...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Here we go again. QUEEN NEFERTITI BROUGHT TO LIFE WITH CONTROVERSIAL
» 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] I'm aware Egypt didn't start in the northern part. I'm just saying that the archeological record would make more Eurocentrists comfortable with revealing northern DNA. I'm not sure how Lower Egypt's mixture has "nothing to do with" anything. It has everything to do with it. Lower Egypt had 2-3 foreign invasions before any of this research was done and already had a connection to the Levant that extended to the predynastic. If you were a Eurocentric that wanted Egyptians to seem like a Levanite transplant (even before the state), would you use Old Kingdom southern Egyptians where the archeological record suggests extended ties with "Nubia" or would you use northern Egyptians after numerous migrations from the middle East? Which is "safest?" [QUOTE]Originally posted by Doug M: [qb]There is no location on earth that is or was immune from immigration. That is the point. The same geography that allows you to claim that Egypt was subject to "backmigration" is the same geography that makes the Levant and Europe subject to African migration as well. Migration is a two way street. Before anybody could back migrate there had to be an initial immigration first.[/qb][/QUOTE]True, but southwestern Europe is not as easily accessible to Africa as Egypt was to western Asia. This is the difference. Rome was accessible, but it's location rendered it most accessible to other Europeans. Yes Africans could reach it, but it wasn't within walking distance. [/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