Видео

The "documentary" is accused of disregarding historical facts about the ptolemic family and assuming all of them are of African black descent while they are all Greek. Not just about the actors being of a black skin color, but the supposed experts say that "Cleopatra was black" for sure without any doubt. We can't remove the racist white washing from hollywood with another washing of history.

I really appreciate that you’re engaging with the actual content of the video rather than shifting the discussion elsewhere or resorting to name-calling, as some other comments have done. Regarding the honesty of the study, the paper actually explicitly states how the sample size was reduced from 151 examined mummies to 90 for mitochondrial DNA analysis, and then to 3 for full genome-wide sequencing. Each subset was used for different levels of genetic analysis, with the 3 mummies being the most detailed because they were the only ones that met the criteria for that specific test. While I don’t claim to be an expert in genetics, the paper seemed very transparent about its methodology. They did not "lie", they openly disclosed their process in the study. If you look at Figure 3, you’ll see the broader analysis using 90 mummies, while Figure 4 shows the more detailed genomic study of the 3 full genomes. Additionally, it’s worth noting that 2 of these 3 mummies were from the pre-Ptolemaic period-before any Greek rule-while 1 was from the Ptolemaic period. Despite this, all three fell within the same genetic profile, suggesting continuity rather than a sudden foreign genetic takeover. Furthermore, when looking at all 90 mummies, the study still found genetic continuity in the population over time, rather than drastic shifts. The authors also acknowledged the study’s limitations, particularly its geographic focus-Abusir el-Meleq, located in northern Egypt near Beni Suef, south of Cairo. They never claimed their findings represented all of ancient Egypt, and they openly invited further research to expand on their work. As for the article you referenced in response, it’s a preprint, meaning it hasn’t yet undergone peer review, whereas the Schuenemann study was published in a high-impact scientific journal (Nature) with full peer review and publicly available datasets, including raw data, peer review files, and supplementary materials. That level of transparency makes it difficult to argue that the study was deceptive. Finally, I’d really encourage keeping the discussion focused on the evidence. Saying that "white supremacists rule academia" is a broad and dismissive claim-it can be used to shut down any discussion without actually engaging with the data. If we want a meaningful conversation, it’s important to focus on the evidence itself rather than attributing studies we disagree with to an overarching conspiracy.

@ For sure. I believe in constructive discourse based on evidence not opinions so much. We can disagree and still sit down and have. meal together. I am not a hateful person. As far as the study goes it was dishonest for sure lol. The Bold title is a lie. Which is why I have people everyday posting this dishonest study but have never actually never read it. They only regurgitate the headlines. You can throw that study away for the reasons I have already mentioned. I encourage you to do another video to let your followers know that the study is actually not sufficient as they did not test mummies from the old kingdom or from Upper Egypt and the sample size was criminally low. For a more honest study look to Project Muse which is the largest study of the ancient Egyptian Genome to date. As far as "White academia" historically the loudest and morst funded voices were white supremacists. The likes of George Risner and Flinders Petrie were known racists. It was not a secret. The racist theories such as the "Hamitic theory" and "dynastic theory" however have long been debunked and abandoned. Modern academia is far more honest which is the reason the consensus today is that the ancient Egyptians, Badarians, Naqada I, II and III were indeed black Africans. Of course many Egyptologists are muzzled because anyone who says these things to loud will be banned from studying in Egypt by the government who actively censors the truth. The Schuenemann study is the best example of propaganda, and the whitewashed reconstruction of King Tut commissioned by the disgraced Dr Hawass is another.

@ Scientist Alejandro Jiménez-Serrano admits ruling elite were Black: Africans:ruclips.net/user/shortshffWp1i4F5g?si=KMzMpo7szxsdK11l Scientist in the video Alejandro Jiménez-Serrano’s peer reviewed scientific journal on the Tomb of SarenputII, Brother of Shemai, the Mummy in the video. "Moreover, the anthropological study of his bones show that this individual was seventeen or eighteen years old when he died and his ethnic features were negroid. There is no doubt that Sarenput was member of the late Twelfth Dynasty ruling family of Elephantine because of the richness of his burial, the name of his mother (very common for women of the ruling family) and his own name, which linked him with the initiator of the lineage. But, what was unexpected was the discovery that a member of the ruling family of Elephantine had Nubian physical features. His body confirmed that, as in the case of the Sarenput, he also died young (twenty one years old) and was also negroid. Future DNA analyses will confirm whether both were in any way related. All indications are that the ruling family of the Twelfth Dynasty in Elephantine had negroid features, as Habachi had already suggested from the statues that he found in Elephantine." www.academia.edu/43390049/The_World_of_Middle_Kingdom_Egypt_2000_1550_BC?fbclid=IwAR1AP1SAMCqovsI74LVz0FIkZmfr7XBo2QeGFsp417oQblDwS60WkI0c750

First, please don't assume without knowing that I haven't read the 2017 study. You mentioned before that they lied about the study and they only examined 3 mummies from the Greeko-Roman period. Well, you were wrong they actually detailed everything the paper and they did analysis on different levels for the 151, 90, and 3 mummies. You should read the paper in detail. If you watch my video again, you will see that I mention the limitations of the paper that the mummies were from Northern Egypt. So, I don't think I will make another video about it. You can make a video answering the 3 points I raised specially the Arts part. Regarding your other comment about Cleopatra's sister and mother were African Americans, no bodies were actually found of them to throw this claim please refer to www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-83870-x From the article that you actually sent which I am not sure in which journal is it published but anyways. "The different ethnic types found in the individuals buried in QH33 at the end of the Twelfth Dynasty show the diversity of the members of the local élite. But the inscriptions permit us to go further. The jmj-rA pr Saren- put had the same mother (Sattjeni) as Heqaib III, but they had physical differences. As briefly commented above, the former was negroid and the latter was closer to Mediterranean. This might only be explained because of the existence of different fathers." So, some were negroid and some were Mediterranean. That can tell the Egyptians were mixed and indeed in some dynasties Egyptians royalties intermarries from the kingdom of Kush. I never claimed that there was no black Negroid in Egypt, I claimed it was a mixed civilization with people from the North probably lighter than the south. Your claim that it Egypt was a fully Negroid black civilization is a very strong claim, that needs really strong evidence, which is lacking (finding a Negroid 1 mummie doesn't cut it). I invite you to visit the musuem of Egyptian civilization in Cairo to see the amount of kings' mummies and their features. An extra question that I want to raise, do you think the copts, who kept speaking Coptic (the latest development of the Ancient Egyptian language, used by Champilion to understand Hierogylphs) till 18th century, are not related to the Ancient Egyptians? Finally, it would be great if you answer each of my points in separated paragraphs to make it easier to follow.

@@echoes_of_egypt-J Not going to beat a dead horse. The Schuenemann study is bogus and is not representative of the genetic make up of ancient Egyptians in any form or fashion. As far as cleopatra goes I have addressed that issue in a video and have little interest in it. I have never said Ancient Egypt was Homogeneous. It was in my opinion a Black African civilization which a multi-Ethnic make up. Meaning, it was created by Black Africans and the population was made up of various Nile-Sahran, Nilotic, and Asiatic Populations. This is the consensus among academics. The institution of Pharaonic Kingship is a black African institution and the royal elite were historically black Africans. The cattle cults and worship of Het-Heru was a black African institution. The study of the stars and the procession of the equinox was a black African institution which we can trace back to the site of Napta Playa in Sudan. The science of mummification was created by black Africans with the Tashwinat mummy also known as the "Black Mummy of the Green Sahara" being the earliest evidence of ritualistic mummification found in Africa which was later transferred into the Nile Valley. The genetic make up of the Badarians, and Naqada I, II, and III have proven them to be Black Africans. The black African component was dominant is all aspects regarding ancient Egyptian culture and civilization. The Asiatic presence was secondary and this is the consensus among the academic community. I will share this information with a link to the studies.

Actually, the word Nile started to appear after the Arab conquest and it might come from Arabic or sematic. In the ancient Egyptian language, the Nile is called Hapy. In Coptic, the word ⲫⲓⲁⲣⲟ, pronounced piaro (Sahidic) or phiaro (Bohairic), means "the river" (lit. p(h).iar-o "the.canal-great"), and comes from the same ancient name. Furthermore, I never claimed that Arabs are related to Ancient Egyptians to make the comparison.

The head of the Sphinx, plus good eye sight and the mystery is solved 😂.

I haven't talked about this debate in my video maybe in the future who knows, however for now my channel focuses about Egyptian history and culture not ancient Greece....but anyways I simply disagree with you

None of the bodies of Cleopatra's sister Arsinoe, the mother or Cleopatra were ever found. The skull that was long believed to belong to Arsinoë IV, Cleopatra’s sister, was actually misidentified. It was discovered in 1929 in Ephesus, Turkey, and for decades, some researchers suggested it belonged to Arsinoë IV, who was reportedly executed on Cleopatra’s orders. However, recent studies revealed that the skull actually belonged to an 11-year-old boy with developmental disorders. www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-83870-x So no, we don't know if Arsinoe or the mother were actually black Africans. We only know that Cleopatra's father was Greek and her mother can be either Greek or Egyptian, we are not sure. I know exactly what Afrocentric means and I know how I used the term, which started to appear actually in the 1960s.

@@echoes_of_egypt-J Ok So it was another person of royal blood buried in turkey who were black Africans. I really do not care too much to make the claim that she was a black African, although it is not out of the realm of possibility as some people make it seem. People she was Greek as if there was no such thing as a Black Greek person. The Macedonians who were actually a different population from the Greeks cluster with sub-Saharan Africans more then they do with Greeks. HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11260506/

I just saw your comment here for some reason I don't get notifications for all replies. That's another very very bold claim. Macedonians were different from Greeks and were black Africans. Wooow! I honestly have nothing to say. At the begining, it was Cleopatra's sister and then you don't care it was some royal blood who were black.....I think you should revise youe sources other than sending some bbc biased videos from the 70 or 80s.

@ No need to say anything. Feel free to read the study as I have provided the link. Let us know what you learn.

I learned that you want to win the conversation despite what the truth actually is, that I got from throwing things like Arisnoe and Cleopatra's mother are black Africans with some 70s old debunked evidence, when it didn't work, then Macedonians from Europe are actually black...how come you ignore all the archeology and statues we have from the ptolemic dynasty....well anyways maybe we discuss again in a future video....I am happy to change my mind if I am given real tangeble evidence...for now my stance is the same...cheers!

Very Well said! Indeed, Eurocentric views and whitewashing in movies are a real issue. However, we cannot correct a racial bias with another. Instead of repeating past mistakes, we should strive to be fair and historically accurate rather than reactive.

I am really glad that you said it's my history. If you watch my previous episodes, I mention, the Arabs, Mamluks, Ottomons, French, etc. I just don't see how is this related to the points I mentioned in the video.

​@@echoes_of_egypt-J not you history 😂😂

You are completly wrong. It's not easy to steal from Africans or Egyptians. With all these invasions for thousands of years, Egyptians kept their culture and language speaking Coptic (the lastest development of the Ancient Egyptian language) till 17th-18th century, and it's still spoken till today in the coptic churches. Feel free to refer to my video about the coptic language ruclips.net/video/tMGZKVJqnnc/видео.html

@echoes_of_egypt-J Afrikan's or Egyptian's are Egypt not in Afrika ? Can you please explain I'm confused now

Mary Lefkowitz and another fraud was commissioned by their University to debunk Black Athena even tho non of them were scholared in Afrikan History nor did anyone of them ever sat foot in Afrika Hopefully that explains it all It's easy to steal from the Afrikan

Egypt is in Africa obviously. I don't understand what I said that is confusing. I am saying that the Egyptian's (in Africa) culture and language were still preserved in the coptic language for example and was never stolen.

You should read more about the Hamites narrative, it's a white superemacy narrative really. And you believe all the stories written in the dead sea scrolls?

You are right about this people in the south of Egypt indeed have darker skin tones, I didn't mention otherwise. That is differnt than calling the full Egyptian civilization a black Negro civilization. Have you heard about the Coptic Christian population in Egypt who have limited mixing with the invadors? ruclips.net/video/tMGZKVJqnnc/видео.html

@@77Creation The Dogon people that's currently residing in Mali are Indigenous to that Land and than there's another people that's occupying the coastal side of Ghana which is also Indigenous to that land These are facts and no pseudo historical lies to constantly perpetuate the inferiority of the Afrikan

@@shanegedula8183 this video in no way inferiorities the African because Egyptians ARE African, but what he is arguing is African doesn't equal Black. We are North Africans and we come in many skin tones and we are proud of it ..

​@@echoes_of_egypt-Jlimited mixing 😂. You're referring to the new coptics not the actual coptics who are different from the so called ethnoreligious new coptics who were given that name as a deliberate distraction from what coptic really is.

@@dudzii the people's in north Africa are recent occupiers

Actually of you read the sources you can find DNA from Greeks and eastern European

Also we are well aware that we are also African, but African doesn't equal black 🖤

@ What Greek or Eastern Europeans are that? Because every DNA found so far among mummies are African.

@ Where do black people come from then? Europe? Does white mean Humans?

@ Does white==humans?

First of all, I appreciate that you expressed your thoughts without resorting to insults as some other comments, which makes it easier to have a rational and respectful discussion. I am strongly against Eurocentrism, and I hope that’s obvious. I oppose the depiction of historical figures like Moses or Jesus as white and blonde, just as much as I oppose any distortion of history. In fact, many Egyptians objected to Cleopatra being depicted as blonde in old movies, but back then, it was harder to challenge such portrayals as openly as we can today. However, I also believe that replacing one form of historical distortion with another is not the solution. Cleopatra belonged to the Ptolemaic dynasty, and while there is uncertainty about her mother’s identity-whether she was Cleopatra V or an Egyptian woman-her father is well-documented. More importantly, we have coins and statues that depict her appearance, and based on this historical evidence, the most accurate representation of Cleopatra would be as a light-skinned Mediterranean Greek, not black. If it doesn't matter so much, then why does it insist on portraying Cleopatra as definitively black? Why not depict her in a way that aligns with the statues and historical data we have? The documentary not only portrays her as black but also depicts her family members, advisors, and siblings the same way. It’s clear that there’s an intentional message being pushed. Similarly, I also oppose depicting Moses and Jesus as black. They were Middle Eastern and Semitic, not African. Jesus was not from Africa, and attempts to argue otherwise-such as suggesting that Africans traveled to Asia and that Jesus descended from them without any proof-are based on clear bias rather than historical fact. The origins of the Jewish people trace back to Abraham, who, according to biblical and historical accounts, was not from Africa. In the end, historical accuracy should be our priority. If we oppose Eurocentric distortions of history, we should also reject any other distortions. Truth should not be replaced with another form of ideological rewriting.

@@echoes_of_egypt-J I appreciate that you are against Eurocentrism, and I did say that it was a crazy thing to depict the Ptolemy as black. I understand your views on what Ancient Semitic people looked like, and this would not stray from what most people believe; however there is sufficient archaeological evidence showing Semitic people with negroid features such as the Ancient Hebrews, and the Elamites. I also reject the claim that only people of the continent of Africa are or were "Black" as it is not true. The most ancient Filipino tribe is black, many South Pacific islanders, and there are black Cambodians who are indigenous to Cambodia. This belief that only Africans are black came from the Hametic theory. A belief held by white supremist christians and several modern jewish people that Ham, a son of Noah uncovered his father's nakedness and mocked him and therefore was cursed with black skin. First of all, even the Hebrew text does not say that Ham was curse; it says that Canaan was cursed, but the Canaanites moved to what we now call the Middle East and so that land was called Canaan. This does not explain how Kush or Phut became black, and it does not explain why we have black Asians. So you're opposition to Jesus and Moses being depicted as black with the explanation that they were not African is only echoing the fallacy that if you're black, you must also be African, and it is also a denial of a people's history. The Middle East is a melting pot where many ethnic groups have settled and mixed. No one there looks exactly like the original inhabitants. You can't have thousands of years of military occupations, intentional "Nation Swap" done by Colonial Powers such as Assyria, and Greece, and the migrations and takeover of Turkic peoples and expect that the current inhabitants look exactly the the original. I'm about 85% Yoruboid (Yoruba, a people who migrated from Arabia more than a thousand years ago) and about 15% Scottish, but I'm very fair in complexion. On the other hand a person from the Middle East who's about 25% Turk/Caucasian (I'm not referring to you) would want me to believe that Semitic people are light brown by default. I've mentioned that some blacks have tested positive of having Hebrew DNA, and this includes a number of Lemba people. The Jewish people claim to be Hebrew, but have a significant percentage of Eastern European/Caucasian DNA.

@@echoes_of_egypt-J I'll also point you to language. We have found that the Hebrew manuscripts have Eastern Yoruba/Edekiri, Gadangme, Ewe, and Akan words which are all West African. Each of these tribes have claimed to be Semitic tribes that fled into Africa on difference occasions. The Gadangme is a coalition of Gadites and Danites that fled into Egypt in the 6th century B.C. as they fled from the Assyrians. The Akans are a mix of people who fled into from the ME and those who were already in Egypt. Look at the first word in the Hebrew bible "Beresheet" (begnning). The Dan people in Ivry Coast would say Bereshee (beginning). In Hebrew we have various forms of the verb "To come" such as Ba/Bo/Va/Vo. In Akan and Gadangme it is Ba, and in Ewe it is Va. Look at the Hebrew word Dam (Red); in Akan Dam means red; and a person who is friendly in Akan is Adamfo. Eve's name in Hebrew is Khavah, and in Ewe its spelled as Xawa, but pronounced as Khawah. The Ewe meaning for the name is "Created from the side" which agrees with the Hebrew Bible story on how she was created. The Hebrew word מופת which is often believed to be Mowfaith is Ewe/Eʋe (Ehvreh). That is מ - Ma; ו - wu; פ - ƒe; ת - ta. It means a sign or work of God which corresponds with the modern interpretation of "Miracle". Messiah is an Eʋe derived word from Si ami na (wrongly interpreted as Semen for oil) which mean to anoint with oil. To anoint a person with oil, in Eʋe we say Si ami na ame. So in converting this into a descriptive noun, we have Amesiamina (Anointed one), not Hameshiach. Traditional Eʋe names are Hebrew. Names such as Elikem, Elinam, Seyram, Miyram, Axadzi (Ahaz is a corruption as its missing the Kh guttural sound, and the Z should be Dzi which sounds like the English J). There are so many more examples, but before people take this things into consideration, they just shut us down and call us Afrocentrists. This is why we are so adamant, because our history has been stolen, our languages have been corrupted, and when we want our history back we are called Afrocentric. Even a group of Israelis have been able to confirm the Dan tribe in Ivy Coast as authentic Danites. The people who wrote that Jesus, and Moses were white, and those who also wrote that Semitic people are brown are the writers of History (mere humans). Winston Churchill was quoted saying "History is written by the victors". That implies that you're not hearing the loser's side of the story. Are we to believe that the winner always tells the truth? As for my people. We were conquered, our books were burned, our infrastructure was decimated, our buildings and walls levelled, and the whole world was taught that we had no history, and that we had no civilization, no writing system, no books, no houses. You all were taught that we were nothing but savages in the jungle. I shake my head when I hear modern Egyptians speaking with such contempt against us with such degrading language. So lastly I request you to rethink what you've been taught about the world, and the things in which you have not learned yet. I will not claim to know everything, but we all have something to learn from each other.

Thanks again, Andrew. I completely agree that depicting the Ptolemies as black is historically inaccurate and was clearly done to push a specific message. What many people don’t realize is that this kind of portrayal is actually an insult to African history. If the goal was to highlight powerful African queens, there are plenty of real African women who deserve recognition. Why not focus on them instead? I’m glad we see eye to eye on this point. Secondly, I also agree that being black doesn’t automatically mean someone is from Africa, nor does it mean that Africa only has black people. However, this also doesn’t mean that Jesus or the ancient Jews were black-especially when there is no solid historical or archaeological evidence to support such a claim. The people of that region in the ancient Middle East were depicted with lighter skin tones and distinct beards, visually different from the ancient Egyptians. Also, if you visit churches from the first centuries in Egypt or Cyprus (where st Paul visited according to the bible), you have icons of Jesus and his disciples, Paul, Lazaraus, etc, all depicted with this light brownish color not white blonde as the famous European pics but not as black too. I guess icons from the first centuries of christianity would mean something. Regarding Egypt’s diverse history, I fully acknowledge that it has been a melting pot of cultures-Greeks, Romans, Persians, Turks, Arabs, and others all played a role in shaping it. I’ve never denied this. However, it’s important to note that not all Egyptians mixed with foreign invaders. Up until the 17th or 18th century, many communities in Egypt still spoke Coptic, the final stage of the ancient Egyptian language. Even today, Coptic is actively used in Egyptian churches. To claim that these people-who still carry linguistic and cultural ties to ancient Egypt-have no connection to their own land, while suggesting that African Americans of West African descent have a stronger connection to Egypt, is an incredibly bold claim. As for the idea that having black skin was seen as a curse, that’s just a white supremacist narrative that doesn’t reflect historical reality. Finally, my conclusion in the video was that this entire racial obsession-classifying people as "black" or "white"-is largely a Western construct. In Egypt, people with brown or even darker skin, especially in the south near Sudan, don’t think in these rigid racial terms. This black-and-white racial classification is mostly a US way of thinking, not an indigenous Egyptian perspective.

@@echoes_of_egypt-J I appreciate that you are against Eurocentrism, and I did say that it was a crazy thing to depict the Ptolemy as black. I understand your views on what Ancient Semitic people looked like, and this would not stray from what most people believe; however there is sufficient archaeological evidence showing Semitic people with negroid features such as the Ancient Hebrews, and the Elamites. I also reject the claim that only people of the continent of Africa are or were "Black" as it is not true. The most ancient Filipino tribe is black, many South Pacific islanders, and there are black Cambodians who are indigenous to Cambodia. Its always assumed that if a person is black, he or she came from Africa despite being so genetically different. This belief that only Africans are black came from the Hametic theory. A belief held by white supremist christians and several modern jewish people that Ham, a son of Noah, mocked his father who was drunk and "not really clothed" and therefore was cursed with black skin. First of all, even the Hebrew text does not say that Ham was cursed; it says that Canaan was cursed, but the Canaanites moved to what we now call the Middle East and so that land was called Canaan. This does not explain how Kush or Phut became black, and it does not explain why we have black Asians, but the fact that we have ancient black Asian tribes suggests that this is how mankind started out. If this causes people to feel offended, they'll need to ask themselves "Why is it that the teaching that I came from a darker skinned people makes me feel offended?". The question we should be asking is "Why weren't we taught about the reality of the world?". Well the answer is simple. Those who have been pushed aside by larger, more powerful tribes will inevitably be forgotten.

Cleopatra was from the Greek invadors for your knowledge, she was from the Ptolomeic dynasty. When the Arabs invaded Egypt, did they wipe out all the indiginous Egyptian people? Have you heards of the copts? ruclips.net/video/tMGZKVJqnnc/видео.html

Exactly

​@echoes_of_egypt-J before 332 bce when a group of barbarians invaded Egypt and forcefully seized control there's no record of Europeans contacting the Africans in Africa. We can all agree that a group of savages from Macedonia tyrannically seized control of Egypt in 332 bce.

🤝

@@speed_dillinga7680 holla at this lame my G

​@@kayla3456It's a shame because you havev an Arab trying to play on team White Supremacy.

I know the reference you are talking about and read it. Which of my sources have been proven wrong and by whom? Was the reference number 1 in the list also proved wrong?

@@echoes_of_egypt-Jyes it was proved wrong even Mary lefkowitz was proven wrong By John Henrik Clarke..look up Dr.John Henrik Clarke vs Mary lefkowitz: The great debate 1996 here on RUclips. John Henrik Clarke challenged this topic on there and also read “Spirituality Before Religions By Kaba Kamene. On top of this if you study Herodotus and Plato you will find that they go into extreme detail on who the original Egyptians were. And also read “Stolen Legacy” By George GM James

@@echoes_of_egypt-J yes all of them were proven wrong lol. Look up Dr. John Henrik Clark vs Mary Lefkowitz: the great debate 1996 here on RUclips. If you study Herodotus and Plato they state clearly who the autochthonous Kemites (“Egyptians) were. Also Kaba Hiawatha Kamene has a Book titled “spirituality Before Religions”. “Stolen legacy By George GM James. Anything great that came out of Africa is taken away from the original inhabitants and given to the foreigners (Europeans)

Not really. They were Brown skin. North Africa is in the temperate climate zone. People in these area tend to have a Brown complexion. People in the tropics tend to be darker.

@@MrAmhara If ever you're brown skin you're not from that region It's either you're part of the 600AD gang or you arrived later thru the Ottoman Empire who we're controlling the Sahel region in its later phase

​@@shanegedula8183nice comments. The 600 CE gang is a myth though, they actually came in the 1071 seljuk eruption from Afghanistan through Iran.

​@@shanegedula8183Hyksos were Arab relatives

Looks like this vid cut deep if you have to come back to it every 4hrs 🫢🫢

@dudzii no boo boo just had to correct your lady

I read through the comments, honestly you’re hella lame. Go get a life.

That the truth

You are fake

@@georgemoneer842 girl what you know

@@ifilie2 this boy hella dumb enjoy 😭😭😭

Glad you like them! 🤩 more to come!

@@ifilie2 white supremacists rule academia SON WAKE UP

@@ifilie2 white supremacists rule academia

Thanks for your comment but I don't see the point you are making. I know the Arabs invaded Egypt in the 7th century, that's a fact.

@echoes_of_egypt-J you don't see the point wow ok listen when I hear Arabs claiming that so-called black people are stealing their culture while ignoring the fact that the original people of Kemet were indeed people who came from lower Africa FYI go research what the Arabs were doing at the time of the pyramids being built all of them these so-called egyptologist are nothing but white supremacists and the very thought that the people they call sub-human developed all the science's of the mind is intolerable

@echoes_of_egypt-J fraud

Exactly

You can refer to my sources some of which are from reputable journals like Nature, which have rigorous peer review processes. The Arabs invaded Egypt in the 7th Century but they didn't wipe out and massacared the whole Egyptians and replaced them with an Arab population. Egyptians remained Egyptians, though some mixed with Arabs and later invaders, while others, like the Copts, had limited external mixing. You can refer to this study pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4446898/ This is an excerpt from the study "The North African/Middle Eastern genetic component is identified especially in Copts. The Coptic population present in Sudan is an example of a recent migration from Egypt over the past two centuries. They are close to Egyptians in the PCA, but remain a differentiated cluster, showing their own component at k = 4 (Fig. 3). Copts lack the influence found in Egyptians from Qatar, an Arabic population. It may suggest that Copts have a genetic composition that could resemble the ancestral Egyptian population, without the present strong Arab influence." Of course, I strongly oppose Eurocentric narratives and white supremacy-history should be approached with fairness and respect for all peoples. No one should ever be called a sub-human; you can refer to reference number 5 for that. Also, calling me ‘lame’ is an ad hominem attack, which doesn’t contribute to a productive discussion. I think it's better to focus on the evidence rather than personal insults.

Hello Paul, I think you might have not watched the episode till the end...but I don't think Egyptians were black or white Caucassian (only the Ptolomies because they are from Greece including Cleopatra)...from Arts they differenciate their color from black (the Nubians or Kush) or white (Libyans for example) with this reddish middle eastern color...Indeed I talk about the genetic study in my video :)

And I also mention the Nubian invasion which lasted for nearly one century so I agree of course you cannot call the Egyptians black.

Glad you enjoyed it 😁

Glad you liked it! More coming 😁

Thanks! More of that to come hopefully 😁

Thanks! Next time 😁 you can see Halloumi cheese everywhere in Cyprus which is traditional there but you can also find claims that it's Egyptian. You can see contradition between the English and Arabic Wikepedia pages. Needs further research 😅

Thank you 🙌

Glad you liked it!

anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1548-1425.2011.01326.x

Thanks! 😁

Hahaha...thanks 😊🥰

😅

That's great...keep going 💪

Well thanks for your comment and I hope u liked the video...I intend to put more simmilar content every week....I don't think I can fully agree with you...Nasser had the option to leave everything to a fully civil non military rule specially at the time the majority of Egyptians were well educated....what Nasser did left the military to rule till today and made it so hard to transition to a non military ruler.