Why do people constantly deny Egyptians were black?

[Villager720]

They didn't even have slaves last I heard, they were all being paid. I think a lot of the slave-whipping-dragging-huge-bricks stuff was just old assumptions because Egyptians were brown "and therefore must be barbarous."

They definitely had slaves, they just don't believe slave labor was used to build the pyramids anymore.

[Varitok]

Also there were no slaves in Egypt either as people seem to think.

They basically were, If you're paid for your services with food and shelter, you are sort of stuck in that job like a slave because you have no other place to go unless you are willing to die without food.

It's like the old railroad towns.

[Deleted]

see, this is what i mean. the closest he looks like to any modern humans is slav.

What ? He looks like he is from the middle east. Which is likely where Egyptians came from.

[Elegiac]

They basically were, If you're paid for your services with food and shelter, you are sort of stuck in that job like a slave because you have no other place to go unless you are willing to die without food.

It's like the old railroad towns.

There's quite a difference between corvee and slavery.

Also, trying to apply modern economic principles to ancient economies is extremely fraught.

[Nathreim]

Probably because they were slaves.

[Ghostpanther]

Ethiopians are actually an interesting case... they're actually more closely related to Arabs and other Western Eurasians than Bantus and speak a Semitic language (Amharic).

The major theory on the origin of Abyssinians/Habesha is that they descend from a mass migration of South Arabians into East Africa who intermixed and assimilated Cushites. At least that's what I've heard.

I have heard that before. The ones I have seen however, much more often than not, look pretty black. I am sure a lot of interracial breeding has taken place there also. But as stated before, it should not matter.

[Stelio Kontos]

Well this topic sure is a shit show.

History Channel? Wow...

Egyptians were most likely descended from a mixture of Semitic and other Mediterranean peoples. Yes, there were blacks in ancient Egypt, but they were not the basal population.

There's no archaeological evidence the Hebrews were in Egypt - Ever.

Not as such, no, but there is an interesting theory that when the Hyksos (most likely a confederation of Semitic tribes from the Levant) entered Egypt, Hebrews may have been among the confederation, who came in first as migrant laborers (not slaves), and then ended up taking over Egypt for 100 years or so before being driven out.

I remember I read that modern Greeks for instance have pretty significant Slav and Turk admixtures.

I wonder what these ancient people's would look like if you were to clone them, like you have a lot of art depicting Blonde light eyed greeks, so genes definitely change

Bollocks, considering Turks are for the most part genetically identical to Greeks, Armenians, and Kurds. You know, the natives of Anatolia. The central Asian Turkic admixture is there, sure, but the bulk of their lineage is from local populations. And Greeks are not that dark. There are Greeks who are blonde and blue-eyed. My grandfather was one. Hell, not all Turks are even that dark. I've known plenty of Turks from the Istanbul area that could fit in as European. I had a boss named Ali, the guy had grey eyes and strawberry hair.

Now yes, there was a small amount of admixture with Slavs in parts of northern Greece (Thrace and Macedonia). But it's more accruate to say that Turks are mostly Greek, Armenian, and Kurd rather than the other way around.

4000 BC there were people in the nordic countries. Even before that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bromme_culture

There were people almost everywhere by that point, it's not very impressive. I think what they are referring to is more advanced cultures, the sort of thing you'd call a civilization, not just neolithic farmers or hunter-gatherers. Hell, farming entered the Balkans before spread to the rest of Europe around 6000-7000 years ago, but again, can we really call if a full civilization at that point?

https://www.livescience.com/19924-ag...th-europe.html

An analysis of 5,000-year-old genetic material from preserved human remains found in Sweden suggests that people moving from southern to northern Europe spread agriculture across that continent long ago.

In addition to agricultural know-how, the intrepid farmers brought their genes: They interbred with hunter-gatherer communities to create modern humans living in Europe today.

"Genetic variation of today's Europeans was strongly affected by immigrant Stone Age farmers, though a number of hunter-gatherer genes remain," study researcher Anders Götherström, of Uppsala University in Sweden, said in a statement.

The results of this study, to be published in the April 27 issue of the journal Science, match up well with previous archeological evidence of farming in Europe.

The researchers studied the remains from four humans, one found on an ancient farm in Gökhem parish, likely belonging to a member of the agricultural Funnel Beaker culture. Less than 250 miles away, a second set of remains from three humans were unearthed on the island of Gotland, from hunter-gatherers of the Pitted Ware culture.

"We know that the hunter-gatherer remains were buried in flatbed grave sites, in stark contrast to the megalithic sites that the farmers built," said study researcher Mattias Jakobsson, also from Uppsala University. "The farmer we analyzed was buried under such a megalith, and that's just one difference that helps distinguish the two cultures."

Researchers already knew a fair bit about these different cultures and the excavated remains, though nobody had looked at their genetics. In the new study, the team analyzed the bones' genetic information to see how the humans differed from each other genetically as well as from other modern humans.

The group analyzed thousands of genetic markers from each Stone Age individual. The genetics of the hunter-gatherer sample looked similar to that of modern northern Europeans (from countries like Finland), while the genes isolated from the Stone Age farmer looked more like modern southern Europeans who live along the Mediterranean Sea.

Interestingly, these ancient genomes don't share many similarities with modern-day Swedes, despite their discovery and excavations in Sweden.

These southern Europeans, who were genetically distinct from the hunter-gatherer societies in the area, seem to have brought their agriculture knowledge north, where they made their homes and likely interbred with hunter-gatherers in what is now Sweden. [10 Wedding Traditions from Around the World]

"When you put these findings in archaeological context, a picture begins to emerge of Stone Age farmers migrating from south to north across Europe," said study researcher Pontus Skoglund, a graduate student at Uppsala University. "And the result of this migration, 5,000 years later, looks like a mixture of these two groups in the modern population."

This finding agrees with previous reports on the age of farming. Researchers think that agriculture emerged about 11,000 years ago in the Near East before reaching Europe about 5,000 years later (about 6,000 years ago in total). The new study supports this idea and suggests that farming was first introduced to southern Europe before it spread north about 1,000 years later.

This spread of agriculture also seems to have been a movement of people, and as a result introduced new genetic diversity into northern European communities.

"The results suggest that agriculture spread across Europe in concert with a migration of people," Skoglund said. "If farming had spread solely as a cultural process, we would not expect to see a farmer in the north with such genetic affinity to southern populations."

[Deleted]

WTF

I think gay porn is forbidden on these boards

[Grimbold21]

He's setting the bait for Shinra

[Z-Man]

That DNA is not bait people. I actually saw it on the history Channel a few months back, they could've been lying sure but it seemed pretty sure. Not to mention the paintings on the wall of ancient Egypt fully support they were black or dark skinned.

Except for the ones that were painted white, of course.

[derpkitteh]

What ? He looks like he is from the middle east. Which is likely where Egyptians came from.

i mean his facial features. the thick cheek bones, the eyes, the nose. all slav looking. he almost looks like putin.

only the skin tone is different.

[Deleted]

Not as such, no, but there is an interesting theory that when the Hyksos (most likely a confederation of Semitic tribes from the Levant) entered Egypt, Hebrews may have been among the confederation, who came in first as migrant laborers (not slaves), and then ended up taking over Egypt for 100 years or so before being driven out.

When you say Hebrews you mean canaanites,right?

Because Hyksos invasion predates more than 4 centuries even before the Merneptah Stele. There's not even evidence of Yaweh worship in the Midian area at that date. It's too early. The canaanite religion still shows no sign at all of the future transition to Yaweh worship.

[tumppu]

you got to remember even before the Romans came, Egypt was a melting pot.

^this pretty much covers the subject in hand. Also, OP is hilariously wrong.

[Ehrenpanzer]

So.. the first humans were black. Which means we are all black. Since Black Lives Matter, that means All Lives Matter.

3 sentences guaranteed to make an ultra SJW's head explode trying to play mental gymnastics to deny it.

[Stelio Kontos]

When you say Hebrews you mean canaanites,right?

Because Hyksos invasion predates more than 4 centuries even before the Merneptah Stele. There's not even evidence of Yaweh worship in the Midian area at that date. It's too early. The canaanite religion still shows no sign at all of the future transition to Yaweh worship.

Well, yes, I meant Canaanites in the whole, but also probably the tribes specifically that would go on to develop Judaism centuries later.

Hmm, makes me think, if Akhenaten's religious reforms had some effect on the Levant's religious development over time?

[Cracked]

Race, like laws, is a social construct. Do laws exist? Then race exists, just perhaps not scientifically.

Race is a social construct? I guess dog breeds is also a social construct, then.

[Techno-Druid]

Race is a social construct? I guess dog breeds is also a social construct, then.

Race in humans both does and does not exist. Or rather, there are differences in human populations, but often not in the way a lot of people would generally think. Most human genetic variance is in Africa for example as the ancestral populations that would go to colonize the rest of the world were a relatively small population (see: founder effect), even despite of diverse appearances. There are populations in Africa that may look extremely similar but are more distantly related than Western Europeans are to South Asians or East Asians.

As for dog breeds, they're a pretty bad comparison as they are artificially selected to fulfill specific roles for humans. By comparison, there are very few environments which humans live in where things such as athletic ability or intelligence wouldn't be advantageous.

[Player Twelve]

Race is a social construct? I guess dog breeds is also a social construct, then.

Race as is often touted is a social construct, yes. US people are talking about "brown people" from middle east or north africa while in European countries they're considered white. If we were to consider them not white because there's more people with tanned skin among them than among north europeans, what should we consider the south europeans? Not white too? That's pretty offensive.

[Villager720]

Race is a social construct? I guess dog breeds is also a social construct, then.

People will say race doesn't exist at all - and genetically it's hard to prove a "race". What's a "black American"? Is it someone who looks "black" or has African descent or identifies as black?
Was Obama black? He was also half European. Is he a new race? You can't draw an official line, and "black", as an example, other people have noted, means different things to different groups. Thus it being a social construct and less a biological one.
But yeah, dog breeds are a good comparison.

[Elegiac]

Race is a social construct? I guess dog breeds is also a social construct, then.

Are redheads a race?

Because that's what it amounts to, ultimately; arbitrary definitions based on generalised phenotype.