Keita being a modern bio-antropologist rejects the entire notion of the
biological concept of race! He would reject not only calling the ancient Egyptians black but any other African peoples and likewise he would reject calling any European population "white". In that exact same video segment he states that the reason for not accepting racial terminology is not because he believes them be distinct in phenotype from other Africans who are generally deemed "black", but because the definition of a said race varies from region to region (where race is even relevant). His research on the other hand which he was lecturing states that the ancient Egyptians generally ranged from broad featured to "Somali like" in cranial variation. He also stated that based on ecological principal that the ancient Egyptians had dark skin as a result of their tropical adaption. Taking away the PC terminology what else is an indigenous dark skinned Northeast African population with "Somali like" facial features called if not black in society. His research has also been contextualized by less "PC" scholars who directly consulted with him on their implications:
Once again the author of this book who is not a bio-anthropologist and as such is not blocked from resorted to racial terminology, consulted with Keita and from that came to the conclusion above. The conclusion above has been echoed by a number of contemporary scholars to some even stretching all the way back to the 18th century. It has been validated by contemporary research as well (from numerous sources).
Why are you trying to make skin color inferences based on archaeological evidence? Why not
You have been presented with biological evidence ranging from genetics to anthropology stating that the ancient Egyptians and Nubians were essentially the same people; You have been presented with archaeological and cultural evidence backing these findings suggesting a common Saharan origin for this group of people who would later become to separate political entities. In other words just about all evidence is against the notion that one was black while the other was something else, because they were the same people.
Since the beginning of the Dynastic era is when Egypt became it's own separate
political entity, what is your point? The entire point of this
section of the publication, is to show that ancient Egypt did essentially derive from Nubian political structure. This has been accepted for years, even by the modern Egyptian antiquities counsel:
Once again the origins of Egypt and Nubia are the same, hence they were the same people! Trying to separate Egypt from Sudan is no longer viewed as appropriate in modern academia.
No
YOU don't get! Your insistence that Egypt and Nubia were somehow different entities is false. Your fallacious attempts to equate Nubia as the black civilization and Egypt as something else is false, because they were the same people:
link
Saying that there was "Sub Saharan" element to Egypt is a severe underestimate of the fact. It is like saying that there was an Asian element to ancient China. The biological evidence as stated by Donald Redford in the Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt shows that the ancient Egyptians would be considered black:
Why are you fighting this clear fact so vigorously?
Not only does ecological principal show that the ancient Egyptians had dark skin like other tropical African populations to the south of them, but even skin analysis has confirmed that they had the same melanin content as "Negroid" populations whom the same source (like just about every other one) states that they originated from:
I mean my goodness what else does it take to convince you that these ancient Africans were black?
Bookmarks