Ramses II a Red head ?

[MKGLouisville]

An unanswered question was brought up in our previous civil disscussion regarding the hair color of Ramses II. One problem that I had with this question is that the supposite red hair of this one individual was thrown at me in such a way that if I were to concede to that fact that it would somehow change the fact that Egypt's origins and ethnicity lie to the South of it. It would be the same as if someone were to assert that because Obama (just one of over fourty presidents) is of mixed ancestry that it changes the fact that America was originally an English settlement. It doesn't and the same is true Ancient Egypt.

SOME GENETIC FEATURES OF ANCIENT EGYPTIANS

As part of research conducted by the Cairo University in collaboration
with the Higher Council of Antiquities, it has been possible to achieve the
anthropological characteristics of the Pharaohs.

According to preliminary indications, we reached a number of traits of the
Pharaohs. It was possible to identify genes for size, color and eye color and
hair of the king in the Pharaonic era in which samples were collected. They
were placed on mummies in sarcophagi. A group of researchers has been
able to separate those genes that have proven that the ancient Egyptians
were not taller as previously thought. Their size was rather average, with
the exception of Ramses II, whose analysis of genes has proven to be cut.

It has also been demonstrated that his skin was brown and his hair was black,
not red. The color red has been found on his mummy is due to a dye (probably henna).
His eyes were black with a slight tinge of brown.

Amenhotep III was short of stature, the color of his skin was a light brown.
His eyes and his hair was black dark. These features show that the kings were
related. All the kings at that time had a common origin in the family tree of the
royal family. It is possible to determine a precise dates and times in the future.
This research will confirm certain anthropological traits that have been studied
before on the Pharaonic mummies. This will give preliminary indications about
the traits, diseases and characteristics of the Pharaohs.

Source

The source above is a rough translation of a study written in French. One particular member asked for the source so here it is.

 

[Lillefix]

I haven't read the locked thread about Egyptians and skin colour, so forgive me if I ask an already answered question: Is there any reason to believe that the Eyptians looked different 4000 years ago compared to today?

 

[dannyshenanigan]

Genghis Khan was also curiously enough supposed to have red hair.

 

[Cynovolans]

Your source is a paper that was never actually published? It also says his hair was the result of dyes, but we already know from looking at his roots under a microscope his hair was a naturally auburn color, henna was only used in his old age. Examining his father's hair also proved he too was a redhead.

 

[MKGLouisville]

I haven't read the locked thread about Egyptians and skin colour, so forgive me if I ask an already answered question: Is there any reason to believe that the Eyptians looked different 4000 years ago compared to today?

Throughout the previous thread has overwhelming irrefutable evidence (ranging from biological to linguistic and cultural evidence) that the original ancient egyptians was an indigenous Northeast African population most closely related to more Southerly Northeast African populations suchas modern somalis and ethiopians, ancient kuhorsehockeyes, ancient Saharans, and particularly ancient Nubians. All of the listed populations were proven to overlap with the ancient egyptians biologically all of which have always been regarded as 'Black' in the Western sense of the word. This has not been refuted nor has anyone even attempted to be refuted in the previous thread. What has been argued frivelously is rather or not the ancient Egyptians would be considered black like the Tropical Africans populations that they are proven to overlap with biologically.

As far as modern Egyptians are concerned while they are the descendants of the ancient egyptians it has been confirmed that multiple foreign invasions have left signifgant genetic imprint on the modern population (particularly Northern Egyptians) so much so that Northerners aew not a representative for of their core indigenous ancestors. All of this has been proven through a plethora of recent scientific studies.

Cyno the study actually found that ramses red hair was due to dye most likely hena that many Northeast African use to cover grey hair. The study was published in french I gave you a direct link to the information before the rough translation.

 

[Cynovolans]

Cyno the study actually found that ramses red hair was due to dye most likely hena that many Northeast African use to cover grey hair. The study was published in french I gave you a direct link to the information before the rough translation.

I read it, but it isn't a published paper, it is a website that claims there was a paper. Their source for its existance is another website that doesn't even exist. Ramses did dye his hair red, in old age, but looking at his hair roots, which won't change even after using a hair dye, showed his hair was a natural auburn color.

 

[xchen08]

Throughout the previous thread has overwhelming irrefutable evidence (ranging from biological to linguistic and cultural evidence) that the original ancient egyptians was an indigenous Northeast African population most closely related to more Southerly Northeast African populations suchas modern somalis and ethiopians, ancient kuhorsehockeyes, ancient Saharans, and particularly ancient Nubians. All of the listed populations were proven to overlap with the ancient egyptians biologically all of which have always been regarded as 'Black' in the Western sense of the word. This has not been refuted nor has anyone even attempted to be refuted in the previous thread. What has been argued frivelously is rather or not the ancient Egyptians would be considered black like the Tropical Africans populations that they are proven to overlap with biologically.

As far as modern Egyptians are concerned while they are the descendants of the ancient egyptians it has been confirmed that multiple foreign invasions have left signifgant genetic imprint on the modern population (particularly Northern Egyptians) so much so that Northerners aew not a representative for of their core indigenous ancestors. All of this has been proven through a plethora of recent scientific studies.

Hmm, unilaterally declaring victory in another thread locked for unilaterally declaring victory... This thread won't last long.

 

[Bast]

Red hair does not mean a "red head" as they exist in the modern world with red hair, blue eyes and pale skin.

I have seen Asian people whose dark hairs become more copper like brown as they aged.

 

[LightSpectra]

I'm astonished that this debate has dragged on so long. It's really a simple disagreement here: one side contends that there is in fact some objective Western standard of 'being black,' whereas the other side contends that its arbitrariness means that what certain individuals call 'black' is entirely subjective and useless. As Plotinus said: "This isn't an argument about what the Egyptians looked like so much as an argument about what to call them."

I can't say whether or not this question can be settled, but that so much genetic evidence continues to be cited seems pointless to me, since it's a sociological dispute, not a biological one.

 

[Shaihulud]

Well no doubt that the ancient Egyptian were undeniably African, they were also a whole spectrum of colours what we would called "black" and "white" in modern times. I think it is stretch to call such a cosmopolitan civilization black, especially if they do not classify it as such themselves, also it seems that modern Egyptians do not want their ancestors to be labelled as black. We might as well call the USA civilization as white then.

 

[Lockesdonkey]

Red hair is not unheard of in the Eastern Mediterranean; I've known a few red-headed Syrians in my time.

 

[MKGLouisville]

I'm astonished that this debate has dragged on so long. It's really a simple disagreement here: one side contends that there is in fact some objective Western standard of 'being black,' whereas the other side contends that its arbitrariness means that what certain individuals call 'black' is entirely subjective and useless. As Plotinus said: "This isn't an argument about what the Egyptians looked like so much as an argument about what to call them."

I can't say whether or not this question can be settled, but that so much genetic evidence continues to be cited seems pointless to me, since it's a sociological dispute, not a biological one.

For the most part I agree with you that the term black is subjective and you're right there is enough biological evidence presented in the previous thread to indicate what the ancient Egyptians looked like. Howver we are arguing that through overwhelming scientific, linguistic, and cultural evidence it's quite clear that the subjective social term black can be applied to that ancient population.

Some argue that applying such a social lable to the ancient Egyptians shouldn't be done because they themselves didn't apply it to on them (while some argue that the word kemet means land of the. Black). The problem with this argument is that despite the lack of 'racial awareness' in the ancient world it doesn't stop us from portraying the ancient Greeks and Romans as 'white' Europeans, nor did it stop NatGeo from stating the the Nubians were 'Black' in their Feb. 2008 issue of their magazine. So if there is a plethora of irrefutable evidence confirming that the early ancient Egyptians and the 'Black' Nubians were biologically almost indistinguishable from one another (overlapped) and in turn both overlap with modern black Sub Saharan african populations then why the big fuss when the modern social label 'Black' is applied to the ancient Egyptian?

Shaihulud a fact confirmed in the previous thread time and time again is that there is not a shred of evidence of any non African migration into the Nile Valley prior to Egypt's creation. All evidence confirms that the original ancient Egyptians came from the South of Egypt and no where else. Egypt did however BECOME a hetergeneous society overtime with the steady infiltration of Eurasian migrations throughout Egypt's 5,000 years of existence. This is why Keita and Kempt have both stated that both late Dynastic Northern (where the bulk of migrants settled) and modern Egyptians biological affinity have been dilluted and that they no longer represented what their core indigenous ancestors looked like. Still no one denies that they are the descendants of the ancient Egyptians, but that they have multiple lines of ancestry which is irrefutable.

Modern Egyptians (particularly in the North) may reject the notion that ancient indigenous African ancestors were 'Black' in the social sense of the word, but they cannot refute that their biological affinties overlapped with Tropical Africans.

PS. Anyone who is taking the time out of their day to reply (and especially engage in a debate) to this thread (or the previous one) obviously cares about the topic being disscussed so please don't say different further down the road.

 

[MKGLouisville]

I read it, but it isn't a published paper, it is a website that claims there was a paper. Their source for its existance is another website that doesn't even exist. Ramses did dye his hair red, in old age, but looking at his hair roots, which won't change even after using a hair dye, showed his hair was a natural auburn color.

Cyno it is a letter sent to the Egypt State Infornation Service concluding a finding from a study conducted by Cairo university with proper citation and all . The letter was sent to the gov. website and copied before it was taken down.

And no the study is conflicting with the findings in the 1970's French study that Ramses was a natural red head.

 

[Cynovolans]

Cyno it is a letter sent to the Egypt State Infornation Service concluding a finding from a study conducted by Cairo university with proper citation and all . The letter was sent to the gov. website and copied before it was taken down.

And no the study is conflicting with the findings in the 1970's French study that Ramses was a natural red head.

I'm looking through the Egypt State Information Service website right now, they have no records of a study like that ever existing.

 

[GinandTonic]

Given hair continues to grow for a time after death, establishing the colour of a corpses hair really is as simple as looking at the roots.

 

[Cynovolans]

They did look at the roots with a microscope and they confirmed his hair was a natural auburn color. Yet a paper that was never published, and a genetic study that never actually happened reached a different conclusion.

 

[Lord Baal]

Genghis Khan was also curiously enough supposed to have red hair.

According to some Spanish priests, so did many Incas.

 

[Traitorfish]

Genghis Khan was also curiously enough supposed to have red hair.

Apparently that's not unheard of among the Mongols; they tend to show a greater range of physical attributes, particularly in terms of hair and eye colour, than other East Asians. I've been told that it may be to do with their nomadic history- such peoples tend to breed more regularly with those outside of their native ethnic group, particularly with other nomadic peoples, thus providing a more diverse genetic background. The average Briton's ancestors may be British back into the neolithic, but the average Mongol may well have ancestors ranging from Korea to Ukraine.
Of course, it may also be entirely indigenous; there are other typically black-haired peoples who throw up a red-head now and then, such as certain Pacific Islanders and, as Lord Baal mentioned, some South American peoples.

 

[MKGLouisville]

I'm looking through the Egypt State Information Service website right now, they have no records of a study like that ever existing.

Once again cyno the letter was taken down, but before it was taken down it was replicated. Which why it is floating around now.

 

[Cynovolans]

So is it just coincidence that the one website that claims the paper existed is an Afrocentric website?