posted
hi all just wanted someone to help clear this question up for me.
older books like diop african origins of civilisation have a picture which says this is thothmosis 3. then on the internet they say a bust of a pharoah who looks nothing like the one on diops book is him. so i was wandering if anyone had a pic or name of a site i can go to with a pic that is him.
Posts: 164 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by adrianne: hi all just wanted someone to help clear this question up for me.
older books like diop african origins of civilisation have a picture which says this is thothmosis 3. then on the internet they say a bust of a pharoah who looks nothing like the one on diops book is him. so i was wandering if anyone had a pic or name of a site i can go to with a pic that is him.
Might help if you could link us to what pictures you're referring to?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
sorry rasol im on a work computer ill try and find a site with the pics . bear with me a minute
Posts: 164 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by adrianne: hi all just wanted someone to help clear this question up for me.
older books like diop african origins of civilisation have a picture which says this is thothmosis 3. then on the internet they say a bust of a pharoah who looks nothing like the one on diops book is him. so i was wandering if anyone had a pic or name of a site i can go to with a pic that is him.
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Might help if you could link us to what pictures you're referring to?
Diop -- African Origin of Civilization, page 20.
.
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
yes thanks myra thats one of them . i cant go to a lot off sites because this is a work comp. but if u type in tuthmosis 111 on the net and go to images they give you pharoahs that look nothing like this guy.
Posts: 164 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
i thought the guy you got up was the authentic one. but lately when ive been looking him up the pharoahs with his name has been a man who looks more european to me. just wanted to know why people are re assigning him . ive seen the picture above being reassigned to represent amonhotep 111
Posts: 164 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
nice pics myra but whats your views on why he might be re assigned to represent some other pharoah.and vice versa
Posts: 164 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
im trying to get a complete list of pharoahs bust and statues so i needed the right name for the right pharoahs.
Posts: 164 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
There aren't THAT many statues of Thutmosis to begin with. A great pharoah like him, founder of a dynasty, would have had literally THOUSANDS of images in ONE temple complex. Unfortunately, only a SMALL fraction of those images remain to us today. Suffice to say, that for MOST Egyptian personalities that are known to us, the images we have are not always exactly the same. Some have been damaged and repaired, some have been created by different sculptors who had different technique, others may just reflect a different style for a given period.
The ultimate issue you seem to be pointing out is what constitutes true "negroid" features. This topic is HOTLY debated here at Egyptsearch, but suffice to say, there are MANY Africans with features like the statues you call "European looking" but are NOT European and are BLACK. The Beja are a PERFECT example of this. This is the reason for the many controversies over the way European and even Egyptian museums display the remaining relics from Egypt. Firstly, many times what you see in the museum is taken OUT of context and presented in such a way to make the ancient Egyptians seem MOSTLY lighter complexioned and more LIKE Europeans and others from the Levant. HOWEVER, if you GO to Egypt and examine the MANY remaining images that you DONT see in the museums, you get the OPPOSITE perspective, that MOST ancient Egyptians were DARKER complexioned with SOME that may have been lighter. THIS is a form of distortion, especially in the way that UNPAINTED statues are presented and the features are labelled "European or Near Eastern" yet when the SAME statues are found with the colors intact, they are NOWHERE NEAR European in complexion.
Africa is a diverse continent and DARK BROWN Africans have the MOST DIVERSE range of features in the world, from thin to thick lips, from tall to short from round to elongated heads and everything in between. STEREOTYPING Black Africans as having ONLY broad noses and thick lips is EXACTLY part of the reason so many here try and DISPEL the myths and LIES of archaeology and Egyptology that tries to pigeonhole BLACK African features into a SMALL subset of all the TRUE features found among BLACK Africans.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
the 18th dynasty is partly nubian, they can not be european looking.
neither do they represent the typical egyptians at the time. as you might know there is 33 dynasties.
Sorry AMR but NOT QUITE.
First off WHAT is a Nubian and what is a TYPICAL Egyptian in the time of the 18th dynasty? YOU again are exposing the DISTORTED nonsense that gets passed off as FACTS concerning ancient Egypt. The 18th dynasty was the FIRST NATIVE dynasty of Egypt AFTER the expulsion of the Hyksos who were FOREIGNERS to Egypt. Are you trying to say that those Egyptians who were PARTLY descended from Hyksos invaders were MORE indigenous and MORE typical than the Egyptians who were NOT mixed with the Asiatic Hyksos? WHERE is your evidence that MOST Egyptians were MIXED or were NOT like those who you claim were PARTLY Nubian? How can you even SAY this when it has been shown REPEATEDLY that the Egyptians and their CULTURE ORIGINATED amongst the people to the SOUTH of Egypt who were NOT called "Nubians"? Therefore, you CONTINUE to show a BLATANT disregard for the FACTS and HISTORY of Egypt, especially when LUMPING all 33 dynasties together as THE SAME. The Ptolemaic Dynasties of Egypt were NOT EGYPTIANS and were TRULY not TYPICAL of the Egyptian population. Neither were the Libyan dynasties, the ROman dynasties NOR the Hyksos dynasties NOR the dynasties of the FIRST intermediate period, when Asiatics FIRST invaded in large numbers. The FACT that you look at the periods of FOREIGN domination and control as being somehow "normal" or "typical" shows how much you are AGAINST the views of the ancient Egyptians themselves. The ancient Egyptians HATED foreign domination, did not look at periods of FOREIGN domination as being "typical" and did NOT identify with the FOREIGNERS OR their descendents as being TRUE Egyptians and heirs to the ancient culture that originated in the SOUTH of the country. This is why people like Thutmosis III was the son of a Southern woman, because the Egyptians considered the connection to the South and southern peoples as "sacred" as well as IMPORTANT in keeping the country UNITED against the INVADERS who YOU consider "typical".
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
i did not compare the 18th dynasty with the hyksos dynasty numbered the 17th.
i compared them with the egyptian population. egypt had 33 dynasties 10 or eleven were foreigners, even the 18th was not 100% egyptian.
Dont lie AMR1, we already have a thread on you and lying. You said that
quote: [b]the 18th dynasty is partly nubian, they can not be european looking.[b]
neither do they represent the typical egyptians at the time. as you might know there is 33 dynasties.
As if to IMPLY that 1) the 18th dynasty was DIFFERENT from the OTHER 33 dynasties and 2) it was different BECAUSE of the association with Egypt and peoples to the South.
NOWHERE did you MENTION that the PREDYNASTIC and EARLY first to fifth dynasties were ALSO associated with the South. Nor did you mention that Egypt ALWAYS turned to the south AFTER periods of foreign domination, such as Senwosret of the 12th dynasty, which was ALSO STRONGLY affiliated with the SOUTH because the Senwosret and Amenhemaat lines ALL had a GREAT amount of Southern wives as MOTHERS of the ROYAL line. Therefore, it is YOU who tries to FLIP the tide of Egyptian history by NOT showing that it STARTED OFF in the South and ALWAYS turned to the SOUTH in periods of trouble for support and replentishment of the ROYAL line, making the SOUTHERN affinities of the ancient Egyptians TYPICAL, especially when contrasted against the FOREIGN periods of domination like that of the Hyksos.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
i did not compare the 18th dynasty with the hyksos dynasty numbered the 17th.
i compared them with the egyptian population. egypt had 33 dynasties 10 or eleven were foreigners, even the 18th was not 100% egyptian.
Dont lie AMR1, we already have a thread on you and lying. You said that
quote: [b]the 18th dynasty is partly nubian, they can not be european looking.[b]
neither do they represent the typical egyptians at the time. as you might know there is 33 dynasties.
As if to IMPLY that 1) the 18th dynasty was DIFFERENT from the OTHER 33 dynasties and 2) it was different BECAUSE of the association with Egypt and peoples to the South.
NOWHERE did you MENTION that the PREDYNASTIC and EARLY first to fifth dynasties were ALSO associated with the South. Nor did you mention that Egypt ALWAYS turned to the south AFTER periods of foreign domination, such as Senwosret of the 12th dynasty, which was ALSO STRONGLY affiliated with the SOUTH because the Senwosret and Amenhemaat lines ALL had a GREAT amount of Southern wives as MOTHERS of the ROYAL line. Therefore, it is YOU who tries to FLIP the tide of Egyptian history by NOT showing that it STARTED OFF in the South and ALWAYS turned to the SOUTH in periods of trouble for support and replentishment of the ROYAL line, making the SOUTHERN affinities of the ancient Egyptians TYPICAL, especially when contrasted against the FOREIGN periods of domination like that of the Hyksos.
upper egypt is egypt, nubia nd sudan are not egypt and i don't lie, the liars called me a liar, the one who post nubian picture and fabricate it as an egyptian.
Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
thanks for the info. you doug m and rasol are right. im right now looking at the busts of the earliest pharoahs we have available and it proves black africa is diverse in terms as facial features in egypt. some web sites like wiki are very eurocentric biased as they show on their web page called egyptians they have a very narrow view of what egyptians looked like
nubia - a region of southern egypt and northern sudan.
It will no doubt come as a shock to the Egyptian government that Lower Nubia is not a part of Egypt.
Perhaps the Israeli's should go ahead and annex it.
by the way the way borders drawn by the british and turks are wrong.
first they made of three countries one country and called it anglo egyptian sudan(nubia, south sudan, darfur).
second they made the borders of this anglo egyptian sudan which should have started from the first catract, instead they make the borders at halaib, including part of nubia with egypt.
Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
nubia - a region of southern egypt and northern sudan.
It will no doubt come as a shock to the Egyptian government that Lower Nubia is not a part of Egypt.
Perhaps the Israeli's should go ahead and annex it.
by the way the way borders drawn by the british and turks are wrong.
first they made of three countries one country and called it anglo egyptian sudan(nubia, south sudan, darfur).
second they made the borders of this anglo egyptian sudan which should have started from the first catract, instead they make the borders at halaib, including part of nubia with egypt.
AMR you are so confused it is ridiculous. How can you make 3 countries into one when the 3 werent countries to BEGIN WITH. Nubia was NEVER mentioned in the ancient Egyptian heiroglyphs for people to the SOUTH of Egypt. The GENERAL term for people from the South in ancient Egypt was NEHESI, not NUBIAN. The word NUBIAN comes from the word NUB in Egyptian, which means GOLD. The Egyptians actually used NUB or NUBIAN to refer to THEMSELVES and THEIR GODS. Hence the GOLDEN gods were NUBIAN gods (and also came from the South). The King had a "golden" throne name, or in other words a NUBIAN throne name. Once again, you are allowing Eurocentrics and their pseudoscience to be used as if it is VALID HISTORICAL FACT. There NEVER WAS a country or Kingdom or people called NUBIANS during the dynastic period of Egypt. There never WAS a country called DARFUR during the dynastic period of Egypt NOR was there a COUNTRY called Sudan during dynastic period either. In a sense though you ARE right in that the Europeans, Turks and Arabs HAVE lumped civilizations in the South of the ancient Egypt during dynastic period together as "NUBIAN" when NO SUCH COUNTRY EXISTED....
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It seems AMR still holds the silly view that Nubian = Kushite. Even though we have told him many times that 'Nubians' consisted of various different peoples some of whom looked no different from Egyptians.
Certain evidence suggests that the 17th-18th dynasties have part Nubian specifically Medjay ancestry. The Medjay are very much similar to the Egyptians in appearance.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Getting back to Adrianne's question. Adrianne, you have to show us what 'European' looking bust you are referring to.
Also, you should be cautious about what you mean by 'European' looking, because I assume you mean narrow shaped face and narrow nose which is a trait not uncommon to africans as well!
Akhenaten, European?
Definitely not!Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Thanks, I got the comparison from the pictures section of Ausar's Nile Valley Civilization forum from a thread entitled Pharoah look-alikes.
Although I've had the actual idea of the Akhenaton/Maasai comparison for a long time. I even found images of Somali men who bear striking resemblance to Akhenaten! Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: It seems AMR still holds the silly view that Nubian = Kushite. Even though we have told him many times that 'Nubians' consisted of various different peoples some of whom looked no different from Egyptians.
Certain evidence suggests that the 17th-18th dynasties have part Nubian specifically Medjay ancestry. The Medjay are very much similar to the Egyptians in appearance.
Yes, Supercar you are exactly right. However, most people here get CONFUSED by the usage of the term NUBIAN by Egyptologists. People MUST understand that the term NUBIAN is a term that was coined LONG AFTER the Old, New and Middle Kingdoms. Yet, Eurocentrics USE the term as if it has MEANING in terms of DESCRIBING those people to the South of Egypt, their cultures, nationalities and facial features, when ACTUALLY it doesn't. Therefore, the ONLY way to clarify the confusion and answer the ORIGINAL question posted by adrienne is to review the FACTS. The point here is that NUBIANS and NUBIA has NOTHING to do with the relations and origins of the Egyptians and the people of the South.
Firstly, the Thutmosids were the first kings of the 17th dynasty. The FATHER of Amose and Kamose was Sequenenre Tao II. HE was a person of SOUTHERN extration himself, even the NAME indicates this and it is NOT clear exactly WHERE he comes from among the peoples of the South. Some say he was even from Ethiopia. Either way, this is a PERFECT example of why calling the 17th dynasty a "Nubian" dynasty is to reinforce a FAKE distinction between Egyptians and people to the South. Egyptians and their culture and the early forms of KINGSHIP ORIGINATED in the South and therefore it makes ancient Egyptians CLOSER to Southern peoples than people ANYWHERE ELSE. Therefore calling into question the whole idea of SEPARATING Egyptians from this fake concept of "Nubian" in the first place. What is a Nubian? Where did they COME from? What was their CULTURE and what CITIES did they build? NONE of these questions can be answered because NOBODY ever existed by that name. REALITY is MUCH more complex than that.
Anyway, starting with Seqenenre Tao, you have the Kings of the 17th Dynasty. Ahmose, son of Sequenenre, himself chose a woman from the South as his WIFE, Ahmose-Nefertari. This was done throughout the 17th and 18th dynasties. Thutmosis Ist was the result of this marriage. The Thutmosid line, like the lines of Narmer, Djoser, Menes, Pepi, Mentuhotep, Senwosret and other famous NON FOREIGN dynasties, were ALL associated with the SOUTH. Therefore there is NOTHING atypical about the 17th dynasty versus OTHER indigenous dynasties,EXCEPT in the minds of the Eurocentric scholars who want to CREATE a FAKE distinction between Egyptians and people to the South of Egypt based on RACE not ethnicity or culture.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: It seems AMR still holds the silly view that Nubian = Kushite. Even though we have told him many times that 'Nubians' consisted of various different peoples some of whom looked no different from Egyptians.
Certain evidence suggests that the 17th-18th dynasties have part Nubian specifically Medjay ancestry. The Medjay are very much similar to the Egyptians in appearance.
Yes, Supercar you are exactly right...
Look at who the quote is attributed to, dude! LOLPosts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Getting back to Adrianne's question. Adrianne, you have to show us what 'European' looking bust you are referring to.
Also, you should be cautious about what you mean by 'European' looking, because I assume you mean narrow shaped face and narrow nose which is a trait not uncommon to africans as well!
posted
Ah, damn you're good Djehuti at getting these pictures! Maybe that Masai brotha should play Akhenaten in the next movie instead of Colin Ferrell! And what are all these theories about sculptures of Akhenaten and Amarna period art in general being "unrealistic" and "exaggerated"? Is there any evidence?
Posts: 447 | From: Somewhere son... | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
They are exaggerated stylistically in many ways. But the exaggeration is nothing more than a expression of AFRICANNESS and BLACKNESS by Akhenaten. It is absurd how Eurocentrics try and deny the OVERWHELMING EXTREME prognathism and African features of the Amarna style, which featuresd BIG lips, BIG hips, and extreme prognathism. However, those EXTREME images are HARDLY EVER GIVEN the LIGHT of day and NOWHERE NEAR as PROMINENTLY displayed as the bust of Nefertit in Berlin, even though in Akhenaten's time, MOST of the images LOOKED like that. Likewise, you MUST remember that those STATUES of Akhenaten were ONCE painted BROWN, like most OTHER Egyptian depictions of themselves from ALL periods of dynastic Egypt. That right there is a POWERFUL statement of AFRICANNESS and BLACKNESS that CANNOT be denied. THAT is why they HAD to find(create) that BUST of Nefertiti in Berlin in order to COUNTERACT the effect of the OVERWHELMING African likenesses from the Amarna period. It is also why Tut is OFTEN depicted as WHITE as another attempt to deny the so-called "Nubian", ie BLACK AFRICAN affinity of the 18th dynasty, even though ALL of the NATIVE dynasties of Egypt had BLACK AFRICAN affinity. MOST of the leaders of the 17th and 18th dynasty and Akenaten's FATHER Amenhotep III, has some of the MOST UNDENIABLE BLACK AFRICAN features of ANY pharoah. Yet Eurocentrics STILL try to call the lineage of Amarna and tut into question. THIS is why the Eurocentrics always show the same 1 statue of Amenhotep III, the one in black granite, that looks "European", because most of the OTHERS are BLACK AFRICAN looking, like those of Amenhotep III and others, because of the STRONG African affinity due to them ALL being sons of GREAT ROYAL WIVES of the SOUTH.
It is also why so many speculate on the origins of the various figures within the Amarna royal line, going so far as to TRY and USURP the role of TIYE, the great royal mother from the SOUTH, part of the LONG LINE of Great Royal mothers from the South, by introducing Asiatic origins for Nefertiti due to diplomacy or the presence of Asiatic women in the harem for the same reason. They FOCUS on the FLIMSIEST evidence in order to PROPOSE a SIGNIFIGANT presence of ASIATIC blood, where there was none, TOTALLY contradicting the STRONG affiliation of the Egyptian royal line with the South that started with Seqenenre Tao, Ahmose-Nefertari right down through Tiye, ALL of whom were great royal wives from the SOUTH. There is NO POINT in even DENYING that if ANY princesses and wives were prominent in the NATIVE dynasties of Egypt, it was SOUTHERN wives and SOUTHERN princesses that were considered the BACKBONE of the bloodline. Not the ASIATIC women that many Eurocentrics SPECULATE about.
Only those who are gullible and BELIEVE in the "objectivity" of the Egyptologists and Egyptology in general would actually believe that these statues are representations of people with Marfan's disease, ie, WHITES.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: They are exaggerated stylistically in many ways. But the exaggeration is nothing more than a expression of AFRICANNESS and BLACKNESS by Akhenaten. It is absurd how Eurocentrics try and deny the OVERWHELMING EXTREME prognathism and African features of the Amarna style, which featuresd BIG lips, BIG hips, and extreme prognathism. However, those EXTREME images are HARDLY EVER GIVEN the LIGHT of day and NOWHERE NEAR as PROMINENTLY displayed as the bust of Nefertit in Berlin, even though in Akhenaten's time, MOST of the images LOOKED like that. Likewise, you MUST remember that those STATUES of Akhenaten were ONCE painted BROWN, like most OTHER Egyptian depictions of themselves from ALL periods of dynastic Egypt. That right there is a POWERFUL statement of AFRICANNESS and BLACKNESS that CANNOT be denied. THAT is why they HAD to find(create) that BUST of Nefertiti in Berlin in order to COUNTERACT the effect of the OVERWHELMING African likenesses from the Amarna period.
Only those who are gullible and BELIEVE in the "objectivity" of the Egyptologists and Egyptology in general would actually believe that these statues are representations of people with Marfan's disease, ie, WHITES.
I thought we are not allowed to talk about colour here any more???
Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: They are exaggerated stylistically in many ways. But the exaggeration is nothing more than a expression of AFRICANNESS and BLACKNESS by Akhenaten. It is absurd how Eurocentrics try and deny the OVERWHELMING EXTREME prognathism and African features of the Amarna style, which featuresd BIG lips, BIG hips, and extreme prognathism. However, those EXTREME images are HARDLY EVER GIVEN the LIGHT of day and NOWHERE NEAR as PROMINENTLY displayed as the bust of Nefertit in Berlin, even though in Akhenaten's time, MOST of the images LOOKED like that. Likewise, you MUST remember that those STATUES of Akhenaten were ONCE painted BROWN, like most OTHER Egyptian depictions of themselves from ALL periods of dynastic Egypt. That right there is a POWERFUL statement of AFRICANNESS and BLACKNESS that CANNOT be denied. THAT is why they HAD to find(create) that BUST of Nefertiti in Berlin in order to COUNTERACT the effect of the OVERWHELMING African likenesses from the Amarna period.
Only those who are gullible and BELIEVE in the "objectivity" of the Egyptologists and Egyptology in general would actually believe that these statues are representations of people with Marfan's disease, ie, WHITES.
I thought we are not allowed to talk about colour here any more???
Really? I didn't know that. But either way, FACTS are FACTS, and if you are going to TALK about the 17th and 18th dynasty and TALK about the history, culture and ethnicity of those periods, you HAVE to talk about the STRONG cultural connections between these people and the South. The tradition of the great royal wives from the South is ONE aspect, along with other aspects of culture and history that ties Egypt to the lands of the South.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Getting back to Adrianne's question. Adrianne, you have to show us what 'European' looking bust you are referring to.
Also, you should be cautious about what you mean by 'European' looking, because I assume you mean narrow shaped face and narrow nose which is a trait not uncommon to africans as well!
Akhenaten, European?
Definitely not!
Excellent Jehuti, excellent pic. Salaam
This is not academic comparison, because there is europeans whop look like that. actually the african guy is with european feature but black.
Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Getting back to Adrianne's question. Adrianne, you have to show us what 'European' looking bust you are referring to.
Also, you should be cautious about what you mean by 'European' looking, because I assume you mean narrow shaped face and narrow nose which is a trait not uncommon to africans as well!
Akhenaten, European?
Definitely not!
Excellent Jehuti, excellent pic. Salaam
This is not academic comparison, because there is europeans whop look like that. actually the african guy is with european feature but black.
How can that GUY be European if he has no "European" blood? If NO ONE in his FAMILY has ANY European blood then he HAS NO EUROPEAN FEATURES, only INDIGENOUS AFRICAN FEATURES.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
According to ethnic studies, it shows Euroasians coming and changing ethnicity in places like Cameroon.
What study? And what does some STUDY about Cameroon have to do with that PHOTO? Your attempts to show that African feature diversity, which PREDATES the EXISTENCE of Europeans is BASED on the presence of Europeans is RIDICULOUS. You have no more understanding about the phenotypical diversity of Africans and the fact that they are INDIGENOUS to Africa with NO ADMIXTURE than a ant has about the workings of the Martian atmosphere. Until you can provide some PROOF that the man in the photo is the result of some EUROPEAN ancestry you should consider your LAME attempts to explain those features as BASELESS and not worth the e-paper they are written on.
I am waiting for that proof.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: They are exaggerated stylistically in many ways. But the exaggeration is nothing more than a expression of AFRICANNESS and BLACKNESS by Akhenaten. It is absurd how Eurocentrics try and deny the OVERWHELMING EXTREME prognathism and African features of the Amarna style, which featuresd BIG lips, BIG hips, and extreme prognathism. However, those EXTREME images are HARDLY EVER GIVEN the LIGHT of day and NOWHERE NEAR as PROMINENTLY displayed as the bust of Nefertit in Berlin, even though in Akhenaten's time, MOST of the images LOOKED like that. Likewise, you MUST remember that those STATUES of Akhenaten were ONCE painted BROWN, like most OTHER Egyptian depictions of themselves from ALL periods of dynastic Egypt. That right there is a POWERFUL statement of AFRICANNESS and BLACKNESS that CANNOT be denied. THAT is why they HAD to find(create) that BUST of Nefertiti in Berlin in order to COUNTERACT the effect of the OVERWHELMING African likenesses from the Amarna period.
Only those who are gullible and BELIEVE in the "objectivity" of the Egyptologists and Egyptology in general would actually believe that these statues are representations of people with Marfan's disease, ie, WHITES.
I thought we are not allowed to talk about colour here any more???
Really? I didn't know that. But either way, FACTS are FACTS, and if you are going to TALK about the 17th and 18th dynasty and TALK about the history, culture and ethnicity of those periods, you HAVE to talk about the STRONG cultural connections between these people and the South. The tradition of the great royal wives from the South is ONE aspect, along with other aspects of culture and history that ties Egypt to the lands of the South.
No, not really.
AMR1, the quote I posted was from the owner of Egyptian Dreams, showing how they're not allowed to talk about race or color. It has no bearing on this forum, which is moderated by Ausar.
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AMR1: This is not academic comparison, because there is europeans whop look like that. actually the african guy is with european feature but black.
How can such features be "European" if they developed in and are indigenous to Africa?!
I get tired of repeating myself to the forgetful one.
quote:Djehuti has said many times:
Cranial features: The human phenotypic trait that holds the greatest diversity is cranial morphology. Because of this fact, cranial features can at times be misleading if not taken into proper context. For example, for a long time features like long narrow faces and narrow noses have been associated with “caucasian” or “caucasoid” people even though such features are present in populations throughout the globe from Africa to the Americas. The same can be said about so-called “negroid” features such as broad faces and noses which are also not just confined to Africans but various peoples in Asia, the Pacific etc.
Which is why we have studies like this:
J. Edwards, A. Leathers, et al. ...based on Howell’s sampling Fordisc 2.0 authors state that "there are no races, only populations," yet it is clear that Howell was intent on providing known groups that would be distributed among the continental "racial" groups. We tested the accuracy and effectiveness of Fordisc 2.0 using twelve cranial measurements from a homogeneous population from the X-Group period of Sudanese Nubia (350CE-550CE). When the Fordisc program classified the adult X-Group crania, only 51 (57.3%) of 89 individuals were classified within groups from Africa. Others were placed in such diverse groups as Polynesian (11.24%), European (7.86%), Japanese (4.49%), Native American (3.37%), Peruvian (3.36%), Australian (1.12), Tasmanian (1.12%), and Melanesian (1.12%). The implications of these findings suggest that classifying populations, whether by geography or by "race", is not morphologically or biologically accurate because of the wide variation even in homogeneous populations.
And...
Forensic Misclassification of Ancient Nubian Crania: Implications for Assumptions about Human Variation -April 2005, Current Anthropology:
It is well known that human biological variation is principally clinal (i.e., structured as gradients) and not racial (i.e., structured as a small number of fairly discrete groups). We have shown that for a temporally and geographically homogeneous East African population, the most widely used “racial” program fails to identify the skeletal material accurately. The assignment of skeletal racial origin is based principally upon stereotypical features found most frequently in the most geographically distant populations. While this is useful in some contexts (for example, sorting skeletal material of largely West African ancestry from skeletal material of largely Western European ancestry), it fails to identify populations that originate elsewhere and misrepresents fundamental patterns of human biological diversity.
These exact same mistakes were made in classifying Egyptian skulls and is also the reason you hear these old studies speak of a percentage of “Caucasoid” and even a percentage of “mongoloid” skulls!
Jean Hiernaux The People of Africa(Peoples of the World Series) 1975 The oldest remains of Homo sapiens sapiens found in East Africa were associated with an industry having similarities with the Capsian. It has been called Upper Kenyan Capsian, although its derivation from the North African Capsian is far from certain. At Gamble's Cave in Kenya, five human skeletons were associated with a late phase of the industry, Upper Kenya Capsian C, which contains pottery. A similar associationis presumed for a skeleton found at Olduvai, which resembles those from Gamble's Cave. The date of Upper Kenya Capsian C is not precisely known (an earlier phase from Prospect Farm on Eburru Mountain close to Gamble's Cave has been dated to about 8000 BC); but the presence of pottery indicates a rather later date, perhaps around 400 BC. The skeletons are of very tall people. They had long, narrow heads, and relatively long, narrow faces. The nose was of medium width; and prognathism, when present, was restricted to the alveolar, or tooth-bearing, region......all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions............. From the foregoing, it is tempting to locate the area of differentiation of these people in the interior of East Africa. There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. Neither of these populations, fossil and modern, should be considered to be closely related to the populations of Europe and western Asia.
claims that Caucasoid peoples once lived in eastern Africa have been shown to be wrong, - JO Vogel, Precolonial Africa.
So features like narrow faces and noses do NOT indicate foreign ancestry or ‘admixture’.
Fulani (West African)
Somali (East African)
Egyptian (North African)
Tutsi (Central African)
Ironically, another trait all of these people above share in common besides facial features is skeletal structure of their bodies. Their body structure has been called “super-negroid” indicating their extra-tropical adapted bodies compared to stereotypical blacks of West Africa who only have plain “negroid” builds. This is another indication that these people definitely have NO non-African ancestry!
Also, just because someone happens to have the same features as those you consider ‘true blacks (negroes)’ does not mean they are even African. As seen by this Andamanese person below.
Asian
Jean Hiernaux The People of Africa 1975 p.53, 54
"In sub-Saharan Africa, many anthropological characters show a wide range of population means or frequencies. In some of them, the whole world range is covered in the sub-continent. Here live the shortest and the tallest human populations, the one with the highest and the one with the lowest nose, the one with the thickest and the one with the thinnest lips in the world. In this area, the range of the average nose widths covers 92 per cent of the world range:
only a narrow range of extremely low means are absent from the African record. Means for head diameters cover about 80 per cent of the world range; 60 per cent is the corresponding value for a variable once cherished by physical anthropologists, the cephalic index, or ratio of the head width to head length expressed as a percentage....."
So all this talk of such peoples being “not black” and “mixed” because of certain looks is downright silly... And why there really are no 'races' because most of human diversity *comes from Africans*.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
According to ethnic studies, it shows Euroasians coming and changing ethnicity in places like Cameroon.
LOL And again, for the hundredth time the studies you speak of are genetic studies which show that Cameroonians have original underived R1 while most Eurasians do not and have only descended R1! Which means that either R1 ORIGINATED in Africa, or if it originated in Eurasia it only spread back to Africa at a very remote period by tropically adapted Eurasians who looked no different from indigenous Africans and were thus BLACK!
Like this Andamanese
We have no evidence whatsoever from the fossil record of migrations because the remains all look African.
In fact, Maasai do NOT carry any R lineages yet they look as you say 'European', while Cameroonians who do carry R lineages look like this:
Therefore your argument (as always) is null and senseless!
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
All my posts that I was replying to others about colour and ethnicity in the last 24 hours were deleted.
So I am not making any effort to reply.
Not one of these posts had insults or even mockery of others, yet nevetheless it was deleted.
Posts: 1090 | From: Merowe-Nubia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by adrianne: hi all just wanted someone to help clear this question up for me.
older books like diop african origins of civilisation have a picture which says this is thothmosis 3. then on the internet they say a bust of a pharoah who looks nothing like the one on diops book is him. so i was wandering if anyone had a pic or name of a site i can go to with a pic that is him.
Everyone stop, take a deep breath, and consider this: Take any culture and look at all the images of a personnage. Note that all are representations made by different artists and all are similar but also very different from each other. Kemet's artists were no exception to this natural phenomenon...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
According to ethnic studies, it shows Euroasians coming and changing ethnicity in places like Cameroon.
Sorry but i'm quite fed up with your silly things, before you came here i enjoyed reading the posts in this forum, but now you're wasting our time. LET ME READ SOME BRAINY STUFFS AND KEEP QUIT PLEASE..
Posts: 13 | From: Bacaadweeyn | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Before I comment. Are we allowed to discuss ethnicity, but not colour?
How can this be done, I am truly confused.
It does not matter what you discuss, because you WRONG every time! LOL
Such an attitude is not healthy Djehuti. Instead of insulting, simply refute (which you have done, but can also be done without insulting in the process).
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Getting back to Adrianne's question. Adrianne, you have to show us what 'European' looking bust you are referring to.
Also, you should be cautious about what you mean by 'European' looking, because I assume you mean narrow shaped face and narrow nose which is a trait not uncommon to africans as well!
Akhenaten, European?
Definitely not!
Excellent Jehuti, excellent pic. Salaam
This is not academic comparison, because there is europeans whop look like that. actually the african guy is with european feature but black.
Amr,
......your ignorance is appalling. I can easily dismantle this assinine statment you made, but for what? I have come to realize that you are ignorant and there is nothing I PERSONALLY can do about it.................Ausar, please talk to Sammy and have Amr banned. Shukran. Salaam.
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic