posted
Earlier it was stated that male figures, whether divine or human, were given reddish-brown skin tones. Women were given yellow-gold skin tones. A poem from the Papyrus Chester Beatty I describes a female object of affection with "bright skin," arms more "brilliant than gold," and "white-breasted."
Since Egypt included people close to the Mediterranean as well as to sub-Sahara, its people showed many skin tones. But the men of Egypt had to be distinguished from non-Egyptians, from foreigners. Foreign peoples of different races were given appropriate skin colors by stylized characterizations. While Nubians and Kushite kings living to the south of Egypt were depicted as black in contrast to the red-brown skin hues of the Egyptian male, Libyans, Bedouin, Syrians and Hittites, living to the north, west, and closer to the Mediterranean were all shown with light yellow skin, as well as distinctive clothing and hair-styles.
So what could we say of modern Egyptian to what colours could represent them today .Info please .
Posts: 53 | From: Daffodill land entering Egypt | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Most of your [touregypt] discourse is inaccurate or distorted.
The above is a gross reworking of Denkmaeler plate 136, the original and accurate version of which is shown below....
Notice the difference in skin tone and facial features between the actual plate and your altered version?
Below is Denkmaeler plate 48
The Rm.t classified themselves and Nhsy as Blacks. They often showed the Nehesi to be darker but not always, sometimes Rm.t and Km.t are shown, as above, as literally Black.
Sometimes Nhsy were shown in lighter brown skin-tones as well.
It's also worth noting that the original 'Libyans' of Siwa Oasis were portrayed as dark skinned as well. [as is the current population of Siwa]
It's only from the late kingdom that we begin to see the lighter skinned Tamehu Libyans.
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ Most of your discourse is inaccurate or distorted.
The above is a gross reworking of Denkmaeler plate 136, the original and accurate version of which is shown below....
Below is Denkmaeler plate 48
The Rm.t classified themselves and Nhsy as Blacks. They often showed the Nehesi to be darker but not always, sometimes Rm.t and Km.t are shown to be literally Black, and sometimes Nhsy were shown in lighter brown skin-tones as well.
It's also worth noting that the original 'Libyans' of Siwa Oasis were portrayed as dark skinned as well. [as is the current population of Siwa]
It's only from the late kingdom that we begin to see the lighter skinned Tamehu Libyans.
Hope this helps.
They often showed
Yes may be im agree with you Rasol on this as im still in learning history and realised i should have posted the link .What i asked for now is of the modern Egpytian of now -too what he would be if he was in the past .Could you please show me where or what a modern day Egyptian looks like to what a past Egyptian is ,i have looked for any certain threads here and cant find them or they dont excist . Im new to the forums and this is to a learning process for me please give me time .
Posts: 53 | From: Daffodill land entering Egypt | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
There are certainly plenty of pictures of modern Egyptians and Ancient Egyptians here if you search for them.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
For those who question the emphatic import of this scene, keep in mind it's the only one ttbomk that gives text and illustration pertaining to the colour and genesis of the depicted. And it's a sacred text of spiritual value as is the similar text of Genesis chapter 10 which however has no accompanying art.
Table 1). Comparison of Gate of Teka Hra scene 30 and Genesis 10 Only the Egyptians and Libyans are the same in both schemes. The AEs' A3MW included all Levantines whereas the Hebrew's Canaanites where only a tribal confederation near the Mediterranean coast. Likewise, the Hebrew's KWSH included some people in the Sinai, in Mesopotamia, the Arabian peninsula, and the southern Levant that weren't NHHSW (southerners) to the AEs.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yes may be im agree with you Rasol on this as im still in learning history and realised i should have posted the link .What i asked for now is of the modern Egpytian of now -too what he would be if he was in the past. Could you please show me where or what a modern day Egyptian looks like to what a past Egyptian is ,i have looked for any certain threads here and cant find them or they dont excist . Im new to the forums and this is to a learning process for me please give me time
Welcome to the forum. Since I am a modern Egyptian I will answer your question with the best of my ability. Modern Egyptians are diverse and range from a very light to dark skin color. The darkest Egyptians being mainly around Aswan and lightest typically in more urban areas like Cairo and Alexandria. Although, there are some very light skinned people in places like Middle Egypt and many Egyptians in Cairo,Alexandria and the Delta can be as dark as Aswani.
Modern Egyptians have abosrbed more foreign admixture than ancient Egyptians. Even the Fellahin are more mixed than their ancestors but less than the upper classes in Egypt. I have some photobucket representations of Egyptians. I will probably post the pictures later.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
I am especially weary of any ancient Egyptian poem translated where an Egyptian woman is described as being "bright skin" and even having "white breasts", considering most of the anthropological work we have points to Egyptians having skin tones matching those of indigenous (black) Africans.
Perhaps this is mistranslation of the European word 'fair' which means light complected as well as beautiful(?).
I say this because many white supremacist distort the word 'fair' in Egyptian poetry to mean white.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The word they typically mistranslate [on purpose] is nefer, which means beautiful and certainly does not mean white.
But as we've seen before, in the warped Eurocentric brain, they are free to rewrite kemitic texts to conform with their preferred conception.
I meantioned earlier the lack of reference in mdw ntr to reddish brown, however there is reference to skin color of women in poetry likened to jasper [khenmet].
This makes sense, as in the Armana period Jasper [a reddish-brown stone] was used for sculptures. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: The word they typically mistranslate [on purpose] is nefer, which means beautiful and certainly does not mean white.
But as we've seen before, in the warped Eurocentric brain, they are free to rewrite kemitic texts to conform with their preferred conception.
So I was right then! They conveniently translated the Mdu Ntr word nefer into 'fair', which in European dialectics means 'beautiful' but also means 'very light' in complexion!
Will the wonders of the twisted Eurocentric mind ever cease?
quote:I meantioned earlier the lack of reference in mdw ntr to reddish brown, however there is reference to skin color of women in poetry likened to jasper [khenmet].
Makes perfect sense. Unlike the 'white color' the Euros mistranslated. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
For those who question the emphatic import of this scene, keep in mind it's the only one ttbomk that gives text and illustration pertaining to the colour and genesis of the depicted. And it's a sacred text of spiritual value as is the similar text of Genesis chapter 10 which however has no accompanying art.
Excellent post.
This should help also answer Doug's question on why the focus on this particular 'tableau'.
It's not just 'another painting'.
It's not a random collection of different peoples.
It's the Kemetians own [mythological] take on their ethnic origins and relationship to other peoples.
The iconography and text tells us which of the characters are Rm.t and why they considered themselves Blacks.
It's Eurocentrism that attempts to treat it as just another 'tableau' and so open to free interpretation and gross distortion which is why they never address either the text or the context.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Recently, more definitive evidence suggesting contact between India and Egypt has become available. A terracotta mummy from Lothal vaguely resembles an Egyptian mummy and a similar terracotta mummy is found also at Mohenjodaro. In this context it is of interest to note that the Egyptian mummies are said to have been wrapped in Indian muslin. Characters similar to those on the Indus seals have also been found on tablets excavated from Easter Island.
India - Yaksha (dwarf) image discovered in cave 2nd century BC. Egypt Bes. depicted as a deformed dwarf. 3rd century BC.
Posts: 53 | From: Daffodill land entering Egypt | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^I concur with Ausar and Rasol.
I am especially weary of any ancient Egyptian poem translated where an Egyptian woman is described as being "bright skin" and even having "white breasts", considering most of the anthropological work we have points to Egyptians having skin tones matching those of indigenous (black) Africans.
Perhaps this is mistranslation of the European word 'fair' which means light complected as well as beautiful(?).
I say this because many white supremacist distort the word 'fair' in Egyptian poetry to mean white.
The status of women in AE were that they were exalted and placed on a high pedestal. This is a common theme in Africa. Specifically: women gave birth to children, an important source of renewal and strength and women were the source of inheritence and kingship. Therefore, they were golden, like goddesses, because of these traits, which the AE and many Africans consider divine qualities.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I am especially weary of any ancient Egyptian poem translated where an Egyptian woman is described as being "bright skin" and even having "white breasts", considering most of the anthropological work we have points to Egyptians having skin tones matching those of indigenous (black) Africans.
I think the Ibo of Nigeria often describe lighter-skinned people among them as "white". Perhaps "white" in the aforementione papyrus means the same thing.
Anyway, I'm not sure what anthropological work specifies the skin color of Ancient Egyptians. Most of what we have is skeletal data. The wall paintings you see on tomb walls have symbolic coloration (brick-red men, yellow women?) and are not meant to be realistic. I don't think we can discern for certain what the Ancient Egyptians' skin color was, although possibly there was a greater bias towards darker tones.
posted
I dont agree with men in Egyptian art being red. Men in Egyptian art were mostly brown, however, due to time, enviroment and other factors, some of the images have changed colors somewhat. Still you are right those colors do not give you an exact understanding of what the Egyptian skin color was, but that isnt necessary. The intent is what counts and the images represent populations of a primarily medium to dark brown complexion, which is enough to get a general understanding of the predominant complexion of the people.
quote:Originally posted by Inmybackgarden.: Recently, more definitive evidence suggesting contact between India and Egypt has become available. A terracotta mummy from Lothal vaguely resembles an Egyptian mummy and a similar terracotta mummy is found also at Mohenjodaro. In this context it is of interest to note that the Egyptian mummies are said to have been wrapped in Indian muslin. Characters similar to those on the Indus seals have also been found on tablets excavated from Easter Island.
The evidence you speak of sounds very superficial and is not all definitive of direct contact with Egypt. Terracotta mummies, you say? This is the first I've heard of this. Do you have any sources about this claim? The Egyptians did not use terracotta to preserve their mummies and I don't know about Indian muslin.
quote: India - Yaksha (dwarf) image discovered in cave 2nd century BC. Egypt Bes. depicted as a deformed dwarf. 3rd century BC.
Yakshas were natures spirits who were originally depicted as larger and more human in size but were eventually diminished in stature. The diminuitive portrayls of Yakshas have absolutely nothing to do with the Kememu god Bes any more than European dwarves. In fact, I believe the same comparison was made by March Washington! LOLPosts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus: I think the Ibo of Nigeria often describe lighter-skinned people among them as "white". Perhaps "white" in the aforementione papyrus means the same thing.
Actually, the Ibo like many sub-Saharan Africans only call those with very fair complexions-- those of white ancestry-- white. Biracial people like Halle Berry or Barrack Obama, who are considered 'black' in America would be considered 'white' by Ibo and other West Africans.
quote:Anyway, I'm not sure what anthropological work specifies the skin color of Ancient Egyptians. Most of what we have is skeletal data. The wall paintings you see on tomb walls have symbolic coloration (brick-red men, yellow women?) and are not meant to be realistic. I don't think we can discern for certain what the Ancient Egyptians' skin color was, although possibly there was a greater bias towards darker tones.
It has been explained on this board ad-nasium as well that while the 'yellowish' color maybe symbolic, the same cannot be said for the men who are portrayed as brown and NOT brick-red!! Most paint that is 'brick-red' today was actually darker back then, and the same can also be said of the women whose color was faded into a lighter yellow. We actually have enough portraits with the paint still intact to know for sure what complexion the Egyptians were!
Here are Egyptian painted works where the paint has not faded to 'brick-red'.
Tut
Thutmose
Seti I
Ramses II
Hatshepsut
Tiye Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: I dont agree with men in Egyptian art being red. Men in Egyptian art were mostly brown, however, due to time, enviroment and other factors, some of the images have changed colors somewhat. Still you are right those colors do not give you an exact understanding of what the Egyptian skin color was, but that isnt necessary. The intent is what counts and the images represent populations of a primarily medium to dark brown complexion, which is enough to get a general understanding of the predominant complexion of the people.
^Everything Doug said above is correct. It is only through the erosion of the ancient paint that we get the 'brick red' color we see today in many, but not all Egyptian art.
Although I may add that one of the common shades of brown used was a reddish-brown, which is not uncommon among rural Egyptians today (as well as other Africans).
^Of course they're color is very different from any "brick-red" which a color no human skin has.
Seriously T-rex, with the questions you ask or the comments you make, one would think this is your first time on this forum. LOL
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus: I think the Ibo of Nigeria often describe lighter-skinned people among them as "white". Perhaps "white" in the aforementione papyrus means the same thing.
Actually, the Ibo like many Africans only call those with very fair complexions-- those of white ancestry-- white. Biracial people like Halle Berry or Barrack Obama, who are considered 'black' in America would be considered 'white' by Ibo and other West Africans.
And at any rate it has just been explained that the Egyptians never used "white" to describe any one amongst their people, and that it is a Eurocentric mistranslation (distortion) of the word nefer which means beautiful into the English word 'fair' which also means beautiful but also means white!!
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here's the poem in question from Chester Beatty Papyrus, the word for white in mdr ntr is hdj, it is not in the poem:
nfr Hr-nb ptri.s mi spdt xay m HAt rnpt nfrt Sspt iqrt wbxt inw ant irty gmH bnri spt.s mdwt bn n.s xnw m HAw qAt nHb wbxt qby xsbd mAa Snw.s gAb.s Hr iT nwb Dbaw.s mi sSnw bdS pHt.s mrw.t(i) Hr-ib DA mnty.s nfrw.s tw iwt xnd.s Hr tA iT.s ib.i m Hpt.s di.s st wn nHb TAy nb msHn n mAA st rSwt Hpty st nbt sw mi tpy n mryw ptr.ti pr.st r HA mi tfyt wat
Here's a translation:
Sister without rival, most beautiful of all, she looks like the star-goddess, rising at the start of the good New Year. Perfect and bright, shining skin, seductive in her eyes when she glances, sweet in her lips when she speaks, and never a word too many. Slender neck, shining body, her hair is true lapis, her arm gathers gold, her fingers are like lotus flowers, ample behind, tight waist, her thighs extend her beauty, shapely in stride when she steps on the earth. She has stolen my heart with her embrace, She has made the neck of every man turn round at the sight of her. Whoever embraces her is happy, he is like the head of lovers, and she is seen going outside like That Goddess, the One Goddess. http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/literature/lovesongs.htmlPosts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
I think the Ibo of Nigeria often describe lighter-skinned people among them as "white". Perhaps "white" in the aforementione papyrus means the same thing.
Actually, the Ibo like many sub-Saharan Africans only call those with very fair complexions-- those of white ancestry-- white. Biracial people like Halle Berry or Barrack Obama, who are considered 'black' in America would be considered 'white' by Ibo and other West Africans.
Caution: Which specific west Africans would consider "Halle Berry or Barrack Obama, who are considered 'black' in America", to be "white", and based on what specific evidence?
Africans are not ignorant of the fact that there is a difference between lighter complexion Africans, along with the said American public figures, and depigmented northern Eurasians.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well apparently many Ghanains refer to African-Americans as "Obrunis" (White foreigners)..
"Many African-Americans who visit Africa are unsettled to find that Africans treat them - even refer to them - the same way as white tourists. The term "obruni," or "white foreigner," is applied regardless of skin color.
To African-Americans who come here seeking their roots, the term is a sign of the chasm between Africans and African-Americans. Though they share a legacy, they experience it entirely differently."
"It is a shock for any black person to be called white," said Ms. Mann, who moved here two years ago. "But it is really tough to hear it when you come with your heart to seek your roots in Africa."
"A recent African-American visitor to Cape Coast castle took the emotionally charged step through the door of no return, only to be greeted by a pair of toddlers playing in a fishing boat on the other side, pointing and shouting, "obruni, obruni!"
"William Kwaku Moses, 71, a retired security guard who sells shells to tourists on the other side of the door of no return, shushed the children.
^Though as it is emphasized in the article, "white foreigner", or "Obruni" is applied regardless of skin color, but it is still a bit unsettling to be called a "white" anything.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The point is, as apparent even in the piece that you are citing, is that "white" isn't used in the context as some may be led to believe. It is simply used in a way to connote 'foreign', that is to say, the said people are "culturally distant", which naturally comes with a foreign social attitude different from the Ghanaian ways. Apparently, this piece in no way attempts to nor substantiates the idea that Ghanaians aren't aware that black Americans are 'black', so to speak, or that they aren't able to distinguish black Americans from Euro-Americans and northern Eurasians. The context utilized herein for the word, as should be apparent to anyone with common sense, is "cultural". Plus, what goes on in Ghana, socio-culturally speaking, isn't necessarily the case elsewhere in West Africa. Thus, generalization based on what may be the case here and there, but doesn't necessarily hold true for other areas, is without merit. Only people who have rarely set foot in anywhere of the continent make these baseless generalizations, as if to say that west Africa or any other part of Africa for that matter, is some sort of a monotypic cultural sphere.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mystery Solver: Africans are not ignorant of the fact that there is a difference between lighter complexion Africans, along with the said American public figures, and depigmented northern Eurasians.
Technically, we aren't depigmented. We do have a little melanin. Only albinos are truly depigmented.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
Technically, we aren't depigmented. We do have a little melanin. Only albinos are truly depigmented.
And?
^Ps - Bottom line, you are essentially telling this to a person who is already in the know of the said "technicality", as clearly noted herein and in discussions prior to that:
"The matter only becomes perplexing when it is assumed that a polymorphism of a single gene causes variation in human phenotype pigmentation, and that a single gene controls pigmentation in skin, eyes and hair:
Where knowledge has improved over the past century has been in precisely how many genes are involved and their specific loci. As of 1998, five human pigmentation genes had been identified. Their symbols and genome loci are: “TYR” at 11q14-21, “TYRP1” at 9p23, “TYRP2” at 13q31-32, “P” at 15q11.2-12, and “MC1R” at 16q24.3 (Sturm, Box, and Ramsay 1998).
Subsequent work has identified five non-synonymous polymorphisms at the MC1R site (Rana and others 1999). Polymorphisms have been related to phenotype (Harding and others 2000). And gene-enzyme-protein reaction chains have been identified (Kanetsky and others 2002).
Much of the genetic mechanism remains to be unraveled but one conclusion is pertinent to this essay. Several independent genes must work in concert to produce the deepest complexion—the extreme of the darkness adaptation.
Many things can go wrong and, when they do, the result is a lighter complexion. For instance, deleterious mutations at the five loci above result in various forms of albinism, whether the patient’s heritage is dark or pale. In other words, there are many random ways “accidentally” to evolve a light complexion. **But no genetic defect can make the child of light-skinned parents come out dark.** [Nelson’s syndrome does this, but it is due to a pituitary tumor, not to a mutation, nor to genetic variability (Robins 1991, 125-26).] - Frank Sweet
While phenotypic pigmentation genes appear to have correspondence with one another, whatever the degree, this doesn't mean that eye pigmentation is necessarily directly linked to the polymorphisms in say, a gene at certain locus which has effect on the production of melanin in skin. As mentioned above, the interaction of many "independent" genes appear to be necessary for the production of dark skin, and it is much more easier for loss of dark skin to occur by these polymorphisms, because the product is 'recessiveness', or else 'deficiency'. Hence, the odds against recessive pigmentation genes resulting dark color, is much, much higher than vice versa…...meaning, virtually very slim to non-existent. The 'slim' chance presents itself only if the gene is 'temporarily' shut off, and then somehow activates at some point in time, i.e. delayed in its function of imparting pigment.
As noted before, even what we refer to as 'depigmented' in north Europeans, can be somewhat misleading, especially to the laymen who don't read into the implication, since even they exhibit some level of melanin in skin, although this cannot be produced to the levels seen in much darker populations. What little more these folks can possibly produce, results in reddish-burnt skin, called 'tanning'; that is it. The light skin here is a recessive trait, but nonetheless selected for. So it is no coincidence that these folks exhibit more recessive phenotype pigmentation traits than many others. "Blondism" in the case of the likes of Australian aborigines and Melanesians, I've come across a rationalization that the trait of ‘blond’ hair could be dominant one, unlike that seen in Europeans. Don’t know the validity of this explanation [indeed questionable, given that 'blondism' appears to be 'loss' of color or pigmentation], although the trait itself seems to be relatively more prevalent in the adolescent and females than adult males…
It is possible that ‘blondism’ in tropical groups like Australian aborigines and Melanesians is “neotenous” in character, attributable to dietary habits or some yet-to-be specified response to the interactions of these groups with their natural environment. Studies specific to this trait would independently verify the underlying factors, but it is undoubtedly tied to workings of human pigmentation genes."
quote:Originally posted by Mystery Solver: Africans are not ignorant of the fact that there is a difference between lighter complexion Africans, along with the said American public figures, and depigmented northern Eurasians.
Technically, we aren't depigmented. We do have a little melanin. Only albinos are truly depigmented.
In which case, technically speaking you aren't white, either.
indeed, let's look at a variety of things commonly stated by Eurocentrism which are technically not true.
- technically speaking caucasians are only the native people of caucasia - A native or inhabitant of the Caucasus, their language and culture.
Therefore Germans and English and most 'white' Americans are not technically Caucasians any more than Somali or Yoruba or African Americans are Bantu.
Technically speaking there is no such thing as 'caucasoid', a phenotype reference, in genetics.
Technically speaking Europe is not a continent but rather only the Western most part of Asia, or Eurasia.
Technically 'western civilization', when describing western Europe, cannot encompass Greece which is not a part of Western Europe, and can *never* encompass Mesopotamia which is not a part of the Europe at all.
Technically the term 'middle east' is a nonsense word.
It was invented only a century ago by the British to imperialistically describe a region of the world where Britain could imply a 'natural' political control especially of petroleum resoures.
Otherwise the term has no native meaning for any of the peoples who live in the areas so described.
Technically all of the above false concepts exist as ethnocentric grandstanding of the 'white' people of the 'continent' of Europe, in order to give them and imaginary sense of self importance, which they then desparately cling to and beligerantly assert as essentially racist propaganda.
Technically speaking, of course. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus: Thutmose Why do male Egyptian gods always wear dreadlocks?
LOL Those aren't dreadlocks, that is just the headdress cloth!
By the way, technically 'white' people are depigmented, just not entirely as is an albino.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus: Thutmose Why do male Egyptian gods always wear dreadlocks?
LOL Those aren't dreadlocks, that is just the headdress cloth!
Really? I always though the long, grooved mass found on Egyptian gods' heads was supposed to be long hair. However, said masses do also look vaguely similar to the nemes crown that pharaohs wore. I guess it depends on how you look at it.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Its obviouse that the Egyptians were similar to modern day East African Cushetic types.
I wonder why people can't simply accept that the Egyptians resembled people such as the Beja and other horn Africans, as they obviously share a similar ancestory in that region meanin punt!
Posts: 265 | From: UK | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think AEs or their ntjrw wore uncombed matted hair. In one rare painting a workman sports such hair along with unkempt beard.
Ausar explained it as a sign of mourning. The AE norm seem to be regular grooming and braiding.
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus: Why do male Egyptian gods always wear dreadlocks?
LOL Those aren't dreadlocks, that is just the headdress cloth!
Really? I always though the long, grooved mass found on Egyptian gods' heads was supposed to be long hair. However, said masses do also look vaguely similar to the nemes crown that pharaohs wore. I guess it depends on how you look at it.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I don't think AEs or their ntjrw wore uncombed matted hair. In one rare painting a workman sports such hair along with unkempt beard.
Ausar explained it as a sign of mourning. The AE norm seem to be regular grooming and braiding.
Indeed, Egyptians both women as well as men usually kept their hair clean cut or even bald and wore wigs. We have rare instances of Egyptians growing their hair long, but when they do it, it grows out usually very curly (afro) and not that long. We even have evidence of Egyptians having their hair plaited down but non of any "dreadlocks".
If one has seen many Egyptian headdresses, then one could easily tell that what comes off of Anupu's (Anubis's) head is just cloth and not hair as there is no Egyptian hair that looks that straight or that shape.
That reminds me of our past troll Abaza who claimed Egyptians had red or blonde hair and cited pictures of Kememu women wearing red and yellow head-cloths! LOLPosts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Prince_of_punt: Its obviouse that the Egyptians were similar to modern day East African Cushetic types.
I wonder why people can't simply accept that the Egyptians resembled people such as the Beja and other horn Africans, as they obviously share a similar ancestory in that region meanin punt!
Why should anyone accept that? They were not from horn of africa, and i doubt they resembled "cushitic types" more than they did people in their closer vicinity like northern sudanese or the saharan dwellers. Imo they looked probably like modern upper egyptians, i don't think it's necessery to go outside Egypt so to find the looks which best fits their own ancestors.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: We have rare instances of Egyptians growing their hair long, but when they do it, it grows out usually very curly (afro) and not that long. We even have evidence of Egyptians having their hair plaited down but non of any "dreadlocks".
Actually, I have seen a few images of Egyptians wearing long, straight hair (e.g. Ranofer), but it isn't terribly common considering the popular stereotypical image of Egyptians.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
technically 'western civilization' is a mis-leading term.
quote:Originally posted by Yonis:
quote:Originally posted by Prince_of_punt: Its obviouse that the Egyptians were similar to modern day East African Cushetic types.
Why should anyone accept that? They were not from horn of africa, and i doubt they resembled "cushitic types" more than they did people in their closer vicinity like northern sudanese or the saharan dwellers. Imo they looked probably like modern upper egyptians, i don't think it's necessery to go outside Egypt so to find the looks which best fits their own ancestors.
Yoner, I agree that you don't have to (and shouldn't logically) go outside of Egypt to find ancient Egyptian looks, but I find the Beja look most believable, for the most part. And Egyptians are mixed, so you're gonna find some ohter looks to a signif. scale.
Some of their population did have its origins in the horn. So I wouldn't say your response was entirely accurate.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes we do have a painting of an AE with uncombed matted hair. As I wrote earlier, he's a workman (stone fitter?) and he also has a stubbly beard. Ausar opined that the man was in mourning.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: We have rare instances of Egyptians growing their hair long, but when they do it, it grows out usually very curly (afro) and not that long. We even have evidence of Egyptians having their hair plaited down but non of any "dreadlocks".
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^I don't deny existence of such pictures (and I think I know which one you are talking abou ), but I think that is a far cry from the long dreads T-rex speaks of.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Prince_of_punt: Its obviouse that the Egyptians were similar to modern day East African Cushetic types.
I wonder why people can't simply accept that the Egyptians resembled people such as the Beja and other horn Africans, as they obviously share a similar ancestory in that region meanin punt!
Why should anyone accept that? They were not from horn of africa, and i doubt they resembled "cushitic types" more than they did people in their closer vicinity like northern sudanese or the saharan dwellers. Imo they looked probably like modern upper egyptians, i don't think it's necessery to go outside Egypt so to find the looks which best fits their own ancestors.
You seem to forget that this entire region was occupied by similar people in the past, and they came from the Horn meaning Ethiopia.
Genetics proves this, as well as the ancient Egyptians themselves. The Egyptians came from Punt, they were derived from a stock of horn Africans. Even they themselves documented this.
Im not trying to rule out the influence of other groups, as this would be silly. All that im suggesting is that the original stock of Egyptians were most likely similar to horn African cushetic Africans, but were subsequently intermingled with other groups from Eurasia as well as the Nubians from the south.
I know that many people on this thread hate to distinguish the nubians from the ancient Egyptians, but why should we not if they themselves did. It does not mean they were not tropically adapted Africans because they chose to distinguish themselves. For example I know that Africans classify themselves into groups in modern day, as they obviously are, but ultimately share a common ancestory.
Posts: 265 | From: UK | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
However long or short they are, dreads are dreads. You're too young to remember when Bob's dreads, or Winston's locks were just starting like below.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^I don't deny existence of such pictures (and I think I know which one you are talking abou ), but I think that is a far cry from the long dreads T-rex speaks of.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannosaurus: Actually, I have seen a few images of Egyptians wearing long, straight hair (e.g. Ranofer), but it isn't terribly common considering the popular stereotypical image of Egyptians.
The long straight 'hair' you speak of are artificial wigs usually made of plant fibers and painted black. In fact there are peoples in Africa who wear similar types of wigs.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nose is obviously retouched; hair looks natural (skin between the part) doesn't look like a wig; for its era, can't say if its thick and straight or if it's braided. I don't see any reason why there must be no leiotrichous haired individuals in T3 Shemaw and T3 Mehw. That attitude strikes of the reactionary.
The reality of ancient Egypt's/Sudan's/Horn's inner Africanity is not threatened by the fact that certain of the population didn't have the pure wooly/fuzzy/nappy/kinky/frizzy hair. There's more to their air than just their hair.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
You seem to forget that this entire region was occupied by similar people in the past, and they came from the Horn meaning Ethiopia.
Genetics proves this, as well as the ancient Egyptians themselves. The Egyptians came from Punt, they were derived from a stock of horn Africans. Even they themselves documented this.
If you go by Cruciani's latest study, it would appear that Upper Paleolithic groups came initially from East Africa, not sure from exactly where, but it had to have been within the tropics...AND THEN, there was back-migration from the vicinity of Upper Egypt to sub-Saharan East Africa.
The precise location of Pwnt is 'equivocal', in that it could well be a generalized reference to a "region", as opposed to one in which the location can be boxed into a single contemporary nation, that is, not transcending national borders of contemporary nations.
quote:Prince_of_punt:
Im not trying to rule out the influence of other groups, as this would be silly. All that im suggesting is that the original stock of Egyptians were most likely similar to horn African cushetic Africans, but were subsequently intermingled with other groups from Eurasia as well as the Nubians from the south.
By doing this, you are implying that the so-called "Nubians" don't come from a common origin as the "Egyptians". What evidence do you have for this? In fact, it is much more likely that predynastic Egyptians directly drew from the so-called "Nubia" and the Sahara, rather than the African Horn. Common sense tells us that, people from deep in Sub-Saharan Africa would have first had to go through "Nubia" before reaching what is now "Egypt", and that these populations would have stemmed from common origins...so trying to separate "ancient Egyptians" from the so-called "Nubians" absolutely makes no sense.
quote:Prince_of_punt:
I know that many people on this thread hate to distinguish the nubians from the ancient Egyptians, but why should we not if they themselves did.
You make it sound like it is the dogma of posters here, that "ancient Egyptians" and the so-called "Nubians" had affinities, rather than a matter of objectivity. The matter of fact, as presented ad nauseam, is...
Keita, on centroid values of cranial series:
"Badarian (8) occupies a position closest to the Teita, Gaboon, Nubian, and Nagada series by centroid values and territorial maps. The Nagada and the Kerma series are so similar that they are barely INDISTINGUISHABLE in the territorial maps; they subsume the first dynasty series in Abydos… The Badarian crania have a modal metric phenotype that is clearly “southern”; most classify into the Kerma (Nubian), Gaboon, and Kenyan groups…No Badarian cranium in any analysis classified into the European series, and few grouped with the “E” series…
The keywords here is "INDISTINGUISHABLE", as far as the correlation of the Nagada samples with the Kerma series is concerned.
Nutter (1958) found that they [the Nagada] are essentially identical to the Badarian series. The classification of crania into specific groups does NOT imply identity with those specific series, only AFFINITIES with broad patterns connoting COMMON ORIGINS..." - Keita, Studies of Ancient Crania From Northern Africa
There is strong continuity between the Badarian series and the Nagadan series, and this continuity goes all the way through the dynastic period.
However...
“The centroid values of the various upper Egyptian series viewed collectively are seen to vary over time. The general trend from Badari to Nakada times, and then from the Nakadan to the First Dynasty epochs [b]demonstrate change toward the northern-Egyptian centroid value on Function I with similar values on Function 11. This might represent an average change from an Africoid (Keita, 1990) to a northern-Egyptian- Maghreb modal pattern.
It is clear however from the unknown analyses that the Abydene centroid value is explained primarily by the relatively greater number of crania with northern-Egyptian-Maghreb and European patterns in the series.
Badari crania analyzed in this fashion revealed few or none which classified into the northern-Egyptian groups (Keita, 1990).
This **northern modal pattern**, which can be **called coastal northern African**, is noted in general terms to [b]be intermediate, by the centroid scores of Function I, to equatorial African and northern European phenotypes.
...some gradual change is observed towards a relatively "generalized pattern" vis-à-vis the northern coastal pattern, largely from progressive periods of the Nagadan complex, when it would appear that commercial contact between them and predynastic Northern Egyptian counterparts considerably enhanced.
So, in a sense, the Badarians likely had stronger prevalences of the "stereotyped" sub-Saharan traits, which pseudo-science conformists would call relatively more "Negroid" [as is the case with the likes of Natufians], than the Nagadan series by the turn of the predynastic period...at least in so far as sites sampled revealed, particularly from the first dynastic royal tombs, the modal pattern of which still tilts towards the "southern" modal patterns, namely upper Egypt/"Lower Nubia", Kerma, Gabon and Kenyan series. Remember that the predynastic samples don't necessarily reflect the royal specimens, unless stated otherwise, which in Nagadan case, lies in the predynastic Abydos tombs and other tombs in the Nagadan regions. Ta-Seti specimens would have been recovered in the Qustul tombs and other cemeteries in that part of the Nile Valley.
^Even the fact that ancient Upper Egyptian elites had strong affinities with the so-called "Nubians", is supported by studies like:
"A biological affinities study based on frequencies of cranial nonmetric traits in skeletal samples from three cemeteries at predynastic Naqada, Egypt, confirms the results of a recent nonmetric dental morphological analysis. Both cranial and dental traits analyses indicate that the individuals buried in a cemetery characterized archaeologically as high status are significantly different from individuals buried in two other, apparently nonelite cemeteries and that the nonelite samples are not significantly different from each other.
A comparison with neighboring Nile Valley skeletal samples suggests that the [b]high status cemetery represents an endogamous ruling or elite segment of the local population at Naqada, which is more closely related to populations in northern Nubia than to neighboring populations in southern Egypt.
Extract from: American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol. 101, Issue 2, October 1996, Pages: 237-246
Last, but not least, Pwnt apparently also comprised of peopl with varied phenotype:
It does not mean they were not tropically adapted Africans because they chose to distinguish themselves.
There are various instances where the so-called "Nubians" and "ancient Egyptians" aren't necessarily distinguished in skin tone or conventions in phenotype, but more so, in attire...particularly in Old to Middle Kingdom periods.
quote:Prince_of_punt:
For example I know that Africans classify themselves into groups in modern day, as they obviously are, but ultimately share a common ancestory.
...agreed here, which is why your initially point about separating "Nubians" from "Egyptians" by implicating that the latter come from the "Horn", while the other supposedly doesn't (?), isn't sensible.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Getting back to that statue of Ranofer. First of all, yes the nose is obviously a re-done and maybe the lips too, but that doesn't seem tampered with.
As for his hair. I do not doubt that it could be his natural hair as Africans with straight hair exist or more common hair that is plaited straight. Although in Diop's past book, he did make references to artifical hand-woven wigs made from various materials and did give it a straightened look. If anyone could back me up on that or whatever.
[ 04. May 2007, 02:41 PM: Message edited by: Horus_Den_1 ]
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Getting back to that statue of Ranofer. First of all, yes the nose is obviously a re-done and maybe the lips too, but that doesn't seem tampered with.
How would anyone "re-work" lips? Why can't an African have thin lips?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ Most of your [touregypt] discourse is inaccurate or distorted. The above is a gross reworking of Denkmaeler plate 136, the original and accurate version of which is shown below.... Notice the difference in skin tone and facial features between the actual plate and your altered version?
LOL. That image is a modern rendering. Have a picture of the original?
quote:Below is Denkmaeler plate 48 The Rm.t classified themselves and Nhsy as Blacks. They often showed the Nehesi to be darker but not always, sometimes Rm.t and Km.t are shown, as above, as literally Black. Sometimes Nhsy were shown in lighter brown skin-tones as well. It's also worth noting that the original 'Libyans' of Siwa Oasis were portrayed as dark skinned as well. [as is the current population of Siwa] It's only from the late kingdom that we begin to see the lighter skinned Tamehu Libyans. Hope this helps.
I always love how you love showing that one plate. Why don't the others ever show the same thing. Maybe because it is an anomaly. And as I stated in the other thread. there was variety in the region since the predynastic.
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: The rest of your post is jibberish, which anyone on here can pick apart.
Your wishful thinking is entertaining
quote:But this I want to address. Please point me to the Peer-Reviewed source for this claim. Brace can ASSUME anything, but the scientific method calls for peer-review. In addition, it is not unusual that AE would tie in with Pliestocene North Africans, especially since the Pliestocene runs all the way up to the Dynastic era. The Badarians were North Africans and would fit into this picture. What Brace is using is known as 'double-talk'. Pliestocene North Africans migrated from LGM tropical East Africa as Brace himself knows and has admitted. So tieing Dynastic Africans to other Dynastic Africans tells us nothing. Now if we go back further in time we know that Joel Irish conducted phenetic analysis on early Holocene North East Africans and they clustered with modern Sub-Saharan Africans phenetically. This WAS a peer-reviewed study. In addition most of North Africa and many parts of the Arabian penninsula were depopulated until the early Holocene when there was a repopulation by the predecessors of the Badarians and Natufians. All of this is from peer-reviewed sources unlike Braces COMMENT via a email to you.
Brace's response to your spouting:
quote:the substance for my claims I published the data and the statistics with the help of six co-authors in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 103(1):242-247 on January 3, 2006. That counts as a distinguished peer-reviewed journal. It should be noted that the Natufian is not the source of the European Neolithic. The pottery and agriculture of the Natufian came down from Anatolia and was adopted by the Natufian in Israel. Our data do show whiffs of sub-Saharan Africa in the Natufian but not in the Neolithic skeletal material from Greece, Italy, or elsewhere in Europe. Since I am not an archaeologist, I have relied on colleagues who are archaeologists to provide me with sources and analysis of the Natufian and other sites. My archaeological colleagues have actually worked on the Natufian and other Neolithic sites in Egypt, Iraq, Syria, and eastern and western Europe. Kent Flannnery, Henry Wright, John O'Shea, and Rich Redding are all well-known and widely published in the business, and I have always used their help in assessing the evidence. The skeletal work was done largely by me, but my co-authors have worked on collections I could not get to to provide the needed metric data.
Then let's look at Irish's response:
quote:Here is an excerpt from my 2006 Egyptian paper. Beyond the citations below, Hendrickx and Vermeersh (2000) also suggest influence on the Badari culture from the Levant.
The numerically-derived affinities in Table 4, and their patterning as illustrated by the MDS and CA figures (Figs. 2, 3 and 5), suggest that there is some measure of homogeneity among the bulk of Egyptian samples. Specifically, the aforementioned clustering of 11 or so samples is reminiscent of that observed among post-Paleolithic Nubians in a previous dental study of the region (Irish, 2005). In the latter case, homogeneity was thought to be suggestive of population continuity. Similarly, the potential Egyptian continuity extends across time -- as evidenced by affinities among the three predynastic, five of seven dynastic, and two or perhaps three Roman period samples, and space - as indicated by the mostly random distribution of points denoting Upper and Lower Egyptians. If true, these findings vary from those based on cranial morphometric data that indicate biological heterogeneity, at least in predynastic times (Prowse and Lovell, 1996; Keita, 1996), and a broad clinal variation between populations in the north and south (Keita, 1990, 1992). The source of any heterogeneity is thought to have stemmed from the make-up of the "proto-predynastic" (Keita, 1992, p. 251) founding population that may have comprised many biologically distinct peoples, including Saharan, Nilotic, AND LEVANT GROUPS (Hassan, 1988; Keita, 1990, 1992; Prowse and Lovell, 1996). This amalgam is still evident in Egypt's modern peoples (Manni et al., 2002). However, the overall diachronic homogeneity indicated by the dental, as well as other data (e.g., Brace et al., 1993), is likely due to extensive interaction via trade, population movement, and genetic exchange among the many communities along the Nile between Upper and Lower Egypt (Hassan, 1988). As Hassan (1988) observes, the narrow river valley with its thin strip of habitable land would quickly be populated during the rapid late predynastic expansion. In other words, Egypt "became a melting pot" for the founding groups (Hassan, 1988, p. 135) by the predynastic period and beyond.
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: The Journal of North African Studies, Vol.10, No.3–4 (September–December 2005) The Climate-Environment-Society Nexus in Sahara from Prehistoric Times to the Present NICK BROOKS, ISABELLE CHIAPELLO, SAVINO LERNIA, NICK DRAKE, MICHEL LEGRAND, MOULIN AND JOSEPH “It is worth noting that the scant palaeo-anthropological evidence (from Uan and Uan Muhuggiag in the central Sahara of Libya) points to sub-Saharan affinities.55 This fits with more recent human remains from the Egyptian oasis, which indicate similar affinity on the basis of dental analysis. These findings support the of a northwards movement of human populations as they followed the monsoon rains, which strengthened and penetrated further north into the Sahara at the beginning the Holocene. The gap between the beginning of the humid period in the after the last glacial maximum (ca. 15–13 ka) and the appearance of the Holocene occupation sites might be interpreted as a consequence of the time for vegetation and fauna to recolonise hyperarid environments. More cautiously, the first genetic data on Saharan palaeo-populations also a sub-Saharan affinity. Evidence for a southern provenance of the first Saharans might also be seen in from rock art, although the subjective nature of interpretations must be recognised: in the and Acacus depictions figures with what appear to be black African features have been interpreted indicating the possible presence of populations originating in sub-Saharan regions.”
You forgot to check the reference. 55. S. di Lernia and G. Manzi, ‘Funerary practices and anthropological features at 8000–5000 BP. Some evidence from central-southern Acacus (Libyan Sahara)’, in M. Cremaschi and S. di Lernia (Eds.),
Also from Di Lernia:
quote:Human figures are represented only in the painted imagery recorded to date; they are absent from the recorded engravings of Sluguilla, although their presence at unrecorded sites cannot be discounted. Some of the figures at Bou Dheir are represented with distinctive crests or head-dresses reminiscent of painted figures of Mediterranean or Near Eastern appearance in the central Sahara, while representations at Erqueiz are very different in appearance, suggesting at least two different population groups.
also from Di Lernia:
quote:All these elements concur to define a composite society, probably the fruit of mixing and relations with surrounding regions : also rock art, considered with caution, seems to indicate a mixture of 'races', with configurations of individuals with negroid ‘characters’, but also with ‘mediterranean’ or ‘nilotic’ peoples(Fig. 6).
quote: The Rm.t classified themselves and Nhsy as Blacks. They often showed the Nehesi to be darker but not always, sometimes Rm.t and Km.t are shown, as above, as literally Black.
Sometimes Nhsy were shown in lighter brown skin-tones as well.
It's also worth noting that the original 'Libyans' of Siwa Oasis were portrayed as dark skinned as well. [as is the current population of Siwa]
It's only from the late kingdom that we begin to see the lighter skinned Tamehu Libyans. Hope this helps.
quote:A frustrated Troll replies: I always love how you love showing that one plate.
We love showing it because we know you will whine bitterly, babble borishly, and produce no answers, as usual....
Kmst [Black Lady] Kmt[Nwt] Blacks, the Black Community.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: The Rm.t classified themselves and Nhsy as Blacks. They often showed the Nehesi to be darker but not always, sometimes Rm.t and Km.t are shown, as above, as literally Black. No evidence of this at all. Feel free to show where the Nhsy are being called Black. And again, that one plate of a Nhsy with the word Rmt, does not say Black, and it is still an anomaly. ALL other Gates of Nations portray them different and the Egyptian as being lighter. Feel free to show me another place that depicts the nations of Rmt and Nhsy as being the same.
Sometimes Nhsy were shown in lighter brown skin-tones as well. Never when being contrasted with the Kmtyw. And again, predominantly, they were not. It's also worth noting that the original 'Libyans' of Siwa Oasis were portrayed as dark skinned as well. [as is the current population of Siwa]
It's only from the late kingdom that we begin to see the lighter skinned Tamehu Libyans. Hope this helps. You have yet to provide evidence for this.
We love showing it because we know you will whine bitterly, babble borishly, and produce no answers, as usual.... You love to show it because it is all you have. Kmst [Black Lady]
Yes, a dark skinned lady surrounded by a bunch of non darkskinned Egyptians. Kmt[Nwt] Blacks, the Black Community. Again, nice try. One group is Medjay and the other is Egyptian slightly lighter, and of all the models in that tomb depicting Egyptians they were the darkest. Again the MAJORITY portrayed the Egyptians as being lighter.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Will the wonders of the twisted Eurocentric mind ever cease?![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Yeah^.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic