“People who overindulged at Home Town Buffet?” 
Yes, the Afrocentric view of Egypt is only supportable by ignoring about 95% of the representations of people, who across the span of the civilization are portrayed in various shades, with the darkest/black ones almost always captives, enemy soldiers or a very few exceptions. Pointing to one king or scribe here or there who had negroid features is as selective as anything Von Daniken did.
Martin Bernal is currently working the comic-book circuit. (NSFW)
Can we agree at least that Charlton Heston would not have “passed” as an Egyptian prince… OR as a 1400-BC Israelite tribesman 
?
It being such a crossroads location and having been subject to so many invasions and migrations one would expect a rather richly mixed population in Ancient Egypt after a few dynasties had gone by. Must have looked “nonwhite” by the standards of some European and North American societies of our time but maybe that says more about us now than about them then.
The push-back you got was due to the Indus river being nowhere near Mesopotamia ;). Did you mean to say the Euphrates?
That, too, but I am distinctly recalling scholarly claims that migrants from the Indus Valley helped form the early population of Egypt.
Given that Egyptology writings cover more than a hundred years and various theories have come and gone, it’s possible that’s outdated info. But the people of the middle east down into what became Egypt came from somewhere, and it was far too late in human history for them all to have been the first bipeds that far north of the Rift Valley…
Well, technically the person he was portraying was not Egyptian. Kind of an important plot point.
Actually, you cannot open an early twentieth-century history book without reading up of speculation on some “ancient white race” which was the original creator of all these great civilizations which was then destroyed by intermarriage with the “darkies”, the evidence being i) Most people there are swarthy, ii) but its pretty common to see a person as fair as any North Euro and iii) seriously, you think these darkies could have ever made something like that?
Yes, that’s my favorite subset of the Afrocentric arguments: “Cleopatra was black, you know!” “Really? And how *do *you say ‘black’ in Greek?”
Like hell, they don’t. As far as I’m aware, current theories still favour an in situ, mostly-Western Desert origin for prehistoric Egyptian culture, with only subsequent pan-Levantine development. And as for Indus influences? There’s no evidence of any significant contact before dynastic times. So no, I don’t know of any experts who think what you just claimed - perhaps you could name names?
I’m willing to concede the point if that’s current thinking. My study of Egypt has spanned a lot of years, and a wider range of texts, and I do find outmoded ideas and theories in the mix as I read newer material.
I really should have been more specific in saying “Indo-European” influences in the first post. “Indus” was a collateral flub.
Either would be equally wrong.
There is some clear influence on pre-Dynastic Egypt from Mesopotamia. A sea route from Mesopotamia would go past the Indus Valley civilisation, as well as the probable sites of Melliha and Dilmun. So wouldn’t rule it out, however I’m not aware of any proven connection between pre-dynastic Egypt and the Indus Valley civiilisation.
Egyptian civilization predates the Indo-Europeans. Unless you go with the Anatolian hypothesis for the Indo-European origin, but developments in genetics in the last two years have pretty much killed that off.
Personally, I always thought the origin involved a population movement from the west when the Sahara dried out. The areas that mummified burials 1000 years before Egypts started doing that. Mixing with the levantine agriculturalist populations.
A migration from the Indus seems… improbable. Contact through sea routes I can believe, but an actual population movement just has to cross too many different populated territories.
First, there’s a reason the Middle East is called the Crossroads of the World. It’s where Europe, Asia and Africa meet. You’d almost EXPECT ancient Egypt to have people from all three continents, and to find DNA from all three continents in those people.
Were many/most ancient Egyptians “black”? I dunno. I suspect most would not blend in well in Harlem or Compton. On the other hand, many would probably have been kicked out of an Alabama restaurant in 1948. Make of that what you will (I prefer to make nothing of it).
“Black Athena” was ridiculously overblown, but it wasn’t ALL nonsense. Egypt DOES deserve more study, because it was an amazing and interesting civilization. And Greek culture surely DID copy/borrow a lot from Egypt, perhaps even their gods (Herodotus thought so, at least). But the purpose of studying history is NOT to give readers a self-esteem boost, and too many black Americans treat ancient Egypt as a source of pride, rather than an ordinary subject if study.
Sure.
Ermm, no it wouldn’t. You’d have to purposefully sail outwards to get to the Indus region from the direct Red Sea-Persian Gulf route, and early ships were coast-huggers.
Neither am I.
Μελανια.
The African Egyptian nuts think Cleopatra was black. That’s Cleopatra, who came from a long line of Macedonian Greeks who intermarried.
Yeah, but “Macedonia” means “land of the tall ones” - does that sound like Greeks to you? Naah, clearly Ancient Macedonia was actually the Sudan…
for the humour-impaired
I am not aware of any studies that say “closer to” as opposed to “some admixture.”
As a broad generalization, haplotype groups in modern Egypt are from sub-saharans who left africa at least 40-50+ kya, became established in what we now consider the “non-african” lineages, and then migrated back into what is now northern africa to populate what is now Egypt. But by the time of the Pharaohs there would have been some representation of modern sub-saharan gene pools, and at least one study (Paabo and DiRienzo, 1993) found evidence of that. Other genetic studies have suggested various Pharaohs (including Tut) to be non-african (R1 line, in the case of IGENEA’s over-the-shoulder guess for Tut).
Gobs of controversy on both sides, because everyone wants a nice neat narrative that the highly successful Egyptians were a sub-saharan success story.
Probably not gonna happen. Genes are messy; getting pure DNA from the mummies is always going to be tainted by “you didn’t get a clean sample,” and the ridiculous modern overlay of anxiety over what sub-saharans are and are not thought to be capable of means “racist!” is gonna be hollered at whoever tries to sort it out.
I wouldn’t say “everybody wants a nice neat narrative that the highly successful Egyptians were a sub-saharan success story” - there are probably just as many people equally as invested in scrubbing out any trace of sub-Saharan influence on Ancient Egypt, even in the face of the clear evidence of that influence.
If you look at the last few leaders of Egypt they range from very much “white” by modern “Western” ethnic standards to very much “black”, most would probably described as “olive skinned”.
I don’t see any particular evidence that the first few dozen leaders of Egypt would look very much different.
