Black Egypt?

[Brivime]

I don't think I referred to them as white. Afrocentrists refer to ancient Egyptians, or any prominent African civilization, as a black civilization. As in sub-Saharan. I know that area encompasses many shades/colors of people. When I mean black I mean sub-Saharan.

It isn't just a difference in the amount of melanin or visible physical features. There are genetic/biological differences that give advantages and disadvantages to various groups.

Are you saying it is correct or incorrect? I don't quite follow you.

Correct that guy looks straight outta Iskendariya

[PunitorMaximus]

It isn't just a difference in the amount of melanin or visible physical features. There are genetic/biological differences that give advantages and disadvantages to various groups.

hair, size, shape, appearance, that's is what "physiognomic pecularities" mean...i dont quite get your point.
ofcourse people look different. but there are no significant differences regarding intelligence or organs. the differences are limited to the changes needed to fit the environment.
and these are by far not serious enough to define an new race or subspecies. in general "race" is the wrong term. a race defines a manmade breed, no naturally evolved animal can be a race therefore. except one is naive enough to believe a god or sth bred us
also something genetically similar to a race to us would be homo sapien neanderthalensis - as we are homo sapien sapien, the last existing subspecies of the homo sapien species.
luckily there is already a word for "region specific human population": ethnicity.

[Dan113112]

hair, size, shape, appearance, that's is what "physiognomic pecularities" mean...i dont quite get your point.
ofcourse people look different. but there are no significant differences regarding intelligence or organs. the differences are limited to the changes needed to fit the environment.
and these are by far not serious enough to define an new race or subspecies. in general "race" is the wrong term. a race defines a manmade breed, no naturally evolved animal can be a race therefore. except one is naive enough to believe a god or sth bred us
also something genetically similar to a race to us would be homo sapien neanderthalensis - as we are homo sapien sapien, the last existing subspecies of the homo sapien species.
luckily there is already a word for "region specific human population": ethnicity.

I agree that "race" is the wrong term. It also seems to divide people. I have heard there are slight differences in IQ between ethnicities but I can't verify that at the moment. It really is negligible from what I hear. Certain genes have been speculated to be more prominent in some ethnicities than others as well. Perhaps affecting behavior and thus affecting culture as well. I think this is theoretical at best though. I guess my main point is that you hear far too often that "we're all the same" when that isn't the case. We are quite diverse as a species.

[PunitorMaximus]

i agree, we are not the same, but really closely related. much closer than chimp populations f.e.
hmm the only difference regardig body functions i can recall at the moment is the maasai's ability to produce omega 3 themselves. due to thousands of years of omega 3 poor nourishment

[JPrice94]

It doesn't matter if the egyptians are white people dipped in tea or black people dipped in milk. They're all pretty much brown.

[Dan113112]

It doesn't matter if the egyptians are white people dipped in tea or black people dipped in milk. They're all pretty much brown.

We know.

[PunitorMaximus]

yeah, i used the same skin we made for the canaanites and arabs.

[aqualord123]

Recent genealogical evidence has suggested that hunter-gatherer humans in Europe were in fact dark-skinned (but had Caucasian facial features) prior to the immigration of light-skinned farmers from the middle east into Europe, and the arrival of Siberian peoples. The dark skin of the early Europeans did not cause vitamin D deficiency because the hunter-gatherers were able to obtain vitamin D from the meat they consumed.

Perhaps the Egyptians were light-skinned or olive before the Arab Islamic Conquests of the 7th and 8th centuries?

This is the article showing the new theory:
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29213892

[PunitorMaximus]

yup, i read that too!
europeans consist of 3 genetical groups:
1. dark-skinned, bright-eyed, dark haired caucasian hunter gatherers
2. fair-skinned, dark-eyed, dark-haired middle eastern type farmers
3. fair-skinned, -eyed and haired hunter gatherers from northeastern europe

http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and...an-family-tree

[Dan113112]

Recent genealogical evidence has suggested that hunter-gatherer humans in Europe were in fact dark-skinned (but had Caucasian facial features) prior to the immigration of light-skinned farmers from the middle east into Europe, and the arrival of Siberian peoples. The dark skin of the early Europeans did not cause vitamin D deficiency because the hunter-gatherers were able to obtain vitamin D from the meat they consumed.

Perhaps the Egyptians were light-skinned or olive before the Arab Islamic Conquests of the 7th and 8th centuries?

This is the article showing the new theory:
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29213892

By dark skinned they don't mean black (if that is what you were hinting at). Their reconstruction sort of reminds me of Spaniards.

[SanderP]

From what I know the Egyptians weren't a black people. However, I keep hearing this theory in "documentaries" on the subject as well as online. What are your thoughts on this as well as other theories like black Carthaginians and black Phoenicians? I've seen Egyptian artwork clearly depicting them as not being black. Why are people still perpetuating this?

Also, can you point me to any good books about bronze age history?

Why even care about the race of north african peoples?

[Dan113112]

Why even care about the race of north african peoples?

I care more about an accurate depiction of how the Egyptians actually looked. Not an Afrocentric nor a Eurocentric one.

[SanderP]

I care more about an accurate depiction of how the Egyptians actually looked. Not an Afrocentric nor a Eurocentric one.

Aren't the peoples in north africa not looking like they're looking today? Brownish something. Not black or white really but inbetween.

[PunitorMaximus]

By dark skinned they don't mean black (if that is what you were hinting at). Their reconstruction sort of reminds me of Spaniards.

nope, dark skinned.
but in comparison to what we imagine when we hear "blue eyed" they were quite dark. as you said, iberian tone.

Brownish something. Not black or white really but inbetween.

aye, agreed.

[Brivime]

Aren't the peoples in north africa not looking like they're looking today? Brownish something. Not black or white really but inbetween.

North Africans do not look the same, Egyptians have a very distinctive look but some also look like other Arabs and Tunisians look more like people from the Middle East compared to others but also have a more distinctive look to Algerians, who are generally fair skinned and Moroccans who tend to be on the darker side of olive skinned.

Never the less what they look like today, the Egyptians left us a clear image of what they should look like.

[Dontfearme22]

North Africans do not look the same, Egyptians have a very distinctive look but some also look like other Arabs and Tunisians look more like people from the Middle East compared to others but also have a more distinctive look to Algerians, who are generally fair skinned and Moroccans who tend to be on the darker side of olive skinned.

Never the less what they look like today, the Egyptians left us a clear image of what they should look like.

Agreed, but remember ancient egyptian artwork idealized human forms, so while the skin tones and general features might be accurate the specific 'faces' would be different. I imagine portrait sculptures might be a tad bit more representative of real people, if still idealized.

[AntonioHundangir]

I think that true is in the middle.
Egyptian were like phoenicians, or berber (i know some berber that is more white than me), olive colour, or a little dark skinned, in delta, in south more dark skinned but not black.
Were more like arabs that like people from black-africa.
Don't forget that Pharaoh's Ramses II hairs were red.
Yes Red.
Were without doubt african people, but north africans, like berber or lybians, not from black-africa.
Afro-centrism like Euro-Centrism are excesses.
The True is in the middle.
Like Malcolm X that say that Hannibal or Severus are blacks (were northafricans i repeat, not black, dark skin, not ebanus in case of hannibal even olive)
My umble opinion. sorry for english.

[PikeStance]

Race is an artificial construct. You should look at the both YDNA and mtDNA to get a more accurate understanding. Ancient Egyptians were neither "black" or "white" at least in the way it is being "defined" by "race conscious" people.

[PunitorMaximus]

seems like you know the subject, Pike
i wrote a script about the relation of mitochondiral and YDNA in melanesian/polynesian natives for my final exam. i focussed on the spreading of austronesians (3000 year old population from taiwan) throughout the melanesian tribes (40 - 50 000 year old population, very old one). f.e. a strong presence of austronesian mDNA in a patriachal melanesian tribe indicated that they got themselves some austronesian wifes. meaning the man stayed, the females had to marry elsewhere. while in other tribes/regions the opposite was the case (matriachal society or simply different marriage customs). in general every imaginable combination and amount of mixed DNA components can be found just in melanesia. this shows how complex interactions between human populations can be.
also it should be noted that nowhere else a mixture between 2 populations with such a huge age gap took place. and it caused no extraordinary problems, such as disabilities in offsprings.
my point is that race is indeed a artificial construct, in german for example the word "Rasse", which means race ofcourse, was/is only used in 2 meanings: as nazi term and for human bred animal races.
so i consider the word race as a term indicating that it was bred by humans for a certain purpose.
what we call a human races today are in fact just populations with fluent borders to other human populations.

[gnhtd]

...The actual theory of Afrocentrism is that we were all originally African (black) and then white people came about through genetic mutation or some other nonsense....

Wtf ?! You really think genetic mutation itself is nonsense ?!