Egypt 25th Dynasty

WI: The 25th dynasty of Egypt (Nubian) had lasted longer? How would it have developed? I also had a disagreement with some Afro-centrists would consider Egyptian civilization to be primarily African, but I disagreed. Just how "African" were the ancient Egyptians, and are attempts to "Africanize" them based on twentieth century concepts of ethinicty and race?
 
Attempts on africanising are 20th century based and actually I think they matter litle when it comes to the debate. It´s not like civilisation depends heavily on those factors... Egyptians were... mixed. Nubians are definitely african but african is a lot of things. Africa is more varied than Europe. (Of course... It´s bigger that´s why!)
 
WI: The 25th dynasty of Egypt (Nubian) had lasted longer? How would it have developed? I also had a disagreement with some Afro-centrists would consider Egyptian civilization to be primarily African, but I disagreed. Just how "African" were the ancient Egyptians, and are attempts to "Africanize" them based on twentieth century concepts of ethinicty and race?

Attempts on africanising are 20th century based and actually I think they matter litle when it comes to the debate. It´s not like civilisation depends heavily on those factors... Egyptians were... mixed. Nubians are definitely african but african is a lot of things. Africa is more varied than Europe. (Of course... It´s bigger that´s why!)

The problem is that the "Afro-Centrists" aren't really saying that Egypt was an "African" civilization. Of course it's "African"...Egypt is in Africa! What the Afro-Centrists are saying, however, using the euphemistic term "African," is that Egypt was a BLACK civilization, whose people were racially BLACK AFRICANS.

The Egyptians themselves left ample evidence that this wasn't really the case...they pretty consistently depicted themselves with a lighter skin tone than that of the Nubians, who most definitely were a Black African people. Certainly there were black Africans living in Egypt, especially in the far south on the borders of Nubia. There were Nubians who had been brought there as slaves or as mercenary warriors serving with the Egyptian armies. But its pretty clear that the majority of Egyptians...especially in classical period of Egyptian history (the Old, Middle, and New Kingdoms)...were of the "Mediterranean Caucasoid" type which was, and still is, common across North Africa.

None of this really matters...regardless of what their racial makeup might have been, the Egyptians produced one of the world's outstanding civilizations. The Afro-Centrists are simply attempting to make use of those achievements for what are, essentially, 20th and 21st century political purposes, and their efforts should be rejected for what they are...propaganda, not history.

How seriously can you really take people who claim that Cleopatra and Jesus were black, for example?*

*These are common claims found in Afro-Centrist "black history" texts. I took one of these courses in college. It was very entertaining, but had little to do with history.
 
What defines a civilization as 'African'? If this is about race, the question is anachronistic since the idea of 'black' or 'white' as we conceive of them would not have existed, as is the concept of race.

If the question is of ethnicity, there are theories that posit a pre-Egyptian civilization emerging before the Egyptians arrived there, it's rare for 'aboriginal' populations of countries to disappear as opposed to assimilating. As for the Egyptians themselves, as mentioned they were a mix, and this especially depends on the period you're talking about and where in Egypt as well. The question is difficult enough that the case can be made they are ethnically African in character but not definitively.

If the question is of culture, definitely not. Egypt was a civilization that was admired and copied and rarely copied outside practices. The Nubians became more Egyptian than the Egyptians doing exactly this. It also doesn't seem to have had many contacts in Africa outside of Nubia/Punt, and had more in common with the majority of other 'Semitic' civilizations.

If the question is of politically, again definitely not. Egypt considered its interests to lie in the Near East on the whole along with Greece to a limited extent. The majority of Egypt's 'Empire' was in the Levant, along with the powers that it considered its peers.

If the question is of geography, then yes, but that tells you absolutely nothing.

On the other hand, claiming no African links or influences or presence within Egypt would be equally as stupid. The Nubians are a clear example of how Egypt could become controlled and influenced by a clearly 'African' culture.
 
The Ancient Egyptians were, by our standards today, a "Mixed" people. We might refer to them as "Mediterranean", "Middle Eastern", "Brown", or any number of things to get over the fact that they seem to blur the line between the standard Black-White dichotomy. The point is, I've seen North African "caucasoids" that could pass for Ancient Egyptians, I've seen black Africans (typically East Africans, like Ethiopians and Eritreans) that could pass for Ancient Egyptians, North and South Indians that could pass for Ancient Egyptians, and even Latinos that could pass for Ancient Egyptians. You cannot call them "white" or "black" - two distinctions that emerged relatively recently. To the Egyptians, what determined "race" wan't phenotype, but culture; if you were raised in Egypt, spoke Egyptian, and acted like an Egyptian, then that's what you were. Period.

To answer your question, the 25th Dynasty kings regarded themselves as the guardians of traditional Egyptian religion and kingship, and the Egyptians were overwhelmingly accepting of them because they had brought order to the country after a sustained period of civil strife. However, though the Kushite kings adopted all the trappings of Egyptian monarchy (not a huge step, mind you, as Kushite culture was highly Egyptianized as a legacy of Egyptian imperialism by this point), they still kept their capitals at Napata and Meroe, beyond the borders of Egypt. If the 25th Dynasty can fight off the Assyrians, and prevent them from sacking Waset (Thebes), then they will not be inclined to withdraw to their homeland and will continue ruling, I suspect, much like any other stable Egyptian dynasty. They may even start trying to expand their empire into the Levant, taking the fight to the Assyrians, so to speak.

All dynasties in Egyptian history are ephemeral, however, and soon they may have to deal with Babylonians, perhaps alt-Persians (maybe Medes?) and of course the Egyptians won't appreciate being ruled from Nubia (unless the Kushites move their capital into Egypt), and will probably eventually rebel.
 
However, though the Kushite kings adopted all the trappings of Egyptian monarchy (not a huge step, mind you, as Kushite culture was highly Egyptianized as a legacy of Egyptian imperialism by this point), they still kept their capitals at Napata and Meroe, beyond the borders of Egypt. If the 25th Dynasty can fight off the Assyrians, and prevent them from sacking Waset (Thebes), then they will not be inclined to withdraw to their homeland and will continue ruling, I suspect, much like any other stable Egyptian dynasty. They may even start trying to expand their empire into the Levant, taking the fight to the Assyrians, so to speak.

Or, alternatively, Taharqa might pull in his horns and accommodate the Assyrians, withdrawing from the Levant and paying tribute rather than getting into a fight he can't win.

As you say, dynasties come and go, but either a successful defense against the Assyrians or successful grovelling to them might give the dynasty another century or so. I wonder if this would be long enough for Napata and Meroe to start thinking of themselves as part of metropolitan Egypt, and for other Egyptians to share this opinion, such that northern Nubia remains Egyptian under the next dynasty rather than breaking away. Could we see Nubia becoming an integral part of Egypt for the long term, being passed on from conqueror to conqueror along with the lands of the north? (The 22nd dynasty didn't do this for Libya, but then again, the 22nd was a mess.)
 
Or, alternatively, Taharqa might pull in his horns and accommodate the Assyrians, withdrawing from the Levant and paying tribute rather than getting into a fight he can't win.

As you say, dynasties come and go, but either a successful defense against the Assyrians or successful grovelling to them might give the dynasty another century or so. I wonder if this would be long enough for Napata and Meroe to start thinking of themselves as part of metropolitan Egypt, and for other Egyptians to share this opinion, such that northern Nubia remains Egyptian under the next dynasty rather than breaking away. Could we see Nubia becoming an integral part of Egypt for the long term, being passed on from conqueror to conqueror along with the lands of the north? (The 22nd dynasty didn't do this for Libya, but then again, the 22nd was a mess.)

That's definitely another possibility... It could potentially go the other way, too, with Upper Egypt becoming part of "Greater Nubia", but that strikes me as a bit less likely.
The key difference between the 25th and 22nd dynasties it that the 22nd didn't even have de facto control over the entire country - that, and their "Egyptianness" was more of a veneer rather than an ingrained part of their culture, as was the case with the Kushites.
 
Top