...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Of course there were 'Horner' pharaohs
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Akachi: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [qb] [QUOTE] Originally posted by Akachi: you ran and created a new thread [b]just like Swenet had to do here[/b][/QUOTE]You made me run? Using what data? You mean with the source you posted which states that the occurrence of the true negro type in Ancient Egypt is at 2% or lower, and that this type has nothing to do with the native proto-Egyptians and lower Nubians? This is from YOUR OWN SOURCE. [i]The authors are always at pains to point out that [b]the pure negro element appears to have been minute in the groups analysed; two skeletons in a hundred, for example, at Naga-ed-Der in early predynastic times, and one in fifty-four in Lower Nubia (Massoulard, 1949, p396 and pp410-411),[/b] although all anthropologists concur in acknowledging the existence of a "negroid" component in [b]the mixed population which constitutes the primitive Egyptian "ethnic group", at least from neolithic times onwards.[/b][/i] --[URL=http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0003/000328/032875eo.pdf]The peopling of ancient Egypt and the deciphering of Meroitic script[/URL] [IMG]http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-laughing004.gif[/IMG] You Afroloons are something else. It takes a very special type of mentally retarded klutz to cite four self-defeating sources in a row (Holiday, Irish, Ricaut, Unesco/Sheik Anta Diop) and somehow construe that as "making someone run". [/qb][/QUOTE]Your highlights defeat my point how? Firstly this exert is highlighting a specific Pre-Dynastic site ("Naga-ed-Der") not the Pre-Dynastic or Dynastic populations as a whole. The screen shot that I took from the book states their "overall" ethnic composition percentages, and "Negroid" constituted the largest ethnic percentage of all other African groups. You have never addressed this fact. It pretty much goes without saying that UNESCO's numbers are [b]collective[/b] and [b]conclusive[/b], as opposed to your "2% Negroid" study which only used a few selected Pre-Dynastic sites. If only 2% of Pre-Dynastic Egyptians were "Negroid" then why does this study characterize this period's key sites as "Negroid"? [i] [b]On this basis, many have postulated that the Badarians are relatives to South African populations [/b] (Morant, 1935 G. Morant, A study of predynastic Egyptian skulls from Badari based on measurements taken by Miss BN Stoessiger and Professor DE Derry, Biometrika 27 (1935), pp. 293–309.Morant, 1935; Mukherjee et al., 1955; Irish and Konigsberg, 2007). The archaeological evidence points to this relationship as well. (Hassan, 1986) and (Hassan, 1988) noted [b]similarities between Badarian pottery and the Neolithic Khartoum type, indicating an archaeological affinity among Badarians and Africans from more southern regions. Furthermore, like the Badarians, Naqada has also been classified with other African groups, namely the Teita[/b] (Crichton, 1996; Keita, 1990). [b]Nutter (1958) noted affinities between the Badarian and Naqada samples, a feature that Strouhal (1971) attributed to their skulls possessing “Negroid” traits[/b] . Keita (1992), using craniometrics, discovered that [b]the Badarian series is distinctly different from the later Egyptian series[/b], a conclusion that is mostly confirmed here. In the current analysis, [b]the Badari sample more closely clusters with the Naqada sample and the Kerma sample.[/b] However, it also groups with the later pooled sample from Dynasties XVIII–XXV. -- Godde K. (2009) An Examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development? Homo. 2009;60(5):389-404. Not only are the "Negroid" characteristics of these key Pre-Dynastic Egyptian groups commented on, but even the undeniable cultural relationship that these Pre-Dynastic "Negroid" Egyptian populations had with "Negroid" Niger-Congo (Bantu) speakers. I thought that you said that the reference to "Negroid" in all of these studies somehow doesn't equate to the "Negroid" populations of Sub Saharan-Saharan Africa? If this is really the case then please explain why on top of this anthropological and archaeological evidence, the Pre-Dynastic populations of ancient Egypt also suffered from a blood disease specific to "Niger-Congo" speaking "Negroid" populations. 1999 May-Jun Dipartimento di Biologia Animale e dell'Uomo, Università degli Studi di Torino. "[I]We conducted a molecular investigation of [b]the presence of sicklemia in six predynastic Egyptian mummies (about 3200 BC)[/b] from the Anthropological and Ethnographic Museum of Turin. Previous studies of these remains showed [b]the presence of severe anemia[/b], while histological preparations of mummified tissues revealed hemolytic disorders.[/i]" All of this evidence conclusively points to the overwhelming presence of this African group dominating along the Nile Valley during ancient times: [i]Original homeland of the Bantu up to 1500 A.D Dark shading: Possible ultimate origin of the "Niger-Congo" speakers Cross shading: Area of "Niger-Congo" expansion into Egypt:[/i] [IMG]http://www.kaa-umati.co.uk/Bantu%20in%20Ancient%20Egypt_files/image008.jpg[/IMG] Bantu Migration Routes from Cush and the Island of Meroe [IMG]http://www.kaa-umati.co.uk/Bantu%20in%20Ancient%20Egypt_files/image010.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.languagesgulper.com/eng/Niger_files/droppedImage.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.slavevoyages.org/tast/assessment/intro-maps/09.jpg[/IMG] You bolding the point which points to ethnic diversity of ancient Egypt is just a strawman attempt on your part (among other sad **** that you have done throughout this thread; like editing your [b]entire[/b] post after I quickly annihilate your main points) to stay alive in this. Have I not posted the article which proves that Niger-Congo populations and Ethiopic populations (both E bearing brother populations) followed the same damn migration (the so called "Afro-Asiatic" migration). Do you lack the common sense to deduce that this dual migration brought different types of black Africans (hence "indigenous African diversity") wherever they settled. I do however assert that the "Negroid" element (or "Nargas/N_G_R/Pharaohs/"niggas") were the dominant ethic group among these Africans (which later included Nilotes from the drying Central Sahara). Here's why I assert that the "Nargas"/"Niggas" were the dominant ethnic grouping of Africans: [IMG]http://h6img.com/g/9/great-sphinx-of-giza-1.jpg[/IMG] 90% of Pharonic art depicts our group of Africans. [IMG]http://oi62.tinypic.com/6hkw12.jpg[/IMG] Common sense...just try to refute it! [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3