The extent to which the population of modern Egypt descends from the original Ancient Egyptians is a frequent subject of controversy.
I believe ethnic or so called "racial" features are determined largely by where a people live, so people living in Egypt I think would possibly in time come to look like Ancient Egyptians did regardless of how much they descend from them. And likewise my suggesting a certain currently "White" population descends partly from ancient Egyptians does not mean I think Ancient Egyptians were White, I think when they lived in Egypt they were Brown or Light-Skinned Black like modern Egyptians are.
Historically the modern Population of Egypt seems to descend largely from Assyrians, Persians, Greeks and Romans and others who settled there in classical antiquity, and then Arabs who migrated there after the Islamic conquest.
It is popular to claim that Nebuchadnezzar never conquered Egypt as Jeremiah and Ezekiel foretold. This is because Egypt is the pillar of how we research Ancient History, and so rarely do we know Egyptian history from anything other then Egyptian propaganda. Even among the Classical historians, Herodotus just based his whole history of Egypt on what Egyptian Priests told him, and then Manetho was an Egyptian Priest, though one who had his own criticisms of Herodotus.
On another blog I've argued that Amasis was Nebuchadnezzar's governor of Egypt. And I think Amasis conquering of Cyprus around 570 BC was really Egypt being exiled there. After 40 years some of them returned, but perhaps not all just as not all of Judah returned after their 70 years were over.
So perhaps one of the nations it's popular to identify with the Lost Tribes is actually Mizraim? While modern Egypt is still a head of Javan's Leopard?
I did a post on ways America could be viewed as Egypt. Thing is much of that could overlap with England aka Great Britain aka The United Kingdom, and arguably fit them better. Including the relationship with modern Israel to some extent. Britam and British Israelists love to obsess over their perception that Anglo-Saxons are the most pro-semtic people.
England also had a division between north and south, York and London/Somerset. And the interpretation of Isaiah 19 I alluded to there is one I've criticized elsewhere, so I kinda felt like cheating mentioning that.
And then there is the role of Freemasonry. While America and Modern France are nations who's history has been shaped by Freemasonry, Britain is where Freemasonry comes from, and London is still the supreme grand lodge of all Masonry. It was in Brittan that Cagliostro founded his Egyptian Freemasonry in 1776. Nicolas Bonnevile was involved in Masonry in Britain before becoming a leader of the French Revolution. Karl of Hesse-Kassel and Brunswick, leaders of German Freemasonry who also joined the Illuminati, where grandchildren of King George II. And Albert of Saxe-Gotha who harbored Weishaupt is the ancestor of the current British Royal Family. Mazzini was also harbored in Britain. And Albert Pike's Freemasonry is what ruled the Confederacy, which Britain secretly supported but couldn't openly.
And it is Britain not America or Modern France that has Ancient Egypt's form of Government. Monarchy. Theirs is the one Monarchy the Revolutions never sought to overthrow. And their Monarchy is firmly tied to their state religion, Anglicanism. And it was among Anglicans of the 19th century that the desire to co-opt the Pyramid as a Christian symbol saying Enoch built it started.
England was originally seven Anglo-Saxon kingdoms that were eventually united. In Genesis 10 Misraim had seven sons. And with that correlation we could view York as Upper Egypt and London/Somerset as Lower Egypt, now switched geographically because in England up and down are viewed differently.
Many looking for Biblical significance to Modern Britain will site them being represented as a Lion, and also heraldry that shows a Lion and a Dragon. Ezekiel 32:2 says.
Son of man, take up a lamentation for Pharaoh king of Egypt, and say unto him, "Thou art like a young lion of the nations, and thou art as a dragon in the seas"So that fits too.
Perhaps those whom Britam identifies with Joseph are really Misraim. While the true identity of Joseph is as Native Americans and perhaps other Israelites wound up in America via the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. Enslaved by Egypt once again. Hosea 9:3 does say "Ephraim shall return to Egypt".
I mentioned France a couple times because there is a school of thought out there that identifies France with Egypt, spiritually at least. This mostly comes from a desire to see France as the source of modern Atheism thanks to people like Voltaire, and the Reason worshipers of the Revolution. And then saying that Ancient Egypt was the most Atheistic nation of antiquity. The former accusation I could nitpick, but the latter is what is truly absurd. Egypt was anything but Atheistic, in fact at times Ptah came close to resembling a Monotheistic concept of God. But their main contribution to modern religious trends is Gnosticism.
During World War I, Britain's military operations in the Near East were carried out from Egypt. You can see this demonstrated in the film Lawrence of Arabia.
Herodotus Histories Book 2:159 records that after Pharaoh Necho's victory at Megiddo, he sent his cloths to Branchidae of Miletus in Ionia for some reason. Bill Cooper in After The Flood dates 509 BC as when the Milesians came to Ireland from Miletus. The leaders of that colonization were already Grandparents when they reached Ireland and their mother was a daughter of Pharaoh. Necho as Rameses II (who is confirmed to have had red hair) had plenty of daughters to spare, over 40. And the Egyptian royal-line unlike Judah's was traditionally passed through the daughter of Pharaoh. So perhaps the same royal line British Israelism claims to be heirs to the Throne of David, are actually heirs to the throne of Egypt?
Jeremiah 46:24 says the daughter of Egypt will be delivered to the people of the north, through their father Scota's children were traced back to Magog, The Bible associates Magog with the North. Or it could be alluding to scattered offspring of the Northern Kingdom.
Also in After The Flood, Bill Cooper documents how all seven Anglo-Saxon royal houses traced their ancestry back to Odin. Similar sources have lead many others to speculate a real King named Odin may have lived about 100 BC-300 AD.
I may feel the need to place Odin a little earlier then that, his worship was entrenched among Germanic peoples from Rome's very earliest contact with them during the last century BC. Though strictly the Greco-Roman sources just say they worshiped Mercury/Hermes. Maybe they identified this deified King with that planet later.
The genealogies further traces Odin back to a Geat and then Geat back to Sceaf, only needing around 17 generations. Bill Cooper is convinced Sceaf is Japheth, I'm not so much. He sites one source that rendered Sceaf as Seth, and then tries to argue that Seth could be a corruption of Japheth, an argument that in the Hebrew is only them ending with the same letter.
But maybe he was Seth/Set of Egyptian Mythology? The Egyptians did consider red hair a sign of descent from Seth. Or perhaps this reflects the name Seti/Sethos, a Set theophoric name.
As a supporter of revised Chronology I place Seti I in 664-609 BC, and Seti II in the 570s BC. But Seti II had a son called Seti-Merneptah who's fate is unknown. This is the same time period as Egypt's foretold scattering. Seti II's grandfather was Rameses II. And the time the historical Odin is speculated to have lived could be defined as 17 generations later. Matthew recounts 14 generations from the Captivity to Jesus, but he'd already demonstrated a willingness to skip generations. Luke has more then that in the same time frame.
Now the Pross Edda traced Sceaf back to Memnon of Greek mythology. That is generally viewed as something made up by the medieval writer. But I did recently argue for the Ethiopia of Memnon and Cepheus being around Seir, where the Horites lived. And have also argued for the gods of Egypt coming from the Horites. And also it is known that the Ancient Greeks identified a large statue of Amenhotep III in Thebes with Memnon.
But still. Mainly my hunch now is Sceaf/Seth identifies a Seti of the 19th Dynasty as the progenitor of Anglo-Saxon royalty. A Seti was also one of the lesser known sons of Rameses II. And Ramses firstborn by Nefertari (who I discussed on the revised chronology blog, linking him to Ezekiel 30) had a son named Seti. A Seti had also been Viceroy of Kush, who may have been of the royal family since he's called a hereditary Prince. Perhaps he's the same as one of the before mentioned Setis.
For this scenario the descent from Egypt overlaps with who I've argued elsewhere to descend from Dan. It's interesting typologically that Leviticus 24 talks about a Blasphemous Israelite who's mother was Danite and Father was an Egyptian. Meanwhile Scota's descendants I think intermarried with remnants of Manasseh, Asher, Zebulun & Issachar. Manasseh's mother was also an Egyptian.
Of course it's not just English Royalty and Nobility that claims descent from Scota, it's the same with Irish and Scottish Royal and Noble houses. And descent from Odin can also be claimed by continental Royal Families of Denmark and Norway and some in Germany, there were Saxons who remained in Germany (Queen Victoria and her Husband both descended from Royalty of Saxony). But it was in King James I that the English Crown become the one to unite these two Royal lines together.
All the ways in which British Royalty can be traced back to the Seleucid Dynasty, also involve Ptolemaic Queens and Princesses, Cleopatra Thea, Tryphanea, and the children of Anthony and Cleopatra. The Ptolemies including the most famous Cleopatra also tended to have red hair.