Mena: It is amazing that archeologist are still discovering tomb in Egypt because in the last fifty years Egypt has been a country were the most archeological work in the world have been done.
The tomb’s colorfully decorated ceiling
An image of the god Ra-Atum being worshipped by four baboons near the tomb’s entrance. Waseda University
In the almost 200-year history of Egyptology, so many ancient tombs have been located and identified that it was thought further finds would be rare. But a team of archaeologists just discovered another of especially high significance.
A team of Japanese archaeologists just came across a previously unknown tomb in the Theban necropolis in Egypt. Their research has determined it was built for a man named Khonsu with the title of Royal Scribe. And it’s not only 3,000 years old, but also beautifully decorated.
What’s more, the discovery gives hope that there are even more to discover. “No one knows that unknown tombs that still have beautiful decorations or inscriptions still remain undiscovered…I think that there might be more tombs hidden in this area,” Waseda University Professor Jiro Kondo, who led the team behind the discovery, told the Observer. This is not his first big find. Kondo discovered the tomb of Khonsuemheb in the same area in December 2013, and he came across this new discovery while cleaning the forecourt of another, the tomb of Userhat.
Read also: Archaeologists Just Made a Major Discovery About the Dead Sea Scrolls
What’s most unique about the tomb of Khonsu, though, is how large and elaborately decorated it is. The tomb, which is shaped like a T, measures 14 feet from east to west and 15 feet from north to south and features colorful, well-preserved images on the walls and ceilings.
An image of the god Ra-Atum being worshipped by four baboons An image of the god Ra-Atum being worshipped by four baboons near the tomb’s entrance. Waseda University As shown in the above photo, the north wall of the entrance has a carved picture showing the solar boat of the god Ra-Atum being worshipped by four baboons in poses of adoration. Next to it in vertically inscribed hieroglyphics is Khonsu is referred to as the “true renowned scribe.”
An image on the northern part of the eastern wall depicts Khonsu and his wife worshipping the gods Osiris and Isis. The same gods are featured on another area of the eastern wall, this time with broken upper bodies. Lower on the same wall, a painting shows the fellows of the tomb owners.
This image puts the tomb's size into perspective. This image puts the tomb’s size into perspective. Waseda University The southern wall by the hole to Userhat’s tomb has vertical inscriptions near the ceiling that identify it as belonging to Khonsu.
And there’s still more mystery the researchers have yet to uncover. Piles of stone blocks are currently blocking entry to the inner chamber, but the team expects to find more wall paintings inside.
Posts: 5374 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Look how well preserved is this wall painting. No restoration and clearly one can see the tawny complected Egyptians.
They're only slightly a darker reddish than the Minoans.
It makes no sense to argue Egyptians were "black".
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
Only self-hating Afrocentric Blacks continue to latch onto their pseudohistorical account of ancient Egypt. The rest of the world marches on.
quote:Originally posted by Diebythesword:
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Look how well preserved is this wall painting. No restoration and clearly one can see the tawny complected Egyptians.
They're only slightly a darker reddish than the Minoans.
It makes no sense to argue Egyptians were "black".
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Look how well preserved is this wall painting. No restoration and clearly one can see the tawny complected Egyptians.
They're only slightly a darker reddish than the Minoans.
It makes no sense to argue Egyptians were "black".
On the mural you can see the difference between the face and the arms. There has been some fading over time. But, even if it hadn't, there are other Africans (e.g Red Igbo and Khoisan) that can be lighter than the reds as they are seen in these murals. Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Only self-hating Afrocentric Blacks continue to latch onto their pseudohistorical account of ancient Egypt. The rest of the world marches on.
Clearly they haven't if people like you are still here trying to debate it. Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Look how well preserved is this wall painting. No restoration and clearly one can see the tawny complected Egyptians.
They're only slightly a darker reddish than the Minoans.
It makes no sense to argue Egyptians were "black".
On the mural you can see the difference between the face and the arms. There has been some fading over time. But, even if it hadn't, there are other Africans (e.g Red Igbo and Khoisan) that can be lighter than the reds as they are seen in these murals.
Igbo
Of course someone could cherry pick a lighter Igbo individual, but photos of large crowds of Igbo don't show the average Igbo to be light brown, they're dark brown like all populations at that latitude.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
don't kid yourself. people are not even putting effort into debating Afrocentrists these days. You are more of an amusement. The fact is no one in mainstream academia takes you people seriously. We know your pseudohistorical claims are borne out of social trauma.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Only self-hating Afrocentric Blacks continue to latch onto their pseudohistorical account of ancient Egypt. The rest of the world marches on.
Clearly they haven't if people like you are still here trying to debate it.
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Look how well preserved is this wall painting. No restoration and clearly one can see the tawny complected Egyptians.
They're only slightly a darker reddish than the Minoans.
It makes no sense to argue Egyptians were "black".
On the mural you can see the difference between the face and the arms. There has been some fading over time. But, even if it hadn't, there are other Africans (e.g Red Igbo and Khoisan) that can be lighter than the reds as they are seen in these murals.
Igbo
Of course someone could cherry pick a lighter Igbo individual, but photos of large crowds of Igbo don't show the average Igbo to be light brown, they're dark brown like all populations at that latitude.
No one was even saying the average was very light, just that they can produce it indigenously. Ancient Egyptians weren't on average incredibly light skinned like the khoisan or the Ngwa Igbo. They especially weren't towards the south where the civilization really took off.
Ngwa Igbo are the largest sub group of igbo. They have been found in studies dating to the 60s (Talbot) to have light skin. While not a majority among the ngwa, they had very light skin at 20% and mid tones at 25%. Dark skin among the ngwa had a slight 6% majority. There's also been historical accounts and linguistic evidence discussing the variation among the igbo. Blacks have popularized words that came from that specific phenomenon. (red bone coming from the term red igbo).
"Badsen [GT Badsen, "Niger Ibos," Frank Cass and Co, London, 1938: 123-124], in his early-twentieth century study of the physical appearance of the Igbo, had this to say: 'On the whole, the Ibos are of good physique and compare favorably with other African tribes.. Many Ibos are truly as black as the proverbial coal: others are almost as light-skinned as the natives of Southern Europe, while a few are distinctly reddish. The folk who stand out obtrusively are the albinos.'" --Gloria Chuku (2013) The Igbo Intellectual Tradition. pp 48-49
QUOTE:
"He disengaged himself from other life experiences and went back to a particular spot in his memory to capture the racial distinctions he was able to make. He saw no distinction in skin color between the red men in Igboland and the white men he met on the slave ship. " --Jacob Korieh. 2009. Olaudah Equiano and the Igbo world: history, society and Atlantic. 2009
" Oye-Eboe" may be a version of the Igbo word oyibo used in the nineteenth century to mean "white man," Equiano clearly uses it to refer to other Africans, perhaps the Aro slave traders. At this point in is life, he tells us, he had not yet seen or even heard of a European." -- Vincent Carretta. 2005. Equiano, the African: biography of a self-made man. p15
At best (assuming your pictures were Ngwa) you could maybe try to lay claim of a decline of skin diversity among the Ngwa since the 60s. This could be possible as populations of people are not static, but the point would still be the same. A sub group of people indigenous to Africa can develop traits like that without non blacks. They (non-blacks). Are. NOT. Needed. For. Light. Skin. In. Africa. Where Africans live on the continent may affect the probability for light skin, but Africa can produce it on it's own.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: don't kid yourself. people are not even putting effort into debating Afrocentrists these days. You are more of an amusement.
Why would Afrocentrics be an "amusement" if the world has "marched on?" You soundin like a girl who says to the homegirls she over her man, but when he roll through she jump out her seat. You can't put effort into a debate because the research does not support you.Your thirsty @$$ is still in here derailing a thread to prove some faded picture murals are evidence of Ancient Egyptians not being African because it's the best you guys can do. This thread wasn't even really discussing race but you're so over it, you're going to inject race into the conversation.
quote: The fact is no one in mainstream academia takes you people seriously. We know your pseudohistorical claims are borne out of social trauma.
And no one should take you seriously. I'm embarassed to have to say you type like an overseas American caricature. you do not think scientifically at all and are lazy. First, bandwagon fallacies are not scientific. The legitimacy of an idea lies not within knowing many people believe something, but the support that is the foundation for that consensus.
Blacks especially should NEVER trust anything without reviewing the research. Discarded scientific theories of today were widely believed years ago (often to their detriment). Having said that, mainstream research is increasingly corroborating an indigenous foundation for Egypt, and that it was a characteristically African civilization. Make a new thread to contest the research, we'll be waiting. Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Listen, you moron, the people of Egypt today are the descendants of ancient Egypt, not you sub-Africans.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: don't kid yourself. people are not even putting effort into debating Afrocentrists these days. You are more of an amusement.
Why would Afrocentrics be an "amusement" if the world has "marched on?" You soundin like a girl who says to the homegirls she over her man, but when he roll through she jump out her seat. You can't put effort into a debate because the research does not support you.Your thirsty @$$ is still in here derailing a thread to prove some faded picture murals are evidence of Ancient Egyptians not being African because it's the best you guys can do. This thread wasn't even really discussing race but you're so over it, you're going to inject race into the conversation.
quote: The fact is no one in mainstream academia takes you people seriously. We know your pseudohistorical claims are borne out of social trauma.
And no one should take you seriously. I'm embarassed to have to say you type like an overseas American caricature. you do not think scientifically at all and are lazy. First, bandwagon fallacies are not scientific. The legitimacy of an idea lies not within knowing many people believe something, but the support that is the foundation for that consensus.
Blacks especially should NEVER trust anything without reviewing the research. Discarded scientific theories of today were widely believed years ago (often to their detriment). Having said that, mainstream research is increasingly corroborating an indigenous foundation for Egypt, and that it was a characteristically African civilization. Make a new thread to contest the research, we'll be waiting.
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Listen, you moron, the people of Egypt today are the descendants of ancient Egypt, not you sub-Africans.
So because the mulatto youth in this picture are the descendants of a white man, they are the same race as their father and would be biologically representational of the parts of Europe he came from? GTFOH. People change. Nations change. Nobody was saying many of them aren't descendants but things change. Ugh...look kid... Make. A. New. Thread. You're still derailing this topic! Show us what Eurocentric/racist spin on academic research we haven't covered and/or debunked (in a new thread) or take a seat.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: don't kid yourself. people are not even putting effort into debating Afrocentrists these days. You are more of an amusement.
Why would Afrocentrics be an "amusement" if the world has "marched on?" You soundin like a girl who says to the homegirls she over her man, but when he roll through she jump out her seat. You can't put effort into a debate because the research does not support you.Your thirsty @$$ is still in here derailing a thread to prove some faded picture murals are evidence of Ancient Egyptians not being African because it's the best you guys can do. This thread wasn't even really discussing race but you're so over it, you're going to inject race into the conversation.
quote: The fact is no one in mainstream academia takes you people seriously. We know your pseudohistorical claims are borne out of social trauma.
And no one should take you seriously. I'm embarassed to have to say you type like an overseas American caricature. you do not think scientifically at all and are lazy. First, bandwagon fallacies are not scientific. The legitimacy of an idea lies not within knowing many people believe something, but the support that is the foundation for that consensus.
Blacks especially should NEVER trust anything without reviewing the research. Discarded scientific theories of today were widely believed years ago (often to their detriment). Having said that, mainstream research is increasingly corroborating an indigenous foundation for Egypt, and that it was a characteristically African civilization. Make a new thread to contest the research, we'll be waiting.
The "debate" moved on from 5+ years ago. Very few people on internet forums now argue there was large scale migration into Neolithic/Early Dynastic Egypt from West Asia. Most Afrocentrists have also modified their position to realise the Egyptians were Saharan [North] Africans, not Sub-Saharan Africans. My only issue with the latter is that they still call Saharan Africans "black"; the average skin colour of northern Saharan peoples, including modern Egyptians, is too light to be labelled black and living Egyptians do not consider themselves to be black either.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
The "debate" moved on from 5+ years ago. Very few people on internet forums now argue there was large scale migration into Neolithic/Early Dynastic Egypt from West Asia. Most Afrocentrists have also modified their position to realise the Egyptians were Saharan [North] Africans, not Sub-Saharan Africans. My only issue with the latter is that they still call Saharan Africans "black"; the average skin colour of northern Saharan peoples, including modern Egyptians, is too light to be labelled black and living Egyptians do not consider themselves to be black either. [/QB]
"Black" as per most Americans means "a person of primarily African descent" regardless of if they might be light brown.
For instance Barack Obama is widely considered Americans first Black president
Yet his skin tone is light brown
And since most Africans are brown and not literally black, then one cannot use a literal color definition
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon: The "debate" moved on from 5+ years ago. Very few people on internet forums now argue there was large scale migration into Neolithic/Early Dynastic Egypt from West Asia. Most Afrocentrists have also modified their position to realise the Egyptians were Saharan [North] Africans, not Sub-Saharan Africans. My only issue with the latter is that they still call Saharan Africans "black"; the average skin colour of northern Saharan peoples, including modern Egyptians, is too light to be labelled black and living Egyptians do not consider themselves to be black either.
Stop talking about what you think "online consensus" is and make your own thread to discuss real research. We give no fvcks what "consensus" is without data. I honestly can't hold out hope for much data though (not from you guys), as it seems y'all have some sort of reading comprehension problem. STOP derailing this guy's thread and make your OWN thread.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon: @ real tawk, true, but a couple of the old posters modified their Afrocentric views from a "hard" to "weak" Afrocentrism. The "weak" Afrocentrism accepts ancient Egyptians were not Sub-Saharan Africans (but North/Saharan Africans), however they still call Saharan Africans "black" to desperately try to attach themselves to ancient Egyptian civilization. Also they downplay the Levantine biological links to Lower Egyptians.
That has no impact on afrocentrism, it's still Africa centered
It would only affect subsaharan-centrism
It's like Southern European Greeks and Romans being pillars of civilization to West Central Europeans or Europeans in general
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Listen, you moron, the people of Egypt today are the descendants of ancient Egypt, not you sub-Africans.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: don't kid yourself. people are not even putting effort into debating Afrocentrists these days. You are more of an amusement.
Why would Afrocentrics be an "amusement" if the world has "marched on?" You soundin like a girl who says to the homegirls she over her man, but when he roll through she jump out her seat. You can't put effort into a debate because the research does not support you.Your thirsty @$$ is still in here derailing a thread to prove some faded picture murals are evidence of Ancient Egyptians not being African because it's the best you guys can do. This thread wasn't even really discussing race but you're so over it, you're going to inject race into the conversation.
quote: The fact is no one in mainstream academia takes you people seriously. We know your pseudohistorical claims are borne out of social trauma.
And no one should take you seriously. I'm embarassed to have to say you type like an overseas American caricature. you do not think scientifically at all and are lazy. First, bandwagon fallacies are not scientific. The legitimacy of an idea lies not within knowing many people believe something, but the support that is the foundation for that consensus.
Blacks especially should NEVER trust anything without reviewing the research. Discarded scientific theories of today were widely believed years ago (often to their detriment). Having said that, mainstream research is increasingly corroborating an indigenous foundation for Egypt, and that it was a characteristically African civilization. Make a new thread to contest the research, we'll be waiting.
Dude please. Egypt TODAY is full of people who are various shades of brown and black. Egypt is not Europe, has never been Europe and has never been populated by white folks.
You aren't an Egyptian and these people aren't your 'brethren'.
And this is from Cairo, not even further South where the ruins are.
But sure, go ahead and pretend you really have some serious facts to produce supporting whatever claims you believe in.
There are plenty of threads on this forum already discussing this topic ad-infinitum and you aren't introducing anything new to change any of the facts.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon: The "debate" moved on from 5+ years ago. Very few people on internet forums now argue there was large scale migration into Neolithic/Early Dynastic Egypt from West Asia. Most Afrocentrists have also modified their position to realise the Egyptians were Saharan [North] Africans, not Sub-Saharan Africans. My only issue with the latter is that they still call Saharan Africans "black"; the average skin colour of northern Saharan peoples, including modern Egyptians, is too light to be labelled black and living Egyptians do not consider themselves to be black either.
Stop talking about what you think "online consensus" is and make your own thread to discuss real research. We give no fvcks what "consensus" is without data. I honestly can't hold out hope for much data though (not from you guys), as it seems y'all have some sort of reading comprehension problem. STOP derailing this guy's thread and make your OWN thread.
Consensus based on data is this. And it doesn't play into anyone's politics. That's why people like you won't accept it - it doesn't fit your pan-Africanist political agenda.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Listen, you moron, the people of Egypt today are the descendants of ancient Egypt, not you sub-Africans.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: don't kid yourself. people are not even putting effort into debating Afrocentrists these days. You are more of an amusement.
Why would Afrocentrics be an "amusement" if the world has "marched on?" You soundin like a girl who says to the homegirls she over her man, but when he roll through she jump out her seat. You can't put effort into a debate because the research does not support you.Your thirsty @$$ is still in here derailing a thread to prove some faded picture murals are evidence of Ancient Egyptians not being African because it's the best you guys can do. This thread wasn't even really discussing race but you're so over it, you're going to inject race into the conversation.
quote: The fact is no one in mainstream academia takes you people seriously. We know your pseudohistorical claims are borne out of social trauma.
And no one should take you seriously. I'm embarassed to have to say you type like an overseas American caricature. you do not think scientifically at all and are lazy. First, bandwagon fallacies are not scientific. The legitimacy of an idea lies not within knowing many people believe something, but the support that is the foundation for that consensus.
Blacks especially should NEVER trust anything without reviewing the research. Discarded scientific theories of today were widely believed years ago (often to their detriment). Having said that, mainstream research is increasingly corroborating an indigenous foundation for Egypt, and that it was a characteristically African civilization. Make a new thread to contest the research, we'll be waiting.
Dude please. Egypt TODAY is full of people who are various shades of brown and black. Egypt is not Europe, has never been Europe and has never been populated by white folks.
You aren't an Egyptian and these people aren't your 'brethren'.
But sure, go ahead and pretend you really have some serious facts to produce supporting whatever claims you believe in.
There are plenty of threads on this forum already discussing this topic ad-infinitum and you aren't introducing anything new to change any of the facts.
Massive straw man, no one has ever claimed ancient Egyptians were "white". And the Afroloons on this forum don't answer inconvenient questions for them e.g. if ancient Egyptians were "black" why did they write they were a different skin colour to the Nubians?!
"The countries of Syria and Nubia, the land of Egypt,Thou settest every man in his place,Thou suppliest their necessities:Everyone has his food, and his time of life is reckoned.Their tongues are separate in speech,And their natures as well;Their skins are distinguished,As thou distinguishest the foreign peoples."
The Egyptians considered themselves as intermediate in skin hue between light brown Syrians to their north, and dark brown Nubians to their south. This is also what the artwork shows.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon: The "debate" moved on from 5+ years ago. Very few people on internet forums now argue there was large scale migration into Neolithic/Early Dynastic Egypt from West Asia. Most Afrocentrists have also modified their position to realise the Egyptians were Saharan [North] Africans, not Sub-Saharan Africans. My only issue with the latter is that they still call Saharan Africans "black"; the average skin colour of northern Saharan peoples, including modern Egyptians, is too light to be labelled black and living Egyptians do not consider themselves to be black either.
Stop talking about what you think "online consensus" is and make your own thread to discuss real research. We give no fvcks what "consensus" is without data. I honestly can't hold out hope for much data though (not from you guys), as it seems y'all have some sort of reading comprehension problem. STOP derailing this guy's thread and make your OWN thread.
Consensus based on data is this. And it doesn't play into anyone's politics. That's why people like you won't accept it - it doesn't fit your pan-Africanist political agenda.
Consensus by liars about lies.
Here are Egyptians excavating a site in the early 1900s. Yeah they sure look like a bunch of white folks to me. Can't tell the difference between them and the Europeans.
Funny how all these Europeans have gone to Egypt and been surrounded by black and brown modern Egyptians and then claim the brown paint in the tombs is symbolic and then claim "consensus", meaning cause they said so.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Listen, you moron, the people of Egypt today are the descendants of ancient Egypt, not you sub-Africans.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: don't kid yourself. people are not even putting effort into debating Afrocentrists these days. You are more of an amusement.
Why would Afrocentrics be an "amusement" if the world has "marched on?" You soundin like a girl who says to the homegirls she over her man, but when he roll through she jump out her seat. You can't put effort into a debate because the research does not support you.Your thirsty @$$ is still in here derailing a thread to prove some faded picture murals are evidence of Ancient Egyptians not being African because it's the best you guys can do. This thread wasn't even really discussing race but you're so over it, you're going to inject race into the conversation.
quote: The fact is no one in mainstream academia takes you people seriously. We know your pseudohistorical claims are borne out of social trauma.
And no one should take you seriously. I'm embarassed to have to say you type like an overseas American caricature. you do not think scientifically at all and are lazy. First, bandwagon fallacies are not scientific. The legitimacy of an idea lies not within knowing many people believe something, but the support that is the foundation for that consensus.
Blacks especially should NEVER trust anything without reviewing the research. Discarded scientific theories of today were widely believed years ago (often to their detriment). Having said that, mainstream research is increasingly corroborating an indigenous foundation for Egypt, and that it was a characteristically African civilization. Make a new thread to contest the research, we'll be waiting.
Dude please. Egypt TODAY is full of people who are various shades of brown and black. Egypt is not Europe, has never been Europe and has never been populated by white folks.
You aren't an Egyptian and these people aren't your 'brethren'.
But sure, go ahead and pretend you really have some serious facts to produce supporting whatever claims you believe in.
There are plenty of threads on this forum already discussing this topic ad-infinitum and you aren't introducing anything new to change any of the facts.
Massive straw man, no one has ever claimed ancient Egyptians were "white". And the Afroloons on this forum don't answer inconvenient questions for them e.g. if ancient Egyptians were "black" why did they write they were a different skin colour to the Nubians?!
"The countries of Syria and Nubia, the land of Egypt,Thou settest every man in his place,Thou suppliest their necessities:Everyone has his food, and his time of life is reckoned.Their tongues are separate in speech,And their natures as well;Their skins are distinguished,As thou distinguishest the foreign peoples."
The Egyptians considered themselves as intermediate in skin hue between light brown Syrians to their north, and dark brown Nubians to their south. This is also what the artwork shows.
The point is there are plenty of people in Egypt TO THIS DAY who are black and are not "Nubian".
And no the Egyptians never called anybody "Nubian". Nub was the word for gold and was considered sacred. They would have never have used such a term for "hated foreigners". Not to mention the word for black is KM as in KMT. Therefore, they had no problems calling themselves "black", as in the "black country", the "black nation" or the "black community".
The "debate" moved on from 5+ years ago. Very few people on internet forums now argue there was large scale migration into Neolithic/Early Dynastic Egypt from West Asia. Most Afrocentrists have also modified their position to realise the Egyptians were Saharan [North] Africans, not Sub-Saharan Africans. My only issue with the latter is that they still call Saharan Africans "black"; the average skin colour of northern Saharan peoples, including modern Egyptians, is too light to be labelled black and living Egyptians do not consider themselves to be black either.
"Black" as per most Americans means "a person of primarily African descent" regardless of if they might be light brown.
For instance Barack Obama is widely considered Americans first Black president
Yet his skin tone is light brown
And since most Africans are brown and not literally black, then one cannot use a literal color definition [/QB]
Black refers to the darkest pigmentation shades (dark brown) and white to the lightest (light pink). This is not ambiguous/controversial because these are the poles or extremes of the variation like cold & hot labels. The problem is when you try to classify everything between those extremes as white/black, the same for everything between cold/hot like "warm" temperatures. Afrocentrists broaden the definition of black to include much lighter brown skin shades so they can attach themselves to Egyptians. Its a silly trick.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
The "debate" moved on from 5+ years ago. Very few people on internet forums now argue there was large scale migration into Neolithic/Early Dynastic Egypt from West Asia. Most Afrocentrists have also modified their position to realise the Egyptians were Saharan [North] Africans, not Sub-Saharan Africans. My only issue with the latter is that they still call Saharan Africans "black"; the average skin colour of northern Saharan peoples, including modern Egyptians, is too light to be labelled black and living Egyptians do not consider themselves to be black either.
"Black" as per most Americans means "a person of primarily African descent" regardless of if they might be light brown.
For instance Barack Obama is widely considered Americans first Black president
Yet his skin tone is light brown
And since most Africans are brown and not literally black, then one cannot use a literal color definition
Black refers to the darkest pigmentation shades (dark brown) and white to the lightest (light pink). This is not ambiguous/controversial because these are the poles or extremes of the variation like cold & hot labels. The problem is when you try to classify everything between those extremes as white/black, the same for everything between cold/hot like "warm" temperatures. Afrocentrists broaden the definition of black to include much lighter brown skin shades so they can attach themselves to Egyptians. Its a silly trick. [/QB]
No the problem is you simply like to miss the point.
So again, your attempts to place them somewhere outside of what most people call black is simply you lying again.
Most Africans are black and most Africans are a shade of brown and not literally JET BLACK like those "Nubians" you keep referring to. Because if to be black means you had to be the same color as a 'coal black' Nubian then most Africans wouldn't be black.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
The Egyptians distinguished their skin colour to the peoples below the first cataract of the Nile, i.e.. Nubians. It is no coincidence the first cataract was where the approx. tropic of cancer line passed through in ancient times. The first cataract was the yardstick for who was black, not Egypt. The ancient Greeks realised the same: the aethiopes (burnt faced) from the 6th century BCE were not Egyptians, but the populations below Egypt.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon: Black refers to the darkest pigmentation shades (dark brown) and white to the lightest (light pink). This is not ambiguous/controversial because these are the poles or extremes of the variation like cold & hot labels. The problem is when you try to classify everything between those extremes as white/black, the same for everything between cold/hot like "warm" temperatures. Afrocentrists broaden the definition of black to include much lighter brown skin shades so they can attach themselves to Egyptians. Its a silly trick.
"Black" doesn't matter Afrocentric is "African centered" Egypt is in Africa, Nigeria is in Africa
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
The Egyptians distinguished their skin colour to the peoples below the first cataract of the Nile, i.e.. Nubians. It is no coincidence the first cataract was where the approx. tropic of cancer line passed through in ancient times. The first cataract was the yardstick for who was black, not Egypt. The ancient Greeks realised the same: the aethiopes (burnt faced) from the 6th century BCE were not Egyptians, but the populations below Egypt.
The ancient Egyptians did not use the word Nubian to refer to foreigners. The term came about in the Roman Era as a reference to the gold mining areas of Upper Egypt and Lower Sudan. Since that time many populations in this area have adopted the term as a reference of self identification. In Sudan there are people identified as "Nubians" but it has nothing to do with being black because most Sudanese ARE BLACK.
In the language of Ancient Egypt, Nub means gold. And this is seen in the name of the town that is called by Egyptologists (based on the arabic town) Naqada. In ancient Times it was called "Nubt" because it was a town for gold trading. The god Set was the main deity there and he is often seen being called "Set the Nubti(nubian/golden)" in ancient Egyptian texts...
quote: Naqada was the necropolis of the town of Nubt, the town of gold, known in Greek as Ombos. It had been devoted to the god Set, or Set of Nubt, Nubty, as he is called in the Pyramid Texts, and as evidenced by inscribed blocks found at Naqada.
The ancient Egyptians had various names for the various people along the Nile to their south. They weren't all identified as "one group" and they recognized them as different ethnic groups. Wawat, Yam, Irtet, Kesh (Kush), etc.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
The ancient Egyptians had various names for the various people along the Nile to their south. They weren't all identified as "one group" and they recognized them as different ethnic groups. Wawat, Yam, Irtet, Kesh (Kush), etc. [/QB]
They did have the word nHsy ( Nehesy)
/nHsy/ Nehesy corresponds with the modern term Nubian.
Mena: It is amazing that archeologist are still discovering tomb in Egypt because in the last fifty years Egypt has been a country were the most archeological work in the world have been done.
What's even more amazing is despite the fact that it is a country where the most archaeology is conducted it is still denied that the country and its ancient history has anything to do with the continent it is on-- AFRICA! LOLPosts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Look how well preserved is this wall painting. No restoration and clearly one can see the tawny complected Egyptians.
Yes their skins are very tawny like King Tut and his wife Ankhesenamun below.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
The "debate" moved on from 5+ years ago. Very few people on internet forums now argue there was large scale migration into Neolithic/Early Dynastic Egypt from West Asia. Most Afrocentrists have also modified their position to realise the Egyptians were Saharan [North] Africans, not Sub-Saharan Africans. My only issue with the latter is that they still call Saharan Africans "black"; the average skin colour of northern Saharan peoples, including modern Egyptians, is too light to be labelled black and living Egyptians do not consider themselves to be black either.
"Black" as per most Americans means "a person of primarily African descent" regardless of if they might be light brown.
For instance Barack Obama is widely considered Americans first Black president
Yet his skin tone is light brown
And since most Africans are brown and not literally black, then one cannot use a literal color definition
Black refers to the darkest pigmentation shades (dark brown) and white to the lightest (light pink). This is not ambiguous/controversial because these are the poles or extremes of the variation like cold & hot labels. The problem is when you try to classify everything between those extremes as white/black, the same for everything between cold/hot like "warm" temperatures. Afrocentrists broaden the definition of black to include much lighter brown skin shades so they can attach themselves to Egyptians. Its a silly trick.
Not really sure what you mean, but you come off as confused.
The narrower facial features here are not uniquely African, Middle Eastern, European or Indian. They could be found in any of these places
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is China in Europe or vice versa? I am using your dumb geography logic.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon: Black refers to the darkest pigmentation shades (dark brown) and white to the lightest (light pink). This is not ambiguous/controversial because these are the poles or extremes of the variation like cold & hot labels. The problem is when you try to classify everything between those extremes as white/black, the same for everything between cold/hot like "warm" temperatures. Afrocentrists broaden the definition of black to include much lighter brown skin shades so they can attach themselves to Egyptians. Its a silly trick.
"Black" doesn't matter Afrocentric is "African centered" Egypt is in Africa, Nigeria is in Africa
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Is China in Europe or vice versa? I am using your dumb geography logic.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon: Black refers to the darkest pigmentation shades (dark brown) and white to the lightest (light pink). This is not ambiguous/controversial because these are the poles or extremes of the variation like cold & hot labels. The problem is when you try to classify everything between those extremes as white/black, the same for everything between cold/hot like "warm" temperatures. Afrocentrists broaden the definition of black to include much lighter brown skin shades so they can attach themselves to Egyptians. Its a silly trick.
"Black" doesn't matter Afrocentric is "African centered" Egypt is in Africa, Nigeria is in Africa
You will have to explain
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The idiot is about to circular reason the **** out of this... China shares landmass with Europe Nigeria shares landmass with Egypt He'll insist that these two things are equivalent ignoring relationships such as Europeans and contemporary Australians. Or Amazonians and the Algonquin Innu. Fact of the matter is, regardless, the respective groups share deep rooted similarities in culture despite geographical distances....with an added bonus if they do in fact share a landmass.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
You said Egypt is African-centered based on geography. I responded with the example of China and Europe to illustrate how ignorant that logic is.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Is China in Europe or vice versa? I am using your dumb geography logic.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon: Black refers to the darkest pigmentation shades (dark brown) and white to the lightest (light pink). This is not ambiguous/controversial because these are the poles or extremes of the variation like cold & hot labels. The problem is when you try to classify everything between those extremes as white/black, the same for everything between cold/hot like "warm" temperatures. Afrocentrists broaden the definition of black to include much lighter brown skin shades so they can attach themselves to Egyptians. Its a silly trick.
"Black" doesn't matter Afrocentric is "African centered" Egypt is in Africa, Nigeria is in Africa
posted
Asshole, I was showing her, as you clearly caught on, sharing landmass is no basis for racial, historical or cultural centeredness.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: The idiot is about to circular reason the **** out of this... China shares landmass with Europe Nigeria shares landmass with Egypt He'll insist that these two things are equivalent ignoring relationships such as Europeans and contemporary Australians. Or Amazonians and the Algonquin Innu. Fact of the matter is, regardless, the respective groups share deep rooted similarities in culture despite geographical distances....with an added bonus if they do in fact share a landmass.
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: You said Egypt is African-centered based on geography. I responded with the example of China and Europe to illustrate how ignorant that logic is.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Is China in Europe or vice versa? I am using your dumb geography logic.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon: Black refers to the darkest pigmentation shades (dark brown) and white to the lightest (light pink). This is not ambiguous/controversial because these are the poles or extremes of the variation like cold & hot labels. The problem is when you try to classify everything between those extremes as white/black, the same for everything between cold/hot like "warm" temperatures. Afrocentrists broaden the definition of black to include much lighter brown skin shades so they can attach themselves to Egyptians. Its a silly trick.
"Black" doesn't matter Afrocentric is "African centered" Egypt is in Africa, Nigeria is in Africa
You will have to explain
Tell, Real quack. Where did the first Nile Valley Cataract arose? Point at the geographic location.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Asshole, I was showing her, as you clearly caught on, sharing landmass is no basis for racial, historical or cultural centeredness.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: The idiot is about to circular reason the **** out of this... China shares landmass with Europe Nigeria shares landmass with Egypt He'll insist that these two things are equivalent ignoring relationships such as Europeans and contemporary Australians. Or Amazonians and the Algonquin Innu. Fact of the matter is, regardless, the respective groups share deep rooted similarities in culture despite geographical distances….with an added bonus if they do in fact share a landmass.
So, with whom did ancient Egyptians share cultural patterns, Real quack? Which continent and people would that be, Real quack?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Is China in Europe or vice versa? I am using your dumb geography logic.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon: Black refers to the darkest pigmentation shades (dark brown) and white to the lightest (light pink). This is not ambiguous/controversial because these are the poles or extremes of the variation like cold & hot labels. The problem is when you try to classify everything between those extremes as white/black, the same for everything between cold/hot like "warm" temperatures. Afrocentrists broaden the definition of black to include much lighter brown skin shades so they can attach themselves to Egyptians. Its a silly trick.
"Black" doesn't matter Afrocentric is "African centered" Egypt is in Africa, Nigeria is in Africa
Logic is when you ask, is Cambodia in Asia?
Or Thailand?
Or Vietnam?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Problem is afrocentrists (esp. doug) keep setting up the straw man that "eurocentrics" (who don't even exist - no one has ever claimed Europeans founded Early Dynastic Egypt) state the Egyptians were "white".
Yet no one has ever claimed Egyptians had skin colour like following:
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Asshole, I was showing her, as you clearly caught on, sharing landmass is no basis for racial, historical or cultural centeredness.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: The idiot is about to circular reason the **** out of this... China shares landmass with Europe Nigeria shares landmass with Egypt He'll insist that these two things are equivalent ignoring relationships such as Europeans and contemporary Australians. Or Amazonians and the Algonquin Innu. Fact of the matter is, regardless, the respective groups share deep rooted similarities in culture despite geographical distances….with an added bonus if they do in fact share a landmass.
So, with whom did ancient Egyptians share cultural patterns, Real quack? Which continent and people would that be, Real quack?
Egypt is a trans-continental country, part of it (Sinai) is a segment of Levant/West Asia (the Eurasian continent). All Afrocentrists ignore this. The Sinai was an important land-bridge between the two continents and there is consensus among scholars that Egyptian agriculture derived from the southern Levant via Sinai:
"The prevailing view among archeologists is the hypothesis identifying southern Levant as the origin of Egyptian agriculture and animal breeding (Hendrickx & Vermeersch 2000: 37; Wengrow 2006: 44; Hendrickx et al. 2010: 19). The new subsistence system could have reached Lower Egypt via Sinai, together with materials imported from the east, e.g. shells from the Red Sea and turquoise (acculturation model). Alternatively, it might have come together with Levantine farmers migrating as a result of climate changes (demic diffusion model) (Borgoginini Tarli & Manzi 1998: 36). According to F. Hassan (1984b: 222), farming was introduced to the Delta by migrants from the east. However, their movement was not linked to the mass migrations from southwest Asia. Lower Egypt is claimed to have been gradually infiltrated by drifters and refugees over a relatively long period of time (some 500 years or more). In his opinion, the change in subsistence was almost imperceptible, and thus peaceful and gradual. Levantine farmers easily adapted to local hunter-gatherers, which was facilitated by the flexible social organization and the probably exogamous marriage pattern followed by autochthonous communities (Hassan 1984b: 222)." http://www.muzarp.poznan.pl/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/AMaczynska_ma%C5%82y-pdf.pdf
Lower Egyptian have biological ties to the southern Levant and Greece (circum-Mediterranean populations), this shows in craniometric studies.
"Lower Egyptian groups have tended to pool more with European and Mediterranean groups, while Upper Egyptians are biologically more similar to southern African groups. The geographic proximity of Lower Egyptians to the Mediterranean Sea and of Upper Egyptians to Nubia likely explains the phenotypic and genotypic differences between the two areas." - Klales, A. R. (2014). "Computed Tomography Analysis and Reconstruction of Ancient Egyptians Originating from the Akhmim Region of Egypt: A Biocultural Perspective". MA Thesis. University of Manitoba http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/jspui/bitstream/1993/23992/1/Klales_Alexandra.pdfPosts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
ugh you guys are STILL are in here derailing this guys thread to make it about race even after a new one was made for you. SMH...
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: Asshole, I was showing her, as you clearly caught on, sharing landmass is no basis for racial, historical or cultural centeredness.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: The idiot is about to circular reason the **** out of this... China shares landmass with Europe Nigeria shares landmass with Egypt He'll insist that these two things are equivalent ignoring relationships such as Europeans and contemporary Australians. Or Amazonians and the Algonquin Innu. Fact of the matter is, regardless, the respective groups share deep rooted similarities in culture despite geographical distances….with an added bonus if they do in fact share a landmass.
So, with whom did ancient Egyptians share cultural patterns, Real quack? Which continent and people would that be, Real quack?
Egypt is a trans-continental country, part of it (Sinai) is a segment of Levant/West Asia (the Eurasian continent). All Afrocentrists ignore this. The Sinai was an important land-bridge between the two continents and there is consensus among scholars that Egyptian agriculture derived from the southern Levant via Sinai:
"The prevailing view among archeologists is the hypothesis identifying southern Levant as the origin of Egyptian agriculture and animal breeding (Hendrickx & Vermeersch 2000: 37; Wengrow 2006: 44; Hendrickx et al. 2010: 19). The new subsistence system could have reached Lower Egypt via Sinai, together with materials imported from the east, e.g. shells from the Red Sea and turquoise (acculturation model). Alternatively, it might have come together with Levantine farmers migrating as a result of climate changes (demic diffusion model) (Borgoginini Tarli & Manzi 1998: 36). According to F. Hassan (1984b: 222), farming was introduced to the Delta by migrants from the east. However, their movement was not linked to the mass migrations from southwest Asia. Lower Egypt is claimed to have been gradually infiltrated by drifters and refugees over a relatively long period of time (some 500 years or more). In his opinion, the change in subsistence was almost imperceptible, and thus peaceful and gradual. Levantine farmers easily adapted to local hunter-gatherers, which was facilitated by the flexible social organization and the probably exogamous marriage pattern followed by autochthonous communities (Hassan 1984b: 222)." http://www.muzarp.poznan.pl/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/AMaczynska_ma%C5%82y-pdf.pdf
Lower Egyptian have biological ties to the southern Levant and Greece (circum-Mediterranean populations), this shows in craniometric studies.
Silly individual, read!
quote: "...sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans."
—Barry Kemp, Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation, Routledge. (2006) p. 52-60)
quote:Ofer Bar-Yosef cites the microburin technique and “microlithic forms such as arched backed bladelets and La Mouillah points" as well as the parthenocarpic figs found in Natufian territory originated in the Sudan.
--Bar-Yosef O., Pleistocene connections between Africa and South West Asia: an archaeological perspective. The African Archaeological Review; Chapter 5, pg 29-38; Kislev ME, Hartmann A, Bar-Yosef O, Early domesticated fig in the Jordan Valley. Nature 312:1372–1374.
quote:Christopher Ehret noted that the intensive use of plants among the Natufians was first found in Africa, as a precursor to the development of farming in the Fertile Crescent.
--Ehret (2002) The Civilizations of Africa: A History to 1800. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia
quote:The Natufians existed in the Mediterranean region of the Levant 15,000 to 11,500 years ago. Dr. Grosman suggests this grave could point to ideological shifts that took place due to the transition to agriculture in the region at that time.
quote: Examination of African barbed bone points recovered from Holocene sites provides a context to interpret three Late Pleistocene occurrences from Katanda and Ishango, Zaire, and White Paintings Shelter, Botswana. In sites dated to ca. 10,000 BP and younger, such artifacts are found widely distributed across the Sahara Desert, the Sahel, the Nile, and the East African Lakes. They are present in both ceramic and aceramic contexts, sometimes associated with domesticates. The almost-universal presence of fish remains indicates a subsistence adaptation which incorporates a riverine/lacustrine component. Typologically these points exhibit sufficient similarity in form and method of manufacture to be subsumed within a single African “tradition.” They are absent at Fayum, where a distinct Natufian form occurs. Specimens dating to ca. 20,000 BP at Ishango, possibly a similar age at White Paintings Shelter, and up to 90,000 BP at Katanda clearly fall within this same African tradition and thus indicate a very long-term continuity which crosses traditionally conceived sub-Saharan cultural boundaries.
--John E. Yellen
September 1998, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 173–198 Barbed Bone Points: Tradition and Continuity in Saharan and Sub-Saharan Africa
quote:From various kinds of evidence it can now be argued that agriculture in Ethiopia and the Horn was quite ancient, originating as much as 7,000 or more years ago, and that its development owed nothing to South Arabian inspiration. Moreover, the inventions of grain cultivation in particular, both in Ethiopia and separately in the Near East, seem rooted in a single, still earlier subsistence invention of North-east Africa, the intensive utilization of wild grains, beginning probably by or before 13,000 b.c. The correlation of linguistic evidence with archaeology suggests that this food-collecting innovation may have been the work of early Afroasiatic-speaking communities and may have constituted the particular economic advantage which gave impetus to the first stages of Afroasiatic expansion into Ethiopia and the Horn, the Sahara and North Africa, and parts of the Near East.
quote:Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon: "Lower Egyptian groups have tended to pool more with European and Mediterranean groups, while Upper Egyptians are biologically more similar to southern African groups. The geographic proximity of Lower Egyptians to the Mediterranean Sea and of Upper Egyptians to Nubia likely explains the phenotypic and genotypic differences between the two areas." - Klales, A. R. (2014). "Computed Tomography Analysis and Reconstruction of Ancient Egyptians Originating from the Akhmim Region of Egypt: A Biocultural Perspective". MA Thesis. University of Manitoba http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/jspui/bitstream/1993/23992/1/Klales_Alexandra.pdf
Odd individual you are.
quote:…"most of which originated from Akhmim and primarily date to the Ptolemaic Period"…
—Akhmim Region of Egypt: A Biocultural This is pre-dynastic, it's old and well known. Nothing special was revealed.
quote: "Still, it appears that the process of state formation involved a large indigenous component. Outside influence and admixture with extraregional groups primarily occurred in Lower Egypt—perhaps during the later dynastic, but especially in Ptolmaic and Roman times (also Irish, 2006). No large-scale population replacement in the form of a foreign dynastic ‘race’ (Petrie, 1939) was indicated. Our results are generally consistent with those of Zakrzewski (2007). Using craniometric data in predynastic and early dynastic Egyptian samples, she also concluded that state formation was largely an indigenous process with some migration into the region evident. The sources of such migrants have not been identified; inclusion of additional regional and extraregional skeletal samples from various periods would be required for this purpose."
--Schillaci MA, Irish JD, Wood CC. 2009 Further analysis of the population history of ancient Egyptians.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic