Were the Ancient Egyptians Sub-Saharan Africans?

 Were the Ancient Egyptians Sub-Saharan Africans?

A Historical and Scientific Response to Afrocentric Claims

Prepared by the "Masry" Project — Messages from Egypt to Its Youth and the World

---

Introduction

In recent decades, a cultural and ideological movement known as Afrocentrism has gained popularity online, claiming that ancient Egypt was a "Black" civilization—specifically Sub-Saharan African in origin and identity.

While this theory may resonate emotionally with some communities seeking historical justice, it lacks solid anthropological, genetic, linguistic, and archaeological evidence. This article provides a balanced, well-documented scientific response.

---

What Is Afrocentrism?

Afrocentrism is a scholarly and cultural movement developed mainly in the United States to re-center African contributions to world history.

Key proponents include:

Cheikh Anta Diop (Senegalese historian)

Yosef Ben-Jochannan (Ethiopian-American writer)

They argue that ancient Egyptians were Black Africans, both racially and culturally, and that Western and Arab historians have deliberately erased this fact.

---

Scientific and Historical Counter-Evidence

1. Anthropological Evidence (Cranial and Skeletal Analysis)

Numerous studies have compared ancient Egyptian skeletal remains with other populations:

Clines & Brace (1993) and Barry Kemp (Cambridge University) found that ancient Egyptian skulls were closer to those of North African and Mediterranean populations, not to Sub-Saharan types.

Zakrzewski (2007) analyzed remains from Giza and Saqqara, showing that Egyptians had body proportions adapted to the Nile Valley, distinct from Sub-Saharan groups.

📚 Source:

Zakrzewski, S. R. (2007). Population continuity or population change: Formation of the ancient Egyptian state. American Journal of Physical Anthropology.

---

2. Genetic Evidence (Ancient DNA)

In 2017, a landmark study was published in Nature Communications, analyzing DNA from mummies in Abusir el-Meleq (Middle Egypt), dating from the New Kingdom to the Roman era.

Findings:

The mummies had closer genetic affinities with ancient Levantine and Anatolian populations, not with Sub-Saharan Africans.

Sub-Saharan genetic influence increased only after the Roman period, likely due to migrations and trade.

📚 Source:

Schuenemann, V. J. et al. (2017). Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods. Nature Communications.

---

3. Linguistic Evidence

The ancient Egyptian language is a branch of the Afroasiatic language family, which includes:

Egyptian (Hieroglyphic/Coptic)

Berber (Amazigh)

Semitic (Arabic, Hebrew)

Cushitic

It is linguistically unrelated to the Niger-Congo language family, which dominates Sub-Saharan Africa.

📚 Source:

Diakonoff, I. M. (1981). Afroasiatic Languages. Moscow School of Linguistics.

---

4. Visual Depictions in Ancient Egyptian Art

Egyptians depicted themselves and other peoples in tombs and temples using distinct skin tones and features:

Egyptians: reddish-brown skin, straight or wavy hair, narrow noses.

Nubians: darker skin, broader noses, tightly curled hair.

Libyans and Asiatics: lighter skin tones, different dress and hairstyles.

These visuals demonstrate a clear awareness of ethnic diversity, and show Egyptians had a unique identity, separate from other African peoples.

📚 Source:

Wilkinson, R.H. (1994). Symbol and Magic in Egyptian Art. Thames & Hudson.

---

5. Cultural Identity of the Ancient Egyptians

Ancient Egyptians identified themselves as "Remetj" (the people), and their land as "Kemet" (the Black Land – referring to the rich soil of the Nile, not skin color).

Pride in Egyptian identity was cultural and geographic, not racial.

Egypt developed in North Africa, and while it interacted with Nubia and other southern civilizations, its cultural heartland was always in the Nile Delta and Valley.

📚 Source:

Kemp, B. (2005). Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization. Routledge.

Trigger, B.G. (1994). Paradigms in Egyptian Archaeology.

---

Why Is This Theory Popular?

As a reaction to historical erasure and marginalization of African contributions.

Egypt’s global status as a symbol of ancient greatness makes it politically attractive.

Lack of access to academic research in some communities allows myths to spread unchecked.

---

Egypt’s Real Identity

Egypt was neither “white” nor “black” by modern definitions—it was a multi-ethnic, North African civilization with Mediterranean and African ties.

Its uniqueness lies in its synthesis of geography, innovation, and spiritual continuity—not in race.

---

Conclusion

The idea that ancient Egypt was a Sub-Saharan African civilization is not supported by anthropology, genetics, linguistics, or archaeology.

However, dismissing the theory should not ignore the valid demand for historical inclusion. We must distinguish between emotional ownership and scientific truth.

Egypt belongs to humanity, but its identity was distinct—neither West African, nor European, but proudly Egyptian.

---

References

1. Schuenemann, V. J. et al. (2017). Nature Communications.

2. Zakrzewski, S.R. (2007). American Journal of Physical Anthropology.

3. Kemp, Barry. (2005). Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization.

4. Diakonoff, I. M. (1981). Afroasiatic Languages.

5. Wilkinson, R.H. (1994). Symbol and Magic in Egyptian Art.

6. Trigger, B.G. (1994). Paradigms