Another great video! It really showcases why no one group of people can claim ownership of who invented what first. Alot of people put way too much emphasis on Egypt and Mesopotamia civilizations' accomplishments. Don't get me wrong, they were incredible civilizations, but even they adopted traditions, technology, and techniques from little known people thousands of miles from their homeland.
@@Chigo-nr8jg Yet, you folks like to come here to be dismissive and whine and cry instead of enjoying something you actually like. You don't get to decide what we choose to be proud of. Go troll and be worthless somewhere else.
@@Chigo-nr8jg Being proud of mummification all comes down to personal opinion but it's hard to ignore whether or not it's sophisticated. Intentionally mummifying a body shows that you completely understand the science and biology behind the decomposition process.
@@FromNothing that’s fine, you’re correct that it does require skill and ingenuity to do that, I just had a feeling like we’re trying so hard to prove something to white people, of course we’re being educated at the same time about history and that is good enough to do a video about.
Great Video, Jabari. Quick Fact: The Tashwinat Mummy is the OLDEST Mummy in Africa, but the Chinchurro Mummies in Northern Chile are the oldest in the World that we found so far.
I want to thank you SO MUCH for existing. African history has always been my dark spot, I was always hesitant due to how infused the topic is with politics and Afrocentrism. To have found someone who sifts through that complicated web to deliver the facts has been a godsend to me. I hope after enough of your videos, I'll feel confident enough on African history to have the courage to sift through everything myself. Cheers.
This was a nice and interesting video about African mummification! Speaking of death rituals, I hear that the people of Madagascar take pictures with their deceased relatives and bury them on tall mountains, but I could be wrong. And with Egyptian history in general, I've kinda backed myself away from it since we already here about a lot in schools and also whenever someone nowadays talks about Egyptian history it almost ALWAYS goes back to the Egyptian race debate, even though, like you said, they weren't ONE specific race. I have nothing against the Egyptian people (modern and ancient), their history or their cultures, I was just saying how I feel.
Aw man this was an amazing one! This really motivates me to push for more finds like these. It makes wonder just how old and well preserved some of the bodies in unexcavates tombs throughout Africa might be; even if the remain undisturbed for traditionalist reasons, so maybe not. For example, they detected a that the tombs of Bilikisu Sungbo in Yorubalands was genuine, but decided to opt out of digging it up. Maybe she too is mummified in a similar manner.
I have been to the region nearby to Joubertina. The region rises up over the Knysna forest towards the town. In the valley itself, with its cool climate and foggy precipitation is perfect for the apple and lumber industries. Once you go beyond the town itself however. The Kouga Mountains dry out alot. I was walking there one day after the Knysna Bushfires burned through the region a few years ago. The ground is basically made up of sharp rocks, with otherwise shrub like plants, think a cross between Cape Fynbos and Bushveld. I can see how conditions in some parts of the Kouga range would be perfect for preserving mummies.
Another great video and I didn't know of other African mummies outside of Egypt. My only complaint was the evidence on the bog bodies about them being form for human sacrifice. I know your focus is African history and European history like this can be misleading due to Victorian and Roman sources. The idea that the bog bodies were of human sacrifice is controversial and probably not true. The source is based on the Romans who claimed the druids did human sacrifice and when these bodies were later found they assume these were the sacrificial victims. The problem is that these bodies do not share similarities to methods of ritualistic killing. Many of these bodies were killed by various means and there isn't a pattern even in geographic regions. What is more commonly assume is that these bodies were murders or executions and the bog was a convenient place to dispose the body. That is the common theory at least. But again I know your focus is in African history and you make great work. I just wanted to throw that information out there.
Great video Jabari. Also I think you should turn if the comment section because reading them on your other videos its the same thing over and over. Really interesting these Individuals who just continue to comment and talk sh-t
Really enjoying some attention being given to some of the less hierarch peoples with simpler material cultures of Africa. But I do understand why you give more attention to the societies you do to counter peoples preconceptions.
🤣🤣🤣!! I knew Mr. Bigot and Dr. Kangz were coming. This was awesome. I didn't know about the San mummy.The similarities between the two are fascinating. This does make you wonder if this is prehistoric or some sort of shared culture, the later being ofcourse the less likely. Similar burial positions can be seen at Mapungubwe the place where our early ancestors (Shona) built befire GZ. 23 graves have been excavated from the Hill Top site. The bodies in three of these graves were buried in an upright seated position, associated with royalty. Two of the skulls found have been associated with the Khoisan. The burial positions were all associated with Bantu speakers such as sitting with legs drawn to the chest, arms folded round the front of the knees. Very similar to what you presented here. I believe Kerma remains were buried in similar positions. I wonder maybe there are benefits to this position or maybe its just a practice that's stuck with us going back to the prehistoric period.
Yeah I find it interesting how in southeastern Africa the Bantu more or less assimilated the natives into their societies but in other parts they displaced them. I wonder if it was primarily disease that caused it.
@@FromNothing Ye it wasn't all violent like Eurocentric people make it out. Got to remember the Bantu speakers weren't united into one nation with one purpose they were different scattered clans and tribes migrating in different waves, that split of in maby cases. Some of course were aggressive towards those they came across, others though were willing to coexist with the people they encountered. It's why you see some admixture and shared cultural elements in many cases, especially in parts of South Africa
@@admirekashiri9879So the Bantus , didn't intentionally annihilate most of he Khoisan population right? I guess that maybe the disease that bantus carried did most of the Job in the same way that happened with the Amerindians
Eurocentrism is all but dead Afrocentricsm is alive and thriving , so its not really comparable , we have so called documentaries on Netflix with people saying Cleopatrick was black because their grandmother told them.
The Egyptian rac3 is very real, those is the North (Delta) just have slightly more Levantine and those in the South (Sa'idis) more Northeast African, however they are first related to each other before any outside populations. There are also Nubians, Siwas, Beja and Arab Bedouins in Egypt. Otherwise, thank you for sharing the Khoisan finding, not many know about the story behind it.
In all honesty have tittle to no interest in Egypt, as Nubia is far more interesting & unlike Egypt, remained African in its entirety until relatively recently such as the Islamic Invasion of North Africa & the Arab Slave Trade. In which Nubians as well as other African ethnic groups were victims. Though I have issue with the term "black African" there is no such thing, we are the African from Nubia to parts of Egypt to the rest of the continent
There is no proof that Islam conquers changed genetics in North Africa. Actually the proof science has says genetics didnt change much. You can look up recent dna studies saying sub saharan dna is actually more recent as a result of the trans saharan slave trade . Look at like this ,the whole Europe colonized and conquered Africa, but that didn't change the genetic make up of Africa.
My Dad's Y DNA was traced back to the lineage of Pharoah Ramses III.I have a video on my channel showing the results and migration patterns and haplogroup, the video is titled "Black people are NOT Egyptian ".My Dad is a Black man
@@soda8736 I know alot of black people that dont look like they are black so not sure what your point is...Look at his statues it shows him and how he looked alived without any decay.
@@hurrikaynekayetv4086 go look at people of Egypt today , its wide range of phenotypes , now and imagine them in stone. .. Black Americans dont understand other peoples have broad noses and full lips.
@@soda8736people in tropical environments sure. We are taking in the area near to Egypt during the time it was at its height. I don't think there were olmecs or southeast Asians in Egypt then. A lot of people want to downplay the art and say black people were only in Egypt due to slavery and that's just wrong. I don't like the crazy people who say every society was black...even though they're kind of right....but if we have appropriate representations of the past they wouldn't have any arguments.
egyptians are actually natufian now, natufian then and natufian always. whiter north (more anatolian dna) blacker south (east african dna) dna tests prove this. greeks didnt mix with egyptians. kushites were ran out by assyrians including probably mixed egyptian kushites in a 90 year war. arabs are natufian anyway doesnt make a difference. kthxbye
Guy, you are clueless about African history, the ancestors never called themselves Egyptians, this tells me you don't no the origins. They called themselves Kemetic from Kemet. Here is a recent article... where they and Nubians as one fought and split Upper and Lower to Kush. Ancient Nubian Artifacts Yield Evidence of Earliest Monarchy... Evidence of the oldest recognizable monarctiy in human history, preceding the rise of the earliest Egyptian kings by several generations, has been discovered in artifacts from ancient Nubia in Africa. Until now it had been assumed that at that time the ancient Nubian culture, which existed in what is now northern Sudan and southern Egypt, had not advanced beyond a collection of scattered tribal clans and chiefdoms. The existence of rule by kings indicates a more advanced form of political organization in which many chiefdoms are united under a more powerful and wealthier ruler. The discovery is expected to stimulate a new appraisal of the origins of civilization in Africa, raising the question of to what extent later Egyptian culture may have derived its advanced political structure from the Nubians. The various symbols of Nubian royalty that have been found are the same as those associated, in later times, with Egyptian kings. The new findings suggest that the ancient Nubians may have reached this stage of political development as long ago as 3300 B.C., several generations before the earliest documented Egyptian king. The discovery is based on study of artifacts from ancient tombs excavated 15 years ago in an international effort to rescue archeological deposits before the rising waters of the Aswan Dam covered them. The artifacts, including hundreds of fragments of pottery, jewelry, stone vessels, and ceremonial objects such as incense burners, were initially recovered from the Qustul cemetery by Keith C. Seele, a professor at the University of Chicago. The cemetery, which contained 33 tombs that were heavily plundered in ancient times, was on the Nile near the modern boundary between Egypt and the Sudan. The majestic figure on the incense burner, Dr. Williams said, is the earliest known representation ‘of a king in the Nile Valley. His name is unknown, but he is believed to have lived approximately three generations of kings before the time of Scorpion, the earliest known Egyptian ruler. Scorpion was one of three kings said to have ruled Egypt before the start of what is called the first dynasty around 3050 B.C. Dr. Williams said the dating is based on correlations of artistic styles in the Nubian pottery with similar styles in predynastic Egyptian pottery, which is relatively well dated. He said some of the Nubian artifacts bore disconnected symbols resembling those of Egyptian hieroglyphics that were not readable. He said it was not known what the ancient Nubian civilization was called at the time but that he suspected it was Ta‐Seti, a name known from Egyptian writings that means “Land of the Bow,” referring to the weapon which, apparently, was deemed characteristic of peoples in that part of Africa. Dr. Williams said there were accounts in later Egyptian writings of the Egyptians attacking Ta‐Seti some time around 3000 B.C. This is just about the time, according to the archeological record, when a major cultural transformation began in that part of Nubia. Little is known of what was happening in the region between 3000 B.C. and 2300 B.C. when inhabitants were unquestionably governed by separate chiefdoms. Dr. Williams suggested that, after the Egyptian attack around 3000 B.C., the people of Ta‐Seti migrated up the Nile and settled south of the river's third cataract, near a place known today as Dunqulah. Their descendents, he suggested, may have developed the Sudanese Kingdom of Kush, based in Kurma, which in later centuries battled the Egyptians for sovereignty and, in fact, prevailed over them for a while.
The answer to your question is No. The ancient Egyptians are the modern Egyptians.. There is no proof of a mass migration or genocide of a bunch of black folks, also we have DNA now which afrocentric scholars didnt have( not that they would have cared).
@@soda8736 where did the bantu come from then? There are plenty studies that prove west Africans only recently arrived there. Sow where did they come from? The sky? West Africans are originally north Africans who only came to south around 2 thousand years ago
@@skeeta4289 i don't know were you got west Africans arrived 2000 years ago. Thats crazy ..There has been human activity in west Africa for a hundred thousand years at least. But let me entertain you, so these people came from North Africa to west Africa and forgot their whole culture , architecture, food, languag, writting systems, customs, clothing, and relion?. Ok.
Nah I think weak people are so blinded by their own agenda that they simply can't acknowledge the fact that some topics aren't as simple as black or white. Much less the fact that Egyptian history has nothing to do with African-American history. If you want to find connections to your ancestors, then look into west African civilizations, not the Nile Valley.
@@FromNothing Personally, I like to learn about all of Sub-Saharan African history, from east, to west, to central, to south, and I don't focus on North Africa too often simply because the mainstream media is way too focused on North Africa. Great video btw, greetings from England.
You're weak my friend. You remind me of the obas of Benin, desperate for euro asian acceptance recognition. Instead of you to tell it how it is, that ancient kemet was black until it was userped by eurasia, you're there false claiming balanced historian My friend GET OUT😂
@@chadtep7571 Yeah, it takes effort to be worthless, mouth breathing trolls. Also, a severe and uncontrollable mental deficiency which these folks have in excess.
@@soda8736 phenotypically, is only one way, if you don't have melanin, and have a tropical body type, you ain't African. People only play those games when it comes to Africa, every one will tell you what a European looks like, no matter what part of Europe he comes from, or an Arab, an Indian, a Japanese, Chinese, but when it comes to African identity, anyone could look African, as if there isn't any phenotype requirement to be African, this is how foreign invaders were able to claim African heritage in Africa, like Arabs claiming to be Egyptians, when you can clearly see that ancient Egyptian art works, clearly show African people, and not the images of the modern so called Egyptian population.
@@deadpoo4707 there is not one way to be Asian, or Europeans. A person from India, and a person from China do not lookm the same. Melain doesn't mean black either, India, Asia , Australia, South / Meso America all have melanitaed people. . All scientists says the people in Egypt been there , if you want to belive pseudo afrocentrics thats on you. Artwork, look how the Egyptians women were painted light or pale and the Nubian women are painted black or brown. A study came out saying genetics didn't change much even with the invasions, so where did all the black people go, there is no documents of a mass migration or genocide and also DNA doesn't add up to them being black either. Alot of the early black scholars could lie and make up crazy stories, now we have DNA.
The earliest Egyptians before all the foreign invasions, were Africans, why would they build their national monuments in the image of African people if they were not black? You're trying to walk a thin line, so you don't upset your non black viewers.
Yep, which is a prime reason why I don't understand why the kangz assume that the braids on the stone heads authenticate the "Africaness" of the Olmec civilization.
