Egypt: Nordic Desert Empire

[Ronald Anderson]

http://www.white-history.com/hwr8.htm

[Shapur]

http://www.white-history.com/hwr8.htm


Nice lies!

[Ronald Anderson]

How so? Please tell us more.

Nice lies!

[Ronald Anderson]

Check these sites out:

http://www.white-history.com/earlson/nordicarabs.htm

http://www.white-history.com/earlson/nordicegypt.htm

[Ronald Anderson]

Also:

http://www.white-history.com/earlson/rameses.htm

[FranzJoseph]

Very interesting Rameses link, Ronald.

A sketch artist did a reconstruction of the old boy once (Rameses the Great reigned for 62 years). Based on the mummy and some of the less-damaged wall reliefs, Rameses ended up looking a lot like Field Marshall Erwin Rommel.

What makes that resemblence interesting is one of Rommel's opponents, U.S. General George S. Patton, believed in reincarnation. Most people don't, but as a war leader Rameses does seem surprisingly modern, including his delightfully obsessive concern for public relations. They may have had to carve the history in rock, but Rameses made sure the rocks said the right thing.

French historian Christian Jacq caught Rameses just right in his series of pulp novels about him, which included cameo appearences from Homer and Moses. It takes a powerful personality to inspire that sort of thing after over 3000 years.

[True Hellenes]

Rameses, he has a hooked nose, hardly a Nordic trait. Would the original colour of someones hair last however many thousands of years? Some Aborigines also have coloured hair, does that make them Nordic too? Also please find a white woman with the facial features of Queen Nafatiti (sp?).

Nordic Arabs? That is a joke.

here is an unadulterated nomadic bedouin arab:

http://www.fostertravel.com/egy5.jpg

[True Hellenes]

Another point, I have seen what happens to Germans and English in the desert, they look like beatroot and complain every two minutes, you think they could bear to walk bareback in Egypt?

[Ronald Anderson]

http://www.white-history.com/nefer.htm

[True Hellenes]

If that represents the empire builder of the ancient world why does this represent a third world mongrel today? After all this time they have been unable to reengineer such great architecture? Bull.

Many great feats of engineering today have a Nordic mastermind, much like in the ancient world before the rise of Rome. How much astounding architecture is built today by the mongrel pictured above? Suspension bridges? Skyscrapers? Giant oil rigs? Anything?

What you think a fifty foot mosque is astounding?

Unsubstantiable nonsense: 'Nordic Mastermind'


Cesiphon - largest man made arch, ever.

http://people.hofstra.edu/faculty/martha_hollander/GalleryPictures/FullSizedImages/AncientNearEast/Ctesiphon.jpg

built by these 'Nordic' masterminds:-

http://www.hp.uab.edu/image_archive/ugm/coin03.jpg

http://www.hp.uab.edu/image_archive/ugm/coin04.jpg

Persepolis:-

http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~aam24/pics/iran/persepolis.jpg

built by these 'Nords'

http://www.iranchamber.com/art/articles/images/tiles_iranian_soldiers.jpg

[FranzJoseph]

Hook nose Rameses? What?

Any number of famous Europeans have fairly generous beaks, this is not disputed. Take a look at some of the old robber barons for some modern-day pharohs if you get a chance. Some look plenty like Rameses.

[True Hellenes]

Nords should have straight noses, anything otherwise obviously has ashkenazi influence and therefore mongrelic. Let me guess, Nords also have chinky eyes and flat noses like Otto Von Hindenberg and this fine character here: -

http://www.nato.int/sfor/nations/various/finland/finnish.jpg

That muddy arab and his ancestors built nothing, they conquered people who could build things and commissioned htem to do so. You can rest assured that the Golden age of Islam did not come about as a result of the work of his kin. It was through the work of Greeks, Persians, Phoenecians and Egyptians.

[Herman van Houten]

http://www.stormfront.org/whitehistory/hwr8_files/hor2.jpeg

[Испанец]

Any number of famous Europeans have fairly generous beaks, this is not disputed. Take a look at some of the old robber barons for some modern-day pharohs if you get a chance. Some look plenty like Rameses.

Keltic-Nordics, especially in the British Isles, are known for having prominent noses, like the Romans. However, hook noses are much more common in Southern than Northern Europe, and are even more common in the Middle East. It would seem some convergent evolution took place based on the climate around the Mediterranean basin.

One could argue that Ramses II was a Nordic because many Nordics have a hook nose, but it seems improbable that the disproportionate number of figures with hook noses whom Kemp refers to as "White" are all Nordics. You have to assume, by logical deduction and the findings of reputable anthropologists, that there is some continuity between ancient and modern Egyptians. In fact, the Egyptian Copts, a Christian sect, are said to retain the ancient Egyptian features with a high degree of fidelity. Carleton Coon wrote that anthropometrically the modern Egyptians are much like the ancient Egyptians (ie., they were not exactly "Negrified," as Kemp assumes).

More likely, the light-haired elements that Kemp emphasizes are related to the Berbers of North Africa, who are known, in pure form, to have relatively high degrees of blondism and rufosity. Blond North Africans are thus not exactly a new finding. Moreover, the blond elements would be more likely to engage in administrative posts (as opposed to agriculture or construction) because they would be less tolerant than their Mediterranean kin of the scorching sun of Egypt. The idea that because a few blonds are found in a population that you have a Nordic empire is absurd, and not even an anthropologist like Coon, who is actually said to have been racist, would accept that conclusion.

Undoubtedly some Nordics lived in ancient Egypt. But there are Nordics who today live in Greece, Sicily, and Spain. As a general rule, Nordics do not have hook noses.

[FranzJoseph]

I was disputing the idea that Ramses even had a hook nose. He had a big nose, maybe, but I never saw a portrait that made it look hooked.


Ramses: Nose Big Not Hooked!
http://www.ed-dolmen.com/historia/art/ramses5.jpg

[Anima Eternae]

More likely, the light-haired elements that Kemp emphasizes are related to the Berbers of North Africa, who are known, in pure form, to have relatively high degrees of blondism and rufosity. Blond North Africans are thus not exactly a new finding. Moreover, the blond elements would be more likely to engage in administrative posts (as opposed to agriculture or construction) because they would be less tolerant than their Mediterranean kin of the scorching sun of Egypt. The idea that because a few blonds are found in a population that you have a Nordic empire is absurd, and not even an anthropologist like Coon, who is actually said to have been racist, would accept that conclusion.

Undoubtedly some Nordics lived in ancient Egypt. But there are Nordics who today live in Greece, Sicily, and Spain.

Well said. A minor Nordic presence does not warrant labeling the ancient Greeks and Egyptians as "Nordics".

I wouldn't trust www.whitehistory.com any more than I would trust www.blackhistory.com.

[Aryan Lord]

Nice lies!

No not "lies" but fact. All civilisation is the creation of the Aryan mind.
Semites and negroes are unable to form anything remotely connected to civilisation.
The archaeological evidence speaks for itself. The only people that have their feathers ruffled by Kemp`s work are those who are racially inferior and realise it every time they stare at their own reflection.
Meds and muds, interesting phoentic similarity.

[Herman van Houten]

The rulers were Aryans.

[Vikinkur]

So muds made the pyramids?

Modern day greeks could not do it.


LOL.


They where whites who lost their authority (jews took it away) and so racial integrity.

[FranzJoseph]

The archaeological evidence speaks for itself. The only people that have their feathers ruffled by Kemp`s work are those who are racially inferior and realise it every time they stare at their own reflection.


I have to agree with that.

From scholars like Emory on down, the story on ancient Egypt remains so simple almost everyone screws it up. Roughly, this is all there is:

1. The Nile Valley had an original, non-white population.

2. At some very ancient point in time, a group of Nordic seafarers invaded. We know they were seafarers because they brought a language with them that has a high percentage of nautical terminology.

3. These invaders settled and built an impressive civilization.

4. Over time (Emory says it took a damn long time) these invaders mated with both the indigenous population and slaves that they had collected during their various conquests.

5. The race-mixing ultimately led to a decline that became terminal early in the New Kingdom (1600 BC, give or take.)

6. Even so, modern Egyptians are of a different stock altogether anyway. After the Persian and Greek conquests (600 BC on) the northeast border was kept open and peoples from the Phoenician city-states and NE Asian countries inundated the place. It is believed most modern Egyptians are of mainly Syrian stock. (For a bit of historic contrast, the ancient Egyptians called Syrians "vile Asiatics").

It's happened in more recent times. Brilliant and aggressive Spaniards and Dutch have conquered South American countries, built impressive states, intermarried with the local populations and ended up with mestizo stew and third world begging bowls. History really does repeat, sort of.

For whatever reason, people like to overcomplicate ancient Egypt. Elmer Pendel covered it all long ago in "Why Civilizations Self-Destruct" and it's all fairly simple. Frustrating, but simple.

[Angle]

I don't think that every originally-creative race was white or Nordic. No one does. But people who call themselves Aryan and spend their time 'bigging up' Asiatic cultures are just wankers. 'True' wankers. Egyptian culture is very foreign to us. Greek culture, Celtic culture, megalithic culture is not, though they are of great antiquity.

[FranzJoseph]

Egyptian culture is very foreign to us.

Us or you? Pick up some of the language. It gets unforeign fast.

That's how I sussed that they were kin. Wogs did not build Thebes. :D

[Anima Eternae]

I don't think that every originally-creative race was white or Nordic. No one does. But people who call themselves Aryan and spend their time 'bigging up' Asiatic cultures are just wankers. 'True' wankers.

Well said. It's funny hearing tales about the Chinese or Japs being white...

[ngrh8r]

Nords should have straight noses, anything otherwise obviously has ashkenazi influence and therefore mongrelic. Let me guess, Nords also have chinky eyes and flat noses like Otto Von Hindenberg and this fine character here: -

http://www.nato.int/sfor/nations/various/finland/finnish.jpg

That muddy arab and his ancestors built nothing, they conquered people who could build things and commissioned htem to do so. You can rest assured that the Golden age of Islam did not come about as a result of the work of his kin. It was through the work of Greeks, Persians, Phoenecians and Egyptians.


This guy is a bad example no matter who's side you support. The sun is clearly in his eyes, causing him to squint. He's also a fat fucking slob, and excess fat can distort facial structure.

[Rhadley]

Pick up some of the language. It gets unforeign fast.



I assume here you mean ancient Egyptian - not Arabic?

[J.P. Slovjanski]

No not "lies" but fact. All civilisation is the creation of the Aryan mind.
Semites and negroes are unable to form anything remotely connected to civilisation.
The archaeological evidence speaks for itself. The only people that have their feathers ruffled by Kemp`s work are those who are racially inferior and realise it every time they stare at their own reflection.
Meds and muds, interesting phoentic similarity.

China was the creation of Aryans? I also hate to tell you but Kemp's work is full of nonsense in several areas. He refers to Slavs as Celtic, claims that Franco was Jewish, to name a few.

[FranzJoseph]

I assume here you mean ancient Egyptian - not Arabic?

Right, out of Allen's Middle Egyptian Grammar.

But I've been really lucky to pick up a bit of Arabic from a decent Egyptian dude I work with. He's into vids and is getting me a copy of Egypt TV's big hit of 2001. There's no English subtitles so I can see how much of it I can make out (probably very little).

On the other hand, a Certain Ethnic Group got unhappy with Egypt because of the movie. This is the handout that got me interested in it:

During the second half of Ramadan, a number of television stations, including Egyptian stations, will be screening the thirty-part series "Horseman Without a Horse," starring the well-known Egyptian actor Muhammad Subhi and a cast of 400 others from Egypt, Syria, and France.

The series, whose budget ran six to eight million Egyptian pounds, was produced by Arab Radio and Television (ART), established in 1993, which broadcasts to the Middle East, North America, Latin America, Australia, and Africa.

In a report on the series, the Egyptian weekly Roz Al-Youssuf described it as the "first of its kind" - both artistically, as it is the first time a single actor plays 14 different characters, and in the way in which it deals with the issues it raises.

The following are excerpts from a report on the series: "For the first time, the series' writer courageously tackles the 24 Protocols of the Elders of Zion, revealing them and clarifying that they are the central line that still, to this very day, dominates Israel's policy, political aspirations, and racism... "

***

(It ain't gonna show up at Blockbuster.) :D


.

[FranzJoseph]

He refers to Slavs as Celtic, claims that Franco was Jewish, to name a few.

There is a Slav-Celt connection. The ancient kingdom of Gordian, way out East, was Celtic and after Alexander's conquest are known to have migrated right into the area where Slavs rule now. They have a few other points of relationship.

Franco? Never heard that one. Let me check.

[J.P. Slovjanski]

There is a Slav-Celt connection. The ancient kingdom of Gordian, way out East, was Celtic and after Alexander's conquest are known to have migrated right into the area where Slavs rule now. They have a few other points of relationship.

Franco? Never heard that one. Let me check.


There are connections but it is not correct to state that they as a whole ARE Celtic. And I assure you he does claim that Franco was part Jewish, with no evidence, and states an incorrect reason for his position of neutrality in WWII.

[FranzJoseph]

The Rabbi Franco issue don't seem to have legs.

Besides a few obvious BS sites, this is all that comes up:

"David Seckler says: "What Hans Meyer Morgenthau told Tim Brown reminds me of an experience I had in Cordoba in 1972. A native of the city told me, out of the clear blue sky, that he was Jewish and that his family had retained their Jewish identity during the past 500 years. Even though he knew little of Jewish tradition, this identity was something he felt deeply. I wonder if there is any truth to the rumor I once read--totally without any substantiating evidence--that Francisco Franco descended from a Marrano family. Many Spaniards with very Catholic names (e.g., de los Santos) or names of cities are. But the name Franco doesn't fit either of these categories.


RH: Corominas devotes three and a half pages to "marrano"! He defines it as "new Christian", i.e. a Jewish or a Moorish convert. Since "marrano" means "pig" in Spanish, it is an insult, especially as they consider pork unclean. The word really comes from an Arab word meaning "forbidden thing". It was thought that Jewish converts were "judaiazantes", practicing Jewish rites in private, although publicly devout Catholics. One way of testing these converts was to ask them to eat pork. I don't know if this test would work anymore, since I have Jewish friends who love pork. As for family place names, the Mexican labor leader Lombardo Toledano had two Jewish names. I have heard that Francisco Franco had Jewish ancestry, and Franco can be a Jewish name.

Ronald Hilton - 11/27/02 "

http://wais.stanford.edu/Spain/spain_sephardicjewsunderfranco112702.html

[Whirlwind]

Why is it that to this day asians still see light skin as a sign of high birth, JP?

[Испанец]

1. The Nile Valley had an original, non-white population.

This would be news to both Grafton Elliot Smith and Carleton Coon. The Nile Valley was the home to Caucasoids of the Mediterranean type for many thousands of years. If they were not "White," what were they? Yellow, Black?

2. At some very ancient point in time, a group of Nordic seafarers invaded. We know they were seafarers because they brought a language with them that has a high percentage of nautical terminology.

Apparently they were not numerous enough to alter the Egyptian language from Hamitic to Indo-European. Even so, the vast majority of skeletal remains point to a small Mediterranean element, much like the Iberians, predominating in the region for many thousands of years. If a bunch of Nordics took over Egypt and built all of those pyramids, where is the evidence for this? If Nordics were able to build pyramids in Egypt, why didn't they do it whence they came?

3. These invaders settled and built an impressive civilization.

And amazingly this theory has escaped the notice of anthropologists such as Smith and Coon.

4. Over time (Emory says it took a damn long time) these invaders mated with both the indigenous population and slaves that they had collected during their various conquests.

5. The race-mixing ultimately led to a decline that became terminal early in the New Kingdom (1600 BC, give or take.)

And yet an analysis of the skeletal structure shows that modern Egyptians are much the same as ancient Egyptians, albeit with Semitic accretions since the Mohammedan invasions of the 7th century (which they likely had to an extent before that).

To say Egypt fell due to race-mixing is to ignore that race-mixing has been going on in Egypt since probably prehistoric times, due to its location between two continents; and according to G.E. Smith race-mixing actually allowed it to have its empire, especially with early Asiatic accretions which brought in a larger head size.

6. Even so, modern Egyptians are of a different stock altogether anyway.

Carleton Coon actually went out and compared the modern Egyptians with the ancients in skeletal and body dimensions, and disagreed completely.

The sad thing here is that I can imagine barely literate but well meaning White parents teaching their children that the Egyptians were "Nordic." Of course, most White Nationalists here tend to be unmarried, but of those having kids their kids will grow up with a false sense of their place in the world and a totally skewed version of history that will no doubt harm them.

Imagine going to college and interrupting a professor who has actually gone out on digs in Egypt and saying: "Sir, you are wrong, the Egyptians were Nordic invaders from Europe or West Asia, and the reason why they built an empire is because they were not yet of mixed race." The poor kid would be a laughing-stock in the class, and the professor who has actually measured skeletons would feel bad for him.

[Steve B]

Apparently they were not numerous enough to alter the Egyptian language from Hamitic to Indo-European. Even so, the vast majority of skeletal remains point to a small Mediterranean element, much like the Iberians, predominating in the region for many thousands of years. If a bunch of Nordics took over Egypt and built all of those pyramids, where is the evidence for this? If Nordics were able to build pyramids in Egypt, why didn't they do it whence they came?



And amazingly this theory has escaped the notice of anthropologists such as Smith and Coon.

To say Egypt fell due to race-mixing is to ignore that race-mixing has been going on in Egypt since probably prehistoric times, due to its location between two continents; and according to G.E. Smith race-mixing actually allowed it to have its empire, especially with early Asiatic accretions which brought in a larger head size.



Carleton Coon actually went out and compared the modern Egyptians with the ancients in skeletal and body dimensions, and disagreed completely.

The sad thing here is that I can imagine barely literate but well meaning White parents teaching their children that the Egyptians were "Nordic." Of course, most White Nationalists here tend to be unmarried, but of those having kids their kids will grow up with a false sense of their place in the world and a totally skewed version of history that will no doubt harm them.

Imagine going to college and interrupting a professor who has actually gone out on digs in Egypt and saying: "Sir, you are wrong, the Egyptians were Nordic invaders from Europe or West Asia, and the reason why they built an empire is because they were not yet of mixed race." The poor kid would be a laughing-stock in the class, and the professor who has actually measured skeletons would feel bad for him.

When was the last time you saw a "Mediterranean" with red hair? Isn't red hair a feature of the Nordic subrace of white people?

Although the pharaoh was 90 years old(Ramesses II) when he died, and basically the color of the mummy’s hair (reddish-yellow) was caused by dying with a henna solution, the professor found that the hair roots had retained traces of natural red pigmentation, and that therefore during his youth Ramesses had been red haired. Ceccaldi also studied the cross-sectional shape of the hairs he was allowed to test, and found them to be oval in cross section. This showed that the Egyptian leader was wavy haired, or cymotrich. He said this combination of characteristics shows Ramesses was a leucoderm (white person).

These facts have not only anthropological interest, but also great symbolic importance. In ancient Egypt, the god Seth was said to have been red-haired, and redheads were claimed to have worshiped the god devoutly. In a Ramesses study, the Egyptologist Desroches-Noblecourt wrote an essay, in which she discussed the importance of Ramesses’ rufous condition. She noted that the Ramessides (the family of Ramesses II), were devoted to Seth, with several bearing the name Seti, which means “beloved of Seth.” She concluded that the Ramessides believed themselves to be divine descendants of Seth, with their red hair as proof of their lineage; they may even have used this peculiar physical feature to propel themselves out of obscurity, and onto the throne of the pharaohs. Desroches-Noblecourt also speculated that Ramesses II may well have been descended from a long line of redheads.

Her speculations have been proved correct: Dr. Joann Fletcher, a consultant to the British Bioanthropology Foundation, has proved that Seti I (the father of Ramesses II), had red hair. It has also been demonstrated that the mummy of Pharaoh Siptah (a great-grandson of Ramesses II), has red hair.

Ramesses II is better known as Ramesses the Great. His birth name was Ramesses Meryamun (“Re has fashioned him, beloved of Amun”), and his throne name was Usermaatre Setepenre (“The justice of Re is powerful, Chosen of Re”). Although different authorities give different dates, he ruled from about 1279 to 1212 B.C. Known for his military prowess, he raided the Libyans and Nubians and attacked the Syrians nearly half a dozen times. He also battled the Hittites and later formed a treaty with them, marrying two of their princesses. He had eight main queens during his life, and a total of somewhere around 200 wives, and is said to have had about 60 daughters and almost 100 sons. Ramesses also built more temples and monuments than any other pharaoh. His most impressive project was his temple at Abu Simbel in northern Nubia. This vast temple was carved into the face of a cliff and features four colossal statues of himself, each of them 60 feet tall, in a sitting position. Thanks to some interesting engineering and archeoastronomy, the sun would shine directly through the entrance of the temple at sunrise on the equinoxes. Ramesses was the last of the great white native rulers of Egypt. After his era, Egypt became decadent and degenerate, and Negro blood began to infiltrate on a large scale.

It is worth noting that the ancient Libyans, by the way, were a white people. The ancient Libyans extended from Morocco across North Africa to the Nile Delta. Libyans occupied the western third of the delta during the early years of the Egyptian civilization and were apparently the descendants of Cro-Magnon people, by way of the Afalou race, according to Prof. Carleton S. Coon. Cro-Magnon braincases were larger, on average (1,617 cc), than those of any modern race of men.

Coon stated that Egypt’s Queen Hetep-Heres II, of the Fourth dynasty, the daughter of Cheops (Khufu), “is shown in the colored bas-reliefs of her tomb to have been a distinct blonde. Her hair is painted a bright yellow stippled with little red horizontal lines, and her skin is white.”

The North African Nordics resemble the mixed Nordics of Upper Paleolithic derivation found in Ireland and western Norway more than they do the ash-blond Nordics of Norway and Sweden. These Nordics of North Africa are a mixture of brunet Mediterraneans of tall stature and considerable facial length with Afalou survivors. The blondism of these Nordics is derived from the Afalou side. http://www.barnesreview.org/Feb_2004/Egyptians/egyptians.html

[FranzJoseph]

This would be news to both Grafton Elliot Smith and Carleton Coon. The Nile Valley was the home to Caucasoids of the Mediterranean type for many thousands of years.

That's what I said. The question is when the Caucasoids got there.

The original Nile Valley inhabitants were the same nonwhite nomads that are all over N. Africa today. They saw civilizations come & go.


Apparently they were not numerous enough to alter the Egyptian language from Hamitic to Indo-European.

This is still a contentious issue. There's a 30% overlap between Middle Egyptian and Homeric Greek. Language divisions are arbitrary. ("Hamitic" is a catch-all for "Somewhere in Africa Maybe")

Language is a tricky issue where Egypt is concerned because (a) no IndoEuropean language enters the Mediterranian area earlier than the 17th century BC, when Egypt was already ancient and (b) not enough classical scholars know Egyptian.

When Schwaller de Lubicz demonstrated how large the number of modern European words that derive from Egyptian is, they were surprised. They haven't forgiven de Lubicz for it since. It's easier to call him a nazi and ignore him (And they do! He was a friend of Rudolf Hess after all.)


If a bunch of Nordics took over Egypt and built all of those pyramids, where is the evidence for this? If Nordics were able to build pyramids in Egypt, why didn't they do it whence they came?

Wilhelm Teudt proved all of this and his work remains hard to find because he worked for the SS.

Current theory "whence they came" actually happens to be simple, though still hypothetical. The Black Sea Flood (5600 BC) interrupted a European civilization in that area, sent them scattering to places like Egypt and Sumer.

This explains why Egyptian and Sumerian civilizations were too developed to begin with, and seem connected but not directly. Whether it's the whole story or only part of it, there's lots of evidence on it now. For a good start, go to Noah's Flood by Ryan and Pittman.

this theory has escaped the notice of anthropologists such as Smith and Coon.

Not surprisingly. Anthropology is an asshole science and misses most everything.


To say Egypt fell due to race-mixing is to ignore that race-mixing has been going on in Egypt since probably prehistoric times

Not to mention everywhere else? It's the type of race-mixing we're discussing.

Still, when early American colonists race-mixed to a small degree with (for instance) the Cherokee, it added a touch of fire to the mix. Large-scale miscegenation with Mestizos and Africans is another matter.

In much the same way, the Nordics who built Egypt mixed with the indigenous population in the Old Kingdom and got little more than a dash of color. The later large-scale mixing with Syriaic peoples was much different and more destructive.

The sad thing here is that I can imagine barely literate but well meaning White parents teaching their children that the Egyptians were "Nordic."

Not sad if they teach it right. The Egyptians who counted were Nordic.

Imagine going to college and interrupting a professor who has actually gone out on digs in Egypt and saying: "Sir, you are wrong, the Egyptians were Nordic invaders from Europe or West Asia, and the reason why they built an empire is because they were not yet of mixed race." The poor kid would be a laughing-stock in the class, and the professor who has actually measured skeletons would feel bad for him.

A white nationalist kid is probably going be more than a laughing-stock anyway, which is why we have to teach our kids the truth carefully.

Enough people who have "actually gone on digs" is the reason we know the Official Story is bunk, and unpersons like Teudt were right. One archeologist told me flat out that the bodies from Dynastic Egypt could be stuck in modern European graveyards and no one would tell the difference between them and a Dutchman or Yorkshireman.

Skip what anthropologists fantasize and spend an evening with some good information, like Robert Temple's The Crystal Sun. Temple therein gives some good information about Egypt's advanced optics and wet chemistry in the era just before Aegean civilization begins. Add to that the fact Egypt had a deep water navy before Athens was built. You want to hand all that to muds, go right ahead. But the science and the naval achievements are White signatures, and I'll take that over anything Carleton Coon ever dreamed up.

[Испанец]

When was the last time you saw a "Mediterranean" with red hair?

Red hair is found in North Africa and Galicia today. There is a tendency toward blondism in virtually all Mediterranean populations.

Ramses II may have had red hair (although an American Renaissance article expressed a little doubt about it). You can't be absolutely sure given the facts available now because the Egyptians used exotic substances in preserving the bodies (although certain tests on the structure of the strands might confirm the color). It would not surprise me if he did have red hair, merely because it's not uncommon among some groups of Berbers today.

Isn't red hair a feature of the Nordic subrace of white people?

No, it is not. Red hair is commonest in the British Isles, especially in Ireland and Scotland. Nordics are actually a minority in Ireland. Rufosity is just as common among Upper Paleolithic types as among Nordics, if not even moreso.

Upper Paleolithic types have coexisted with Mediterraneans in North Africa for many thousands of years. I believe Coon even speculated that the blondism in North Africa could be the result of mixture between UPs and Mediterraneans.

[Испанец]

The question is when the Caucasoids got there.

The Caucasoids have been in North Africa since early prehistoric times. The Mediterraneans are actually better adapted to the desert life than Negroes.

The original Nile Valley inhabitants were the same nonwhite nomads that are all over N. Africa today.

North Africa today is still overwhelmingly Caucasoid, whether or not you consider them White. North Africans today are especially adapted to desert life, which is why they tend to be darker than Europeans.

Many North Africans, even entire tribes, can fit into parts of Europe very easily. Pockets of North Africa today are Nordic, though it would not surprise me if they were considered "non-White" simply because of their religion and the clothes they wear.

There's a 30% overlap between Middle Egyptian and Homeric Greek.

There was certainly some degree of cultural exchange between the sophisticated Egyptians and at that time the relatively unsophisticated Greeks.

Current theory "whence they came" actually happens to be simple, though still hypothetical. The Black Sea Flood (5600 BC) interrupted a European civilization in that area, sent them scattering to places like Egypt and Sumer.

This reminds me of what Afrocentrists write when they claim that Blacks created Egypt and nearby civilizations by displacing the indigenous inhabitants, then, after some time, mysteriously disappeared or were displaced. The question is: where are these Nordics? Where is the evidence that the Egyptians were Nordic? Why aren't there pyramids around the Black Sea?

As I wrote, one or two blonds (or redheads) in a population does not make a "Nordic empire."

For a good start, go to Noah's Flood by Ryan and Pittman.

I'll do a search on this "source."

The later large-scale mixing with Syriaic peoples was much different and more destructive.

Round-headed Egyptian skeletal remains have been found in very ancient sites and G.E. Smith established his own theories based on them. The Asiatic component to Egypt existed long before you acknowledge it. Egypt was always racially mixed, and to some extent this allowed it to be as great as it was by the confluence of (largely) Caucasoid influences.

A white nationalist kid is probably going be more than a laughing-stock anyway, which is why we have to teach our kids the truth carefully.

The Creationists feel the same way regarding the "truth" they have. This discussion has made me realize that parents who teach children these absurd theories are engaging in a form of child abuse.

Enough people who have "actually gone on digs" is the reason we know the Official Story is bunk, and unpersons like Teudt were right. One archeologist told me flat out that the bodies from Dynastic Egypt could be stuck in modern European graveyards and no one would tell the difference between them and a Dutchman or Yorkshireman.

Carleton Coon wrote that no anthropologist could tell the difference between the bones of tall Arabs and tall Englishmen. The reason why this "archeologist" told you that is because Mediterraneans and Nordics have nearly the exact same skeletal structure and dimensions. The same reasoning could even be used with modern tall Egyptians and Englishmen.

You want to hand all that to muds, go right ahead. But the science and the naval achievements are White signatures, and I'll take that over anything Carleton Coon ever dreamed up.

The Phoenicians and Polynesians were also excellent navigators. I doubt most White Nationalists would call the highly talented Phoenician mariners "White" if they saw them today.

Carleton Coon, by the way, was one of the greatest physical anthropologists of the 20th century, and was even cited heavily by the race-denier Ashley Montagu, just because his work, which acknowledged race, could not be ignored. The point I am making here is that those such as yourself who want to believe that the Egyptians were "Nordic" are digging yourselves into a hole and being left isolated from anything near the mainstream, just like the Creationists. Like Afrocentrism, Nordicism seems like a self-esteem movement.

[FranzJoseph]

The Phoenicians and Polynesians were also excellent navigators. I doubt most White Nationalists would call the highly talented Phoenician mariners "White" if they saw them today.

Yes they would.

For a highly readable and concise look at how the Phoenician seaman came out of the north and were rebuffed by Mycenean and Egyptian forces to settle the Leventine coast, check out Jurgen Spanuth's classic Atlantis of the North.

I'm happy to report that Spanuth's 1979 classic is no longer languishing in obscurity. It's been picked up for the new National Alliance book catalog where, if us diffusionists are lucky, it will get the attention it's always deserved.


The point I am making here is that those such as yourself who want to believe that the Egyptians were "Nordic" are digging yourselves into a hole and being left isolated from anything near the mainstream, just like the Creationists.

Actually the mainstream, despite hostile disciplines such as anthropology, is moving toward acceptance of diffusionism more than ever. Even works such as Perry's Children of the Sun are back in print and making the case for the diffusion of knowledge of the "white gods" all over the world in prehistory and ancient times. Including whites from Egypt of course.

Despite flukes like Coon, whom I've read, the disturbing trend over the last 70 years or so is disciplines like anthropology falsifying or ignoring this sort of information.

Throw your nets out a little wider. The truth really is out there and Teudt and his collegues were right: Aryans made civilization. It's time to let even history professors in on the fact.

[Испанец]

I looked up your sources, FranzJoseph, and I must say I am not impressed at all, to put it mildly. At best your sources only tangentially or speculatively support the claim that the Egyptians were once (significantly) Nordic.

Maybe some people who don't know a whole lot about anthropology are going to see all of the book titles you have posted in this thread and think that your conclusions are correct. My impression, given your lack of solid sources, is that you have formed your opinion on the matter and are desperately seeking affirmation for it. On this I won't hold it against you, since you are only showing a trait common among mankind. You sorta remind me of the Christian Identity types, given the Biblical overtones and sources, although you seem more literate than most of them.

My concern here, and we all have our biases, is that Whites who swallow these beliefs are going to be harmed. They are going to be unable to see the humanity of their fellow Whites, and certainly not that of non-Whites. Kids who go to school believing these theories are going to be at a disadvantage to other Whites and non-Whites with more solid footing in history. It's not good for White Nationalism, either, because knowledge is power, and as far as I am concerned knowledge is getting obscured by racial triumphalism and the need to put one's race at the top. I believe most Whites are too sophisticated for this, and the diffusionist paradigm you offer to observers is so far off what scholars know and understand that it can only serve to amuse Web surfers who happen upon this thread. But I digress.

Even works such as Perry's Children of the Sun are back in print and making the case for the diffusion of knowledge of the "white gods" all over the world in prehistory and ancient times. Including whites from Egypt of course.

Perry wrote very early in the 20th century (the book you cite was published in 1923!), and even collabored with G.E. Smith. Perry was actually a cultural anthropologist: the type Carleton Coon warned about in The Story of Man. Cultural, or social, anthropologists should not be confused with physical anthropologists. Cultural anthropologists study cultures, whereas physical anthropologists study bones and skeletons and physical differences between groups: exactly what is needed to bring clarity to this debate. Cultural anthropologists are today's biggest race-deniers. They seek to obscure rather than mathematicize human differences, unlike Coon.

Two of your sources were German clerics, one of whom was affiliated with the National Socialists. I won't hold that against you, but you should understand that a lot of knowledge in anthropology has been gained since then. Still, I don't believe the work of clerics, or those with a Biblical perspective, trumps the work of Coon.

[...] Phoenician seaman came out of the north and were rebuffed by Mycenean and Egyptian forces to settle the Leventine coast, check out Jurgen Spanuth's classic Atlantis of the North.

Coon pointed out that anthropologists had obtained a good understanding of the race of the Phoenicians. They were of an eastern Mediterranean type, with prominent noses, like those of the Middle East and southeast Europe. This is exactly what I am talking about: you are putting the speculation of obscure clerics above even a politically incorrect, though widely respected, anthropologist. This is grasping for straws.

[FranzJoseph]

I looked up your sources, FranzJoseph, and I must say I am not impressed at all, to put it mildly...

Sure, because you still trust scholars. I don't.

Spanuth in particular is easy to dismiss as a "cleric" (he was indeed a Pastor) but it misses the amount of knowledge he collected and added to in other disciplines. You're missing a very good experience not reading him.

There are, of course, two histories: The one the scholars promote and what really happened. The subjects most usually given the "UFO" treatment are:

1. Egypt and which population built the ancient civilization there;

2. US copper country and connections with Europe and the Med in the Bronze Age.

Serious work on both subjects cannot be pursued in acedemia despite the work done by loads of people over the last century. Why the taboo? I have no idea.

I do know this: Official "history" is due for some serious slagging in the years ahead so I wouldn't be too certain who'll be mocked in some future history class. The bright kid who reads what is alternative history now might have the last laugh.

Once you leave the brainwashed behind there's a whole new world waiting for you. Best of luck when you make the leap.

[Abzug Hoffman]

"When Schwaller de Lubicz demonstrated how large the number of modern European words that derive from Egyptian is, they were surprised. They haven't forgiven de Lubicz for it since. It's easier to call him a nazi and ignore him (And they do! He was a friend of Rudolf Hess after all.)"

Where is this demonstration? I want to see it.

Greeks and Romans SAID they got a lot of religion and technology from Egypt, therefore Egyptian words should have entered Europe in the normal way. But, even if the non-Aryan Egyptian language wiped out all Aryan Europe languages, that wouldn't mean the Egyptians were Nordic.

Don't you think the Romans and the Greeks would have recognized Nordics when they saw them? And they would have commented. The Egyptians were nothing like Nordics in any way.

[Испанец]

Don't you think the Romans and the Greeks would have recognized Nordics when they saw them?

The Greeks have always had noticeable Nordic elements among them. Today perhaps up to 5% of the Greek population is Nordic. The problem with the Nordicist interpretation is that it assumes that the Nordic element has decreased over time due to Turkish and sub-Saharan mixture. In fact, Nordics have always been a small minority among Greeks, who since ancient times have been predominantly a mixture of Alpine and Atlanto-Mediterranean.

The Greeks were always swarthy. Anatolians always were about the same color as the Greeks, because they are primarily indigenous to Anatolia and thus evolved under the same climatic conditions as the Greeks. The Turks did originally migrate to Anatolia from Central Asia, but they blended in with far more numerous indigenous elements and, according to DNA tests, possess negligible amounts of Mongoloid in them today. Kemp's assertions about the absorption of Black slaves in ancient Greece are not supported by DNA tests, either.

[Abzug Hoffman]

Us or you? Pick up some of the language. It gets unforeign fast.

That's how I sussed that they were kin. Wogs did not build Thebes. :D

You are completely coconuts. Say something in Egptian. It won't be like any language except Hebrew.

[Herman van Houten]

Egptian is an Arab dialect, so it resembles the kike language.

The language of the old egyptians developed into Coptic, which is still spoken as a church language. I never heard a word of it in my life and have no idea how it sounds.

[J.P. Slovjanski]

The language of ancient Egypt was Semitic, as is apparent from the old name with its root of KMT. That does not mean that they were "Arabs" specifically. We would not say that the early Aryans on the Russian steps must have been Russians or Slavs- history shows that the people known as Slavs were for the most part separated from the bulk of Classical civilization much like the Scandinavians and thus they don't appear in history for quite some time.

[Испанец]

Carleton Coon on the Phoenicians:

"The physical type of the Phoenicians is well known from the skeletal remains found at tombs in Carthage. A series of 117 skulls, of which 68 are male, belong for the most part to one characteristic type; dolicho- to mesocephalic, with a cranial index at 75; fairly long vaulted, and hence moderately broad; with a very low vault, a moderately broad forehead, a short face, high orbits, and a narrow, projecting nose which often springs directly from the frontal bone with little or no nasion depression. These skulls are in many ways similar to the Megalithic or Long Barrow type of the preceding millennium; but, as is to be expected in view of their late Middle Eastern origin, show modifications toward a shortening and widening of the vault, and a beaking of the nose." (The Races of Europe, p. 153)

"The Greek evidence, already quoted, indicates that they [Phoenicians] were brunet." (The Races of Europe, p. 153)

Carleton Coon on the Egyptians:

"It will be recalled that throughout their pre-Islamic history the Egyptians consistently maintained their affiliation to a central Mediterranean racial type of moderate head size and intermediate stature. Nevertheless there may have been several contributing Mediterranean elements from different sources which together combined to produce the Egyptian population as a whole. It will be recalled that the ruling class in Egypt was often characterized by a Hamitic facial cast, recalling the upper class Somalis and aristocrats of the cattle-tending tribes of Uganda. The Cushitic element in the Egyptian language had its racial counterpart." (The Races of Europe, p. 458)

"Egypt has never been truly isolated, and has continually drawn to it peoples from other countries." (The Races of Europe, p. 458)

"In Egypt as elsewhere, the country feeds the city with men, and one may expect to find racial continuity between the landed peasants of ancient Egypt and the modern Fellahin. This continuity is, and should be, as great as that between ancient Mesopotamia and modern Iraq. The Copts, who have lived endogamously ever since the advent of Islam, must be even better representatives of the early Egyptian type than the Moslem peasantry." (The Races of Europe, p. 459)

"The modern Egyptian cranial vault is slightly larger than that of most Mediterranean Arabs, and consistent with the dynastic Egyptian dimensions and form." (The Races of Europe, p. 460)

Carleton Coon on the Greeks:

"It is inaccurate to say that the modern Greeks are different physically from the ancient Greeks; such a statement is based on ignorance of the Greek ethnic character. In classical times the Greeks included many kinds of people living in different places, as they do today. If one refers to the inhabitants of Attica during the sixth century, or to the Spartan of Leonidas, then the changes in these localities have probably not been nearly as great as that between the Germans of Tacitus and the living South Germans, to cite but a single example." (The Races of Europe, p. 604)

[FranzJoseph]

If I'd been Kemp I'd have called the chapter "White Desert Empire" instead of using the term Nordic. Despite the evidence of who build what when, Nordic would have been a misnomer most of the time.

Still Kemp may be tactically correct. When whites are supposed to step aside and let America's gene pool get "enriched" by everything from Hmongs to Mestizos, we are under seige. Under those circumstances it's insane to give anything to our racial enemies.

As long as the likes of Michael Jackson runs loose making music videos depicting Egyptians as black Africans, the more sense it makes for us to accentuate who actually created the fucking Dynastic Period. Whether Egyptians of that period ran more to Arminid or toward Nordic is just nitpicking.

And it's worse than nitpicking to let a profession with known hostility toward the white race to call the shots or have a deciding vote. Anthropology is not a source for answers about history.

Egypt is a tough nut because there's been about 2700 years of negative press about them from one specific source. All of this negativaty is fiction and starts with Genesis. Suppose there's a reason for that we might not know?

Got to keep our eyes on the ball. Kemp did, and for all his critics he's done the cause more good than he might know.

.

[Испанец]

If I'd been Kemp I'd have called the chapter "White Desert Empire" instead of using the term Nordic.

I don't know exactly what to say about this, because so many different things can be said about this particular issue. To me Kemp represents a very amateurish, almost embarrassing, attempt to write a history of "White" people (as defined by many Americans). The WN movement is not very intelligent, and this is reflected in the leadership. The only WN leader that truly struck me as intelligent and intellectual was Dr. Pierce, who had training mostly in physics. Dr. Pierce would not have been equipped to write a history of the White race (as he defined it), because despite his relatively wide-ranging reading habits he did not strike me as a scholar of history. For example, National Vanguard Books never had the very politically incorrect Coon, but it did offer, while he was alive, The Passing of the Great Race by Madison Grant (it's written in excellent prose, by the way), which is largely pseudohistorical.

I am interested in the writings of early 20th century thinkers, because they were less politically restrained and offer a unique perspective, but it indicates to me that there was a major limitation in the breadth of what Pierce read or at least in what he was willing to endorse. He lacked the objectivity to be a good historian. So that's the problem in a nutshell: the intellectual inferiority of the movement gave it an intellectually inferior official "historian." At least the Birdman got accolades from mainstream thinkers due to his wit; Kemp would be ridiculed without the ideological insulation that his groupies provide. Outside of Stormfront, he is a nobody.

As to whether the Egyptians were White, I will say that Coon would agree, but his definition of White (like that of other physical anthropologists who believed in race as a valid concept) differed from that of many of Kemp's readers. Physical anthropologists have tended to equate White with Caucasoid, which is more accurate in a taxonomic sense. Race as defined by WNs is largely arbitrary, but it has been internalized so that this arbitrariness is not recognized. This is what the PC types who deny race play on.

[FranzJoseph]

Physical anthropologists have tended to equate White with Caucasoid, which is more accurate in a taxonomic sense. Race as defined by WNs is largely arbitrary, but it has been internalized so that this arbitrariness is not recognized.

Well, that I can get with. What fried some of us in the Official Old Farts division (that's all of us 55 or older) is that Emery, among others, nail Egyptians as Caucasian no later than 1961, and in 1964 Time-Life did their coffee-table history book The Epic of Man calling Egypt a "product of the African-Asian melting pot."

Talk about urge to kill. I mean they knew they were lying by then, they knew.

If Kemp is reacting to that sort of thing, and I think he is, it's understandable. I never go to Stormfront and had no idea Kemp has a following. That's interesting all by itself.


.

[Abzug Hoffman]

The Egyptians all look like chinks or Hindus so African-Asian melting pot is half right. I think the Egyptians did not race mix or even socially mix with other people if they could help it. Their religion had circumcsion and many a jewy thing in it, in fact, Moses and Aaron were prob. Egyptians of the Akhenaton cult.

The Phoenicians looked exactly like Jews, talked exactly like Jews, acted exactly like Jews and nobody could tell the difference between them and the Jews.

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Moses and Aaron didn't exist. Second, just because a group is Semitic does not mean it is of the "Jews". The Hebrews were a very small nomadic people.

[Ronen]

The language of ancient Egypt was Semitic.

No it wasn't. It was hamitic.

[FranzJoseph]

Linguists called old Egyptian Hamitic because the country was physically in Africa. Sons of Ham = Africans. The fact that the language itselt was not related to anything there didn't matter, they had to classify it somehow.

I had fun long time ago with a guy who translated Linear B, and showed me roughly how it work. So is it Greek, I asked. He said it's officially classified as something like "pre-Greek Greek that early residents of Greece spoke before some migrants or invaders added other stuff that makes it more Greek."

You can get more technical, but that's roughly what it is.

All the Bronze Age languages are dead. You know that part going in. Classification really don't matter. Hebrew shows up around 700 BC give or take. So far as anyone can tell it's a corruption of diplomatic Akkadian, a language of diplomacy and trade in the Levant from much earlier.


.

[Herman van Houten]

I had fun long time ago with a guy who translated Linear BI read an old tattered copy of a book some time ago of how it was translated, using aryan ingenuity, written by a man called Chadwick. Fascinating how step by step they deciphered it, and explained how it was done.

From what I googled, apparently the term hamitic is obsolete. Now the egypt language is a group by itself.

The Egyptian branch of the Afroasiatic family comprises Ancient Egyptian and its descendant, Coptic. Both languages are now extinct, although a dialect of Coptic continues to be used liturgically by the Coptic Church.

[Abzug Hoffman]

I read an old tattered copy of a book some time ago of how it was translated, using aryan ingenuity, written by a man called Chadwick. Fascinating how step by step they deciphered it, and explained how it was done.

From what I googled, apparently the term hamitic is obsolete. Now the egypt language is a group by itself.

The Egyptian branch of the Afroasiatic family comprises Ancient Egyptian and its descendant, Coptic. Both languages are now extinct, although a dialect of Coptic continues to be used liturgically by the Coptic Church.

And you can tell from that Coptic language it's nothing like a Nordic language.

Edit: You can translate English words to Coptic here.

http://mycopticchurch.com/coptic/lexicon.asp

Try father, mother, and brother. Interesting.