Who was Tutankhamun?

Great Debates
1

Based on the link above, it appears that some African Americans are protesting the depecition of the child-Pharaoh Tutankhamun. In essence, they are arguing that the bust depicts him as white when it should depict him as black.

This caught my eye due to this Straightdope discussion:

My understanding was that Tutankhamun was semetic. Put another way, he would resemble a mediteranean or a middle-eastern man but he would not be considered black or African American (as we use that term today). The protest seems way off base and fundamentally un-intellectual.

Any thoughts (I’m looking at Askia here :cool: )?

2

I hate news stories like that. No mention that the bust is made from calcite. There were lots of calcite busts and trinkets in Tut’s tomb. See this (PDF), and this, for example. And this. The use of calcite is historically and geographically accurate. It seems to me that the Agence France-Presse is engaging in journalistic trolling.

3

Well, the fact is nobody knows exactly what the Egyptian royal family or their subjects look like, because it is hard to say how much the art is idealized. The Amarna period art is often considered a more naturalistic/realistic depiction and Amarna subjects often have a distinctly more stereotypically “negroid” look to them. At least in the opinion of many, though one can judge for themself:

http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Arts/scultpurePlastic/SculptureHistory/ArtofEgypt/ArtAmarnaPeriod/ArtAmarnaPeriod.htm

On the other hand even if you extrapolate from that to say much of Egyptian art is idealization, there still must have been some source for that ideal. If that idealized standard appears slightly more “caucasoid” to modern perceptions, what are you left with? Perhaps a folk who varied somewhat in physiognomy and the best answer to whether Tutankhamen was white or black by modern standards ( going by appearance, not a ‘one drop’ rule ) is he could be either.

Of course the real best answer is neither. As Chronos pointed out in the thread you linked to, the concept of “white” and “black” are relatively modern ones.

  • Tamerlane
4

While the concept of race may be modern theory (though I do not entirely agree with you) the concept of ethnic identity certainly isn’t. Put another way, there does not appear to be much similarity between ancient Egyptian culture and ancient Ethiopian culture much less sub-Saharan African culture.

It also appears that the recent busts are supported by three seperate anthropological teams. Two teams created their reconstructions separatelyfrom a plastic skull, while an Egyptian team worked directly from CT scans. All three appear to have come to the same conclusion that King Tut was a caucasoid north African. This view is further supported by the Secretary-General of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities Zahi Hawass.

5

To the contrary, one of the identifying features of the ancient site of Axum ( the first identifiable organized state in the highlands which would become Abyssinia/Ethiopia ) are what are almost certainly Egyptian-inspired obelisks. It also conquered the state of Meroe in Nubia, which was undeniably very heavily influenced by Egypt. To be sure Axum’s south Arabian ties were probably just as prominent, perhaps more so, but there was undeniably Egyptian influence, one odd ( and unfortunate ) outlier of the common cultural ties of the region being the practice of female ‘Pharoanic’ circumscision, a particularly invasive style pretty much exclusive to Egypt and areas south to the Horn of Africa, practiced near-universally by people of all faiths ( the one group of Jews known to practice female circumscion were in fact Ethiopian Jews ).

Eh, well, that’s fine. I don’t dispute that might be the case. But even if that solves the Tut dilemma, that doesn’t mean everyone in ancient Egypt looked white. Egypt expanded south into Nubia and later the Nubians returned the favor by advancing north ( to create the 25th dynasty, 747-656 B.C.E. ). And I believe the evidence is pretty solid that at least many of the Nubians were mighty dark. It isn’t hard to imagine a “mixed race” society where ethnicity derived from shared language and culture, rather than shared coloration.

And I still think squabbling over who among modern American-defined sociocultural races had best claim to the heritage of Egypt ( as if anyone today truly shares any real connection to it ) to be a bit silly.

  • Tamerlane
6

There are quite a few things that the Afrocentrists believe that we of the Western tradition would not. Some things that I have heard over the years include:

1: Egyptians are black even though the females are depicted as being white while the men, who worked outside for the most part are tan. Very similar to the way the Minoans depicted themselves. Egyptian mummies have caucasian features. The mummy believed to be Ramses the Great has red hair. Furthermore, the Egyptians depicted themselves very differently from the Africans further south. They are usually depicted by Egyptians as being darker with curly hair and thicker lips.

2: The famous Nefertiti bust, which shows a woman with what appears to be Caucasian features, is a fake created by the Germans who claimed to have discovered it. It should be pointed out the this theory has never been proven and before you have visions of Nazi plots for proving European superiority, the bust was discovered before their rise to power.

3: Euclid traveled to Egypt, like other Greeks, and learned mathematics from the aforementioned black Egyptians. This has not been proven either and the lack of Egyptian evidence suggests that they did not teach him the revolutionary concepts which he is credited with discovering.

4: The Khazars are the progenitors of the modern Jews and the real Jews of the old testament were black Africans. This would clear up the connection with Semitic and Hammitic languages.

5: Other classical figures were black. Hannibal and Cleopatra were also black Even though Carthage was a Phoeniciann colony and Cleopatra descended from Macedonians.

The moral of the story is that you can write whatever history suits you. I think that these people need to concentrate of on the great cultures that they know are black African in origin. Great Zimbabwe, Axumite, and Kushite kingdoms. These civilizations were great and need historians to do research on. Instead of debating whether Egyptians were white or black with spurious facts, why not develop a body of work that brings to light these overlooked civilizations? Ultimately, the other poster is right: Race is an invention of modern times.

7

“Semitic” is a linguistic designation, and has little to do with “race,” whatever that difficult term has come to mean. Modern linguists recognize the Semitic languages as part of a larger family called Afro-Asiatic. Other languages in the Afro Asiatic family include Ancient Egyptian, Hausa, Somali, Amharic and other languages of Ethiopia.

The ancestral home of proto Afro Asiatic is thought to be the highlands of East Africa, what is now Ethiopia and Kenya. The ancestors of Semitic languages migrated from East Africa into the Arabian peninusula where they may have mixed with speakers of languages related to the Indo European family. Other branches of Afro Asiatic speakers migrated into ancient Egypt, and what is now Nigeria and Chad. The greatest number of Afro Asiatic languages are found in Ethiopia.

Generally speaking, the ancient Egyptians were quite racially mixed, and different peoples moved in and out throughout its several thousand year history. So the question “what ‘race’ were the ancient Egyptians?” can only be answered, “Which ancient Egyptians? What part of Egypt? What time in history?”

In ancient Greek and Roman literature, there are repeated references to the ancient Egyptians as “blacks” whose physical appearance resembles those other peoples of Africa. While it’s fairly clear that all of the ancient Egyptians weren’t black, especially those in the more populous, more diverse, northern part, the ruling classes often were “black” as we Americans commonly understand the term. This is because the ruling classes tended to come from the southern part Egypt, where most people were “black” by any reasonable definition.

For example, Mentuhotpe II, the founder of the Middle Kingdom, came from a southern Egyptian noble family, and led a long military campaign to successfully reunify Egypt. http://www.egyptarchive.co.uk/images/cairo_museum/22_mentuhotep.jpg

The face depicted on the Sphinx, most likely that of an Egyptian ruler whose identity is lost to history, is “black”, that is, phenotypically Negroid. High cheekbones, full lips, prognathism etc. The French writer Flaubert, on seeing the Sphinx for the first time, said, “Alas, it is Negroid.”

Other “black” ancient Egyptian nobles:

Tutankhamen:
http://www.freemaninstitute.com/Gallery/Egyp059_big_copy.jpg

Discovery Channel recreation of Tut, more accurated than Nat Geo’s recent one:
http://dsc.discovery.com/anthology/unsolvedhistory/kingtut/face/face.html

Queen Tiye, thought to be Tut’s grandmother:
http://www.utexas.edu/courses/classicalarch/images1/TijeWoodD18.jpg

Rahotep, Old Kingdom noble:
http://www.egyptarchive.co.uk/html/cairo_museum_06.html

Pharoah Menkaure:
http://www.egyptarchive.co.uk/html/cairo_museum_11.html

http://www.egyptarchive.co.uk/html/cairo_museum_21.html

Pharoah Djedfra:
http://www.eglyphica.de/egpharaonen/inhalt/kings/djedefra/steckbrief_pic.html

The issue is made more complex by the extensive racial mixing from the earliest period on, among the nobility as well as the comon people (Rahotep and wife):

Contemporary Egyptologists, Egyptian authorities, as well as historians and antiquarians, have a vested interest in downplaying or hiding the black African element in ancient Egypt. Tourist dollars, public support for funding, and overall social status depend on the ancient Egyptians being percieved as “white” or Caucasoid as possible.

So it isn’t a case of the Afrocentrists being “wrong” and the mainsteam scholars being “right”. Politcal and social considerations color the claims made by both sides.

8

Sorry, but I see no definitive evidence in the face of the Sphinx. That’s asking an awful lot from a giant bust of a quasi-human shape.

Yes, yes it is. Afrocentrists flat out lie (or failing that, pick and choose only the evidence that suits them from a wide area) to “prove” their points. If it were true, the scholars who proved it would have a huge find on their hands; they’d be famous.

Nobody on “my” side makes any particular claims about Egyptian race, scholars or not. It’s a total nonissue. The only reason it ever became an issue is the ridiculous self-importance of a certain segment of American “blacks” who have an absurd inferiority complex.

Some Egyptians may have been “black.” Some were probably not. The Exact mix is entirely unimportant. Moreover, your pictures are not particularly proof of anything, except that they used darker dyes on to depict men than women. Indeed, some of your picures actually suggest that Egyptians *were * naturally “white,” and heavily tanned in the sun.

9

Meanwhile, the Africa-Africans carry on with their lives.

10

This statement is consistent with both my own observations of paintings and statues and with a known history of the land that served as the bridge between Africa and Southwest Asia.

And yet, of the nine images you’ve presented, only three look to me to be representative of the people from South of Nubia, four look to me to be typical of “Middle Eastern” people today, and the others are indeterminate. I would agree that Menuhotep appears to be from sub-Saharan Africa, but the image of Rahotep appears to be a typical sharp nosed, but deeply tanned (or idealistically ruddy) “Caucasoid.”
(And the claim that your Tut image is “more accurate” than the recent National Geographic reconstruction is simply opinion. It may be a good opinion, but any attempts to display soft tissue not based on muscular attachments to the skull–such as lips and the nose–are, by necessity, interpretative.)

And I would also agree with your final assessment:

11

Thanks for fixing the links.

As to the Sphinx, it’s generally agreed that the face is a representation of a human. The body is non human, but the face is thought to be a representation of a ruler, a god, or some combination of the two.

Sphinx in profile

Roughly 3/4 view

The face of the Sphinx is consistent with a sub Saharan African phenotype. You could argue that the features are merely symbolic, but it would be a stretch. Everyone in ancient Egypt knew what sub Saharan Africans looked like. If the builders chose to put such a face on the Sphinx, they did it to represent someone important. The Sphinx is extremely old, as old as anything in ancient Egypt, perhaps even older (there’s some debate about this.) Building it was a massive undertaking, and a huge amount of time and resources were put to the representation of that particular face.

Calling the Afrocentrists “liars” is an overlybroad generalization. Some Afrocentrists are misinformed and uneducated with regard to the history of the ancient Mediterranean and Middle East, especially the self educated laymen who first popularized the dissenting philosphies that have since come to be known as Afrocentrism. You’ll be hard pressed to find a trained academic Afrocentric scholar who claims, for example, that Cleopatra IV (Shakespeare’s Cleopatra) was black. All the university based Afrocentricists that I’m aware of know full well that Cleo IV was Greek.

In fact, Asa Hilliard, the Georgia State prof who is one of the leading Afrocentrist scholars, makes claims of “blackness” only for the native Egyptian dynasties. He’s never claimed that foreign dynasties, like the Ptolemies, were black.

The fact that some of the ancient Egyptians were black, (and some weren’t) is precisely the point. If this were not the case, there would be no debate. Of course, even Mary Lefkowitz, one of Afrocentrism’s most strident critics, admits that the ancient Egyptians woudl be black people by Americans standards. (Which may be just an admission that American standards are silly.)

Smiling Bandit, the idea that the race of the ancient Egyptians has been a non issue in Egyptology and ancient history is, to use your term, “absurd”. It’s always been an issue, it’s always discussed in any general work on ancient Egypt - though, recent works may shy away from it to avoid controversy.

Comte de Volney, one of the earliest Egyptologists noted (Im parapharasing) that it was ironic that black and brown people built this great civilization, while black and brown people were being conquered and colonized by Europeans. Race was a central issue in academic discourse from the the age of colonialism onwards.

Your claim that Afrocentric scholarship is motivated by an “inferiority complex” on the part of black Americans is just silly, the weakest form of ad hominem. Amateur psychoanalysis isn’t neccessary to explain the phenomenon. There are repeated references in ancient Greek lit to ancient Egyptians as “blacks”. There are numerous representations of ruling class ancient Egyptians as “blacks”. The ancient Egyptians had a huge influence on Greco Roman civilization and Judeo Christian civilization.

The best work I’ve seen on this issue is (white, conservative) writer Richard Poe’s Black Spark, White Fire. He’s a white American of Greek ancestry, so I doubt if he’s operating from an “inferiority complex”.

12

Would you happen to have a citation for these references? The closest that I can remember is the myth in which Phaeton loses control of the chariot of Helios, his father. In that story, he ran too close to the Earth and Zeus destroyed him, but not before he had already scorched the Ethiopians–not the Egyptians or even the Nubians, but the Ethiopians. To me this implies a pretty clear case that the Greeks recognized the “blackness” of the Ethiopians as quite separate from that of the peoples to their north. (And I have never encountered a Roman reference to Egyptians as black or even dark.)

Again, I am not challenging the fact that some Egyptians at various times in the 3,000 years prior to the Macedonian conquest would have been considered black by current American definitions, I am simply curious as to where the Greeks or Romans ever identified “Egyptians” in that way.

13

The Egyptian Race According to the Classical Authors of Antiquity (page down)

These are most of the references in one place. I was using “literature” in the sense of written works - histories, philosophies, traveler’s accounts etc.

14

In case you didn’t notice, the Sphinx has four legs and paws. If the statue is an accurate representation of what an Egyptian of its era looked like, history is going to need a lot more revision than just adjusting the tint.

15

ROFL.

16

Thanks.

17

My knowledge of Egyptian history is somewhat limited Belowjob2.0 but it appears quite clear that Tutankhamen was not negroid (i.e. Nubian or sub-Saharan African). Three seperate teams have confirmed what DNA evidence always pointed to, he was a caucasoid. Now that does not mean he was “white” per se but it does mean that he, and most likely most of the rulers of Egypt, were not negroid.

For example, Ramesses II had red hair which I do not believe is a trait familiar to Nubians or sub-Saharan Africans.

For what it’s worth, I would imagine that initially Sub-Saharan Africans were a slave class that eventually intermarried with the more caucasoid Egyptian ruling class. This created a genuine “mixed-racial grouping” that subsequently ruled Egypt. Just a wild-arsed guess but there you go.

18

No disrepect, but that’s hardly and impartial essay. It’s written by an admitted Afrocentrist so I’m a little skeptical.

The site quotes the author thusly:
“In practice it is possible to determine directly the skin colour and hence the ethnic affiliations of the ancient Egyptians by microscopic analysis in the laboratory; I doubt if the sagacity of the researchers who have studied the question has overlooked the possibility.”
–Cheikh Anta Diop

Ok, this woman:

http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/quest/projects/fletcher.html

using analysis of hair and other DNA determined that Seti I (the
father of Ramesses II), had red hair and that the
mummy of Pharaoh Siptah (a great-grandson of Ramesses II), has red hair.

19

Reading comprehension’s just not your strong point.

To elaborate, exactly whose face is on the Sphinx has been a matter of debate for years in Egyptology. The standard opinion has been that the face is that of the Pharoah Khafre, but some scholars have criticized that view, because the resemblance isn’t close enough, and because the Sphinx is probably much older than first believed.

Assuming that your aim was more than puerile humor, you’re just plain wrong. I believe “arguing from ignorance” is the technical term.

20

Lochdale you seem to be seriously underplaying the role, resistance and ultimate victory the Nubians had on Egypt…I wouldn’t necessarily call them a slave class.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/02/0227_030227_sudankings.html

http://www.nubianet.org/about/about_history6.html