...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Because some fools don't know how to make their own thread about the race of kemet
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oshun: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Cass/Dead/Krom/Atlantid: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Oshun: You were using descriptions of their Gods and mythological figures to suggest the Greek people were white.[/QUOTE]No. If anyone is really interested in stuff I was posting 6 years ago, see [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=004993;p=1]here[/URL] to get the correct context of what I said about white Greeks gods. Oshun is lying as usual. July, 2011- [QUOTE]Indo-Europeans often seem to have been small minorities in the countries they penetrated... anthropologists who have studied the hair or pigmentation of the ancient Greeks have concluded [b]only around 7% were blonde[/b]. The Indo-Europeans in Greece therefore only reflected the physique of the [b]higher classes, who claimed descent from the fair Gods[/b].[/QUOTE]I was talking about a theory that a small Indo-European elite (who had fairer pigmentation) ruled over the darker Greek masses i.e. caste-like stratification, following this article: http://www.geocities.ws/race_articles/greekface.html My mythology discussion of gods is in context pf the caste-pigmentation theory that says the blonde elites claimed descent from the gods; I estimated the white skinned fair-haired IE caste in Greece was as [i]little as 7%[/i] of the population; this is no longer even a hypothesis I defend. ... Regardless, nowhere did I claim the typical Greek was white (93% as [i]not[/i] white skinned/blonde haired), but the opposite [/qb][/QUOTE]No, you did not limit such descriptions strictly to the elite: [QUOTE] Ruddy was also applied to physically describe [b]ordinary Greek (and Roman) citizens[/b]: ''TRACHALIO Have you seen to-day, while you've been standing here, any young man, of courageous aspect, ruddy, stout, of genteel appearance, come by this way, who was taking with him three men in scarfs, with swords?'' - T. Maccius Plautus, Rudens 2.2 ''PAMPHILUS Then I'll tell you how to know it; a huge fellow, ruddy, with curly hair, fat, with gray eyes and freckled countenance.'' - P. Terentius Afer (Terence), Hecyra III. 4[/QUOTE]It doesn't really matter though. I'm losing interest in playing around now. This thread was created because you "real tawk" and the other resident white supremacists of the board [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009584]hijacked another guy's topic to make it about race[/URL]. What they were literally colored is irrelevant because the discussion itself had derailed to talk about where the Egyptians fit racially. Neither blacks nor whites define races by literal colors. Races at best describe the [b]stereotypical[/b] color schemes for people in certain area. Your involvement in the topic was strawmanning to b!tch about Afrocentrists and to make divides on social races about literal pigment instead of Pan regional identity. Afrocentrism nor Pan Africanism divide races by literal pigments. Likewise, "whiteness" is a social name for a pan European identity that works off a stereotype for their appearance. Whiteness also includes people who don't have pink/white skin. Greeks and Italians are not a different race if many of them don't fit the stereotype. [QUOTE] [QUOTE]I think you missed the part where I said I don't believe the average AE skin tone was especially light. And for those it was I make "no distinctions" as far as what? I'm not blind, I know they're not the same skin shade. That doesn't mean that light skinned people are automatically genetically more distant to darker skinned people. A lighter skinned Ngwa Igbo is not going to be more closely related to a lighter skinned San than a darker skinned Igbo. [/QUOTE]The point is you use the term "black" to cover those lighter skin shades. You're politicalizing the word. [/QUOTE]Read the name of the topic. Do I believe in biological races? No. But this thread was made in response to you and other white supremacists derailing someone else's topic to make it about race and to talk about Afrocentrics. Socially people are ascribed pan regional identities and light skin or dark skin, they associate with that identity. If you're going to discuss their labels for people, you can't strawman the foundation. White and Black to Afrocentrics and Eurocentrics are pan identity concepts that are given a label. The label happens to be a color. Membership to the groups given theses labels doesn't require anybody to be literal those colors though. Throughout history there are many positive and negative examples of stereotypes influencing the words people use to describe entire groups of people, even if they don't physically or behaviorally meet the stereotype. [QUOTE] If you truly recognise Egyptians were lighter brown skin shades (than more southern populations), why not recognise the cline, instead of using a very broad category black. Why not call Egyptians light or medial brown than black? Answer: this doesn't play into your politics. [/QUOTE]As it relates to science I said AE gravitate more to Africans, and that I regionalize Africa because there's no consistency in what groups are used in Africa to compare to AE in research. They are meant as stand-ins for an "African" group and sometimes the research will be very open about saying this. However if I'm being asked if they were "black," while you guys are talking about Afrocentrics calling Egyptians black then that means we're talking about blacks as a social group, not blacks as a color. Afrocentrism isn't discussing literal colors. [QUOTE] [QUOTE] 1. This should be pretty obvious but Pre Dynastic Egyptians for thousands of years lived in lands that were not "Saharan." To say it moar: They and today's "Sub Saharan Africans" lived alike in an Africa without a bigass desert. You're applying modern geological constructs to ancient people who hadn't lived in a full blown desert for very long before dynastic Egypt started. The Sahara hadn't completely returned in a window span of a few centuries before Dynastic Egypt or a few centuries after. [/QUOTE]This is nonsense. The movements were more westward than southward, but those settlements to the south were not into lower latitude Sub-Saharan Africa, but the northern fringe/Sahel - so what's your point? [/QUOTE] :rolleyes: Indeed what is [b]your[/b] point. Many African Americans and other such Sub Saharan descended people came from the Sahel but are still classified as sub Saharan. The Sahel isn't regarded as a "genetic barrier" to SSA like the Sahara. Also going to say this again but: There was no Saharan African for there to be a sub saharan African. The whole point of people even trying to separate Saharan Africans from SSA the Sahara provided a geological barrier for genetic continuity with SSA and so Egyptians became genetically distant. However even if we're going to pretend the Nile doesn't extend into SSA, the Sahara had either only been around a few centuries before or AFTER dynastic Egypt. [QUOTE] [QUOTE]The populations that made Egypt came from the South and moved North, this is why we see the affinities we do to many SSA populations.[/QUOTE]They don't show close affinities to SSA populations, with the possible exception of the northern fringe or Sahel groups. Also its disputable "Egypt came from south", since you ignore the Lower Egyptian contributions.[/QUOTE]But the state and culture largely came from Upper Egypt, not Lower Egypt. [QUOTE] And you're not bigoted? :rolleyes: Since Lower Egypt is closer to Europe and Levant than Upper Egypt, this is why Afrocentrists downplay Lower Egyptian contributions and obsess with Upper Egypt. waycism much? [/QB][/QUOTE]Lower Egyptians were still culturally assimilated to Upper Egyptians, regardless of whatever levels of mixture they may have eventually developed over time: "Evidence in Lower Egypt consists mainly of settlements with very simple burials, in contrast to Upper Egypt, where cemeteries with elaborate burials are found. The rich grave goods in several major cemeteries in Upper Egypt represent the acquired wealth of higher social strata, and these cemeteries were probably associated with centers of craft production. Trade and exchange of finished goods and luxury materials from the Eastern and Western Deserts and Nubia would have taken place in such centers. In Lower Egypt however, while excavated settlements permit a broader reconstruction of the prehistoric economy, there is little evidence for any great socioeconomic complexity... Archaeological evidence points to the origins of the state which emerged by the 1st Dynasty in Nagada culture of Upper Egypt, where grave types, pottery and artifacts demonstrate an evolution of from from the Predynastic to the 1st Dynasty. This cannot be demonstrated for the material culture of lower Egypt, which was eventually displaced by that originating in Upper Egypt." --K. Bard (2005). Encyclopaedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt. 28 [/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