A Racist Conspiracy? Why are we taught that Black Africans never formed or ruled Ancient Egypt?

To me it seems to be an arguement between Muslim Arabs and Black Africans! Whites do not figure in this picture except in the movies. cohesion.rice.edu...

reply to post by fordrew


wow, they say ignorance is bliss!! are you blissful?

It's irrelevant what shade of skin the people who formed and ruled ancient Egypt were. Regardless of how much melanin they had in their skin, the culture and architecture of ancient Egypt is fascinating.

reply to post by kro32


What you say is not true. The Moors were black afroasians. The Phoenicians, Hebrews, Early Indians, the empire in Timbuktu, Ghana, Mali, the ancient Nubian from Africa, all these and more when Europeans were running around in caves.

www.africankingdoms.com...

reply to post by CasiusIgnoranze


Unfortunately, I was never taught much about Egypt in grade school. I always assumed they were dark-skinned people, though. One just needs to look at a few pieces of sculpture or frescoes to see that. No conspiracy, I think, just crappy edumacations.

Ancient Egypt was awesome in the extreme. Amen?

You can kinda look at the longitude on that side of the world to see the skin color of the natives. The people that settled there were brown skinned. Not really what most would consider black or white. I'm not sure about the pharaohs, but the average citizen in the region we today call Egypt 3000 years ago on until today looked identical in appearance to Arabs today. Not really sure why there's so much confusion here. They were brown skinned.

If you go to the top of ancient Egypt, closing in on Europe, they were lighter skinned. If you look at south Egypt towards Africa they were darker skinned. For people that have a need for classing and naming and organizing this subject in a simple manner, brown suffices.

If you walked around in the area we know as central Egypt way back when and happened across some people, they'd most likely be brown skinned. This is not complicated.

reply to post by ProphecyPhD


Well no because don't you think they would of repilcated it or have some knowledge of their history? most of African history is taught verbally anyway and is rarely written.

The other racist conspiracy that no one talks about was that black africans, known as moors, or blackamoors by the europeans, took white slaves long before whites took black slaves. They came all the way up into France and other european nations. This was long before the crusades. This slave trade might have had a lot to do with a motivation for the crusades.
They weren't run out by the europeans until the battle of hastings in 1066

reply to post by John_Rodger_Cornman


they slaughter their own people continually, rape their own women and children repeatedly, and have been fighting wars everyday since I have been alive. And if Im not mistaken AIDS my friend, originated in Africa. Please........you are being silly.

reply to post by John_Rodger_Cornman


they dont have the capabilities too. Because there still to busy fighting over waterholes.

reply to post by roadtoad


Slavers were everywhere. Greeks and Romans had slaves. The Vikings were big slavers and sold their captives as far away as Constantinople. The much touted democracy of Iceland had more slaves than freemen. African tribes sold slaves from other tribes to slave traders for the new world [you didn't think that those English sea captains actually went in the jungle and caught slaves, did you?]

reply to post by Painterz


Yeah I bust out laughing when people say Jesus was white...some even believe he was black but about Jesus/Egyptians they were brown like arabians when there in the sun too much their skin turns really dark so people might think they was black

reply to post by 2012srb


AGREED!

Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman

Originally posted by kro32
Well it seems that blacks are so desperate to find good things about their history that they often push subjects like this when for other races it is not so important a subject since there is plenty of historical evidence of their past acheivements.

I'm not sure what this means beyond the premise that either their isn't alot of black dominance in history or that it just hasn't been uncovered yet.

This is silly. Is this some silly contest? What continents created to most wars,which continents spends the most on war and weapons? What countries have the highest war budget?

We never created massive world wide wars,infected innocent people with STDs, nor nuked innocent civilians. Did african cause the last two economic depressions(including this one)? No.

Who's continent created most of the wars in history?

See how silly this is?

You know, I was really gonna try to sit this debate out and just watch from the bleachers, but your allegations of "silliness" while simultaneously going off the rails yourself sort of lit a fire under me.

Where, in the post you quote, is "war" mentioned at all?

But let's just roll with your rant here, and carry it to a logical extension.

On what continent was the human use of weapons originated? Without that, the question of "war" would be sort of moot, wouldn't it?

On what continent can one obtain a working AK-47 in trade for a bag of corn?

On what continent are women and children routinely raped, mutilated, and murdered? On what continent can one find piles of limbs hacked off of innocents with machetes?

Let's roll with the claim that "we never infected innocent people with STD's". My ex worked at an orphanage in South Africa that was devoted exclusively to children BORN with AIDS, infected by their mothers who were in turn infected by... wait for it... other South Africans. Are you saying here that those women and children were NOT "innocent people", and in fact had it coming to them?

Economic troubles? Mugabe really has a handle on economic mastery in Rhodesia, doesn't he? Yeah, I said Rhodesia. "Zimbabwe" is just a name they made up so that Europeans didn't have to be associated with the embarrassment of what Rhodesia has become when it got out from under them.

Way to go with your entry into the "silliness contest"! Thanks for playing!

Originally posted by roadtoad
The other racist conspiracy that no one talks about was that black africans, known as moors, or blackamoors by the europeans, took white slaves long before whites took black slaves. They came all the way up into France and other european nations. This was long before the crusades. This slave trade might have had a lot to do with a motivation for the crusades.
They weren't run out by the europeans until the battle of hastings in 1066

Improper history. The Battle of Hastings was between Englishmen and Normans. The Battle of Tours, fought by Charles Martel against the Moorish invasion of France is what turned the tide of battle against the Moorish invasion of Europe.

The other racist conspiracy that no one talks about was that black africans, known as moors, or blackamoors by the europeans, took white slaves long before whites took black slaves.

And before Moors were around you had Greeks taking slaves of whites and blacks. What is your point? Every ancient culture took slaves.

Could this topic possibly get any further off topic? The fact is, there was a conspiracy by early scholars (and some still today it seems) to deny that black Africans ever ruled in Egypt. As it has been repeatedly pointed out, they did, as the 25th dynasty. Furthermore they have always had a presence in Egypt at all strata of society there - just as did the Asiatics (Hittites, Assyrians, Canaanites, Babylonians, etc) and the Libyans/north Africans.

Ancient Egyptian writing also shows they didn't set much by skin color.

reply to post by CasiusIgnoranze


I could believe this quite easily....but the evidence just isn't there. And by evidence I mean DNA evidence.....Good DNA evidence done by scientists. Now most genetic scientists tend to be a fairly non-racist sort these days. Generally the message claimed by most geneticists is that Race is simply inherited traits and I've heard it emphasized many times that, even the very Idea of race is a bit misleading...on a genetic level, that is...none the less they can indeed tell a black person from a white person quite easily and they have conclusively stated that the race of ancient Egyptians is.....well pretty much like the Egypt of today...a bit mixed but mostly brownish white (OK so maybe 'brownish-white' isn't a scientific term...but that's what I'd call it)
Don't get me wrong...I think there has been some ancient black achievments that have been suppressed...mainly by earlier more racist scientists/archaeologists. For instance the obviously Black African Olmec Heads in South America. The whole 'Egyptians were black' thing just doesn't pan out from the evidence though.

Originally posted by 2012srb
reply to post by Xaphan

 

They've already done DNA tests on the available mummies.

The conclusion was that the pharaohs were -

G R E E K

Yes. But the ancient Greeks are not the same as the modern Greeks. The ancient Greeks and Egyptians would be what are today called "Northern Europeans".

People forget that because of geology, Egypt was isolated for a long time. so they very easily could of developed a mixed race, or those of Mediterranean decent and stayed that way. There are most likely quite a mixture after some time, considering how many civilizations wanted to control the fertile lands of Egypt.
There are mixed cultures, like the natives of the Sechelles, that are of African, french, and mediterranean decent after control of the islands were changed several times.

This is a good thread sir. Star and flag from me even if only for the fact that you brought out the real bigots who can't stand the thought of blacks being capable of anything.There's something about it that just grinds those gears, it's inherent.