Who where the true Ancient Egyptians?

Question

I was really want to know but some people they was not black or white. Egypt is in africa, Why do people arguing what color they where. They are humans, Africans did do something in thos world.

give any ideas or websites and give me your opiion

Answer 1

They were people who lived in Egypt a long, long time ago.

Seriously, everybody in that whole area all the way around Egypt is some shade of BROWN. Egypt is in AFRICA. They did lots of trade with the Greeks and the Romans (who also weren't all that pale), but for the most part, the Egyptians were, are, and remain brown people. All the countries all the way around Egypt, including Libya, Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan, and the Arab Penninsula, are full of various shades and textures of brown and fuzzy/kinky people. NOBODY in that part of the world is "white". If you go over there and ask them, they will look at you funny and tell you that they aren't white.

People need to stop asking this silly question.

Answer 2

The argument stems from the fact that the more Caucasian people and the Africans existed so close together there.

At times each side ruled Egypt. With the way that race relations has shifted to a new form of battle (white man evil, find ways to prove he's evil and that everyone else is better) there are a number of people that want to say that those that accomplished all those great things for Egypt were the Africans.

Really, it doesn't matter. Not to me, and not to the grand scheme of things. People did it, either way. I don't feel one race is superior to the other based solely on their accomplishments.

Answer 3

Yes they were and here is a peer reviewed study of the population history of ancient Egypt, which clearly proves that they were originally black Africans just like ancient Nubians, Somalis, Ethiopians and Saharans until Mediterranean populations migrated into the Nile Valley and mixed with the native black Egyptians: "The question of the genetic origins of ancient Egyptians, particularly those during the Dynastic period, is relevant to the current study. Modern interpretations of Egyptian state formation propose an indigenous origin of the Dynastic civilization (Hassan, 1988). Early Egyptologists considered Upper and Lower Egyptians to be genetically distinct populations, and viewed the Dynastic period as characterized by a conquest of Upper Egypt by the Lower Egyptians. More recent interpretations contend that Egyptians from the south actually expanded into the northern regions during the Dynastic state unification (Hassan, 1988; Savage, 2001), and that the Predynastic populations of Upper and Lower Egypt are morphologically distinct from one another, but not sufficiently distinct to consider either non-indigenous (Zakrzewski, 2007). The Predynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples, while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Predynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002). In addition, the Badarians have been described as near the centroid of cranial and dental variation among Predynastic and Dynastic populations studied (Irish, 2006; Zakrzewski, 2007). This suggests that, at least through the Early Dynastic period, the inhabitants of the Nile valley were a continuous population of local origin, and no major migration or replacement events occurred during this time. Studies of cranial morphology also support the use of a Nubian (Kerma) population for a comparison of the Dynastic period, as this group is likely to be more closely genetically related to the early Nile valley inhabitants than would be the Late Dynastic Egyptians, who likely experienced significant mixing with other Mediterranean populations (Zakrzewski, 2002). A craniometric study found the Naqada and Kerma populations to be morphologically similar (Keita, 1990). Given these and other prior studies suggesting continuity (Berry et al., 1967; Berry and Berry, 1972), and the lack of archaeological evidence of major migration or population replacement during the Neolithic transition in the Nile valley, we may cautiously interpret the dental health changes over time as primarily due to ecological, subsistence, and demographic changes experienced throughout the Nile valley region." -- AP Starling, JT Stock. (2007). Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 134:520–528

Answer 4

Ethnically, the Ancient Egyptians were neither ******* nor European, but something in between - just like the Berbers, ancient Libyans and other indigenous peoples of North Africa.

They were certainly not black-skinned like the Nubians of Cush and Wedjay to the south, nor was their skin as pale as English people. Wall paintings show the men as tanned brown, something like the people of India, but women (who spent less time working out in the sun) as paler, more yellow (like Native North American babies). This yellowish colour would be the natural skin colour which tanned rapidly to red-brown.

There have been many attempts in the past to classify the original people of Egypt, all without success (it was at one time fashionable to call them "Hamitic", related to Semitic, but this theory has been dropped).

We must accept that they can not be fitted into either ***** or European stereotypes, but are essentially a separate African race related to other North African indigenous peoples.

Answer 5

In my opinion the Ancient Egyptians were simply Egyptians who can be called Africans because of where they lived. It does not matter whether they were black, white or purple what matters is that they existed and did many wonderful things. I grow weary of people trying to turn every last bit of culture into some sort of race issue. The concept of race wasn't even an issue until fairly recently - before people were judged by their culture not by their race or nationality. Gypsies were looked down upon as were the Irish and the Scots.

Answer 6

If you mean racially....
The works of Cheikh Anta Diop has given us adequate proof of the Blackness of ancient Egypt. This includes various forms of evidence including melanin, bone and blood tests; ancient Egyptians’ self-definition as Kemetiu, Black people; and eyewitness reports by Greek, Roman and Hebrew contemporaries of the ancient Egyptians. Also, there is the evidence of cultural similarities with other African cultures; the artistic self-presentation of the ancient Egyptians; linguistic affinity of ancient Egyptian with other African languages; and finally, the evidence of geography.
However, this is before the reign of the Ptolemy's. They were a Macedonian/Greek heirarchy. Additionally, there is compelling evidence of the intermarriage of Egyptian royalty with other peoples. Which makes a new (and I absolutely hate this word) classification of Egpytians as a race/ethnicity/identity all their own. The plain truth is that ancient Egypt was a multi-racial society.
It little matters what ethnicity the ancient Egyptians were. Their works are still marveled at today by professional and tourist alike.
http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/social/race.html
http://xenohistorian.faithweb.com/holybook/articles/race.html

Answer 7

Is this a geography question? Technically the area east of the Med.Sea ,below the Caucus Mountains, is part of the African Continent under the term "suspect"
To go Evan further the top of the Matterhorn, in Switzerland is also part of the African Continent.
It all goes back to who was the strongest tribe at the time of early settlement/conquest

Answer 8

stop asking silly question...egyptian have different shade of color from brom brown to light brown

Answer 9

They are North African...white. Just like today.