Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 151 to 166 of 166

Thread: Black Egyptians

  1. #151

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    Quote Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla View Post
    A theory may be accepted if it adaquately explains the evidence, all the evidence. If the Unbreakable wants me or anyone else with historical acumen to accept his thesis he needs to explain why the Egyptians are often depicted in a way contrary to his biological evidence from the mummies. If he cannot, he must modify his theory to accomodate that evidence, particularly in the context of contact and exchange between Egypt and the Hitties and the people in the Levant.
    Hang on. Aren't you getting this the wrong way round? If you claim that the Egyptian artistic depictions are 'realistic', surely it is for you to explain why that perception does not match the physical (genetic and morphological) data. You are the one making the positive claim here, and that claim is that a clearly stylised and symbolic art form is a better representation of the 'reality' of the Egyptian phenotype than the morphological and genetic data, and you demand an explanation as to why the two don't match up? That's without the cultural and religious affinities with the southern sub-sharan populations and political entities being taken into account, an affinity that seems to still be relevant in the timeframe of EB, btw, under the rule of the Greeks and the Romans.

    In terms of the differing representations of people within Egyptian art, is it not more likely that such demonstrates that form and symbolism are key to understanding it rather than the suggestion that such changes are down to technical incompetence - given that these artworks are formal works. Do you suggest that Egyptian society was sloppy with regards to its formal representation of itself? For that can surely be the only explanation for so much incompetence to have survived for us.

  2. #152
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    11,124

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius Sempronius Gracchus View Post
    Hang on. Aren't you getting this the wrong way round? If you claim that the Egyptian artistic depictions are 'realistic', surely it is for you to explain why that perception does not match the physical (genetic and morphological) data. You are the one making the positive claim here, and that claim is that a clearly stylised and symbolic art form is a better representation of the 'reality' of the Egyptian phenotype than the morphological and genetic data, and you demand an explanation as to why the two don't match up? That's without the cultural and religious affinities with the southern sub-sharan populations and political entities being taken into account, an affinity that seems to still be relevant in the timeframe of EB, btw, under the rule of the Greeks and the Romans.

    In terms of the differing representations of people within Egyptian art, is it not more likely that such demonstrates that form and symbolism are key to understanding it rather than the suggestion that such changes are down to technical incompetence - given that these artworks are formal works. Do you suggest that Egyptian society was sloppy with regards to its formal representation of itself? For that can surely be the only explanation for so much incompetence to have survived for us.
    It is for the Unbreakable to support his claims.

    I have not made a claim such as "The Egyptians were white". I have readily admitted an African element in the Egyptian population, in the Unbreakable wishes me to accept more than that he must explain why there is a conflict in the evidence.

    If Egyptian art is symbolic then the colouring of the people must have a significance - if it doesn't, beyond identifying them as Egyptian, then you have to account for the discrepency when they are compared with Nubians. The Nubians are clearly depicted as darker, with full lips and tighly curled hair - Egyptians are occasionally depicted in this manner, but more often they are not - even if they do not have the red-brown skin tone.

    This leads me to believe that the red-brown tone is designed to identify Egyptians as themselves and in the absense of a better explanation it is reasonable to assume that when depicting themselves they do so realistically.

    Think about it, WE know what WE look like, so WE identify ourselves and then WE exagerate THEM, because THEY have thicker lips and curlier hair than US. Iconographic art only works if you start with a baseline, otherwise WE might be mistaken for THEM if WE aren't depicted in a recognisable way. What you are suggesting is not symbolism, it's a form of hyper-symbolism which is a closed system only understood by people "in the know", which would mean that only educated Egyptians could read it - and that would rather defeat the point of all that monumental building and artwork, which is designed to impress foriegners and the uncouth masses.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  3. #153

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    Zahi Hawass explains why Egyptian artwork cannot be used to tell what the ancient Egyptians really looked like:



    While I don't agree with everything that has came out of this man's mouth, his analysis on the reliability of Egyptian artwork is consistent with just about every other Egyptologist.

  4. #154
    Speaker of Truth Moderator Moros's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    12,972

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    Member thankful for this post:



  5. #155
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    11,124

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    If I were the good doctor I'm not sure which I would be more offended by, the unnecessay subtitles or the Unbreakable's twisting of my words.

    He talked about the use of colour as symbolism - he didn't say all colouration was invalid, indeed he talked mostly about the material used to render statues and other artefacts and nothing about the pigments used in paintings except for the one reference to black.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  6. #156
    Member Member moonburn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    963

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    actually my point of view is highly based on Zahi Hawass point of view

    nobady said that egypt was not african i only defend that they are north africans and they created it on their own and crap iīm breaking my word i told myself i wasnīt going to post again but that scotish dna stuff is in accordance with what i said earlyer in the debate that the people biological hability to adapt can be as low as 8 generations or even lower

    thereīs an interesting case of a gana couple living in london who never had any registered (and according to dna studies ) white people in their family and their 3rd child a litle girl was born white with blond hair and blue eyes and yes sheīs the daughter of that couple so the human hability to adapt to new conditions can sometimes be extreme (2 kids pop up black and the 3rd one comes out white thats pretty fast for any person point of view)

    anyway people will not leave their current standpoints it became a batle of egoīs but i still consider it that egypt was created by the egyptians even tough they have probably borrowed a few ideas from the nubians such as the piramids wich is something nobady can doubt

    if the politics want a black civilization to claim "superiority" then they can use the zimbabwe stone cityīs itīs in the right part of the continent and as far more impressive and interesting points of view ofc itīs not that well known but thats a responsability of those wanting to go further into that road

    as for my ancestors 1500 years ago they where still happylly hunting auroqs until those damm huns arrived and forįed them to invade the roman decrepit empire and learn that there was more to life then just bashing other peopleīs heads and drinking the freaking mead before it spoils

  7. #157
    Member Member Vaginacles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    74

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    Quote Originally Posted by The Unbreakable View Post
    What biological evidence do you have of this? While I think that it's highly likely that there were pockets of people from the Levant in early Lower Egypt, the bulk of all evidence (in all forms) points towards this region being peopled primarily by the Nilotic communities of the ancient Sahara.



    Actually Keita only commented on the commonality seen between admixed Coastal Northwest African populations and early Dynastic Egyptians, he did not purposely exclude Semitic populations in the Middle East. In fact in his next study it was found that even when Egyptian cranial from different times periods and regions (including the north) pulled together they grouped closer to the tropical African series (which included Sudanese and even a West African sample) over the Near Eastern series:



    In case you haven't noticed by now, the number of studies conducted on early Lower Egyptian population remains are minimal at best. One of the main reasons given for the lack of anthropological analysis of those people during that time is due to a simple lack of human remains, which is another nod to the fact that this region was sparsely populated during pre-early Dynastic times.



    No, Actually Northeast African cranial variations are not the result of isolated/limited outside geneflow, but instead an product of Africa:



    Genetic research also finds the same the thing:



    Understanding that not all "black" Africans conform to a particular set of traits is key to understanding this stance. So when some people are insistence on using their own subjective interpretations of stylized Egyptian art work (while simultaneously ignoring everything else), then they must take these facts into consideration. For example are the Egyptians not "black" because they don't have the same pitch black skin tone as Dinka people? If so then that would mean that damn near 90% of Nigerians tend be a brownish-to yellow skinned color aren't black either:

    Attachment 6276
    (Egyptians bottom left)

    Attachment 6277
    (Beja man)

    Attachment 6293
    (Sudanese Dinka)

    Attachment 6279
    (Nigerian)

    Attachment 6281
    (Kenyan)

    The list goes on X(1000).



    What evidence do you have for this? The Thesis paper by Raxter (assuming that's what you're building off of) is limited in validity, but none the less does not dispute the consistent fact that the ancient Egyptians and Nubians (who are once yet again mentioned interchangeably) had limb proportions that grouped them with the majority of other Africans (who are tropically adapted). No mention of this affinity with Middle Easterners who are not tropically adapted.



    No I did do not equate all of Africa and Africans as black, instead I have always specified "tropical" African and note that this indicates that a population is "black" or has dark skin like black Africans. Both Lower and Upper Egyptians were tropically adapted like other Africans further to the south. One was not intermediate between tropical and sub tropical populations as you are insinuating, but fully tropically adapted.



    Nothing in that study refutes what I have been arguing. NEVER have I denied that there was mutual influence between the Levant and early Lower Egypt. I have even stated several times that I believe it to be very likely that there were pockets of Levantine communities in early Lower Egypt. What I and the study that you just cited refute is the notion that Lower Egypt was initially populated by a large early movement of people from the Levant. The people of pre-Dynastic Lower Egypt were not LONG TERM residence of the Sub Tropical environment that they recently settled in, UNLIKE most people in the Levant. This is why they had limb proportion ratios which were said to have been "significantly different" from the people of the Levant and instead grouping with the majority of tropical African populations further to the south. This is consistent with archaeological evidence suggesting a migration from the southerly/tropical regions of the Sahara to Lower Egypt...hence the primary population source of that region. So why would these recent Nilotic migrants on the Lower Nile not be "black"?



    No I'm asking YOU to back YOUR assertion that Egyptian artwork display a skin tone gradient from the south to the north. You have asserted time and time again (baselessly) that Lower Egyptians were tropically adapted yet "light skinned" and stated that artwork validates this claim (as nothing else appears to), so please back your assertion or admit that it is fallacious.



    You are in denial of what almost every Egyptologist considers to be common knowledge. ALL of it has not been destroyed by silt. It is SPECULATED that SOME sites may not have been destroyed, none the less I have yet to see any Egyptologist withhold judgement on the matter of early ancient Egypt's population centers because of this. They all conclude that it's CLEAR that the south was where most of early Egypt's population resided and conversely where Dynastic culture originated. Acknowledging this fact does not "down play" the cultures of Lower Egypt, is a statement of fact.



    Your entire opposition to calling ancient Egypt black, is because you wish to hold onto the SPECULATIVE notion that some sites in Lower Egypt were destroyed by silt. From that YOU (never citing an Egyptologist) comes to the conclusion that Lower Egypt and Upper Egypt may have had comparable populations (a statement which is contrary to two authoratative sources presented to you). Of course it all boils down to your unfounded belief that Lower Egyptians were some "light skinned" (yet tropically adapted) population. From all of that speculation that you've come up with YOU conclude that my position that Egypt was black, which is soundly supported by biological and cultural evidence showing closest affinities towards more southerly African populations is baseless. Interestingly enough I have authoritative scholarship unmistakably backing my assertion:



    So who is wrong; The scholars at Oxford or You and a handful of other armchair historians?



    Tell me what bearing would population movement from 30k years ago have on a population that came into existence 5k years ago? Better yet what did people from the Levant even look like during early time in human history? Studies from the oldest skeletal remains in Egypt (around this time period) not surprisingly shows close affinities towards black Africans:
    sorry but i no longer have time to debate with you, life beckons. Your insistence on misconstruing my statements also is annoying. I have, and always had, maintained that lower egyptians were a mixed race of people from south, east, and west in terms of geography. If you equate black with African, then fine i don't care. But make no mistake, I AM NOT DENYING THE AFRICAN ORIGINS OF EGYPT OR EVEN LOWER EGYPT, i question the validity of "tropical body plans" as the ultimate indicator of a people's origin. But screw it, its like arguing with a pole.

    So, you are happy to accept a level of sexual dimorphism within Egyptian history unseen anywhere else in any human population? So, whether or not the pattern you have observed can consistently explain the representation, and despite that representation being clearly (at the very least) nuanced and (at least) temporally contextual, you will use this as evidence in opposition to the available morphological and genetic data. Here you hide your physics background particularly well. I would have thought, from a physicists perspective, empirical data would trump an opinion of what something seems to look like.
    Size is perhaps symbolic in terms of power held in society, aka larger means more powerful. Egypt was paternalistic so this is a logical conclusion. Now if you're referring to skin colour, the ancient greeks kept women indoors so they would be horribly pale compared to the tanned men. This of course only refers to nobility, but nonetheless it was a common practice there.
    Last edited by Vaginacles; 07-15-2012 at 00:24.

  8. #158
    Member Member Vaginacles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    74

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    Quote Originally Posted by odia View Post
    @Vaginacles thank you very much for providing the opportunity for me to download that Smith 1992 study on Early Lower Egyptian-Southern Levant Affinities. I have been longing for a long time to have it . Much appreciated.
    PS: But, the findings sought of do not upport significant migrations from the Levant as the study says- but I will look through it again.
    Thanks again, Please do you have access to the Bluk and Beck Studies on this issue or others, if you do be much appreciated if you shared.
    No i actually don't. I'm sure if you do some sleuthing you can find it on the internet. I just did a google search of the title and author, thats how i found it.

  9. #159
    Member Member Nabaati's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    31

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    Quote Originally Posted by Vaginacles View Post
    sorry but i no longer have time to debate with you, life beckons.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaginacles View Post
    I AM NOT DENYING THE AFRICAN ORIGINS OF EGYPT OR EVEN LOWER EGYPT.
    Lest there be any confusion, these two statements apply to me as well.

  10. #160

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    Quote Originally Posted by moonburn View Post
    nobady said that egypt was not african i only defend that they are north africans and they created it on their own[
    North Africa and "black" are not mutually exclusive and anyone who has studied African history and it's people should be very aware of this fact. The Saharan region (North Africa) was originally inhabited by black Africans. The specific Africans in question were predominantly Nilo Saharan (Nilotic) and when the region began to turn into desert these people migrated to the southwest and East into the Nile Valley. Once again:



    Have you ever heard of Uan Muhuggiag aka "the black mummy" of Libya/the Sahara? This is where mummification came from.



    link

    if the politics want a black civilization to claim "superiority" then they can use the zimbabwe stone cityīs itīs in the right part of the continent and as far more impressive and interesting points of view ofc itīs not that well known but thats a responsability of those wanting to go further into that road
    My goodness! I mean seriously where in the Hell does this come from? It's not only offensive but blatantly ignorant of what has been argued by myself and others throughout this thread. Is this back thought the ROOT of all of this silly denial of the clear implications of multiple sources of evidence? How on Earth would relaying the fact that a long dead ancient civilization was created by black Africans from the south and west equate to any sort of racial "superiority"? It's utterly ridiculous of you to assert that this is what anyone is trying to prove, but none the less it (IMO) gives much incite on the motives behind the "no no no" crowd in this thread. All get I can say is please get a clue!

  11. #161

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    Quote Originally Posted by Vaginacles View Post
    Your insistence on misconstruing my statements also is annoying.
    I'm not misconstruing anything. I'm pointing out the baselessness of your speculations which is the single leg that you are leaning on in order to avoid conceding to what my sources have clearly stated about the ancient Egyptians.

    I have, and always had, maintained that lower egyptians were a mixed race of people from south, east, and west in terms of geography.
    With what evidence? I'm tired of people presenting this assertion that if we say that everyone had their hand in pot then it somehow makes it true. Every study presented (including the very study that you cited about Lower Egypt's relations the Levant) refutes any notion of the Levant being a major population source for Lower Egypt. None the less as I have maintained it is likely that there were isolated pockets of people from this region for a host of reasons.

    If you equate black with African, then fine i don't care. But make no mistake, I AM NOT DENYING THE AFRICAN ORIGINS OF EGYPT OR EVEN LOWER EGYPT, i question the validity of "tropical body plans" as the ultimate indicator of a people's origin.
    What limb proportion ratios of Lower Egyptians indicate is that they were tropically adapted. As we should all know by now Egypt (especially Lower Egypt) is not within the tropics. The only way to obtain tropical body plans is to be a long term residence of the tropics. This indicates that the early people of Lower Egypt were recent migrants from the tropics (which is further to the south). It also indicates based on ecological principal that these tropically adapted peoples were "dark skinned" like other tropical Africans. Limb proportion comparisons of Lower Egyptian limb proportions to the "Semitic" people of the Levant confirms that they were "significantly different" from one another as a result from a "lack of common ancestry". Indicating a significant difference in phenotype (at least skin color) between the neighboring people.

  12. #162
    Member Member moonburn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    963

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    thats all very nice except that the sahara before it dryed up was not a savanah but a jungle so the people of egypt could have very well have what you claim still doesnīt mean or prove that they came from the south and thus my argument they where always there still stands

    as for the levantine theory all it takes is 1 dude to reach a city and screw around a bit to make a genetic diference in less then 2/3 generations i mean people with diferent gens have more advantages since they are perceived as more atractive (whats new is always pretty some sayings go ) thus easyer acess to women who can preocupy themselfs more with finding "better" gens and less about sustenance and a good hunter

    i think it as been argued pretty sucefully that due to the climatic nature of the delta itīs impossible to get reliable data from that area altough what we do know is that that area was far more fertile and thus more able to sustain larger populations without a decling into competition over resources you continuous analogy of just putting off the delta nile because of the lack of evidence (when the reason for those same lack is what allows us to infer that it had the hability to sustain more people )

    itīs like you point the spotlight at what you want and turn the lights off of what you deslike itīs not the evidence i wonīt be moved from my stand egypt belongs to the egyptians and nobady else as the right to claim it but itīs the way you conduct yourself that creates a wedge beteween us both and yes iīm very politically motivated to drift away from anything resembling politics for personal reasons

  13. #163

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    Quote Originally Posted by moonburn View Post
    thats all very nice except that the sahara before it dryed up was not a savanah but a jungle so the people of egypt could have very well have what you claim still doesnīt mean or prove that they came from the south and thus my argument they where always there still stands

    as for the levantine theory all it takes is 1 dude to reach a city and screw around a bit to make a genetic diference in less then 2/3 generations i mean people with diferent gens have more advantages since they are perceived as more atractive (whats new is always pretty some sayings go ) thus easyer acess to women who can preocupy themselfs more with finding "better" gens and less about sustenance and a good hunter

    i think it as been argued pretty sucefully that due to the climatic nature of the delta itīs impossible to get reliable data from that area altough what we do know is that that area was far more fertile and thus more able to sustain larger populations without a decling into competition over resources you continuous analogy of just putting off the delta nile because of the lack of evidence (when the reason for those same lack is what allows us to infer that it had the hability to sustain more people )

    itīs like you point the spotlight at what you want and turn the lights off of what you deslike itīs not the evidence i wonīt be moved from my stand egypt belongs to the egyptians and nobady else as the right to claim it but itīs the way you conduct yourself that creates a wedge beteween us both and yes iīm very politically motivated to drift away from anything resembling politics for personal reasons
    ...sigh....

    This random jumble of ideas is just that. A random jumble of ideas. Again, the 'arguments' made against The Unbreakable's impressively documented and referenced position lack any reference or form of evidential support. And why? For the reason that I have felt (and tried to elucidate in a previous post) it has been. Because of a fear of some agenda, or political motivation....

    "from my stand egypt belongs to the egyptians and nobady else as the right to claim it"
    Meaningless guph. Of course Egypt belongs to the Egyptians. As a Brit I identify with my country. Can I claim, with hand on heart, that I am related to the people who put up Stonehenge? No, I can't. Does it matter? No, it doesn't. What matters is that identifying with my country is about relating to the cultural uniqueness that the history of that country has developed. All aspects of that history play a part in that.

    "but itīs the way you conduct yourself that creates a wedge beteween us both"
    ?? You mean like, putting forward evidence for a position? Why would that put a wedge between you and anybody else?

    You suggest that it has been "argued pretty sucefully that due to the climatic nature of the delta itīs impossible to get reliable data from that area", but where is the peer-reviewed/accepted argument for this. Where do you reference the rejection of the position as evinced by The Unbreakable?

    What is going on here? At no point has anybody credibly supported any claim they have made against the case put forward. I'll try and encapsulate the arguments as best as I can.

    That promiscuous Levantine's bedded their way through the course of the Nile and their pretty children carried on the process. Backed by....no evidence. No doubt linked in some way to the revelatory suggestion that looking at a map will reveal the truth of the matter.

    That the Nile Delta was as populous (at least) as more Southerly regions. Backed by.....no evidence, nor by any scholarship supporting such claim (nor refuting the position that the area was much less populous)

    That Egyptian art-work can be used to define Egyptian phenotypes, and even that such an idea demands from the physical data why the two do not match up......... without any reference to back up that claim.

    That the physical data could be anomolous (while declaring that the counter-argument does not suggest anomaly...), without referencing a single scholar suggesting so. And, as an aspect of that, that the physical data is unreliable because it relies upon (inferring a single stream of data) genetic markers - completely ignoring that the argument is based upon multiple strands of evidence.

    If I've missed anything, please let me know.

    Could somebody who is arguing against the position please reference a reliable article from within the field itself to back up the claims made? Its no good decrying that; "itīs like you point the spotlight at what you want and turn the lights off of what you deslike " when there is nothing to turn the light onto.

    In short, you have summed up your position very well when you say "itīs not the evidence i wonīt be moved from my stand"
    Last edited by Gaius Sempronius Gracchus; 07-16-2012 at 02:00.

    Members thankful for this post (2):



  14. #164
    Member Member odia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Nigeria
    Posts
    8

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    Quote Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
    Even then, as Odia has admitted, previously both genders were depicted as brown, which suggests that the male depiction may be normative as one might expect from a Patriarchal society. So you still have a "brown not black" issue to account for.

    This shows clearly that you have a strong attachment to the status quo, an attachment that is not driven by the espousing the truth of the matter.
    For how many times have I demostrated that MOST 'Black' Africasn skin-colour hinge on BROWN and not Black literarily(any more than 'White' people are actually White literarily). The few African peoples tha approach Black(like Shilluk, Dinka, Ashanti) are actually very dark Brown,some of whom reflects a purple tink.
    I have also provided links to very many randomly generated images(pictures) of some indigenous 'Black' Africans in thsi post:
    http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showth...post2053466110
    So how can you admit that a population in Africa is painted in Brown and argue that this is yur main eveidence that they are not 'Black' Africans when virtually all 'Black' Africans are shades of Brown themselves.

    You seem to be making a wrong assumption here: when we consider the art evidence as been subjective in itself and seconadry to other lines of evidence, we are actually be honest in the methodology of our argumants. The art evidences when uesd as a seconadary evidence actually supports our stance, as you will be hard pressed to find Levantines or southern Europeans who are within the range of variation dispalyed in Egyptian paintings. Compare that with those links of pictures of 'Black' Africans above, and see if MOST Egyptian paintings, whom not be within their range.



    Quote Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
    The variation in lighter skinned people between those who stay indoors and those who go outside can be quite pronounced, to the extent that many European women with social standing still wear sun hats to prevent their faces tanning. If previously in the Pre-Dynastic period both men and women are depicted as the same shade then it is possible that what we are seeing later on is evidence of greater social stratification, such that high-class women no longer work and therefore do not tan.

    First off, it is actually silly to argue that a tropically/supertropically adapted population can tan!!! Am not aware of such, and the ancient Egyptians were in the main tropically/supertropically adapted(that is a biological measured FACT that can not be 'interpreted' as subjective evidences like art work).
    By the way, the CONVENTION of painting females many times in lighter shades of Brown than male, apart of the conundrum of the stylization of Egyptian art, might be explicable by an attempt to reflect Sexual Dimorphism(which is a physical anthroplogy phenomenon where there are slight general differences in the features of both sexes- in the case females been generally lighter than males, which is a general obervation in manybhuman populations including 'Black' Africans). There is no need to explain it in terms of tanning.
    Againlet me repeat, a tropically/supertropically adapted population that mainly migrated from the sahara does not tan-if you disagree, I DARE you to provide examples.

    Quickly,for your information Egyptian women were not locked indoors like their Greek counterparts. If you did Egyptology, you would know that Ancient Egyptian women enjoyed a measure of 'freedom' than women in the Middle East(a phenomenon more widespread in Africa by the way).


    Once again, what actual anthropologists say about the use of art as biological data:

    Art objects are not generally used by biological anthropologists. They are suspect as data and their interpretation highly dependent on stereotyped thinking. However, because art has often been used to comment on the physiognomies of ancient Egyptians, a few remarks are in order. A review of literature and the sculpture indicates characteristics that also can be found in the Horn of (East) Africa (see, e.g., Petrie 1939; Drake 1987; Keita 1993). Old and Middle Kingdom statuary shows a range of characteristics; many, if not most, individuals depicted in the art have variations on the narrow-nosed, narrow-faced morphology also seen in various East Africans. This East African anatomy, once seen as being the result of a mixture of different "races," is better understood as being part of the range of indigenous African variation. (S. O. Y and A.J. Boyce, "The Geographical Origins and Population Relationships of Early Ancient Egyptians", in Egypt in Africa, Theodore Celenko (ed), Indiana University Press, 1996, pp. 20-33)

    Member thankful for this post:



  15. #165
    Member Member Cutlass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    4

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    Innappropriate post.
    Last edited by Moros; 07-17-2012 at 22:17.

  16. #166
    Speaker of Truth Moderator Moros's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    12,972

    Default Re: Black Egyptians

    The discussion started out very well and remained very civil and mature, even though there was a big disagreement between the two parties, for which I want to congratulate the members, especially concerning possible racial sensitivities. But I think the discussion has run its course and both parties were able to present their argument. However the thread seems slowly degrading and as this discussion surely doesn't deserve trolls entering it I think it's best for it to be closed.

    Of course if people feel really the need to continue it, I will reopen it on the condition the new posts have to be on topic and present new arguments or sources and should be entirely on and about the matter, not one of the other people taking part of the discussion.

    -Moros

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •