posted
Tracing ancient Egyptians though the features of the Pharaohs is not very clever. The Pharaohs were royalty and royalty tends not to marry from the local stock but marry other royal who are usually foreign. This means the royal line is tainted and does not reflect how the local population looked like in appearance.
Posts: 620 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Tracing ancient Egyptians though the features of the Pharaohs is not very clever. The Pharaohs were royalty and royalty tends not to marry from the local stock but marry other royal who are usually foreign. This means the royal line is tainted and does not reflect how the local population looked like in appearance.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Royals tend to marry other royals and since other royals tend to be foreigners it is not too much to understand the bloodline of the Royals are not the purest.
posted
brother! I am new to this BUT I believe the convention is to marry their kin/sibling/cousin. NOT foreigners.
Seems like incest to me but that is their custom.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes you are right, royals do marry cousins and other distant relatives to keep the royal line intact and strong. I wouldn't call it incest. Incest is when brothers and sisters from the same parents have sex.
But apart from this arrangement of marrying within the family, royals also marry strategically to foreign princes and princesses to form military alliances to strengthen their kingdom. This way when they are attacked by an enemy, their allies through marriage are compelled by family ties to come to their assistance.
posted
I am going to leave this alone. Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Royals tend to marry other royals and since other royals tend to be foreigners it is not too much to understand the bloodline of the Royals are not the purest.
Well if you can cite any source with evidence of Egyptians marrying foreigners and making them the basis of the dynastic line in ancient Egypt please do so.
The facts will show that this was not the case.
The Egyptians had harems for the king who had multiple wives and concubines. Only one Queen was the chief Queen responsible for making an heir to the throne. Lesser Queens and concubines could be foreign princesses, but to my knowledge, none of these have ever produced a royal heir or ever promoted to the rank of Great Royal wife. It went against Egyptian tradition and custom. In fact the only "foreign" women were made into chief Queens were women from the South which was a way of strengthening ties between Egypt and the Southern areas that were traditional allies in the time of struggle with other foreign nations. But seeing as ancient Egyptian traditions and cosmology originated in the Southern areas, calling these people "foreign" is a bit of a stretch.
But again, I could be wrong, I doubt it, but if you have some evidence or source for this claim please provide it.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doug M , what I am saying is not limited to how the situation was in ancient Egypt. I am talking about what is the norm with royals worldwide. Surely you know that is the case don't you?
In days gone by, royal families across the globe marry strategically to form military alliances. There is no need to limit this obvious truth to only the ancient Egyptians.
If you care to check, royal families across Europe are all related to each other. They are one big family. How did this happen? Through marriage alliances of course.
posted
^ I was simply suggesting a comparison between faces of Ethiopia and the faces of the Pharoahs.
Who cares about their lineage? I was simply noticing similarities in facial features.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ I was simply suggesting a comparison between faces of Ethiopia and the faces of the Pharoahs.
Who cares about their lineage? I was simply noticing similarities in facial features.
Who cares? You should if you do not want to be ambushed in a debate on how and how not ancient Egyptians looked like.
I was pointing out the dangers in following down this road of focusing the identity of the ancient Egyptians on their royal line. Let me ask you? What happens if you follow down this road and someone comes along and shows you a Pharaoh who looked like a Caucasian? What do you do then huh? Without any knowledge of what I am talking about, in your ignorance you would be stumped and not understand how this came about and therefore not have an answer.
Because of the lack of answers the other side would also end up thinking, ancient Egyptians may have been Caucasian. Meanwhile both sides involved in this debate forget that, the Pharaohs being royals married far and wide hence the admixture in their features.
If you want to talk about the features of the ancient Egyptians, the best bet is to concentrate on ordinary Egyptians and not put too much emphasis on how this and that Pharaoh looked like. Its not a clever approach.
Posts: 620 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Tracing ancient Egyptians though the features of the Pharaohs is not very clever. The Pharaohs were royalty and royalty tends not to marry from the local stock but marry other royal who are usually foreign. This means the royal line is tainted and does not reflect how the local population looked like in appearance.
My word exactly. Huh? LOL. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK - I think I have must have entered the Twilight Zone. Departure soon?
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Doug M , what I am saying is not limited to how the situation was in ancient Egypt. I am talking about what is the norm with royals worldwide. Surely you know that is the case don't you?
In days gone by, royal families across the globe marry strategically to form military alliances. There is no need to limit this obvious truth to only the ancient Egyptians.
If you care to check, royal families across Europe are all related to each other. They are one big family. How did this happen? Through marriage alliances of course.
This is a thread specifically about ancient Egypt. Therefore if you brought it up in this thread you are basically saying that the ancient Egyptians married foreigners and made them chief wives. I have already asked you for evidence of this and provided the context in which foreign marriages did happen.
Anything else is speculation on your part and really has nothing to do with the features of the ancient Egyptians.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Energy: If you care to check, royal families across Europe are all related to each other. They are one big family. How did this happen? Through marriage alliances of course.
With Egypt wouldn't they be mostly connected to African royalty? Africans seem freakishly connected with each other over long distances
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
I was pointing out the dangers in following down this road of focusing the identity of the ancient Egyptians on their royal line. Let me ask you? What happens if you follow down this road and someone comes along and shows you a Pharaoh who looked like a Caucasian?
No need to worry about that ever happening though, unless of course, its in a dream. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
I was pointing out the dangers in following down this road of focusing the identity of the ancient Egyptians on their royal line. Let me ask you? What happens if you follow down this road and someone comes along and shows you a Pharaoh who looked like a Caucasian?
No need to worry about that ever happening though, unless of course, its in a dream.
I guess you are not aware there is a whole movement out there that says the ancient Egyptians were not black. Did you ever wonder how they arrived at that conclusion?
Even on this site you have posters saying the AE were not black because of this and that reason and you still want to ignore the dangers in putting out an argument on AE without covering all the loopholes?
Out of curiosity, why the fascination with the Pharaohs? Why don't you focus instead on the real people, the local people, who made up ancient Egypt?
Posts: 620 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ I was simply suggesting a comparison between faces of Ethiopia and the faces of the Pharoahs.
Who cares about their lineage? I was simply noticing similarities in facial features.
Who cares? You should if you do not want to be ambushed in a debate on how and how not ancient Egyptians looked like.
I was pointing out the dangers in following down this road of focusing the identity of the ancient Egyptians on their royal line. Let me ask you? What happens if you follow down this road and someone comes along and shows you a Pharaoh who looked like a Caucasian? What do you do then huh? Without any knowledge of what I am talking about, in your ignorance you would be stumped and not understand how this came about and therefore not have an answer.
Because of the lack of answers the other side would also end up thinking, ancient Egyptians may have been Caucasian. Meanwhile both sides involved in this debate forget that, the Pharaohs being royals married far and wide hence the admixture in their features.
If you want to talk about the features of the ancient Egyptians, the best bet is to concentrate on ordinary Egyptians and not put too much emphasis on how this and that Pharaoh looked like. Its not a clever approach.
Strange, I could care less about the debate on Black or White Egypt in this thread.
Maybe I should have said - many of the Non-Caucasian Pharoahs look like Ethiopians to me.
Ramses doesn't look like an Ethiopian to me. Many of the other Pharoahs as well.
Just saying that quite a few of the Pharoahs had facial features very similar to modern day Ethiopians. I am not saying they were Ethiopians either. Just noting the similarities.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Tracing ancient Egyptians though the features of the Pharaohs is not very clever. The Pharaohs were royalty and royalty tends not to marry from the local stock but marry other royal who are usually foreign. This means the royal line is tainted and does not reflect how the local population looked like in appearance.
Evergreen Writes:
Your position is of interest and needs to be further explored.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is how mentally challenged this forum has become.
Osirion, pregnancy and crack don't mix.
How in the world does your brain come to the conclusion that the Ancient Egyptians are more related to Ethiopians and Somalis than to the Sudanese and especially the indigenous population of Egypt?
Ethiopia and Somalia have little to nothing to do with Ancient Egypt.
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
WHAT needs to be explored????? That the egyptians Pharoahs married foreigners? How long have you been here.
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen:
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Tracing ancient Egyptians though the features of the Pharaohs is not very clever. The Pharaohs were royalty and royalty tends not to marry from the local stock but marry other royal who are usually foreign. This means the royal line is tainted and does not reflect how the local population looked like in appearance.
Evergreen Writes:
Your position is of interest and needs to be further explored.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ What has how long he or she has been on this site got to do with the wisdom of further exploration of evidence to arrive at the conclusive truth in this matter?
This site is not the rest of the world. Out there in the real world there are people claiming, the ancient Egyptians were not black but white, and so far they have been holding their own in the debate. To stamp their authority and buttress their claims, these ones even put out movies that support their claim that the ancient Egyptians were Caucasian by using Caucasian actors to play the ancient Egyptians.
Your job as an Afrocentric is to use the opportunity presented on this site, where like minded people have congregated who hold the view that the ancient Egyptians were black, to engage in discussions that explore all the angles and cover all the loopholes in order to leave the Eurocentric with no room to manoeuvre.
Coming up with a comment like, "WHAT needs to be explored?????" is a sign of pure mental laziness. We need to challenge our own opinions and beliefs with regard to AE before exposing ourselves to the battlefield.
Posts: 620 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
I was pointing out the dangers in following down this road of focusing the identity of the ancient Egyptians on their royal line. Let me ask you? What happens if you follow down this road and someone comes along and shows you a Pharaoh who looked like a Caucasian?
No need to worry about that ever happening though, unless of course, its in a dream.
I guess you are not aware there is a whole movement out there that says the ancient Egyptians were not black. Did you ever wonder how they arrived at that conclusion?
Even on this site you have posters saying the AE were not black because of this and that reason and you still want to ignore the dangers in putting out an argument on AE without covering all the loopholes?
Out of curiosity, why the fascination with the Pharaohs? Why don't you focus instead on the real people, the local people, who made up ancient Egypt?
First of all as far as i can see the pharaohs thru all of AE's history looked like there people especially in the body type which i have yet to see among any person of European extraction. There was also nothing in physical anthropology that says they were different.
Second I don't focus on Pharaohs so u are asking the wrong person.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ I was simply suggesting a comparison between faces of Ethiopia and the faces of the Pharoahs.
Who cares about their lineage? I was simply noticing similarities in facial features.
Who cares? You should if you do not want to be ambushed in a debate on how and how not ancient Egyptians looked like.
I was pointing out the dangers in following down this road of focusing the identity of the ancient Egyptians on their royal line. Let me ask you? What happens if you follow down this road and someone comes along and shows you a Pharaoh who looked like a Caucasian? What do you do then huh? Without any knowledge of what I am talking about, in your ignorance you would be stumped and not understand how this came about and therefore not have an answer.
Because of the lack of answers the other side would also end up thinking, ancient Egyptians may have been Caucasian. Meanwhile both sides involved in this debate forget that, the Pharaohs being royals married far and wide hence the admixture in their features.
If you want to talk about the features of the ancient Egyptians, the best bet is to concentrate on ordinary Egyptians and not put too much emphasis on how this and that Pharaoh looked like. Its not a clever approach.
Strange, I could care less about the debate on Black or White Egypt in this thread.
Maybe I should have said - many of the Non-Caucasian Pharoahs look like Ethiopians to me.
Ramses doesn't look like an Ethiopian to me. Many of the other Pharoahs as well.
Just saying that quite a few of the Pharoahs had facial features very similar to modern day Ethiopians. I am not saying they were Ethiopians either. Just noting the similarities.
Osirion please point out the non-Caucasian pharaohs since u have obviously discovered they existed. I don't know why u are the only person on this site that drives me crazy with your comments. Except for the well-known Old Kingdom fakes sometimes posted wearing Turkish-looking moustaches. I have yet to see a pharoah than didn't look "Ethiopian" - and that included Ramses.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
Some Egyptians want you to know that they know what they looked like and more importantly what they did not! Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by argyle104: This is how mentally challenged this forum has become.
Osirion, pregnancy and crack don't mix.
How in the world does your brain come to the conclusion that the Ancient Egyptians are more related to Ethiopians and Somalis than to the Sudanese and especially the indigenous population of Egypt?
Ethiopia and Somalia have little to nothing to do with Ancient Egypt.
I didn't say the Ethiopians were Egyptians of vice versa. I simply said that modern day Ethiopians remind me of Pharonic art.
Stop putting words into my mouth.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ I was simply suggesting a comparison between faces of Ethiopia and the faces of the Pharoahs.
Who cares about their lineage? I was simply noticing similarities in facial features.
Who cares? You should if you do not want to be ambushed in a debate on how and how not ancient Egyptians looked like.
I was pointing out the dangers in following down this road of focusing the identity of the ancient Egyptians on their royal line. Let me ask you? What happens if you follow down this road and someone comes along and shows you a Pharaoh who looked like a Caucasian? What do you do then huh? Without any knowledge of what I am talking about, in your ignorance you would be stumped and not understand how this came about and therefore not have an answer.
Because of the lack of answers the other side would also end up thinking, ancient Egyptians may have been Caucasian. Meanwhile both sides involved in this debate forget that, the Pharaohs being royals married far and wide hence the admixture in their features.
If you want to talk about the features of the ancient Egyptians, the best bet is to concentrate on ordinary Egyptians and not put too much emphasis on how this and that Pharaoh looked like. Its not a clever approach.
Strange, I could care less about the debate on Black or White Egypt in this thread.
Maybe I should have said - many of the Non-Caucasian Pharoahs look like Ethiopians to me.
Ramses doesn't look like an Ethiopian to me. Many of the other Pharoahs as well.
Just saying that quite a few of the Pharoahs had facial features very similar to modern day Ethiopians. I am not saying they were Ethiopians either. Just noting the similarities.
Osirion please point out the non-Caucasian pharaohs since u have obviously discovered they existed. I don't know why u are the only person on this site that drives me crazy with your comments. Except for the well-known Old Kingdom fakes sometimes posted wearing Turkish-looking moustaches. I have yet to see a pharoah than didn't look "Ethiopian" - and that included Ramses.
Never seen such an ugly Ethiopian.
Ethiopians are some of the best looking people in the world.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ I was simply suggesting a comparison between faces of Ethiopia and the faces of the Pharoahs.
Who cares about their lineage? I was simply noticing similarities in facial features.
Who cares? You should if you do not want to be ambushed in a debate on how and how not ancient Egyptians looked like.
I was pointing out the dangers in following down this road of focusing the identity of the ancient Egyptians on their royal line. Let me ask you? What happens if you follow down this road and someone comes along and shows you a Pharaoh who looked like a Caucasian? What do you do then huh? Without any knowledge of what I am talking about, in your ignorance you would be stumped and not understand how this came about and therefore not have an answer.
Because of the lack of answers the other side would also end up thinking, ancient Egyptians may have been Caucasian. Meanwhile both sides involved in this debate forget that, the Pharaohs being royals married far and wide hence the admixture in their features.
If you want to talk about the features of the ancient Egyptians, the best bet is to concentrate on ordinary Egyptians and not put too much emphasis on how this and that Pharaoh looked like. Its not a clever approach.
Strange, I could care less about the debate on Black or White Egypt in this thread.
Maybe I should have said - many of the Non-Caucasian Pharoahs look like Ethiopians to me.
Ramses doesn't look like an Ethiopian to me. Many of the other Pharoahs as well.
Just saying that quite a few of the Pharoahs had facial features very similar to modern day Ethiopians. I am not saying they were Ethiopians either. Just noting the similarities.
Osirion please point out the non-Caucasian pharaohs since u have obviously discovered they existed. I don't know why u are the only person on this site that drives me crazy with your comments. Except for the well-known Old Kingdom fakes sometimes posted wearing Turkish-looking moustaches. I have yet to see a pharoah than didn't look "Ethiopian" - and that included Ramses.
Never seen such an ugly Ethiopian.
Ethiopians are some of the best looking people in the world.
rameses was almost 100 years old when he was mumufied, so i wouldn't call him ugly.
he looks no different than these men, apart from the hooked noise, which we know was altered during the mummification.
quote:Originally posted by argyle104: Ethiopia and Somalia have little to nothing to do with Ancient Egypt.
Why not? They all originated in the Horn of Africa during the late Pleistocene.
Posts: 7082 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is just typical of the brainless thinking these afronuts use. Truthcentric, nobody is buying all this nonsense. You have been drinking way too much koolaide.
Posts: 2036 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ I was simply suggesting a comparison between faces of Ethiopia and the faces of the Pharoahs.
Who cares about their lineage? I was simply noticing similarities in facial features.
Who cares? You should if you do not want to be ambushed in a debate on how and how not ancient Egyptians looked like.
I was pointing out the dangers in following down this road of focusing the identity of the ancient Egyptians on their royal line. Let me ask you? What happens if you follow down this road and someone comes along and shows you a Pharaoh who looked like a Caucasian? What do you do then huh? Without any knowledge of what I am talking about, in your ignorance you would be stumped and not understand how this came about and therefore not have an answer.
Because of the lack of answers the other side would also end up thinking, ancient Egyptians may have been Caucasian. Meanwhile both sides involved in this debate forget that, the Pharaohs being royals married far and wide hence the admixture in their features.
If you want to talk about the features of the ancient Egyptians, the best bet is to concentrate on ordinary Egyptians and not put too much emphasis on how this and that Pharaoh looked like. Its not a clever approach.
Strange, I could care less about the debate on Black or White Egypt in this thread.
Maybe I should have said - many of the Non-Caucasian Pharoahs look like Ethiopians to me.
Ramses doesn't look like an Ethiopian to me. Many of the other Pharoahs as well.
Just saying that quite a few of the Pharoahs had facial features very similar to modern day Ethiopians. I am not saying they were Ethiopians either. Just noting the similarities.
Osirion please point out the non-Caucasian pharaohs since u have obviously discovered they existed. I don't know why u are the only person on this site that drives me crazy with your comments. Except for the well-known Old Kingdom fakes sometimes posted wearing Turkish-looking moustaches. I have yet to see a pharoah than didn't look "Ethiopian" - and that included Ramses.
Never seen such an ugly Ethiopian.
Ethiopians are some of the best looking people in the world.
rameses was almost 100 years old when he was mumufied, so i wouldn't call him ugly.
he looks no different than these men, apart from the hooked noise, which we know was altered during the mummification.
Hooked nose was due to mummification? Or was it due to his Asiatic harem mother's ancestry?
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Energy - You received an unwarranted spanking from these hooligans. You raised a valid point, for though the current Pharaohs children, by his secondary wives and concubines, did not "NORMALLY" ascend to the throne. They did create a "Pool" of royalty from which "New" dynasty's might rise.
And we KNOW that these secondary wives and concubines were not necessarily Egyptian, because of the Armana letters.
quote:
Letter from Amenhotep III to Milkilu of Gezer
To Milkilu, prince of Gezer Thus speaks the king. I am sending you this tablet to tell you: Behold, I have sent you Hanya, the commissioner of the archers, with merchandise in order to have beautiful concubines, i.e. weavers; silver, gold, garments turquoises, all sorts of precious stones, chairs of ebony, as well as all good things, worth 160 deben. In total: forty concubines - the price of every concubine is forty of silver. Therefore, send very beautiful concubines without blemish. And the king, your lord, says to you: This is good. For you life has been decreed.
To Nibmuaria, King of Egypt, my brother, say: Thus says Tushratta, King of Mitanni, your brother. It is well with me. May it be well with you; with Kelu-Heba, my sister, may it be well; with your household, your wives, your sons, your nobles, your warriors, your horses, your chariots, and throughout your land may it be very well.
When I sat upon my father's throne, I was still young, and Tuhi did evil to my land, and he killed his lord. And, therefore, he did not treat me well, nor the one who was on friendly terms with me. I, however, especially because of those evils, which were perpetrated on my land, made no delay; but the murderers of Artashumara, my brother, along with all that they had, I killed.
Because you were friendly with my father, for this reason I sent and spoke to you, so that my brother might hear of this deed and rejoice. My father loved you, and you loved my father still more. And my father, because of his love, has given my sister to you. And who else stood with my father as you did? The very next year, moreover, my brother's . . . the whole land of Hatti. As the enemy came to my land, Teshub, my lord, gave him into my hand, and I destroyed him. And not one of them returned to his own land.
Behold, one chariot, two horses, one male servant, one female servant, out of the booty from the land of Hatti I have sent you. And as a gift for my brother, five chariots (and) five teams of horses I have sent you. And as a gift for Kelu-Heba, my sister, one set of gold pins, one set of gold earrings, one gold idol, and one container of "sweet oil." I have sent her.
Behold, Keliya, my sukkal along with Tunip-ibri, I have sent. May my brother quickly dispatch them so that they may quickly bring back word so that I may hear my brother's greeting and rejoice. May my brother seek friendship with me, and may my brother send his messengers so that they may bring my brother's greeting and I may receive them.
Egypt had 30 dynasties, each one reflecting (to some extent) a new bloodline. So to say that none of them were of partial foreign blood is naive.
I would remind everyone that the British royal line is more German than it is English. (Okay, okay, I know the Brits were originally a Germanic tribe anyway).
posted
we have a picture from the 19th century to try to make a point? Geeeze it gets nuttier every day around here.
Posts: 2036 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LOL Of course Hammered being a 'history' professor only accepts history that fits his preconceived racist views. If not, he complains no matter how much evidence we show him, even if that evidence comes from his alleged European ancestors!
To Energy: The Egyptian practice of incest more has to do with ritual traditions among royalty that is also found in other African cultures. While pharaohs did indeed marry foreign women, the only women who could take the position of chief wife or 'queen' and produce an heir is a native of the Nile! So no, there was no "tainting" of royal blood by foreigners.
To Osirion:
First all, Ramses mummy is a mummy so of course it's ugly! You don't expect a shriveled millennia old corpse to look good. Second, if you are referring to the hooked nose, it has been pointed out countless times that findings show that the shape of the nose was damaged when it was stuffed with peppercorn. It's likely Ramses nose straight in shape the countless depictions of him show. In fact there was a pic I used to post of rural Egyptian from the Giza region who was a black man with features strikingly similar to Ramses including long nose.
To Dana: We know Ethiopians are not one people but comprise a multitude of peoples with diverse features. You can ignore Argyle who is a depraved troll that loves to make false accusations against people as some failed attempt to appear like a relevant poster. LOLPosts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
^ The above face was not too long ago classified as "caucasoid" along with other Africans including Egyptians. That is what people like the liquor hammered professor fail to realize.
Posts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ I was simply suggesting a comparison between faces of Ethiopia and the faces of the Pharoahs.
Who cares about their lineage? I was simply noticing similarities in facial features.
Who cares? You should if you do not want to be ambushed in a debate on how and how not ancient Egyptians looked like.
I was pointing out the dangers in following down this road of focusing the identity of the ancient Egyptians on their royal line. Let me ask you? What happens if you follow down this road and someone comes along and shows you a Pharaoh who looked like a Caucasian? What do you do then huh? Without any knowledge of what I am talking about, in your ignorance you would be stumped and not understand how this came about and therefore not have an answer.
Because of the lack of answers the other side would also end up thinking, ancient Egyptians may have been Caucasian. Meanwhile both sides involved in this debate forget that, the Pharaohs being royals married far and wide hence the admixture in their features.
If you want to talk about the features of the ancient Egyptians, the best bet is to concentrate on ordinary Egyptians and not put too much emphasis on how this and that Pharaoh looked like. Its not a clever approach.
Strange, I could care less about the debate on Black or White Egypt in this thread.
Maybe I should have said - many of the Non-Caucasian Pharoahs look like Ethiopians to me.
Ramses doesn't look like an Ethiopian to me. Many of the other Pharoahs as well.
Just saying that quite a few of the Pharoahs had facial features very similar to modern day Ethiopians. I am not saying they were Ethiopians either. Just noting the similarities.
Osirion please point out the non-Caucasian pharaohs since u have obviously discovered they existed. I don't know why u are the only person on this site that drives me crazy with your comments. Except for the well-known Old Kingdom fakes sometimes posted wearing Turkish-looking moustaches. I have yet to see a pharoah than didn't look "Ethiopian" - and that included Ramses.
Never seen such an ugly Ethiopian.
Ethiopians are some of the best looking people in the world.
rameses was almost 100 years old when he was mumufied, so i wouldn't call him ugly.
he looks no different than these men, apart from the hooked noise, which we know was altered during the mummification.
Now that I think of it, using Amhara Ethiopians as an example of Ramses is pretty much supporting my position of an Asiatic mix. Especially since we know Amhara aren't true Ethiopians but are an Asiatic and NE African mixture.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ I was simply suggesting a comparison between faces of Ethiopia and the faces of the Pharoahs.
Who cares about their lineage? I was simply noticing similarities in facial features.
Who cares? You should if you do not want to be ambushed in a debate on how and how not ancient Egyptians looked like.
I was pointing out the dangers in following down this road of focusing the identity of the ancient Egyptians on their royal line. Let me ask you? What happens if you follow down this road and someone comes along and shows you a Pharaoh who looked like a Caucasian? What do you do then huh? Without any knowledge of what I am talking about, in your ignorance you would be stumped and not understand how this came about and therefore not have an answer.
Because of the lack of answers the other side would also end up thinking, ancient Egyptians may have been Caucasian. Meanwhile both sides involved in this debate forget that, the Pharaohs being royals married far and wide hence the admixture in their features.
If you want to talk about the features of the ancient Egyptians, the best bet is to concentrate on ordinary Egyptians and not put too much emphasis on how this and that Pharaoh looked like. Its not a clever approach.
Strange, I could care less about the debate on Black or White Egypt in this thread.
Maybe I should have said - many of the Non-Caucasian Pharoahs look like Ethiopians to me.
Ramses doesn't look like an Ethiopian to me. Many of the other Pharoahs as well.
Just saying that quite a few of the Pharoahs had facial features very similar to modern day Ethiopians. I am not saying they were Ethiopians either. Just noting the similarities.
Osirion please point out the non-Caucasian pharaohs since u have obviously discovered they existed. I don't know why u are the only person on this site that drives me crazy with your comments. Except for the well-known Old Kingdom fakes sometimes posted wearing Turkish-looking moustaches. I have yet to see a pharoah than didn't look "Ethiopian" - and that included Ramses.
Never seen such an ugly Ethiopian.
Ethiopians are some of the best looking people in the world.
rameses was almost 100 years old when he was mumufied, so i wouldn't call him ugly.
he looks no different than these men, apart from the hooked noise, which we know was altered during the mummification.
Now that I think of it, using Amhara Ethiopians as an example of Ramses is pretty much supporting my position of an Asiatic mix. Especially since we know Amhara aren't true Ethiopians but are an Asiatic and NE African mixture.
well the first pic is a Somali(Hawiye what you would call true cush) man with not asiatic mix. as for Amharas not being true horners please!!!
Posts: 54 | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Amhara are not true Ethiopians - they are mixed. Oromos are true Ethiopians and especially the Borana.
I agree about the Somali though.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ And since when does having mixed ancestry especially such that dates back to ancient or even neolithic times make one not true to ones homeland? About a quarter of Greeks carry mixed African ancestry from neolithic times, does this make them 'not true Greeks' then?? By the way, it was a two way streak and Arabs especially in west and southwest Arabia are mixed too. I suppose they are not 'true' Arabs then? LOL On the contrary these black Arabs were the original Arabs as can be seen here and here.
Posts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Greeks are europeans they have no black blood. This is more of the slight of hand these black radicals try to play. Lie , distort, imply etc.
Posts: 2036 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Nope. Of course Greeks are Europeans but this in of itself is no guarantee for no admixture especially since Europe is just a few hundred miles away from Africa on the other side of the Mediterranean. On the other hand Egyptians are Africans, yet that hasn't stopped you or your ilk from white-washing them and claiming them to be "caucasians"! LOL
Besides, we've already shown you all the genetic and anthropological studies. But as I said, you will deny evidence even if it stares at you in the face. Posts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Greeks are europeans
That doesn't make them white or Western, unless you define those words as synonymous with European.
Posts: 7082 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Amhara are not true ethiopians what are u talking about Amhara are more related to Oromo than Tigrean and Eritreans from my understanding
Posts: 410 | From: Al-Ard | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
Just insert Mendel's law into your thought process and the light may finally come on.
I often wondered why my 9th grade psychology class taught on Mendel's law. I clearly remembered being taught that Black/Dark is dominate (strong) and white/light and other eye/hair color is recessive (weak). I learned that you can get white from exclusively black/dark, but you can not get black/dark from exclusively recessive.
Of course, maybe that is why it was included in the psychology text book, it was prepping us to deal with how "sick" white people would be to learn that what they think of as "white"/better is actually a mental disease.
To be quite honest, I personally believe that my ancient ancestors knew in order to cure leprosy/albinism; hence, the descendants of the earlier albinos, would be to contribute their genetic material (melanin), thereby curing the offsprings.Posts: 35 | From: ATL | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
brother! I am new to this BUT I believe the convention is to marry their kin/sibling/cousin. NOT foreigners.![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Departure soon?
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic