Origin of the Nilotic peoples

The Nile Valley is dominated by the longest river in the world, stretching from the Great Lakes of East Africa, to the Ethiopian Highlands, and northward track into cultivated Egypt. Extending over 4,000 miles, the Nile River drains an area exceeding 1 million square miles and supported over 50 million people in the mid-1960s. The Nile Valley is home to a large variety of peoples and cultures, who vary widely in skin color, facial shape and other indices. This article looks at the peopling and origins of the Nile Valley populations and scholarly anthropological and archaeological views on their origins and movements. Scholars have used many different methods and concepts, and these are presented. It does not deal with popular controversies such as Neferti's skin color, or issues such as the influence of ancient Nile Valley populations on Greece, nor does it deal with the history of ancient Egypt. The reader is directed to other Wikipedia articles for those topics. Scholarly research and its different approaches, not popular speculation, is the main focus of this article, which falls within the anthropology group of Wikipedia articles.

Older approaches to complexity of Nile Valley populations
Many mainstream references allude to the racial complexity of North Africa and the Nile Valley, going back to pre-dynastic times. These complexities do not yield easily to modern racial controversies or catch-all terminologies like "Mediterranean," or "Middle Eastern." Earlier histories of Egyptian people as recently as the 1970s classified them as Caucasoid or "Hamites" who migrated to the Nile Valley, transmitting light and civilization to slower-witted negro tribes. (Wyatt MacGaffey, 'Concepts of race in the historiography of northeast Africa', Journal of African History). Subsequent approaches have used such vague terms as "Mediterranean" even though many peoples of North Africa such as Ethiopians or Somalians would fall into this category.

Newer approaches: The Egyptians as simply another Nile Valley population
A number of current mainstream scholars such as Bruce Trigger, and Frank Yurco eschew a racial approach, asserting that the previous archaeological and anthropological approaches were 'marred by a confusion of race, language, and culture and by an accompanying racism'. As to racial affinities of the people of northeast Africa, Yurco declares that all the peoples of the region are indigenous Africans and that arbitrary divisions into Negroid and Caucasoid stocks is misguided and misleading. To Yurco, the indigenous stocks are part of a continuum of physical variation in the Nile Valley. Just as Europeans are noted to vary between tall blonde Swedes, and shorter, darker Portuguese, or Basques with strikingly different blood types, so the Nile Valley populations are simply allowed similar variation. Other mainstream scholars such as Shomarka Keita applaud Trigger's and Yurco's approach but note the continued use of terms such as "Mediterranean" to incorporate the ancient Egyptians, and the continued use of classification schemes that screen out or deemphasize variability. (S.O.Y. KEITA, "Studies of Ancient Crania From Northern Africa) The general consensus is captured in the words of mainstream Egyptologist Frank Yurco:
 * "The peoples of Egypt, the Sudan, and much of East African Ethiopia and Somalia are now generally regarded as a Nilotic continuity, with widely ranging physical features (complexions light to dark, various hair and craniofacial types) but with powerful common cultural traits, including cattle pastoralist traditions (Trigger 1978; Bard, Snowden, this volume)."(F. Yurco "An Egyptological Review", 1996)

Standards of interpretation on mixed or variable types
The issue of "mixed" populations. As regards mixed populations, the issues of methodology remain, particularly in view of the makeup or variability of ancient stocks in that region. To what group for example, will a mixed race individual be credited? Variability within individual groups also involves the question of arbitrary assignment. The "Negroid" grouping in the Saharan - Nilotic - Sudanic triangle has ranged from extremely short Pygmy tribes, to slender, seven-foot tall groups with aquiline features and wavy hair. Are the latter "Caucasoid" (as asserted in older histories), of "mixed" race, or simply just another variant within the Nile Valley or Northeast African populations? Similar variability occurs in European populations, with generally longer head shapes (dolichocephaly) seen in Scandinavian and Mediterranean populations, and shorter ones (brachycephaly) seen in central and eastern Europeans. And yet it would be difficult to use such variation to biologically justify a rigid racial taxonomy for these European peoples. They are generally seen as simply variants within a larger European population. In Northeast Africa however standards are applied differently according to some mainstream scholars. Some older histories assert a "third race". A more specific reexamination of the early Nile Valley populations such as the Badari, show a range of types with the consensus showing hybrids or population variants. (Strouhal, E., 1971, ‘Evidence of the early penetration of Negroes into prehistoric Egypt’, Journal of African History, 12: 1-9)

Difficulties with fossil remains and shifting terminology. Some researchers have moved away from the terms "Negroid" or "Caucasoid" in favor of formulations like "Saharan-Nilotic" or Africoid (see Trigger above and Keita below), which emphasizes the direct local area and indigenous populations in the Nile Valley. "Saharan-Nilotic" would include the Sudan, with its well established physical and cultural linkages with Nile Valley populations. Older formulations have included racial terminologies such as "Eastern Hamites" which basically substituted for "Caucasoid". Whatever the terms used, pinning down fossil evidence can be a problematic task.
 * "The present indigenous inhabitants of sub-Saharan Africa fall into three groups: Negroid, Khoisan (Hottentots and men), and “Caucasoid” (Eastern Hamites). These may be easily distinguished by external features such as skin colour and hair form, but in skeletal features there is a good deal of overlap even today, when they have probably become increasingly divergent from their more generalized ancestors. From fragmentary fossil remains, therefore, it is difficult to distinguish among them. Negroids, for instance, typically have a narrow rounded forehead, but Eastern Hamites also tend to have a narrow skull and rounded forehead, and Bushmen also have a rounded forehead. A protruding upper jaw is characteristic of Negroids, but this part of is not always preserved in fossil remains.

Alternatives to notion of 'mixed populations. Some scholars such as Alan Templeton have challenged the notion of mixed populations (see DNA Analysis section below) holding that race as a biological concept is dubious and that only a minor percentage of human variability can be accounted for by distinct "races." They argue that modern DNA analysis presents a more accurate alternative, that of simply local population variants, gradations or continuums in human difference like skin color or facial shape or hair, rather than rigid categories. The notion of "mixed races" it is asserted, is built on the flawed assumptions of old racial models.

Objections to how categories are drawn in analyzing Nile Valley populations
Some Afrocentric writers question why the same broad approach used with European populations is not also applied to Negroes who also show dolichocephaly, and also vary in other physical indices. They argue that a double standard is in play, and that the use of such terms as "Mediterranean" or "Middle Eastern" conveniently allow more skeletal remains from the Nile Valley to be essentially classified as Caucasoid, but the same line is curiously drawn much more narrowly in defining "Negroid." Terms like "Mediterranean" or "North African" it is also contended, sound more neutral but are, like the older "Eastern Hamite," really subtle code for "Caucasoid," and shows a tendency to appropriate as much as possible, even incorporating Ethiopians, as in the theories of. Variable human remains (such as the aquiline features of some Northeast African peoples, or the rounded foreheads of many African peoples) are thus assigned to Caucasoid groupings. These are interpreted as broadly and expansively as possible with a bearing on Egypt, covering the vast range of the Mediterranean zone from Portugal, to Morocco, to parts of Turkey. By contrast, the variation in "Negroids" is carefully defined in a much narrower sense as regards the Nile Valley. This manipulation of categories and definitions (broad Caucasian -- narrow Negro), it is held, downplays the Nilo-Saharan and Sudanic roots of the Egyptian gene pool. An assessment of the literature on these issues reveals several patterns:

Issues of "true negro" stereotyping
Modern re-analyses of previous studies shows a clear tendency deny or minimize variability within the ancient Egyptian population. , As far as Negroid elements, this takes the form of establishing a baseline determination for a "true negro" (generally a sub-Saharan type) and anything not closely matching this extreme type is disregarded or incorporated into a Caucasoid or "Mediterranean" cluster. Conversely the same selective classification scheme is not applied to groups traditionally categorized as Caucasoid. Scholars such as Carelton Coons report "Mediterranean" remains that seem to have "Negroid" traits but do not mention the opposite, nor have scholars generally bothered to define a similarly stereotypical "true white." Documentation shows researchers repeatedly excluding or minimizing certain skeletal remains in formulating approaches to the ancient Egyptian people. For example:
 * "Nutter (1958), using the Penrose statistic, demonstrated that Nagada I and Badari crania, both regarded as Negroid, were almost identical and that these were most similar to the Negroid Nubian series from Kerma studied by Collett (1933). [Collett, not accepting variability, excluded “clear negro” crania found in the Kerma series from her analysis, as did Morant (1925), implying that they were foreign.].."

Some anthropologists maintain that these methods still continue with the use of more modern statistical aggregation techniques based on crania or on dental morphology. They include selective frontloading of measured indices to minimize variability, using the stereotypical "true" sub-Saharan type as a basis for comparison, separating out adjacent Nile Valley and Northeast African populations like Ethiopians and Somalians, and grouping all else not meeting the extreme sub-Saharan type into broad Caucasoid clusters, although such clustering may be given different names like "North African", "Middle Eastern" or "Southwest Asian". (The Persistence of Racial Thinking and the Myth of Racial Divergence, S. O. Y. Keita, Rick A. Kittles, 1997)

Issues of lumping under Mediterranean clusters
Re-analyses of scholarship show a clear tendency to lump remains under broad clusters or categories such as Mediterranean. Numerous studies of Egyptian crania have been undertaken, with many showing a range of types, and workers often describing substantial Negroid remains. Often this type has been lumped into a Caucasoid cluster, typically using the term "Mediterranean." A majority of these studies show the strong influence of Sudanic and Saharan elements in the predynastic populations and yet classifictions systems often incorporate them into the Mediterranean grouping. (Vercoutter J (1978) The Peopling of ancient Egypt)

Issues of specific methodology and interpretation in Craniofacial Anthropology
The heavy reliance on skeletal evidence or crania in classifying Egyptian racial classifications has a number of weaknesses, namely assumptions that racial characteristics do not change from one generation to another and that statistical aggregation could represent huge populations when in essence the aggregation serves to hide or eliminate variability within those populations. (Encyclopedia Britannica, Macropedia, 2005 ed. Volume 18, "Evolution, Human", pp. 843-854) See also. As regards dental morphology methods such as the Arizona State University Dental Anthropology System (ASUDAS), researchers note its limitations in that only those characters that are present and variable in modern humans are evaluated. If the remains under analysis are missing certain characteristics, (as noted above with the prognathism of the Negroid samples) would tend to be downplayed in the sampling results.

The methodology used in statistical studies of skeletal data has also been challenged by some researchers, not only as to the manipulation of categories, but in the results obtained with computer programs commonly used by researchers to find matches between sets of data correlated with geographic origins or race. A test of one such program for example matched ancient Nubian samples with people as far afield as Hispanics, Japanese and Easter Islanders. Such programs and models it is held, rely heavily on front-loading: starting with assumptions as to rigid, "idealized" types. This misrepresents fundamental patterns of human biological diversity.

Modern DNA analysis throws doubt on racial categories
Modern DNA analysis such as the workof Luigi Cavalli-Sforza, has analzed genetic affinities among peoples and enabled broad clustering groups to be defined. These clusters are held to relate fairly well to the "classical" racial groupings. Other researchers however such as Lewontin using the same analysis point out that the genetic affinities attributable to race only make up 6-10% of variant analysis. This is a threshold well below that used to analyze lineages in other species, leading many researches to question the validity of race as a biological construct. (Apportionment of Racial Diversity: A Review, Ryan A. Brown and George J. Armelagos, 2001, Evolutionary Anthropology, 10:34-40) Lewontin's analysis has been validated and replicated by numerous other studies, using a wide range of different analytical methods- (Latter 1980, Nei and Roychoudhury 1982, Ryaman 1983, Dean 1994, Barbujani 1997). Other similar work using mtDNA analysis shows a larger variance within designated racial categories than outside (Excoffier 1992). Work such as Miller (1997) has found greater racial difference by focusing on specific loci, but these are compartively rare (2 out of 17, and 4 out of 109 in re-analyses by other researchers), and are well within the range of other factors such as genetic drift and clinal variation. Restudies of loci data (Lewotin, Barbajuni, Latter, et. al as noted above)yield even more conservative estimates of race as a factor in genetic variability. On the basis of this data, some scholars (Owens and King 1999) hold that skin color, hair and facial features and other factors are more attributable to climate selective factors rather than stereotypic racial differences.

DNA racial studies yield contradictory results
Liberman and Jackson (1995), and Ryan and Armelagos(2001) point to contradictory results in DNA racial analysis, in that many studies "select the small proportion of genetic variability that is roughly apportionable by race to plot out dendrograms of essentially false categorizations of human variability. T oaccomplish this, these studies use apriori categorizations of human variability that are based on the inaccurate belief that classical racial categorization schemes delineate a series of isolated breeding populations.." An exampleof contradictory results are seen in the work of such researches as Bowcock, Bowcock, Sforza, et. al, 1994. "Despite a research design that should have maximized the degree to which the researchers were able to classify individuals by racial category, the results are something less than "high resolution" with respect to this goal. For example, 88% of individuals were classified as coming from the right continent, while only 46% were classified as coming from the right region within each continent. Notably, 0% success was achieved in classifying East Asian populations to their region or origin. These results occurred despite the fact that Bowcock and co-workers entered their genetic information into a program that already used the a priori racial categories they were trying to replicate." Ironically, some of Bowcock's data itself contradicts "classical" race categories, suggesting that Caucasoids, rather than being a primary group, are a secondary type or race, a hybrid strain based on certain variants of African and Asian populations.

Application of DNA analysis to ancient Nile Valley populations
In the light of this modern DNA analysis, grouping methods and classifications like Cavalli-Sforza's to incorporate various North African peoples like the Egyptians, Ethiopians, and others, has drawn criticism from some scholars (Keita and Kittles 1999) for advocating the language of a non-racial approach, but in practice, using pre-defined, arbitrary categories to hold the data rather than let them speak for themselves. Populations like those in the Nile Valley can have a wide range of variation, hold Kittles and Keita in The Persistence of Racial Thinking and the Myth of Racial Divergence as opposed to pigeonholing them into apriori groupings. As Brown and Armelagos (2001) put it: "In light of this, the low proportion of genetic variance across racial groupings strongly suggests a re-examination of the race concept. It no longer makes sense to adhere to arbitrary racial categories, or to expect that the next genetic study will provide the key to racial classifications."

Specific DNA methods: sampling techniques and cladistics
Limitations in specific DNA sampling techniques have also been noted by writers such as Keita and Kittles, particularly as regards the "representative" samples used for "black" Africans. One example cited is Cavalli-Sforza's advocacy of defining "core populations" (discrete, less admixed groupings, i.e. "races") and their evolution and migration. Followers of this approach (Horai 1995) use DNA analysis to postulate racial divergence times, when discrete populations supposedly began to form from "core" peoples into spreading populations throughout Africa, Europe, Asia and elsewhere. As regards Africa, the entire mtDNA sequence was applied to the core groups or populations to determine such divergences. Samples used in measurement were (a) one African individual from Uganda who was used to represent all African peoples, (b) 10 individuals from Japan, whose gene data was amalgamated into a consensus to represent Asians, and (c) a cluster of Europeanized data called the Cambridge sequence. On this basis, entire geographic regions were conceptualized as authentic. Keita and Kittles call for less narrow definition of "true types" and recognition of a wide range of population gradients and variations among peoples of Africa, particularly northeast Africa (the Horn, Nubia, the Nile Valley and the Sahara). Other anthropologists such as Lieberman and Jackson (1995), also find numerous methodological and conceptual problems in using DNA sequencing methods such as cladistics to support concepts of race. They hold for example that: "the molecular and biochemical proponents of this model explicitly use racial categories in their initial grouping of samples For example, 'the large and highly diverse macroethnic groups of East Indians, North Africans, and Europeans are presumptively grouped as Caucasians prior to the analysis of their DNA variation. This limits and skews interpretations, obscures other lineage relationships, deemphasizes the impact of more immediate clinal environmental factors on genomic diversity, and can cloud our understanding of the true patterns of affinity.'

Debate over "race neutral" approaches to studying Nile Valley populations
Whether a "race nuetral" approach towards the Nile valley populations in DNA analysis will take hold is unknown. Proponents such as Sforza, et. al continue to use categories such as Extra European Caucasoid to categorize its peoples. Others such as Keita and Kittles argue that modern DNA analysis points to the need for less pre-categorization and more emphasis on clinal variation and gradations that are more than adequate to explain differences between peoples rather than pre-conceived racial categories. Arbitrary divisions into "Caucasoid" clusters, use of stereotypical "true" negro or sub-Saharan samples, and separating out of other Northeast African populations, does not capture the full range of variation among of Nile Valley peoples. Such variation need not be the result of a "mix" from categories such as Negroid or Caucasoid, but may be simply a contiuum of peoples in that region from skin color, to facial features, to hair, to height. On a bigger scale, the debate reflects the growing movement to minimize race as a biological construct in analyzing the origins of human populations.
 * "Genetic surveys and the analyses of DNA haplotype trees show that human "races" are not distinct lineages, and that this is not due to recent admixture; human "races" are not and never were "pure." Instead, human evolution has been and is characterized by many locally differentiated populations coexisting at any given time, but with sufficient genetic contact to make all of humanity a single lineage sharing a common evolutionary fate.."(Human Races: A Genetic and Evolutionary Perspective, Alan R. Templeton. American Anthropologist, 1998)

The Sahara and the Sudan in Nile Valley peopling
Saharan-Sudanic inheritance of Nile Valley settlers. Data on the peopling of the Nile Valley do not appear to support earlier historical notions of an initial wave of Caucasoid invaders entering from the North to introduce civilization. Mainstream data shows gradual movement and peopling from the south- the Saharan zone and associated parts of the Sudanic region, fusing with indigenous Nilotic elements already in place, leading into the development of the well-known Egyptian kingdoms, not sweeping insertions from the Mediterranean, Mesopotamia or elsewhere.(AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 83:35-48 (1990) See Wiki article for the now discounted . As to the Saharan movement even Afrocentric critics such as Mary Lefkowitz note:
 * "Recent work on skeletons and DNA suggests that the people who settled in the Nile valley, like all of humankind, came from somewhere south of the Sahara; they were not (as some nineteenth-century scholars had supposed) invaders from the North. See Bruce G. Trigger, "The Rise of Civilization in Egypt," Cambridge History of Africa (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1982), vol I, pp 489-90; S. O. Y. Keita, "Studies and Comments on Ancient Egyptian Biological Relationships," History in Africa 20 (1993) 129-54."

Sudanic threads. Elements from both the Sahara and associated Sudanic regions appear to have been involved in the peopling Egypt according to a number of mainstream references. The Khartoum Culture and other zones of the Sudan for example show significant influence as indicated by pottery, jewelry, tools and implements, raw materials such as certain types of stone, and artistic designs. These elements (claimed as negroid in older histories), were clearly in contact with the predynastic cultures of Egypt.

Saharan threads. The once fertile Sahara stretches in a belt from the Mediterranean to the Red Sea. As noted above, fluctuating climate cycles acted as a "pump", pushing people from the south up towards the wetter, more fertile Nile Valley, or down, to zones of similar likeness. As regards the people, historic populations also appear to follow the same pattern of complexity noted above. Generally the pattern is in a "southern" direction, with early peoples being joined by other populations mixes like Berbers, who appear to have been clearly established by 1000, B.C.

Limited outside inspiration needed by Nile Valley settlers. Whatever the exact mix of peoples on the ground, the work of mainstream research therefore demonstrates that from early pre-dynastic times, Egypt was essentially settled by indigenous elements closely associated with groups from the Saharan and Sudanic region moving up into the Nile Valley, and excluded any significant influx from Mediterraneans, Mesopotamians or others not indigenous to the area. Mass migration theories sometimes rely on the introduction of cattle herding, but archealogical data (Wendorf 2001, Wettstrom 1999) suggests that the peoples of the Sahara had already independently domesticated cattle in the early Holocene eastern Sahara, earlier than in the Near East, followed by the gradual adoption of grain cultivation. As another mainstream scholar puts it:


 * "Some have argued that various early Egyptians like the Badarians probably migrated northward from Nubia, while others see a wide-ranging movement of peoples across the breadth of the Sahara before the onset of desiccation. Whatever may be the origins of any particular people or civilization, however, it seems reasonably certain that the predynastic communities of the Nile valley were essentially indigenous in culture, drawing little inspiration from sources outside the continent during the several centuries directly preceding the onset of historical times... (Robert July, Pre-Colonial Africa, 1975, p. 60-61)

Peopling from the Levant and Maghreb sources
The archealogy of the Predynastic and early Dynastic periods show relatively little large-scale movement of peoples from the Levant- the zone bordering the Eastern Mediterranean that includes parts of Turkey, and Syria, Lebanon, and Israel - and the Maghreb which includes modern day countries in North Africa like Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Libya. However this does not mean that there was not small-scale migration. The fertility of the Nile Valley and comparatively easy food collection opportunities would facilitate such movement. There is clear evidence of trade contacts and material culture, reflected in the increasing weight of trade material such as lapis lazulli, copper and silver.

Continuity of Nile valley populations over extended periods
Some current dental studies of ancient Egyptians as a whole over the millennia show continuity between early racial or cultural types peopling Egypt, well into the dynastic period, and show that these peoples had a wide range of characteristics including Nubian, Saharan, Nilotic and Levantine. Such variability makes make rigid racial taxonomies, or selective highlighting, grouping and labeling as "Middle Eastern" or "Mediterranean" or sweeping genetic claims of outside influence problematic. The issue of continuity with past Egyptian racial stocks has also been raised in older scholarship since the 1960s, most notably the case of the fellahin in Egypt, which are referenced as an indicator of a more ancient genetic strand associated with Negroid or Sudanic/Saharan influences.

Some older studies also suggest continuity of racial stocks in Egypt. A British analysis of craniometric traits from several Egyptian predynastic gravesites showed a wide range of physical variability, making it difficult to establish a rigid taxonomy of races. However the same study compared craniometric traits found on the Egyptian samples, to samples from other areas such as Caanan and found limited matches with the predynastic crania. It thus concluded that at no time did any non-Egyptian group provide a significant change to the Egyptian gene pool for the length of the Pharaonic monarchy. As noted with the example of the fellahin above, the genetic or racial elements on the ground (whatever the unique mix of racial types that made up Egypt), at least in the early millennia of Egyptian civilization, were thus not significantly affected by any influx of distant outsiders from Mesopotamia, the Mediterranean or elsewhere. Such outsiders, like the well known Hyksos, were to appear in significant numbers on the scene much later, about 1000 years after Eygptian dynastic civilization had been established. ("Genetical Change in Ancient Egypt," Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 1967).

Continuity extends into dynastic period of kingship and nation building
This continuity holds into the early dynastic period, in that elements from the South, (a region closer to the Sahara and the Sudan), brought about the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt, ushering in the early Egyptian dynasties. This union is of monumental significance in Egyptian history, and was considered as such by the Egyptians themselves. It does not appear to be a crude tribal polity awaiting inspiration from Mediterranean or Near Eastern outsiders, as asserted by the now discredited. Union provided a stable umbrella that helped shape the creative and productive energies of their civilization for millennia to come. (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1984 ed. Egypt, History of," p. 464-65)

Language as a way to classify Nile Valley Egyptian peoples
Complications have also cropped up in the use of linguistics as a basis for racial categorization. The demise of the famous "Hamitic Hypothesis", which purported to show that certain African languages around the Nile area could be associated with "Caucasoid" peoples is a typical case. Such schemes fell apart when it was demonstrated that Negro tribes far distant also spoke similar languages, tongues that were supposedly a reserved marker of Caucasoid presence or influence. For work on African languages, see Wiki article and. Older linguistic classifications are also linked to the notion of a "Hamitic race", a vague grouping thought to exclude Negroes, but accommodating a large variety of dark skinned North and East Africans into a broad-based Caucasoid grouping. This Caucasoid "Hamitic race" is sometimes credited with the introduction of more advanced culture, such as certain plant cultivation and particularly the domestication of cattle. This scheme has also been discredited by the work of post WWII archaeologists such as A. Arkell, who demonstrated that predynastic and Sudanic Negroid elements already possessed cattle and plant domestication, thousands of years before the supposed influx of Caucasoid or Hamitic settlers into the Nile Valley, Nubia and adjoining areas. Modern scholarship has moved away from earlier notions of a "Hamitic" race speaking Hamito-Semitic languages, and places the Egyptian language in a more localized context, centered around its general Saharan and Nilotic roots.(F. Yurco "An Egyptological Review", 1996) Linguistic analysis (Diakanoff 1998) places the origin of the Afro-Asiatic languages in northeast Africa, with older strands south of Egypt, and newer elements straddling the Nile Delta and Sinai.

Other recent research demonstrates several African languages that share features with Egyptian, such as the Chadic languages of west and central Africa, the Cushitic languages of northeast Africa, and the Semitic languages of Ethiopia and Eritrea.

Cultural and religious linkages between Egypt and the Sahara and Sudan
Questions of cultural linkages between Ancient Egypt and black Africa have been a matter of controversy. Afrocentric writers such as assert cultural and material ties from Egypt stretching across the continent, arguing that they provide a building block for viewing the Ancient Egyptians as racially "black." See Wiki article. More mainstream scholars hold that the Egyptians had linkages with a variety of cultures, including Mesopotamia, the Near East, the Mediterranean, the Levant and Black Africa. As regards Black Africa, Negroid skeletal remains in ancient times, old artifacts in Egypt showing similarities with Negroid tribes of the Saharan or Sudanic region, trade and conquest involving the Nubian/Sudanic zone, and various other similarities have been broadly accepted by mainstream writers. Anthropologist E. Strouhal who reexamined the data prior to the 1970s (a period sometimes marked by issues of selective analysis- see "General methodology" issues above), nevertheless lists several archaeological studies that suggest a migration of culture, practice and belief from African regions located to the west and south of the Badarian sites." (Strouhal, E., 1971, ‘Evidence of the early penetration of Negroes into prehistoric Egypt’, Journal of African History, 12: 1-9)

Nubia and Egypt in Nile Valley peopling and cultures
Cultural links between Egypt and its nearby Nile Valley populations also appear in the matter of Nubia. Mainstream scholars such as F, Yurco note that among foreign peoples, the Nubians were closest ethnically to the Egyptians, shared the same culture in the predynastic period, and used the same pharaonic political structure. Nubia also figures in the archealogical research of scholar Bruce Williams who suggests that Nubian influence underlying the establishment of the Egyptian state. Most scholars see limited evidence of Nubian statebuilding in the further north (Lower Egypt), but Williams focuses on the south, based on the initial predominant influence of the south, closest to Nubia, and various cultural linkages with the south such as discovery of the Qustul incense burner and of a city at Kerma dating back to 4,500 BCE.

A number of scholars finding that the ancient Egyptians were closely related to Nilo/Sudanic peoples like Nubians, sharing substantial genetic admixuture, and cultural elements such as the pharonic structure (Keita 1992, Krings et al. 1999, Williams 1999, Yurco, 1989). Egyptologist Frank Yurco notes that note that among foreign peoples, the Nubians were closest ethnically to the Egyptians, and the recent excavations of Swiss archealogist Charles Bonnet also confirm the linkages between Nubia and Egypt via excavations at Kerma (Charles Bonnet and Dominique Valbelle, The Nubian Pharaohs). Even if the Afrocentric view may be as flawed as another race-centric view, and even if there are many mistakes in the work of Diop, one has to acknowledge the core of its oeuvre—that European archaeologists before and after the Decolonization have understated and continue to understate the extent and possibility of Black civilizations. Mainstream egyptologists such as F. Yurco shared the same culture in the predynastic period, and used the same pharaonic political structure

Cultural/Religious links and population classifications
Various cultural and religious practices in particular seem to show greater affinity with that of the peoples or northeast Africa, rather than the Mediterranean or Mesopotamia. These include numerous animal gods, the king as chief ritualist, the king's mother, ritual/ceremonial dresses, and regicide.
 * Encyclopedia Britannica 1984 ed. Macropedia Article, Vol 6: "Egyptian Religion", pg 506-508
 * "A large number of gods go back to prehistoric times. The images of a cow and star goddess (Hathor), the falcon (Horus), and the human-shaped figures of the fertility god (Min) can be traced back to that period. Some rites, such as the "running of the Apil-bull," the "hoeing of the ground," and other fertility and hunting rites (e.g., the hippopotamus hunt) presumably date from early times.. Connections with the religions in southwest Asia cannot be traced with certainty."
 * "It is doubtful whether Osiris can be regarded as equal to Tammuz or Adonis, or whether Hathor is related to the "Great Mother." There are closer relations with northeast African religions. The numerous animal cults (especially bovine cults and panther gods) and details of ritual dresses (animal tails, masks, grass aprons, etc) probably are of African origin. The kinship in particular shows some African elements, such as the king as the head ritualist (i.e., medicine man), the limitations and renewal of the reign (jubilees, regicide), and the position of the king's mother (a matriarchal element). Some of them can be found among the Ethiopians in Napata and Meroe, others among the Prenilotic tribes (Shilluk)."

For more specialized reference on cultural links, see also (Strouhal, E., 1971, ‘Evidence of the early penetration of Negroes into prehistoric Egypt’)

Cultural markers of later Egyptian civilization found in early peoples
The Libyan area, particularly around the Fezzan, also shows a range of physical types. Of note is the mummified form of a Negro child, dated to around 3000 B.C, discovered at the Uan Muhuggiag rock shelter by a team of Italian archaeologists. What makes this skeleton interesting is that it is so well preserved that it challenges the notion that the Egyptians were the original pioneers of mummification. The Italian excavation suggests that many practices associated with Egypt, may have already been established on an indigenous basis in the areas adjoining the Nile Valley, prior to the rise of the Egyptian dynasties. This finding is consistent with the general pattern noted above- the appearance of long-standing cultural and skeletal elements from a variety of indigenous peoples, in the areas close to Egypt. It is also consistent with a movement of peoples, up from the Saharan Zone into the Nile Valley, as noted by Afrocentric critic Mary Leftkowitz.

Theories of outside dynastic races in Nile Valley development questionable
If therefore, ancient Egypt had a number of cultural similarities and links, with the Saharan or Sudanic tribes, the notion of sweeping invasions by Caucasoids as a source for civilized developments is questionable. Data suggests that numerous material and religious elements unique to Egyptian civilization were already in place, forming a basis for the rise of more elaborate cultural developments, as opposed to having them substantially introduced by outsiders from the Mediterranean or elsewhere. Indeed the early dynastic kingdoms of Egypt saw the accession of peoples from the South, bordering the Saharan and Sudanic regions, with the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt traditionally credited to Menes. This does not displace the influences or trade from Mesopotamia, which can been clearly seen in trade artifacts, nor does it mean other influences or indeed peoples were not present. Modern archaeology has shown a significant trade of goods, ideas, and even people throughout Egypt, the Levant, and Mesopotamia, as well as the Saharan and Sudanic zones. Scholar Robert July also shows such linkages, but holds that outside influences appear to have had little significant impact on the early development of Egyptian civilization. A more recent survey (see Yurco above) sums up the consensus in the field:
 * "In summary we may say that Egypt was a distinct North African culture rooted in the Nile Valley and on the Sahara. The dynastic race theory has been shown to be an outdated myth generated by the "Aryan Model."

Claims of massive cross-continent Nile Valley influence also questionable
The unique nature of many Egyptian cultural patterns also calls into question sweeping notions of a unified Egyptian umbrella or cultural set from Cape to Cairo. , Just as alleged Caucasoid or "Mediterranean" invasions do not define Egyptian civilization, neither do things like Egyptian funerary practices or kingships define such far flung African peoples as the Khosians of Southern Africa or the Bantu of Central Africa. Such influences can be more directly traced to locations close to Egypt like the Sudan, or parts of Ethiopia. Afrocentric critic Mary Leftkowiz argues that sweeping claims of Egyptian influence across the board have their origin in white esoterics, Free Masons and mystics concerned with Egyptian religious practices, particularly the Egyptian Mystery System.

Visual images and Nile Valley Egyptian populations
The Egyptians quite clearly distinguished between non-Egyptian peoples like Nubians or Phoenicians and themselves in visual imagery, suggesting they viewed themselves as a unique people apart from other nations. Categories as "Mediterranean" or "Middle Eastern" or "Caucasian" or "Negro" do not capture or define what these ancient peoples thought. According to Egyptologist, Frank J. Yurco, the Egyptians did not view race in the same manner in which people of the modern era view it.

Visual images: the case of the Pharaoh Seqenenre (c. 1545 BC) While much popular attention has been paid to Tut and other icons such as Nefertiti, the case of the pharaoh Seqenenre has attracted the attention of some mainstream scholars. Over 200 years before Tut, Seqenenre Tao II was a king of Egypt who according to tradition clashed with the West Asian/Semitic Hyksos invaders that had overrun much of the country. He was forced to live in the South, while the Hyksos dominated the north- Lower Egypt. As regards portraiture, mainstream scholars note the wide range of variability indicated by Seqenenre:
 * "Cephalometric work on Old and New Kingdom remains demonstrates variability in the ancient period, as noted in observations by Harris and Weeks (1973:123) of a Seventeenth Dynasty pharaoh:
 * His entire facial complex, in fact, is so different from other pharaohs (it is closest to that of his son Ahmose) that he could be fitted more easily into the series of Nubian and Old Kingdom Giza skulls than into that of later Egyptian kings. Various scholars in the past have proposed a Nubian-that is, non-Egyptian-origin for Seqenenre and his family, and his facial features suggest this might indeed be true."
 * MacGaffey (1966) comments on variation in ancient Egyptian portraiture. 'Negroid' and 'Egyptian' were not mutually exclusive [see Petrie, (19061, plate xix.]"

The localized approach to Nile Valley Egyptian populations
Some mainstream scholars prefer to place peoples into a more localized context, such as Nilo-Saharan, and note however that discussion of race may be unavoidable since much archealogical research uses certain terminology, and certain methodologies such as Mediterranean "lumping" and selective reporting. This earlier excavation and research in Egypt however contains valuable basic data. No serious discussion or attempt at getting a more accurate picture of the peoples and population movements involved can be made without reference to it. Mainstream scholar B. Trigger and S. Keita advocate terminology more directly based on the local variability of the data, and its changes over time, which allows for a wide range of types and variation:
 * "There is little demarcation between the predynastics and tropical series and even the early southern dynastic series. Definite trends are discernible in the analyses. This broadly shared "southern" metric pattern, along with the other mentioned characteristics to a greater or lesser degree, might be better described by the term Africoid, by definition connoting a tropical African microclade, microadaptation, and patristic affinity, thereby avoiding the nonevolutionary term "Negroid" and allowing for variation both real and conceptual."

Names for ancient Nile Valley Egypt as a source for population classifications
One of the many names for Egypt in ancient Egyptian is km.t (read "Kemet"), meaning "black land". More literally, the word means "something black". The use of km.t "black land" in terms of a place was generally in contrast to the "desert" or "red land": the beyond the Nile valley. When used to mean people, km.t "people of Kemet", "people of the black land" is usually translated "Egyptians". Debate has centered around whether the 'kmt' term refers to the racial characteristics of the people. <Diop, op. cit. A majority of mainstream scholars disagrees with this position, and hold that k.m.t refers to the colorof the land, not the people. Another approach centers on the color of the Nile River and the sediments it carried in flood, into the cultivated lands of ancient Egypt. The river was sometimes called "Ar" or "Aur" (Coptic 'laro') The land itself may have been given its oldest name, 'Kem' or 'Kemi', which signifies darkness, based on the black color of these sediments.