posted 23 September 2004 11:23 AM            

quote:

---

If you come to Texas you will find that we are heavily influenced by Mexican culture but it doesn't make us Mexicans.

---

posted 23 September 2004 11:25 AM            

Today Egyptians are the descendants of their ancestors. They are of Afro-Asiatic stock. They are of brown/tanned skin and black hair. They vary in look- some rather like Arabs of Arabia. Others (like Umm Kalthoum) have a more African appearance, but not Negro.

Negroes did live in Ancient Egypt- that is obvious. And even if Civilisation was started by Negroes, that does not mean that Egyptian Civilisation/KMT was Negro, or "Black". Nubia was Black in total, and civilised. Egypt was mixed; with a basic Afro-Asiatic stock.

Ausar, I see what you mean about art and colour symbolism. Obviously Osiris being shown green cannot mean that their were any green people! And so we do have to be careful- art is art and not scientific racial fact. But if their is a statue of a princess and she is white- are you sure that means that she is mourning? As I said I doubt she was of pure Egyptian blood.

posted 23 September 2004 11:36 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sneuropa:
Ancient Egyptians spoke an Afro-Asiatic language. This is not a Bantu language. So the basic language stock was Hamitic-Semitic. Like Ethiopean today. Ethiopeans are "black" but not Negroes.

---

Here we go again.

Sneuropa,
Do you know negro means black in spanish?

What defines a black? Humm, I mean negro.

posted 23 September 2004 11:38 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by kenndo:

most ancient egyptians were still black folks,i guess for you light skin,brownskin or dark brownskin blacks with negriod features are not black as well.that type of thinking is non-sense and incorrect.

---

To paraphrase Diop, on the 'true negro': it is a kind of [anti] Platonic ideal, which allows white anthropologists to claim if need be, that all the actual Blacks of africa approach but never completely achieve.

It has been noted that Diop himself, with his smalll mouth, and nose, and minimal prognathesism, could easily be defined as 'non negroid'.

I know why Eurocentrists continue to traffic in this 'scam'. Because it allows them to obfuscate and sow the seeds of confusion.

But I do not know why Africans bother with it. It is as silly as if a white person waded into Africa, and decided that only Pigmy could be negro, and that near 7 foot tall Watusi could not. The fact is, east African type, (Twa/Pigmy), and Khoisan types, have as much of an authentically African pedigree as any of the West African archtypes...if not more so, not to mention that many African's have combinations of these features.

There is no valid basis for questioning the African pedigree of the AE. Just the jealousy and avarice of some misguided Eurocentrists who need to claim other peoples heritage as their own.

posted 23 September 2004 11:43 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackman:
Here we go again.

Sneuropa,
Do you know negro means black in spanish?

What defines a black? Humm, I mean negro.

[This message has been edited by blackman (edited 23 September 2004).]

---

Yes, it means "black" ultimately of Latin origins and then ultimatly from Aryan meaning and cognate with the word "night".
But I'm here using the word in a scientific way to mean a Negro peoples such as Bantu not other black people of say Austric, Dravidian, Khoisan etc etc.

posted 23 September 2004 12:03 PM            

quote:

---

Ancient Egyptians spoke an Afro-Asiatic language. This is not a Bantu language. So the basic language stock was Hamitic-Semitic. Like Ethiopean today. Ethiopeans are "black" but not Negroes..

---

You have to be careful here because many darker and lighter Egyptians have typical negriod crania types. Many modern Upper Egyptians and even Lower Egyptians have protrusive jaw lines which is nearly an exclusive negriod trait.

Be careful also trying to associate narrow features that are exclusive to one racial group,for Nilotic people in southern Sudan often have wavy hair and features you would associate with ''whites'' but this is not the case. The type that you see in many ancient and modern Egyptians is called the elongated African.

Narrow features are as indigenous to tropical Africa as they are to other regions.

You also have to be careful with lingustics also because the Hausa people in northern Nigeria speak Afro-Asiatic languages but look no different from typical Western Africans. The Fulani people that live in Western Africa look very much like Somalis and Eastern Africans but live in Western Africa. Fulani speak a Niger-Congo language.

The origin of the Western African people that currently reside in the Sahel region is the Central and southern Sahara. During pre-dyanstic times a bulk of the AE population also came from this region intermingling with the stock already present in the Nile.

quote:

---

Today Egyptians are the descendants of their ancestors. They are of Afro-Asiatic stock. They are of brown/tanned skin and black hair. They vary in look- some rather like Arabs of Arabia. Others (like Umm Kalthoum) have a more African appearance, but not Negro

---

Egyptians vary from light Med types in the north to dark brown to black types in Upper Egypt. Even in Egypt sometimes you get these mixtures within families,and most Egyptians will acknowleadge this. You will often see light Med types even with kinky hair,and dark Upper Egyptian people with wavy hair.

Many Egyptians,especially in Middle and Upper Egypt, have craniametrical features that are negriod. See the following for instance:

"While the Upper Nile Egyptians show phenotypic features that
occur in higher frequencies in the Sudan and southward into
East Africa (namely, facial prognathism, chamaerrhiny, and
paedomorphic cranial architecture with specific modifications
of the nasal aperature), these so-called Negroid features are
not universal in the region of Thebes, Karnak, and Luxor."

(Kennedy, Kenneth A.R., T. Plummer, J. Chinment, "Identification of
the Eminent Dead: Pepi, A Scribe of Egypt," In Katherine J. Reichs
(ed.), _Forensic Osteology_, 1986. )

The point is that early pre-dyanstic Egyptians were negriod,but in later times when the countries unified both of these regions mixed leaving a hetrogenous population you see today in Egypt. AE civlization was culturally Africa and remains so in the rural areas of Egypt.

posted 23 September 2004 12:09 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sneuropa:

But I'm here using the word in a scientific way to mean a Negro peoples such as Bantu not other black people of say Austric, Dravidian, Khoisan etc etc.

sneuropa

---

Sneuropa, you can try to place negro/black-African people into a nice little small box to help seperate AE from other negro/black-Africans, if it makes you feel better. The fact remains that negro/black-Africans are the most diverse group of people. Bantu as well as Ethiopian are both black-Africans. You can choose not to call Ethiopians negro, but the fact remains they are black-Africans just as the AE.

posted 23 September 2004 12:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sneuropa:
Ancient Egyptians spoke an Afro-Asiatic language. This is not a Bantu language.

---

Scholars generally recognize four African language families: Niger-Congo, Afro-Asiatic, Nilo-Saharan, and Khoisan.
Virtually all of these languages originated in Africa.

That includes Afro-asiatic family, the only one of which spoken widely outside of Africa is semitic, and some linguists believe that even semitic languages originated in Africa.

quote:

---

Ethiopeans are "black" but not Negroes.

---

quote:

---

Today Egyptians are the descendants of their ancestors.

---

quote:

---

They are of Afro-Asiatic stock.

---

quote:

---

They are of brown/tanned skin and black hair.

---

quote:

---

Negroes did live in Ancient Egypt- that is obvious. And even if Civilisation was started by Negroes, that does not mean that Egyptian Civilisation/KMT was Negro, or "Black".

---

quote:

---

Nubia was Black in total, and civilised. Egypt was mixed with a basic Afro-Asiatic stock.

---

Ethnically, Nubian civilisation history parallels Kemetic history, founded by Black Africans, but increasingly mixed over time due in large matter to Asiatic invasion.

quote:

---

And so we do have to be careful- art is art and not scientific racial fact.

---

You might just as well refute molecular genetics by claiming to have "looked at the genes", and concluding that they ....'look white to me'. lol.

Bottom line: the reason we are discussing art, right now, instead of forensics (see subject) is that you want to dispute the facts, but cannot.

posted 23 September 2004 12:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackman:
Sneuropa, you can try to place negro/black-African people into a nice little small box to help seperate AE from other negro/black-Africans, if it makes you feel better. The fact remains that negro/black-Africans are the most diverse group of people. Bantu as well as Ethiopian are both black-Africans. You can choose not to call Ethiopians negro, but the fact remains they are black-Africans just as the AE.

---

Ethiopeans are black. Yes I agree with you.
I am not placing all black Africans in a tiny box. I am trying to make it quite clear that races, languages, cultures etc do vary.
And I am placing AE within this African continent and African peoples. But not that the KMT were closley related to say the Matabele who are Bantu. Some Negro-Bantu in AE, but not enough to make them Negroes.

Also there are the Tuareg. They are black- absolutely black. But they are of Afro-Asiatic race and language and therefore related closely to the main stock of KMT. But Matabele are also black but not so closely related to the main stock of KMT.

You can see quite clearly that Japanese people (especially of the Ainu race rather than the Turanian- but both I will include) are also with white skin. But they are not very closely related to Indo-European races which include Germans and Latins. However Ainu are with paler skin than many Latins. Race is complicated; I am not in anyway trying to simplify it- just understand it better.

posted 23 September 2004 12:25 PM            

quote:

---

Sneuropa, you can try to place negro/black-African people into a nice little small box to help seperate AE from other negro/black-Africans, if it makes you feel better

---

Well said blackman, but tell me...are you are you a "negro" or just a blackman? Maybe you should ask Sneuropa. lol.

ps - the sadest thing about these conversations is that it should really not be necessary to obsess over Kemetic ethnic identity, any more than we do over the identity of the Greeks, or the Chinese. All civilisation is ultimately about sharing ideas, and therefor is heterogeneous in that sense. It is only near psychotic racism of modern [wst], western civilisation (such as it is), that requires them to go to extremes just to question the pedigree of the Black People who created Ancient Egyptian Civilisation. You see this when they resort to all manner of inane babbling in order to rationalize their twisted world view.

And so, we have these little discussions, which ultimately have nothing to do with the ethnicity of AE, and everything to do with the racism of modern [wst]. It's fascinating.

posted 23 September 2004 12:39 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Well said blackman, but tell me...are you are you a "negro" or just a blackman? Maybe you should ask Sneuropa. lol.

---

Rasol,
I'm a blackman, Humm negroman, Humm colored-man, Humm brown-man, Humm African-descent-man.

posted 23 September 2004 12:48 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackman:
Rasol,
I'm a blackman, Humm negroman, Humm colored-man, Humm brown-man, Humm African-descent-man.

Heck, Sneuropa got me confused. I guess I'm all of the above.

---

With all respect, Rasol and blackman. If you told a Tamil he was a Negro I'm not sure he would agree with you.

I am not placing all blacks or Africans in a little box. You guys are. I'm trying to understand AE identity, and not constantly get tangled up with your Black/White American issues.

posted 23 September 2004 12:51 PM            

sneuropa

posted 23 September 2004 01:09 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sneuropa:
[B] Saying that- if you went to Egypt and asked them there- would they say they were Negroes?

---

posted 23 September 2004 01:18 PM            

No,because color convention in Egypt is different than in the Western world. Most Egyptians reguardless of their skin color would call themselves Al qahmy[which means wheat color] Although many modern Upper Egyptians and even Lower Egyptians would be considered ''black'' by America's standards. Most Egyptians just consider themselves Egyptians and are little concerned with color of one's skin.

However,I would be nieve to say that no racism exist because it clearly does in Egypt. Most of the people on the bottom tend to be rural Egyptians and Balady Egyptians. Generally these people are much darker than the elites whom many can claim desent from Ottoman Turks.

One thing I notice also is that many lighter African Americans often get mistaken for Egyptians themselves. Many people will think they are Nubians or Sa3eadi people. The American Egyptologist named Frank Joseph Yurco points this out in his article. See the following quotes from Frank Joseph Yurco:

quote:

---

Some modern Afro-Americans, particularly those with mixed racial ancestry, will find that they look
like some ancient (and modern) Egyptians. Should they travel to Egypt, they may find that in terms of
their complexion they resemble people of a particular region of Egypt. This is no accident; there has
been racial or ethnic intermingling in both instances. For the Afro-American, it has been relatively
recent; in Egypt it has been a slow process lasting thousands of years, as far back into prehistory as
can be gauged.

---

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/9507/c-wh1-ane-yurco.htm

quote:

---

Ten days later, I cut short my stay and left the country -- not for
fear of riots, but because in Cairo I had been living a lie. A
light-skinned black man, I looked perfectly Egyptian, so Egyptian that
I'd been passing for the past six months.

When I first walked the overcrowded streets of Cairo, the hustlers who
preyed on tourists rarely noticed me; they chased after Swedes and
Italians in the papyrus shops instead. At first I thought the hustlers
assumed a black tourist had less money to be schemed from his pockets.
But twice in my first week, native Egyptians asked me for directions.

For a few months, I enjoyed the privilege of resembling everyone else.
A family of devout Muslims who worked in a tourist shop nearby adopted
me, wanting to shield a new believer from those cynical Muslims who
prey on wide-eyed converts. During Ramadan, I broke my fast with them
daily. We talked of the coming war, of Islam and of America, about
which they held many misconceptions. But we never talked of race. I
often wondered if they knew I was black at all. They arranged lessons
for me with their village sheik. I told myself it was not because I
looked so Egyptian that they embraced me, but only because I was a
Muslim. Hadn't I embraced Islam to find the racial utopia Malcolm X
discovered in Mecca? .

---

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50917F63A5D0C758DDDA80994DB404482

On the other hand in Western Africa they have their own color convention. Anyone lighter than a Western Africa is often called red skinned which is applied various times to Fulani and Tuareg people who also live in the Sahel.

posted 23 September 2004 01:18 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by sneuropa:
[B] Saying that- if you went to Egypt and asked them there- would they say they were Negroes?

---

[/QUOTE]

Rasol, I think you've hit the nail upon the head. I am not American and neither were the KMT nor are modern Egyptians. It seems to me that most of this racist talk is American due to a history of oppression and then justifying it all.

posted 23 September 2004 01:19 PM            

quote:

---

But I'm here using the word in a scientific way to mean a Negro peoples such as Bantu not other black people of say Austric, Dravidian, Khoisan etc etc

---

There is no scientific way to use pseudo scientific terminolgy.

Evidently you do not know that that some anthropoligist have defined Austrialian aboriginenes, as well as some Khoisan peoples as Caucasoid.

posted 23 September 2004 01:22 PM            

Evidently you do not know that that some anthropoligist have defined Austrialian aboriginenes, as well as some Khoisan peoples as Caucasoid.

Actually, I do. Also one anthropologist reckoned that Khoisan were the result of Negroes and Chinese mixing. I however disagree with both.

just about to view the link you posted...

posted 23 September 2004 01:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sneuropa:

Rasol, I think you've hit the nail upon the head. I am not American and neither were the KMT nor are modern Egyptians. It seems to me that most of this racist talk is American due to a history of oppression and then justifying it all. How very unlike each other are KMT and Americans.

---

posted 23 September 2004 01:27 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sneuropa:
Actually, I do. Also one anthropologist reckoned that Khoisan were the result of Negroes and Chinese mixing. I however disagree with both.

---

posted 23 September 2004 01:39 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

---

Rasol, there are always different opinions.
Eurocentrist arguments are usually racist. Sometimes folk can't face facts or the Truth. I suppose to some, it is too revolutionary to accept KMT a real African identity. Others are too frightened to ever accept one for them (fear of a Black Planet sort of thing). Personally I never heard the argument about KMT and Black people. That was until I first posted on this forum asking what the AE called themselves and Egypt. Thats why I think these forums are good because we can discuss these problems. I had heard arguments as to whether the AE were Black or not. But never in a serious academic way. I have seen Wil Smith's pop video with the hip-hop Egyptians.

I can't seem to get that link to down load- so I'll get back to it tommorrow or sometime.

Have to go now,
regards,
sneuropa

posted 23 September 2004 04:53 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
interesting that many of these pseudo-scholars here point to AE's African location as a reason that it is a black African society. They fail to point out that it is just as close to the middle east in terms of location and was influenced by both areas. If you come to Texas you will find that we are heavily influenced by Mexican culture but it doesn't make us Mexicans. The skin color was redish brown, not black and everyone here knows that.

---

posted 23 September 2004 05:20 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sneuropa:
Ancient Egyptians spoke an Afro-Asiatic language. This is not a Bantu language. So the basic language stock was Hamitic-Semitic. Like Ethiopean today. Ethiopeans are "black" but not Negroes.

Today Egyptians are the descendants of their ancestors. They are of Afro-Asiatic stock. They are of brown/tanned skin and black hair. They vary in look- some rather like Arabs of Arabia. Others (like Umm Kalthoum) have a more African appearance, but not Negro.

Negroes did live in Ancient Egypt- that is obvious. And even if Civilisation was started by Negroes, that does not mean that Egyptian Civilisation/KMT was Negro, or "Black". Nubia was Black in total, and civilised. Egypt was mixed; with a basic Afro-Asiatic stock.

Ausar, I see what you mean about art and colour symbolism. Obviously Osiris being shown green cannot mean that their were any green people! And so we do have to be careful- art is art and not scientific racial fact. But if their is a statue of a princess and she is white- are you sure that means that she is mourning? As I said I doubt she was of pure Egyptian blood.

sneuropa

---

Sorry but you are talking pseudo-sceince that has been debunked. Those Ethiopian features are black or whatever you want to call it. Negro and caucasian mean nothing and is fake science. Some Asians have similar "negroid" features and some have similar "caucasian" features. The exact same thing goes for Africans except one BIG difference that have been proved time and time again, the tree trunk of humanity is established in Africa. Europe and its people (even Asians)are but a limb on that tree. "Pure" Africans whom "asians" and "caucasians" remembles still exists in Africa today. These populations have been shown to be some of the oldest populations on the earth especially older than any population in Europe. Any scientist who denies this is in total denial or out right lying. Does this mean anything in terms of accomplishments?-Of course not its just simple evolutionary fact that somehow is swept under the rug when dealing with history. The parents don't resemble the children, its the other way around. Point #2 is that those ethiopioid features (found in prehostoric skulls) are older than any european skull by far. Bottom line is features that we call "caucasian" were african before europeans and others came along. Negro is a recent modern term that means nothing so does caucasian, however these are the terms that we talk in because of our Eurocentric contradictory bio-anthropology and history. Unless Europeans are from a different pre-homosapien species then we need to have our history and anthropology be parellel and congruent.

posted 23 September 2004 05:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
To paraphrase Diop, on the 'true negro': it is a kind of [anti] Platonic ideal, which allows white anthropologists to claim if need be, that all the actual Blacks of africa approach but never completely achieve.

It has been noted that Diop himself, with his smalll mouth, and nose, and minimal prognathesism, could easily be defined as 'non negroid'.

I know why Eurocentrists continue to traffic in this 'scam'. Because it allows them to obfuscate and sow the seeds of confusion.

But I do not know why Africans bother with it. It is as silly as if a white person waded into Africa, and decided that only Pigmy could be negro, and that near 7 foot tall Watusi could not. The fact is, east African type, (Twa/Pigmy), and Khoisan types, have as much of an authentically African pedigree as any of the West African archtypes...if not more so, not to mention that many African's have combinations of these features.

There is no valid basis for questioning the African pedigree of the AE. Just the jealousy and avarice of some misguided Eurocentrists who need to claim other peoples heritage as their own.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 23 September 2004).]

---

posted 23 September 2004 06:07 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sneuropa:
Saying that- if you went to Egypt and asked them there- would they say they were Negroes, would they say they were Black?

sneuropa

[This message has been edited by sneuropa (edited 23 September 2004).]

---

posted 23 September 2004 06:12 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sneuropa:
Saying that- if you went to Egypt and asked them there- would they say they were Negroes, would they say they were Black?

sneuropa

[This message has been edited by sneuropa (edited 23 September 2004).]

---

posted 23 September 2004 06:32 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by kifaru:
Speaking to whether or not ethiopians are negroes or not, I would like to say that it depends. Ethiopia is a country like any country on the the planet where many ethnic groups live. In ethipoia there are habash and oromo and tigrinya peoples as well as others. Just speaking about habash and oromo people I attend school with many as well as work with many in Greensboro, NC. I can tell you without a doubt that although many of the habash are lighter than some west africans many are not. The majority have frizzly afro type hair with the exception of the women who get perms. As for the oromo many of them have less tightly curled hair and they tend to be darker in complexion. If you placed the vast majority of them around african american it would be harder to distinguish them from african americans than it would be from a light colored Northern Egyptian. But the striking thing is they aren't that tall in general but based on hair texture they hair is very similiar to many Zarma people who also work with me. The Hausa people who I work with have hair more similiar with the habash as wellas facial features. It is possible to distinguish each group from one another if you look at extreme ethnically typicall features. Oromo and habash both tend to have round heads with what I'd describe as large foreheads but when you take into account the gradiations between each group it becomes more difficult to distinguish the Zarma from the Oromo and in turn either the Zarma from the African Americans and the Habash and the Hausa. So, what is it you use as criteria to define as "negro". The hair of the habash tends to be more frizzley than the oromos I know. By vertue of hair texture are they less negro than the Habash? what about the zarma who tend to be darker than the habash but the same complexion as the oromo? The Hausa speak an afro asiatic language as do the Habash and the Oromo. And finally since I only know two egyptians one who looks like a lighter habash (Halle Berry's complexion)except with fuller lips and straight(lank) hair and another who has a gray afro and has complexion and facial features like Tony Shaloub. So who's the negro?

---

Somebody earlier asked sneuropa, what defined a "Negro", but his answer was Bantu. Keino and Kifaru's comments have reiterated this question in their own way. This is the question that sneuropa should have persistently been pressed on, instead of allowing him to divert the subject into a drawn out, but useless debate on artistic impressions of Ancient Egyptians, and all that nonsense of Afro-Asiatic "languages" being a sub-race group. The question I now ask Sneuropa, is that same question...What defines a "negro"? What defines a "Bantu", in terms of "race"? An individual from the Bantu group, who happens to have a thin nose, thin lips, curly or wavy hair, narrow long-face shape, should now be considered a different race from his Bantu relatives who are considered to have the so-called "forest/true Negro" features?
West Africans aren't a homogeneous group. Should some of these west Africans be considered a different race from the others, if they don't have the so-called typical "Bantu" or "Negro" features? Kifaru pointed out the heterogeneity of Ethiopians. Should these folks now be in different racial categories? Should a West African, who resembles an Ethiopian, should no longer be called a "Negro", and then feel free to turn that question around? I am quite interested in hearing your scientific or logical answers to these questions!

As for some of the facial reconstructions depicted here, those who seem to resemble people in the Bantu African groups, should they be called a "Negro" or not?

posted 23 September 2004 06:47 PM            

Using this kind of "science" as you did, a case can be made that southern Europeans like Italians, or Greeks aren't "caucasians" as Europeans to their North, they are just "white" people! Therefore, European groups towards the North of Southern Europeans, are a different race from their southern counterparts, who are in the vicinity of the Mediterranean sea!

------------------
Logic

posted 23 September 2004 07:10 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keino:
by rasol:
...if not more so, not to mention that many African's have combinations of these features.

I think this need to be clearly understood. MOST AFRICANS ARE A MIXTURE OF THE VARIOUS TYPES IN AFRICA, (bantu, kosisan, and "ethiopiod")

---

Of course. Eurocentric anthropologies are utterly contrived. Predicated on the transparent agenda of separating Africa's people from the civilisations and cultures we originated. It's always good to "hear" their agenda and tactics, so that the fallacies involved can be publicly exposed.

Sneuropa's use of "Afro-asiatic" was interesting. He attempted to use it as a (mixed) racial catagory. lol. Nice try.

posted 23 September 2004 07:36 PM            

Southern Sudanese are classified into a category called elongated Africans. The ancestors of most southern Sudanese originated from the Khartoum Mesolithic which had a custom of filing teeth. Similar pratices have been found in pre-dyanstic sites like Faiyum in Egypt. I can also attest that some Western African types were found in pre-dyanstic Egypt amungst the Badarian people. I would say all these groups share a common history but the ancient Egyptian type still exists in the rural Fellahin in Upper Egypt. You probabaly also had some Beja type people in modern Sudan.

In the Aswan area there are even Egyptians there that look like people from Western Africa. Why? Because their ancient ancestors looked that way.

Most modern rural Upper Egyptians have both the L2 and L3 markers,and have some Asiatic markers from slight admixture from Yemani Arabs. Most people in Upper Egypt tend to marry their first cousins so this keeps their lineage pure. Unlike the more urban people in Egypt.

Lots of modern Nubians have mixture from Turks,Albanians,Arabs and even Bosnians. This mixture is very prevelent around areas like Dongola.

posted 23 September 2004 07:36 PM            

Southern Sudanese are classified into a category called elongated Africans. The ancestors of most southern Sudanese originated from the Khartoum Mesolithic which had a custom of filing teeth. Similar pratices have been found in pre-dyanstic sites like Faiyum in Egypt. I can also attest that some Western African types were found in pre-dyanstic Egypt amungst the Badarian people. I would say all these groups share a common history but the ancient Egyptian type still exists in the rural Fellahin in Upper Egypt. You probabaly also had some Beja type people in modern Sudan.

In the Aswan area there are even Egyptians there that look like people from Western Africa. Why? Because their ancient ancestors looked that way.

Most modern rural Upper Egyptians have both the L2 and L3 markers,and have some Asiatic markers from slight admixture from Yemani Arabs. Most people in Upper Egypt tend to marry their first cousins so this keeps their lineage pure. Unlike the more urban people in Egypt.

Lots of modern Nubians have mixture from Turks,Albanians,Arabs and even Bosnians. This mixture is very prevelent around areas like Dongola.

posted 23 September 2004 07:56 PM            

Ethiopeans and Khoisan Share the deepest clades of male (Y) chromosome Phylogeny:

The genetic structure of 126 Ethiopian and 139 Senegalese Y chromosomes was investigated by a hierarchicalanalysis of 30 diagnostic biallelic markers selected from the worldwide Y-chromosome genealogy. The present studyreveals that (1) only the Ethiopians share with the Khoisan the deepest human Y-chromosome clades (the African-specific Groups I and II) but with a repertoire of very different haplotypes; (2) most of the Ethiopians and virtually all the Senegalese belong to Group III, whose precursor is believed to be involved in the first migration out of Africa - Semino, Sforza, Underhill

researcher, Dr. Peter A. Underhill of Stanford University, believes some present- day Ethiopians and the Khoisanmay may include descendants of the ancestral human population that occupied the eastern region of Africa in the Paleolithic era. New York Times

...as example of the deep and complex biological relationships between Africans. Of course Ethiopeans are generally more heterogeneous than Khiosan, but they are Africoids of the most primary order...meaning they are related to virtually all other Africoids.

posted 23 September 2004 08:23 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Since we are talking about genes now:

Ethiopeans and Khoisan Share the deepest clades of male (Y) chromosome Phylogeny:

The genetic structure of 126 Ethiopian and 139 Senegalese Y chromosomes was investigated by a hierarchicalanalysis of 30 diagnostic biallelic markers selected from the worldwide Y-chromosome genealogy. The present studyreveals that (1) only the Ethiopians share with the Khoisan the deepest human Y-chromosome clades (the African-specific Groups I and II) but with a repertoire of very different haplotypes; (2) most of the Ethiopians and virtually all the Senegalese belong to Group III, whose precursor is believed to be involved in the first migration out of Africa - Semino, Sforza, Underhill

researcher, Dr. Peter A. Underhill of Stanford University, believes some present- day Ethiopians and the Khoisanmay may include descendants of the ancestral human population that occupied the eastern region of Africa in the Paleolithic era. New York Times

...as example of the deep and complex biological relationships between Africans. Of course Ethiopeans are generally more heterogeneous than Khiosan, but they are Africoids of the most primary order...meaning they are related to virtually all other Africoids.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 23 September 2004).]

---

Matter of fact, litmus test of "homogeneity" application to any continent, will be destined to fail. As diverse as the African "Negro" group is, this doesn't stop those Euro-folks, stuck with debunked theories, to continue to setup racial "demarcation" walls between African groups. It is as though, Africans are a "stationary" group, and have always been that way!

Facial recontructions by Forensics, aren't mere artistic impressions, which one can just passively make a "critic" on; other science go into the equation. As pointed out earlier, it is the only avenue available to recreate a visible likeness of an ancient mummy or other dead subjects, from various scientific data available from mostly physical evidence.

posted 23 September 2004 08:38 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
Matter of fact, litmus test of "homogeneity" application to any continent, will be destined to fail. As diverse as the African "Negro" group is, this doesn't stop those Euro-folks, stuck with debunked theories, to continue to setup racial "demarcation" walls between African groups. It is as though, Africans are a "stationary" group, and have always been that way!

Facial recontructions by Forensics, aren't mere artistic impressions, which one can just passively make a "critic" on; other science go into the equation. As pointed out earlier, it is the only avenue available to recreate a visible likeness of an ancient mummy or other dead subjects, from various scientific data available from mostly physical evidence.

---

Of course you're right. But this non forensic debate begain with someone trying to 'play off' the results with 'Aretha Franklin' jokes. When they were indulged with inquiry as to whether they had any 'real' objections to the work shown, they could not respond. And so...off we go, off topic as usual.

Btw. The only possibility on earth for a the existence of a 'pure race' would be precisely among the Khoisan types mentioned in the Underhill study.

Racial purity for any non African group is a complete scientific impossibility.

Europeans and Asians are literally derivitive forms of African, nothing more.

posted 23 September 2004 11:26 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Europeans and Asians are literally derivitive forms of African, nothing more.

---

That is basically the case, unless Europeans are now prepared to prove that they came from a completely different stock from the rest of Humanity!

------------------
Logic

posted 27 September 2004 09:11 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
[my friend most ancient egyptains were negriod with kinky hair,dark skin like the nilotic folks of southern sudan,africans of west africa and bantu,and other parts of africa.]

Southern Sudanese are classified into a category called elongated Africans. The ancestors of most southern Sudanese originated from the Khartoum Mesolithic which had a custom of filing teeth. Similar pratices have been found in pre-dyanstic sites like Faiyum in Egypt. I can also attest that some Western African types were found in pre-dyanstic Egypt amungst the Badarian people. I would say all these groups share a common history but the ancient Egyptian type still exists in the rural Fellahin in Upper Egypt. You probabaly also had some Beja type people in modern Sudan.

In the Aswan area there are even Egyptians there that look like people from Western Africa. Why? Because their ancient ancestors looked that way.

Most modern rural Upper Egyptians have both the L2 and L3 markers,and have some Asiatic markers from slight admixture from Yemani Arabs. Most people in Upper Egypt tend to marry their first cousins so this keeps their lineage pure. Unlike the more urban people in Egypt.

Lots of modern Nubians have mixture from Turks,Albanians,Arabs and even Bosnians. This mixture is very prevelent around areas like Dongola.

---

right but let's not forget too that west africans vary and many in the sudanic regions of northernwest in west africa and some in the forest areas are long headed types as well,but most southern sudan types still have the woolly hair,dark,skin and broad nose like most other black africans,just want to make that clear so no one else is confused.

posted 27 September 2004 09:22 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
[my friend most ancient egyptains were negriod with kinky hair,dark skin like the nilotic folks of southern sudan,africans of west africa and bantu,and other parts of africa.]

Southern Sudanese are classified into a category called elongated Africans. The ancestors of most southern Sudanese originated from the Khartoum Mesolithic which had a custom of filing teeth. Similar pratices have been found in pre-dyanstic sites like Faiyum in Egypt. I can also attest that some Western African types were found in pre-dyanstic Egypt amungst the Badarian people. I would say all these groups share a common history but the ancient Egyptian type still exists in the rural Fellahin in Upper Egypt. You probabaly also had some Beja type people in modern Sudan.

In the Aswan area there are even Egyptians there that look like people from Western Africa. Why? Because their ancient ancestors looked that way.

Most modern rural Upper Egyptians have both the L2 and L3 markers,and have some Asiatic markers from slight admixture from Yemani Arabs. Most people in Upper Egypt tend to marry their first cousins so this keeps their lineage pure. Unlike the more urban people in Egypt.

Lots of modern Nubians have mixture from Turks,Albanians,Arabs and even Bosnians. This mixture is very prevelent around areas like Dongola.

right but let us not forget,that many west africans in the sudanic regions are longhead types too and some are in the forest areas as well,and most folks in the sudan are dark,with woolly hair and broad noses,like most and i and mean most ancient upper egyptians and alot of modern nubians still have negriod features and many are still full blooded blacks.

---

posted 18 October 2004 07:30 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
I'll get my Aretha franklin look alike yet. What a bunch of nonsense.

---

Its ignorant comments like this that make me feel pity for you.
Yes indeed people whom looked like aretha franklin did exist in AE, many AE did and most in upper egypt resemble not only African Americans,but also "west" africans.

Young bwoy what a pity.

posted 18 October 2004 07:57 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keino:
Its ignorant comments like this that make me feel pity for you.
Yes indeed people whom looked like aretha franklin did exist in AE, many AE did and most in upper egypt resemble not only African Americans,but also "west" africans.

Young bwoy what a pity.

[This message has been edited by Keino (edited 18 October 2004).]

---

posted 18 October 2004 07:58 PM            

They had no idea of who this person was, male, female, young, old, European, African. They were given no clues. As they explained: 'Whenever we do any sort of forensic work we work with the data we are given and nothing more'

Search for Nefertiti, Joann Fletcher.

posted 16 January 2005 07:50 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by solar:
Other useful links for the black supremist: http://www.white-history.com/egypt.htm http://www.white-history.com/hwr6a.htm http://www.white-history.com/hwr8.htm

[This message has been edited by solar (edited 15 January 2005).]

---

posted 16 January 2005 11:49 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by YuhiVII:
Here we go again! The March of the Titans is back. How lame...

---

posted 17 January 2005 06:01 AM            

quote:

---

I mentioned there is something called 'phenotypes' which give you the color of your skin, hair and eyes and other attributes.

---

quote:

---

I find it lame that you don't recognize

---

quote:

---

perhaps this is why people of fair skin call themselves caucasion

---

The term and concept is seldom used any more in bio-science, and is being phased out of historical discourse on Ancient Egypt.

quote:

---

Slavery in africa has been around for centuries and still is so even in this century!

---

quote:

---

I redeem the 'white' man as not being the root to all your social problems and ills

---

posted 17 January 2005 11:44 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Solar, This thread is about forensic science and Kemetian mummies, why you choose to spam it with white supremacist idiocy is beyound me.

[QUOTE] I mentioned there is something called 'phenotypes' which give you the color of your skin, hair and eyes and other attributes.

---

Everyone here knows what phenotype means.

quote:

---

I find it lame that you don't recognize

---

No you are being lame, and spamming the board.

quote:

---

perhaps this is why people of fair skin call themselves caucasion

---

The term is 'caucasian', and this kind of misinformation is what your referenced site is notorious, and laughable for. The very fact that you take them seriously, means that we cannot take you seriously. The term caucasian was coined by the German racist Johann Frederich Blumenbach in the early 1800's- who believed that a race of superior men was born in the caucasus region of Eurasia, and that other 'races' are degenerate. This false idea reached is frenzied zenith with the Nazi belief in Aryanism, which extended the idea of racial degeneracy to Jews, Arabs and much of Southern Europe as well.

The term and concept is seldom used any more in bio-science, and is being phased out of historical discourse on Ancient Egypt.

quote:

---

Slavery in africa has been around for centuries and still is so even in this century!

---

The word slavery is derived from slav. The slavic peoples include Russian, Poles and Serbs. The term is literally European in origin, describing European attrocities against European peoples. White on white slavery is centuries old in Europe, and there are still sporadic reports of white slavery and child sexual slavery there as well.

quote:

---

I redeem the 'white' man as not being the root to all your social problems and ills

---

But you are responsible for your own ills, which you foolishly display in public exercise in attention seeking hatred and stupidity. Now please [b]redeem 'yourself'

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 17 January 2005).][/B][/QUOTE]