posted
I somewhat recently found out about a quote that said:
"the men of Egypt are mostly brown or black with a skinny desiccated look."-Ammianus Marcellinus
The person who brought up the quote on a site where I found it said that he had only visited the southern part of Egypt when he made that statement. This seems to be supported when one considers this quote
Arrian, Indica 6.9
"As for the people of India, those in the south are like the Aethiopians in color, although they are like the rest in respect to countenance and hair (for on account of the humidity of the air their hair does not curl), whereas those in the north are like the Egyptians."
So this quote seems to imply that Ancient Lower Egyptians looked like Northern Indians. I know North Indians tend to have fair skin so this was very interesting.
I decided to look at threads here on Lower Egypt, and there seems to be a stalemate in the sense that we can't recover much remains due to the harsh conditions of the delta. So I tried to see if there were any artistic depictions of lower Egyptians in the Dynastic period that supports them much looking different than the ones in the south. Unfortunately, the pictures didn't survive in the discussions I found. But I remember hearing mention of SOY Keita stating that the crania of the north was closer to the Mediterranean type, but of course given Africa's genetic diversity and variance this doesn't say much about their phenotypical appearance.
I suppose to sum things up does anyone have any depictions of lower Egyptians in the dynastic period that supports/rejects the Arrian quote? It would help my study a lot.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
First of all, the excuse that Ammianus Marcellinus only visited the south is absurd, as if he somehow bypassed the north which was actually the center of Greco-Roman culture in Egypt.
Second, the majority of North Indians are not as light-skinned or fair as Bollywood media makes it seem. In fact India has a history of foreign immigration and invasions and even then, it wasn't enough to lighten the populations as a whole.
Northern Indians
Thirdly, if you read Manilius' complete writings of his Astronomica you will see that he divides the world into black races and white races with the Mediterranean Sea as the division between them which was an ancient Greek view. The black peoples vary in shade or hue just like the white peoples. Egyptians fall in the former category.
The Greeks had the myth of Phaethon nearly crashing the sun the latitudec below the Mediterranean as an explanation of why the natives of the nótios éthni (southern nations) are black people as well as why there are many deserts there-- from the Sahara in Africa to the Thar in India.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Thirdly, if you read Manilius' complete writings of his Astronomica you will see that he divides the world into black races and white races with the Mediterranean Sea as the division between them which was an ancient Greek view. The black peoples vary in shade or hue just like the white peoples. Egyptians fall in the former category.
That is false
Manilius never even uses the word black in the whole of his writing much less dividing the word into two (or more) races
Here words can be searched in Astronomica, the only work assumed to be written by him
Here he talks about the skin tones of various people near the top of the lower page, 281 he talks about Indians and Egyptians
quote:Curly hair about the temples betrays the Syrian. The Ethiopians stain the world and depict a race of men steeped in darkness; less sun-burnt are the natives of India; the land of Egypt, flooded by the Nile, darkens bodies more mildly owing to the inundation of its fields: it is a country nearer to us and its moderate climate imparts a medium tone.
posted
^ Your claim is false, because I never said Manilius used the word 'black'!!
I said Manilius was going on the very ancient premise of the Greeks that the peoples of the world are divided into dark and light races, with the Mediterranean Sea serving as the border between them!
I used the word 'black' as synonymous with dark though it's not the same thing.
And why do you keep posting that truncated quote? I already provided the link to the original thread where Tukuler busted your dishonest self!
Here is the whole quotation!:
Idcirco in varias leges variasque figuras dispositum genus est hominum, proprioque colore formantur gentes, sociataque iura per artus materiamque parem privato foedere signant. flava per ingentis surgit Germania partus, Gallia vicino minus est infecta rubore, asperior solidos Hispania contrahit artus. Martia Romanis urbis pater induit ora Gradivumque Venus miscens bene temperat artus, perque coloratas subtilis Graecia gentes gymnasium praefert vultu fortisque palaestras, et Syriam produnt torti per tempora crines.
Aethiopes maculant orbem tenebrisque figurant perfusas hominum gentes; minus India tostos progenerat; tellusque natans Aegyptia Nilo lenius irriguis infuscat corpora campis iam propior mediumque facit moderata tenorem. Phoebus harenosis Afrorum pulvere terris exsiccat populos, et Mauretania nomen oris habet titulumque suo fert ipsa colore.
Rough translation: Therefore, in various laws and various figures It is arranged races of men, and of its own color Nations are formed, and associated rights are formed by framework and they sign the matter according to a private treaty. Germany's birth through the giants rises, neighboring Gaul is less infected with the scarlet fever, the rougher the solid frame of Spain. Martia, the father of the city of Rome, put on a coat of arms And step by step Venus, mixing well, adjusts the frame, and through the colored and fine nations of Greece he prefers the gymnasium with a strong face and athletics, and Syria betrays the twisted hairs of the ages.
The Ethiopians stain the world and depict a race of men steeped in darkness; less toasted are Indians progeny; and the flooded land of the Egyptian Nile darkens bodies more mildly owing to the inundation of its fields now closer and the medium makes a moderate tenor. Phoebus the sandy soil of the Aferorum dry up the peoples, and the name Mauretania it has a mouth and bears its title in its own color.
Manilius goes from lightest to dark among the light-skinned (white) nations and darkest to light among the dark-skinned (black) nations. Quit playing games.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
This seems to be supported when one considers this quote
Arrian, Indica 6.9
"As for the people of India, those in the south are like the Aethiopians in color, although they are like the rest in respect to countenance and hair (for on account of the humidity of the air their hair does not curl), whereas those in the north are like the Egyptians."
^ This quote is Strabo
not Arrian
the same quote, translation slightly different, here >
The inhabitants of the south resemble the Ethiopians in colour, but their countenances and hair are like those of other people. Their hair does not curl, on account of the humidity of the atmosphere. The inhabitants of the north resemble the Egyptians.
The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.
Therefore, in various laws and various figures It is arranged races of men, and of its own color Nations are formed, and associated rights are formed by framework and they sign the matter according to a private treaty. Germany's birth through the giants rises, neighboring Gaul is less infected with the scarlet fever, the rougher the solid frame of Spain. Martia, the father of the city of Rome, put on a coat of arms And step by step Venus, mixing well, adjusts the frame, and through the colored and fine nations of Greece he prefers the gymnasium with a strong face and athletics, and Syria betrays the twisted hairs of the ages.
The Ethiopians stain the world and depict a race of men steeped in darkness; less toasted are Indians progeny; and the flooded land of the Egyptian Nile darkens bodies more mildly owing to the inundation of its fields now closer and the medium makes a moderate tenor. Phoebus the sandy soil of the Aferorum dry up the peoples, and the name Mauretania it has a mouth and bears its title in its own color.
I just posted the quote, pages form Astronomica by an expert translator (see second paragraph "For this reason" corresponds to the quote in this post "Therefore"...)
Also there is no paragraph gap in the actual writing prior to "The Ethiopian"
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
I said Manilius was going on the very ancient premise of the Greeks that the peoples of the world are divided into dark and light races, with the Mediterranean Sea serving as the border between them!
but it doesn't matter which translation you use, yours or mine of the same Manilius quote
He does not talk about the peoples of the world being divided into dark and light races. He merely describes the skin tones in various places
You are attempting to superimpose a modern two race concept of "black" and "white" even if you try to change the "race" names to "dark races" and "light race"
Manilius does not use this two part divide.
I recommend people read very slowly, Djehuti's translation and the one I posted (read from 2nd paragraph of top page "For this reason..). You will see nothing in this long poem Astronomica that says there are two races and that they are divided by the Mediterranean
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Apparently, you missed my point that Manilius like many Romans was using the context which the Greeks used-- that is the nations of the world were divided into northern and southern with the Mediterranean Sea being the central border between them. The northern nations are light-skinned while the southern are dark-skinned. The Greek myth of Phaethon gives the explanation that peoples of southern nations are dark because they were burned by the sun nearly crashing to earth.
Manilius lists the fairest to darkest among northern nations and darkest to lightest among the southern nations. Tukuler explained all this before due to your dishonest out of context quotation. Again, quit with the foolishness.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
As far as the OP is concerned, maybe look up where in Egypt particular ancient sculptures or artifacts were found to get a sense of what people in that area of Egypt might have looked like back. Sculptures excavated in northern Egyptian sites might give you an idea of what the ancient people in that area might have looked like, at least with regards to facial features.
posted
Here is a picture from the 21th dynasty in Tanis which is located in the Delta. The matter is somewhat complicated though since according to Wiki the mans mummy suggests a Nubian heritage. Regardless this is a funerary mask of Wendjebauendjed, a general, high dignitary and high priest during the reign of pharaoh Psusennes I of the 21st Dynasty.
quote: Nothing is known about his life other than his occupations: Wendjebauendjed held an impressive list of military, administrative and religious titles, such as Hereditary prince, count, Seal-bearer of the King of Lower Egypt, God's father, General and Army leader, High steward (later High priest) of Khonsu, Priest of "Osiris lord of Mendes", Superintendent of the Prophets of all the gods and Superintendent of the Sole Friend.[1] The fact that Wendjebauendjed held such important offices granted him the great honor to be buried in the royal necropolis even though he was not a royal personage. According to one of his titles, it is possible that he was a native of Mendes (Djedet).[1] His mummified remains shows that he was perhaps of Nubian descent and that he died around his fifties.[2]
Manilius lists the fairest to darkest among northern nations and darkest to lightest among the southern nations. Tukuler explained all this before due to your dishonest out of context quotation. Again, quit with the foolishness.
I posted a quotation in a book page image and then you posted the same quotation but less of it Both translations says the same thing and you are now accusing me of taking something out of context, ridiculous. You posted the same quote but with less context!
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: if you read Manilius' complete writings of his Astronomica you will see that he divides the world into black races and white races with the Mediterranean Sea as the division between them which was an ancient Greek view. The black peoples vary in shade or hue just like the white peoples. Egyptians fall in the former category.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Apparently, you missed my point that Manilius like many Romans was using the context which the Greeks used-- that is the nations of the world were divided into northern and southern with the Mediterranean Sea being the central border between them. The northern nations are light-skinned while the southern are dark-skinned.
I heard you twice the first time, now you are just repeating the same thing paraphrased You are trying to fit a Roman writer's work into a modern racial dichotomy of "black" and "white" races and one wonders where you would place yourself in these categories but that is besides the point
Now you are using the same black/white checkerboard concept but using "light skinned" and "dark skinned" as proxies
You are so entrenched in the modern concept of dual color races that you can't imagine that the Romans did not have this two part racial dichotomy that they merely noted the complexion shades of different places.
It's disappointing how you cling to these modern 2 color race concepts
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: As far as the OP is concerned, maybe look up where in Egypt particular ancient sculptures or artifacts were found to get a sense of what people in that area of Egypt might have looked like back. Sculptures excavated in northern Egyptian sites might give you an idea of what the ancient people in that area might have looked like, at least with regards to facial features.
I've tried, but Archeopteryx's presentation of Wendjebauendjed highlights how this is no easy task given Africa's genetic diversity. Facial traits that look to be exclusive to a northern population may also be present in the south and nubian populations. Hence why I was curious whether or not Egyptians made phenotypic distinctions between the two groups on their wall paintings that would support Arrian's/Strabo's description of the two populations. So far I haven't gotten anywhere.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
Artistic depictions of Northern Egyptians/Lower Egyptians in the Dynastic period?
Egypt had been unified upper and lower since the 1st dynasty. I don't think it is useful to expect to find distinct upper and lower types and try to devise some kind of racial dichotomy
if you look up each photo album type you can google the title and find out the places Then with a map of Egypt opened that shows upper and lower Egypt identify the various art's location and time period context
quote: The two kingdoms of Upper and Lower Egypt were united c. 3000 BC, but each maintained its own regalia: the hedjet or White Crown for Upper Egypt and the deshret or Red Crown for Lower Egypt. Thus, the pharaohs were known as the rulers of the Two Lands, and wore the pschent, a double crown, each half representing sovereignty of one of the kingdoms. Ancient Egyptian tradition credited Menes, now believed to be the same as Narmer, as the king who united Upper and Lower Egypt. On the Narmer Palette, the king is depicted wearing the Red Crown on one scene and the White crown in another, and thereby showing his rule over both Lands
Manilius lists the fairest to darkest among northern nations and darkest to lightest among the southern nations. Tukuler explained all this before due to your dishonest out of context quotation. Again, quit with the foolishness.
I posted a quotation in a book page image and then you posted the same quotation but less of it Both translations says the same thing and you are now accusing me of taking something out of context, ridiculous. You posted the same quote but with less context!
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: if you read Manilius' complete writings of his Astronomica you will see that he divides the world into black races and white races with the Mediterranean Sea as the division between them which was an ancient Greek view. The black peoples vary in shade or hue just like the white peoples. Egyptians fall in the former category.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Apparently, you missed my point that Manilius like many Romans was using the context which the Greeks used-- that is the nations of the world were divided into northern and southern with the Mediterranean Sea being the central border between them. The northern nations are light-skinned while the southern are dark-skinned.
I heard you twice the first time, now you are just repeating the same thing paraphrased You are trying to fit a Roman writer's work into a modern racial dichotomy of "black" and "white" races and one wonders where you would place yourself in these categories but that is besides the point
Now you are using the same black/white checkerboard concept but using "light skinned" and "dark skinned" as proxies
You are so entrenched in the modern concept of dual color races that you can't imagine that the Romans did not have this two part racial dichotomy that they merely noted the complexion shades of different places.
It's disappointing how you cling to these modern 2 color race concepts
If we assume that Manilius didn't subscribe to a racial dichotomy of light skinned and dark skinned you have to admit it's odd that he first groups and describes populations we consider to be "light skinned" in the modern era, and then groups together and describes darker skinned populations together in the text. His choice of narrative flow seems to support this dichotomy.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
For this reason the human race is so arranged that its practices and features vary: nations are fashioned with their own particular complexions; and each stamps with a character of it's own like nature and anatomy of the human body which all share. Germany, towering high with tall off-spring, is blond: Gaul is tinged to a less degree with a near related redness; hardier Spain breeds close knit, sturdy limbs. The Father of the city endows the Romans with the features of Mars, and Venus joining the War-God fashions them with well-proportioned limbs. Quick witted Greece proclaims in the tanned faces of it's people the gymnasium and the manly wrestling schools. Curly hair about the temples betrays the Syrian. The Ethiopians stain the world and depict a race of men steeped in darkness; less sun-burnt are the natives of India; the land of Egypt, flooded by the Nile, darkens bodies more mildly owing to the inundation of its fields: it it a country nearer to us and its moderate climate imparts a medium tone. The Sun-God dries up with dust the tribes of Africans amid their desert lands; the Moors derive their name from their faces, and their identity is proclaimed by the colour of their skins.
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: If we assume that Manilius didn't subscribe to a racial dichotomy of light skinned and dark skinned you have to admit it's odd that he first groups and describes populations we consider to be "light skinned" in the modern era, and then groups together and describes darker skinned populations together in the text. His choice of narrative flow seems to support this dichotomy.
Read the above quote slowly and carefully You have a writer who has his own complexion, so he is writing form his perspective of who he is and calling people dark compared to him. Also as you can see in the quote he does not use the word "light" He says Germany, towering high with tall off-spring, is blond: Gaul is tinged to a less degree with a near related redness He doesn't even describe the German skin tone, he refers to their blond hair
This the the poem Astronomica It is only describing people's complexions varying from place to place relative to his own It does not say "there are two races of man, the dark ones and the light ones"
That is to try to project a simplistic modern racial stereotype brand of thinking, that one "race" is dark (compared to who is speaking) and the other is not ( I can't use "light" because it is not in the text) And "dark" is subjective, there is no standard to determine a dividing line between "dark" and "not dark" Also note in the text there is no paragraph break. People quote it in the forum are adding a paragraph break on their own trying to create a separation
This is an ongoing deeply entrenched color = race mentality brought about by the Europeans beginning in the 17th century, that people belong to 3-5 biologically defined "races"
The Greeks and Romans did not think like that and it's projection to think that someone merely describing skin tone compared to his own is constructing racial categories
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Ancient Greece certainly knew a black-white dichotomy expressed as Aithiopian and Skythian. In Homer's Iliad has archetypal heroes for each, Memnon and Achilles. They envisaged skin colour opposites in head and neck plastic art.
In this example both have ulotrichous hair, a term applied to textures from nappy to tightly curly and everything in-between hair. Physical features are rather stereotypical emphasizing the prime characteristics of each stock.
The common Roman male even wrote about black-white people poles in a Pompeii brothel prostitute preferal graffito “Candide me docuit nigras odisse puellas...” under which was written “Odero septero sed invitus amabo.” “A white girl taught me to hate black girls.” “You may hate them but you will return to them. --signed by Venus Physica of Pompei ”
The colour-blind antiquity world 'before colour prejudice' idea is a feeling saver invented by the quadroon Frank Snowden, who often snubbed contemporary black and colored scholars, that cannot stand up to historical investigative scrutiny. It's a ludicrous notion that people couldn't see obvious skin colour and physical form differences until almighty 18th century European whitey invented racial anthropology.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Narmer's Palette is the earliest piece of art seemingly depicting what would later come to be known as Upper, Middle, and Lower Egyptians.
Serpopard Handlers and Smitten One. South to mid Egyptians descendents of neolithic Nile dwellers with drying western desert refugees plus northbound Sudani settlers? and ?far northern mid Egyptian (Fayum to delta) inhabitant.
Sprawled or Fleeing Ones ?Primarily western delta Egyptians of west of delta and western desert ancestry?
"Ta Mehhu man" and Trampled-by-Bull ?Primarly eastern delta inhabitants/Egyptians of possible Sinai and/or Levant antecedents?
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: As far as the OP is concerned, maybe look up where in Egypt particular ancient sculptures or artifacts were found to get a sense of what people in that area of Egypt might have looked like back. Sculptures excavated in northern Egyptian sites might give you an idea of what the ancient people in that area might have looked like, at least with regards to facial features.
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: If we assume that Manilius didn't subscribe to a racial dichotomy of light skinned and dark skinned you have to admit it's odd that he first groups and describes populations we consider to be "light skinned" in the modern era, and then groups together and describes darker skinned populations together in the text. His choice of narrative flow seems to support this dichotomy.
Lioness is reverting back to her dishonest ways.
Again, go and read the original thread where Tukuler put it very concisely and bluntly:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: You [Lioness] are refusing to read Manilius in context. He places the Egyptians complexion between that of the Indians and the Saharans.
Roman complexion is between Spaniards and Greeks.
There is no escaping the plain meaning of the text.
Standing between Egyptians and Romans in increasing lightening of complexion are the dark Saharans and Maures and the light Syrians and Greeks.
In Manilius' order white complexions from the most light to the least light are - Germania - Gallia - Hispania - Romanis - Graecia - Syrium
In Manilius' order black complexions from the most dark to the least dark are - Aethiopes - India - Aegyptia - Afrorum - Mauretania
This leaves Afrorum, Mauretania, Syrium, and Graecia complexions interspacning those of Egypt and Rome. That's four intervening complexions. No way for Egypt and Rome being near in complexion, while Egypt has only India between it and Ethiopia.
Therefore by Manilius Egypt is very close to Ethiopia in colour but very far from Rome in "skin pigmentation adaptation" as you put it.
As far as differences go in physical looks between Lower and Upper Egyptians, the former tend to be relatively lighter having a brown sugar hue while the latter tend to have a rich mahogany hue. Also in terms of craniofacial features, Lower Egyptians have larger rounder heads with sharper facial features ie. narrower noses, etc. While Upper Egyptians have narrower skulls and broader noses. Of course these are the general traits with exceptions occurring in each group.
As far as painted portraits of Lower Egyptians go, the most extensive I've seen come from Old Kingdom tombs like at Saqqara although, many especially statues have lost much of their original paint giving them much lighter complexions than they originally had.
Some good examples of Lower Egyptians:
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This Pharao also comes from 21th dynasty Tanis. He does not look different from a lot of other ancient Egyptian portraits from different time periods. But as have been said, in the time of the 21th dynast Egypt as a state had existed for millennia so people had moved around and mixed.
The gold funerary mask of Psusennes I
quote: Psusennes I (Ancient Egyptian: pꜣ-sbꜣ-ḫꜥ-n-njwt; Greek Ψουσέννης) was the third pharaoh of the 21st Dynasty who ruled from Tanis between 1047 and 1001 BC. Psusennes is the Greek version of his original name Pasibkhanu or Pasebakhaenniut (in reconstructed Late Egyptian: /pəsiwʃeʕənneːʔə/), which means "The Star Appearing in the City" while his throne name, Akheperre Setepenamun, translates as "Great are the Manifestations of Ra, chosen of Amun."[2] He was the son of Pinedjem I and Henuttawy, Ramesses XI's daughter by Tentamun. He married his sister Mutnedjmet.
posted
If one wants to investigate how people lived in the delta before dynastic time Tell al Samara seems to be the place to begin. Here is an article about the findings there
quote:This article provides an overview of the first results from the archaeological fieldwork conducted at Tell el-Samara by a joint IFAO and Egyptian Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities mission. Located in the eastern Nile Delta, Tell el-Samara was a settlement inhabited from the late 5h millennium BCE to the end of the Early Dynastic period. The renewed archaeological investigations on the tell have uncovered the remains of one of the most ancient villages known so far in Egypt—providing detailed insights into the onset of Neolithic economy and sedentary village life in Lower Egypt. They have also revealed a continuous occupation sequence from the Neolithic period to the advent of the 1st Dynasty, which provides relevant data on the emergence and further development of a regional culture in the Nile Delta prior to the rise of a monarchy and the political unification of Egypt at the turn of the fourth and 3rd millennium BCE.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
As far as differences go in physical looks between Lower and Upper Egyptians, the former tend to be relatively lighter having a brown sugar hue while the latter tend to have a rich mahogany hue.
Some good examples of Lower Egyptians:
you are making a comparison but not showing upper Egyptians
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: I suppose to sum things up does anyone have any depictions of lower Egyptians in the dynastic period that supports/rejects the Arrian quote? It would help my study a lot.
I don't believe that the artistic canon of the ancient Nile had a different way of depicting people from the Upper or Lower parts of the Nation. However, that doesn't mean that there wasn't variation in skin tone presented in the art, but that doesn't necessarily imply or represent a distinction between those from the North or those from the South of the country. From the Old Kingdom to the late period there are plenty of examples where they portrayed crowds or groups of people in alternating tones, either indicating a mixture of skin tones in general or simply for artistic contrast. You can't simply look at one or two statues and say if someone is from the lower or upper part of the country because we have numerous examples of art for the same person with various tones due to fading and other factors.
And for us today, trying to distinguish who is from the South of the country vs the North has to be based on text evidence vs simply looking at statues.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Narmer's Palette is the earliest piece of art seemingly depicting what would later come to be known as Upper, Middle, and Lower Egyptians.
Serpopard Handlers and Smitten One. South to mid Egyptians descendents of neolithic Nile dwellers with drying western desert refugees plus northbound Sudani settlers? and ?far northern mid Egyptian (Fayum to delta) inhabitant.
Sprawled or Fleeing Ones ?Primarily western delta Egyptians of west of delta and western desert ancestry?
"Ta Mehhu man" and Trampled-by-Bull ?Primarly eastern delta inhabitants/Egyptians of possible Sinai and/or Levant antecedents?
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: As far as the OP is concerned, maybe look up where in Egypt particular ancient sculptures or artifacts were found to get a sense of what people in that area of Egypt might have looked like back. Sculptures excavated in northern Egyptian sites might give you an idea of what the ancient people in that area might have looked like, at least with regards to facial features.
The problem with the palette is that it depicts the pre-diagnostic populations. We don't know the fate of the people shown on the palette, for example, the ones up north could have escaped to Levant or other parts of Africa for example. I was hoping for depictions from later dynasties, to see how Northers that embraced the culture looked back them.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: As far as differences go in physical looks between Lower and Upper Egyptians, the former tend to be relatively lighter having a brown sugar hue while the latter tend to have a rich mahogany hue. Also in terms of craniofacial features, Lower Egyptians have larger rounder heads with sharper facial features ie. narrower noses, etc. While Upper Egyptians have narrower skulls and broader noses. Of course these are the general traits with exceptions occurring in each group.
As far as painted portraits of Lower Egyptians go, the most extensive I've seen come from Old Kingdom tombs like at Saqqara although, many especially statues have lost much of their original paint giving them much lighter complexions than they originally had.
Some good examples of Lower Egyptians:
First and foremost I really appreciate you finding these examples, but looking at them closely authenticity of some of them looks questionable. The first two men have moustaches, when the customs back them would’ve demanded them to remain clean shaven. The 3rd image features men believed to be Dagi’s sons, if we assume this to be true, since Dagi was buried in Thebes wouldn’t that make those men Thebean? The last one seems to be the worst offender, Rahotep lacks a moustache in his other depictions and it seems to stick out like a sore thumb from the other AE statues from that same time period. I wouldn’t consider it to be an authentic depiction.
Posts: 78 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2022
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: I suppose to sum things up does anyone have any depictions of lower Egyptians in the dynastic period that supports/rejects the Arrian quote? It would help my study a lot.
I don't believe that the artistic canon of the ancient Nile had a different way of depicting people from the Upper or Lower parts of the Nation. However, that doesn't mean that there wasn't variation in skin tone presented in the art, but that doesn't necessarily imply or represent a distinction between those from the North or those from the South of the country. From the Old Kingdom to the late period there are plenty of examples where they portrayed crowds or groups of people in alternating tones, either indicating a mixture of skin tones in general or simply for artistic contrast. You can't simply look at one or two statues and say if someone is from the lower or upper part of the country because we have numerous examples of art for the same person with various tones due to fading and other factors.
And for us today, trying to distinguish who is from the South of the country vs the North has to be based on text evidence vs simply looking at statues.
I actually just may have found something that distinguishes the Northern And Southern Egyptian during the time of Amenhotep III's rule. It says that Ta-shema (Upper Egyptians) looked like this:
Diodorus Siculus made a similar distinction. "-The majority of them, and especially those who dwell along the river, are black in color and have flat noses and woolly hair."
Note: Especially along the river in comparison to the Delta.
In the Ipuwer Papyrus which is dated near 1900 BC it was noted that foreign tribes of the desert had become like Egyptians. Ammianus Marcellinus lived during 300 AD. This was more than 2000 years after the Delta faced major immigration. This was after Lower Egypt faced major foreign occupation.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ True, the Delta has had influxes of foreigners especially from the time of the Hyksos, but both archaeology and historical documents show that foreigners have always been in the minority until the Islamic Era when, from the Ummayad Caliphate to the Ottoman, there were multiple periods of mass immigration.
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: First and foremost I really appreciate you finding these examples, but looking at them closely authenticity of some of them looks questionable. The first two men have moustaches, when the customs back them would’ve demanded them to remain clean shaven. The 3rd image features men believed to be Dagi’s sons, if we assume this to be true, since Dagi was buried in Thebes wouldn’t that make those men Thebean? The last one seems to be the worst offender, Rahotep lacks a moustache in his other depictions and it seems to stick out like a sore thumb from the other AE statues from that same time period. I wouldn’t consider it to be an authentic depiction.
You are probably correct about the 3rd photo which I simply copied from a google search on Old Kingdom murals but I'll correct it with something more accurate. As far as the authenticity of the other portraits, the depiction of mustaches is not unusual especially in Old Kingdom portraits. What makes Rahotep's statue suspect is the simple fact that hieroglyphs are found in the back of his seat and that of his wife which goes against artistic convention. Other than that, the statues themselves are typical of the time. It was during the Old Kingdom that Egyptologists notice an expansion of Delta peoples into middle and upper Egypt as noted by Batrawi.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
From Saqqara comes several beautiful decorated coffins and other works of art, some of them excavated by Zahi Hawass and his team, which is shown in the film Tombs of Egypt, the increcible mission which was sent on TV here recently.
Among the findings is this coffin from the New Kingdom, made of ceramics.
At the excavation Zahi Hawass and his team found 57 grave tunnels and 290 coffins and mummies, and also "a love story" between a pharaoh and an unknown queen".
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Well it's either fact or fiction that AEs considered facial hair bad hygiene, Ala fake beards for pharaohs instead of natural chin tufts. Ancient Sudanese also rid themselves of beard mustache sideburns
posted
^ That's true, but from what I recall the practice of being clean shaven was more strictly enforced on the priesthood (including kings and other royals).
Plus Old Kingdom art is unique in that not only was it more realistic showing many unique (perhaps accurate) facial features and even rare depictions of deformed and handicapped people, but also the most depictions of facial hair. This makes me think this was an original artistic tradition perhaps native to Lower Egypt before the art became more uniform.
Modern Bohari (Northern Egyptians) in a tomb of their ancient kinsman.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I have referencesd Cyril Aldred's works, Imgard Woldering, Peter Nevill, Arpag Mekhitarian, Hawass' Great Book, and others.
Please support with a plethora of art works that lower facial hair, the hygienic equivalent of bad breath or body odor, was not universally a no-no in AE since Narmer until the last Native dynasty. Do not include mourners. Thx.
Leave out distractions like speculations, physically challenged or malformed folk. Those face savers have nothing to do with the targeted point. "Nothing but the facts ..."
posted
^ I never said it was universal, only that all the examples I've seen (other than Hyksos and other foreigners) all come from the Old Kingdom. I don't know about a "plethora" but I've already provided examples of Old Kingdom men bearing mustaches.
posted
^ Like I said, I'm just going by observation. All the depictions of Egyptian men I've seen are cleanshaven except for those in the Old Kingdom. This seems to indicate to me that convention on facial hair was codified afterwards.
Your guess is as good as mine.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Like I said, I'm just going by observation. All the depictions of Egyptian men I've seen are cleanshaven except for those in the Old Kingdom. This seems to indicate to me that convention on facial hair was codified afterwards.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Okay, if we establish that facial hair was acceptable in the old kingdom period, that still doesn't explain why Rahotep isn't shown with a moustache in any other depictions. That picture you posted of Hesy Re supports the statue being fake.
posted
^ I don't see how. Hesira is also mustached. There are are various other Old Kingdom figures bearing mustaches.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Rahotep wears a moustache, which was popular during the Old Kingdom, but unfortunately cannot be seen on most statues, since it was usually painted on and the paint usually does not survive.
posted
Even if we exclude the moustache, there's still several other details that makes me doubt the authenticity of the Rahotep statue. But to put things back on track, I want to place our attention back to this post, is the information from this site correct? To make final conclusions.
quote:Originally posted by Ibis:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by Ibis: I suppose to sum things up does anyone have any depictions of lower Egyptians in the dynastic period that supports/rejects the Arrian quote? It would help my study a lot.
I don't believe that the artistic canon of the ancient Nile had a different way of depicting people from the Upper or Lower parts of the Nation. However, that doesn't mean that there wasn't variation in skin tone presented in the art, but that doesn't necessarily imply or represent a distinction between those from the North or those from the South of the country. From the Old Kingdom to the late period there are plenty of examples where they portrayed crowds or groups of people in alternating tones, either indicating a mixture of skin tones in general or simply for artistic contrast. You can't simply look at one or two statues and say if someone is from the lower or upper part of the country because we have numerous examples of art for the same person with various tones due to fading and other factors.
And for us today, trying to distinguish who is from the South of the country vs the North has to be based on text evidence vs simply looking at statues.
I actually just may have found something that distinguishes the Northern And Southern Egyptian during the time of Amenhotep III's rule. It says that Ta-shema (Upper Egyptians) looked like this:
posted
^ Doug is correct that in Egyptian cannon art when Egyptians are depicted, usually there is no distinction between Lower and Upper with there being a homogenization. However, when the artwork is localized such as Lower Egyptians in Saqqara or Upper Egyptians in Thebes, certain peculiarities do tend to stand out a bit. And I think these differences are more stressed in the website your cited where the pharaoh calls out domestic rebels by region of Egypt. The hieroglyphs are a little faded but from what I make out they do indeed say Ta-Shema and Ta-Mehu (Upper and Lower Egypt) respectively.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It should be noted that on these particular images of foreigners or Nine Bows groups, where there is a bound captive and a cartouche on top, that the cartouche is not always labeling the figure it's on top of For instance in this different tomb, Ramses II
Name-Keftiu-at-Abydos-Ramses-Temple
^^The cartouche above has the hieroglyph for Keftiu they were Aegeans, possibly Minoans or Cretans
but this is how Keftius are depicted in Egyptian art
that same figure from two photos back is here, 4th from the left
This is an Asiatic. In fact all of them here are images of Asiatic yet the cartouches each indicate different ethnicities of the nine bows The Asiatic is used here as generic foreigner
quote:Originally posted by Ibis:
I actually just may have found something that distinguishes the Northern And Southern Egyptian during the time of Amenhotep III's rule. It says that Ta-shema (Upper Egyptians) looked like this:
I'm not going to make any final conclusions until I can confirm it's validity. [/QB]
Your figures are from here and there are different ones, not all Asiatic like I just showed
But what I'm saying is that when you see various captives like this with a cartouche with glyphs on top the figures behind them cannot be assumed to necessarily match
And you should realize the ram bound 9 bows are enemies and should not be looked at in isolation from the rest of the figures in this Upper Egypt Theban tomb Kheruef TT 192
This is likely a Nubian although the cartouches says Ta-shema (Upper Egyptians) and this is one of the arm bound enemies of the Nine Bows, scholars are not certain about exactly who the Ta-shema are in these Nine Bows scenes. I can go into further discrepancies also, between the glyphs and the figures and in other tombs I can also show clear errors made by the artisans in some cases, labeling foreigners
this is likely an Asiatic although the cartouches says Ta-Mehu (Lower Egyptian)
There are thousands of tombs with wall scenes depicting Upper Egyptians and Lower Egyptians. It does not make sense to look at Nine Bows captives to try to find out what they looked like
This one is 18th dynasty and a couple of thousands years after the unification and I have seen a lot of art and have never noticed a skin tone difference between Upper and lower Egypt that you could detect in the art
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ The 9 Bows were a generic collective of the 9 most hostile enemies of united Kmt, though not all them were foreign! Indeed depending on the time period, there were rebels from one or both of the Two Lands that make up Egypt therefore having either Ta-Shemau or Ta-Mehu on the list of 9 Bows is not unusual nor would it be some sort of error or mistake.
So the figure labeled as Ta-Shemau is NOT Nubian but an Upper Egyptian and the figure Ta-Mehu is NOT Asiatic but an actual Lower Egyptian both are enemies of the crown and therefore state.
The Enemies of Ancient Egypt The earliest depictions we have of Egyptian kings portray the motif of prostrate foreigners as a symbol of Egyptian supremacy over the rest of mankind. For example, the Narmer Palette shows the king in his efforts to rid the world of such aberrations as the "vile Asiatic". Here, we find the trampling of the "Nine Bows", as the Egyptian referred to their enemies, as a vivid embodiment of the king's supremacy over foreigners (and sometimes even other Egyptians). The figure "nine" represented three times three, which was the "plurality of Pluralities", thus designating the entirety of all enemies.
There was another thread in which we discussed the members of the 9 Bows in the above picture. Hopefully someone can pull up the link but in the meanwhile here is another translation of the list (from right to left):
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ The 9 Bows were a generic collective of the 9 most hostile enemies of united Kmt, though not all them were foreign! Indeed depending on the time period, there were rebels from one or both of the Two Lands that make up Egypt therefore having either Ta-Shemau or Ta-Mehu on the list of 9 Bows is not unusual nor would it be some sort of error or mistake.
So the figure labeled as Ta-Shemau is NOT Nubian but an Upper Egyptian and the figure Ta-Mehu is NOT Asiatic but an actual Lower Egyptian both are enemies of the crown and therefore state.
The Enemies of Ancient Egypt The earliest depictions we have of Egyptian kings portray the motif of prostrate foreigners as a symbol of Egyptian supremacy over the rest of mankind. For example, the Narmer Palette shows the king in his efforts to rid the world of such aberrations as the "vile Asiatic". Here, we find the trampling of the "Nine Bows", as the Egyptian referred to their enemies, as a vivid embodiment of the king's supremacy over foreigners (and sometimes even other Egyptians). The figure "nine" represented three times three, which was the "plurality of Pluralities", thus designating the entirety of all enemies.
There was another thread in which we discussed the members of the 9 Bows in the above picture. Hopefully someone can pull up the link but in the meanwhile here is another translation of the list (from right to left):
Ta-Shemau as appear in Nine bows are not understood by scholars and it cannot be assumed a general term for Upper Egyptians in 9 bows scenes like this. It's an upper Egyptian tomb, it cannot be assumed that they intend, "here this bound figure is one of us"
Additionally these cartouches should not be assumed as to correspond with the figures behind them
posted
^ What is there not to understand. The mdu neter is clear. Are you saying the tomb artists made not one mistake but two regarding the 9 Bows??
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ What is there not to understand. The mdu neter is clear. Are you saying the tomb artists made not one mistake but two regarding the 9 Bows??
I just added picture to my previous post take a look
it corresponds to your labeling, R-L basis #1 being on the right
As we can see, issues
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [qb] ^ The 9 Bows were a generic collective of the 9 most hostile enemies of united Kmt, though not all them were foreign! Indeed depending on the time period, there were rebels from one or both of the Two Lands that make up Egypt therefore having either Ta-Shemau or Ta-Mehu on the list of 9 Bows is not unusual nor would it be some sort of error or mistake.
So the figure labeled as Ta-Shemau is NOT Nubian but an Upper Egyptian and the figure Ta-Mehu is NOT Asiatic but an actual Lower Egyptian both are enemies of the crown and therefore state.
The Enemies of Ancient Egypt The earliest depictions we have of Egyptian kings portray the motif of prostrate foreigners as a symbol of Egyptian supremacy over the rest of mankind. For example, the Narmer Palette shows the king in his efforts to rid the world of such aberrations as the "vile Asiatic". Here, we find the trampling of the "Nine Bows", as the Egyptian referred to their enemies, as a vivid embodiment of the king's supremacy over foreigners (and sometimes even other Egyptians). The figure "nine" represented three times three, which was the "plurality of Pluralities", thus designating the entirety of all enemies.
There was another thread in which we discussed the members of the 9 Bows in the above picture. Hopefully someone can pull up the link but in the meanwhile here is another translation of the list (from right to left):
I'm clearing up some confusion here putting in the right picture
The Ta-Shema and Ta-Mehu brought up by Ibis are at Kheruef not Tomeb of Anen which is similar you reference here. However the Nines Bows text order is the same in tombs However you can go right to left or left to rights as per the the figures, you will see some fit and some don't This means the regular order of the groups in text is separate from the irregular order of the pictures of the captives You have to slowly look at the order, some match the text, others clearly don't My guess is the when they depict enemies the order is loose. They have these enemies all over the place in some of these 18th dynasty spots. The text, in my view is read separately to the degree they are not intending to label each foreigner strictly
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
How about another example for further reference?
https://www.ancient-egypt.co.uk/fitzwilliam/index_2.htm The Nine Bows This is an ancient term that collectively referred to the enemies of Ancient Egypt. The name could originate from the use of Bows by their enemies and the ritual breaking of bows of defeated foes - but the actual reason is not known. The actual enemies that this refers could be adjusted to reflect the current contact with neighbours and their relations with them - we can include Asiatic, Sand Dwellers, Nubians and even lower and upper Egyptians.
The block, a base for a statue of Rameses II, has the traditional enemies of Egypt represented on the sides of the block - personified as bound and kneeling captives.. They were therefore symbolically beneath the feet of the king and under his control. From the front of the block they are (right-left):
1. Hanuenbu (northernmost foreigners) 2. Shat (a Land in Nubia) 3. Tashema (Upper Egypt, the south land) 4. Sekhet-lamu (the people of the desert oases) 5. Ta-Mehu (Lower Egypt, the Delta) 6. Pedjet Shut (foreign barbarians) 7. Tehenu (Libyans) 8. Iuntyw Seti (natives of Nubia) 9. Mentiu Setet (Nomads of Asia) 10. Khet Hesy (Hittites)Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic