Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Fair enough I guess. And I remain B L A C K and PROUD as it goes. I ain't gonna black out nothing where when how or why I see black is relevant. Nevermind the bollocks.
I could perhaps be too historic bent. while the thread is contemporary. But one other my bent thing, the transition period between all Egypt designated Qubt and only Christian Egyptians + Diaspora fitting the ID. Cut to the chase/Moral of that story:, how many Muslim fellahin are lineal Qubt from before Islam? The boogah-bear of Coptic Christian lineage frequency is its corollary.
Worked a ADMIXTURE redux focused on Sudan Copt genomes posted here a few yrs gone ...
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: You're absolutely right, Tukuler! I don't mean to dictate to posters on this thread which was started by Wally but personally I'm just too weary of certain individuals arguing about who is and who isn't 'black', while never arguing the same about the label of 'white'. I get very irritated by that. To me there is far more to a people's ethnic identity than just skin color though such is a part of it. I want to get down to the bottom of just who the Copts are as a people as opposed to other Egyptians who are non-Copts or Muslim.
You seem confused, one day you claim only skin color matters (therefore ancient egyptians were black) and the other you accept diversity and understand that skin color isn't enough to determine ethnicity.
Since when did I say "only skin color matters"??! Just because I acknowledge the fact that ancient Egyptians were black as evidenced by their skin color does not mean that was the ONLY thing that determines their ethnicity.
A-M Mekota1, M Vermehren Department of Biology I, Biodiversity Research/Anthropology1and Department of Veterinary Anatomy II2, Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Germany Submitted January 8, 2002; revised May 4, 2004; accepted August 12, 2004 Skin sections showed particularly good tissue preservation, although cellular outlines were never distinct. Although much of the epidermis had already separated from the dermis, the remaining epidermis often was preserved well (Fig. 1). The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin. In the dermis, the hair follicles, hair, and sebaceous and sweat glands were readily apparent (Fig. 2). Blood vessels, but no red blood cells, and small peripheral nerves were identified unambiguously (Fig. 3). The subcutaneous layer showed loose connective tissue fibers attached to the dermis, and fat cell remnants were observed
Skin color is just one trait, there are many others including cranial, post-cranial skeletal, and even dental as shown here.
But when it comes to overall ethnicity, culture including language is just as significant.
Christopher Ehret Professor of History, African Studies Chair University of California at Los Angeles Ancient Egyptian civilization was, in ways and to an extent usually not recognized, fundamentally African. The evidence of both language and culture reveals these African roots.
The origins of Egyptian ethnicity lay in the areas south of Egypt. The ancient Egyptian language belonged to the Afrasian family (also called Afroasiatic or, formerly, Hamito-Semitic). The speakers of the earliest Afrasian languages, according to recent studies, were a set of peoples whose lands between 15,000 and 13,000 B.C. stretched from Nubia in the west to far northern Somalia in the east. They supported themselves by gathering wild grains. The first elements of Egyptian culture were laid down two thousand years later, between 12,000 and 10,000 B.C., when some of these Afrasian communities expanded northward into Egypt, bringing with them a language directly ancestral to ancient Egyptian. They also introduced to Egypt the idea of using wild grains as food.
Now unless you have any evidence to the contrary, what are you complaining about??
Posts: 26553 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Since when did I say "only skin color matters"??! Just because I acknowledge the fact that ancient Egyptians were black as evidenced by their skin color does not mean that was the ONLY thing that determines their ethnicity.
A-M Mekota1, M Vermehren Department of Biology I, Biodiversity Research/Anthropology1and Department of Veterinary Anatomy II2, Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Germany Submitted January 8, 2002; revised May 4, 2004; accepted August 12, 2004 Skin sections showed particularly good tissue preservation, although cellular outlines were never distinct. Although much of the epidermis had already separated from the dermis, the remaining epidermis often was preserved well (Fig. 1). The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin. In the dermis, the hair follicles, hair, and sebaceous and sweat glands were readily apparent (Fig. 2). Blood vessels, but no red blood cells, and small peripheral nerves were identified unambiguously (Fig. 3). The subcutaneous layer showed loose connective tissue fibers attached to the dermis, and fat cell remnants were observed
Skin color is just one trait, there are many others including cranial, post-cranial skeletal, and even dental as shown here.
But when it comes to overall ethnicity, culture including language is just as significant.
Christopher Ehret Professor of History, African Studies Chair University of California at Los Angeles Ancient Egyptian civilization was, in ways and to an extent usually not recognized, fundamentally African. The evidence of both language and culture reveals these African roots.
The origins of Egyptian ethnicity lay in the areas south of Egypt. The ancient Egyptian language belonged to the Afrasian family (also called Afroasiatic or, formerly, Hamito-Semitic). The speakers of the earliest Afrasian languages, according to recent studies, were a set of peoples whose lands between 15,000 and 13,000 B.C. stretched from Nubia in the west to far northern Somalia in the east. They supported themselves by gathering wild grains. The first elements of Egyptian culture were laid down two thousand years later, between 12,000 and 10,000 B.C., when some of these Afrasian communities expanded northward into Egypt, bringing with them a language directly ancestral to ancient Egyptian. They also introduced to Egypt the idea of using wild grains as food.
Now unless you have any evidence to the contrary, what are you complaining about?? [/QB]
They weren't "black" since they didn't depict themselves as such and genetic/anthropologic datas show a predominantly west eurasian population with (as expected) black affinities. Moreover "afro-asiatic" isn't a culture nor do people identify with it and most "afro-asiatics" are predominantly eurasian not really "negroid". I shouldn't remind you that from a genetic standpoint people like ethiopians or eritreans are closer to people in the middle east than west or central africans.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: They weren't "black" since they didn't depict themselves as such...
First off, "black" is a reference to skin color, and not only did I cite a study showing their skin to be "packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin", but they also depicted themselves as such. Or what do you call these pharaonic portraits below?
I could go on and on but I don't want to turn this thread into a picture spam.
quote:and genetic/anthropologic datas show a predominantly west eurasian population with (as expected) black affinities...
First of all, we've gone over literally tons of anthropological data in this forum your can either search through the archives or simply read snippets of it on Zarahan's thread here and they all support an African identity. As far as actual genetics go, modern Egyptians show predominantly African lineages both maternally and paternally, the only debate now is about their autosomal patterns particularly those of the Abusir Mummy study whose so-called 'Western Eurasian' identity is still in conjecture as explained by Beyoku in his thread here, but then you call them Eurasians with "black affinities", now what exactly do you mean by that?!! LOL
quote:Moreover "afro-asiatic" isn't a culture nor do people identify with it and most "afro-asiatics" are predominantly eurasian not really "negroid". I shouldn't remind you that from a genetic standpoint people like ethiopians or eritreans are closer to people in the middle east than west or central africans.
Wrong. Afro-asiatic is a linguistic as well as a cultural group that originated in Africa, hence the majority of Afroasiatic speakers are AFRICAN with the only non-African branch being Semitic. "Negroid" is a typological classification that is just as faulty as "Caucasoid" hence, prehistoric "Caucasoids" in Kenya and Indigenous Americans with "Negroid" features. Regardless, Ethiopians and Eritreans are still as African as Central Africans just as the Egyptians that doesn't mean they have to look or be identical to Central Africans. Central Africa is NOT Africa but a region of it.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26553 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Fair enough I guess. And I remain B L A C K and PROUD as it goes. I ain't gonna black out nothing where when how or why I see black is relevant. Nevermind the bollocks.
I could perhaps be too historic bent. while the thread is contemporary. But one other my bent thing, the transition period between all Egypt designated Qubt and only Christian Egyptians + Diaspora fitting the ID. Cut to the chase/Moral of that story:, how many Muslim fellahin are lineal Qubt from before Islam? The boogah-bear of Coptic Christian lineage frequency is its corollary.
Worked a ADMIXTURE redux focused on Sudan Copt genomes posted here a few yrs gone ...
Thank you Tukuler. The common conjecture is that the vast majority of Egypt was 'Qubt' before the Islamic invasion, and that over time more people began converting to Islam. I recall Ausar stating the fact that many Baladi especially in rural areas are endogamous though religion plays a large role as well as Muslims typically only marry Muslims and Christians only marry Christians, even then many marry only others of their community and even practice cousin marriage. That said, the Sudanese Copts do represent an interesting sub-population.
I also think the issue of Judaean presence is pertinent to the topic as the first Christians are very much tied to these communities. This makes me wonder about Irish's findings on the El Hesa sample. The eighth sample is from a late Roman middle class cemetery on the now submerged Nile island of El Hesa (HES) (Elliot Smithand Wood-Jones, 1910; Reisner, 1910). Museum recordsreport that the remains were excavated in 1907–1908 forvon Luschan (Irish, 1993)
^ Note El Hesa is located in the 1st nome near Elephantine.
Irish then went on to state: El Hesa is more divergent (Figs. 2, 3, 5); this divergence was shown to be driven by several extreme trait frequencies, including very high UI2 interruption groove and UM3 absence, and very low UM1 Carabelli’s trait. As above, the first two traits are common in Europeans and western Asians; the latter is rare in these areas, as well as greater North Africa (Irish, 1993, 1997).Like the Greeks, the Romans did not migrate to Lower and especially Upper Egypt in large numbers (Peacock,2000). As such, the distinctive trait frequencies of El Hesa were probably not due to Roman gene flow.
So could the El Hesa sample represent a remnant of the Elephantine Judaean community??
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26553 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: First off, "black" is a reference to skin color, and not only did I cite a study showing their skin to be "packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin", but they also depicted themselves as such. Or what do you call these pharaonic portraits below?
These are not old kingdom egyptians + I notice when afrocentrists try to prove egyptians were black they always use wood statues but forget that such material becomes darker over time (the degree of variation depends on which type of wood was used). We have the mummy of Queen tiye and there is nothing "black" about it and the face of tutankhamun has been reconstructed (by 2 different labs btw) and he didn't look black at all (same for his father btw).
When we look at old kingdom artifacts, they obviously don't look black :
I also wouldn't be surprised if during later periods egyptian faced an influx of nubian settlers and some being able to reach high positions.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: First of all, we've gone over literally tons of anthropological data in this forum your can either search through the archives or simply read snippets of it on Zarahan's thread here and they all support an African identity. As far as actual genetics go, modern Egyptians show predominantly African lineages both maternally and paternally, the only debate now is about their autosomal patterns particularly those of the Abusir Mummy study whose so-called 'Western Eurasian' identity is still in conjecture as explained by Beyoku in his thread here, but then you call them Eurasians with "black affinities", now what exactly do you mean by that?!! LOL
I've read almost all of them and none actually show they were black but simply SSA affinities with some (like badarians) being somewhat intermediate. You shouldn't forget that such affinity still exist and upper egyptians would already show affinities with their southern neighbours.
Moreover I think you forget that we also have the genomes of egyptians who lived in Lebanon and roman England + a whole set of haplogroups but yes let's pretend it's simply a coincidence that they are all predominantly eurasian.
Even geneticists noticed it :
quote:On top of this historical information offering an explanation for the observed mtDNA data are now additional, recently published, mtGenomes from Africa, and Egypt in particular. MtDNA haplotypes recently obtained from ancient human remains from sub-Saharan Africa belong only to haplogroup L subgroups [65,88]. However, nearly all of the remains excavated in the Northern part of the continent belong to Eurasian mtDNA lineages [63,67,74,89,90]. In fact, of the 114 mtDNA genomes now available from northern African ancient human remains, only one belongs to an African lineage (L3 observed in a skeleton from Abusir el-Meleq [74]). The deep presence of Eurasian mtDNA lineages in Northern Africa has, therefore, been clearly established with these recent reports and offers further support for the authenticity of the Eurasian mtDNA sequence observed in the Djehutynakht mummy
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Wrong. Afro-asiatic is a linguistic as well as a cultural group that originated in Africa, hence the majority of Afroasiatic speakers are AFRICAN with the only non-African branch being Semitic. "Negroid" is a typological classification that is just as faulty as "Caucasoid" hence, prehistoric "Caucasoids" in Kenya and Indigenous Americans with "Negroid" features. Regardless, Ethiopians and Eritreans are still as African as Central Africans just as the Egyptians that doesn't mean they have to look or be identical to Central Africans. Central Africa is NOT Africa but a region of it.
Afro-asiatic is a culture now ? XD It's a linguistic family that's it, people who belong to it aren't culturally similar : Semites share more culturally with their non semitic middle eastern neighbours than groups like berbers or horners, berbers share more with mediterranean europeans than horners, etc etc
+ "originating in africa" first that's an hypothesis and secondly it doesn't mean it necessarily originated from non-eurasian groups. And stop trying to play on the "muh negroid/caucasoid is a construct" not it is not, forensic anthropology can clearly differentiate both and both are induced by certain type of ancestry. Caucasoid in Kenya is supported by migrations of west eurasian pops in that part of the world and negroid in America is evidence of these negrito like populations reaching america that's it (even though I have some doubt about it).
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Basically NorthAfrocentrics pick black targets for to rage over their inadequesies and ambivalent ID. Hung up between poles they greatly admire their European conquerors, huff and puff about the Arab one, but vent full spleen against Inner Africans and Blacks of such descent.
We see in above posts their aim/goal is not so much swapping info and data on a subject matter but to express bias prejudice and contempt toward black people code-worded Afrocentrics though neither DJ nor myself cotton to Afrocentricity and Djehuti is neither black, African, nor faking to be either black or African to gain acceptance points. DJ is also a vet like Brandon who doesn't fake being black either.
@ Atlas
No man Not this shite again We are sick of North Afrocentricists' cherry pic spam What we could use is some tangier oranges please There are countless threads with a plethora of imgs showing the geo-biological diversity of pre-historic through current Egypt.
Of the three SahraSudanese, SahraGafsian, and Levantine the former is associated with state initiation and the latter more important than the middle in the unorganized delta which the SahraSudanese descendants conquered, forged into a state annexed into their nation's new dual kingdom state empire.
We understand the inferiority complex aMazigh nationalist and other NorthAfrocentrics feel behind the relative minor role they played until New Kingdom times when they became the Big Boss. Helene's garbage "work" The Shining Ones --only 12 libraries in the whole world stack this pamphlet designed according to author to school the blacks-- should've focused on that instead of trying to steal AE so the resentful among the Berbers could feel better about themselves.
But on Narmer's Palette anything near to resembling today's coastal North Africans are trampled underfoot of the Big Black Bull. See the bumped Narmer thread in this forum.
=-=-=-=-=
Now back to stuff truly worthy of reply
@ DJ The ADMIXTURE redux shows its Copt sample set is majority the K found predominantly in north and northeast Africa with spill over into the Levant. Copt shares exactly the same individual lineages only with Halfaween but, of course, in different proportions.
At K 13 the Greek sample sets show no distinct Aegean-Balkan-Adriatic genomic lineage(s) to compare against Copt. Nonetheless K 9 found predominant in north Mediterraneans from Iberia to Anatolia is exemplified by Greece_N and is significant in Copt. Note Shaigia_Khartoum has nearly 3X more K 9 than Copt. Does anyone propose Graeco origins for these Khartoum region residents? Lesst it go unsaid, Copt has as much South Sudan genomics as it does north or east Medit ones. K 9
posted
Does anyone know if Coptic Egyptians have any special cultural ties to the pre-Christian Pharaonic culture besides liturgical language? We know that some elements of indigenous Egyptian culture survive today, particularly among rural Upper Egyptians, but have the Coptic ones preserved more of those traditions than their Muslim neighbors?
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: These are not old kingdom egyptians + I notice when afrocentrists try to prove egyptians were black they always use wood statues but forget that such material becomes darker over time (the degree of variation depends on which type of wood was used)...
Since when do I have to give examples from only the Old Kingdom? Fine. Here are Old Kingdom Examples below:
I could go on and on but such is a waste of time and bandwidth when I could simply present the bio-anthropological data or better yet save me all the trouble when YOU can look through Egyptsearch archives yourself!
By the way, I'm not Afrocentric and I provided examples of PAINTED portraits, including murals! The whole dark coloring due to rotted wood excuse is pathetically erroneous. Why do Eurocentrics like yourself always provide examples of Old Kingdom statues that are either unpainted or whose paint has faded, especially those with so-called "Caucasian" features?
Posts: 26553 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:We have the mummy of Queen tiye and there is nothing "black" about it and the face of tutankhamun has been reconstructed (by 2 different labs btw) and he didn't look black at all (same for his father btw).
Wrong again. Data from Harris & Wente's book X-ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies has been compiled and shows the royal mummies display many traits typically held by "black" Africans including the mummy of Tiye.
"The Elder Lady", First identified as Queen Tiye The occipital bun is reminiscent of Mesolithic Nubians (see below). Sagittal plateau, rounded forehead with moderately projecting glabella; globular cranium with high vault. Protrusion of incisors, receding chin and steep mandible. Very vertical zygomatic arches and pronounced maxillary prognathism.
And her bust painted bust shows she bears a striking resemblance to modern Beja women.
As for Tutankhamun, there were actually at least 8 reconstructions made in the past 30 years, with each one looking different from the other. This is because soft tissue features like nose tip and lips are largely left to conjecture and the same with skin color. Most of the reconstructions done were not double-blinded meaning the scientists knew who the skull belonged to and input their biases.
However one forensic artist involved in the 2005 Nat Geo reconstruction, Susan Anton had this to say: Thanks for your email. I actually didn't choose the term "North African Caucasoid" that is the term used by another team (there were three that worked on separate reconstructions). The French team was responsible for the reconstruction that was on the cover of National Geographic Magazine and they also used that term. Our team, myself and Michael Anderson of Yale, were the ones that did the plaster reconstruction without knowledge of whose skull we were working on. I did the biological profile (assessment of age at death, sex and ancestry), Michael made the actual reconstruction. Based on the physical characters of the skull, I concluded that this was the skull of a male older than 15 but less than 21, and likely in the 18-20 year range and of African ancestry, possibly north African. The possibly north African came mostly from the shape of the face including the narrow nose opening, that is not entirely consistent with an 'African' designation. A narrow nose is more typical of more northerly located populations because nose breadth is thought to be at least in part related to the climate in which ancestral populations lived. A narrow and tall nose is seen most frequently in Europeans. Tut's head was a bit of a conundrum, but, as you note, there is a huge range ofvariation in modern humans from any area, so for me the skull overall, including aspects of the face, spoke fairly strongly of his African origins..
So his overall skull shape was African except his nose and perhaps face, but as the one who emailed her responded there are those in Africa not only North Africans but even certain populations in Sub-Sahara who share the same features but are clearly 'black'.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26553 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
These brothers above are so non-black that Afrocentrics are using them as examples of black Egypt! LOL
Oh yes the overused bleached seated scribe whose Caucasian features are so favored, here are remnants of his skin color before his bleaching.
An unpainted woman with ambiguous features.
Yes more Egyptian men with Caucasians features yet remnants of their chocolate dark skin remain. Again, like was explained to Susan Anton such features are not limited to Europeans or other Eurasians but is found in Africans as well not just North Africa but certain areas of Sub-Sahara also along with black skin.
quote:I also wouldn't be surprised if during later periods Egyptians faced an influx of Nubian settlers and some being able to reach high positions.
Unfortunately for you, what you don’t understand is that Nubians are the closest relatives of the Egyptians to the point that Eurocentrics try to white-wash them too!
quote:I've read almost all of them and none actually show they were black but simply SSA affinities with some (like badarians) being somewhat intermediate. You shouldn't forget that such affinity still exist and upper egyptians would already show affinities with their southern neighbours.
Gee, the Egyptians are Africans who show SSA affinities including black skin but are not ‘black’. Okay, but the same nonsensical reasoning can be applied to their southern neighbors, the Nubians, and IS applied to them!
quote:Moreover I think you forget that we also have the genomes of egyptians who lived in Lebanon and roman England + a whole set of haplogroups but yes let's pretend it's simply a coincidence that they are all predominantly eurasian.
What Eurasian haplogroups? The only haplogroups Egyptians share with Lebanese and other Eurasians are all African such as paternal E-M215 and maternal L2b also being found in Lebanon.
quote:Even geneticists noticed it: On top of this historical information offering an explanation for the observed mtDNA data are now additional, recently published, mtGenomes from Africa, and Egypt in particular. MtDNA haplotypes recently obtained from ancient human remains from sub-Saharan Africa belong only to haplogroup L subgroups [65,88]. However, nearly all of the remains excavated in the Northern part of the continent belong to Eurasian mtDNA lineages [63,67,74,89,90]. In fact, of the 114 mtDNA genomes now available from northern African ancient human remains, only one belongs to an African lineage (L3 observed in a skeleton from Abusir el-Meleq [74]). The deep presence of Eurasian mtDNA lineages in Northern Africa has, therefore, been clearly established with these recent reports and offers further support for the authenticity of the Eurasian mtDNA sequence observed in the Djehutynakht mummy https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/9/3/135/htm
First of all, the mixed ancestry of Djehutynakht was discussed before. Second, the claim in the passage you cited is misleading by suggesting that all Sub-Saharan or even African maternal lineages only belong to the L clade. The highest maternal clade among modern especially indigenous Egyptians is actually M1 which has its highest frequency and diversity in Sub-Saharan East Africa. They also carry N clade and underived N* was discovered in the Neolithic Central Sahara. Haplogroup U5 has its highest frequency in the Maghreb but there are suggestions of a possible origin for U in northeast Africa.
quote: Afro-asiatic is a culture now? XD It's a linguistic family that's it, people who belong to it aren't culturally similar : Semites share more culturally with their non-semitic middle eastern neighbours than groups like berbers or horners, berbers share more with mediterranean europeans than horners, etc etc
Of course first and foremost it is a linguistic family however language is a part of culture, and thus Proto-Afro-asiatic was spoken by a particular cultural group. Your Eurocentric kinsmen know this which is why the field of ‘Indo-European Studies’ doesn’t just include language. You are correct about Semites, because Semitic developed in the Levant and cut off from their African relatives. It’s the same thing with Berber which had more relations with Mediterranean Europeans than with other Africans-- at least those Berbers who lived along the coasts. By the way, are you aware that those same Mediterranean Europeans show African admixture in their genetics just as coastal Berbers show European admixture?
quote:+ "originating in africa" first that's an hypothesis and secondly it doesn't mean it necessarily originated from non-eurasian groups. And stop trying to play on the "muh negroid/caucasoid is a construct" not it is not, forensic anthropology can clearly differentiate both and both are induced by certain type of ancestry. Caucasoid in Kenya is supported by migrations of west eurasian pops in that part of the world and negroid in America is evidence of these negrito like populations reaching america that's it (even though I have some doubt about it).
Afroasiatic’s origins in Africa is a hypothesis that is heavily supported by both linguistics and population genetics. For example, the majority of Afroasiatic speakers share African haplogroups in common especially paternal E1b1b. Also, while “negroid” and “Caucasoid” features have some basis the overall classification that is typological is not. Please cite evidence of West Eurasians in Mesolithic Kenya, last I checked no DNA was found in the fossilized remains of Gamble’s Cave and the DNA of Luzia’s people was examined and there were no “Negrito” genes. You really need to do research on topics before you address them.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26553 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seriously, Antalas all your assertions have been debunked countless times on this forum. If you have an objection, I suggest you pick a particular topic from the archives and address it. This thread is about the Copts. I really don't want to lose my patience and treat you like the other Euronutcases that have been humiliated many times before. So until then I'll just ignore you.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26553 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Since when do I have to give examples from only the Old Kingdom? Fine. Here are Old Kingdom Examples below:
So where are the blacks ?? They look like modern egyptians
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
By the way, I'm not Afrocentric and I provided examples of PAINTED portraits, including murals! The whole dark coloring due to rotted wood excuse is pathetically erroneous. Why do Eurocentrics like yourself always provide examples of Old Kingdom statues that are either unpainted or whose paint has faded, especially those with so-called "Caucasian" features? [/QB]
The painted portraits didn't show black people but "red/brown" skinned people like modern egyptians + such color was based on conventional artistic canons it doesn't mean all egyptian men from north to south had this skin color. The statues I posted are way more relevant and give us a better glimpse at how they view themselves. Also how can I be "eurocentric" if I'm not European ? I'm against all kind of -ism and -tric and as for "faded" do you have any evidence of it ? they could have used a pitch black pigment for these statues they would have still not look like blacks. These people literally depicted themselves as red skinned, with caucasoid features, their mummies all had straight hair, etc but you still want to defend they were "black" ? Come on be serious
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Wrong again. Data from Harris & Wente's book X-ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies has been compiled and shows the royal mummies display many traits typically held by "black" Africans including the mummy of Tiye.
hahaha source is "realhistoryww" and after that you claim you're not afrocentric. + many north africans show ssa affinities or ssa traits especially people like upper egyptians that doesn't mean they are black or look black.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: And her bust painted bust shows she bears a striking resemblance to modern Beja women.
That's not a painted bust but wood (yew wood) and painted depictions and statues of her didn't show any black phenotype + her haplogroup was eurasian (K) and her father's paternal haplogroup was again eurasian (G2a)
That's literally her parents :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: As for Tutankhamun, there were actually at least 8 reconstructions made in the past 30 years, with each one looking different from the other. This is because soft tissue features like nose tip and lips are largely left to conjecture and the same with skin color. Most of the reconstructions done were not double-blinded meaning the scientists knew who the skull belonged to and input their biases.
However one forensic artist involved in the 2005 Nat Geo reconstruction, Susan Anton had this to say: Thanks for your email. I actually didn't choose the term "North African Caucasoid" that is the term used by another team (there were three that worked on separate reconstructions). The French team was responsible for the reconstruction that was on the cover of National Geographic Magazine and they also used that term. Our team, myself and Michael Anderson of Yale, were the ones that did the plaster reconstruction without knowledge of whose skull we were working on. I did the biological profile (assessment of age at death, sex and ancestry), Michael made the actual reconstruction. Based on the physical characters of the skull, I concluded that this was the skull of a male older than 15 but less than 21, and likely in the 18-20 year range and of African ancestry, possibly north African. The possibly north African came mostly from the shape of the face including the narrow nose opening, that is not entirely consistent with an 'African' designation. A narrow nose is more typical of more northerly located populations because nose breadth is thought to be at least in part related to the climate in which ancestral populations lived. A narrow and tall nose is seen most frequently in Europeans. Tut's head was a bit of a conundrum, but, as you note, there is a huge range ofvariation in modern humans from any area, so for me the skull overall, including aspects of the face, spoke fairly strongly of his African origins..
So his overall skull shape was African except his nose and perhaps face, but as the one who emailed her responded there are those in Africa not only North Africans but even certain populations in Sub-Sahara who share the same features but are clearly 'black'.
Doesn't mean these reconstructions all had the same level of quality + the last one we have is based on two different labs and they both reached the same results so this can't simply be "conjecture" Moreover he looked like his father akhenaten :
Also the fact that some horner have caucasoid features is due to their eurasian ancestry and most sub-saharans don't have such features.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Sure, when all the original paint is faded to YOU they may not "look black", but let's see.
These brothers above are so non-black that Afrocentrics are using them as examples of black Egypt! LOL
Oh yes the overused bleached seated scribe whose Caucasian features are so favored, here are remnants of his skin color before his bleaching.
Yes more Egyptian men with Caucasians features yet remnants of their chocolate dark skin remain. Again, like was explained to Susan Anton such features are not limited to Europeans or other Eurasians but is found in Africans as well not just North Africa but certain areas of Sub-Sahara also along with black skin.
Literally not a single one of them look black lmao They look exactly like modern egyptians and even if you want to darkwash them they would still not look black in any way.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Unfortunately for you, what you don’t understand is that Nubians are the closest relatives of the Egyptians to the point that Eurocentrics try to white-wash them too!
The situation isn't as simple as that since both regions show important diversity and even in the past egyptians used to depict nubians as very different from them whether in terms of skin color or facial traits (as far as I know only the nubians of Wawat were depicted as similar to egyptians physically).
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Gee, the Egyptians are Africans who show SSA affinities including black skin but are not ‘black’. Okay, but the same nonsensical reasoning can be applied to their southern neighbors, the Nubians, and IS applied to them!
What does "african" even mean ? Japanese don't have anything to do with indians or iranians despite all of them being asians. And yes showing SSA affinities isn't going to make someone black, north africans are a good example of this + egyptians whether modern or ancient didn't have "black" skin.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: What Eurasian haplogroups? The only haplogroups Egyptians share with Lebanese and other Eurasians are all African such as paternal E-M215 and maternal L2b also being found in Lebanon.
Wrong, these are "african" ? :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: First of all, the mixed ancestry of Djehutynakht was discussed before. Second, the claim in the passage you cited is misleading by suggesting that all Sub-Saharan or even African maternal lineages only belong to the L clade. The highest maternal clade among modern especially indigenous Egyptians is actually M1 which has its highest frequency and diversity in Sub-Saharan East Africa. They also carry N clade and underived N* was discovered in the Neolithic Central Sahara. Haplogroup U5 has its highest frequency in the Maghreb but there are suggestions of a possible origin for U in northeast Africa.
M1 nor U5/U6 are african they were brought by eurasian back migrants :
quote:The oldest arrivals amongst extant mtDNAs appear to be the U6 and M1 lineages, which date to 36.6 (24.9; 48.8) and 25.4 (17.9; 33.1) ka respectively [31]. As with U5 in Europe [11], the arrival time could be older in each case, since the haplogroups appear likely to have arisen within the southern Mediterranean region from haplogroup U and M ancestors, making dating the arrival time very imprecise. Nevertheless, the estimates seem to match best the appearance of the Upper Palaeolithic Dabban industry in Cyrenaïca, as suggested before [15, 23]. [...] For U6, by contrast, the corresponding increases in effective sizes were less marked (~3-fold and ~1.5-fold, respectively), and the signal indicates that the expansion began earlier, ~22 ka. This coincides closely with the beginning of the Iberomaurusian industry in the Maghreb. These results therefore suggest that the Iberomaurusian was initiated by an expansion of modern humans of ultimately Near Eastern, carrying mtDNA haplogroup U6, who had spread into Cyrenaïca ~35-45 ka and produced the Dabban industry. The link back to the Near East and the European Early Upper Palaeolithic (which likely has the same source) may explain the suggested skeletal similarities between the robust Iberomaurusian "Mechta-Afalou" burials and European Cro-Magnon remains, as well as the case for continuity of the bearers of the Iberomaurusian industry from Morocco with later northwest African populations suggested by the dental evidence [57]."
quote:Individuals carrying haplogroup U possibly spread westward from Western Asia around 39–52 ky, reaching Europe as signaled by haplogroup U5, and North Africa signaled by haplogroup U6, which likely represents a genetic signal of a EUP return of Homo sapiens from Eurasia to North Africa11,29,30. The time of the most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) for U6 was estimated to 35.3 (24.6–46.4) ky BP29,30. Thus it has been proposed that the lineage originated somewhere in Western Asia11,29,30. We found a basal U6 in South East Europe, on the current territory of Romania 35 ky BP, suggesting that either the U6 lineage originated in Eastern Europe or the TMRCA of U6 is older than 35 ky.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Of course first and foremost it is a linguistic family however language is a part of culture, and thus Proto-Afro-asiatic was spoken by a particular cultural group. Your Eurocentric kinsmen know this which is why the field of ‘Indo-European Studies’ doesn’t just include language. You are correct about Semites, because Semitic developed in the Levant and cut off from their African relatives. It’s the same thing with Berber which had more relations with Mediterranean Europeans than with other Africans-- at least those Berbers who lived along the coasts. By the way, are you aware that those same Mediterranean Europeans show African admixture in their genetics just as coastal Berbers show European admixture?
What kind of mental gymnastic is that ? That PAAs had a common culture doesn't mean all their modern descendents share the same culture or speak a common language. The analogy with "indo-europeans" is fallacious since it's two very different context and yes I'm aware they have "african" admixture but why do you bring this ? European admixture among Berbers (not only coastal since all berbers show it) is old going back to the early european farmers/cardial industry and bell beaker era.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:Afroasiatic’s origins in Africa is a hypothesis that is heavily supported by both linguistics and population genetics. For example, the majority of Afroasiatic speakers share African haplogroups in common especially paternal E1b1b. Also, while “negroid” and “Caucasoid” features have some basis the overall classification that is typological is not. Please cite evidence of West Eurasians in Mesolithic Kenya, last I checked no DNA was found in the fossilized remains of Gamble’s Cave and the DNA of Luzia’s people was examined and there were no “Negrito” genes. You really need to do research on topics before you address them.
Show me exactly where it says mesolithic kenyas were caucasoids (I need the context) + Where it says Luzia was negroid.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Dj
Couldn'tya just bump one o d pic threads by Mena or sumpin
of rounding out the knowledge base and making new research breakthroughs and you're falling for it.
Yeah yeah I know every masculine male wantsta fight.
Anyway 'faded paint' doesn't matter since one can look at even a toddlers one color pencil and paper sketches of people and tell the race and it is facial features your opponent means by black not skin color.
Your opponent also counts so-called racial ambiguity looks as non-black but let me assure you these aNazigh nationalist are biologically determinant in favor of Euro yteness in reading out blk mixtures from Berberdom while avidly adopting mixtures having three yte Euro (usually Spaniard) grandparents as fully and unquestionably Berber.
They've adopted yte Euro racist anthropology methodology well known to all but perhaps best worded by P Manansala
* ytes can have thick lips and/or broad nose with rounded nostrils and/or woolly hair and /or brown skin per the yte invented science anthropology but
* blx cannot have thin lips and/or medium to narrow nose width with slit or teardrop shaped nostrils and/ or loose curly, wavy, or straight hair.
Can't beat that official science definition even if verdict reached by an all white jury.
When Simon makes the rules and one unquestioningly abides by them then the game is fixed because ppl act like scientist aren't people who have biases of their own affecting their precious 'scientific' interpretations and conclusions.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
From Manansala's (he banned me from TaSeti yahoogroup) Short Anthropology Primer, once posted on ES but can't find it and luckily Asar Imhotep archived it SALUD!
=-=-=-=
the Badari and early Nakada were clearly Africoid in character, even the neolithic Saharan element that came to cast more and more influence on Southern Egypt could also be characterized as African variants. In fact, in most cases, these hetergenous peoples were strongly "Negroid." (Gabel 1966, Keita 1993).
In concluding, we can illustrate the problem in this way using the old three race theory still commonly used by geneticists and forensic anthropologists:
Let A = Africoid, C = Caucasoid, M = Mongoloid; and the monotypic trait types so that in pure form:
A = A monotypic traits M = M monotypic traits C = C monotypic traits; In addition, there are variants to the above traits that are similar to the monotype yet significantly different. Lets label these types:
A2, A3, A4 types, M2, M3, M4 types, C2, C3, C4 types; And also there are variants that don't quite fit any of these patterns (at least not from the non-Eurocentric perspective) such as many South Asians, Australians, etc. For the sake of convenience lets say there are four such types (there are probably more):
D type, E type, F type, G type; Now, we will take the Eurocentric position and classify all types into the original three monotypic groups:
A does not = A2, A3, A4, M, M2, M3, M4, C, C2, C3, ,C4, D, E, F or G types
M does not = A, A2, A3, A4, M2, M3, M4, C, C2, C3, ,C4, D, E, F or G types
However,
C = A2, A3, A4, M2, M3, M4, C, C2, C3, C4, D, E, F and G types
Armed with such a contrived system, the Eurocentric, hyperdiffusionists can argue just about anything they please without regard to the true facts.
Anyway 'faded paint' doesn't matter since one can look at even a toddlers one color pencil and paper sketches of people and tell the race and it is facial features your opponent means by black not skin color.
Exactly.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Your opponent also counts so-called racial ambiguity looks as non-black but let me assure you these aNazigh nationalist are biologically determinant in favor of Euro yteness in reading out blk mixtures from Berberdom while avidly adopting mixtures having three yte Euro (usually Spaniard) grandparents as fully and unquestionably Berber.
That's not true. I've never seen any north african who consider mixed euro-amazigh as fully berber. And culturally, Berbers didn't go by skin color, facial traits or maternal ancestry. You were considered amazigh if your father was one and if your tribe was amazigh therefore many half-black, half-euro or whatever else were seen as "fully" berber as long as their father was.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: They've adopted yte Euro racist anthropology methodology well known to all but perhaps best worded by P Manansala
* ytes can have thick lips and/or broad nose with rounded nostrils and/or woolly hair and /or brown skin per the yte invented science anthropology but
* blx cannot have thin lips and/or medium to narrow nose width with slit or teardrop shaped nostrils and/ or loose curly, wavy, or straight hair.
Can't beat that official science definition even if verdict reached by an all white jury.
When Simon makes the rules and one unquestioningly abides by them then the game is fixed because ppl act like scientist aren't people who have biases of their own affecting their precious 'scientific' interpretations and conclusions. [/QB]
In general, caucasoid traits in sub-saharan africa are induced by west eurasian ancestry that's why it's present among horners or fulanis instead of Pygmies or Igbo people. You're dishonest and not in phase with scientific datas if you think otherwise.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Armed with such a contrived system, the Eurocentric, hyperdiffusionists can argue just about anything they please without regard to the true facts. [/QB]
I don't see why all groups should necessarily express the same proportion of variations, they don't have the same history, didn't produced the same mutations, didn't evolved in same environments, etc
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: M1 nor U5/U6 are african they were brought by eurasian back migrants :
40,000 years ago (U6) and further bifurcated only in Africa.
Illogical stupid special plead 'argument'
Aren't all eurasians nothing but african forward migrants?
Well what else but cracked pot logic to expect from racists NorthAfrocentrics?
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: M1 nor U5/U6 are african they were brought by eurasian back migrants :
40,000 years ago (U6) and further bifurcated only in Africa.
Illogical stupid special plead 'argument'
Aren't all eurasians nothing but african forward migrants?
Well what else but cracked pot logic to expect from racists NorthAfrocentrics?
It doesn't matter because even if you want to make these eurasians as black as you want, these lineages didn't appear in Africa nor are historical horners those who spread this haplogroup.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
"You're dishonest"
STFU
Yes it is true. And beyond true, it's a fact.
Tukuler is my ethnicity not just a forum name tag. You can't tell me shih about our features, where they're from, etc. Our lactase gene is the oldest and ytes got it from us just as Mykenaean and other Aegean ppls have our Tropical African genome in their ADMIXTURE results.
No one, repeat, no one --archaeologist ethnographer anththropologist historian geneticist genomist-- other than speculatation has shown as much as a single yte man migrating to the SE Algerian earliest halPulaaren habitats which cave paintings show no proto-Pulaar looking like any kind of yte man, Euro or Afr.
In fact one geneticist team saw fit to go str8 and actually put in published writing that the Fulani they sampled who had exotic genealogy did not have any exotic looks. "The whiteman of Africa" is as Inner African as any Sahel Savanna even many Forest Africans.
When it comes to militant aMazigh NorthAfrocentric racism, bias, and prejudice lemme set all str8.
I'm talking personal experience with a prominent figure in turn of the century aMazigh nationalism who was 3/4 Spaniard and behind my back told a mutual acquaintance I was "fraud," in claiming my Nafusa paternal lineage and heritage, solely based on my prognathous face and nappy hair.[*]
The very definition of Biological Determinism and one reason I now refuse to meet up in real life with and develop 'friendships' with ppl I first meet via the Web.
For a while Dr Winters was also a member of a background check restricted membership aMazigh internet group closely related to The Amazigh Voice.
No Mughrebiym at Jersey City predominantly Moroccan congregation Qahal Qadosh Har Sinai either questioned or doubted me. Ditto for the defunct Moroccan Jewish Organization where I, a Lewi, was warmly welcomed by the native Cohaniym.
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: That's not true. I've never seen any north african who consider mixed euro-amazigh as fully berber. And culturally, Berbers didn't go by skin color, facial traits or maternal ancestry. You were considered amazigh if your father was one and if your tribe was amazigh therefore many half-black, half-euro or whatever else were seen as "fully" berber as long as their father was.
Oh no another don't know whether I'm Berber or aMazigh confused coastal North African who knows less about aMazighity than I an admitted outsider does
[*] What's funny is a professional colleague pointed at the Berber woman on Nat'l Geo's Africa map saying you look like that one after he saw the Fulani woman on that map and me telling him of my Fulani ancestry.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Yes it is true. And beyond true, it's a fact.
Tukuler is my ethnicity not just a forum name tag.
I'm talking personal experience with a prominent figure in turn of the century aMazigh nationalism who was 3/4 Spaniard and behind my back told a mutual acquaintance I was fraud in claiming my Nafusa paternal lineage and heritage solely based on my face and hair.
Are you talking about Antonio Cubillo ? Most berbers aren't even aware of canarians or their islands and on internet most berbers actually make fun of them because we know they aren't really berber genetically. Some of these canarians even go as far as learning tifinagh and tamazight but we can't take these people seriously they're just facing an identity crisis in order to feel native to these islands. So again stop talking in the name of people you don't know much about.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: No Mughrebiym at Moroccan congregation Qahal Qadosh Har Sinai either questioned or doubted me. Ditto for the defunct Moroccan Jewish Organization where I, a Lewi, was warmly welcomed by the native Cohaniym.
I don't see why you bring this but these jews don't feel native to north africa nor do they know much about berbers in general therefore no wonder they didn't questioned you.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Oh no another don't know whether I'm Berber or aMazigh confused coastal North African who knows less about aMazighity than I an admitted outsider does
???
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Antalas:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by Antalas:
M1 nor U5/U6 are african they were brought by eurasian back migrants :
40,000 years ago (U6) and further bifurcated only in Africa.
Illogical stupid special plead 'argument'
Aren't all eurasians nothing but african forward migrants?
Well what else but cracked pot logic to expect from racists NorthAfrocentrics?
these lineages didn't appear in Africa nor are historical horners those who spread this haplogroup.
Why thread bumping isn't enough Will post U6 science fact later
BTW Moroccan Jewry goes back to pre-Roman Africa and's been enhanced by Expulsion refugees no diff than non-Jewish Moroccans. Yte anthopologists and ethnologists plainly posit the majority of Mughrebi Jews are converted indigenous Africans in relative isolation marrying mainly local mates.
Take that I-already-know-who-you-mean chip off your shoulder, no wait a minute and lemme knock it off. The aMazigh nationalist I wrote of above, she was a staunch Muslim when I first met her. Within a couple of years she converted to Judaism (no, I didn't make her do it). Just googled her name, she still passionately loves her Algerian aMazighity and toned down the militant nationalism somewhat. Nah, she was never really a wild eyed militant aMazigh nationalist like Helene.
Anyway only a smug fool imagines he knows the details of all the 'Berber' and non-Berber N Afr Jews of my friendship or acquaintance when such idiot doesn't even know me, less lone the individuals i refer to. SMH
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
SORRY FOR THE DIVERGENCE BUT AS USUAL I WILL NOT REMAIN SILENT TO POSTER NONSENSE
posted 30 March, 2018 11:28 PM Profile for Tukuler Author's Homepage Send New Private Message Edit/Delete Post Reply With Quote
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I'm saying the subclade that made its way to Africa stopped in the Levant, first. The Romanian individual belongs to another subclade. Both subclades originate with a parent population that migrated from Asia.
quote:The analysis of the PM1 mitogenome polymorphisms revealed 15 nucleotide changes with respect to the rCRS28, identifying the PM1 mitogenome as a basal haplogroup U6* (Supplementary Table 1). One of these polymorphisms is a private mutation, T10517A, not previously found in any mitochondrial genome.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Icon 1 posted 31 March, 2018 11:32 AM Profile for Tukuler Author's Homepage Send New Private Message Edit/Delete Post Reply With Quote
Ah, but what is the age of U6 in the Arabian Plate?
Is AP U6 from pre-history or from the Amazigh girls whom one physician ranked the most perfect slave?
"The Berber women are from the island of Barbara (sic), which is between the west and the south. Their color is mostly black, though some pale ones can be found among them. If you can find one whose mother is of Kutama, whose father is of Sanhaja, and whose origin is Masmuda, then you will find her naturally inclined to obedience and loyalty in all matters, active in service, suited both to motherhood and to pleasure, for they are the most solicitous in caring for their children. Abu Uthman the slave-dealer says, If it happens that a Berber girl with her racial excellence is imported at the age of nine, spends three years in Medina and three years in Mecca, comes to Iraq at the age of fifteen and is educated in Iraq, and is bought at the age of twenty-five, then she adds to the excellence of her race the roguishness of the Medinans, the languor of the Meccans, and the culture of the women of Iraq. Then she is worthy to be hidden in the eyelid and placed in the eye."
~ ibn Butlān, a Nestorian Christian physician of Baghdad ~
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Hey Antalas
I ain't here to dialog with you I'm here to show you stupid and manipulative by presenting fact derived from raw data thoroughly rebuffing everything you've posted.
Why don't you start your own dang thread instead of disrupting and diverting this one?
You bored & lonely so waste ppl's time here w/old shih we done ran thru & turned inside out decades ago.
Only reason responded so far is for those not familiar w/t site and to buck the trend of sourcing outside ES when links to ES contributors brings out the intricacies not found elsewhere. and I tired reacting to horseshit and gaslighting
quote:Originally posted by SlimJim: Thanks for linking those books/website, I'm gonna check those out, I never knew there was a Jewish presence in Elephantine but I don't see how that could have spread into the Horn, I think Yemen/Himyarites may be the most likely... thanks again
The Judaean community was established in Elephantine during Persian rule by Judaean mercenaries guarding the southern border. You can read more about it here. However, the community eventually declined and ceased to exist due to civil conflict post-Persian times going into Ptolemaic rule.
This is why as I pointed out in the 1st page of this thread, that by Roman times during the lifetime of Jesus, Besides Alexandria, there were 6 other cities that were centers of Judaean communities since the Ptolemaic period and even before then: Tahpanhes (bordering the Sinai), Migdol (somewhere in the eastern delta), Leontopolis (in the east-central delta in modern Damietta), Memphis, Oxyrhyynchus (in middle Egypt near Abusir el-Melek), and Antinoopolis (in Upper Egypt near Thebes).
That Ethiopian Jewry came from the Nile is a lesser known theory based on the fact that there was a Judaean presence in the Upper Nile of Egypt as well as the peculiar fact that Beta-Israel Ethiopians today are largely confined to the northwest of the country toward the Sudan and away from the coast. However there are many arguments against the theory as Kaplan shows in his book on the Beta Israel here, particularly when you scroll down to pages 27-29.
quote: I believe the craniofacial data show there was a lot of morphological change from the early dynastic into the late northern dynastic.
True, one also has to keep in mind the non-metric features which are a better indicator of genetic relatedness than the metric features. Despite whatever variation and heterogeneity the Egyptian populations show, there was still an underlying relatedness as expressed in non-metric traits both in skull and teeth that was expressly North African.
quote:I don't know much when it comes to dental traits but aren't they strongly dependent on diet? If Greco Roman Egyptians had similar diets to early dynastic Egyptians than they could show dental affinities regardless of how related they really are, Hanihara 2006 was a dental study showing Somalis to be closest to Japan, South Africa and China which is obviously not what the genetic and craniofacial data will attest to, Pre dynastic Egyptians were closest to Afghanistan, North India and South Australia, they had an Israeli/Iran sample in the study a swell yet all of the aforementioned groups plotted closer to Egypt than Israel.
Yes diet affects some traits of cranium and teeth especially metric features, but non-metrics are largely not plastic but determined by specific genetic features of populations. The study you're referring to is the 2005 Hanihara & Ishida paper Metric dental variation of major human populations whose results are shown below:
But again, their paper is based on metric analysis. Non-metric features are more accurate for assessing population relatedness.
^ "Africa" refers to his Sub-Saharan sample grouped with Australo-Melanesians while Nubians are grouped with Indians.
I wasn't aware there was such a big difference between metric and non metric studies in terms of relatedness, thanks for the help.
I recall the user "Swenet" using the 1993 study among other lines of evidence to argue that ancient Egyptians could be modelled as part EEF, in that study its shown that Neolithic Germans fit into the Predynastic Egyptian type, but seeing as this is a metric study do you think it takes a way from the idea that Ancient Egyptians could be modelled as EEF? Are there any non metric analyses comparing EEF to Ancient Egyptians?
Posts: 163 | From: England | Registered: May 2020
| IP: Logged |
These brothers above are so non-black that Afrocentrics are using them as examples of black Egypt! LOL
Oh yes the overused bleached seated scribe whose Caucasian features are so favored, here are remnants of his skin color before his bleaching.
An unpainted woman with ambiguous features.
Yes more Egyptian men with Caucasians features yet remnants of their chocolate dark skin remain. Again, like was explained to Susan Anton such features are not limited to Europeans or other Eurasians but is found in Africans as well not just North Africa but certain areas of Sub-Sahara also along with black skin.
quote:I also wouldn't be surprised if during later periods Egyptians faced an influx of Nubian settlers and some being able to reach high positions.
Unfortunately for you, what you don’t understand is that Nubians are the closest relatives of the Egyptians to the point that Eurocentrics try to white-wash them too!
quote:I've read almost all of them and none actually show they were black but simply SSA affinities with some (like badarians) being somewhat intermediate. You shouldn't forget that such affinity still exist and upper egyptians would already show affinities with their southern neighbours.
Gee, the Egyptians are Africans who show SSA affinities including black skin but are not ‘black’. Okay, but the same nonsensical reasoning can be applied to their southern neighbors, the Nubians, and IS applied to them!
quote:Moreover I think you forget that we also have the genomes of egyptians who lived in Lebanon and roman England + a whole set of haplogroups but yes let's pretend it's simply a coincidence that they are all predominantly eurasian.
What Eurasian haplogroups? The only haplogroups Egyptians share with Lebanese and other Eurasians are all African such as paternal E-M215 and maternal L2b also being found in Lebanon.
quote:Even geneticists noticed it: On top of this historical information offering an explanation for the observed mtDNA data are now additional, recently published, mtGenomes from Africa, and Egypt in particular. MtDNA haplotypes recently obtained from ancient human remains from sub-Saharan Africa belong only to haplogroup L subgroups [65,88]. However, nearly all of the remains excavated in the Northern part of the continent belong to Eurasian mtDNA lineages [63,67,74,89,90]. In fact, of the 114 mtDNA genomes now available from northern African ancient human remains, only one belongs to an African lineage (L3 observed in a skeleton from Abusir el-Meleq [74]). The deep presence of Eurasian mtDNA lineages in Northern Africa has, therefore, been clearly established with these recent reports and offers further support for the authenticity of the Eurasian mtDNA sequence observed in the Djehutynakht mummy https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/9/3/135/htm
First of all, the mixed ancestry of Djehutynakht was discussed before. Second, the claim in the passage you cited is misleading by suggesting that all Sub-Saharan or even African maternal lineages only belong to the L clade. The highest maternal clade among modern especially indigenous Egyptians is actually M1 which has its highest frequency and diversity in Sub-Saharan East Africa. They also carry N clade and underived N* was discovered in the Neolithic Central Sahara. Haplogroup U5 has its highest frequency in the Maghreb but there are suggestions of a possible origin for U in northeast Africa.
quote: Afro-asiatic is a culture now? XD It's a linguistic family that's it, people who belong to it aren't culturally similar : Semites share more culturally with their non-semitic middle eastern neighbours than groups like berbers or horners, berbers share more with mediterranean europeans than horners, etc etc
Of course first and foremost it is a linguistic family however language is a part of culture, and thus Proto-Afro-asiatic was spoken by a particular cultural group. Your Eurocentric kinsmen know this which is why the field of ‘Indo-European Studies’ doesn’t just include language. You are correct about Semites, because Semitic developed in the Levant and cut off from their African relatives. It’s the same thing with Berber which had more relations with Mediterranean Europeans than with other Africans-- at least those Berbers who lived along the coasts. By the way, are you aware that those same Mediterranean Europeans show African admixture in their genetics just as coastal Berbers show European admixture?
quote:+ "originating in africa" first that's an hypothesis and secondly it doesn't mean it necessarily originated from non-eurasian groups. And stop trying to play on the "muh negroid/caucasoid is a construct" not it is not, forensic anthropology can clearly differentiate both and both are induced by certain type of ancestry. Caucasoid in Kenya is supported by migrations of west eurasian pops in that part of the world and negroid in America is evidence of these negrito like populations reaching america that's it (even though I have some doubt about it).
Afroasiatic’s origins in Africa is a hypothesis that is heavily supported by both linguistics and population genetics. For example, the majority of Afroasiatic speakers share African haplogroups in common especially paternal E1b1b. Also, while “negroid” and “Caucasoid” features have some basis the overall classification that is typological is not. Please cite evidence of West Eurasians in Mesolithic Kenya, last I checked no DNA was found in the fossilized remains of Gamble’s Cave and the DNA of Luzia’s people was examined and there were no “Negrito” genes. You really need to do research on topics before you address them.
Even if that lightskinned statue wasn't bleached and it represents his original tone, I'm lighter than him lol and I'm Eritrean, I have family who are midnight black, we carry the same type of ancestries, in the same proportions and are just as African as each other. This stuff is borderline meaningless.
Posts: 163 | From: England | Registered: May 2020
| IP: Logged |
maybe, if the clade of R1B is R1b-V88 as 27% of Siwa are, V88 is at highest frequency in the Chad Cameroon basin
Also if you look at that G2 of the male Yuya there is no male child and also no known male ancestor of Yuya The haplogroup K interestingly, found in 32% of people with Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry and a varied distribution in Europe, North Africa and the Middle East
Posts: 43157 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Haplogroup U5 has its highest frequency in the Maghreb
No, that's U6 highest frequency in the Maghreb but highest diversity on the Iberian peninsula, (10 out of 19 sublineages are only found there)
U5a and U5b today form the highest population concentrations in the far north, among Sami, Finns, and Estonians.
Posts: 43157 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Even if that light skinned statue wasn't bleached and it represents his original tone, I'm lighter than him lol and I'm Eritrean, I have family who are midnight black, we carry the same type of ancestries, in the same proportions and are just as African as each other. This stuff is borderline meaningless.
It's silly at this point and the fact that ppl don't understand how all these features originated in Africa is mind boggling. It's one of the many signs of why there's so much genetic and phenotypic diversity on the continent before migration from other groups.
quote:Originally posted by beyoku:
All of the genetic diversity found Eurasia is a subset of that which comes form Africa. Some of that "Subset" comes from African populations who no longer exist.
Some of the Genetic diversity found in Africa is a subset of that which comes from Eurasia. This can be seen any many of the Derived mtdna N lineages as well as plenty of Downstream Y-dna M89 lineages. This is also seen at an autosomal level with many of the autosomal components that originate in (or are more frequent in) Eurasia showing evidence of having back-migrated via the Gate of tears, Straights of Gibraltar or Sinai.
This shows up in things like skin tones and hair textures. The fact that Africans have dark AND light skinned gene variants that are native to the continent does not preclude them from ALSO carrying Eurasian derived genes relating to of skin and hair texture.
There are also certain gene functions dealing immune system response that are passed from Eurasia to Africa. Think of recently admixed Africans and African Americans carrying mutations related to Cystic Fibrosis from Eurasians or Eurasian specific lactose persistence mutations in addition to the African ones they may also carry.
Africans in a Hot/Dry environment may have selected adaptations for thinner noses. African living more in the Tropics of in Hot/Humid location could have admixture from Africans who migrated from that Hot/Dry location....or a Eurasians that migrated from a Cold/Dry location. Or Eurasians that migrated from a Hot/Dry location. Or they could have those noses by way of Admixture mediated through a secondary African populations that mixed with any of the former thinner nosed selecting groups. OR.....They could be in the tropic, but have a local geography that includes Mountainous Highlands....or extremely dry Lowlands. Or it could be sexually selected and population could shape the noses of their offspring while the bones are malleable. I have personally witnessed this.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Beyoku via TubaYal
The nose pinching and head shaping, some Blk Amers do, may well be an Africanism heldover from Fulani practices.
Head shaping is one reason I rejected craniometry as anywhere conclusive and only some kind of valid indicator only when the subject ppl don't do it.
But I don't believe nose pinching greatly effects either the nose bridge or nostril shape of individuals. And I don't think it effects generational inheritance any more than chopping tails off generations of mice only to find that won't engender a subspecies of tailless mouse. De-tailing mice admittedly is a debility not an enhancement like which seem to drive [micro]evolution/physical adaptation.
But we can't select a couple whose 7 of 8 great grandparents were all flat nose wide 'nostriled' or prominent bridge nosed with slit nostrils, force them to mate identical twins that we can nose pinch the one but not the other and see what happens as we'll then do the same to all generations resulting from our human lab mice.
Who knows? If the Republicans keep moving the USA in the direction that led the Weimar Republic into Nazism we just may be able to Mengele it. [sic, no sick]
quote:The painted portraits didn't show black people but "red/brown" skinned people like modern egyptians + such color was based on conventional artistic canons it doesn't mean all egyptian men from north to south had this skin color. The statues I posted are way more relevant and give us a better glimpse at how they view themselves. Also how can I be "eurocentric" if I'm not European ? I'm against all kind of -ism and -tric and as for "faded" do you have any evidence of it ? they could have used a pitch black pigment for these statues they would have still not look like blacks. These people literally depicted themselves as red skinned, with caucasoid features, their mummies all had straight hair, etc but you still want to defend they were "black" ? Come on be serious
You don't have to be European to be Eurocentric or rather Eurasiocentric. Trust me, I've come across too many Asians who share your mentality. Again, your excuses for the way Egyptians portray themselves in their original dark color is pathetic and absurd. I told you, your arguments have been debunked too many times in this forum. If you want to argue a point, I suggest you go search in the archives and pull one up.
quote: hahaha source is "realhistoryww" and after that you claim you're not afrocentric. + many north africans show ssa affinities or ssa traits especially people like upper egyptians that doesn't mean they are black or look black.
Actually the source originally came from an Asian researcher named P.K. Manansala whose webpage became defunct but luckily was copied by Mike a.k.a. "realhistory" who is an Afrocentric. Another member of this forum copied another page from Manansala that would do you good to read and learn: PKM's Short Primer on Physical Anthropology By the way, I find it odd that you complain about "Afrocentrics" yet attempt to white-wash the Egyptians who are an AFRICAN people.
So according to you North Africans, who are still African, who display so-called SSA affinities like tropical adapted bodies and black skin are still not black or don't even "look black".
Okay, I'm done. There's no way I could argue with someone that irrational. I suggest you seek professional mental health treatment.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26553 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SlimJim: Even if that lightskinned statue wasn't bleached and it represents his original tone, I'm lighter than him lol and I'm Eritrean, I have family who are midnight black, we carry the same type of ancestries, in the same proportions and are just as African as each other. This stuff is borderline meaningless.
Which statue are you referring to? By the way, in many statues you can still see traces of the original paint. In most cases the paint decayed with age, but there are instances where the statues were "cleaned up" and in the process all of their original paint was brushed off. The seated scribe with the thin nose and thin lips is an example of this. That said, I don't deny there were ancient Egyptians with original lighter complexions.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26553 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SlimJim: Even if that lightskinned statue wasn't bleached and it represents his original tone, I'm lighter than him lol and I'm Eritrean, I have family who are midnight black, we carry the same type of ancestries, in the same proportions and are just as African as each other. This stuff is borderline meaningless.
Which statue are you referring to? By the way, in many statues you can still see traces of the original paint. In most cases the paint decayed with age, but there are instances where the statues were "cleaned up" and in the process all of their original paint was brushed off. The seated scribe with the thin nose and thin lips is an example of this. That said, I don't deny there were ancient Egyptians with original lighter complexions.
I was talking about the seated scribe, I agree with you that it looks like the paint has decayed and was orignally darker but I was arguing on the basis that it is the orignal color as Antalas is claiming just to say it doesn't matter much either way, that complexion doesn't say much about the kind of ancestry he would have carried as was being claimed.
Posts: 163 | From: England | Registered: May 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
I love how foolish people like Antalas uses words like "Blacks" but claims that he or she isn't a eurocentric anti-black tool. lol
And ignorantly argues that indigenous North Africans don't look like "blacks", when "blacks" are the blueprint. It's clear as day whos not using the full extent of their brain power.
Posts: 45 | From: U.S | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Notice how he admits that North Africans share affinities with Sub-Saharans including very dark skin, but they still aren't black. LOL
This is like saying southern Europeans like the Greeks share affinities with northern Europeans but they still aren't white. Funny thing is Classical authors like the Greeks and Romans outright called Egyptians 'black' people.
There's no arguing with people that deep in denial to the point of irrationality.
Posts: 26553 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Notice how he admits that North Africans share affinities with Sub-Saharans including very dark skin, but they still aren't black. LOL
This is like saying southern Europeans like the Greeks share affinities with northern Europeans but they still aren't white. Funny thing is Classical authors like the Greeks and Romans outright called Egyptians 'black' people.
There's no arguing with people that deep in denial to the point of irrationality.
The very roots of people like him and their knowledge. Is founded on pure delusion. Despite, the wealth of information out there - including the classical - that were around at the time and consistently compared Ancient Egyptians to "black' people from the Nile Valley and to East Africans, in general. How many times does the research have to debunk the notion that so called "sub-saharans" aren't directly related to native melanated North Africans and the same applies to so called coptic groups. And as you said if a group shares strong affinities with another group, why wouldn't they be the same as that group? It's nonsensical (though, some Greeks will argue that they aren't white). This tells me that a lot of these "Egyptians aren't black" charlatans are stuck in the world of "dark skinned Caucasians" despite what they say otherwise.
Plus, no one ever takes into account the location of Punt and Egyptians direct relation to that civilization.
quote:
I mean in no text or readings, do (perfectly sane) individuals from 3,000 years ago. Let alone 1,000 years ago - do these people ever refer to AE's looking like them or like other "Caucasians" or Southern Europeans. Let alone what modern North Africans look like today, in terms of the assumed majority. In almost all references in regards to Egyptians or Kemet - the word Ethiopian or Aethiopia is a constant and that's not a play on words. It's a noted descriptive of the physical being.
quote:
The word 'black" or "black" groups continues to be used in relation to North Africa.
quote:
--------
quote:
Then you see how these people love to ignore the people of the oasis.
Posts: 45 | From: U.S | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
Famile Copte (Coptic Family) Autour du monde, aquarelles, souvenirs de voyages, fascicules i à xii. (1890s)
Figure 2: Coptic scribe, late 19th century, photographer unidentified collections of Paul Frecker, British 19th century photography dealer based in London. Notice the white turban which Copts only started wearing after 1856, when the old Islamic injunction to confine Copts to wear only black or dark turbans, to distinguish them from Muslims, was revoked after intervention from the European Powers.
“Coptic priest.” I, however, doubt this. I would say this is a Coptic deacon, and perhaps was being trained under his father to become priest. The Coptic Church does not ordain a man priest until he reaches the age of 30 years. Priesthood often ran in families and a son follows a father at the same church. The photographer unidentified at or around 1869
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Notice how he admits that North Africans share affinities with Sub-Saharans including very dark skin, but they still aren't black. LOL
This is like saying southern Europeans like the Greeks share affinities with northern Europeans but they still aren't white. Funny thing is Classical authors like the Greeks and Romans outright called Egyptians 'black' people.
There's no arguing with people that deep in denial to the point of irrationality.
"very dark skin" is induced by high level of SSA therefore can't be native to our mediterranean area.
The berber genetic profile is mostly defined by EEF, IBM and natufian or steppe ancestry therefore "very dark skin" can't be regarded as indigenous berber trait. Many north africans today have black slave ancestry which can produce dark types but still they aren't perceive as black by their fellow countrymen.
Here a quick example so you understand :
Obvious recent SSA ancestry but not seen as black by north africans or europeans :
And Greeks/Romans didn't really call egyptians "black" or else they would have considered them "aethiopians". "Black" in some context simply meant dark/swarthy which is kind of obvious when you compare an average egyptian to greeks or italians.
People who knew them well could easily make the difference :
quote: As for the people of India, those in the south are like the Aethiopians in color, although they are like the rest in respect to countenance and hair (for on account of the humidity of the air their hair does not curl), whereas those in the north are like the Egyptians.
Strabo, Geography 15.1.13
Also don't bring herodotus pls this has been debunked again and again.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: The very roots of people like him and their knowledge. Is founded on pure delusion. Despite, the wealth of information out there - including the classical - that were around at the time and consistently compared Ancient Egyptians to "black' people from the Nile Valley and to East Africans, in general. How many times does the research have to debunk the notion that so called "sub-saharans" aren't directly related to native melanated North Africans and the same applies to so called coptic groups. And as you said if a group shares strong affinities with another group, why wouldn't they be the same as that group? It's nonsensical (though, some Greeks will argue that they aren't white). This tells me that a lot of these "Egyptians aren't black" charlatans are stuck in the world of "dark skinned Caucasians" despite what they say otherwise.
Plus, no one ever takes into account the location of Punt and Egyptians direct relation to that civilization.
I mean in no text or readings, do (perfectly sane) individuals from 3,000 years ago. Let alone 1,000 years ago - do these people ever refer to AE's looking like them or like other "Caucasians" or Southern Europeans. Let alone what modern North Africans look like today, in terms of the assumed majority. In almost all references in regards to Egyptians or Kemet - the word Ethiopian or Aethiopia is a constant and that's not a play on words. It's a noted descriptive of the physical being.
I would honestly suggest you to avoid ad hominems and to read more about North Africa's history because no one denied that some aethiopians actually lived in what is now considered north africa but no ancient authors view them as Libyans or Egyptians. They were described as aethiopians and lived on the northern fringe of the Sahara.
We already have tons of anthropological conclusions about this area from the neolithic, protohistoric, iron age era, etc and negroid skulls always form a minority. Since you posted Datas by Chamla see here her conclusions about Neolithic north-west africans :
so on 62 skulls only 4 were negroid
roman era north west africans were similar to modern north africans :
quote:Thus, in spite of a certain heterogeneity - difficult to appreciate -, our Algerian series of Roman period presents, as a whole, affinities at the same time with the "Berber" populations of North Africa and with various other Mediterranean populations. Among these last, the Eastern Iberian populations of the same time hold undoubtedly a privileged place, according to the data which we have (tabl. III). It seems however that our series is appreciably more robust than these Spanish series. It does not possess, on the other hand, the very broad front and the high stature of certain current Berbers (Tuareg), but would be rather similar to the Kabyles, of which it offers us perhaps an approximate image of the ancestors. "
So who's delusional now ? There were black populations living in ancient north africa especially in the Sahara some even in coastal cities (we do have testimonies of carthage using ethiopian mercenaries in Sicily along side its african/berber troops) but they weren't seen as libyans/moors/africans nor egyptian and were seen as exotic and rare by the classical world. Blacks only started to be more common with the trans-saharan slave trade which brought millions of them in our regions making a lot of modern north africans mixed. That's why mountainous berbers tend to look more mediterranean/eurasian that the mixed urban people.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
And Greeks/Romans didn't really call egyptians "black" or else they would have considered them "aethiopians". "Black" in some context simply meant dark/swarthy which is kind of obvious when you compare an average egyptian to greeks or italians.
People who knew them well could easily make the difference :
quote: As for the people of India, those in the south are like the Aethiopians in color, although they are like the rest in respect to countenance and hair (for on account of the humidity of the air their hair does not curl), whereas those in the north are like the Egyptians.
Strabo, Geography 15.1.13
Also, don't bring herodotus pls this has been debunked again and again.
Don't need Herodotus and yes, they did call Egyptians - Aethiopians (Not all the time but the terms used were consistent).
quote: “We now recognize that populations of Nubia and Egypt form a continuum rather than clearly distinct groups,” Mr. Emberling writes, “and that it is impossible to draw a line between Egypt and Nubia that would indicate where 'black' begins.”
or their calling
Diodorus of Sicily a liar...it's always curious when so called scholar disagree with the ancient people of their day. From their modern, biased jaded positions, when the topic of "black" Egypt is concerned.
quote:They say also that the Egyptians are colonists sent out by the Ethiopians, Osiris having been the leader of the colony. 2 For, speaking generally, what is now Egypt, they maintain, was not land but sea when in the beginning the universe was being formed; afterwards, however, as the Nile during the times of its inundation carried down the mud from Ethiopia, land was gradually built up from the deposit. Also the statement that all the land of the Egyptians is alluvial silt deposited by the river receives the clearest proof, in their opinion, from what takes place at the outlets of the Nile; 3 for as each year new mud is continually gathered together at the mouths of the river, the sea is observed being thrust back by the deposited silt and the land receiving the increase. And the larger part of the customs of the Egyptians are, they hold, Ethiopian, the p95 colonists still preserving their ancient manners. 4 For instance, the belief that their kings are gods, the very special attention which they pay to their burials, and many other matters of a similar nature are Ethiopian practices, while the shapes of their statues and the forms of their letters are Ethiopian; 5
or
quote: "Lycinus (describing an Egyptian): 'This boy is not merely black; he has thick lips and his legs are too thin... his hair worn in a plait shows that he is not a freeman.' Timolaus: 'but that is a sign of really distinguished birth in Egypt, Lycinus. All freeborn children plait their hair until they reach manhood...' - Lucian (Lycinus) of Samosata
I mean, it begs the question, are we to believe that all these equally ancient people were just making stuff up? Did they not see these people traveling on boats or on land in armies from the Nile Valley or Ancient Egypt? it's truly mind-bogglingly, that Eurocentrics will go as far as to deny the ancient etymology of the word "black" across multiple cultures and civilizations. When it's in reference to Ancient Egyptians and how the people of the time came upon them. And the notion that those people didn't comprehend differences in color among other groups, compared to their own - to be the height of absurdity.
Posts: 45 | From: U.S | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: The very roots of people like him and their knowledge. Is founded on pure delusion. Despite, the wealth of information out there - including the classical - that were around at the time and consistently compared Ancient Egyptians to "black' people from the Nile Valley and to East Africans, in general. How many times does the research have to debunk the notion that so called "sub-saharans" aren't directly related to native melanated North Africans and the same applies to so called coptic groups. And as you said if a group shares strong affinities with another group, why wouldn't they be the same as that group? It's nonsensical (though, some Greeks will argue that they aren't white). This tells me that a lot of these "Egyptians aren't black" charlatans are stuck in the world of "dark skinned Caucasians" despite what they say otherwise.
Plus, no one ever takes into account the location of Punt and Egyptians direct relation to that civilization.
I mean in no text or readings, do (perfectly sane) individuals from 3,000 years ago. Let alone 1,000 years ago - do these people ever refer to AE's looking like them or like other "Caucasians" or Southern Europeans. Let alone what modern North Africans look like today, in terms of the assumed majority. In almost all references in regards to Egyptians or Kemet - the word Ethiopian or Aethiopia is a constant and that's not a play on words. It's a noted descriptive of the physical being.
I would honestly suggest you to avoid ad hominems and to read more about North Africa's history because no one denied that some aethiopians actually lived in what is now considered north africa but no ancient authors view them as Libyans or Egyptians. They were described as aethiopians and lived on the northern fringe of the Sahara.
We already have tons of anthropological conclusions about this area from the neolithic, protohistoric, iron age era, etc and negroid skulls always form a minority. Since you posted Datas by Chamla see here her conclusions about Neolithic north-west africans :
so on 62 skulls only 4 were negroid
roman era north west africans were similar to modern north africans :
quote:Thus, in spite of a certain heterogeneity - difficult to appreciate -, our Algerian series of Roman period presents, as a whole, affinities at the same time with the "Berber" populations of North Africa and with various other Mediterranean populations. Among these last, the Eastern Iberian populations of the same time hold undoubtedly a privileged place, according to the data which we have (tabl. III). It seems however that our series is appreciably more robust than these Spanish series. It does not possess, on the other hand, the very broad front and the high stature of certain current Berbers (Tuareg), but would be rather similar to the Kabyles, of which it offers us perhaps an approximate image of the ancestors. "
So who's delusional now ? There were black populations living in ancient north africa especially in the Sahara some even in coastal cities (we do have testimonies of carthage using ethiopian mercenaries in Sicily along side its african/berber troops) but they weren't seen as libyans/moors/africans nor egyptian and were seen as exotic and rare by the classical world. Blacks only started to be more common with the trans-saharan slave trade which brought millions of them in our regions making a lot of modern north africans mixed. That's why mountainous berbers tend to look more mediterranean/eurasian that the mixed urban people.
Sorry, but ppl that use the word "blacks" as a reasonable connotation to refer to melanated Africans, in the refuse of AE being a "black" population. Brings me to certain conlcusions about you as a indiviual in regards to this specific matter.
I know pretty about North African history, and the fact of the matter is (as noted in the text and elsewhere) it's a region that has been invaded upon and occupied by many groups. So using, skulls from the Roman period as an example and there only being 4 out of 64 that can be noted as "Negroid" doesn't make your claim any more true. There is far more research now, beyond the data Ms. Chamla found during her time and the location of her study.
quote:From Figure 7.22 it can be seen that the GARAMANTES (Berbers) cluster most closely to the Sub-Saharan Africans and secondarily to the Roman Egyptians from Alexandria and the Nubians from Soleb
- The Archaeology of Fazzan. Volume 3, Excavations carried out by C.M. Daniels (pp.375-408)Editors: Mattingly, D.J. and Daniels, C.M. and Dore, J.N. and Edwards, D. and Hawthorne, J.
And this has every little to do with Ethiopian mercenaries or slaves. This the foolish notion that people like you always amount to, when you have zero grasp on the subject and contextualize things in such stereotypical terms and realities. Nothing you posted refutes nor debunks from my point, so that delusional tag will persist.
Posts: 45 | From: U.S | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: Don't need Herodotus and yes, they did call Egyptians - Aethiopians (Not all the time but the terms used were consistent).
They actually never called them aethiopians which is quite strange for a population that was apparently sun-burnt....
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: “We now recognize that populations of Nubia and Egypt form a continuum rather than clearly distinct groups,” Mr. Emberling writes, “and that it is impossible to draw a line between Egypt and Nubia that would indicate where 'black' begins.” or their calling
I totally agree.
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: Diodorus of Sicily a liar...it's always curious when so called scholar disagree with the ancient people of their day. From their modern, biased jaded positions, when the topic of "black" Egypt is concerned.
quote:They say also that the Egyptians are colonists sent out by the Ethiopians, Osiris having been the leader of the colony. 2 For, speaking generally, what is now Egypt, they maintain, was not land but sea when in the beginning the universe was being formed; afterwards, however, as the Nile during the times of its inundation carried down the mud from Ethiopia, land was gradually built up from the deposit. Also the statement that all the land of the Egyptians is alluvial silt deposited by the river receives the clearest proof, in their opinion, from what takes place at the outlets of the Nile; 3 for as each year new mud is continually gathered together at the mouths of the river, the sea is observed being thrust back by the deposited silt and the land receiving the increase. And the larger part of the customs of the Egyptians are, they hold, Ethiopian, the p95 colonists still preserving their ancient manners. 4 For instance, the belief that their kings are gods, the very special attention which they pay to their burials, and many other matters of a similar nature are Ethiopian practices, while the shapes of their statues and the forms of their letters are Ethiopian; 5
or
quote: "Lycinus (describing an Egyptian): 'This boy is not merely black; he has thick lips and his legs are too thin... his hair worn in a plait shows that he is not a freeman.' Timolaus: 'but that is a sign of really distinguished birth in Egypt, Lycinus. All freeborn children plait their hair until they reach manhood...' - Lucian (Lycinus) of Samosata
I mean, it begs the question, are we to believe that all these equally ancient people were just making stuff up? Did they not see these people traveling on boats or on land in armies from the Nile Valley or Ancient Egypt? it's truly mind-bogglingly, that Eurocentrics will go as far as to deny the ancient etymology of the word "black" across multiple cultures and civilizations. When it's in reference to Ancient Egyptians and how the people of the time came upon them. And the notion that those people didn't comprehend differences in color among other groups, compared to their own - to be the height of absurdity. [/QB]
I was expecting something more explicit but anyway I could have directly posted this :
quote:One such inscription from the Palermo Stone records the acquisition of some 7000 male and female slaves from the “Land of the Blacks” along with some 20,000 herd animals including cattle, sheep, and goats and what appears to have been 40 ships laden with cedar, along with other raw materials.
quote:The Ethiopians stain the world and depict a race of men steeped in darkness; less sun-burnt are the natives of India; the land of Egypt, flooded by the Nile, darkens bodies more mildly owing to the inundation of its fields: it is a country nearer to us and its moderate climate imparts a medium tone.
Manilius, Astronomica 4.724
And yes you should question the meaning of "black" in classical times especially since greeks had different words for it and they didn't all had the same meaning. They described all dark skinned populations as aethiops but strangely missed north africans ?
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: Don't need Herodotus and yes, they did call Egyptians - Aethiopians (Not all the time but the terms used were consistent).
They actually never called them aethiopians which is quite strange for a population that was apparently sun-burnt....
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: “We now recognize that populations of Nubia and Egypt form a continuum rather than clearly distinct groups,” Mr. Emberling writes, “and that it is impossible to draw a line between Egypt and Nubia that would indicate where 'black' begins.” or their calling
I totally agree.
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: Diodorus of Sicily a liar...it's always curious when so called scholar disagree with the ancient people of their day. From their modern, biased jaded positions, when the topic of "black" Egypt is concerned.
quote:They say also that the Egyptians are colonists sent out by the Ethiopians, Osiris having been the leader of the colony. 2 For, speaking generally, what is now Egypt, they maintain, was not land but sea when in the beginning the universe was being formed; afterwards, however, as the Nile during the times of its inundation carried down the mud from Ethiopia, land was gradually built up from the deposit. Also the statement that all the land of the Egyptians is alluvial silt deposited by the river receives the clearest proof, in their opinion, from what takes place at the outlets of the Nile; 3 for as each year new mud is continually gathered together at the mouths of the river, the sea is observed being thrust back by the deposited silt and the land receiving the increase. And the larger part of the customs of the Egyptians are, they hold, Ethiopian, the p95 colonists still preserving their ancient manners. 4 For instance, the belief that their kings are gods, the very special attention which they pay to their burials, and many other matters of a similar nature are Ethiopian practices, while the shapes of their statues and the forms of their letters are Ethiopian; 5
or
quote: "Lycinus (describing an Egyptian): 'This boy is not merely black; he has thick lips and his legs are too thin... his hair worn in a plait shows that he is not a freeman.' Timolaus: 'but that is a sign of really distinguished birth in Egypt, Lycinus. All freeborn children plait their hair until they reach manhood...' - Lucian (Lycinus) of Samosata
I mean, it begs the question, are we to believe that all these equally ancient people were just making stuff up? Did they not see these people traveling on boats or on land in armies from the Nile Valley or Ancient Egypt? it's truly mind-bogglingly, that Eurocentrics will go as far as to deny the ancient etymology of the word "black" across multiple cultures and civilizations. When it's in reference to Ancient Egyptians and how the people of the time came upon them. And the notion that those people didn't comprehend differences in color among other groups, compared to their own - to be the height of absurdity.
I was expecting something more explicit but anyway I could have directly posted this :
quote:One such inscription from the Palermo Stone records the acquisition of some 7000 male and female slaves from the “Land of the Blacks” along with some 20,000 herd animals including cattle, sheep, and goats and what appears to have been 40 ships laden with cedar, along with other raw materials.
quote:The Ethiopians stain the world and depict a race of men steeped in darkness; less sun-burnt are the natives of India; the land of Egypt, flooded by the Nile, darkens bodies more mildly owing to the inundation of its fields: it is a country nearer to us and its moderate climate imparts a medium tone.
Manilius, Astronomica 4.724
And yes you should question the meaning of "black" in classical times, especially since greeks had different words for it and they didn't all had the same meaning. They described all dark skinned populations as aethiops but strangely missed north africans?
You're quoting's were supposed to rely, to me what exactly? Kemet is the word for black in the Nile Valley, but I'm not using that word in this context. Also, Ancient Egypt was founded in the South not in North Africa proper, and you should know this Antalas.
And no, there's no reason to disregard the notions of blackness in the classical period, as they understand the meaning. Very well, the same with the idea of race, and they understood populations with different creeds these words may might different things in particular ways, but the context in which they were used can not be denied. Otherwise, we should just throw out all classical viewpoint, if words and meanings don't mean what they mean.
Posts: 45 | From: U.S | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: Sorry, but ppl that use the word "blacks" as a reasonable connotation to refer to melanated Africans, in the refuse of AE being a "black" population. Brings me to certain conlcusions about you as a indiviual in regards to this specific matter.
???
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: I know pretty about North African history, and the fact of the matter is (as noted in the text and elsewhere) it's a region that has been invaded upon and occupied by many groups. So using, skulls from the Roman period as an example and there only being 4 out of 64 that can be noted as "Negroid" doesn't make your claim any more true. There is far more research now, beyond the data Ms. Chamla found during her time and the location of her study.
No you don't seem to know much about the subject or else you would have known that the trans-saharan slave trade brought more people than all the invaders combined lol and indeed we do have more datas now and they confirmed even more what I said.
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23:
quote:From Figure 7.22 it can be seen that the GARAMANTES (Berbers) cluster most closely to the Sub-Saharan Africans and secondarily to the Roman Egyptians from Alexandria and the Nubians from Soleb
- The Archaeology of Fazzan. Volume 3, Excavations carried out by C.M. Daniels (pp.375-408)Editors: Mattingly, D.J. and Daniels, C.M. and Dore, J.N. and Edwards, D. and Hawthorne, J. [/QB]
Actually it's more complex :
quote: The study of the fifty or so skulls collected in the central Sahara allows the distinction of three morphological types: Negroids representing barely 25%, a mixed type, in which are associated either prognathism and leptorhynia, or orthognathism and platyrhynia, which constitutes a third of the whole, and finally a non-negroid type, well known above all in the central Sahara (Hoggar-Tassili), representing 41.6% of all the skulls studied. However, some 17 years earlier Professor Sergi had also distinguished, among the skulls collected in the burials of Fezzan rightly attributed to the Garamantes, 46.6% Eurafricans, 26.6% nigrified Eurafricans (= mixed type of M.-C. Chamla) and 26.6% negroid. In conclusion, M.-C. Chamla believes that since protohistoric times the racial composition of the populations of the Saharan and South Saharan regions does not seem to have undergone profound changes .
They literally lived in the Sahara and used to enslave aethiopians (especially "troglodyte aethiopians") no surprise they became darker. Even a ancient african poet (Luxorius) actually criticized their dark skin :
quote: The aesthetic prejudice appears with much clearness, at the end of the ancient period it is true, in Luxorius, African poet exerting at the court of the Vandal kings, at the beginning of the VIth century AD. He opposes, in one of his poems, to the pretty pontic girl, who symbolizes the Nordic woman, a garamante ugly girl (foeda), symbolizing if not the Ethiopian woman, at least the southern type the most distant from the Nordic type
L'Afrique noire et le monde méditerranéen dans l'Antiquité (Éthiopiens et Gréco-Romains)par JEHAN DESANGES, p. 410
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: You're quoting's were supposed to rely, to me what exactly? Kemet is the word for black in the Nile Valley, but I'm not using that word in this context. Also, Ancient Egypt was founded in the South not North Africa.
And no, there's no reason to disregard the notions of blackness in the classical period, as they understand the meaning. Very well, the same with the idea of race, and they understood populations with different creeds these words may might different things in particular ways, but the context in which they were used can not be denied. Otherwise, we should just throw out all classical viewpoint, if words and meanings don't mean what they mean. [/QB]
"Kemet" is not a reference to skin color. And Egypt wasn't founded in the "south" but in Upper Egypt which lies in North Africa.
I never said or imply they didn't have notions of "race" "people" but a same word could have in some cases different meanings and one reality could be described by a large variety of words. When it comes to describing populations they usually used aethiopians for the black ones this includes dark skinned populations of Asia. Egyptians were obviously not described as "black" the same way we understand it today but as dark/swarthy and were always distinguished from aethiopians same for libyans. Moreover I posted some sources which you apparently avoided for no reasons.
In classical times egyptians were seen as similar to northern indians (aka pakistanis) and colchians (aka western georgians) never to aethiopians or nubians.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: You're quoting's were supposed to rely, to me what exactly? Kemet is the word for black in the Nile Valley, but I'm not using that word in this context. Also, Ancient Egypt was founded in the South not North Africa.
And no, there's no reason to disregard the notions of blackness in the classical period, as they understand the meaning. Very well, the same with the idea of race, and they understood populations with different creeds these words may might different things in particular ways, but the context in which they were used can not be denied. Otherwise, we should just throw out all classical viewpoint, if words and meanings don't mean what they mean.
"Kemet" is not a reference to skin color. And Egypt wasn't founded in the "south" but in Upper Egypt which lies in North Africa.
I never said or imply they didn't have notions of "race" "people" but a same word could have in some cases different meanings and one reality could be described by a large variety of words. When it comes to describing populations they usually used aethiopians for the black ones this includes dark skinned populations of Asia. Egyptians were obviously not described as "black" the same way we understand it today but as dark/swarthy and were always distinguished from aethiopians same for libyans. Moreover I posted some sources which you apparently avoided for no reasons.
In classical times egyptians were seen as similar to northern indians (aka pakistanis) and colchians (aka western georgians) never to aethiopians or nubians. [/QB]
I never said that Kemet referenced skin color. And which direction do you think Upper Egypt is located? The far South, not the far North. Don't be obtuse in regards to this historical fact.
quote:
Upper Egypt -
quote:Recent controversy over the date and origin of cattle domestication in northeast Africa has brought this topic, and Frankfort's early treatment of it, to the attention of pre-historians once more.In a discussion of their discoveries at Nabta Playa, Wendorf and Schild73 draw upon Kingship and the Gods to support their reintroduction of a variant upon the idea of a northeast African Kulturkreis74 based around the cultural significance of cattle, from which the belief systems of both ancient Egypt and the modern cattle-keepers of southern Sudan are held to have emerged.While it is true that Frankfort adopted this concept from C.G. Seligman, 75 the founding father of Sudanese ethnography, and in so doing fell prey to a theory founded ultimately upon spurious racial and linguistic premises rather than historical evidence, it did not, however, constitute his main motivation for introducing a perspective derived from anthropology into his discussions of ancient Egypt. This stemmed, rather, from what he perceived as the inadequacy of Western conceptual frameworks for understanding key aspects of dynastic culture: “The profound significance which cattle evidently possessed for the ancient Egyptians allows us to bring an entirely fresh kind of evidence to bear on the problem. For some modern Africans, related to the ancient Nilotes, display a similar attitude toward cattle; and these living adherents to a point of view so utterly alien to us open our eyes to possibilities which our own experience could never have suggested.
*******
quote: Shared features of Neolithic burial across the Nile Valley extend beyond the treatment and ornamentation of the corpse to the deposition of functionally similar artefacts within graves. These too are highly portable—and so consistent with the requirements of a relatively mobile lifestyle—and are closely associated with the presentation of the body, hair and skin (for Egyptian examples, see Figure 3). They include a range of cosmetic articles and implements as well as small vessels made of clay, stone or ivory. Combs of bone or ivory, and spatulas used with hollowed tusks for mixing and pouring fluids are among the grave goods documented throughout the valley, as are stone grinding palettes accompanied by rubbing pebbles (themselves often carefully selected in colourful varieties) and pigments for making body paint (Stevenson 2009; some of the earliest attestations of cosmetic palettes, dating to the mid–late sixth millennium BC, derive from Djara in Egypt's Western Desert; Riemer a al. 2009). Pigments are sometimes found within miniature containers of ivory, shell, pottery or ornamented cow horn. Mace-heads, which only later became a common grave good in Egypt, make their first appearance in central Sudanese burials at this earlier time (e.g. Lecointe 1987; Krzytaniak 1991). Markings on anthropomorphic figurines of the period point towards practices such as tattooing and scarification (Edwards 2004: 51), reinforcing the overall impression of a complex and exuberant material culture, strongly focused on the social presentation of the body in life as well as death.
*******
quote: More recently, Butzer (1976: 14) has related the distribution of early neolithic (Badarian) sites along the outskirts of the Nile Valley to pastoral activity, while Midant-Reynes (2000: 160) sees them as "mainly ... the result of pastoralism" and a "relatively mobile existence". Clark (1971:36) similarly observed of Badarian sites that "the circle of grain pits surrounding a central area of ash and pottery suggests a plan similar to that of the Nilotic, cattle-herding Jie in Uganda, the Songhai south of the Niger bend and other Central African peoples where a central stock pen is surrounded by the grain stores and temporary or permanent dwellings of the inhabitants". The recent excavations at Maghara 2 support the view that the formation of early neolithic sites in the Nile Valley was generated through the seasonal sojourns of mobile herding groups, rather than the establishment of permanent farming villages (Wengrow 2001: 95, 99 n. 5).
********
quote: "The question of the genetic origins of ancient Egyptians, particularly those during the Dynastic period, is relevant to the current study. Modern interpretations of Egyptian state formation propose an indigenous origin of the Dynastic civilization (Hassan, 1988). Early Egyptologists considered Upper and Lower Egyptians to be genetically distinct populations, and viewed the Dynastic period as characterized by a conquest of Upper Egypt by the Lower Egyptians. More recent interpretations contend that Egyptians from the south actually expanded into the northern regions during the Dynastic state unification (Hassan, 1988; Savage, 2001), and that the Pre-dynastic populations of Upper and Lower Egypt are morphologically distinct from one another, but not sufficiently distinct to consider either non-indigenous (Zakrzewski, 2007). The Pre-dynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples, while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Pre-dynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002).In addition, the Badarians have been described as near the centroid of cranial and dental variation among Pre-dynastic and Dynastic populations studied (Irish, 2006; Zakrzewski, 2007). This suggests that, at least through the Early Dynastic period, the inhabitants of the Nile valley were a continuous population of local origin, and no major migration or replacement events occurred during this time.
Studies of cranial morphology also support the use of a Nubian (Kerma) population for a comparison of the Dynastic period, as this group is likely to be more closely genetically related to the early Nile valley inhabitants than would be the Late Dynastic Egyptians, who likely experienced significant mixing with other Mediterranean populations (Zakrzewski, 2002).A craniometric study found the Naqada and Kerma populations to be morphologically similar (Keita, 1990). Given these and other prior studies suggesting continuity (Berry et al., 1967; Berry and Berry, 1972), and the lack of archaeological evidence of major migration or population replacement during the Neolithic transition in the Nile valley, we may cautiously interpret the dental health changes over time as primarily due to ecological, subsistence, and demographic changes experienced throughout the Nile valley region."
- AP Starling, JT Stock. (2007). Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 134:520-528
Posts: 45 | From: U.S | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: Sorry, but ppl that use the word "blacks" as a reasonable connotation to refer to melanated Africans, in the refuse of AE being a "black" population. Brings me to certain conlcusions about you as a indiviual in regards to this specific matter.
???
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23: I know pretty about North African history, and the fact of the matter is (as noted in the text and elsewhere) it's a region that has been invaded upon and occupied by many groups. So using, skulls from the Roman period as an example and there only being 4 out of 64 that can be noted as "Negroid" doesn't make your claim any more true. There is far more research now, beyond the data Ms. Chamla found during her time and the location of her study.
No you don't seem to know much about the subject or else you would have known that the trans-saharan slave trade brought more people than all the invaders combined lol and indeed we do have more datas now and they confirmed even more what I said.
quote:Originally posted by TubuYal23:
quote:From Figure 7.22 it can be seen that the GARAMANTES (Berbers) cluster most closely to the Sub-Saharan Africans and secondarily to the Roman Egyptians from Alexandria and the Nubians from Soleb
- The Archaeology of Fazzan. Volume 3, Excavations carried out by C.M. Daniels (pp.375-408)Editors: Mattingly, D.J. and Daniels, C.M. and Dore, J.N. and Edwards, D. and Hawthorne, J.
Actually it's more complex :
quote: The study of the fifty or so skulls collected in the central Sahara allows the distinction of three morphological types: Negroids representing barely 25%, a mixed type, in which are associated either prognathism and leptorhynia, or orthognathism and platyrhynia, which constitutes a third of the whole, and finally a non-negroid type, well known above all in the central Sahara (Hoggar-Tassili), representing 41.6% of all the skulls studied. However, some 17 years earlier Professor Sergi had also distinguished, among the skulls collected in the burials of Fezzan rightly attributed to the Garamantes, 46.6% Eurafricans, 26.6% nigrified Eurafricans (= mixed type of M.-C. Chamla) and 26.6% negroid. In conclusion, M.-C. Chamla believes that since protohistoric times the racial composition of the populations of the Saharan and South Saharan regions does not seem to have undergone profound changes .
They literally lived in the Sahara and used to enslave aethiopians (especially "troglodyte aethiopians") no surprise they became darker. Even a ancient african poet (Luxorius) actually criticized their dark skin :
quote: The aesthetic prejudice appears with much clearness, at the end of the ancient period it is true, in Luxorius, African poet exerting at the court of the Vandal kings, at the beginning of the VIth century AD. He opposes, in one of his poems, to the pretty pontic girl, who symbolizes the Nordic woman, a garamante ugly girl (foeda), symbolizing if not the Ethiopian woman, at least the southern type the most distant from the Nordic type
L'Afrique noire et le monde méditerranéen dans l'Antiquité (Éthiopiens et Gréco-Romains)par JEHAN DESANGES, p. 410 [/QB]
There you go with the slave angle again...and why are you going back to Chamla? the group used in the garamante study weren't slaves.
It wasn't that confusing, don't use the word "blacks" as you continue to refuse the fact that AE were a "black" population.
quote:Originally posted by Ty Daniels: @Antalas AKA Hotepboy AKA Nassabean
You were BANNED TWICE on this site.
Why do you keep coming back?????
Oh, he's a repeat nutcase offender? Thanks, now it all makes sense. Given the sources he was pulling.
Posts: 45 | From: U.S | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic