Was the middle east really white ?

You are salty my friend.

This.

Scandinavia was a poor irrelevant shithole until the late 19th century. They are objectively the least accomplished Europeans.

That's only true of Finns. Sweden was a big deal in the 17th century. Made some important innovations in military stuff, or something. Also Denmark was important before that. Even the Finn's eventually gave us Moomins, the greatest artistic achievement of the modern age.

I agree that Stormniggers trying to appropriate Rome are retarded, but give credit where it's due.

Moomins were created by an ethnic Swede.

>Made some important innovations in military stuff, or something.
Nordcuck history in a nutshell. Hopefully they'll go the way of the red indian so Latins and Slavs can colonize their land

She was a Fenno-Swede, which as far as I know is like the equivalent of an English-speaking Irishman, which is to say they identify with the country over the language.

>Sweden was a big deal in the 17th century

Yes, behold the """empire""" of irrelevant frozen wasteland, lmao.

Depends, do you mean Nordic-toned light-skinned or Caucasoid?

Nice argument

At least you tried.
Even for a shit board like Veeky Forums you need some stronger bait

>can't think of a single famous Scandinavian painter
>can't think of a single famous Scandinavian sculptor
>can't think of a single famous Scandinavian composer
>can't think of a single famous Scandinavian writer
>can't think of a single famous Scandinavian scientist besides Niels Bohr (who was Jewish
>can't think of a single famous Scandinavian invention besides dynamite and Celsius scale
>can't think of a single famous Scandinavian great leader

really cooks my coconuts

Kek, fair enough

>Strindberg
>Irrelevant
>Grieg
>Strindberg
>Nobel
>Ball bearing
>Vasa

>Persia was
>Can't say about Iraq

Nigga wat

>Was the middle east really white

No. Categorically, no.

To answer your question, the only evidence you should rely on is how they depicted themselves, rather than rely on the conjecture of some "WE WUZ"-ing /pol/ack.

If they did not make art of themselves... then the butthurt Scandinavians wouldn't bother LARPing as them.

pic related is Sumerian paintings; scholars agree that they invented the first writing system and the first civilization.

Here is how Assyrians drew portrayed themselves (wall painting 8th century BCE)

s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/69/7f/bb/697fbbf053d52d3cc4734a48c126b7cb.jpg

Here's ancient Egyptians, again, not white:

hermionesknapsack.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/tomb-of-horemheb-and-horus.jpg

ducksters.com/history/art/ancient_egypt_bust_of_nefertiti_sm.jpg

I'm going to continue posting until the /pol/acks stop.

BTW, I'm a pale Anglo; I don't try to assert that Middle Easterners ever looked like me because I'm not an insecure freak.

...

You can't base anything on pictures from the ancient world you THICK cunt. They used a very limited pallete of colors and weren't interested in realism.

Yes, DNA has proven that MENA people today are much the same as those thousands of years ago, ie, they're white.

As for the blue eyes, the one piece of evidence that the Swede has, people put Lapis Lazuli in the eyes, along with shells, because it looks beautiful and God-like, not because Mesopotamian were pale Swedes.

It's funny how it's always the Scandinavians that try to LARP as Mesopotamians the most I think it can be linked to this:

Here's some Babylonian, brown, soldiers.

Those are Persians, aren't they?

White = European. They weren't European nor were known to have European features or related to Euros.

D A M A G E
C O N T R O L

>They weren't interested in realism
Well, they clearly were to a certain extent, since they were painting a recognizable form of a human body. My second picture is actually very realistic; look at the fauna, for the love of God!

>They had a limited pallet of colours.
Clearly they didn't. I can see white colouring on both paintings. If their skin was white, they would have painted it so.

Have none of you thought about what would have happened to white skin in the arid climate of the middle East?

Pic related is Achaemenid sculptures, depicting a style of hair commonly seen in the suburbs of both Stockholm and Oslo.

forgot the sculpture

Nah, those are on the Ishtar gate in Babylon. Persians were also not white, as can by how they portrayed themselves in an extremely similar way to how the Babylonians and other Mesopotamians did

Ancient Persians and Anatolians looked like modern Persians and Turks. They weren't white

I thought the Mitanni were considered Indo-European.
>the only evidence you should rely on is how they depicted themselves, rather than rely on the conjecture of some "WE WUZ"-ing /pol/ack.

Its a tough question. We have seen art depicting them as both white and dark-skinned, so that is not going to help us in answering the question.

>White = European.
So all Americans and all expats from Europe are not "white". Got it.

>or related to Euros.
Oh, look at him trying to weasel himself out of this problem. Too bad that when you start using this factor, the Middle East easily becomes "white" or European peoples on the borders (such as Hungary or Greece) easily become "non-white".

I think they're Medes

>tfw persian
>tfw whiter than some of my "white" friends

WE

>I thought the Mitanni were considered Indo-European.

No

Ancient middle easterners looked no different than the middle easterners of today. The Middle East is a large diverse region, they all come in various types. You get pale ones with colored eyes that could fit in Southern Europe, tanned/olive ones, and full on dark brown ones

Not any "whiter" than it is currently. The vast majority of Levant and MENA overall is olive-skinned to pale. The "arab conquests" didn't leave that much genetic contributions (not enough to noticeably affect phenotype); arabization was mostly cultural. Every bullet point in OP's pic is distortion of actual history.

>people put Lapis Lazuli in the eyes, along with shells, because it looks beautiful and God-like, not because Mesopotamian were pale Swedes

In fact, ancient Arabians used lapis lazuli in the eyes of their statues as well. Pic related. Are Arabs white?

>tfw no pale middle eastern gf

>tfw no Phoenician gf

>You can't base anything on pictures from the ancient world you THICK cunt. They used a very limited palette of colors and weren't interested in realism.

In that case, then the argument of the statues in OP's pic having blue eyes is bullshit.

>You can't base anything on pictures from the ancient world you THICK cunt. They used a very limited pallete of colors and weren't interested in realism.
HAHAHAHAHA nordicucks ladies and gentlemen

I really like this idea that a small population can genetically displace the much larger native population just because they managed to conquer them. Don't these people realize how stupid they sound when they say
>well the Persians and Levantine used to be white but the Arabs conquered them and they became brown all of a sudden
Arab conquests were cultural and religious, I don't why everyone automatically assumes they must have raped the women and had children with them. People use the same retarded logic with the greeks

They're olive to brown because from April to October the temperatures over there are 20-50 degrees Celsius

Levantines, Mesopotamians and Berbers had light skin (lighter than Egytpains at least), but I don't think they were Nordicks.

They descended from the southern russian steppes tho

Gr8 b8 m8 8/8

>Red — Dešr. This Old Egyptian term, while it describes the color red, tended to include the colors yellow and orange, as these were all derived from the same sources: naturally occurring ochre and oxide. (Wilkinson, SMEA, 106, 107; Robins et al., 59) Red was the “heraldic color” of Lower Egypt, embodied by its signature Deshret crown. It was associated with the the sun, both in its terrible radiance and in its life-giving capacity; the solar aspects of Kingship; and virility*; among many other things. It could also be employed to represent negative entities and concepts that embody the dangerous, hostile forces beyond the realm of total control — in other words, isfet. Unlucky days and the names of hostile beings, for instance, were often written in red rather than black ink. (Wilkinson, SMEA, 106) Red as a concept also embodied anger and destruction, and it is from the root dešr that we get the expressions dešr ib — literally “red of heart,” meaning “to be furious” — and dešru, “wrath.” It could also represent the desert, and subsequently the lack of pregnancy and fertility. The use of red in Egyptian art and language was rather ambiguous to say the least, so its meaning must be carefully evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

warboar.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/color/

No, these people just want to plunder other countries of their heritage while simultaneously disassociating from their modern problems

Color use did have symbolic value (especially with gods being painted non-human colors) but the author overstates his case; obviously there there was a correspondence with the perceived "average" skin tones of different groups.

Yes the Egyptian were.

>what is a suntan
>what is muh henna body paint.
>what is brown war paint.
>what is red hair
It's not realistic to paint ramesses 2 that dark since he was very light in skin tones. Look at his red haired mummy.
Most Egyptian art was for effect until the amarna period.
Sorry to say your the cuck. Why do you want everyone to be brown or black?

They had such a problem with malaria because they were white.

>Groups of human beings were given stylized, characterizing skin tones in order to designate their ethnicity. Ancient Egyptian artists gave their Nubian neighbors from the South dark brown or pure black coloration, as we would expect most African groups to be portrayed in any art form. Conversely, Libyans and Bedouins* from just beyond Egypt’s borders in North Africa, along with Canaanites, Hittites, and other “Asiatic” foreigners hailing from the Near East were generally given much lighter complexions, often of yellowish or even near-white hues, which was not a terribly realistic choice of color. Egyptian men since the beginning of the Early Dynastic Period (ca. 3100 – 2686 BCE) were almost invariably shown with a reddish-brown skin tone, while Egyptian women were with few exceptions given a light golden skin tone similar to that of “Asiatic” foreigners. (Wilkinson, SMEA, 114 – 115) These skin tones were clearly symbolic, and were only loosely based on objective reality.

>The skin tones of humans do not always serve to indicate a particular ethnicity. Such coloration of figures could be used in the same purely symbolic and non-real fashion as was employed in the depiction of deities (which shall be discussed in the next subsection).

He doesn't overstate anything, you just haven't read the link.

Google "Fayum portraits". They are all realistic portrayals of Egyptians who lived under Roman rule. None of them look white.

What has the Ptolemaic period got to do with ancient egyptian art from the early dynastic to late kingdom era?

also
>realistic portrayals of Egyptians
they were the greek elite lmao

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fayum_mummy_portraits#Subjects_and_social_context_of_the_paintings

>an Egyptian dynasty ruled by Greeks/Romans is somehow less white than other dynasties

Fucking idiot.

I think the majority of them were Egyptians with SOME Greek/Roman admixture.

Humans had blue eyes before white skin iirc

I've already adressed that; they put Lapis Lazuli in their eyes to make themselves appear more God-like.

1) Having blue eyes does not make you white; it's a genetic mutation.

c1.staticflickr.com/9/8363/8293682898_2161c61ecb_z.jpg

2) This is one example, found in one ancient culture of the middle east, against a shit-tonne of evidence.

Convince me that these people were actually pale, blonde haired Scandinavians:

Your evidence is pathetic. Just admit that you're wrong and we'll stop cucking you.

Nice. I don't understand why the /pol/acks don't LARP as Arabians as well, since they also had organized civilization before Northern Europeans did too.

>an Egyptian dynasty ruled by Greeks/Romans is somehow less white than other dynasties
Read the fucking thread you moron, I was responding to this post It's ramses II from the new kingdom era being painted in red. Hence my fucking response. Then you start being autistic about ptolemaic greeks nearly 1000years later, using an entirely different and foreign art style.

Black and white wewuzzers are fucking retarded.

maybe they were just high as shit

>Sun tan

Northern europeans don't tan, they burn. That's why people in hot countries have darker skin, user.

>>an Egyptian dynasty ruled by Greeks/Romans is somehow less white than other dynasties
And actually they were MORE "white" than the previous dynasties. 22nd to 24th dynasties were berbers, 25th was nubian and 26th was a return to berbers, then 27th to 31st are greekfags from alexander's diadochi.

Exactly how little do you know about Egypt?

persianfags until alexander's diadochi*
sorry I sperged over my keyboard

There is still a difference in skin tone between modern Egyptians and Kabyle Berbers (the "Libyans" portrayed in those murals) and Levantines. Ancient Egyptians were probably darker than them as well.

That's what I implied. If even the Greek/Roman dynasty looks like shitskins then the others were probably even less white.

>There is still a difference in skin tone between modern Egyptians and Kabyle Berbers
Most certainly, see >Conversely, Libyans and Bedouins* from just beyond Egypt’s borders in North Africa, along with Canaanites, Hittites, and other “Asiatic” foreigners hailing from the Near East were generally given much lighter complexions, often of yellowish or even near-white hues

>Henna body paint
Evidence?

>Brown war paint
You must be joking at this point, this damage control is pathetic.

Ancient Egyptians were people indigenous to the Nile valley, meaning that they were a mix of people from north and south of the Sahara. To say that pale skinned people would have been native to such an arid climate is utterly and completely absurd.

Ramases II is an exception; red hair was a trait associated with the Gods, so it is understandable that his family (where the gene obviously existed) would have been elevated to such a high status.

I think the world was more global in its history than we are lead to think.

There is still a difference TODAY, you retard. Kabyle Berbers and Levantines look white as fuck compared to Copts even.

>I think the majority of them were Egyptians with SOME Greek/Roman admixture.
not even that. There is 0 evidence of any greek or roman mixture

Well of course, but it's literally the waning days of Egypt when they were not only ruled by immediate neighbouring ex-subjects (id. the nubians and libyan dynasties of the last intermediate), but literally by faraway powers like the persians or greeks.

Wewuzzers typically don't give a fuck about anything post 660BC tbqh, that's why they project so hard on the palettes of the middle and new kingdom art styles. Did the ruling elite get BLEACH'D during and after the ptolemaic era? Of course. But then again they also got ARAB'D after 642AD.

>Wewuzzers typically don't give a fuck about anything post 660BC tbqh, that's why they project so hard on the palettes of the middle and new kingdom art styles. Did the ruling elite get BLEACH'D during and after the ptolemaic era? Of course. But then again they also got ARAB'D after 642AD.
both untrue. The Hellenistic elite lived separately and there is 0 evidence of mixture. As far as Arab mixture, there is some but not enough to affect phenotype. The Coptic population has 0 arab mixture.

pic-related is coptic girl. 0 arab and greek mixture. Probably close represetative of how Ancient (Lower) Egypt looked. Ancient Lower Egypt was browner. The brown type seems to be more relevant in their art but the women are more often portrayed as the fair type.

While we can't rule out kabyle berbers or their ancestors from being possibly involved in Egypt, when egyptologists talk about berber involvement they typically mean the meshwesh berbers from libya you nonce.

Hence libyans, not north algerians you faggot.

I'm sorry Upper Egypt = brown type. Lower Egypt = lighter type

What does white even mean?

>What race was x
>Are x white/black

Fucking heck, Mod should do something before this place become a miniature version of /pol/

She's a qt. Post more brown egyptian girls.

quality posts.

The different ethnic groups would have definitely not mixed for the most part, since marriages were arranged back then; what kind of a pious Muslim would have married a Copt, and vice versa.

Does this mean White people are to blame for Islam?

>MENA could be great again if they embrace modern principles and tune down islam
>instead turkey, one of the few OK muslim states, becomes a dictatoriship
brown girls are cute

>The Coptic population has 0 arab mixture.

They have negroid admixture.

>The Hellenistic elite lived separately and there is 0 evidence of mixture
That's the ruling elite though, and I acknowledged that. I'm not trying to argue that the plebs got enriched by ionian/dorian/macedonian dick either.

But the ptolemaic elite did marry with the persian elite, who were the rulers of egypt before they showed up. Now whether we want to argue about whether the persian elite practiced admixture with the egyptian is another story. And ultimately pointless because that ruling elite would have been berber since it was the Saites who were in charge when Egypt had to bend the knee to Cambyses.

Whichever way it's pointless to get hung up on admixture (or absence of) in the aristocracy. The plebs is what wewuzzers cry about since there is literally zero chance of them being related to any royalty, and the plebs NEVER EVER got bleach'd and probably hardly ever got BLACK'D (and if it was, it was by north nubians) and possibly midly ARAB'D (but even the mamluk era, it was mostly the ruling elite who was arabic).

Ancient egyptians probably are essentially the same as the modern egyptians, give or take some minor degree of admixture.

...

Look at those caucasian lips

...

That's Alessia Cara. She's 100% Italian

>She is of Italian descent from Calabria; her father was born in Canada to Italian parents, and her mother is an Italian immigrant.[6][7

No she isn't. The girl he posted looks less nigger than her.

You know what I mean. I don't mean "European" as in strictly living in Europe (otherwise, non-whites there would be considered European) but descended from Europeans and have ancestors indiginous to Europe. It's why names like "Italian-American" exist.

>Oh, look at him trying to weasel himself out of this problem. Too bad that when you start using this factor, the Middle East easily becomes "white" or European peoples on the borders (such as Hungary or Greece) easily become "non-white".
What are you talking about? I said that MENA people aren't European because they literally aren't. The closest would be Turkey but even that's debatable.

mediterraneans are the most powerful race in the world

Why can't people who are 70%-80% white feel any connection to their heritage in your guy's mind? I never understood this.
Why are mixed people shamed if they feel any connection to Europe?

Which existed for thousands of years, if you're implying it came from the slave trade.

>Those nigga lips

She is clearly a terrone

No, she's a mulatto. Calabrians don't look like that.