posted
^ So far, I see nothing new. We all know that Egyptian civilization is indigenous to the African Nile Valley and that pharaonic culture originated in the south in the Nekhen area (Hierakonpolis) though with crucial aspects originating further south still.
What I don't get despite all this knowledge Nat Geo artists still depict the Egyptians as such:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ So far, I see nothing new. We all know that Egyptian civilization is indigenous to the African Nile Valley and that pharaonic culture originated in the south in the Nekhen area (Hierakonpolis) though with crucial aspects originating further south still.
What I don't get despite all this knowledge Nat Geo artists still depict the Egyptians as such:
there are range of skin tones in the Egyptian art but I would say the above is too light for average Nat Geo seems still somewhat racist in 2013 in their illustrations Picks. This piece I think was made in the 1940s or 50s.
posted
The illustration by NGS is off, from what the real images look like. Or even what modern descendants look like. It looks like a scene of North American Amerindians.lol
Conclusion, the illustration is a lie, and that dialog will probably too. And that illustrator probably has never been to Egypt.
April 15th to 17th, 2013 Guatemala City, Guatemala Hotel Grand Tikal Futura
posted
As Goebbels once said "the bigger the lie, and repeated over and over again" the more people believe it.
According to Western racial ideology the impressive civilisation of Ancient Egypt could not have been built by indigenous prognathous blacks origined in Africa proper.
Hence all those obfuscatory so-called "scholarly" articles about "sub-Saharan" and "Eurasian " genes. Plus ca change--plus c'est...la meme chose, and all that.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lets restrict 'origins' to only refer to going from semi-nomadic to the moment of settling down, rather than showing a gradation from to hunter gatherers to Pharaonic culture. Lets talk about Hierakonpolis and hope no one notices that we've just blatantly skipped over Nabta Playa, Bir Kiseiba, Gebel Ramla, Nazlet Khater, Wadi Kubbaniya, Qadan, etc.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: As Goebbels once said "the bigger the lie, and repeated over and over again" the more people believe it.
According to Western racial ideology the impressive civilisation of Ancient Egypt could not have been built by indigenous prognathous blacks origined in Africa proper.
Hence all those obfuscatory so-called "scholarly" articles about "sub-Saharan" and "Eurasian " genes. Plus ca change--plus c'est...la meme chose, and all that.
If I am not mistaking this is that exact quote:
quote: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: It's unbelievable, but that idiot has more of these funny imaginary troll illustrations.
Those images are all by the artist H M Herget from the 50s. He illustrated a book Everyday life in ancient times or something like that.
Those images are basically copies in 3d from famous tomb scenes. And basically they prove the point that European artists, mostly due to their historical racism, are NOTORIOUS for trying to depict ancient Egyptians as white.
Some of the images are based on those from the tomb of Nebamun or Nakht and some others . Now NONE of the images from those tombs look like that, but that is how he decided to portray them.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yep. White people shirtless in the Sahara desert of Africa toiling in the sun pulling huge stoane and building stone structures. "And they lived happily ever after...."
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Yep. White people shirtless in the Sahara desert of Africa toiling in the sun pulling huge stoane and building stone structures. "And they lived happily ever after...."
Funny how they use artistic reproductions when the originals are some of the best preserved ancient art anywhere on the planet:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: It's unbelievable, but that idiot has more of these funny imaginary troll illustrations.
How cute they even managed to include a blond man..lol
Eurocentric Delusion compared to the Original Primary Source the artist used to make his hallucination..
It amazes me the nerve and Gall of these people. I mean they were obviously lying. Its like looking at portraits of George Washington and painting him Chinese.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The crazy part is many of these tombs have been known to Egyptologists for a while and only recently been open to the public. These were available to the Artist who created his Eurocentric Delusions. You can go to Osiris.net and see all the Nobles Tombs from Thebes etc.
I mean really how can one look at the tomb painting and not conclude it was depicting black people?? How? I wonder what was going on in their heads as they blatantly lied to the world??
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: ^So true.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: It's unbelievable, but that idiot has more of these funny imaginary troll illustrations.
How cute they even managed to include a blond man..lol
Eurocentric Delusion compared to the Original Primary Source the artist used to make his hallucination..
It amazes me the nerve and Gall of these people. I mean they were obviously lying. Its like looking at portraits of George Washington and painting him Chinese.
^ Good lookin' Jari, pinpointing the exact source. Here're some more vinters. Not a pink skin nor baldy among 'em.
Yep! Bunch of lying thieves not content with what their people/race accomplish reach back into time to steal another people's/race's civilization and then dny such people had a past before meeting them.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^^ you said "How cute they even managed to include a blond man..lol"
I don't know if anybody knows but what is your guess as to the explanation of this hair type and color on the person at left ? Is it a wig? Is it colored hair? Is it his natural hair?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LMAO @ the desperate lyinass above who can't tell the difference between faded paint and actual blonde hair! By the way, those are the examples of straight/wavy hair I was looking for.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: ..I mean really how can one look at the tomb painting and not conclude it was depicting black people?? How? I wonder what was going on in their heads as they blatantly lied to the world??
The psychology of white-wash was explained various times before, but I think it was best explained by Philip Emeagwali, the computer science genius from Nigeria. Emeagwali was one of the forefathers of high-speed internet processing.
In an autobiography Emeagwali wrote:
"Twelve years ago, a magazine hired a white man to prepare an illustration of a supercomputer wizard riding an ox. I was supposed to be the supercomputer wizard. But the white illustrator, who knew that I am black, portrayed me as a white person in his published illustration."
The first draft of a portrait that depicted Emeagwali as a supercomputer wizard driving a carriage powered by thousands of chickens (a metaphor for his 65,000 weak processors that performed the world's fastest computation). The "Negro Emeagwali" (shown in this illustration) was rejected and replaced with a "Caucasian Emeagwali" (shown below).
A "whitened" Caucasian portrait of Emeagwali was acceptable and widely published. One illustrator argued that Emeagwali has a trace of Caucasian blood and said that he could see the "Caucasian look" in his face!! [sic]
Emeagwali himself
Emeagwali wrote of the white illustrator: "I learned that the white illustrator was searching for himself in me."
And there you have it in a nutshell-- so many whites are desperate to see themselves in the peoples of great civilizations of the world. This is why back in the 19th century Euro-colonialists were proclaiming peoples from the Aztecs to the early Chinese has having "Caucasoid" ancestry. The 'Middle East' including Egypt was a hotbed of this nonsense and especially Egypt. Today while the Americas and much of Asia is purged from this nonsense unfortunately Southwest Asia and indeed Egypt and greater north Africa are not. Even Sub-Sahara is not safe and even the indigenous cultures of southern Africa are not safe from the psychotic white-wash!!
So why this need of whites like Anglo-idiot to "see themselves" in other people who are not white??
I'm no psychologist but it doesn't take an expert to know what the problem is. and I leave the answer below to Anglo-idiot and his ilk:
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
If you click that pic I posted it'll take you to a discussion of workers and foreigners and what you ask about the bent over guy.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^^^ you said "How cute they even managed to include a blond man..lol"
I don't know if anybody knows but what is your guess as to the explanation of this hair type and color on the person at left ? Is it a wig? Is it colored hair? Is it his natural hair?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
If "Black" = dark skin, then these people are "white":
Ancient China:
Ancient Japan:
Suddenly though when it comes to defining who is "white", the Afrocentrics bring bone structure into account, but not for "Blacks" [suddenly they are race realists like Carleton Coon, only for "white people" LMAO ]
Afronut logic -
"Black" = anyone with dark skin regardless of hair texture or facial features
"white" = white skin but with specific facial features only.
posted
^Of course its just symbolism, seeing as though the skeletal remains generally show the Egyptian female population to be more African phenotyped than their male counterparts, with the mural paintings showing the exact opposite.
Don't mention my name if you know you'll just get ran out of this forum like the previous time you desperately solicited a response from me, which ended with you pathetically abandoning your own thread, and not rearing your ugly head for a week, if not longer.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: [QB] If you click that pic I posted it'll take you to a discussion of workers and foreigners and what you ask about the bent over guy.
I'm not seeing what is clickable. I've tried clicking on the photos in all your posts or copying URLs. Where's the discussion link?
Also my questions pertain to the standing figure as well as the bending figure. They both appear to have the same hair type. And also this second picture below, persons showing with a sand colored hair. I usually considered refereces alone to another discussion on a given topic if they are from a forum as an indication that the issue is unresolved because these discussions typically have different points of view expressed in them
Faheemdunkers you would have to agree that the average male skin tone as portrayed by this 1940-50s National geographic illustrator has intentionally lightened the skin tone of what is the most commonly portrayed in actual Egyptian art. (keep in mind scenes dealing with prior to late periods)
Now without even getting into what you think "Cacasoid" and "Negoid" is we can see a clear cut example of a racist alteration of skin tone.
hasn't the racism now been proven to you?
Look at the above illustartion. It doesn't have any type printed saying "Caucasian" or "Negoid"
Deal with what we are looking at. You see a picture with no words.
We see the average skin tone of the ancient Egyptians in their own art is significantly darker than what this illustrator is portraying. He intentionally changed it. This is what is being observed in the example.
Now what do you have to say about that?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
You will see numerous thousands of images with this skin tone also common in paintings of Pharoahs. Yet the modern Western artist in many different illustration doesn't include them.
If you want to say both skin tones were present this modern illustatrator is not showing both. He is showing only one and that skin tone is still lighter than the Egyptian art males you posted.
Surely you must see the bias and manipulation here?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course this therad is being reduced to another mindless picture spam war. Yet it still does not change the relevant point I made:
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: ..I mean really how can one look at the tomb painting and not conclude it was depicting black people?? How? I wonder what was going on in their heads as they blatantly lied to the world??
The psychology of white-wash was explained various times before, but I think it was best explained by Philip Emeagwali, the computer science genius from Nigeria. Emeagwali was one of the forefathers of high-speed internet processing.
In an autobiography Emeagwali wrote:
"Twelve years ago, a magazine hired a white man to prepare an illustration of a supercomputer wizard riding an ox. I was supposed to be the supercomputer wizard. But the white illustrator, who knew that I am black, portrayed me as a white person in his published illustration."
The first draft of a portrait that depicted Emeagwali as a supercomputer wizard driving a carriage powered by thousands of chickens (a metaphor for his 65,000 weak processors that performed the world's fastest computation). The "Negro Emeagwali" (shown in this illustration) was rejected and replaced with a "Caucasian Emeagwali" (shown below).
A "whitened" Caucasian portrait of Emeagwali was acceptable and widely published. One illustrator argued that Emeagwali has a trace of Caucasian blood and said that he could see the "Caucasian look" in his face!! [sic]
Emeagwali himself
Emeagwali wrote of the white illustrator: "I learned that the white illustrator was searching for himself in me."
And there you have it in a nutshell-- so many whites are desperate to see themselves in the peoples of great civilizations of the world. This is why back in the 19th century Euro-colonialists were proclaiming peoples from the Aztecs to the early Chinese has having "Caucasoid" ancestry. The 'Middle East' including Egypt was a hotbed of this nonsense and especially Egypt. Today while the Americas and much of Asia is purged from this nonsense unfortunately Southwest Asia and indeed Egypt and greater north Africa are not. Even Sub-Sahara is not safe and even the indigenous cultures of southern Africa are not safe from the psychotic white-wash!!
So why this need of whites like Anglo-idiot to "see themselves" in other people who are not white??
I'm no psychologist but it doesn't take an expert to know what the problem is. and I leave the answer below to Anglo-idiot and his ilk:
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Of course this therad is being reduced to another mindless picture spam war. Yet it still does not change the relevant point I made:
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [qb] ..I mean really how can one look at the tomb painting and not conclude it was depicting black people?? How? I wonder what was going on in their heads as they blatantly lied to the world??
The psychology of white-wash was explained various times before, but I think it was best explained by Philip Emeagwali, the computer science genius from Nigeria. Emeagwali was one of the forefathers of high-speed internet processing.
In an autobiography Emeagwali wrote:
"Twelve years ago, a magazine hired a white man to prepare an illustration of a supercomputer wizard riding an ox. I was supposed to be the supercomputer wizard. But the white illustrator, who knew that I am black, portrayed me as a white person in his published illustration."
The first draft of a portrait that depicted Emeagwali as a supercomputer wizard driving a carriage powered by thousands of chickens (a metaphor for his 65,000 weak processors that performed the world's fastest computation). The "Negro Emeagwali" (shown in this illustration) was rejected and replaced with a "Caucasian Emeagwali" (shown below).
A small circulation University publication from 20 years ago
The situation is not that simple.
If the original illustation was accepted it could be construed by some as a racial competition, the figures as symbolic even though that might not be a correct interpretation of the intent of the illustator.
It also gives a first impression of a white man coming up aggressively behind a black man with a whip and at first glance has a connotaion of a slave master even though that might not have been the intent of the illustator.
The solution would be to change the illustration in some way.
However they picked the wrong worst solution and made a black man into a white man
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^Of course its just symbolism, seeing as though the skeletal remains generally show the Egyptian female population to be more African phenotyped than their male counterparts, with the mural paintings showing the exact opposite.
Don't mention my name if you know you'll just get ran out of this forum like the previous time you desperately solicited a response from me, which ended with you pathetically abandoning your own thread, and not rearing your ugly head for a week, if not longer.
lol. That thread I left, as it was impossible to respond to. Wiercinski was a male, Professor of Anthropology and Archaeology at Warsaw University, not a female. And I cannot enter a debate on typology, when you don't know what it is.
Note that Wiercinski's "Negroid" is not Negroid but Bushmanoid, his "Sudanese" is Negroid.
So around 1% of predynastic egypt's overall population was Negroid (3. 1% at Wadi). Nordics even outnumbered them by a . decimal. Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
Andrzej Wiercinski is a favorite of Van Sertima and Clyde Winters for his writing on Olmecs
Wiercinski's research methods and conclusions are not accepted by the vast majority of Mesoamerican scholars, in part because of his reliance on the Polish Comparative-Morphological methodology which limits the placement of skull types within a very narrow spectrum that is often within: Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid. Native Americans are thus made to fit within these groups which often yields false and contradictory assumptions as a result of sample bias.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Andrzej Wiercinski is a favorite of Van Sertima and Clyde Winters for his writing on Olmecs
Wiercinski's research methods and conclusions are not accepted by the vast majority of Mesoamerican scholars, in part because of his reliance on the Polish Comparative-Morphological methodology which limits the placement of skull types within a very narrow spectrum that is often within: Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid. Native Americans are thus made to fit within these groups which often yields false and contradictory assumptions as a result of sample bias.
Clyde lied about Wiercinski's data.
In fact Clyde lies about everything.
When I get the time, I'll cover this in full.
But to show you briefly what Clyde was doing:
"Wiercinski's typology of Olmec crania, represent the Dongolan (19.2 percent), Armenoid (7.7 percent)"
But then Clyde says this:
"The Dongolan, Anatolian and Armenoid terms are euphemisms for the so-called "Brown Race" "Dynastic Race", "Hamitic Race",and etc., which racist Europeans claimed were the founders of civilization in Africa"
He then claims they are all "Black".
Here's an Armenoid actually from a plate Wiercinski used from Czekanowski:
lol.
All Clyde does is claim Caucasoid types are "Black" or "Negro euphemisms".
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: A small circulation University publication from 20 years ago
The situation is not that simple.
If the original illustration was accepted it could be construed by some as a racial competition, the figures as symbolic even though that might not be a correct interpretation of the intent of the illustrator.
It also gives a first impression of a white man coming up aggressively behind a black man with a whip and at first glance has a connotation of a slave master even though that might not have been the intent of the illustrator.
The solution would be to change the illustration in some way.
However they picked the wrong worst solution and made a black man into a white man
LOL Rationalize all you want. The black man was suppose to be Emeagwali himself and the white guy behind him had a whip for the bull NOT to whip Emeagwali who wasn't a "slave". The connotation was clear and there was nothing "racial" about the original. The illustrators were racists could not come to grips that a computer genius could be a black man from Africa. Just as you cannot come to grips that the Egyptians were 'pure' Africans without being mixed with Eurasians so as to claim their civilization.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Funny how you only show Nofret but not her husband Rahotep.
^ His paint is also faded which means he was even darker still.
One could only imagine that the original complexions would have looked something like these:
Male and female skin colors were probabaly not uniform among the entire population of Egypt,with pigmentation being darker in the south[closer to sub-sahara Africans] and lighter in the north[closer to Mediterranean Near Easteners] A woman from the south would probabaly have had darker skin than a man from the North. Thus,the colorations used for skin tones in the art must have been schematic [or symbolic] rather than realistic;the clear gender distinction encoded in that scheme may have been based on elite ideals relating to male and female roles,in which women's responsibilities kept them indoors,so that they spent less time in the sun than men.Nevertheless, the signifcance of the two colors may be even deeper,making some as yet unknown but fundamental difference between men and women in Egyptian worldview....-- Gay Robins
Real life Nofret and Rahotep couple:
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Rationalize all you want. The black man was suppose to be Emeagwali himself and the white guy behind him had a whip for the bull NOT to whip Emeagwali who wasn't a "slave". The connotation was clear and there was nothing "racial" about the original.Just as you cannot come to grips that the Egyptians were 'pure' Africans without being mixed with Eurasians so as to claim their civilization.
My opinion is that should have left the man Black. The exact reasoning that they changed it I don't know. if I were Emeagwali I would have raised hell about it regardless.
Of course you know everything, you're Djefruity
It's a pretty obscure and old example.
Nat Geo is a National Magazine. The illustarions is are from the 40s-50s but here they are using it again in a new article. And they screwed up the skin tone on the Tut reconstruct several years ago.
As for the Egyptians I think some of them had pure African ancestry and also there's a possibility that some of them might have been mixed with people in the nearby Northern region as well as all surrounding regions. I'm not a purist like you
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Like I said these people are delusional. Please show me anywhere anything resembling a European/Eurasian in Ramose's Tomb?
These are white people to them??
I mean I hate Mike's and other Afrocentric radicals who claim whites are covering up some massive global black Empire, but stuff like this just adds fuel to their fire. In all honesty I think Eurocentrics are delusional. For example the loser who tried to claim Ramose's tomb as depictions of white people.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers:
quote:Now what do you have to say about that?
I can cherry pick photos as well...
^^^ They are still darker
^^^ This is Tutankhamun.
You will see numerous thousands of images with this skin tone also common in paintings of Pharoahs. Yet the modern Western artist in many different illustration doesn't include them.
If you want to say both skin tones were present this modern illustatrator is not showing both. He is showing only one and that skin tone is still lighter than the Egyptian art males you posted.
Surely you must see the bias and manipulation here?
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nice find Al! yeah goes to show you how the Egyptians depicted themselves. What gets me is that at this point in time Europeans could have claimed the Romans, Greeks, the British Empire, the French Empire and the Colonial and New World Cultures, so why lie about Egypt. I understand at the time their ideology of race prevented them from being truthful, going as far as claiming the Nubians to be whites. This goes to show that their approach was not scientific.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: It's unbelievable, but that idiot has more of these funny imaginary troll illustrations.
How cute they even managed to include a blond man..lol
Eurocentric Delusion compared to the Original Primary Source the artist used to make his hallucination..
It amazes me the nerve and Gall of these people. I mean they were obviously lying. Its like looking at portraits of George Washington and painting him Chinese.
^ Good lookin' Jari, pinpointing the exact source. Here're some more vinters. Not a pink skin nor baldy among 'em.
Yep! Bunch of lying thieves not content with what their people/race accomplish reach back into time to steal another people's/race's civilization and then dny such people had a past before meeting them.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [QB] Like I said these people are delusional. Please show me anywhere anything resembling a European/Eurasian in Ramose's Tomb?
I mean I hate Mike's and other Afrocentric radicals who claim whites are covering up some massive global black Empire, but stuff like this just adds fuel to their fire. In all honesty I think Eurocentrics are delusional. For example the loser who tried to claim Ramose's tomb as depictions of white people.
I agree
but this hair thing I haven't figured out.^^^^ I don't know what's going on here
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Note this key repeated Afrocentric fallacy:
"White" people = pale white only.
Then the Afrocentrics say: where are pale white people in the tombs, or if they existed wouldn't they burn in the sun to death?
Just one of them "knock em downs"...
"Whites" [Caucasoids] were never all "pale white" to begin with, as any anthropologist will confirm:
"The term 'White' is something of a misnomer, because the range of skin color in this race extends from light brown to ruddy, and there can be no doubt that the vast majority of 'White' individuals have brunet skins". (Hooton, 1946)
"Caucasian" by Bernard J. Freedman British Medical Journal Vol. 288, No. 6418, Mar. 1984, pp. 696-698 -
quote:"Let us now look [...] at some terms in current use in the light of these criteria:
Caucasian - geographically wrong. European geographical race - explicit but unwieldy. European - excludes those living in other continents. Caucasoid - It retains the fallacious Caucasian implication. White - There are varying degrees of skin pigmentation in Caucasians. Europid - (en suite with negrid, mongolid, australid, etc) adopted by Baker (1974) after its introduction by Peters. The suffix -id is stated to be a truncation of the Greek -ides, of the family of. "Europid," which will be unfamiliar to most readers, does fulfil the above mentioned criteria. Its use in a medical journal might initially evoke more letters of complaint than the use of Caucasian does now. I believe that, with repeated usage under authoritative aegis, familiarity would achieve acceptance."
posted
I thought it was depicting a fresh hair cut..revealing a paler scalp.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [QB] Like I said these people are delusional. Please show me anywhere anything resembling a European/Eurasian in Ramose's Tomb?
I mean I hate Mike's and other Afrocentric radicals who claim whites are covering up some massive global black Empire, but stuff like this just adds fuel to their fire. In all honesty I think Eurocentrics are delusional. For example the loser who tried to claim Ramose's tomb as depictions of white people.
I agree
but this hair thing I haven't figured out.^^^^ I don't know what's going on here
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fartheadbonkers: Note this key repeated Afrocentric fallacy:
"White" people = pale white only.
Then the Afrocentrics say: where are pale white people in the tombs, or if they existed wouldn't they burn in the sun to death?
Just one of them "knock em downs"...
"Whites" [Caucasoids] were never all "pale white" to begin with, as any anthropologist will confirm:
"The term 'White' is something of a misnomer, because the range of skin color in this race extends from light brown to ruddy, and there can be no doubt that the vast majority of 'White' individuals have brunet skins". (Hooton, 1946)
"Caucasian" by Bernard J. Freedman British Medical Journal Vol. 288, No. 6418, Mar. 1984, pp. 696-698 -
quote:"Let us now look [...] at some terms in current use in the light of these criteria:
Caucasian - geographically wrong. European geographical race - explicit but unwieldy. European - excludes those living in other continents. Caucasoid - It retains the fallacious Caucasian implication. White - There are varying degrees of skin pigmentation in Caucasians. Europid - (en suite with negrid, mongolid, australid, etc) adopted by Baker (1974) after its introduction by Peters. The suffix -id is stated to be a truncation of the Greek -ides, of the family of. "Europid," which will be unfamiliar to most readers, does fulfil the above mentioned criteria. Its use in a medical journal might initially evoke more letters of complaint than the use of Caucasian does now. I believe that, with repeated usage under authoritative aegis, familiarity would achieve acceptance."
The racial nonsense of "Caucasoid/Europid" aside, the Egyptians have chocolate to mahogany complexions. Such complexions are associated with BLACKS. Of course racist idiots like yourself cling to this stereotype of "true negro" where the complexion is only ebony dark or something silly or other.
Your game of claiming the Egyptians to be "brun" colored Caucasoids is laughable at best and utterly retarded at worst. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [qb] ^Of course its just symbolism, seeing as though the skeletal remains generally show the Egyptian female population to be more African phenotyped than their male counterparts, with the mural paintings showing the exact opposite.
Don't mention my name if you know you'll just get ran out of this forum like the previous time you desperately solicited a response from me, which ended with you pathetically abandoning your own thread, and not rearing your ugly head for a week, if not longer.
And I cannot enter a debate on typology, when you don't know what it is.
YOU don't know what typology is, as evinced by your posting a pitch black Nilote man that you labelled ''Negroid'', but who wouldn't fall into either of Wiercinsky's Sub Saharan African (whether Bushman or Negroid proper or Pygmy) categories, nor fit the descriptions of the Negroid typology that you've listed many times here on Egyptsearch. You're a total fraud. I've never said that the analysed Egyptian skulls don't classify according to the Nordic, Armenoid etc clusters when you use those limited variables, so you're just spamming that classification table to knock down strawmen. What my issue with that table is, and what you ran away from addressing is:
Exactly, so how can you be so adamant that Wiercinski was right that her clusters represents the presence of actual Nordics, Cromagnonoids, Horners, Negroids etc, in the proportions that she says they were present? What credibility does this table have, if, as you say, there is no clear cut link between ancestry and type --Swenet
Its one thing to say the Egyptian skulls cluster with Eurasians, Horners and West Africans in that analysis, and a totally different thing to say that those Ancient Egyptian individuals originate from the nations they were allocated to by Wiercinsky. Of course, you already know this, since you said:
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: There is no clear cut link between ancestry and type
^You're dumber than a phucking rock. You're a phuckin buffoon. You don't even realize that this statements undermines typology--which is basically everything your confused dysfunctional azz stands for.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:As for the Egyptians I think some of them had pure African ancestry and also there's a possibility that some of them might have been mixed with people in the nearby Northern region as well as all surrounding regions. I'm not a purist like you
I see you are back to your full spectrum defensive mode. Repeat 100 times: There is no such thing as a 'pure black' or 'pure African'.
Some posters above are asking questions about the hair of the AE generic figures above. The hair style is similar to that of the East African Hima, Acoli, Tutsi, etc. Some the men above seem to have gray hair. Or if not, the hair is coloured with henna.
But the casual observer will note the following about the AE male physiognomy: 1) dark mahogany pigmentation. Check any bill-board for West Africans and you will see the same colour, 2) short faces with moderate prognathism and a non-projecting chin, 3) thick lips, 4)depressed nasal structures, 5) lean and long-limbed bodies, 6) hairstyle approximating that of the East African Himas, Acoli, and Tutsis, 7) non-black hair: probably coloured with henna or the men are just gray, and 8) males are always beardless or with a very short goatee.
The females are sometimes(compare with mahogany brown colour of the Amarna princess and Queen Tiye) coloured brown/yellow as is the natural colour of many African females and the hair of the dancing girls and others is presented as long curled braids. Most likely such braids are wigs and extensions--given the length of the hair.
As one can see the natural hair and length of the AE females would be that of Queen Tiye or just that of the male AEs as portrayed on the murals.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The generic physiognomy of the AE female is that of naturalistic Armana princess. The shaved is the norm for both males and females.
But note that the colour is mahagony brown on a face with normal African traits. The princess was a member of the royal caste in AE society, so clearly her physiognomic traits would represent that of her class.
quote:Originally posted by lamin: For those puzzled by the hair of the generic AE male consider the following East African hairstyles.
Rameses II
Queen Tiye.
Hatshepsut Yuya
what is your opinion on these hair types were the afros that were straightened out or did they have this type of hair?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
The saddest part is that you've been here years.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic