dana marniche says To the question of, Why is it that no ancient Mesopotamian or Persian artwork depicts any black

people? They all have big noses, which is a semitic !ndic trait"# What is important to note is $phraim %peiser and others have commented on the apparent discrepancy between ancient numerically predominant skulls of the ancient Mesopotamians &which were $thiopic' while the monuments shown in books are of a prominent nosed $urasiatic type" This is because of what was said by (r" Winters on one of these blogs about when the art was made" !t is clear now that the art and sculpture was made for the most part much later than the %umerians e)isted and it was not made by early *kkadians either but belongs to non+semitic ,uti some other late coming people which makes some sense since supposedly early -semites# thought it taboo to sculpt or paint the human image " !n ./01 historian William 2anger wrote, -The population of both 3pper and 2ower Mesopotamia in prehistoric times belonged to the brown or Mediterranean race" While this basic stock persisted in historical, times especially in the south, it became increasingly, mi)ed especially with broad+ headed *rmenoid peoples from the northeastern mountains owing to the recurrent incursions of mountain tribes into the plain"# !n William 2" 2anger 4 *n $ncyclopedia of World 5istory, 5oughton Mifflin 6ompany 7oston ./01 " !n the -%yria, *rabia, Mesopotamia and %umer were parts of the original domain of the 7rown 8ace# p" .9:+.9;" ,rafton $lliot %mith What does that mean? Was %mith delusional? 5istorian $phraim %peiser also mentions in his book <riental %tudies, the monuments appear to represent an *rmenoid type while the bulk of the early Mesopotamians were in fact of the long+ headed Mediterranean which is the -brown# or $ast *frican i"e", hamitic type" The same is the case with *natolia or Turkey &*sia Minor'" ./.. 4 anatomist ,rafton $lliot %mith wrote 4 -the physical characteristics of the present day =ubian, 7e>a, (anakil, ,alla, and %omali populations are ?are an obvious token of their undoubted kinship with the proto+$gyptians"## " @ound on page 0: in The *ncient $gyptians and the <rigin of 6iviliAation &2ondon =ew Bork, 5arper C 7rothers' ./.." *n <" 8" ,urney mentioned in ./:1 that , -$)amination of the skulls which have been found on several sites in *natolia shows that in the third millennium the population was preponderantly long+headed or dolichocephalic, with only a small admi)ture of brachycephalic types" !n the second millennium the proportion of brachycephalic skulls increases to about :D percent"## &;' ,urney, <"8"E The 5ittites, Penguin 7ooks, .//D, @irst $d" ./:1 p" 1F9 6arleton 6oon who was one of the first to misinterpret this -Mediterranean race# terminology was also one of th efirst to admit that dolichocephaly is -no where to be found on a regional based in $urope#" *mong fair+skinned =orth *fricans as well heads tend toward the mesocranic and brachycephalic unlike the ancient peoples there" This is because dolichocephaly is basically a trait of *fricans" %o wherever you see populations in the ancient world that were predominantly dolichocephalic you can rest assured that they were dark in color like modern sub+%aharans" People need to understand that the early neoltihic world and the earliest civiliAations throughout most of the 7ronAe *ge across the world were basically -black *frican# affiliated and continued to be so well into the history period and that includes $urope, the =ear $ast and southern *sia e)tending well into $ast *sia" That also includes the people who made the megaliths of $urope, the %tone 5enge and those of *sia and =orth *frica"

$lliot %mith 4 -a description of the bones of an $arly 7riton of that remote epoch might apply in all essential details to an inhabitant of %omaliland? The people were longheaded of small stature, skull is long, narrow and coffin shaped, brow ridges poorly developed, forehead is narrow, vertical and often slightly bulging?# p" :F +:/ The earliest megalithic astronomical ruins 4 the prototype of the %tone henge is found .DDD year searlier in the =abta Playa or =ubian desert" =eedless to say these sites are associated with *frican physical types" *nd that is not some *frican *merican making this up" That is a fact that Western scholars have concluded" !t doesnGt mean there was some biological disposition that dark+skinned people possessed that led to the development of early civiliAations" !t >ust so happens dark skinned *frican+looking people were the numerically predominant people of the world in that time" The 7ronAe *ge =orth *frican, such as =aqada man which was related to neolithic and bronAe age %aharans and who spread out over $gypt directly before the rise of the pharoahs was unquestionably related to modern peoples of the 5orn of *frica but also to the neolithic =orth *fricans and $uropeans and =ear $asterns" That is not some *frican saying that , that is what has been discovered by $uropean scholars" %o most people who are coming to *frocentric sites as they are called really need to get a grip and learn what science is actually saying" Why should people in the horn of *frica be taught that ancient $gyptians looked like Turks or like the rendition of ancient $gyptians presently in =ational ,eographicGs *pril .//D issue" %aid 2oring 7race 1DD: and 1DD;, --Modern $uropeans ranging all of the way from %candinavia to $astern $urope and throughout the Mediterranean on to the Middle $ast show that they are closely related to each other" The surprise is that the =eolithic peoples of $urope and their 7ronAe *ge successors are not closely related to the modern inhabitants?# $lsewhere in the same article he writes, -7asques and 6anary islanders are clearly related to modern $uropeans"# That article is, -The questionable contribution of the =eolithic and the 7ronAe *ge to $uropean craniofacial form, 6" 2oring 7race,HI =oriko %eguchi,J 6onrad 7" Kuintyn,L %herry 6" @o),M *" 8ussell =elson, %otiris N" Manolis,HH and Pan Kifeng Proc =atl *cad %ci 3 % *" 1DD; Oanuary PE .DP&.'Q 1914190" *lso in the same article we are told these same people that had no significant connection to modern peoples of $urope and the =ear $ast were related to 4 guess who? 7race et al" says, -#!t is a further surpise that the $pi+palaeolithic =atufian of !srael from which the =eolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to sub+%aharan *frica"# 5e mentions these sub+%aharans as being of the =iger+6ongo group" and -The =iger+6ongo speakers, 6ongo, (ahomey and 5aya, cluster closely with each other and a bit less closely with the =ubian sample, both the recent and the 7ronAe *ge =ubians, and more remotely with the =aqada 7ronAe *ge sample of $gypt, the modern %omalis, and the *rabic+speaking @ellaheen &farmers' of !srael" When those samples are separated and run in a single analysis as in @ig" ., there clearly is a tie between them that is diluted the farther one gets from sub+%aharan *frica# &7race, 1DD:' 5e is saying that the so called -true =egro# is closely linked to the =atufians and =ubians while the people of the horn of *frica are related to the early $gyptian or proto+$gyptian and agriculturalists whoGve recently moved up from the *rabian peninsula 4 or am ! >ust misinterpreting something" 3nderstand what $uropean physical anthropologists in general are sayingR !t is not that subtle Q -#There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient $gyptians, especially southern $gyptians, e)hibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the %ahara and tropical *frica"" !n general, the inhabitants of 3pper $gypt and =ubia had the greatest biological

affinity to people of the %ahara and more southerly areas"# &=ancy 6" 2ovell, # Physical *nthropology of $gyptians,#S in $ncyclopedia of the *rchaeology of *ncient $gypt, ed" Nathryn *" 7ard and %teven 7lake %hubert, & 2ondon and =ew Bork 8outledge, .///, pp P1F+PP1" %o it is not that people like (r" Winters or so called *frocentrics are making things up" The fact that *frican types were predominant in the =ear $ast %outhern *sia and =orth *frica have been called Mediterranean has been misconstrued by many people over the last century who have e)pertise in only one area of the anthropology" ,eneticists are a good e)ample of this and there is now a debate taking place among scholars about the obvious discrepancy between the genetic sciences and the physical anthropological findings also founded now today genetic based morphological change" -5anihara &.//;' also shows that ancient West *sians resembled *fricans"&5anihara T", -6omparison of craniofacial features of ma>or human groups,# *m O Phys *nthropol" .//; MarE//&P'QPF/+9.1"'# What does that mean? Why would 5anihara find ancient West *sians related to *fricans" Why does he not say modern West *sians &Middle $asterners, etc'" 7ecause T5$B W$8$ =<T T5$8$R ! know this has been hard for some of us to grasp but that is to say they were not the predominant population of that area yet 4 periodR That was also what said by the early anthropologists" Bet if someone like (r" Winters repeats what has been discovered by $uropeans they are supposed to be something radically *frocentric" 3nderstand the relationship that ancient $gyptians biologically and culturally before the Ptolemaic period had with the rest of sub+%aharan *frica goes back for thousands and thousands of years, as does their culture" -#We also compare $gyptian body proportions to those of modern *merican 7lacks and Whites? 2ong bone stature regression equations were then derived for each se)" <ur results confirm that, although ancient $gyptians are closer in body proportion to modern *merican 7lacks than they are to *merican Whites"" !ntralimb indices are not significantly different between $gyptians and *merican 7lacks"# &-%tature estimation in ancient $gyptiansQ * new technique based on anatomical reconstruction of stature"# Michelle 5" 8a)ter, 6hristopher 7" 8uff, *yman *Aab, Moushira $rfan, Muhammad %oliman, *ly $l+%awaf, &*m O Phys *nthropol" 1DDF, OunE.P;&1'Q.90+:: %o beware what you read in blogs 4 !t is important to understand that $gyptian culture can only be studied in the conte)t of an *frican one" That is why it is not doing anyone any good to send a tour of Tut around the world with a forensically recast version in white as if there were some scientific proof of it , or to show photos in books wear the paint has been worn of ancient $gyptians or soft $thiopian hair made straighter and redder from hair chemicals and then have the audacity to get upset when some -*frocentric# proclaims the $gyptians were -black#" Thus we readQ # -?1 years was found to be the ma)imum duration of 6aucasian hair buried under the ground# in 8ogers %pencer 2ee 4 Personal !dentification from 5uman 8emains ./F0" *lso the breakage of bond in the human hair of the mummies,#was related to mummification and cosmetic teatments embalming materials " %ee -Microbeam %ynchrotron !maging of hairs from *ncient $gyptian Mummies# 7ertrand, 2" (umas P %ynchrotron 8adiation 1DDP %pet" P" PF0+/1 from the 6entre de 8echerche et de 8estauration de Musees de @rance 3M8 .0. -*frocentric # history e)plains why 7race and other physical anthropologists from the beginnings of anthropolgy until now have said that the ma>ority of the ancient neolithic people, 6ro+Magnons and their Mesolithic descendants were not directly ancestral to modern $uropeans or $urasians of the Middle $ast who also moved into !ndia"

What do the anthropologists say about $gyptians until very late period in $gypt when other physical types had become numerically significant in Palestine, -!f there was a south+north cline variation along the =ile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine" The limb+length proportions of males from the $gyptian sites group them with *fricans rather than with $uropeans"# &7arry Nemp, -*ncient $gypt *natomy of a 6ivilisation" &1DD:' 8outledge" p" :1+;D' The anatomist ," $lliot %mith said of the modern east *fricansQ -The essential identity to the early =eolithic $uropeans and of the proto+$gyptians is generally admitted# p" 1D The works of Nrogman, 5addon and other early physical anthropologists make clear that there is no way in heaven or on earth that modern $uropean or even fair+skinned people now living in the =ear $ast were even a significant number of the early 7ronAe *ge populations" Thus people reading about the ancient world need to revise their own thinking when reading into genetic studies and come to terms with what is really being said" 5ow were *frican haplotypes and genes really transferred to present $uropeans and =ear $asterners? !t is obvious that the early haplotypes in $urope and $urasia belonged to people with no strong link to modern $uropeans" %o what does that mean for genetics that they were transferred so late " What does it mean for linguistics when the =ostratic theory says that the semitic culture and for that matter the !ndo $uropean language group began to spread from the =atufians F to /,DDDD years ago or people from that period in the 2evant 4 a people that have been long known to have been of -=egro# and =egroid" What does that really mean? (oes everyone really want to know? =o 4 ! think people would rather turn history around so that it fits into their M,M picture view of what ancient peoples like -semites#, and *kkadians and Philistines and Phoenicians, and Moors and Persians and the builders of stone henge really looked like" ! wonGt say <lmecs since they havenGt done a film on them yet" %o 4 sorry that *frocentrics are as one book title reads 4 in search of -an imaginary past#" 7ut as early *fricans were well aware the ancestral ties were the ties that bind and thatGs a link thats not going to be broken 4 not even through time" May ;, 1DD/, 0QP. pm 8eply %tellar Mythos says Well researched, well constructed, >ust a magnificent amalgamation of evidence to support your thesis" ! have read myriad books of ancient history and one of the facts that ! outline to those who debate me and denigrate me is that, the vast ma>ority of evidence to support 7lack *fricans pioneering achievements in antiquity come from white scholars" Therefore, -*frocentrism# as many people call it, is rooted in large part, on white scholarly evidenceE talk about bitter irony" Neep up the good work ! beg, beseech, and implore you to do so" Thank Bou =ovember .D, 1D.D, 1Q.. pm 8eply dana marniche says %orry should have said =atufians F+/,DDD years ago" Oust writing my letter too quick " May ;, 1DD/, 0Q99 pm 8eply dana marniche says *nother interesting thing about the =atufians who first lived .D,DDD +.1DDD years ago or F,/,DDD 7"6"" The crania 7race studied he described as -robust# while the later =atufians that were more gracile were also -=egroid# and were either influenced by the Mushabians from the =ile or were the Mushabi" !t probably needs to be made clear if the pre+Mushabians were related to teh =iger +6ongo group or if the latter ones were" 2ater 3baid skeletons that spread the neolithic culture over Mesopotamia and *rabia had the same skeletal markings as the =atufians and were also described as robust, large bodied and -negroids# by s few early antrhopologists"

May ;, 1DD/, FQD. pm 8eply terrrell ali bey says oh yes indeed dana marniche ,the confirmation information reality be mad tight ,,,P;D degrees,,,,,,,,,,,,,,this is terrell ali bey ,"indeed May 0, 1D