Another criterion, which had proved successful in the past in determining racial origins, is the so-called Lepsius Canon. This entails examining the bones of mummies’ bodies rather than their skulls. According to Diop, this method shows that the “bodily proportions of the ideal Egyptian was short-armed and of Negroid or Negrito physical type.”22 In addition, Diop suggests that blood groups could be used, for even today’s modern Egyptians, especially those in Upper Egypt “. . . belong to the same Group B as the populations of western Africa on the Atlantic seaboard and not the A2 group characteristic of the white race prior to any crossbreeding. It would be interesting to study the extent of Group A2 distribution in Egyptian mummies, which present-day techniques make possible.23
Diop also reviewed the various statements made by ancient Greeks and Romans who visited Egypt, as did Martin Bernal later in Black Athena. Diop asserts that if we accept what the ancient Greek and Roman writers say—and frankly, there are no good reasons why we shouldn’t—then we must conclude that the ancient Egyptians were black-skinned, for these writers leave us with no doubt that they saw the Egyptians as “dark” or “black” men. Egyptologists, on the other hand, insist that we should not take seriously these ancient writers. A few Greek and Roman writers make clear Diop’s point.
Herodotus (ca. 450 BCE), the father of history, states that “. . . it is in fact manifest that the Colchidians are Egyptian by race . . . several Egyptians told me that in their opinion the Colchidians were descended from soldiers of Sesostris. I had conjectured as much myself from two pointers, firstly because they have black skins and kinky hair . . .”24 Herodotus also used the fact that the Egyptians were Black in order to prove that the oracle of Dodoni in Epirus, which according to legend was founded by a Black woman, was Egyptian in origin: “. . . and when they add that the dove was black they give us to understand that the woman was Egyptian.”25
In one of the works of Aristotle (ca. 320 BCE) the great philosopher and father of scientific thinking speaks rather derogatorily about the Egyptians but nonetheless shows that he too regarded them as black-skinned: “Those who are too black are cowards like, for instance, the Egyptians and Ethiopians. But those who are excessively white are also cowards as we can see from the example of women . . . the complexion of courage is between the two (brown or tanned).”26
Aeschylus (ca. 480 BCE), in his play The Suppliants, has one of the protagonists, a certain Danaos, comment on an Egyptian ship: “I can see the [Egyptian] crew with their black limbs and white tunics.”27
Apollodorus (ca. 70 BCE) affirms that “Aegyptos conquered the country of the black-footed ones and called it Egypt after himself.”28
Another Greek writer, Lucian (180 BCE), presents a dialog between two Greeks, Lycinus and Timolaus, discussing a young Egyptian boy. “Lycinus: This boy is not merely black; he has thick lips and his legs are too thin . . . his hair worn in a plait behind shows that he is not a freeman.”29
Statements by many other ancient Greek and Roman writers provide similar confirmation, either directly or indirectly, that the ancient Egyptians were black-skinned.30 Interestingly, before racial and cultural bias affected European scholars, many European travelers such as Constantin-Francois Volney, who journeyed in Egypt in 1783–1785, wrote honest statements: “. . . on visiting the Sphinx, the look of it gave me the clue . . . beholding that head characteristically Negro in all its features, I recalled the well-known passage of Herodotus which reads: ‘For my part I consider the Colchoi are a colony of the Egyptians because, like them, they are black skinned and kinky-haired . . .’”31
Champollion-Figeac, the brother of the famous Champollion the Younger, who deciphered the hieroglyphics, wrote this bizarre response to Volney’s observations: “. . . Volney’s conclusion as to the Negro origin of the ancient population of Egypt is glaringly forced and inadmissible.”32
Diop approaches the argument from a different and in some ways better perspective by asking how the ancient Egyptians viewed themselves. He notes that they referred to themselves as the Rmt-en-Km-t, which Egyptologists usually translate as People of the Black Land,33 because, they say, the ancient Egyptians were not referring to themselves but rather to the color of the alluvial soil of the Nile Valley, which has a dark, almost black tint. Diop argues, however, that it makes far more sense to translate this term as Land of the Black People. Indeed, Km-t is perhaps the origin of the Biblical name Ham (hence Hamite), which also means “black.” The H and K in the Semitic dialects are often mingled to create the guttural Kh. Thus the Hebrew Kh-am may be a derivative of the earlier Egyptian Kh-em. This would certainly explain why in the Bible, Egypt is often called the land of Ham or Khem. Diop also presents an array of epithets of divinities of ancient Egypt that associate them with the color black implicitly, if it’s not explicitly stated that they were black-skinned,34 and he also presents a variety of other arguments involving complex linguistic comparisons and word syntax of the ancient Egyptian language and other African languages, but such arguments are well outside the scope of our investigation.
At any rate, suffice it to say that the evidence presented by Diop overwhelmingly supported a Black African origin for the ancient Egyptians. As we have said earlier, Diop’s crowning moment was at the UNESCO Symposium in January 1974 in Cairo, where he and a colleague, Professor Obenga, carefully presented their scientific findings to a large audience of Egyptologists and anthropologists from all parts of the world. It was nevertheless stated in the conclusion of the report of the symposium: “Although the preparatory working paper sent out by UNESCO gave particulars of what was desired, not all participants had prepared communications comparable with the painstakingly researched contributions of Professors Cheikh Anta Diop and Obenga. There was consequently a real lack of balance in the discussions.”35
The attending Egyptologists had not even bothered to prepare for a proper and balanced debate. Their biased conviction was so entrenched that they merely listened politely and then ignored the issue at hand. The UNESCO organizers, however, were clearly impressed by Diop and commissioned him to write the entry on the origins of the pharaohs in their General History of Africa published a few years later, in 1981. Yet the archaeologist Ahmed Mokhtar, who, ironically, was the editor of this UNESCO publication, could not prevent himself from adding a note in the introduction of the report: “The opinions expressed by Cheikh Anta Diop in this chapter are those which he developed and presented at the UNESCO symposium of ‘The People of Ancient Egypt,’ which was held in Cairo in 1974. The arguments put forward in this chapter have not been accepted by all the experts interested in this problem.”
Notwithstanding Ahmed Mokhtar’s odd remarks about a colleague and contributor to the UNESCO publication, what he said did not take into account the fact that some very senior French Egyptologists—notably Professors Jean Vercouter and Professor Jean Leclant—had been very impressed with Diop’s professional presentation. In reality the resistance to accept or even consider Diop’s thesis came not from Egyptologists in general but specifically from high Egyptian officials, as is well demonstrated by Dr. Zahi Hawass, the present chairman of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA) and undersecretary of state to the Ministry of Culture. Hawass is well-known for his aggressive attitude toward those who oppose him so that even the normally discreet Sunday Times of London felt compelled to write: “He rules Egyptology with an iron fist and a censorious tongue. Nobody crosses Zahi Hawass and gets away with it. . . . Nobody of any standing in Egyptology will come out to help you . . . because they’d lose their jobs. Sadly, people are cowering round his ankles. . . . The hugged ankles belong to the most powerful man in archaeology, Dr Zahi Hawass, aka Big Zee, secretary-general of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA). It is Hawass who holds the keys to the pyramids, the Valley of the Kings, the Sphinx, Abu Simbel, everything. No Egyptologist gets in without his permission, and few will chance his anger. . . .”36
More on Hawass
More recen
tly, the New York times was even more candid about Dr. Hawass’s behavior to colleagues, students, and other researchers.
Zahi Hawass, secretary general of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Egypt, seems to get his name in the papers and his face on television every time anyone sticks a shovel in the ground there. The resulting fame—the man has become ubiquitous on history-heavy American cable channels—has apparently given Dr. Hawass, like many celebrities before him, the mistaken impression that any sort of personal behavior will be embraced by his adoring public, because he sure is obnoxious on “Chasing Mummies,” an annoying new show that begins Wednesday night on History. Dr. Hawass has allowed a History crew to tag along as he does what he does, but, at least from the evidence of the premiere, this does not result in many revelations about the science of archaeology. It results instead in a fair amount of footage of Dr. Hawass verbally abusing those around him: the film crew, college-age interns who have come to worship at his feet, and so on. Any infraction, or no infraction at all, seems sufficient to warrant one of Dr. Hawass’s tirades.37
We have experienced Hawass’s anger since early 1994, when our first book, The Orion Mystery, was published. He branded Robert Bauval and his colleagues as liars, amateurs, pyramidologists, pyramidiots, and, befuddling as it may seem, even Zionists who were trying to steal the pyramids. In fact, when it comes to the ethnic origins of the ancient Egyptians or who built the pyramids, Hawass has issued some rather odd statements. For example, when, in 2002, a small robot was used to explore narrow shafts in the Great Pyramid of Giza, he told a bemused journalist of the popular Al-Gomhoreya newspaper: “The results of the robot’s exploration refute the allegations reiterated by Jews and some Western countries that the Jews built the pyramids!”38
Hawass’s superior, Egypt’s Minister of Culture Farouk Hosni, made a very similar bizarre statement: “Israeli allegations that they built the Pyramids abound, and we must face up to this even if it triggers a crisis with Israel! This is piracy! Our history and our civilization must be respected but the Israelis want to take over everything! We must counterattack with full strength because this is how they took Palestine. They keep on saying Palestine belongs to them and now they are doing the same with the Pyramids!”39 Further, Hawass added to this: “A group of people are making an organized campaign. There are some people pushing them [Israel]. . . . These people are waging a big attack against us. I swore two years ago that I would not reveal their names, but I found out that I must mention them because it is becoming a threat . . . there is among us a bad person, a Jew . . . and I will tell the public that everyone who tries to talk against the Egyptians should shut their mouths!”40
According to Hawass, a member of the group allegedly waging a “big attack” backed by Israel against the Egyptians is Robert Bauval. Bauval is a Christian, not a Jew, and, ironically, he was born and raised in Egypt.*40
In a more recent television interview in February 2009, Hawass unabashedly claimed that the Jews “control the entire world” and that “. . . for eighteen centuries they [the Jews] were dispersed throughout the world . . . they went to America and took control of its economy . . . they have a plan: Although they are few in number, they control the entire world . . . look at the control they have over America and the media!”42
Needless to say, with this type of display by the chief of the SCA, any claim, however scientific and scholarly, of a Black African origin for Egypt’s ancient civilization will inevitably be met with indifference and, more likely, with opposition. Indeed, Hawass has already made this quite clear with his latest commentaries on this issue to the official Egyptian MENA News Agency: “. . . the portrayal of ancient Egyptian civilization as black has no element of truth to it! Egyptians are not Arabs and are not Africans despite the fact that Egypt is in Africa . . . !”43
According to this kind of logic, though Egypt is in Africa, Egyptians are not Africans. Such blatant contradiction most likely stems from the fact that Hawass probably equates Africans and Blacks. Therefore, any connection between the ancient Egyptians and Blacks or Africans must be rejected at all cost, even if it contradicts geographical realities. Perhaps this extreme view clarifies other, less blatant but still puzzling attacks that scholars have made in their academic publishing. Facts, however, are facts: Egypt is in Africa, Egyptians are Africans, and there is now overwhelming evidence that ancient Egyptians have a Black African origin.
Rejection of an Article
In early 2008, Thomas Brophy, together with another coauthor, submitted to an academic journal a paper about a small part of the proposed astronomy of Nabta Playa. The journal returned it with a critical review from an anonymous referee (perhaps from an Egyptian scholar) who, in the course of recommending that the journal reject the paper, actually referred to Brophy and his colleagues as “behaving like arrogant Westerners.” We were puzzled by that strange comment. Why, we thought, would an accomplished scholar make such a personal attack within the formal review process? It seemed out of context. Then it dawned on us: perhaps he was speaking from a perspective formed partly by a racially hierarchical worldview. If this was true, it would be natural for him to have a sort of chip on his shoulder about Westerners. In Brophy’s paper, as far as we were thinking at the time, we were simply proposing a solution to an astronomy puzzle. He and his colleagues made no mention of or concerned themselves with any contemporary racial-cultural implications of their paper. Yet we now understand why those innocent suggestions about astronomy at Nabta Playa may have been perceived as a threat.
At this point, we must state categorically that we are not trying to steal the pyramids, we are not claiming to have built the pyramids, and we are not claiming that our friends and family—or even our ethnic group—built them. We say this with tongue in cheek, of course—hoping that the SCA director will make room for some humor and a broader perspective. We must also acknowledge that Dr. Hawass, as a deputy minister of the Egyptian government, could well be under pressure from various contemporary sociopolitical sources. It is reasonable, then, to suppose that not all of his commentaries are motivated purely by dispassionate analysis of events from four or five thousand years ago but may be colored in small part by contemporary sociopolitical concerns. Yet the modern Egyptian government has been a leader in the terribly difficult, indeed Herculean, contemporary efforts to transcend the ages-old rivalry between Egypt and Israel as evidenced for example by the 1979 peace treaty for which Egyptian president Anwar Sadat shared the Nobel Peace Prize. If in some sense, therefore, there is a subliminal struggle going on among the various currently powerful ethnonationalist and subnationalist groups in Egypt today regarding claims of the origin of the civilization that built the pyramids, then it seems that the emerging answer should serve not to inflame but to defuse the situation—because the answer is that the origins stem not from any of these groups but from Black Africans. Certainly it was the Black Africans of Egypt who, over the subsequent ages, melded with a number of other colors and ethnicities and thus essentially are today the same people of Egypt who should be extremely proud of the ancient accomplishments of their heritage.
CONSOLIDATING THE EVIDENCE
Other than the visual evidence of prehistoric rock art at Uwainat and Gilf Kebir, we will also see here and in chapter 6 that there is even more supporting evidence of a Black African origin in further analysis of the astronomical alignments at Nabta Playa and other prehistoric sites in the Egyptian Sahara. Meanwhile, in 2002, three decades after Nabta Playa was discovered, anthropologists Fred Wendorf and Romuald Schild published their overall views in the Journal of the Polish Academy of Science [Archaeologia Polona] affirming that
[t]he tumuli, calendar, stele alignments and megalithic constructions, all concentrated around western shores of the then already dried ancient Lake Nabta, indicate that this area was an important ceremonial centre in the late and final Neolithic. The complexity of the arrangements, and enormous amount of closely managed work put into the construction
of the megalithic constructions, indicate that the cattle herders of the South Western Desert created an early complex society with the presence of a religious and/or political control over human resources for an extended period of time. Common contacts of the Desert Dwellers with the Nile Valley inhabitants are indicated by frequent presence of raw material and ceramics originating in the Nile Valley. These contacts of cattle pastoralists with Predynastic, agricultural groups in the Nile Valley may have played an important role in the emergence of a complex, stratified society in the Great River Valley. . . . Physical anthropology of rare skeletal remains found in the late early, middle and late Neolithic suggests racial association of the populations with Sub-Saharan or black groups . . .44
Other eminent anthropologists were more categorical. In National Geographic News of July 2006, this article appeared:
The pharaohs of ancient Egypt owed their existence to prehistoric climate changes in the eastern Sahara, according to an exhaustive study of archaeological data that bolsters this theory.
Starting at about 8500 B.C., researchers say, broad swaths of what are now Egypt, Chad, Libya and Sudan experience a “sudden onset of humid conditions.” . . . During this time the prehistoric people of the eastern Sahara followed the rains to keep pace with the most hospitable ecosystems.
But around 5300 B.C. this climate-driven environmental abundance started to decline, and most humans began leaving the increasingly arid region.
“Around 5,500 to 6,000 years ago the Egyptian Sahara became so dry that nobody could survive there.” Said Stefan Kröpelin, a geoarchaeologist at the University of Cologne in Germany and study co-author. . . .
Among their findings, the researchers provide further evidence that the human exodus from the desert about 5,000 years ago is what laid the foundation for the first pharaoh’s rule . . .
Black Genesis Page 17
