Cool hairstyle. Interesting that Arabs used to have box braids and frizzy hair

No it's not. Arab DNA is only 1/7th the population. They're genetically distinct and only started to use the term Arab in 1958 as an attempt to promote Islamic unity. It's artificial and if the nation was still Christian, they'd still consider themselves the Egyptian ethnicity.

Egyptians and Arabs share a lot of DNA because of the Natufians, they have the same ancestors

haplogroup doesn't tell you everything about ancestry. You need 4 more years of learning about this stuff before you can participate in discussions

>Natufians aren't the ancestors of the Arabs
Yes they are. The closest modern populations to Natufians are Saudis.

moron, yDNA on its own means nothing.

JK2888 has Y DNA E-V22 and mtdna U6 and the same as other samples
And Hyksos didn't exist or have any sites outside the Eastern Delta
https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fncomms15694/MediaObjects/41467_2017_BFncomms15694_MOESM113_ESM.xlsx

Egyptians were bucked and enslaved far harder by others

>Egyptians were never enslaved
Lmao, Egyptians were conquered by Hyksos, Libyans, Nubians, Assyrians
Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Turks, and Brits. Literally one of the most conquered countries in history
>Meanwhile blacks always were
Nope. Ancient world lacked meaningful interactions with blacks aside from East Africans and the Arab slave trade had many races enslaved
>in your 25% average Euro admixture
You talking about african americans? Lmao, most black africans are pure whereas modern egyptians are somewhat mutted

not just blacks, libyans and semites were enslaved too

And yet

>were the main source of slaves across entire human history
only in medieval MENA and europe. other races were enslaved in large quantities throughout history so blacks aren't unique in that regard

they aren't unique at all. massive slave trades have been conducted since ancient times and involved way more than just blacks. or do you seriously think the main source of slaves for the romans and greeks were blacks? history of slavery is extremely long bro, blacks were only relevant to it from middle ages onwards

turks came to the middle east as slaves.

There are 2 bedouin pops on your sheet with opposite conclusions wtf

>Egyptians are closer to Saudis than Iraqis are
You just proved my point.

are closer to Saudis than Iraqis are
What is the implication here? both aren't Arabs. Iraqis have many indigenous minorities.

If you're being taxed by some people you're basically being ruled by them, muh dude

(cont.)
But if you think these people look black I really don't know what to tell you.

The Macedonians came like 1700 years later to Egypt m8
Even the Hyksos and other Caucasians of Ancient Egypt came in later, though Egypt may have been muttified since the beginning.

Ngl though, brown girls are hot

Picrel is 'Minoan', not Egyptian.

What's the white stuff in their hair?

Butter and fats and stuff.

(cont.)
But if you think these people look black I really don't know what to tell you.

They were brown, but those two are very unique looking and far removed from most of the artwork of Egyptians.

Merely wigs you see

Im just posting what I think the other anon was referring to.

>repeating woke n pozzed cultural holocaust

The Sahara desert didn't exist when OoA occurred. The Sahara desert formed a couple thousand years ago while OoA happened around 60,000 years ago.

Modern humans have existed for hundreds of thousands of years.

The Khoisan lineage has existed for a long time. They diverged fairly early compared to others.

>The Greeks commented on this.

Why does this myth persist? For the last time, "melanchroes" does not mean "black" in a racial sense. The term is used to describe tanned Greeks for God's sake. Terms like "black" and "dark" are often used in a relative sense to describe people with swarthier complexions, who are not necessarily black Africans.

And BTW, the Greeks (Herodotus, Arrian, Stabo, etc.) describe Egyptians as resembling North Indians and Colchians (southern Caucasians), and Ethiopians as resembling South Indians. They also describe them as being intermediate in skin tone, darker than Greeks, but lighter than Ethiopians. This tracks with them being a predominately West Asian population.

>We are living in a world my ancestors built and you are forced to argue with me in MY ancestral tongue
that's a cope, you have no argument

you are still coping, using a lingua franca doesn't mean your amerimutt argument is any better

-saxon who believes Renaissance and Roman Empire Italians are his ancestors

How could black Africans say they're related to Egyptians?

>It seems my superiority
Superiority in serving Israel perhaps
>why so many people speak English that you are able to communicate in it.
Because its the lingua franca moron
>They didn't contribute much if anything to the modern world
See those very letters we are typing? They came from the Phoenicians who in turn took the Hieroglyphics. Didn't contribute much my ass
>spent the majority of their long history getting BTFO
Believe me, it will be nothing compared to how America will be BTFO. Egypt will continue to be in everyone's minds for millenias to come. America will die as a footnote and known as a failed experiment.

>Yes, because we are better than you.
Back then perhaps and only because Europe declined post-WW2
>lmfao even you don't believe this
Everyone knows it. Typical ignorant burger
>Still had a greater impact on the world in 200 years than Egypt did in 2000
Nope, like I said. Everyone will remember Egypt for their pyramids and role in the bible while America will at best be remembered for their BLM worship and how not to run a democracy

>why am I not surprised?
Cope
>is not a proper source for a wild claim.
https://www.worldhistory.org/alphabet/
>other countries have adopted many facets of our legal system
Lmao, stop claiming civil and common law you dumb burger
>freedom is a scary concept to mindless peasant people
Are you implying Americans have freedom? Laughworthy

>Less than in the past but still more than you
Prepare to own nothing. You will be happy

Alphabetic writing began in Egypt, idiot
And the earliest writing in Phoenicia is Egyptian written on a literal obelisk
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abishemu_obelisk

KYS mutt
And Black folk will always be Black folk.... no amount of cherry pick and spam will make right equal left
If only life was that simple

......
And Phoenicians themselves admitted it

>Phoenixville
*Phoenician

I think you forget that we also got egyptian samples from Lebanon and an egyptian gladiator from UK and they are similar to the abusir samples.

Moreover a new study confirms that even old empire upper egyptians had similar uniparental profile than the abusir samples :

>We collected 81 tooth, hair, bone, and soft tissue samples from 14 mummies and 17 skeletal remains. The samples span approximately 4000 years of Egyptian history and originate from six different excavation sites covering the whole length of the Egyptian Nile River Valley. NGS based ancient DNA 8 were applied to reconstruct 18 high-quality mitochondrial genomes from 10 different individuals. The determined mitochondrial haplogroups match the results from our Abusir el-Meleq study. Our results indicate very low rates of modern DNA contamination independent of the tissue type. Although authentic ancient DNA was recovered from different tissues, a reliable recovery was best achieved using teeth or petrous bone material. Moreover, the rate for successful ancient DNA retrieval between Egyptian mummies and skeletal remains did not differ significantly. Our study provides preliminary insights into population history across different regions and compares tissue-specific DNA preservation for mummies and skeletal remains from the Egyptian Nile River Valley."

??

idiot it's about burial context and the fact that they weren't similar to the local remains. Go read the papers but yes I suppose it's a coincidence they are similar to the abusir samples.

Stop wewuzzing complexed Black person

Do you have any evidence that these Lebanese and White samples are Egyptian?

Nevermind, I checked it myself. The British and Lebanese samples were Arab.

>Arabs are closest to Arabs
Imagine my shock lol

I posted an Egyptian bust next to a descendant of the Ancient Egyptians.

He looks like a Libyan.

no one objects to the claim that egyptians, then and now, were diverse, or even that certain pharaohs may have been black. the objection is to the claim that they were, on the whole, black africans and only took on their current appearance due conquest by white greeks/romans/arabs/etc. ancient egyptians are the same people as modern egyptians. this is just a fact. sorry if it hurts your self-esteem.

also, it's disengenous to attribute all the overwhelming dna evidence connecting ancient and modern egyptians to just haploautists going on about r1n king tut or whatever. and btw, you know as well as i do that you'll forget your anti-dna stance in a second if anyone came out with a study that even sort of supported your case. you are certainly not a disinterested observer. let's not kid ourselves.

these links are literal just quotes from the ancients, and you can't refute it because you're literally just spamming the same shit as all the hoteps who post on quora or wherever else. you people have no ability to think for yourselves.

they're direct quotes from herodotus, arrian, stabo, etc., i don't care if the name of the blog is cringe or whatever. i'm too lazy to post all the quotes myself and don't feel like arguing any greater depth about something that is obviously not true. you people are incredibly tedious. the quotes in these links are direct quotes from the people you say believe that ancient egyptians were black africans. if you really cared about this issue, you'd try to debunk them, but instead you're just going to use the chanspeak in the blog title as an excuse not to engage with, which is pretty fricking hilarious given where you're posting.

for the last time, "melanchroes" does not mean black! No one disputes this. It is not a racial term. It is not meant to literally describe someone with ash black skin. It just means "dark" or "swarthy". The Greeks used it to describe members of their own ethnic group. Or were they black as well?

uuuuuuuuuuuuughhhhhhhh. "black" does not always mean BLACK. the world is not 21st century america, dude. europeans throughout history have used the term "black" to refer to other europeans. when the overwhelmingly majority of people are essentially the same race, differences in hair/eye color, as well as relative differences in skin tone (fair vs. olive), have greater salience. tell me, when someone is referred to as a "blonde", does that mean the person is literally yellow? are all blondes east asians?

>Some were.

they use it to describe people who were clearly not black. are you being willfully obtuse? this is well-established. no serious person thinks "melanchroes" is a racial term.

>Black people in Africa are simply "black" by any definition.

wtf are you talking about? i'm saying the term "black" does not always imply someone is a black african. yes, some people throughout history have described darker haired or more olive toned white people as "black". they weren't implying that they were black africans or somehow related to them. they were just making a relative comparison of their hair/eyes/skin tone with other europeans. again, the world is not 21st century america, and not all words carry the same connotations. this literally how people try to argue beethoeven or karl marx were black. lol

>And they also described black people who clearly were black.

but this is clearly not the case here since egyptians were consistently described as resembling north indians, darker than greeks, but lighter than ethiopians, who were said to be closer to south indians in skin tone.

>And I said that if you're "black" and an Africa, well... you're probably a black African. How did you miss that?

who's disputing that? uuuuggh. god, you're such a muddle-head. there is a difference between being a black african and residing in africa and being referred to by a term from a foreigner that could be translated as meaning "black" (which again does not have the modern racial connotations you're assuming and is not even the preferred translation, as "dark"/"swarthy" is generally considered to be more accurate given that it's been used many, many, many times to refer to people we know are white europeans).

north africans are generally not black. sorry. back to africa migrations from west asia are well-established. you can cry about it all you want.

>According to this guy yes lol.

yeah, again, you can cherrypick, but he's generally been viewed as a caucasian/west eurasian, and that's the conclusion most people would draw form looking at his mummy (not saying that's the best way to evaluate these things). most anthropologists have described him as resembling a berber. but whatever, again, we've established you don't care about being consistency. dna is irrelevant, until it isn't. you can go by looks on mummies/statues, until you can't. whatever suits your agenda is obviously correct, and anything that goes against it is wrong. there's no underlying methodology or principles, just whatever suits your enthonarcissist cope ideology. i'm done arguing about this shit. go spam your shit on quora.

hair wasn't dyed. red was found in the roots.

it wasn't dyed the analysis is clear :

>Professor Ceccaldi determined that: "Hair, astonishingly preserved, showed some complementary data - especially about pigmentation: Ramses II was a ginger haired 'cymnotricheleucoderma'." The description given here refers to a fair-skinned person with wavy ginger hair.[70][71] Subsequent microscopic inspection of the roots of Ramesses II's hair proved that the king's hair originally was red, which suggests that he came from a family of redheads.[72] This has more than just cosmetic significance: in ancient Egypt people with red hair were associated with the deity Set, the slayer of Osiris, and the name of Ramesses II's father, Seti I, means "follower of Seth."[73]"

the study literally shows that he was a real ginger haired

OK I need to point this out but deep black skin like you keep posting here isn't skin colour. It's depicting that person is as fertile as the the mud on the river Nile which was very black. It's not supposed to be a skin colour.

Egyptians famously coloured people by symbolism, Osiris and Ptah were green.

Bruh, it's not my fault you're uppity cause you got slight lighter due your people and country being one of the most communal sperm bank in the world.

Imagine being more illiterate than fricking South Africa and Equatorial Guinea, that
s your people, imagine being Ottoman, British, Arab, Cirricisians, Assyirans, Nubians, Roman b***h for essentially 1000 years are so, there has never been an independent Egypt where it was ruled by an actually Egyptian native. At least Africans Kangs in their respected empires looked like their citizens.

So the Thracian kings had cup-bearers who were black is what that looks like.

True, I was hazarding a guess. Could have just been a model made of a person a merchant had seen.

Ramses wasn't E1b1a
And not a single native egyptian was black.

I explained it before. Surely a 3 iq Black person won't get it

He doesn't have this haplogroup
It's a prediction from some STRs from here (https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Revisiting-the-harem-conspiracy-and-death-of-III%3A-Hawass-Ismail/2378baa8e73af9f64d5b74750cc20cbb86111287)

I explained it before

The forensic study assigned E1b1a based on whit athey predictor's prediction. It's basically a dead tool. if you google search "haplogroup predictor", first result is NevGen predictor (in pic related

[...]

) while whit athey is the 50th result (dead tool)
Also the data on the different haplogroups and clades available or non-available from testings is crucial in predictions in that some clades will be underrepresented in tests (some people test much more than others e.g. Aframs) which creates a bias in these predictors
This probably applies to the R1b too where millions of European testers results are available while other R1bs are not represented and etc.

>Ramesses III's e1b1a

> how the 2017 nature study affirmed that race mixing was taking place?
2017 confirmed no mixing over 1400 years

>In other words you're arguing with someone imaginary living rent free in your head, just like anyone mentioning west or south Africa in a thread about Egypt. No one has ever said that every Egyptian was black. If we're lucky we'll talk about particular majorities but it never gets that far because people with your stance don't have any evidence to back up your claims.

you are claiming that they are MAJORITY black. this is demonstrably false. it's false even if you're trying about upper egypt. upper egyptians are more closely related to lower egyptians than they are any other group. this is a fact.

ancient egyptians represent a sort of levantine/nilotic continuum, with those in the north being lighter and having greater west asian ancestry and those in the south being darker and having greater nilotic as well as some nubian admixture in the far south. some are black, most aren't.

dna evidence overwhelmingly links ancient and modern egyptians, and egyptian y chromosomes, of both ancient and modern egyptians, are african, which makes the notion that they were blandaup'd by foreigners absurd (are you seriously arguing they were conquered by a race of female invaders?).

We fundamentally have no ancient DNA so any argument concerning DNA is invalid schizo babble. Wake up anon, a hundred mtdna samples of mixed race people in one town is nothing. It means nothing. Haplogroups also have nothing to do with phenotypes as I already said.

>These contain nubians
I have never even seen a Nubian mummy before, those are all Egyptians.
>nd none of the egyptians looks black or Black person
Haha why are you saying they're Nubians then? Jesus you're deranged.

Because DNA evidence is evidence of nothing we don't already know from the written word and from studies that existed before we even knew what DNA was. And I don't disagree with any ancient description nor am I arguing with anyone but you.
>"just look at this mummy/statue/etc., it's gotta be black, it's just gotta be!".
If you aren't insane that is all you need to deduce whether a person is white or black.

In my own opinion he looks a bit like this guy who is more African than middle-eastern. And Ramesses II's skull is very horner-like.

>hey look i found one black redhead with caucasian features so this lower egyptian from a northern family of redheads is obviously black

>In other words you're arguing with someone imaginary living rent free in your head, just like anyone mentioning west or south Africa in a thread about Egypt. No one has ever said that every Egyptian was black. If we're lucky we'll talk about particular majorities but it never gets that far because people with your stance don't have any evidence to back up your claims.

you are claiming that they are MAJORITY black. this is demonstrably false. it's false even if you're trying about upper egypt. upper egyptians are more closely related to lower egyptians than they are any other group. this is a fact.

ancient egyptians represent a sort of levantine/nilotic continuum, with those in the north being lighter and having greater west asian ancestry and those in the south being darker and having greater nilotic as well as some nubian admixture in the far south. some are black, most aren't.

dna evidence overwhelmingly links ancient and modern egyptians, and egyptian y chromosomes, of both ancient and modern egyptians, are african, which makes the notion that they were blandaup'd by foreigners absurd (are you seriously arguing they were conquered by a race of female invaders?).

>Saying this is ignoring that Egyptians have objectively evolved in the past 3,000 years though. They are NOT the same as they were and it's much more diverse today than it was even 500 years ago.

again, continuity between ancient and modern egyptians has been well-established, with the only substantial difference being greater ssa in modern egyptians due to the arab slave trade.

>This does not exist.

lol okay.

>You mean like Ramesses III's e1b1a? Or how the 2017 nature study affirmed that race mixing was taking place? None of this matters though because haploautism has nothing to do with phenotypes which is what the discussion is about.

lol yes, that's exactly what i mean. dna is irrelevant until it isn't, and of course, it isn't whenever it seems to support your case.

anyway, others have suggested ramesses iii fits better with e1b1b, the most common haplogroup in africa, but whatever the case, no, i don't have any objection to the notion that he may have been black, which is certainly possible. oh, and who the frick would dispute the notion that there was race mixing going on? lmao. talk about making someone up in your head. jesus christ.

Due to their arts, ruling style, language, cultural practices being Egyptian especially decades and centuries after new kingdom departed kush, many propose 3rd intermediate period Egyptian priestly immigrants

>They came from Napata
The male founders cemetery contains unmistakable egyptian burials.

Nope it wasn't. The Egyptian burials are distinct from the native ones
And Egyptianization would have occurred in the nee kingdom and ceased afterwards

Are you fricking moronic? Your quote is the argument here. There was sudden egyptian arrival in the 3rd intermediate period not new kingdom egyptianization

>>The first burial on the site, placed at the highest point, was of a traditional Nubian form: a round mound of stones piled over a burial pit. And even though it had been looted in antiquity, the remains were incredibly rich, including more than 400 gold beads and pendants. From that point, the burials became progressively more Egyptian

The founders cemetery has distinct egyptian burials

>Are you moronic?
Yes.

>There was sudden 3rd intermediate period egyptian arrival
it wasn't "sudden". The region was literally conquered during the New Kingdom Era before.
>No way you could explain their egyptian art Architecture Motifs Language
What exactly are you trying to say here? That after being conquered and freed that the cemetery had Egyptian characteristics? No shit
>By muh egyptianization which ended in the late 20th dynasty
Obviously but since Egypt ruled over Nubia over centuries, the influence stuck

>there were new arrivals/immigrants in the 3rd intermediate period as the burials and material culture shows
Already addressed here
>Perhaps, as some scholars have suggested, Egyptian priests fleeing political unrest in Egypt arrived in Kush and instructed the locals.
Why do you assume these people became the ruling class?