What race do you think Ancient Egypt was?

Was that Darwin's theory? Did he claim that dark-skinned people were less evolved?

 

What a load of drivel.

Ancient Egypt covers 5 Millennia and you ask what race they were? The first couple of posts nailed it .....a mix. The stupid racists here who want to insist that they were all 'black' are pathetic. Ill take another guess. Upper egypt was 'darker skinned' than lower Egypt.

King Tut? ie Tuthankhamun. An utterly irrelevant Monarch.

 

A mix between what and what? The real racists are the ones who deny that the Ancient Egyptians were Black because they can't accept that Blacks built an advanced civilization. It's not racist to say that the early Ancient Egyptians were dark-skinned Africans. That is simply correct.

 

How do you know they were "black" though? Dark skinned doesnt necessarily mean black. Many East Africans are dark skinned, but they dont have features traditionally associated with black people. For example, many Nubians have straight hair and more Caucasian looking features-many look more Indian/mid eastern than black.

 

The were considered Paleo Mediterraneans.... No one knows what the Natufians and Annu people looked like.

 

Some Nubians are lighter skinned because of the presence of mtDNA Haplogroup M, which spans all kinds of ethnic groups imaginable from Siberian, Native American, East Asian, Southeast Asian to Egyptian, Ethiopian, Somali, and Middle Eastern populations. Haplogroup M2 coincides with Egyptian/Nubian Halfan Culture that dates back to 24,000 B.C., which can also be commonly found in India, while Haplogroup M1 has a restricted geographic distribution in Africa. A back migration from in the Indian subcontinent to East Africa has been suggested as African M lineages are younger than Indian M lineages and Nubian people are genetically akin to Asians.

 

I have no doubt of an early migration from India to East Africa.

 

Black is a reference to skin color. In terms of facial features, as Keita said, Africans have a variety of face forms. The broad features you're talking about are more common in hot/humid climates like West and Central Africa. The hot/dry climate of East Africa creates conditions more suitable for narrow facial features. Both broad and elongated phenotypes have been found in Ancient Egypt. Look for example at the broad face of Narmer Menes in Jonah's avatar or the Sphinx. Both phenotypes and intermediate phenotypes have been found in Egypt and they have nothing to do with admixture with non-Africans.

Considered by who? Keita, a biological anthropologist, for example simply considers them to be biological Africans who were phenotypically variable. Read the article that I presented. They shared biological relationships with Africans from the Sahara, Sudan and the Horn with little to know connection with Europe or the Near East until people from those areas invaded the region.

Back migration from India in to Africa is possible but attributing skin color or facial features to an mtDNA lineage is fallacious. The narrow nose and faces of East Africans is not attributable to admixture with non-Africans. Africans have these features naturally and no exterior influence need be sought.

 

The Arabs traded across Yemen to Bahrain and the Indus Valley and the other direction across the Bab al Mandab to East Africa...

 

Yes. They made contact with East Africans. That doesn't mean that East African facial features are attributable to Arabs.

 

Arabs, while not a race, tend to be lighter skinned than most Africans unless you are looking at pearl divers on the East coast... and they are black as jet.

 

If black is just a "skin color" why are many southern Indians the same skin tone as black africans, yet arent considered black?

 

My point is that East African facial features have nothing to do with Arabs or any other population.

Some dark-skinned Indians do consider themselves to be Black but the reason why they generally are not regarded as Black is because Black was traditionally designated for African people. That doesn't mean that there is some unique qualifier for Blackness. Race is a social construct. For the purposes of discussion here I will refer to Black people as a dark-skinned indigenous Africans with no restrictions on what other physical traits a Black person is supposed to have. Regardless of how you define Black I think it's been well-established by my sources that the Ancient Egyptians were dark-skinned and tropically adapted Africans who resembled people in the Sahara, Sudan and Horn of African. Southern Egyptians around the cities of Aswan and Luxor most resemble the ancient Egyptians.

 

What proof do you have they were predominately black? Egyptians today are dark skinned, but only a minority is pure black.

 

Go back and read post #3 for proof. Modern Egyptians are descended from the ancients and all the people who invaded Egypt over the course of hundreds of years.

 

If "black" is a term for dark skinned people, then why are light skinned people of African descent considered black too? Not all light skinned blacks are mixed.

 

I'm aware of that. Africans have a range of complexions, face forms, hair types, body builds etc.

I think you're focusing too much on the word Black. It's just a word. It's a label with no objective designation. What is at issue is whether the ancient Egyptians were biologically African.

 

And all the slaves brought to Egypt. Interestingly all yDNA migration maps lead back to the Levant/ Middle East/ North Africa area, and geneticists theorize all of humanity is based on only four mitochondrial DNA Eves, the same number of women that walked off the Ark.

 

Hahaha.. they were either all wiped out in Noah's flood or Egypt NEVER flooded.

 

They are considered black though

 

Yes, substantially I share your opinion. At the point that I see Ancient Egyptian people so mixed as for ethnicity that I would talk about "Egyptian race", but it would be not accurate as well. The composition of the Egyptian community has been well variable during the millenniums so ...

When I hear someone making reference to Egypt as a "Black Land" [meaning something ethnic, I tend to think to a misunderstanding of the original name of the land of the Nile: KmT, possible pronounce "Kemet". It meant "black land", in the sense of that dark fertile land left by the floods of river Nile, not in the sense of a land occupied by black persons ...

The central African influence on early Egypt is clear, in the South of the country [passing through megalithic sites like Nabta, indicating that this influence is precedent to the Egyptian civilization [proper civilization]. On the other hand the Mediterranean region of Egypt has always been a land of transit for many population [coming from Asia and from the sea as well]. This has generated a really particular mix at level of culture, religion, ethnicity ... in a word: Egypt.

 

Indians are not considered "black", as black is synonymous with sub-Saharan African Negro.

 

Do you believe the Ancient Egyptians predominatley looked like sub saharan Africans-yes or no?

 

They were a blend of people from the Sahara, Sudan and Horn of Africa. They looked like ethnic groups such as the Somali, Oromo and Nilotic groups who are all dark-skinned Africans. So my answer is yes.

 

Studies have shown the invasions didnt change Egypts DNA and racial content significantly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_history_of_Egypt