Were The Ancient Egyptians Black? The Obsession With White-Washing Ancient Kemet

Were The Ancient Egyptians Black? The Obsession With White-Washing Ancient Kemet

This lengthy blog entry has been something I've been wanting for write for some time. It will answer the question, "Were the Ancient Egyptians Black?" It's a doozy because it has to be, because the Africanity of the Ancient Kemetians has not only been answered scientifically, but simple logic should dispel all notions to the non-Blackness of these ancient people of the Nile. However simple logic has not worked and to this day I grow tired of uninformed and complete scientifically out-of-touch drivel about the Ancient Kemetians (Egyptians) looking like modern-day Egyptians or somehow being connected to other "Middle Easterners." Black history has been under attack since slavery and during Black history month, very rarely is the true identity of the people of Kemet pronounced proudly and loudly. Notice though that I don't call them Ancient Egyptians. It's first important for readers to understand that they didn't call themselves Egyptians. Egyptian comes from the Greek word 'Aegyptos' which literally meant "Place where the Projection of Ptah Manifested." Ptah being known as one of the 'Creator Gods' who existed before all other things and thought the world into existence. He is also known as the father of Imhotep, who I will discuss in another blog entry in the future. It is Imhotep who was often depicted with the now famous symbol of the Ankh. So don't be confused by me saying 'Ancient Kemetian' instead of 'Ancient Egyptian.' 

However I won't deal too much with Kemetic cosmology and religion in this entry. I'll save that for another day. This entry will focus purely on the Genetic Evidence of Ancient Kemetic Africanity and the Linguistic Evidence of Ancient Kemetic africanity...with a brief discussion about pre-dynastic Kemet. Also, understand that there are many pieces of evidence pointing to the Blackness of the Ancient Kemetians...I only focus on the things that are not really in too much dispute and can't be written off as easily. So I will avoid using hieroglyphs as proof or getting into the debate over the meaning of Kemet. It means 'The Black Land' and that is not in dispute. What IS in dispute is what the Kemetians meant by them calling their nation 'The Black Land.' I'm sticking to evidence that is not so easily explained away by the deniers of the obvious.

Before we begin in earnest, let's discuss culture and the meaning of it. The first major hurdle for people in understanding the blackness of Kemet is that most who are under-educated on this topic don't identify Ancient Kemetic culture with Africa and Black people. Be aware that I use the phrase 'Ancient Kemetic culture' synonymously with the more proper phrase 'Pharaonic culture.' Both mean the same thing. However many will falsely and erroneously attribute Pharaonic Civilization to Near Eastern influences and/or culture. This couldn't be further from the truth and anyone who you see or hear making those arguments can be directed here. There is a reason Europeans have gone out of their way to white-wash this great civilization. Culture is generally described as a collection of shared behavior's and/or ideas shaped by a particular group of people that is usually considered tradition by those people and is passed down from one generation to the next. It's a type of collective programming based on shared experiences in the distant past that involves religion, values, concepts of the universe, gender roles, social hierarchies, language, attitudes and symbols. One of the most important aspects of a culture is the language that it's adherents speak. Language is important in understanding the flow of populations as many of them are connected historically. To any culture, it's language is one of the most obvious characteristics of it. It's why I have chosen to focus on it in this entry. However then you have genetics (specifically a field with genetics called 'population genetics') that gets into the shared genes of a group of people and, like language, can be used to trace the origins of a people and how related they are with different cultures of foreigners.

The Myth of the "True Negro" - How the White-Washing Began

In order to understand white-washing, one has to understand the origins of race theory and how one man's grouping of people has had such a tremendously negative impact on history. That man was named Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, a German physician and anthropologist who is remembered as the originator of the categories of race. In many ways, Blumenbach and his contemporaries can be regarded as the ideological founders of race theory and essentially white supremacy. 

Johann Friedrich Blumenbach

During the Enlightenment (1650's-1780's), many things were being debated and discussed and the period is remembered positively for the good impacts it has had on society with regards to theories on government and the separation of church and state. Many of the basic tenets of what many today call freedom, liberty and democracy were born out of this era of intellectuals and they were incredibly influential on the Founding Fathers of America and the basic principles of America itself. However what has been forgotten is that while they were debating the role of government and the 'rights of man,' they were also defining the role of the races! They were also defining society and social norms based around a caste system where White was on top and Black was at the very bottom!! Convenient for them in the midst of a booming slave trade!

It is Blumenbach's description of a Black person in 1795 that became the standard stereotypical definition of the 'True Negro' for the next century and beyond. He believed that "the White race" was the original one beginning with Adam and Eve and was the most pure and intelligent of all others. He and many others believed Blacks were a result of being burnt by the sun and as a result had muscular bodies, big lips, big noses, a projecting jaw and curly hair. This became very convenient when it came to classifying ancient civilizations because if you didn't fit into the "true negro" mold then by default you were considered to be more Caucasian! BTW, most Black people don't fit into the "True Negro" mold. 

In many ways, we are still living in the world of Samuel Morton (1799-1851). Morton was a physician from Philadelphia who became the first person to scientifically study Ancient Kemetic remains. A major believer in the Master Race Theory, which went hand-in-hand with the scientific racism of the Enlightenment, in 1844 Morton described Kemet as a place where Black slaves served White masters. 

What is white-washing? White-washing is the co-opting of a non-European civilization and culture and creating a 'white mask' to step into the roles to represent those people in art.

Studying the skulls he had access to, he arbitrarily placed the outdated labels of "caucasoid", "negroid" and "mixed" onto the skulls and arbitrarily stated that the "caucasoids" were the invading race of mysterious Whites who invaded Egypt and civilized the barbaric inferior Blacks. This seems silly today, but the mentality was prevalent throughout the 19th century and well into the 20th century...even indirectly inspiring films like The Ten Commandments, Cleopatra and the recent film Exodus: Gods and Kings. None of these films directly credit Samuel Morton for anything, but he should get some sort of "Inspired by the Works Of..." credit at the end of the film. The imagery of white Pharaoh's being tended to by nameless Black servants is directly out of the propaganda of the Antebellum South.

Then you had the racist white-washing works of Josiah Nott and George Glidden who would jump through even more logical hoops to distance Ancient Kemet from Blacks. They worked together with Morton and believed his white invasion theory but were forced to acknowledge that the original group in Kemet were Blacks. Being extremely pro-slavery and having gone around the country lecturing on the inferiority of Blacks, they knew this answer needed to be explained away. They devised a far-fetched theory that suggested a separate mysterious group of "somewhat Black" people, but not 'True Negro,' made up the original Kemites and it was this "more White, less Black" group that intermarried with Europeans to build Kemet. As convoluted and crazy as it sounds...it stuck. It's important to note before moving forward that this went on with different scientists, historians, etc for decades well into the 20th century where more and more people would build on the works of racist intellectuals who CLEARLY had a political agenda for why they were writing what they wrote. Severing Kemet from Blackness served a major purpose in maintaining the justification of slavery and white supremacy. Both Nott and Glidden were fierce proponents of slavery and furiously advocated against race-mixing. Nott himself toured the American South giving lectures on "niggerology" and considered Blacks a separate species entirely from Whites.

That Nott, Glidden and Morton have had such a major impact on the depiction of the Ancient Kemetians cannot be understated. The theory of Kemets non-Blackness would evolve however over the years, but the agenda would stay the same. For more information about this, check out Richard Poe's book called 'Black Spark, White Fire.' The de-Africanization of Ancient Kemet is a history riddled with scientific racism and debunked assumptions that had the clear political agenda of further legitimizing slavery in the eyes of Europeans.

The 'True Negro' myth would be taken further as some writers, anthropologists and historians would even go so far as to say the Africans who built the empires of Ghana, Mali and Songhay were not "true negro" despite being Black. Robin Walker points this out in his book 'When We Ruled' in the chapter entitled The Land of the Blacks. The Hausa of Nigeria (and Niger) weren't considered 'truly Black' because they spoke a language that is not part of the Niger-Congo language family, but part of the Afro-Asiatic family (spoken mostly in East Africa) and was therefore labeled as "Hamitic" which was code for literally a "dark-skinned Caucasian." The Yoruba too were caught up in this racist lie as well as other groups of West Africans who came from groups that did great things in the past. To many of the early eurocentric historians and writers, if you were African and Black and were part of a group that did anything remotely important in the past...you HAD to be part White or a descendant of a lost white tribe that came in and "civilized" Africa and intermarried with the population.

However what is the truth? We could go on and on about the lies that have been told but just who were the Ancient Kemites and how was Pharaonic Civilization started? To begin to answer that question we must start by talking about pre-dynastic Kemet.

The Ancient African Kingdoms of Pre-Dynastic Kemet: Ta-Seti and Yam

Before I lay out the genetic and linguistic evidence to answer the question of "were the Ancient Egyptians black?", we should first go over where exactly the people of Ancient Kemet came from. That is very key to this entire equation and if you don't get anything else, you have to understand this. As seen above, part of the reason why the historical community and the entertainment world is able to still get away with white-washing Kemet is because their very origin has been made into such a convoluted and confusing hot mess that the lies have persisted despite being no longer valid and the true story has been under-emphasized and at times down right ignored. So setting the record straight with regards to the peopling of Kemet is key to all of this. We'll begin with  Ta-Seti.

Ancient Kemet, while being the first major civilization in Africa that we're aware of, was not the first monarchy. That honor goes to Ta-Seti which existed in the territory of modern day northern Sudan and southern Egypt. It is not only one of the oldest civilizations in world history, given some date the first kings of Ta-Seti to 5,900 BCE...it may in fact be THE oldest. I say this given the fact that many historians date Ancient Sumerian civilization in Ancient Mesopotamia to a 'pre-Semitic' people from the South who didn't settle the region permanently until around 5,500 BCE at the very earliest. This would have been some 400 after the earliest dates given to Ta-Seti. However Ta-Seti is very rarely recognized as being potentially the worlds oldest civilization and monarchy. Most people will still erroneously state that civilization started in Mesopotamia, however I digress on this point.

In 1962, an archeological team from the University of Chicago discovered a very large series of tombs by the town of Qustul near the modern Sudanese border containing over 1,000 finely painted pots as well as gold, copper and ivory artifacts for everything from jewelry and rings, to maceheads and spearheads. The most important discovery of all in one of the oldest tombs was a Horus incense burner with symbols that were used by Ancient Kemetic royalty...however the tomb itself predated the founding of Ancient Kemet! In 'When We Ruled,' Walker explains that the range of pottery found at Qustul not only displays that Ta-Seti had trade links far and wide but that the evidence shows that the story of the Kemetic deity Horus came from the South and was only inherited by the people of Kemet. This belief is due to the fact that on the burner itself, there is a depiction of a royal figure wearing the familiar white crown of Upper Egypt and in front of him is the tail of a falcon, symbolic of the deity Horus (known as Heru to the Kemetians) who was the son of Osiris (Ausar) and Isis (Auset).

In 1978, Dr. Bruce Williams of the Oriental Institute from the University of Chicago studied the findings of Qustul and came to the conclusion that some nine generations of monarchs ruled in Ta-Seti and along with other contemporary Kings in Upper Egypt created a unified culture that would become Ancient Kemet. He discovered that it was during the 4th generation of rulers that a Ta-Seti "Pharaoh" marched against Hierakonpolis (also known as Nekhen which was the original capitol of Upper Egypt) and conquered it as well as another state in Upper Egypt known as Ta-Shemau and began intermarrying with them and spreading their culture further North along the Nile. Several generations later there is evidence of Ta-Seti kings being buried at Abydos, which was the sacred necropolis revered by the Ancient Kemetians so much due to it being the burial site of their kings. The point of all of this is to show the close links between pre-dynastic Kemet and the groups of Black Africans directly to the South of them who show signs of cultural elements that would be commonly used throughout Ancient Kemetic history.

Mentuhotep II of the 11th Dynasty. Were Ancient Egyptians Black? Clearly he was.

There aren't just linkages to be made with the direct South of Ancient Kemet along the Nile. Robert Bauval has shown in his book entitled 'Black Genesis: The Prehistoric Origins of Ancient Egypt' that there was a cattle culture that existed in the Sahara to the West of the Nile that was responsible for the construction of Nabta Playa, an astronomical site containing over thirty complex stuctures located in the Western desert of modern day Egypt. Bauval and his co-author Thomas Brophy detail in their book how Nabta Playa was used to track the rising of the star Sirius in the East and another star in the Big Dipper in the Northern Sky.  They say that there is a direct link to the Ancient Kemetians who would track the same exact stars in the Nile Valley on the island of Elephantine many years later and the tracking of those stars would play a major role in the Kemetic invention of the solar calendar split into twelve months. For the details about how they came to this conclusion, I'd highly recommend you read his book. Bauval continues however with this theory and explains the connection between the pastoralist cattle culture at Nabta Playa and other cattle cultures that existed in the area that we only know about through the rock art they left behind. He connects these nomadic pastoralists to the fabled kingdom of Yam; a semi-mythological nation that the Ancient Kemetians believed existed and made contact with according to several sources. One of those ancient sources comes from the story of the expeditions of Harkhuf during the 6th dynasty. Bauval has placed the location of Yam in the modern day country of Chad somewhere in the Tibesti Mountains. This belief is due to a stunning discovery of a pharaonic cartouche near the modern Sudanese border close to a mountain range known as Jebel Uwainat that confirms that the first Pharaoh of the Middle Kingdom during the 11th Dynasty named Mentuhotep II (pictured above) sent an envoy to meet up with representatives from Yam to exchange goods. It is Bauval and Brophy's belief, as well as others, that the same pastoralists of Nabta Playa and Jebel Uwainat slowly migrated to the East along the Nile river and met up with folks already there and shared cultural ideas that would lead to the founding of Pharaonic civilization. Possibly the descendants of the people of Ta-Seti? This would've happened between 8,500 BCE and 5,300 BCE when the stable humid period of the Sahara ended and desertification took over forcing the cattle people to abandon their ancestral homes in search for a more consistent water supply further East towards the Nile.

The pre-dynastic period of Ancient Kemet is an interesting one, but there can be no doubt that all of the influences that led to the rise of Africa's first empire and great civilization came from Africa! Specifically from the South in the regions of modern-day Sudan and the Western regions of the Sahara from a group of people who followed the same stars that the Kemetians would themselves follow later. I have listed several books that do a great job at laying this out, but there are numerous others that I have not mentioned that contain their own pieces of evidence as to the Africanity of Ancient Kemet. One needs no longer wonder WHO populated Ancient Kemet and where they came from. They came primarily from Southern and Central Africa. However if this isn't proof enough, let's talk about the linguistic evidence finally to further prove the point.

The Linguistic Evidence - Ancient Egyptian is a Black African Language

When one looks at the language spoken by the people of Ancient Kemet, one has to look at how that language fits in with other languages in the world. True, language doesn't denote race or a particular ethnic origin. One theoretically could've been an outsider not ethnically of Kemetic stock and had spoken the Ancient Kemetic language that they themselves called mdu ntr (pronounced medu neter). Matter of fact we know this happened after various non-Kemetic groups invaded Kemet at different points and adopted Kemetic culture as their own. The most famous example being that of Cleopatra VII who went above and beyond to learn the Kemetic language, religious and culture to make it easier for the people of Kemet to accept her foreign rule.

Let us first begin by breaking down the top three major language families that are indigenous to Africa...

  1. Niger-Congo: the world's 3rd largest language family and the largest in Africa in terms of geography and number of people who speak one of the numerous languages in this family. Spoken predominantly in Western and Southern Africa, but in Central Africa as well. Languages in this family include Yoruba, Igbo, Zulu, Mandinka and various other Bantu tongues.
  2. Nilo-Saharan: this language family is spoken primarily in Central and Eastern Africa with pockets of speakers in Western Africa along the Niger river basin such as the Songhay language spoken by descendants of the former African empire of Songhay. Other well known languages in this family include Nubian (spoken in Sudan and Egypt) and Maasai (spoken in Kenya).
  3. Afro-Asiatic: this will be the language group we will spend the most time discussing in this blog entry. This is the language family that Ancient Egyptian (using their term) belongs to. Unlike the previous two languages, it's also a family heavily spoken by millions of people outside of Africa. A major branch of Afro-Asiatic is the Semitic group of languages that includes languages typically not associated with Africa and Black people. This includes Semitic languages such as Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic and dead languages no longer spoken today such as Akkadian.

Due to the importance of Afro-Asiatic (sometimes called Afrasan or Afrasian), there is a history of linguists who have attempted to de-Africanize the family and attribute its origins to the Middle East. This is not only done because of the importance of the family in world history with several powerful civilizations (some of them Biblical) having spoken languages in this family, but some actually believe it and wouldn't attribute their academic positions to any sense of anti-blackness. In the December 2004 issue of Science magazine (pages 1680-1681), linguist Christopher Ehret and geneticist S.O.Y. Keita offer a rebuttal on the origins of Afro-Asiatic being in the Levant via demic diffusion of food-producing peoples (demic diffusion refers to a migration of a group of people into a new area entirely that they didn't exist in prior). They suggest that proto-Afro-Asiatic originated firmly in Africa around 10,000 B.C.E. among people who domesticated cattle prior to the domestication of cattle in the Levant. Why is this important and what does it have to do with Ancient Egyptian? It is important because the placement of the origin of Afro-Asiatic defines the linguistic origins of the oldest language in the group and that is Ancient Egyptian. If one were to attribute Afro-Asiatic to Levantine origins, then one is indirectly reinforcing the de-Africanization of Ancient Kemet. So reaffirming the position that Afro-Asiatic is of African origin helps to reaffirm the Africanity of Kemet.

Christopher Ehret is a major linguistic scholar who currently teaches at UCLA (as of the writing of this blog entry) who has written extensively on the history of Afro-Asiatic and has played a major role in how the language family is viewed and discussed. His grouping of languages is widely sourced and referenced in various works in the field. Ehret places the origins of Afro-Asiatic (aka Afrasan) within the Ethiopian highlands. The linguistic lineage goes as follows...first you had proto-Afro-Asiatic, then you had a younger language sub-grouping within that known as proto-Erythraic. Proto-Erythaic was followed by a couple of even younger subgroups before finally getting to Ancient Egyptian which as mentioned above is considered the oldest of the Afro-Asiatic languages (but obviously not THE oldest hence all of the 'proto' groups that were older but African). 

There are those who may rightfully suggest that the whole term 'afro-asiatic' is problematic to begin with which may be why Ehret and others instead use the term 'afrasan.' Some have suggested that there is very little (if anything) "asiatic" about the language family to begin with and the label was implied in the past to add a non-African element to what is a fundamentally African language group. Even the subgroup of Semitic is believed by some to have been formed in East Africa among Blacks, before being diffused to the Near East and developing into the languages of Aramaic, Hebrew, Arabic, etc. I digress on this issue however other than to say that Ehret also places proto-Semitic in Africa in terms of its origins.

I'll end this section with a quote from Christopher Ehret from an article entitled 'Ancient Egyptian as an African Language, Egypt as an African Culture.' 

Ancient Egyptian civilization was, in ways and to an extent usually not recognized, fundamentally African. The evidence of both language and culture reveals these African roots.

The origins of Egyptian ethnicity lay in the areas south of Egypt. The ancient Egyptian language belonged to the Afrasian family (also called Afroasiatic or, formerly, Hamito-Semitic). The speakers of the earliest Afrasian languages, according to recent studies, were a set of peoples whose lands between 15,000 and 13,000 B.C. stretched from Nubia in the west to far northern Somalia in the east. They supported themselves by gathering wild grains. The first elements of Egyptian culture were laid down two thousand years later, between 12,000 and 10,000 B.C., when some of these Afrasian communities expanded northward into Egypt, bringing with them a language directly ancestral to ancient Egyptian. They also introduced to Egypt the idea of using wild grains as food....Languages provide a powerful set of tools for probing the cultural history of the peoples who spoke them. Determining the relationships between particular languages, such as the languages of the Afrasian or the Nilo-Saharan family, gives us an outline history of the societies that spoke those languages in the past. And because each word in a language has its own individual history, the vocabulary of every language forms a huge archive of documents. If we can trace a particular word back to the common ancestor language of a language family, then we know that the item of culture connoted by the word was known to the people who spoke the ancestral tongue.
— Christopher Ehret

The Genetic Evidence - The Proverbial Nail in the Coffin

If neither the linguistic evidence or the evidence of the clear racial animus held by early thinkers on the subject who obviously were extremely biased on the matter aren't enough to convince you. Nor the evidence of the pre-dynastic makeup of the region...then allow me to introduce the genetic evidence of the africanity of the Ancient Kemites of the Nile. Let us first define some terms that will be used very often for the remainder of this entry.

  1. Allele: an allele is a different form of the same gene that is inherited by each parent at birth. One parent provides one allele, meaning we as Humans have 2 alleles per gene and dominance (dominant or recessive) determines how that gene is expressed.
  2. Haplotype: there are several ways to define haplotypes. The simplest way is to say that haplotypes are groups of alleles inherited by one parent (not both) and only occur on one chromosome.
  3. Haplogroup: a haplogroup is made up of a collection of haplotypes. A genetic population group that shares a common ancestor either maternally or paternally. Working in our allele definition, we understand that haplogroups are determined by the combinations of different alleles in different areas of the chromosome that are closely-linked and inherited by a common ancestor.
  4. Clade: for the purposes of this blog entry, we'll say that a clade is a grouping of like organisms in a tree-like form to express relatedness. Through the formation of cladograms, one can trace genes and populations back to a common ancestor.
  5. Population Genetics: a field of genetics that studies the distribution and change within the frequency of alleles in a given population. Through population genetics, scientists can study gene flow, genetic drift and the flow of mutations on top of a variety of other things.

So where do we place the Ancient Kemetians genetically? We have to understand first and foremost that there is no genetic marker that denotes race. Race, for all intents and purposes, is a figment of the imagination. A sociological construct developed during the Enlightenment with the purpose of creating a caste system (as described above). It has no scientific or genetic value whatsoever despite 100+ years worth of destructive race theory that failed in trying to find a scientific basis for race. This is expressed perfectly by geneticists S.O.Y. Keita and Dr. Rick Kittles in their paper 'Conceptualizing Human Variation' which was published in 2004 in the journal Nature Genetics.

‘Race’ is ‘socially constructed’ when the word is incorrectly used as the covering term for social or demographic groups. Broadly designated groups, such as ‘Hispanic’ or ‘European American’ do not meet the classical or phylogenetic criteria for subspecies or the criterion for a breeding population. Furthermore, some of the ‘racial’ taxa of earlier European science used by law and politics were converted into social identities2. For example, the self-defined identities of enslaved Africans were replaced with the singular ‘Negro’ or ‘black’, and Europeans became ‘Caucasian’, thus creating identities based on physical traits rather than on history and cultural tradition. Another example of social construction is seen in the laws of various countries that assigned ‘race’ (actually social group or position) based on the proportion of particular ancestries held by an individual. The entities resulting from these political machinations have nothing to do with the substructuring of the species by evolutionary mechanisms.
— S.O.Y. Keita, Rick Kittles, et al

Human Y-Chromosome DNA (Y-DNA) haplogroups are categorized using letters ranging from A to T, with subdivisions and subgroupings using numbers and lower-cased letters. Different populations of people around the world have different haplogroup letters depending on who they are most genetically related to. So it would be uncommon for a person of African descent to carry haplotypes and haplogroups that are say European or Asian in origin...unless there is admixture and vice versa. Certain haplogroups such as A, B and E dominate in Africa. So it is important to note that Ancient Kemetians were carriers of what is known as Haplogroup E and to be specific we're talking about haplotype E3b (which has been relabeled E1b1b). Most Black Africans on the entire continent are also haplogroup E carriers, but depending on the region it may not be haplotype E3b, but instead E3a (also relabeled E1b1a). Just understand that E3a and E3b are sister haplotypes that originated in Africa and belong to the larger E3 clade (see definition above) which is part of the even larger super family of Haplogroup E. 

So you may be wondering if Ancient Kemetians were carriers of the same major haplogroup family as other Black Africans, then why is there even a debate still? There have been a number of genetic studies conducted over the years of Africans, "Middle Easterners," and Ancient Kemetians. To avoid getting too wonkish with the science, understand that there isn't much of a debate anymore genetically. Genetics has proven to be an essential nail in the coffin of the theory that Ancient Kemetians were not of African stock originally. It has been discovered through genetic research that the people of Ancient Kemet were members of the PN2 clade (mentioned above as the parent of the sister E3a and E3b haplotypes) which is found in its highest frequency among Blacks in Africa. Not Near Easterners who mostly carry the genetic markers of Haplogroup J. If the Ancient Kemites were originally from the Near East or had a tremendous amount of Near Eastern (ie. non-Black) admixture, you would see tremendous amounts of Haplogroup J, not Haplogroup E. Due to this obvious issue for eurocentrists, some have tried to attribute Haplogroup E to a non-African origin and even the older Haplogroup that came before E emerged called Haplogroup DE. It was originally suggested by scientists like Michael Hammer out of the University of Arizona that DE was of Asian origin in 1998. However a few years later, based on new research, he retracted that previous conclusion and acknowledged that DE originated in Africa before spreading out of Africa via migration. 

The evidence doesn't stop there however. In 2012, the genetic testing company known as DNA Tribes conducted a test on Amarna mummies who lived during the 18th dynasty in Kemetic history. This was the dynasty that saw well-known Pharaoh's and Queens such as Amenhotep III, Akhenaten, Nefertiti, King Tut, Queen Hatshepsut and Queen Tiye rule. Based on the samples of 8 genetic markers, they concluded that King Tut and his relatives were most genetically related ancestrally to neighboring Africans in the Great Lakes region in Central Africa, Southern Africans and even high relatedness to West Africans! It doesn't stop there though, in 2013 DNA Tribes followed up with another genetic analysis this time from the 20th dynasty which included Ramses III and a mummy that they believed may have been his son. Ramses III is an important Pharaoh in Kemetic history because for all intents and purposes...he was the last indigenous ruler of Kemet. Every dynasty after the 20th were dynasties of imposters and foreign invaders who came in and adopted Kemetic culture. Just like with the study of the Amarna mummies, it was concluded that Ramses III had strong genetic lineage with Central Africans and that his genetic markers are found outside of Africa, but in rare or non-existent amounts. DNA Tribes concluded that both New Kingdom families had African autosomal ancestry in high amounts. Both genetic studies in 2012 and 2013 sent shockwaves through the online communities who follow these types of things despite the fact that the research got little to no mainstream publicity.

In conclusion, the pre-dynastic, historical, linguistic and genetic evidence all point in one direction. That direction is a CLEAR and obvious Black African origin of Ancient Kemet. The Hollywood myth of European Ancient Kemetians is a myth that for all intents and purposes holds no scientific value whatsoever and can be compared to J.R.R. Tolkien fantasy at this point. One of the ways they've been able to get away with this for so long is that much of the scientific evidence backing up the Africanity of Ancient Kemet is ignored purposefully which allows eurocentrists to continue to prop up a lie that is patently baseless and devoid of intellectualism. It has become so brazen, that white Kemetians borders on blatant propaganda at this point...as if it wasn't propaganda before anway. The title of this article is...

'Were Ancient Egyptians Black? The Obsession With White-Washing Ancient Kemet.'

Kemet is one of the most important civilization to ever exist and is to this day one of the longest surviving kingdoms in human history (if not THE longest). The Great Pyramid at Giza is a testament to their power and intellect and they had a tremendous influence on later European societies such as Greece and Rome. A major aspect of white supremacy has been the denial of greatness to people of African descent for things they did in the past. Much of this was done because of slavery and instead of correcting the wrongs of that era, far too many scientists, intellectuals and thinkers have doubled down on the racism and cultural appropriation. Things have slowly turned around thanks to the scientists and intellectuals named above, but also others such as Cheikh Anta Diop, Chancellor Williams, Ivan Van Sertima and a host of others whose works I haven't even mentioned in an attempt to not make this blog entry too long. I will continue to expand on this entry as this is just the first in what will become a series of blogs on this subject. However this is enough material to chew on for right now until those other entries are posted. 


Sources

 

The Academy's Race Problem - Why It's Time to Build Black Hollywood & Redefine Black Storytelling

The Academy's Race Problem - Why It's Time to Build Black Hollywood & Redefine Black Storytelling

A History of Voting Rights and Why the Voting Rights Act is in More Danger Now Than Ever Before

A History of Voting Rights and Why the Voting Rights Act is in More Danger Now Than Ever Before