posted
This I found in the internet and reflect my views exactly.
What race or ethnic background were the ancient Egyptians?
A: This is a very popular question, and unfortunately, there is no simple answer. However, it is an important one to address due to the racial divide the exists in many countries today, especially the United States. An ancient history professor once related the anecdote of how in one of his classes, a student wanted to know why Africa didn't have any civilizations in ancient times. When asked where he was when the class covered ancient Egypt, the student became visibly exasperated and said, "Yah... but they don't count!" His explanation for this statement was that the Egyptians were not negroes, and thus not really "African".
In a way, the student was right. The ancient Egyptians were not "black". However, they were not "white" or any other so-called "race." This does not mean that they were not African though. A simple matter of geography forces them into that classification. Ancient Egypt was the most successful and longest lasting civilization on Earth, and it was African.
So how does one determine what "race" a people are? Sociologists and historians use various yardsticks to determine this, such as physical characteristics of the people, what language they spoke, or what religion they believed in, etc...
Seated at the juncture of three continents, the Egyptians showed the physical characteristics of Caucasians, Negroes, and Asians. With the migration of various peoples into the Nile Valley throughout the thousands of years in which the Egyptian culture flourished, it is nearly impossible to avoid a racial mixture of the population. Therefore, the most heated debate centers around what race the Predynastic or earliest Egyptians were, the "original" Egyptians, if you will. Yet again, skeletal remains indicate that they shared the characteristics of Caucasians, Asians and Negroes.
Linguistically, Egyptians spoke and wrote a language that held Semetic and sub-Saharan African properties. Their language fell into the language group that linguists call, "Afro-Asiatic". Language is not necessarily the best yardstick to use concerning racial background though. One must remember that languages can be spoken by vastly different ethnicities, just as Spanish is spoken today by both Spaniards and South American Indians.
In terms of religion, the Egyptians appeared to have a mostly indigenous belief system. That is, they thought it up for themselves. It is most original among the ancient peoples of the world. It many ways it was a "monolatry". A monolatry is a religion where one god's many personalities are seen as somewhat separate deities. For instance, the sun god Re, his other aspects or personalities were known as Atum, Khepera and Horus. When the Egyptians wished to emphasize that the god they were referring to was expressing more than one personality, they would hyphenate the name, "Re-Atum", etc...
At one point, each of these personalities were probably separate deities (which is how they are treated in this website). As Egypt grew to encompass the entire Nile Valley from the Delta to the Cataracts, the individual communities learned more about the belief systems and deities of their neighbors and incorporated these new gods which were similar to their into their religion.
However, it must be noted that several "Egyptian" gods probably originated in other countries. for instance, Bes probably came from Sub-Saharan Africa. Qetesh was a Semetic (Middle Eastern) goddess, and Serapis was Greek.
Perhaps the most important question to answer is: What race did the Egyptians believe they belonged to? The ancient Egyptians saw themselves as being ethnically distinctive from both the Asiatics to the north and the Negros to the south. The tiles from a palace shown here depict a negro and an Asiatic captive. They look distinctly different from the Egyptian priest shown above. Both in art and in literature, it was clear that they saw themselves as being different from their neighbors. The Egyptians believed that they were of the "Egyptian" race.
posted
The website you posted is useless when it comes to the ancient Egyptian's ethnicity because it cites no sources to validate its claim. One might wonder what study the supposed writers read to come to the conclusion about the ethnic origins of the ancient Egyptians. The website might contain good information on ancient Egyptian myths but I would never cite this website in a debate on the origins of the ancient Egyptians.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
I thought this dude was gone.........Amr, you are BLACK homeboy! Face it! Get over it! You are Black, even as the Ancient Egyptians were....... You never cite source that are creditable at all! Why do you post here? You make yourself look more foolish each and every time....... It is one thing for someone to "Not know" and yet "know" that they "don't know" or perhaps they "don't know" that they "don't know"......But then you got guys who don't "know" AT ALL, yet they THINK that they "know"...............
I wouldn't even be surprised to meet this Amr dude and he is darker skinned then I am.....LOL! Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
What proof do you have that Egypt was not migrated to before 7000 years.
It seems to think that migration into Egypt started in the last 3000 years only.
In my view it started 20000 years ago and never stopped.
Same with Nubia, especially from influx of Egyptians into Nubia, those Egyptians come with all the different racial background they have. That is why Nubians has changed ethnically through history.
In North Sudan we have huge influx of West Africans in the last 1000 years, little is knowmn about.
But in Ayoub Balamoun's Anglo Egyptian Sudan 1898-1956, he actually talk about it extensively.
Again you think this racial changes in the North of the Nile Valley has started only in the last 3000 years, but it did not. Because man migrated in and out of Africa for the last 60 thousand years.
What I want you is to proof otherwise. You are the moderator and the scholar here.
Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
I thought this dude was gone.........Amr, you are BLACK homeboy! Face it! Get over it! You are Black, even as the Ancient Egyptians were....... You never cite source that are creditable at all! Why do you post here? You make yourself look more foolish each and every time....... It is one thing for someone to "Not know" and yet "know" that they "don't know" or perhaps they "don't know" that they "don't know"......But then you got guys who don't "know" AT ALL, yet they THINK that they "know"...............
I wouldn't even be surprised to meet this Amr dude and he is darker skinned then I am.....LOL! Salaam
''Black'' in Egypt and the Sudan means something else than in America which is why Amr probably does not use it to refer to himself. The word ''black'' probably to him means a Southern Sudanese or a inner African from Western or Central Africa.
I know in Southern Egypt lots of people are ''black'' in the American sense but would consider only a pitch black southern Sudanese iswad instead of Sumr.
Amr's particular group are the Gi'afra who in Aswan have always claimed to be Arabs instead of people indigenous to the Nile Valley. Gi'afra and Ababda make up most of the elected officals in Aswan.
Lots of people know alot about ancient Egypt but little about modern Egypt. People have different perceptions of color in different societies.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
In fact that is what I found out when my brother made that test you mentioned a while ago. But it seems we do have Arabic blood also, it did not come even 10%.
I think the whole region is like us, no one is pure and I am certain when I look at those Ancient Egyptians, they were the same, they look identical to my cousins and brothers.
I am certain that in Egypt we always had people in and out of Africa through its doors long before dynastic times.
posted
I think the whole region is like us, no one is pure and I am certain when I look at those Ancient Egyptians, they were the same, they look identical to my cousins and brothers.
Me too.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
What proof do you have that Egypt was not migrated to before 7000 years.
It seems to think that migration into Egypt started in the last 3000 years only.
In my view it started 20000 years ago and never stopped.
Same with Nubia, especially from influx of Egyptians into Nubia, those Egyptians come with all the different racial background they have. That is why Nubia has changed through history.
Again you think this racial change has started only in the last 3000 years, but it did not. Because man migrated in and out of Africa for the last 60 thousand years.
What I want to proof otherwise. You are the moderator and the scholar here.
First, I am no scholar but somebody that reads periodicals,peer reviewed journals,and books on ancient Egyptian pre-history.
Second, you make constant claims without any sources to validate your claims. If you went to a University you will know first hand and second hand sources in history. Since we don't have detailed histories left by the ancient Egyptians we have to go by what materials we have:archaeology;written inscriptions;texts;Manetho,and kingslist. Plus we have the physical remains from the tombs that exist from the pre-dyanstic into the early dyanstic period. So far in published studies by Dr. Shomarka Keita he has shown the Upper Egyptians to be tropical Africans with little input from non-African groups. Lower Egypt is not so clear because the skeletal remains in the Delta deteriate quickly due to the elevation of the Delta. We do have remains from Faiyum but I have yet to see a detail study of them.
Archaeological evidence per Fekri Hassan[cited by Robert Morkot] have shown Africans from the Upper Nile and Sahara were part of the early Egyptians.
Go to your local library,Amr, and pick up these two books:
The Egyptians by Robert Morkot
Egypt in Africa edited by Theodore Celenko
You might have to obtain these books through inter-library loan because both are hard to find.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
LMAO at how desperate this Arabized AMR is! The link that 1ARM cites has been debunked on this forum ages ago! I know, because I remember the thread that discussed that link before I became a member of this forum and was still lurking!!
quote:A: This is a very popular question, and unfortunately, there is no simple answer. However, it is an important one to address due to the racial divide the exists in many countries today, especially the United States. An ancient history professor once related the anecdote of how in one of his classes, a student wanted to know why Africa didn't have any civilizations in ancient times. When asked where he was when the class covered ancient Egypt, the student became visibly exasperated and said, "Yah... but they don't count!" His explanation for this statement was that the Egyptians were not negroes, and thus not really "African".
After everything this forum has taught, obviously the student knows nothing about native African physical appearance, the inaccuracy of racial classifications, and he obviously hasn't seen many Egyptian depictions.
quote:In a way, the student was right. The ancient Egyptians were not "black". However, they were not "white" or any other so-called "race." This does not mean that they were not African though. A simple matter of geography forces them into that classification. Ancient Egypt was the most successful and longest lasting civilization on Earth, and it was African.
And apparently the same with the author of the source!
quote:So how does one determine what "race" a people are? Sociologists and historians use various yardsticks to determine this, such as physical characteristics of the people, what language they spoke, or what religion they believed in, etc...
Racial classifications are subjective and therefore non-scientific which was exactly why both Egyptians as well as some East Africans and Central Africans were classified as "kacazoid".
quote:Seated at the juncture of three continents, the Egyptians showed the physical characteristics of Caucasians, Negroes, and Asians. With the migration of various peoples into the Nile Valley throughout the thousands of years in which the Egyptian culture flourished, it is nearly impossible to avoid a racial mixture of the population. Therefore, the most heated debate centers around what race the Predynastic or earliest Egyptians were, the "original" Egyptians, if you will. Yet again, skeletal remains indicate that they shared the characteristics of Caucasians, Asians and Negroes.
LOL Apparently AMR missed the part where the author spoke of the "original" Egyptian population. (even though she was wrong about Egyptian civilization being the result of admixture)
As for the way predynastic remains were classified, many scholars agree that there was a "strong negroid component".
So what about the other features-- Caucasians, Asians etc??
That has already been covered:
J. Edwards, A. Leathers, et al. ...based on Howell’s sampling Fordisc 2.0 authors state that "there are no races, only populations," yet it is clear that Howell was intent on providing known groups that would be distributed among the continental "racial" groups. We tested the accuracy and effectiveness of Fordisc 2.0 using twelve cranial measurements from a homogeneous population from the X-Group period of Sudanese Nubia (350CE-550CE). When the Fordisc program classified the adult X-Group crania, only 51 (57.3%) of 89 individuals were classified within groups from Africa. Others were placed in such diverse groups as Polynesian (11.24%), European (7.86%), Japanese (4.49%), Native American (3.37%), Peruvian (3.36%), Australian (1.12), Tasmanian (1.12%), and Melanesian (1.12%). The implications of these findings suggest that classifying populations, whether by geography or by "race", is *not* morphologically or biologically accurate because of the wide variation even in homogeneous populations.
And...
Forensic Misclassification of Ancient Nubian Crania: Implications for Assumptions about Human Variation -April 2005, Current Anthropology:
It is well known that human biological variation is principally clinal (i.e., structured as gradients) and not racial (i.e., structured as a small number of fairly discrete groups). We have shown that for a temporally and geographically homogeneous East African population, the most widely used “racial” program fails to identify the skeletal material accurately. The assignment of skeletal racial origin is based principally upon stereotypical features found most frequently in the most geographically distant populations. While this is useful in some contexts (for example, sorting skeletal material of largely West African ancestry from skeletal material of largely Western European ancestry), it fails to identify populations that originate elsewhere and misrepresents fundamental patterns of human biological diversity.
And of course, we have evidence of migrations but in the *opposite* direction-- Africans migrating into Asia and Europe!!
quote:Linguistically, Egyptians spoke and wrote a language that held Semetic and sub-Saharan African properties. Their language fell into the language group that linguists call, "Afro-Asiatic". Language is not necessarily the best yardstick to use concerning racial background though. One must remember that languages can be spoken by vastly different ethnicities, just as Spanish is spoken today by both Spaniards and South American Indians.
But apparently the author hasn't heard that Afro-asiatic originated in Africa, and that most Afro-asiatic languages are located in Africa with Semitic the only one outside the continent! LOL
quote:In terms of religion, the Egyptians appeared to have a mostly indigenous belief system. That is, they thought it up for themselves. It is most original among the ancient peoples of the world. It many ways it was a "monolatry". A monolatry is a religion where one god's many personalities are seen as somewhat separate deities. For instance, the sun god Re, his other aspects or personalities were known as Atum, Khepera and Horus. When the Egyptians wished to emphasize that the god they were referring to was expressing more than one personality, they would hyphenate the name, "Re-Atum", etc...
At one point, each of these personalities were probably separate deities (which is how they are treated in this website). As Egypt grew to encompass the entire Nile Valley from the Delta to the Cataracts, the individual communities learned more about the belief systems and deities of their neighbors and incorporated these new gods which were similar to their into their religion.
LOL And their indigenous spiritual beliefs resemble Sub-Saharans more than anything else!
quote:However, it must be noted that several "Egyptian" gods probably originated in other countries. for instance, Bes probably came from Sub-Saharan Africa. Qetesh was a Semetic (Middle Eastern) goddess, and Serapis was Greek.
Irrelevant. Native Egyptian gods, as Egyptians were African.
quote:Perhaps the most important question to answer is: What race did the Egyptians believe they belonged to? The ancient Egyptians saw themselves as being ethnically distinctive from both the Asiatics to the north and the Negros to the south. The tiles from a palace shown here depict a negro and an Asiatic captive. They look distinctly different from the Egyptian priest shown above. Both in art and in literature, it was clear that they saw themselves as being different from their neighbors. The Egyptians believed that they were of the "Egyptian" race.
Irrelevant. There are Somalis and Ethiopians who see themselves as a different "race" from say Nilotic Surma.
Posts: 26566 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
In fact that is what I found out when my brother made that test you mentioned a while ago. But it seems we do have Arabic blood also, it did not come even 10%.
I think the whole region is like us, no one is pure and I am certain when I look at those Ancient Egyptians, they were the same, they look identical to my cousins and brothers.
I am certain that in Egypt we always had people in and out of Africa through its doors long before dynastic times
Yes, during the dyanastic period lots of foreigners came to Egypt as captives or migrants and in later times more foreigners came after the collapse of ancient Egypt. These foreigners[mostly Eur-Asians] developed the people in Egypt you see today.
Lots of the people that migrated into Egypt during dyanstic times did not exist during the pre-dyanstic period.
Before you make anymore conclusions about this I suggest you read up on the pre-history of the Nile Valley more.
The Ja'afra I don't know exactly who they are but most likely are Nubians with lots of Arab admixture. During the time of the Fatimids many bedouins were moved into Aswan. Gi'afra can range from fair skinned to dark brown. I know the Ababda are just Arabized Beja people.
As far as genetic tests the percentages are not always accurate and only reflect a portion of someone's ancestry. I side with Dr. Spencer Wells with skepticism on how much percentages genetic tests can tell you.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ausar: First, I am no scholar but somebody that reads periodicals,peer reviewed journals,and books on ancient Egyptian pre-history.
Second, you make constant claims without any sources to validate your claims. If you went to a University you will know first hand and second hand sources in history. Since we don't have detailed histories left by the ancient Egyptians we have to go by what materials we have:archaeology;written inscriptions;texts;Manetho,and kingslist. Plus we have the physical remains from the tombs that exist from the pre-dyanstic into the early dyanstic period. So far in published studies by Dr. Shomarka Keita he has shown the Upper Egyptians to be tropical Africans with little input from non-African groups. Lower Egypt is not so clear because the skeletal remains in the Delta deteriate quickly due to the elevation of the Delta. We do have remains from Faiyum but I have yet to see a detail study of them.
Archaeological evidence per Fekri Hassan[cited by Robert Morkot] have shown Africans from the Upper Nile and Sahara were part of the early Egyptians.
Go to your local library,Amr, and pick up these two books:
The Egyptians by Robert Morkot
Egypt in Africa edited by Theodore Celenko
You might have to obtain these books through inter-library loan because both are hard to find.
Ausar, you waste your energy with this guy. You know his mixed-up mind will never accept truth, only fantasy!
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: Ausar
What proof do you have that Egypt was not migrated to before 7000 years.
What proof do you have that it was immigrated into??! Answer: NON
quote:It seems to think that migration into Egypt started in the last 3000 years only.
In my view it started 20000 years ago and never stopped.
LOL And where is this evidence of "20,000" year old immigration?!
quote:Same with Nubia, especially from influx of Egyptians into Nubia, those Egyptians come with all the different racial background they have. That is why Nubians has changed ethnically through history.
ROTFL at this nonsense!
quote:In North Sudan we have huge influx of West Africans in the last 1000 years, little is knowmn about.
But in Ayoub Balamoun's Anglo Egyptian Sudan 1898-1956, he actually talk about it extensively.
Again you think this racial changes in the North of the Nile Valley has started only in the last 3000 years, but it did not. Because man migrated in and out of Africa for the last 60 thousand years.
What I want you is to proof otherwise. You are the moderator and the scholar here.
I'm sorry AMR, but you are cracking me up!
Seriously, I'm laughing hard here at what this guy is saying especially after everything we told him for like the past year now!
I'm sorry AMR but we have NO evidence of prehistoric migrations into the Nile Valley during predynastic and prehistoric times, BUT.. We do have evidence of the OPPOSITE-- Migrations of Africans FROM the Nile Valley and INTO Asia and Europe!!
It is people in Western Asia and even Greece who are mixed with Africans!! LOLPosts: 26566 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
We all know why Arabized AMR is desperate to have Egyptians and other Nile Valley Africans mixed "20,000" years ago!-- Because he simply cannot stand not only himself, but even his ancient ancestors to be pure African!! For him, being a pure African is a curse worse than death!! Therefore, his ancestors had to be mixed with Asians or anyone else not African!! LMAO
Unfortunately for him, all the the evidence from anthropological remains to genetics shows that it was the opposite. Africans expanded out of Africa during the Mesolithic and into Western Asia and the Aegean.
The genetic evidence itself shows that Western Asians, especially Arabs are more mixed than Africans i.e. there are more African lineages in Arabia and the Near East than there are Asian lineages in Africa!!
And apparently Europe wasn't safe either!
Posts: 26566 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's actually quite sad when you think about it...
That Africans like AMR in their daily salah or five prayers to Allah every day would include pleas to ensure that their ancient African ancestors were 'mixed' and not pure Africans!!
"Please God, don't let my ancestors be pure Africans.. at least 20,000 years back!" LOLPosts: 26566 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
This site of the National Geographic, will show you the movement of man since 60000 years ago out of Africa and the influx of some back to Africa, with Egypt its main door.
The colour of Ancient Egypt, their hair textures, eyes, and nose clearly show that they were a race of their own as a result of intermingling with groups coming out of Africa or into Africa as the site of the National geographic clearly shows.
Click on the arrows coming into and out of Egypt or across the red sea, around 20000 years ago.
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: The eyes, and nose clearly show that they were a race of their own as a result of intermingling with groups coming out of Africa or into Africa as the site of the National geographic clearly shows.
The site you referenced says nothing at all about race.
And certainly nothing to lend support to your pseudo-scientific pseudo arab fantasies.
The head of National Geographic project is Spencer Wells.
This is what he has to say about race....
Races really have no meaning biologically, certainly not genetically.
Here is what he has to say about the *ORIGINAL* population of North Africa visa ve the 'middle east':
"They [Asiatics] left only a small impact in North Africa," Wells says. "No more than 20 percent of the men we sampled had Y chromosomes that originated in the Middle East. Most carried the aboriginal North African M96 [Haplogroup E] pattern."
Since Dr. Wells disagrees with you, can you name a geneticist who does agree with you, and quote him directly to that effect?
If not, then you need to stop lying. Makes you seem desparate.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
The problem is by the standards of today's world, the Anceint Egyptians are Black. Were they admixed with West Asians and Berbers. I think their wall paintings say so.
So What? They were Black. If I call this African American actress whose father is Jewish(West Asian?)
or
this Afro-British singer whose mother is Jewish
non-Black, then who is Black?
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Add common sense to your DNA studies. Use the logic of the time period you are in. Please.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
The problem is by the standards of today's world, the Anceint Egyptians are Black. Were they admixed with West Asians and Berbers. I think their wall paintings say so.
So What? They were Black. If I call this African American actress whose father is Jewish(West Asian?)
or
this Afro-British singer whose mother is Jewish
non-Black, then who is Black?
You see for me a North African, this people are not black, those are African Americans.
your a fool. Probably darker skinned then I am...........what a brainwash! My God, they wonder why people are Afrocentric?! It is because we know the freedom that Amr could never know...................I guess Amr doesn't know that PROPHET MUHAMMAD WAS BLACK! Yeah, I said it! Was he literally Black-skinned: no, he wasn't. Was his father Black as night? The answer, according to Al-Jahiz, the great Muslim philosopher of the ninth century, is YES! He described Muhammad's father as being Black as night! Therefore, a Black man fathered Muhammad: isn't that something Amr!? And you were ashamed to be Black..........lol. I can mess with you cause you are not bringing anything scientific or historical to your discussions: NOTHING AT ALL! Have you given ONE legitimate source yet? When I told you that Athanaius, the fourth century patriarch of Alexandria, was Black, Ausar challenged(or rather "interrogated") me by asking me for the source. And I gave him the source. Dude, you haven't done anything close to the same. We all see it. Everybody knows it. You are a brainwashed Arab wannabe who, combined with your pseudo-Islamic thought, spews a ideology that isn't based on any type of truth...........I'll guarantee you this homeboy: when you are walking around downtown D.C. at night, people ain't gonna be thinking, "There is an Arab-wannabe man". There gonna be scared of that Black male who is walking around at night..............if you want to be an ignoramous, then be "yourself". Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ As usual, you've failed to answer the question.
quote: Since Dr. Wells disagrees with you, can you name a geneticist who does agree with you, and quote him directly to that effect?
If not, then you need to stop lying. Makes you seem desparate.
quote:"They [Asiatics] left only a small impact in North Africa," Wells says. "No more than 20 percent of the men we sampled had Y chromosomes that originated in the Middle East. Most carried the aboriginal North African M96 [Haplogroup E] pattern."
posted
i don't know who is your professor wells, but i know the national geographic.
they said many people in different intervals of human history has moved back to Africa from the near east and from europe to moroco and from arabia to east africa, between 5000-20000 years ago.
No race is pure and certainly the least pure is Egypt, the only country with land access to the rest of the world, and standing in the corner of three continents.
quote:originally posted by rasol: "They [Asiatics] left only a small impact in North Africa," Wells says. "No more than 20 percent of the men we sampled had Y chromosomes that originated in the Middle East. Most carried the aboriginal North African M96 [Haplogroup E] pattern."
If thats the case then how come some argue that ancient egyptians were displace by thousands of years of admixture from invading forces? Wells says "No more than 20 percent of the men we sampled had Y chromosomes that originated in the Middle East. Most carried the aboriginal North African M96 [Haplogroup E] pattern." This would mean that atleast 80% of modern north africans have not been affected by the arabs, greeks, Hyksos, assyrians, persians, romans etc?
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
North African = Maghreb - they are not including Egypt in this study, as it certainly has, for instance, J haplotype levels around 40%.
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
This is Dr. Spencer Wells. He is the brilliant scientist that said, "We are all Africans under the skin." He leads the National Geographic Project. His Y chromosome is R1b.
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Forgive if I am wrong but wouldn't any back migration into Africa about 20,000 still have tropically adapted humans? When did Europeans begin to lose their tropical adaptation? I believe,thought, a former poster here, used this against the hypothesis of fair skinned northern Africans existing in pre-history.
Can anybody please explain this to me further? I used to comprehend this but I have become a little rusty.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ausar: Forgive if I am wrong but wouldn't any back migration into Africa about 20,000 still have tropically adapted humans? When did Europeans begin to lose their tropical adaptation? I believe,thought, a former poster here, used this against the hypothesis of fair skinned northern Africans existing in pre-history.
Can anybody please explain this to me further? I used to comprehend this but I have become a little rusty.
Although we humans are all pure African under the skin as the professor said.
But when we look at the last 5000-20000 years only, humanity had been identified into different colours.
In that context, while Egypt specifically sitting in the corner of three continents with migration occuring in and out of Africa, as shown in the National Geographic that never ceased to stop, Egypt could not have been pure African in the context of that divided colours of humanity of the last 20000 years.
Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
The problem is by the standards of today's world, the Anceint Egyptians are Black. Were they admixed with West Asians and Berbers. I think their wall paintings say so.
If that's what you think, then you are just as mentally mixed-up as AMR! LOL
The Egyptians' wall paintings show them as no different from other unmixed groups in Africa, including peoples farther south like the people of Punt!
All evidence, including archaeology and even genetics show that the ancestors of the Egyptians were entirely indigenous and were NOT West Asians. As for 'Berbers' that is a language group, whose original speakers were also black Africans!
quote:So What? They were Black. If I call this African American actress whose father is Jewish(West Asian?)
or
this Afro-British singer whose mother is Jewish
non-Black, then who is Black?
^^All of which is irrelevant because the Egyptians were entirely indigenous Africans and NOT modern day African Americans or British. Posts: 26566 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
So are you dismissing the national geographic migration maps of the last 60000 years, showing many people migrating back into Africa, through Egypt specifically, long before Pharonic Egypt?
Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: i don't know who is your professor wells, but i know the national geographic.
LMAO Rasol just told you who he was!! Dr. Wells is the founder and head of the National Geographic Genographic project!! Or perhaps your Arabized mind cannot comprehend that!
quote:they said many people in different intervals of human history has moved back to Africa from the near east and from europe to moroco and from arabia to east africa, between 5000-20000 years ago.
Yes, and there was indeed an influx of peoples into Egypt and Africa, mainly during Islamic times!
quote:No race is pure and certainly the least pure is Egypt, the only country with land access to the rest of the world, and standing in the corner of three continents.
Your point on "pure" or "mixed" race is null and void since there is no such thing as 'race' in the first place! In terms of lineage, are you saying that rural Chinese people have mixed lineages? What about rural Upper Egyptians who have never intermarried outside their communities??
Are you going to deny that the predominant haplotype in Egypt, especially in rural areas is indigenous African E and NOT West Asian lineage??
Posts: 26566 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: If thats the case then how come some argue that ancient egyptians were displace by thousands of years of admixture from invading forces? Wells says "No more than 20 percent of the men we sampled had Y chromosomes that originated in the Middle East. Most carried the aboriginal North African M96 [Haplogroup E] pattern." This would mean that atleast 80% of modern north africans have not been affected by the arabs, greeks, Hyksos, assyrians, persians, romans etc?
Well those studies only talk about male lineages, and not mtDNA lineages. Studies on mtDNA show that many Berbers, especially in the Maghreb have European maternal ancestry.
quote:Originally posted by Yom: North African = Maghreb - they are not including Egypt in this study, as it certainly has, for instance, J haplotype levels around 40%.
Yes, but there are still more African E lineages in Egypt than J lineages!
Put that together with all the other E lineages in the Maghreb and you can easily see how African lineages still make up the majority for all of North Africa in general. Posts: 26566 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
So are you dismissing the national geographic migration maps of the last 60000 years, showing many people migrating back into Africa, through Egypt specifically, long before Pharonic Egypt?
No, not entirely. It depends on specifically which migration they are talking about and what they base this on. Even the Genographic project makes mistakes. It even once claimed that E3b was West Asian in origin and not African! They had to change that when people, including some geneticists started mailing them. LOL
What lineage was this 20,000 year old migration based on?? Can you tell me?
Posts: 26566 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] Yes, and there was indeed an influx of peoples into Egypt and Africa, mainly during Islamic times!
[QUOTE][qb]
Check the National geographic carefully, they are talking about migration that occured over 5000 years ago to like 60000 years through and into Egypt, from Europe and WestAsia.
We are not talking about Romans and Arabs here.
Egypt long before its dynastic history had migration into it and out through it, my friend, only fools will deny that Egyptians were not a pure African, seeing all this migration going through it it for 35000 years before King Mena.
Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: Check the National geographic carefully, they are talking about migration that occured over 5000 years ago to like 60000 years through and into Egypt, from Europe and WestAsia.
We are not talking about Romans and Arabs here.
Egypt long before its dynastic history had migration into it and out through it, my friend, only fools will deny that Egyptians were not a pure African, seeing all this migration going through it it for 35000 years before King Mena.
LOL I have already checked it out, and the lineages they addressed have already been explained in the thread here!! We have already told you that some of those lineages like U6 and M1 were mislabeled as Asian when they were really African! LOL All of that has been explained in that thread before Ausar closed it! You keep repeating the same crap over and over again even after we corrected you! I forgot you have a memory problem. Perhaps that comes with having an Arabized mixed-up mind. Posts: 26566 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But National Geographic is NOT a scientific journal. It does a lot of photographs and geography essays on places and peoples that Westerners deem "exotic". But where'e the EMPIRICAL proof--from genetics--for the migration claims made by NG?
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: But National Geographic is NOT a scientific journal. It does a lot of photographs and geography essays on places and peoples that Westerners deem "exotic". But where'e the EMPIRICAL proof--from genetics--for the migration claims made by NG?
National Geographic will not put something in its web site that is faulty, like Djehuti claims.
It is Diopp, and other African Americans who are desperate to prove Egypt as a pure African, while Egypt was never pure racially, ever in its last 10,000 year history.
In fact neither is North or East Africa were ever pure racially when you look at the last 10,000 years, THAT IS according to the maps of migration of the National Geographic.
I believe any one who is so desperate to make a race pure to raise his ego, is a person who is racist, MORE THAN THE ONE HE/SHE IS LABELING THOSE AS RACIST.
Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
U6 is not a very frequent halotype in modern Egypt and neither is M1. Why do people on this message board get Northwestern Africa mixed up with Northeast Africa? Egypt is not in Northwest Africa but Northeastern Africa!!!
If the National Geographic project is showing back migration into Northern Africa then archaeological evidence does not validate it. All the tool industry like Aterian,Capsians and Sebellian are indigenous to Northern Africa.
Could anybody answer my question about tropical adaptation of Western Asians and Europeans? If we do except back migration into northern Africa then wouldn't such people still have a tropical African phenotype?
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:National Geographic will not put something in its web site that is faulty, like Djehuti claims.
It is Diopp, and other African Americans who are desperate to prove Egypt as a pure African, while Egypt was never pure racially, ever in its last 10,000 year history.
In fact neither is North or East Africa were ever pure racially when you look at the last 10,000 years, THAT IS according to the maps of migration of the National Geographic.
I believe any one who is so desperate to make a race pure to raise his ego, is a person who is racist, MORE THAN THE ONE HE/SHE IS LABELING THOSE AS RACIST
Archaeology does not support a back migration into Northern Africa. Even if there was some backmigration about 20,000 years ago how do you know what their phenotype was? Genetics only tells us about migration and not phenotype.
National Geographic is just a periodical magazine that does not even go through peer review of other scientists. Many times their information have been scientifically inaccurate.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^LOL Ausar, you know that it is futile to argue with the likes of Arabized AMR
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: National Geographic will not put something in its web site that is faulty, like Djehuti claims.
It is Diopp, and other African Americans who are desperate to prove Egypt as a pure African, while Egypt was never pure racially, ever in its last 10,000 year history.
In fact neither is North or East Africa were ever pure racially when you look at the last 10,000 years, THAT IS according to the maps of migration of the National Geographic.
I believe any one who is so desperate to make a race pure to raise his ego, is a person who is racist, MORE THAN THE ONE HE/SHE IS LABELING THOSE AS RACIST.
^^ LMAO Yes and anyone who is so desperate to make his people into a "mixed" raise to raise his ego (because he hates his ancestry that much) is just as racist and is even CRAZIER THAN AVERAGE RACISTS!!
AMR: "Allah, please don't let my ancestors be pure Africans!! May they have been mixed at least 20,000 years back, please!"
LMAOPosts: 26566 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Are you saying that the different colours of humanity started only 10,000 years ago. Before that we were all black?
I don't think so. It probably changed with time, remember we are talking about 60,000 years of migrating out of Africa and 40000 thousand years of migrating into Africa.
This still means that AE were not a pure race, since there was peope moving into Africa until 7000 years ago as documented by the National Geographic who were not Romans or Arabs.
i don't hate my ancestry. it is the opposite. i love it to the extend of madness, that is why i don't want any one to erase any part of my ancestry as if it had never happened.
You refer to "Diop and OTHER African Americans"--. You are a bit off on this: Diop was not African American. He was from Senegal. He wouldn't have been put off by your error though because he saw blacks in the Americas as "transplanted Africans"--see his "Anteriorite des nations negres et cultures".
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anr, the problem is we don't know the melanin content of people about 20,000 years ago. Also we don't know for sure if the supposed back migration are even the same people who founded ancient Egyptian civlization. Unlike you, I try not to comment on things I don't grasp.
I do have knowledge of the archaeological history of 20,000 years agao both in Northwestern Africa and Northeastern Africa which donot give any indication of back migration of people into Africa. Analyzing various tool kits in Africa around this period is just as effective as genetics.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Ausar, what should we do with the National Geographiv claim of people migrating into Africa through Egypt and people crossing the red sea into East Africa and than are going North into Egypt.
Others crossing to Spain from Europe and going East into Egypt, along the Mediteranean.
Are you saying, we should just assume they went through, but did not stay there, they all went To Libya?
Because I am convinced that those migrations have occured into Africa, but of course not sure they stayed in Egypt.
But we also all know people when moving, some stay in certain ares and others continue.
I am sorry, but it had been always obvious to me that all this people nmigrating to out of Africa and from Africa, many settled in Egypt and made the Egyptian race.
That race exist as if this date, with of course, new blood in its pool of the last 4000 years of other fresh group of migrants.
Ausar, what should we do with the National Geographiv claim of people migrating into Africa through Egypt and people crossing the red sea into East Africa and than are going North into Egypt.
Others crossing to Spain from Europe and going East into Egypt, along the Mediteranean.
Are you saying, we should just assume they went through, but did not stay there, they all went To Libya?
Because I am convinced that those migrations have occured into Africa, but of course not sure they stayed in Egypt.
But we also all know people when moving, some stay in certain ares and others continue.
I am sorry, but it had been always obvious to me that all this people nmigrating to out of Africa and from Africa, many settled in Egypt and made the Egyptian race.
That race exist as if this date, with of course, new blood in its pool of the last 4000 years of other fresh group of migrants
The problem is you are correlating populations that existed 20,000 bp to modern populations. The map is not definite nor do we know what exactly the people around 20,000 years looked phenotypically nor if they lost their tropical adaptation.
I will repeat the archaeological evidence found in northern Africa does not support a back migration!!!!!
I am also not a geneticist nor know enough about genetics but I do know about archaeological and fossil records from northern Africa.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
at how desperate this Arabized AMR is! The link that 1ARM cites has been debunked on this forum ages ago! I know, because I remember the thread that discussed that link before I became a member of this forum and was still lurking!! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Therefore, his ancestors had to be mixed with Asians or anyone else not African!! LMAO
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic