quote:Originally posted by KING: YOU ARE NOT LISTENING....THE HIEROGLPYH IS PART OF ANCIENT EGYPT LANGUAGE AND WAS POSTED AS PART OF THE WALL STATUE.
ITS THE EGYPTIAN LANGUAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! this Black African is what they used for there language to spell out Face. it spanned 3000 years and was not altered to look Caucasoid.
[/QB]
What are you laughing about??? You cannot refute the Hieroglyph because the picture for face inside ancient egypt is a Black African.
Prove theres a counter to this.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm also still waiting for an answer as to which people outside the Baladi preserve customs that go back to dynastic times.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Another elephant in the room that many try to ignore is why is it that these same black-looking Baladi preserve customs and traditions that are strikingly akin to those of pharaonic Egyptians??! Ironically it is those same customs that Afrangi Egyptians like Arabs call "strange" and "backwards". The few ethnologists who have studied Baladi culture have noted that such customs are also strikingly similar to those of Sub-Sahara and question how much of it is due to Sub-Saharan influence and how much of it is pharaonic. But perhaps the answer is that Pharaonic culture itself is linked to Sub-Sahara.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2001/03/28/stories/05281349.htm Islam has perhaps not penetrated into the consciousness of the Upper Egyptians as deeply as it has in other parts of the world because it is still in some ways considered an alien import. The people in these parts are most definitely African in their physiognomy and culture. Traces of other races are noticeable in physical features and Arabic is, of course, the sole spoken language. But for all that the pride in being African is unmistakable. At a factory producing alabaster figurines for sale to tourists a Saidi (as the denizens of Upper Egypt are called) points to three phallic figures of different sizes. "This is Egyptian", he says pointing to the largest one and then at the middle-sized one, "that is Nubian". (The Nubians are the African people who live in the stretch between the southern Egyptian town of Aswan and Sudan). Then pointing to the smallest- sized he says with a smirk, "And that is Arab". Besides being proud of their Africanness, the people of Upper Egypt also appear to be stubbornly rural. Like the peasantry in large parts of India these people seem to be in deliberate resistance to sophistication and even to look on some of the mores of modern life as being beneath their dignity. They look well-fed but even those farmers who seem more prosperous than their brethren seem to look on modern conveniences as something not really relevant to their lives. TV antennae sprout from every house-top (and as always, Mr. Amitabh Bachhan is a topic of conversation).
Min statue
West African ithyphallic figure
The practice of magic/sorcery. Even today though Islamic shariah prohibits saher (sorcery) many Arab and Afrangi Egyptians will turn to Baladi to seek out magical remedies like love spells or fertility amulets. You also have malicious magic where they make a wax sculpture of somebody and melt or make clay figurines with people's name on it and break it, or if an unwanted guest arrives a clay pot is broken after they leave to ensure they never come back.
The practice of tahtib or stick fighting is very ancient and similar to other African peoples. The practice has recently been popularized to become a national sport in Egypt.
There is also the voodoo-like ritual of Zar, whereby a person, usually a young woman, is possessed by a spirit. This ritual is often mistaken to be an exorcism of an evil spirit when in actuality it is an adoration ritual of a guardian spirit whereby the ritual is meant to reconcile the woman to her guardian spirit. Once reconciled, the spirit will bring blessings on the woman and her family. The term 'zar' comes from Ethiopia and is more accurately used to describe the type of ritual that occurs there but many believe that zar was introduced to Egypt by slaves from Ethiopia. The problem with that theory is that specific rites in Egyptian zar differ from those of Sudan or Ethiopia.
Similar practices are also found in other parts of Africa like West African Vodun, Ifa, etc.
Other practices...
quote:Originally posted by ausar: Sorry I have been busy for the last few days. Anyway, what Djehuti wrote is what folk customs still persist in rural areas of Egypt.
Another one that Djehuti left out is el Sebeou[the seven] to where seven days after a child is born a type of celebration happens. The infant is place on a sieve and usually the mother steps over the child seven times.
The funerary traditions is usually 40 days of mourning and within the forty days people visit the grave and give offering to the poor in the name of the deceased. The occurrence is repeated every religious festival and on the date the person died. The 40 days is connected back to how many days it usually took to mummify the dead.
In the beleifs of rural Egyptians usually everybody is born with a qarina,shadow and akht or akhi. Usually an akhi for females and a akht for males. The Qarin is like the exact double of the person. Many rural Egyptians also believe in a underworld filled with afreet usually associated with departed souls.
The Moulid or Saints birthdays were probably first started around the Fatimid and some have ancient Egyptian origins and some are fairly new festivals. The rural Egyptians took these festivals and modified them with their own traditions.
Other survivals are mostly attached to females trying to prevent barreness and ensure fertility. Often rural women will go to temples,saint shrines or rub themselves with ancient objects to ensure fertility...
There are also marriage practices like uxorilocal residence in which a groom moves into the home of his bride or a residence near the bride's parents. And there are peculiar wedding customs like the groom kneeling before his bride seated in a bed. More recently in Luxor police cited a group of men for 'indecent exposure' because they were caught dancing shirtless in the street holding sticks as part of a wedding celebration.
Why is it that Afrangi Egyptians of Arab, Circassian, or Turk ancestry don't practice of these customs?
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Furthermore, it's worth noting that ityphallic figures are not exclusive to Africa either. Numerous examples can be found in ancient Greece, Italy, and even Mesopotamia.
Another example is the ancient Norse god of fertility, Frey
Already in the bronze age these kind of figures were common, especially in rock art
Ithyphallicism is universal and we have it in the Philippines too. My post pertains to the specific form that is found in Baladi which is most similar to ancient Egyptians.
Now, I don't know about Mesopotamians but I was tipped off by Tukuler years ago that ithyphallicism in Europe whether it be the Nordic examples you provided above or even the 'herm' statues seen in ancient Greece, the one thing they all have in common is that the erection forms an acute angle with the torso which apparently is a common feature of "cauacasians" according to old anthropological literature. African erections have straight out projections that form a 90 degree angle with the torso.
Greek herms
African examples:
^ Only one example is from Sub-Sahara.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Anyone have any thoughts about these people? Are they descendants of Ancient Egyptians? Are they "new comer" graver robbers? Are they descendants of slaves?
Posts: 200 | From: Nibiru | Registered: Mar 2023
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Gurna is a town or group of communities in Upper Egypt near the Valley of the Kings. The Gurna people are definitely Baladi of Upper Egypt.
Who else would these people be other than the descendants of the same people whose kings are buried in the tombs they live near??!
By the way, as far as slave descendants, they exist in Egypt but are found in the Delta! The mass importation of slaves from further south in Africa began from the Abbasid Caliphate up until the Ottoman Caliphate. The indigenes of Egypt (Baladi) were serfs under the feudal system and were not much better than slaves in terms of economic status so virtually all the slaves imported to Egypt were sent to the Delta where the Arabs and other Afrangi elite purchased and sold them to other parts of the Caliphate.
Unlike the Trans-Atlantic slave system in the Americas where there was high fertility among the enslaved, such was not the case in the Islamic slavery of Africans. For one, male slaves usually double castrated (look that up if you dare) but the females for some unknown reason had low fertility. It's suspected that they took contraceptive drugs. So there are actually very few slave descendants in North Africa and in the Islamic realm (except for southern Iraq).
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Im definitely not saying that I think that they're new comers or slave descendants, although I do think many posters do believe so. Im just pointing out that the delta groups are trying to write people who look like that off as slave descendants or new comers.
As far as them living near the valley of the kings, that article I linked suggests that their village was only established in the 1940/50's.
The source?
quote:Christine Desroches-Boblecourt, Tutankhamen (Penguin Books, 1971), p. 30.
Although it doesn't seem Christine Desroches-Boblecourt published a book in 1971....
LOL...
quote:The area around Thebes is the main setting for this story. Although we wall follow the river to Tell el-Amarna in order to reconstruct Tutankhamen’s early years, we must always return to that supreme city of high antiquity and its environs. When we examine its bricks and stones, we go back in time to the fourteenth century B.C., to the heart of a civilization throbbing with life. Today the temple at Luxor sprouts like a garden of magnificent sturdy plants on the bank of the Nile. Approaching it, one senses the power of the gods and priests of Egypt, who were the principal beneficiaries of Pharaoh’s prodigality. Luxor, however, was created primarily as the great god Amun’s harmonious Opet of the south, the centre of his family and personal life, where he went during the eleven days of his divine emergence for the great feast of Opet. Throughout the whole of his journey he appeared to his faithful worshippers in his magnificent ceremonial barge sparkling with gold. Karnak is a world of temples, a maze of sanctuaries and pylons, its doors and walls covered with figures of kings and gods, The great gods of the Egyptian empire were all honoured in chapels and sanctuaries. Chief among them was Amun, whose name means the Hidden One, but who is represented everywhere bestowing strength and eternal life on the king. Two tall plumes rising from his head-dress symbolize his celestial origin. He is thus at once an invisible demi¬ urge in the firmament and a god on earth, served by his priests, who exacted from the pharaoh all the moral and material support Amun could wish for. Among the many evocations of the Theban kings an eloquent image adorns the seventh pylon of the great temple: that of Tuthmosis III, seventeen times conqueror of the Asians. He is consecrating before the charming little goddess- Thebes (under the aegis of Amun) a huge human cluster of enemies kneeling to implore mercy. Elsewhere, a gigantic panel depicts heaps of gold, rare jewels, and exotic produce brought back by the king from victorious campaigns and nearly all presented to the deity of the sanctuary as a thank-offering. Every Egyptian monument evokes with intensity an event, an instant in the life of its vanished people. With so much evidence available about the history of Tuthmosis III, the great conqueror, it eventually became possible to establish the link between a detail on the surface of an obelisk, confirming the inscription at its base, an image on a Theban chapel wall, and a cylinder (now in the Louvre) with cuneiform inscriptions in the name of Ashurbanipal. This cylinder tells us that when the Assyrian king sacked Thebes, during the reign of Tanoutamun, he sent back to his palace two columns, or obelisks, which had stood at the temple gate. Made of electrum, an alloy of 75 per cent gold, 22 per cent silver, and 3 per cent copper, their combined weight was 2,500 talents, or 166,650 pounds.
p30-32
Christine Desroches-Boblecourt,Tutankhamen : life and death of a Pharaoh, No mention of the population at Gurna at all. Maybe its the wrong book?
But certain posters would like people to believe it's all Hakuna matata in Egypt, they're all the same people who claim each other. Clearly not
And yes I'm well aware of the barbaric nature of the Arab and their practice of castration
Posts: 200 | From: Nibiru | Registered: Mar 2023
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Shebitku: Im definitely not saying that I think that they're new comers or slave descendants, although I do think many posters do believe so. Im just pointing out that the delta groups are trying to write people who look like that off as slave descendants or new comers.
Actually even most Afrangi living in the Delta know that the dark Baladi are indigenous but they seem to have this cognitive dissonance where they are in denial of the Baladi's African identity and relation to other Africans. We see a perfect example of this with Zahi Hawass who admits that rural Upper Egyptians best represent the ancient Egyptian but then goes on to say "they are different from the Negro type". So he basically suffers from the same "true negro" mentality as Antalas many other North Africans.
quote:As far as them living near the valley of the kings, that article I linked suggests that their village was only established in the 1940/50's.
The source?
quote:Christine Desroches-Boblecourt, Tutankhamen (Penguin Books, 1971), p. 30.
Although it doesn't seem Christine Desroches-Boblecourt published a book in 1971....
LOL...
quote:The area around Thebes is the main setting for this story. Although we wall follow the river to Tell el-Amarna in order to reconstruct Tutankhamen’s early years, we must always return to that supreme city of high antiquity and its environs. When we examine its bricks and stones, we go back in time to the fourteenth century B.C., to the heart of a civilization throbbing with life. Today the temple at Luxor sprouts like a garden of magnificent sturdy plants on the bank of the Nile. Approaching it, one senses the power of the gods and priests of Egypt, who were the principal beneficiaries of Pharaoh’s prodigality. Luxor, however, was created primarily as the great god Amun’s harmonious Opet of the south, the centre of his family and personal life, where he went during the eleven days of his divine emergence for the great feast of Opet. Throughout the whole of his journey he appeared to his faithful worshippers in his magnificent ceremonial barge sparkling with gold. Karnak is a world of temples, a maze of sanctuaries and pylons, its doors and walls covered with figures of kings and gods, The great gods of the Egyptian empire were all honoured in chapels and sanctuaries. Chief among them was Amun, whose name means the Hidden One, but who is represented everywhere bestowing strength and eternal life on the king. Two tall plumes rising from his head-dress symbolize his celestial origin. He is thus at once an invisible demi¬ urge in the firmament and a god on earth, served by his priests, who exacted from the pharaoh all the moral and material support Amun could wish for. Among the many evocations of the Theban kings an eloquent image adorns the seventh pylon of the great temple: that of Tuthmosis III, seventeen times conqueror of the Asians. He is consecrating before the charming little goddess- Thebes (under the aegis of Amun) a huge human cluster of enemies kneeling to implore mercy. Elsewhere, a gigantic panel depicts heaps of gold, rare jewels, and exotic produce brought back by the king from victorious campaigns and nearly all presented to the deity of the sanctuary as a thank-offering. Every Egyptian monument evokes with intensity an event, an instant in the life of its vanished people. With so much evidence available about the history of Tuthmosis III, the great conqueror, it eventually became possible to establish the link between a detail on the surface of an obelisk, confirming the inscription at its base, an image on a Theban chapel wall, and a cylinder (now in the Louvre) with cuneiform inscriptions in the name of Ashurbanipal. This cylinder tells us that when the Assyrian king sacked Thebes, during the reign of Tanoutamun, he sent back to his palace two columns, or obelisks, which had stood at the temple gate. Made of electrum, an alloy of 75 per cent gold, 22 per cent silver, and 3 per cent copper, their combined weight was 2,500 talents, or 166,650 pounds.
p30-32
Christine Desroches-Boblecourt,Tutankhamen : life and death of a Pharaoh, No mention of the population at Gurna at all. Maybe its the wrong book?
But certain posters would like people to believe it's all Hakuna matata in Egypt, they're all the same people who claim each other. Clearly not
And yes I'm well aware of the barbaric nature of the Arab and their practice of castration
Even if the town was built 50 years ago, is there any proof that the people living there are not Baladi but descended from Sub-Saharan slaves??
By the way, recall the genetic findings from the predynastic site of Adaima Upper Egypt that shows affinities to Sub-Saharans.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I thought we discussed the Slaves/Slave Trade in Egypt and that as you said mostly ended up in places like Cairo or the Delta, but also that they were mostly castrated and barely reproduced descendants...it was an old thread, proably long gone but I remember book evidence was provided...
So the favorite "They're all Slaves" talking point mantra used to explain dark folks above the magical SSA barrier in Egypt pretty much falls apart
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Gurna is a town or group of communities in Upper Egypt near the Valley of the Kings. The Gurna people are definitely Baladi of Upper Egypt.
Who else would these people be other than the descendants of the same people whose kings are buried in the tombs they live near??!
By the way, as far as slave descendants, they exist in Egypt but are found in the Delta! The mass importation of slaves from further south in Africa began from the Abbasid Caliphate up until the Ottoman Caliphate. The indigenes of Egypt (Baladi) were serfs under the feudal system and were not much better than slaves in terms of economic status so virtually all the slaves imported to Egypt were sent to the Delta where the Arabs and other Afrangi elite purchased and sold them to other parts of the Caliphate.
Unlike the Trans-Atlantic slave system in the Americas where there was high fertility among the enslaved, such was not the case in the Islamic slavery of Africans. For one, male slaves usually double castrated (look that up if you dare) but the females for some unknown reason had low fertility. It's suspected that they took contraceptive drugs. So there are actually very few slave descendants in North Africa and in the Islamic realm (except for southern Iraq).
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The best representatives of the ancients are groups like the Beja. This is not only an issue of skin color but of culture and the Beja have maintained many aspects of the ancient culture. Populations in Sudan and of course Upper Egypt, but many of them have been Arabized and no longer maintain old African traditions.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [QB] I thought we discussed the Slaves/Slave Trade in Egypt and that as you said mostly ended up in places like Cairo or the Delta, but also that they were mostly castrated and barely reproduced descendants...it was an old thread, proably long gone but I remember book evidence was provided...
So the favorite "They're all Slaves" talking point mantra used to explain dark folks above the magical SSA barrier in Egypt pretty much falls apart
I've previously discussed this topic in a thread I made , and it's evident that the majority of male slaves were not castrated. Those who underwent castration were considered highly valuable and often purchased by the elite. Additionally, most slaves were females, allowing North Africans to have offspring with them, explaining the sex-biased pattern observed in genetic studies of North African uniparental markers.
Furthermore, it's funny how ancient Near Eastern or Libyan settlers in the Delta are acknowledged, but the presence of Nubian colonies throughout Upper Egypt, extending as far north as the Fayoum, is often overlooked :
A. Hamid Zayed, Egypt's relations with the rest of Africa, General History of Africa, Vol. II, 1980, p. 142
Is it a coincidence that G. Billy 1981 detected a "Negroid influx" in lower Nubia and Upper egypt during the Middle Kingdom ? :
quote:After a long period of stability during the third millennium, the Egyptian-Nubian population experiences the influence of a Negroid influx during the Middle Kingdom, which extends into Lower Nubia, reaching the gates of Upper Egypt at El Kubanieh. The cultural shift from groups A and B to group C, which occurs simultaneously, appears to be connected to the arrival of new ethnic groups and a population modification, as confirmed by the overall increase in variability from group A to group C (Batrawi, 1945)
What about the nubian colony of Gebelein where Nubians married egyptian women ? :
quote:Similarly, from the First Intermediate Period onwards, evidence from steles suggests that Gebelein had a colony of Nubian mercenaries (Zakrzewski 2001). For example, some steles, such as Boston MFA03.1848 (which specifically calls the individual depicted “Nehesy”, the ancient Egyptian name for Nubians (Kendall 1997)) and Leiden F 1938/1.6, suggest that Nubian mercenaries had married Egyptian women (Fischer, 1961). These steles from Gebelein indicate that Nubians lived with, and were buried near the Egyptian community they served, and although they were buried in an Egyptian manner,they were still depicted as Nubian, thus retaining their ethnic identity.
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: [QB] I thought we discussed the Slaves/Slave Trade in Egypt and that as you said mostly ended up in places like Cairo or the Delta, but also that they were mostly castrated and barely reproduced descendants...it was an old thread, proably long gone but I remember book evidence was provided...
So the favorite "They're all Slaves" talking point mantra used to explain dark folks above the magical SSA barrier in Egypt pretty much falls apart
I've previously discussed this topic in a thread I made , and it's evident that the majority of male slaves were not castrated. Those who underwent castration were considered highly valuable and often purchased by the elite. Additionally, most slaves were females, allowing North Africans to have offspring with them, explaining the sex-biased pattern observed in genetic studies of North African uniparental markers.
Furthermore, it's funny how ancient Near Eastern or Libyan settlers in the Delta are acknowledged, but the presence of Nubian colonies throughout Upper Egypt, extending as far north as the Fayoum, is often overlooked :
A. Hamid Zayed, Egypt's relations with the rest of Africa, General History of Africa, Vol. II, 1980, p. 142
Is it a coincidence that G. Billy 1981 detected a "Negroid influx" in lower Nubia and Upper egypt during the Middle Kingdom ? :
quote:After a long period of stability during the third millennium, the Egyptian-Nubian population experiences the influence of a Negroid influx during the Middle Kingdom, which extends into Lower Nubia, reaching the gates of Upper Egypt at El Kubanieh. The cultural shift from groups A and B to group C, which occurs simultaneously, appears to be connected to the arrival of new ethnic groups and a population modification, as confirmed by the overall increase in variability from group A to group C (Batrawi, 1945)
What about the nubian colony of Gebelein where Nubians married egyptian women ? :
quote:Similarly, from the First Intermediate Period onwards, evidence from steles suggests that Gebelein had a colony of Nubian mercenaries (Zakrzewski 2001). For example, some steles, such as Boston MFA03.1848 (which specifically calls the individual depicted “Nehesy”, the ancient Egyptian name for Nubians (Kendall 1997)) and Leiden F 1938/1.6, suggest that Nubian mercenaries had married Egyptian women (Fischer, 1961). These steles from Gebelein indicate that Nubians lived with, and were buried near the Egyptian community they served, and although they were buried in an Egyptian manner,they were still depicted as Nubian, thus retaining their ethnic identity.
Why do your types like to pretend there would not be "sub-Saharan" type Africans above the Sahara dessert in pre-dynastic times? There were literally prognathous skulls found within the Nile valley(and in the Levant) prior to the formation of Egyptian culture. if there were skulls that had prognathism(which is apparently a "sub-Saharan" trait) in the Levant area it would stand to reason that there would have been "sub-Saharan" types that were in Egypt thousands of years before any slave trade, correct?
Posts: 80 | From: USA, America | Registered: May 2023
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Why do your types like to pretend there would not be "sub-Saharan" type Africans above the Sahara dessert in pre-dynastic times? There were literally prognathous skulls found within the Nile valley(and in the Levant) prior to the formation of Egyptian culture. if there were skulls that had prognathism(which is apparently a "sub-Saharan" trait) in the Levant area it would stand to reason that there would have been "sub-Saharan" types that were in Egypt thousands of years before any slave trade, correct? [/QB]
That's a straw man. There were "sub-Saharan" types present in the Sahara region throughout history, including the present day, but they did not constitute the majority of North Africa's population, nor a significant percentage of it. Regarding your questions, my statements are based on the findings of bioanthropological papers. These papers indicate that predynastic and later Egyptians would not fit within the variation of sub-Saharan African populations.
The closest Sub-saharans to the ancient Egyptians in terms of physical characteristics would be lower Nubians and certain groups from the Horn of Africa. However, this information alone may not be fully informative, as these populations also demonstrate craniometric similarities with Europeans. It is essential to recognize that modern Egyptians still exhibit affinities with these same southern populations.
Furthermore, studies that highlight "negroid traits" or "SSA admixture/affinities" do not negate the possibility that the trans-Saharan slave trade had an impact on North Africa and introduced additional influences from sub-Saharan Africa.
This scatterplot, taken from Irish 2010, illustrates that the average modern Sub-Saharan profile (SAF) is noticeably distant from Ancient Egyptians, Nubians, and Maghrebis. Among the Sub-Saharan populations, modern Ethiopians show a relatively closer resemblance to them. However, it is important to note that overall, both Ancient Egyptians and lower Nubians exhibit significantly greater proximity to European populations than to most modern Sub-Saharan groups :
Now add to this the fact that modern egyptians actually cluster with predynastic egyptians :
In the 1972 paper, "On the Craniological Study of Egyptians in various periods" by M.F Gaballah et al, with reference to the works of both Batrawi 1946 and Sidney Smith 1926, it is said that the available series of modern Egyptian skulls conform more closely with the Southern phenotype that characterized the predynastic and early dynastic cultures of Upper Egypt such as the Naqada.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Why do your types like to pretend there would not be "sub-Saharan" type Africans above the Sahara dessert in pre-dynastic times? There were literally prognathous skulls found within the Nile valley(and in the Levant) prior to the formation of Egyptian culture. if there were skulls that had prognathism(which is apparently a "sub-Saharan" trait) in the Levant area it would stand to reason that there would have been "sub-Saharan" types that were in Egypt thousands of years before any slave trade, correct?
That's a straw man. There were "sub-Saharan" types present in the Sahara region throughout history, including the present day, but they did not constitute the majority of North Africa's population, nor a significant percentage of it. Regarding your questions, my statements are based on the findings of bioanthropological papers. These papers indicate that predynastic and later Egyptians would not fit within the variation of sub-Saharan African populations.
The closest Sub-saharans to the ancient Egyptians in terms of physical characteristics would be lower Nubians and certain groups from the Horn of Africa. However, this information alone may not be fully informative, as these populations also demonstrate craniometric similarities with Europeans. It is essential to recognize that modern Egyptians still exhibit affinities with these same southern populations.
Furthermore, studies that highlight "negroid traits" or "SSA admixture/affinities" do not negate the possibility that the trans-Saharan slave trade had an impact on North Africa and introduced additional influences from sub-Saharan Africa.
This scatterplot, taken from Irish 2010, illustrates that the average modern Sub-Saharan profile (SAF) is noticeably distant from Ancient Egyptians, Nubians, and Maghrebis. Among the Sub-Saharan populations, modern Ethiopians show a relatively closer resemblance to them. However, it is important to note that overall, both Ancient Egyptians and lower Nubians exhibit significantly greater proximity to European populations than to most modern Sub-Saharan groups :
Now add to this the fact that modern egyptians actually cluster with predynastic egyptians :
In the 1972 paper, "On the Craniological Study of Egyptians in various periods" by M.F Gaballah et al, with reference to the works of both Batrawi 1946 and Sidney Smith 1926, it is said that the available series of modern Egyptian skulls conform more closely with the Southern phenotype that characterized the predynastic and early dynastic cultures of Upper Egypt such as the Naqada.
quote:That's a straw man. There were "sub-Saharan" types present in the Sahara region throughout history, including the present day, but they did not constitute the majority of North Africa's population, nor a significant percentage of it.
And you know this information about their population based on what, your own personal opinion? There were "sub-Saharan" type skulls found within North Africa, it does matter if it was the Sahara region or not, it is still Northern Africa... this is what we mean when we say you guys are trying to diminish the presence of "Sub-Saharan" populations within North Africa. The fact is that they were present.
quote:The closest Sub-saharans to the ancient Egyptians in terms of physical characteristics would be lower Nubians and certain groups from the Horn of Africa. However, this information alone may not be fully informative, as these populations also demonstrate craniometric similarities with Europeans. It is essential to recognize that modern Egyptians still exhibit affinities with these same southern populations.
quote:Furthermore, studies that highlight "negroid traits" or "SSA admixture/affinities" do not negate the possibility that the trans-Saharan slave trade had an impact on North Africa and introduced additional influences from sub-Saharan Africa.
Who is talking about the slave trade? I am talking about ancient populations in North Africa and their craniometry that would prove "sub-Saharans" existed in North Africa. No one is saying the TST did not have an impact on the genetics of these regions, BUT what I am saying is that they would have been there before that. But, you take issue with this fact which is why you try and minimize their presence.
Also in that paper, they refer to the skulls as being "Europoid". As if there aren't any Africans Below the Sahara with features that can be classified as "Europoid". Fact of the matter is, there were skulls found along the Nile Valley in pre-dynastic times that had "prognathism" which would prove that those types of Africans that you dislike so much were in the Nile Valley.
Posts: 80 | From: USA, America | Registered: May 2023
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
"In fact, for those with eyes to see, the individuals that Egyptian art has made familiar to us are variety itself, with their 'straight profiles, prognathous profiles, sometimes high cheekbones as in the case of Sesostris III, fleshy, often curling lips;... ...It is more than probable that the African strain, black or light, is preponderant in the ancient Egyptian, but in the present state of our knowledge it is impossible to say more."
"General History of Africa: Ancient civilizations of Africa" by G. Mokhtar, page 15 (1991) United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, International Scientific Committee for the Drafting of a General History of Africa
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: And you know this information about their population based on what, your own personal opinion? There were "sub-Saharan" type skulls found within North Africa, it does matter if it was the Sahara region or not, it is still Northern Africa... this is what we mean when we say you guys are trying to diminish the presence of "Sub-Saharan" populations within North Africa. The fact is that they were present.
Because you expect the desert to have a higher population density compared to the fertile Mediterranean coast ? Have you familiarized yourself with archaeological studies concerning the Sahara? It's still North Africa according to who ? Modern borders are purely conventional I don't see why you project them onto the past.
Populations from the Sahara were not necessarily physically similar to populations further north. A good example of this are Garamantes (Central Sahara) who don't cluster with ancient north africans and this highlights how the Sahara played the role of a genetic barrier :
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Who is talking about the slave trade? I am talking about ancient populations in North Africa and their craniometry that would prove "sub-Saharans" existed in North Africa. No one is saying the TST did not have an impact on the genetics of these regions, BUT what I am saying is that they would have been there before that. But, you take issue with this fact which is why you try and minimize their presence.
Also in that paper, they refer to the skulls as being "Europoid". As if there aren't any Africans Below the Sahara with features that can be classified as "Europoid". Fact of the matter is, there were skulls found along the Nile Valley in pre-dynastic times that had "prognathism" which would prove that those types of Africans that you dislike so much were in the Nile Valley. [/QB]
Why don't you adress the scatterplot and the modern egyptian affinities with predynastic egyptians ? The africans which you describe as "europoid" are in fact genetically and morphologically closer to light skinned north africans, middle easterners and europeans so why do you see them as your kin ? Simply because of dark skin ? .
"Prognathism" doesn't mean much as the few individuals who had it still did not cluster with most modern SSAs. Additionally, it appears that you may not be aware that modern North Africans do possess some Sub-Saharan features.
And I'm not minimizing anything, we have large collections of North African skulls and negroid skulls always constitute a tiny %. Here as an example are 62 neolithic skulls from North Africa of which only 4 are negroid :
Learn to respect Africa's diversity. Not all Africans are related to each other or look the same. Stop trying to desesperately insert yourself in North Africa in order to claim our history and ancestors.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Antalies' mental gymnastics are on full display. You're agreeing with Kimbles but at the same time trying to disagree with him. Rofl
Posts: 2491 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: And you know this information about their population based on what, your own personal opinion? There were "sub-Saharan" type skulls found within North Africa, it does matter if it was the Sahara region or not, it is still Northern Africa... this is what we mean when we say you guys are trying to diminish the presence of "Sub-Saharan" populations within North Africa. The fact is that they were present.
Because you expect the desert to have a higher population density compared to the fertile Mediterranean coast ? Have you familiarized yourself with archaeological studies concerning the Sahara? It's still North Africa according to who ? Modern borders are purely conventional I don't see why you project them onto the past.
Populations from the Sahara were not necessarily physically similar to populations further north. A good example of this are Garamantes (Central Sahara) who don't cluster with ancient north africans and this highlights how the Sahara played the role of a genetic barrier :
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Who is talking about the slave trade? I am talking about ancient populations in North Africa and their craniometry that would prove "sub-Saharans" existed in North Africa. No one is saying the TST did not have an impact on the genetics of these regions, BUT what I am saying is that they would have been there before that. But, you take issue with this fact which is why you try and minimize their presence.
Also in that paper, they refer to the skulls as being "Europoid". As if there aren't any Africans Below the Sahara with features that can be classified as "Europoid". Fact of the matter is, there were skulls found along the Nile Valley in pre-dynastic times that had "prognathism" which would prove that those types of Africans that you dislike so much were in the Nile Valley.
Why don't you adress the scatterplot and the modern egyptian affinities with predynastic egyptians ? The africans which you describe as "europoid" are in fact genetically and morphologically closer to light skinned north africans, middle easterners and europeans so why do you see them as your kin ? Simply because of dark skin ? .
"Prognathism" doesn't mean much as the few individuals who had it still did not cluster with most modern SSAs. Additionally, it appears that you may not be aware that modern North Africans do possess some Sub-Saharan features.
And I'm not minimizing anything, we have large collections of North African skulls and negroid skulls always constitute a tiny %. Here as an example are 62 neolithic skulls from North Africa of which only 4 are negroid :
Learn to respect Africa's diversity. Not all Africans are related to each other or look the same. Stop trying to desesperately insert yourself in North Africa in order to claim our history and ancestors. [/QB]
quote:]Why don't you adress the scatterplot and the modern egyptian affinities with predynastic egyptians ? The africans which you describe as "europoid" are in fact genetically and morphologically closer to light skinned north africans, middle easterners and europeans so why do you see them as your kin ? Simply because of dark skin ? .
Because I do not care about your misconstrued or cherry picked bullshit. You have an agenda to push. ive seen your past threads, its YOU that has no idea about the genetic diversity of Africa. Most of the diversity of Africa is within "sub-Saharan" Africa. Did you know that? You know... the negroes you dislike so much are much more diverse than any other population on this planet.
From West Africans:
Horn of Africa
East Africa
South Africa
As you can see, many different phenotypes and cultures represented. And there is much more I cannot show due to limitations. All of these people would be considered "Black" in the US(even that "Caucasian" looking man above lol).
quote:"Prognathism" doesn't mean much as the few individuals who had it still did not cluster with most modern SSAs. Additionally, it appears that you may not be aware that modern North Africans do possess some Sub-Saharan features.
Isnt prognathism present mostly in "sub-Saharan" African skulls. The "true negro" classification is based on this. How can they cluster more with "Europeans" and "North Africans" when they lack this classification? European/"Caucasoid" type skulls typically do not show prognathism. And LOL at you claiming North Africans have "Sub-Saharan" features which would make them "you know whats" in your eyes, but that's different because North Africans are diverse LMAO. You are a ki!
quote: Stop trying to desperately insert yourself in North Africa in order to claim our history and ancestors.
I don't want to be you, nor do I want to be North African. When have I ever claimed to be such? I have my own history on the continent and in the United States. We are popping over here, everyone imitates us because we are the f*cking blueprint.
Why would I want to be Moroccan? Don't you guys have rampant sex tourism/prostitution over there, to where European/French men go there to get piped down by AmaZighen men? Give it up, we know all about what goes on in Northern Africa, but oop, let me keep it on the DL for your sake. No one black in America wants to be yall, no shade, we could care less. But what you aren't going to do in this thread is spread disinformation about origins in North Africa, there were black people there . Now like I said before, go smoke some shisha and sit yo ass down somewhere.
Posts: 80 | From: USA, America | Registered: May 2023
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Kimbles
I literally laughed when antalies said:
quote: Additionally, it appears that you may not be aware that modern North Africans do possess some Sub-Saharan features.
He literally admit modern north africans possess "sub-saharan" features, and we already know that there are black people in north africa -- he has admit that as well.
Yet both of these facts are the exact idea(s) that he constantly argues against. 90% of the time he is trying to convince everyone that all black "africans" look like kunta kinte.
Antalies stays contradicting himself and always ends up shooting himself in the foot if you let him talk long enough.
He has made claims in other threads that completely contradict the quoted statement above. Sometimes I think he just gets off on trolling black people and being pseudo.
Posts: 2491 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Kimbles you have a photo above of two W. African women with face paint. I recommend not posting photos this large because it make the whole thread harder to read. When something is too large the whole thread page is subjected to the side slider which makes things harder to read
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Because I do not care about your misconstrued or cherry picked bullshit. You have an agenda to push. ive seen your past threads, its YOU that has no idea about the genetic diversity of Africa. Most of the diversity of Africa is within "sub-Saharan" Africa. Did you know that? You know... the negroes you dislike so much are much more diverse than any other population on this planet.
From West Africans:
Horn of Africa
East Africa
South Africa
As you can see, many different phenotypes and cultures represented. And there is much more I cannot show due to limitations. All of these people would be considered "Black" in the US(even that "Caucasian" looking man above lol).
Can you please refrain from using ad hominem attacks and instead focus on discussing the data I provided? Funny how you recognize the diversity within the sub-Saharan region, and yet you treat them like a monolith. Moreover, this diversity doesn't negate the fact that some individuals from the SSA are genetically closer to populations in the northern part of the continent, regardless of whether they would be classified as "black" in the US or not.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Isnt prognathism present mostly in "sub-Saharan" African skulls. The "true negro" classification is based on this. How can they cluster more with "Europeans" and "North Africans" when they lack this classification? European/"Caucasoid" type skulls typically do not show prognathism. And LOL at you claiming North Africans have "Sub-Saharan" features which would make them "you know whats" in your eyes, but that's different because North Africans are diverse LMAO. You are a ki!
No the negroid pattern isn't only defined by prognathism but by a whole set of other features. Here a non-exhaustive list :
Furthermore the prognathism was only detected among some Badarian skulls which predate by millenias Ancient Egypt and this is where they plot :
They appear to fall between the European and Sub-Saharan clusters. However, they clearly have a greater shift towards Sub-Saharan ancestry compared to the ancient Egyptians, who exhibited a higher Eurasian influence.
And yes North Africans have some SSA features simply due to the fact that they have SSA admixture.
Here an example :
quote: North Africans exhibit a marked divergence in several traits from the Sundadonts and Sinodonts (e.g., UI1 winging, UI1 shoveling, UC distal accessory ridge, six-cusped LM1, etc.), as well as Australia/Tasmania and Melanesia samples (e.g., UM1 cusp 5, UM3 agenesis, LM1 deflecting wrinkle, four-cusped LM2). Howe ver, they show a strong affinity to Europeans, and perhaps West Asians based on recent work by Lipschultz (1996), sharing many traits involving dental simplification and mass reduction. These traits (Table V) include comparable frequencies of four-cusped LM2 and M3 agenesis, as well as UM1 Carabelli's trait, two-rooted LC, and relatively low frequencies of UI1 shoveling, UC distal accessory ridge, UM1 cusp 5, premolar odontomes, six-cusped LM1, LM1 deflecting wrinkle, and LP1 Tome's root. North Africans also exhibit rocker jaw (see Table IV), a trait known to commonly occur in Europeans (Turner and Marko witz, 1990). Any North African deviations away from a simple dental pattern are in the direction of complex Sub-Saharan traits (e.g., UI2 tuberculum dentale, Bushman Canine, two-rooted UP1, three-rooted UM2), suggesting likely gene flow from these peoples. These findings agree with genetic-based results that link North Africans to Europeans and western Asians, yet record many Sub-Saharan influenced traits (e.g., Mourant 1954, 1983; Hiernaux 1975; Nurse et al., 1985; Sanchez-Mazas et ai, 1986; Excoffier et ai, 1987; Roy choudhury and Nei 1988).
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: I don't want to be you, nor do I want to be North African. When have I ever claimed to be such? I have my own history on the continent and in the United States. We are popping over here, everyone imitates us because we are the f*cking blueprint.
Why would I want to be Moroccan? Don't you guys have rampant sex tourism/prostitution over there, to where European/French men go there to get piped down by AmaZighen men? Give it up, we know all about what goes on in Northern Africa, but oop, let me keep it on the DL for your sake. No one black in America wants to be yall, no shade, we could care less. But what you aren't going to do in this thread is spread disinformation about origins in North Africa, there were black people there . Now like I said before, go smoke some shisha and sit yo ass down somewhere.
You don't want to be us yet constantly stick your nose in our History and culture and try to insert yourself everywhere. Rather than harboring self-hatred, I encourage you to embrace and explore the rich history of your West African ancestors, rather than trying to modify Egypt and North Africa to fit your narrative. It feels like you might be using our history to find validation and acceptance.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ You’re a known troll on this website apparently, so imma let you rock. I really do not care to go back and forth with you because the data speaks for itself. And you keep on falsely accusing me of wanting to be North African when I’ve told you already that I don’t lol.
P.S You didn’t deny my allegations I posted above, just sayin…
Posts: 80 | From: USA, America | Registered: May 2023
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: @Kimbles you have a photo above of two W. African women with face paint. I recommend not posting photos this large because it make the whole thread harder to read. When something is too large the whole thread page is subjected to the side slider which makes things harder to read
Noted..
Posts: 80 | From: USA, America | Registered: May 2023
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: ^ You’re a known troll on this website apparently, so imma let you rock. I really do not care to go back and forth with you because the data speaks for itself. And you keep on falsely accusing me of wanting to be North African when I’ve told you already that I don’t lol.
P.S You didn’t deny my allegations I posted above, just sayin…
Indeed, the data, which you have yet to address, clearly speaks for itself but unfortunately afrocentrist of your kind choose to remain in denial and envision a black North Africa that has no scientific basis.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
15,000 years ago, Moroccans (North Africans) were a mixture of Levantine and Sub-Saharan African. Current day North Africans are largely related to Eurasian populations.
Posts: 2491 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: 15,000 years ago, Moroccans (North Africans) were a mixture of Levantine and Sub-Saharan African. Current day North Africans are largely related to Eurasian populations.
And there he goes throwing that "Afrocentric" word out again like the troll he is.
Coastal North Africans, the ones he likes to post on here that are extremely pale, have alot of admixture with Europeans. Hell, most of the European/Levantine settlements( like Carthage, the Pheonicians, etc.) were along the coast where he claims the "original" North Africans live. That would make sense as to why they look like that.
Its like saying the present day Egyptians represent what the AEs would have looked like, ignoring all of the invasions and migrations into the area after the formation of the dynastic kingdom itself. Its absurd lol.
Posts: 80 | From: USA, America | Registered: May 2023
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: And there he goes throwing that "Afrocentric" word out again like the troll he is.
Coastal North Africans, the ones he likes to post on here that are extremely pale, have alot of admixture with Europeans. Hell, most of the European/Levantine settlements( like Carthage, the Pheonicians, etc.) were along the coast where he claims the "original" North Africans live. That would make sense as to why they look like that.
Its like saying the present day Egyptians represent what the AEs would have looked like, ignoring all of the invasions and migrations into the area after the formation of the dynastic kingdom itself. Its absurd lol. [/QB]
How comes the ancient samples we have are genetically similar to modern north africans ? Why would a few phoenician traders that came by boat have a greater impact that the millions of black slaves that were imported more recently ?
Modern egyptians are genetically similar to the few egyptian samples we have and as I've shown you they are also morphologically similar to predynastic and early dynastic egyptians from Upper Egypt. You speak without a single shred of evidence you just want to believe in a black North Africa to claim our history and feel better about yourself. You cannot resist being racist and have a hard time accepting that not all Africans look like you.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Kimbles exactly. The problem is he does not want to acknowledge that he descends from people who are not truly native to north africa, and instead spends his time trying to gaslight and project.
@Antalas I just referenced a source saying that 15,000 years ago, north africans were Levantine + Sub-saharan african. While current north africans are largely related to eurasian populations. That completely contradicts all the cherrypicked rhetoric you have been pushing and 100% substantiates Kimble's position.
It appears as though you've been misrepresenting the sources and data you are referencing.
Posts: 2491 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
@Antalas I just referenced a source saying that 15,000 years ago, north africans were Levantine + Sub-saharan african. That completely contradicts all the cherrypicked rhetoric you have been pushing and 100% substantiates Kimble's position.
Thanks for showing again your ignorance because this is outdated information. Lazaridis 2018 has already shown that Iberomaurusians descend from a Dzudzuana-like population and a local north african population known as ANA (Ancestral North Africa) and it's actually levantines (Natufians) and Sub-saharans that have Iberomaurusian ancestry not the other way :
quote:Moreover, our model predicts that West Africans (represented by Yoruba) had 12.5±1.1% ancestry from a Taforalt-related group rather than Taforalt having ancestry from an unknown Sub-Saharan African source 11; this may have mediated the limited Neanderthal admixture present in West Africans23. An advantage of our model is that it allows for a local North African component in the ancestry of Taforalt, rather than deriving them exclusively from Levantine and Sub-Saharan sources.
quote: Our co-modeling of Epipaleolithic Natufians and Ibero-Maurusians from Taforalt confirms that the Taforalt population was mixed , but instead of specifying gene flow from the ancestors of Natufians into the ancestors of Taforalt as originally reported, we infer gene flow in the reverse direction (into Natufians). The Neolithic population from Morocco, closely related to Taforalt is also consistent with being descended from the source of this gene flow, and appears to have no admixture from the Levantine Neolithic (Supplementary Information section 3). If our model is correct, Epipaleolithic Natufians trace part of their ancestry to North Africa, consistent with morphological and archaeological studies that indicate a spread of morphological features and artifacts from North Africa into the Near East.
Also Iberomaurusians were not genetically nor physically similar to Sub-saharans. Instead they show morphological affinities with modern north africans :
Funny how you use genetic studies only when you think it supports your afrocentrist standpoint but when those same studies says Ancient Israelites were similar to modern levantines ...you disappear. Also funny how much back in time you have to go to prove that North Africans are not "native" ... Don't think I will answer you after that I just wanted to clarify things so you don't mislead Kimbles. And I already told you that you're not at my level israelite larper.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Antalas
Outdated information? The source I referenced was published last month (June 7, 2023). Yet you are appealing to information from 2018 and calling the info I referenced outdated? You call literally everything "outdated" when it debunks you. This time you were stupid enough to call a source from last month of this year "outdated". You might be the biggest gaslighter on this website.
There's nothing wrong with me using genetic articles to expose your lies and dishonest rhetoric, even if I do not subscribe to it myself. The fact of the matter is that you subscribe to it, and you are clearly misrepresenting it. That's easy to see once it gets put into proper context.
Lastly, there is no ancient Israelite DNA on record, nor can genetic markers determine jewish descent according to Raphael Falk. So.... stop the BS.
Posts: 2491 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
The idiot didn't notice that the statement is refering to an older study...
Keep embarassing yourself
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Antalas
So you would have us believe that a paper published last month of this year (June, 2023) is referencing "outdated" information... and this "outdated" information being referenced just so happens to originally be from the same year (2018) as the paper you are appealing to in your counter argument?
Rofl... nice try, antalies.
Posts: 2491 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: And there he goes throwing that "Afrocentric" word out again like the troll he is.
Coastal North Africans, the ones he likes to post on here that are extremely pale, have alot of admixture with Europeans. Hell, most of the European/Levantine settlements( like Carthage, the Pheonicians, etc.) were along the coast where he claims the "original" North Africans live. That would make sense as to why they look like that.
Its like saying the present day Egyptians represent what the AEs would have looked like, ignoring all of the invasions and migrations into the area after the formation of the dynastic kingdom itself. Its absurd lol.
How comes the ancient samples we have are genetically similar to modern north africans ? Why would a few phoenician traders that came by boat have a greater impact that the millions of black slaves that were imported more recently ?
Modern egyptians are genetically similar to the few egyptian samples we have and as I've shown you they are also morphologically similar to predynastic and early dynastic egyptians from Upper Egypt. You speak without a single shred of evidence you just want to believe in a black North Africa to claim our history and feel better about yourself. You cannot resist being racist and have a hard time accepting that not all Africans look like you. [/QB]
Which ancient samples? The ones you posted that had 40% Eurasian DNA?
quote:Why would a few phoenician traders that came by boat have a greater impact that the millions of black slaves that were imported more recently
Because it wasn't just a "few" Phoenician traders like you claim. They were literally colonies along the North African coast. What makes you think they wouldn't come into contact with coastal North Africans and possibly intermix? Not to mention other influences from Southern Europe later on.
What's also interesting is that you play up the TSST as if only black Africans had been enslaved. But you conveniently never mention the Barbary Slave trade and the genetic impact it may have had on North Africa as well.
quote:Modern egyptians are genetically similar to the few egyptian samples we have and as I've shown you they are also morphologically similar to predynastic and early dynastic egyptians from Upper Egypt. You speak without a single shred of evidence you just want to believe in a black North Africa to claim our history and feel better about yourself. You cannot resist being racist and have a hard time accepting that not all Africans look like you.
What studies are you mentioning with similar DNA with modern day Egyptians? Are you referencing the Abusir study that was flawed? How can you sit here with a straight face and claim continuity between modern day and AE when they were subject to many invasions throughout their history? Many immigrants and foreigners that controlled Egypt at some point later on. it would make sense that they would be mixed up, I doubt there would be resemblance to their ancestors.
Again you keep claiming that I want to be you, at this point you are a delusional troll.
Edit: Also the fact that these North African folks keep using the term "afrocentric" when they themselves and their history would be considered African is telling. The only thing here is that they take issue with blackness. Just like the Egyptians had an issue with their past president Anwar Sadat for being dark-skinned(when he was caramel colored) and the actor that played him. The use of this word is nothing more than racism, it has no basis. Because if we were talking about civilizations that were outside of Africa, like the Aztecs/Incas, or ancient Rome or Greece it would be applicable.
But we are literally talking about areas on the continent itself which would have had Black people on them. its dumb for "native" Africans to use this term in respect to their history. At this point, I am convinced that they do not consider themselves as Africans or they are pretenders.
Posts: 80 | From: USA, America | Registered: May 2023
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Why do your types like to pretend there would not be "sub-Saharan" type Africans above the Sahara dessert in pre-dynastic times? There were literally prognathous skulls found within the Nile valley(and in the Levant) prior to the formation of Egyptian culture. if there were skulls that had prognathism(which is apparently a "sub-Saharan" trait) in the Levant area it would stand to reason that there would have been "sub-Saharan" types that were in Egypt thousands of years before any slave trade, correct?
"Prognathism" is NOT what defines a Sub-Saharan as there are North Africans that are prognathous as well as Sub-Saharans that are orthognathous (the opposite).
Craniofacially this is the general distinction between North Africans and Sub-Saharans
The Neolithic Badarians for example were noted for their prognathism but their narrow facial dimensions are North African and not Sub-Saharan. The same is true with Nubians. Many Upper Egyptians today are still prognathous.
Another difference between North Africans and Sub-Saharans is dental morphology.
Metrically North Africans have smaller 'microdont' crowns than Sub-Saharans who have 'megadont' crowns.
And even in nonmetric traits there is a difference.
Thus, I proposed (Irish, 1993b, 1998a) that the North African dental trait complex is one which parallels that of Europeans, yet displays higher frequencies of Bushman Canine, two-rooted UP1, three-rooted UM2, LM2 Y- groove, LM1 cusp 7, LP1 Tome's root, two-rooted LM2, and lower frequencies of UM1 enamel extension and peg/reduced or absent UM3. North Africans also exhibit a higher frequency of UM1 Carabelli's trait than sub-Saharan Africans or Europeans. --Irish (1998)
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
To Antalas, perhaps Kimble likely resorts to ad-hominem attacks because he knows you're full of sh*t.
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: Furthermore the prognathism was only detected among some Badarian skulls which predate by millenias Ancient Egypt and this is where they plot :
Yet that still doesn't change the fact that in many craniometric studies, the Badarians show a central position amongst all Egyptian populations both predynastic and dynastic.
quote:They appear to fall between the European and Sub-Saharan clusters. However, they clearly have a greater shift towards Sub-Saharan ancestry compared to the ancient Egyptians, who exhibited a higher Eurasian influence.
Who? The Badarians?! The graph you post clearly shows they plot next to the Nubian Centroid which still falls within the overall North African cluster NOT Sub-Saharans! LOL And both the Badarian and Nubian Centroid are not far from the centroid of the entire graph which is where the "Proto-Mediterranean" sample resides.
quote:And yes North Africans have some SSA features simply due to the fact that they have SSA admixture.
No, dummy! We told you countless times it has nothing to do with "admixture" but the simple fact that North Africans are genetically intermediate between Sub-Saharans and Eurasians! For example why do some Eurasians approach Sub-Saharans in crown size closer than North Africans or why do North Africans have the highest incidence of UM1 Carabelli's trait than either Eurasians or Sub-Saharans. Genetics has debunked your whole racialized way of thinking!
And this is why nobody in this forum takes you seriously.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Which ancient samples? The ones you posted that had 40% Eurasian DNA?
Why are you talking about Upper Pleistocene populations ? And estimates of eurasian admixture for this population varies a lot depending on the paper. Here Lazaridis 2018 estimates it at 72% :
And as I've shown above they weren't physically/morphologically similar to sub-saharans.
Interesting Paleolithic NW Africans already had that much eurasian admixture ? I thought it was phoenicians and white slaves who brought it ...
But I wasn't refering to these old folks but rather to the samples from the Copper and Iron Age, all of which exhibit a clustering pattern with modern North Africans :
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Because it wasn't just a "few" Phoenician traders like you claim. They were literally colonies along the North African coast. What makes you think they wouldn't come into contact with coastal North Africans and possibly intermix? Not to mention other influences from Southern Europe later on.
What's also interesting is that you play up the TSST as if only black Africans had been enslaved. But you conveniently never mention the Barbary Slave trade and the genetic impact it may have had on North Africa as well.
"Colonies" is a big word when those where in most cases small trading posts built next to indigenous towns and also can you explain us why already in the early phase of this "colonization" the north african element was predominant ? Why are carthaginian skulls most similar to North Africans instead of phoenicians ? Why is the expansion of Carthage in the mediterranean associated with North African ancestry ?
We already possess numerous modern and ancient North African samples. I'm curious, where is the evidence for the Phoenician or recent South European genetic influence you mentioned? Additionally, I find it interesting that whenever I bring up the trans-Saharan slave trade, proponents of Afrocentrism tend to bring up the "Barbary slave trade," which involved fewer individuals, mainly men, who were often ransomed back in most cases.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: What studies are you mentioning with similar DNA with modern day Egyptians? Are you referencing the Abusir study that was flawed? How can you sit here with a straight face and claim continuity between modern day and AE when they were subject to many invasions throughout their history? Many immigrants and foreigners that controlled Egypt at some point later on. it would make sense that they would be mixed up, I doubt there would be resemblance to their ancestors.
"Flawed" ? Says who ? It appears you might not be aware that we have three additional Egyptian samples from Phoenicia and a gladiator from York, and interestingly, all of them are closely related to the Abusir samples. Moreover, the mtDNA profile of the 90 mummies from Abusir matches the present-day Egyptian profile :
and the results of the Abusir paper are supported by an upcoming paper that includes upper egyptian samples and span 4000 years of History :
quote:Egypt represents an ideal location for genetic studies on population migration and admixture due to its geographic location and rich history. However, there are only a few reliable genetic studies on ancient Egyptian samples. In a previous study, we assessed the genetic history of a single site: Abusir el-Meleq from 1388 BCE to 426 CE. We now focus on widening the geographic scope to give a general overview of the population genetic background, focusing on mitochondrial haplogroups present among the whole Egyptian Nile River Valley. We collected 81 tooth, hair, bone, and soft tissue samples from 14 mummies and 17 skeletal remains. The samples span approximately 4000 years of Egyptian history and originate from six different excavation sites covering the whole length of the Egyptian Nile River Valley. NGS based ancient DNA 8 were applied to reconstruct 18 high-quality mitochondrial genomes from 10 different individuals. The determined mitochondrial haplogroups match the results from our Abusir el-Meleq study. Our results indicate very low rates of modern DNA contamination independent of the tissue type. Although authentic ancient DNA was recovered from different tissues, a reliable recovery was best achieved using teeth or petrous bone material. Moreover, the rate for successful ancient DNA retrieval between Egyptian mummies and skeletal remains did not differ significantly. Our study provides preliminary insights into population history across different regions and compares tissue-specific DNA preservation for mummies and skeletal remains from the Egyptian Nile River Valley.
Military invasions do not necessarily lead to population replacement or significant genetic alterations. Egypt was literally one of the most densely populated areas in the entire region.
You seem to be continuously making assumptions based on your personal preferences, completely disregarding the extensive body of bioanthropological research that contradicts your Afrocentrist perspective.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Edit: Also the fact that these North African folks keep using the term "afrocentric" when they themselves and their history would be considered African is telling. The only thing here is that they take issue with blackness. Just like the Egyptians had an issue with their past president Anwar Sadat for being dark-skinned(when he was caramel colored) and the actor that played him. The use of this word is nothing more than racism, it has no basis. Because if we were talking about civilizations that were outside of Africa, like the Aztecs/Incas, or ancient Rome or Greece it would be applicable.
But we are literally talking about areas on the continent itself which would have had Black people on them. its dumb for "native" Africans to use this term in respect to their history. At this point, I am convinced that they do not consider themselves as Africans or they are pretenders.
What is "African" even supposed to mean here ? Are you implying that all Africans share a uniform culture or history? Historically and culturally, North Africans have more similarities with populations from the Middle East or Europe than with Sub-Saharan Africa. It's important to remember that Africa is a diverse continent with various distinct groups, not a singular country where all groups are inherently related. For instance, I haven't heard of any Japanese individuals complaining that Indians don't identify as 'Asian,' nor have I encountered any Chinese individuals insisting that there were Mongoloids in India simply because the continent is full of them.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: To Antalas, perhaps Kimble likely resorts to ad-hominem attacks because he knows you're full of sh*t.
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: Furthermore the prognathism was only detected among some Badarian skulls which predate by millenias Ancient Egypt and this is where they plot :
Yet that still doesn't change the fact that in many craniometric studies, the Badarians show a central position amongst all Egyptian populations both predynastic and dynastic.
quote:They appear to fall between the European and Sub-Saharan clusters. However, they clearly have a greater shift towards Sub-Saharan ancestry compared to the ancient Egyptians, who exhibited a higher Eurasian influence.
Who? The Badarians?! The graph you post clearly shows they plot next to the Nubian Centroid which still falls within the overall North African cluster NOT Sub-Saharans! LOL And both the Badarian and Nubian Centroid are not far from the centroid of the entire graph which is where the "Proto-Mediterranean" sample resides.
quote:And yes North Africans have some SSA features simply due to the fact that they have SSA admixture.
No, dummy! We told you countless times it has nothing to do with "admixture" but the simple fact that North Africans are genetically intermediate between Sub-Saharans and Eurasians! For example why do some Eurasians approach Sub-Saharans in crown size closer than North Africans or why do North Africans have the highest incidence of UM1 Carabelli's trait than either Eurasians or Sub-Saharans. Genetics has debunked your whole racialized way of thinking!
And this is why nobody in this forum takes you seriously.
The core problem with Antalas and the European academics who concocted these theories is that they want everyone to believe that North Africa was populated 10 to 20 thousand years ago by Eurasian migrants who are distinct from Africans. Therefore, in their minds, "North Africans" have always been a branch of Eurasians with light/white skin since then and not the result of more recent migrations or mixture. There is no evidence for this as the actual evidence says that these migrations of light skinned Eurasians only happened within the last 5,000 years and that even then black African were still present. This is why they completely ignore the Sahara wet phase when it was full of black Africans in "North Africa". It is all a bunch of pseudo scientific nonsense trying to prop up a mythical ancient white North African race that never existed.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Which ancient samples? The ones you posted that had 40% Eurasian DNA?
Why are you talking about Upper Pleistocene populations ? And estimates of eurasian admixture for this population varies a lot depending on the paper. Here Lazaridis 2018 estimates it at 72% :
And as I've shown above they weren't physically/morphologically similar to sub-saharans.
Interesting Paleolithic NW Africans already had that much eurasian admixture ? I thought it was phoenicians and white slaves who brought it ...
But I wasn't refering to these old folks but rather to the samples from the Copper and Iron Age, all of which exhibit a clustering pattern with modern North Africans :
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Because it wasn't just a "few" Phoenician traders like you claim. They were literally colonies along the North African coast. What makes you think they wouldn't come into contact with coastal North Africans and possibly intermix? Not to mention other influences from Southern Europe later on.
What's also interesting is that you play up the TSST as if only black Africans had been enslaved. But you conveniently never mention the Barbary Slave trade and the genetic impact it may have had on North Africa as well.
"Colonies" is a big word when those where in most cases small trading posts built next to indigenous towns and also can you explain us why already in the early phase of this "colonization" the north african element was predominant ? Why are carthaginian skulls most similar to North Africans instead of phoenicians ? Why is the expansion of Carthage in the mediterranean associated with North African ancestry ?
We already possess numerous modern and ancient North African samples. I'm curious, where is the evidence for the Phoenician or recent South European genetic influence you mentioned? Additionally, I find it interesting that whenever I bring up the trans-Saharan slave trade, proponents of Afrocentrism tend to bring up the "Barbary slave trade," which involved fewer individuals, mainly men, who were often ransomed back in most cases.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: What studies are you mentioning with similar DNA with modern day Egyptians? Are you referencing the Abusir study that was flawed? How can you sit here with a straight face and claim continuity between modern day and AE when they were subject to many invasions throughout their history? Many immigrants and foreigners that controlled Egypt at some point later on. it would make sense that they would be mixed up, I doubt there would be resemblance to their ancestors.
"Flawed" ? Says who ? It appears you might not be aware that we have three additional Egyptian samples from Phoenicia and a gladiator from York, and interestingly, all of them are closely related to the Abusir samples. Moreover, the mtDNA profile of the 90 mummies from Abusir matches the present-day Egyptian profile :
and the results of the Abusir paper are supported by an upcoming paper that includes upper egyptian samples and span 4000 years of History :
quote:Egypt represents an ideal location for genetic studies on population migration and admixture due to its geographic location and rich history. However, there are only a few reliable genetic studies on ancient Egyptian samples. In a previous study, we assessed the genetic history of a single site: Abusir el-Meleq from 1388 BCE to 426 CE. We now focus on widening the geographic scope to give a general overview of the population genetic background, focusing on mitochondrial haplogroups present among the whole Egyptian Nile River Valley. We collected 81 tooth, hair, bone, and soft tissue samples from 14 mummies and 17 skeletal remains. The samples span approximately 4000 years of Egyptian history and originate from six different excavation sites covering the whole length of the Egyptian Nile River Valley. NGS based ancient DNA 8 were applied to reconstruct 18 high-quality mitochondrial genomes from 10 different individuals. The determined mitochondrial haplogroups match the results from our Abusir el-Meleq study. Our results indicate very low rates of modern DNA contamination independent of the tissue type. Although authentic ancient DNA was recovered from different tissues, a reliable recovery was best achieved using teeth or petrous bone material. Moreover, the rate for successful ancient DNA retrieval between Egyptian mummies and skeletal remains did not differ significantly. Our study provides preliminary insights into population history across different regions and compares tissue-specific DNA preservation for mummies and skeletal remains from the Egyptian Nile River Valley.
Military invasions do not necessarily lead to population replacement or significant genetic alterations. Egypt was literally one of the most densely populated areas in the entire region.
You seem to be continuously making assumptions based on your personal preferences, completely disregarding the extensive body of bioanthropological research that contradicts your Afrocentrist perspective.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Edit: Also the fact that these North African folks keep using the term "afrocentric" when they themselves and their history would be considered African is telling. The only thing here is that they take issue with blackness. Just like the Egyptians had an issue with their past president Anwar Sadat for being dark-skinned(when he was caramel colored) and the actor that played him. The use of this word is nothing more than racism, it has no basis. Because if we were talking about civilizations that were outside of Africa, like the Aztecs/Incas, or ancient Rome or Greece it would be applicable.
But we are literally talking about areas on the continent itself which would have had Black people on them. its dumb for "native" Africans to use this term in respect to their history. At this point, I am convinced that they do not consider themselves as Africans or they are pretenders.
What is "African" even supposed to mean here ? Are you implying that all Africans share a uniform culture or history? Historically and culturally, North Africans have more similarities with populations from the Middle East or Europe than with Sub-Saharan Africa. It's important to remember that Africa is a diverse continent with various distinct groups, not a singular country where all groups are inherently related. For instance, I haven't heard of any Japanese individuals complaining that Indians don't identify as 'Asian,' nor have I encountered any Chinese individuals insisting that there were Mongoloids in India simply because the continent is full of them.
I said it would have been mixed due to the historical populations that inhabited those areas in Ancient times. Phoenicians and Romans were present in North Africa, that is a fact.
And there you go trying to minimize the presence of black people in North Africa to being slaves. When "black" phenotypes would have existed way earlier than that.
quote:Egypt represents an ideal location for genetic studies on population migration and admixture due to its geographic location and rich history. However, there are only a few reliable genetic studies on ancient Egyptian samples. In a previous study, we assessed the genetic history of a single site: Abusir el-Meleq from 1388 BCE to 426 CE. We now focus on widening the geographic scope to give a general overview of the population genetic background, focusing on mitochondrial haplogroups present among the whole Egyptian Nile River Valley. We collected 81 tooth, hair, bone, and soft tissue samples from 14 mummies and 17 skeletal remains. The samples span approximately 4000 years of Egyptian history and originate from six different excavation sites covering the whole length of the Egyptian Nile River Valley. NGS based ancient DNA 8 were applied to reconstruct 18 high-quality mitochondrial genomes from 10 different individuals. The determined mitochondrial haplogroups match the results from our Abusir el-Meleq study. Our results indicate very low rates of modern DNA contamination independent of the tissue type. Although authentic ancient DNA was recovered from different tissues, a reliable recovery was best achieved using teeth or petrous bone material. Moreover, the rate for successful ancient DNA retrieval between Egyptian mummies and skeletal remains did not differ significantly. Our study provides preliminary insights into population history across different regions and compares tissue-specific DNA preservation for mummies and skeletal remains from the Egyptian Nile River Valley.
it makes sense to see a diversity of haplogroups because throughout Egypt's history there were many different people that came and settled within the Nile Valley. I am not denying that fact of diversity, and that there would have been a wide range of different looks within Egypt.
quote:In a previous study, we assessed the genetic history of a single site: Abusir el-Meleq from 1388 BCE to 426 CE. We now focus on widening the geographic scope to give a general overview of the population genetic background, focusing on mitochondrial haplogroups present among the whole Egyptian Nile River Valley. We collected 81 tooth, hair, bone, and soft tissue samples from 14 mummies and 17 skeletal remains. The samples span approximately 4000 years of Egyptian history and originate from six different excavation sites covering the whole length of the Egyptian Nile River Valley. NGS based ancient DNA 8 were applied to reconstruct 18 high-quality mitochondrial genomes from 10 different individuals. The determined mitochondrial haplogroups match the results from our Abusir el-Meleq study.
This part is confusing. So they were only able to locate the mitochondrial DNA from 10 individuals out of the 90 mummies they sampled. And then from there, they concluded that it must be representative for all Egyptians spanning Egypt's entire history?
quote:What is "African" even supposed to mean here ? Are you implying that all Africans share a uniform culture or history? Historically and culturally, North Africans have more similarities with populations from the Middle East or Europe than with Sub-Saharan Africa. It's important to remember that Africa is a diverse continent with various distinct groups, not a singular country where all groups are inherently related. For instance, I haven't heard of any Japanese individuals complaining that Indians don't identify as 'Asian,' nor have I encountered any Chinese individuals insisting that there were Mongoloids in India simply because the continent is full of them.
I'm not about to play games with you, you know what the hell I mean when I say that. You're either trolling or you are just dumb. Toodles Posts: 80 | From: USA, America | Registered: May 2023
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: they completely ignore the Sahara wet phase when it was full of black Africans in "North Africa".
Tell us which human remains sites you can point to to prove this
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: they completely ignore the Sahara wet phase when it was full of black Africans in "North Africa".
then tell us at what point in time North Africa because not full of "black Africans"
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: the actual evidence says that these migrations of light skinned Eurasians only happened within the last 5,000 years and that even then black African were still present.
Tell us when Eurasians migrated to North Africa without the caveat of being a particular skin color
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Yet that still doesn't change the fact that in many craniometric studies, the Badarians show a central position amongst all Egyptian populations both predynastic and dynastic.
It all depends on which paper and method you use. For example, Keita 2020 describe them as "the most distinct southern series" and shows how the 1st dynasty remains were in fact closer to the northern series than Badarians. Keita 2008 also highlights how distinct badarians are compared to late predynastic remains from Upper Egypt.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Who? The Badarians?! The graph you post clearly shows they plot next to the Nubian Centroid which still falls within the overall North African cluster NOT Sub-Saharans! LOL And both the Badarian and Nubian Centroid are not far from the centroid of the entire graph which is where the "Proto-Mediterranean" sample resides.
What are you talking about ? Here a clearer picture of this plot :
Don't you see where the centroids of Upper/Lower Egypt are positioned compared to where Badari plot ? Ancient Lower Nubia and Badarians can be described as "intermediate" but certainly not Ancient Egyptians who like I said are much more eurasian shifted basically like modern egyptians.
In any case, it is evident that Ancient Egyptians are significantly distant from most modern Sub-Saharan African populations on the plot. Therefore, there is no justification for labeling them as "black."
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: No, dummy! We told you countless times it has nothing to do with "admixture" but the simple fact that North Africans are genetically intermediate between Sub-Saharans and Eurasians! For example why do some Eurasians approach Sub-Saharans in crown size closer than North Africans or why do North Africans have the highest incidence of UM1 Carabelli's trait than either Eurasians or Sub-Saharans. Genetics has debunked your whole racialized way of thinking!
And this is why nobody in this forum takes you seriously.
This may apply to Lower Nubians/Horners or Upper Egyptians to some extent, but it certainly does not hold true for other North Africans. Regarding the SSA affinities, it is obviously due to admixture. Are you implying that populations evolving in a Mediterranean climate would develop equatorial traits ?
Even Irish makes it clear that it is due to admixture :
quote:Any North African deviations away from a simple dental pattern are in the direction of complex Sub-Saharan traits (e.g., UI2 tuberculum dentale, Bushman Canine, two-rooted UP1, three-rooted UM2), suggesting likely gene flow from these peoples.These findings agree with genetic-based results that link North Africans to Europeans and western Asians, yet record many Sub-Saharan influenced traits (e.g., Mourant 1954, 1983; Hiernaux 1975; Nurse et al., 1985; Sanchez-Mazas et ai, 1986; Excoffier et ai, 1987; Roy choudhury and Nei 1988).
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Yet that still doesn't change the fact that in many craniometric studies, the Badarians show a central position amongst all Egyptian populations both predynastic and dynastic.
It all depends on which paper and method you use. For example, Keita 2020 describe them as "the most distinct southern series" and shows how the 1st dynasty remains were in fact closer to the northern series than Badarians. Keita 2008 also highlights how distinct badarians are compared to late predynastic remains from Upper Egypt.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Who? The Badarians?! The graph you post clearly shows they plot next to the Nubian Centroid which still falls within the overall North African cluster NOT Sub-Saharans! LOL And both the Badarian and Nubian Centroid are not far from the centroid of the entire graph which is where the "Proto-Mediterranean" sample resides.
What are you talking about ? Here a clearer picture of this plot :
Don't you see where the centroids of Upper/Lower Egypt are positioned compared to where Badari plot ? Ancient Lower Nubia and Badarians can be described as "intermediate" but certainly not Ancient Egyptians who like I said are much more eurasian shifted basically like modern egyptians.
In any case, it is evident that Ancient Egyptians are significantly distant from most modern Sub-Saharan African populations on the plot. Therefore, there is no justification for labeling them as "black."
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: No, dummy! We told you countless times it has nothing to do with "admixture" but the simple fact that North Africans are genetically intermediate between Sub-Saharans and Eurasians! For example why do some Eurasians approach Sub-Saharans in crown size closer than North Africans or why do North Africans have the highest incidence of UM1 Carabelli's trait than either Eurasians or Sub-Saharans. Genetics has debunked your whole racialized way of thinking!
And this is why nobody in this forum takes you seriously.
This may apply to Lower Nubians/Horners or Upper Egyptians to some extent, but it certainly does not hold true for other North Africans. Regarding the SSA affinities, it is obviously due to admixture. Are you implying that populations evolving in a Mediterranean climate would develop equatorial traits ?
Even Irish makes it clear that it is due to admixture :
quote:Any North African deviations away from a simple dental pattern are in the direction of complex Sub-Saharan traits (e.g., UI2 tuberculum dentale, Bushman Canine, two-rooted UP1, three-rooted UM2), suggesting likely gene flow from these peoples.These findings agree with genetic-based results that link North Africans to Europeans and western Asians, yet record many Sub-Saharan influenced traits (e.g., Mourant 1954, 1983; Hiernaux 1975; Nurse et al., 1985; Sanchez-Mazas et ai, 1986; Excoffier et ai, 1987; Roy choudhury and Nei 1988).
There is lots of reasons to label Ancient Egyptians as Black including this hieroglyph for Face:
You are an culture thief and you are trying to take Ancient Egypt out of Black Africas hands. You even dig deeper then skin color to dna because you know that the People are Black you are trying to claim.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
At this point, we are all just beating a dead horse. You have a racist in here that cant fathom "sub-Saharan" African people being in all areas of the African continent(whether it be distant past or present), so when you say they were he claims we are being "Afrocentric" lol. And that we are trying to steal history which is completely idiotic.
Lets ignore migrations all around the continent so it can satiate whatever racial bias they may have against "black" Africans. If the Pharaoh Ramses III and his child had E1b1a, which is a Y-haplogroup predominant in Western Africa, it would stand to reason sub-Saharan types would be present in Egypt, no? And that's IF it is accurate that he looked like a West African because we cannot be too sure of physical characteristics of populations when they were alive. Only through analyzing the traits of their skeletons. Some Pharaohs do appear to show some traits that would be considered "broader" and some do show more "thinner" features. However, this does not take away from their African-ness like Antalas claims because, like I said before, there are "black" Africans below the Sahara that display features he claims to be "Caucasoid" that would still be labeled Black if they were to immigrate to the US.
He needs to minimize blackness into a minute definition of having broader features so that it can fit his agenda. That is why he only posts Africans with extreme traits, and not Africans that show these features that he claims are only present above the Sahara.
Posts: 80 | From: USA, America | Registered: May 2023
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: I said it would have been mixed due to the historical populations that inhabited those areas in Ancient times. Phoenicians and Romans were present in North Africa, that is a fact.
And I'm telling you that due to their small population size, their genetic impact was insignificant. There is no evidence of their influence in the DNA of modern North Africans, as supported by the quotes I provided earlier, which you seem to disregard.
The majority of individuals considered "Romans" in Africa were actually local people who had been romanized. Phoenician settlers were assimilated into the Berber population, and later, Punic individuals were essentially North Africans with a Punic cultural background.
Here are some quotes to expand your knowledge on the subject. However, I suspect you might overlook them once more, as they contradict your existing narrative :
quote:In fact, if we attempt to determine the numerical importance of the contingent of Roman or Italian immigrants in Africa, we have every reason to believe that it was small.Even if we add non-Italian immigrants, it does not increase significantly. These immigrants include high-ranking officials, but the lower-level office personnel were recruited locally. There were some large landowners, but often they resided in Rome and were represented in Africa by local managers and farmers. Additionally, there were a few Italian, Eastern, or Spanish merchants in coastal cities and some major settlements in the interior, such as Cirta. These contributions do not alter the Berber character .[...]
Louis Leschi, L'Afrique romaine, p. 35
quote:Most often, it involved a cultural fusion: from an ethnic perspective, the Phoenician element coming from the East, a minority in comparison to the native population, was quickly assimilated; it asserted its influence through its cultural contribution and imposed the aspects of Phoenician civilization. This reciprocal assimilation required a very long period, but it was already accomplished at the time when the city of Carthage held dominion over the western Mediterranean. Carthage was no longer merely a Phoenician city in Africa but rather an African city with a prevailing Phoenician cultural influence.
Mhamed Fantar, L'Afrique du Nord dans L'antiquité, p. 61
quote: Bringing together several material traits for comparison can shed light on the ethnic origin of the Punic populations. The Punic population is in fact autochthonous, a Phoenicianized Libyan one, a Libyo-Phoenician one.
Habib Ben Younes, Interculturality and the Punic Funerary World, in : Mortuary Landscapes of North Africa, University of Toronto Press, 2007, p. 41
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: And there you go trying to minimize the presence of black people in North Africa to being slaves. When "black" phenotypes would have existed way earlier than that.
Who said that ? I have never denied the existence of black populations in the Sahara, and it's true that many Nubians settled and resided in Egypt. However, asserting that the average North African back then was "black" and later became lighter-skinned due to invasions is not supported by scientific evidence or historical records.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: it makes sense to see a diversity of haplogroups because throughout Egypt's history there were many different people that came and settled within the Nile Valley. I am not denying that fact of diversity, and that there would have been a wide range of different looks within Egypt.
What you still fail to understand is that the significant changes and impactful gene flow occurred long before the establishment of Ancient Egypt. The subsequent "invasions" involved such small numbers of people that they couldn't drastically alter the Egyptian genome in the long run and indeed there would have been a wide range of phenotypes like today.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: This part is confusing. So they were only able to locate the mitochondrial DNA from 10 individuals out of the 90 mummies they sampled. And then from there, they concluded that it must be representative for all Egyptians spanning Egypt's entire history?
You're confused : The paper I referred to is different, and the 90 mummies I mentioned are from the Abusir paper. The upcoming paper presents new evidence challenging certain afrocentrists' claims, such as labeling the Abusir samples as "invaders," "not representative," or from "too late" a period. The newly gathered samples from various regions in Egypt spanning 4000 years of history yield comparable results to the Abusir samples. This strongly suggests that the Abusir samples were not foreigners and are indeed representative of the wider ancient Egyptian population.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: I'm not about to play games with you, you know what the hell I mean when I say that. You're either trolling or you are just dumb. Toodles [/QB]
Huh ??? You said : "I am convinced that they do not consider themselves as Africans or they are pretenders." and I'm telling you that such identification doesn't make sense.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: I said it would have been mixed due to the historical populations that inhabited those areas in Ancient times. Phoenicians and Romans were present in North Africa, that is a fact.
And I'm telling you that due to their small population size, their genetic impact was insignificant. There is no evidence of their influence in the DNA of modern North Africans, as supported by the quotes I provided earlier, which you seem to disregard.
The majority of individuals considered "Romans" in Africa were actually local people who had been romanized. Phoenician settlers were assimilated into the Berber population, and later, Punic individuals were essentially North Africans with a Punic cultural background.
Here are some quotes to expand your knowledge on the subject. However, I suspect you might overlook them once more, as they contradict your existing narrative :
quote:In fact, if we attempt to determine the numerical importance of the contingent of Roman or Italian immigrants in Africa, we have every reason to believe that it was small.Even if we add non-Italian immigrants, it does not increase significantly. These immigrants include high-ranking officials, but the lower-level office personnel were recruited locally. There were some large landowners, but often they resided in Rome and were represented in Africa by local managers and farmers. Additionally, there were a few Italian, Eastern, or Spanish merchants in coastal cities and some major settlements in the interior, such as Cirta. These contributions do not alter the Berber character .[...]
Louis Leschi, L'Afrique romaine, p. 35
quote:Most often, it involved a cultural fusion: from an ethnic perspective, the Phoenician element coming from the East, a minority in comparison to the native population, was quickly assimilated; it asserted its influence through its cultural contribution and imposed the aspects of Phoenician civilization. This reciprocal assimilation required a very long period, but it was already accomplished at the time when the city of Carthage held dominion over the western Mediterranean. Carthage was no longer merely a Phoenician city in Africa but rather an African city with a prevailing Phoenician cultural influence.
Mhamed Fantar, L'Afrique du Nord dans L'antiquité, p. 61
quote: Bringing together several material traits for comparison can shed light on the ethnic origin of the Punic populations. The Punic population is in fact autochthonous, a Phoenicianized Libyan one, a Libyo-Phoenician one.
Habib Ben Younes, Interculturality and the Punic Funerary World, in : Mortuary Landscapes of North Africa, University of Toronto Press, 2007, p. 41
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: And there you go trying to minimize the presence of black people in North Africa to being slaves. When "black" phenotypes would have existed way earlier than that.
Who said that ? I have never denied the existence of black populations in the Sahara, and it's true that many Nubians settled and resided in Egypt. However, asserting that the average North African back then was "black" and later became lighter-skinned due to invasions is not supported by scientific evidence or historical records.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: it makes sense to see a diversity of haplogroups because throughout Egypt's history there were many different people that came and settled within the Nile Valley. I am not denying that fact of diversity, and that there would have been a wide range of different looks within Egypt.
What you still fail to understand is that the significant changes and impactful gene flow occurred long before the establishment of Ancient Egypt. The subsequent "invasions" involved such small numbers of people that they couldn't drastically alter the Egyptian genome in the long run and indeed there would have been a wide range of phenotypes like today.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: This part is confusing. So they were only able to locate the mitochondrial DNA from 10 individuals out of the 90 mummies they sampled. And then from there, they concluded that it must be representative for all Egyptians spanning Egypt's entire history?
You're confused : The paper I referred to is different, and the 90 mummies I mentioned are from the Abusir paper. The upcoming paper presents new evidence challenging certain afrocentrists' claims, such as labeling the Abusir samples as "invaders," "not representative," or from "too late" a period. The newly gathered samples from various regions in Egypt spanning 4000 years of history yield comparable results to the Abusir samples. This strongly suggests that the Abusir samples were not foreigners and are indeed representative of the wider ancient Egyptian population.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: I'm not about to play games with you, you know what the hell I mean when I say that. You're either trolling or you are just dumb. Toodles
Huh ??? You said : "I am convinced that they do not consider themselves as Africans or they are pretenders." and I'm telling you that such identification doesn't make sense. [/QB]
I cede about Northern Africa, as I am not well versed on the matter. So Ill go along with your points for now.
quote:Who said that ? I have never denied the existence of black populations in the Sahara, and it's true that many Nubians settled and resided in Egypt. However, asserting that the average North African back then was "black" and later became lighter-skinned due to invasions is not supported by scientific evidence or historical records.
The Egyptian culture was started in the South of Egypt near Northern Sudan. Nubians may have settled within the Egyptian area but it doesn't not change the fact that Egyptians that formed the predynastic culture would have been similar in appearance to the people that were native to that area. The Egyptians overwhelmingly depicted themselves with brownish- to copper colored skin. many Africans in Egypt/Sudan, as well as "Sub-saharan" Africans do show that skin color today. So yes, they would be classed as being "Black" in present day.
I know what you are doing by stating the Nubian population was "black" because of that cherry-picked image showing them with stereotypical "Negro" features. But what you don't understand is that there were darker skinned Nubians that shared similar features to Egyptians...
Also, Nubians weren't a monolith, there were many different tribes under the term Nubian and they would NOT have all looked the same, so nice try.
quote:What you still fail to understand is that the significant changes and impactful gene flow occurred long before the establishment of Ancient Egypt. The subsequent "invasions" involved such small numbers of people that they couldn't drastically alter the Egyptian genome in the long run and indeed there would have been a wide range of phenotypes like today.
I am not denying the fact that there would have been mixed Egyptians. Considering all of the immigration that was going on in the area. Maybe they were a group that was majority African with Near-Eastern admixture(which I think is the case here). However, if you take AFram for example, many have European admixture, but that does not completely change the phenotype that we have. Even some of the Pharaohs you can clearly see they have features that you would claim as being black. And their skin tone usually depicted with brownish to copper coloured skin, which again, is shown in "Sub-Saharan" populations.
quote:Huh ??? You said : "I am convinced that they do not consider themselves as Africans or they are pretenders." and I'm telling you that such identification doesn't make sense.
Now you're trolling. Because North Africans are in fact African themselves. And you look stupid throwing around that term because it does not make sense when talking about African history.
Posts: 80 | From: USA, America | Registered: May 2023
| IP: Logged |
posted
the fact is that antalas is a culture thief and he is trying to use DNA to claim Black skinned people as part of his White race
Good words Kimbles
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
I will repost this one last time. Doug, this confirms what you were saying about antalies' pseudo argument(s) on the matter.
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah: 15,000 years ago, Moroccans (North Africans) were a mixture of Levantine and Sub-Saharan African. Current day North Africans are largely related to Eurasian populations.
Posts: 2491 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: The Egyptian culture was started in the South of Egypt near Northern Sudan. Nubians may have settled within the Egyptian area but it doesn't not change the fact that Egyptians that formed the predynastic culture would have been similar in appearance to the people that were native to that area. The Egyptians overwhelmingly depicted themselves with brownish- to copper colored skin. many Africans in Egypt/Sudan, as well as "Sub-saharan" Africans do show that skin color today. So yes, they would be classed as being "Black" in present day.
Who claimed that the Ancient Egyptian civilization was not established by indigenous Egyptians? What I demonstrated is that those southern Egyptians differed significantly from the majority of Sub-Saharan Africans, making it misleading to label them as black. Additionally, I presented evidence that modern Egyptians share morphological similarities with these pre-dynastic/early dynastic Upper Egyptians, which you chose to overlook.
It is important to note that the depiction of skin color in Egyptian art was conventional and not necessarily a realistic representation of all Egyptians. Furthermore, the "brownish-copper colored skin" you mentioned can be observed in people throughout Egypt even today :
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: I know what you are doing by stating the Nubian population was "black" because of that cherry-picked image showing them with stereotypical "Negro" features. But what you don't understand is that there were darker skinned Nubians that shared similar features to Egyptians...
Also, Nubians weren't a monolith, there were many different tribes under the term Nubian and they would NOT have all looked the same, so nice try.
Could you kindly refrain from using straw man arguments and continuously assuming my statements? I am well aware of the diversity among the Nubians. Anthropological papers have provided evidence that lower Nubians were distinct from the majority of Sub-Saharan populations. Even today, the inhabitants of this region exhibit genetic, morphological, and cultural similarities to North Africans, Middle Easterners, and potentially Europeans, rather than being closely aligned with the majority of Sub-Saharan Africans.
The "black" nubians I'm talking about would be from further south.
This spectrum was already reported by ancient Greco-romans :
quote:Now the inhabitants of the marches are not yet fully black but are half-breeds in matter of color, for they are partly not so black as the Ethiopians, yet partly more so than the Egyptians.
Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 6.1-5.
How come this is exactly what we see today ? A coincidence according to afrocentrists.
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: I am not denying the fact that there would have been mixed Egyptians. Considering all of the immigration that was going on in the area. Maybe they were a group that was majority African with Near-Eastern admixture(which I think is the case here). However, if you take AFram for example, many have European admixture, but that does not completely change the phenotype that we have. Even some of the Pharaohs you can clearly see they have features that you would claim as being black. And their skin tone usually depicted with brownish to copper coloured skin, which again, is shown in "Sub-Saharan" populations.
But your assertions are based on your own suppositions rather than being supported by academic research.
I have mentioned this previously, but it's worth reiterating that many of you may not be acquainted with tanning. North Africans have the ability to tan well. I don't have the same skin tone when I'm in North Africa.
That's the reason why pharaoh Ramses II might be portrayed with a tanned complexion or a conventional color in depictions, but it's essential to note that the analysis of his mummy indicates he was actually light-skinned :
quote: Ramses II, as for him, would have had, according to the most recent investigations carried out on his mummy, the milky skin and the ginger hair of the man of the North , which is not surprising since it is well known that his family was born in the Eastern Delta, […]
quote:Originally posted by Kimbles: Now you're trolling. Because North Africans are in fact African themselves. And you look stupid throwing around that term because it does not make sense when talking about African history.
Merely being located in Africa does not necessarily imply that they are more closely related to other African populations than to those outside the continent. Therefore, knowing that they are African doesn't provide concrete knowledge if, in reality, they exhibit genetic, morphological, and cultural similarities that align them more closely with Eurasian populations.
Afrocentrism/eurocentrism are basically two sides of the same coin and none should be tolerated. You're Afro-american therefore predominantly west african with a NW european input why do you care so much about the phenotype and population affinities of Ancient North Africans ?
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
antalas is a culture thief and promoting DNA as a way of stealing Black people from Africa and Claim them as part of the white race.
What antalas does is move the goalpost and twist up that the dna is a lie and does not correlate to what it means to be an ancient Egyptian.
Not only Ramses the great is Black, but there is no pictures inside his lifetime that shows him as non black.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas Afrocentrism/eurocentrism are basically two sides of the same coin and none should be tolerated. You're Afro-american therefore predominantly west african with a NW european input why do you care so much about the phenotype and population affinities of Ancient North Africans ?
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: Afro-americans have NW european ancestry
Here we go again.
quote:Originally posted by Firewall:
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: Afro-americans have NW european ancestry
The way you write this you make it seem like it's all,but it's not true. Some african americans have NW european ancestry,not all.
quote: @JaKommenterar quote- @lifeleaves1268 Interestingly some ancestry may not show up in these tests for groups originating in mixed regions like Middle Eastern - for example, most southern Europeans, Jews, Arabs and Iranians will have between 2-10% Black African ancestry on average (some more some less) but it often won’t show up unless its a detailed genetic research. Harvard Medical School published on this, you may find it interesting.
@lifeleaves1268 quote- @JaKommenterar you are absolutely right. To be totally honest with you my brother from the same parents had super shocking results compare to me. I am the last guy in the video by the way. He was more than 27 percent Jewish and less than 40 percent Iranian but also about 10 percent scottish. To me these tests are just where science meets the fun and entertainment. I personally believe we only know so much from the original DNA’s of our ancestors and it is not enough to be exact results.
@blackcoffeebeans6100 quote- Sami ppl is a different race and has a culture of their own. From all the Nordic countries Finland has The smallest number of them. Norway has 40 000 Samis. Sweden 15 000 -25 000. Finland 10 000.
@JaKommenterar quote- @diamondsarenotforever8542 Yes that’s what I’m saying, it isn’t ”eskimo” ancestry but they share genes with the Sami so the data confused the two. Many in Finland have Sami ancestry, more than Sweden and Norway, they have less of them because they got assimilated. Plus Fin’s language is close to Sami.
@blackcoffeebeans6100 quote- @JaKommenterar Not true. Sami ppl mostly have dark complexion and eyes. Also they are quite short. Finns are opposite. Sami ppl always wanted not to be mixed. They very rarely married ppl from different race. Of course swedish ppl think finns are mongolians. This is not true. Finland has got more blondies than Sweden.
@JaKommenterar quote- @blackcoffeebeans6100 What you are saying is entirely nonsensical, having a little bit of Sami ancestry will not make you dark, and genes do not lie. I know it makes you uncomfortable that Finns are not fully white. And yes Sweden has more immigrants than Finland so it therefore has fewer blonds. By the way, many Sami people are mixed race as you can tell by their appearance. Non-european blood is common amongst Europeans, southern Europeans are ca 2% Black. Nothing wrong with Sami blood.
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
@Antalies
I will delete my account right now if you can provide a credible source that says the information in the paper I referenced is "outdated".
I am referring to the paper I posted that says north africans 15,000 years ago were Levantine + Sub-Saharan african, and that modern north africans are largely related to eurasians.
Produce a source that says the info I referenced is outdated as you claim. If you are unable to do this then it will only confirm what we all ready know about you -- that you are a racist, pseudo liar who misrepresents data and spreads disinformation to push false narratives.
Posts: 2491 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
[/QB]
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic