...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Egyptology » Because some fools don't know how to make their own thread about the race of kemet (Page 3)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 13 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  11  12  13   
Author Topic: Because some fools don't know how to make their own thread about the race of kemet
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There is absolutely no need to engage with that pathological liar; I made my posts entirely for the benefit of third party observers - specifically Africans and the diaspora. The opinions of a cretin and a troll are beyond irrelevant. The opinion (s) of all contemporary Europeans in relation to African history is irrelevant.

The facts speak for themselves and do not require any form of validation - especially not from them; impart the truth to our own and they can continue to distort to their hearts content.

Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sudaniya:
[The opinion (s) of all contemporary Europeans in relation to African history is irrelevant.


what about Arabs?
Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by sudaniya:
[The opinion (s) of all contemporary Europeans in relation to African history is irrelevant.


what about Arabs?
The Arab identity is linguistically contingent. Arabs are not an ethnic group or a racial group and so you have to start with this understanding before posing such a question. The indigenous people of Egypt in the South may consider themselves Egyptian Arabs (as do some Sudanese groups) so some indigenous people that identify as Arabs are of tremendous importance and must be treated with respect and regard.

The other Arabs are irrelevant with regard to African history. All others are irrelevant in relation to African history. There is certainly a place for engaging with those non-Africans that are receptive to objective evidence, however, seeking the validation of non-Africans is demeaning, pathetic and unwarranted; they either accept objective material evidence or be dismissed and ignored.

Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Concerned member of public
Banned
Member # 22355

Rate Member
Icon 10 posted      Profile for Concerned member of public   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sudaniya is posting photos of Nubians/Sudanese, but saying they are Egyptians. But he didn't check the URLs he's posting ; they have "Nubian" and "Nubian girls" in their titles.  - Egyptians are not black - so he's spamming photos of darker skinned Nubians while titling them Egyptians trying to fool people. He's just discredited himself.

Also, the ancient Greek term Afrocentrists translate as "black skin" is highly ambiguous; as classicist Alan B. Lloyd notes: "Melanchroes could denote any colour from bronzed to black". When it is used to describe ancient Egyptians, it refers to a light brown/bronze complexion because ancient Greeks likened the Egyptian skin hue to north Indians.

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:


I don't think populations who fall in the medium UV radiation zone with "moderate" skin are "white". For example North African populations such as Berber groups and the Egyptians would fall in the "moderate" skin category - light brown to reddish-brown. They score between 50 and 60% skin reflectance.


 -


 -

 -
Seti I


 -
Tutankhamun

^^ this is what you mean by "moderate" not black skin tone , all of the three above.
The problem is that they are all far from above 50% for skin reflectance as we can see on any chart that gradates white to black
--and there are thousands of examples of art like this

Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
Sudaniya is posting photos of Nubians/Sudanese, but saying they are Egyptians. But he didn't check the URLs he's posting ; they have "Nubian" and "Nubian girls" in their titles.  - Egyptians are not black - so he's spamming photos of darker skinned Nubians while titling them Egyptians trying to fool people. He's just discredited himself.


Even if some are Nubian, why would it be a problem? Y'know I'm just curious...but would you think someone whose about 1/4th Maasai (and let's say 3/4ths non African) serves as a better representative of the average Maasai than say related Nilotic peoples like the Samburu? Because what you're suggesting is that highly admixed descendants are better representations of what Egypt would've been like than groups that didn't mix as much, and were closely related.

QUOTE:
"Morphological and genetic research seems to provide further support for the topic. According to Grigson (1991, 2000) Egyptian cattle of the 4th millennium BC were morphologically distinct from Eurasian cattle (Bos taurus) and Zebu (Bos indicus), meaning that African cattle may have been domesticated from the local wild Bos primigenius before the aforementioned date.... The zoological, genetic and linguistic studies thus not only suggest an African origin for cattle domestication, but also provide a precise time frame and geographicallocation which, generally speaking, fits well with that proposed by the CPE (Combined Prehistoric Expedition). A further element which might give support to the matter comes from the archaeological record, namely the pottery.

To sum up, Nubia is Egypt’s African ancestor. What linked Ancient Egypt to the rest of the North African cultures is this strong tie with the Nubian pastoral nomadic lifestyle, the same pastoral background commonly shared by most of the ancient Saharan and modern sub-Saharan societies. Thus, not only did Nubia have a prominent role in the origin of Ancient Egypt, it was also a key area for the origin of the entire African pastoral tradition."
--Gatto M. 2009. The Nubian Pastoral Culture as Link between Egypt and Africa A View from the Archaeological Record. British Archaelogical Reports: Egypt in its African Context: BAR S2204- Archaeopress. 21-29


"Genetic continuum of the Nubians with
their kin in southern Egypt is indicated
by comparable frequencies of E-V12 the
predominant M78 subclade among
southern Egyptians."
[Hassan et al. Y-chromosome
variation.." Am J. Phy Anthro. v137,3.
316-323

"Overall, when the Egyptian crania are evaluated in a Near Eastern (Lachish) versus African (Kerma, Jebel Moya, Ashanti) context) the affinity is with the Africans. The Sudan and Palestine are the most appropriate comparative regions which would have 'donated' people, along with the Sahara and Maghreb. Archaeology validates looking to these regions for population flow (see Hassan 1988)... Egyptian groups showed less overall affinity to Palestinian and Byzantine remains than to other African series, especially Sudanese."
S. O. Y. Keita, "Studies and Comments
on Ancient Egyptian Biological
Relationships," History in Africa 20
(1993) 129-54

"A biological affinities study based on frequencies of cranial nonmetric traits in skeletal samples from three cemeteries at Predynastic Naqada, Egypt, confirms the results of a recent nonmetric dental morphological analysis. Both cranial and dental traits analyses indicate that the individuals buried in a cemetery characterized archaeologically as high status are significantly different from individuals buried in two other, apparently non-elite cemeteries and that the non-elite samples are not significantly different from each other. A comparison with neighboring Nile Valley skeletal samples suggests that the
high status cemetery represents an endogamous ruling or elite segment of the local population at Naqada, which is more closely related to populations in northern Nubia than to neighboring
populations in southern Egypt. "

T. Prowse, and N. Lovell "Concordance
of cranial and dental morphological traits
and evidence for endogamy in ancient
Egypt" American journal of physical
anthropology. 1996, vol. 101, no2, pp.
237-246 (2 p.1/4)

Meanwhile modern Egyptians (especially towards the North) have been especially mixed since the Islamic expansion. They're accurate picture of how khemet would've looked like? I'm sure people that looked like modern Egyptians were there, but not as commonplace. The level of mixture we see in Modern Egypt wasn't like that in ancient times.


 -

Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 10 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oshun

You are dealing with a mentally ill troll with no intelligence or reasoning capacity.

Everybody is free to check the URLs; the pictures are all from Luxor, Edfu, Kom Ombo and Esna. The troll is a pathological liar and is projecting his vices onto others. The pictures (perhaps with the exception of just one) show indigenous black Egyptians in Luxor, Esna , Edfu and Kom Ombo. I excluded the 'Nubians' of Aswan but that was a mistake considering that they are descendants of the 12th Dynasty and can never be excluded from their cousins in Upper Egypt. The 'Nubian's are acknowledged as ethnically the closest people to Egypt and stem from a common origin with ancient Egyptians tens of thousands of years into the past.

The people of Aswan have infinitely greater claims to Pharaonic Egypt than any person in Cairo and Alexandre.

The 12th Dynasty originated in Aswan - where the "Nubians" reside; and it is this dynasty that completed the expulsion of Asiatic invaders. Perhaps the dunce would like to argue to Egyptologists that Senusret I and his dynasty were not Egyptians.

The people of Aswan are descendants of this great Pharaoh and of the illustrious 12th Dynasty... they are descendants of the Pharaohs.

the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.) originated from the Aswan region. As
expected, strong Nubian features and
dark coloring are seen in their sculpture
and relief work. This dynasty ranks as
among the greatest, whose fame far
outlived its actual tenure on the throne.
Especially interesting, it was a member of
this dynasty- that decreed that no Nehsy
(riverine Nubian of the principality of
Kush), except such as came for trade or
diplomatic reasons, should pass by the
Egyptian fortress at the southern end of
the Second Nile Cataract. Why would
this royal family of Nubian ancestry ban
other Nubians from coming into
Egyptian territory? Because the Egyptian
rulers of Nubian ancestry had become
Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they
exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and
adopted typical Egyptian policies."

- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient
Egyptians black or white?', Biblical
Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5,
1989)


" Among the foreigners, the Nubians were closest ethnically to the Egyptians. In the
late predynastic period (c. 3700-3150
B.C.E.), the Nubians shared the same
culture as the Egyptians and even
evolved the same pharaonic political
structure."
- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient
Egyptians black or white?', Biblical
Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5,
1989)


There is now a sufficient body of
evidence from modern studies of skeletal
remains to indicate that the ancient
Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians,
exhibited physical characteristics that are
within the range of variation for ancient
and modern indigenous peoples of the
Sahara and tropical Africa.. In general,
the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and
Nubia had the greatest biological affinity
to people of the Sahara and more
southerly areas." (Nancy C. Lovell, "
Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in
Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of
Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and
Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and
New York: Routledge, 1999) pp
328-332)

and

"must be placed in the context of
hypotheses informed by archaeological,
linguistic, geographic and other data. In
such contexts, the physical
anthropological evidence indicates that
early Nile Valley populations can be
identified as part of an African lineage,
but exhibiting local variation. This
variation represents the short and long
term effects of evolutionary forces, such
as gene flow, genetic drift, and natural
selection, influenced by culture and
geography." ("Nancy C. Lovell, "
Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in
Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of
Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and
Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and
New York: Routledge, 1999). pp
328-332)


"Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant. . (Egypt and Sub-Saharan Africa: Their Interaction. Encyclopedia of Precolonial Africa, by Joseph O. Vogel, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, California (1997), pp. 465-472 )

Which fits in very nicely with this:

Diodorus Siculus: "The Ethiopians say that the Egyptians `are one of their colonies, which was led into Egypt by Osiris, which was led into Egypt by Osiris. They claim that at the beginning of the world Egypt was simply a sea but that the Nile, carrying down vast quantities of loam from Ethiopia in its flood waters, finally filled it in and made it part of the continent."


Then a king will come from the South, Ameny, the justified, my name, Son of a woman of Ta-Seti, child of Upper Egypt, He will take the white crown, he will join the Two Mighty Ones (the two crowns) Asiatics will fall to his sword, Libyans will fall to his flame, Rebels to his wrath, traitors to his might, As the serpent on his brow subdues the rebels for him, One will build the Walls-of-the-Ruler, To bar Asiatics from entering Egypt .


Ammianus Marcellinus: " the men of Egypt are mostly brown and black with a skinny and desiccated look.

Glorious Pharaoh Senusret I

 -


 -

 -

 -


 -

 -


[URL=http://s525.photobucket.com/user/kushkemet08/media/50175611.jpg.html]  -


I see black people. [Big Grin]

Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Even if we were to accept the falsehood that Lower Egyptians were essentially Eurasians, the retarded troll doesn't seem to realise that this is a non-starter; he doesn't seem to realise that since ancient Upper Egyptians were closely related to 'Nubians' (irrefutable fact) that he's already lost. It was the significantly more sophisticated, wealthier and far more powerful South that conquered the North [Narmer] and united the two lands that determined the political and cultural norms.

The South created the ancient Egyptian civilization; it was the South that created the written language; the powerful priestly class was centred in Waset -"Thebes"-; the population of ancient Egypt was concentrated in the South; invaders were almost invariably expelled by Southern warrior-kings; the swampy Delta was nothing but a sparsely populated, fragmented backwater until the Southerners conquered it and built magnificent structures that have stood the test of time.

The famous Narmer palette shows him on one side wearing the white crown of Upper Egypt, and the other shows him wearing the red crown of Lower Egypt. It also shows the hawk emblem of Horus, the Upper Egyptian god of Nekhem, dominating the Lower Egypt personified papyrus marsh. From this, Narmer is believed to have unified Egypt."

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/predynastic.htm

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. (2005) Routledge. p.
52-60)


Karl Butzer has estimated that two areas of greatest population
density in dyanstic times were between Luxor{Waset} and Aswan
{Elephantine}

Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To quote one of my favourite posters:

The reference to Black skinned and woolly haired Egyptians has been translated as such in Herodutus Histories not only by Rawlinson, but Aubrey De Selincourt and most others and indeed, I am unaware of any African translation of Herodotus the Histories. The idea that "Black skinned and woolly haired" is an "Afrocentric" interpretation is therefore a non-starter.

And the notion of intepreting Herodotus in some other way (where Black does not mean "Black" is largely a sop to Eurocentric political correctness and disingenuousness- re-writing the Histories.

Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -

 -

 -


 -

 -

 -

 -

[URL=http://s525.photobucket.com/user/kushkemet08/media/08011038_zpsqjoxiq0t.jpg.html]  -

Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -
(actually taken in Pakistan, but she is from a Thar Desert ethnicity)

LARGE image

 -

 -

 -

These are the only Northern Indians that approach the skin tone of Upper Egyptians.

Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
Sudaniya is posting photos of Nubians/Sudanese, but saying they are Egyptians. But he didn't check the URLs he's posting ; they have "Nubian" and "Nubian girls" in their titles.  - Egyptians are not black - so he's spamming photos of darker skinned Nubians while titling them Egyptians trying to fool people. He's just discredited himself.

Also, the ancient Greek term Afrocentrists translate as "black skin" is highly ambiguous; as classicist Alan B. Lloyd notes: "Melanchroes could denote any colour from bronzed to black". When it is used to describe ancient Egyptians, it refers to a light brown/bronze complexion because ancient Greeks likened the Egyptian skin hue to north Indians.

O_o boy, shut f... up.

Nubians are Southern Egyptians and North Sudanese. Who gives a s...t about classicist Alan B. Lloyd and his nazi theory.

quote:
"The Mahalanobis D2 analysis uncovered close affinities between Nubians and Egyptians. Table 3 lists the Mahalanobis D2 distance matrix. As there is no significance testing that is available to be applied to this form of Mahalanobis distances, the biodistance scores must be interpreted in relation to one another, rather than on a general scale. In some cases, the statistics reveal that the Egyptian samples were more similar to Nubian samples than to other Egyptian samples (e.g. Gizeh and Hesa/Biga) and vice versa (e.g. Badari and Kerma, Naqada and Christian).

These relationships are further depicted in the PCO plot (Fig. 2). Aside from these interpopulation relationships, some Nubian groups are still more similar to other Nubians and some Egyptians are more similar to other Egyptian samples. Moreover, although the Nubian and Egyptian samples formed one well-distributed group, the Egyptian samples clustered in the upper left region, while the Nubians concentrated in the lower right of the plot. One line can be drawn that would separate the closely dispersed Egyptians and Nubians. The predynastic Egyptian samples clustered together (Badari and Naqada), while Gizeh most closely groups with the Lisht sample. The first two principal coordinates from PCO account for 60% of the variation in the samples. The graph from PCO is basically a pictorial representation of the distance matrix and interpretations from the plot mirror the Mahalanobis D2 matrix."

--Godde K.

An Examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development?

Homo. 2009;60(5):389-404. Epub 2009 Sep 19.


quote:
The Predynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples, while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Predynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002).

[...]

Studies of cranial morphology also support the use of a Nubian (Kerma) population for a comparison of the Dynastic period, as this group is likely to be more closely genetically related to the early Nile valley inhabitants

[...]


-- AP Starling, JT Stock. (2007), Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 134:520–528
Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Concerned member of public
Banned
Member # 22355

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Concerned member of public   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
[qb] 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".

" Egypt progressed, and why, because it was Caucasian."

Campbell 1851, p. 10–12.

In 1854, Josiah C. Nott with George Glidden saod "the Caucasian or white, and the Negro races were distinct at a very remote date, and that the Egyptians were Caucasians."

Baum 2006, p. 108

Please do better about your claims, this could be found with a basic wiki search. Today, Eurocentrics don't as often say words like "Caucasian" directly, but will use buzzwords like "Caucasoid" and "Negroid" or "Eurasians" to low key inject themselves into the conversation.

Morton, Nott & Gliddon described the Egyptians as reddish-brown skinned and darker than Greeks. My point was no anthropologist has ever said Egyptians had a white complexion; this is a straw man Doug sets up.
But it would incorrect to infer Eurocentrism hasn't existed within "Egyptology" just because people didn't argue Egyptians had a white complexion. As you saw in one of the people here that I'd quoted, they were trying to suggest that while not typical of Europeans, they had features that were possible for Europeans to have. With buzzwords like "Eurasian" or "Caucasoid" to replace "Caucasian," Eurocentrics have attempted to be more subtle, but Eurocentrism hasn't gone away. Eurocentrism will briefly and arbitrarily extend it's identity to be more inclusive in certain areas it has to (like in academia). But such extensions have no basis in the real world.

Historically, Eurocentrism and white supremacist attitudes have been intertwined. The diffusion model is the latest attempt at minimizing Egypt's African identity to preserve the same white supremacist interests. When they suggest that "Eurasians" or foreign "Caucasoids" mixed with "real" Africans (significantly), the implication is the same theme of African dependence. This time, the theme is geared towards making Africa appear highly dependent on a foreign (and fictional) group that's identity can be extended to Europe. While white supremacists would prefer to discuss Egypt as Eurocentrically as possible, even if they can't do so overtly, as long as it's not a "black thing" they will live. That would be enough to satiate their political agendas. This slick sh!t is not lost on researchers.


--"We can REJECT a simple model of long-term continuous gene flow between the Near East(QATAR/ARABIA) and North Africa" (contradicting simplistic claims of hordes of "Middle Easterners" flowing into Africa)

--"Maghrebi populations do not represent a large-scale demic diffusion of agropastoralists from the Near East/Arabia." (again debunking simplistic claims of "Middle Easterners" flowing into Africa to "tutor" the natives- a staple claim in some quarters)
Genomic Ancestry of North Africans Supports Back-to-Africa Migrations. Henn et. Al 2012
quote:
Also I would not label Morton, Nott or Gliddon "Eurocentrists". They actually changed their views to argue ancient Egyptians were native Saharan Africans, not a colony of Asiatics or Indo-Arabians as Morton formerly argued.

In 1854, Nott & Gliddon (Types of Mankind, p. 232) quote a letter Morton wrote in 1850: "You allude to my altered view in Ethnology, but it consists in regarding the Egyptian race as indigenous people of the valley of the Nile. Not Asiatics in any sense of the word, but autochthones of the country and the authors of their own civilization." Nott & Gliddon also modified their views to support Morton. In another letter Morton wrote: " recant so much of my published opinions as respects the origin of the Egyptians. The never came from Asia, but are the indigenous or aboriginal inhabitants of the valley of the Nile."

You said no one argued they were white. Taking back a point of view doesn't erase the prior beliefs they'd held from history. Eurocentrics like I said use words like "Caucasoid" or "Eurasian" to create groups that are socially irrelevant, but academically place them near Khemet's history.

There is no such thing as "Eurocentrism": the Asiatic/Dynastic race theories and Hamiticism do not say migrants from Europe created ancient Egyptian civilization, but peoples from Southwest Asia. And as I keep repeating, no one has ever said ancient Egyptians were white skinned; this is a straw man Afrocentrists like Doug set up.

Furthermore, I dispute the Asiatic/Dynastic race theories and Hamiticism have anything to do with racism. They trace back to Biblical thinking, i.e. Old Testament geneology. Same for the tripartite "Caucasoid"/"Negroid"/"Mongoloid" racial division - invented to match Noah's three sons (Cuvier) and in Blumenbach Caucasoids (Caucasians) are archetypal (i.e. the original or progenitor race everyone else sprung from) because the Caucasus mountains was where he thought Noah's Ark landed.

"the term “Caucasoid” traces back to the Old Testament story of Noah”s Ark"
- Takezawa Y: Problems with the terms: “Caucasoid”, “Mongoloid” and “Negroid”. Zinbun. 2011, 43: 61-68

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Concerned member of public
Banned
Member # 22355

Rate Member
Icon 10 posted      Profile for Concerned member of public   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sudaniya:
To quote one of my favourite posters:

The reference to Black skinned and woolly haired Egyptians has been translated as such in Herodutus Histories not only by Rawlinson, but Aubrey De Selincourt and most others and indeed, I am unaware of any African translation of Herodotus the Histories. The idea that "Black skinned and woolly haired" is an "Afrocentric" interpretation is therefore a non-starter.

And the notion of intepreting Herodotus in some other way (where Black does not mean "Black" is largely a sop to Eurocentric political correctness and disingenuousness- re-writing the Histories.

Because those scholars are/were not experts in ancient Greek colour. The experts do not automatically translate melas as black and leukos as white. An example is the Iliad. 20. 496 where barley is described as leukos.

 -

Does this look white to you?
Leukos ranges from chalk-white to a faint light brown like barley [in context this would explain Greek leukos-armed godesses, not as pale-white but a faint brown]. Similarly we find melas used to describe things that are not pitch-black or dark brown, but shades that are lighter brown. but experts who examine this stuff in better context of ancient Greek colour terminology are "Eurocentrists"... [Roll Eyes]

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 6 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -

The word melanchroes (not melas) was used to describe the ancient Egyptians and has been rightly translated as black, much to your chagrin. The Upper Egyptians were the dominant majority and they looked like this, so keep telling yourself that these people were not black, so that we can all continue to laugh at your desperate stupidity.

 -


[URL=http://s525.photobucket.com/user/kushkemet08/media/268_Egypt_Tiye.jpg.html]  -


Ammianus Marcellinus: " the men of Egypt are mostly brown and black with a skinny and desiccated look.

There is no getting around the fact that the Upper Egyptians stem from a common origin with 'Nubians'; created the ancient Egyptian civilization; and were the dominant majority in ancient Egypt, so your desperate references to Lower Egypt are ultimately self-defeating.


You can't even begin to challenge the facts of Upper Egypt's biological affinities and since they were the source of the civilization and the demographic majority... you lose. [Big Grin]

Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
quote:
Originally posted by sudaniya:
To quote one of my favourite posters:

The reference to Black skinned and woolly haired Egyptians has been translated as such in Herodutus Histories not only by Rawlinson, but Aubrey De Selincourt and most others and indeed, I am unaware of any African translation of Herodotus the Histories. The idea that "Black skinned and woolly haired" is an "Afrocentric" interpretation is therefore a non-starter.

And the notion of intepreting Herodotus in some other way (where Black does not mean "Black" is largely a sop to Eurocentric political correctness and disingenuousness- re-writing the Histories.

Because those scholars are/were not experts in ancient Greek colour. The experts do not automatically translate melas as black and leukos as white. An example is the Iliad. 20. 496 where barley is described as leukos.

 -

Does this look white to you?
Leukos ranges from chalk-white to a faint light brown like barley [in context this would explain Greek leukos-armed godesses, not as pale-white but a faint brown]. Similarly we find melas used to describe things that are not pitch-black or dark brown, but shades that are lighter brown. but experts who examine this stuff in better context of ancient Greek colour terminology are "Eurocentrists"... [Roll Eyes]

Why, when so much art has been shown that is dark brown or medium brown do you keep talking about light brown? Name any pharaoh who is depicted light brown - I dare you


quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:

There is no such thing as "Eurocentrism": the Asiatic/Dynastic race theories and Hamiticism do not say migrants from Europe created ancient Egyptian civilization, but peoples from Southwest Asia.


Some would say that to suggest the Egyptians were from Southwest Asia is Eurocentric because the aim is to remove the from African origin and make them not black when if we look at the art thousands of images are as dark as people regarded black in Europe and America

And if they were of Middle Eastern origin that would connect them more to the Middle/Near Eastern input to the Neolithic on Europe
placing them also closer biologically on a relative basis to European than if they were regarded are primarily African

Also the Nile Valley civilization is a river civilization and the Nile flows North to South starting in Ethiopia so geographically it is quite different from the berbers nomadic desert lifestyle

Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
[qb] 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".

" Egypt progressed, and why, because it was Caucasian."

Campbell 1851, p. 10–12.

In 1854, Josiah C. Nott with George Glidden saod "the Caucasian or white, and the Negro races were distinct at a very remote date, and that the Egyptians were Caucasians."

Baum 2006, p. 108

Please do better about your claims, this could be found with a basic wiki search. Today, Eurocentrics don't as often say words like "Caucasian" directly, but will use buzzwords like "Caucasoid" and "Negroid" or "Eurasians" to low key inject themselves into the conversation.

Morton, Nott & Gliddon described the Egyptians as reddish-brown skinned and darker than Greeks. My point was no anthropologist has ever said Egyptians had a white complexion; this is a straw man Doug sets up.
But it would incorrect to infer Eurocentrism hasn't existed within "Egyptology" just because people didn't argue Egyptians had a white complexion. As you saw in one of the people here that I'd quoted, they were trying to suggest that while not typical of Europeans, they had features that were possible for Europeans to have. With buzzwords like "Eurasian" or "Caucasoid" to replace "Caucasian," Eurocentrics have attempted to be more subtle, but Eurocentrism hasn't gone away. Eurocentrism will briefly and arbitrarily extend it's identity to be more inclusive in certain areas it has to (like in academia). But such extensions have no basis in the real world.

Historically, Eurocentrism and white supremacist attitudes have been intertwined. The diffusion model is the latest attempt at minimizing Egypt's African identity to preserve the same white supremacist interests. When they suggest that "Eurasians" or foreign "Caucasoids" mixed with "real" Africans (significantly), the implication is the same theme of African dependence. This time, the theme is geared towards making Africa appear highly dependent on a foreign (and fictional) group that's identity can be extended to Europe. While white supremacists would prefer to discuss Egypt as Eurocentrically as possible, even if they can't do so overtly, as long as it's not a "black thing" they will live. That would be enough to satiate their political agendas. This slick sh!t is not lost on researchers.


--"We can REJECT a simple model of long-term continuous gene flow between the Near East(QATAR/ARABIA) and North Africa" (contradicting simplistic claims of hordes of "Middle Easterners" flowing into Africa)

--"Maghrebi populations do not represent a large-scale demic diffusion of agropastoralists from the Near East/Arabia." (again debunking simplistic claims of "Middle Easterners" flowing into Africa to "tutor" the natives- a staple claim in some quarters)
Genomic Ancestry of North Africans Supports Back-to-Africa Migrations. Henn et. Al 2012
quote:
Also I would not label Morton, Nott or Gliddon "Eurocentrists". They actually changed their views to argue ancient Egyptians were native Saharan Africans, not a colony of Asiatics or Indo-Arabians as Morton formerly argued.

In 1854, Nott & Gliddon (Types of Mankind, p. 232) quote a letter Morton wrote in 1850: "You allude to my altered view in Ethnology, but it consists in regarding the Egyptian race as indigenous people of the valley of the Nile. Not Asiatics in any sense of the word, but autochthones of the country and the authors of their own civilization." Nott & Gliddon also modified their views to support Morton. In another letter Morton wrote: " recant so much of my published opinions as respects the origin of the Egyptians. The never came from Asia, but are the indigenous or aboriginal inhabitants of the valley of the Nile."

You said no one argued they were white. Taking back a point of view doesn't erase the prior beliefs they'd held from history. Eurocentrics like I said use words like "Caucasoid" or "Eurasian" to create groups that are socially irrelevant, but academically place them near Khemet's history.

There is no such thing as "Eurocentrism": the Asiatic/Dynastic race theories and Hamiticism do not say migrants from Europe created ancient Egyptian civilization, but peoples from Southwest Asia. And as I keep repeating, no one has ever said ancient Egyptians were white skinned; this is a straw man Afrocentrists like Doug set up.

Furthermore, I dispute the Asiatic/Dynastic race theories and Hamiticism have anything to do with racism. They trace back to Biblical thinking, i.e. Old Testament geneology. Same for the tripartite "Caucasoid"/"Negroid"/"Mongoloid" racial division - invented to match Noah's three sons (Cuvier) and in Blumenbach Caucasoids (Caucasians) are archetypal (i.e. the original or progenitor race everyone else sprung from) because the Caucasus mountains was where he thought Noah's Ark landed.

"the term “Caucasoid” traces back to the Old Testament story of Noah”s Ark"
- Takezawa Y: Problems with the terms: “Caucasoid”, “Mongoloid” and “Negroid”. Zinbun. 2011, 43: 61-68

""the term “Caucasoid” traces back to the Old Testament story of Noah”s Ark"

Where in the Torah is the word Caucasoid written? [Confused]

SHOW IT!!!


The beautiful skull and Blumenbach’s errors


 -

 -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergi_bernal/2359958575/in/set-72157603132968848/


 -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergi_bernal/2475694262/in/set-72157603132968848/

Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
[qb] 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".

" Egypt progressed, and why, because it was Caucasian."

Campbell 1851, p. 10–12.

In 1854, Josiah C. Nott with George Glidden saod "the Caucasian or white, and the Negro races were distinct at a very remote date, and that the Egyptians were Caucasians."

Baum 2006, p. 108

Please do better about your claims, this could be found with a basic wiki search. Today, Eurocentrics don't as often say words like "Caucasian" directly, but will use buzzwords like "Caucasoid" and "Negroid" or "Eurasians" to low key inject themselves into the conversation.

Morton, Nott & Gliddon described the Egyptians as reddish-brown skinned and darker than Greeks. My point was no anthropologist has ever said Egyptians had a white complexion; this is a straw man Doug sets up.
But it would incorrect to infer Eurocentrism hasn't existed within "Egyptology" just because people didn't argue Egyptians had a white complexion. As you saw in one of the people here that I'd quoted, they were trying to suggest that while not typical of Europeans, they had features that were possible for Europeans to have. With buzzwords like "Eurasian" or "Caucasoid" to replace "Caucasian," Eurocentrics have attempted to be more subtle, but Eurocentrism hasn't gone away. Eurocentrism will briefly and arbitrarily extend it's identity to be more inclusive in certain areas it has to (like in academia). But such extensions have no basis in the real world.

Historically, Eurocentrism and white supremacist attitudes have been intertwined. The diffusion model is the latest attempt at minimizing Egypt's African identity to preserve the same white supremacist interests. When they suggest that "Eurasians" or foreign "Caucasoids" mixed with "real" Africans (significantly), the implication is the same theme of African dependence. This time, the theme is geared towards making Africa appear highly dependent on a foreign (and fictional) group that's identity can be extended to Europe. While white supremacists would prefer to discuss Egypt as Eurocentrically as possible, even if they can't do so overtly, as long as it's not a "black thing" they will live. That would be enough to satiate their political agendas. This slick sh!t is not lost on researchers.


--"We can REJECT a simple model of long-term continuous gene flow between the Near East(QATAR/ARABIA) and North Africa" (contradicting simplistic claims of hordes of "Middle Easterners" flowing into Africa)

--"Maghrebi populations do not represent a large-scale demic diffusion of agropastoralists from the Near East/Arabia." (again debunking simplistic claims of "Middle Easterners" flowing into Africa to "tutor" the natives- a staple claim in some quarters)
Genomic Ancestry of North Africans Supports Back-to-Africa Migrations. Henn et. Al 2012
quote:
Also I would not label Morton, Nott or Gliddon "Eurocentrists". They actually changed their views to argue ancient Egyptians were native Saharan Africans, not a colony of Asiatics or Indo-Arabians as Morton formerly argued.

In 1854, Nott & Gliddon (Types of Mankind, p. 232) quote a letter Morton wrote in 1850: "You allude to my altered view in Ethnology, but it consists in regarding the Egyptian race as indigenous people of the valley of the Nile. Not Asiatics in any sense of the word, but autochthones of the country and the authors of their own civilization." Nott & Gliddon also modified their views to support Morton. In another letter Morton wrote: " recant so much of my published opinions as respects the origin of the Egyptians. The never came from Asia, but are the indigenous or aboriginal inhabitants of the valley of the Nile."

You said no one argued they were white. Taking back a point of view doesn't erase the prior beliefs they'd held from history. Eurocentrics like I said use words like "Caucasoid" or "Eurasian" to create groups that are socially irrelevant, but academically place them near Khemet's history.

There is no such thing as "Eurocentrism": the Asiatic/Dynastic race theories and Hamiticism do not say migrants from Europe created ancient Egyptian civilization, but peoples from Southwest Asia. And as I keep repeating, no one has ever said ancient Egyptians were white skinned; this is a straw man Afrocentrists like Doug set up.

Furthermore, I dispute the Asiatic/Dynastic race theories and Hamiticism have anything to do with racism. They trace back to Biblical thinking, i.e. Old Testament geneology. Same for the tripartite "Caucasoid"/"Negroid"/"Mongoloid" racial division - invented to match Noah's three sons (Cuvier) and in Blumenbach Caucasoids (Caucasians) are archetypal (i.e. the original or progenitor race everyone else sprung from) because the Caucasus mountains was where he thought Noah's Ark landed.

"the term “Caucasoid” traces back to the Old Testament story of Noah”s Ark"
- Takezawa Y: Problems with the terms: “Caucasoid”, “Mongoloid” and “Negroid”. Zinbun. 2011, 43: 61-68

JoshuaConnerLoon, stop lying to yourself.

George Gliddon and Samuel Morton (1844) argued "The Egyptians were white".

quote:
CAUCASIAN RACE HYPOTHESIS
In 1844, Samuel George Morton, one of the pioneers of scientific racialism and polygenism, published his book Crania Aegyptica with the intention of proving that the Ancient Egyptians were not black.[103] In 1855 George Gliddon and Josiah C. Nott published Types of Mankind with the same intention.[104] All three authors concluded that Egyptians were intermediate between the African and Asiatic races. They acknowledged that Negroes were present in ancient Egypt but claimed they were either captives or servants.[105] George Gliddon in his book Ancient Egypt: Her monuments, hieroglyphics, history and archaeology (1844) wrote: "The Egyptians were white men, of no darker hue than a pure Arab, a Jew, or a Phoenician."[106] However, it is now largely agreed that Dynastic Egyptians were indigenous to the Nile area, in Africa.

https://www.penn.museum/sites/expedition/the-samuel-george-morton-cranial-collection/


 -


 -


 -

Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Anyone familiar with the context, source or supplementary commentary/literature to go along with this image?

 -


Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Interesting.

quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
quote:
Originally posted by sudaniya:
To quote one of my favourite posters:

The reference to Black skinned and woolly haired Egyptians has been translated as such in Herodutus Histories not only by Rawlinson, but Aubrey De Selincourt and most others and indeed, I am unaware of any African translation of Herodotus the Histories. The idea that "Black skinned and woolly haired" is an "Afrocentric" interpretation is therefore a non-starter.

And the notion of intepreting Herodotus in some other way (where Black does not mean "Black" is largely a sop to Eurocentric political correctness and disingenuousness- re-writing the Histories.

Because those scholars are/were not experts in ancient Greek colour. The experts do not automatically translate melas as black and leukos as white. An example is the Iliad. 20. 496 where barley is described as leukos.

 -

Does this look white to you?
Leukos ranges from chalk-white to a faint light brown like barley [in context this would explain Greek leukos-armed godesses, not as pale-white but a faint brown]. Similarly we find melas used to describe things that are not pitch-black or dark brown, but shades that are lighter brown. but experts who examine this stuff in better context of ancient Greek colour terminology are "Eurocentrists"… [Roll Eyes]

In what position are you, to tell who is an expert on classical Greek or not and to what degree?

Perhaps you can explain / show Greek classic texts, describing ancient Egyptian art? Such as the murals posted by Sudaniya.

Beside that:

quote:
Herodotus (c. 484 – 425/413 BCE) was a writer who invented the field of study known today as `history’.

http://www.ancient.eu/herodotus/



quote:
Outside influence and admixture with extra- regional 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).
—Irish JD et al. (2006, 2009) "Further analysis of the population history of ancient Egyptians". American Journal of Physical Anthropology


quote:
“While commonly believed to represent Greek settlers in Egypt, the Faiyum portraits instead reflect the complex synthesis of the predominant Egyptian culture and that of the elite Greek minority in the city. According to Walker, the early Ptolemaic Greek colonists married local women and adopted Egyptian religious beliefs, and by Roman times, their descendants were viewed as Egyptians by the Roman rulers, despite their own self-perception of being Greek. The dental morphology of the Roman-period Faiyum mummies was also compared with that of earlier The dental morphology of the Roman-period Faiyum mummies was also compared with that of earlier Egyptian populations, and was found to be "much more closely akin" to that of ancient Egyptians than to Greeks or other European populations.

—Irish JD et al. (2006). "Who were the ancient Egyptians? Dental affinities among Neolithic through postdynastic peoples". Am J Phys Anthropol 129

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16331657

Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Concerned member of public
Banned
Member # 22355

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Concerned member of public   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If you read the full quote from Gliddon you get the proper context-

"The Egyptians were white men, of no darker hue than a pure Arab, a Jew, or a Phoenician."

The Arabs, Jews, Phoenicians are light brown skinned, not white. That's why he uses those examples of Arab or Jews, rather than say Celts or Germanics.

And I don't see what your problem is with Nott & Gliddon's conclusion that Egyptians plot intermediate as a gradient between Sub-Saharan Africans and Asiatics. That's what modern craniometric and genetic data supports, its also plain common-sense if you look at the geographical position of Egypt.

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
If you read the full quote from Gliddon you get the proper context-

"The Egyptians were white men, of no darker hue than a pure Arab, a Jew, or a Phoenician."

The Arabs, Jews, Phoenicians are light brown skinned, not white. That's why he uses those examples of Arab or Jews, rather than say Celts or Germanics.

And I don't see what your problem is with Nott & Gliddon's conclusion that Egyptians plot intermediate as a gradient between Sub-Saharan Africans and Asiatics. That's what modern craniometric and genetic data supports, its also plain common-sense if you look at the geographical position of Egypt.

The problem is when someone writes The Egyptians were white men, of no darker hue than a pure Arab, a Jew, or a Phoenician that this is patently false and you yourself said they weren't white. There is no need to speculate and obfuscate with semantics and terminology there is a massive amount of art where you can see the skin tone. Much of it is dark brown not light brown. You choose to ignore it, that is dishonest.


 -
Seti I


 -
Tutankhamun

Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Concerned member of public
Banned
Member # 22355

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Concerned member of public   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sudaniya:


The word melanchroes (not melas) was used to describe the ancient Egyptians and has been rightly translated as black, much to your chagrin.

The suffix chroes/chros means skin, while melan/melas refers to a dark colour range; it is not limited to black. And the first appearance of the word melanchroos in classical literature (Homer) is describing Odysseus (a native Greek from Ithaca), not a black.

To quote the classicist W.E.Gladstone-

"Oyusseus, on his restoration to beauty by Athene, becomes melanchroos (Od. xvi. 171). The melanchroos [p.377] of his herald, in Od. xix. 245, does not seem to bear any different sense. Homer's melas means dark rather than black, and is itself but indefinite; we are obliged to take these words as referring to an olive complexion."

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
If you read the full quote from Gliddon you get the proper context-

"The Egyptians were white men, of no darker hue than a pure Arab, a Jew, or a Phoenician."

The Arabs, Jews, Phoenicians are light brown skinned, not white. That's why he uses those examples of Arab or Jews, rather than say Celts or Germanics.

And I don't see what your problem is with Nott & Gliddon's conclusion that Egyptians plot intermediate as a gradient between Sub-Saharan Africans and Asiatics. That's what modern craniometric and genetic data supports, its also plain common-sense if you look at the geographical position of Egypt.

LOL @ this retard.


 -  -

 -

Reconstruction of Phoenician from Achziv, Israel

http://bioanthropology.huji.ac.il/publications.asp


 -


Head of a Syrian
KhM 3896a
TILE; RAMESSES III/USERMAATRE-MERIAMUN

http://www.globalegyptianmuseum.org/record.aspx?id=4906


 -


Head of a Beduin from Syria
KhM 3896b
TILE; RAMESSES III/USERMAATRE-MERIAMUN

http://www.globalegyptianmuseum.org/record.aspx?id=4907


 -



Head of a Beduin from Syria
KhM 3896c
TILE; NEW KINGDOM

http://www.globalegyptianmuseum.org/record.aspx?id=4908


"The Phoenicians likely referred to themselves as Canaanites."


A Syrian mercenary drinking beer in the company of his Egyptian wife and child, c. 1350 BC. Photograph: Bettmann/Corbis

 -


http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2010/oct/27/old-ale-beer-history

Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Concerned member of public
Banned
Member # 22355

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Concerned member of public   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:

^^ this is what you mean by "moderate" not black skin tone , all of the three above.
The problem is that they are all far from above 50% for skin reflectance as we can see on any chart that gradates white to black
--and there are thousands of examples of art like this [/QB]

I don't normally do picture spams, but look how easy it is to finder lighter brown shades in the art-

 -

 -

 -

 -

 -

 -

 -

 -

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What it the above supposed to prove? [Big Grin]


quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
quote:
Originally posted by sudaniya:


The word melanchroes (not melas) was used to describe the ancient Egyptians and has been rightly translated as black, much to your chagrin.

The suffix chroes/chros means skin, while melan/melas refers to a dark colour range; it is not limited to black. And the first appearance of the word melanchroos in classical literature (Homer) is describing Odysseus (a native Greek from Ithaca), not a black.

To quote the classicist W.E.Gladstone-

"Oyusseus, on his restoration to beauty by Athene, becomes melanchroos (Od. xvi. 171). The melanchroos [p.377] of his herald, in Od. xix. 245, does not seem to bear any different sense. Homer's melas means dark rather than black, and is itself but indefinite; we are obliged to take these words as referring to an olive complexion."

quote:


Were the ancient Greeks and Romans colour blind?

Wednesday 19 February 2014 11:50AM


Homer left historians with the impression that the ancient Greeks and Romans had an underdeveloped appreciation of colour. The ancients, in fact, were a shade more sophisticated than that and understood colour in a completely different way to us, argues Mark Bradley

Gladstone noted that Homer actually uses very few colour terms, that black and white predominate, and that he uses the same colours to describe objects which look quite different.


According to Bradley, the Greeks viewed chroma (in Latin color) as essentially the visible outermost shell of an object. So a table wouldn't be brown, it was wood-coloured. A window would be glass-coloured. Hair would be hair-coloured, skin would be skin-coloured. 'They wouldn't talk in terms of the abstract colours that we are used to today.'

The term 'synaesthetic' can be used to broadly describe the different kind of association that the ancient Greeks made between the five senses. 'If colours are the external manifestations of objects, then the perception of that colour can tap into other ideas such as smell, liquidity, saturation, touch, texture.'

In what we would tend to think of as purely visual, the ancient Greeks brought other senses into play. 'In antiquity, in pre-modern societies, there is much more capacity for the way you describe the world to tap into several different senses simultaneously,' says Bradley.

So what of Homer's wine-dark sea (oinops pontos)? Bradley describes this as antiquity's best-known colour problem and one that's given rise to various theories. One interpretation is that it describes the sea at sunset when it's a sort of fiery red. Another interpretation hold that it's an allusion to a now obsolete type of French wine called le petit bleu or le gros bleu, a blue wine, which, if it even existed in antiquity, might explain the metaphor.

—Amanda Smith

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/bodysphere/features/5267698


So, tell how did Homer describe these?


 -


 -


 -

Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:

^^ this is what you mean by "moderate" not black skin tone , all of the three above.
The problem is that they are all far from above 50% for skin reflectance as we can see on any chart that gradates white to black
--and there are thousands of examples of art like this

I don't normally do picture spams, but look how easy it is to finder lighter brown shades in the art-


 -

 -

 -

 -

 -

 -


You have a scribes posted and some scribes were Asiatic

Try finding some pharaohs of lighter shade.

 -
Seti I


 -
Tutankhamun

There is a variety of skin tones depicted yet you deny the darks ones and there are so many thousands of them
-and the pharaohs are most commonly depicted mid to dark brown not light
But will you admit to it?

Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^And eventually, the dark and the lighter complexioned are of the same abstract. This is what science tells us.

In JoshuaConnerLoon's deplorable mind there was a color barrier. SMH

You have been on this for years and where has it got you? In a position of being ridiculed. Seek another hobby.


 -

 -


 -

Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
[QB] ^And eventually, the dark and the lighter complexioned are of the same abstract. This is what science tells us.


If you look at the wide variety of features the population does not look homogenous.
DNA tests performed on Egyptian remains have been very few

Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Brada-Anansi
Member
Member # 16371

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Brada-Anansi   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -
note the first registrar see the brown and definitely Black skinned men..well those are Phoenicians.
 -
And when you say llte brown are you including this Phonecian
 -

Or this guy
 -
Now Iam sure you would just love to label this guy a Nubian,maybe he is a descendant of one or perhaps not, but what we do know is ppl like him were no strangers or foreigners to the area, matter of fact they were present as far back as the Natufian days, now I am not gonna argue that they all looked like the above all the time, and if I take a second look at the registrar the much darker types seemed to a significant but still a minority.
 -
High yella type.
 -
Darkish brown type.
 -
A very lite skinned type although with heavy features, possible a north Syrian..all are Phoenicians and their off spring the Carthaginians showed just as much variety in other art forms..point is there were no one way to be Phoenician or other Levantine.

Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
^And eventually, the dark and the lighter complexioned are of the same abstract. This is what science tells us.


If you look at the wide variety of features the population does not look homogenous.
DNA tests performed on Egyptian remains have been very few

They do look homogeneous within their own variety.
Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
[QB]  -
note the first registrar see the brown and definitely Black skinned men..well those are Phoenicians.

 -

close up top row, they are not Phoenicians, they are believed to be from Punt, note the baboons

Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"they are believed to be from Punt".

Could be, and ironically there are in the same color variety.

quote:

English: The tomb of Rekhmire the vizier, the highest ranking official under the pharaohs Tuthmosis III and Amenophis II (New Kingdom) during a period when Egypt’s empire stretched to its farthest extent and was at the peek of her prosperity. Representation from foreigners, bringing trades, tibutes and taxes to the tomb owner.

  • The people of Punt who bring incense trees, baboons, monkeys and animal hides.


  • The people of Kefti (probably Crete), carrying pots and cubs.

  • The Kushites (Nubians) who bring animals of equatorial Africa (giraffes, leopards, baboons, monkeys and dogs), offering ivory, animal hides and gold.

  • People from Syria


  • Slaves


https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitxer:Rechmire-Tributszene.jpg
Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ not the actual wall painting however, a copy redone on paper by a modern illustrator
Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
beyoku
Member
Member # 14524

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for beyoku     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
quote:
Originally posted by sudaniya:


The word melanchroes (not melas) was used to describe the ancient Egyptians and has been rightly translated as black, much to your chagrin.

The suffix chroes/chros means skin, while melan/melas refers to a dark colour range; it is not limited to black. And the first appearance of the word melanchroos in classical literature (Homer) is describing Odysseus (a native Greek from Ithaca), not a black.

To quote the classicist W.E.Gladstone-

"Oyusseus, on his restoration to beauty by Athene, becomes melanchroos (Od. xvi. 171). The melanchroos [p.377] of his herald, in Od. xix. 245, does not seem to bear any different sense. Homer's melas means dark rather than black, and is itself but indefinite; we are obliged to take these words as referring to an olive complexion."

I see plenty of black folks here. Not all of them of course.....but plenty of them. I have been to Egypt. If you go to Egypt with the idea that no black people exist.....you are going to be disappointed and NOT because you find Nubians. You will be equally disappointed when you step into Ethiopia looking for caucasoids.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=QnyCGiwGGSQ

Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
They're not black they're Hamitic
Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Brada-Anansi
Member
Member # 16371

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Brada-Anansi   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -
Note the national dress,puntities do not dress like that, these people appears to be Phoenician nationals, that they or their ancestors ultimately came from further south is a given, black folks of that Phenotype are not strangers to the region that they maintained trade links with folks further south,goes back to the Ta-Seti finds.
Also these guys were not bringing the ivory and Baboons to the Phoenicians proper but to Ramses.
 -
This man of a later period is a continuation.

Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The tomb of vizier Rekhmire, ca. 1450 BCE

quote:
Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
 -
Note the national dress,puntities do not dress like that,



Yes they do dress like that and if they didn't that doesn't make them Phoenicians. You will have to do better with visual references supporting your two claims
a) punt garment example
b) phoenician garment example

Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Thread's a poor ripoff of the 3 yr old ESR original

Grand Procession pt1 (link)

where I made one image from Hoskins' 4 parts and
the identity question was answered and xlation
of hieroglyphs were given in the 3rd to last post.
Unfortunately Arara Sabalu deleted all his contributions.


quote:
Getting back on topic ...

The inscription in the upper right corner of the entire painting
explicitly names only three tributaries -- Punt, Retenu, Keftiu
-- being the 1st, 4th, and 2nd registers respectively.

As for the 3rd and 5th registers the selfsame inscription only
says they are from the "south country" and "all countries"
beholden to Tuthmosis III.

 -


Except for the far top right the hieroglyphics are too small to read
for the most part and zooming in only makes it even harder to see.

According to Hodel-Hoenes & Warburton
register 1: the prince of Punt
register 2: princes of Crete and Mediterranean islands
register 3: princes of southern lands and the Antiu (cavern dwellers)
register 4: princes of Retenu and northern lands clear to the far north
register 5: captive children of southern and northern lands for workshops



Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
^ not the actual wall painting however, a copy redone on paper by a modern illustrator

Tomb of Rekhmire

https://youtu.be/brgKjehOHVU


 -

Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Anyone familiar with the context, source or supplementary commentary/literature to go along with this image?

 -


This is an illustration from the Noah Webster’s dictionary of 1828.


 -


NOAH Webster is called the “Father of American Scholarship and Education.” His name is synonymous with the textbook on American language – the dictionary.


http://nypost.com/2006/10/16/noah-webster-father-of-the-dictionary/

Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Note the illustration for Caucasian lower left
Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Brada-Anansi
Member
Member # 16371

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Brada-Anansi   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
The tomb of vizier Rekhmire, ca. 1450 BCE

quote:
Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
 -
Note the national dress,puntities do not dress like that,



Yes they do dress like that and if they didn't that doesn't make them Phoenicians. You will have to do better with visual references supporting your two claims
a) punt garment example
b) phoenician garment example

 -
Punt garment example note they dressed in a similar fashion to other Nile valley folks, the repo of the registrar labeled them along with their brown skinned nationals as belonging to the same nation, it is us moderns who want to see them as apart from the others based off what they appeared to look like.

Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
^ Note the illustration for Caucasian lower left

Webster, Noah, 1758-1843: An American Dictionary of the English Language (2 volumes; New York: S. Converse, 1828)

Volume I (introductory material, and A-I): multiple formats at archive.org

https://archive.org/details/americandictiona01websrich

Volume I (J-Z, addition, and corrections): multiple formats at archive.org

https://archive.org/details/americandictiona02websrich

http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupname?key=Webster%2C%20Noah%2C%201758-1843

Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ I don't think you are going to find the later illustrated version of that same dictionary online

The original version simply says:

CAUCASIAN
CAUCASEAN
Pertaining to Mount Caucus in Asia
As Resarches, Pinkerton

Assuming that it is correct that that illustration is from the illustrated version of the Webster's dictionary based on the 1928


quote:

Upon Webster's death in 1843, the unsold books and all rights to the copyright and name "Webster" were purchased by brothers George and Charles Merriam, who then hired Webster's son-in-law Chauncey A. Goodrich, a professor at Yale College, to oversee revisions. Goodrich's New and Revised Edition appeared on 24 September 1847, and a Revised and Enlarged edition in 1859, which added a section of illustrations indexed to the text. His revisions remained close to Webster's work, but removed what later editors referred to as his "vexcrescences".

In 1850, Blackie and Son in Glasgow published the first general dictionary of English that made heavy use of pictorial illustrations integrated with the text, The Imperial Dictionary, English, Technological, and Scientific, Adapted to the Present State of Literature, Science, and Art; On the Basis of Webster's English Dictionary

^^ these two other versions based on the 1928 are the ones with illustrations added after Webster's death
Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
If you read the full quote from Gliddon you get the proper context-

"The Egyptians were white men, of no darker hue than a pure Arab, a Jew, or a Phoenician."

The Arabs, Jews, Phoenicians are light brown skinned, not white. That's why he uses those examples of Arab or Jews, rather than say Celts or Germanics.

So what? Europeans can have the same colors as Jews and Jews have frequently worked to attain whiteness (and largely succeeded). IDK How there's still debate, he called them "white men." He referred to AE by a label or identity that not only involves Europeans, but has always been Eurocentric.


"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"

Get it yet? HE SAID THAT! Stop trying to revise history, he said they were WHITE! Academic use of the words Caucasoid, Eurasian etc do the same thing: Bring European identity or whiteness into the discussion of Egypt.

Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
The tomb of vizier Rekhmire, ca. 1450 BCE

quote:
Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
 -
Note the national dress,puntities do not dress like that,



Yes they do dress like that and if they didn't that doesn't make them Phoenicians. You will have to do better with visual references supporting your two claims
a) punt garment example
b) phoenician garment example

 -
Punt garment example note they dressed in a similar fashion to other Nile valley folks, the repo of the registrar labeled them along with their brown skinned nationals as belonging to the same nation, it is us moderns who want to see them as apart from the others based off what they appeared to look like.

You said they were Phoenicians.


As we can see the skirts in the illustration we have been talking about form the tomb of Rekhmire are not far off from the skirts of the Puntite, most likely in the coastal region of what is today Eritrea or somewhere in the horn, possibly
Of course they are not of the Egyptian nation. The scene is of several types of foreigners paying tribute to Egypt


 -

^^ The obese Queen of Punt here is dissimilar to depictions of Egyptian women

Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Concerned member of public
Banned
Member # 22355

Rate Member
Icon 13 posted      Profile for Concerned member of public   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
If you read the full quote from Gliddon you get the proper context-

"The Egyptians were white men, of no darker hue than a pure Arab, a Jew, or a Phoenician."

The Arabs, Jews, Phoenicians are light brown skinned, not white. That's why he uses those examples of Arab or Jews, rather than say Celts or Germanics.

So what? Europeans can have the same colors as Jews and Jews have frequently worked to attain whiteness (and largely succeeded). IDK How there's still debate, he called them "white men." He referred to AE by a label or identity that not only involves Europeans, but has always been Eurocentric.


"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"

Get it yet? HE SAID THAT! Stop trying to revise history, he said they were WHITE! Academic use of the words Caucasoid, Eurasian etc do the same thing: Bring European identity or whiteness into the discussion of Egypt.

You're distorting the quote. My point was no one has ever said the ancient Egyptians were white skinned and that quote confirms this. Gliddon likens AE pigmentation to east Mediterranean populations, who are light brown. The term "white men" has no reference to skin colour, in correct context Gliddon is using it as a synonym for Caucasian. If you want to play silly word games like this then I guess whenever you see the word Mongoloid, that must mean Mongols only... [Roll Eyes]

The simple point I made is no scholar has ever said AE's had white skin in the sense of actual "white" (light-pink) as observed at highest frequency in northern Europeans. The claim ancient Egyptians were white (pigmentation) is an Afrocentric straw man.

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
If you read the full quote from Gliddon you get the proper context-

"The Egyptians were white men, of no darker hue than a pure Arab, a Jew, or a Phoenician."

The Arabs, Jews, Phoenicians are light brown skinned, not white. That's why he uses those examples of Arab or Jews, rather than say Celts or Germanics.

So what? Europeans can have the same colors as Jews and Jews have frequently worked to attain whiteness (and largely succeeded). IDK How there's still debate, he called them "white men." He referred to AE by a label or identity that not only involves Europeans, but has always been Eurocentric.


"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"

Get it yet? HE SAID THAT! Stop trying to revise history, he said they were WHITE! Academic use of the words Caucasoid, Eurasian etc do the same thing: Bring European identity or whiteness into the discussion of Egypt.

You're distorting the quote. My point was no one has ever said the ancient Egyptians were white skinned and that quote confirms this.
I'm not distorting the quote. He said AE were white. No one HAS to argue the Egyptians were literally white skinned to argue they were white and connected to modern Europeans. Many white people are not literally white skinned. White people can for example have olive complexions.


quote:
Gliddon likens AE pigmentation to east Mediterranean populations, who are light brown. The term "white men" has no reference to skin colour, in correct context Gliddon is using it as a synonym for Caucasian.
Which is still Eurocentric and interchangeable in language with European. The Egyptians did not come from Eurasia, the Caucus mountains or the European peninsula.

quote:
The simple point I made is no scholar has ever said AE's had white skin in the sense of actual "white" (light-pink) as observed at highest frequency in northern Europeans. The claim ancient Egyptians were white (pigmentation) is an Afrocentric straw man.
Eurocentrism does not require people to say AE/K had WHITE skin or even light pink. This is a strawman YOU keep using. Eurocentrism does not require people to say the Egyptians had features most common to Northern Europeans. It simply means that a person is trying to describe the origins of AE in a way that involves Europeans or to support other racist political interests Eurocentrism supports such as Africa being incapable of independence. For example, Eurasians is a loaded term that tries to create a fictional identity that involves Europeans. "Caucasoid" tries to claim certain features to whites and attributes them to an identity that again includes Europeans.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Concerned member of public
Banned
Member # 22355

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Concerned member of public   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
If you read the full quote from Gliddon you get the proper context-

"The Egyptians were white men, of no darker hue than a pure Arab, a Jew, or a Phoenician."

The Arabs, Jews, Phoenicians are light brown skinned, not white. That's why he uses those examples of Arab or Jews, rather than say Celts or Germanics.

So what? Europeans can have the same colors as Jews and Jews have frequently worked to attain whiteness (and largely succeeded). IDK How there's still debate, he called them "white men." He referred to AE by a label or identity that not only involves Europeans, but has always been Eurocentric.


"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"
"The Egyptians were white men"

Get it yet? HE SAID THAT! Stop trying to revise history, he said they were WHITE! Academic use of the words Caucasoid, Eurasian etc do the same thing: Bring European identity or whiteness into the discussion of Egypt.

You're distorting the quote. My point was no one has ever said the ancient Egyptians were white skinned and that quote confirms this.
I'm not distorting the quote. He said AE were white. No one HAS to argue the Egyptians were literally white skinned to argue they were white and connected to modern Europeans. Many white people are not literally white skinned. White people can for example have olive complexions.


quote:
Gliddon likens AE pigmentation to east Mediterranean populations, who are light brown. The term "white men" has no reference to skin colour, in correct context Gliddon is using it as a synonym for Caucasian.
Which is still Eurocentric and interchangeable in language with European. The Egyptians did not come from Eurasia, the Caucus mountains or the European peninsula.

quote:
The simple point I made is no scholar has ever said AE's had white skin in the sense of actual "white" (light-pink) as observed at highest frequency in northern Europeans. The claim ancient Egyptians were white (pigmentation) is an Afrocentric straw man.
Eurocentrism does not require people to say AE/K had WHITE skin or even light pink. This is a strawman YOU keep using. Eurocentrism does not require people to say the Egyptians had features most common to Northern Europeans. It simply means that a person is trying to describe the origins of AE in a way that involves Europeans or to support other racist political interests Eurocentrism supports such as Africa being incapable of independence. For example, Eurasians is a loaded term that tries to create a fictional identity that involves Europeans. "Caucasoid" tries to claim certain features to whites and attributes them to an identity that again includes Europeans.
The fact remains no one has ever argued (a) Early Dynastic Egyptian civilization was created by European migrants or (b) that ancient Egyptians were white skinned. I don't see "Eurocentrism". What you're talking about is Asiatic/Dynastic race theory, or Hamiticism. Both are dead in academia. Virtually no scholar today is arguing ancient Egyptian civilization was made by 'Caucasoids' from southwest Asia. Among layperson's there also has been a shift to abandon the antiquated Caucasoid/Hamitic theories, hence I have observed this on forums over the past 5 years. Gliddon himself in the 19th century changed his views to argue ancient Egyptian civilization was an indigenous development. These Caucasoid/Hamitic theories were already losing proponents over a century ago.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 13 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  11  12  13   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3