posted 02 November 2004 07:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by theborg:
Starts December 5, with "Rameses: Wrath of God Or Man?". The promos are already running. The film is hot...Nefertari is even hotter. And yes, she is a North African woman.

I see in the other threads people are still arguiing about the image of Nefertiti the forensic experts came up with. I made that film. Even Zahi Hawass doesn't argue with the accuracy of the image, just the findings (he's wrong). As I wrote up top, wait until the first week of December, for my films "Rameses: Wrath of God or Man?" (what we discovered is going to shake the world), and "Sphinx Unmasked" (I cast Fellahin as the Pharaoh and Queen). The Egyptians in the films are indeed Africans, and our Nefertari is extremely beautiful (Dr. Kent Weeks saw the film Sunday, and thanked us for casting the "right" types). Egypt Week on Discovery Channel coming in December.

---

You say Hawass is wrong? So what is your take on the DNA tests of the hypothetical Nefertiti mummy?

posted 03 November 2004 08:29 AM            

Here's a link to the trailer for the Ramses documentary: http://adsales.discovery.com/pop.asp?nID=DSC&pID=1323

posted 03 November 2004 09:01 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by theborg:
rasol, you don't know me, but take my word for it...no...DNA...tests were ever done on those mummies. None. Nada. Zip. Neither were any of the other so-called tests performed. How do I know this? Because the technology to perform the tests didn't exist until we acquired the equipment and took it into the tomb with Joann. Even if Joann, were only guessing...my friend, she guessed "right". This was a case of bruised ego's. Life goes on.

---

posted 03 November 2004 10:54 AM            

Also what caused the breach between Fletcher and the SCA? It was not merely a "dissagreement", but she violated some of the rules of the SCA, which she had previously agreed to honor.

Be sure to use an underscore between 040113 and nef, also between dna and test.

I can't get the link to work either. Sorry! Basically, it's an offical report, submitted to the SCA and done by Dr. Salama, reporting the results of the dna test done on the mummy thought to be that of Nefertiti. The results showed that the mummy was male.

posted 07 November 2004 10:27 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Osiris II:
You comment on no dna testing being done. But how do you explain the test by Dr. Salama of Abu Sbams University?
http://www.cbc.ca/discolosure/archives/040113_nef/documents/dna_test.pdf

Also what caused the breach between Fletcher and the SCA? It was not merely a "dissagreement", but she violated some of the rules of the SCA, which she had previously agreed to honor.

Be sure to use an underscore between 040113 and nef, also between dna and test.

I can't get the link to work either. Sorry! Basically, it's an offical report, submitted to the SCA and done by Dr. Salama, reporting the results of the dna test done on the mummy thought to be that of Nefertiti. The results showed that the mummy was male.

[This message has been edited by Osiris II (edited 03 November 2004).]

---

posted 07 November 2004 11:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by kembu:

Simple. He was paid to tell a lie. Presumably by Hawass. Let them allow a neutral and reliable third party to do an ACTUAL DNA test and see what you will get.

---

Thought Writes:

posted 11 December 2004 04:35 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by nupe357:
The Borg:

Congrats on two great programs! I hope the Discovery Channel will one day present a show that highlights the "afrocentric" theories of Egyptology. That would be very interesting! Do you think the Discovery Channel is ever likely to produce such a show??

---

Thought Writes:

I hope the Discovery Channel presents the Ancient Egyptians as they actually looked during the Pharonic period (like modern Horn of Africa populations), instead of using Arab stand-ins.

posted 11 December 2004 04:53 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by nupe357:
The Borg:

Congrats on two great programs! I hope the Discovery Channel will one day present a show that highlights the "afrocentric" theories of Egyptology. That would be very interesting! Do you think the Discovery Channel is ever likely to produce such a show??

---

Now that Nupe357 has divulged his preference, which is fine on a personal level, how about productions encompassing the unbiased and fully substantiated representation of Ancient Egypt, as so repetitively maintained on this board?

posted 11 December 2004 05:09 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

I hope the Discovery Channel presents the Ancient Egyptians as they actually looked during the Pharonic period (like modern Horn of Africa populations), instead of using Arab stand-ins.

---

These documentaries often add cinematic dramatizations using western actors. For the documentary parts, they show real Egyptians. For the dramatizations, of course they'll use stand-ins...

Arab stand-ins? Some of these shows look like they use real fellahin while others seem to use Afro-American and Latino American stand-ins.

posted 11 December 2004 05:33 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:

I credit the Discovery Channel with trying to make ancient Egypt look diverse.

---

posted 11 December 2004 07:22 PM            

Thought Writes:

I was referring to the “Real Egyptians” when I mentioned Arab stand-ins. They may be real modern Egyptians but modern Horn of Africa populations LOOK more like Ancient Egyptians.

{I credit the Discovery Channel with trying to make ancient Egypt look diverse.}

Thought Writes:

posted 11 December 2004 07:41 PM            

Thought Writes:

I do, which is why I said:

“I agree that the Fellahin, Beja and Nubians are as close as we can get in modern Egypt to the ancient type”.

However, I also said:

“but even they have been altered from the original phenotype and genetic frequencies.”

Both of these assertions are supported by the cranial, skeletal, linguistic and genetic record.

posted 11 December 2004 09:09 PM            

quote:

---

“but even they have been altered from the original phenotype and genetic frequencies.”

Both of these assertions are supported by the cranial, skeletal, linguistic and genetic record.

---

What are you referencing in terms of original genetic frequences.

On the issue of height, height is known to vary by virtue of diet more than most physical attributes. And even in terms of genetics height responds quickly do diet and 'inbreeding'. The Watusi for example are famously tall...but they have been varioiusly reported as avergaging anywhere from 5'8" or so, to nearly 6'10" (!)

posted 11 December 2004 10:13 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
What are you referencing in terms of original genetic frequences.

---

Thought Posts:

Luis et al
2004

“In Egypt, the order of the polymorphic groups is slightly different: E (39.5%), J (32%), G (8.8%) K2 (8.2%), and R (7.5%).”

“A more recent dispersal Out-Of-Africa , represented by E3b-M35 chromosomes, expanded northward during the Mesolithic.”

“The presence of G and J lineages in Egypt probably represent a southern branch of the Neolithic agricultural diffusion, which may have RETURNED some E3b-M35 chromosomes as well.”

“The above data strongly suggest that the Levantine corridor was, by far, more important than the Horn of Africa passage in the ORIGINAL African dispersal of UNDIFFERINTIATED M173 chromosomes as well as the MORE RECENT introduction into Africa of its DERIVATIVES…”

“The current patchy distribution of K2-M70 in Africa may be a remnant of a more widespread occupation. Subsequent demic events introducing chromosomes carrying E3b-M35, E3a-M2, G-M201, and J-12f2 haplogroups may have overwhelmed the K2-M70 representatives in some areas. Like the R1*-M173 males, the M70 individuals could represent the relics of an early back migration to Africa from Asia, since these chromosomes are not associated with the G-M201, J-12f2, and R1-M173 derivatives, lineages that represent more recent Eurasian genetic contributions.”

Semino et al.
2004

“In this regard, it is worth noting that the median expansion time of the J-M267 ….. These results are consistent with the proposal that this haplotype was diffused in recent time by Arabs who, mainly from the 7th century A.D., expanded to northern Africa (Nebel et al 2002)

Keita et al.
2004

“The delta region of Egypt has been impacted by European (Graeco-Roman) and Near Eastern peoples, the latter apparently PRIMARILY during the Islamic and NOT Neolithic period (Nebel et al., 2002).”

Thought Writes:

posted 11 December 2004 11:47 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
{These documentaries often add cinematic dramatizations using western actors. For the documentary parts, they show real Egyptians.}

Thought Writes:

I was referring to the “Real Egyptians” when I mentioned Arab stand-ins. They may be real modern Egyptians but modern Horn of Africa populations LOOK more like Ancient Egyptians.

{I credit the Discovery Channel with trying to make ancient Egypt look diverse.}

Thought Writes:

I agree with Kem-Au, I prefer authenticity over diversity. Scientific studies in genetics and physical anthropology indicate that the earliest Egyptians were linked with modern populations from the Horn of Africa. Furthermore, these same studies indicate general continuity from the early pre-dynastic down to the New Kingdom. After this period there was SUBSTANTIAL in-migrations from Europe and Arabia. I have not seen ANY reenactments on the Discovery Channel that portray the Ancient Egyptians they way they REALLY would have looked. I agree that the Fellahin, Beja and Nubians are as close as we can get in modern Egypt to the ancient type, but even they have been altered from the original phenotype and genetic frequencies.

---

Interesting point! I had a Greek patient a few days ago and some how we got into discussing the film Alexander. He was relaying his disdain for the film firstly because he thought the actor Colin Farrell should not have been used to play greek because he does not look greek and b/c he's not greek. Secondly he was upset over how they portrayed Alexander as a bisexual man. He said that he was never taught in school that Alexander was "fruity". He went on to say, " How can a powerful man who ruled egypt and the world be soft and fruity?"
I just laughed it off b/c examining someone is not the ideal place to discuss issues that can become political and I just figured he got the toned down verson from his high school education.

posted 12 December 2004 12:47 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keino:
Interesting point! I had a Greek patient a few days ago and some how we got into discussing the film Alexander. He was relaying his disdain for the film firstly because he thought the actor Colin Farrell should not have been used to play greek because he does not look greek and b/c he's not greek. Secondly he was upset over how they portrayed Alexander as a bisexual man. He said that he was never taught in school that Alexander was "fruity". He went on to say, " How can a powerful man who ruled egypt and the world be soft and fruity?"
I just laughed it off b/c examining someone is not the ideal place to discuss issues that can become political and I just figured he got the toned down verson from his high school education.

The point is sometimes one does not like the facts or let ou biases get into understanding of history based on our modern societal norms and dogma.

---

I saw the film.by the way alexander never really ruled the world,it was his world,and the same goes for the persians,romans,greeks,etc etc.
THERE were other,great superpowers during those times in later ancient times like kush(nubia)other ancient nubian kingdoms in late ancient times,axum,china,india,etc.

posted 12 December 2004 02:39 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:

I was referring to the “Real Egyptians” when I mentioned Arab stand-ins. They may be real modern Egyptians but modern Horn of Africa populations LOOK more like Ancient Egyptians.

---

"More or less" depends on one's perspective. The claim that any Egyptians who don't look like Michael Jordan are Arabs is pretty baseless and disrespectful. You can't be referring to modern Horn of Africa peoples because I've seen plenty of modern Egyptians who look like Sudanese, Ethiopians, or Somalis.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:

I agree with Kem-Au, I prefer authenticity over diversity. Scientific studies in genetics and physical anthropology indicate that the earliest Egyptians were linked with modern populations from the Horn of Africa.

---

Well when there is a documentary based on pre-dynastic Egyptians, then for authenticity, they should actors with more East African physical types. However, if there is a documentary about dynastic Egyptians, it is more authentic to show some diversity(and I don't mean extreme diversity like blue eyed and blonde haired actors playing Egyptians). Egyptians were not a homogeneous population. They weren't even mono-ethnic.

The image we have of ancient Egypt today is but a small snapshot of what the population realitically was. We don't know as much about the lives of the commoners, how they differed from the royalty, or what different interest groups existed within their societies.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:

Furthermore, these same studies indicate general continuity from the early pre-dynastic down to the New Kingdom. After this period there was SUBSTANTIAL in-migrations from Europe and Arabia. I have not seen ANY reenactments on the Discovery Channel that portray the Ancient Egyptians they way they REALLY would have looked.

---

Well let's see. So far, all of these re-enactments have been based on persons or events taking place in or after the beginning of the New Kingdom. So if your theory is correct, you have nothing to whine about. You must be quite insecure about your views if you need a TV docudrama to reinforce them.

posted 12 December 2004 11:26 AM            

Thought Writes:

Relativism as a ruse.

{The claim that any Egyptians who don't look like Michael Jordan are Arabs is pretty baseless and disrespectful.}

Thought Writes:

When did I mention Michael Jordan? Was that a Freudian slip on your part? Enough with the “True Negro” stereotypes. The Ancient Egyptians looked like modern Horn of Africa populations. These types are RARELY depicted in Discovery Channel documentaries. That is the point. Certainly there were some Ancient Egyptians who looked like Jordan, but based upon Egypt’s location, language, skeletal remains and genetics most Ancient Egyptians probably looked more like Mohamed Farrah Aidid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Farah_Aidid

{You can't be referring to modern Horn of Africa peoples because I've seen plenty of modern Egyptians who look like Sudanese, Ethiopians, or Somalis.}

Sight Writes:

I have to, just not in Discovery Channel documentaries.

{Well when there is a documentary based on pre-dynastic Egyptians, then for authenticity, they should actors with more East African physical types. However, if there is a documentary about dynastic Egyptians, it is more authentic to show some diversity(and I don't mean extreme diversity like blue eyed and blonde haired actors playing Egyptians). Egyptians were not a homogeneous population. They weren't even mono-ethnic.}

Thought Writes:

The genetic, skeletal, linguistic and archaeological record of Ancient Egypt indicate general continuity with some small scale immigration from the Badarian period down to the New Kingdom. While there was indeed diversity within Ancient Egypt it was no more diverse than modern Somalia which has received Eurasian genetic inputs on a small scale as well. If you have some data that contradicts this, please provide it.

{The image we have of ancient Egypt today is but a small snapshot of what the population realitically was.}

Thought Writes:

Not in terms of phenotype or genetics, they have changed since the New Kingdom. I have provided scientific evidence to support my contention, you have not!

{Well let's see. So far, all of these re-enactments have been based on persons or events taking place in or after the beginning of the New Kingdom.}

Thought Writes:
The scientific consensus, not MY THEORY is that most of the MAJOR changes began in the New Kingdom, however the most substantial genetic and phenotypic changes seem to have taken place with the Greek and Arab incursions.

{So if your theory is correct, you have nothing to whine about.}

Thought Writes:

I am a man, hence I never whine anyway. I am simply stating a historical fact.

{You must be quite insecure about your views if you need a TV docudrama to reinforce them.

Thought Writes:

Not so, I simply believe in the manifestation of the truth. This is living Maat.

{I'm not trying to be disagreeable here, I just think there's too much whining about small irrelevant issues.}

Thought Writes:

Perhaps what is relevant to one person is less relevant to another.

{If they had actors who looked like Leonardo Dicaprio, or Brook Shields playing Egyptians, then we'd have something to complain about. So far, all I've seen are people of color(actors who seem to be of African ancestry) standing in as ancient Egyptians. If we all agree that Africa is the most diverse continent then why are some people complaining about how authentic Africans must look? How can there be one authentic look when there is so much diversity?}

Thought Writes:

posted 12 December 2004 12:14 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:

Many of the Arabs that portray Ancient Egyptians have primary roots in Eurasia not Africa in bio-historical terms.

---

It doesn't make a difference really whether Arabs, Nubians, or Ethiopians portray Egyptians in cinematic dramatizations because all of those physical types are present in ancient and modern Egypt.

BTW, many of these dramatizations are filmed in Morocco or Tunisia so it's possible that many of the extras are from other parts of north Africa.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:

Modern Africans are diverse but we have to educate ourselves to be able to differentiate INDIGENOUS diversity from FOREIGN INCURSIONS.

---

Based on Egypt's location and history, it's nearly impossible. Of course when we see Egyptians who physically look and behave like Greeks or Frenchmen, it's obvious that the person has recent non-African ancestry. But for the majority of Egyptians, it's more complicated. So out of the pics of Egyptian persons below, which ones are authentic to you?

Number 1

Number 2

Number 3

Number 4

They are all Egyptians and all their phenotypes were present as far back as pre-dynastic times...

posted 12 December 2004 12:30 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:

Thought Writes:

Relativism as a ruse.

P.W. Botha is an African based upon citizenship, but he is not rooted in Africa from a bio-historical perspective. Many of the Arabs that portray Ancient Egyptians have primary roots in Eurasia not Africa in bio-historical terms. Modern Africans are diverse but we have to educate ourselves to be able to differentiate INDIGENOUS diversity from FOREIGN INCURSIONS.

---

posted 12 December 2004 12:36 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
Based on Egypt's location and history, it's nearly impossible. Of course when we see Egyptians who physically look and behave like Greeks or Frenchmen, it's obvious that the person has recent non-African ancestry. But for the majority of Egyptians, it's more complicated. So out of the pics of Egyptian persons below, which ones are authentic to you?

Number 1

Number 2

Number 3

Number 4

They are all Egyptians and all their phenotypes were present as far back as pre-dynastic times...

[This message has been edited by neo*geo (edited 12 December 2004).]

---

You can tell from the images the impact of Arab admixture. But if your point is that the ancient Egyptian population includes foreign migrants such as Libyans and Syrians, I would understand.

Compare with those images posted on the KMT art thread to get a more accurate picture.

To say that modern Egyptians have remained practically the same as ancient Egyptians is a non-starter.

posted 12 December 2004 12:41 PM            

Thought Writes:

There were NO Arabs, Nubians or Ethiopians in Pharaonic Egypt. However, it is clear that Ancient Egyptians, Modern Ethiopians and Modern Nubians share a common Holocene origin. Arabs invaded Egypt in the 7th Century, this is well over one-thousand years AFTER the end of the New Kingdom!

{BTW, many of these dramatizations are filmed in Morocco or Tunisia so it's possible that many of the extras are from other parts of north Africa}

Thought Writes:

Probably!

{Based on Egypt's location and history, it's nearly impossible.}

Thought Writes:

Genetic data and the study of skeletal remains allows this process.

{But for the majority of Egyptians, it's more complicated. So out of the pics of Egyptian persons below, which ones are authentic to you?}

Thought Writes:

Again, I believe most Modern Egyptians have ancestors who were Ancient Egyptains. However, I also believe that most Modern Egyptians look less like Ancient Egyptians than Modern Somali or Oromo from Kenya.

posted 12 December 2004 02:06 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by kembu:
You can tell from the images the impact of Arab admixture.

---

Arab admixture? Arabs didn't even exist in the 4th dynasty

posted 12 December 2004 02:21 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
Arab admixture? Arabs didn't even exist in the 4th dynasty

---

Thought Writes:

I could find a jet Black Somali with the same bone-structure. The difference is that we KNOW that the early Egyptians were tropically adapted, hence within the normal range of skin-tones found in tropical Africa.

posted 12 December 2004 02:26 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

I could find a jet Black Somali with the same bone-structure. The difference is that we KNOW that the early Egyptians were tropically adapted, hence within the normal range of skin-tones found in tropical Africa.

---

posted 12 December 2004 02:41 PM            

Thought Writes:

I am not claiming that Ancient Egyptians were Somalian either. What I am claiming is that based upon the SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE the Ancient Egyptians were CLOSER to Somali than MOST Modern Egyptians in genotype and phenotype.

{I'm not saying all ancient Egyptians looked like the young man above, I'm saying that his physical type is one of several that existed in Egypt throughout dynastic times.}

Thought Writes:

In terms of bone structure, yes. Melanin level and limb length, no!

posted 13 December 2004 03:25 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
Arab admixture? Arabs didn't even exist in the 4th dynasty

---

Obviously, I am sure you can see that there is little resemblance between the two. For one thing, the "Prince" has a thick face while the Egyptian's tend to be narrower. Of course, there are many tropical Africans who approximate this depiction.

There are Nordic women, of course, who could approximate somewhat to the bust of Nefertiti. But does that mean that there were Nordics present in Kemet or that they were part of the indigenous population of Egypt?

Like I said before, if Arabs, Libyans, Syrians and the like were present in Kemet (as some artwork may tend to portray), they were there as foreigners and not as indigenous Egyptians.

posted 13 December 2004 03:39 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by neo*geo:
Arab admixture? Arabs didn't even exist in the 4th dynasty

---

When I said "Arab admixture," I meant with regards to modern Egyptians, not ancient Egyptians; if that was not obvious anyway.

BTW, when did the Arabs come into existence????

posted 13 December 2004 04:08 PM            

quote:

---

When I said "Arab admixture," I meant with regards to modern Egyptians, not ancient Egyptians; if that was not obvious anyway.

BTW, when did the Arabs come into existence????

I am sure it's obvious to you that while the Prince's bust will certainly not pass for Arab, the image of the "Egyptian" you posted most likely would.

---

Arab is not really a race. You have Arabs in Gulf countries that range from a tanned color to even black color. The Arab's own folklore place them as being two seperate people called the Adanan and Qahtani. Adanan are northern Arabs,and Qahtani are southern Arabs.

Before the modern Arabs came into existence parts of Yemen and Gulf countries were inhabited by Austric,Negrito,and even Veddoid type people. Remnants of these people remain in the Maharra in Yemen who are the oldest people to inhabit the area.

One thing that distinguishes even a lighter skinned Egyptian from the Arab is our nasal features. We have flatter noses than Arabs,and bedouin Arabs have sharper features. The word for Arabs in Egypt is shamy Sheik[reffering to Syrian Arabs].

However, it should be emphasized that no one group of people have the monopoly on facial features. Your nose shape is highly determined by what climate you evovle in.

posted 13 December 2004 06:16 PM            

quote:

---

Ausar:

Could you give an explanation as to the obvious phenotypical differences between Arabs of the Arabian peninsula and those from places like Jordan, Syria, and Iraq? Most of those Arabs from Arabia do seem to have an obvious Africanoid facial structure in contrast to those from Syria, Jordan, etc.What langauges did the people of Jordan, Palestine, Iraq, etc. speak before they were Arabised? And why didn't the Persians lose their language despite adopting Islam?

---

I don't know much about Syria other than various groups of people from Semetic to even Indo-European people like Mitanni lived in this region. Palestine are said by some to be Edomites and some Caanites. Many groups live in Palestine from ex-African slaves,Gypsies,and even desendants of Crusaders. You will find that the Christian populations in parts of the Middle East often desend from Europeans instead of the indigenous people of this region.

Before Arab conquest Jordan had bedouin Arabs known as the Nabteans. Nabteans are northern Adanan Arabs.

Nefertiti was probably half Syrian through her mother Pey. Some speculate that one of her distant relatives was Sequenen Re tao of the 17th dyansty.

posted 14 December 2004 04:12 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
For Ausar:

Kembu mentioned the Nefertiti bust so let me ask this question. Is the bust authentic? I ask the question because other sculptures and mural depictions of her are radically different. Also the bust of one of her supposed daughters is chocolate coloured--how could that be if Nefertiti were that yellow in colour.

---

Sorry I made this analogy. That was to take nothing from Nefertiti's kemetianess. Actually, there are numerous African women who look almost exactly as Nefertiti, with the elegant neck and seemingly "European" profile.

I don't think the bust is a fake. Yet, I am not digging my heels on the belief that is authentic. You must realize the original bust is brown-skinned ("light skinned" African). Don't go by reproductions that tend to lighten her skin.

You must also remember that depictions of a person can vary, especially when it is done using less than perfect techniques, i.e., sculpting, painting, etc. If you want to test this, take different pictures of yourself at different moments and possibly different places within the same year for that matter, let alone over the course of your lifetime. Compare the pictures and you will be shocked what you see.

posted 14 December 2004 04:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

Nefertiti was probably half Syrian through her mother Pey. Some speculate that one of her distant relatives was Sequenen Re tao of the 17th dyansty.

---

posted 14 December 2004 04:34 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:

Arab is not really a race. You have Arabs in Gulf countries that range from a tanned color to even black color. The Arab's own folklore place them as being two seperate people called the Adanan and Qahtani. Adanan are northern Arabs,and Qahtani are southern Arabs.

Before the modern Arabs came into existence parts of Yemen and Gulf countries were inhabited by Austric,Negrito,and even Veddoid type people. Remnants of these people remain in the Maharra in Yemen who are the oldest people to inhabit the area.

One thing that distinguishes even a lighter skinned Egyptian from the Arab is our nasal features. We have flatter noses than Arabs,and bedouin Arabs have sharper features. The word for Arabs in Egypt is shamy Sheik[reffering to Syrian Arabs].

However, it should be emphasized that no one group of people have the monopoly on facial features. Your nose shape is highly determined by what climate you evovle in.

---

Actually, my point was that Arabs fit certain phenotypical features generally recognizable in the average Arab. While it is true that technically the Arabs are not really a race, not every jack and jill who speaks Arabic and wears Arab clothes can just get up one morning and claim to be "Arab." Otherwise, there would be no genocide in Darfur.

Scientifically, it would be very hard to define a race. It is more of a social concept.

Put simply, the Arabs are a semitic people who originate from the Arabian peninsula.

posted 14 December 2004 04:47 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by kembu:

Scientifically, it would be very hard to define a race. It is more of a social concept.

---

Everybody, that is everybody but me , seem to be totally confused on this:

The "race construct" you, and most, are referring to is the Nazi one where there are supposed to be different species or sub-species of human races. That nonsense.

All humans belong to the same species(which is why DNA cannot be used to determine a persons race), only differentiating externally in the manner you and Ausar were describing in your discussions.

Please, everyone, read Diop's brief but lucid assessment of race in "Civilization and Barbarism"...please

posted 14 December 2004 04:57 PM            

quote:

---

Actually, my point was that Arabs fit certain phenotypical features generally recognizable in the average Arab. While it is true that technically the Arabs are not really a race, not every jack and jill who speaks Arabic and wears Arab clothes can just get up one morning and claim to be "Arab." Otherwise, there would be no genocide in Darfur.

Scientifically, it would be very hard to define a race. It is more of a social concept.

Put simply, the Arabs are a semitic people who originate from the Arabian peninsula.

To a large extent, Saudi Arabia is to the Middle East and North Africa what England is to the United States, Australia, Canada, South Africa and the like.

---

Well,I think you should look at a few Arabs besides what the media shows you. Many of the Qahtani Arabs[Southern Yemen] Arabs look very much like the people from the Horn of Africa. You might he shocked when you see these people. Not to mention there are non-Semetic tribes in Southern Yemen that are the Harra and others.

Even amungst the bedouins of the Sinai you will find people who would fit the descrption of Africoid. Many are shocked when they find these populations amungst otherwise Semetic Arabs,but I am not.

See the following:

The three tribes
that speak Mahra are known to other Arabs as the Ahl al Hadara. They
are the Qarra, Mahra and Harasis with parts of other tribes (WT
p.47.) The language is derived from the language of the Sabaeans,
Minaeans and Himyarites. The Mahra with other Southern Arabian
peoples seem aligned to the Hamitic race of north-east Africa. The
Mahra are believed to be descended from the Habasha, who colonised
Ethiopia in the first millennium BC (WT p. 198). Many Bait Kathir
understand the Mahri language. The Qarra and Mahra have almost
beardless faces, fuzzy hair and dark pigmentation (WP171).
<http://www.globalconnections.co.uk/pdfs/MAHRAArabs.pdf>>.

Report:
Near Eastern languages came from Africa 10,000 years ago
Investigator: Ene Metspalu
Tuesday May 28th, 2002
by Laura Spinney
Analysis of thousands of mitochondrial DNA samples has led Estonian
archeogeneticists to the origins of Arabic. Ene Metspalu of the
Department of Evolutionary Biology at Tartu University and the
Estonian Biocentre in Tartu, claims to have evidence that the Arab-
Berber languages of the Near and Middle East came out of East Africa
around 10,000 years ago. She has found evidence for what may have
been the last sizeable migration out of Africa before the slave
trade.
Genetic markers transmitted through either the maternal or paternal
line have been used to trace the great human migrations since Homo
sapiens emerged in Africa. But attempts to trace the evolution of
languages have met with less success, partly because of the impact on
languages of untraceable political and economic upheavals.
Metspalu and colleagues analyzed inherited variations in a huge
number of samples - almost 3000 - of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) taken
from natives of the Near East, Middle East and Central Asia, as well
as North and East Africa.
mtDNA is inherited through the maternal line, and by comparing their
data with existing data on European, Indian, Siberian and other
Central Asian populations, the researchers were able to create a
comprehensive phylogenetic map of maternal lineages diverging from
Africa and spreading towards Europe and Asia.
Working in collaboration with language specialists, they found that
this movement 10,000 years ago, which was probably centred on
Ethiopia, could well have been responsible for seeding the Afro-
Asiatic language from which all modern Arab-Berber languages are
descended.
"This language was spoken in Africa 10,000 or 12,000 years ago,"
Metspalu told BioMedNet News. "We think it was around that time that
carriers brought these Afro-Asiatic languages to the Near East." The
language, or its derivatives, later spread much further afield.
What could have triggered the movement she can only speculate. One
possibility is that increasing desertification was causing famine in
Africa and driving hunters further afield in search of animals.
Interestingly, the lineages they traced through this 10,000-year-old
migration didn't seem to get much further north than modern-day Syria
or east of modern-day Iraq. There is no evidence of the lineages in
the mtDNA of people from Turkey or Iran, says Metspalu.
"We can't understand why this boundary [to the Arab-Berber speaking
world] is so sharp," she said. "They came out of Africa, and when
they reached Turkey they just stopped." She believes some kind of
physical boundary, now vanished, must have impeded them.
The same genetic detective work has confirmed archeological evidence
that the biggest movement out of Africa occurred around 50,000 years
ago - which is when Africans first settled in other continents - and
that it originated in a small East African population.
<http://news.bmn.com/join>

Journal of World Prehistory
12 (1): 55-119, March 1998
Southwest Arabia During the Holocene: Recent Archaeological Developments
Christopher Edens, T.J. Wilkinson
Abstract
Recent fieldwork has considerably increased our knowledge of early
Holocene settlement in Southwest Arabia. Neolithic settlement occured
within an environmental context of increased monsoonal moisture that
continued during the mid-Holocene. A now well-attested Bronze Age
exemplified by village and town settlements occupied by sedentary
farmers developed toward the end of the mid-Holocene moist interval.
The high plateau of Yemen was an early focus for the development of
Bronze Age complex society, the economy of which relied upon terrace
rain fed and runoff agriculture. On the fringes of the Arabian Desert,
the precursors of the Sabaean literate civilization have been traced
back to between 3600 and 2800 B.P., and even earlier, so that a
virtually continuous archaeological record can now be desribe for
parts of Yemen. In contrast to the highlands these societies relied
upon food production from large scale irrigation systems dependent
upon capricious wadi floods. Bronze Age settlement, while showing some
links with the southern Levant, now shows equal or stronger linkages
with the Horn of Africa across the Red Sea. Although some regions of
Yemen show breaks in occupation, others show continuity into the
Sabaean period when a series of major towns grew up in response to the
increased incense trade with the north. It is now clear that these
civilizations grew up on the foundations of earlier Bronze Age complex
societies.

posted 14 December 2004 05:37 PM            

You say that the definition of "Arab" is that of a "semitic people" with origins in Arabia. The whole thing is a bit confusing because I know many people who confuse Iranians, Turks, a nd Pakistanis with "Arabs". The talk is to refer to Arabs as "semitic" when in actual fact it's more accurate to say "semitic SPEAKING". Turks, Iranians and Pakistanis don't speak a Semitic languageand people are confused by this distinction.

The reference to Darfur is a bit confusing. According to African journalists who have actually visited Darfur there's no genocide there. What happened was large numbers of people decided to flee from their villages when the conflict between the rebels and the government/janjaweed escalated. The violence in Darfur was much less than that in Falooja--as I was informed.

But interesting point: the Arabs of Northern Sudan have the same phenotype as the so-called "black Africans" as portrayed by the Western media. The politics played by the Western media here is palpable....

posted 14 December 2004 06:22 PM            

quote:

---

Please, everyone, read Diop's brief but lucid assessment of race in "Civilization and Barbarism"...please

---

However, because Diop has changed the game....the game itself has moved on.

I think if Diop were alive today, it is probably SOY Keita, who would best express the latest findings and scientific principals that Diop's revolution originated.

For example: Diop was among the 1st to critique the notion of the 'true negro' as classified by skeletal analysis.

He stated that it was a 'swindle' that enabled [wst] anthropology to deny the existence of all the 'real negros' in the world if need be.

This was prior to the revolution in molecular genetics, which proved that actual lineage did not necessarily match up with the broad physical catagories devised by wst scholorship, and moreover demonstrated that the human genome is largely out of Africa, and NOT one of "caucasoid" defusion.

Because of this, Eurocentrist wst' has had to change it tactics....this requires adaption on the part of non Eurocentric scholars.

A good example of the 'new' Eurocentrism is Brace's clines and clusters methods, which do not define race groups, but merely examines skeletal affinities with what superficially appears to be a set of metric objective criterion.

These Eurocentric methods are designed so that they cannot be countered by Diop's methodologies.

posted 14 December 2004 06:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ausar:
[b]

Nefertiti was probably half Syrian through her mother Pey. Some speculate that one of her distant relatives was Sequenen Re tao of the 17th dyansty.

---

posted 05 May 2005 02:42 PM            

Nupe357

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
Now that Nupe357 has divulged his preference, which is fine on a personal level, how about productions encompassing the unbiased and fully substantiated representation of Ancient Egypt, as so repetitively maintained on this board?

---

posted 05 May 2005 04:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by nupe357:
I'm replying to your quote below...What "preference" are you speaking of? I did not discuss nor divulge preferences for anything. I simply asked a question.

Nupe357

---