Meathead
Diamond Member
No, that would be "schwartz", "negro" is Spanish. US public education, eh?I believe the confusion in this issue derives from use of the word Black in place of the academically correct word, Negro.
The fact is a truly black complexion is relatively rare. The complexion of the vast majority of Negroes is some shade of brown. And the only truly white Caucasians (or Negroes) are albinos. In contemporary parlance the terms Black and White used in reference to ethnicity have a more socio-political than anthropological meaning.
What I'm getting at is having a brown complexion does not mean one belongs to the Negro race. East Indians are brown -- but they are not Negroes. Many South American natives have brown skin, as do Polynesians, along with many Middle Eastern categories, including some Egyptians.
So the correct question is was Ramses III a Negro. While I am not conclusively certain, based on images I've seen he was not.
Negro is a label made up by white people without the consent of Black people. At the end of the day negro is the the Latin word for the color black anyway. So whatever word you choose Ramses III was Black. Same goes for King Tut. This is not my opinion. It is a fact as proven by DNA. Don't take my word for it. Look it up if the proof provided is not up to your standards.
I guess I forgot white people may have a different thought process when it comes to the word Black. I don't mean Black literally as in the color of of ink though some of us are that dark. I mean any light tan, tan, brown, black, or even albino person that has roots in African culture even without realizing it sometimes. We can look at each other and just know we share something. What I'm getting at is when I meet a Polynesian or Fijian for example and we immediately feel the kinship. I have had a lot of them tell me they know their roots are in Africa. Turns out DNA proves that to be true as well.
Negro is the word for the color black in the German language