King Tut's Royal DNA Results Posted

No, there were at least four or five advanced, independent ancient civilizations that we know about.

Last Edited by The Guy on 01/22/2011 06:45 PM

This topic intrigues me ...

I did a little googling on the red haired mummies and this page is a good starter.

[link to www.egyptorigins.org]


Some excerpts:

“The vast majority of hair samples discovered at the site were cynotrichous (Caucasian) in type as opposed to heliotrichous (Negroid), a feature which is standard through dynastic times . . .”


And Rameses II:

“Professor P. F. Ceccaldi, with a research team, studied some hairs from the mummy's scalp. Ramesses II was 87 years-old when he died, and his hair had turned white. Ceccaldi determined that the reddish-yellow color of the hair was due to a dye with a dilute henna solution. As we saw earlier, many Egyptians dyed their hair, and this personal habit was preserved by the embalmers. However, traces of the hair's original color remained in the roots. Microscopic examinations showed that the hair roots contained natural red pigments, and that therefore, during his younger days, Ramesses II had been a red head. Analysis concluded that these red pigments did not result from the hair somehow fading, or otherwise being altered after death, but did represent Ramesses' natural hair color. Ceccaldi also studied the cross-section of the hairs, and determined from their oval shape, that Ramesses had been "cymotrich" (wavy-haired). Finally, he stated that such a combination of features showed that Ramesses had been a "leucoderm" (white-skinned person).

[…]

The fact of red-headed Egyptians has not only anthropological interest however, but also great symbolic importance. In ancient Egypt, the god Seth was said to have been red-haired, and redheads were claimed to have worshipped the god devoutly. See G. A. Wainwright, The Sky-Religion in Egypt: Its Antiquity and Effects, Cambridge University Press, 1938, pgs 31, 33, 53. In the Ramesses study by the French, the Egyptologist Desroches-Noblecourt discussed the importance of Ramesses' rufous condition. She noted that the Ramessides (the family of Ramesses II), were devoted to Seth, with several bearing the name Seti, which means "beloved of Seth". She concluded that the Ramessides believed themselves to be divine descendants of Seth, with their red hair as proof of their lineage. She speculated that Ramesses II may have been descended from a long line of redheads.

Her speculations have been proved correct: Joann Fletcher, as a consultant to the British Bioanthropology Foundation, has proved that Seti I, the father of Ramesses II, had red hair. See L. Parks, "Ancient Egyptians Wore Wigs," Egypt Revealed, May 29, 2000. Other investigators have demonstrated that the mummy of Pharaoh Siptah, a great-grandson of Ramesses II, had red hair.

See my reference to Partridge above.

All of these features are characteristic of the Celtic people we know from history and today.
[link to www.egyptorigins.org]

The Celts didn't appear until about 1500 BC in what is now Austria. I doubt they could reach Egypt in a century or two and found a dynasty of redheads. Your claim is absurd.

It is true that there were numerous blacks in Egypt, after all Egypt is on the African Continent.
However, the reason you see so many blacks depicted in paintings of that time period is because the Egyptian high born considered them an oddity and good luck, not to mention they had great stamina and did physical labor well.

They were hired and maintained many positions in the large cities for this reason.

So the population of Egypt, at that time, contained many blacks from all over Africa, brought there mainly as labor and guards.

People don't just appear. Perhaps that was the start of the Celtic culture, but the people were descendants of other people.

But it is also true that the Egyptians, at times, went to war with the blacks. The Egyptian blacks brought to Egypt to work were called Nubian and at that time were considered separate from the major black population of Africa.
The high born had light colored skin and now we know why.

You are an uneducated idiot. Case closed LOL

If you claim that they came from Africa, show us the evidence in Africa of Egyptian pyramids and Egyptian influence.

Because I fail to see any.

Ireland, not Egypt, was the post-diluvian cradle of the elements of civilization. It is from Britain and Scandinavia that these elements spread throughout the world. This fact is widely denied because it would inevitably give rise to speculation about Atlantis, the Age of Catastrophe, and antiquity of advanced humans.

Revelations on these subjects devastate fundamental tenets of modern-day science and religion. However, the true facts about the widespread influence of Irish Druidism is largely unknown because of the wholesale destruction of the Druids and the prolonged and deliberate suppression and mutilation of their social traditions and religious leitmotifs.

There were primordial connections between Britain and Egypt. Long before the first official dynasties, over 4,000 years ago, the Western Arya migrated to the Middle and Far East, establishing new civilizations and enriching existing ones. Their remains have been discovered in Upper Egypt and locations farther East.
[link to anilmachado.wordpress.com]

An extreme claim? Sure. Butteh DNA evidence appears to support it!

All of these features are characteristic of the Celtic people we know from history and today.
[link to www.egyptorigins.org]

There were several Nubian pharaohs.

You can make up a gigantic website, whose sole intention is to determine, who has the biggest ego and call it stormfront.

the racism is strong indeed
white people love a eurocentric view of history
makes them feel more special than they really are

And you're just as guilty, making a broad generalization about "white people."

You by the way too, because throughout times and history, only a handful of people, ever pushed for new concepts.

And the rule here is, that they were rather the complete opposite, of a "socially stable existence".

Zahi Hawass is a tool.

You think Egypt represents African history?

Not even close. Show me even one other African civilization even 1/100th of Egypt.

Show me even one monument (other than Egyptian) built in Africa by Africans.

The history of ancient Africa is just as interesting, complex, and sophisticated as any other ancient civilization, yet almost without exception; it is only Egypt that receives any consideration at all when writing history. Because of this mentality, European and American historians have long espoused that Africa and its inhabitants had no culture or history of their own, except what was given to them by outside factors.

archaeological evidence discovered in North Sudan that is over 2,500 years old, there was an old civilization along the Nile River at lower and Upper Nubia (modern day Sudan) that was older than the civilizations in the North (Egypt). Also, there is evidence that proves that the known Old Egyptian Civilization was an advanced stage of an even older civilization located in the Sudan (Davis & Gates, p. 35).

This evidence proves that Meroë had a culture and history that was even older than of the Egyptians. If anything, Egypt was a carbon copy of Meroë.

Another little know fact about the Meroitës is that they had a unusually high number of
queens who ruled without male intervention. One queen, Queen Amanirenus led her army against a Roman invasion in 24 BC. She won the first battle, and despite losing a second battle, the Romans had enough, agreed to a truce and went back to Rome.



The West African Empire of Ghana is another kingdom whose history was downplayed and attributed to outside factors. Although the Berbers originally founded Ghana in the fifth century, it was built on the southern edge of Berber populations. In time, the land became dominated by the Soninke, a Mande speaking people who lived in the region bordering the Sahara (McKissack & McKissack, p. 112). They built their capital city, Kumbi Saleh, right on the edge of the Sahara and the city quickly became the center of the Trans-Saharan trade routes.


Another Ghana

Ghana accumulated great wealth because of the Trans-Saharan trade routes. This wealth made it possible for Ghana to conquer local chieftaincies and demand tribute from these subordinate states. This tribute, however, paled next to the wealth generated by the commerce of goods that passed from western Africa east to Egypt and the Middle East. This trade primarily involved gold, salt, and copper (Koslow, p. 70).

A hereditary king called the Ghana ruled Ghana. The kingship was matrilineal (as were all Sahelian monarchies to follow); the king's sister provided the heir to the throne (McKissack & McKissack, p. 115). In addition to military power, the king appears to have been the supreme judge of the kingdom.

Although northern African had been dominated by the religion of Islam since the eighth century, the kingdom of Ghana never converted (McKissack & McKissack, p. 120). The Ghanaian court, however, allowed Muslims to settle in the cities and even encouraged Muslim specialists to help the royal court administer the government and advice on legal matters.

Because the thing with the ego works vice versa too.

Last Edited by LVPravdaFan on 01/22/2011 08:10 PM

The ancient britons of 12000 years ago probably looked like basques but then again some say basques were atlantaens. If you want to see what ancient britons looked like go to North Wales or western ireland. They are the least admixed with Indo-European blood (like Celtic, germanic and norse).

Maybe get on with realizing that the color of the skin doesn't really matter.
How about that.?

So, what is this supposed to mean? Did the early races all work together and lived in harmony?

Or, did the Africans have an uprising and kicked out the Pharoah who fled to Ireland?


Peace.

Honestly, all are created equal, no one is better than anyone else.

Hopefully we can evolve from petty differences.


Peace. :o)

All have the equal potential, but the differences can be enormous (and that's quite a difference to all people are "equal"). What follows is, that a society should be organized hierarchically - democracy is nonsense.

Last Edited by LVPravdaFan on 01/22/2011 08:38 PM

You have my attention. But please say why.

I'm not sure what it means...I only recently came across this stuff about the mummy DNA, but if correct it is quite intriguing.

This is not about race politics to me. It's about science. It's about truth. I'm not trying to push anything here. I'm new to this stuff and interested in what others think.

The 'Ireland' theory is also something that I just came across recently. The most vocal contemporary advocate appears to be Michael Tsarion. It is linked with Atlantis destruction:

Michael Tsarion; The Irish Origins of Civilization.

[link to www.irishoriginsofcivilization.com]

Some interesting quotes:
[link to www.truthcontrol.com]

The red hair stuff is intriguing and dovetails with stories of these ancient red-haired Gods…

"As the red haired gods went up the Shannon river and settled in central Ireland, they met the dark haired, dark eyed, smallish cave-dwelling type of the Mediterranean savage. The Conquerors, the Tuath de Danaan, were a tall, blue-eyed, red-haired Caledonian type of Hall dwellers. Today both types may be seen among the Irish people."
— Henry Binkley Stein; Thirty Thousand Gods Before Jehovah

When you say hierarchically, are you meaning kings and queens?
Isn't that like a pyramid (how the military is setup)?

I kinda liked what I learned of Druidic law... all are free to go about their own business. Peace keepers are only needed when disputes arise. But I am by no means an expert on the subject.

Peace. :o)

All are not equal, but all deserve an equal chance to prove themselves as individuals.

Egypt is a creation of high priests/refugees from Atlantis - the same goes for many other ancient civilizations too.

A high priest/mage run monarchy - every sound ancient society was setup this way.

Last Edited by LVPravdaFan on 01/22/2011 08:52 PM