Egyptian Mythology

Bulgarian. French. MagyarSerbian. Spanish.

We all know that Egypt is located in Africa, but DNA research tells us that at least the first Egyptian dynasties were ruled by Europeans. We assume that the last dynasty had a black pharao, and we know that in the few dynasties before that the royalty struggled to find royal mates. They even preferred to import princes and princesses from enemy kingdoms, rather than marry one from their own population. In fact, they even preferred to marry their own siblings, rather than marry anyone from the ordinary Egyptian population. We also know that finally, when they ran out of ‘good marriage material’ the Egyptian kingdom fell (during the black dynasty).

Egyptian Queen Nerfertiti


The Egypt we know today is of course different from Ancient Egypt. First the Africans (blacks) took over, then the Greeks conquerred the falling Ancient Egypt (and as we know, the amazingly beautiful Cleopatra of Ancient Egypt was of Greek origin), then the Romans took over, and then the Arabs took over, as late as in the 7th century. Today’s Egyptians are probably a mix of all these groups: Ancient Egyptians, Africans, Greeks, Romans, Arabs and slaves of all ‘nearby’ races.

The Egyptian mythology though, is of course of European origin, and is therefore in accordance with the other European mythologies – all of them, from Ireland to India. Not only that: it is one of the oldest European mythologies, and can because of that be seen by us Europeans as one of the most valuable ones.


PS. There is a hypothesis, stating that the last of the eventually rather racially mixed lower nobility and less racially mixed upper nobility left Egypt for Ireland, and was assimilated by the natives there, and that would of course explain the presence of so much red and other dark hair in Ireland and the rest of the British Isles, and also the many myths about snakes in Ireland (there are no snakes in Ireland), but whether or not this is true is still unknown.  

A source (L. A. Waddell’s, The Makers of Civilisation) supporting what I say here, and adding so much more as well:

(1). The Makers of Civilization in Race & History. (Title and preliminary pages).

(2). The Makers of Civilization in Race & History. (Page. 1-150).

(3). The Makers of Civilization in Race & History. (Page. 151-300).

(4). The Makers of Civilization in Race & History. (Page. 301-450).

(5). The Makers of Civilization in Race & History. (Page. 451-600).

(6). The Makers of Civilization in Race & History. (Page. 601-608).

(7). The Makers of Civiliszation in Race & History. (Index).



95 thoughts on “Egyptian Mythology

  1. Pingback: Egyiptomi mitológia | Magyar Thulean Perspective

  2. Pingback: La mythologie Égyptienne | Thulean Perspective Français

  3. Pingback: Египетската Митология | Езичество

  4. NB! Source added in post! (Entire book by L. A. Waddell’s, The Makers of Civilisation, in PDF format)

  5. In traditional Irish stories, the Milesians were a band of Iberians who arrived in Co.Kerry in South-West Ireland in ancient times, and are considered the ancestors of the Gaels. These stories were written down by Christian monks who confused the Tuath Dé Danann (the fairies, the people who dwell in the burial mound) for a race of people who lived in Ireland before the Milesians arrived. Anyway, the interesting thing is that their leader Míl was married to Scotia, the daughter of the Egyptian Pharaoh. Her tomb is near Tralee in Co. Kerry. It is supposedly because of her that the Irish became known as “Scots”.

  6. ”The Egyptian mythology though, is of course of European origin, and is therefore in accordance with the other European mythologies – all of them, from Ireland to India. Not only that: it is one of the oldest European mythologies, and can because of that be seen by us Europeans as one of the most valuable ones.” – I’ve been reading a lot of comparative mythology, some Dumezil, some Vodskov, but never about Egyptian mythology being european. Can you give some links or litterature suggestions?

    ”There is a hypothesis, stating that the last of the eventually rather racially mixed lower nobility and less racially mixed upper nobility left Egypt for Ireland, and was assimilated by the natives there, and that would of course explain the presence of so much red and other dark hair in Ireland and the rest of the British Isleas, and also the many myths about snakes in Ireland (there are no snakes in Ireland), but whether or not this is true is still unknown.” – Again very interesting! Can you refer to some link or litterature?

    • First you have the claim that Greek mythology is a ‘rip’off’ of Egyptian mythology, which as I see it only means they had the same mythology to start with (because they had the same European origin).

      Then you have the rather obvious similarity between (other?) European mythologies and Ancient Egyptian mythology. Osiris-Horus-Isis being the most obvious, I guess (Sky God-Sun Child-Earth Goddess).

      You can also see the pyramids as a form of burial mounds, found all over Europe.

      Then you have the Egyptian book of the dead, explaining the typical European initiation rite (of rebirth).

      I can not recall any sources regarding the Irish-Egyptians hypothesis, but I think you will be able to find some if you Google it. See also my extended answer to Galloglach further down here.

  7. Queen Thuya, Tutankhamon’s great grandmother:

    The fascinating thing is, the Egyptians did exactly the same thing we are doing today: they imported cheap labour from the “third world” to do the dirty work for them. That is exactly the argument of today’s pro-immigration activists – they say we *need* this labour in order to run our society. History, as we all know, repeats itself.

  8. What confuses me a bit is that according to Wikipedia ancient Egyptian was a subgroup of the afroasian language family, another subgroup of the afroasian languages are the semitic languages…

    • 1. Maybe that only apply to the last dynasties (= ‘blacks’).
      2. Languages doesn’t matter much. E. g. the ‘blacks’ of America speak a Germanic language, and are thus per definition ‘Germanic’…. Some times we speak other languages than we logically should speak.
      3. Hieroglyphs is a sign language, so I don’t think you can easily link it to a language just like that.
      4. Coptic is an Afro-Asiatic language, but it is not Semitic.

    • What if the semites took the “afroasian” language from the Egyptians and by time it evolved into the semitic languages of today?

  9. Pingback: Mitología egipcia | Hermandad Pagana

  10. Pingback: Египатска Митологија | The Call of Thule

  11. Over the years – on many forums, blogs, books and websites – I’ve seen Germanics calling Slavs impure, Slavs calling Meds impure, Spaniards calling Italians impure, Italians calling Spaniards impure, Nordics calling Finns impure, Celts calling Greeks impure, and Nordics calling Celts impure.

    I just don’t see the use in this habit that Europeans have of proclaiming their group’s (or own individual) superiority. I’ve known full-blooded Celts who look Nordic, full-blooded Scandinavians who don’t look Nordic, full-blooded Slavs who look Gaellic… and so on. And that doesn’t mean they don’t have a Moor 15 generations back in their bloodline (they probably don’t, but there’s a tiny possibility).

    We can search for the historic truth about race – fine – but there will always be details uncovered, and no assumptions about a European individual or nation will ever be able to account for the passage of time.

    That said, the issue of Egypt is fascinating. It is also worth mentioning that Snorri Sturluson, compiler of the Prose Edda, believed Thor to have come from Troy.

    • Actually, Snorri probably knew perfectly well that Troy is a name for the realm of death.

      See my picture: the Trojan fortress (an image of the burial mound).

      • “Near the earth’s centre was made that goodliest of homes and haunts that ever have been, which is called Troy, even that which we call Turkland […] One king among them was called Múnón or Mennón; and he was wedded to the daughter of the High King Priam, her who was called Tróán; they had a child named Trór, whom we call Thor.”
        (Brodeur translation)

        This is usually put down to Sturluson’s own Christianity and thus his Eastern-centric view of civilisation.

        • Yes I know — and that is certainly correct. However, I think he knew perfectly well that Troy was actually the burial mound/realm of the dead.

          There is no ‘historical’ Troy. They just found some town they think is the one, or perhaps the myth simply used a real world location as an example, in a myth that was purely metaphysical.

          • I don’t necessarily agree with Sturluson’s hypothesis, and I would rather think that he is referring to the metaphysical ‘Troy’. But if he is talking literally, then his hypothesis is, objectively speaking, (as far as I know) no less valid than the hypothesis you mentioned about the last Pharoah(s) relocating to Ireland.

      • On the topic of ”Troy”..What are your thoughts then on the fact that Emperor Augustus decided to rewrite the origins of Rome to a version in wich Rome was founded by Aeneas who had escaped the burning of ”Troy”?

    • Steed that’s a sharp observation. Searching for truth and thinking you’ve found it doesn’t necessarily mean anything. People are all too happy to find “truths” that appeal to their needs and wants(not based in reality or even close).

      • The truth is often subjective, considering that we all perceive reality in a different way (we all have different priorities and spiritual views of life). I know it’s Marxist to say “all truth is relative”, and I’m not saying that. But as humans we are only privy to varying amounts of ‘the big picture’. None of can hope to ever know the truth about everything. What matters is that we seek it with an honest heart, soul and mind – that’s what separates many of us from the masses.

        • Precisely. Its all mostly a perception. This is important to remind yourself of on a daily basis. I agree, the honest heart, soul and mind separates us.

      • Groupthink facilitates that people will always believe what they want to believe and will usually only go to the sources that reinforces what they already think. To them, truth is not always rooted in reality. The truth is what people want it to be. No matter what is really true or how much evidence is presented to them, they will never believe it, even if it is completely palpable to the point of being able to observe and experience it directly (i.e. being able to witness it with their own eyes). The truth is all about personal perception.

  12. Interestingly, there are also red-headed populations in central Russia. That is the other really strong red-head area. Wonder what’s going on here…

    • On the topic of red hair, a friend of mine who used to breed Angus cows noted how 1/300 of them were born red-heads in a group that were all the average black furred Angus cows. Every single one of the red-headed cows also had blue eyes, white skin, freckles, and a much more friendly disposition. Over time they bred for the red-haired Angus as they were much less dangerous to be around, now 1 in 300 are born Albino and they die from too much exposure to the sun.

      I don’t know what comparisons to humans can be made here but it’s all very interesting. The genes that carried the red-hair, white skin, freckles, blue eyes, and friendly disposition were either one in the same or always went together.

        • To add some further information as I remembered it, my friend also mentioned how all Angus cows in the US share a single ancestor. This is because there was a cow born without horns and as that was seen as a desired trait that cow and his offspring were used across the US for breeding.

          It’s thought that the red gene is recessive, I just find it interesting that it’s re-emergence is as such and so comparable to the emergence of albinism within the herd. I wonder if it is also a recessive gene that various animals share from a time where it may have been dominant? Perhaps a time where sunlight was weak/blocked out?

          To a degree I’m mainly curious as I would like to know if there is any truth to the theory I proposed a year ago here. Then again my same friend who talked about the cows assured me that ‘junk DNA is most certainly junk.’ He also gave me a lecture on how much more complex the DNA of most living creatures are over a bacteria. Comparing it to computer code a simple organism will have a ‘line of code’ for a specific action everywhere it is needed whereas a more complex organism will have a line that basically says ‘reference XYZ’ which keeps the genetic code far less cluttered.

          • I agree. It makes most sense that recessive genes are just “reserve” genes that will be dominant when the appropriate conditions arise to make the population group prefer them (or those individuals will just be the ones who survive, making them dominant).

            DNA is not really like computer code. People keep trying to compare humans to computers (like the brain, DNA, etc), and as a computer engineer, I just find it amusing. People and computers could not be more different. The systems are arranged completely differently. In the case of DNA, there are sections of it that preform certain chemical-machenical tasks, which result in certain traits (usually the creation of certain proteins), but it is also interlinked with other sections, such that one part is not independent from the other. They combine and preform more secondary and tertiary results, in a very complex manner that is not fully understood. Computer programs run specific instructions into a CPU (usually limited to below ~100 different instructions). That small set of instructions is then grouped into chunks that perform specific tasks that the programmer wants (called abstraction). The CPU’s activities in the end are very primitive, whereas the DNA’s activities are much more specific (from what I know). You can think of computer code as abstractions of very simple tasks. And DNA as “code” that builds other things that sometimes build other things. I don’t think those two systems are very similar.

            As for traits randomly appearing in populations, I think you are right. The idea that macro-evolutionary theories propose is a DNA replication error process where the random errors in the copying of DNA chains eventually happens upon a useful DNA change, which might randomly be useful to the organism for survival (then further reproduction). (Like the well-known idea “that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type a given text”). This sounds very clever, except that it is mathematically impossible. There has not been anywhere near enough time between the changes in the organisms to attribute it to random DNA mutations. If you’d like to read the mathematical proof to this, look at this paper: I was going to do the calculations myself, but it seems someone beat me to it (a computer scientist by the way, way back in the 60’s!) Biologists aren’t very mathematically inclined and just don’t realize or understand this.

      • I think the comparison can be made to humans here. One advantage to having been in a multicultural environment is that I have observed all the varieties of races and their dispositions, and I don’t think you need to be too sharp to recognize them. Maybe just not brainwashed. And of course people still act out the truth much of the time whether they see it or not.

        Fair people can be made aggressive while still retaining their fairness in character, though. I’ve observed many white kids adapting to black behaviour when they hang out in multicultural crowds. It is possible for fair features to dominate though. You can dominate with kindness and strength. You have to be willing to back up your kindness with active aggressiveness though. So fair cows might lack some of this 🙂

        • I agree Adalwolf. That is probably one of the few good points in a multicultural environment. As I myself have grown up in this…I have always been curious to this distinction between certain “looks” and “actions”. Its also just fun playing a guessing game on where someone is from and finding out you aren’t too far off by simply observing their Physiognomies in relation. Then you can speculate further and come up with some deeper theories on humans and their behavior. Endlessly fascinating to me.

  13. I find it very interesting that the first ancient society of Egypt was a culture that worshiped the sky around our Earth. They had huge seafaring ships and believed if they were mummified in them, they would sail to the after life and into eternity. Similar to Viking ideology of the after life. I also notice a possible correlation between ancient Egyptians and Meso-American astronomy culture and pyramids; as well as Roman, Greek, and European Paganism/Shamanism . I was already aware of the neanderthal theory. This is, in fact, where our fair skin, hair, and problem solving brains came from. When our clothed prehistoric ancestors hunted epic beasts and had to resort to sacrifice, cannibalizing the dead, and ancient knowledge to survive the Ice Age. Of course Civilization itself and the Viking Age resulted with those who descended on the land. There is a theory that the neanderthal man was the main aggressor in these times and not the frail Africans. Alas, the religion of the last Africanized Egyptians is the mother religion of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. What will our fate hold? Will we meet again in the halls of our fathers?

  14. I’ve also been very interested in this subject for some time now. Going on forums and reading comments by afrocentrists can be quite frustrating. Why do you think Zahi Hawass tried to suppress the DNA test results? I know he had been quoted as saying something to the effect of “Ancient Egyptians were definitely not black”. Was he afraid of the backlash or was he told not to release it?

  15. Avez vous vu cette nouvelle thėorie faite par un Français au sujet de l’architecture interne de la pyramide de khéops?
    Voici le lien vers l ‘une ses vidéos
    Une serrure hydraulique dans la pyramide de Kheop… :

    Bien à vous.

  16. I’ve been fascinated by ancient Egypt since I was a child, likely a by product of horror films and an overactive imagination, but as well in the same sense that everyone else finds it to be interesting.
    Lately I’ve been wondering like others here about the Sphinx and it’s true origins, as the head has clearly been ‘renovated’ so to speak.

    Perhaps it was something like this originally? Who knows.

  17. I so find it puzzling that akhenaten appears to have large negroid type lips in most of the statues of him. If Tut is European, how does this work. Perhaps they are wrong to say that Akhenaten is his father?

    • Maybe his statue was just made by those of the later dynasties, and they wanted him to look more like them.

      • some claim he had some medical condition explaining his weird appearance, given the generally unorthodox nature of his reign maybe his sculpture was just unusually stylised…

    • Akhenaten has a very strange head. It’s not black racially. I don’t know what it is. It is very long, like some sort of very old Neanderthal hybridization.

      • He had an elongated skull, as did Nefertiti, and practically every other royal of the ancient egyptian dynasties — except the last. Those they call ‘artificially bound’. There’s evidence suggesting that the Neanderthal man along with other known hominids such as the Homo Sapiens and the Denisovan wasn’t alone, but shared the planet with a ruling class of mega-skulled social manipulators, people that walk among as to this day. Common among royals, banksters, and politicians… These people generally [except if hybrids] lack the occipital mass associated with the Neanderthal man, but tend to have massively enlarged parietal lobes.

        (And then there’s always the hot potatoe of the Starchild — of course. Another hominid? Who knows…)

        • And the coneheads of Peru. I don’t see how artificially binding heads can make them BIGGER. I understand making them deformed, but how does restricting their growth in certain directions during development INCREASE their overall cranial volume. Oh, and they were found with red hair.

    • He carries european haplogoroup his forebears were western european he is probably mixed or mulato.

  18. Within the past few years, not only have I been told, however, also have, for myself, read that many Iberians and northwestern Celts and Anglos (Irish and Englishmen) possess DNA from King Tutenkhamen. Apparently, the Celts, as a biological entity, originated in what is today northwestern Spain and migrated to Ireland a tad over 3.000 years ago, was it? Outside of my Germanic and Iberian blood, I have ancestors from Galicia who are both genetically and culturally Celtic, so taking into account both the Iberian and Celtic blood, it’s perhaps likely that I possess a considerable volume of ancient “Egyptian” blood if this analysis holds any weight.

    Nevertheless, I was wondering as to why you incorporated an Egyptian element into Forebears, Vårg 🙂

      • Have you ever heard of Ron McVan, Vårg? He has written a few books on our Germanic- Norse ancient ancestral path despite being Celtic. In one of his literary works(?), he had written therefor an article, entitled the Black Sun and therein, he refers to the Egyptian mythos and the dog star Sirius, likely, being our true location of origin. It, verily, had me thinking.. and still does. After all, we don’t even resemble the creatures who we call animals in the slightest iota. Then again, we don’t resemble Congoids either yet we share this once pristine and beautiful earth therewith. Still, it’s something to ponder upon in one’s spare time. Let me know if you can read the document. file:///C:/Users/Emilio/Desktop/Der%20Schwarze%20Sonne%20by%20Ron%20McVan%20HTML.html

        • Crap. Nevermind the file. I derived it from Facebook (how I despise that word alone) and, consequently, you won’t be able to read it. Nevertheless, your wife’s intelligence, knowledge, and determination to learn and pass on to our descendants the old wisdom and lost knowledge is a ray of hope and tranquility for our peoples. You’re lucky to have a wife like her as here in the USSA, attempting to even hold a conversation with even the “most intelligent” types is a migraine and a half. Thankfully, I have had the experience of conversing with a few European women and I must state that they were very pleasant and truly intelligent and very knowledgeable people. Of course, I intend on departing from this open Judeo- Christian sewer for Pagan Mother Europe as soon as possible. Besides my aging parents and only living grandfather (the only three individuals who I care about), I have no one to leave behind. Just the scum, my brother and extended family included.

    • I dont buy this. Why of all places they had to go that far away, they had Italy, Greece… also, is the other way around, that haplogroup (R1b) was already in the British Isles since the Neolithic, long before Egypt. This haplogroup was extended pretty much evenly, stemming from the Eastern European steppe and beyond. All of this sounds like the “British Israelism” christians and CI, these stories of the european royals being descended of the house of David.etc. The most dominant type is “J” both in the middle east and N. Africa.

        • Yes, but that is what the study is about, R1b was also present down there but it was the minority. I think when comes to certain studies haplogroups come handy.

          • I believe it is wrong to just dismiss haplogroups altogether Varg. Small pieces of a puzzle help put the pieces together. Many times what is considered wrong may mean you are unable to put that piece into perspective or find where it fits into the big picture. This is the main problem with A LOT of modern day scientists, one of the many.

      • One may not need a scientific explanation for this, but instead a human one. In Irish myths various kingdoms and empires in the east etc are mentioned e.g. Persia which is surprising because we’re led to believe that ancient people couldn’t have travelled such distances. If the ancient Irish knew about Persia surely they knew about Egypt and vice versa. On top of this a local historian I know here in Ireland has told me there was a lot more trade etc in the ancient world. This hypothesis seems certainly plausible and Ireland is far enough away and safe if the lesser races were percieved as a threat; and, being a island with cliffs and mountains along the coast, it is a highly strategic spot.

      • It’s not my hypothesis, I just mention it, and from what I know of it it makes sense.

        We know that the Vandals left what is today Poland, went through Germany, France, Iberia, Northern Africa and ended up in Sardinia and other Mediterranean Isles. Now why would they, if they could just go to Friesland, to the Baltics, to Switzerland or whatever? Because things are not that easy. Migrating tribes don’t always settle right next to where they used to live. In fact: hardly any migrating people ever did! Instead they tend to wander off far and wide.

        The Ancient Egyptian lower and upper nobility, or just some of them for that sake, seem to have left Egypt, and ended up in Ireland. Why is that so hard to accept as a feasible hypothesis? This would e. g. explain some things that nothing else can explain: why is there so many with red hair in the British Isles, and why are there snakes in the Irish mythology, when there are no snakes in Ireland.

        If haplogroup R1b means so much to you, let me explain one thing: it only proves that one single individual from that group has genetically influenced the peoples you talk about. Yes: one single individual. All the others of those peoples might in fact come from other haplogroups.

        Further, you are not correct when you state that haplogroups R1b was extended pretty much evenly, stemming from Eastern Europe and beyond. That is not correct, as shown by the images in this post: Haplogroup R1b is found mainly in the areas we call “Celtic”.

        Further, we know that DNA samples prove that the Ancient Egyptian royals were genetically speaking Western European (as in Irish, Scottish, English, French, etc.).

        So, you can disbelieve this if you want to, fine, but to compare this to “British Israelism” is just absurd, unfair and outright dishonest. There is no evidence whatsoever supporting the “British Israelism” hypothesis, but there are hard facts (e. g. DNA tests) supporting this hypothesis, in addition to circumstantial evidence (e. g. red hair, snake myths).

        And I can add that I don’t have a dog in this fight. I don’t care either way, if this hypothesis holds water or not, but it does make sense and it is supported by evidence.

        • I know is not yours Varg. I don’t think it holds too much water at all to be honest. The haplogroups means that a whole group of people got there from somewhere (R1b) and spread their own, that’s why I-M170 is mostly common in Scandinavia, they were shielded from this huge migration. I honestly think redhair has nothing to do with some egyptians going there…sorry. I don’t believe a mongrelized egyptian dinasty went to Ireland for whatever reasons. There’s also some evidence that even Phoenician with their ships went as far as London and other places and built cities, and that is also told by the CI people. Genetics and populations simply disprove that.

          • How does genetics disprove that when DNA tests show that the Ancient Egyptian royals where Western Europeans?

            Haplogroups means that one male individual has given his ‘haplogroup’ to his sons, who then again gave it to their sons, etc.

            If one single male from another race mixed into a tribe and had many sons with women of the tribe he mixed into, and they had many sons, etc. it means that the entire group coming from these sons will belong to his haplogroup.

            So haplogroups says nothing about race, save that ONE SINGLE male from a certain group must have a at one point been mixed into the group.

            Then we can turn the thing, and say that a tribe replaces ALL their women with women of another race, and then their children did the same, and then their children, etc. for 100 generations, but still their haplogroup will not change. The entire race will be completely different, but the haplogroup will NOT change! See?

            So, haplogroups are pretty much useless to determine anything at all, save to establish as a fact that one single male from the talked about haplogroup at some point was married into the group and had sons.

            Again you mud this discussion by talking about the CI hypothesis, as if this was the same. It is not. Come on!

            Btw: The name of the god Horus in Ancient Egyptian: “Heru-khesbetch-ar-ti”, and this means “The Blue-Eyed God”. Likewise, Buddha is always portrayed as having blue eyes. Why? Because these cultures were originally European.

            ONLY the first individual need to have been o

            • PS. Sorry, i though you talked about Egyptians there, with genetics disproving the connection, but you obviously talked about Phoenicians.

              • Mr Vikernes, why do you take random portrayals of “Eastern” deities/figures that confirm your bias (e.g. random depictions of blue eyes, which are both rare and questionable) and ignore the massive abundance of surviving archaeological evidence in thousands of clay tablets, ancient reliefs, statues and general references (including statues) depicting a morphology that defies your claims?

                Why did you not approve my first post? I hope that you’ve not been negatively influenced by the media’s suppression of your voice and chosen to do the same to people wishing to engage in discussion. As with my unpublished post, I wish to ask again – why do you feel the need to claim every innovative pocket of human history to fit a modern context? I am European, and proud, and I will not submit to Zionist mentality and attempt to claim the intellectual rights of other cultures.

                Europeans achieved a lot in Europe, enough to make us all proud and reject cultural Marxism. But what I see here is a desperate attempt to put Europeans everywhere on the world map at every influential point in history. In my time reading various viewpoints from various people (all with extremely questionable references and logic), I’ve seen Europeans put in India, Phoenicia proper and Carthage (with some claims of Hannibal being NORDIC (???)), Sumeria, Egypt, Persia, Babylon, and many others.

                With the logic you and others present, this European was omnipotent and like a chameleon. Looking blonde with blue eyes, but tricking the relief carvers of the day into depicting them with obviously Semitic/Hamitic looks? Do you know what also explains blue eyes in Persia, much better than a completely disproven Aryan invasion? A successful war, waged by the Greeks, that conquered every region in the Middle East, and a subsequent mixing of race by some Greeks and locals in occupied areas. Rome did the same. And Egypt was among the areas conquered by those 2 mighty European empires.

                So, we have literally thousands of pieces of evidence, available for public viewing, suggesting Semitic civilisations in the Middle East, and Hamitic African civilisations in North Africa, plus the conquering by Rome and Greece to inject some blue eyes into the mix. Also consider the maritime empire of the Phoenicians which bridged 3 continents. Rome and Greece were paddling in the local baby pool while Phoenicians built a continent on the sea. Blue eyes are nice, it’s not hard to give them to a God, and Phoenicians traveled enough to see many blue eyes, and so did the Egyptians.

                Regarding Phoenicians building as far as Western Europe, look up Brito-Phoenician temples that depicted the Sun Priestess Bel with her Swastika dress. The earliest known Swastika carving is at Baalbak in Lebanon.

                Please do publish my posts, because I would surely like to know what you have to say in rebuttal.

                • First of all: you address me with respect. This is my blog, and you are just a guest here, and I am your host. If you talk more shit to me, then I tell you to fuck off and delete all your posts. Get it?

                  Further, I have no special need to portray ‘Eastern’ deities/figures as European, but the truth is that e. g. Buddha is always said to have had blue eyes, and Horus was called — in Antiquity — “Horus the Blue-Eyed”. That is long before any Greeks or Macedonians arrived there. Further, DNA samples of the mummies in Egypt states clearly that they are of Western European origin. So you can take all the figurines and clay paintings and whatever you have, of Semitic of Hamitic looking people, and it doesn’t mean anything — save that obviously those who came later made such images. Just like all the images made in Phrygia after the Turkish invasion are of TURKS. So, will you claim that the Phrygians were Turks then? Using your (lack of) logic, you should: there are thousands, if not millions, of images from Phrygia, since the Middle Ages, showing that the Phrygians looked like Turks!

                  You are European? Can you prove that? A depressingly large part of the Italian people today has genetically speaking more in common with Arabs (and Jews…) than they do with other Europeans. So, how about that? Are you European, or do you just have an Italian passport?

                  Oh! So you have seen Europeans ‘put’ in India? And in Persia? And Sumeria? And Egypt? Yes, perhaps because there were Europeans there before. I know science is not always to be trusted, but at least the scientists tell us that Egyptians today try to hide the fact that DNA samples of the mummies show that they were Europeans. So why should I not think they were? Do you think Horus The Blue-Eyed was an African?

                  What Aryan invasion are you talking about?

                  You are aware that the Scythians were Europeans, right?

                  I have no idea why you are talking about Phoenicia to me.

                  No, the earliest ‘Swastika’ carvings are to my knowledge from Ukraine, and they are some 10,000 years old. Most of the Baalbek site was built by Romans, by the way. “Romans” as in “not even close to 10,000 years ago”. In any case: what is your point here?

                  And with all this said: what is your problem? What is it you want? You have a problem with others seeing obvious links to Europeans outside of geographical Europe, and wanting to investigate this? Sure, the peoples living there are no longer European (but nor is all the Italian people…), but so what? Most people living in London are not Europeans, so you think we should stop linking any archaeological finds from that area to Europeans from now on?

                  Do you dislike the Native American myths about blonde, blue-eyed and white people coming and teaching them everything? Do you dislike the Ürümchi mummies, showing Viking-looking Nordics in Northern China? Do you dislike it when we find that EUROPEANS have been elsewhere than in geographical Europe?

          • PS. What concrete evidence is there that the Phoenicians went as far as London and built cities?

          • By the way: the Egyptian nobility left Egypt (for Ireland?) because Egypt turned into a desert, so there was no future for them there anymore. As you might know, Ancient Egypt (before turning into a desert) was forested.

            • Just a thought on why the Egyptians left Aegyptus.
              If the Europeans left the land of Egypt for Britain,it surely did not have to do with desertification,Europeans have lived in any habitat and bent it to our own use as we saw fit,the only reason I see,which is more than enough to have made the Egyptians leave northern Africa, was the mongrelization of the masses,when the Europeans were overwhelmed and about to be destroyed/exterminated by mixed individuals,Negros and Semites,they probably did not have any other chance,then they left it behind for the Negros,Egypt almost immediately fell to the hands of Assyrians and other middle-eastern European peoples of the time.

        • That puts the whole concept of St. Patrick getting rid of ‘all the snakes in Ireland’ into context. He simply eliminated those who were still telling the stories of old. :/

  19. Ha ha, I’m not sure wether its freaky or not. But you frequently post of things I just recently looked into or researched. Like just last night I was looking into this, and looking into Egyptian history again in general, and then you post this.

    Very intriguing.

        • This. The other day I was having a discussion with someone about morality in pre Christian Europe and just last night I was looking at articles of early Egyptian artwork and was thinking about how light skinned they were interpreted. You also notice that often their enemies were depicted as dark skinned.

      • I’ve noticed this too, never mentioned it until this point because it got so repetitive for me ha ha.

        I’ve read all of the articles on here including the comment sections, It mysteriously really does seem to happen with many others. I thought I was nuts (as always) for a bit until I witnessed others mention the same. Strange. Weird. And really cool.

  20. Oi! Today I was wondering about egyptian culture. Did Egyptians have similiar traditions as other European tribes? How similiar Egyptians and Europeans (talking about those europeans who lived in Europe) were?

  21. I do take issue with “the amazingly beautiful Cleopatra”; contemporary coinage depict her as rather broad-nosed and frumpy. But it’s interesting that the golden ages of Egyptian architecture were in its most distant past. All geological evidence points to a much older sphinx than archaeologists are willing to concede, indicating that the earliest version of the Sphinx may have been carved and dug from a large standing rock formation around the time that global chilling in the 10th century would’ve forced European humans into warmer regions. 😉

      • Forested with temperate grasslands, and with significant rainfall; Geologically, the weathering to the lower sphinx could only have been caused by rainfall which had not been present in Egypt for thousands of years before the earliest civilization archaeologists acknowledge. Another fascinating aspect of the Sphinx is its head: it is proportionally much smaller than the rest of the body, meaning both that kings likely would put their own faces on it whenever they attempted to restore or renovate the structure and that the original head was much larger and much more imposing. By 2500 BC, Khafra, who is incorrectly attributed with its construction, was only able do some restoration to the long buried monument.

  22. I have heard of the theory that some Egyptians left for Ireland and Britain. I believe someone else had brought it up in a previous post and mentioned the book “The Kingdom of the Ark”. I am curious, though, as to the source of your information about the first few dynasties being of European origin. I do not doubt your claim, though it would be interesting to know about the beginning of Egypt.

  23. well, yes… it is connected with the myths of ancient Galaecia, the sons of Mil (who defeated the Tuatha de Dannan in Ireland and forced Them to migrate to the Underworld) ; anyway, one of those sons Traveled to Egypt according to the legend; and returned married to a egyptian princess to Galaecia first and eventually to Ireland, Remember Ireland and North Iberia are DNA connected.
    great post!!

    • No I did not, and when I check the link to Facebook is there.

      Please try again.

      Let me know if it is still not there.


  24. Pingback: New TP post : Egyptian Mythology | Ancestral Cult

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s