5 ms·

The people who control Egypt now conquered it 1400 years ago and deliberately destroyed all the cultures that existed before them. Ancient treasures created by

The people who control Egypt now conquered it 1400 years ago and deliberately destroyed all the cultures that existed before them. Ancient treasures created by those predecessor cultures are not owned by the people who destroyed the culture they come from. They literally have no connection. Not culturally, and to a large degree not even genetically. It would be like saying that ancient Native American art is rightfully owned by the Kennedy family. So that's the moral side. On the practical side - what a terrible idea, to send irreplaceable ancient human cultural artifacts to be kept in such an unstable, low-trust society. They will not be good stewards. If we care at all about people in future centuries and millennia being able to see these objects, they need to be kept in the most stable countries.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
AlotOfReading 2y ago
There's significant population continuity between ancient and modern Egyptians. What's your purpose with even trying to make this argument?
- keenmaster 2y ago
  You are correct, and there are genetic studies to back you up. Modern day Egyptians have substantial continuity from ancient Egypt. Even in Ancient Egypt, there was trade and mixture with people from the Levant, but that didn’t massively change Egyptian genetics. As for your question, you probably suspect the answer - many people will discredit Middle Easterners (including North Africans if you consider them distinct), past and present, inadvertently or not, intentionally or unintentionally. They are the modern day scapegoats, and nothing good can come from scapegoats right? The biggest boogeyman in particular is the Arab. Muslim Egyptians, which are the vast majority of Egyptians, have a minority % of Arab ancestry. Oh God forbid, people of a shared faith but different ethnicity occasionally intermix. /s
  - philwelch 2y ago
    “Arab” is a cultural identity that is not entirely equivalent to genetics. During the mid-20th century, Egypt was a center of pan-Arab nationalism, and even briefly formed a “United Arab Republic” with Syria. That fell through pretty quickly, but even today Egypt calls itself an “Arab Republic”. This isn’t to claim that Egyptian people today universally consider themselves to be Arabs, but many of them apparently do. Regardless, I would still question the basic premise that contemporary Egyptians have some sort of exclusive claim to the archeological heritage of ancient Egypt. Almost every aspect of ancient Egyptian culture—its law, religion, written and spoken languages—have been long destroyed, forgotten, or replaced, in many cases deliberately. (Yes, I know Coptic is still used as a liturgical language by the Christian minority, but even they natively speak Arabic.) What exactly gives Egyptians an exclusive claim to an ancient culture that’s as foreign to them as anyone else—blood and soil? Maybe I’m being naive but I would prefer to treat the ancient world as the common heritage of all of humanity, with its preservation and study as a common good than to treat it as some sort of private ethno-nationalistic domain.
    - bluish29 2y ago
      > What exactly gives Egyptians an exclusive claim to an ancient culture that’s as foreign to them as anyone else—blood and soil? Extend this logic and then any country who want to consider inclusive claim on this matter to abolish inheritance law. Why do you have exclusive claim to your dead relative wealth? Is that because you maybe lived together or only blood? Or why only ancient world, let's treat the Modern world like that as well. And then let's distribute the wealth. > Maybe I’m being naive I do agree with you.
      - philwelch 2y ago
        The fact that you’re looking at this in terms of wealth and not even in terms of cultural heritage is revealing. Would you rather an Egyptian use the Rosetta Stone for building materials than a French scholar use it to decipher the hieroglyphs? > Or why only ancient world, let's treat the Modern world like that as well. And then let's distribute the wealth. This might be shocking to you, but not only am I opposed to blood-and-soil ethnonationalism, but also communism!

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

AlotOfReading 2y ago

There's significant population continuity between ancient and modern Egyptians. What's your purpose with even trying to make this argument?

keenmaster 2y ago
You are correct, and there are genetic studies to back you up. Modern day Egyptians have substantial continuity from ancient Egypt. Even in Ancient Egypt, there was trade and mixture with people from the Levant, but that didn’t massively change Egyptian genetics. As for your question, you probably suspect the answer - many people will discredit Middle Easterners (including North Africans if you consider them distinct), past and present, inadvertently or not, intentionally or unintentionally. They are the modern day scapegoats, and nothing good can come from scapegoats right? The biggest boogeyman in particular is the Arab. Muslim Egyptians, which are the vast majority of Egyptians, have a minority % of Arab ancestry. Oh God forbid, people of a shared faith but different ethnicity occasionally intermix. /s
- philwelch 2y ago
  “Arab” is a cultural identity that is not entirely equivalent to genetics. During the mid-20th century, Egypt was a center of pan-Arab nationalism, and even briefly formed a “United Arab Republic” with Syria. That fell through pretty quickly, but even today Egypt calls itself an “Arab Republic”. This isn’t to claim that Egyptian people today universally consider themselves to be Arabs, but many of them apparently do. Regardless, I would still question the basic premise that contemporary Egyptians have some sort of exclusive claim to the archeological heritage of ancient Egypt. Almost every aspect of ancient Egyptian culture—its law, religion, written and spoken languages—have been long destroyed, forgotten, or replaced, in many cases deliberately. (Yes, I know Coptic is still used as a liturgical language by the Christian minority, but even they natively speak Arabic.) What exactly gives Egyptians an exclusive claim to an ancient culture that’s as foreign to them as anyone else—blood and soil? Maybe I’m being naive but I would prefer to treat the ancient world as the common heritage of all of humanity, with its preservation and study as a common good than to treat it as some sort of private ethno-nationalistic domain.
  - bluish29 2y ago
    > What exactly gives Egyptians an exclusive claim to an ancient culture that’s as foreign to them as anyone else—blood and soil? Extend this logic and then any country who want to consider inclusive claim on this matter to abolish inheritance law. Why do you have exclusive claim to your dead relative wealth? Is that because you maybe lived together or only blood? Or why only ancient world, let's treat the Modern world like that as well. And then let's distribute the wealth. > Maybe I’m being naive I do agree with you.
    - philwelch 2y ago
      The fact that you’re looking at this in terms of wealth and not even in terms of cultural heritage is revealing. Would you rather an Egyptian use the Rosetta Stone for building materials than a French scholar use it to decipher the hieroglyphs? > Or why only ancient world, let's treat the Modern world like that as well. And then let's distribute the wealth. This might be shocking to you, but not only am I opposed to blood-and-soil ethnonationalism, but also communism!