What happened to its nose?

What happened to its nose?

it was broken off to disguise the fact that the ancient egyptians were a negroid people, what else?

French soldiers shot it off.

I heard that it had a chin that fell off and that the Brits stole it, is that true?

Supposedly it was accidentally shot off during Napoleon's invasion of Egypt.

Gauls happened.

PERFIDY

14th century vandals most likely.

Too bad we have other statues with their noses intact and they don't have nigger noses.

...

are you trolling?
>dem lips
>dat prognathism
clearly negroid

Islam poisons everything

Obama is half white

>[citation needed]

i'm sure the negroid pharoahs interbred with mediterraneans to some extent, akhenaten was a new kingdom pharoah after all

...

what about this one

Botched surgery

or this one

top meme
>The Arab historian al-Maqrīzī, writing in the 15th century, attributes the loss of the nose to iconoclasm by Muhammad Sa'im al-Dahr—a Sufi Muslim from the khanqah of Sa'id al-Su'ada—in AD 1378, upon finding the local peasants making offerings to the Sphinx in the hope of increasing their harvest. Enraged, he destroyed the nose, and was later hanged for vandalism

You don't even need the nose to see this guy was black.

Protrusions are the first things to fall off of statues. Noses and male genitals especially.

This is actually really funny. I wonder how he got up there.

Sahure

Inb4 "muh one drop rule"

>Islam poisons everything.
>Islamic ruler hangs man for vandalism.
Ok.

Next time I find the odd protestant shittalking about the Catholic church's monuments and how "they should be destroyed or auctioned off and given to the poor." I will say Christianity poisons everything, ok?

Religion poisons everything

jewish tricks

...

Might not even be true, he's simply recounting something he has been told by the locals some time after the fact.

What matters, however, is that there is a report that the nose was already gone by the time of his writings in the late 1300s, therefore throwing the napoleon did it meme out of the window. Napoleon is pretty much THE guy who enabled egyptomania to take off with his sponsorship of Vivant Denon during his egyptian campaign, which later led to Champollion finally translating the hieroglyphic language.

The man wasn't hanged because of Islam, he was hanged because he broke the law. Just because the rulers were Islamic doesn't mean everything they do is attributable to Islam.

Violent iconoclasm, however, is always motivated by religion, and Islam is especially good at doing that.

I once read that there is no mention of the great pyramids or the sphinx in the OT?
is that true? pretty silly that jews would spend all this time being "slaves" and not remark on the constructions right? could it be possible that jews were never actually "slaves" in egypt? if that is the case then what would be the motivation for lying?

woah, really makes you think

> there is no mention of the great pyramids or the sphinx in the OT?
>pretty silly that jews would spend all this time being "slaves" and not remark on the constructions right?
Several reasons for this.

1)First off the pyramids we are most familiar (giza) with are centered in lower egypt (the delta nile region) and were built during the early part of the old kingdom. That was roughly between 2700-2500BC. At this time we know egyptians did not partake in slavery for the single reason Egypt did not really begin to expand and colonize other regions until the middle kingdom era. All the labor was done by drafting the peasantry in service during the seasons the Nile over-flooded (roughly 4-6months) . It's been calculated/estimated egyptian peasantry at the time could provide roughly about 100k workers, and that the khufu pyramid probably represented about 24million manhours in terms of necessary labor. If you do the math, that means those pyramids could be erected within 20-30years. Jews, or nubians, never ever had anything to do with the construction of those particular monuments.

2)Second reason, the merneptah stele. This is the first time jews are mentioned in Egyptian "literature"/inscriptions. It dates back to 1200BC. We're fully in the New Kingdom era now and some things have changed. Merneptah's reign is basically THE turning point in the history of ancient egypt's decline. This is after Khufu and his pyramids, after Mentuhotep and his great waret/nomarch administration reform, this is after Hatshepsut, Thutmoses III and Ramses II great military successes.
The reason I mention these specific names is that all of them were responsible for specific and long lasting reforms. Namely the waret reform (or bureau) from Mentuhotep, which made all the governors/lords (nomarch) directly answerable to mini viziers/governors all across egyptian prefectorates. What I am getting from this is that slavery was simply not common and serfdom was the preferred model.

This means that IF Egypt ever enslaved the proto-hebrews, then it would have been extremely unlikely for them to have even left the region or at least not in large numbers for the sole purpose of slavery. The entire pharaonic administration model instead suggests the various jewish tribes would have been put to work under a local nomarch, who ensured labor and taxation was taking place, who then answered to the regional waret (or local admin) who would tally the numbers and necessary trade agreements, who then would pass on this information to the vizier who would corroborate that data with the other warets below him and THEN would answer to the pharaoh who would then make the decisions. Simply put, there was no need for the deportation of jews as it didn't fit the egyptian model of locking down on a region and setting its roots deeply. It was a deeply agrarian system and there was no shortage of experienced labor at home. No jews back in Israel meant nobody to work the land of those colonies, and the whole effort would have been pointless. Instead from the data we have, it would imply that the Canaan region was HIGHLY profitable and provided a large source of income. There had to be a lot of workers there still present.

3) Thirdly, when the canaan region first was captured and absorbed into the nomarchia/waret administration during the conquest of Canaan/Levant by Thutmoses III around 1425BC, we have to bear in mind the context of the time. Barely a 100 years before, Egypt had been invaded and ruled by a foreign elite - the Hyksos - for the very first time in its long history. It was unprecedented in a whole manner of ways we can't imagine. The tradition of the curse tablets date back to this era, Khamoses & Ahmose (the pharaoh brothers who would evicted the hyksos in 1550BC) encouraged the practice of writing down the name of the Hyksos who invaded their land and smashing them in long processions down the streets of Memphis, Heliopolis and Thebes.

What we're witnessing here is a culture that became vehemently xenophobic overnight, but which ALSO had an entire kingdom to repair. The hyksos for the 1650-1500BC period of their rule, let the entire egyptian infrastructure rot. Canals along the Nile weren't maintained, Temples were left scorched from their initial invasion, roads weren't getting and irrigable farmlands falling in general disrepair. You get the picture. The campaigns of Thutmoses III had the general therapeutic effect of calming that angst felt by the egyptians towards the near-east, but it was still present. Nonetheless, he launched what was a fairly unorthodox drive for multiculturalism and for a brief time period (1425 to 1220BC) for two principle reasons: the need for extra-added expert craftsmanship and to reboot the economy. That being said, it was executed fairly carefully as not to offend the sensibilities of the egyptian populace who was still traumatized from the 2nd intermediate episode. So you have a 'moderate-to-slow' import of skilled laborers from all over the egyptian empire - Nubians, Libyans, Canaanites and even Hurrians. We know this because throughout this period might as well be known as the "Egyptian Renaissance", we see foreign style suddenly being adopted by Egyptians for the first time from all across the near-east ranging from temple frescoes and statues to more personal items. What this means is that whatever NEW labour/population entered Egypt throughout this period was mostly voluntary to entice craftsmen but also still fairly controlled. This does not fit with the model of the mass deportation of people that the Exodus describes.

4)Perhaps the most important argument as to why Egypt did not partake in the Exodus is mostly due to its immediate decline post Ramses II. Most of us think of Charlton Heston's 10 commandments when we hear that name and his assumed role in the Exodus, but this representation of Ramses II does not even come close to the real one.

In reality, Ramses II was a big proponent of the Thutmoses "doctrine". He believed in big empires, he believed in cultural unity, he believed in a functional administration. Most of his reign was trying and reversing the major fuck-ups of Akhenaten's reign (massive loss of territory to the hittites, solar cult memes). He literally had no time to waste with the jews as the two main threats to the Egyptian empire were sea peoples and the Hittites to the north, as will be exemplified at the Battle of Qadesh in 1257BC. He has a long and happy reign in general but that's really the turning point for Egypt, the last zenith. His successor Merneptah which I mentioned much earlier is the beginning of the end. He can barely hold on to the territories of the empire, namely the levantine region and his entire focus is on the sea peoples and rebellions. He is the one who will carve the very first stele referring to a place called Israel where a revolt was put down. He does an admirable job of holding Ramses II empire together but he is the last competent pharaoh of the 19th dynasty.

The administration that I talked to you about earlier, the nomarch/waret/vizier system? Well it is falling apart now. There is rampant corruption all across the board, mostly due to those positions being hereditary (which none of them were meant to be originally when conceived) and you have an entire noble class at war with each other and countless court intrigues. You have about 9 other ramses which follow between the 1200-1050BC period, during which further rebellions occur, bad harvests and severe droughts (unsure whether due to mismanagement of the irrigable farmlands or genuinely climatic events), and slowly but surely Egypt loses its grasp on most of its colonies in the Levant. The collapse of the bronze age does not make things easier either. By 1040BC, the levantine arm of the empire is completely gone.

The very next time Egypt is back to dealing with the hebrews is during the 22nd dynasty's campaign against the emerging Judah and Israel kingdoms around 940BC. This is during the reign of Soshenq, or Susac as he is referred to in the hebrew bible. Bear in mind the 22nd dynasty is now even ethnically egyptian anymore, this is a meshwesh berber martial elite that used to be part of the royal army and seized power at the end of the 21st dynasty because the old ruling families had become so inbred and inept at their jobs that the loyalist frontier people had to swoop in to try and hold the fracturing empire together. This is exactly how bad the 1200-900BC period had been for Egypt. But the main point that interests us is that we now have reached the point where the jewish account has finally become somewhat semi-historically accurate. At least in its referencing of names and timing. There is no way for them to cram an "exodus" anywhere in between at this point.

This is why even from ONLY looking at Egypt's history, foregoing all various forms of argumentations of "aetiological myths", probability arguments, random desert wandering or the jewish settlements of the sinai (or absence thereof) that the jewish exodus and enslavement simply not happen.

Now I am not saying that proto-jews were not either drafted/employed by egyptians post-Thutmoses III to work for him. But that would have been as skilled craftsmen, and most likely compensated for their work. I am also not saying that egyptians did not use the local jews of Canaan as serfs in their own lands but they did not get deported. This is not how egyptians engaged with forced labour or indentured servitude.
And before 1550BC, Egypt did not even begin to expand into canaan.

I am just pointing out that the entire exodus only had a brief possible window in history to be "possible", and that was between 1550-900BC. And looking at what we know about their society, its economy and its history...it's bullshit.

Something that's bothered me ever since I found out: why is the Sphinx called "father of terror" in Arabic?

There is something vague and ominious about it.

Underrated.

>Napoleon blew it off for target practice XD
actually it was buried up to its neck in sand and Napoleon excavated it and provided us everything we know about Ancient Egypt

a lot of old stone statues have similar damage from wear and age, more than a few old roman statues have lost their noses and the breakage doesn't look dissimilar

HOW IS HE SUPPOSED TO HAVE "DESTROYED THE NOSE" —WITH SHEER POWER OF RAGE?

THE FRENCH EXPEDITION TO EGYPT WAS FINANCED WITH THE COVERT PURPOSE OF DESTROYING ANY EVIDENCE OF EGYPT'S TRUE HISTORY, AND OF STEALING EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WAS TRANSPORTABLE.

No? He went to Egypt to cut off trade from the British. And as said, we knew more about Egypt from his exploits than before.

filtered

i fucking hate muslims

ACCORDING TO YOU, HOW DOES REAFFIRMING THE OFFICIALIST FALSE NARRATIVE CONSTITUTE A REFUTATION OF WHAT I POSTED?

it's natural to dislike a people that are open to incalculable barbarity

>HOW IS HE SUPPOSED TO HAVE "DESTROYED THE NOSE" —WITH SHEER POWER OF RAGE?

I WAS THINKING MORE LIKE WITH A HAMMER

>THE FRENCH EXPEDITION TO EGYPT WAS FINANCED WITH THE COVERT PURPOSE OF DESTROYING ANY EVIDENCE OF EGYPT'S TRUE HISTORY, AND OF STEALING EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WAS TRANSPORTABLE.

WOW THIS IS VERY INTERESTING TO ME BUT DO YOU HAVE A SOURCE SO I CAN READ MORE ALL THE SOURCES I FIND ON NET SAY OTHER THINGS

Because the actual purpose of the expedition was for Napoleon to gain more glory and power, not destroy heritage like you claimed.

>The peoples we will be living alongside are Muslims; their first article of faith is "There is no other god but God, and Muhammad is his prophet". Do not contradict them; treat them as you treated the Jews, the Italians; respect their muftis and their imams, as you respected their rabbis and bishops. Have the same tolerance for the ceremonies prescribed by the Quran, for their mosques, as you had for the convents, for the synagogues, for the religion of Moses and that of Jesus Christ. The Roman legions used to protect all religions. You will here find different customs to those of Europe, you must get accustomed to them. The people among whom we are going treat women differently to us; but in every country whoever violates one is a monster. Pillaging only enriches a small number of men; it dishonours us, it destroys our resources; it makes enemies of the people who it is in our interest to have as our friends. The first city we will encounter was built by Alexander [the Great]. We shall find at every step great remains worthy of exciting French emulation.

SO, DO YOU DISLIKE JEWS?

CAN YOU RESPOND TO MY POST NOW I HAVE TO GO TO GO TO TO BED SOON OR I WILL GET IN TROUBLE

H ICAN YOU LINK ME TO YOUR SOURCE ABOUT

>THE FRENCH EXPEDITION TO EGYPT WAS FINANCED WITH THE COVERT PURPOSE OF DESTROYING ANY EVIDENCE OF EGYPT'S TRUE HISTORY, AND OF STEALING EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WAS TRANSPORTABLE.

THANK YOU PLEASE RESPONBD SOON I HAVGE TO GO TO TO TOI BED

...

>Pyramid construction between 2700-2500BC
>mf

I AM STARTING TO THINK YOU WEREW MAKING THINGS UP WHY WILL YOU NBOT SHOW ME SOURCWE HOW DO I KNOW YOU NOT MAKE ME UP???

THIS NIGGER IS FUCKED

This thread started out good :/