I'm not black, I'm Indian.
Secondly I'm not arguing that the ancient Egyptians werent originally a "black" people because I believe that they were. I'm just questioning this obsession with identifying with them at any and all costs. It seems foolish IMO.
Well, to be fair. The origin and "race/ethnicity" of Ancient Egyptians is the only ancient civilization that has been hijacked passed as someone else's. Not surprised since they were ahead of their time and everybody admired them. I think that this debate is important to clear some things up for future generations. Nobody is trying to say they are direct descendants of Ancient Egyptians, more than likely they were wiped out of the land If they were still around, they should still be speaking "Egyptian", something should have been preserved from their culture or language, but we don't see that among modern Egyptians. Afterall, Iranians still speak Farsi even after Arab invasions.
This tells me that they practically wiped out after the land was being passed around like a blunt from one kingdom to another. It like the US being conquered by Russia for a few hundred years and later Chinese. If that happened a Native American would be a thing of the past.
You watch those old Cleopatra (who was mixed with Macedonian) movies and other Ancient Egypt based stuff from back in the day and all the slaves were black and all the nobles are white.
Also to dead a lot the arguments about the "racial" origin of the Pharaohs who were mummified and preserve, their DNA was analyzed and it was found that their DNA was closer related to African tribes of the Great Lakes of Africa and southern, Chadic and Cameroons than any other group in the world.
In December 2011, DNA Tribes released an analysis, based on 8 forensic autosomal STR markers, of the Amarna Pharaohs concluding that "Results indicated the autosomal STR profiles of the Amarna period mummies were most frequent in modern populations in several parts of Africa."
Top MLI (Match Likelihood Index) scores for Amarna mummies based on the world regions identified by DNA Tribes® STR analysis. Each MLI score identifies the likelihood of occurrence of an STR profile in that region versus the likelihood of occurrence in the world as a whole.
This study was completed by Swiss scientists. The chart says a lot...look at the results.
Racial identity of Tutankhamun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Funny thing is, they are claiming that King "
Tutankhamun has Haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50% of European men belong.[45] However, this DNA group also shows up in parts of northern Africa, particularly Algeria, where tests have found it in 11.8% of subjects.[46] The R1b haplogroup is also found in central Africa around Chad and Cameroon,[47] but the Chadic-speaking area in Africa is dominated by the branch known as R1b1c (R-V88).[48] (Note that the Y-chromosome of King Tut has never been published, and speculation about it is based on some screencaps from a Discovery Channel documentary that may or may not belong to the Pharaoh)"
Notice, they don't want to reveal what was found on the y-chromosome.
If you look up the R1b
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b_(Y-DNA)
They say that western and northwestern Europeans have the highest R1b1a2 percentage. So how the the hell did that show up and skip the rest of Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East?
The British who conquered Egypt last and the Swiss scientists are trying to look like they are related to King Tut.
Then, they point out the R1b is found the highest concentration in Africa. Especially among African tribes in the Cameroon region. Like 90+% among multiple tribes. A high percentage in the Chadic region as well.
Basically, when looking at his entire DNA profile, King Tut is closer related to Eastern and sub-Saharan Africans than any other group in the world.
