Were Egyptians black or white?

[MKGLouisville]

okay, so the ancient Egyptians were dark brown, but why does it matter?

IDK I think if you ask that question it would be better to ask yourself why are you even participating in a thread entitled "Were Egyptians Black or White".

I imagine Lower Egyptians were whiter than upper Egyptians because of the climate

It's plausible that they (early Northern Egyptians) could have been "lighter" in hue (there is nothing "white" about any population surrounding Egypt), but then again there are multiple shades of brown throughout tropical Africa. Interestingly enough pre Dynastic lower Egyptians were proven to have limb proportions "signifigantly different" from Near Easterners of the same period who also share the same climate (Kemp 2005). Instead they like Upper Egyptians and Southerly Africans showed adaptation to the Tropics, which sugguest (according to Brace'93) that they had dark skin.

You can actually look through the tomb and see how the Egyptians were portrayed.[/URLSAME]

Rather than relying on subjective artwork, why not just accept the conclusive findings that they were Northeast Africans (Nubians, Saharans, Modern groups from the Horn) based on their actual skeletal remains

I, for one, believe that the Egyptians were a twisted web of races. The Africans were the first people in Egypt, and it could be accurate to say Narmer was "black" (I dislike it, I prefer dark brown). The Hebrew workers and the Hyksos brought in a Semitic population that would breed with the Africans. It can be safe to assume that Rammeses II was either Semitic, African or a mix of both. When the Persians conquered the region, the Egyptians now had Persians added to the mix, allowing for Semitics, Africans and Afro-Semitics to breed with them. When the Greeks came in, they added yet another ethnic group to this, allowing for their to be a person to have African, Semitic, Persian and Caucasian in his heredity. And while the Caucasian and Persian groups are not common outside of the very large cities, they can still be found.

Good simple analysis

 

[Dachs]

That statement about linguistic evidence is rather inaccurate. Ehrets postulation of the spread of Afro Asiactic from Sub Saharan East Africa, up the Nile, and across Northern Africa has been confirmed by a recent genetic study (Frig 2010). So it's safe to say the Ehret was right on the money with this analysis of linguistic evidence. I'll post the study later on if you'd like.

You can confirm linguistic spreads through genetic studies? As if the two were inherently connected in any way? God, I thought history was past this bull.

 

[MKGLouisville]

You can confirm linguistic spreads through genetic studies? As if the two were inherently connected in any way? God, I thought history was past this bull.

I mean what do you want me to say? You attempted to discredit the linguistic evidence because it was not genetic evidence. Then when I reveal to you that the linguistic evidence that you were attempting to discredit was confirmed by a recent genetic study you get frustrated! So Ill ask again do you want me to post the findings of the new genetics study? Or you can just accept the fact that all lies of evidence from anthropological to genetic to linguistic to cultural evidence indicate a more Southerly inner African origin for Egypt.

 

[innonimatu]

Then when I reveal to you that the linguistic evidence that you were attempting to discredit was confirmed by a recent genetic study you get frustrated!

Where can I find those talking genes? There's good potential for a TV show there! Can they sing too?

 

[MKGLouisville]

Where can I find those talking genes? There's good potential for a TV show there! Can they sing too?

.....te hee

 

[xchen08]

Define "white" and "black" first.

If the definition of "black" used is intended to or is able to in any way imply kinship, genetic, cultural, etc, with African Americans, that is a transplanted population mostly of West African descent mixed with European, then no, the Ancient Egyptians most definitely were not "black."

If we use the informal definition most likely among Europeans and Americans of the 19th and early 20th century and still common in certain quarters today, then probably yes, but then "black" would also include most Indians, SE Asians, many Pacific Islanders, and some of the indigenous peoples of the Americas...so why are we using that definition again?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Moderator Action: Please keep the discussion civil, folks.

 

[Holycannoli]

There is no actual mural, what you posted was just someone garbling a few drawings from Lepsius's notes on Ramses III's tomb and then printed them in a re-edition of one of his books(after he died of course). You can actually look through the tomb and see how the Egyptians were portrayed.

Those murals show the asian features I suspect ancient egyptians had. Their skin tone is also nearly identical to the skin tones of native americans of central and south america (aztecs, mayans and inca) which is copper. In fact the more I think about it, the more they look native american than negroid.

Their mummies and the sarcophagi sculptures of their faces only support this, to me.

I'm trying to find pictures and I'll post links as I find them.

Egyptian mummy portraits from around 100 A.D (OMG it's Tiger Woods!)

Egyptian Mummies (Sarcophagi) at the Britain Museum

The first link is obviously not going to be an accurate depiction of an ancient egyptian, but you have to view it in light of the murals and sarcophagi depictions. The sarcophagi too are hardly accurate depictions of those mummified within, but they're still accurate enough to see that their features were not negroid.

All I know for sure is they didn't look like this:

 

[Gelion]

Guess the race:

Spoiler :

 

[Holycannoli]

Egyptian?

EDIT: Am I the only one who sees a hint of asian features? I don't mean the eyes.

 

[GamezRule]

Arab. More specifically, descendent's of Ishmael.

 

[Cynovolans]

Guess the race:

Spoiler :

It's hard to tell because the skin is golden, and the facial features may be inaccurate because the mask was originally intended for a woman.

 

[Dachs]

I mean what do you want me to say? You attempted to discredit the linguistic evidence because it was not genetic evidence. Then when I reveal to you that the linguistic evidence that you were attempting to discredit was confirmed by a recent genetic study you get frustrated! So Ill ask again do you want me to post the findings of the new genetics study? Or you can just accept the fact that all lies of evidence from anthropological to genetic to linguistic to cultural evidence indicate a more Southerly inner African origin for Egypt.

You have totally misunderstood me. My argument is that linguistic evidence is inherently suspect for anything involving something genetic, and vice versa. You cannot connect them. One cannot confirm the other. There is no necessary connection between lineage and language, and definitely no necessary connection between lineage and a given state (Egypt? Rome? the Pechenegs? whomever). You cannot bring up a correlation of some kind in some genetic data - and honestly, I've found that a lot of genetic studies purporting to show relevant migrations for Sub-Roman Britain to be highly suspect in their data-gathering, never mind that the premise is inherently a bad one, and don't have a whole lot of faith in other historical genetic studies attempting to indicate migratory activity - and claim that it has reflection in the historical record in state organizations.

Furthermore, you're assigning me a role in this wider thread that I never took up. I don't really care about whether "Egyptians" were black or white, at any point in history. I don't really care about much of anything that happened before the sixth century BC, and even that's a bit of a stretch; the only times when my interests intersect with Egypt are the Ptolemaic and early Byzantine periods, and at that point I'm not very interested in ethnic data that's probably half-made up to support one side or another's claims anyway. What I do care about is trashing outmoded methods of historical study and analysis, and that's what I just saw.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

.

Egyptian?

EDIT: Am I the only one who sees a hint of asian features? I don't mean the eyes.

The mask has subtle hints of Asian features, but there are several African ethnicities that share such features too. The side view actually looks a lot like a couple of Eritreans I used to know, who actually happened to be darker skinned than most of those whom I knew from their country. These Africans were also Semites though, with facial structures much more similar to those of the inhabitants of Europe than of West Africa (and more like Arabs than Europeans, obviously).

Arab. More specifically, descendent's of Ishmael.

Perhaps a relative of Ishmael, but not a descendant. Keep in mind that Ishmael's mother Hagar was supposed to have been an Egyptian woman. Arab features might come from their Egyptians descent as much or more than the other way around.

 

[MKGLouisville]

Define "white" and "black" first.

If the definition of "black" used is intended to or is able to in any way imply kinship, genetic, cultural, etc, with African Americans, that is a transplanted population mostly of West African descent mixed with European, then no, the Ancient Egyptians most definitely were not "black."

Let's check the Oxford Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt;

"Two opposing theories for the origin of Dynastic Egyptians dominated scholarly debate over the last century: whether the ancient Egyptians were black Africans (historically referred to as Negroid) originating biologically and culturally in Saharo-Tropical Africa, or whether they originated as a Dynastic Race in the Mediterranean or western Asian regions (people historically categorized as White, or Caucasoid) ...."("Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999). pp 328-332)

"There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.. In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas." (Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999) pp 328-332)

"must be placed in the context of hypotheses informed by archaeological, linguistic, geographic and other data. In such contexts, the physical anthropological evidence indicates that early Nile Valley populations can be identified as part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation. This variation represents the short and long term effects of evolutionary forces, such as gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection, influenced by culture and geography." ("Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999). pp 328-332)

In other other words there is more than enough evidence to confirm that the ancient Egyptians fit into the Western social known as "black"

 

[MKGLouisville]

You have totally misunderstood me. My argument is that linguistic evidence is inherently suspect for anything involving something genetic, and vice versa. You cannot connect them. One cannot confirm the other.

Ancient Local Evolution of African mtDNA Haplogroups in Tunisian Berber Populations

Frigi et al.

Human Biology

August 2010 (82:4)

Abstract

Our objective is to highlight the age of sub-Saharan gene flows in North Africa and particularly in Tunisia. Therefore we analyzed in a broad phylogeographic context sub-Saharan mtDNA haplogroups of Tunisian Berber populations considered representative of ancient settlement. More than 2,000 sequences were collected from the literature, and networks were constructed. The results show that the most ancient haplogroup is L3*, which would have been introduced to North Africa from eastern sub-Saharan populations around 20,000 years ago. Our results also point to a less ancient western sub-Saharan gene flow to Tunisia, including haplogroups L2a and L3b. This conclusion points to an ancient African gene flow to Tunisia before 20,000 years BP. These findings parallel the more recent findings of both archaeology and linguistics on the prehistory of Africa. The present work suggests that sub-Saharan contributions to North Africa have experienced several complex population processes after the occupation of the region by anatomically modern humans. Our results reveal that Berber speakers have a foundational biogeographic root in Africa and that deep African lineages have continued to evolve in supra-Saharan Africa.

The finding by Ehret was referenced in this study, thus confirming that he was right on the money with this illustration and his conclusions;

There is no necessary connection between lineage and language, and definitely no necessary connection between lineage and a given state (Egypt? Rome? the Pechenegs? whomever).

Wrong;

Molecular studies on the Y chromosome in
North Africa are interpreted as indicating that the southern part of Africa, namely,
the Horn/East Africa, was a major source of population in the Nile Valley and
northwest Africa after the Last Glacial Maximum (Frigi et al. 2010)

 

[civ_king]

Do you realize how long ago the Last Glacial Maximum was? (20000 years.) Enough to change from pitch black to sparkling pasty white and back again twice

 

[MKGLouisville]

Those murals show the asian features I suspect ancient egyptians had. Their skin tone is also nearly identical to the skin tones of native americans of central and south america (aztecs, mayans and inca) which is copper. In fact the more I think about it, the more they look native american than negroid.

Why go across the globe to find biological kinship when it's quite clear from multiple lines of evidence that the kinship is to the South of Egypt

"The Nubian tribute-bearers are painted in two skin tones, black and dark brown. These tones do not necessarily represent actual skin tones in real life but may serve to distinguish each tribute-bearer from the next in a row in which the figures overlap. Alternatively, the brown-skinned people may be of Nubian origin, and the black-skinned ones may be farther south (Trigger 1978, 33). The shading of skin tones in Egyptian tomb paintings, which varies considerably, may not be a certain criterion for distinguishing race. Specific symbols of ethnic identity can also vary. Identifying race in Egyptian representational art, again, is difficult to do- probably because race (as opposed to ethnic affiliation, that is, Egyptians versus all non-Egyptians) was not a criterion for differentiation used by the ancient Egyptians..."(pg 105-107)

Their mummies and the sarcophagi sculptures of their faces only support this, to me.

"In terms of head shape, the XVIV and XX dynasties look more like the early Nubian skulls from the mesolithic with low vaults and sloping, curved foreheads.The XVII and XVIII dynasty skulls are shaped more like modern Nubians with globular skulls and high vaults."(An X-ray atlas of the royal mummies. Edited by J.E. Harris and E.F. Wente. (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980.) Review: Michael R. Zimmerman, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Volume 56, Issue 2 , (1981) Pages 207 - 208)

"While the Upper Nile Egyptians show phenotypic features that occur in higher frequencies in the Sudan and southward into East Africa (namely, facial prognathism, chamaerrhiny, and paedomorphic cranial architecture with specific modifications of the nasal aperature), these so-called Negroid features are not universal in the region of Thebes, Karnak, and Luxor."
(Kennedy, Kenneth A.R., T. Plummer, J. Chinment, "Identification of the Eminent Dead: Pepi, A Scribe of Egypt," In Katherine J. Reichs (ed.), Forensic Osteology, 1986.)

The sarcophagi too are hardly accurate depictions of those mummified within, but they're still accurate enough to see that their features were not negroid.

"using the Penrose statistic, demonstrated that Nagada I and Badari crania, both regarded as Negroid, were almost identical and that these were most similar to the Negroid Nubian series from Kerma studied by Collett (1933). [Collett, not accepting variability, excluded "clear negro" crania found in the Kerma series from her analysis, as did Morant (1925), implying that they were foreign..." (S. Keita (1990) Studies of Ancient Crania From Northern Africa. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 83:35-48)

"A biological affinities study based on frequencies of cranial nonmetric traits in skeletal samples from three cemeteries at Predynastic Naqada, Egypt, confirms the results of a recent nonmetric dental morphological analysis. Both cranial and dental traits analyses indicate that the individuals buried in a cemetery characterized archaeologically as high status are significantly different from individuals buried in two other, apparently non-elite cemeteries and that the non-elite samples are not significantly different from each other. A comparison with neighboring Nile Valley skeletal samples suggests that the high status cemetery represents an endogamous ruling or elite segment of the local population at Naqada, which is more closely related to populations in northern Nubia than to neighboring populations in southern Egypt."(T. Prowse, and N. Lovell "Concordance of cranial and dental morphological traits and evidence for endogamy in ancient Egypt". American journal of physical anthropology. 1996, vol. 101, no2, pp. 237-246 (2 p.1/4)

"The question of the genetic origins of ancient Egyptians, particularly those during the Dynastic period, is relevant to the current study. Modern interpretations of Egyptian state formation propose an indigenous origin of the Dynastic civilization (Hassan, 1988). Early Egyptologists considered Upper and Lower Egyptians to be genetically distinct populations, and viewed the Dynastic period as characterized by a conquest of Upper Egypt by the Lower Egyptians. More recent interpretations contend that Egyptians from the south actually expanded into the northern regions during the Dynastic state unification (Hassan, 1988; Savage, 2001), and that the Predynastic populations of Upper and Lower Egypt are morphologically distinct from one another, but not sufficiently distinct to consider either non-indigenous (Zakrzewski, 2007). The Predynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples, while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Predynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002). In addition, the Badarians have been described as near the centroid of cranial and dental variation among Predynastic and Dynastic populations studied (Irish, 2006; Zakrzewski, 2007). This suggests that, at least through the Early Dynastic period, the inhabitants of the Nile valley were a continuous population of local origin, and no major migration or replacement events occurred during this time.

Studies of cranial morphology also support the use of a Nubian (Kerma) population for a comparison of the Dynastic period, as this group is likely to be more closely genetically related to the early Nile valley inhabitants than would be the Late Dynastic Egyptians, who likely experienced significant mixing with other Mediterranean populations (Zakrzewski, 2002). A craniometric study found the Naqada and Kerma populations to be morphologically similar (Keita, 1990). Given these and other prior studies suggesting continuity (Berry et al., 1967; Berry and Berry, 1972), and the lack of archaeological evidence of major migration or population replacement during the Neolithic transition in the Nile valley, we may cautiously interpret the dental health changes over time as primarily due to ecological, subsistence, and demographic changes experienced throughout the Nile valley region."

-- AP Starling, JT Stock. (2007). Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 134:520–528

"During an excavation headed by the German Institute for Archaeology, Cairo, at the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt, three types of tissues from different mummies were sampled to compare 13 well known rehydration methods for mummified tissue with three newly developed methods. .. Skin sections showed particularly good tissue preservation, although cellular outlines were never distinct. Although much of the epidermis had already separated from the dermis, the remaining epidermis often was preserved well (Fig. 1). The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of Negroid origin."--(A-M Mekota and M Vermehren. (2005) Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues. Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, Vol. 80, No. 1, Pages 7-13[[37A]]

All I know for sure is they didn't look like this:

I agree below is a more accurate portral of early Egyptian variability;

Here you have the both the broad and fine features proven to be the prodominant phenotypes in early Egypt.

 

[Xanikk999]

^

What movie is that with Eddie Murphy (Is that Eddie Murphy)? I would of never imagined him in such a role.

 

[MKGLouisville]

Do you realize how long ago the Last Glacial Maximum was? (20000 years.) Enough to change from pitch black to sparkling pasty white and back again twice

The point of that Frigi 2010 is to show that the Northern African population base is East African and not Eurasian. None the less there is no biological evidence to sugguest that the original ancient Egyptians were different from the East Africans who migrated up the Nile.