Black basalt bust of Pharaoh Ptolemy I of Egypt, dating from the 4th century BC, which was the period of the 30th Dynasty.
Ptolemy I was also known as Ptolemy Soter, meaning 'saviour', and before becoming Pharaoh of Egypt, was a Macedonian general who served under Alexander the Great. With Alexander, he served in many military campaigns, including those in India, Babylon, Persia, and Afghanistan. After Alexander's death, Ptolemy was appointed Satrap (governor) of Egypt, and later took the title of Pharaoh, founding the Ptolemaic dynasty.
Repost,
The satues of the Ptolemy are purely metaphorical, in Egyptian style not litaraly. During hell'anism they forced themselves upon Egyptians, killing people left and right, after Alexander begged for the Pharaohs tittle, which they the priests, did not want to him to have, since he was not of Egyptian royal lineage.
Tarnos is a liar.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
You've got nothing to come back with but an absurd and unwarranted accusation of racism. Then again, several people hereabouts are so stupid and wrong-headed that they call anyone who disagrees with the far-fetched notion of black Egypt a 'nazi'. You insult anyone who has been on the receiving end of racism or fascism as much- as you insult me- when you speak such foolishness. It is really the likes of you who should be ashamed when you stoop to this level of unreason.
And what is so absurd or "farfetched" about a black Egypt. Egypt is in Africa and blacks are indigenous to ALL of African including North Africa since the Sahara did not exist during the Holocene times.
quote:There isn't anything inherently 'black' about the features of Khaemhat. You are delusional.
These figures, with their cascading, wavy hair, look perfectly like average modern Egyptians, and nothing like average black Africans. Anyone in denial over this needs to seek psychiatric help.
You obviously don't know much about the physical diversity of black Africans then. I have seen Ethiopians not to far from where I live with those same facial features and wavy hair. Ignorance must be bliss for you, huh?
quote: Most of the images I posted were fourth or fifth dynasty. Here is another, Userkaf, first king of the Fifth Dynasty...
No one, to my knowledge, has ever attempted to suggest that there was a change in Egypt's makeup between the third and fourth dynasty. There is no case to answer.
Of course there wasn't the change came during Greek and Roman times when many of those Europeans settlers mixed with the native population before they were converted to the Coptic faith.
quote:I don't see anything 'black' about the figures on the Narmer Palette. There is no negroid maxillary prognathism to be seen, rather (as with Userkaf) the foreheads tend to prokect further forward than the mouths, and the line from the brow to the nose is straight, rather than depressed as is more usual for black people.
The same goes for king Scorpion:
More idiotic strawman! There are many black Africans that do not have maxillary prognathism. Why do you incessantly insist on this FALSE standard or this very limited trait for a people to be black?? Of course the answer is so you can white-wash Egypt!
quote:And for a number of predynastic figures, which look more Sumerian than black African...
I already explained the statue is wearing a tight skull cap of the kind worn by Puntites. He does not have convergent eyebrows like Sumerians, and he even wears a PENIS-SHEATH (not shown in the picture) which ties him to many Nilotic Africans!
quote:The statue of Djoser may shows some black traits, but it is somewhat ambigious, and isn't sufficiently well preserved to say for sure. At any rate it's all within the bounds of the present Egyptian population.
LOL You're thinking is ambiguous at best and incoherent at worst! Of course you ignore the chocolate brown traces of paint on the face.
Fact the facts. The Egyptians were black! This is why you continue to ignore the actual bio-anthropological data as cited by Calabooz!
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The claim that blacks are native to all of Africa is unsubstantiated, and there is no evicence that blacks were ever the majority in Egypt.
It is far fetched in the light of the fact that the descendants of the non-black indigenous peoples of the region are still very much present, and the fact that anthropologists have identified ancient skeletons as north Africans, without knowing what age said skeletons were. In the light of numerous paintings of people with skin tones that black people do not have, and of 3,000 year-old Egyptian love poems praising womens' white breasts and lips like rose buds.
There may be blacks who do not have maxilliary prognathism, but negroes generally do. Afrocentrists (who are themselves mostly negroes) are swift enough to seize upon images from Egypt with the slightest suggestion of prognathism, but when there is no trace of one, then we hear this about blacks not needing to have such a feature... and sometimes having narrow noses and fine lips! (Meanwhile you say nothing to discourage the resident lunatics who claim the Habsburgs as black because of their congenital jaw deformity!)
Afrocentrists (who, as mentioned, are mostly black American negroes) are disingenuous when they go on about black african diversity. Such people have almost as little to do with Ethiopia as they do with Egypt. Their obsession with the history of these lands is more about bigging up their own kind than anything else. The civilizations that these American 'afrocentrists' would appropriate for a mythical pan-African race have nothing to do with their own ancestors. They are only the heritage of the people who live there still- the modern Egyptians etc. Egypt is as far from the ancestral lands of black Americans as it is from Finland, and as Finland is from China.
I'm sick of explaining the fact that the Egyptian Copts do not descend from Greeks and Romans. This is a pathetic fabrication, an attempt on the part of Afrocentric culture-thieves to explain away the inconvenient living representatives of the indigenous peoples.
You don't have to be black to wear a penis sheath, by the way (but it probably helps). This is what nilotic Africans look like with no outside admixture. The only man there who could potentially pass for an Egyptian (unless everyone knew better) had a white mother.
quote:Originally posted by dahoslips101: These figures, with their cascading, wavy hair, look perfectly like average modern Egyptians, and nothing like average black Africans. Anyone in denial over this needs to seek psychiatric help.
You obviously don't know much about the physical diversity of black Africans then. I have seen Ethiopians not to far from where I live with those same facial features and wavy hair. Ignorance must be bliss for you, huh?
If he thinks black people can't wear their hair in a way that makes it look long and cascading, he clearly has never heard of dreadlocks:
And then there's the fact that many Egyptians would often wear wigs, sometimes made out of plant fibers that were painted black as you have pointed out before.
Meanwhile he ignores all those Egyptian wall reliefs which do depict woolly African hair:
Posts: 7083 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blackfetishcentric: If he thinks black people can't wear their hair in a way that makes it look long and cascading, he clearly has never heard of dreadlocks:
I've never seen dreadlocks falling in wavy ripples. There is also nothing 'woolly' about the layered style. You're deranged if you think Egyptians looked more like Jamaicans than Egyptians!
posted
^^ Truthcentric never said the Egyptian hair were dreadlocks, dummy! He made the comparison in terms of hair LENGTH, since you think blacks can only have short hair! As far as wavy ripples that is actually characteristic of the natural hair of many black peoples of east Africa!
By the way, the cascading effect can be achieved through butter or animal fat as I have seen east Africans with that exact same hairstyles as such Egyptian women achieved through natural lipid gels!
You must be deranged if you think peoples hair texture or color remains the same after millennia if at all!
You must be deranged if you think the fairest skinned 'whitish' looking Egyptians represent the original BLACK inhabitants!
Oh please!
Zahi Hawass is from the city of Damietta which is a known historical ARAB colonial settlement.
LMAO You are DEFINITELY deranged if you think these MODERN 'fair and lovely' beauties represent Nefertari or any ancient Egyptian woman!!
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dahoslips: The claim that blacks are native to all of Africa is unsubstantiated, and there is no evidence that blacks were ever the majority in Egypt.
LOL Unsubstantiated you say? Even after we cited dozens of studies from experts??
How are blacks only native to 'Sub-Sahara' when the Sahara desert did not always exist??
The period when sub-Saharan Africa was most influential in Egypt was a time when neither Egypt, as we understand it culturally, nor the Sahara, as we understand it geographically, existed. Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant. Egypt rapidly found a method of disciplining the river, the land, and the people to transform the country into a titanic garden. Egypt rapidly developed detailed cultural forms that dwarfed its forebears in urbanity and elaboration. Thus, when new details arrived, they were rapidly adapted to the vast cultural superstructure already present. On the other hand, pharaonic culture was so bound to its place near the Nile that its huge, interlocked religious, administrative, and formal structures could not be readily transferred to relatively mobile cultures of the desert, savanna, and forest. The influence of the mature pharaonic civilizations of Egypt and Kush was almost confined to their sophisticated trade goods and some significant elements of technology. Nevertheless, the religious substratum of Egypt and Kush was so similar to that of many cultures in southern Sudan today that it remains possible that fundamental elements derived from the two high cultures to the north live on.--Joseph O. Vogel (1997)
"It is possible from this overview of the data to conclude that the limited conceptual vocabulary shared by the ancestors of contemporary Chadic-speakers (therefore also contemporary Cushitic-speakers), contemporary Nilotic-speakers and Ancient Egyptian-speakers suggests that the earliest speakers of the Egyptian language could be located to the south of Upper Egypt (Diakonoff 1998) or, earlier, in the Sahara (Wendorf 2004), where Takács (1999, 47) suggests their ‘long co-existence’ can be found. In addition, it is consistent with this view to suggest that the northern border of their homeland was further than the Wadi Howar proposed by Blench (1999, 2001), which is actually its southern border. Neither Chadics nor Cushitics existed at this time, but their ancestors lived in a homeland further north than the peripheral countries that they inhabited thereafter, to the south-west, in a Niger-Congo environment, and to the south-east, in a Nilo-Saharan environment, where they interacted and innovated in terms of language. From this perspective, the Upper Egyptian cultures were an ancient North East African ‘periphery at the crossroads’, as suggested by Dahl and Hjort-af-Ornas of the Beja (Dahl and Hjort-af-Ornas 2006).[/b] The most likely scenario could be this: some of these Saharo-Nubian populations spread southwards to Wadi Howar, Ennedi and Darfur; some stayed in the actual oases where they joined the inhabitants; and others moved towards the Nile, directed by two geographic obstacles, the western Great Sand Sea and the southern Rock Belt. Their slow perambulations led them from the area of Sprinkle Mountain (Gebel Uweinat) to the east – Bir Sahara, Nabta Playa, Gebel Ramlah, and Nekhen/Hierakonpolis (Upper Egypt), and to the north-east by way of Dakhla Oasis to Abydos (Middle Egypt)."--Anselin (2009)
As for blacks never being the majority in Egypt:
The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the "super-Negroid" body plan described by Robins (1983).. This pattern is supported by Figure 7 (a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994), which indicates that the Egyptians generally have tropical body plans. Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. Despite these differences, all samples lie relatively clustered together as compared to the other populations." (Zakrzewski, S.R. (2003). "Variation in ancient Egyptian stature and body proportions". American Journal of Physical Anthropology 121 (3): 219-229.
"There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.. In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas." (Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999) pp 328-332)
"Certainly there was some foreign admixture [in Egypt], but basically a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times... [the] Badarian people, who developed the earliest Predynastic Egyptian culture, already exhibited the mix of North African and Sub-Saharan physical traits that have typified Egyptians ever since (Hassan 1985; Yurco 1989; Trigger 1978; Keita 1990.. et al.,)... The peoples of Egypt, the Sudan, and much of East African Ethiopia and Somalia are now generally regarded as a Nilotic continuity, with widely ranging physical features (complexions light to dark, various hair and craniofacial types) but with powerful common cultural traits, including cattle pastoralist traditions.." (Frank Yurco, "An Egyptological Review," 1996 -in Mary R. Lefkowitz and Guy MacLean Rogers, Black Athena Revisited, 1996, The University of North Carolina Press, p. 62-100)
"The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin." (Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues", Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13)
These are just a FEW of the COUNTLESS studies verifying the so-called "Afrocentric" position which again makes perfect sense considering Egypt IS African!
As for the aboriginal populations of North Africa, there is a thread where we are currently discussing the findings on who the first populations of North Africa were right here:
quote:It is far fetched in the light of the fact that the descendants of the non-black indigenous peoples of the region are still very much present, and the fact that anthropologists have identified ancient skeletons as north Africans, without knowing what age said skeletons were. In the light of numerous paintings of people with skin tones that black people do not have, and of 3,000 year-old Egyptian love poems praising womens' white breasts and lips like rose buds.
And again non-black peoples of the region are due to FOREIGN admixture or immigration. In the meantime, there are more pristine black types also present especially in more isolated areas least affected by foreigners, yet you dismiss such folk as recent Sub-Saharan immigrants! LOL It is common sense that these black populaces represent the aboriginal people. Anthropologists have identified the earliest skeletons of North Africans as having tropical adapted traits no different from so-called "Sub-Saharans" as cited above. As for for how their skulls were identified based on cranio-facial features there is a thread dedicated to that here and the answers are the same ones you don't like!
As for the numerous paintings not showing black peoples skin tones:
^ Most sane thinking people acknowledge that such chocolate brown to hazel complexions are skin tones found in Sub-Sahara let alone the Sahara and areas in the north. That one poem of "white breasts" and lapiz lazuli hair aside!
quote:There may be blacks who do not have maxillary prognathism, but negroes generally do. Afrocentrists (who are themselves mostly negroes) are swift enough to seize upon images from Egypt with the slightest suggestion of prognathism, but when there is no trace of one, then we hear this about blacks not needing to have such a feature... and sometimes having narrow noses and fine lips! (Meanwhile you say nothing to discourage the resident lunatics who claim the Habsburgs as black because of their congenital jaw deformity!)
Again your willful ignorance of physical anthropology is obvious from your continued use of debunked racial terms like “negroes” and “caucasians” whose basis was refuted by science decades ago. Indigenous (black) Africans vary in phenotypic features especially craniofacial ones. Prognathism is no more a basis of African identity than is broad nose or kinky hair. I don’t know what “Afrocentrics” you are referring to but the more educated folk in this forum (including the few whites) who post here are not foolish enough seize upon a single trait like prognathism, (even though there were many Egyptians that did exhibit this trait in one form or another) anymore than they would seize upon broad noses! As for lunatics who make such claims about the Habsburgs, trust me I’ve learned long ago in this forum better than to argue with lunatics!! What is the point exactly if their arguments are lunacy?? Frankly, I’ve begun to think you are no saner than they are!!
quote:Afrocentrists (who, as mentioned, are mostly black American negroes) are disingenuous when they go on about black african diversity. Such people have almost as little to do with Ethiopia as they do with Egypt. Their obsession with the history of these lands is more about bigging up their own kind than anything else. The civilizations that these American 'afrocentrists' would appropriate for a mythical pan-African race have nothing to do with their own ancestors. They are only the heritage of the people who live there still- the modern Egyptians etc. Egypt is as far from the ancestral lands of black Americans as it is from Finland, and as Finland is from China.
I find your claims rather ridiculous considering that in my recent years of African studies, I do find a common link between Africans genetically as well as culturally. For example West Africans share many genes and lineages with East Africans like Ethiopians, and they also share many cultural traits and traditions as well, yet I find it odd you find the idea of a ‘pan-African race’ to be mythical yet not a ‘pan-European’ let alone a “Caucasian” race which you and other Eurocentrics not only include all Europeans but even peoples outside of Europe such as North Africa, Southwest Asia and even Central and South Asia!! There are many scholars, and I mean mainstream WHITE scholars who acknowledge a common genetic and cultural connection between West Africans and East Africans including Egypt via a common source in the region that is now the Sahara when it was once green and fertile. Traditions like totems, animal masks, headrests, ritual scepters, wigs, fertility paddle dolls, fertility belts, etc. etc. are found in traditional West African cultures as they are in dynastic Egypt. Genetic components like haplogroup IV and Benin HBS (sickle cell) are present in Egypt as they are in West Africa and archaeology shows the common link to be the Sahara itself, the very desert you use as a pathetic excuse to divide and segregate the populations of Africa! Now tell me what right do you and other Northwest Euros have to claim the cultural traditions of southeastern Europe like Greece?? One could argue you like many Brits cling to the Greeks and Romans to “big” your own kind!!
quote:I'm sick of explaining the fact that the Egyptian Copts do not descend from Greeks and Romans. This is a pathetic fabrication, an attempt on the part of Afrocentric culture-thieves to explain away the inconvenient living representatives of the indigenous peoples.
And I’m sick of explaining to you that Egyptian Copts descend from Egyptians of many backgrounds from native to foreign!! Again, I never said all Copts are of Greco-Roman descent as there are many Copts in Upper Egypt who still resemble their ancient (black) ancestors! My point is you love to cling to the Copts of the Delta and particularly Alexandria who are historically known to have Greek and Roman ancestry!! We’ve had a native Egyptian (Ausar) explain this to you several times on several threads!! Do you not even realize that the height of Greco-Roman presence on the Delta occurred during the advent of the Coptic Church??!
quote:You don't have to be black to wear a penis sheath, by the way (but it probably helps). This is what nilotic Africans look like with no outside admixture. The only man there who could potentially pass for an Egyptian (unless everyone knew better) had a white mother.
LMAO Stupid strawman! Nobody said only blacks wore penis sheaths! There are tribes in Asia and the Pacific as well as in South America who wore penis sheaths but the accessory is common in tribal Africa as well, especially in ancient to predynastic times in Egypt! Coeval with those time periods there is no evidence of it in the Near East such as Sumer. There is no evidence of it in Anatolia and Europe. Yet there is evidence of it in the Sudan and Sahara! Your stereotyping of what Nilotic Africans look like is also a strawman as refuted before!!
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QUOTE] Stupid strawman! Nobody said only blacks wore penis sheaths! There are tribes in Asia and the Pacific as well as in South America who wore penis sheaths but the accessory is common in tribal Africa as well, especially in ancient to predynastic times in Egypt! Coeval with those time periods there is no evidence of it in the Near East such as Sumer. There is no evidence of it in Anatolia and Europe. [/QB]
You are wrong thimble head. Before the rise of Egypt:
posted
^ Yet what exactly does that skeleton have to do with rise of Egypt or Egypt at all, you microcephalic fool?!!
What does that SMALL gold penis sheath have anything to do with the types worn in Africa in the Nile Valley like this...
I notice you have nothing to say about the REST of my response in regards as to the black identity of ancient Egyptians and other indigenous North Africans yet you nitpick my comment about penis sheaths yet still are unable to prove anything about your silly racist theories of Europeans being the founders of civilization in Africa! LOLPosts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^You said that Europe didn't have any evidence of having used penis sheaths. The grave above is from the Varna Necropolis in Bulgaria dated 4700-4200 B.C. Long before the rise of Egypt. The graves have what is known as the first manufactured use of gold known in the world. Obviously this individual had a high status considering the amount of gold found with him. Notice the positioning of the left arm? Look familiar thimble head?
Posts: 527 | From: usa | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Delusion caused by White, reactionary racism...
↓ ↓ ↓ three Asian whores/Harem girls; like imported wine they were a delicacy for the Black elite...........
quote: A delusion, in everyday language, is a fixed belief that is either false, fanciful, or derived from deception...incomplete information, "incorrect" dogma, stupidity, apperception, illusion, or other effects of perception.
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz ': Are they really worth it, really?
^ Worth the humiliation? Yes.
quote:Originally posted by Pea-brained Simpleton: You said that Europe didn't have any evidence of having used penis sheaths. The grave above is from the Varna Necropolis in Bulgaria dated 4700-4200 B.C. Long before the rise of Egypt.
Your point?? The penis sheath is nothing like the kind worn by Egyptians, Libyans, and other Africans. That among other obvious reasons is why archaeologists have never connected the Varna culture with Egypt or any African culture. In fact there are neolithic graves in the Sudanese Nile that predate that of Varna going back to 6000 B.C.
quote:The graves have what is known as the first manufactured use of gold known in the world. Obviously this individual had a high status considering the amount of gold found with him. Notice the positioning of the left arm? Look familiar thimble head?
LOL And?? What about the positioning of the left arm? Are you implying a relation to later Egyptian royal burials?? LOL The varna man has his fingers splayed and some tangled among his necklace. Egyptian royals have their hands clenched either holding royal symbols or empty. Plus Egyptian royals would have their right arms straight or bent across the chest not holding a scepter or whatever.
You are obviously grasping in the dark for anything aren't you little girl? Too bad it ain't working. Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by DJehuti: ^ Worth the humiliation? Yes.
OK. Then my question is this, why do you always say to people: "Why you respond to [Insert Troll] is beyond me" when you respond to them just as much if not more? No offense intended, this has just been nagging at me for a while.
-------------------- L Writes: Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ On the contrary, I make one or two quick quip responses to trolls while you and especially Jari would argue with them for how many pages or dedicate entire threads to them. Sorry if I appear hypocritical but or two rebuttals to trolls is not the same as long drawn pages.
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not even about that (about me or Jari et al.), but how you tell it to people. As if it is wrong, yet you do it too. And I'm not talking about me or Jari, but with other members as well. And do you consider this thread "one or two rebuttals", really? Don't get me wrong, I honestly don't care about offering counter arguments, just you telling others that you can't understand why they do it when they decide to (heck, everyone does it, which I never denied). So yeah, I would say hypocritical. If you would notice, when you said "worth the humiliation, yes!" I just said OK and didn't even show signs of having a problem with it, because it is not why I asked in the first place but to ask the leading up question.
So the whole point is my question why do you keep telling people that you don't know why the respond to rahotep, lioness, simple girl etc., and pretend you don't. Not that you shouldn't respond at all, except the hardcore trolls.
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Calabooz has certain people on ignore he's sensitive to.
that's his solution
I know ignore doesn't do anything. If it did you and Simple would be on it, at least everyone else makes sense.
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic