...
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 Doug M: [QB] The bottom line point here is that with all the images and actual mummies and funeral masks from ancient Egypt, why are they so obsessed with making reconstructions? And the simple answer is the existing art from Ancient Egypt isn't WHITE enough. Therefore they need modern artists to make reconstructions that look white. Now all these folks claim that AE were brown, but if that is the case, the AE art is already brown so why do another reconstruction if the original art is good enough? Note that in no other ancient culture, such as Europe or Asia are they making reconstructions and putting them on display next to orignial artifacts as if they are equally of the same historic value. You will not see reconstructions of Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar next to the orignal art of these folks in European museums. Why? Because they are white and there is no debate or guessing about it. Now, if these folks were so "liberal" and were open minded, why do they always chose the same folks to make reconstructions of Egyptian ancient royalty? Why do they not chose Egyptians to do reconstruction of their own ancient royalty? Again the answer is that these reconstructions need to look like white Europeans. Egyptians might not necessarily do that seeing they are the most knowledgeable and familiar with the phenotype of their own country and history. And certainly they would never choose Africans or Asians to do reconstructions of ancient European rolyalty and have that on display in European museums either. So what gives? This is part of the continuation of the same system of colonial appropriation of non European culture and history that started in the colonial era. The people who make these reconstructions are part of that colonial system of history and antrhopology. And their works are primarily for the children of the colonizers around the world. Their work is not really for the indigenous populations in the areas they colonized where these ancient cultures originated. Folks like Elizibeth Daynes primarily do work for European owned anthropology and history museums around the world in European colonies..... And looking at her work you would think the first humans were Europeans. And you can see this clearly from her own web site. Again reinforcing why the Egyptians have to be reconstructed to look white. http://www.daynes.com/en/hominids-reconstructions/hominids-familly-hominids-familly-56.html Amarna DNA. Where is it? Why are we still obsessing over an admittedly fake bust of Nefertiti and not dealing with actual DNA which they supposedly already have? If this DNA was so overtly Eurasian I am sure it would have been released by now. Head elongation. How come no body is pointing out the fact that Tut shows signs of head elongation? What culture in Levant would have been practicing this form of head binding and bring it into Egypt? Why is nobody pointing this out? Because obviously there was no culture in the Levant practicing this and the only cultures doing so were in Africa, DEEP in Africa. Obviously there must have been a reason why Akhenaton decided to depict himself and his family with elongated heads. How come the exhibitions and descriptions of Amarna don't point out that this is an actual practice among cultures in Africa? In fact most discussions of Amarna don't even mention this. And even most discussions of Tuts mummy don't mention this either. And why would white Levanting looking Egyptians (according to the reconstructions) depict themselves as black Africans with elongated heads like central Africans? And yes that is the primary way that the art of the Amarna period depicted Egyptians. Just so happens a lot of that art was later destroyed and covered over by the Egyptians themselves. https://www.fieldmuseum.org/blog/why-did-king-tut-have-flat-head As for Abusir DNA, one must understand why Abusir exists. During the colonial era most of the notable tombs were plundered by Europeans and that most of the tombs of the known royals of the dynastic era. Those mummies were often taken and unwrapped by European pseudo scientists. Fortunately later Egyptian governments cracked down on this practice and kept the mummies in Egypt from some of the more notable tombs found in later times. However, during the late dynastic and Roman eras there were a LOT of mass tombs and mummies created. A lot of these tombs were not opened until relatively recently and it is these tombs that would obviously have the most foreign DNA. Abusir is one example of such a tomb which started in the dynastic era and was reused in the late period/Greco Roman period. A lot more mummies from this period have survived than early dynastic and dynastic mummies, especially of common folks. Egyptian queens. Now, this is another example where Egyptology just skips over and outright omits facts. They say the AE would allow women in the harem from the Levant to become queens and that Nefertiti is one example. But here is the prolem, the AE 18th dynasty arose to repel Levantine/Asiatic invaders from the country and spent over 100 years fighting wars against such Levantines and Indo Europeans in the Levant. Why on earth would they be taking these folks as their wives? And on top of that during this era, their closest allies in this war were from the South and those were the folks who helped them retake Egypt. And starting in the 18th dynasty you see the tradition of the Great Royal Wife/Gods' Wife of Amun as being a black skinned woman. So where are the Levantines in this tradition? There are numerous queens during the 18th dynasty who are openly described by Egyptologists as possibly being "Nubian" (whatever that means), yet this doesn't seem to come up when they talk about Tut or Nefertiti and the AE traditions of kingship/queenship in general. And keep in mind that the Southern Opet(Karnak) was aligned with and associated with the seat of Amun being in Kush. But of course no mention of that when it comes to AE queens. There was no such temple associated with Egyptian royalty and divinity in the Levant or Egyptian Queens and the legitimacy of the throne. [QUOTE] God's Wife of Amun has its origins prior to the 18th Dynasty, appearing first in the 10th and 12th Dynasties of the Middle Kingdom, but it was an obscure, non-royal role prior to the reign of Ahmose I, the founder of the New Kingdom.[b] He not only elevated the "Great Southern City" (Thebes), but also the position of God's Wife of Amen, by bestowing it on his chief wife, Ahmose Nefertari. She had held the title, Second Prophet of Amun, an exceptional rank for a woman, but arranged by contract to exchange the title for that of God's Wife. In doing so, she created an important religious concept held at least through the 18th Dynasty. During this period, the Egyptians held that the crown prince was the child not of the king, but of the union between Amun and his Great Royal Wife.[/b] At first, the position was hereditary, more or less, passing either to the daughter of the Queen who held the title, or to the next king's wife, who frequently was one and the same. From Ahmes Nefertari the title passed to her daughter, Meritamen after she married her brother, Amenhotep I. However, it was Hatshepsut who took the position over from Meritamen, rather than the wife of Tuthmosis I, perhaps because his chief wife, Ahmes, may have been the sister of Meritamen. Hatshepsut seems to have kept it when she became regent for Tuthmoses III and it has been suggested that the title was so important that this was a means to gather authority for Hatshepsut before she claimed the throne. She did not relinquish the title until she later took the full titles of a king. However, now as king, sometimes depicted as a man, it would have been incongruent for her to remain as God's wife, so she relinquished the role to her daughter by Tuthmosis II, Princess Neferure. [/QUOTE] http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/godswife.htm Ahmose Nefertari God's Wife [IMG]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Ahmes_Nefertari_Grab_10.JPG[/IMG] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmose-Nefertari Of course the facts don't stop these people.... https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/en/news/2016/11/exhibition-shows-luxury-and-power-of-egyptian-queens But that said there are still plenty of obviously African mummies from later eras in Egypt and the question becomes why don't we have the DNA from these mummies? Ironically enough the mummies of the 20th and 21st dynasty are from a time when there was a LOT of Levantine mixture in Egypt (supposedly) as the Ramessid era was constantly fighting wars in the levant but these mummies also seem to be the most African looking of ANY Egyptian mummies.... [IMG]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bb/Mummy_Nodjmet_Smith.JPG/512px-Mummy_Nodjmet_Smith.JPG[/IMG] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nodjmet [/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