^ This.
I normally don't reply to things like this. In fact, i just verified my account so i could post, and now i'm gonna get nerdy...
Hieroglyphs, reliefs, stelas, and other statues and works of art clearly show they were in contact with people who were ethnically different than them. They painted skin color--and by paint i mean used pigment. They used minerals for colors, thats why they have held up as they have. (ex: Red was Iron Oxide and Cinnabar. Green was Malachite. Blue was Azurite, which is a variant of Malachite. White came from the mineral gypsum and sometimes chalk. In Seti's tomb there are frescos showing Libyans (who are painted light), Nubians (who are painted black), Asiatic (who are also painted light), and Egyptians (painted brown). I'm sorry to say, even in 3500 B.C. people were differentiated by color.
As for the other stuff in this thread:
1. Egyptians are native African, yes. Egypt is IN Africa, on the Mediterranean coast, with deserts bordering the Middle East. Now, i'm generalizing here -- so forget specific hereditary DNA for just a second (because yes, that does play a part in what makes you you, but that's not my point), skin pigment is mostly dependent on how close you are to the equator. The higher the UVR in the area, the more melanin in your skin, period. Its cellular.
2. This "bleaching artifacts" nonsense - the only "bleaching" that was done, was done by the sun -- Travertine was used for small statuettes and shawabti figures, canopic and unguent jars, vases of manyforms, bowls and dishes, offering tables and paving stones. They also used it for life-size and colossal statue, sarcophagi, embalming beds and shrines. From the quarries and statuary, the sun bleaching phenomenon with this particular stone is well documented. The British had little to do with it. In fact, by 1859, much of the artifacts from new discoveries were in the care of the Department of Antiquities (Its changed names since then, now it's the SCA). They set boundaries for archeologists. They are the ONLY agents allowed to restore and preserve Egyptian monuments/artifacts. The first bunch of directors were French, then the Egyptians took over, not British. They also worked hard to recover those lost, sold, and stolen artifacts (a task they are still trying to do this to this day!) They required Archeologist to report ALL discoveries before publication - a rule which got some archeologists expelled from Egypt -- including Howard Carter. The SCA took over the excavation of Tut's tomb for a period of time. Although, Pierre Lacau eventually did let him come back and continue his work. Archeologists and Museums do not alter or destroy ancient relics, they do their best to preserve them.
3. About Napoleon's men - Just no. The truth is NO ONE actually knows what happened to the nose, lips, and ear of the sphinx, but everyone had an opinion on it. Opinions are not facts. One person's opinion on what the damaged face looks like is going to be different than the next persons. And if you look at artists renderings through the ages from 1500's-1800's, you can see clear differences in all of them. Time, weathering, sun, sand, and the particular artists perspective all played a part, most of egyptology is hypothesis anyway -- and that change with every new discovery.
reply
share
lz-vb
8 years ago
I totally agree with you. Thanks for posting.
reply
share