It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Death of White Supremacy: 95 yrs ago TutanKhamun tomb was first opened by Archaeologists

page: 6
16
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 11:42 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 11:44 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

I'd say he was dead ringer for Michael Jackson before the nose jobs and skin bleaching..



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

Hi Peter, let's dispense with the stereotype that all Africans south of the desert looked a certain way, and conversely folks of the Med and beyond, did not look like some stereotype typical African, there is the registrar of tomb of Rekmire that showed some of the Cannanites to look like they, should be from Kush.

However they wore the same garb as their creamy colored colleagues, my first assumption was, they are what they appeared to be,

but that was just eyeballing on my part, they could very well be in the area since the Natufian folks, or may have settled there anytime after, but there were no reason for me to say they were Kush-ite offspring based on what they looked like.

And if you have time looked up Dahomey applique cloth, it typically showed the Dahomean to be red, while their Yoruban enemy to be Black , both these ppl are tropical West Africans from the forest empires.
Sorry unable to post examples and links of which I have computer problems..

edit on 27-11-2017 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

I apologize if that's how my post came across when I was attempting to dispute the OP's insistence of a standardized African phenotype which is what their point seems to have been. I'm well aware that both genotype and phenotype are widely varied across all ethnicities.

But the fact remains that the OP is insisting that Tut appears as what would have been considered in decades last, a stereotypical "Sub Saharan" phenotype and anyone who has studied the history of the continent knows that there is a large degree of variation amongst all members of our Genus past and present. Unfortunately, in Anthropology we deal in averages when discussing phenotype in broad terms and that's what I was doing.

I certainly wasn't trying to perpetuate any stereotypes of any of the people who call Africa home today or in he past and I apologize if I wasn't more clear in the point Iwas trying to make.



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

No need to apologize brother, you know we good, it took sometime for me to adjust my views on things and I m always trying to evolve..



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: The angel of light
It is also intellectual dishonesty to intentionally change on that recreation of the proportions of his nose, the base was intentionally narrowed to support the hoax, nothing to do with the proportions in his mask.


You truly are a funny person. I guess that evil Zahi is at it again:


Led by Zahi Hawass, head of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities, a National Geographic Society team commissioned French experts to create the lifelike bust. Using the CT scans (see "King Tut Mummy Scanned"), French forensic anthropologist Jean-Noël Vignal determined the basic measurements and features of Tutankhamun's face. Vignal deduced that Tutankhamun had a narrow nose... Source


Zahi is Egyptian too, not sure how he figured into the Great Cracker Cover Up.



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Personally I preferred the one some yrs. Before that, the measurement were given to the lab using a double blind test, they finished the coloring with the average for a modern boy from Thebes, where Tut came from, the French folks did not do that, and she used her face as a template and the coloring touch up from the average Cairoin,where Tut was not from, the results differed significantly..with one looking more African and the other stereotypically med.

edit on 27-11-2017 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Interesting....


According to Bower, the Scottish people were not an amalgam of Picts, Scots and other European peoples, but were in fact Egyptians, who could trace their ancestry directly back to a pharaoh's daughter and her husband, a Greek king.The queen's name was Scota – from where comes the name Scotland. The Greek king was Gaythelos – hence Gaelic, and their son was known as Hiber – which gives us Hibernia.

Nor was Bower the first to propose such exalted lineage for the Scots. The story goes back further and was even included in The Declaration of Arbroath. This seminal document - written in 1320 by the Barons and noblemen of Scotland - was a letter imploring the Pope to intervene on their behalf during the Wars of Independence. The text refers to "the ancients" who "journeyed from Greater Scythia … and the Pillars of Hercules … to their home in the west where they still live today
Being from Arbroath this fascinates me.


www.google.co.uk...



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: indigothoughts

Will never say never, but the pharaohs almost never give their daughters to foreign kings, which would be quite rare, a colony of lost Egyptians in the lands of the Scots, they weren't big on colonising anywhere not on the Nile, although legend and a belief by Herodotus have them colonizing a spot around the Black sea known as Kolkhis.
Wandering Hyksos royals?? after being ousted?? could be, but that's a long ways to go, if there is a small truth to this legend, then the most likely people would be Phoenicians as they were very Egyptian like in culture and art but most of all they actually did business In Cornwall England trading in tin.



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879


Do you have a link?



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

So
what do a greek(mycenaen)king, egyptian princess, the Hyksos, Phonecians and Celtic people all have in common.



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

Hey Terry apologies I wasnt replying directly to you , it was just at the time you were last in the post and I must have it reply to you instead, I was just replying to the thread in general , but I agree with your point!



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

Spider,
One must also consider that some "Cannanites" might have been Dravidian, at the far ends of their trade world. I know you and I have discussed the dravidian aspect of the multi cultural/multi ethnic Sumerians. Sargon extended the Akkadian empire to include the ancient caananite coastal cities after absorbing the sumerians. And since the heyday of the akkadians was a prosperous time in which trade flourished from the indus all the way to the med., I think it would be safe to assume dravidian traders made their way to many of the major hubs in the region. It would also help account for that small percentage of south asian ancestry found in the DNA of people in the region.
A couple of weeks ago I was following along with an online discussion about Linear A, and a poster from India made a pretty big claim, namely that Linear A and the Indus script are related to a dravidian "trade" language, one that is still in limited use on the sw coast of india.
It is mixed idea/logographic system where some symbols represent concepts and some represent words in a particular language.
He made a pretty good case, and actually partially translated a Linear A example, and it made sense to a point, it was an account of a transaction for quantity of goats or sheep, but much didnt make any sense, as though the writers had assigned their own values to a symbol with knowing the original meaning.



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

Correct, he was drawn black for a reason he was black - suppressed black history that all it is



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Spider879

There has been the DNA results that showed his father was closer related to Europeans. (I’ll admit, it’s a bit sketchy and not definitive).

The only issue I have, is the OP is saying King Tut was black because of the lips on the burial mask and the colour of his skin (after being coated in bitumen and left for a few thousand years). That’s all the “evidence” he has.

It’s as bad as saying all the bog mummies must have been black (or silver) because of their skin colour now.

He also seems to think that Egypt was a closed environment. It’s just below Turkey and Africa as whole is below modern day Europe. To think there was no outside ethnicity coming in and, possibly, having an influence on colour, would be a stretch.

Was King Tut white? Not very likely.
Was he black? Again, I don’t think it’s very likely.

I think he was more the stereotypical Spaniard colour. Not white, not black, but some mix. [/quote

He was black the drawings are of him as black, his features are black the only thing that suggests otherwise are computer imaging which is a load of tosh... Black history Suppressed



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: theruthlessone

He was also drawn red and his death mask is gold.

I guess King Tut was a rainbow.



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

No worries.

Seems we’re on the same page though.




posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Melanin can change all the way from white to black, or back again, in as few as 200 generations. That's why people in Somalia and Ethiopia, when DNA tested, are actually found to be genetically closer to Western Europeans than they are to the nearby Sub Sahara African peoples, even though their skin is just as dark.

DNA is the only way we're ever going to know if Tut was "black" in the sense of sub-Sahara African. And short of that, who cares?

Besides that, the nobility of most ancient nations kept themselves genetically distinct from the people they ruled. In this case, they went so far as to breed in the family. No matter what Tut's DNA turns out to be, it won't tell us anything about the people who actually built the pyramids. Only the guy who was king at the time.



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Again you are bringing a uniteral dictamen of a French Anthropologist about the dimensions of the nose of Tutankhamen in open defiance of the aspect that it is showed in his funerary mask, his sarcophagus and his golden throne, give me a good reason to trust in his European opionion and not in what the Artist of the time of this Pharaoh registered for the posterity?

Somebody has asked about a good reference that shows there were Dark skinned Pharaohs in Ancient Egypt, well here it is one entire book on the subject and it was in the opening post of the thread but in the myriad of Non sensical attacks I have received for my attempt to enlighten the topic it was of course ignored:

The African Origin of Civilization: Myth or Reality
Cheikh Anta Diop
Published by Lawrence Hill Books (1974)
ISBN 10: 1556520727 ISBN 13: 9781556520723

That is just one of the many references I also have cited from reputable sources about the Nubian Pharaohs, and that were posted in the following link also at the beginning of the day but it was of course ignored by the same people that were asking for references:

Nubian Civilizations of the Nile( Contains 41 bibliographic references)

Finally let me respond one question asked to me: why I called the dark skinned Egyptian President Anwar Sadat with the title of Gral? for the simple reason that he was a General in the war of Yon Kippur and before to arrive to the office of Head of State.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

edit on 11/27/2017 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)

edit on 11/27/2017 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
16
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join