Re: King Tut "Primarily Caucasoid" ?

The following link states that "African-American activists" protested the Tut exhibit in Los Angeles for its portrayal of Tut as a "North African caucasoid".

How ironic that so many people are concerned and even jealous to protect Tut's racial identity, whether that be black, white, or in between. In reality, he was a tyrant from a long line of tyrants, and a tyrant by any other name is still a tyrant. You would think that black people would be happy to learn that the pharaohs were white and not black oppressors. Similarly, you would think that those who have pride in their whiteness might like to exonerate their race of choice from charges of tyranny and lay that on rulers of color.

The way I look at it, we all have to claim Tut and his line as our own even if we may not want to. The so-called scarlet thread of kings did the lion's share of reproducing in the ancient near east (often extirminating the offspring of others), therefore most if not all of us alive in the Western world today (and perhaps beyond) possess the genes of those kings. So, the racial characteristics of that ancient royal family may be of interest, but certainly are not worth getting worked up about. For better or for worse, the world is united by the fact that it was dominated so thoroughly and over such a lengthy time period by a single ruling house. They are us and we are them.

Here's yet another perspective. The Bible is the Jewish record of the ancient royal family. It is the only narrative record of many rulers and events in ancient times, but it should not be considered as exclusively Jewish history. Because we can all claim one or more ancestors from among that storied lineage, the Jews who wrote the Bible were actually writing about ancestors that are shared more or less equally by everyone today. All of us apples fell from one branch or another of that same tree.

Yet another way to look at it is that Tut was not half-Jewish and half-Egyptian. He was fully Jewish and fully Egyptian. He was also fully Babylonian, fully African, fully Assyrian, fully Greek, etc. As Paul might have put it, he was "all things to all people", and that is exactly how the royal family presented themselves.

Responses To This Message

Re: King Tut "Primarily Caucasoid" ?