i have tons of questions i want to ask national geographic because i question your motives in regards to african history, but anyway.

what difference in skin colour does national geographic and experts think there would of been between the badarians and the nearest peoples living to the south of them?.

in my view if we use a multi disciplinery approach to the subject.

the original ancient egyptians whose first nome is the border of sudan must surely of looked liked the sudanese themselves since the culture came from the southfor a start.

in regards to the king tut controversy, the A.E have left us with bust of king tut themselves why cant we use these to determine what he looked like?

if there were 3 busts made of king tut by the reconstruction teams, using the skull, why do they all look different? we cant be certain he looked like the latest reconstruction you showcase.and why did national geographic use the model they used to showcase king tut?

The problem that a lot of people have with the Tut model and the overall model of Egypt is very basic at its core. How can you have two supposed separate nation powers living right next to each other, and one being of a darker hue (African) and the other so light (with European features). When I look at the geography of the two it doesn’t make common sense. If you look at the map in this article (Black Pharaohs), the Valley of the Kings and/or Thebes are right down the Nile from the border of Nubia. You don’t think that before or during Pharonic Egypt, these two peoples had no contact that was not construed as aggression? I understand the invasion and subsequent beginning of the 2nd intermediate period between the middle and the new kingdom, which lasted a few dynasties. I also understand the third intermediate (Assyrian invasion) period between the New and the Napata (25th) Dynasty. However; none of that would suggest a total racial whitewash of Pharonic Egypt. To suggest that the wood carving of Queen Tye has darkened over time (which it very well could have) and that would give others the opening to question the race or skin color of her or her son Akenaton, (whom I dare you to show me ANY European that looks remotely like him. And if you try, all I will do is point you to the actor Tyrees or the model Tyson Beckman, if we were to use such parochial means). There is no total separation of Nubia and Egypt. They are just to close for that. It is nice that the story of the 25th dynasty be told however I have already learned of these stories from great people such as Dr. Clarke, Dr Ben, Dr Van Sertima and especially Dr Diop and countless others.

Why is it that Europeans always think on the linear plane of black and white and race?The skin color of King Tut was sure not like a caucasian because in the period he lived which was around the 15th century B.C. the word Europe did not existed.From the 1st recorded Ancient Khemetian king Menes you can see his features which was non caucasian.Then let's move bacwards to the Old Kingdom to the 3rd dynastic period where you had king Djoser who is also certainly of African ancestry along with his chief adviser Imhotep.Then move to the 12th dynasty and there are man black african featured kings.
In your piece in the new issue you wrote about queen Tiye's wooden bust being darkened with age but Stevie Wonder can see her Africoid features.Further more her son was the infamous Akhanaten and his features also drove home the Africoid bloodlines.From all the great work people like Dr Ben,Dr john Henrik Clark,Dr Ivan Van Sertima,Chek Anta Diop produced, it was like in vain.In this day and age we are still asking the redundant question about the race and color of Ancient Khemetian/Egyptian Kings especially before the Greco/Roman era .The Greco/Roman era was when Khemet/Egypt was invaded by Greece and Rome and Roman and Greek people usurped and imposterized an ancient tradition.
I have read many early classical Greek and Roman writers like Herodotus and Manetho who left discriptions of the people of ancient Khemet/Egypt as dark with wooly hair no different from the Ethiopians.I beleive we have grown up and demand truth and stop playing with our intelligence.
Here are a few books to enlighten you on Africans especially the people from the Nile Valley civilazations.1 Wonderful Ethiopians of the ancient Cushite Empire, by Drusilla Dunjee Houston.2 The African origin of civilazation,by Cheik Anta Diop.Signs &Symbols of Primordial man, by Sir Albert Churchward.4 Introduction to Nile Valley Civilazation , by Anthony Browder.5 The Histories , by Herodotus.
The Nile Valley theology and philosophy was a result of the Ancient Egyptian Empire and from there it was the ancient Khemetians/Egyptians who thaught the Greeks as was mentioned by Plato and others.Then the Greeks thought the Romans,hence the roots of many of the most important gods of both countries had their roots in Khemet/Cush or Ancient Egypt.While you at it do some research on the Akan people of Ghana and the Fulani of Nigeria who are black Africans.

If you travel to Egypt or encounter some Egyptians in America, it will be obvious to you that they are predominantly Caucasian in appearance. I have asked several of them what race they belong to, and they have all answered that they are Caucasian. The Egyptians I have met all contend that they are the direct descendents of the ancient Egyptians even if they have some Arab ancestry. Thus, their appearance and testimony would make it difficult to believe that they are not predominantly Caucasian, although I would speculate that they are partly of Negroid ancestry (perhaps 10-15%). Of course, there are minority races among the Egyptians, but they are primarily descended from immigants. A famous example is Anwar Sadat, who was of Sudanese descent.

Is it not clear that the ancient Egyptians, by knowing their Spiritual culture is a mix of the Red and black races?

first of all i`d like N.G. to stop tricking people`s mind with title such as ``black pharaohs`` when they know too well that there has never been a white pharaod in history at all. They always try to make the burden of proof on black people to divert the attention, the real question is who was the white pharaoh, if he ever existed. If i can remember N.G. was a major advocate of false facts about ancient blacks and their achievements as a whole, and kemet in particular back in the day. it wasnt until DR DIOP had put all the racially charged scientists and archeologists to the test back in 1974( a fact that u dont document at all)that the situation slowly changed.
secondly , how is it that kemet influence nubia when we all know now that most of the pyramids in nubia predated the ones in kemet.
nice try guys but i never belived u then and i ll never will

I'd like to respond to a few of the comments made here. First, to slater: We can use the likenesses of King Tut from the art that the Egyptians left us but only to a point. Their art, as you know, was highly stylized, and therefore not particularly reliable regarding the details of personal appearance. The reason we chose the model that appeared on the cover is simple. That was the only one that was prepared with the full "treatment" to make it look realistic. It was the first one we started and therefore the first to be ready. In the end it was a "photo finish" to have anything to print on the cover at all!

To Michael L: I'm sorry the story didn't tell you anything new. I'm not surprised. The point of doing it, however, was to bring this information to the huge number of people that are not aware, including many school children. I see it as a starting point. Now 40 million more people know about the Nubian pharaohs, not counting those who see it on this web site.

To Victor Cumberbatch and JM: I agree with you that "Black Pharaohs" may not be the best title from the perspective you present. It sets up the logic, "If you are not black, then you are white," which is, of course, misleading and incorrect. On the other hand, the phrase "Black Pharaohs" is useful as a headline. One can argue whether there was a better one or not, but these headlines are meant to attract readers and sell magazines off the newsstand, so the nuances that you are sensitive to are considered, but often overridden by the need for editorial "punch." Its just the nature of the business.

Thank you for the article "Black Pharaohs" by Robert Draper.

Much of it was true and therefore refreshing to see African history honestly written in a mainstream periodical. However, I have several questions/comments.

1. We believe in one God and NOT multiple gods (God has many traits and therefore symbols were/are used to represent them).

2. The article, "Black Pharaohs", focused on the 25th dynasty yet failed to mention anything about the first 10 dynasties (Kemet). That doesn’t make sense because there's no point of origin. For instance, why would the Egyptians support Nubians ruling over Egypt? Is there a connection between the Nubians and Egypt's past dynasties and/or ancestors? How was King Piankhy (Piye) and the other Black kings so familiar with Egyptian spirituality and culture?

3. What prompted King Piye and the Nubian troops to restore order, unify the land/people, and then just leave? Clearly, he wasn’t an “Egyptomaniac” (how insulting) or else he would have jumped at the chance to stay in Egypt. Was he called upon by the Theban officals to improve the state of Egypt? If so, why him?

4. After the Black kings regained control of Egypt and traveled back south to Napata, who was left to rule over Egypt during that time? Could it have been their wives and daughters - Black women (assisted by the Egyptian administrators who were also black)? If I’m not mistaken the symbol for order, justice, truth, harmony, balance, reciprocity, and propriety in Egypt, Nubia, and Kush (and probably many other cultures in Africa) was/is a “black woman”. This information is missing from the article.

5. To say the Nubians were the first to experience “Egyptomania” is a huge assumption (it wasn’t proven in the article) and insult. Nubian culture/people could have actually been the basis of Egypt for all we know. That culture may have just been a way of life for them before Egypt even took its first breath.

6. Africans are spiritual people. They don’t see their fellow friends, elders, family members, neighbors, etc. as “subjects”. They see them all as family. So, the Nubians may have voluntarily built pyramids for their leaders to commemorate them or to thank God for years of leadership and guidance. It may have been out of love, dedication, and tradition (not because it was written in their leaders' wills).

7. After Kemet (Egypt) was conquered, what exactly did the leadership contribute to Egyptian/African/World history? It seems as if the spiritual growth/advancement of civilization in Kemet (1st several dynasties)/Egypt (25th dynasty) occurred when blacks were leading the masses.

Thank you

Edgar Cayce said that some survivors of Atlantis, fleeing from their famed city, brought their high degree of civilzation to the nile valley. Think of it as a "rebirth"-- a new set of ideals imposed by Lord Menes (Horus? Narmer et al.)

If that is the case and these so called Atlantans resembled a "proto" North America race, then they would have the make-up of the DNA haplogroup A, B, C+D, and the newly discovered "X". This so called "X" is key, more study into its origin could prove vital in this controversial theory.

You can can cleary see this link in "Old" kingdom busts. They definitely have some (not all) racial features that native americans have. Now before someone attacks me on this idea remember north america has many, many tribes. If you were to categorize them into distinct groups you probably could get by with the following.

West- (Cal, NW, Alaska)
Middle- (Plains tribes, Kiowa, Crow, Sioux, etc.)
East- (Iroquois, Huron, etc)
South- (Maya, Mexico, Andes, etc)

10,000-15,000 years is a lot of developement time to offer distinct racial differences between all North American peoples.

Now fast forward to 3000 BC. These "proto" americans would only resemble modern native americans to a certain degree...say 10-25%.

Now on to the whole enchilada...

These refugees from the west, "across the seas", would already find a nile valley composed of many peoples. There were definitely links in the old kingdom between Sumer and Egypt. These early migrates from Sumer probably already had inter-mingled with the black population already entrenched there.

So in conclusion- you'd have these sailors from Atlantis (possibly with haplo-group A,B, C+D, X) coming from the north (or across the desert in the west with sahara tribes) and establishing their capital at Memphis. This is documented in the Horus vs. Seth epic battle. I also wouldn't be surprised if these so called "Atlantans" had direct contact with Sumer. A contact that could go back 10, 000-30,000 years ago.

I know this idea is controversial , but it should at least be explored. Thank you!

JMoore

Why don't you do a DNA test? I would think NG could do that easily. Seems that would answer most of the questions.

Two comments on genes that are relevant to Smoke Jaguar's and Red Hat's comments. Studies of the DNA of living people show that Egyptians arose in Egypt, in Africa, and that while there was genetic influence from virtually every direction, it was influx from neighbors and not from far away.

Secondly, DNA tests on mummies have been done in the past and are ongoing. My understanding of the reasons why we have not heard more from these studies is that:

1) It is incredibly hard to get decent samples of ancient DNA, especially from mummies that have been so highly manipulated by other humans and materials.

2)Some of the studies that have been performed have been criticized and therefore are not widely publicized.

3)Using DNA to determine affiliations can be controversial and scientists must be extremely sensitive to the social consequences of their work.

4)Mummies are the cultural heritage of Egypt and Egypt has not had, until recently, a DNA lab. Samples had to be sent out of the country. This is something that Egypt was very reluctant to do. The problem with a DNA lab in Egypt, however, is that there is a high risk of confusion because contamination might be hard to detect. Some ancient DNA specialists suggest that the LAST place you would want to look for ancient DNA in mummmies is in Egypt.

this my 1st time ever commenting on this subject and i have long been a fan of NG. until the last few egyptian articles.My great grand mother(she is the same complexion as michael jordan) was born in the southern most part of egypt and as told by her there was a time when sudan and egypt were considered the same land.I grew up listening to all the old stories and ways.If you look at the founder of the 3rd dynasty Sa-Nekht was obviously negro many of our Gods came out of what is called Sudan.Prehistoric furnaces were found in notheren Rhodesia(almost near the heart of africa).and Nino Del Grande shows that it was introduced to us by "other" africans. If NG checked you would see that the Dogons in Mali were people who migrated in ancient times from the area you call egypt.Even Ptah is a negro. I felt compelled to write this because i was so offended by the asumption that we were not black "all" of the land was negro.Stop trying to tie youselves into our history you were not there.One of the bloggers was absolutely right about the writings of people like Heridotus describing us ...why do you use him when you want to show how the Greeks traveled but not to show we are negroid.....for the rest of the bloggeres what you see on tv is not how we look even today they are usually the ones who live in the city...

I'll start from early on in my evolution... I am a biracial man whose father is African-American and mother is Caucasian. My parents met in 1959 when my un-wed mother was in a nursing school where my father was employed as a nurses aide... my mother was engaged to a white man who was attending engineering school. My father had an African-American wife and (5) children at the time of his extra-marital relationship with my mother. At some early point of my mothers pregnancy with me she made the decision to marry her fiance, and to lie to everyone about who the father of her un-born child was... she achieved this by claiming that I had been afflicted with a skin-disease called "melanism".

My mother and step-father had four more children together in the space of nine years after I was born, and we grew up together in a middle-class household in white america where the subject of "race" was never discussed. My earliest recollections of having to be aware of race was when I was asked questions about the color of my skin by other classmates in first grade... "Why was my skin dark?", "Was I adopted?" race was certainly a hot-button issue in 1965-66 when I began school , but any awareness that my mother and step-father had achieved from growing up in their white neighborhoods in the 40's and 50's was insufficient in preparing them for raising a biracial child... and to complicate things, they were both in complete denial of their complicity in my mis-education. When I came home from school after having been asked questions by fellow students from my all-white school district, my mother then explained "the skin-disease story" to me... "other kids with this disease usually have dark blotches all over their bodies, so you should feel fortunate". When I would tell my mother about other boys and girls who would call me names or act aggressively for no apparent reason, I began to understand that I would get no further assistance from her to explain this rationale... my step-father was even more removed from the conversation and would only add, "You know what your mother said".

By the time that my step-father transferred jobs and our family of (7) had moved from the all-white Cleveland, Ohio suburb of Stow to the all-white school district of Portville in Western up-state N.Y. it was the spring of 1970 and I was in fourth grade, and already the veteran of many racial incidents and altercations between myself, classmates, and even some adults. My four younger siblings had also been told the same story, and had to explain the same things to their friends when asked why they had a brother who was black... "Hey, did your mother fool around a little bit??" I remember how much that hurt me when I heard it, and I'm sure that they felt just as badly when they did... nonetheless, this was a "subject" that we never discussed as a family, not once, at least in my presence.

I was taught through my observations of my mother and step-father to keep quiet about things that I wasn't sure about, and I was also taught to ignore the obvious.

As I matured into my teen-aged years and began to experience societies issues and insecurities in coming to terms with this countries racial in-equalities during the 70's, I felt an increasing need to rationalize and then codify the information that my mother had given me, regardless of what I was beginning to realize inside... I felt an increasing discomfort, yet there was no one in my life to offer any prospective... I had learned that black people were a part of society that we didn't talk about. ( There was a black family in my small town, and they were poor and lived in a run-down house near the river...I never had any opportunity or reason to associate with them)

I was a "B" student and also began taking an interest in sports where I was above average. Meeting other schools and student athletes were opportunities to then be exposed to populations that had not been inured by my story yet...I was just another black kid to them.

Communicating my experiences to my mother and step-father was difficult because they had no experience with racial prejudice, therefore when I had problems with other children it would be looked at as an issue that "I" had in getting along with others(as well as intra-family sibling issues).
Because "race" was being ruled-out entirely, by my mothers denial of my father, she could not logically use that rationale to explain any conflicts that I would have. My step-fathers complicity in this was to blindly support my mothers viewpoint.

The "white" viewpoint has always been that blacks(black society) were pretty well cared for, and what contact they did have would be polite and careful... What, with the Voting Rights and Civil Rights Acts being passed, the playing field had been leveled.(re: my mother and step-father's generation)
The feelings and comfort of my mother were apparently what was important, and her inculcation had to have been partly comprised of the idea that white society acted as the gate-keepers and care-takers of an infantilized black population.

questions:

How has black society formed its identity?

What role models have been used, and how does white society react to positive
black role models today? (Are they held to a more critical prism??)

Is there enough information readily available for black people to easily form a
positive racial identity?

Is it important that black society is able to connect accurately the dots of its social
evolution in America? and is it also important that white society can connect those
same dots??

What is White Privilege?

What is White awareness?

What is Whiteness?

What about Affirmative Action?

Is Race just a social construct?

How do we improve our society in America?

Is there any other way(besides the attrition of the old guard) to achieve this??

Dave Myers
www.discussrace.com

I recently saw a video titled The Real Eve narrated by Danny Glover. I believe it came out in 2002. The video does a remarkable job in illustrating how everyone came from Africa. The world became populated with human beings because some Black Africans decided to leave Africa and travel the world. So truly there is only one human race.

The reason why we look and act different is because of our natural environments. Skin color is determined by your exposure to ultraviolet sunlight. The absorption of some ultraviolet light is needed to produce natural vitamin D, but too much exposure of ultraviolet light is harmful. Our bodies produce melanin to regulate its absorption of ultraviolet light. People who live in environments that have a lot of sun exposure produce a lot of melanin to reflect off the ultraviolet light and people who live in environments that have low sun exposure produce less melanin so that their skin can absorb some ultraviolet light. Our skin color is just a protective function of our bodies.

My point is basic, other cultures exist today outside of Africa because Black Africans decided to leave Africa and populate the world. People look different today because of what I explained above.

How can the racial identity of the Ancient Egyptians even be questioned? The starting point of all human beings including the Ancient Egyptians is Black. They had to be of a darker skin tone because of their amount of exposure to ultraviolet light. Questioning their racial identity will always bring you back to Black.

Clearly the real issue is the false notion of Black inferiority and White superiority? The only reason why white scientists refuse to simply acknowledge the true identity of the Ancient Egyptians is because of the White Superiority complex. Also entire economies were built around the African Slave trade. The justification of African Slavery has been the notion of Black inferiority.

It is impossible for Black people to be inferior to anyone when all other cultures come from Africa.

Firstly I'd like to respond to Dave Myers.I sympathize with you for what you went through.Your mother was so wrong to lie to you about your origins when every time you looked at your skin it told you otherwise.But thank God you finally at some point in your life came to know the truth about yourself.In all things the truth will one day reveal itself.
I commend NG for the article, for finally bringing some truth to the egyptian history matter.Some truth.Your title Black Pharoahs is quite interesting. were there other pharoahs who were not black?
NG needS to tell the whole truth of the matter. Ancient Egypt was a black civilisation for many hundreds of years.One of many on the black continent of Africa.There were many black pharoahs,kings, queens and leaders.Some we know of already and others who have'nt even been discovered yet.Regarding the latter,I pray and hope that when they are brought forth from their graves of sand,dust and water and are found to have been black when they lived,I hope that some prejudiced scholar does not distort/fudge the truth to further perpetuate the many lies and falsehoods that have been written against the black race.In other words,Dont sand down the black skin of the people on drawings you've discovered, in order to make them look less african and more caucasian.You have stolen enough of our history and distorted too many truths concerning the black race.
That egypt was a black civilisation is quite obvious just from looking at the paintings they drew of each other.They drew and painted themselves as they saw themselves.If the egyptians were white, why in God's name would they paint themselves as being black and brown skinned.In today's world,all black people are not of one shade, AND THIS WAS JUST HOW THE EGYPTIANS WERE, BLACK PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT TONES AND HUES.Some dark black,some brown,some in between.Yeah in today's egypt you may call them arab but in the west you would quickly refer to them as black, negro or african american.
Racist white scholars have always tried to fudge the truth when it comes to black history.Egypt was just one of many ancient black civilizations on the continent of Africa and indeed the world.Black people notice how whenever it comes to our history or past especially if it is a great one, there's always some suppression or fudging of the truth? This is because the those who hate us in this world want to keep us misinformed and dumb about our origins and great achievements.Try as they have,it never will work for too long because we soon find the truth of the whole matter.The black race cannot be kept in the dark.Many of us have discovered real factual truths about ourselves and our origins.These truths were always here.Although many have been distorted, disguised and hidden we found the truth of the matter and will continue to find out more about ourselves.
It started with us and if there is an ending it will end with us.
Herodotus has told the world what we looked like back then.He was'nt lying.He even talked about the colchians, how they were exactly the same people as the ethiopians.
What NG needs to do is an in depth article on the black race and how it helped to influence and create many other civilizations.
Another point, has anyone heard about the blacks that have lived in the area of the Black sea in europe(Colchis) Descendants of a black army from egypt that passed through the area hundreds of years ago.Read up on herodtus's account of the colchians.Find out more about these modern day black russians.
To end I say this.I am not a racist or despiser of any man because of his skin color, but I do say to those racist white people who have shunned and suppressed others because they were or are of darker shades than yourself,beware because your time
is short.From the first day you crawled from your caves and cold places way up north in europe and the icier regions of the planet,you have been a detriment to us.You observed us for centuries, plotting on how you would take what was ours.We befriended you, we welcomed you into our villages, towns and cities as guests,visitors and residents.You took our kindness and in turn gave us your treachery.You used our differences between us to stir up strife and caused us to fight and weaken each other.Then you pounced,took over our dwellings and proclaimed what was ours as yours.You broke us down mentally and in some instances physically.You belittled us and took us by force to places we did not wish to go.Our history you stole,tore it apart, made it yours and told us we did'nt have any.You hid our great achievements.Made us to work for hundreds of years on your plantations.
Somewhere though in the back of our minds a knowledge of our past remained.Try as u did, u did not completely destroy us.For with this knowledge of our past, we rebelled, we fought back, we inspired ourselves and slowly but steadfastly crawled out of the pit you had placed us in.We have come a long way,but there is still a ways to go.Our mind is opening up and we are coming into even greater knowledge of our past, who we were and are and the awesome things we did on this planet.

I have a brief comment on a major piece of information omitted from the article, "Black Pharaohs." Draper fails to mention the groundbreaking research of Bruce Williams, who found the proto-Nile Valley civilization of Kush/ Ta-Seti based around Qustul, Sudan. The very first depiction of ANY Pharaoh is in Nubia (Qustul) (circa 4236 - 3500 bce). Such an omission from America's premier periodical of public history is highly problematic. The article also fails to cite the work of Cheikh Anta Diop and Theophile Obenga, who successfully defended the Africanity of Kemet, the Black country/nation (not black LAND) in the 1970s at a UNESCO symposium. Bruce Williams work has been available since the 1960s. Either, Draper made a major omission or he conveniently omitted solid & relevant research for his own agenda -to establish/suggest a racial difference between the Kemite and Kushite peoples. This was slyly suggested in the caption to the comic-painting of Piankhy's troops storming Memphis (p.36-37), where Ramses II is painted in the background as a white/pale Mediterranean figure. This is a racist suggestion that shows clear Hegelian anti-African bias. Nice photography, but Draper's Neo-Hegelian suggestions taint a potentially profound article. Oh, one last comment on Queen Tiye. The 'rumors' of her Nubian ancestry are irrelevant. Her pronounced prognathism, facial features and hairstyle mark her -and the Kemetic civilization- as a daughter of Africa. That National Geographic cannot discuss Ancient Egypt as an African civilization is very disappointing, but speaks volumes about the persistent power of racist bias. In its effort to give props to Kush and Nubia, NGM has ignored Nubia's most profound historic claim - that Kemet was its most celebrated, but still younger progeny.

RE: Samory Ba's comment. My understanding is that discoveries made since Bruce Williams's work at Qustul show that earlier, or at least contemporaneous, pharaohnic iconography appeared further north in Egypt, I believe at Heirakonpolis.

RE: J.H. Nina Jablonski is one scientist who has done much to illuminate the causes of skin color variation. A nice profile of her and a reference to her book on skin, "Skin: A Natural History," is at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/09/science/09conv.html.

Although i am aware of the ancestry of the pharoahs of the first dynastics period in kemet i am curious to know who NGM think they might be.
If you look at the nubians and then suggest that five miles cross the border is an entirely different race of people in kemet is absurd and totally imbecillic. Besides language,are the Germans and French that different. Egypt could not look like it did today as it did 2000 years ago. It is like saying North America looks the same today as it did 1000 years ago.
It has become very evident that there is a fear of the black/African race by our major media outlets. If people were to know the truth about African civilizations and the origins of the human race, they would be very surprise, because the media and many historians have distorted the truth.
If you are able to think for yourself, logic will dictate that certain things cannot be and can only be a particular way.
At one time they try to take Egypt out of Africa, now they are trying to take blacks out of Africa.
Anything that confuses the mind and allows you to make up lies from the truth you see and then you try to spread it to the masses,makes it a danger to yourself and society.

RE: Kenneth McFarlane. NGM reports what it hears from scientists and tries to present the most balanced perspective. So, what we (at NGM) think is not really the issue. It is what the scientific community thinks. And from what I hear, that community is not saying that there was "an entirely different race" in Egypt. They are saying the people living in Egypt in the past are much like they are today.

So-called white people are about 8% of the population of the earth.
They (you) are now in the process of re-classifying the race of people that were once considered to be black. The question is:

WHY?????

Of course the people in Egypt today are not the same as 2000 years ago!!!!! That is a ridiculous claim. And anyway since when are Arabs considered "white" or Causasian.

Forgive my derision Chris, but to believe that the people of Egypt now are exactly the same as they were in ancient Egypt is a bit...naive. We have seen too many examples of similar civilizations being displaced entirely - i.e. Mayans and Incas. The African diaspora feel they need to know because it's one of the few civilizations in Africa that current society has a genuine interest in. Knowing that such a powerful civilization (its grip still exists today if it's able to evoke such debates) was composed of "blacks" would be a powerful point of pride.

As an African-American of Ethiopian, Native American, West African, Scottish and Irish descent I was delighted to see your cover and immediately snatched it up. I don't normally buy your magazine and have not read one in more than 10 years. The story on Piankhy and his family is not new to me. I had a book when I was a teenager about him with full illustrations that is now lost to the ravages of time. I am happy you shared this story with EVERYONE and would love to see you do one on Timbuktu and the great library that the Romans talked about in ancient times. My people have a long and marvelous history that has been stunted and ignored by those who would see us as "less than human". You have made us whole again by this one story. Thank you and bless you all!

Nat. Geo probably would not have been let back into Egypt if they simply came out and said what everyone with eyes can see; That ancient Egyptians were African Blacks. "Blacks" as in the social term with use today in America and Africa. Im sure some reading this and other familiar with history remember (as the article even states) when the Nubians were WHITE. Along with the Nubians you also had White Ethiopians, Tutsi, Masai etc. Also Somalians used to be "Dark Skinned Whites", Even the darkest North Sudanese were "White." Oh, and the Dinka at one point, you guessed it, were also white. This gets old. With all the technology and research we have done we are still taking steps backwards when it comes to acknowledging the true history of Africans. YES Modern Egyptians ARE the closest link to Ancient Egyptians. This is so true especially when we look through DNA. You will notice they never really come out and say that the Modern Egyptians that they are speaking of all live south of the Delta in Upper Egypt, where there has been less mixture and many in the population look and are no different from East African Blacks such as Ethiopians and Somalians. They also never come out and say that the largest percentage of DNA that modern Egyptians have is also the largest that Ethiopians and Somalis have, 2 populations that have no history of invading Egypt. We know who HAS invaded Egypt within the last 200 years, if you subtract their DNA who's do you have left? Even the legendary Land of Punt which we KNOW to be in East Africa (Ethiopia/Eritrea) had a population that was shown no different from Ancient Egyptians. Ancient Egyptians did this to show Heritage. With All this evidence we choose to still state that the Ancient Egyptians were something other than African Blacks. Sad, wake up Nat Geo, this is 2008 not 1908!

JM, I think there were white Pharaohs. The last dynasty was started by Ptolemy I who came from Masadonia.

NGM seems to think Nubia conquered Egypt for Egypt's own good. How do they know this? Conquerers usually do so for personal gain, no matter what the skin color.

As for the race of the Ancient Egyptians, I doubt they were either Caucasian or Negroid, but somewhere in between.

Someone mentioned the documentary, The Real Eve. I loved it. We should always remember that we are all descended from Africans.

I was a student at historically black Jackson State University in 1980, taking a history course in pursuit of a communications degree. A white professor who was teaching the class noticed a lack of interest among the students, when he asked why, he got an ear full of responses. It's boring, it only speaks of europeian conquests, it's full of lies and half truths, etc. His response was that if you really want to know about onces true history you have to do you own research and you have to read between the lines of mainstream history. He spoke of the question of the race of Jesus Christ and how he and his family was able to hide in Egypt when Herod wanted to kill all male children two years old and younger, if he were europian do you think he could have pulled that off? Now I'm not saying he was african, I'm simply saying that the truth is all we want.

So called scientist can not prove what race the ancient Egyptians were, so why do so called historians try to. It is tiresome to keep hearing the "fact" that Nubia and Egypt developed totally independent of each other when they are geographicly adjacent. They were trading partners, did these goods get dropped off at the boarders and simply picked up by other side with nothing else being exchanged culturally. To say the the Egyptians didn't sail the oceans when they clearly had very large vessels or even in the face of clear evidence that the west africans took to seas.

We know that the Vikings sailed to the Americas before Columbus yet they are not given credit for being the first europians to do so and africans landed on american soil before Columbus as well. Or the fact that Africans controlled the Spanish pennisular for quite some time. There is even the legend that africans fought in the Trojan/Spartan war, and before you harp on the word "legend" it can be applied to the war itself.

From what I have found in my quest for the truth is that the earliest Egyptians were of African origin and the powerful Egypt that we are speaking of was an african/asiatic mix, not the Egyptians that occupy Egypt today. The Egyptian book of the Dead (why don't we call it by its real name "The Book Of Comingforth By Day" is it another attempt to demean its place in history) dates beyond the pyrimids, were there no Africans living in the region then.

You give afrocentricity all the fuel it needs when you try to explain away obvious truths with nonsense and complete falsehoods. The truth, that all we want and all we need.

Whites invaded Egypt and wars won resulted in massive rape as women were spoils creating the Middle Eastern races half white half African, before this we were building temples in Africa. Don't need a scientist to study it, just LOOK at the pictures on the tombs in Egypt, Egyptians made themselves not only black in color but gave themselves full lips in their artwork. Why remake the face of King Tut if his people made it in Gold on the Coffin. Oh, maybe cause they made him a black man with full lips.

"There is nothing of value in Africa."

Twenty-one years later, I still remember those words said by my history teacher, who happened to be a white male. That was his response to a question a student had asked about why the class was not studying Africa. It was the next chapter in our history book. This was just after we had studied Egypt, where he also stated that the Egyptians were Caucasian.

Back in 1987, I was a 14-year-old first generation Haitian-American female attending an all white Catholic school in the Poconos. My history teacher's comments didn't sit well with me. I went home that day and asked my mother, "Mom, were the Egyptians white?" Her response was that they were black and also mixed. That answer was good enough for me.

As I went through college, grad school, and finally out into the real world, the debate still continued. It will only be settled when the truth is told.

The oldest remains of homo sapiens were discovered in Africa (Tanzania, I believe). An African (who I'm guessing was probably black since it was 150,000 years ago) gave birth to the human species that come in many different shades. Eventually civilizations were born. No matter what color you are, humans are all one "race" - black. We are one species with many cultures. Our DNA can be traced back to one African. We are all related.

For far too long, Africa has been devalued. Isn't it about time the truth be told?

Check out:
http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/stephenoppenheimer/

Please see "Featured Books and Articles" on www.discussrace.com

1. There seems to be some confusion between the term "white" and the Caucasian race. A "white" person is usually someone descended from Europeans or various peoples of the Middle East who have fair skin. The majority of the Caucasian race is not fair-skinned. For example, most people in India and North Africa are not fair-skinned but are Caucasians. DNA analysis confirms that they are relatively closely related to Europeans.

2. Anyone who thinks that the majority of Egyptians are black should take a good look at Hosni Mubarak, Omar Sharif, and Gamal Abdel Nasser among many other well-known Egyptians. It will be obvious that they are predominantly Caucasian.

3. Yes, some of the pharaohs and some of their consorts were black; they were primarily descended from the Nubian minority in the far South, near the current border with Sudan.

4. Egyptian art carefully differentiates between the native Egyptians and the Nubians. If you compare Egyptian depictions of themselves with the self-depictions of the Ashanti and other West African peoples, you will see that the Nubians closely resemble the West Africans, but not the Egyptians. The facial features of most (but not all) of the ancient Egyptians, as represented in their art, are clearly Caucasian.

5. Conclusion: The Egyptians, both ancient and modern, are predominantly Caucasian. However, only a minority are "white" enough to pass for Europeans or "white" Americans.

The comment that the people of Ancient Kamit look like the people of modern day so called Egypt does not take into consideration:

1.) The historical facts that Kamit was the "University" of the World in Ancient times. Many people from modern day Asia, Europe, etc. came to study and never left.

2.) The historical facts that Kamit was "Wall Street" of the World in Ancient times. The tradesmen and merchants came to do business and some never left.

3.) The historical facts that the outside nations of the students and tradesmen eventually took there turns invading and occupying Kamit.

The last major invation being of people from Arab decent spreading Islam the dominant religion in the Area.
As you all should know the spreading of the Islamic religion was by the sword.

The original people of Kamit were invaded and persecuted and forced to run, hide, die or live in bondage.
The majority people of the modern day Egypt are not the original people of Kamit they are decendants of the invaders of Kamit.

We have come a long way in the strugle for truth but we still have a very long way to go. NGM keep putting out your stories, it gives us an avenue for discussing the TRUTH.

ONELOVE PEACE and BLESSINGS

HRKS

Chris,

Your publication is called "National" Geographic..that "Nation" it is based in is America which is made up of many races. What other races of scientists work did you use beyond Caucasian?

There are several "Noted" Black scientists and scholars in this field whom Mr. Draper could have consulted. But instead he chose to insult them by NOT mentioning them and implying that African centered scholarship is based on frivolous information. (The Queen Tiye comment on aged darkened wood inspiring the notion she is Nubian)

From the start, the article is based in either lackadaisical research or a White Supremacist mindset. To ignore the OVERWHELMING research done by Black scientists and scholars and present the "Black Pharoahs" as Conquerors of an already established white/caucasian high culture during Black History Month is a serious snub!

The following references make it clear that the Nubians did not "Conquer Egypt" which is a misleading statement in itself, but they kicked out of THEIR land those who would bring shame to and mock the High Culture established by THEIR ancestors!

The Destruction of Black Civilization
by Chancellor Williams

The African Origin of Civilization
by Cheikh Anta Diop

The Black Man of the Nile and His Family
by Dr. Yosef Ben Jochannon

Egypt: Child of Africa
Edited by Ivan Van Sertima

Egypt Revisited
Edited by Ivan Van Sertima

Wonderful Ethiopians of the Ancient Cushite Empire
by Drusilla D. Houston

Echoes from the Old Darkland
by Dr. Charles S. Finch, III

And since you're so seemingly bent on using caucasian scholars, at least study and or reference the works of

C.F. Volney
Ruins of Empires

Gerald Massey
A Book of the Beginnings
The Natural Genesis
Ancient Egypt the Light of the World

When I saw the cover my first thought was wow, finally some recognition of what Blacks really accomplished in ancient history. But, when I got to the subtitle I could see where this was going. No mention of the First Dynasty at all!!? From where do you think Menes/Narmer had come?

NG could have taken a serious step in properly educating millions on the true place of Blacks in history but instead you chose to do what you did and continue to push the false case of White Supremacy.

Then again, this is YOUR (White) publication and if we (Blacks) want better representation then we better create our own.

Why is it that Europeans spend so much time trying to disqualify and hide the contributions of blacks.

How did Egypt move out of Africa and into a new place called the Middle East?

Why were so many of the contributions of African Americans in the time of slavery and there after stolen and no recognition given?

Why is it so important for Europeans to feel that they are superior?

Why are there so many pictures of dark skinned Egyptians in the hieroglyphics, did they darken over time, too? Did the heads and noses of the Egyptians that were destroyed, destroyed because they told the true story that Europeans didn't wanted to hear?

Why is Africa, Egypt and Black Pharaohs bold and in bigger font that the rest of the text in the feature story of National Geographic's February issue? What is the point that Draper is trying to make? Does he want to sublimanally tell us now that Egyptians weren't black?

Give me a BREAK! Stop already!!

Wow. The comments are amazing! Everyone here has expressed exactly what I want to address.
Let me say that I frankly am very disappointed in NGM. You are adding fuel and fanning the flames of modern mythology that there is a race issue here and I think frankly think it disingenuous of you. I always considered the staff at NGM to be honest and forthright in their research and exploration. You have spent so much time on the African continent bringing us amazing images of Mother Nature and her people.
I agree with the readers that the art stands for itself. I am an art history major and I have never seen modern science reconstruct the features of any Roman ruler, Greek ruler, or any people from the ancient world so as to suggest that the original art is stylized and therefore not a true depiction of the people of that time. The art always speaks for itself. I find it curious that, if the ancient Egyptian pharaohs were white, that they would stylize their art in such a way as to depict themselves with African features. Especially if they looked like your ridiculous depiction of King Tut with the long European nose, thin lips and recessed chin. He hardly looks anything like his sarcophagus or his African (looking) grandmother, Queen Tiye, who you suggest might be Nubian. Your reconstruction looks more like what we see in some of the ancient Sumerian art. Most of the ancient Sumerians are depicted with full lips and curved noses resembling many Arabs of today. However there are drawings and sculptures of a strange looking people with long pointed noses, thin lips and receding chins. They look very European and do not resemble the ancient Sumerians at all, and certainly are not similar to the ancient Egyptians.
I find your attempts intellectually and spiritual immature. You go to such lengths to reconstruct the faces of an amazing and beautiful civilization of people who left behind a vast treasure of art that clearly speaks for itself. I also find it very manipulative of you to use the art of contemporary artist in lieu of the original works to influence people’s visual image of the ancient Egyptians. It is comparable to the Vatican using Michelangelo to paint God in the image of a giant bearded white man with a great athletic body and lots of great hair. That is the image the masses have held in their consciousness for centuries. You are influencing millions of people away from the original art toward some modern image of a new ancient Egyptian by redesigning the faces of the people of this great empire.
In your article you suggest European archeologist are guilty of destroying potentially countless African artifacts because they could not accept the historical truth. If scientists are willing to destroy evidence in order to support the premise that ancient Egyptians were a white race of people, it seems to me that you are appearing to be dangerously guilty of the exact same offense. Your credibility is on the line here and you may be influenced by the same destructive ego that has manipulated and destroyed African history over hundreds of years.
I have always enjoyed this magazine but I realize when you published this article that your staff may be less concerned with history and more concerned with protecting the illusion that the white race is and always will be a superior one over people of color. I never saw your faces until today when I looked at the pictures of your staff. It so resembles the political structure of this country, the faces that everyone in this country wants to change and diversify, the panel of “all white men.”
I do appreciate your story of the Black Pharaohs of Africa. It is good for people to realize the African continent has a great, powerful, and ancient history. It is also illuminating that there is this thing call “racism” rearing its ugly head even in science. Change happens when people demand the truth and insist on putting an end to this unhealthy obsession with whiteness. This a time when we need historical truths and emotional healing among all the people of color; black, brown, red, yellow, white. We are on the horizon of discovering oneness in our humanity, as a race of people; Race has been used as a weapon and is a merely illusion now that we know we all come from mother Africa. I hope you can find it within you to honestly soul-search that which motivates you in being a part of the solution, and instead of being a part of the problem.

Mr. Draper mentioned in his
article - which I loved - that
early 20th century White
Egyptologists like Reisner
considered the Kushites Caucasian.
This begs two questions:
1) What evidence or documentation
led them to that conclusion?
2) What evidence or documentation
leads present White Egyptologists
to the conclusion that ancient
Egyptians were Caucasian?

Here's an article you might be interested in:

http://www.theanthonyreport.com/StillMisEducating.pdf

Wow!

I really don't know where to begin...

I thought we, as a people, were beyond hiding the truth. Gone are the days of blind ignorance. People are more inclined to do their own research in order to root out the facts behind the stories of their youth. A "scientists" word is no longer held as unquestionable. Their credibility will be forever tarnished.

What I don't understand is why put so much effort into denying Africans their rightful heritage?

What are people afraid of?

Do we really believe that, Africans of all nations and continents are incapable of such a history?

Historically, when will we evolve from "bush-men" in the public opinion?

Question to Chris Sloan--

Why did they portray the Nubians in leopard skins, giving the impression that the Nubians were primitives? Some of the Nubian soldiers look like Zulu warriors. The magazine played on the image of Africa(black Africa) as primitive and backwards. None of Tuharqa's statues have leopard skins. I am assuming the scientist you are talking about who influence this article was Timothy Kendall and his ilk. Timothy Kendal takes a wretched Kush position(nubia is a bastard child of Egypt), other nubiologist don't take that postion. This article was not a scientific consensus enterprise. It was a Timothy Kendall consensus.

During a recent 28 day holiday in Australia and the South Pacific I was fortunate to meet and visit with Robert Draper the author of "Black Pharaohs" in the February issue of National Geographic. I rushed to read his article when I returned home and found the acticle well researched and fasinating. His article gives well documented evidence of black ancestry in Egypt. Ancient Egyptians were not concerned with the color of a persons skin but more concerned for the persons culture. Isn't it amazing how much more advanced the ancient Egyptian civilization was in regarding race and the color of a person skin than we are in this modern more enlightened civization?

Why not apply Cheikh Anta Diop's approach and examine the skin of the mummies as he did on the Marietta excavation?

http://www.blackhistoryjohnmoore.bravehost.com/chapter7.html

Does anyone have sites that show pictures of the collections in the basement of that Cairo museum?

This article was not well researched. It took the position of the likes of Timothy Kendall and William Y Adams. The age of the Qustal incense burner proved, even though evidence of contemporary or predated artifacts of Egyptian origins have been discovered, Egypt and Nubia were related civilization, from the same cultural techno-complex and not just Nubia doing the borrowing. The Nubians did not suffer from "Egyptomania" as is the position of Kendall and Adams. The position of other Nubiologist like Bruce Williams, Stanley Burstein, and African Sudanes scholars does not support this. An Egyptomania Nubia is not the consensus of Nubiologist, the "scientific community." The Egyptomania Nubia is the consensus of those of he old guard Nubiology. I think Robert Draper spent too much time with the likes of Kendall and read too much William Y Adams(maybe that is where the notion of primitive Nubian soldiers come from). Again NG, you have pimp falsehood as scientific truth. In its beginning,Egypt was doing the borrowing from Nubia around 6000 BCE, when it was first being settled. This is fact as seen from the Khartoum Mesolith.

I’m amazed at how everyone fails to look at the historical evidence; iconography, myths and mythology. This is what the story of Horus vs. Seth represented. It was “highly portrayed that there was a deep rooted conflict between the Nubian south and the Red north. The Nubians prized the north and vice-versa. The Red north didn’t look at the Nubians in racist terms as some people do today. They projected out to expand their territory for the safety of their legacy. Hence…Nubians were prized and accepted in all walks of life, from being a general in the army, all the way up to being a queen to the pharaoh.

I find it amusing that modern day archaeologists and Egyptologists continue to support old tradition and precepts. When will they move on and open their eyes to the truth. It is evident that there was a link between Phoenicia, Egypt, Mycenae, Minoan, and the New World (really the old world; now that would shock to the world), and of its inhabitants, these so called people Columbus called “Indians”.

Pharaoh Djoser is a prime example. NA features all the way- tall and graceful, high cheek bones, big ears, full lips. Did he have a roman nose?

I’m not saying all pharaohs were descended from the Red race. If I was to surmise…the early founders of the Old Kingdom (3100-2800bc) sparked the founding link between North America. Then Djoser(2400-2200bc), and then the Middle Kingdom (2100-1800bc). I’m not sure how vibrant the New Kingdom (1500-1200bc) link was, but it was definitely there and alive.

A’ho “Thank You”
The Kwuda “coming out”

PS- After looking at the bust of king Tut, I find it appalling how he was portrayed. He looks more like a Hyksos or something of a northern Aryan horseman. Good grief NatGEO, he would have had the same traits as Akhenaten and queen Nefertiti.

PS2- Also look at the iconography portrayed on the coffin of the Middle Kingdom warlord recently discovered. If that isn’t a map of a journey from the west to east across water…then I don’t how much more you need.

The ignorance of the National Geographic and some of the comments here are astounding to say the least.

Has anyone from N.G. or here ever go to Egypt? Anyone actually know an Egyptian? More than 5?

As for the "color" of all of our Art. Has anyone even researched this??? The pharaoh's were painted many different colors. Aometimes also painted green. Now we're Martians right?

Take an Egyptology course or do some research otherwise shutup.

Dear National Geographic,

I've been reading your magazines for as long as I can remember. I learned to research on my own using National Geographic because my family has a very nearly complete collection, one that begins in the early 1930's.
I fully appreciate National Geographic and believe fully in the academic stewardship of your great publication's founders and defining objectives.

It would appear that a great many of these comments have been written by African Americans. I don't know what your publication's readership statistics look like but it would be curious to learn how many African American households have subscriptions to National Geographic and of these, how many generations has been reading, learning from your magazine?

As an African American myself and one whose parents are both indigenous Egyptians, indistinguishable from other East Africans of the Horn, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Yemen, and Sudan, I must be candid with my disappointment with your publication of late.

For me, the Elisabeth Daynes reconstruction of Tutankhamen was simply insulting. Anyone that has spent even one hour in Upper Egypt knows full well what a Saiddi porter looks like. They will also be able to recognize a photograph of Anwar Sadat with ease. Clearly from looking at the dessicated mummy, the criminally exploited human bodily remains of the indigenous Upper Egyptian "boy king" should put any question of his ethnicity to rest.

What National Geographic has done is marginalize and disavow the existence of the Upper Egyptian ethnicities and there are more than one or two mind you. I have had enough of this black or white talk. That is for your American or European mind set. No one in Egypt understands that dialog at all. Anyone curious to know what an Ancient Egyptian looked like needs only to visit Upper Egypt or the Western Desert Oases or travel to the Horn or Eritrea. Of course it is ridiculous to try and force an enormous incredibly diverse culture into such limiting stereotypes which brings me to my second issue with your magazine.

Your article on "Black Pharaohs" did nothing to elucidate the cultural anthropological foundations of 25th Dynasty Egypt. There was no superimposed map across the desert that outlined where people with different skin colour or features should live. Political unrest within Egypt by native Egyptians, many of which from the vassal kingdoms of Irthet, Wawat and Shendi Reach, originally, were obliged to migrate out of Egypt for a time, only to return again.

Westerners have never been comfortable with acknowledging the ethnic diversity within Africa and this is not limited to those of the European extraction.
It is important to remember that East Africa and the Sahara are home to many millions of living human beings, each more valuable and beloved than the next one. We mustn't trample on the living cultures' self- identities by projecting racial constructs upon them.

Here is a woman that appears as if she fell from a stone temple in Karnak:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/07/exmodel-waris-dirie-foun_n_90425.html
Please do not insult Waris Dirie or any other East African native with these constructs that have been created for and by the west.

Lastly, the most disturbing issue is the use of the term " Pharaoh".

This was simply not used to describe a king it is the term used to describe the governmental body, known as the " Great House ". It is misleading and inaccurate to call any single person a Pharaoh before the Roman's conquered Egypt and demanded that they, as in individual men, be called The Great House.

The fact that National Geographic would continue to misuse the term flagrantly, almost in an appeal to readers that primarily equate Egyptian rulers with Biblical legend, flies in the face of what National Geographic is supposed to represent .

I would prefer to believe that objective academic stewardship would take precedence of magazine sales.

Perhaps we are too idealistic to believe so.

Sincerely
Milad Sourial

Dear National Geographic,

I've been reading your magazines for as long as I can remember. I learned to research on my own using National Geographic because my family has a very nearly complete collection, one that begins in the early 1930's.
I fully appreciate National Geographic and believe fully in the academic stewardship of your great publication's founders and defining objectives.

It would appear that a great many of these comments have been written by African Americans. I don't know what your publication's readership statistics look like but it would be curious to learn how many African American households have subscriptions to National Geographic and of these, how many generations has been reading, learning from your magazine?

As an African American myself and one whose parents are both indigenous Egyptians, indistinguishable from other East Africans of the Horn, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Yemen, and Sudan, I must be candid with my disappointment with your publication of late.

For me, the Elisabeth Daynes reconstruction of Tutankhamen was simply insulting. Anyone that has spent even one hour in Upper Egypt knows full well what a Saiddi porter looks like. They will also be able to recognize a photograph of Anwar Sadat with ease. Clearly from looking at the dessicated mummy, the criminally exploited human bodily remains of the indigenous Upper Egyptian "boy king" should put any question of his ethnicity to rest.

What National Geographic has done is marginalize and disavow the existence of the Upper Egyptian ethnicities and there are more than one or two mind you. I have had enough of this black or white talk. That is for your American or European mind set. No one in Egypt understands that dialog at all. Anyone curious to know what an Ancient Egyptian looked like needs only to visit Upper Egypt or the Western Desert Oases or travel to the Horn or Eritrea. Of course it is ridiculous to try and force an enormous incredibly diverse culture into such limiting stereotypes which brings me to my second issue with your magazine.

Your article on "Black Pharaohs" did nothing to elucidate the cultural anthropological foundations of 25th Dynasty Egypt. There was no superimposed map across the desert that outlined where people with different skin colour or features should live. Political unrest within Egypt by native Egyptians, many of which from the vassal kingdoms of Irthet, Wawat and Shendi Reach, originally, were obliged to migrate out of Egypt for a time, only to return again.

Westerners have never been comfortable with acknowledging the ethnic diversity within Africa and this is not limited to those of the European extraction.
It is important to remember that East Africa and the Sahara are home to many millions of living human beings, each more valuable and beloved than the next one. We mustn't trample on the living cultures' self- identities by projecting racial constructs upon them.

Here is a woman that appears as if she fell from a stone temple in Karnak:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/07/exmodel-waris-dirie-foun_n_90425.html
Please do not insult Waris Dirie or any other East African native with these constructs that have been created for and by the west.

Lastly, the most disturbing issue is the use of the term " Pharaoh".

This was simply not used to describe a king it is the term used to describe the governmental body, known as the " Great House ". It is misleading and inaccurate to call any single person a Pharaoh before the Roman's conquered Egypt and demanded that they, as in individual men, be called The Great House.

The fact that National Geographic would continue to misuse the term flagrantly, almost in an appeal to readers that primarily equate Egyptian rulers with Biblical legend, flies in the face of what National Geographic is supposed to represent .

I would prefer to believe that objective academic stewardship would take precedence of magazine sales.

Perhaps we are too idealistic to believe so.

Sincerely
Milad Sourial

Dear National Geographic,

I've been reading your magazines for as long as I can remember. I learned to research on my own using National Geographic because my family has a very nearly complete collection, one that begins in the early 1930's.
I fully appreciate National Geographic and believe fully in the academic stewardship of your great publication's founders and defining objectives.

It would appear that a great many of these comments have been written by African Americans. I don't know what your publication's readership statistics look like but it would be curious to learn how many African American households have subscriptions to National Geographic and of these, how many generations have been reading, learning from your magazine? We can only hope that new generations will sign on.

As an African American myself and one whose parents are both indigenous Egyptians, indistinguishable from other East Africans of the Horn, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Yemen, and Sudan, I must be candid with my disappointment.

For me, the Elisabeth Daynes reconstruction of Tutankhamen was simply insulting. Anyone that has spent even one hour in Upper Egypt knows full well what a Saiddi porter looks like. They will also be able to recognize a photograph of Anwar Sadat with ease. Clearly from looking at the desiccated mummy, the criminally exploited human bodily remains of the indigenous Upper Egyptian "boy king" should put any question of his ethnicity to rest.

What National Geographic has done is marginalize and disavow the existence of the Upper Egyptian ethnicities and there are more than one or two mind you. The Beja, Bisharin, Hadendoa,, Saiidi and Siwi are just the first that come to mind.
I have had enough of this black or white duality talk. That is for a Euroentric/Afrocentric mindset. No one living in Upper Egypt understands that dialog at all. Anyone curious to know what an Ancient Egyptian looked like needs only to visit Upper Egypt or the Western Desert Oases or travel to the Horn or Eritrea. Of course it is ridiculous to try and force an enormous incredibly diverse culture, that is Egypt, into such limiting stereotypes which brings me to my second issue with your magazine.

Your article on "Black Pharaohs" did nothing to elucidate the cultural anthropological foundations of 25th Dynasty Egypt. There was no superimposed map across the desert that outlined where people with different skin colour or features should live. Political unrest within Egypt by native Egyptians, many of which from the vassal kingdoms of Irthet, Wawat and Shendi Reach, originally, were obliged to migrate out of Egypt for a time, only to return again.

Westerners have never been comfortable with acknowledging the ethnic diversity within Africa and this is not limited to those of the European extraction.
It is important to remember that East Africa and the Sahara are home to many millions of living human beings, each more valuable and beloved than the next one. We mustn't trample on the living cultures' self- identities by projecting racial constructs upon them.

Here is a woman that appears as if she fell from a stone temple in Karnak:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/07/exmodel-waris-dirie-foun_n_90425.html
Please do not insult Waris Dirie or any other East African native with these constructs that have been created for and by the west.

Lastly, the most disturbing issue is the use of the term " Pharaoh".

This was simply not used to describe a king it is the term used to describe the governmental body, known as the " Great House ". It is misleading and inaccurate to call any single person a Pharaoh before the Roman's conquered Egypt and demanded that they, as in individual men, be called The Great House.

The fact that National Geographic would continue to misuse the term flagrantly, almost in an appeal to readers that primarily equate Egyptian rulers with Biblical legend, flies in the face of what National Geographic is supposed to represent .

I would prefer to believe that objective academic stewardship would take precedence of magazine sales.

Perhaps we are too idealistic to believe so.

Sincerely
Milad Sourial

Dear National Geographic,

I've been reading your magazines for as long as I can remember. I learned to research on my own using National Geographic because my family has a very nearly complete collection, one that begins in the early 1930's.
I fully appreciate National Geographic and believe fully in the academic stewardship of your great publication's founders and defining objectives.

It would appear that a great many of these comments have been written by African Americans. I don't know what your publication's readership statistics look like but it would be curious to learn how many African American households have subscriptions to National Geographic and of these, how many generations have been reading, learning from your magazine? We can only hope that new generations will sign on.

As an African American myself and one whose parents are both indigenous Egyptians, indistinguishable from other East Africans of the Horn, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Yemen, and Sudan, I must be candid with my disappointment.

For me, the Elisabeth Daynes reconstruction of Tutankhamen was simply insulting. Anyone that has spent even one hour in Upper Egypt knows full well what a Saiddi porter looks like. They will also be able to recognize a photograph of Anwar Sadat with ease. Clearly from looking at the desiccated mummy, the criminally exploited human bodily remains of the indigenous Upper Egyptian "boy king" should put any question of his ethnicity to rest.

What National Geographic has done is marginalize and disavow the existence of the Upper Egyptian ethnicities and there are more than one or two mind you. The Beja, Bisharin, Hadendoa,, Saiidi and Siwi are just the first that come to mind.
I have had enough of this black or white duality talk. That is for a Euroentric/Afrocentric mindset. No one living in Upper Egypt understands that dialog at all. Anyone curious to know what an Ancient Egyptian looked like needs only to visit Upper Egypt or the Western Desert Oases or travel to the Horn or Eritrea. Of course it is ridiculous to try and force an enormous incredibly diverse culture, that is Egypt, into such limiting stereotypes which brings me to my second issue with your magazine.

Your article on "Black Pharaohs" did nothing to elucidate the cultural anthropological foundations of 25th Dynasty Egypt. There was no superimposed map across the desert that outlined where people with different skin colour or features should live. Political unrest within Egypt by native Egyptians, many of which from the vassal kingdoms of Irthet, Wawat and Shendi Reach, originally, were obliged to migrate out of Egypt for a time, only to return again.

Westerners have never been comfortable with acknowledging the ethnic diversity within Africa and this is not limited to those of the European extraction.
It is important to remember that East Africa and the Sahara are home to many millions of living human beings, each more valuable and beloved than the next one. We mustn't trample on the living cultures' self- identities by projecting racial constructs upon them.

Here is a woman that appears as if she fell from a stone temple in Karnak:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/07/exmodel-waris-dirie-foun_n_90425.html
Please do not insult Waris Dirie or any other East African native with these constructs that have been created for and by the west.

Lastly, the most disturbing issue is the use of the term " Pharaoh".

This was simply not used to describe a king it is the term used to describe the governmental body, known as the " Great House ". It is misleading and inaccurate to call any single person a Pharaoh before the Roman's conquered Egypt and demanded that they, as in individual men, be called The Great House.

The fact that National Geographic would continue to misuse the term flagrantly, almost in an appeal to readers that primarily equate Egyptian rulers with Biblical legend, flies in the face of what National Geographic is supposed to represent .

I would prefer to believe that objective academic stewardship would take precedence of magazine sales.

Perhaps we are too idealistic to believe so.

Sincerely
Milad Sourial

[QUOTE]And from what I hear, that community is not saying that there was "an entirely different race" in Egypt. They are saying the people living in Egypt in the past are much like they are today.[QUOTE]

For Chris Sloan and others that are fighting with themselves in denying african beauty, trueness, richness and superiority. I can help all you people (especially caucations) to stop denying yourselfs and accept where you all come from.

I will not blame you caucasians of today for your ignorance..... We use to say "Don't blame the messenger", but for once I will blame the messenger. Namely your caucation messenger(s) who out of all human being have been trying to study and understand what is truelly called your origins - When I look through the eyes of todays and past (the messengers) caucatians I can imagine how hard it must be for you all to see and accept the fact that you couldn't have existed when we (original blacks) didnt moved around the globe.

After all what your messengers and their messengers have done - telling and making you believe in lies that has become your standard way of life. Having been thought and brought up by your messenger(s) to view black as anything that has to be minor than yourself, and to discover that actually you are the minor ones is hard. We all can imagine that, but there is no other alternative but the truth and purity of your origins that must be accepted.

I feel for you all (another thing the black race is good at: forgiving, since we are superior we have the ability to place ourselves in your situation). It is a thick pill to swallow, but hey remember we are the khem people who can do misterious things (khemistry: chemistry). We can make the pill easy to swallow for you. Only and only if you realize and accept where you and you fellow caucatians come from.

The funny thing is is that we blacks know long time what is going on (duhhh how could it be defferent - remember who your superior is, who your creator is). One thing superior people have in common is patience. Patience and more patience, and that is what we do. We believe that finally you will strike yourself at the right place, right time and right moment. However you all feel the time for your denial is running out.....

What we are doing is to led you go on lying and denying your selfves (because that is what you do when you are lying your origins and denying us, remember you origin from us? (always keep this break down in your mind).

At some point the lying and denying of you caucasians will explode in your face and make you and the rest of your fellow caucasians see the reality and the truth. We will appear in front of you and you shall bow and kiss our feeth and ask for forgiveness for your ignorance.

To start your journey of truth and purity - stop being the messenger your past messengers were. Bring the reality to your self and your next generation to avoid the maximum humiliation of you and your kind.

From the supreame being, the source of existance, the blacks many kinds has been 'created' obviously not always to the perfection as we see now.

However the clean up has started. The truth is revealing itself, and clarity will come to make all you caucasians see, understand and accept that we are the one you originated and gained knowledge from.

Soon more will come. check on http://kwakumensah.blogspot.com/2008/04/known-unknown-and-hidden-unknown.html

This site and blog is for blacks and all others that origins from us.

PS: To my brothers and sisters since you and me know that we are superior, don't let our caucasian friends miss lead us in defending our superiority. What ever they do like i said soon the truth will be out. So lets do what we are good in at. keeping our inner peace and patience, while revealing the truth together. Hail you all my brothers and sisters.

Any caucasian that accepts its origins and stop lying about it and denying it will automatically become a brother or sister. Isn't that a nice thing to look forward to? That we accept you as a brother or sister?

kwaku Mensah -
"the unlocker of truth and purity"

Black Africans built the Egyptian Empire and ruled it until it was invaded and taken over by the Muslims and white Greeks. Just about all of the tombs were raided for treasure and mommies. The whites of that time thought if they ground the remains of the powerful black leaders and consumed them, that it would cure any and all ailments. This took place all over Egypt and in other parts of Africa where mummification was practiced. So it would have been very easy for the whites who loved to rape Africa of everything, to replace the mummies with lighter colored Muslims or white Europeans. When the Caucasian scientist first started to uncover Egyptian mummies on national TV, they were extremely shock when they saw Black/Negroid features and they so stated that on TV that they were Blacks/Negroids. Now the finds are swept away and studied and etc… and when they come out with their findings, it is always a very light skinned person with the looks from the movie Star Gate!!!!
All of the great knowledge created by the Black Empires were said to have never been written down, only passed down orally until outsiders were allowed to learn from the Black empires. The Greeks were educated by the blacks and recorded what they learned and they even gave credit to there black teachers. All most all of that credit was “White Washed” or destroyed in the book burnings/White Washing!!!! Ancient Black Africans had traveled to many different countries only later to be massacred or completely eliminated form European countries, South America, Mexico, The US, (THE ORIGINAL BLACK INDIANS), Australia, Tanzania etc… The Caucasians made the mistake of documenting the atrocities that they committed against the Black African settlers in places like Australia and a few other places, but not the whole truth in Africa. And nothing about South America, Mexico or America were they completely eliminated almost every trace of the Black African races from those countries.
Lots of US history concerning Blacks are left out of the US history books. Like how there were not only Black Native Americans who were in America before Columbus, but that Black Moors also were here and that the Black Moors from Africa were one of the first countries to formally recognize America as a country. Also that there were black owned towns, cities and more that were burned to the ground by whites. That there were Blacks who earn, or bought there freedom, (BEFORE THE LAWS CHANGES AND ONCE A SLAVE ALWAYS A SLAVE FOR EVERY AND ONE’S BABIES WERE ALSO BORN INTO SLAVERY), and that there were also blacks who were never slaves. They never tell of the many slave revolts or uprising because they want the world to think that the slaves were treated so well that there was never any need for such incidents. Also that the Spanish, blacks and other races mixed and formed lighter skinned Native Americans. And that the Moors mixed with them making them dark again. There is so much more that I could tell and so much more that is unknown to me because it was effectively WHITE WASHED and that is not only what the US believes, but also the world.
There are also many people of all races, black race included, who didn’t know that Black Africans also owned Black African slaves. Most of them were not treated as less than subhuman lower than animal. Some were given there freedom, some were given land and animals, the women were most likely married off to the owners becoming free with the marriage. Slavery is slavery, but slavery under the Caucasians was just brutally inhuman.
When will the Caucasian world stop worrying about keeping the world in ignorance through WHITE WASHING and let the truth be known?
PS
There was never any white Cleopatra being carried around by black slaves, because there was never a white Cleopatra!

Black Africans built the Egyptian Empire and ruled it until it was invaded and taken over by the Muslims and white Greeks. Just about all of the tombs were raided for treasure and mommies. The whites of that time thought if they ground the remains of the powerful black leaders and consumed them, that it would cure any and all ailments. This took place all over Egypt and in other parts of Africa where mummification was practiced. So it would have been very easy for the whites who loved to rape Africa of everything, to replace the mummies with lighter colored Muslims or white Europeans. When the Caucasian scientist first started to uncover Egyptian mummies on national TV, they were extremely shock when they saw Black/Negroid features and they so stated that on TV that they were Blacks/Negroids. Now the finds are swept away and studied and etc… and when they come out with their findings, it is always a very light skinned person with the looks from the movie Star Gate!!!!
All of the great knowledge created by the Black Empires were said to have never been written down, only passed down orally until outsiders were allowed to learn from the Black empires. The Greeks were educated by the blacks and recorded what they learned and they even gave credit to there black teachers. All most all of that credit was “White Washed” or destroyed in the book burnings/White Washing!!!! Ancient Black Africans had traveled to many different countries only later to be massacred or completely eliminated form European countries, South America, Mexico, The US, (THE ORIGINAL BLACK INDIANS), Australia, Tanzania etc… The Caucasians made the mistake of documenting the atrocities that they committed against the Black African settlers in places like Australia and a few other places, but not the whole truth in Africa. And nothing about South America, Mexico or America were they completely eliminated almost every trace of the Black African races from those countries.
Lots of US history concerning Blacks are left out of the US history books. Like how there were not only Black Native Americans who were in America before Columbus, but that Black Moors also were here and that the Black Moors from Africa were one of the first countries to formally recognize America as a country. Also that there were black owned towns, cities and more that were burned to the ground by whites. That there were Blacks who earn, or bought there freedom, (BEFORE THE LAWS CHANGES AND ONCE A SLAVE ALWAYS A SLAVE FOR EVERY AND ONE’S BABIES WERE ALSO BORN INTO SLAVERY), and that there were also blacks who were never slaves. They never tell of the many slave revolts or uprising because they want the world to think that the slaves were treated so well that there was never any need for such incidents. Also that the Spanish, blacks and other races mixed and formed lighter skinned Native Americans. And that the Moors mixed with them making them dark again. There is so much more that I could tell and so much more that is unknown to me because it was effectively WHITE WASHED and that is not only what the US believes, but also the world.
There are also many people of all races, black race included, who didn’t know that Black Africans also owned Black African slaves. Most of them were not treated as less than subhuman lower than animal. Some were given there freedom, some were given land and animals, the women were most likely married off to the owners becoming free with the marriage. Slavery is slavery, but slavery under the Caucasians was just brutally inhuman.
When will the Caucasian world stop worrying about keeping the world in ignorance through WHITE WASHING and let the truth be known?
PS
There was never any white Cleopatra being carried around by black slaves, because there was never a white Cleopatra!