quote:Originally posted by rat-ho-pig1001: This is a better photo of the Menes statue, the version black-Egypt advocates prefer has been somewhat distorted.
So you still think it looks "caucasian".
Okay so how about this statue?
quote:I stand my my contention that modern Copts are the closest living people to the ancient Egyptians.
Even though Copts are a Christian demonination, and Copts vary in their looks depending on what part of Egypt they live just as Egyptian Muslims, and that the Coptic elite are northern Delta people who have known significant European ancestry.
quote:Her'es a question, what colour are the inlay eyes in this predynastic egyptian figure?
A better view Blue because of the blue stones. Are you suggesting this is reflective of reality even though very few statues feature such eye color? By the way many African cultures share a belief that gods or in human form may have 'odd' eye colors like blue, green, yellow etc. The predynastic figure likely represents a goddess. Unless you think she is a blue-eyed European, if so where is the evidence?
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
She obviously wasn't a real blonde! LOL As was discussed before, she wore a wig as some Egyptian royals were known to wear wigs of different colors which were very expensive. Some wigs were blonde while others red, blue, or green.
quote:Who was 'ginger'?
Ginger as explained here , is a mummy from the Naqada II period. Whether the reddish hue of his hair was due to the natural process of mummification of it was reddish in life, there is no evidence of him being European if that's what you're thinking.
Unless you consider this Peruvian mummy below to be a "ginger" girl with freckles in life.
quote:Why is Queen Nefertari blushing?
LMAO
Shes not blushing. The paint on her cheek is actually a remnant of her original skin tone:
Besides, last time I checked, natural blush produces a reddish color not a brownish one.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I stand my my contention that modern Copts are the closest living people to the ancient Egyptians.
Then how do you explain their change in phenotype, and significant admixture? Did we not go over this exhaustively? Stand by your beliefs all you want, doesn't make them true
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Terracotta Head of Menes (from L.A. Waddell, Egyptian Civilization Its Sumerian Origin and Real Chronology, 1930):
- Thin nose, straight hair, long beard. Not Negroid. Waddell also noted that the inlay to the eyes originally contained blue lapis lazuli stones, reflecting Menes original light eye-colour. Menes was a blue eyed Caucasian.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
Epic fail. Black painted deities are black people, but blue-eyed figurines are weird looking aliens.
In a dozen image of Nefertari from her tomb the original colour retains only on the cheeks and lips, to make them look redder. What a coincidence! The second Nefertari image you showed is fake. The other two are not of a black person. Check out the lack of difference between the image of the queen and this Italian conservator... Two Mediterranean Caucasians together...
As for the predynastic mummy 'ginger', several brown haired mummies were descovered alongside him of similar age. If the desert turned him into a ginger, why not those as well?
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidiot: Terracotta Head of Menes (from L.A. Waddell, Egyptian Civilization Its Sumerian Origin and Real Chronology, 1930):
- Thin nose, straight hair, long beard. Not Negroid. Waddell also noted that the inlay to the eyes originally contained blue lapis lazuli stones, reflecting Menes original light eye-colour. Menes was a blue eyed Caucasian.
Is that figurine even Egyptian?? Please cite the source. For I have seen a lot of predynastic figures and have never before seen that! You are most likely mistaken.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Epic fail. Black painted deities are black people, but blue-eyed figurines are weird looking aliens.
Epic fail on your part. Where did I say it was an anomalous "alien"?? Where did I even said anything about black painted deities??! Your warped little mind must be confusing the claims of someone else for mine. Go back and read my post again especially my comment on the depiction of African deities.
quote:In a dozen image of Nefertari from her tomb the original colour retains only on the cheeks and lips, to make them look redder. What a coincidence!
Moron, does this look "red" to you?? Maybe you need to get your eyes checked.
^ Also notice the remnants of original dark paint are left on the cheek and lips, as well as NECK, NOSE, and CHIN. Perhaps instead of blushing she was having some allergic reaction! LOL
quote:The second Nefertari image you showed is fake. The other two are not of a black person. Check out the lack of difference between the image of the queen and this Italian conservator... Two Mediterranean Caucasians together...
^ You are obviously delusional if you think Nefertari looked like the woman in the photo.
Exactly what is "black" to you. Any person who saw a woman with chocolate complexion as hers
quote:As for the predynastic mummy 'ginger', several brown haired mummies were descovered alongside him of similar age. If the desert turned him into a ginger, why not those as well?
It may very well have. Are you saying the hair of 5,000 year old dried corpses remains the same even its color? What about skin??
Again was this ancient Peruvian woman a "ginger" as well?
I notice you ignored my other replies.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
LOL Modern Egyptians of European ancestry maybe, but what of the ancients. What makes you think the girl above represents as opposed to these rural girls below:
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Too bloody right that Nefertari picture of yours is a fake! It's a big fat fake! The colours have been played with anyway. Leaving aside the darkened skintones, the vulture headress has been turned blue. In every true image the queen wears an entirely gold headdress.
posted
Waddell was a non-academician Aryan enthusiast with no training in anthropology, archaeology, Egyptology nor history.
He is the favorite pseudo-scholarly source for white supremacist intent on hi-jacking ancient world history for white northwest Europeans and making them and their culture to be Hebrew and Israelite.
You'll never find Waddell quoted in any main stream publication except as an example of foolishness parading as academics. Anyone citing him, or citing a reference that uses him, isn't being serious and is either akin to a pyramidiot or is having one over on you.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidiot: Terracotta Head of Menes (from L.A. Waddell, Egyptian Civilization Its Sumerian Origin and Real Chronology, 1930):
- Thin nose, straight hair, long beard. Not Negroid. Waddell also noted that the inlay to the eyes originally contained blue lapis lazuli stones, reflecting Menes original light eye-colour. Menes was a blue eyed Caucasian.
Is that figurine even Egyptian?? Please cite the source. For I have seen a lot of predynastic figures and have never before seen that! You are most likely mistaken.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Even though most of those statues have translucent marble that can either be blue or gray.
quote:Originally posted by DaDumho: Djehuti
Too bloody right that Nefertari picture of yours is a fake! It's a big fat fake! The colours have been played with anyway. Leaving aside the darkened skintones, the vulture headress has been turned blue. In every true image the queen wears an entirely gold headdress.
Is this fake?
quote:Why is Nefertari blushing? Why aren't you?
So she blushes not only in her cheeks and nose but her chin neck and apparently parts of her arms and hands too? LOL You are a joke.
Just face it. Nefertari was obviously much darker and the so-called "blush" as you put it are remnants of her original paint.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ They don't want to play games they know they'll use but rather want to play their own game of "debunk my b.s. AGAIN". Notice nobody answers what I point out.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: This is a better photo of the Menes statue, the version black-Egypt advocates prefer has been somewhat distorted.
Both images represent the same sculpture under different times with different lighting and print quality conditions.
Here's a better image of the bust in both angles, set in print from the 20th century:
]
quote:"the version black-Egypt advocates prefer has been somewhat distorted."
Somewhat distorted by who, what, where, when, why and how?
Posts: 535 | From: From the Darkest of the Abyss | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
Yes the statues, mostly 4th Dynasty, have rock inlay eyes with a blue grey look. Why would they use that material? Why are you dodging the issue that at least a dozen different paintings of Nefertari from her tomb have blushing cheeks, when before you were trying to make out that the area was merely a trace of darker original paint that once covered the whole figure? Even on the paintings by different craftsmen within the same tomb, which have even colouring, it appears the same colour as the skin of Italians, in the same light.
Adrianne your question involves a logical non-sequitur. Just because a couple of Egyptians may have had these features it doesn't mean they were typical. You can't conclude that all the Medidics were mulattos, for example, just because Alessandro was.
The alleged Narmer/Menes statue looks as mongolois as negroid to me. The lips are quite thin and do not push out nearly as far as the nose. With pure negroids the lips often project as far forward as the tip of the nose. The statue's profile is quite perpendicular, there is no sunken nasal bridge. The eyes look oriental, with an epicanthic fold.
Same silly questions back at you...
WILL YOU ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS PLEASE
Did Old Kingdom Egyptians look like these people:
2. Are these people Ancient Egyptians, yes or no?
3. Do they look like sub saharan Africans? Yes or no.
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, I'm sure the lady Noftet could have passed inconspicuously through a crowd of Nigerians...
These are the living representatives of Noftret's people: Egyptian Copts.
it is time for an end to the nonsensical idea that the Egyptians typically had the same racial characteristis as black Africans, as negrocentrists would have us believe. This is clearly not the case.
posted
1. no rahotep mixed race people were not the majority in 16th century italy,nobody said they were, but people who looked like menes and huni were the majority in egypt in the dynastic era, hence you cant and wont find caucasian pharoahs from that era, its been 2 days and counting since i challenged you and friends tio show me caucasian dynastic era pharoahs
WHATS TAKING SO LONG??
2.we know by the 4th dynasty foreigners came to egypt.
thats why i speciafically concentrated on the dynastic era i;e dynastys 1-3
she does look caucasian .she dosent look sub saharan, so what, she is a foreigner.
Posts: 164 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: Yes, I'm sure the lady Noftet could have passed inconspicuously through a crowd of Nigerians...
These are the living representatives of Noftret's people: Egyptian Copts.
it is time for an end to the nonsensical idea that the Egyptians typically had the same racial characteristis as black Africans, as negrocentrists would have us believe. This is clearly not the case.
Dumb ass I'm talking about features. Everything but the skin color, that's what I'm talking about.
Posts: 1819 | From: odesco baba | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:An Egyptian can have blue, grey, green or light coloured eyes without having (recent) European ancestry.
And you know that the individuals don't have European ancestry how?
quote:it is time for an end to the nonsensical idea that the Egyptians typically had the same racial characteristis as black Africans, as negrocentrists would have us believe. This is clearly not the case.
posted
Adrianne What evidence is there that Nofret was a 'foreigner' and that Huni was not? Both were members of related reigning dynasties. Huni's daughter Hetepheres I married Snefru and was the mother of Khufu and of Rahotep, who was the husband of Nofret. Nofet was probably a close blood relation as well, knowing what the Egypians were like. Nefertiabet, in the fetching leopardskin above, was Khufu's daughter, sister of Chephren, whose profile is above in the inside bottom corner of the Egyptian montage. None of these people resemble black Afrians. Anyway where is the evidence for a Caucasian influx between the two dynasties? There is ample evidence for caucasoids from the Predynastic era.
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Calabozo, it is not necessary for modern blue-eyed Egyptians to have post-dynastic Eurasian ancestry because there are blue eyed dynastic and predynastic Egyptian images. Black African means sub-saharan negroid, or peoples who are typically negroid. Yememi Arabs and southern Indians might be darker skinned than Nigerians but they aren't termed 'black'. As somone said, Japs and Irish can be similar colours without being remotely related. Also I'm not taking Egyptian art literally. Two of those images shown are of actual mummified Egyptians, not of paintings, and they are contrasted against actual black Africans. The racial difference is glaringly obvious. There is no reason why Egyptian women would be painted lighter in colour than they could ever be in reality. That is madness.
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
you have just debunked your whole argument i want you to carefully look at the bloodlines of the two pharoahs above and the people you mentioned in your post , then we discuss how they look like they do
posted
Calabozo which congregation would Nofret and Nefertiabet look most incongruous in, the Nigerian or the Egyptian one?
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Deluded negrocentrists are blind to logic and reason. Their eyes filter out anything that doesn't agree with their prejudices. No hope for them.
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do not understand the need to involve such geographically distant places such as Nigeria for a comparison. But to answer your question, based on the sculpture alone, the Egyptian one. I say "based on the sculpture" because that may not be representing how she actually looked (see the thread I linked you to).
quote:Calabozo, it is not necessary for modern blue-eyed Egyptians to have post-dynastic Eurasian ancestry because there are blue eyed dynastic and predynastic Egyptian images.
I never said it was. However, by you saying this:
quote:An Egyptian can have blue, grey, green or light coloured eyes without having (recent) European ancestry.
And thereafter including modern Egyptian in your comparison, you implicate that you think those Egyptians you posted have no European ancestry.
Ancient Dynastic portraits reflecting blue eyes can not be take literally given the symbolic meaning of colors in their art
quote:Black African means sub-saharan negroid
No it doesn't. Black is a social term that came about to describe dark skinned people. If you saw an Ethiopian in the 1950s you can bet that they would be called black regardless of facial features.
quote:Yememi Arabs and southern Indians might be darker skinned than Nigerians but they aren't termed 'black'.
Social Construct- a term that would not have come about without society
Black came about as a descriptive of dark-skinned African descent populations. Not Middle Easterners. Hence the reason they are not called black
Herein lies your problem Rahotep,
A.You believe in a Hamitic hypothesis that has been debunked since the 70's
B.You think Africans with narrow features have Eurasian admixture, EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR THIS
C.You think black is a descriptive of facial features.
D.You think Egyptians remained phenotypically the same for 5,000 years
All of the above has been refuted ad-nauseam
-------------------- L Writes: Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
''Waddell was a non-academician Aryan enthusiast with no training in anthropology, archaeology, Egyptology nor history.'' ============
Completely false. Waddell was an academic and polymath, a Fellow of the Linnean Society of London, a Doctor of law (LL.D) as well as a Master of Surgery (M.S.), hence his qualified background on physical anthropology (especially on the Sumerians, who alongside Arthur Keith, Leonard Woolley etc he proved were Caucasian).
You seem to troll this forum calling anyone who isn't an afrocentric, a crank, when you yourself are an afrocentrc crank who thinks the egyptians were negroid.
No scholar believes the egyptians were black. Only afrocentric cranks of the internet do.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
''Deluded negrocentrists are blind to logic and reason'' ====
Couldn't agree more. The bigger joke is that they call anyone who thinks the egyptians were not black as 'eurocentrics' 'white supremacists' or pseudo-scholars (despite this is the mainstream concensus amongst historians and anthropologists regarding the ancient egyptian race issue).
As i said above, only cranks think the ancient egyptians were black.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are literally describing yourself. We have given you tons of scientific evidence to substantiate our statements, only to have you repeat yourself in spite of the data.
The difference between you and us; you rely solely on subjective art whereas we rely on objective scientific findings
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: Deluded negrocentrists are blind to logic and reason. Their eyes filter out anything that doesn't agree with their prejudices. No hope for them.
posted
I don't necessarily think narrow featured Africans have Eurasian admixture, but I'm fairly sure Egyptians do, given that they also have light skin and striaght or wavy rather than kinky hair, and that some of them have blue eyes. They also have the mass-reduced teeth and larger ears which are a Caucasian trait. Geography is also on the side of this conclusion. Egypt joins on to Eurasia, part of Egypt is in Asia, and the sea also connects it to both the North and East.
Eritreans also evidently have Caucasian ancestry, but I wouldn't make such claims about peoples like the Tutsis. Ancient Caucasian DNA has been found very far south among black African populations, however, for example the Lemba of South Africa, who claim to be lost Israelites. They look just like other black Africans, due to heavy intermixing, but the genetic trace is there.
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't necessarily think narrow featured Africans have Eurasian admixture, but I'm fairly sure Egyptians do, given that they also have light skin and striaght or wavy rather than kinky hair, and that some of them have blue eyes.
Foreign admixture in Egypt was restricted to Lower Egypt and even they were distinct from Near Easterners. Modern Egyptians have significant admixture from recent times from non-African populations.
And since when is hair a sign of admixture? That makes no sense. I highly doubt any of the ancient Egyptians had blue eyes.
quote:They also have the mass-reduced teeth and larger ears which are a Caucasian trait.
See, you have no idea what you are talking about. In the Nile Valley, Tooth reduction was associated with agriculture and changes in daily diet.
Origins of dental crowding and malocclusions: an anthropological perspective.
Rose JC, Roblee RD.
Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2009 Jun;30(5):292-300.
"David Greene studied the teeth of skeletons excavated in the Sudan just south of Egypt along the Nile and documented a long-term trend in dental-size reduction for the 10,000-year period. He suggested this reduction in tooth size was from changes in diet and methods of food processing as agriculture was adopted and refined. **Analysis of more samples by numerous researchers has established this general trend in tooth-size reduction that is associated with changes in diet**. As the diet has become more refined, the consequent increase in dental decay selected for smaller and less complex teeth has moved distally in relation to the skull, such that the body of the mandible now protrudes forward underneath the alveolar bone producing a chin. Because teeth have become smaller without producing excess room in the jaws, other evolutionary mechanisms must have been at work on the alveolar bone and supporting structures of the maxilla and mandible."
As for you suggestion on Ears, that absolutely makes no sense whatsoever.
quote:Geography is also on the side of this conclusion. Egypt joins on to Eurasia, part of Egypt is in Asia, and the sea also connects it to both the North and East.
This makes no sense. Just because to regions are close to each other doesn't mean there will be bi-directional gene flow. Let us not forget, Egypt IS in Africa NOT Asia. And as I said, gene flow was restricted to lower Egypt and it was Upper Egyptian civilization that became dynastic civilization.
quote:Eritreans also evidently have Caucasian ancestry, but I wouldn't make such claims about peoples like the Tutsis. Ancient Caucasian DNA has been found very far south among black African populations, however, for example the Lemba of South Africa, who claim to be lost Israelites. They look just like other black Africans, due to heavy intermixing, but the genetic trace is there.
Post the genetic evidence suggesting admixture in Eritreans. The Lemba are not descended from Israelites. You have no evidence for significant admixture amongst East Africans
-------------------- L Writes: Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
The idea that Eurasian gene flow into Egypt would be restricted to the north is nonsense, because there was always frequent movement between north and south Egypt, from the Delta to Elephantine and back. Temples were twinned in religious cults, the pharaoh's court was peripatetic, and stone from the south was brought north for major construction projects like the pyramids. Workers also moved about. Egyptian Armies moved between alternating campaigns in Syria and Nubia, recruiting troops from the whole empire, so the idea of stagnant population within Egypt is just stupid.
Some people seem to grossly distort the size of Egypt, as though Upper Egypt was in the Congo Basin. It is still part of north Africa, and the middle-east. There were also ancient trade routes across the eastern desert connecting the southern Egyptian population centres to the Red Sea and the Arab world.
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find it amusing that some many Eurocentric posters in this forum are trying to discredit the idea that indigenous Africans were part of ancient Egypt. Using facial characteristics of statues or the pigment of paintings as "proof" of Egyptians being Caucasians (although Black features and racially ambiguous features are in equal or greater abundance) ignores Egypt’s immigration and military occupations. Are the people in the U.S. the same as those 5,000 years prior? Why would Egypt have a more stable identity while North America with a much later European and African immigration is extremely diverse? But the further you go back on the timeline in any African region, the Blacker it gets. Digging through Egypt’s history you will eventually have to cope with its Black bedrock when reach the bottom.
Posts: 4 | From: Dayton, Ohio | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic