Skip to main content

The Ancient Egyptian Race Controversy


Tutankhamun embraces Osiris
Ancient Egypt is in dispute. Although we can now more accurately devise the racial profile of ancient Egyptians, it seems as if many believe it is still up for grabs, with multiple supremacist groups claiming to be direct descendants.  
The motives behind the claims are obvious.  Egypt has a long, sophisticated history dating back to the late Sumerian period.  The pyramids are numerous and constructed with precision.
Great Pyramid of Giza
  They made early contributions to mathematics and technology and were one of the first states in history. 
All racist beliefs (and many nationalist ones) have a sense of superiority and uniqueness ingrained in their narratives and this is where the trouble lies.  To support many claims, researchers have looked at head shapes of statues and mummies and the skin tones of people on paintings and frescos.  But how valid are any of these methods of determination?
The Cursory Observation Method & Its Flaws
Researchers have looked at the head of the Sphinx and measured its features.  It was concluded by several observers that the Sphinx’s head (allegedly that of Pharaoh Khafra) was similar in shape to someone of Sub-Saharan Africa.  
Great Sphinx of Giza

However, other cases of craniometry, have met with much speculation and disagreement.  Tutankhamun’s features, for example, have an African cranial shape while having a gracile nose.  Not surprisingly, it was concluded that he was North African. 1 
Examples of painted faces on mummies have proven to be a mixed bag.  They are not definitively racial in any category, with many variations in skin tone and facial features.  
These speculations and observations are based on one big fundamentally flawed assumption: that ancient and modern Egyptians differ significantly in their genetics. That assumption relies on the belief that the population of Ancient Egypt has suffered a near complete population displacement, replacement or genocide.  Terrible genocides and upheavals have taken place throughout history, but most invasions did not have this result.  Language, culture, and religion are typically among the largest changes to society, but population genetics remain relatively static. 
The Anglo-Saxon Genocide Theory was a hypothesis originally used to explain why Celtic culture and language was all but completely eradicated in England. The hypothesis holds that when the Saxons invaded, they pushed all the Celtic speaking peoples to the West (Wales) and the north (Scotland). 
A detailed analysis of the genetics of Britain revealed that while there is a significant western European input in the British gene pool, the majority of the genetic legacy is that of the ancient Britons, proving this theory inaccurate.  Turkey, similarly, retained its ancient Middle Eastern genetic characteristics despite many major and minor migrations. 
Egypt suffered conquests and invasions throughout its history, but the genetic effects are not nearly as comprehensive as were previously imagined.  Alexander the Great conquered his way from Greece to Southeast Asia with a mere fifty thousand men.  This is how Macedonian general Ptolemy came to be the founder of the Ptolemaic dynasty.  
Bust of Cleopatra
After Ptolemy, came the Romans.  Again, Egypt subsumed the culture and language but was scarcely affected in terms of population transfer.
During the Arab invasion of Egypt by the Rashidun Caliphate, a force comprising thousands, rather than tens of thousands was used to conquer the then Byzantine province. Yet once more, scarcely affecting the population.
Doubtless more migrations of Arabs would have followed, but this would not make much difference to the millions of Egyptians who already lived there. 
DNA testing has been hampered by the fact that the cremation process destroys much of the DNA.  Nonetheless, samples taken from ancient mummies have been successfully tested.  The conclusion is that they share the greatest similarity to Middle Eastern populations.  Modern Egyptians share more Sub-Saharan African DNA than their ancient forebears but remain relatively unchanged.2
The descendants with the least admixture, in terms of both language and genetics, would be the Coptic community. 
Coptic Artwork
 
Religious affiliation would have predominantly prevented admixture with their surrounding Arab Muslim neighbors. 
In conclusion; a determination using scientific methods and an objective interpretation of history rules out the common supremacist claims.  Ideologically motivated research is always counterproductive because it ignores the most likely possibilities in favour of a convoluted, chauvinistic interpretation of history.

1.      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/10/AR2005051001522.html
2.      http://uk.businessinsider.com/r-whos-your-mummy-genetic-secrets-of-ancient-egypt-unwrapped-2017-5?r=US&IR=T



Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Whatever happened to slingers?

Andean sling - Img source Wikimedia commons This is a question that crops up in forums and discussions about ancient combat.  Slingers were described by the ancients in very positive terms.  Suddenly they were no longer present.  There are scanty records of sling combat post-antiquity and many explanations have been postulated for their demise. The first is that slings were replaced by bows.   Bows became predominant simply because they were better, more precise, farther reaching etc. The problem with this theory is that while both slings and bows are biodegradable, the oldest discovered bows (Holmegaarde, 6000 BC) predate the oldest sling discovered (2500 BC, Lovelock cave) by thousands of years.   The theory also discounts all written evidence concerning the sling.   Slings were crude but powerful weapons which could project missiles much further than an archer could shoot an arrow.   Long range throwing also depended on the type of ammun...
Post a Comment
Read more

Vikings vs Romans: A hypothetical battle

Roman army vs the Vikings If one were to take the Roman army at its height, it would decimate any early medieval army that would cross its path, according to a claim by Dan Carlin. To test his theory, let’s take a look at a hypothetical battle fought between the Vikings and the Romans.   It is easy to see how Carlin would come to such a conclusion.  At the height of the Roman empire in 117 AD, the army boasted hundreds of thousands of soldiers, all professional, all equipped and supplied well at the expense of the state. No such force existed in western European countries in the Viking age.  Armies were mostly levies with core body of professionals such as the Germanic huskarls or household guard. One could argue that this lack of professionalism was mitigated by a warrior culture.  This is erroneous, however.  Classical Greek and early Roman societies had a warrior culture that prized courage in battle.  Every citizen was also considered a so...
Post a Comment
Read more

Does Gandhi's civil resistance always work?

Gandhi's salt march Non-violent civil resistance is a wonderful idea whose utility cannot be underestimated.  In theory and practice, the authority which does not lead by consent will naturally lose its foundation.  If the non-violent civil resisters are brutalised , then the authority loses all vestiges of legitimacy since legitimacy stems from honorable action and popular consent. However, it is not a principle that can work universally.  Non-violent civil resistance worked well in India for a number of reasons. The first is the population in India outnumbered the British expatriate class and administration by over a thousand to one.  Secondly, the vast geographical expanse between India and England was a further deterrent to keeping India.  Keeping India could only be justified (from an economic perspective) if the risks and losses from such a distance could be mitigated or exceeded by the resources gained from ruling.  Furthermore, the adminis...
Post a Comment
Read more