Redpill me on Egyptians Yas Forums
Were they black, white or Arabic?
On a scale of nigger to nord how human were they?
Would they have ever had a chance if they had to battle Vikings?
Are Egyptians just a meme?
Like, dude, there are millions upon fucking millions of socioeconomic factors that play into this. I mean, like, there are so fucking many. Want me to list them? Education, diet—if a kid eats a shitty fucking diet then his brain won't develop right—poor access to birth control—if his mother didn't fucking want to have him, then he won't receive the attention he needs to develop into a proper fucking human being now will he?—Uhh let's see... RACISM. That's a big one. You COMPLETELY underestimate and constantly downplay the deleterious effect racism has on a child's development! Black kids are told since BIRTH, my dude, that they are stupid and worthless, and on top of that they have to deal with the racism deeply ingrained in their fellow African-Americans, that they're a traitor if they choose to educate themselves. I don't know, dawg, I don't know! That seems like to me that they have some pretty significant fuckin' hurdles, dawg!
Bump
Racism is not a pol word.
Mostly Balkan/Med mixes.
Nice copypasta my dawg
romans
They were the same skin tone as other ancient civilizations from mesopotania and the levant. There's 3000+km of inhospitable desert between the Nile delta and niggers.
first egyptians, the northern were white and brown. They advanced further south by the nile and took blacks as slaves. Later blacks formed settlements in the south and in the end helped the persians to defeat northern egyptians only to be fucked by the persians themselves. End of story. Took around 500 years. Tho, it kind of repeats itself now kek
It's difficult to find real answers to this question, even digging into academic works. Ramesses II was white. Fair-skinned with red hair. His mummy confirms and was tested in the 70s. Tut probably white too. The races of the Pharaohs seems to have varied between dynasties but it's difficult to find and parse useful data about the earliest ones. There were unquestionably quite Pharaohs though.
the egyptian mystery schools are a fragment of nimrods reign like the babylonian, roman and greek mystery schools.. all connected to nimrods rule..... this is why the occult kabbalistic shit the elites follow has elements of all the myrhos in them
They were Levantine, neither nigger nor European
>Balcan
Now that's a new one
Why are niggers allowed to appropriate this culture
Because ppl call us AFRICAN Americans and Egypt is in AFRICA.
They looked like modern day nubians basically.
So why don't you appropriate berber culture too ? Because it's not mainstream enough ?
Continental thinking is wrong by fact. Because it has been proved that even 10.000 years ago our ancestors have been traveling the world.
We let French Montana say "Nigga" so..... Honestly though the we wuzz shit gets tiring. We KNOW who we are, it's just lame to us, so we larp. People envy us because we inherited American citizenship, we envy them because they have long and glorious histories which when taught in schools imbues a certain intrinsic level of respect from other groups thus making life easier.
>Were they black, white or Arabic?
The story of civilisation is the story of one ethnic group conquering another, resulting in the former starting a racially homogeneous elite. Over time, assimilation occurs. This is true for Europe, East Asia, South Asia, the Middle East, Central America, etc.
Archaeogenetics proves that the pioneers of ancient Egyptian civilisation came from the Near East, and possibly from as far north as Anatolia. They were not black, they were not 'white', and they were not arabs. They were a long-gone near eastern neolithic people, somewhat represented in today's coptic population.
That you will find more north-east negroid features amongst later egyptian statues is no surprise, since with Empires assimilation with conquered populations is inevitable. It happened to Rome, China, Persia and India.
'Blacks' did not create ancient Egypt, but they did have representation in later eras.
>Would they have ever had a chance if they had to battle Vikings?
In 1:1 numbers not a chance.
Genetically and culturally the Egyptians were influenced mostly by Mediterranean and Near-Eastern cultures. It should be noted that the ethnicity of the ruler of Egypt varied from time to time, at times being Balkan, Mediterranean, Coptic, or Near Eastern. There was a Nubian (black) dynasty at one point, but it was extremely short lived. I believe it consisted of two pharaohs, a father and son, before it's fall.
As for would they "stand a chance" if they fought "THE Vikings"? First, "the Vikings" aren't a people, wiking ("viking") was a profession. The peak of the Egyptian empire was during the Second Millennium BC, while the "vikings" would have been some 3000 years after, coming in between the Germanic Iron Age and the Middle Ages. At this time, Egypt was under Islamic control.
Regardless of if you're comparing the peak Empire to bronze age Nords or Islamic Egyptians to Viking Age nords, odds are that Egypt would wipe the floors with "the Vikings". Considering that vikings were usually small bands (exceptions exist such as the Norman incursions into Francia) while Egypt usually maintained an organized standing army, the Nords would likely be outnumbered and outmatched. Egypt also led the world in a lot of technological advances for hundreds of years, so they would probably hold that edge as well. Finally, the Egyptian Empire has a history of fighting and repelling sea raiders, namely the confederation known as the "Sea Peoples" in ancient sources, a group generally suspected to be Near Eastern diaspora.
Realistically the Egyptians would have massacred the Nords.
>t. Studied archaeology before I got burnt out by leftists
Caucasian races: Aryans, Semitic and Hamitic
Hamitic = egyptians
Shithole full of immigrants, led by hook nosed retards and gay niggers. The prototype of Brazil and USA.
They even destroyed the nearby civilizations because they were bad goys (like amerisharts are doing now).
2 clarifications/points I should make:
1. The Sea Peoples were not necessarily composed entirely of Near Eastern people, but instead were a Mediterranean people that moved along the coasts of the Near East and expanded with the collapse of numerous empires in the region producing refugees that joined their ranks.
2. Egypt enjoyed a position as one of the greatest powers in the known world multiple times throughout their history. They're a pale shadow of their former selves, but this was not always the case. That alone should tell you what kind of odds some random Nords would be put up against.
>Realistically the Egyptians would have massacred the Nords.
In a 1:1 confrontation, no way, even against bronze age nordic cultures. The majority of the ancient egyptian military were conscripts, mercenaries or slaves fighting for either pay or threat of death. And warfare amongst ancient middle eastern civilisations was mostly a numbers game more than anything.
Meanwhile, from the bronze age on, every nordic male, from farmer to king, was part of the military caste; they breathed, ate, shit and worshipped battle.
They were their own people. Just like the Libyans and the Nubians.
So you was saying that actually we wuz kingz n shieeet
whatever. this dick aint gonna clean itself. get me another nigger cock cleaner, this one has asphyxiated.
That metric is absurd though. It's like saying that on a 1:1 Denmark could beat China. It also entirely neglects the technological advantage the Egyptians had at the time.
>they breathed, ate, shit, and worshipped battle
The bit about military castes is true, but this is straight larpagan fantasy.
The common people were mostly dark skinned caucasians, with other races being minorities. The pharaohs varied in race, sometimes white European, a few times negro.
>>Would they have ever had a chance if they had to battle Vikings?
Isn't it a theory that the "sea people" actually were Northern Europeans?
>That metric is absurd though. It's like saying that on a 1:1 Denmark could beat China.
I think OP's question implied who were superior warriors. The ancient Norse were like Mongols, Aztecs or Maori. Bred for battle.
>It also entirely neglects the technological advantage the Egyptians had at the time.
For an archaeology student you demonstrate some considerable knowledge gaps. What exactly did Egyptians have that they didn't? Chariots? Swords? Armor? Ships? A nordic bronze age soldier was easily as well, if not better, equipped than an ancient Egyptian soldier.
>but this is straight larpagan fantasy.
Their entire cosmology was premised on battle between gods and giants. Everything in their culture was about battle.
Checked.
The theory is whether Sea Peoples were Indo-European or not. It seems that alot of them, possibly most, were. But ultimately it was an alliance of different nations.