Is there any solid proof that Ancient Egyptians were white ?

[rivertemz]

Just for rational comparison with the Race argument, are there any primary sources  
that favours the idea that Ancient Kemet was of Caucasian origin ?
Is there any solid evidence for the existence of a White majority population near the nile river during Ancient Kemet?

It's important to know, once this "so called" controversial debate is taken on seriously, what would one side have in support of an Aryan-ruled Kemet ??

[kaskata]

I thought this issue was settled at the UNESCO conference in Cairo in 1974. Even when Kemet fell to foreign invasion forces, the Caucasian rulers from Europe were not "Aryan" Nordic Europeans. The Nordic European rule of Egypt only came first with Napoleon then the British. Only the ignorant and racist scholars still try to debate the issue. When I was in Europe, the people in West and Northern Europe use to claim that southern Europeans are not full Europeans. Wasn't it once claim that Ethiopians were dark skinned Caucasian despite the evidence. All the lies Europeans have told the world is beginning to crumble as they no longer hold sole monopoly on studies of ancient history. Even their descendants are now questioning the validity of some of the written accounts. This partly why the recent movies have been exposed for their white washing.

[truthteacher2007]

??

[anansi]

Jan 13, 2015 16:40:55 GMT -5 rivertemz said:

Just for rational comparison with the Race argument, are there any primary sources  
that favours the idea that Ancient Kemet was of Caucasian origin ?
Is there any solid evidence for the existence of a White majority population near the nile river during Ancient Kemet?

It's important to know, once this "so called" controversial debate is taken on seriously, what would one side have in support of an Aryan-ruled Kemet ??

By primary sources are you referring to 19th century pseudo-science of Hamitic theory or ancient documented text.
If it is the latter then no! nothing! zilch! nada! and if it's the first,then some did try to turn Black people into melaninated white people.

[zarahan]

Just for rational comparison with the Race argument, are there any primary sources
that favours the idea that Ancient Kemet was of Caucasian origin ?
Is there any solid evidence for the existence of a White majority population near the nile river during Ancient Kemet?
It's important to know, once this "so called" controversial debate is taken on seriously, what would one side have in support of an Aryan-ruled Kemet ??

lol there is precious little evidence, but when it comes to Africans, the "Race"
controversy is in some ways bogus- a way for Eurocentrics to divert attention from
the African foundations of Kemet, by talking bout "controversial." By using the label
"controversial," the hard data on that African foundation can be minimized,
nitpicked down, or dismissed, without actually engaging it, or admitting it.

Eurocentrism has changed its colors. The days of open, bald claims are gone, save among
the right wing racist set, and even they have switched to a subtler "down low" racism
strategy in many respects That's the game these days- being "muted", covert and subtle.
When Martin Luther King and Elijah Muhammed held their famous meeting in the 1960s,
Muhammed said afterwards- (paraphrase) "We disagreed on some things, but we both
being country boys from Georgia, one thing we agreed on, we both know what a snake is."
Muhammed was referring to white deception and dissimulation. His words still ring true.



What would be a practical example of the "down low" Eurocentrism approach? Well like
how Natl Geo and the media and film packs its imagery with only one type of image
where ancient Kemetians are concerned, and subtly reinforces the idea that everything
else is foreign or "outsider." The recent film Exodus for example makes sure to
portray all dark skinned or black folk as slaves and servitors. That's the game
these days- "down low."

But like Anansi says, the primary sources lend no support to th claim and the old
Hamitic theory has had to be abandoned. But below would be a roundup of sorts
of the arguments in favor. All have been pretty much debunked. The heart of the
game is to define a narrow, stereotypical "true negro" African type, somebody maybe looking like
Mike Tyson, or Louis Armstrong. Anything that doesn;t meet the stereotypical strawman
can then be assigned to a "Caucasian" or "mixed" classification. Th same thing is done
in various DNA studies. The pattern has been called out by some scholars in the academic
literature- its not just guys off the street pointing it out. The second part of the game
is manipulated sampling so the full range of African diversity is not used. Hence
assorted studies will pull samples from the north after there was much more immigration
into the country and use that as "representative", while ignoring the "darker" south.
Again, some honest scholars have pointed out this dodge in the literature- its not random
bloggers off the web.

Everyone knows Kemet was never isolated, and always had people from different parts
at various times, just like the US. But Africans are the foundation and founders and
builders of Kemet. Others were to join them later- invaders, conquerors, migrants etc in
later millennia- Hyksos, PErsians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs etc. No one is "denying" this as
another convenient strawman claims. And there were always foreign merchants, war captives,
nomads, etc flitting about over a 3000 year span. Sure. But what is the core, the groundings
- Africa and Africans.




But here's some of the game:

1- A mass influx of "settlers" from the "Middle East".
2- "Caucasoid" skulls (a favorite using manipulated sampling, and "true negro" strawmen).
3- "Caucasoid" body build and limb proportions
4- Presumed domestication of certain crops and animals from Mesopotamia thus indicating inflowing "colonists"
5- Supposed "Middle Eastern" cultural elements like religion as forming Kemet
6- Alleged "racial" distinctions between Egyptians and "Nubians" held by the ancients
7- Putative "Caucasoid hair"
8- Reputed "caucasoid blood types"
9- So-called "non-African looks" visual carvings/paintings (as if "Africans" are only "supposed" to look one way)
10- Claimed "non-African" skin color, as if "true" Africans don't vary and dark skin is mysteriously "foreign" to Kemet

All of the above have been comprehensively debunked, as the site threads show and our quick reference
Basic Database shows. egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/thread/15/basic-database-nile-valley-studies

But aha some say. What about DNA? Well, aome DNA research shows the exact same games being
played with skulls, limb proportions, etc- the manipulated "representative" sampling, the stereotypical
"true negro" strawman categories etc etc. They have carried over all that into DNA research.
But alack and alas, those pesky "culluds" refuse to go away in the DNA- whether it be the skin
studies showing mummy cells packed with melanin, the bloodtype genotype studies or the pesky
African origin Haplogroup E that unites most African males across the continent, and even shows
up in gasp, Pharaoh Ramses 3, and other royals.

Curses! Be thar none to rid us of these negroes!?

[zarahan]

What some folks forget too is that the ancient "Nubian" A-group and C-groups
were already mostly INSIDE Kemet not somewhere in sub-Saharan Africa. People
keep taking bout "Nubians" and "Nubia" but these key groups lived primarily WITHIN Egypt.
And the A-group predates the Dynasties. They were just as "Egyptian" as anyone else.
Another Eurocentric dodge is "splittism"- slicing and dicing up African peoples into
little boxes so larger cultural patterns and links are obscured.






^^But even as to this, long BEFORE the 25th Dynasty, "Nubian" pharaohs sat
on Egypt's thrones. One of Egypt's greatest dynasties, the 12th, originated
from dark-skinned "Nubian" stock, according to conservative Egyptologist F. Yurco
(1989). The 12th Dynasty ruled approximately 1000 years BEFORE the well known "black"
25th Dynasty. So we don't have to wait for the 25th Dynasty or even the 12th. And
before the Dynasties we had all the pre-dynastic folk at Badari, Naquada, etc etc..

Does anyone have anything on Menes, founder of the Dynastic era?

"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.)
originated from the Aswan region.4 As
expected, strong Nubian features and
dark coloring are seen in their sculpture
and relief work. This dynasty ranks as
among the greatest, whose fame far
outlived its actual tenure on the throne.
Especially interesting, it was a member of
this dynasty- that decreed that no Nehsy
(riverine Nubian of the principality of
Kush), except such as came for trade or
diplomatic reasons, should pass by the
Egyptian fortress at the southern end of
the Second Nile Cataract. Why would
this royal family of Nubian ancestry ban
other Nubians from coming into
Egyptian territory? Because the Egyptian
rulers of Nubian ancestry had become
Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they
exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and
adopted typical Egyptian policies."

- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient
Egyptians black or white?', Biblical
Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5,
1989)

[Tukuler al~Takruri]

Jan 14, 2015 14:33:05 GMT -5 zarahan said:

What some folks forget too is that the ancient "Nubian" A-group and C-groups
were already mostly INSIDE Kemet not somewhere in sub-Saharan Africa. People
keep taking bout "Nubians" and "Nubia" but these key groups lived primarily WITHIN Egypt.
And the A-group predates the Dynasties. They were just as "Egyptian" as anyone else.

I dunno.

I think those guys had their own
separate identity but for sure a
subset of them were among the elite
Badarians judging from phys anthro
of the involved region (Ta Shemau
& TaSeti A-group / Wawat C-group)
at the time (late 4th millenium).

Where they within "Egypt?" Have
to define Egypt's southern border
from natural to political at any
given era.

The earliest Egyptian records of
"Lower Nubia" region indicate it
was neither a natural nor then a
political part of Egypt as far as
my researches have yielded.

There were several independent
Lower Nubian polities co-current
with OK Egypt that in time were
brought under suzerainty of Wawat
(meaning "the Conspirators" in AEL).

[zarahan]

Indeed, absolutely correct Takuri. I am only thinking of distortions of "Nubians"
as somehow alien and distant from Egypt, separate "racial outsiders" as far as Egypt-
that only show up to be slaves and servitors later on down the road. Some
older books still have this model and of course the distorters embrace it.

But what you say is spot on. They were distinct people, and the border
definition is a clear consideration. I have not looked at borders except
the Egyptian empire and the modern map, but they would have been varied
back in the day.

[Tukuler al~Takruri]

Jan 14, 2015 23:41:55 GMT -5 zarahan said:

Indeed, absolutely correct Takuri. I am only thinking of distortions of "Nubians"
as somehow alien and distant from Egypt, separate "racial outsiders" as far as Egypt-
that only show up to be slaves and servitors later on down the road. Some
older books still have this model and of course the distorters embrace it.

But what you say is spot on. They were distinct people, and the border
definition is a clear consideration. I have not looked at borders except
the Egyptian empire and the modern map, but they would have been varied
back in the day.

Oops, I can't see your image, and I want to.

If I had missed your point earlier
now I see you mean inside borders
of today's Arab Republic of Egypt.

Somewhere I have some posts on AE's
shifting southern border over time
from where sandstone replaces limestone
along the river to the firm 2nd cataract
border after the defeat of Kerma.


Anyway, here's Wally's old old thread on it
Ancient Egypt's southern borders by Wally (2004)
www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001092.html
on the old original Ancient Egypt and Egyptology forum.

[zarahan]

Thanks, I'll check it out. That image was nothing more than a map of the Egyptian empire-
new kingdom- don;t know why it didn't show. But as you say, Egypt did not
extend that far south then.


333



^^another map from same website purports to show Old Kingdom extent- dont know how accurate



^^and this they say is predynastic- which seems t slice off just before he modern sudan border,
though again, full accuracy is unknown
near-east-images.blogspot.com/2007/10/maps-of-development-of-egyptian-empire.html


----------------------------------------------------------

I'll check out more on the link you give, Wally pushes the border back further south
but your take may be more accurate:

--------------------------------------------

Originally posted by al Takuri: posted 15 December 2004 06:44 PM


K I will use the less precise term Nubia.
The Nubians were the first to form a centralized
state with a king. They controlled the area
of Nubia and as almost as far north as Edfu.
All this region was then TaSeti.x3st.

When Egypt unified its kings took control as
far south as the 1st cataract. The area between
Edfu and the first cataract ised to belong to
TaSeti.x3st. Now, no longer under Nubian
control but in the hands of the Egyptians it
became the 1st nome of Egypt and was renamed
TaSeti.nwt.


If you have evidence that the Egyptians had
control over the region between Edfu and
Elephantine before the pre dynastic, or Wawat
up to the 2nd cataract before Snefru of dynasty 4 and Sesostris III of dynasty 12
and finally Ahmose of dynasty 18, Id be
interested. Because each time one of the
above mentioned pharaohs took TaSeti it
wasnt long before the Nubians retook
control of their country. It was only from
the time of Ahmose onward that Buhen in Nubia
became the southern border of Egypt.

When the Egyptians then moved further upriver
to Tombos there was fierce Nubian resistance
to overcome. This was when they hit on the
idea of taking the royals of Nubia for court
hostages.

Thutmose I extended Egyptian control up to
the 4th cataract. Thutmose III had a temple
built for deified Sesostris III at Semna and
dedicated it to two local Nubian deities.

Yet there was still some Nubian resistance to
Egyptian control that Thutmose IV and
Amenophis III had to take care of.

Only after major Egyptian architectural sites
go up in Nubia and the Nubians were won over
by a show of goodwill in trade, civics, and
inclusion in the royal circle did all of Nubia
truly become a willing annex of Egypt.

[Tukuler al~Takruri]

Below my succinct latest (Oct 2014) compare and contrast with the above.
Did I learn and grow over the last 10 yeas?

=-=-=-=

In the sandstone regions of the Nile Valley the Nehhesyw we know
as the A-Group had various polities in the Middle Nile Valley. TaSeti
is a term that covers all those separate polities. A few of those polities
appear to have confederated by territory into three states. Eventually
those three states formed a nation with, and named after, Wawat.
TaSeti once extended from Nag el Hasaya, Edfu in what became T3wy's
2nd sepat (nome), to the Batn el Hagar (just above the 2nd cataract).

TaShema[u/w], the southern of the Two Lands (T3wy) took over the
sandstone region from Edfu (Djeba/Nesen) to the 1st cataract. This area
became the southern half of the 2nd sepat (Heru's Throne) and all of the
1st sepat (TaSeti.nwt). The area between the 1st and 2nd cataracts
retained the name TaSeti.x3st and was an active part of Wawat (the
"Conspirators"). How far Wawat extended south of the 2nd cataract
is unknown but probably only to the Batn el Hagar (Rocky Belly).

Yam may've began just south of the Batn el Hagar and was the next state
above Wawat. Sai may've been a northern polity under Yam. Yam probably
extended as far as the 4th cataract judging from the fact that "Ancient
Urban Kerma" artifacts have been unearthed from the 3rd to at least the
4th cataracts. At this period in time Kush was the next territory upriver.
Kerma appears to have been Yam's capital. Yam enjoyed a most favorable
trade relationship with T3wy.

"Urban Kerma" was a magnet for populations west and east of the Nile as
well as those south upriver in the Upper Nile Valley. At some point in time
Yam disappears from the record as the Keshli took over "Middle Urban Kerma"
and toughened up terms of trade with T3wy. Resentful of a situation it was
powerless to overturn, the Kmtyw label the nation of Kesht as "Kesh keshyt"
(Kush the contemptible).

As far as I can gather, Kesh proper was a nation located at least between the 4th
and 5th cataracts with Gebel Barkal (Napata) as an important politico-religious
center for all the Nile Valley. As a kingdom on its way to empire Kesh began to
control provinces all the way upriver to the Butana and all the way downriver
to somewhere between the 2nd and 1st cataracts. "Classic Urban Kerma" was
a capital of Kush. So during Hyksos times Kerma cannot be juxtaposed to Kush.
In its heyday Kush was the most far flung ancient world empire. Its borders were
the Butana (confluence of the White and Blue Niles) way in the south and the city
of Megiddo (in the Levant) far to the north.


* (3800-2850 BCE) A-Group
* (2300-1500 BCE) C-Group
* (?-2150 BCE) Yam

* (4800-3500 BCE) Neolithic Kerma
* (3500-2700 BCE) Pre-Kerma

* (5000-1500 BCE) Sai

* (2450-2050 BCE) Kerma Ancien
* (2050-1750 BCE) Kerma Moyen
* (1750-1550 BCE) Kerma Classique

* (1640-1530 BCE) Hyksos

* (2000BCE-350CE) Kush (Kerma, Napata, Meroe)

[zarahan]

lol indeed, your decade on the front lines has been put to good use!
One can see the power and fluency in your excellent chart, particularly
the timeline. I have been looking lately at the extent of Kushite dominion
south, and seems to me looking at some scholars that it extended beyond
Kusti, below & south of Khartoum, and drew huge amounts of resources and
trade from further south deep into Sudan, which effectively makes Kush's
empire a "sub-Saharan" entity, a physical reality obscured by the shifting
of the Sahara south, converting African cultures once far to the north into NON
sub-saharan entities..



But anyway, when you say in its heyday Kush up to Meddigo, are you
thinking of the empire under Taharqa and others expanded into Palestine and
Syria?

And I know its been written about (but cant find links)- What's the latest on the
role of Kerma/Qustul/Nubia in founding the AE dynastic era? Way back
Bruce Trigger or Williams made this argument, and I know its been out of
favor for a while, but what's the latest? I know you are a master custodian of
"institutional memory" on the many links and resources of ES/The Nile.

[rivertemz]

Wow im glad to be apart of this forums, you all just give "The Best" commentary and sources on subjects like these, you make it so easy yet it's so hard for the general public to grasp & place these blatant facts together for some odd reason.

So a definite support for Kemet being of African origin, period, nothing else came before, but after the dynastic period.
It just bothers me how much support the pseudo-historically aryan-influenced academics and media outlets are going to continue to push that concept. When would it ever end !?

[zarahan]

Wow im glad to be apart of this forums, you all just give "The Best" commentary and sources on subjects like these, you make it so easy yet it's so hard for the general public to grasp & place these blatant facts together for some odd reason.

Well the general public, the average person are often like lemmings on these
subjects- meekly taking their cues from the mass media and general establishment.
There are increasing exceptions though, particularly in the black community
and progressive white community, even now some mainstream academics.
But the media in particular, like National Geographic, and Disney will continue
for some time to distort things.

Think about it- when Napoleon came back from Egypt with a huge ton of documentation
and artifacts, Westerns realized that there was a whole other massive, advanced
ancient culture that did not depend on, that was long before Greece and ROme.
Hence as some academics note- it was this "Egyptian wave" that really expanded
the museum in the West and made Egyptian art part of the Western canon. In other
words, the West co-opted and incorporated all those artifacts as part of "the West."
This is why "Egyptomania" was and is still alive in the West. Even the Romans were
collectors of Egyptian art and the Greeks recognized Egypt as superior on some counts.

SO basically you have a huge amount of ego, resources, money and emotion invested
by white people in Egypt. Egyptian symbols even appear on their paper money.
This is why they will fight tooth and nail to downplay, dismiss or distort Kemet's
African roots (the "3D" strategy). They are hugely invested - body and soul in this.
Below is a link to the 'Egyptomania" page on ES. A short excerpt will be posted below
just so we can have some info over here on Reloaded posted.


www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=007127


So a definite support for Kemet being of African origin, period, nothing else came before, but after the dynastic period.

Yes Kemet is of African origin and foundations. Now just to be clear, there
were always people from the Middle East and elsewhere floating into Egypt over
the millennia. So-called "Afrocentrists" don't "deny" this at all- despite strawmen
claims to the contrary. There were always merchants, traders, nomads and war captives
from the Mid East and Europe- how could there not be, given Kemet's location?
But the core population and the founders are African, well up into the NEw Kingdom.
And the closest people biologically and culturally to the Egyptians as study after study
shows are not "Middle Easterners" but Nubians.

Now also keep in mind that parts of Egypt were overrun in some eras- like the Hyskos
era some 1700-2000 or so years AfTER the dynastic founding. Again, no one "denies" this
and sure, these outsiders would have brought in new people, new mixes, and so on that
would affect things. But eventually they were expelled. Then centuries later came the
even more distant Greeks, Romans, PErsians and finally the Arab invaders who still
have not gone.

But despite these changes, archaeological data shows no mass influx of settlers or
colonists from Europe or the Middle East until the end phases. Were there mixes here
and there? Sure- but nothing major. The population basically remained what they were- indigenous
Africans. Some ask about "African looking" Egyptians. Well there are plenty of those-
they just don't get much press. And 'African looking" can mean anything- narrow noses
for example tend to show up in desert areas (like Egypt) or high mountain plateau,
(as in East Africa) or cool coast (like plenty of other areas including West Africa)
So "African looking" is all those, not only people looking like Mike Tyson. Notice no
one ever asks white people to "stick to one type of look" to be "really" EUropean.
Nut brown Italians or Greeks and pale lily white Swedes get to be all European but in Africa,
out come the hypocritical double-standards.

Some claim Egyptians skin colors should all be "black" to "qualify" as "black people." Yeah I
I know you are laughing, but this is the nonsensical 24/7 propaganda out there. But aside from
the fact that there is plenty of "black" skin in Egypt, skin can vary by climate- darker
in the tropical south, lighter in the cooler north near the Medit coast. So "wandering
Caucasoids" or "settlers" are not needed to give peoples of Kemet varying skin colors.
And on top of that- there is some evidence that Egyptians used symbolic colors in some
paintings- lighter and yellowish for women for example to indicate status (work indoors, not
out in that hot sun), and men a darker reddish to contrast against women- clear gender signifiers.
Takur can give more info on this. Finally genetically, Africans have the most varied skin color-
light/yellowish San or 'Red Igbo" in West Africa, as tan as any Italian or Greek, to super dark
and everything in between. Africa has the highest level of albinism too of all continents-
while not plentiful white skin is nothing special for the place where modern humanity originated.
So assorted claims about what "really" "qualifies" Egyptians as "Africans" are a lot of rubbish
once you start looking at these details.

I know you & others know the above but just mentioning it for any new readers and also to expose
assorted strawmen, bogus claims about so-called "Afrocentrists" who allegedly believe
"no one entered Egypt until the end". Its all fake strawmen they set up to "refute."


It just bothers me how much support the pseudo-historically aryan-influenced academics and media outlets are going to continue to push that concept. When would it ever end !?

Its not going to end soon, but it has improved some. Some mainstream scholars
now openly admit the truth. Others know the truth but are using a subtle
dismissal/downplay/distort "3D" strategy. It is up to folks like you, and indeed
all with an interest in a more balanced picture of African bio-history
to continue to fight to set the record straight. Its a protracted fight-
like the NVA/Viet COng in Vietnam who defeated (at heavy cost) the Americans
despite their much vaster resources. Think of yourself as part of the "people's forces."
You don't have to write books and stuff, just educate others as you can
with the facts, whenever you can.

I ran across the well known Natl Geog article on "the Black Pharaohs" the other
day and a line early on, just dripping with condescension said it all- they said
that the Black Pharaohs came from "deep in Africa" to conquer Egypt. Now why would
they have to come from "deep in Africa" as if they were some distant, alien species?
The Sudan is right next door to Egypt, and the Nubians are biologically and culturally
the closest peole to Egyptians. How would they be coming from "deep" in Africa? You can
see the subtle dismissal, the condescension, as if they were some exotic species from
"deep" in an exotic place- "Africa", as if Africa is somehow exotic or alien to
the Nile Valley. These are their tactics these days. It is not open denial, but distortion,
deceit/dismissal and downplay. Some people ask why we keep repeating stuff, well its
because of the relentless 24/7 "3D" approach that we are facing.

I am sorry to sound like a teacher (I was actually in an earlier life). Don;t
mean to come across so, but the problem you highlight is a critical one, and
you will find yourself as you start educating people, have to keep repeating
the same thing again and again. That's the only way to win the war. We update
the knowledge base, and then you have to go out and spread the word, trying
to keep reasonably close to the facts- thus avoiding the trap of wild claims
like Egyptians levitating pyramids and such. There are various "Afro-enthusiasts"
out there unfortunately who don;t stay reasonably close to the facts, or at least
don't ground their arguments close to some evidence. The trick is to steer a middle
course. But that's another story.

============================================================================================

www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=007127
ARE WHITE PEOPLE TOO OBSESSED WITH ANCIENT EGYPT?

The book below details how whites have been
obsessed with ancient Egypt thru the centuries,
from Greece all the way down to present.



jacket blurb
“Consuming Ancient Egypt examines
the influence of Ancient Egypt on the
everyday lives of people, of all ages,
throughout the world. It looks at the
Egypt which the tourist sees, Egypt in
film and Egypt as the inspiration for
opera. It asks why so many books are
published each year on Egyptological
subjects at all levels, from the austerely
academic to the riotous celebrations of
Egypt as a land of mystery, enchantment
and fantasy.

It then considers the ways in which
Ancient Egypt interacts with the living
world, in architecture, museum-going,
the acquisition of souvenirs and
reproductions, design, and the perpetual
appeal of the mummy. The significance
of Egypt as an adjunct to (and frequently
the subject of) marketing in the
consumer society is examined. It reveals
much about Egypt's immemorial appeal
and the psychology of those who
succumb to its magnetism.”.

From:
-- Consuming Ancient Egypt, 2003,
By Sally MacDonald, and Michael Rice.


Another book notes:

quote

"Roman emperors built Egyptian gardens
in their palaces. Cults based on Egyptian
gods and godesses spread throughout the
empire. The goddess Isis, for example,
was worshipped from England to
Afghanistan. Later medieval popes
constructed obelisks that mimicked those
of the pharaohs. Medieval doctors
ground up mummies and fed them to
patients in the mistaken belief that these
well preserved bodies had supernational
healing powers.

In the 19th century, Egyptian influence
became fashionable in design and the
arts. Jewelry, furniture, and an
assortment of decorative objects and
accents pieces were adorned with
designs and images that conjured
thoughts of life along the Nile.
Egyptian themed (and or at least
tinged) operas, plays and novels were
a hit with the general public.

It seemed that the more that was
revealed about ancient Egypt, the
more appetite for faux relics and
representations grew in America and
throughout Europe. The discovery of
King Tutankhamen's tomb in the early
20th century sparked yet another
round of Egyptomania."

From:
--Ancient Egypt: From Prehistory to the
Islamic Conquest. By Educational
Britannica Educational 2010

[zarahan]

White people love Egypt so much that at one time, they were
consuming the flesh of dead Egyptians, (mummies) as medicine.
Yet the standard propaganda line about alleged "Afrocentrics"
is that they are "too concerned" about Egypt. Now who are the people
most obsessed with Egypt, and how come we seldom hear of cannibalism
in Europe but mostly "deep" in some dark African venue? lol

CANNIBALISM IN EUROPE AND EGYPTIAN MUMMIES
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------