Not a term that we would use today but in a modern sense she was ‘Black’. When George Reisner discovered the representation of a woman at Giza, now in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, he described her as a ‘negroid princess’. Occasionally Egyptologists did identify some representations being of Africans based on features alone. It is worth noting that the term ‘mixed’ in this context does not refer to the diversity of African peoples, it is used to suggest that the entire population was in part descended from non-Africans. It is because of this mindset that we find the Ancient Egyptian population being described as ‘mediterranean’ or ‘mixed’. This is partly because many people fail to see the variation amongst indigenous African populations.
#BLACK PHARAOH SKIN#
Libyans are generally depicted by Egyptians artists as having light brown skin the Egyptians themselves range between light and dark brown skin tone and of course the Nubians (Kushites) are depicted with jet black skin. Some people would fail to take account of other physical features, for example hair type, when considering this point. The Libyan, Nubian and Egyptian all have African-type hair and yet they are someone seen to be different. For many people who are of non-African descent, skin colour alone would be the deciding factor. However, which would we identify in the modern sense of the word as ‘Black’. Three out of the four figures above are, of course, African. In that post I explored the racist ideologies of Nott and Glidden, who used the figure above to illustrate racial types.
![black pharaoh black pharaoh](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QE7i5MDZHUo/WCG5klrrONI/AAAAAAAAQRI/EGSkFomFOik2myRA4giw6wLiVZSIwMfPgCLcB/s1600/unsungno1%2Bnyarlathotep%2Bblack%2Bpharaoh%2Bpapyrus%2Bscroll.png)
Who’s Black and who’s not? ‘Libyan’, ‘Nubian’, ‘Asiatic’ and ‘Egyptian’ By adopting the stance of deciding what is and is not ‘acceptable’ as an African we are simply seeing a continuation of those early attempts to deny that Ancient Egypt was an African culture that I summarised in an earlier post. A future post will consider this term in more detail, but my point at present is that both titles infer that there was an artificial point beyond which people were indigenous Africans, and that anyone further north was not.įor me, part of the problem lies in exactly how Egyptology defines indigenous African peoples. I’d like to spend a moment deconstructing these titles and thinking about the implications for African centred approaches within Egyptology. Both books use the term Nubian to distinguish these rulers from any other Egyptian kings.
![black pharaoh black pharaoh](https://images.halloweencostumes.com/products/43517/1-1/mens-dark-egyptian-pharaoh-costume.jpg)
It detailed the discovery of the group of statues now in the Kerma Museum (above). Black Kings on the Nile was published by Charles Bonnet and Dominique Valbelle. Then in 2007 a book entitled: The Nubian Pharaohs.
![black pharaoh black pharaoh](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51SO-awvKTL._AC_UL1005_.jpg)
In 1999 Robert Morkot published an academic book: The Black Pharaohs. As rulers of Kush and Kemet these kings are often referred to as ‘The Black Pharaohs’ by the popular press and academics alike. On the one hand mainstream Egyptology does not like to enter into discussions about the racialised identity of the ancient people and yet certain representations are seen to be ‘acceptable’ as ‘African’. Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Share on Pinterest The ‘Black’ Pharaohs