|
Post by Brandon S. Pilcher on Sept 13, 2024 15:13:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by djehuti on Sept 14, 2024 3:43:59 GMT -5
^ The color label of 'black' is obviously a racializing term that gets applied to Kushites but not Egyptians. Ironically we've all known what Crawford points out-- that Egyptians and Kushites are closely related populations. Metrically Kushites resemble predynastic Naqada Egyptians. Yet non-metrically their crania show affinities to Lower Egyptians If they whitewash Egyptians, they'll have to do the same for the Kushites.
|
|
|
Post by archaeologist on Sept 14, 2024 4:42:12 GMT -5
There are also fictional books which underscores differencies between Nubians and Egyptians. Christian Jacq´s T he Black Pharaoh is one and another is E harper Johnssons Piankhy the Great. The cover of the latter also highlights the differences between the Black Nubian conquerer and the more light skinned Egyptians.
|
|
|
Post by djehuti on Sept 14, 2024 13:11:12 GMT -5
^ No doubt the Kushites were darker in complexion than Egyptians but Western academia and media has consistently portrayed Kushites (and Nubians in general) as black people while Egyptians were not. These portrayals were based entirely on political agenda than reality. It's the exact opposite of the situation in the Balkans where the lighter-skinned Macedonians were not portrayed as a different race from the darker Greeks. Indeed, ancient Macedonians are often identified as Greeks despite all the textual evidence showing they were different ethnicities who spoke different albeit related languages.
|
|
|
Post by Brandon S. Pilcher on Sept 14, 2024 22:28:11 GMT -5
^ No doubt the Kushites were darker in complexion than Egyptians but Western academia and media has consistently portrayed Kushites (and Nubians in general) as black people while Egyptians were not. These portrayals were based entirely on political agenda than reality. It's the exact opposite of the situation in the Balkans where the lighter-skinned Macedonians were not portrayed as a different race from the darker Greeks. Indeed, ancient Macedonians are often identified as Greeks despite all the textual evidence showing they were different ethnicities who spoke different albeit related languages. Agreed. Kushite civilization is fascinating enough without selling them as the "Black Pharaohs" (which implies that Egyptians could never be considered as "Black" too). Not to mention how that narrative doesn't jive very well with the commonplace acknowledgement that so-called Black people can range in skin tones too. You might as well say Khmers weren't East Asian since they were on average darker than Han Chinese people.
|
|
|
Post by archaeologist on Sept 15, 2024 2:36:33 GMT -5
One can also imagine that some of the ancient Egyptians own depictions have led to the assumption that Kushites were much darker than Egyptians. In some depictions the Southern peoples are depicted as literally black or very dark.
|
|
|
Post by archaeologist on Sept 15, 2024 5:15:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by djehuti on Sept 15, 2024 16:23:48 GMT -5
^ I've always found the description of Kushites and other Nubians as "barbarous" or "backwards" rather bizarre considering that archaeology has shown they were as advanced as the Egyptians in terms of technology and culture. Perhaps this view of 'civilized' was based on urbanization since Egypt had more urban sites than Kush. Even so, capital centers like Kerma and Meroe were much larger than the largest Egyptian cities. Ancient Macedonia, Illyria and Thrace were less urban than their Greek counterparts and indeed the Greeks called them 'barbaroi' meaning foreign not because they necessarily less sophisticated in culture. In fact archaeology in Macedon and the other ancient Balkan nations has debunked these notions. Even the very notion of 'Egyptianization' has to be specified because there were in fact many traits Kushites and other Nubians shared in common with Egyptians before Egypt formally expanded southward and colonized Kush. Again, the same was true with the Paleo-Balkan nations sharing certain cultural traits and customs in common before Hellenization which was a trend started by the Macedonians themselves. As far as differences in physical appearance go, ironically Archaeologist your avatar is a scene of Kushite princes from the tomb of Amenhotep Huy, the Viceroy of Kush. Egyptians depicted from the same tomb: 123Amenhotep Huy himselfYou can see more in Tomb of Amenhotep-Huy Opened to the Public
|
|
|
Post by archaeologist on Sept 15, 2024 17:15:47 GMT -5
Yes I seen these Kushites before. It seems my Avatar came by default. Maybe I later choose another one so I don´t have the same as many others.
|
|
|
Post by djehuti on Sept 15, 2024 20:48:51 GMT -5
^ You can customize your avatar by choosing a picture url from the internet and uploading it, that's what I did. It's unfortunate Egyptsearch is down because there is so much info on Kush that I want to post, but here is an excellent source: The Kingdom of Kerma (2500-1500 BC)The Egyptian Middle Kingdom (2040 to 1782 BC) started later and ended earlier than Kerma. It was during the Middle Kingdom that Egypt under Mentuhotep II expanded southward and annexed Wawat (Lower Nubia) building a series of forts in the process. The Egyptians also made efforts to prevent the Wawati from uniting into another centralized kingdom like that of their Qustul predecessors. In fact they played the tactic of divide and conquer by siding with certain local weru (chieftains) against powerful heqa-khastu (enemy lords). Unfortunately, these political shenanigans caused resentment amongst some Wawati leaders who were the source of many assassination attempts on Middle Kingdom kings. This was the reason why Senwosret III made a degree that no Nehesy (Nubian) may enter pass the 1st Cataract except to do trade and no doubt were kept under heavy surveillance. Of course when Egyptologists accepted the Breasted translation of Nehesy as "Negro", the interpretation was that Senwosret III was racial segregationists! LOL Ironically not only did kings of the 12th dynasty marry Nubian wives from Wawat, but the dynasty originated in Ta-Seti whose inhabitants were originally ethically Nubian. The question I have is when Egypt realized the threat of Kush under the kingdom of Kerma. We know that after Egypt secured control of Wawat they were able to have direct access to trade with Kush. Not only that, but there is evidence of Egyptians visiting Kerma for both commercial reasons and religious pilgrimages. We even have evidence of important Egyptian officials taking residence there especially in the city of Soleb. So when did their relations with Kush turn sour?? To my knowledge we first read of Kushite raids into Egypt during the 2nd Intermediate Period, with the most devastating yet known from the tomb of Sobeknakht II governor of Nekheb (El-Kab) during the 17th Dynasty. By then Wawat had been incorporated into the Kushite Empire the extent of which we have yet to find out. According to the record Nekheb account. Kush lead forces of Wawati, Medjay, and Punti peoples as part of their raid which suggest a vast sphere of influence. And we know of the infamous letter from the Hyksos king that was intercepted by the Theban King Kamose which exposed the plot to literally divide and conquer Egypt in which all of Ta Shemau (Upper Egypt) would be given to Kush which was was the final straw that lead up to the Theban revolt. Anyone have any new info to add??
|
|
|
Post by Brandon S. Pilcher on Sept 16, 2024 13:00:04 GMT -5
Even so, capital centers like Kerma and Meroe were much larger than the largest Egyptian cities. How true is this? Kerma's population is estimated at around 10,000 people, whereas Men-Nefer (Memphis) in Kemet had a population around 30,000 and Waset (Thebes) had around 75,000. I am still looking for figures on Meroe though.
|
|
|
Post by djehuti on Sept 17, 2024 0:27:45 GMT -5
^ I was referring to size in area not population. The vast majority of populations in the Kushite empire were nomadic and not settled like Egyptians. But I did read some years ago about the limits of Kerma being greater than previously thought, though I forgot the exact estimates. Because most of the populations were nomadic the permanent housing comprised a small fraction of the city's buildings with the important ones being the living quarters of the elites. Other buildings were either commercial for trade and businesses, or storage houses for food, or temples and shrines. Because of the nomadic nature of the peoples, the population size of Kerma varied by the season. The only two other major cities I know of in Kush was Soleb and Sai Island. The latter was a capital of another kingdom that became annexed by Kerma.
|
|
|
Post by Brandon S. Pilcher on Sept 19, 2024 14:46:02 GMT -5
Another question I have. Not only that, but there is evidence of Egyptians visiting Kerma for both commercial reasons and religious pilgrimages. Where were these pilgrims headed to? Did they consider Jebel Barkal near Napata to be sacred to Amun already?
|
|
|
Post by djehuti on Sept 20, 2024 3:34:03 GMT -5
^ Judging from the archaeological evidence, Soleb and Kerma were important sites during the Middle Kingdom. The latter city had the Defuffa which was a giant mudbrick temple resembling a mountain of some sort (Jebel Barkal?). There was a lot of Egyptian material, especially votive material, in both sites. Soleb in particular was said to have actual Egyptian burial sites or cemeteries. I think Kerma may have Egyptian graves too. As far as I know the Egyptians only began pilgrimages to Jebel Barkal only after the conquest of Kush by Thutmose III in which he made the city of Napata the southernmost city of the New Kingdom Empire. The fact that Egyptians came that far south to at least Soleb and Kerma not only for commercial interactions but also to pay religious homage is very interesting but it makes me even more curious about why their relations with Kush turned bad so as Kush and her allies like Punt would raid Egypt and later try to divide Egypt with the Hyksos. Mind you, most of the pilgrimage sites that Egyptians traveled to in Nubia were located in Wawat which was where Egyptians built the majority of their temples in that region during the Middle Kingdom.
|
|
|
Post by archaeologist on Sept 20, 2024 12:03:16 GMT -5
One of the documentaries that are mentioned in the op, Rise of The Black Pharaohs, produced by National Geographic:
|
|