The following is based on “Arguments Against a Negro Origin”, chapter eight of Cheikh Anta Diop’s “The African Origin of Civilization: Myth or Reality” (1974):
Reasons why Ancient Egypt could not have sprung from black Africa:
- Blacks are backwards and incapable of high civilization on their own.
- Mummies had straight hair.
- Egyptians painted themselves dark red, not black, in pictures.
- Blacks were slaves in ancient times.
- The Stela of Philae calls the people south of Egypt “blacks”.
Take each in turn:
1. Blacks are backwards and incapable of high civilization on their own.
West Africa was arguably more advanced than Western Europe in the 1300s. The accounts of Arabs in the 1300s and the first Portuguese to arrive there in the 1400s make that clear.
Further, Ibn Batuta, travelling through West Africa in the 1350s, said the roads were completely safe – no one tried to rob him – and that “the Negroes are of all peoples those who most abhor injustice.”
It was Europe’s advantage in ships and guns after 1500 that changed all that, allowing it to:
dominate the continent and to falsify the Negro’s personality. That is how things still stand and that is what has caused the subsequent alteration of history concerning the origin of Egyptian civilization.
It also made possible the slave trade, which both destroyed civilization in Africa and made it necessary for whites to see blacks as immoral half-animals.
2. Mummies have straight hair.
At least the mummies museums like to show have straight hair. So do some blacks. But from Herodotus’s description and the sort of hair styles Egyptian women are pictured wearing, it is clear that most did not have fine, straight hair like white people.
3. Egyptians painted themselves dark red, not black, in pictures.
Dark red is within the skin colour range of black Africa, not of white Europe or Asia. Even Europeans understood that – that is until the 1800s when:
it was recognized with amazement that Egypt was the mother of all civilization. Then eyesight suddenly improved and it was possible to distinguish, on the frescoes where everyone had previously recognized Negroes, evidences of a “white race with red skin”, a “white race with dark red skin”, a “white race with black skin.” But they never distinguished, as Egyptians, a white race with white skin.
4. Blacks were slaves in ancient times.
Some blacks were slaves. Yet some of the oldest pictures in Egypt show dark-skinned Egyptians taking whites as slaves.
5. The Stela of Philae calls the people south of Egypt “blacks”.
The Stela of Philae was a stone marker at the southern limits of Egypt. The Egyptian written on it calls people to the south Nahasi, southerners – not “blacks” as latter-day European mistranslation would have it. Herodotus was mistranslated the same way, some putting “blacks” where he said Ethiopians, giving readers the false idea that Herodotus saw Ethiopians as black and therefore different from Egyptians. The Egyptians themselves only used “black” (khem) to mean themselves or their country.
See also:
to make it simple egypt was first settled by blacks and they built the first civilazation. with time other people came in from other areas of the world because they heard of its glory and grandeur . those who decided to settle married the indigenous people and with time some of them became light skinned. just like what happened in the united states to the black americans even people who were black like adam clayton powell could pass for white ,he even had straight, when you go to ethiopia some of them have almost straight hair. in time past they had advanced black civilizations and others that were not so advanced. just like in europe the romans thought of the germanic people as savage and backward. the argument that egypt was not black is baseless , clearly egypt is in africa and most of its people black arabs ,they are clearly not white or caucasian. infact history was delibrately altered and falsified for the sole purpose of debasing people of african heritage especialy in the western world ,as to make it easy for the perpetrators of this lies to subjugate , enslave and exploit this group of peolpe. let europe write its history and african write its own. egypt is africa”s child and it is black.
LikeLiked by 1 person
to add this ,civilization is not the property of any peoples . when people mingle they advance and learn new things and when they are isolated from other civilizations they cease to advance and become frozen in time. human intreraction is neccesary for advancement.
LikeLike
I don’t even know where to start with this. Basically, the whole issue tells us nothing about the actual Ancient Egypt; it’s all about the way we see things today.
For the 534253456436th time: you can NOT use Egyptian art as a proof of how Egyptians looked like, because Egyptian art didn’t portray realistic people. Egyptian art uses rigid canon and therefore doesn’t portray human beings the way they are. End. Of. Story.
LikeLike
Compare with this:
Is this a realistic painting of a human being? Assume we’re aliens who never visited Earth before and this is our only source on how human beings look like. What would we conclude about human physical appearance and anatomy, based on this image?
LikeLike
I have to agree on this with mira to certain extent. There are more realistic depictions of humans from this period too, such as the famous Nefertiti bust etc. But in general it is quite funny when art is seen as proof of something that existed. On that vein there were hell of a lot angels and demons and hell and heaven on earth during the medieval times and even later, that is if we draw conclusions from art alone. Or during 1910-20*s there lived people in Europe whose heads were twisted and assembled from blocks, cubic people, and also they had burning giraffes and melting watches and clocks. In the 50’s and 60’s there were people in USA who were mish mash of stripes, lines, fibers of some sort, like De Koonings paintings show. Also Superman really lived in USA.
LikeLike
I’ll respond to Mira on basis of a slightly larger picture. With every argument you make the latent implication that race/color of ancient egyptians doesn’t matter,
LikeLike
But I say, politically and socially, in a world where blacks are believed to be backwards uncivilized,with no civilization or technology to lay claim to, and a percieved cause-effect reletionship b/t whiteness and cultural/technological acheivement and my pet axiom for race determination holds true, we should be grasping for any claim to greatness we can get our hands on, we didn’t start this race argument, but we’re obligated to defend ourselves within it
LikeLike
“I have to agree on this with mira to certain extent. There are more realistic depictions of humans from this period too, such as the famous Nefertiti bust etc….”
For the umpteenth time the “Famous Nefertiti bust”, aka the BERLIN BUST, is more than likely a fake, and therefore NOT from that time period. There is no reason to believe it was created thousands of years ago other than the fact that some Germans said it was. That is unless it’s important to certain people that light skinned Viking types were innumerated amongst the darker skinned people of such a glorious civilization as ancient Egypt. The fact that the plaster of paris bust (with an unfinished eye to add authenticity as being ‘damaged over the millennia’) is far more realistic and different from other ancient Egyptian depictions should tell you something is amiss.
Even the predominantly fair-skinnedd Northwest European whites of Australia were dropping like flies from skin cancer until they promoted the usage of shade & sunscreen. What was it all those “light-skinned” Egyptians were doing in hot ass Egypt thousands of years ago to protect themselves from skin cancer before the invention of umbrellas & SPF 1billion?!
LikeLike
@parfumbleu: Well, I do not know if that Nefertiti bust is a fake. Nor do you however much you think so. Unless, you have the evidence to show it as a fake.
Also, there are several similar very naturalistic statues around. There is another famous statue of a scribe who is also very light skinned. Is that a fake too? Are those few thousand years old wall paintings which depict brown, black, white and yellow people fakes too? Are the miniature statues found on some graves fakes too? They depict black, brown and white men too.
There are some excellent paintings from very old times which are very naturalistic too, such as a the painting showing different birds of the Nile. It could be used to teach different spieces of birds, so finely are they painted.
I understand that such statues and images do not sit in the “pure black” idea of Egypt but they are there. I am not inventing them. And it is very hard for me to believe that somebody got the idea of this un-pure racial conspiracy many millenia ago.
Believe me, I have no racial issue here. I really do not. Egyptian civilization was african. Absolutely. I am not saying it was white or european, or like ignorant americans say “caucasian” which is even funnier. After all Caucasus is a long way a way and real caucasians are more than often dark haired brown eyed people.
As for your implication that I somehow think that the vikings were jumpin up and down the Nile 4000 years ago or that I have some kind of germanic ideology behind my thoughts, please. I’m a finn and we have nothing in common with anybody else, other than estonians and carelians. Magyars are our linguistic cousins but that is all.
As for the skin cancer, it is very much connected to the thinning of the ozone layer, phenomena which propably did not exist at that time. And some indian tribes had their own sun blockers, hence the name red skins, and some africans applied mud to protect their skin from scorching sun, just like the aborginals if they needed some protection. Which was and is still a very smart move since the mud dries on you and forms protective layer, and it does not boil in the skin like the modern western “sun protection creams”.
@bulanik: Very good point. We just try to figure that out. One has to use reason when trying to figure out what the artist meant. A good example is one famous wall carving painting which shows the pharao three times bigger than any other figure. Now it is reasonable to assume that the artist tries to show the greatness of the pharao, not that he was three times the size of the others.
LikeLike
“Also, there are several similar very naturalistic statues around. There is another famous statue of a scribe who is also very light skinned”
You’re the one who persists in bringing up the Berlin bust as an example of very light skinned ancient Egyptians — which doesn’t make much sense in light of it’s quesitionable authenticity. It would make more sense to focus on the statuettes of the light skinned scribe et cetera. That being said, I don’t doubt that over time there were lighter skinned inhabitants of Egypt; that these very light-skinned peoples were the creators/originators of Egyptian civilization is what I find questionable.
Even from the period of Roman occupation, the fayum death portraits depict few, if any, very dark-skinned types (as well as few very light-skinned types–I don’t recall seeing any of either shade, as matter of fact, however, I’ve only seen a fraction of the known portraits), but of the portraits I’ve seen most are a shade of olive, with many portraits appearing to depict individuals of discernible black sub-Saharan African descent regardless of skin shade.
LikeLike
“That is unless it’s important to certain people that light skinned Viking types were innumerated [Edit: not “innumerated” but “enumerated”] amongst the darker skinned people of such a glorious civilization as ancient Egypt.”
To sam: The phrasing in my post to you was unnecessarily rude. Please accept my apologies.
LikeLike
@parfum bleu: Of course, no problem. When discussion is passionate and subject is important one, sometimes wording becomes a bit harder than perhaps intented. I have done it myself un intentionally so no hard feelings at all.
LikeLike
louie jacuzzi
As for Nefertiti bust: I have no idea if it’s fake (and I should know about this, right?), but it’s irrelevant. First of all, the bust, realistic or not, doesn’t look (pardon my language) “Aryan” in a way that it “proves” ancient Egyptians were “white”. I don’t get what’s so white about it… Thin lips?
That being said, we’re not even sure if she was Egyptian. There’s a possibility she was a princess from state called Mitanni, located in northern Syrian and Anadolia. (Though this evidence is quite slim and the theory is heavily influenced by another type of ideology).
I think the important thing here to udnerstand is that, no matter how difficult/impossible for us today to understand, phenotype wasn’t that important in antiquity. There was a lot of mixing everywhere, and the fact someone was lighter skinned and mixed with what is today considered “white”, or darker skinned and mixed with what is today considered “black” didn’t matter in Egypt at all. So Nefertiti’s parents could have been people of more Caucasian appearance. Nobody payed attention to that back then.
Still, I don’t see the bust, even if it’s not fake, as a “proof” of this woman being “white”, and even if she was, it sure doesn’t prove anything about Ancient Egypt in general.
When it comes to art, she lived in a very interesting period, when art was changed from the usual canon. Her husband was Akhenaten, a pharaoh who tried to make a huge change in Egyptian culture, mainly in religion (which also influenced art).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akhenaten
They say the art was more realistic in his time. It’s partially true, but I see it more as an establishing a new, different canon than portraying humans the way they realistically look. I wouldn’t take their art as a proof of the way Egyptians looked, at least when it comes to race. Like Egyptian art from other periods, here, too, you have people of various phenotypes,but it doesn’t have to mean the phenotype was realistic.
Not to mention canon of his time made people have elongated skulls, and while some cultures did practice skull modification, there are no proofs (as far as I know- but I might be mistaken here) that Egyptians practiced it in this time. This skull elongation might be just a stylistic choice in his art. Still, some people take these images as proof that Akhenaten was and alien. (Yes, you read that right: an alien).
For example, this image of his daughters:
LikeLike
louie jacuzzi,
I understand the motives, and I support them. People need to know how harmful and influential racism is, and, sadly, many don’t get it. To many, it’s still difficult to admit great civilizations were not built by whites only (though it’s quite debatable which of the great civilizations was actually built by the “whites”, but it’s another story).
Still, drawing conclusions based on Egyptian paintings is not the right way to go. You can’t prove a thing with it (either way), so focusing on it just makes people’s argument invalid. Because, once again, you can’t treat Egyptian art as realistic!
For example:
This isn’t an interracial couple. It’s quite possible these two people had the same skin shade, though her was probably a bit lighter – but not that much lighter than her husband. The canon simply demanded that female Egyptians should have this light skin in art representations, while male Egytpians should be reddish-brown.
Another example:
Whoever is considered Egyptian, and not a foreigner, gets a canonical representation, Egyptian style. So for example, a Nubian or Greek person will be represented as a Nubian/Greek before he is accepted in the Egyptian society. After that, he’ll be represented as an Egyptian (different skin shade and all). If said person is a ruler, he’ll be represented as such.
For example, Ptolemy I Soter, who was Macedonian, became the ruler of Egypt in 4th century BC.
This is Ptolemy I:
… but this is also him:
Both of these sculptures represent the same person.
LikeLike
That bust of the so called interracial couple is all false. I’ve seen proof of this.
LikeLike
Hey Mira, I think you double linked to the same photo above.
LikeLike
True, the art thing is a bit of a reach, that’s not even a major concession, but the what color argument is an important one in the world we live in. I think the sum total of evidence certainly says they weren’t white people, nor were they completely arab either. Considering the history of all conquests, and military incursions, and weighing it against what we see happening today in places like brazil, then it’s certainly not a reach to believe that they were blacker then, than they are now.
LikeLike
Mira is right that Egyptian art was highly stylized – but not to the point of being truly abstract. In other words, Egyptian artists learned how paint and sculpt based on very representative figure drawing, but the figures were based on the “look” of the Egyptian population to a great extent.
For example, this nouveau painting is very stylized, but the style indicates that the subject of the painting is European.
It is my understanding that ancient Egyptian art was much the same way – stylized, but broadly representative of the basic look of the population.
LikeLike
Egypt. The only country in Africa that apparently never had Africans. How convenient.
LikeLike
King,
You’re right. The comment was in moderation and I only noticed it later.
Here’s the first image:
And the second:
About the art: it wasn’t abstract; but cubism did one thing that Egyptian (and some other cultures) used. It represents humans and objects the way they’re seen from different angles. Egyptians didn’t portray things and people the way they see them, but the way they know they are. But that’s just one aspect of the canon.
Egyptians painting themselves as reddish brown (males) and dark eyed was part of the canon, so no matter how you looked like, you will be presented as such. However, we sure could ask why they chose these colours to be the canon, and not something else. But that’s as far as we can go concerning the art. We know for sure that they often didn’t pay attention on persons physical appearance when making a painting or a sculpture, so using that as a proof is not the best way to go. Art in general is not the best source for this sort of information, especially given the fact the concept of race as we know it today didn’t exist, so nobody payed attention to show racial differences.
Still, if one wants to use Egyptian art in this purpose, focus on the images and sculptures representing peasants and common folk, not rulers and high officers. The rich and powerful were affected by the canon the most; they were almost never shown realistically. Servants, maids, etc. give a better picture.
LikeLike
louie jacuzzi,
True, the art thing is a bit of a reach, that’s not even a major concession, but the what color argument is an important one in the world we live in.
You said it yourself: it’s important in the world WE live in. It wasn’t important for Ancient Egyptians (in fact, the concept of race didn’t even existed back then), so trying to “figure things out” based on their art or culture is not the best way to go (either way; no matter if you* want to “prove” Egyptians were white or that they were black, you can’t do it by applying today’s standards, norms and constructs to Egyptians).
* general “you”.
The whole idea about Egypt “belonging” to one race (black or white or whatever), or one continent (Africa or Europe, or whatever) is a modern invention. Therefore, it’s dubious or impossible to use evidence from ancient Egypt to prove something that didn’t even exit back then. 5000 years from now the shape of someone’s ears and voice pitch might be extremely important for humans, and the way their groups are separated. Good for them, but it has nothing to do with us, or the way our societies are organized. Therefore they will have a difficult time deciding “what we were”, by analyzing our paintings. Especially if they take cubist paintings.
LikeLike
Good thought, I’ll walk away peacefully
LikeLike
I like the discussion ladies and gentlemen. Keep it up!
LikeLike
Diop was a bungling fool,who made up as he went along,his works can be picked and refuted easily. He has been debunked long ago. And using Herodotus sources ,your site lost all its crediblity. Herodotus was a traveller and relied on priests gossip to make his assumptions and could not read hieroglphics.You are very deluded like most of your afrocentric goon squad. Its funny your history goes back to 16th century west africa,in dunghuts and you deluded goons want to claim Egypt. Egyptians are not blacks. Its your pseudo science stemming from nil achievement that perpeuates your fruadulant writings. The worlds laughs at your dumb claims.
LikeLike
@aigypotos; You are funny, man! History in West Africa goes a bit further than 16th century and it is about bit more than dung huts. I know that your history as an american (I assume) goes only few decades back, at most couple hundred years, so your concept of history is nicely put a bit limited.
I assume you never heard of libraries of Timbuktu? You haven’t? Well, it fits, doesn’t it? Ignorance is a powerful thing.
LikeLike
@Aigypotos
It’s funny how low-level whites want to disregard and suddenly throw the man they’ve dubbed “The Father of Western Civilization” (Herodotus) under the bus when he mentions something that doesn’t reinforce their flimsy ego.
And Diop’s works as a whole aren’t refuted. Unless you think “refutation” is when biased white scientists engage in semantics and a write a long winded response paper that has no factual evidence, and at the end of the day is nothing more than a basic “Nuh-uh!” response.
LikeLiked by 1 person
From what I understand, the main issue with Diop’s work is that it is based upon linguistic (or rather, pseudo-linguistic) evidence, rather than archeological evidence. I have not seen anything that would suggest that this critique of Diop is unfounded. Have you?
LikeLike
Take a look at King Tut’s mother Queen Tiye. That would bring an end to this discussion immediately.
LikeLike
Absurd blog from an afrocentric in denial. Playing down the facts does not prove the fact that the ancient Egyptians called blacks vile kush and forced their chiefs to wash the gold and the fortresses at Buhen to keep negros out to name a few instances
The head overseer,the one you compare as proof taken from a book is a blurry image. Theres the actual relief that is crystal clear and shows clear Caucasoid features-what about the rest of the officials-you convienently forgot to mention those as they don’t fit a negro profile. The ancient Egyptians chose very carefully in their artwork to distinguish themselves from the negros to the south in costumes,facial features and colors. Negros always were painted as slaves or tribute bearers and usally black like coal wih prothagnism jaws,bulbos forehead -absent in ancient Egyptian artwork
Anyone who knows a thing about ancient Egypt,will laugh at your poorly theorised blog,which shows your desperate need to be attached to a culture that never was connected to you
All blacks,especially black americans should be researching their west African culture,the place you was taken from slavery, north Africa has been Caucasoid since Paleolithic times.
Deal with it afrocentrics and move on
LikeLike
Funny you also mention of Europeans came in the 16th century and dominated you primitive negros. You mentioned your negros was superior than western Europe–laughable rubbish. Yet you harp about how advanced and civilised you lot were,which in reality you was still in your dunghills and mudhuts and hunting with spears,and practsisng cannalbilism etc… Yet all of a sudden the” inferior” white man came with superior weapony,guns and took over your ” superior” race lol….
As you stated where was your so called advanced technology he he he when the white man came
ANSWER
You didn’t have any ,you fake
Mud huts,spears and primitive oral traditions,not a written language or any mathematicians,poets,,architects you can make mention of
You had to rely on the arabs to give you an alphabet for scripts,use arab architects to build timbuktu university and use muslim scripts and conevert to muslims as our primitive culture wasn’t going anywhere.
Even today you are still stuck in the stone age
You couldn’t develop a language until 1949,the Nok alphabet
I could write 50 pages trashing your nonsense with facts rather than your delusional notions
You are a very confused negro with fanciful ideas
LikeLike
Okay…..next!!!!!
LikeLike
http://www.china.org.cn/e-gudai/1.htm
“Some scientists believe that the origin of modern man was an African woman who lived 200,000 years ago, and that some of her descendants arrived in the Middle East some 100,000 years ago. After that, another group arrived in East Asia and Europe about 60,000 years ago. Wherever they stopped, they wiped out the “aboriginals”. Neanderthal Man in Europe and the Peking Man in China were collateral branches which became extinguished during man’s evolutionary process.
Most of the palaeoanthropologists of China do not agree with this. The large amount of palaeoanthropological fossils found in China suggest that Yuanmou Man of 1.7 million years ago, New Cave Man of 100,000 years ago, Upper Cave Man of 18,000 years ago and Jalai Nur Man of 10,000 years ago all had high cheekbones, flat nose bridges and spade-shaped upper front teeth, which are all characteristics of modern man in China, indicating genetic stability and evolutionary continuity.”
LikeLike
I coming for you. hard and dont expect mercy when I touch da key bod.
LikeLike
Though it is likely that Mr Diop will not reply I think the individual needs to do a lot of research.
LikeLike
@jim muwanga
And your mock ebonics give you away to be….(choose a word).
LikeLike
Picture of a mummy with “good hair” from race realist Mathilda’s Anthropology Blog
—————————————————————————————————–
There is no proof it is real, could easily be a weave.
Also, how old is he?
Where is his gray hair?
Check his pubes.
White people are masters of deception.
*be advised*
LikeLike
negros were slaves in egypt
LikeLike
@ ren
Blacks were definitely NOT slaves in ancient Egypt. Maybe captives of war at certain times in dynastic Egypt. Plus, the Spanish term “negro” was inconceivable among the ancient Egyptians and other ancient people of world.
Keep in mind that from 3150 to 332 BCE ancient Egypt was a profoundly black African nation.
ren, my friend, the villain gets f#%* once again.
LikeLike