellow-skinned enemy’—to the victory over the Songhai—‘triumph over the black-skinned slave’—after which he proclaims that God has ‘fulfilled this dynasty’s prayers of unifying the race of Sham with the race of Ham.’ Not only did Ahmad al-Mansur evoke the racialized interpretation of the ‘Curse of Ham’ theory, but his distinction between the ‘yellow-skinned enemy’ and the ‘black-skinned slave’ suggests he perceived himself and his Moroccan subjects as distinct from whiteness and blackness.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:
I thought it was Ramses I who founded the 19th dynasty? Seti I is Ramses I’s son and heir.

EDIT: I see Ramses I did have a father in the military named Seti, as well as a son named Seti I. Really confusing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa:


SETI I

---

I accidentally discovered this is actually a replica of the Seti I mummy
from the National Geographic Treasures of the Earth exhibit at the
Children's museum of Indianapolis


.


.



This is the actual mummy
the replica seems very close to it, probably made with a 3D laser scan


high quality large image:
https://tinyurl.com/ym3z39ub
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:

I thought it was Ramses I who founded the 19th dynasty? Seti I is Ramses I’s son and heir.

EDIT: I see Ramses I did have a father in the military named Seti, as well as a son named Seti I. Really confusing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
[QB] [I think you mix up the culture which span thousands of years with the unification process and I don't see what's your point exactly ? Upper egypt is not nubia nor are its people sub-saharans.

---

quote:

---

So no it's not "Africa" or "The South", that culture doesn't have much to do with any other culture in Africa nor did most africans played any role in its edification (including my own ancestors).

---

You are not an expert or even know WTF you are talking about, the peopling of the Nile Valley and formation of Dynastic Egypt is well known.

This is basic grounded fact, that every Egyptologist or anyone studying the history of the Nile Valley knows and accepts.

I mean really who are you to make sweeping, idiotic statements like that

quote:

---

It shows that even foreigners recognized that they were two distinct populations and not the kind of "egypto-nubian" brotherhood which you try to push.

---

quote:

---

And I told you that they were most likely descendent of slaves and for no reason you got triggered by this and implied I was racist

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
[QB]Djehuti saying east africans don't have eurasian ancestry --> silent
DougM saying no eurasian ancestry in North Africa during the mesolithic and neolithic ---> silent
Yatunde lisa implying modern north africans are arabs mixed with white slaves ---> silent
Tazarah claiming ancient levantines were black ---> silent
Antalas contradicting them with studies ----> "you're obviously anti-black" "true negro fallacy" "racist"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:

Must hurt knowing Ta-Set Neheshy were a foundation of A. Egypt culture huh....must Drive you and every one spamming Ka-Kazoid Egypt what those blubbery lipped True N-gger Egyptians left on the Temple Walls..

---

Naqada and early dynastic history don't have much to do with Ta-seti and there was no "blubbery lipped True N-gger Egyptians" actually they made the distinction clear enough :

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: I did'nt get "triggered" I just find it odd that every black Coastal NA is a slave to you, I mean is there a such thing as a native non slave black in the Mahgreb according to you?

---

quote:

---

According to many Tunisian researchers, whole villages of former slaves still exist in the South. One could even distinguish a discrete border separating them from the villages of their former masters where their descendants continue to live. These villages, where several hundred families reside, bear the collective name that the masters had given to their slaves. It is still in Tunisia that the word 'abid (slave) is used to designate a black person.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:


My disagreement with you is you using True Negro/Neo Hamite arguments in you debates. Maybe you don't realize it, but its obvious to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
[QB]

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:

Must hurt knowing Ta-Set Neheshy were a foundation of A. Egypt culture huh....must Drive you and every one spamming Ka-Kazoid Egypt what those blubbery lipped True N-gger Egyptians left on the Temple Walls..

---

Naqada and early dynastic history don't have much to do with Ta-seti and there was no "blubbery lipped True N-gger Egyptians" actually they made the distinction clear enough :

---

who is the one on the upper left?
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ People, just ignore Antalas the same way he ignores the craniofacial data of the kings and queens showing their African traits while resorting to post cherry picked pics of southern Sudanese to contrast with Egyptians.

The topic is about the 18th and 19th dynasties and their relations or lack thereof to each other.
 

---

Posted by Antalas (Member # 23506) on :
 
I only ignore people who have shown blatant dishonesty and made pseudo-scientific claims. Your craniofacial datas are too specific to draw any conclusion when it comes to race (also nubian admixture can influence the datas) and the same kind of values are found among NW africans so imagine if we had to compared them to modern egyptian values.

Again always put your information into the egyptian context if you're not able to do this then avoid drawing conclusion about ancient egypt's racial make up. Here one example :

In the 1972 paper, "On the Craniological Study of Egyptians in various periods" by M.F Gaballah et al, with reference to the works of both Batrawi 1946 and Sidney Smith 1926, it is said that the available series of modern Egyptian skulls conform more closely with the Southern phenotype that characterized the predynastic and early dynastic cultures of Upper Egypt such as the Naqada.
 

---

Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ People, just ignore Antalas the same way he ignores the craniofacial data of the kings and queens showing their African traits while resorting to post cherry picked pics of southern Sudanese to contrast with Egyptians.

The topic is about the 18th and 19th dynasties and their relations or lack thereof to each other.

---

 

---

Posted by Tazarah (Member # 23365) on :
 
X-ray of King Tut's skull (18th dynasty)



 

---

Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
These two pharaohs above come from two different yet successive dynasties, Amenhotep III of the 18th dynasty and Seti I founder of the 19th dynasty. Of course these two kings show no resemblance because they are unrelated; however is there no connection between them at all??

Seti I was originally a commander of the army hailing from the Delta and was successor to Horemheb who was the last pharaoh of the 18th dynasty who was originally commander-in-chief of the army who served under the pharaohs Aye and his predecessor Tutankhamun.

There is one theory that the key member connecting the 19th to the 18th is Seti I's wife Sitre. She is often assumed to be a nonroyal or even "commoner" simply because of the many royal titles she bears, that of 'King's Daughter' is absent. But such a basis for this assumption is invalid if one considers that Egyptians were matrilineal to begin with. In fact, one royal title she does bear is that of Iryt-pt which is often translated as "hereditary princess". If such is the case then, hereditary to whose family? Tutankhamun or Ay (who is brother to Tiye)??

---

quote:

---

The stela was unearthed in 1863 by Auguste Mariette, who was excavating within the great temple at Tanis. Mariette copied and then reburied the stela, which was rediscovered by Pierre Montet in 1933 and then moved in the Cairo Museum.

The incomplete stela was made during the reign of Ramesses II of the 19th Dynasty; this pharaoh appears in the lunette while offering wine jars to Seth, whose name was erased when this deity was demonised in later times. Behind the pharaoh stands an official named Seti, the author of the stela.

The inscription on the lower register says that Seti, son of Paramessu and Tia, came to worship Seth and commemorate this event by issuing the granite stela; curiously, and with the approval of Ramesses II, Seti dated the stela to the “Year 400, fourth day of the fourth month of the Season of the Inundation” of a pharaoh named Aapehtiseth Nubti (“Great is the strength of Seth, he of Ombos”):

Since the discovery it was obvious that the Year 400 of Nubti was not a regnal year, but rather a sort of anniversary. Giving the 400-years interval and the explicit references to the god Seth, Nubti was initially considered an othervise unattested Hyksos ruler. Thus, it was suggested that the 400th anniversary could refer to an important event such as the construction of a temple of Seth, or, more generally, to the beginning of a new era. The discovery also fueled the now-disproven hypothesis that Tanis had to be identified with the ancient Hyksos capital Avaris, and that the stela may have been a commemoration of the arrival of the Hyksos.

In more modern times, however, scholars realized that the official Seti is none other than Ramesses' father Seti I in his early career, and the earlier king Nubti was not a real king, but rather Seth himself provided with fictitious royal titles. Going 400 years back before the period suggested by the stela (most likely when Seti was an official under king Horemheb), gives a datation of the celebrated event of around 1730–1720 BCE.[

---

quote:

---

May the strong bull [1] beloved of Ma'at [2] live, the lord of the Sed festival [2] , like his father Ptah-Tanen , the King of Upper and Lower Egypt , User-Ma'at-Re , Setep-en-Re , son of Re , Ramses-Meri-Amen [4] , endowed with life,
he who is under the tutelage of the two Ladies [5], the protector of Egypt, the conqueror of neighbouring countries, Re who gave birth to all gods, who ordered the Double-land [6], Golden Horus rich in years and great in victories,
the King of Upper and Lower Egypt User-Ma'at-Re Setep-en-Re, son of Re, Ramses Meri-Amen, the prince who furnished the Double-Land with monuments in his name
in order that the sun may shine in all its love, the King of Upper and Lower Egypt User-Ma'at-Re Setep-en-Re, son of Re, Ramses-Meri-Amen

His Majesty has commanded to raise a great stela in granite for the great name of his fathers, in order to raise the name of the father of his fathers
( and for ) his father the King Men-Ma'at-Re, son of Re, Seti Mer-ne-Ptah lasting for eternity, like Re every day.

Year 400, the fourth month of the season of Shammu, the fourth day of the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, Seth-Great-of-valor, son of Re whom he loves, Nubti [11], beloved by Re-Hor-akhty, may he live for ever.

The Regent came, the mayor of the town, the vizier, the fanbearer on the right hand of the King [7], the leader of the bowmen, the chief of the archers, the governor of the fortress of Tjarw [8], the great of Medjay [9], the royal scribe, the administrative officer of the chariotry
the lord master of the ceremonies of the Feast of the He-goat [10], the master of Smendes, the first prophet of Seth, the lector-priest of Wadjet-Opet-Tawy, the head of all priests of all the gods, Seti, right of voice, son of the Prince regent, the mayor of the town, the vizier,
the chief of the archers, the governor of the fortress of Tjarw, the royal scribe, the administrative officer of the chariotry, Paramesse [12], right of voice, born from the mistress of the house, the songstress of Re, Tiw, right of voice, he says :

---

https://web.archive.org/web/20190318085459/http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/texts/400_year_stela.htm
 

---

Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
 
Scan of Ramses I



 

---

Posted by Forty2Tribes (Member # 21799) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tazarah:
X-ray of King Tut's skull (18th dynasty)

---

 

---

Posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey (Member # 22253) on :
 
found this on social media


 

---

Posted by Mighty Mack (Member # 17601) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:

Must hurt knowing Ta-Set Neheshy were a foundation of A. Egypt culture huh....must Drive you and every one spamming Ka-Kazoid Egypt what those blubbery lipped True N-gger Egyptians left on the Temple Walls..

---

Naqada and early dynastic history don't have much to do with Ta-seti and there was no "blubbery lipped True N-gger Egyptians" actually they made the distinction clear enough :

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: I did'nt get "triggered" I just find it odd that every black Coastal NA is a slave to you, I mean is there a such thing as a native non slave black in the Mahgreb according to you?

---

The people you posted were not "coastal" but southern tunisians living next to the Sahara ; exactly where there are whole communities/villages of ex-slaves and like I said many times there has never been any native coastal north african that was black. Most black in North Africa were brought with the slave trade and we're not talking about a few thousand slaves but millions being brought non-stop from the early 8th century to the early XXth century.

Here one example since you don't want to listen :

quote:

---

According to many Tunisian researchers, whole villages of former slaves still exist in the South. One could even distinguish a discrete border separating them from the villages of their former masters where their descendants continue to live. These villages, where several hundred families reside, bear the collective name that the masters had given to their slaves. It is still in Tunisia that the word 'abid (slave) is used to designate a black person.

---

Malek Chebel, L'esclavage en terre d'islam, p.227

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mighty Mack:
Who is the pharaoh on the left? Is that Hatshepsut? [/QB]

---

I don't really know the pic isn't from me
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

Satet
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

He isn't really flip flopping because he actually believes that ancient "North Africans" were always Eurasian looking going back 20,000 years and therefore could be considered caucasian.

---

The boy is not only flip-flopping but twisting himself in knots like a pretzel.

When he initially questioned Egyptians looking black, I responded by posting photos of Baladi which he then tried to dismiss with the lie that they were cherry-picked photos of "Nubians living near the Sudanese border" even though they were actually indigenous Egyptians from Luxor northward up to Giza! He later posts photos of Baladi of the same exact complexion and in a few instances darker than the ones I posted but denies that they are black!



Then in Brandon's thread on Didyme, he makes the assumption that Didyme was Nubian because the Greek sources liken her complexion to coal even though they say she was a native of Egypt, but then he posts cranial nonmetric data showing Egyptians to be closely related to Nubians anyway! LOL

Then in another thread discussing Nubians, he states that Nubians aren't black either and that they are "genetically closer to Europeans than they are to Sub-Saharans" of course without presenting proof to his claims, though I think he erroneously makes his basis on the Christian Period Kulubnarti study. The guy is obviously caught in a confusion of his own making.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

Are you implying that nubians were not already diverse and depicted differently? Are you implying that the nubians of Kush and Wawat were depicted the same way? Lower nubians had eurasian ancestry and were roughly similar to upper egyptians meanwhile further south nubians have always been depicted as similar to modern day dinkas.

---

Hey nutcase, I already told you that Kushites of Upper Nubia did NOT look like Dinka and Nuer!

Multiple metric studies from Keita and others show that Kushites morphologically resembled predynastic Egyptians, particularly Naqadans!



The peoples in ancient depictions who resemble Dinka and Nuer and most likely ancestors of these groups were instead tribes who lived under Kushite hegemony since Kush was actually an empire that included many peoples.

As for Lower Nubians i.e. Wawati having Eurasian ancestry, do you have any evidence of this? Christian Era Kulubnarti are not the same as dynastic Lower Nubians.

quote:

---

Of course I will not answer to the mad claims of djehuti denying eurasian admixture in the Horn but it's now pretty much settled that lower nubians had eurasian ancestry;..

---

Since when have I ever denied Eurasian admixture in the Horn??! Your statement is a blatant lie so of course you can't cite a single post from me supporting your assertion.

My only claim is that most of the Eurasian admixture in the Horn dates to the early historical period if not Eneolithic times, and that such admixture tends to be overexaggerated by Euronuts like yourself since most of the admixture there occurs among Habesha (Ethio-Semitic speakers) at around 40%.

Again you cite the Kulubnarti study even though Nubia is not in the Horn and again Kulubnarti dates to the early Christian Period.

However, a recent autosomal study on modern Nubians shows that unsurprisingly their autosomal profile most closely resembles modern Sudanese Arabs who are essentially culturally Arabized Nubians.



By the way, I also question how much of this "Eurasian" ancestry actually originated in Eurasia since even scholars are now admitting that Basal Eurasian originated in Africa.

All of your claims are either outright lies or tenuous theories resting on a boat full of holes.
 

---

Posted by Mighty Mack (Member # 17601) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Antalas:
The skull has not a single ssa trait and is perfectly caucasoid

---

If you look at art depicting Amenhotep III
a lot of it

https://images2.imgbox.com/4f/4c/uBMBBbf6_o.png

resembles that painting, stereotypic African features

This leads me to believe that this skull might not be Amenhotep III
although he may still may be part of the Amenhotep lineage.
The identification of this mummy has been historically disputed although recent DNA extraction has proved kinship

However I am not completely certain the features of that painting could not correspond to that skull

---

Yes the depiction look somewhat sub-saharan so he might have had nubian ancestors but the skull itself shows no evident ssa traits so either these depictions are misleading or that's not his skull.

---

"Somewhat Sub Saharan," "Nubian ancestors"
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Time for a reality check

England sees even someone of apparently only 1/8th-1/16th black ancestry as enough to be black.

Impact of the forgotten black Europeans
https://www.islingtontribune.co.uk/article/impact-of-the-forgotten-black-europeans

In Anglo America whites forced black identity onto anyone having the slightest smidgen of black ancestry. Nonetheless hateful anti-blacks hypothesize one drop theory as a Black invention??? Cuckoo ding cuckoo!

Historically in Latin America various schemes were developed for every possible joining of American, African, and European ancestries. In some countries right down to the 1/64 level. These schemes are so ridiculous LAs of any African descent today recognize themselves as black and are seen so in Europe.

This obviously very little black ancestry individual receives the banana treatment from the French.

Fan throws banana at Brazil players during goal celebration in final World Cup warm-up
Now tell us that fan was a visiting American than more likely a Beur upset over the Tunisia's loss.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/28/brazil-richarlison-banana-racism-tunisia-football-match

So regardless of any non-black ancestry such people are taunted as monkeys the same as young Saharawi will stoop grunt and drag their knuckles on the ground to insult black kids there.

Mixed race bi-racial (which two races -- European and East Asian?) is meaningless. The precise ingredients are called for.

Ain't nobody going back to the terms smoothing over black self-identity chosen by most multiple ancestried individuals. Get over it.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ If Antalas is the same as 'Melchior' then I've shown him this before:

https://www.liberationnews.org/06-07-21-world-cup-incident-highlights-ra-html/

Racism in European soccer

In contrast to France’s team, Italy fielded an all-white squad. Marco Materazzi, the Italian player headbutted by Zidane, also plays for the Italian pro team Lazio. Lazio’s hardcore fan club, “the Ultras,” is infamous for its fascist politics and overtly racist behavior. “The Ultras” recruit people to ultra-right political groups in Italy. They have displayed racist banners at matches calling opposing players “n*****s” and frequently make racist chants and monkey sounds at opposing players of African descent.

Again, the racist abuse against African soccer players is NOT limited to "Sub-Saharans" or those who are ebony dark. To many Euros North Africans are "white-washed n*ggers"! Which is ironically what Europeans describe many Egyptian natives especially in the Delta.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
Getting back to the original topic...

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

they look different.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

Again, the racist abuse against African soccer players is NOT limited to "Sub-Saharans" or those who are ebony dark. To many Euros North Africans are "white-washed n*ggers"! Which is ironically what Europeans describe many Egyptian natives especially in the Delta.

---

.
Interesting. I know a Moroccan Jewess who dated a European white guy who called her ma negresse. There was nothing black about her in the least and her profile was the same as many a coastal NA Jewish woman. Much to my delight she shared her region's Judaic culture with NYC blackish Jews identifying themselves as Sepharade.

I guess Euros who feel this way are continuing a long held Euro labelling of blacks from Alexandrine word mauros to Morocco ancient Mauretania named for their maur color.

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008446;p=3#000119

Kudos to DJ because my original posting of the below is lost. Still searching the archive for the post referencing the Tufts Greco-Latin dictionaries for those who recognize a dictionary overrides common man-on-the-street opinion.


μαύρος

noun
μαύρος => black, raven, Negro, nigger
αράπης => nigger, black, Arab, Negro
Νέγρος => Negro, nigger, black

adjective
μαύρος => black, colored, sable, pitchy, coloured
σκοτεινός => dark, obscure, dingy, murky, shady, black
μαυρισμένος => black
άσχημος => ugly, nasty, unsightly, seamy, homely, black
άγριος => wild, feral, fierce, savage, ferocious, black
δυσοίωνος => sinister, ominous, inauspicious, portentous, pessimistic, black

verb
μουτζουρώνω => black, smudge, smut
αμαυρώνω => darken, tarnish, stain, black
δυσφημώ => disparage, discredit, vilify, defame, denigrate, black

DJ added
From Snowden:
The Mauri, another northwest African people whose color received frequent notice, were at times described as 'nigri' (black) and 'adusti' (scorched).
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Luckily I had a copy of the below in my personal archive. It was hacked out by Ukranians from a thread with lots of good stuff from Jari and others.

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=005374;p=3#000147



https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0064:id=mauretania-geo
 

---

Posted by Antalas (Member # 23506) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ If Antalas is the same as 'Melchior' then I've shown him this before:

https://www.liberationnews.org/06-07-21-world-cup-incident-highlights-ra-html/

Racism in European soccer

In contrast to France’s team, Italy fielded an all-white squad. Marco Materazzi, the Italian player headbutted by Zidane, also plays for the Italian pro team Lazio. Lazio’s hardcore fan club, “the Ultras,” is infamous for its fascist politics and overtly racist behavior. “The Ultras” recruit people to ultra-right political groups in Italy. They have displayed racist banners at matches calling opposing players “n*****s” and frequently make racist chants and monkey sounds at opposing players of African descent.

Again, the racist abuse against African soccer players is NOT limited to "Sub-Saharans" or those who are ebony dark. To many Euros North Africans are "white-washed n*ggers"! Which is ironically what Europeans describe many Egyptian natives especially in the Delta.

---

How do you know it was directed towards north african players ? Especially that zidane looks whiter than italian players XD

Also even if europeans saw north africans as black including folks like me so what ? My identity is not based on what others perceive me as and my genetics and culture are unique and do not show any particular affinity with black africans, europeans or middle easterners.


You guys are mentally colonized and talk from the point of view of a discriminated "diaspora" and try to impose your pov on us and other africans.


Here the opinion of some somalis :






In historical/genetics debates blacks like to emphasize the supposedly "blackness" of some population to appropriate their culture and history and create this narrative of us the victims vs whites. Learn to respect our identities and the african diversity you can't reduce all of this to "black" because "whites hate you" "you're niggers to them".
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 
^ I've read the news articles years ago where they said the slurs were against ALL Africans including North Africans. Yes some North Africans like Zidane look European themselves but not all of them. Many look black-mixed hence the French call them "nègre à la peau claire" and the Spanish "güeros negros" or as earlier Europeans said "whitened n*ggers". These are THEIR words not mine!

As for some Somalis not liking the label black, as you pointed out it is simply because the label has traditionally been used to describe Black Americans of slave descent. Somali of course are not that, however it still does not change the fact that the term is first and foremost a color label NOT an ethnic one which is why most Somalis I know have no problem with the label being applied to them only as a color one. Are you aware the same holds true for Nigerians?? I know many Nigerians who don't like the label 'black' applied to them for the same exact reasons as well as certain negative views they have on Black Americans which they use the slur "akata".

As for South Asians, I already told your ignorant self that IN India (and Sri-Lanka) guys like the one in your post would be described as kalu which is a Sanskrit based word. Do you know what that word means? If so, do you think its usage has anything to do with African Americans??
 

---

Posted by Antalas (Member # 23506) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
[QB] ^ I've read the news articles years ago where they said the slurs were against ALL Africans including North Africans. Yes some North Africans like Zidane look European themselves but not all of them. Many look black-mixed hence the French call them "nègre à la peau claire" and the Spanish "güeros negros" or as earlier Europeans said "whitened n*ggers". These are THEIR words not mine!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
As for some Somalis not liking the label black, as you pointed out it is simply because the label has traditionally been used to describe Black Americans of slave descent. Somali of course are not that, however it still does not change the fact that the term is first and foremost a color label NOT an ethnic one which is why most Somalis I know have no problem with the label being applied to them only as a color one. Are you aware the same holds true for Nigerians?? I know many Nigerians who don't like the label 'black' applied to them for the same exact reasons as well as certain negative views they have on Black Americans which they use the slur "akata".

As for South Asians, I already told your ignorant self that IN India (and Sri-Lanka) guys like the one in your post would be described as kalu which is a Sanskrit based word. Do you know what that word means? If so, do you think its usage has anything to do with African Americans??

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
The assumption that she was non-royal simply because she wasn't a king's daughter is one that is all too common in Egyptology though some Egyptologists are realizing the significance of matrilineal kinship in ancient Egyptian culture. Only matrilineage can explain how on can have the title of "hereditary princess" without being a king's daughter and such is found throughout Egyptian dynastic families.

We know that by the late 18th dynasty there were many royal daughters and princesses not all of whom we have records of. We don't even know the identity of Tutankhamun's mother-- the Younger Lady-- other than that she was the full sister of his father whose identity as Akhenaten is also uncertain.

My guess is to legitimize their rule, the 19th dynasty and other dynasty kings married hereditary princesses.

This also explains the unusual craniometric trend among the 19th-21st dynasties, whereas the males tend to have very 'northern' profiles i.e. Coastal North African whereas the females had very 'southern' profiles. [See P.K.M.'s Data for New Kingdom Queens]

Again I am reminded of W.M.F. Petrie commenting how kings of the late New Kingdom "favored queens of inferior type".

---

I am open to the possibility of matrilineage having more importance in ancient Egyptian culture than Western Egyptologists have traditionally assumed, but isn't it usually the case that, in matrilineal societies, leadership gets passed down from maternal uncle to nephew instead of father to son? I normally see AE royal inheritance described as being passed down from father to son, as in a typical patrilineal society.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 





they put Egyptian under white

In my opinion there should be no colors
asked about on a census
 

---

Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
 
^ It is not practiced everywhere. For example in Sweden race or skin color is not a part of any census, and neither is it written in peoples passports or other ID papers. It is usually not mentioned in police reports, or other kinds of judicial documents either.
 

---

Posted by Archeopteryx (Member # 23193) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

So shut up already and steam in the stew your ppl created rather than act like it comes from any other of the world's ppls.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Archeopteryx:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

So shut up already and steam in the stew your ppl created rather than act like it comes from any other of the world's ppls.

---

Interesting though that African Americans have adopted a term that originally was devised to oppress them. Seems like they can not come up with some better identity label for themselves?

And what´s wrong with brown? That is actually the color most African Americans, and other dark skinned people have. Very few people are actually black.

---

quote:

---

People also ask
How racially diverse is Sweden?
Is Sweden Culturally Diverse? Historically, Sweden was mainly ethnically homogenous. This means that most people in the country were ethnic Swedes. The only major minority group was the Sami, a Finno-Ugric people who live in the far north of Scandinavia.Dec 31, 2021

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:

I am open to the possibility of matrilineage having more importance in ancient Egyptian culture than Western Egyptologists have traditionally assumed, but isn't it usually the case that, in matrilineal societies, leadership gets passed down from maternal uncle to nephew instead of father to son? I normally see AE royal inheritance described as being passed down from father to son, as in a typical patrilineal society.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
This is why I think royal incest developed as way of reconciling royal succession with family inheritance-- one patrilineal and the other matrilineal.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Archeopteryx:

^ It is not practiced everywhere. For example in Sweden race or skin color is not a part of any census, and neither is it written in peoples passports or other ID papers. It is usually not mentioned in police reports, or other kinds of judicial documents either.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrandonP:

That is as good a suggestion as any other in my opinion.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
]What is the actual color of the people who call themselves white?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
The topic of this thread is about the difference in looks between two pharaohs from different dynasties NOT specious debates on skin color, which is what Antalas issue is!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Archeopteryx:

^ It is not practiced everywhere. For example in Sweden race or skin color is not a part of any census, and neither is it written in peoples passports or other ID papers. It is usually not mentioned in police reports, or other kinds of judicial documents either.

---

I'll address you Archaeopteryx because you are innocent and because you're from Sweden you don't understand or may be unaware of the socio-political agenda going on.

Here in America color labels of black and white were used to distinguish European colonizers from the African slaves and free settlers.

In societies where people are of the same 'race' or color there is no need for such distinctions. In Africa where everybody is 'black' then nobody is called 'black'. The same is true for Europe yet notice how Europe is being racialized with many European nations being pressured to adopt color labels such as 'white' when the overwhelming majority are white (for now).

Interestingly, in ancient times the Greeks and Romans distinguished themselves and other peoples living north of the Central (Mediterranean) Sea from those living south of it as 'black' Greek- melanchroi Latin- Nigri. That is because they noticed and acknowledged a distinction as well.

By the way, be aware if your nation of Sweden begins adopting the term 'white'. It means that your people are being homogenized and contrasted with non-white peoples who will gain a foot-hold there.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:


Sweden doesn't have enough nonNordic less lone non-white ppl to need a racial/color census nor does it have a history of involvemnt in forcefully importing Africans and/or Asians then discriminating against them to the point of hanging and castrating ppl due to racial hatred and fear.

---