The African Origin of Ancient Egyptian Civilization

[MKGLouisville]

A few things that were claimed as evidence towards a Black Egypt.

1. Afro-Asiatic languages-Although Keita places the origin of the Afro-Asiatic languages in the Horn of Africa, Alexander Militarev and other linguists have placed an Asiatic origin. Which is supported by the large number of Caucasian loanwards in the Proto-Afro-Asiatic language, and the language fits a more Middle Eastern environment.

2. Skeleton and Cranial Analysis-Although some Egyptian samples cluster with Nubians, this article, suggests that they are only similar because of living in similar environments. There is also the problem of where Nubians are, compared to Sub-Saharan Africans and Eurasians. There was one 2003 publications that based on cranial analysis, Nubians cluster more with North Africans than with Sub-Saharan Africans, (with a map).

3. DNA-Populations of the Western Oases of Egypt still show that their DNA was mostly formed during the Neolithic from Near Eastern people.

Hmmmm interesting post so now we're reverting back to arguing for a non African origin of Egypt based on minority opinions and blog entries which is a stance that was even discarded by our opponents? The theory of a non African origin as well as the denial of Egyptian skeletal remains overlapping with more southerly population (especially the nubians) was laid to rest early in this thread and what argued instead was 'what is black' . Regurgitating this futile already debunked argument will only make you look silly for bringing it up and when you will eventually switch to another stance to deny Egypt's black African origins. For your own good reread this thread and check specifically for Keitas '08 study and the Oxford encyclopedia of AE's conclusion on this subject.

 

[Cynovolans]

Hmmmm interesting post so now we're reverting back to arguing for a non African origin of Egypt based on minority opinions and blog entries which is a stance that was even discarded by our opponents?The theory of a non African origin as well as the denial of Egyptian skeletal remains overlapping with more southerly population (especially the nubians) was laid to rest early in this thread and what argued instead was 'what is black' .Regurgitating this futile already debunked argument will only make you look silly for bringing it up and when you will eventually switch to another stance to deny Egypt's black African origins. For your own good reread this thread and check specifically for Keitas '08 study and the Oxford encyclopedia of AE's conclusion on this subject.

Where is your source that Ramesses had black hair and brown skin? I've been waiting for it.

 

[innonimatu]

SMH Boy boy boy its sad and pathetic racism is alive today and comes in many different forms! This particular case involves you called 'intellectuals'/free thinkers in light of overwhelming evidence that should cast away all shadows of doubt you all would rather be struck by lightening then admit that Egypt is a product of black Africans.

That's precious! The guy who drags on and on an absolutely ridiculous thread about how the ancient egyptians were allegedly members of a "black race", an arbitrarily constructed subgroup of humans built around the single issue of having a different skin tone, is calling me a racist!

Anyway, please, please, cannot someone close this thread as pointless?! I mean, who cares what color ancient egyptians were? It has no historical importance as no contemporary records indicate that anyone cared about it at the time. Indicating also that back then they were far, far wiser than some people today.

 

[Mentuhotep23]

You act as if the month long silence has anything to do with Mentuhotep's post. Declaring victory by virture of being the last person arguing is the oldest and most childish of Internet Debate tactics.

In my experience egos are often far too inflated for anyone to concede that either side is right. I often take silence on an issue as a concession that the opposition acknowledges the validity of an argument or has no rebuttal to that argument.

MKGLouisville, felt the need to declare victory for our side. I myself see no need in doing such a thing but I do agree with him that many posters have been very arrogant and childish in their attempts to shut down our argument so perhaps a little gloating may be in order.

A few things that were claimed as evidence towards a Black Egypt.

1. Afro-Asiatic languages-Although Keita places the origin of the Afro-Asiatic languages in the Horn of Africa, Alexander Militarev and other linguists have placed an Asiatic origin. Which is supported by the large number of Caucasian loanwards in the Proto-Afro-Asiatic language, and the language fits a more Middle Eastern environment.

The current mainstream consensus among linguists maintains that Afroasiatic has its origins in Eastern Africa. Christopher Ehret, one of the leading authorities on African linguistics, postulates an origin around the Horn of Africa region. He also provides a rebuttal to Militarev's assertions. You can read the details in this article:

"The Origins of Afroasiatic"

Now what exactly are Caucasian loan words? Caucasian is not even a language family nor a branch of a language family.

2. Skeleton and Cranial Analysis-Although some Egyptian samples cluster with Nubians, this article, suggests that they are only similar because of living in similar environments. There is also the problem of where Nubians are, compared to Sub-Saharan Africans and Eurasians. There was one 2003 publications that based on cranial analysis, Nubians cluster more with North Africans than with Sub-Saharan Africans, (with a map).

The study says that the Egyptian and Nubian groups cluster together which may be due to gene flow between the groups OR adaptation to the same environment.

That means that the study makes the hypothesis that they are similar because of intermarriage or evolutionary adaptation.

It has been well-established by Keita and other scholars that Ancient Egyptians and Nubians have a genetic affinity based on cranial analysis. The map from Mathilda's blog that you posted supports what we've been saying all along, that Egyptians and Nubians are of indigenous Northeast African descent.

Mathilda would like you to believe that North African is synonymous with Caucasian ("White Africa") and Sub-Saharan is synonymous with Negroid ("Black Africa"). But that map established no such thing. Naqada, Kerma, Nubia and Giza have been well-established to be tropically adapted populations.

3. DNA-Populations of the Western Oases of Egypt still show that their DNA was mostly formed during the Neolithic from Near Eastern people.

Your Wiley link isn't working for me but we've covered DNA fairly recently.

That's precious! The guy who drags on and on an absolutely ridiculous thread about how the ancient egyptians were allegedly members of a "black race", an arbitrarily constructed subgroup of humans built around the single issue of having a different skin tone, is calling me a racist!

Anyway, please, please, cannot someone close this thread as pointless?! I mean, who cares what color ancient egyptians were? It has no historical importance as no contemporary records indicate that anyone cared about it at the time. Indicating also that back then they were far, far wiser than some people today.

It's a historically significant topic to many people today which is why this thread is so large. So long as people remain civil I see no reason to close the thread.

 

[ParkCungHee]

In my experience egos are often far too inflated for anyone to concede that either side is right. I often take silence on an issue as a concession that the opposition acknowledges the validity of an argument or has no rebuttal to that argument.

Oh good, then you admit your side will innevitably lose, because this thread is likely to be headed for a lock (meaning Plotinus gets the last word), or a retaliatory necrobump, as the only people arguing on your side don't actually seem to be members of the forum and shall eventually forget about it.

Incidently, as of this moment, I am apparently winning this debate, because no one has responded.

 

[Mentuhotep23]

Oh good, then you admit your side will innevitably lose, because this thread is likely to be headed for a lock (meaning Plotinus gets the last word), or a retaliatory necrobump, as the only people arguing on your side don't actually seem to be members of the forum and shall eventually forget about it.

Incidently, as of this moment, I am apparently winning this debate, because no one has responded.

The difference is that you didn't make an argument that has not been refuted.

Why don't we dispense with the immature crap and actually try to have a productive discussion?

 

[ParkCungHee]

The difference is that you didn't make an argument that has not been refuted.

Yes, I did. I made the argument that you guys hadn't responded to that, and now haven't responded to this, because you know you're wrong. I mean it's not like people don't respond to a thread for months at a time because, I don't know perhaps they've moved on to other things.

Why don't we dispense with the immature crap and actually try to have a productive discussion?

So now we're in agreeance that declaring victory by virtue of a lack of response is immature?

 

[Plotinus]

We've all had enough of this.

Moderator Action: Thread locked. Again.