←back to thread

Whole-genome ancestry of an Old Kingdom Egyptian

(www.nature.com)
149 points A_D_E_P_T | 2 comments | 03 Jul 25 00:24 UTC | HN request time: 0.011s | source
Show context
eddythompson80 ◴[03 Jul 25 01:51 UTC] No.44450865[source]▶
I'll have to bookmark it for later to spend more time than just skimming, but I find 2 things interesting. The lack of any Egyptian archeologists on most interesting and significant findings about Ancient Egypt is one. The other is the seemingly strong conclusion that Ancient Egyptians did in fact move to Egypt from Mesopotamian which is pretty cool.

Egyptians don't like the notion that "they moved there from somewhere". They claim their own unique, uninterrupted, history and connection to the land as well as their civilizational independence from Mesopotamian, Asia Minor, Europe, and Africa.

It's also the same you rarely find Egyptian archeologists/scholars on scientific papers. While this might be a matter of ancient history and science to everyone, it's a matter of current day politics for Egyptians and especially the Egyptian government. The "findings" of the paper has to agree with the narrative built and proposed by the ministry of antiquities or they will literally charge whoever publishes it with a national crime.

replies(18): >>44451004 #>>44451019 #>>44451037 #>>44451074 #>>44451130 #>>44451245 #>>44451366 #>>44451932 #>>44452191 #>>44452447 #>>44452572 #>>44452575 #>>44453486 #>>44454027 #>>44454669 #>>44455890 #>>44458266 #>>44461002 #
NL807 ◴[03 Jul 25 02:32 UTC] No.44451074[source]▶
>The lack of any Egyptian archeologists on most interesting and significant findings about Ancient Egypt is one.

It seems like Egyptian archaeologists is a clique of academics that do not like to rock the apple cart and go against established ideas about Egyptian history. There is a lot of gate keeping going on, mostly in part of Zahi Hawass, a narcissist that likes to self insert into every research into the subject, and control publication of results, etc. Even worse, claim attribution for work he's not even part of. So, if you don't kiss the ring, or dare to challenge ideas without his blessing, you'll be pretty much become a pariah that will never access archaeological sites again. Because of this, research in the field seems to be stagnant.

replies(2): >>44451125 #>>44451132 #
eddythompson80 ◴[03 Jul 25 02:43 UTC] No.44451132[source]▶
Yes, Zahi Hawass is a comical example at this point. But I'm afraid he is merely the manifestation of general desire from the political regime as well as the majority of the uneducated masses there. Zahi Hawass is just the current sociopath to happen to benifiet from the situation to call himself a "scholar".

I spent a significant part of my teen years in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. There isn't really 1 unified feelings towards the "Ancient Egypt" history among Egyptians. First time I heard about the "Ancient Aliens" conspiracy WAS from an Egyptian. I never really paid the theory much attention until all the articles about how "it's a racist theory" "basically indigenous people can't do things without aliens" narrative was surprising.

There was pride in the telling of the conspiracy theory of Ancient Egyptians contacting aliens. "Of course when the Aliens visited Earth, they had to come to Egypt, you konw. We were in touch with aliens and had far more advanced technologies than all other societies. sadly it's been lost" type thinking.

The general opinion was split between people who don't give a shit about all this pharo shit, people who think it's a cool marketing story in the 21st century, people who think it's their history and identity. It was allover the place

replies(3): >>44451256 #>>44451359 #>>44451812 #
prmph ◴[03 Jul 25 03:26 UTC] No.44451359[source]▶
They are ambivalent about "all this pharo" stuff because it is not really their heritage.
replies(1): >>44451432 #
theultdev ◴[03 Jul 25 03:42 UTC] No.44451432[source]▶
> because it is not really their heritage

Could you expand on this?

replies(3): >>44452350 #>>44456071 #>>44457836 #
1. ggm ◴[03 Jul 25 06:50 UTC] No.44452350[source]▶
Not OP but.. The ptolemaic Pharaohs (Cleopatra..) and after are not related to the dynastic cultures which made the pyramids. They were greeks. Subsequent occupation by post Roman cultures including the Byzantine, and Islamic Arabic tribes, and the Ottomans, means the culture and genetics of modern Egypt have little to do with pyramids and pre-roman era mummies and culture/religion/beliefs.

Waves of occupation over 2000 years eroded any cultural link.

What I read suggests the Berbers have some historical relationship and the Bedouin less. Nasser was an arabist, as were the young egypt political movement of the 19th century.

It's like asking why modern British people aren't strongly identifying with pictish culture or beaker people.

The Egyptian archaeologists assert nationalism and cultural goals and have to deal with Islamic fundamentalists who push back on pre Islamic religious artefacts. Saudi archaeologists have similar pressures.

replies(1): >>44453109 #
2. prmph ◴[03 Jul 25 09:11 UTC] No.44453109[source]▶
Thanks, you explained it better than I might have.

> What I read suggests the Berbers have some historical relationship and the Bedouin less.

I understand the Copts in Egypt also have a stronger relationship to the ancient culture than the the population as a whole.