|
Post by topdog on May 22, 2005 0:51:59 GMT -5
And how do you know for sure that the Badarians stayed in Upper Egypt during the civilization of Ancient Egypt? It's not normal for one town to be so isolated from its surrounding areas and to have more in common with a land hundreeds of kilometeres to the South. Who said they did, can you read Alex? I quoted Keita as saying that migration from the north and a blending of the two types began in the predynastic and continued well into the Early Dynastic. Naqadans, who came later after Badarians[really they are culturally a continuation of the later] were less Negroid than Badarians but still closer to Negroids than to Caucasoids. Keita attributed this to migration from the north.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 22, 2005 0:52:46 GMT -5
I think nothing of them. They're Egyptian, and I see them as being mostly Caucasian. Enough said. Some of those show some mixture.
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on May 22, 2005 0:54:45 GMT -5
I agree that they are Caucasian, but before you said that Gurna Egyptians were outliers. Are you sure they're from Gurna?
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 22, 2005 0:56:00 GMT -5
I agree that they are Caucasian, but before you said that Gurna Egyptians were outliers. I wouldn't say they're untypical, they represent just what I said, a blending of Upper and Lower Egyptian further modified by some foreign immigration. There are types that look even more Negroid than those but posting pictures to make a collective conclusion is highly subjective so I will not get into all of that.
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on May 22, 2005 0:56:36 GMT -5
Who said they did, can you read Alex? I quoted Keita as saying that migration from the north and a blending of the two types began in the predynastic and continued well into the Early Dynastic. Naqadans, who came later after Badarians[really they are culturally a continuation of the later] were less Negroid than Badarians but still closer to Negroids than to Caucasoids. Keita attributed this to migration from the north. That doesn't at all explain why Naqadans would be more similar to groups hundreds of kilometers away than their own Upper Egyptian neighbors. Unless both groups were two distinct groups of people. Don't quote Keita. I've had enough of this. I'm really getting tired of debating ancient Egypt.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 22, 2005 1:00:32 GMT -5
That doesn't at all explain why Naqadans would be more similar to groups hundreds of kilometers away than their own Upper Egyptian neighbors. Unless both groups were two distinct groups of people. Don't quote Keita. I've had enough of this. I'm really getting tired of debating ancient Egypt. They may very well be different group but both were closer to Nubians than to Middle Easterners or southern Europeans, with Badarians being the closest.
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on May 22, 2005 1:03:18 GMT -5
They may very well be different group but both were closer to Nubians than to Middle Easterners or southern Europeans, with Badarians being the closest. Where do you get that Both groups are closer to Nubians? By both do you mean Badarians and Naqadans or Badarians and Upper Egyptians?
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 22, 2005 1:07:03 GMT -5
Where do you get that Both groups are closer to Nubians? By both do you mean Badarians and Naqadans or Badarians and Upper Egyptians? Both Naqadans and Badarians are overall closer to Nubians with Badarians being the closer of the two.
|
|
|
Post by kir on May 22, 2005 1:07:15 GMT -5
They remind me so much of Ancient Egyptians, from what I gather in their Art. Eye shape, skin tone, is in AE as in ME.
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on May 22, 2005 1:08:00 GMT -5
Both Naqadans and Badarians are overall closer to Nubians with Badarians being the closer of the two. Oh, ok, I guess I could buy that. But why are Naqadans so distinct from their neighboring southern Egyptians?
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 22, 2005 1:11:44 GMT -5
Oh, ok, I guess I could buy that. But why are Naqadans so distinct from their neighboring southern Egyptians? That study was a bit vague, but think it had more to do with the fact that the Naqdans they were studying were considered to be elite so in terms of díet perhaps, they were better off. I don't think they were a foreign element of Lower Nubians despite the implied similarites of the two.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 22, 2005 1:15:00 GMT -5
They remind me so much of Ancient Egyptians, from what I gather in their Art. Eye shape, skin tone, is in AE as in ME. That maybe true, but like i said there are some who look like Nubians also. Lower Nubians that is. Those kids aren't atypical.
|
|
|
Post by kir on May 22, 2005 1:19:22 GMT -5
That maybe true, but like i said there are some who look like Nubians also. Lower Nubians that is. Those kids aren't atypical. Some AE, look like the kids on the right as well, I've seen many examples of this, as well.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 22, 2005 1:21:01 GMT -5
Some AE, look like the kids on the right as well, I've seen many examples of this. True, thats why I said they aren't atypical, they fit well within the variation you would find in AE.
|
|
Kame
Full Member
Posts: 122
|
Post by Kame on May 22, 2005 3:54:02 GMT -5
Kush was a colony of Egypts for many centuries...And they built there monuments or taught them how. The Cushites learned from them, when they werent to busy being enslaved and paying tribute. The Roman governor of Egypt, Publius Petronius, invaded Nubia in response to a Nubian attack on southern Egypt, pillaging the north of the region and sacking Napata before returning north.The Romans whipped there asses! Strabo reported that when the Roman empire pulled out of northern Nubia in 272, they invited the Nobatae to fill the power vacuum. So dont over exaggerate their precence. The Romans simply moved to more favorable & defensible position in a hostile environment and land,and besides their was very little in Nubia of any worth.They could simply have a few tribes working for them. * Berter this "Person" then, should really be removed! "their was very little nubia was worth" How come the egyptians colonized nubia, but the romans never made nubia a roman province? All those raw materials were'nt valuable? I don't buy it. The romans simply did'nt want a southern threat. They faught a three-year war with nubia and ended up signing a treaty with them, probably because they put up too much resistance, lol the arabs called them "pupil-smiters" for their skill in archery and did'nt mess with them for 600 years. Romans razed napata, but why did they sign a treaty with nubia if they whooped their asses? The nubans simply moved their capital to meroe, while the romans continued to pay tribute to two african tribes to stop their constant raids.
|
|