King Tut Was a European

Map of R1b distribution in Europe. R1b were the Old Europeans pushed to the far west by invading Indo-Europeans.

DNA tests show that King Tut’s Y-DNA matches that of modern day Western Europeans. The lineup is with R1b. The match with modern West Europeans is rather deceptive.

In truth, I believe that R1b is ancient European, or “Old Europe” DNA. It’s found mostly in the Basques these days. It’s probable that the R1b group came from the Caucasus at some unknown time. They probably spoke languages related to the Basques and the languages of the Caucasus. They were overrun by the Indo-European invasion of Europe about 6,000 years ago. The only holdout was the Basques in the high Pyrenees of Spain and France.

So, rather than showing the King Tut was a West European, it shows that he was racially, a member of the “Old Europe” group. No one knows quite what these people looked like, however reports of the “Old Europe” group in the UK say that they had dark hair, dark eyes and were rather swarthy.

Based on drawings, Egyptians seem to have been an olive skinned race similar to the Meds of today. They were surely not either traditional White-Whites and they were definitely not Blacks. The Egyptians made it clear that the Black Nubians were not the same people as Egyptians. The drawings show Nubians are Black Africans and Egyptians as olive-skinned Med types. The Nordicists love to claim the Egyptians. They’re full of shit as usual. The Egyptians were a bunch of swarthy wop non-Whites, you Nordicist turds. Choke on that.

A common White Supremacist lie holds that Egypt was originally “White” (supposedly Nordic too). With time, Egyptians gained more and more Black genes until they hit the 10% figure, whereby any race that has 10% Black genes starts to experience civilizational collapse.

This is a lie. According the Journal of Physical Anthropology, the ancient Egyptians were the same as modern Egyptians racially. The ancient Egyptians test at ~91% Caucasian and 9% African. If anything, this is positive news. It shows that races that are a little bit Black can do some great things, like create the greatest civilizations on Earth.

The website is a disgusting White Supremacist site out of Europe, and the comments are full of WS nutcases, and even worse, Afrocentrists polluting up the threads with “Egypt was Black” crap.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

112 thoughts on “King Tut Was a European”

  1. My new theory on Egyptian was that they were a Semetic people much like arabs (Jesus was also a Medditerranean jew not a Nordic man), but were predated by the Nubians who ruled the empire the Semites came to rule, perhaps there was a caste system and intermixture, but I heard the Nubians built the pyramids, either way i agree the Egyptians were a Mulatto people, but blacks did play a big part in the Zimbabwen, Ethiopian, Malinese, Songhai, and Nubian empires, although there is controvesey over whether Assyrians built Zimbabwen monuments, also Berbers and Moors who were mixed helped in the Carthagian Empire as well as others, they eigineered much of Wesgt Africa’s architecture.

    1. Nubians came at the very end as it was falling apart. They certainly did *not* build the pyramids. That’s Afrocentric crap. If you consider 9% Black to be mulatto, then I guess the Egyptians were mulatto. I consider them to be a mostly Caucasian people.

      1. It appears to me that the definition of “Black” as a racial definition is in need of some degree of explanation, at least here in the U.S. In my experience with African-Americans, too much of the notion of Black = Africa = themselves is at play. As though Africa, as a continent and tectonic plate is somehow that easily wrapped up defined.

    2. The Nubians built many pyramids. There were more pyramids in Nubia than there were in Egypt. Thing is when you say “pyramids”, it is assumed one is speaking of The Great Pyramids, the three megaliths outside Cairo. There are however hundreds of pyramids all across NE Africa. Most of them are small.

      Nubian pyramids:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nubian_pyramids

      1. They were also arch enemies, I might add. The Egyptians would have viewed the Nubians in a similar fashion to how the Chinese would have viewed the Mongols. Or the Romans viewed the Goths and Vandals. Or the Persians viewed the Arabs.

        I would argue that in each case, the conqueror became the conquered. High culture won out.

  2. Robert the news says tut is 99.6% european. Why did they not say what the other .4 percent was? Do people not care, do they even know what the point 4 percent was… maybe they have said and I didnt see? Do you know what the .4 percent was Robert?

  3. What this does or does not prove for Nordicists or WNs is one thing. It is however, more evidence for race realist. The argument is that Sub-Saharan blacks do not have the type of intelligence required for achieving these architectural feats. The Pyramids in Nubia were from technology created by another race. Sure they could build them, but “create” them? No. Not even today.

    So the Tibetans split from the Han Chinese 3,000 years ago and evolved a gene that helps them live at higher altitudes. If that can happen in 3,000 years, what can happen in tens of thousands of years?

      1. Robert, I know the Tatar/Mongol has been played up with Slavs to a high degree. Espeically the Russians.

        I have always wondered, though. How much Scythian, Sarmation and Saka ancestry may very well exist in say Russian genetic ancestry. How many of those pre-Turkic, Iranian speaking, Indo-European horse nomads found there way into the history of modern Russia.

        I am betting there is at least some connection there. There has to be.

        1. I don’t know but those guys sure got around. If you got back 4000 years in Europe, there are Scythian Iranids in Austria!

          And I read a long article some years back that made a case for an Iranid group called the Alans (Ossetians?) who the author felt had gone all the way to Japan and were represented genetically in the Caucasian appearing Samurai caste. Based on shared myths and whatnot.

        2. I agree with you, 100%. The horse nomads, be the Indo-Iranian or Turkic or whatever, left there various marks over distances beyond the comprehension of other groups in the ancient and medieval worlds. By a factor not matched until maybe the Spanish in the New World.

          I personally can note the similarity between Scythian(Saka) and Japanese Samurai armor. I’ve actually seen Scythian armor in person…Simply crazy. 🙂

          Scythian(Saka):

          http://www.magyarsag.org/scythian_armor.jpg

          Japanese Samurai:

          http://www.shogunart.com/images/Daimyo-Red-Armor-webver.gif

          On a side note, isn’t crazy to think that the Ossetians still exist in the modern world. At least their descendants on some level, and the remains of their language? To bad most folks did not learn about that until 2008, if you know what I mean…

        1. Who, the Scythians? They are best described as Eurasian nomads. They probably looked like the Tocharians, early on. You know, the Caucasian mummies in modern day western China.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tocharians

          Or so I guess.

          If you ever get to visit a Kurgan in Eastern Europe or Central Asia…I highly recommend it.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan

          This scene here actually gave me nightmares a few years back.

          http://vm.kemsu.ru/en/skyth/

          Dead horseman. Over a grave mound. Seriously! WTF???

        2. Yes, the burial mound is really scary. Really barbaric, too. As bad as Aztecs and pre-European Africans. It’s looks like early, tribal man is simply a savage, no matter where he lives. I think Malinowski said something like that. At base, we are simply savages. Civilization is probably a think veneer over that. Do you think our genes have changed much from those savage days? And that civilizational veneer can probably come off in a NY minute.

        3. Few are aware of the extensive intercourse between Indo-Iranians like the Alans (ancestors of today’s Ossetians) and Germanic tribes like the Goths. The Alans made it as far as Spain and North Africa with the Vandals, Visigoths, etc.

      2. I think Indo-Iranids going to Japan is a little too far. I did hear that they were colonized by early Korean people and the Portuguese.

  4. It reminds me of that documentary series based on Dr. Henry Louis Gate’s book and starring himself, from a few years back.

    At one point in the series, he actually travels to Egypt, and makes SURE to tell his native Egyptian guide at Giza, that he KNOWS that those Pyramids were not built by the ancestors of modern day Egyptians. No sir, they were built by Black Africans. Like him. His people. This sorry excuse for an academic is also a mega-racist to boot, in addition to a man with no class what so ever.

    Of course, nobody bothered to explain to this fool that his ancestors, or at least Black Americans in general, originated in WEST AFRICA. Ancient Egypt’s connections to African peoples centered in EASTERN AFRICA. In other words, modern day Sudan, and the Horn of Africa. East Africans are very different from West Africans in physical looks, culture, language and history. East Africans were not victims of the European slave trade, and least to any comparable extent, and thus do not have a whole lot of descendants in the modern Americas.

    In other words, for a descendant of what is now an Angolan to call themselves “Nubian,” makes about as much sense as a modern day Iranian to call themselves “Chinese.” Same continent, very different people. Not that there wasn’t contact between these various peoples. No doubt there was, but that is not the point here.

    The Afrocentrist’s view is ugly in many, many ways. When it comes to Egypt, North Africa and the Middle East, it gets really ugly, really quick. It is one thing to rewrite history in your home nation, aka the USA, for local bullshit consumption. It is another to to travel to an ancient place, and belittle and insult the natives, simply because it makes you feel “good.”

    It is akin to going to Mexico, and telling the locals that they have no connection at all to the Aztecs, no matter how much native blood courses through their veins. It is utter insanity.

    This sub-par academic’s documentary came shortly after the looting of the Baghdad museum, I might add. Yes, it makes Americans look very appreciative of ancient Near Eastern history, and the Middle East in general. Real purveyors of the truth.

    Now you know why Egyptian archaeologist like Dr. Zahi Hawass are starting to chime in on this, and angrily so. It is just as absurd as “Nordists” ideologues claiming the ancient Egyptians were really Northern European whites.

    In this time we live in, when it really sucks to be “Middle Eastern” in anyway, I have a message to both White supremacists and Afrocentrics. On behalf of everyone with any ancestral connection at all to the Middle East and Central Asia, and I mean this as heartfelt as can be. Go fuck yourselves.

    1. I actually think that Horners are a completely different race. There is good evidence that they form an intermediate race between Africans and Caucasians. I would call them Africans just based on looks, but genetically, they are incredibly different.

      1. No doubt about it.

        To me at least, they physically have a very different look in the Horn of Africa, than say you average person from Nigeria. Or your average African American, for that matter, but they are a rather diverse group as well.

        I believe their “blackness” of Horners in European eyes comes from their dark brown skin, as opposed to really how they physically appear. As least in my experience.

        Please correct me if I am wrong, but have not DNA ancestral tests shown a connection between “Horners,” and various group in India and South Asia?

        1. I read that about ten years back somewhere. That being the original inhabits of South Asian supposedly had a connection to East Africans genetically on some level. At least the early inhabitants. Then again, it has been so long, I could not even hope to find the source. That, combined with the fact that there is so much politics involved with this area of discussion. I could not even hope to back that statement up.

          That being send, I have on more than one occasion heard a diatribe on local Pacifica Radio 90.7(I am sure you know the station), where a Southern Californian Afrocentric claims the region of South Asia was conquered by “whites” a few thousand years ago, and that the original inhabitants were Black African, with East Africans being mentioned as the connection.

          The Indo-European invasion theory aside, East and West Africans to my eye, look very different. Perhaps my judgment has been clouded. Egyptians surely though, do not look “African” by that logic, at least on the whole. The notion that they ever did, defies logic, and current scientific biological inquiry.

        1. Zahi Hawass (sp?) goes into conniptions when people claim the Jews built the pyramids. I wonder if he heard Gates’ claim, and even more, how he would have reacted, lol.

    2. East Africans are very different from West Africans in physical looks,
      not always

      google alec wek, clara benejamin, ajac,ataui deng, atong arjok and Ajuma Nasanyana

      then google: aninta niaria, kinee diouf, oluchi,agbani darego, mpule kwelagobe

      there is a lot of variety within Africa folks.

      1. Not always, in the modern world.

        A lot of blood has been shed in the last few decades in Africa over these very differences. It is absurd, but last as I checked, Africans are no different than Europeans or Asians in that regard.

        We are talking about ancient Egypt and Nubia here. The level of demographic mobility these last two centuries or so has nothing to do with the level of societal communication in say the ninth century, B.C.E. Central Africa, like the north of the continent, was a major geographic obstacle to cross. Even today, the roads are no charm, if the even exist at all.

        Populations simply did not migrate in such manors over such short periods of time and in such large numbers across most parts of the world, horse nomads aside.

        Saying there is a lot of variety in modern African folks is wonderful. That is a given. Someone ought to tell that one to Dr. Henry Louis Gates, next time he talks with Africans from the north of the continent. He won’t come across as such a self-consumed racist bigot perhaps.

        1. East Africans are a totally different gene pool from West Africans, as you note. In erasing the distinction, Afrocentrists are ironically echoing white racists who think they’re all the same because they’re “all black.”

  5. The seems to be a reluctance amongst African-Americans to face the reality that they are a mixed bunch of West Africans. A reluctance to look in the mirror. They have very little to do with East Africa (Kwanzaa) or North Africa (“King Tut was black like me”) or South Africa (Oprah claiming to be Zulu).

    There’s as much to be proud about being from West African (benin bronzes, asante kingdoms etc) as there is for being some peasant from Eastern Europe, so I don’t quite understand this reluctance to look in the mirror. Unless it is form of self-hatred, like the hair-straightening business.

    1. Mike, the Zulu are Bantu people and are spread pretty far up into West Africa& Central Africa. As far as Cameroon and the Congo.

      Oprah came to that conclusion because what a DNA test she had revealed.

      1. Okay, and it what time frame did the modern day Bantu migrate to other parts of Africa, and even beyond? Are we speaking in modern terms, or over a 5,000 year period?

        1. Bantu expansion occurred 2,300 YBP. It coincided with the discovery of iron smelting by the Bantu, with results being weapons using iron, and also large-scale agriculture, also with ag tools using iron. They were technologically advanced and they just rolled over the Khoisan and Pygmy types. The expansion started in far NW Cameroon. They eventually spread all over South and Central Africa.

        2. Interesting Robert. I have not read up on the Bantus, other than their persecution in Somalia. Major grouping of people, though.

          My real question is, what was the level of communication between Ancient Egyptians 4,000 years ago, and people living in Western and Central Africa. To my own understanding, it was nil. Most Egyptian inter-African communication was between the North and the East. Geography and technology simply limited anything more.

          If anyone can prove me wrong, I’d love to hear it.

        3. Modern African types don’t even show up in that region until 3000 YBP. That’s when they contact Egyptians. When Egypt was well underway. Before that, the Blacks in the area are Khoisan types. The new Blacks are Nilotics (Nubians). They show up 3000 YBP with agriculture, animal husbandry, etc. The Khoisan were just hunter-gatherers.

  6. To Rob:

    I am going to play devil’s advocate. As you probably know, a YDNA haplogroup is a reflection of your direct paternal lineage. Of 115 self identified Black American males in a random sample, 23% were in the R1B haplogroup:

    http://www.cstl.nist.gov/strbase/pub_pres/Vallone2004a.pdf

    (See page 5 of the pdf or 727 from the original source..)

    So King Tut could have been quite dark but still have European paternal lineage. One could even argue that he came from a line of invaders who originated from outside of Egypt hundreds of years before.

    1. Which R1B are we talking about here. No way does 99.6% of their Y-DNA come from a White European R1b1. Forget it.

      There are many types ofR1b1. The line that King Tut had was the Atlantic Modal Haplotype. It is actually R1b1b2a1a, specifically the R-P310/L11 type or Haplotype 15. It shows up about 6,500 years ago in Europe.

      1. To Robert:

        Which R1B are we talking about here. No way does 99.6% of their Y-DNA come from a White European R1b1. Forget it.

        No.. not 99.6%… but 23% (27 out of 115) of Black Americans in that study tested as R1B1.
        Really not that much of surprise albeit a little higher than I expected. And yeah.. now the PDF won’t load for me either. I have it on my work computer.. I can email it later tonight or tomorrow.

        That said I know there was a fair amount of back migration to Africa so it wouldn’t be surprising to find R1B in North Africa.

        1. Fuck yeah, scum of the Earth Jap bastards.

          I don’t know if it’s fascism or not. I don’t know what it is. They were just militarist, imperialist fucks, that’s all. Far rightwing nationalists. Similar to fascists in a lot of ways, but no one ever calls them that.

  7. Two MAJOR points that should be taken from this article:

    1: Scientific facts are being hidden to diminish a European role in an ancient civilization whose role in shaping history was immense. (Not that Europeans have anything to prove in this area.) What else is being hidden?

    2: The theory that Sub-Saharan blacks have never engineered anything resembling modernity is becoming more and more a fact than some Nazi mythology.

    1. Wait a second here. I just finished pummeling the notion of a modern united continental African racial view…Do I have to get started on modern Europeans next?

      If anything, Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, Phoenicians, etc…Are all best described as a Mediterranean race. That is their home, that is where they are from, and that is who they interacted with. They all basically have and had the same “swarthy” look, as some folks like to say.

      While those ancient civilizations where creating things like, well, writing…Northern European tribes were no different than any tribal people from the central regions of Africa. Same exact technological level. Same exact situation. Only the temperature was different.

      That is my theory, and I stand by it. If you don’t like it, well…I have others.

      1. Second. King Tut was probably some kind of a Med. Egyptians are basically Meds.

        Atlantic Haplotype is most common in the far west of Europe now only because Indo-Europeans came in, supplanted the Old Europe people like Basques, and pushed them to the western edge of the continent. So, King Tut is a “Basque.” But at that time, Basque types were generalized all through Europe.

        1. Interesting. So the Basques were the true natives. I vaguely remember a biology professor in college stating that they may have remnants of Neanderthal markers in their DNA. That is how ancient they were.

          Any truth to that? Has that been proven, or yet to be proved? Any hot stuff go down between horny Basque studs and Neanderthal babes?

        2. Don’t know about Neandertals, but the Basques are the leftovers of the Old Europe people. You can still see a lot of them in the UK too. The Old Europe types are kind of short and look like trolls or elves, sort of. Maybe you know what I’m talking about.

        3. Yah Robert, I know the funny looking people you are talking about. Me and my fellow Indo-European speakers use to hunt them for sport on weekends. Nearly hunted their asses out of extinction. Silly us.

        4. Except the Basque pretty much held the “Indo-European” speakers from the mountains because they were too much of a hassle to handle. Oh and it’s Indo-Iranid, same and not the same at the same time.

    2. 1: Scientific facts are being hidden to diminish a European role in an ancient civilization whose role in shaping history was immense. (Not that Europeans have anything to prove in this area.) What else is being hidden?

      This is *not* true. King Tut was an Egyptian. Bottom line. Sure, he has the Atlantic Modal Haplotype, but that was generalized all over Europe and the Mediterranean back in those days. He was born in Egypt, spoke an Egyptian language, lived culturally Egyptian, so: He was an Egyptian!

      Not a “European.”

      1. Read the article please. First paragraph:

        “Despite the refusal of the Secretary General of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities, Zahi Hawass, to release any DNA results which might indicate the racial ancestry of Pharaoh Tutankhamen, the leaked results reveal that King Tut’s DNA is a 99.6 percent match with Western European Y chromosomes.”

        If this is not important, why hide it? I think people who know a bit more about DNA than you or the folks on this site know what it means.

        1. Except that Dr.Hawass would be first to push for the release of that information, if true. Most Egyptians have no problem being counted as “white.” To them, it is a complement. Call it a left over vestige of domination by the British, and even the Ottomans to and extent. Hawass has been directly fighting with the American Afrocentrists this last decade, more than anyone else.

          Hell, everyone in the Middle East calls themselves “white.” Nothing unique to the Egyptians in that regard.

          None of this is shocking, if you have been around modern Egyptians. They are a Mediterranean people. I mean, do these Egyptian college kids look terribly different on average from anyone else in the Mediterranean basin?

          http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/Egyptworkshop.jpg

          They tend to have a darker shade of the “olive tan” that everyone in the Mediterranean gets. Not surprising, when you realize what a unique geography Egypt has. More akin to Iraq perhaps, than anywhere else. Iraqis tend to be darker to. 🙂

  8. All this Afrocentrist BS about Egypt being a “black” civilization are now being exposed as complete absurdity? I guess its cuz there’s nothing below the Sahara that’s worth mentioning in history books.
    Then again Nordicists claiming the Egyptians is just as retarded. Ancient Egyptians probably looked more like a darker version of Al Pacino than some Viking warrior.

    1. Well, Sub Saharan Africans did have metallurgy (iron smelting) and they did have agriculture, possibly some of the earliest on Earth. Agriculture included plantation ag and animal husbandry. Metallurgy and advanced ag are some kicks civilizational attributes. The US Amerindians never got them. Give credit where it’s due.

  9. For the record and to everyone reading this thread! I am not saying that Africans outside of Egypt and anywhere else in Africa are somehow “less” than Egyptians. Every group of people in Africa has it’s own history, culture, background, etc.

    I am saying that Egyptians are Egyptians. Be they ancient or modern. They live on the continent of Africa, an arbitrary designation of what happens to be a really big tectonic plate, slowly crashing into Europe. Just because someone lives on that continent, or recent ancestors came from there, really means nothing. Unless you or your ancestors came from Egypt, or somewhere the ancient or modern Egyptians influenced, or that Egypt was heavily influenced by, you have ZERO connection with the place.

    Telling modern Egyptians that they are not entitled to their own history is nothing but racist, revisionist history. Goes hand in hand with the current trend in hating anything with the words “Arab” or “Muslims” attached to it, in any way possible.

    Too bad so many of the Egyptians I know personally here in the states are so damn polite when encountering this racist Afrocentric nonsense. I guess they just view it all as silly.

    1. So let us pretend you are right. If European Caucasians continue not to procreate, and North African dark skinned Muslims, and west African Black Nigerians continue mass migration there; and 200 years from now when the last whites are in say Iceland and Idaho, can they lay claim to anything? How about just every significant technological advancement known to man? Electricity, Nuclear technology, modern medicine, the microchip, astrophysics, spaceflight, democracy, modern agricultural techniques and technology, (your welcome billions and billions fed)?

      OOORRR? Does the mixed dark African new European race lay claim to these creations? Yes this idea is “racist”, that is what a race realist is friends, sorry, I want no harm to come to any person. I just want the truth to set us free.

      Different races have different abilities, that’s okay, this need not be a basis for hate, I’m okay, you’re okay.

      1. You are of course speaking of the notion of “Eurabia,” yes? That is your concern. The fear of North African and to a lesser extent, sub-Saharan African migration to continental Europe, and the fear of an eventual loss of the cultures and ethnic peoples of mainland Europe? A racial shift in the physical appearance of the average European?

        Well, lets examine this notion. First off, lets throw out the whole concept of “Muslim” immigration, shall we? I know it is hard for some westerners to do, but it is a religion, and nothing more. What we are really talking about is immigration from North Africa, and West Asia, aka the greater Middle East region, and of course Sub-Saharan African immigration as well, which is generally glossed over in these debates. Many of them are not even Muslim, anyways.

        The concern is with the influences these people bring with them. If they were all Christians in some other universe, I am sure you would still be concerned. A different religion just makes them justifiably easier to single out, without a racial element being pointed out as the cause.

        So, now that we have that out there, let me try an answer your question. The European countries as a whole are not “migratory” in nature. They have distinct cultures and ethnic makeups, with their own sometimes ancient histories. It is for this reason that I have always seen the EU as a really bad idea. Eastern Europeans in Scotland, namely Poles, are fucking up the place as bad as Pakistanis in London and Algerians in Paris are. That is a fact. The Scots are not Americans. They are not accustomed to immigrants moving in next door, let alone taking their jobs or sucking up their taxes. Nor should they be. Scotland is for, well, the Scots. A Russian or Greek is pretty exotic to a Scot in many ways as much as a Algerian is, believe or not. Just having a lot of redheads need not make one “cousins.” Hell the French are different enough…

        Today, the French “House” passed legislation banning headscarves in public. I support this. Fucking immigrants from Muslim majority nations need to learn the notion of “when in Rome.” Good for them. The problem, as most of my fellow Americans do not understand, is that many of the North Africans in France are second or thirds generation children of refugees. They do not speak any Arabic. They are not really “Muslim” anymore than the average Frenchman is Catholic. They are not the ones wearing headscarves. They are in France due to the Algerian War of the early 60’s. Their parents and grandparents sided with the French colonists. To have gone back, could have meant death. What to do about them?

        I am all for limiting immigration to Europe from Africa, Asia and the Americas(Spain is importing Central Americans, because they do not like the Moroccans. Good luck with that. Their crime rate should reflect this pretty soon. Say hello to MS-13 for me.). I am also all for limiting immigration WITHIN the continent of Europe, as that has the potential I believe of being at least as damaging, as well.

        In the long run, the South Asians in Britain will be absorbed in the gene pool of the English Isles, so long as millions upon millions more are not allowed in. Their descendants will become Brits soon enough. Who the hell wants to be a fourth generation Pakistani Muslim immigrant, anyways? Same goes for France and Germany. Those long term descendants will be Brits and Franks, because they will be mixed, and their culture will be that of the nation.

        The key factor, I believe, is limiting the numbers. I was in London back in ’94, and as I walked down streets from the “tube,” I was not sure if I had somehow emerged in Islamabad or Bombay. That to me, is too much. The U.K is not a nation of immigrants. They are not the U.S or Brazil.

        Ironically, those North African nations, and Middle Eastern nations in general, have shrinking birth rates. Many of them hold the same views of Sub-Saharan Africans, that Europeans hold for North Africans. Just a little bit ironic, don’t you think?

        1. Uhhh, yeah dude. I think we agree mostly. You are maybe a bit of an ethno-nationalist? Hate to try and label people, just trying to get at your ideas. I have no illusion about creating some “pure white” utopia. My kids are about 10% native American. They are beautiful.

          There is an undeniable causal relationship between “white” and modern technological advancement. That is all. A nation should pay a little attention to these facts.

        2. An ethno-nationalist? Me? How do you figure that?

          You asked in effect what I would do in the “European’s” shoes. In reality, I could care less. If anything, I kind of get a kick out of watching those post-colonialist assholes get overrun by their own former subjects. Poetic justice.

          As for technology, it is true that the overwhelming vast majority of scientific, and cultural advancement came from Europe(largely the north, but certainly not all of it), and Europe’s social offshoots(namely the U.S) these last five centuries. No doubt about it. Just remember though, Europeans, whites, whatever. They do not hold a patent on technology. Such progress very well could have come from China, in perhaps a slightly different history line.

          I also see the technical trend moving eastward this century. The “west” will still develop forward technologically speaking. They just won’t have the stranglehold they have grown so accustomed to in centuries past.

          Your kids are 10% Native American? That is very common here in the U.S. Having some Native ancestry. Hell, I probably have some, if I ever bothered to check.

          Oh, and most people figure me for “half white,” whatever the hell that means. Us “mixed types” never really fit in anywhere.

        3. This is not true.
          Pakistanis have been in thr UK now for more than three generations.
          They have not assimilated and will not assimilate.
          They continue to import brides from Pakistan (to bolster their gene pool), they continue to shut themselves off in ghettoes, they continue to refuse to mix.
          In this they resemble those other sucon immigrants – the Gypsies – in setting themselves as a people apart.
          It’s a deeply Indian thing, to them bloodlines are everything.

        4. Well, it looks as though the Pakistanis have some identity “issues,” but I think we all knew that already.

          Hell, Indians aren’t really any different in that regard, either. They just have more experience in dealing directly with British society, perhaps.

          They learned a better sales pitch when dealing with “Sahib.”

    2. I agree, and the WN’s trying to hijack Egypt now with this latest stuff, saying the Egyptians were not really Egyptians but were “Europeans” is just as bad.

      I have read analyses of ancient Egyptians in anthropological journals. What is shocking is how little the Egyptians have changed. The ancient Egyptians, genetically and phenotypically, are remarkably similar to the North Egyptians of today. If you want to know what ancient Egyptians looked like, take a stroll around Alexandria or Cairo.

      Take that, WN’s! You fuckers can’t claim Egypt either!

        1. I used to know a lot of Copts, and most of them took pride in being the *true* true descendantts of the Pharoahs (as they put it), and seemed to regard the other Egyptians as half breeds or interlopers. I’m sure they’re quiet about that in the Motherland.

        2. Copts are not really the true true descendants. They are just the Christians who did not convert to Islam. The Arabian invaders did not contribute much to the gene pool. They’re all just Egyptians. Muslims, Christians, they all descended from the ancients.

          The Copt spin is more to say that the ancient history of Egypt has been sort of elided by Islam and Islamists. They want to reclaim Egypt as some sort of state with Pharaonic roots as opposed to Islam dominating the history and culture.

          They are actually pretty loud over there in Egypt. There is a lot of the usual Muslim bigotry and discrimination against Copts, and the Copt organizations protest it all the time. The Muslim Brotherhood assholes are particularly unpleasant.

  10. Hey Robert, if R1b represents the old Europeans, does R1a represent the invading Indo-Europeans? I’ve read somewhere that R1a represents the real Aryans who moved into Europe from Central Asia and Siberia in the east. R1a is heavily Slavic/East European.

        1. They’re not from Siberia really. The Indo-Europeans are from southern Russia and far northern Kazakhstan.

          Indo-Europeans did not breed in with Mongoloids all that much, except in some places like Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Iran, northern Pakistan, northern India and far western China.

        2. Sorry about that Robert. I didn’t mean to answer for you, and reiterate what you said. I didn’t see that posting of yours.

          Sheesh…I think I need glasses nowadays. Shit goes all to hell after you turn 30. 🙁

        3. No, not at all. You left some good links and made some good comments. I myself do not know when the Mongoloid element went into Kazakhs, etc.

          31 is paradise. Wait til you hit 51.

  11. Hey Robert, if we got millions of Syrians and Palestinians to immigrate to and live in eastern Europe and Russia for thousands of years, do you think they would end up like Ashkenazis in physical appearance and behavior?

  12. Cyrus
    July 13, 2010 at 7:23 PM
    So I might gather yourself, are at least your family, comes from the Horn of Africa?

    Robert Lindsay
    July 13, 2010 at 9:41 PM
    You’re not a Horner, are you?

    Yes fellas, I’m part “horner”.

  13. Hey Robert, if millions of Syrians and Palestinians were persuaded to immigrate to Russia and eastern Europe and live there for thousands of years, do you think they would turn similar to Ashkenazis in terms of physical appearance and behavior after many generations?

  14. If King Tut was white, then what of his grandmother Queen Tiye—whose depictions (ancient sculptures) are very black indeed? At this point, I don’t trust anyone to give me a history lesson. As I grow older, I realize there are far too many agendas on this planet. Too much ethnocentrism and racism cloaked in “scientific” study and doctorates. Put a PhD behind a study and nearly everyone will believe its results. Are we so desperate to prove that Tut is white that we are dependent on flash glimpses of a DNA report from a Discovery Channel episode? But, if you truly believe King Tut is of Irish or Scottish ancestry (where R1b is most commonly found), well, then that just makes total sense.

    1. I agree with the notion of agendas clouding historical and scientific analysis. Especially as of late. Just seen to much of it with my own eyes.

      As for anyone’s “race,” I’ve always said, just ask ’em. It really is amazing how many ancient groups still exist in the worlds, and have survived onward for literally thousands of years. Simply amazing the number.

    2. Probably because even though the sculpture was made in ancient egypt, it was made much later in Egypt’s history, by black Nubians, the latest, and last rulers of Egypt. This easily explains all the other “black” sculptures amd paintings of early Egyptian rulers.

  15. Haplogroup R is associated with IE speaking people. Mostly west IE while Eastern IE speakers especially Slavs, Iranics, Indo-Aryans, Dardics are R1A.

    R1B would have come from a first wave of IE migration (probably Celtic) followed by Germanics who belonged to Haplogroup I, suggesting a proto-Caucasian origin for them as I mentioned in one of my blog posts.

  16. Gosh I do hope the early Egyptians were white like me. They’d be heroes and by association that would make me a hero. I do hope it’s true for then I will feel like going out and kicking ass… any old ass will do…. as long as it ain’t a white ass.

  17. LOL! They did DNA on all the early Egyptians. None of them were European.
    You really need a hug.

    White Supremacy has FAILED. You are a dying race. Europeans countries are losing full white populations at drastic rates. Europeans are mixing out at higher rates than American Whites. Within the next 50 years, white supremacy will be no more and the remaining whites left will have no other choice but to mix out.
    it’s over….

      1. Hi Robert,
        I reached the After Party (two years later)…
        I am of Albanian origin, live in Canada now. My mother found an old book translated from Italian to Albanian “King Tut spoke Albanian.” I could not believe her. She told me all about the book and the study this archeologist Giuseppe Catapano (or Katapano) had done for 30 years. I haven’t started reading the book yet, in disbelieve I started glancing through the pages. Indeed he had decoded all the Egyptian hieroglyphs, and these hieroglyphs are all the first letter of each Albanian word. For example letter D in Egyptian hieroglyph shows a hand which is Albanian is pronounced DORA. letter B is like a foot which means BROF in Albanian “Stand up on your feet” etc. So now I am not surprised his DNA shows that he was of European origin. I just want to find the original of this book (study) in Italian.

  18. R1b is not a European haplogroup. It’s origin is west Asia, through the Turkey and Iran. But yes, King tut was Caucasian .

  19. There is dna and other physical proof that there were Russian blonds and red heads. Ramses had red hair and not from henna it was examined by the people who took his dna. he also had male pattern baldness that is common in European men only. His hair also had red roots inside of the grey. The process of mummification can not in any was bleach hair platinum or all mummies would be that way. All natural hair of mummies were silky straight or wavy like caucasian . There are quite a few mummies with light hair. They wore wigs of wool. They also took beautiful white captives and put them in harems or made them queens. At this same time there were also platinum blond Russian mummies in china so that is proof they were migrating long distances. No reason they did not go west like everyone else. Ancient egyptians migrated into Africa from the east to settle at the Nile. Also the egyptian woman are portrayed with white skin on the walls and tombs. Most looked like Kim kardashian, she is not black! But to say there were no red haired and blondes , Nordics, is just as ignorant as saying they were black. I’m sure someone slept with a Nubian like they did with usa slaves but it was not common. There is a wall tomb that a king wrote stating Nubians are dirt under his feet. Blacks are tribal and never built anything but huts at that time. They did not then or even now have the ability to make huge monuments. So to think that only one period of time the blacks suddenly became geniuses then never did it again is ubsurd. Egyptians were middle eastern Arab mixed with white but both are caucasoid.
    I’m an anthropology major specializing in dna and forensics.
    Also The Sudan pyramids were built almost 1000 years AFTER the last pyramid in egypt , the Nubians copied some of the egyptians clothing and small pyramids later on that were no where near as sophisticated as the real ones.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *