posted 22 December 2004 11:09 AM            

Hair

Numerous mummies with hair still attached to the skulls show that straight, wavy, or lightly curled hair types were common in ancient Egypt. For example, in a study (Titlbachova and Titlbach, 1977) involving detailed microscopic investigation of hair samples taken from several ancient Egyptian mummies, most were determined to have been naturally straight, wavy, or gently curled, with a roundish cross-section typical of modern Eurasian and North African peoples. Only a minority showed evidence of structural characteristics traditionally called "Negroid"; even in these the "Negroid" elements were weakly manifested.

Joann Fletcher, a consultant to the Bioanthropology Foundation in the UK, in what she calls an "absolute, thorough study of all ancient Egyptian hair samples" — relied on various techniques, such as electron microscopy and chromatography to analyze hair samples (Parks, 2000). She discovered that most of the natural hair types and those used for hairpieces were made of what she calls "Caucasian-type" hair, including even instances of blonde and red hair. Fletcher surmises that some of the lighter hair types may have been influenced by the presence of ancient Libyans and Greeks in ancient Egypt. However, this type of hair was also found to be present in much earlier times."

posted 22 December 2004 11:48 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by HERU:
I came across this early this morning.
http://www.geocities.com/enbp/physanth.html

Hair

Numerous mummies with hair still attached to the skulls show that straight, wavy, or lightly curled hair types were common in ancient Egypt. For example, in a study (Titlbachova and Titlbach, 1977) involving detailed microscopic investigation of hair samples taken from several ancient Egyptian mummies, most were determined to have been naturally straight, wavy, or gently curled, with a roundish cross-section typical of modern Eurasian and North African peoples. Only a minority showed evidence of structural characteristics traditionally called "Negroid"; even in these the "Negroid" elements were weakly manifested.

Joann Fletcher, a consultant to the Bioanthropology Foundation in the UK, in what she calls an "absolute, thorough study of all ancient Egyptian hair samples" — relied on various techniques, such as electron microscopy and chromatography to analyze hair samples (Parks, 2000). She discovered that most of the natural hair types and those used for hairpieces were made of what she calls "Caucasian-type" hair, including even instances of blonde and red hair. Fletcher surmises that some of the lighter hair types may have been influenced by the presence of ancient Libyans and Greeks in ancient Egypt. However, this type of hair was also found to be present in much earlier times."

How true is this? And what kind of hairstyles did the Egyptians use? [/B]

---

To speak of "negroid" hair is to continue holding to the obsolete
notion of the true "negro" which if there is any such thing would be but
one type of inner African.

Why are straight wavy and curly all lumped together as if they
are one hair type when microscopically they all differ?

Inner Africans of the Sudan belt and the Horn regularly display
deep wavy hair and curly hair as well as wooly hair.

While the mummies show what the mummies show, and theres no need to
controvert that, I do have a critique of the red and curly haired Ms
Fletchers hair classifications. Wavy and curly hair is as much
"negroid" as is wooly hair which by the way some "blancoids" also have.

If we were to introduce the blanco and blancoid into anthropology
to take their rightful place beside the negro and negroid, we
woild have to conclude that the majority of caucasoids and even a
few actual caucasians are not blancos or
blancoids.

posted 22 December 2004 12:15 PM            

This is how I think cynotrichous and heliotrichous developed.
Cynotrichous is a typo for cymotrichous which could include
all except one particular hair type. Heliotrichous is a mistaken
attempt to coin a Greek sounding word for "helix haired." Strands
of wooly and frizzly hair when long enough resemble a helix, the
Greek word for spiral.

In what is a classic application of the eurocentric "Negro myth",
Fletcher has taken a narrow constricted view of what she sees as
"negroid hair" given it a name and allows every other hair type
other than wooly to be not just caucasoid but actual "caucasian
hair."

Any Afrikan or dark/black skinned peoples are declared non-Negro
when not compliant to that stereotypical measuring stick known
as the "true Negro." Though not as blatant as the examples in
Diop's chapter 'Birth of the Negro Myth', this reasoning still
exists in historical, anthropological, and other Eurocentric
laden sciences. It is so automatic with Eurocentrists that I
don't believe they are even conscious of perpetrating it.

Caucasian becomes a catch all category more than a defined
variety. Caucasian physical features are laid so broad that
anyone not fitting some stringently defined category become
Caucasian by default. When such people are obviouly non-white
they become caucasoid, an honorary Caucasian status I guess.

Thus East Afrikans have been labeled caucasoid. Nevermind that
they are black, that can be explained away. Caucasoids are
assumed to be derived from Caucasian stock. But let a Caucasian
display any "negroid features" and ingenius hypotheses are
proposed to decry possibilities of inner Afrikan admixture.

The last page of PMK's Short Primer on Physical Anthropology http://www.he.net/~skyeagle/anthro.htm http://members.tripod.com/kekaitiare/anthro.htm
shows the extent that Caucasoid lumping bolsters Eurocentric
racial worldview.

posted 22 December 2004 12:26 PM            

Sorry for all the deletions.
They were format tests for
the following post.

posted 22 December 2004 12:27 PM            

Haddon 1925 characterised two opposing hair types:

ULOTRICHY _ long to short close interlocking spirals (coils
___________ curved follicle
___________ compressed lumen
___________ narrow oval cross section

LEIOTRICHY_ long lank stiff coarse and flopping straight down
___________ straight follicle
___________ round lumen
___________ pseudo circular cross section

This was based on Bory de St Vincent 1827 but with a precision
and expansion. Haddon placed the range of hair types ranging
between wooly and straight extremes into another category:

CYMOTRICHY frizzly _ - very short deep wave having no curve or spiral
___________ curly __ - complete circle or large spiral
___________ wavy __ - low to deep waves
___________ smooth_ - thin soft slightly curved tending to wave
___________ curved to straight follicle
___________ compressed to round lumen
___________ oval to pseudo circular cross section

The terms invented by Fletcher(?) are loaded with preconceptions
and take terrible liberties with their invented Greek etymologies.
Outside of racial joking, just what is dog hair? Is it determined
by its smell when wet? Is it like the fur of a poodle, an Afghan
hound, a spaniel, a wire hair terrier, or a chihuahua? And sun hair
brings to mind images of a color, the tendency of strong sunlight
to bleach hair to reddish and yellowish tints.

Dr. Fletcher's coinages detract from the standard anthropological
and forensic terminology for a fanciful biased determination of
hair type related to stereotypical ideas of the misnomered
classifications Caucasian and Negro. As such it should be avoided.
We should not begin classifying those Ethiopians with straight hair
as Caucasians or those Scotch-Irish or Ashkenazim with wooly hair
as Negro (I only use that word for purposes of illustration).

I recall an Ashkenazi with a Jewfro joking with me that there are
two kinds of hair. There's either hair that grows up or hair that
grows down. This would rob both Fletcher and Bory de St Vincent of
their opinions of frizzly and curly hair being Caucasian and wavy
hair not being Negro.

posted 22 December 2004 12:27 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

Dr. Fletcher's coinages detract from the standard anthropological
and forensic terminology for a fanciful biased determination of
hair type related to stereotypical ideas of the misnomered
classifications Caucasian and Negro. As such it should be avoided.

---

posted 22 December 2004 12:53 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by HERU:
Originally posted by alTakruri:

Dr. Fletcher's coinages detract from the standard anthropological
and forensic terminology for a fanciful biased determination of
hair type related to stereotypical ideas of the misnomered
classifications Caucasian and Negro. As such it should be avoided.

I see what you're saying. Have any idea what sort of hairstyles the ancient Egyptians used?

---

You can look in the Kmt Art threads for some examples.

No doubt there were straight and wooly hairstyles in AE.
The most typical one was an Afro that was short on the top
and thick at the sides and the back. Then theres braids like
those throughout all Africa. Straight haired AEs let theirs flop.
And there were wigs of all possible purities and combinations of the
various human hair types.

If you can find repros of the paintings in the tomb of Nakht, all
kinds of styles are represented. But there was one kind of hair
that predominated in old Kmt that is not so common in the modern Misr
of alYazid's photo contributions of these past few days.

Anthropologist Alfred Haddon used ulotrichous for wooly hair.
But in Greek oulotriches can mean either curly or wooly haired
in contrast to ithutriches or euthutriches. Herodotus uses these
opposite types to distinguish western from eastern Aethiopians.
His eastern Aethiopians are ithutriches -- straight haired, and
western Aethiopians have the oulotaton trichôma -- wooliest hair.

It's clear Herodotus sees a relationship between Colchians and
Egyptians because both have dark complexions and wooly hair.
But that's not enough to adduce a one to one identity because
they aren't the only nationalities so characterized. To tighten his
argument he brings in other evidence like their both practicing
circumcision (along with the Aethiopians another set of dark and
wooly nationalities whom the Greeks thought that the Egyptians
in turn sprung from) before others -- the circumcising "Syrians" --
caught on to it.


HERODOTUS 2.104.1&2 (on Colchian's Egyptian descent)

phainontai men gar eontes hoi Kolchoi Aiguptioi,
For it is plain to see that the Colchians are Egyptians;
noêsas de proteron autos ê akousas allôn legô.
and what I say, I myself noted before I heard it from others.
hôs de moi en phrontidi egeneto,
When it occurred to me,
eiromên amphoterous,
I inquired of both peoples;
kai mallon hoi Kolchoi ememneato tôn Aiguptiôn ê hoi Aiguptioi tôn Kolchôn:
and the Colchians remembered the Egyptians better than the Egyptians remembered the Colchians;

nomizein d' ephasan hoi Aiguptioi tês Sesôstrios stratiês einai tous Kolchous.
the Egyptians said that they considered the Colchians part of Sesostris' army.
autos de eikasa têide,
I myself guessed it,
kai hoti melanchroes eisi kai oulotriches.
partly because they are dark-skinned and woolly-haired;
kai touto men es ouden anêkei:
though that indeed counts for nothing,
eisi gar kai heteroi toioutoi:
since other peoples are, too;
alla toiside kai mallon,
but my better proof was that
hoti mounoi pantôn anthrôpôn Kolchoi kai Aiguptioi kai Aithiopes peritamnontai ap' archês ta aidoia. .
the Colchians and Egyptians and Ethiopians are the only nations that have from the first practised circumcision



HERODOTUS 7.70.1 (on blacks in the Persian army)

tôn men dê huper Aiguptou Aithiopôn kai Arabiôn êrche Arsamês,
The Ethiopians above Egypt and the Arabians had Arsames for commander,
hoi de apo hêliou anatoleôn Aithiopes* dixoi gar dê estrateuonto prosetetachato toisi Indoisi,
while the Ethiopians of the east1 (for there were two kinds of them in the army) served with the Indians;
diallassontes eidos* men ouden toisi heteroisi,
they were not different in appearance from the others,
phônên de kai trichôma* mounon:
only in speech and hair:
hoi men gar apo hêliou Aithiopes ithutriches* eisi,
the Ethiopians from the east are straight-haired,
hoi d' ek tês Libuês oulotaton trichôma echousi pantôn anthrôpôn.
but the ones from Libya have the woolliest hair of all men.

posted 22 December 2004 01:10 PM            

So why did Herodotus refer to Egyptians and Ethiopians(meaning Nubians, etc.) as having black skins and woolly hair?

And why do we find in Aristotle's Physiognomica the observation that Egyptians and Ethiopians have the woolliest hair known at the time?

And why do the large multiplicity of tomb panels show the AE's as having black hair or black wigs?

Very often the hair on the AE's as demonstrated on their tomb panels is often very short(shaved) of the Africoid variety. How realistic is this?

If the AE hair was non-Africoid why then did they wear wigs and why do they seem to be relatively hairless(note very short beards, little facial hair, etc.)?

I have seen pictures of t he kinds of combs the AE's used for their hair and they seem especially made for the Africoid type of hair--so are these combs authentic, and actually used them?

Why did the AE's seem to have the same hair type on the head and face as the Nubians to the South, but different from the Asiatics and Eurasians as shown on their panels showing the different known ethnic types(cf. Lepsius's depiction)?

If Fletcher's analysis is valid then why do the sculpture morphologies with reagrd to hair type of the AE's seem so very different from that of the Greeks and Romans?

So with how much reliability should one regard Fletcher's analysis?

posted 22 December 2004 01:48 PM            

Diop seemed both puzzled and suspicious when he wrote;

quote:

---

It is customary to mention the straight hair of certain carefully chosen mummies, the only ones found in museums, to affirm that they represent a prototype of the White race, notwithstanding their prognathism. These mummies are displayed conspicuously in an attempt to prove the whiteness of the Egyptians. The very coarseness of their hair precludes acceptance of that contention. When such hair exists on the head of a mummy, it merely indicates the Dravidian type, in reality, whereas the prognathism and black skin-pigmented, not blackened by tar or any other product-excludes any idea of a white race. The meticulous selection process to which they have been subjected rules out any possibility of their being a prototype.
-- The African Origin of Civilization

---

Diop was, of course, correct on two points:

1) Among the Cushitic peoples of northeast Africa, of which the Kemetians formed a part, long hair and straight hair was common. It certainly wasn't unusual.

2) Given their tract record, it is plain common sense, to be skeptical of Western Egyptologists and their 'discoveries' and presentations.

But it is my opinion, that due to the process of mummification, it is doubtful that any really 'woolly-haired' mummies would ever be found. And I think that had Diop lived in Harlem, for example, prior to the 1960s, he probably would have understood why this would be.
Ancient Egyptian mummies were, inadvertently, submitted to a form of 'conking' and/or Jheri curl!

Deliberate hair-straightening; the conk and the jheri curl

The Conk, which originated in the 1920s, was an attempt by Black men to straighten their hair to make it look like that of White men.
The primary ingredients used to straighten or relax the hair are:
Sodium hydroxide (the conk) and Ammonium thioglycolate(the jheri curl). These chemical agents work against moisture, or in other words they dry the hair structure to the degree that it relaxes and the woolly hair looses its natural tendency to curl. This chemically straightened hair also cannot be reverted back to its original natural state. The only way to get rid of a conk is to allow it to grow out.

Inadvertent hair-straightening; Kemetian mummification

The primary process of embalming the corpse was the 'natron bath' wherein the corpse was completely covered in dry natron for a period of forty days. The chemical ingredients in natron are:
Sodium carbonate; bicarbonate; sodium sulphate; and chloride. These chemical agents work against moisture, in fact, it was used to 'dry out' the body. (Kinda like making beef jerky.)

This, I think, is why you find all these long haired-straight haired prognathous Negro (IE, Dravidian types.) mummies.

Its more 'conk' than conspiracy.

[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 13 September 2004).]

and ausar concurred:

quote:

---

posted 13 September 2004 04:00 PM

...You are correct...that the substance in the embalming material has been known to straighten hair,and over time mummy hair loses elasticity that hold hair into place. Still there are Nubians and modern Upper Egyptians with a wavy type hair that is not straight but is actually very thick. Europeans have wavy hair that is very thin and has a more rounded folice as opposed to people of African desent.

---

posted 22 December 2004 02:56 PM            

cynotrichous, from,
cyno -> dog and
trich -> hair
cynotrichous -> dog's hair, meaning hair that is wavy to straight in texture like a dog's and contrasted with hair that is wooly in texture (lamb's hair).

The best method for associating hair texture with ethnicity is based on the thickness of the cross section of the hair shaft, and not it's degree of curl or it's color, which for reasons already attested can be misleading. AE hair was generally thick and africoid and not of the thin eurasian variety.

Ethnic Group Hair thickness index
Badarian, pre-dynastic Egyptian 50.0
San, Southern African 55.O0
Zulu, Southern African 55.O0
Sub-Saharan Africa (ave?) 60.O0
Ancient Egypt (ave?) 60.02
Tasmanian (Black) 64.70
Australian (Black) 68.00
Western European 71.20
Asian Indian 73.00
Navajo American 77.00
Chinese 82.60

worth noting:

* notice that some Blacks Asian groups have thin hair much like Europeans, and some Black South Indians have even thinner hair than Europeans.

* for people who like to play games with cluster groups -> notice that European hair and hair texture clusters IN-BETWEEN East Asian and African.

* in terms of texture and thickness the extremes of hair are actually found in khoisanoid and diminuative type (thick and peppercorn) hair; and straight and thin east asian hair at the other extreme.

* even African wooly (afro) hair is in between peppercorn and curly.

* europeans have highly heterogenious hair types...curly bordering on afro, wavy and straight. black, brown, red, blonde (yellow) and blonde (white); attempts to assign these diverse types to the 'caucasian' hair group is just another attempt to disguise the reality of diversity within Europeans.

* the only hair type that is endemic to europe is predominent blondism.

* by virtue of paleness of skin color, eye color and hair color, and recessive genes associated with this, you could arguably define 'nordic types' as a separate race from the rest of Europeans and the rest of the world. it is important to understand why, [wst] anthropologists never attempt to do this, instead sometimes clinging to their 'caucasoid' umbrella which is designed precisely to sweep these facts under the rug.

see : http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/hair2.html

posted 22 December 2004 09:32 PM            

quote:

---

Wally wrote:

2) Given their tract record, it is plain common sense, to be skeptical of Western Egyptologists and their 'discoveries' and presentations.

---

Excellent point. Sad but true, especially given the contribution that many Western Egyptologists have otherwise made to the knowledge, and the access they have to future discoveries.

---

Speaking of hair & race: What conclusions can we come to with regard to body hair?

Are africans less hairy than "caucasians"? Facial hair was mentioned earlier -- do Africans on average have less facial hair (and body hair) than caucasians? (Admixture notwithstanding...)

...And once body hair became all but vestigial among most people, why did it make such a strong comeback in other groups? I'm thinking clothing would've protected from the cold -- so why such furry backs?

I've even heard (from a TV documentary) that ice-age humans in europe would have shaved their beards to avoid it icing up. Why such thick facial hair in the first place, if not as an advantage in an icy climate?

I'm not suggesting any point or other, I just thought these are interesting questions, as long as we're discussing evolutionary biology. I also know some "Africoid" people are hairy, but as a general rule, are caucasians hairier?

(Perhaps it's some protection from the sun?)

posted 22 December 2004 09:49 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sunstorm2004:
I'm not suggesting any point or other, I just thought these are interesting questions, as long as we're discussing evolutionary biology. I also know some "Africoid" people are hairy, but as a general rule, are caucasians hairier?

---

posted 23 December 2004 07:40 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
I don't see any reason to doubt that Eurasians, especially Europeans, generally have more visible body hair, than the tropically adapted folks of Africa.

---

That's another puzzle. To date, I have not seen any artform depicting the ancient Egyptians as "hairy." Mediterranean people are notoriously hairy. I wonder what the proponents of ancient-Egyptians-were-mediterranean-caucasoids would interpose here for an argument.

posted 23 December 2004 11:20 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sunstorm2004:
I don't think they depicted anyone as hairy, even "white" people & asiatics.

Some asiatics were distinguished by tattoos though...

---

One of the brickmakers in a painting in the tomb of Rekhmire, though
not as hirsute as that guy in the post <shudder>, does have a belly
and chest full of sandy hair like his stubbly beard. His lips seem to
mark him as one of the Aamw.

The blue eye in this jpeg is a touchup and does not appear in the
hardcopy prints of this painting.

posted 24 December 2004 12:47 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by kembu:
That's another puzzle. To date, I have not seen any artform depicting the ancient Egyptians as "hairy." Mediterranean people are notoriously hairy.

---

Thought Writes:

posted 24 December 2004 02:55 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

We certainly see this HAIRY type in the reenactments we see on Discovery Channel, etc. Modern and Ancient Egyptians have different phenotypes!

---

Hahahaha! Thats for sure. And Hawass and the antiquity department and
museums of Misr apparently have no problem with that distortion of
fact.

Hope all have a good weekend and a good holiday to those who are
celebrating one or another!!

posted 24 December 2004 04:07 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
And Hawass and the antiquity department and museums of Misr apparently have no problem with that distortion of
fact.

---

Thought Writes:

posted 27 December 2004 12:29 PM            

quote:

---

That's another puzzle. To date, I have not seen any artform depicting the ancient Egyptians as "hairy." Mediterranean people are notoriously hairy. I wonder what the proponents of ancient-Egyptians-were-mediterranean-caucasoids would interpose here for an argument.

---

It seems Egyptians generally didn't depict people as hairy (though set was said to be red and hairy.)

posted 27 December 2004 12:34 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sunstorm2004:

Anyway, you have to wonder if asiatics and mediterranean peoples neighboring egypt depicted themselves as hairy... Maybe you guys know of some pictures?

---

posted 28 December 2004 08:52 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sunstorm2004:
It seems Egyptians generally didn't depict people as hairy (though set was said to be red and hairy.)

Anyway, you have to wonder if asiatics and mediterranean peoples neighboring egypt depicted themselves as hairy... Maybe you guys know of some pictures?

---

posted 29 December 2004 03:34 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
One of the brickmakers in a painting in the tomb of Rekhmire, though
not as hirsute as that guy in the post <shudder>, does have a belly
and chest full of sandy hair like his stubbly beard. His lips seem to
mark him as one of the Aamw.

The blue eye in this jpeg is a touchup and does not appear in the
hardcopy prints of this painting.

---

posted 29 December 2004 03:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by kembu:
Thanks for the pic, but this "hairy" guy looks African. That's the kind of "hairy" you see among the relatively smaller percentage of hairy Africans, especially older men. So he certainly cannot be characterized as a mediterranean caucasoid.

---

posted 29 December 2004 05:53 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by kembu:
Thanks for the pic, but this "hairy" guy looks African. That's the kind of "hairy" you see among the relatively smaller percentage of hairy Africans, especially older men. So he certainly cannot be characterized as a mediterranean caucasoid.

---

Med doesn't automatically corespond to Caucasian. Look at these Keftiu
from the first EgyArt thread who are at once N Med or I Med and Africoid.

And so, well, I don't know about Med caucasoid but the guy with chest
and belly hair his facial profile does resemble some of those I've seen
of E Meds in AE paintings. Not to be absolutist, this guy's profile is in a
contrast to his co-workers who wear the patented "TaSeti leather briefs." <smile>

Tens of thousands of Meds found their way into service in AE.
Should it be impossible to find them portrayed at work
alongside other Kmtyw both native and nationalized or was
it forbidden for artists to put nationalized Aamw in a painting?
So how do we identify nationalized foreigners in AE art if we
can't admit certain sets of features are more likely nonAE
although some AE and NE Africans may have similar traits?

To see the occasional foreign national in AE art doesn't detract
one bit from the fact that AE is an African originated civ founded
by, maintained, ruled, and overwhelmingly populated by inner Africans
as multi-disciplined analyses plainly shows without the slightest doubt.

.

posted 30 December 2004 01:32 PM            

Take a look at this Benin bronze of an African portrait of a Portuguese soldier... http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1895000/images/_1896535_benin150.jpg

It's a small picture, but do you see what I mean?

posted 30 December 2004 06:18 PM            

At right an AE, at left a TMHHW, the rest are AAMW.

posted 31 December 2004 01:05 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kem-Au:
The higher class seemed to be better groomed, but the poor could get wooly, at least in wall reliefs. There's one image of a guy working in a mine who looks like he hasn't shaved in a while and his hair appears to be locking up. I'll try to post the image by the weekend.

---

posted 01 January 2005 09:58 AM            

This 19th Dynasty wig might be trying to portray what Egyptian women thought was the 'ideal hairstyle'? The owner probably wouldn't have gone to the fuss of being buried with it unless it was of the utmost quality and suitable for the afterlife.

posted 01 January 2005 10:02 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Psusennes I:
http://www.stormfront.org/whitehistory/egg3_files/wig.jpg

This 19th Dynasty wig might be trying to portray what Egyptian women thought was the 'ideal hairstyle'? The owner probably wouldn't have gone to the fuss of being buried with it unless it was of the utmost quality and suitable for the afterlife.

[This message has been edited by Psusennes I (edited 01 January 2005).]

---

posted 02 January 2005 10:33 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by anacalypsis:
Sir Altakruri

is this nubian person labeled as such in the original painting, or was he denoted as something else?? I mean, was this a southern egyptain, or a kushite, or Meroe, or southern african??

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anacalypsis:

Also, I noticed that the people of crete look like peoples of color (black african, arab, southeast asia, etc), and NOT EUROPEAN (WHITE) as mentioned by abaza.(sorry to go there, but its astonishing that he could have even thought that in the first place).
My question is how do you know that they are from Crete and not from Punt?

---

posted 09 January 2005 05:46 PM            

Anyone know what evidence supports this reasoning? Are there alternate views?

It just seems a peculiar solution for such a common problem. And if hair lice is the reason behind the custom, why wasn't the custom as widespread in neighboring cultures?

posted 11 January 2005 08:19 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
One of the brickmakers in a painting in the tomb of Rekhmire, though
not as hirsute as that guy in the post <shudder>, does have a belly
and chest full of sandy hair like his stubbly beard. His lips seem to
mark him as one of the Aamw.

The blue eye in this jpeg is a touchup and does not appear in the
hardcopy prints of this painting.

---

I'm wondering is the blue appearance of the eyes of the old man is arcus senilis which is a whitish to appeaing ring around the cornea. In people with dark coloured eyes this ring may have a light or sky blue appearnce. It is due to the deposition of fat granules in the cornea, or to hyaline degeneration. It is mostly seen in old patients and rarely in middle aged and the young. It in the west its is also seen in greater numbers in African americans. This is not generally considered to be of pathological importance, but from a bio-chemical viewpoint, it represents a specific metabolic disturbance and provides a valuable indication as to fat and cholesterol metabolism. One school of thought is that it has some cardiovascular health indications as well. There is also indications that alcohol consumption increases the likihood of it occuring.