Hmm.

I feel as a rag shaken by the dog. Local legends of the Western Desert of Egypt claim that Piye was of Uwainat (Yam) and his son Taharqa was Wawat (oryx). The colony of Napata was made up of indigenous North Africans, many as in a large diaspora came from Upper Egypt originally and many Uwainat ended up there as well. These two ethnic groups are still very present throughout Egypt- especially the Western Desert and Upper Egypt. The Beja/Hadendoa still live in all three places and these people are direct descendants of Medjay caste.
Being an indigenous Egyptian myself, one that is thoroughly African, I find the article intentionally misleading; overly simplistic and disingenuous. The author is willfully ignorant to call Piye and his descendants Black Pharaohs. They were no blacker than anyone else from the region. They were also not "Nubian" as Doug has pointed out and the use of the term Pharaoh eg Governmental Body is egregious as well. Piye was not the Governmental Body but an important attribute of that governance. Piye and his descendants considered themselves Maahes caste - linking them to Amenist cult of Upper Egypt. They were very likely descendants of the warriors entrusted with the stewardship of Amen Cult based in Napata. Their relationship to the Maahes caste and more specifically to matrilinear heiresses directly linked to 21st Dynasty lineages that claimed kinship with Amen and Mut cult centers in the Western Desert of Egypt.

It pains me to learn that the dialogue never gets past skin colour. As much as I detest Afrocentrics I'm still reading the Eurocentric leanings and Semitecentric (if that is a term) foundations of every Biblical scholar firmly in place in the article.
We are Africans and the borders between Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt are not made out of concrete and metal. We are also not the same ethnic assemblage as one might encounter in West African culture centres.
The whole article is confusing and misleading- its giving me a headache.