Silesian:Why bother testing him and not release the results in an official/peer reviewed paper? Maybe he is not even R1b, that is speculation, he maybe of a different ydna group altogether, maybe an Afrocentrist dream come true, why deny them some joy. Of course they will have to do a 180 with all the negative profiling about his looks and health.
Are you feeling quite all right? Why am I to blame if the results weren't released? Of course they should be released. What do I have to do with Afrocentrists? I barely know who they are. Plus, Ramses already carries an African lineage, doesn't he? What's the big deal?
They were not able to defeat the Hittites with their improved chariots, and according to you one of the 19 dynasty famed Pharoahs. What more did they need.
I think you need to go on Wiki and get a simple timeline of Egyptian history. It's not "according to me"; it's according to history and archaeology.
Tut and Akhenaten were members of the 18th dynasty, yes? That dynasty was founded by Ahmose I, who finished the work of EXPELLING the Hyksos. That's why I implied it would be very ironic if this dynasty carried an R1b y presumably from the Hyksos. Get it now? It was the 15th, 16th and 17th dynasties, the Third Intermediate period, which were contemporary with the Hyksos. Of course, there's a dispute as to whether Thutmose I, who continued the dynasty, was actually a male line descendant of Ahmose I. I suppose he could have been descended from some Delta left over male line of ultimate Hyksos origin. Or, if Tut was indeed R1b, maybe it had moved down into Egypt hundreds of years before. These things are murky, which is why I don't get too worked up about them.
As for chariots, the earliest Egyptian improvements to chariots of which I'm aware took place around 1500 BC, which would be the beginning of the 18th dynasty. There were six excellent specimens in the tomb of Tutankhamen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariotry_in_ancient_Egypt
They continued to improve them until they were the marvels used by Ramses II, of a totally different dynasty, in the epic battle of Kadesh in 1274 BC against the Hittites, who could have had nothing to do with the ancestry of the 18th dynasty, since it was centuries before. As I already said, the y of one of these subsequent pharaohs is "E", and may be a Sub-Saharan "E".
As to who won the Battle of Kadesh, it depends upon whom you believe, or whose account you believe, but at worst, from the Egyptian perspectivem it was a draw, if not the victory they claimed. Since I don't look at history and pick winners or losers based on some agenda, I don't care who won or lost. Why would I care? I'm not Egyptian or Hittite.
Some things seem to be part of the consensus however.
"
The Hittites, who believed their enemies to be totally routed, had stopped to plunder the Egyptian camp and, in doing so, became easy targets for Ramesses' counterattack. Ramesses' action was successful in driving the looters back towards the Orontes river and away from the Egyptian camp,[32] while in the ensuing pursuit, the heavier Hittite chariots were easily overtaken and dispatched by the lighter, faster, Egyptian chariots.[13]"
So, yes, their chariots were better.
Still you provide no Afro-Asiatic root associated with the wheels and wagons and chariots word for a very basic technology.
For goodness' sakes, you're going to go back to the invention of the wheel? That's way before the period you started discussing. Can we focus here? Use the search engine. All the latest research indicates that the wheel was invented either in the Near East or "Old Europe". When are you people going to admit that nothing is original to the steppe except the domestication of the horse and perhaps the spoked wheel all the way over in Sintashta. If you want to really get into the chariots you should read up about the role the Mitanni played in all of this. As to the steppe people, in the beginning they got everything from other people with whom they came into contact: herding and the animals to herd, farming, metallurgy, everything, maybe even the damn kurgans. There's just no dispute about these things any longer. Why is that so terrible? The Japanese have borrowed almost everything too and done quite well off it.
I don't see any Egyptian type pyramids or the technology or science that was used to make them anywhere but Egypt. If you know let us in on it.
Don't be childish: different points for tools spread, different domesticates, flora and fauna, and techniques to farm them spread, different firing techniques and glazes for pottery spread, different forms for metallurgy, including furnace technology, spread, different and better sword making techniques spread, and yes, different improvements for chariots spread. It became like an ancient version of the arms war. If you're going to argue about something like this, you have to have done the reading required.
You forgot about the fine examples found in United Nations of their contribution. That's okay I doubt you know what they are.
Getting nasty now about other ethnicities? I don't think that's such a good idea. You really want to compare what your people have contributed of such great import to European or world civilization in the last 5000 years, after this mass inflow of Indo-European genes, compared to the total achievements of the Egyptians? You sure you want to go down that road? It also never makes sense to me to be casting stones at other people when every group has things of which to be ashamed.
Just more political-profiling and cultural-profiling. I think it would be nice to give the linguistic/culture/ tradition that allowed us to communicate and express our ideas to one another a brief mention. Modern Intellectual property laws are written in their language, legal laws are written in their language and peace treaties. Just show me one post, just one where you give your cultural appropriation of due recognition to the Germanic tribe called the Angles, or their customs and traditions.
This is just silly, Silesian. If by Angles you mean their partial descendants the English, I'm an avid admirer of a lot of things about English civilization. In fact, I've been accused of being a bit of an Anglophile. I'll just mention three of the most important.
One: I have profound respect for the tradition of English jurisprudence and law in particular, the common law tradition, the jury system, and on and on. I could wax prolific about it.
Two: it is to the English in great part, but not only, that we owe the modern development of democracy and I am profoundly grateful for it. I could wax prolific about that as well, starting with the Magna Carta, moving all the way through things like the Glorious Revolution etc. etc.
Three: I think English literature is one of the most important contributions of any country to world culture.
If you're talking about things from the culture of the Angles and Saxons specifically, like trial by battle, or fire, or the death of a Celt being worth less money than the death of a Saxon or Angle, then no, I'm not a fan. You can't possibly think there's any comparison in terms of their achievements and those of people like the ancient Egyptians? It's ludicrous. I will grant you, of course, that Alfred's reign was of importance.
That should do, given this is totally off-topic.
You know, I never start this ethnic bashing stuff, and, in fact, I find it abhorrent. If there is anything of which I'm sure, it's that there are good and bad, intelligent and stupid, people in every ethnic group, and I have friends, good friends in most, including yours. However, people who dish it out should be willing to take it. I know I'm not Egyptian, but since we don't have any here I'll take it upon myself to even the playing field. I don't believe in turning the other cheek about this or anything else. I believe in hitting back hard so the bullies think better of it next time. Don't degrade or hold other groups up to ridicule and it won't be done to you.
