And yeah I been meaning to make this thread for some time now. And the theme of this thread is that why ISN'T Aswan or the "Nubian" people who live there not seen as "authentic" Egyptians? We see many Eurocentrics try to dismiss the people of Aswan as foreigners. We are also constantly bombarded with this idea that Aswan is not "really" apart of Egypt or ever WAS. Its to the point where one would think Aswan is the south most city of Egypt, literally on the border i.e Buhen but that's not even the case.
But more importantly(and correct me) but "Aswan" was NEVER apart of Nubia instead it was known as Swenett which was a Upper Egyptian(again correct me) city that was the first cataract. Hell, it was said that Ancient Egypt(due to the flow from south to north of the nile) began with Swenett. So why is places like Cairo/Alexandria and the people who live in those cities seen as "real" Egyptians, whereas as the area of Aswan and the people of that city are just seen as immigrant Nubians? Why has this bias against dark skinned Egyptians been able to last this long?
Also, is it POSSIBLE that these people from Aswan could hold ANA ancestry?
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't you know? They're all the descendants of slaves!!! The true Egyptians are the recent migrants in the North, obviously.
Posts: 24 | From: Jamaica | Registered: Nov 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
It'll hopefully clarify a few things to know Aswan was part of a nome called Ta Seti. The problem however lies in Ta Seti's history before being absorbed into what would become AE. Though it was a nome during dynastic times it was a kingdom before that. Before Egypt was Egypt the Nile had several kingdoms that wanted control of the region, Ta Seti was a kingdom that extended into Sudan. The Qustul incense burner? The Ancient name for the location of the burner was also called Ta Seti. The northern portion of the land towards unification was absorbed into Egypt and the kingdom outside of the northern part collapsed afterwards. Ta Seti would then become a nome of Egypt. So Aswan's history and people are a problem for many to acknowledge in a very general sense because it offers an incredibly direct historical link to Egypt and Sub Saharan Africa (because Ta Seti extended into that area). They want to politicize a geographical region and suggest that Egypt had nothing to do with SSA, so naturally they'll suggest that Aswan and the "Nubians" had nothing to do with the creation of Egypt. This is probably why "Nubia," a term describing modern groups, became a popularized way of describing portions of Africa that were never called this in ancient times. The people that call themselves Nubians today need to be explained in a way that separates them from Egypt. They may describe them as colonized additions perhaps, which is strange because the earliest evidences for the white crown seem to be in Aswan.
Did anyone notice as soon as the Qustul incense burner was found how quick people attempted minimize it's importance? Many were saying "the first" pharoanic images are from Abydos, as though there was a singular predynastic kingship to which all pharoanic culture came from. But it had to be done that way because if it wasn't minimized, you not only show a kingship that extended into SSA, but it was one that influenced Egypt's statehood. First the emphasis was that "the first" of all iconography was found in Abydos until a site in Hierakonopolis had an allegedly earlier finding of the depiction in Qustul.Then THAT place was argued to be the creator of the white crown. Now Maria Gatto and her team say they found the earliest artistic depictions of crown a few years ago in Aswan/Ta Seti. So again the white crow's origins could be from Ta Seti.
There are some questions though. For example, did Hierakonopolis take over Ta Seti before the first symbols of the crown were found in Aswan or was Ta Seti still ab independent territory by about 3200 BC? If so, it'd imply that Ta Seti may have intermarried with Hierakonopolis and Abydos. I've begun to wonder, if it's fully appropriate to look at Egyptian nobility from Nekhen and Abydos as isolated royals that married within their own communities until they wanted northern lands. They probably married with Ta Seti nobility before then.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Askia_The_Great: This thread is a bit different.
And yeah I been meaning to make this thread for some time now. And the theme of this thread is that why ISN'T Aswan or the "Nubian" people who live there not seen as "authentic" Egyptians? We see many Eurocentrics try to dismiss the people of Aswan as foreigners. We are also constantly bombarded with this idea that Aswan is not "really" apart of Egypt or ever WAS. Its to the point where one would think Aswan is the south most city of Egypt, literally on the border i.e Buhen but that's not even the case.
But more importantly(and correct me) but "Aswan" was NEVER apart of Nubia instead it was known as Swenett which was a Upper Egyptian(again correct me) city that was the first cataract. Hell, it was said that Ancient Egypt(due to the flow from south to north of the nile) began with Swenett. So why is places like Cairo/Alexandria and the people who live in those cities seen as "real" Egyptians, whereas as the area of Aswan and the people of that city are just seen as immigrant Nubians? Why has this bias against dark skinned Egyptians been able to last this long?
Also, is it POSSIBLE that these people from Aswan could hold ANA ancestry?
This view on Aswanis could very much have to do with the fact that since the building of the Aswan High Dam in the 1960s, the Nubians who lived in the Nile Valley in the Egyptian Sudanese border had to flee their homes and settle north into Aswan as their valley abode became flooded and turned into Lake Nasser.
So the excuse some people make is that the black people who live in Aswan are all ethnic Nubians which is not the case as there are ethnic Baladi Egyptians still there.
But Oshun is correct that during predynastic times before its assimilation by Naqada Culture, Aswan was part of Qustul (A-Group) Culture.
Of course Qustul has nothing to do with modern Nubian ethnicity.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So where do modern Aswan Nubians trace their ancestry ultimately? And thanks for answering you two.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
My understanding is that the modern Nubians are descended primarily from nomadic peoples like the Noba and Makorae who settled along the middle Nile after the kingdom of Kush fell in the 4th century AD. Of course, their ancestors almost certainly would have admixed with the people already inhabiting the Nile region, including the Egyptians as well as the Kushites. But they aren't quite the same ethnic group.
posted
Just as northern Egyptians mixed with the Near East, Nubians are a mixed too but of Kush, Egypt, etc. Egyptians and "Nubians" have been mixing since ancient times so yes they are different from northern Egyptians. Also heard that Nubians may be of partial Berber or "Barabra" ancestry.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ The Barabra were a tribe of Nubians documented during the late New Kingdom. It's not known what the ethnic affiliation of the Barabra is and that their name bears a likeness to the modern 'Berber' is purely coincidental
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: My understanding is that the modern Nubians are descended primarily from nomadic peoples like the Noba and Makorae who settled along the middle Nile after the kingdom of Kush fell in the 4th century AD. Of course, their ancestors almost certainly would have admixed with the people already inhabiting the Nile region, including the Egyptians as well as the Kushites. But they aren't quite the same ethnic group.
Yes this is the consensus among experts today. To Askia and Asha, 'Nubian' was simply the general label for inhabitans of Nubia that is the region just south of Egypt. Ethnically there were many groups or tribes of 'Nubians' and the demographics changed over time.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So they're saying the Nubians are mostly newer foreigners? Is Nubian not considered Afroasiatic the way Egyptian is? And if so, how does this all work with Egyptian Nubians? I read the language is not from the same language family but I could be wrong. Seeking clarification. But I'm guessing that linguistis and such are implying Nubians to be mostly foreign unlike Arab Egyptians.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some could attempt to support the opinion they don't have much Egyptian ancestry by asking why they don't speak Afroasiatic. But Nilo Saharan's still considered by many to be a dubious language group right? Or has that changed?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not sure re the "many" you talking bout. Nilo-Saharan has the support of several credible mainstream scholars. ANd it has its critics as well. That is nothing unusual- language debates are on every continent, including Europe with its Basque language fights. But anyway, as seen below some scholars support the phylum. Note certain qualifications rather than sweeping certainty. Some scholars hold it is a valid language group, with various "core" groupings better supported than the "outliers," but the point is that there is valid evidentiary and scholarly support for the category. Debates of course, will continue.
And you don;t necessarily have to speak Afro-Asiatic to be "authentically" Egyptian, given the presence of foundational populations from the south, and the influences of Sudan area in the formation of the dynastic state. These early foundational peoples were as "Egyptian" as any, and their cultures form part of ancient Egypt- from religious practices, to agricultural practices, etc etc. They may have included Nilo-Saharan speakers.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Yes, modern Nubians speak Nilo-Saharan languages but historically and archaeologically they correspond to groups like the Noba and Makuria who arrived from the west during Medieval times. The Nubians who lived in the Nile Valley prior were different peoples who were historically if not ethnically related to the Egyptians and who more likely spoke Afroasiatic. There are even surviving Afrasian substratum words in modern Nubian that correspond to Cushitic or Beja languages.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic