Black History Judged: Dismissed Due to Lack of Evidence
Super Phreak
According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and red-
heads.
--
Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
- Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
American Family Physician, p. 1262
March 1, 2000
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Bill Otten
>
>According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and red-
>heads.
>
>--
>Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
> - Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
> American Family Physician, p. 1262
> March 1, 2000
>
Interesting.......so Seti I was a natural redhead. How un-Nubian. But then of
course........Joann Fletcher, a consultant to the Bioanthropology Foundation in
the UK must be one of those Eurocentric-sters for even suggesting that she was
astonished to discover that most of the natural hair types and those used for
hairpieces were made of Caucasian-type hair. "We found natural blonde hair; we
found redheads."
Obviously some retort (hopefully complete with adequately documented
academically credentialled sources) is in order here. ; )
Jefferson Glapski
news:3D102C882ABFBEE9.9544487B...@lp.airnews.net..
.
> Obvious FBI bullshit to root out the evil that lerks in some of your
minds.
> Personally, I hate FBI agents, niggers, crosses, and Oh yeah, Notre
Dumd.
Phuque ewe, cunt.
--
Your pla,
Jefferson N. Glapski
sa...@home.com wrote "Jeffy.Is.Fuckingmental"
sh...@brionne.cyberverse.com wrote "the N is for no fucking clue"
Ze...@hotmail.com wrote "If you indeed have palsy, my apologies.
It still doesn't help the fact that you can't be taken seriously
when you write with such gross mispellings as you did. It makes
you look uneducated, and your posts, as a result, are generally
not worth anyone's time."
r...@itsnpt.com wrote "You're a pathetic little piece of sputum,
go back and crawl into whatever rat-infested hole you were birthed
in, you retarded little monkey."
######### ######### #### ####
#### #### #### #### #### ####
#### #### #### #### ####
#### #### #### #### #### ####
#### #### #### #### #### ####
#### #### #### ####
#### #### #### #### ####
#### ######### #########
Andre Ervin
<vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
>
> According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and red-
> heads.
Jesus was black.
--
dre
(your turn)
Osiris
botte...@aol.comnospamrs (Bill Otten) wrote:
> Super Phreak wrote:>http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
> >
> >According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and red-
> >heads.
> >
> >Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
> > - Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
> > American Family Physician, p. 1262
> > March 1, 2000
> >
>
> Interesting.......so Seti I was a natural redhead. How un-Nubian. But
then of
> course........Joann Fletcher, a consultant to the Bioanthropology
Foundation in
> the UK must be one of those Eurocentric-sters for even suggesting
that she was
> astonished to discover that most of the natural hair types and those
used for
> hairpieces were made of Caucasian-type hair. "We found natural blonde
hair; we
> found redheads."
>
Hmm....interesting indeed. One wonders, however, why the Egyptians
over their 3,000 yr history neglected to depict themselves as having
either natural red or blonde hair or even with red or blonde wigs? I've
heard of one or two paintings of such but haven't seen those paintings
myself. The Egyptians almost always depicted themselves as having
black and often very curly hair.
Also, why didn't any ancient travellers to Egypt (Greeks, Romans,
Hebrews and later Arabs) ever mention this most peculiar Egyptian
characterisic? For it would have been extremely rare among other
Mediterranean populations, except for possibly the Libyians.
Unfortunately, the article didn't provide any pictures of these blonde
and red headed wigs. Their must be plenty, though, since they were so
common. I've only seen one wig and that was in the British Museum.
> Obviously some retort (hopefully complete with adequately documented
> academically credentialled sources) is in order here. ; )
Not really, just some common sense questions. Any thoughts?
HOOVER
Shendryx wrote:
> Obvious FBI bullshit to root out the evil that lerks in some of your minds.
> Personally, I hate FBI agents, niggers, crosses, and Oh yeah, Notre Dumd.
>
> Scott Crossdipcrossdip@home
>
> "Super Phreak" <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
> >
> > According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and red-
> > heads.
> >
> > --
> > Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
> > - Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
> > American Family Physician, p. 1262
> > March 1, 2000
> >
> >
Super Phreak
Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> In article <8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Super Phreak
> <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and red-
> > heads.
>
Jesus is a Latino name.
trudogg®
> Jesus is a Latino name.
...hmmmm...nah, to easy.
Nikk Pilato
> Obvious FBI bullshit to root out the evil that lerks in some of your minds.
> Personally, I hate FBI agents, niggers, crosses, and Oh yeah, Notre Dumd.
Congratulations!
You've now officially crossed the line from "merely annoying" to "clueless
stupid fuck." It usually takes RSFC newbies a few months to get to that
point, but you seem to have accomplished it in a matter of days! In the
tradition of J.R.R. Tolkien, I think they will songs about you in the
future, and about your mighty deeds.
Once again, let me offer congratulations! It's not every day that a
poster reveals himself to be the biggest fucking idiot since Patrick Tong
and Mikey Marron.
*plonk*
++
np
rsfc.nikknakks.net
read.the.damn.faq.newbies
"This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper"
-T.S. Eliot
Super Phreak
Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <20000601193039...@ng-cr1.aol.com>,
> botte...@aol.comnospamrs (Bill Otten) wrote:
> > >
> > >According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and
red-
> > >heads.
> > >
> > >Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
> > > - Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
> > > American Family Physician, p. 1262
> > > March 1, 2000
> > >
> >
But
> then of
> > course........Joann Fletcher, a consultant to the Bioanthropology
> Foundation in
> > the UK must be one of those Eurocentric-sters for even suggesting
> that she was
> > astonished to discover that most of the natural hair types and those
> used for
> > hairpieces were made of Caucasian-type hair. "We found natural
blonde
> hair; we
> > found redheads."
> >
>
> Hmm....interesting indeed. One wonders, however, why the Egyptians
> over their 3,000 yr history neglected to depict themselves as having
> either natural red or blonde hair or even with red or blonde wigs?
Its real hard to depicked blonde hair when your drawing with charcoal.
John Rogers
Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net>, and a bottle of the '92 port:
>In article <8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Super Phreak
><vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
>>
>> According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and red-
>> heads.
>
>Jesus was black.
Deep philosophical question:
Was Jesus *truly* the Rick James of Nazareth?
John Rogers
AU Class of 1985
The Al Del Greco of Atlanta ($1)
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in
peace. We seek not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the
hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may
posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."
Samuel Adams
READ THE DAMB FAQ!!! ( http://rsfc.nikknakks.net/faq.htm )
Jefferson Glapski
news:3938aa91...@news.mindspring.com...
> Killick! Killick there! Fetch me a spotted dog, a drowned baby, a
> Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net>, and a bottle of the '92 port:
>
> >In article <8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Super Phreak
> ><vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> >> http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
> >>
> >> According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and
red-
> >> heads.
> >
> >Jesus was black.
>
> Deep philosophical question:
>
> Was Jesus *truly* the Rick James of Nazareth?
I thought that was Mario Andretti.
Osiris
Super Phreak <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <8h802m$bnm$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > In article <20000601193039...@ng-cr1.aol.com>,
> > botte...@aol.comnospamrs (Bill Otten) wrote:
> > > Super Phreak wrote:>http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-
2.shtml
> > > >
> red-
> > > >heads.
> > > >
Ahhh....is that the reason? Well thanks for your insight on this
matter.
Btw, do YOU have blonde hair?
Katherine Griffis
alt.history.ancient-egypt, wrote the following:
>In article <20000601193039...@ng-cr1.aol.com>,
> botte...@aol.comnospamrs (Bill Otten) wrote:
>> Super Phreak wrote:>http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
>> >
>> >According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and red-
>> >heads.
>> >
>> >--
>> >Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
>> > - Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
>> > American Family Physician, p. 1262
>> > March 1, 2000
>> >
>>
>> Interesting.......so Seti I was a natural redhead. How un-Nubian. But
>then of course........Joann Fletcher, a consultant to the Bioanthropology
>Foundation in the UK must be one of those Eurocentric-sters for even suggesting
>that she was astonished to discover that most of the natural hair types and those
>used for hairpieces were made of Caucasian-type hair. "We found natural blonde
>hair; we found redheads."
>
>Hmm....interesting indeed. One wonders, however, why the Egyptians
>over their 3,000 yr history neglected to depict themselves as having
>either natural red or blonde hair or even with red or blonde wigs? I've
>heard of one or two paintings of such but haven't seen those paintings
>myself. The Egyptians almost always depicted themselves as having
>black and often very curly hair.
However, they have so depicted themselves with such hair, as far back as
the Old Kingdom.
See:
http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/hetepheresii.jpg
Hetepheres II, with her daughter Meresankh, Old Kingdom
http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/antefoker.jpg
A red-haired Antefoker and his red haired daughters, Middle Kingdom
http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/antefoker-detail.jpg
detail of one of the daughters
http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/rekhmire-det2.jpg
A blonde worker from the tomb of Rekhmire, New Kingdom
http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/yuya-thuyu.jpg
Yuya and Thuya, parents of Queen Tiye (Chief Wife of Amenhotep II), New
Kingdom
Images of their actual remains showing fine reddish-blonde hair
http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/nakht.jpg
Detail of a reddish haired man from the tomb of Nakht, New Kingdom
http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/nakht2.jpg
Another blonde worker from the same tomb, New Kingdom
http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DT57.C2_vol59&object=169
http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DT57.C2_vol59&object=170
Views of the fine hair of Ramses II, shown by scientific analysis to be
a "clear red" hair (See analysis, below)*
>Also, why didn't any ancient travellers to Egypt (Greeks, Romans,
>Hebrews and later Arabs) ever mention this most peculiar Egyptian
>characterisic? For it would have been extremely rare among other
>Mediterranean populations, except for possibly the Libyians.
Possibly because they didn't think it worthy of note? In classical
works, the writers noted what differed greatly from their _own_ looks,
and wrote about it in terms of hair color, type, and gradations of color
in comparison to themselves. Those peoples which were differed from the
classical authors' own looks _to a pronounced extent_ were noted with
extreme detail. In discussing the descriptions of Egyptians in regards
to other peoples of Africa, specifically the Nubians (called
"Ethiopians" in classical works), Frank M. Snowden, Professor of
Classics, Emeritus, of Howard University noted:
"Ethiopians served as the standard for classifying other physical traits
of mankind. Ethiopians were the most wooly-haired of all peoples
(Herodotus 7.70) Xenophanes (Fragment 16, Diels) mentions their flat
noses and black skin. The majority of Ethiopians, but especially those
along the Nile River, were black, flat nosed, and woolly haired
(Diodorus, 3.8.2) Southern Indians resembled Ethiopians in color, but
they resembled other Indians in their countenances and non-wooly hair,
while Northern Indians resembled Egyptians (Strabo, 15.1.13). Southern
Indians resembled Ethiopians in blackness, but were no so flat-nosed or
wolly-haired, while the appearance of northern Indians was similar to
that of Egyptians (Arrian, _Indica_ 6.9; Pliny, _Naturalis Historia_
6.22.70). Both Egyptians and Ethiopians were described as black, but
only Ethiopians were described as having exceedingly wooly hair
(Aristotle, Physiognomica 812, a,b)
In short, Greco-Roman textual sources clearly document differences
perceived in the physical characteristics of Ethiopians and Egyptians.
These sources show that 1) all peoples described as dark-skinned were
not Ethiopians in the full sense of the classical word, and 2)
adjectives for dark and black -- melas and niger, for example -- were
relatives terms embracing gradations of skin color such as Greeks and
Romans noted in their comparisons of Ethiopians, Egyptians, and Indians.
<..>
In support of the view that Egyptians were black or Negroid, a
frequently cited passage (Herodotus 2, 104) has been glaringly misread
(Bernal 1987: 52-53). Arguing that Colchians were of Egyptian origin,
Herodotus writes that Colchians were dark-skinned and wolly-haired, but
emphasizes in the very next sentence that this observations amounts to
nothing since it applies to several other peoples also, Therefore,
rejecting color and hair as criteria, Herodotus argues that
Colchian-Egyptian kinship was based upon similarities in languages and
customs, i.e., _cultural, not physical criteria_ (Snowden, 1989: 83-93;
1990: 543-557 for examples of other misreadings of classical sources)
[emphasis_ _ Snowden's]
In short, the totality of classical evidence highlights the fact that
physical characteristics of Egyptians were not considered Ethiopian in
the Greco-Roman sense. The physical traits of both the blacks of
classical art and the Ethiopians of Greco-Roman texts -- i.e. color,
hair texture, and nose type -- have been appropriate described as
'Negroid' or 'black' in later anthropological and historical usage. And
regarding differences between Egyptians and Ethiopians, an observation
of D. O'Connor (1971:2) is relevant:
'Thousands of sculpted and painted representations from Egypt
as well as hundreds of well preserved bodies from the cemeteries
show that the typical physical type was neither Negroid nor
Negro.'
And classical descriptions of physical traits of Nile Valley inhabitants
are strikingly similar to characteristics by later anthropological
observers.
In conclusion, the color and other traits of Ethiopians were prominently
noted in classical descriptions of Egypt's southern neighbors."
"The Physical Characteristics of Egyptians and Their Southern
Neighbors." Frank M. Snowden, Jr. (Howard University), in _Egypt in
Africa_, Theodore Celenko (ed.), (Indianapolis Museum of Art:
Indianapolis, 1996), pp. 106-108.
Snowden's Citations:
Frank M. Snowden.
1989 "Bernal's Blacks: Herodotus and other Classical Evidence."
Arethusa (Special Fall Issue): 83-95.
1990 "Romans and Blacks: A Review Essay." American Journal of
Philology 3 (4).
David O'Connor
1971 "Ancient Egypt and Black African -- Early Contact."
Expedition, the Magazine of Archaeology/Anthropology 14 (1):2.
>Unfortunately, the article didn't provide any pictures of these blonde
>and red headed wigs. Their must be plenty, though, since they were so
>common. I've only seen one wig and that was in the British Museum.
As the article noted, Fletcher tested several wigs in the British
Museum's collection, although a specific number was not named. There are
also examples in the Cairo Museum as well. However, much has been
written on the subject of wigs in ancient Egypt:
Biri Fay, in _Egypt's Golden Age: The Art of Living in
the New Kingdom, 1558-1085 B.C._, Boston: Museum of Fine Arts. (1982).
Georges Posener, "La legende de la tresse d'Hathor", _Egyptological
Studies in Honor of R.A. Parker_ (L.H. Lesko, ed.), (Hanover and London,
1986), p. 111-117.
A. Lucas, "Ancient Egyptian Wigs", ASAE 30 (1930), pp. 190-196.
E. Eisa, "A Study on Ancient Egyptian Wigs," ASAE 48 (1948), pp 9-18.
J. Cox, "Construction of an Ancient Egyptian Wig (c. 1400 BC) in the
British Museum," JEA 63 (1977), pp. 67 ff.
E. Riefstahl, "An Ancient Egyptian Hairdresser," BBM 13, pt 4, (1952),
pp. 7-16.
"A Tale of Hair, Wigs and Lice," Joann Fletcher, Egyptian Archaeology 5
(1994), pp. 31-33.
"Hair and Wigs," _Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology_, Paul
Nicholson and Ian Shaw (ed.), (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge,
2000).
_The Tomb of Meryet-Amun at Thebes_, Herbert Winlock (New York, 1932).
_Ancient Egyptian Materials and Industries_, 4th ed., A. Lucas (rev. by
J. Harris), (London, 1962).
_Women in Ancient Egypt_, Barbara Watterson (St. Martin's Press: New
York, 1991), pp. 101-104.
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg
Member, American Research Center in Egypt
International Association of Egyptologists
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Special Studies
http://www.griffis-consulting.com
Reading mail from me in a Usenet group does not
grant you the right to send me unsolicited commercial e-mail.
All senders of unsolicited commercial e-mail will be
reported to their postmasters as Usenet abusers.
Osiris
Thanks for your detailed response. Unfortunately, I was unable to view
all of the sites that you listed but I will comment on those I did see.
http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/hetepheresii.jp
g
This seems to be a depiction of a genuine red head. Her hair is the
same color of the skin of the man standing next to her.
> http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/antefoker-
detail.jpg
> detail of one of the daughters
Here I don't see red hair at all. I see light brown skin with darker
brown hair.
> http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/rekhmire-
det2.jpg
> A blonde worker from the tomb of Rekhmire, New Kingdom
If this is not a cap, then this man appears to have blonde hair. Yes,
blonde hair with brown skin and black eye brows. Very peculiar. I've
never seen the combination of natural blonde hair and black eye brows.
> http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/yuya-
thuyu.jpg
> Yuya and Thuya, parents of Queen Tiye (Chief Wife of Amenhotep II),
New
> Kingdom
> Images of their actual remains showing fine reddish-blonde hair
These seem to be bleached blondes. I saw something similar a few weeks
ago on a TV documentary on the Nubian cult of the dead. They showed
several Nubian skulls from Kerma with straight blonde hair. They
didn't comment on this, though. I don't know what happens to hair over
a 3-5,000 yr period but it, evidently, undergoes some changes.
Btw, can you direct me to some pics on the net of Yuya and Thuya.
There must be some paintings of them somewhere with blonde hair.
> http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/nakht.jpg
> Detail of a reddish haired man from the tomb of Nakht, New Kingdom
This might be red hair but it might also be a cap. I've seen pics of
pharoahs wearing a cap with the cobra on it. Others are depicted in
the same style but with out the cobra.
> http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/nakht2.jpg
> Another blonde worker from the same tomb, New Kingdom
Another dark brown skinned man with light colored hair and black eye
brows. It also seems that there is an underlying black hair color here.
> http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?
DPI=100&callnum=DT57.C2_vol59&object=169
>
> http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?
DPI=100&callnum=DT57.C2_vol59&object=170
> Views of the fine hair of Ramses II, shown by scientific analysis to
be
> a "clear red" hair (See analysis, below)*
Again, since Ramses II had red hair, are there no pictures or portraits
of him with red hair?
Let me ask you this for the record, though. Being an Egyptologist, are
you inclined to agree with the initial poster that ancient Egypt
was "full of blondes"? I would tend to think that blonde and red hair
would have been extremely rare in Egypt, Nubia, Mesopatamia and even
ancient Greece. Red hair is even uncommon among most northern European
populations. If you're simply trying to point out that there were
*some* light haired people in Egypt I'd have to agree. But if you're
posting in support of the original poster then I disagree. The few
pics that you presented, when compared to literally thousands of pics
of Egyptians with black and curly hair, help to prove my point. I have
a 500 page book at home called "Egypt: The World of the Pharoahs" with
plenty of artifacts, paintings and sculptures and none of them have
blonde or red hair.
> >Also, why didn't any ancient travellers to Egypt (Greeks, Romans,
> >Hebrews and later Arabs) ever mention this most peculiar Egyptian
> >characterisic? For it would have been extremely rare among other
> >Mediterranean populations, except for possibly the Libyians.
>
> Possibly because they didn't think it worthy of note? In classical
> works, the writers noted what differed greatly from their _own_ looks,
> and wrote about it in terms of hair color, type, and gradations of
color
> in comparison to themselves.
I think blonde and red hair would have been worthy of mention by almost
all travellers to Egypt from the Meditarranean world if it was as
common as the article and the first poster seem to imply. Greeks,
Arabs and Hebrews all would have noticed a marked difference between
themselves and Egyptians and even moreso if the Egyptians had different
hair color than themselves. Yet they all fail to mention this.
>Those peoples which were differed from the
> classical authors' own looks _to a pronounced extent_ were noted with
> extreme detail. In discussing the descriptions of Egyptians in regards
> to other peoples of Africa, specifically the Nubians (called
> "Ethiopians" in classical works), Frank M. Snowden, Professor of
> Classics, Emeritus, of Howard University noted:
>
> "Ethiopians served as the standard for classifying other physical
traits
> of mankind. Ethiopians were the most wooly-haired of all peoples
> (Herodotus 7.70) Xenophanes (Fragment 16, Diels) mentions their flat
> noses and black skin. The majority of Ethiopians, but especially
those
> along the Nile River, were black, flat nosed, and woolly haired
> (Diodorus, 3.8.2) Southern Indians resembled Ethiopians in color, but
> they resembled other Indians in their countenances and non-wooly hair,
> while Northern Indians resembled Egyptians (Strabo, 15.1.13).
Southern
> Indians resembled Ethiopians in blackness, but were no so flat-nosed
or
> wolly-haired, while the appearance of northern Indians was similar to
> that of Egyptians (Arrian, _Indica_ 6.9; Pliny, _Naturalis Historia_
> 6.22.70). Both Egyptians and Ethiopians were described as black, but
> only Ethiopians were described as having exceedingly wooly hair
> (Aristotle, Physiognomica 812, a,b)
Both Herodutus and Aristotle described the Egyptians as having wooly
hair. I'm not sure if either mentioned whose hair was curlier but it
should be obvious from the paintings that Egyptian hair, for the most
part, wasn't as curly as those inhabitants further up the Nile.
I imagine alot of opinions have changed on various issues in the field
of Egyptology since 1971 but since Mr. O'Connor can't answer this maybe
you can. What was the "typical physical type" in Egypt?
> And classical descriptions of physical traits of Nile Valley
inhabitants
> are strikingly similar to characteristics by later anthropological
> observers.
>
> In conclusion, the color and other traits of Ethiopians were
prominently
> noted in classical descriptions of Egypt's southern neighbors."
>
> Katherine Griffis-Greenberg
>
> Member, American Research Center in Egypt
> International Association of Egyptologists
>
> University of Alabama at Birmingham
> Special Studies
>
>
I reread my post just to see if I'd made any claims on the ethnicity of
the Egyptians. I didn't but I'm interested in hearing your opinion.
Since you, unlike many other Egyptologist, anthropologists, etc. seem
to be comfortable with words like "black", Negroid, Negro and Caucasian
and since to claim that the ancient Egyptians weren't one thing implies
that they were discernably something else maybe you can answer these
questions. Would you classify all of the Nile Valley inhabitants south
of Egypt (in ancient times) as "black", Negroid and Negro? Also, are
these three terms synonomous? If not, what's the difference? Which of
the north east African ethnic groups made up the *majority* of the
ancient Egyptian population? And since, as many have already stated,
the Egyptians were physically very diverse, were those to their
immediate south also diverse?
I know those aren't simple questions but as an Egyptologist you must
have already formed an opinion.
Super Phreak
Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <8h8bd6$j8s$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Super Phreak <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > In article <8h802m$bnm$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote:
charcoal.
> >
> > Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
> > - Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
> > American Family Physician, p. 1262
> > March 1, 2000
> >
> matter.
>
> Btw, do YOU have blonde hair?
Man, I'm a card carrying member of the NAACP. Just ask the guys in
RSFC.
--
Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
- Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
American Family Physician, p. 1262
March 1, 2000
Martin Stower
[. . .]
> I reread my post just to see if I'd made any claims on the ethnicity of
> the Egyptians. I didn't but I'm interested in hearing your opinion.
> Since you, unlike many other Egyptologist, anthropologists, etc. seem
> to be comfortable with words like "black", Negroid, Negro and Caucasian
[. . .]
As far as I can tell, these words appear in the quoted material only - and (as I
read it) it was quoted for what it says about the classical evidence, not to
endorse the chosen terminology.
Martin Stower
Osiris
ethnicity of
> > the Egyptians. I didn't but I'm interested in hearing your opinion.
> > Since you, unlike many other Egyptologist, anthropologists, etc.
seem
> > to be comfortable with words like "black", Negroid, Negro and
Caucasian
>
>
> As far as I can tell, these words appear in the quoted material only -
and (as I
> read it) it was quoted for what it says about the classical evidence,
not to
> endorse the chosen terminology.
>
> Martin Stower
Actually, I was at first puzzled as to why she devoted half of her post
to refuting an imagined claim by me that the Egyptians were "black" or
Negroid since I only referred to hair type, but after seeing some of
her other posts and considering the title of this thread I understand
better.
Concerning her use of the terms "Negroid" and "black" let me quote her:
"The physical traits of both the blacks of classical art and the
Ethiopians of Greco-Roman texts -- i.e. color, hair texture, and nose
type -- have been APPROPRIATE[LY]described as 'Negroid' or 'black' in
later anthropological and historical usage." (my emphasis added)
She also quoted at least two other writers that use the
terms "black", "Negroid" and "Negro" all which led me to believe that
she is not only comfortable with these terms but that she also has a
clear understanding of their meaning. Not only that, in the above
statement she appears to endorse both the anthropological and
historical usage of these terms. This is rare among current day
scholars.
Hopefully, she can clarify her position on this and possibly explain
the meaning of those terms as well as provide some examples of present
day populations that she would describe as "black" or "Negroid".
Martin Stower
>
> In article <3938F0D3...@NOTnetcomuk.co.uk>,
> Martin Stower <mst...@NOTnetcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
> > Osiris wrote:
> >
> > [. . .]
> >
> ethnicity of
> > > the Egyptians. I didn't but I'm interested in hearing your opinion.
> > > Since you, unlike many other Egyptologist, anthropologists, etc.
> seem
> > > to be comfortable with words like "black", Negroid, Negro and
> Caucasian
> >
> >
> > As far as I can tell, these words appear in the quoted material only -
> and (as I
> > read it) it was quoted for what it says about the classical evidence,
> not to
> > endorse the chosen terminology.
> >
> > Martin Stower
>
> Actually, I was at first puzzled as to why she devoted half of her post
> to refuting an imagined claim by me that the Egyptians were "black" or
> Negroid since I only referred to hair type, but after seeing some of
> her other posts and considering the title of this thread I understand
> better.
>
> Concerning her use of the terms "Negroid" and "black" let me quote her:
>
> Ethiopians of Greco-Roman texts -- i.e. color, hair texture, and nose
> later anthropological and historical usage." (my emphasis added)
This is part of the quote from Snowden.
> She also quoted at least two other writers that use the
> terms "black", "Negroid" and "Negro" all which led me to believe that
> she is not only comfortable with these terms but that she also has a
> clear understanding of their meaning. Not only that, in the above
> statement she appears to endorse both the anthropological and
> historical usage of these terms. This is rare among current day
> scholars.
The words - and the endorsement - are Snowden's.
[. . .]
Martin Stower
Jim McClune
Shendryx wrote:
> Obvious FBI bullshit to root out the evil that lerks in some of your minds.
> Personally, I hate FBI agents, niggers, crosses, and Oh yeah, Notre Dumd.
Dewd. You should'nt use the N word.
Those Dohmers all know each other.
GoSooners!
JimBo
Shendryx
"Who's yo Daddy"
Scott@Home
"Nikk Pilato" <pila...@cmr.fsu.edu> wrote in message
news:8h89bq$btp$1...@news.fsu.edu...
> Shendryx wrote
> > Obvious FBI bullshit to root out the evil that lerks in some of your
minds.
> > Personally, I hate FBI agents, niggers, crosses, and Oh yeah, Notre
Dumd.
>
Osiris
Martin Stower <mst...@NOTnetcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
> Osiris wrote:
> >
> > In article <3938F0D3...@NOTnetcomuk.co.uk>,
> > Martin Stower <mst...@NOTnetcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Osiris wrote:
> > >
> > > [. . .]
> > >
> > ethnicity of
> > > > the Egyptians. I didn't but I'm interested in hearing your
opinion.
> > > > Since you, unlike many other Egyptologist, anthropologists, etc.
> > seem
> > > > to be comfortable with words like "black", Negroid, Negro and
> > Caucasian
> > >
> > >
> > > As far as I can tell, these words appear in the quoted material
only -
> > and (as I
> > > read it) it was quoted for what it says about the classical
evidence,
> > not to
> > > endorse the chosen terminology.
> > >
> > > Martin Stower
> >
> > Actually, I was at first puzzled as to why she devoted half of her
post
> > to refuting an imagined claim by me that the Egyptians were "black"
or
> > Negroid since I only referred to hair type, but after seeing some of
> > her other posts and considering the title of this thread I
understand
> > better.
> >
> > Concerning her use of the terms "Negroid" and "black" let me quote
her:
> >
> > Ethiopians of Greco-Roman texts -- i.e. color, hair texture, and
nose
in
> > later anthropological and historical usage." (my emphasis added)
>
> This is part of the quote from Snowden.
>
> > She also quoted at least two other writers that use the
> > terms "black", "Negroid" and "Negro" all which led me to believe
that
> > she is not only comfortable with these terms but that she also has a
> > clear understanding of their meaning. Not only that, in the above
> > statement she appears to endorse both the anthropological and
> > historical usage of these terms. This is rare among current day
> > scholars.
>
> The words - and the endorsement - are Snowden's.
>
> [. . .]
>
> Martin Stower
>
Martin,
You are right! She made a long quote from Snowden who, in turn, quoted
others. That was MY oversight. However, all of my questions are still
valid, I believe. Since she decided to quote someone who uses these
terms does she agree with them, understand them and believe they
support her point of view? Are the terms "black", Negroid and Negro
accurate descriptions of the Nile Valley inhabitants?
She produced a quote from Snowden, in which he and others repeatedly
referred to them by these names. If she does not agree with him or
understand his terminology, why is she quoting him? If I was trying to
prove a point, I certainly wouldn't quote someone who I disagreed with
or who used inaccurate and confusing terminology.
Instead of debating this with you, though, I would prefer to let her
clarify her point of view.
Snorky
Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dre77-FF6BA1....@news.earthlink.net...
> In article <8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Super Phreak
> <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
> >
> > According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and red-
> > heads.
>
What do you base this on?
Katherine Griffis
alt.history.ancient-egypt, wrote the following:
>In article <393911D0...@NOTnetcomuk.co.uk>,
> Martin Stower <mst...@NOTnetcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>> > > As far as I can tell, these words appear in the quoted material
>only - and (as I read it) it was quoted for what it says about the classical
>evidence, not to endorse the chosen terminology.
>> > >
Osiri quoting Snowden:
>> > Concerning her use of the terms "Negroid" and "black" let me quote
>her:
>> >
>> > "The physical traits of both the blacks of classical art and the
>> > Ethiopians of Greco-Roman texts -- i.e. color, hair texture, and
>nose type -- have been APPROPRIATE[LY]described as 'Negroid' or 'black'
>in later anthropological and historical usage." (my emphasis added)
>>
>> This is part of the quote from Snowden.
>>
>> > She also quoted at least two other writers that use the
>> > terms "black", "Negroid" and "Negro" all which led me to believe
>that
>> > she is not only comfortable with these terms but that she also has a
>> > clear understanding of their meaning. Not only that, in the above
>> > statement she appears to endorse both the anthropological and
>> > historical usage of these terms. This is rare among current day
>> > scholars.
Stower:
>> The words - and the endorsement - are Snowden's.
>Martin,
>
>You are right! She made a long quote from Snowden who, in turn, quoted
>others. That was MY oversight. However, all of my questions are still
>valid, I believe. Since she decided to quote someone who uses these
>terms does she agree with them, understand them and believe they
>support her point of view? Are the terms "black", Negroid and Negro
>accurate descriptions of the Nile Valley inhabitants?
My point was to this issue that you raised, and no other:
"...Also, why didn't any ancient travellers to Egypt (Greeks, Romans,
Hebrews and later Arabs) ever mention this most peculiar Egyptian
characterisic? For it would have been extremely rare among other
Mediterranean populations, except for possibly the Libyians."
What I produced for you in response to this statement is what writers in
ancient times _did_ write about, in terms of physical characteristics
they saw. As Snowden pointed out, there was a gradation of comparisons
of ancient groups' features based upon color, physical features such as
nose, hair texture and so on. It is both Snowden and O'Connor who used
the terms, and of which they _clearly indicate_ is "...as 'Negroid' or
'black' in _later anthropological and historical usage_." (emphasis
mine)
>She produced a quote from Snowden, in which he and others repeatedly
>referred to them by these names. If she does not agree with him or
>understand his terminology, why is she quoting him? If I was trying to
>prove a point, I certainly wouldn't quote someone who I disagreed with
>or who used inaccurate and confusing terminology.
To quote a passage from an author on classical evidence about the
Egyptians which indicates what ancient writers wrote about does not, in
my estimation, indicate any personal "endorsement" of their terms as
"correct," or whatever you are trying to imply here. It is a quote I
noted about classical evidence on what ancient writers wrote, how they
distinguished Egyptians from Ethiopians, what terms were used in ancient
times in making such distinction, and in Snowden's terminology, how
those terms corresponded in modern_anthropological and historical
terminology_ of what was called 'Negroid' or 'black.'
These terms, anthropologically, are no longer used as scientific
designations, and you will please note that even Snowden used the terms
in quotes. I would have to guess that O'Connor did not based upon the
terms still being in use as "designators" in 1971, and the fact it is
Snowden quoting O'Connor's work.
>Instead of debating this with you, though, I would prefer to let her
>clarify her point of view.
And thus you have it. My position is that the issues you raised were
not for information, but for making your points about the Egyptians
being 'black' or whatever. That's your choice, but I don't think the
evidence supports you on this at all. I believe, based upon the
archaeological evidence to date, as well as textual/artistic, that one
cannot claim any one single designation to the ancient Egyptians, as the
ancient Egyptians were comprised of peoples from all areas of the North
Africa, Levant, and subsaharan Africa.
What Herodotus says, in your citation about the Colchians, bears out
what Snowden pointed out. He links the Egyptians and Colchians by
_language, customs and cultural practices (circumcision is specifically
mentioned) rather than by features alone_, for Herodotus points out
_specifically that the physical characteristics of the Colchians vis a
vis the Egyptian were not significant indications of any relationship
between the two groups_.
I noticed that you do not appear to agree that blondes and red heads
appear in Egyptian art, although I provided several images to show this.
That, again, is _your perception of the situation and the art itself_
and you may believe as you wish. I don't see the need to make the
rationalizations as you seem to, however.
One comment on your rebuttals of this images, however:
>> http://www.geocities.com/netwomen_1999/ReschEgy/AmunList/nakht.jpg
>> Detail of a reddish haired man from the tomb of Nakht, New Kingdom
>
>This might be red hair but it might also be a cap. I've seen pics of
>pharoahs wearing a cap with the cobra on it. Others are depicted in
>the same style but with out the cobra.
The "cap crown" to which you refer, however, was only shown in specific
colors -- yellow and blue.
In "The Cap-Crown of Nefertiti," (Earl L. Ertman), JARCE 13 (1976), pp.
63-65, connections of this blue crown with the khepresh crown, which was
also blue (and always was shown as blue through its use in art).
Ertman's article has the focus of pointing out the differences between
the Amarna coloration of the cap-crown and the Khepresh [war] crown.
Ertman cites two other examples of similar close-fitting crowns from the
Old Kingdom, but eventually rejects these as examples of early "cap
crowns," noting the Mycerinus (Men-kau-re) example was a representation
of the hair of the king, and the Pepi II representation, on the king as
a child, was inconclusive for comparison purposes. The only other
example Ertman cites, possibly from Dyn. 13 or Dyn. 17, shows a stela
with a _possible_ prototype of the crown in the ephemeral king
Men-kha-re Sena'aib, in which the crown is yellow. He also points out
that the period from which this stela dates is possibly later than Dyn
13 or 17.
The Cap Crown re-emerges in the post-Amarna Period being worn by kings,
but the coloring of the crown is consistently yellow thereafter.
However, the cap-crown was not, in the Amarna Period, as Ertman points
out as well, shown as a "gold crown," saying of the three-dimensional
example of the crown at the Berlin Museum (No. 21.263, Limestone
Statuette of Nefertiti):
"...If the complete crown had once been yellow, one would justly expect
traces of paint on its upper part as well...Despite the representation
evidence by this cap-crown, the Egyptian [textual] designation for it is
unknown and its particularly significance is not fully established."
That is where the matter remains at present as to the colors and
function of this particular crown.
You also said:
> I would tend to think that blonde and red hair
>would have been extremely rare in Egypt, Nubia, Mesopatamia and even
>ancient Greece. Red hair is even uncommon among most northern European
>populations. If you're simply trying to point out that there were
>*some* light haired people in Egypt I'd have to agree. But if you're
>posting in support of the original poster then I disagree.
Not necessarily do I think that these hair colors were common, but
again, there are indications they existed, and they existed in the art
as I have shown. This means that the Egyptians took notice of these
features within their own people, which was my point, and shows the wide
diversity of the ancient Egyptian population. The same is true today of
the modern Egyptian population.
As for the eyebrows, you must also understand there is a canon to
Egyptian art to represent certain features in shorthand, idealized
fashion. Eyebrows are black because they appear in conjunction with the
black-lined eye under the canon rules of how a person is represented
(although eyes can often be shown in their natural colors as black,
blue, grey, and even green in various representations). The
relationship of eyebrow color to hair color is not shown in Egyptian
art, because the canon so dictates this.*
Recall that the goal of Egyptian art is to show what was the "essence"
of a person -- what made up his individuality under a strict set of
representational rules. So variations in eye and hair color were shown
as constituting what was part of the _real character_ of a person, and
where impressive, duly detailed in the art. The fact that the referred
images I gave you appears "outside" the standard representations of
Egyptians in canonical art also argues for their relationship with
reality.
* Heinrich Schafer, in his _Principles of Egyptian Art_ (Griffith
Institute: Oxford, 1986) described the relationship and coloration of
the eye and eyebrows as follows:
"The eye with its black eyebrows and lids has its various forms between
almond and lancet shape. Sometimes the point on the outside where the
lids meet is drawn out into a brown so-called cosmetic line, which then
runs parallel to the line of the eyebrow...the iris is mostly brown,
blue with blond Libyans -- and the pupil black, unless both are quite
simply black." (p. 290)
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg
Member, American Research Center in Egypt
International Association of Egyptologists
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Special Studies
http://www.griffis-consulting.com
Byker
> In article <8hbjcq$9se$0...@pita.alt.net>, "Snorky" <sno...@REMOVE.com>
In that case, so were the sons of Ham.
Mike Masin
>
> Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:dre77-3FF142....@news.earthlink.net...
> > In article <8hbjcq$9se$0...@pita.alt.net>, "Snorky" <sno...@REMOVE.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > news:dre77-FF6BA1....@news.earthlink.net...
> > > > In article <8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Super Phreak
> > > > <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
> > > > >
> > > > > According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and red-
> > > > > heads.
> > > >
> > > > Jesus was black.
> > >
> > >
> > > What do you base this on?
> >
> > The Bible.
>
> In that case, so were the sons of Ham.
Also the suns of Cheese,Tomatoes,Lettuce,Onyon & Dijon
--
FFF...Mike Masin
"The Web brings people together because no matter
what kind of a twisted sexual mutant you happen to
be, you've got millions of pals out there. Type in
'Find people that have sex with goats that are on
fire' and the computer will say, 'Specify type of
goat.'" - Rich Jeni
Jefferson Glapski
news:3939AAE4...@interpath.com...
> Byker wrote:
> >
> > Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:dre77-3FF142....@news.earthlink.net...
> > > In article <8hbjcq$9se$0...@pita.alt.net>, "Snorky"
<sno...@REMOVE.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:dre77-FF6BA1....@news.earthlink.net...
> > > > > In article <8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Super Phreak
> > > > > <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
> > > > > >
> > > > > > According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes
and red-
> > > > > > heads.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jesus was black.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What do you base this on?
> > >
> > > The Bible.
> >
> > In that case, so were the sons of Ham.
>
> Also the suns of Cheese,Tomatoes,Lettuce,Onyon & Dijon
I JUIST ATE JESUS~!!!11 What will the Mets do for a shortstop now?
Snorky
Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dre77-3FF142....@news.earthlink.net...
> In article <8hbjcq$9se$0...@pita.alt.net>, "Snorky" <sno...@REMOVE.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:dre77-FF6BA1....@news.earthlink.net...
> > > In article <8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Super Phreak
> > > <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
> > > >
> > > > According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and red-
> > > > heads.
> > >
> > > Jesus was black.
> >
> >
> > What do you base this on?
>
> The Bible.
Specifically, what? I know what popular myth on this is, and was wondering
if that was your basis, or something else I hadn't heard yet.
Andre Ervin
wrote:
> Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:dre77-FF6BA1....@news.earthlink.net...
> > In article <8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Super Phreak
> > <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > > http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
> > >
> > > According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and red-
> > > heads.
> >
> > Jesus was black.
>
>
> What do you base this on?
The Bible.
--
dre
Super Phreak
Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <3938F0D3...@NOTnetcomuk.co.uk>,
> ethnicity of
> > > the Egyptians. I didn't but I'm interested in hearing your
opinion.
> > > Since you, unlike many other Egyptologist, anthropologists, etc.
> seem
> > > to be comfortable with words like "black", Negroid, Negro and
> Caucasian
> >
> >
> > As far as I can tell, these words appear in the quoted material
only -
> and (as I
> > read it) it was quoted for what it says about the classical
evidence,
> not to
> > endorse the chosen terminology.
> >
>
> Actually, I was at first puzzled as to why she devoted half of her
post
> to refuting an imagined claim by me that the Egyptians were "black" or
> Negroid since I only referred to hair type, but after seeing some of
> her other posts and considering the title of this thread I understand
> better.
>
her:
>
> Ethiopians of Greco-Roman texts -- i.e. color, hair texture, and nose
> later anthropological and historical usage." (my emphasis added)
>
> She also quoted at least two other writers that use the
> terms "black", "Negroid" and "Negro" all which led me to believe that
> she is not only comfortable with these terms but that she also has a
> clear understanding of their meaning. Not only that, in the above
> statement she appears to endorse both the anthropological and
> historical usage of these terms. This is rare among current day
> scholars.
From 'Slavery not the beginning of Black history', an article from
February 3-9, 2000, in the "Jackson Advocate," an African American
weekly newspaper in Jackson, Mississippi:
"In regards to the introductionm of advanced culture and civilization
in the Americas, we should mention the fact that evidence exists in
Mexico, South America, California, Caholia (in the South Eastern U.S.),
the Carribean, Florida, and parts of the South, which shows an African
presence. Blacks directly from West Africa (as much of the terracotta
and stone art which represents Africans show), Egypt and Nubia
contributed to one of the first great civilizations of the Americas,
the Olmec Civilization. It was a civilization that was known by the
ancient West Africans, where evidence clearly shows that the racial
features and characteristics shown on these heads are of West African
origin as well as Sudanese (or Nubian-Kushite)..."
"Let us begin with the first civilizations created by Black people in
the Nile Corridor and the Sahara about 15,000 to 20,000 years ago.
From Egypt and Nubia began advanced civilization during that period.
Let us remember the great Black civilizations of Sumer, Elam, and
Mesopotamia before the Gutite, Semite, Indo-European invaders occupied
and destroyed them and mixed their blood with the Blacks to create the
ethnic groups there today.
Let us not forget Harappa and Mohenjo Daro of India's Indus Valley
where Blacks developed one of the world's most magnificent urban
cultures (Blacks have lived in cities longer than any other race of
people). These civlizations were the foundation of Indian civilization
and existed from about 4,000 B.C. to 1,500 B.C.
Let us not forget that the shang (1766-1122 B.C.) and Xia Dyanasties
(2205 - 1766 B.C.) of China were greatly influenced and probably
founded by Africans and Blacks of the Asiatic type (the so-called
Oceanic Negroid who originally migrated from Africa, and still exists
in the millions in Irian Jaya, where they are being exterminated by the
Malays, while Black do nothing to help)...
Let us not forget the African introduction of civilization to the
Greeks through Pharaohs such as Senwosret (call "Kecrops" by the
Greeks), who built Athens, or the Blacks who began early civilizations
in Crete, Etrusca, Armenia (by the Abyssinians, where their alphabet
[the Ethiopian alphabet] is still used), and the Mauricians in Western
Europe and Spain, and the Black Moors who civilized Europe (711 A.D. to
1492 A.D.)."
Though you may not choose to believe it, I'm actually a supporter of
the African American community here in Jackson. But it's hard to keep
a straight face amongst my caucasian friends when "Black History" is
expanded to include the founding of every civilization in the history
of the world, including the Indian, Chinese, Greek, Olmec, Egyptian,
and Mesopotamian cultures and "the civilization of Europe [in 711
A.D.]."
It's almost as if an African American got hold of a copy of "The
Thunderbolt," and substituted the word Black for the word White, and
republished the article almost verbatim. Racism is never an
appropriate answer to racism.
--
Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
- Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
American Family Physician, p. 1262
March 1, 2000
Bill Otten
>> >
>> >
>>he was asked:
> What do you base this on?
>
>> The Bible.
Okay Andre...time to quote scripture and verse. Where does it say Jesus was
black?
I hope we're not going to "rewrite" the Bible now. I've seen too much
historical revisionism in these "politically correct" times.
Andre Ervin
wrote:
> Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:dre77-3FF142....@news.earthlink.net...
> > > What do you base this on?
> >
> > The Bible.
>
>
> Specifically, what? I know what popular myth on this is, and was
> wondering
> if that was your basis, or something else I hadn't heard yet.
Sheesh. "Popular myth" is that Jesus was white; just looking at the
modern people of the Middle East region refutes that.
--
dre
(it's always funnier when you have to explain it $1)
Snorky
Popular myth is that he was black, his mother travelling from the west.
The people of the region are not black, but semetic. Which leads us back to
something everyone knows: Jesus was a Jew (but a semetic Jew).
Snorky
Super Phreak <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8hdpa8$8dl$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
> From 'Slavery not the beginning of Black history', an article from
> February 3-9, 2000, in the "Jackson Advocate," an African American
> weekly newspaper in Jackson, Mississippi:
>
> "In regards to the introductionm of advanced culture and civilization
> in the Americas, we should mention the fact that evidence exists in
> Mexico, South America, California, Caholia (in the South Eastern U.S.),
> the Carribean, Florida, and parts of the South, which shows an African
> presence. Blacks directly from West Africa (as much of the terracotta
> and stone art which represents Africans show), Egypt and Nubia
> contributed to one of the first great civilizations of the Americas,
> the Olmec Civilization. It was a civilization that was known by the
> ancient West Africans, where evidence clearly shows that the racial
> features and characteristics shown on these heads are of West African
> origin as well as Sudanese (or Nubian-Kushite)..."
This is a theory with very little proof at this point.
>
> "Let us begin with the first civilizations created by Black people in
> the Nile Corridor and the Sahara about 15,000 to 20,000 years ago.
> From Egypt and Nubia began advanced civilization during that period.
Those dastards enslaved my Jewish ancestors!! THem pyramids, THAT STILL
MAKE MONEY FOR THEM TODAY, were created with the blood and sweat of my
Jewish family!! REPARATIONS!!! I DEMAND 40 ACRES AND A CAMEL!!!
>
> Though you may not choose to believe it, I'm actually a supporter of
> the African American community here in Jackson. But it's hard to keep
> a straight face amongst my caucasian friends when "Black History" is
> expanded to include the founding of every civilization in the history
> of the world, including the Indian, Chinese, Greek, Olmec, Egyptian,
> and Mesopotamian cultures and "the civilization of Europe [in 711
> A.D.]."
I think they must be hungry for pride and take whatever they can. They
really need to just shake off all that hate and inferiority like a bad cold.
Andre Ervin
<byker@do~rag.net> wrote:
> Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:dre77-3FF142....@news.earthlink.net...
> > In article <8hbjcq$9se$0...@pita.alt.net>, "Snorky" <sno...@REMOVE.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > news:dre77-FF6BA1....@news.earthlink.net...
> > > > In article <8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Super Phreak
> > > > <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
> > > > >
> > > > > According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes and
> > > > > red-
> > > > > heads.
> > > >
> > > > Jesus was black.
> > >
> > >
> > > What do you base this on?
> >
> > The Bible.
>
> In that case, so were the sons of Ham.
Ah, the "curse of Ham".
http://www.godonthe.net/cme/lessons/blktribe.htm
http://www.GodOnThe.Net/wasblack.htm
The good stuff's at the end.
--
dre
Mike Masin
>
> Super Phreak <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:8hdpa8$8dl$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> >
> > February 3-9, 2000, in the "Jackson Advocate," an African American
> > weekly newspaper in Jackson, Mississippi:
> >
> > "In regards to the introductionm of advanced culture and civilization
> > in the Americas, we should mention the fact that evidence exists in
> > Mexico, South America, California, Caholia (in the South Eastern U.S.),
> > the Carribean, Florida, and parts of the South, which shows an African
> > presence. Blacks directly from West Africa (as much of the terracotta
> > and stone art which represents Africans show), Egypt and Nubia
> > contributed to one of the first great civilizations of the Americas,
> > the Olmec Civilization. It was a civilization that was known by the
> > ancient West Africans, where evidence clearly shows that the racial
> > features and characteristics shown on these heads are of West African
> > origin as well as Sudanese (or Nubian-Kushite)..."
>
>
> >
> > the Nile Corridor and the Sahara about 15,000 to 20,000 years ago.
> > From Egypt and Nubia began advanced civilization during that period.
>
> MAKE MONEY FOR THEM TODAY, were created with the blood and sweat of my
> Jewish family!! REPARATIONS!!! I DEMAND 40 ACRES AND A CAMEL!!!
>
For the first time in my life I might consider giving up Judaism!
Andre Ervin
wrote:
> Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:dre77-1ACD71....@news.earthlink.net...
> > In article <8hchdi$unk$0...@pita.alt.net>, "Snorky" <sno...@REMOVE.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > news:dre77-3FF142....@news.earthlink.net...
> > > > In article <8hbjcq$9se$0...@pita.alt.net>, "Snorky"
> > > > <sno...@REMOVE.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:dre77-FF6BA1....@news.earthlink.net...
> > > > > > In article <8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Super Phreak
> > > > > > <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > red-
> > > > > > > heads.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jesus was black.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you base this on?
> > > >
> > > > The Bible.
> > >
> > >
> > > Specifically, what? I know what popular myth on this is, and was
> > > wondering
> > > if that was your basis, or something else I hadn't heard yet.
> >
> > Sheesh. "Popular myth" is that Jesus was white; just looking at the
> > modern people of the Middle East region refutes that.
>
>
> Popular myth is that he was black, his mother travelling from the west.
If you think that's the popular myth, you need to get out more.
> The people of the region are not black, but semetic. Which leads us back
> to
> something everyone knows: Jesus was a Jew (but a semetic Jew).
See my other post. And remember that ultimately, it doesn't freakin'
matter.
--
dre
Osiris
k.gr...@griffis-consulting.com wrote:
[snip]
> My point was to this issue that you raised, and no other:
>
> "...Also, why didn't any ancient travellers to Egypt (Greeks, Romans,
> Hebrews and later Arabs) ever mention this most peculiar Egyptian
> characterisic? For it would have been extremely rare among other
> Mediterranean populations, except for possibly the Libyians."
>
> What I produced for you in response to this statement is what writers
in
> ancient times _did_ write about, in terms of physical characteristics
> they saw.
In response to this question you also replied: "Possibly because they
didn't think it worthy of note?" [KGG]
I replied that if blonde and red hair was a common feature among the
Egyptians it would have been mentioned by someone coming from a land
were this feature was very rare (i.e. Greece, Palestine, Arabia,
etc.). It was not mentioned, therefore, we can assume that it wasn't
common enough to warrant mention at all.
> >She produced a quote from Snowden, in which he and others repeatedly
> >referred to them by these names. If she does not agree with him or
> >understand his terminology, why is she quoting him? If I was trying
to
> >prove a point, I certainly wouldn't quote someone who I disagreed
with
> >or who used inaccurate and confusing terminology.
>
> To quote a passage from an author on classical evidence about the
> Egyptians which indicates what ancient writers wrote about does not,
in
> my estimation, indicate any personal "endorsement" of their terms as
> "correct," or whatever you are trying to imply here. It is a quote I
> noted about classical evidence on what ancient writers wrote, how they
> distinguished Egyptians from Ethiopians, what terms were used in
ancient
> times in making such distinction, and in Snowden's terminology, how
> those terms corresponded in modern_anthropological and historical
> terminology_ of what was called 'Negroid' or 'black.'
>
> These terms, anthropologically, are no longer used as scientific
> designations, and you will please note that even Snowden used the
terms
> in quotes. I would have to guess that O'Connor did not based upon the
> terms still being in use as "designators" in 1971, and the fact it is
> Snowden quoting O'Connor's work.
Thanks for clarifying that.
> And thus you have it. My position is that the issues you raised were
> not for information, but for making your points about the Egyptians
> being 'black' or whatever.
Huh? Please show me where in my original response in this thread I
claimed that the Egyptians were "black", as in racially "black". I
never made such a statement. In fact my main contention was simply
that blonde and red hair was not common in Egypt. Period. You proved
this to indeed be the case.
Personally, I also believe that its futile to attempt to pigeonhole the
ancient Egyptians into a specific racial category. It's obvious from
all the anthropological and pictoral evidence that there would have
been too many caucasoid traits among them to declare them "black".
While, conversely, they would have exhibited enough negroid traits that
to declare them "caucasian" would also be inaccurate. You could have
easily asked me to clarify this for you if you were unsure.
> I believe, based upon the
> archaeological evidence to date, as well as textual/artistic, that one
> cannot claim any one single designation to the ancient Egyptians, as
the
> ancient Egyptians were comprised of peoples from all areas of the
North
> Africa, Levant, and subsaharan Africa.
On this point we are in agreement.
> What Herodotus says, in your citation about the Colchians, bears out
> what Snowden pointed out. He links the Egyptians and Colchians by
> _language, customs and cultural practices (circumcision is
specifically
> mentioned) rather than by features alone_, for Herodotus points out
> _specifically that the physical characteristics of the Colchians vis a
> vis the Egyptian were not significant indications of any relationship
> between the two groups_.
Why are you taking a quote I made in another thread in regards to
Egyptian mummy hair and responding to it here? That quote was made not
necessarily to "prove" the race of the Egyptians but to question why
there is such a discrepancy between the fact that most of the mummies
discovered to date have straight hair (AFAIK) and the fact that ancient
eyewitnesses and wall paintings (Roman era portraits especially)
portray Egyptians as having very curly hair. I didn't present it to YOU
as evidence that red and blonde hair was uncommon in Egypt or to prove
that they were racially "black". You were the one to quote Snowden
quoting Herodutus in his argument on race.
> I noticed that you do not appear to agree that blondes and red heads
> appear in Egyptian art, although I provided several images to show
this.
Again, why are you reading things into my comments and misrepresenting
my views? What did I actually say concerning the presence of blondes
and red heads in Egypt?
"If you're simply trying to point out that there were *some* light
haired people in Egypt I'd have to agree. But if you're posting in
support of the original poster then I disagree." [Osiris] The original
posters had interpreted the "Egypt Revealed" article to mean that
ancient Egypt was "full of blondes".
And again, if you wish to dispute this and claim that blonde and red
hair was common in Egypt then what you've presented doesn't prove
that. If you wish to do that then I'd rather see a respected scholar's
opinion on the subject rather than accept your subjective appraisal of
Egyptian artwork.
For the record, I have not claimed that blondes, red heads or other
light haired people were non-existant in ancient Egypt. They were
present but the evidence shows that those traits were not at all
common.
Osiris
Snorky
> In article <8hdvkq$fau$0...@pita.alt.net>, "Snorky" <sno...@REMOVE.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:dre77-1ACD71....@news.earthlink.net...
> > > In article <8hchdi$unk$0...@pita.alt.net>, "Snorky" <sno...@REMOVE.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:dre77-3FF142....@news.earthlink.net...
> > > > > In article <8hbjcq$9se$0...@pita.alt.net>, "Snorky"
> > > > > <sno...@REMOVE.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:dre77-FF6BA1....@news.earthlink.net...
> > > > > > > In article <8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Super Phreak
> > > > > > > <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > red-
> > > > > > > > heads.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jesus was black.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What do you base this on?
> > > > >
> > > > > The Bible.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Specifically, what? I know what popular myth on this is, and was
> > > > wondering
> > > > if that was your basis, or something else I hadn't heard yet.
> > >
> > > Sheesh. "Popular myth" is that Jesus was white; just looking at the
> > > modern people of the Middle East region refutes that.
> >
> >
> > Popular myth is that he was black, his mother travelling from the west.
>
> If you think that's the popular myth, you need to get out more.
He wuz a jew.
>
> > The people of the region are not black, but semetic. Which leads us
back
> > to
> > something everyone knows: Jesus was a Jew (but a semetic Jew).
>
> See my other post. And remember that ultimately, it doesn't freakin'
> matter.
Who said it did? Any Xtian who this really matters to isn't really a Xtian.
Imagine the embarrassing look on Jesse Jackson's face when he comes face to
face with the Lord who says "Welcome to Hymie Heaven".
Lector Priest
> you inclined to agree with the initial poster that ancient Egypt
> was "full of blondes"? I would tend to think that blonde and red hair
> would have been extremely rare in Egypt, Nubia, Mesopatamia and even
> ancient Greece. Red hair is even uncommon among most northern European
> populations. If you're simply trying to point out that there were
> *some* light haired people in Egypt I'd have to agree. But if you're
> posting in support of the original poster then I disagree. The few
> pics that you presented, when compared to literally thousands of pics
> of Egyptians with black and curly hair, help to prove my point. I have
> a 500 page book at home called "Egypt: The World of the Pharoahs" with
> plenty of artifacts, paintings and sculptures and none of them have
> blonde or red hair.
Perhaps the Egyptians were colonsists living in Egypt and were not
indigenous to this region. This has been known to happen.....
> I think blonde and red hair would have been worthy of mention by almost
> all travellers to Egypt from the Meditarranean world if it was as
> common as the article and the first poster seem to imply. Greeks,
> Arabs and Hebrews all would have noticed a marked difference between
> themselves and Egyptians and even moreso if the Egyptians had different
> hair color than themselves. Yet they all fail to mention this.
They were already in trade contact with northern Europeans so it was not
likely seen as being bizarre.
>e Egyptians as having wooly
> hair. I'm not sure if either mentioned whose hair was curlier but it
> should be obvious from the paintings that Egyptian hair, for the most
> part, wasn't as curly as those inhabitants further up the Nile.
Perhaps the ethnicity of the Egyptian population changed much over time, but
they were still regarded as Egyptians. The Ethnic makeup of Texas has
changed drastically in 200 years, but its inhabitants are still called
Texans.
Dale Bright
<j...@GOPSUican.net> wrote:
>Mike Masin <nem...@interpath.com> wrote in message
>news:3939AAE4...@interpath.com...
>> Byker wrote:
>> >
>> > Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> > news:dre77-3FF142....@news.earthlink.net...
>> > > In article <8hbjcq$9se$0...@pita.alt.net>, "Snorky"
><sno...@REMOVE.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> > > > news:dre77-FF6BA1....@news.earthlink.net...
>> > > > > In article <8h5iuv$q1m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Super Phreak
>> > > > > <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > http://www.egyptrevealed.com/052900-wigs-2.shtml
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > According to the article, Ancient Egypt was full of blondes
>and red-
>> > > > > > heads.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Jesus was black.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > What do you base this on?
>> > >
>> > > The Bible.
>> >
>> > In that case, so were the sons of Ham.
>>
>> Also the suns of Cheese,Tomatoes,Lettuce,Onyon & Dijon
>
>I JUIST ATE JESUS~!!!11 What will the Mets do for a shortstop now?
Dood, please do not taunt the Mets. Sheffield has done enough damage,
thank you very much.
Dale Bright
"Is the bright part a joke?"
Osiris
I wonder when they initially came into contact with northern
Europeans. It must have been early on since the article says there is
evidence of blonde haired wigs and natural blondes from even the Old
Kingdom. If I remember correctly most of the wigs were made from human
hair, also. Blonde hair certainly wouldn't have been bizarre, though,
just like it wouldn't be bizarre in India today.
> >e Egyptians as having wooly
> > hair. I'm not sure if either mentioned whose hair was curlier but
it
> > should be obvious from the paintings that Egyptian hair, for the
most
> > part, wasn't as curly as those inhabitants further up the Nile.
>
> Perhaps the ethnicity of the Egyptian population changed much over
time, but
> they were still regarded as Egyptians. The Ethnic makeup of Texas has
> changed drastically in 200 years, but its inhabitants are still called
> Texans.
>
I think you're 100% correct. Its apparent that several types of
indegeneous people have been mixing in the Nile Valley for the last
15,000 yrs. As any Egyptian will tell you, they are a unique group of
people. Some of them would identify themselves as racially caucasian
and some of them would like to be considered "black". The majority,
though, lay somewhere in between. All Egyptians, then and now, would
consider themselves as belonging to an "Egyptian race".
Andre Ervin
wrote:
> Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:dre77-3D9128....@news.earthlink.net...
> > > Popular myth is that he was black, his mother travelling from the
> > > west.
> >
> > If you think that's the popular myth, you need to get out more.
>
>
> He wuz a jew.
Duh. It doesn't preclude Him from black ancestry.
--
dre
Snorky
The fact that you have to be a race-baiter and try and "make" him black is
pathetic.
You were right when you said it doesn't matter, but anyone who really
believes that (and I don't think you do) wouldn't have started the "he was
black" crap any way.
Jon Enslin
Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>In article <8hecjt$5qg$0...@pita.alt.net>, "Snorky"
<sno...@REMOVE.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Andre Ervin <dr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:dre77-3D9128....@news.earthlink.net...
>
>> > > Popular myth is that he was black, his mother travelling
from the
>> > > west.
>> >
>> > If you think that's the popular myth, you need to get out
more.
>>
>>
>> He wuz a jew.
>
>Duh. It doesn't preclude Him from black ancestry.
Hey to '60 Minutes' a couple of weeks ago...
Jon
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Neville Lindsay
"Osiris" <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8hfunc$nln$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Egyptian ehtnicity perhaps?
NL
Osiris
Well, of course, scientifically there is no such thing
as race. I think most people don't have a problem, though,
with terms like "black" and "white" and other descriptive
adjectives meant to describe a groups average physical
appearance when speaking of modern day populations. So
the idea of "race" as a scientific concept is dead. But
the idea of using those words to describe certain ethnic
groups is still generally accepted (but not by scientists,
of course). In an ideal world we would only refer to each
other by ethnic names or by geographical origins but,
unfortunately, we are far from an ideal world.
When I wrote of an Egyptian race above, I had just quoted
Herodotus as referring to the Colchians as belonging to
an "Egyptian race" on another thread. The phrase today,
though, would probably be translated as "Egyptian ethnicity"
or "ethnically Egyptian".
Also, I have spoken with Egyptians who describe themselves
as belonging to a "new race". What they mean is that
Egyptians have mixed with so many different people
throughout the ages, even from the paleolithic era, that
they formed a new ethnic group seperate from the ones
they are surrounded by and unique in their own special way.
Therefore, they don't generally appreciate being described
as either "black" or "white".
Super Phreak
Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> Well, of course, scientifically there is no such thing
> as race.
So, you're saying that medicine is not a science? I see racial
categorization in medical journals all the time.
--
Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
- Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
American Family Physician, p. 1262
March 1, 2000
Osiris
Super Phreak <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <8hl64g$l78$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > as race.
>
> categorization in medical journals all the time.
>
> --
> Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
> - Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
> American Family Physician, p. 1262
> March 1, 2000
>
> Before you buy.
Racial categories still appear in many places. I don't live in the US
but I know that racial categories appear on the Census Form, job
applications, college applications, medical journals and so on. People
still use terms related to "race" because no one has come up with new
ways to describe different ethnic populations. But it is a fact that,
scientifically, "race" does not exist. Take a look at this article.
http://www.melungeons.org/aaa.htm
Here's a quote from the article: "The concept of race is a social and
cultural construction, with no basis in human biology--race can simply
not be tested or proven scientifically, according to the AAA."
That is an official statement from the American Anthropological
Association. Anthropologists, I guess, would know more than anybody
else about the validity if the term "race". For its their job to study
the human race and reach some sort of consensus as to the distribution,
origin, classification and relationship of all ethnic groups.
Obviously, though, until they invent more applicable descriptions,
we're stuck with the ones we have. For better or worse.
alic...@my-deja.com
Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <8hlc5e$p7r$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Super Phreak <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > In article <8hl64g$l78$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > as race.
> >
> > categorization in medical journals all the time.
> >
> > --
> > Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
> > - Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
> > American Family Physician, p. 1262
> > March 1, 2000
> >
> but I know that racial categories appear on the Census Form, job
> applications, college applications, medical journals and so on.
People
> still use terms related to "race" because no one has come up with new
> ways to describe different ethnic populations. But it is a fact that,
> scientifically, "race" does not exist. Take a look at this article.
>
> http://www.melungeons.org/aaa.htm
>
> Here's a quote from the article: "The concept of race is a social and
> cultural construction, with no basis in human biology--race can simply
> not be tested or proven scientifically, according to the AAA."
>
> That is an official statement from the American Anthropological
> Association. Anthropologists, I guess, would know more than anybody
> else about the validity if the term "race". For its their job to
study
> the human race and reach some sort of consensus as to the
distribution,
> origin, classification and relationship of all ethnic groups.
>
> Obviously, though, until they invent more applicable descriptions,
> we're stuck with the ones we have. For better or worse.
I have often heard this before. But I have a question: Why is it
when a skeleton, or even merely a skull, is found the race of the
person can be determined? How are doctors able to discern the race
of a person from a single hair? In order to establish the race of a
person by their hair scientists must perform some type test on this
hair, doesn't disprove the AAA definition of 'race?'
O'Reilly Enright
Osiris
alic...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <8hlflc$rol$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > In article <8hlc5e$p7r$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > Super Phreak <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > In article <8hl64g$l78$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > > Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > as race.
> > >
> > > categorization in medical journals all the time.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
> > > - Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
> > > American Family Physician, p. 1262
> > > March 1, 2000
> > >
I am by no means a spokesperson for the AAA but what I think they mean
is that it's impossible to place *everyone* in a strictly defined
racial category. I would be interested to know if anthropologists
actually still do label skulls according to race. It would clearly be
against the statement made by the AAA.
> How are doctors able to discern the race
> of a person from a single hair?
I've never heard of this before. Tell me which racial category the
following kind of person would belong to, though?
A person who is:
1/4 Chinese 1/4 Senegalese 1/4 Norwegian 1/4 South American Indian
and why would that racial category be more accurate than any other?
I doubt that analyzing one single hair would give anyone a clearer
picture.
The world is becoming smaller and people such as that are becoming more
common. It is also apparent that alot of mixing also took place in
antiquity and especially in ancient Egypt.
> In order to establish the race of a
> person by their hair scientists must perform some type test on this
> hair, doesn't disprove the AAA definition of 'race?'
The AAA doesn't have a definition of race. They have said that its
meaningless and given the example above you can surely see their dilema.
> O'Reilly Enright
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
Osiris
John Rogers
Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com>, and a bottle of the '92 port:
>In article <8hlc5e$p7r$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Super Phreak <vipne...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> In article <8hl64g$l78$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>> Osiris <osiris...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Well, of course, scientifically there is no such thing
>> > as race.
>>
>> So, you're saying that medicine is not a science? I see racial
>> categorization in medical journals all the time.
>>
>> --
>> Idiots, who often need euthanasia, of course never recover.
>> - Walter C. Alvarez, M.D.
>> American Family Physician, p. 1262
>> March 1, 2000
>>
>> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>> Before you buy.
>
>Racial categories still appear in many places. I don't live in the US
>but I know that racial categories appear on the Census Form, job
>applications, college applications, medical journals and so on. People
>still use terms related to "race" because no one has come up with new
>ways to describe different ethnic populations. But it is a fact that,
>scientifically, "race" does not exist. Take a look at this article.
>
>http://www.melungeons.org/aaa.htm
>
>Here's a quote from the article: "The concept of race is a social and
>cultural construction, with no basis in human biology--race can simply
>not be tested or proven scientifically, according to the AAA."
Yeah, right. Like we're supposed to believe the American Automobile
Association about *anything* related to the sciences.
Nice try, Mr. Fisherman, but it's not like the rest of us in this
chatrum was born with a silver spoon in our mouths.
John M. Rogers
AU Class of 1985
The Al Del Greco of Atlanta ($1)
Bashi at Earthlink
> > > > > > > What do you base this on?
> > > > > > The Bible.
In the real world or the mythical one, what does the color of Jesus have to
do with Egypt? Is this a Christian group or a group that discusses Egyptian
history as the title implies? Jesus doesn't have much to do with the
history of the region at all except in the eyes of the Christians. In the
eyes of many of the inhabitants of that area, Jesus never even existed or
was not Jewish at all, but instead Roman. Does this group discuss Egypt
from a Christian perspective or from an historical perspective?
Barbara
Mike Masin
Super Phreak
"Bashi at Earthlink" <ReplyToG...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Jesus was black.
> > > > > > > > What do you base this on?
> > > > > > > The Bible.
>
> In the real world or the mythical one, what does the color of
> Jesus have to do with Egypt?
Like duh! Jesus was born in Bethlehem, but he was reared in Egypt.
Jefferson Glapski
> In article <wEv%4.3797$2X2.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> "Bashi at Earthlink" <ReplyToG...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Jesus was black.
> > > > > > > > > What do you base this on?
> > > > > > > > The Bible.
> >
> > In the real world or the mythical one, what does the color of
> > Jesus have to do with Egypt?
>
> Like duh! Jesus was born in Bethlehem, but he was reared in Egypt.
You know, State College isn't that far from Bethlehem. Or Nazareth
either.
--
Your pla,
Jefferson N. Glapski
sa...@home.com wrote "Jeffy.Is.Fuckingmental"
######### ######### #### ####
#### #### #### #### #### ####
#### #### #### #### ####
#### #### #### #### #### ####
#### #### #### #### #### ####
#### #### #### ####
#### #### #### #### ####
#### ######### #########
Bill Otten
>> Well, of course, scientifically there is no such thing
>
>So, you're saying that medicine is not a science? I see racial
>categorization in medical journals all the time.
>
and therefore are Eurocentric revisionists out to diminish the academic,
social, cultural, culinary, musical, scientific, theologic, linguistic,
artistic, ad nauseum...contributions of the negroid race. Surely, the racial
categorizations in medical journals are simply a tacit means of perpetuating
some "myth" that the races are not equal.
[wink]
bill otten
John Rogers
>In article <wEv%4.3797$2X2.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> "Bashi at Earthlink" <ReplyToG...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > Jesus was black.
>> > > > > > > > What do you base this on?
>> > > > > > > The Bible.
>>
>> In the real world or the mythical one, what does the color of
>> Jesus have to do with Egypt?
>
>Like duh! Jesus was born in Bethlehem, but
>he was reared in Egypt.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ODL.
Toivo Pedaste
>Like duh! Jesus was born in Bethlehem, but he was reared in Egypt.
Must be true, when I was in Egypt I was take to this damp cellar in
the Coptic quarter where is was told Joseph and Mary stayed when
they were in Egypt, this is different from the other wet cellar where
I was told Moses was found in the bull rushes
--
Toivo Pedaste Email: to...@ucs.uwa.edu.au
University Communications Services, Phone: +61 8 9 380 2605
University of Western Australia Fax: +61 8 9 380 1109
"The time has come", the Walrus said, "to talk of many things"...