Originally posted by Djehuti:
This means all those hairy muktaba Southwest Asians adopted their languages from Africans!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
quote:I take it you are referring to this thread here.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
I think I need to start paying attention to some of the people posting things on this site out of context.
Some poster from last year had me believing Christopher Ehret believed Afroasiatics or Afrasians and more specifically Semites didn't come from Africa.
I hope others weren't misled as well.
quote:I find it interesting that Ehret postulates the ancestor of proto-Berber to be the same as that of proto-Chadic. I notice many Euronuts tend to keep quiet about Chadic no doubt because many of its speakers conform to the 'true negroid' type. LOL Only recently have scholars like geneticist Fulvio Cruciani try to postulate a non-African origin for Chadic speakers due to some of them possessing of R1 haplogroups as discussed here. The only problem though is that the frequency of R1* and its diversity is greatest in central Western Africa where Chadic speakers are a minority and Niger-Congo speakers predominate! Though there is a presence of R1* Egypt it fails to be identified with Afroasatic since the vast majority of Afroasiatic speakers in general carry hg E.
The ancestor of the Semitic, Chado-Berber and Egyptian is considered to be Proto-Afrasian and to have emerged in the Erythraean highlands.
quote:I believe Ehret and others identify cattle domestication with Nilo-Saharan speakers since the vocabulary associated with cattle and pastoralism all have Nilo-Saharan roots.
On page 77 "Among the Erythraite peoples who made Capsian civilization who made the Capsian archaelogical cultures of those areas, domestic cattle were probably present in by sometime in the 7th millenium, if not before."
quote:Interesting speculation. I believe Explorer addressed this here with the significance of Ethio-Semitic languages like Gurage.
But, one wonders how the new discoveries of ancient 3rd and 4th millenium "Afro-Arabian" or "Afro-Tihama" culture in the Yemen will come to fit in with his conclusions.
quote:I don't know what a "muktaba" is, but you seem to be using it as a racial slur. I thought you were above such crude racism.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
This means all those hairy muktaba Southwest Asians adopted their languages from Africans!
quote:No, I don't take the illogical postings of the Neandernuts on this site for anything more than what they are. I am talking about a posting by someone whose thinking I actually respect alot, who (possibly not intentionally) made it seem at least to me as if Ehret had given up the idea that semitic-speakers had an African origination.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:I take it you are referring to this thread here.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
I think I need to start paying attention to some of the people posting things on this site out of context.
Some poster from last year had me believing Christopher Ehret believed Afroasiatics or Afrasians and more specifically Semites didn't come from Africa.
I hope others weren't misled as well.
No, I at least was not mislead since the idiotic troll who created the thread shows a map by Ehret which specifically shows Proto-Afrisian in Africa.
^ Note that Proto-Afrasian according to Ehret did indeed lie along the Erythrean (Red) Sea hill area.
quote:I find it interesting that Ehret postulates the ancestor of proto-Berber to be the same as that of proto-Chadic. I notice many Euronuts tend to keep quiet about Chadic no doubt because many of its speakers conform to the 'true negroid' type. LOL Only recently have scholars like geneticist Fulvio Cruciani try to postulate a non-African origin for Chadic speakers due to some of them possessing of R1 haplogroups as discussed here. The only problem though is that the frequency of R1* and its diversity is greatest in central Western Africa where Chadic speakers are a minority and Niger-Congo speakers predominate! Though there is a presence of R1* Egypt it fails to be identified with Afroasatic since the vast majority of Afroasiatic speakers in general carry hg E.
The ancestor of the Semitic, Chado-Berber and Egyptian is considered to be Proto-Afrasian and to have emerged in the Erythraean highlands.
quote:I believe Ehret and others identify cattle domestication with Nilo-Saharan speakers since the vocabulary associated with cattle and pastoralism all have Nilo-Saharan roots.
On page 77 "Among the Erythraite peoples who made Capsian civilization who made the Capsian archaelogical cultures of those areas, domestic cattle were probably present in by sometime in the 7th millenium, if not before."
"It is possible from this overview of the data to conclude that the limited conceptual vocabulary shared by the ancestors of contemporary Chadic-speakers (therefore also contemporary Cushitic-speakers), contemporary Nilotic-speakers and Ancient Egyptian-speakers suggests that the earliest speakers of the Egyptian language could be located to the south of Upper Egypt (Diakonoff 1998) or, earlier, in the Sahara (Wendorf 2004), where Takács (1999, 47) suggests their ‘long co-existence’ can be found. In addition, it is consistent with this view to suggest that the northern border of their homeland was further than the Wadi Howar proposed by Blench (1999, 2001), which is actually its southern border. Neither Chadics nor Cushitics existed at this time, but their ancestors lived in a homeland further north than the peripheral countries that they inhabited thereafter, to the south-west, in a Niger-Congo environment, and to the south-east, in a Nilo-Saharan environment, where they interacted and innovated in terms of language. From this perspective, the Upper Egyptian cultures were an ancient North East African ‘periphery at the crossroads’, as suggested by Dahl and Hjort-af-Ornas of the Beja (Dahl and Hjort-af-Ornas 2006). The most likely scenario could be this: some of these Saharo-Nubian populations spread southwards to Wadi Howar, Ennedi and Darfur; some stayed in the actual oases where they joined the inhabitants; and others moved towards the Nile, directed by two geographic obstacles, the western Great Sand Sea and the southern Rock Belt. Their slow perambulations led them from the area of Sprinkle Mountain (Gebel Uweinat) to the east – Bir Sahara, Nabta Playa, Gebel Ramlah, and Nekhen/Hierakonpolis (Upper Egypt), and to the north-east by way of Dakhla Oasis to Abydos (Middle Egypt)."--Anselin (2009)
In addition to the archeological and paleontological evidence, recent linguistic studies indicate the presence of early pastoralists in the Eastern Sahara. Detailed analysis of Nilo-Saharan root words has provided "convincing evidence" that the early cultural history of that language family included a pastoralist and food producing way of life, and that this occurred in what is today the south-western Sahara and Sahel belt.
The Nilo-Saharan family of languages is divided into a complex array of branches and subgroups that reflect an enormous time depth. Just one of the subgroups, Kir is as internally complex as the lndo-European family of languages and is believed to have a comparable age. The Sudanese branch is of special interest here. This is particularly true of the Northern Sudanese subfamily that includes a Saharo-Sahelian subgroup, the early homeland of which is placed in northwest Sudan and northeast Chad. Today, the groups that speak Saharo-Sahelian are dispersed from the Niger river eastward to northwestern Ethiopian highlands.
The Proto-Northern Sudanic language contains root words such as "to drive," "cow, "grain,""ear of grain," and "grindstone." Any of these might apply to food production, but another root word meaning "to milk" is cetainly the most convincing evidence of incipient pastoralism.
There are also root words for "temporary shelter" and "to make a pot." In the succeeding Proto-Saharo-Sahelian language, there are root words for "to cultivate", "to prepare field", to "clear" (of weeds), and "cultivated field." this is the first unambiguous linguistic evidence of cultivation. There are also words for "thombush cattle pen," "fence," "yard," "grannary," as well as "to herd" and "cattle." In the following Proto-Sahelian period, there are root words for "goat," "sheep," "ram," and "lamb," indicating the presence of small livestock.
There are root words for "cow," "bull," "ox," and "young cow" or "heifer" and, indeed, a variety of terms relating to cultivation and permanent houses.
On the basis of known historical changes in some of the language, Ehret estimates that the Proto-Northern Sudanic language family, which includes the first root words indicating cattle pastoralism, should be dated about 10,000 years ago. He also estimates that the Proto-Saharan-Sahelian language family, which has words indicating not only more complex cattle pastroalism, but the first indications of cultivation, occurred around 9,000 years ago. He places the Proto-Sahelian language at about 8,500 years ago.
These age estimates are just that, and should not be used to suggest any other chronology. Nevertheless, the sequence of cultural changes is remarkably similar to that in the archeology of the Eastern Sahara and, with some minor adjustments for the beginning of cultivation and for' the inclusion of "sheep" and "goat," reasonably closely to the radiocarbon chronology. - Fred Wendorf & Romuald Schild, 1994.
quote:Interesting speculation. I believe Explorer addressed this here with the significance of Ethio-Semitic languages like Gurage.
But, one wonders how the new discoveries of ancient 3rd and 4th millenium "Afro-Arabian" or "Afro-Tihama" culture in the Yemen will come to fit in with his conclusions.
quote:I think you need to read what Ehret says in his books Swenet, because from what you said it sounds like you have read little of him. This was my mistake, not really having read his books myself. He considers Egyptian, Berber, Chadic, Semitic to be all later evolutions of an original Erythraic precursor. He has done much work as a linguist and correlating the linguistic science of evolutionary time frames with archaeology and genetics including the genetic evolution of fauna and animals of the region in relation to these dialects. One can not rely simply on knowledge of genetic or human haplotype information if one doesn't know how it correlates with the physical anthropological, archaeological and other historical evidence. Ehret has extensive background with with relation to all of this subject matter in the region.
Originally posted by Swenet:
I think its wrong to identify Proto-Berbers, or even Proto-Chadians (exclusively) with the Capsian culture. There were obviously lineages in Northern Africa that predate the onset of the Holocene. Why is Ehret making such rudimentary errors? The typical Berber paternal NRY marker E-M81, which may be used to identify their expansion into North Africa, originated less than 6000 years ago.
-Afrasan speakers are NOT the original people of the wider Sahara.
-Despite their language having commonalities with Semitic and Berber languages, the core of the Ancient Egyptian population was probably much more related to the indigenous Northeast African people, who predate those languages, and who may be exemplified by Nazlet Khater. Their ancestry probably had much more affinity with contemporary hunter gatherer Africans all over Sub Saharan Africa, than to ancestral Ethiopians and Somali's and Berber speakers, who seem to be in their own lane, with much of their ancestry being specific to the section of Africa they inhabit, and who are also partially descended from the OOA population(s). This relationship of Palaeolithic Egyptians to contemporary Sub Saharan Africans was not only shown skeletally by Pinhasi, but can also been seen in numerous other ways, such as the presence of severe cases of sickle cell in predynastic Egypt, blood type similarities with groups with Sub-Saharan affinity (Harratin) to dynastic Egyptians, and the latest evidence being stong alleles matches between Egyptians and groups literally all over Sub-Saharan Africa, from Pygmies, to San, and other groups who now reside below the equator.
-During the Holocene, we get the migration of Proto-Afrasan people towards the Nile Valley, which is why we have their lineages and languages (Medjay, Ancient Egyptian, Berber) in Egypt, the Middle East and possibly all three languages in Ancient Sudan as well. These Holocenic demographic changes are what cause people to think that the core Egyptian population must have been genetically identical to Proto-Afrasan speakers, even though Neolithic Egyptians/Northern Sudanese display numerous signs of local differentiation, consistent with above described relatively distant relationship of most Ancient Egyptians to ancestral Somali's and Ethiopians.
quote:With all respect Dana, how is it ok for you to make a general statement about what Ehret thinks about Semitic tongues based on those excerpts, while its not ok for me to make a general statement about what he thinks are the relations between early Afrasan speakers and Capsian people?
I think you need to read what Ehret says in his books Swenet, because from what you said it sounds like you have read little of him. This was my mistake, not really having read his books myself.
quote:Linguistic evidence can be correlated with findings in a various ways. Read what Djehuti said about about Cruciani and Chadic languages. That these correlations are made, makes the theories of said scientists stronger, depending on the logical coherence of the findings that are patched together, but not necessarily correct.
He has done much work as a linguist and correlating the linguistic science of evolutionary time frames with archaeology and genetics including the genetic evolution of fauna and animals of the region in relation to these dialects.
quote:Then he ought to know that the people of the Capsian culture display traits that make them a loose branch of their own, with minimal osteological ties to contemporary Egyptian and Sudanese material, and going from what can be inferred from the Anthropological work that has accumulated so far, there are probably minimal ties between Capsian and ancestral Abysinnians and Somali's as well.
One can not rely simply on knowledge of genetic or human haplotype information if one doesn't know how it correlates with the physical anthropological, archaeological and other historical evidence. Ehret has extensive background with with relation to all of this subject matter in the region.
quote:C'mon Dana, you know as well as I do that doesn't make any sense. Appealing to authority has no currency when addressing me.
As you have accused him of making "rudimentary errors" I am of course assuming you have a background similar to his
quote:Already cited some of the research I had used to come to my conclusions.
I would be happy to look at some of your research as well.
quote:This cannot be inferred from the skeletal record. The ancient remains in the Horn may, or may not, belong to the ancestors of modern day Cushitic speakers. If the idea that Mushabeans spread Afrasan lineages and languages to the Near East, as proposed by Ehret, holds true, one might get an idea of what ancestral Somali's/Abyssinians looked like by looking at some of the Natufian remains that don't seem to be as admixed with local Levantine groups.
I am particularly interested in what you have concluded the supposed "ancestral Somalis Ethiopians " may have looked like and where you suppose they were.
quote:I was thinking the same thing-- Berber lineages only date back to the Neolithic whereas Capsian culture is older. In fact the Capsian culture began around 10,000 B.C.E. and ended 6,000 B.C.E. right when 'Berber' lineages appeared in the area. Capsian Culture is the direct descendant of the Oranian a.k.a. 'Iberomaurusian' Culture 18,000-11,000 B.C.E.
Originally posted by Swenet:
I think its wrong to identify Proto-Berbers, or even Proto-Chadians (exclusively) with the Capsian culture. There were obviously lineages in Northern Africa that predate the onset of the Holocene. Why is Ehret making such rudimentary errors? The typical Berber paternal NRY marker E-M81, which may be used to identify their expansion into North Africa, originated less than 6000 years ago.
quote:Well according to Ehret they are not! Proto-Afrasans originated only in the eastern Sahara around the Red Sea coasts.
-Afrasan speakers are NOT the original people of the wider Sahara.
quote:I agree. Let's not forget the presence of hg B in Egypt as well which is also correlated to paleolithic Sub-Saharan populations.
-Despite their language having commonalities with Semitic and Berber languages, the core of the Ancient Egyptian population was probably much more related to the indigenous Northeast African people, who predate those languages, and who may be exemplified by Nazlet Khater. Their ancestry probably had much more affinity with contemporary hunter gatherer Africans all over Sub Saharan Africa, than to ancestral Ethiopians and Somali's and Berber speakers, who seem to be in their own lane, with much of their ancestry being specific to the section of Africa they inhabit, and who are also partially descended from the OOA population(s). This relationship of Palaeolithic Egyptians to contemporary Sub Saharan Africans was not only shown skeletally by Pinhasi, but can also been seen in numerous other ways, such as the presence of severe cases of sickle cell in predynastic Egypt, blood type similarities with groups with Sub-Saharan affinity (Harratin) to dynastic Egyptians, and the latest evidence being stong alleles matches between Egyptians and groups literally all over Sub-Saharan Africa, from Pygmies, to San, and other groups who now reside below the equator.
quote:I think you're on to something here. So what about pharaonic origins in the Eastern Deserts per scholars like Toby Wilkinson? Do you think such origins are associated with early Afrasian speakers??
-During the Holocene, we get the migration of Proto-Afrasan people towards the Nile Valley, which is why we have their lineages and languages (Medjay, Ancient Egyptian, Berber) in Egypt, the Middle East and possibly all three languages in Ancient Sudan as well. These Holocenic demographic changes are what cause people to think that the core Egyptian population must have been genetically identical to Proto-Afrasan speakers, even though Neolithic Egyptians/Northern Sudanese display numerous signs of local differentiation, consistent with above described relatively distant relationship of most Ancient Egyptians to ancestral Somali's and Ethiopians.
quote:There is no such thing as AfroAsiatic.
Both sources reconstruct lexical relationships in the attested languages as going
back to derivational relationships in the proto-language. (In at least one case OS also
reconstruct a derivational relationship-- an Arabic singular-plural pair qarya(tun), qura(n)--
as going back to lexical ones in Proto-Afroasiatic, reconstructions 1568, 1589.) E does this
in a thorough-going way and the result is proto-language in which the basic vocabulary
consists of a set of polysemous verbal roots with abstract and general meanings, while
verbs with more specific meanings, and almost all nouns are derived by suffixation.
Further all consonants in this language can serve as suffixes. I would argue that both points
are violations of the uniformitarian principle. In general the underived, basic vocabulary of
a language and specific and concrete, while abstract words are formed by derivation.
Further it is rare for the full consonant inventory of a language to be used in its productive
derivational morphology. Finally, given the well-known homorganic cooccurence
restrictions on Afroasiatic roots (Greenberg 1950, Bender 1974), each suffix would have to
have at least one allomorph at a different point of articulation and a hideously complex
system of dissimilation rules would be needed to account for their distribution. E’s
justification for this is revealing “With respect to triconsonantal roots in Semitic, a[n] ...
explanation of the third consonant as lexicalized pre-proto-Semitic suffixal morphemes has
now been put forward (Ehret 1989).... It has been applied here without apology because,
quite simply it works.” This is the worst possible argument in favor of the hypothesis. As
the above calculations have shown, such a procedure should indeed work quite well as a
way of generating random noise.
http://www.tufs.ac.jp/ts/personal/ratcliffe/comp%20&%20method-Ratcliffe.pdf
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Wally:
The study of language, like the study of history, falls within the realm of
Social Science and Social Science is heavily imbued with ideology. Contrast
this with Applied Science which is virtually void of ideology - who debates
whether or not 2 + 2 = 4?
The modern classification of languages began in Western European society.
The grouping of "Indo-European" as a separate and distinct group began as
an abstract notion of a European family that had to be proven; the "Indo"
part could have just as easily been called "Aryo" for Aryan; the Aryans being
Iran, India (Hindu), etc. By the same token, the grouping of Niger-Congo also
began as an abstract notion to enforce the ideology of a distinct Africa-south
of the Sahara!
Ideological reaction to this 'Europeanization' of languages can be seen in recent
moves by some people in South Africa who want to change the name "Bantu"
into something else because of its negative use during Apartheid...the next
step could be the ban of the word Kaffir (non-Muslim) because it too, has been
'Europeanized' into a racial pejorative...
Afro-Asiatic; Afrasan; Hamito-Semitic are all aberrations
of Western European pseudo-social science because:
a) The birth of the Semitic languages was in the environs of modern day Ethiopia
b) The other divisions of this "Afro-Asian" language are also indigenous to Africa!
c) None of these grouped languages, including Arabic, had an origin outside
of Africa.
And were it not for ideology, this phylum would simply be called African.
quote:
Originally posted by Wally:
The gist of my opening statement, but only implied is that we should
stop parroting this pseudo-scientific nonsense! One shouldn't suffer
the delusion that using these terms demonstrates ones 'learnedness' of
the subject, rather it demonstrates a naivety...
In applied sciences this seldom is the case:
ie, Electronics
Knowing that the farad is a unit of capacitance...and named after this English
physicist guy Michael Faraday...picoFarad, microFarad...
or that the collector, base, and emitter are the names for the terminals
of a transistor...
or, in Computer(ese)
Knowing that a Terabyte = approximately one trillion bytes...
demonstrates a familiarity with the subject.
-- this does not work so easily in the ideological minefields of social science.
Thus to parrot the expression "Afro-Asiatic" or any of its variances is
the equivalent of wearing the Dunce cap!
quote:Indeed, whats interesting is that the starting date of the latter culture fits nicely with Frigi's analysis of Tunesian maternal lineages. L3* was said to have been brought from Eastern Africa to North Africa around 20.000 years ago, though pre-berbers people in Nothern Africa are undoubtedly much older, and related to Capsian people. Old modern North African lineages such as U6 strongly point to a very ancient presence of pre-Berbers in the region, and we also wouldn't expect Capsians to group away from Africans in limb proportians and cranio-facial affinity if the ancestral Capsian people were only 20ky migrants from Eastern Africa.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:I was thinking the same thing-- Berber lineages only date back to the Neolithic whereas Capsian culture is older. In fact the Capsian culture began around 10,000 B.C.E. and ended 6,000 B.C.E. right when 'Berber' lineages appeared in the area. Capsian Culture is the direct descendant of the Oranian a.k.a. 'Iberomaurusian' Culture 18,000-11,000 B.C.E.
Originally posted by Swenet:
I think its wrong to identify Proto-Berbers, or even Proto-Chadians (exclusively) with the Capsian culture. There were obviously lineages in Northern Africa that predate the onset of the Holocene. Why is Ehret making such rudimentary errors? The typical Berber paternal NRY marker E-M81, which may be used to identify their expansion into North Africa, originated less than 6000 years ago.
quote:I don't think there are enough remains that would allow one to objectively make a statement in that regard, although body measurements might be a useful marker in the future. Medjay people, and Nubians in general, were, on average, somewhat taller than Predynastic Egyptians, probably because they were they were still very much living a hunter gatherer life style.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:I think you're on to something here. So what about pharaonic origins in the Eastern Deserts per scholars like Toby Wilkinson? Do you think such origins are associated with early Afrasian speakers??
Originally posted by Swenet:
[QUOTE]-During the Holocene, we get the migration of Proto-Afrasan people towards the Nile Valley, which is why we have their lineages and languages (Medjay, Ancient Egyptian, Berber) in Egypt, the Middle East and possibly all three languages in Ancient Sudan as well. These Holocenic demographic changes are what cause people to think that the core Egyptian population must have been genetically identical to Proto-Afrasan speakers, even though Neolithic Egyptians/Northern Sudanese display numerous signs of local differentiation, consistent with above described relatively distant relationship of most Ancient Egyptians to ancestral Somali's and Ethiopians.
quote:Since we know the Vandals conquered the country from the Romans, why should we not be more inclined to seek explanations for the Berbers in the direction, both linguistically and in physical appearance: blond hair, blue eyes, etc? But no! Disregarding all these facts, historians decree that there was no Vandal influence and that it would be impossible to attribute anything in Barbary to their occupation” (p.69). [/b]
Berber Languages, Retrieved april 26,2006
http://www.nvtc.gov/lotw/months/july/berber.html
Introduction
The Berber, or Amazigh, people live in Northern Africa throughout the Mediterranean coast, the Sahara desert and Sahel which used to be a Berber world before the arrival of Arabs. Today, there are large groups of Berber people in Morocco and Algeria, important communitites in Mali, Niger and Libya, and smaller groups in Tunis, Mauritania, Burkina-Faso and Egypt. The Tuareg of the desert also belong to the Berber group. The Berber people speak 26 closely related languages.
Consonants
Berber consonants include:
glottalized consonants, so called because the space between the vocal cords (glottis) is constricted during their pronunciation;
implosive consonants produced with the air sucked inward;
ejective consonants produced with the air "ejected" or forced out;
geminate (doubled) consonants produced by holding them in position longer than for their single counterparts.
Click here to listen to a Berber song recorded in Morocco.
Grammar
Noun phrase
Berber nouns have two cases. One case is used for the subject of intransitive verbs, while the other is used for the subject of transitive verbs and objects of prepositions. There are two genders: masculine and feminine. The plural of nouns has a masculine and a feminine form.
Verb phrase
Verbs are marked for tense and aspect. The perfective of the verb is formed by reduplication of the second consonant of the root, or by the prefix -tt-.
Vocabulary
Most of the vocabulary is Berber in origin with borrowings from Latin, Arabic, French, Spanish, and other sub-Saharan languages. There is generally little or no intelligibility between the dialects.
quote:It would be quite interesting if these nomes were formerly prominent southern nomes who gained prominence once the Inyotefs came to power.
Originally posted by Wally:
Ethnic names in the Mdu Ntr
- Tutsi
Tutsi "the assembled gods"; "all of them (gods)"
Akan
Akan - the name of a god
Akaniu - a class of gods like Osiris
Fante
Fante - "he of the nose" - a name of Thoth - one of the 42 judges in the Hall of Osiris ("Shante" in modern Egyptian)
Hausa
Hosa - a singing god
Yoruba
Ourbaiu - great of souls, a title of gods or kings
Ouruba - Great God of soul
The permutations of names of such folks as the Wolof or the Fulani are so many, that it requires the effort of those who speak the language, to properly interpret the names -ie, Djoloff, Oulof, etc. and then look for their meanings in Budge's dictionary...
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
quote:The ancestor of the Oranian Culture is the Halfan Culture (24,000-15,000 B.C.E.) which began in the Egypto-Sudanese area and spread northwest giving rise to the Oranian as well as northeast giving rise to the Kebaran Culture in the Levant (18,000-10,000 B.C.E).
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Indeed, whats interesting is that the starting date of the latter culture fits nicely with Frigi's analysis of Tunisian maternal lineages. L3* was said to have been brought from Eastern Africa to North Africa around 20,000 years ago, though pre-berbers people in Nothern Africa are undoubtedly much older, and related to Capsian people. Old modern North African lineages such as U6 strongly point to a very ancient presence of pre-Berbers in the region, and we also wouldn't expect Capsians to group away from Africans in limb proportians and cranio-facial affinity if the ancestral Capsian people were only 20ky migrants from Eastern Africa.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
I was thinking the same thing-- Berber lineages only date back to the Neolithic whereas Capsian culture is older. In fact the Capsian culture began around 10,000 B.C.E. and ended 6,000 B.C.E. right when 'Berber' lineages appeared in the area. Capsian Culture is the direct descendant of the Oranian a.k.a. 'Iberomaurusian' Culture 18,000-11,000 B.C.E.
quote:I find it strange you say this, considering that most hunter-gatherers are relatively short. Usually tall stature is associated with pastoralism. I'm not saying that these people were necessarily pastoralists since this advancement in food production happened only later and farther west in the central Sahara. Also, reconstructed proto-Afrisian shows no evidence of animal domestication and only hunting and foraging. I will point out that the tall statures and even cranial features of the people in the Red Sea hills bear a striking resemblance to later peoples across the Red Sea in neolithic and Bronze Age Arabia as per sources cited by Dana.
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:I don't think there are enough remains that would allow one to objectively make a statement in that regard, although body measurements might be a useful marker in the future. Medjay people, and Nubians in general, were, on average, somewhat taller than Predynastic Egyptians, probably because they were they were still very much living a hunter gatherer life style.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
I think you're on to something here. So what about pharaonic origins in the Eastern Deserts per scholars like Toby Wilkinson? Do you think such origins are associated with early Afrasian speakers??
quote:Another thing that complicates things is that remains give no indication whatsoever about language or culture which is fluid and easily transmitted or adopted by different populations.
If the Predynastic Eastern Desert remains turn out to show more affinity with the later Medjay people in this regard, we may be able to conclude from that that they were more similar to modern groups in the Eastern Desert (e.g., Beja) than to Ancient Egyptians.
The thing that complicates the answer to your question is that (Southern) Egyptians didn't live exclusively along the Nile before and around the time of the Badarians. They were semi nomads, and so, there is no telling where they might have went other than the most obvious Plata's, Wadi's and Oases. So, even if the remains turn out to show more affinity to Medjay people than to Predynastic Egyptians, you still can't rule out the drawings were made by Predynastic Egyptians
quote:These are people who have adopted Berber-dialects and are not even mentioned more than 500 years ago.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Berber Languages
quote:Since we know the Vandals conquered the country from the Romans, why should we not be more inclined to seek explanations for the Berbers in the direction, both linguistically and in physical appearance: blond hair, blue eyes, etc? But no! Disregarding all these facts, historians decree that there was no Vandal influence and that it would be impossible to attribute anything in Barbary to their occupation” (p.69). [/b]
Berber Languages, Retrieved april 26,2006
http://www.nvtc.gov/lotw/months/july/berber.html
Introduction
The Berber, or Amazigh, people live in Northern Africa throughout the Mediterranean coast, the Sahara desert and Sahel which used to be a Berber world before the arrival of Arabs. Today, there are large groups of Berber people in Morocco and Algeria, important communitites in Mali, Niger and Libya, and smaller groups in Tunis, Mauritania, Burkina-Faso and Egypt. The Tuareg of the desert also belong to the Berber group. The Berber people speak 26 closely related languages.
Consonants
Berber consonants include:
glottalized consonants, so called because the space between the vocal cords (glottis) is constricted during their pronunciation;
implosive consonants produced with the air sucked inward;
ejective consonants produced with the air "ejected" or forced out;
geminate (doubled) consonants produced by holding them in position longer than for their single counterparts.
Click here to listen to a Berber song recorded in Morocco.
Grammar
Noun phrase
Berber nouns have two cases. One case is used for the subject of intransitive verbs, while the other is used for the subject of transitive verbs and objects of prepositions. There are two genders: masculine and feminine. The plural of nouns has a masculine and a feminine form.
Verb phrase
Verbs are marked for tense and aspect. The perfective of the verb is formed by reduplication of the second consonant of the root, or by the prefix -tt-.
Vocabulary
Most of the vocabulary is Berber in origin with borrowings from Latin, Arabic, French, Spanish, and other sub-Saharan languages. There is generally little or no intelligibility between the dialects.
The influence of European languages on the Berber languages and the grammar of the Berber languages indicate that the Berbers are probably of European, especially Vandal origin.
.
quote:The Tehenu portrayed here above and appearing in Lepsius canon are in my view the brown "brun" Libyans of in Oric Bates texts. The Lepsius Canon also depicts Libyans in a color that was evidently not even realistically reflected in the tomb paintings as shown by the many posters on this forum and as sstated to me by Charles Finch who saw the tombs in person stating the Libyans there were Maasai colored and that Lepsius must have deliberately misrepresented these folk.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The tehenu and Meshwesh
The use of different names to describe the
Tehenu and Asian in the Ramses III Table of Nations is
understood in relation to the political and ethnic
conditions in Egypt and Western Asia during this
period. The research appears to indicate that the
physiognomy of the Libyans had changed by this time .
This resulted , for the most part from the invasion of
Egypt by Sea Peoples in association with the Libu
(Libyans).
The figures on Ramses III Table of nations are
associated with the nations Ramses was dealing with
iduring his reign. The Libyans attacked Egypt during
the 5th and 11th years of Ramses III's reign.
Beginning around 1230 Sea People began to attack
Egypt. In 1180 Ramses III had his decisive battle with
the Libyans. Among the warriors fighting with the Libu
were Sea People.
Ramses III made multiple versions of his
campaigns against the Libyans. To understand the
naming method for Ramses III Table of Nations you have
to understand that the term Tehenu was a generic term
applied to the Libyans, who by this time were mixed
with Palestinian-Syrian people
(who were descendants of the Gutians), and People of
the Sea (Indo-Europeans).
The attack against Egypt in 1188 was a coalition
of tribal groups led by the Meshwesh, who are
believed to be a Tamehu nationality. As a result, we
find that the Meshwesh were referred to as
Tehenu\Tamehu. This may not be correct because the
Meshwesh are not mention in Egyptian text until the
14th Century BC.
The members of the coalition were led by
Meshesher the wr 'ruler' of the coalition.Each group
was led by a "great one" or a magnate. The Meshwesh
were semi-nomads that lived both in villages and
dmi'w 'towns'.The Tehenu lived in the Delta between
the Temehu and the Egyptians. The Egyptians referred
to all of the people in this area most often by the
generic tern "Tehenu".
The TjemhuTemehu which included the Meshwesh
controled an area from Cyrenaica to Syria. As a
result, in textual material from the reign of Ramses
II, there is mention of Temehu towns in Syria. David
O'Connor makes it clear that Ramses III referred to
these Temehu by the term Tehenu/Tjehnyu (p.64).
The Temehu were very hostile to the
Tehenu/Tjehnya. In fact, the first mention of the
Meshwesh in Ramses III inscriptions relating to 1188,
was the attack of the Tehenu, by the Meshwqesh, Soped
and Sea People . David O'Connor makes it clear that
the the records of Ramses III make it clear that the
Meshweshy "savagely" attacked the Tehenu and looted
their cities during their advance to Egypt (p.35 &
105).
The coalition of the Meshweshy had each unit of
the army organized into "family or tribal ' units
under the leadership of a "great one". As result to
understand why the fAsian and Tehenu figures on the
Table of Nations are identified differently you have
use both the pictorical and textual material from the
reign of Ramses III to understand the representations.
As a result, Palestianian -Syrian personage or figure
D, is labled Tehenu because he was probably a member
of one Meshwesh units, thus he was labled Tehenu.
The personage that is second from the Egyptians which
is labled an Asian, eventhough he is clearly a Tehenu,
was probably a member of a Syrian Palestinian unit
when he was captured by the Egyptians thusly he was
labled Asian. You can find out more about this
reality if you check out: David O'Connor, "The nature
of Tjemhu (Libyan) society in later New Kingdom; in
Libya and Egypt c1300-750 BC, (Ed.) by Athony Leahy
(pp.29-113), SOAS Centre of Near and Middle Eastern
Studies and the Society for Libyan Studies, 1990.
In the Table of Nation figure B we see the
traditional depiction of a Tehenu, the sidelock,
shoulder cape and clean face. The Temehu, called
Meshwesh are different from the Tehenu and the
original Tamehu recorded by the Egyptians prior to the
New Kingdom. Below is a Meshwesh
The Meshwesh wore Tehenu traditional costumes but
they are not believed to be real Tehenu. The Tehenu
and the Temehu usually wore different costumes. In the
New Kingdom depictions of the Temehu, the Meshwesh
have "long chin beards", like the Syrian-Palestinians
and Peoples of the Sea. They wear kilts, sheaths and
capes open at the front tied at one shoulder. Like the
earlier Tehenu they wore feathers as a sign of High
Status.
David O'Connor makes it clear that there was
"marked hetergeneity of the Tjemhu" (p.41).
The first attack by Libyans on Egypt were led by
the Libu during the 5th year of Ramses III's reign.
Diop has provided convincing evidence that the Libu,
later migrated into Senegal, where they presenly live
near Cape Verde
The difference in dress among the Meshwesh and
their hostility toward the Tehenu, have led many
researchers to see the Temehu of the New Kingdom as a
different group from the original Temehu of Egyptian
traditions. O'Connor (p.74) in the work cited above
makes it clear that the Temehu in Ramses III
day--"[have] hairstyles, dress and apparently ethnic
type [that] are markedly different from the
Tjehnyu/tjemhu of the Old Kingdom (Osing,
1980,1018-19). Various explanations have been offered:
Wainwright, for example, concluded that 'Meshwesh was
a mixed tribe of Libu like tribesmen with their native
chiefs who become subject to a family of Tjehnu
origin'(1962,p.92), while Osing suggested that the New
Kingdowm Tjemhu had displaced or absorbed the earlier
Tjehnyu but had selectively taken over or retained
some Tjehnyu traits, in the case of the rulers for
Meshwesh (1980,1019-1020). Dr. O'Connor is of the
opinion "that some rulers of the later New Kingdom
Tjemhu deliberately adopted traits they discovered
from the Egyptians to be chracteristic of ancient
Tjehnyu/Tjemhu, so as to increase there prestige, or
in some way had these rtraits imposed upon them by the
Egyptians" (p.74).
It is my opinion that given the organiztion of
the Libyans into mhwt "family or tribal groups',
sometime prior to 1230 BC over an extended period of
time Indo-European speaking people later to be known
as Peoples of the Sea entered Western Asia and Libya
and were adopted by Tehenu families. This adoption of
the new immigrants by Tehenu/Tamehu probably led to
the Meshwesh and Soped adopting Tehenu customs but
maintaining their traditional beards,. The original
Temehu, like the Libu probably saw the integration of
Sea Peoples into Temehu society as a way to increase
their number and possibily conquer Egypt. It is
interesting to note that the Meshwesh were very sure
they might be able to conquor the Egyptians because
they brought their cattle and other animals with them
when they invaded the country. Moreover whereas the
Meshwesh, were semi-nomadic, the Sea Peoples:
Akawashu, Lukki, Tursha., Sheklesh, and Sherden
remained nomadic. and used the spear and round shield.
The Nehasyu were ancient members of the
Tehenu/Temehu. This would explain the reason why the
Meshwesh and Nehasyu were mainly bowman.
In conclusion, the names for the personages in the
Table of Nations from Ramses III tomb were labled
correctly. These personages were recorded in the the
Tables based on the military and family units were
attached too, not the country identifiable by their
dress.
Annotated Bibliograpy
Adler,J.(1991 September 23). "African Dreams",
Newsweek, pp.42- 45. This magazine articles
discussed the controversey surrounding Afrocentrism.
Anselin,A.(1984). "Zeus, Ethiopien Minos Tamoul",
Carbet Revue
Martinique de Sciences Humaines,no. 2:31-50. This
articles explains the African origin of the Libyans.
It has several very good illustrations of
Blacks in ancient Sahara.
.
quote:I do agree there are both AFroloons and Euronuts Djehuti but the Dravidian dialects as I mentioned previously are thought to be structurally-related to African dialects by certain highly regarded Western and Dravidian scholars today. It is not Clyde's idea. Secondly, there are more reasons than just linguistic structural differences to either accept or reject a theory. Since I am not a linguistic specialist I can't speak with regard to the Vandalic influences on Berber. I am sure there is much impress in certain Berber dialects since there is definitely a strong biological and cultural influence among modern fair-skinned Berber speakers.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ Dana, it's rather unfortunate but just as there are Euroloons, there are also Afroloons and Clyde is one of them.
The guy claims Berber languages to be Euoropean in origin due to a few typological similarities here and there despite the glaring differences in structure and vocabulary as well as the fact that Berber is not spoken in Europe and there's no evidence that it ever was. Meanwhile he claims Dravidian to be African in origin even though the Dravidian languages are not only farther removed geographically from Africa than is Europe, but again due to typological similarities in language despite the glaring difference in vocabulary and structure. You see the pattern here-- an Indian language group becomes African while an actual African language group becomes European.
It is pseudo-scholarly nuttiness at its worst.
quote:one thing i don't know much about is linguistic connections of the ancient world. The one thing I do know about is the physical and biological afiliations of the Holocene North Afircans. There are considered two groups of Capsians one related physiologially to the Natufians and the other two the gracile Mediterranean or of ancient Sahara and Nubia.
Originally posted by Swenet:
I think its wrong to identify Proto-Berbers, or even Proto-Chadians (exclusively) with the Capsian culture. There were obviously lineages in Northern Africa that predate the onset of the Holocene. Why is Ehret making such rudimentary errors? The typical Berber paternal NRY marker E-M81, which may be used to identify their expansion into North Africa, originated less than 6000 years ago.
-Afrasan speakers are NOT the original people of the wider Sahara.
-Despite their language having commonalities with Semitic and Berber languages, the core of the Ancient Egyptian population was probably much more related to the indigenous Northeast African people, who predate those languages, and who may be exemplified by Nazlet Khater. Their ancestry probably had much more affinity with contemporary hunter gatherer Africans all over Sub Saharan Africa, than to ancestral Ethiopians and Somali's and Berber speakers, who seem to be in their own lane, with much of their ancestry being specific to the section of Africa they inhabit, and who are also partially descended from the OOA population(s). This relationship of Palaeolithic Egyptians to contemporary Sub Saharan Africans was not only shown skeletally by Pinhasi, but can also been seen in numerous other ways, such as the presence of severe cases of sickle cell in predynastic Egypt, blood type similarities with groups with Sub-Saharan affinity (Harratin) to dynastic Egyptians, and the latest evidence being stong alleles matches between Egyptians and groups literally all over Sub-Saharan Africa, from Pygmies, to San, and other groups who now reside below the equator.
-During the Holocene, we get the migration of Proto-Afrasan people towards the Nile Valley, which is why we have their lineages and languages (Medjay, Ancient Egyptian, Berber) in Egypt, the Middle East and possibly all three languages in Ancient Sudan as well. These Holocenic demographic changes are what cause people to think that the core Egyptian population must have been genetically identical to Proto-Afrasan speakers, even though Neolithic Egyptians/Northern Sudanese display numerous signs of local differentiation, consistent with above described relatively distant relationship of most Ancient Egyptians to ancestral Somali's and Ethiopians.
quote:Germanic peoples in Kabylia are not the only Europeans that influenced the Berber-speakers.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Berber Languages
quote:Since we know the Vandals conquered the country from the Romans, why should we not be more inclined to seek explanations for the Berbers in the direction, both linguistically and in physical appearance: blond hair, blue eyes, etc? But no! Disregarding all these facts, historians decree that there was no Vandal influence and that it would be impossible to attribute anything in Barbary to their occupation” (p.69). [/b]
Introduction
The Berber, or Amazigh, people live in Northern Africa throughout the Mediterranean coast, the Sahara desert and Sahel which used to be a Berber world before the arrival of Arabs. Today, there are large groups of Berber people in Morocco and Algeria, important communitites in Mali, Niger and Libya, and smaller groups in Tunis, Mauritania, Burkina-Faso and Egypt. The Tuareg of the desert also belong to the Berber group. The Berber people speak 26 closely related languages.
Consonants
Berber consonants include:
glottalized consonants, so called because the space between the vocal cords (glottis) is constricted during their pronunciation;
implosive consonants produced with the air sucked inward;
ejective consonants produced with the air "ejected" or forced out;
geminate (doubled) consonants produced by holding them in position longer than for their single counterparts.
Click here to listen to a Berber song recorded in Morocco.
Grammar
Noun phrase
Berber nouns have two cases. One case is used for the subject of intransitive verbs, while the other is used for the subject of transitive verbs and objects of prepositions. There are two genders: masculine and feminine. The plural of nouns has a masculine and a feminine form.
Verb phrase
Verbs are marked for tense and aspect. The perfective of the verb is formed by reduplication of the second consonant of the root, or by the prefix -tt-.
Vocabulary
Most of the vocabulary is Berber in origin with borrowings from Latin, Arabic, French, Spanish, and other sub-Saharan languages. There is generally little or no intelligibility between the dialects.
The influence of European languages on the Berber languages and the grammar of the Berber languages indicate that the Berbers are probably of European, especially Vandal origin.
.
quote:Hebrew = Phoenician and the Phoenicians were Negros to my knowledge. As for the "jews" its fake, the whole story. There was no Jewish people in antiquity, their whole existence is based on a lie.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ LOL Sorry tin cat, but I don't wear panties and Ehret is not confused at all unlike YOU! I doubt Ehret is under the control of YOUR Ashkenazi masters since there are some Ashkenazi elite would find it uncomfortable to know that their ancient language and culture that they claim is originally black African in origin.
So keep watching your silly ass out for dem Juus! LOL
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
quote:The Jews or Judaeans were and are people of the Wahd, once worshippers of Wahd (Yehwd) the lion deity of the Minaeans (Meunim Judges 10:12). Africans were always totemists.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Hebrew = Phoenician and the Phoenicians were Negros to my knowledge. As for the "jews" its fake, the whole story. There was no Jewish people in antiquity, their whole existence is based on a lie.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ LOL Sorry tin cat, but I don't wear panties and Ehret is not confused at all unlike YOU! I doubt Ehret is under the control of YOUR Ashkenazi masters since there are some Ashkenazi elite would find it uncomfortable to know that their ancient language and culture that they claim is originally black African in origin.
So keep watching your silly ass out for dem Juus! LOL
quote:Your talking about fantasy, im talking about here in reality. There was no such thing as Jews in the time they claim the kingdom of Israel supposedly existed. Just do the research. There is no king Solomon's temple, there is no ancient israel, there is no land of king david. When you dig down to that time period, in what they now call israel, you find idol worshipers, not some mythical jewish people. These stories are legends, i.e. they have SOME basis in reality, but they have been turned into myths.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:The Jews or Judaeans were and are people of the Wahd, once worshippers of Wahd (Yehwd) the lion deity of the Minaeans (Meunim Judges 10:12). Africans were always totemists.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Hebrew = Phoenician and the Phoenicians were Negros to my knowledge. As for the "jews" its fake, the whole story. There was no Jewish people in antiquity, their whole existence is based on a lie.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ LOL Sorry tin cat, but I don't wear panties and Ehret is not confused at all unlike YOU! I doubt Ehret is under the control of YOUR Ashkenazi masters since there are some Ashkenazi elite would find it uncomfortable to know that their ancient language and culture that they claim is originally black African in origin.
So keep watching your silly ass out for dem Juus! LOL
The Kahanim definitely existed in Khaibar (Chobar) as late as the 16th century and came from this region Wahid (Yehwd) not far from Marib,(Meriba, Exodus 17), belonging to the eastern part of Kush (south of Mecca down thru Tihama) and Kanaan (Wadi Kenawnah) near Senah (Sana'a) of the Lemba.
quote:I can not disagree entirely with this statement, but, your timeline is recent not ancient.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
quote:Have a look at Keita's chapel hill lecture he gave. He stated the X chromosome has some European markers, how do you suppose that got there? he quoted sources of the Mansa in Mali purchasing white women in Egypt and also asking for Spanish virgins as payment from someone who wanted to move to his kingdom. The idea isn't far fetched. I don't understand though, why do black people think we couldn't have done this? YOu think white hatred for African people is just because they are a hateful bunch? They love their dogs way to much to be purely evil (semi joke).
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:I can not disagree entirely with this statement, but, your timeline is recent not ancient.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
Can you cite a source where it is mentioned that Fula and Igbos purchased 'white' slaves?
.
quote:I don't know since I've never heard of such a thing, Djehuti. That's why I posted the picture of modern apparently probably Slavic descended North AFricans who obviously would have nothing to do with ancient Meshwesh of any sort.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ But what does the Islamic slave-trade of the Maghreb in the Middle Ages have to do with Iron Age Libyans like the Meshwesh?
quote:Not in Syria there isn't but there is in the orignal land of Canaan. Again, see The Bible Came from Arabia and Bernard Leeman's Queen of Sheba: The Menelik Cycle.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Your talking about fantasy, im talking about here in reality. There was no such thing as Jews in the time they claim the kingdom of Israel supposedly existed. Just do the research. There is no king Solomon's temple, there is no ancient israel, there is no land of king david. When you dig down to that time period, in what they now call israel, you find idol worshipers, not some mythical jewish people. These stories are legends, i.e. they have SOME basis in reality, but they have been turned into myths.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:The Jews or Judaeans were and are people of the Wahd, once worshippers of Wahd (Yehwd) the lion deity of the Minaeans (Meunim Judges 10:12). Africans were always totemists.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Hebrew = Phoenician and the Phoenicians were Negros to my knowledge. As for the "jews" its fake, the whole story. There was no Jewish people in antiquity, their whole existence is based on a lie.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ LOL Sorry tin cat, but I don't wear panties and Ehret is not confused at all unlike YOU! I doubt Ehret is under the control of YOUR Ashkenazi masters since there are some Ashkenazi elite would find it uncomfortable to know that their ancient language and culture that they claim is originally black African in origin.
So keep watching your silly ass out for dem Juus! LOL
The Kahanim definitely existed in Khaibar (Chobar) as late as the 16th century and came from this region Wahid (Yehwd) not far from Marib,(Meriba, Exodus 17), belonging to the eastern part of Kush (south of Mecca down thru Tihama) and Kanaan (Wadi Kenawnah) near Senah (Sana'a) of the Lemba.
That might upset some people but, it is, what it is. There is NO archeological evidence to support your claims. As for the Limba people, they did not call themselves jews until those silly Ashkenazis came there and fed them that fanciful lie. Now, I am not saying there was no ancient religion that these "jews" corrupted and base themselves off of. What I am saying is, the "jewish' people, as defined today and as they define their history is a lie.
quote:What land of canaan are you referring too that holds the temple of Solomon or palace of David? Can you please show me scholarly research that would agree with your claims?
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Not in Syria there isn't but there is in the orignal land of Canaan. Again, see The Bible Came from Arabia and Bernard Leeman's Queen of Sheba: The Menelik Cycle.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Your talking about fantasy, im talking about here in reality. There was no such thing as Jews in the time they claim the kingdom of Israel supposedly existed. Just do the research. There is no king Solomon's temple, there is no ancient israel, there is no land of king david. When you dig down to that time period, in what they now call israel, you find idol worshipers, not some mythical jewish people. These stories are legends, i.e. they have SOME basis in reality, but they have been turned into myths.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:The Jews or Judaeans were and are people of the Wahd, once worshippers of Wahd (Yehwd) the lion deity of the Minaeans (Meunim Judges 10:12). Africans were always totemists.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Hebrew = Phoenician and the Phoenicians were Negros to my knowledge. As for the "jews" its fake, the whole story. There was no Jewish people in antiquity, their whole existence is based on a lie.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ LOL Sorry tin cat, but I don't wear panties and Ehret is not confused at all unlike YOU! I doubt Ehret is under the control of YOUR Ashkenazi masters since there are some Ashkenazi elite would find it uncomfortable to know that their ancient language and culture that they claim is originally black African in origin.
So keep watching your silly ass out for dem Juus! LOL
The Kahanim definitely existed in Khaibar (Chobar) as late as the 16th century and came from this region Wahid (Yehwd) not far from Marib,(Meriba, Exodus 17), belonging to the eastern part of Kush (south of Mecca down thru Tihama) and Kanaan (Wadi Kenawnah) near Senah (Sana'a) of the Lemba.
That might upset some people but, it is, what it is. There is NO archeological evidence to support your claims. As for the Limba people, they did not call themselves jews until those silly Ashkenazis came there and fed them that fanciful lie. Now, I am not saying there was no ancient religion that these "jews" corrupted and base themselves off of. What I am saying is, the "jewish' people, as defined today and as they define their history is a lie.
Of course it can be agreed it is European fantasy that ancient Israel/Canaan existed in the place you are talking about. That myth was started with the Greek Septuagint and kept up in the West.
That is not part of the Afro-Asiatic Hebrew origin myth.
quote:Meshwesh or Maazaawazou - still a Tuareg name - could have nothing to do with Vandals. If they are connected at all to any of the "people of the sea" it could only have been some black ones like the Philistines or some other Canaanite supposedly occupying Syria, Crete and other parts of the Aegean.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:I can not disagree entirely with this statement, but, your timeline is recent not ancient.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
Can you cite a source where it is mentioned that Fula and Igbos purchased 'white' slaves?
.
quote:Some slaves may have contributed somewhat to both Fulani and Igbo. But the Fulani phenotype is recognizable in the Central Sahara since the Neolithic along with their single sidelock hair-style later found on C-group Libyan Temehou.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
quote:Fulas vary in their look. Some of them are black like petrol and others are brown. They vary, so I am not sure about the "phenotype", or what you mean by that.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:They may have contributed somewhat to both Fulani and Igbo. But the Fulani phenotype is recognizable in the Central Sahara since the Neolithic along with their single sidelock hair-style later found on C-group Libyan Temehou.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
Thankfully Trollpatrol posted a photo of the rock art in Sahara showing this.
quote:Why would you surmise that the Fulani were influenced by white slaves, TypeZeiss.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Fulas vary in their look. Some of them are black like petrol and others are brown. They vary, so I am not sure about the "phenotype", or what you mean by that.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:They may have contributed somewhat to both Fulani and Igbo. But the Fulani phenotype is recognizable in the Central Sahara since the Neolithic along with their single sidelock hair-style later found on C-group Libyan Temehou.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
Thankfully Trollpatrol posted a photo of the rock art in Sahara showing this.
quote:I don't believe african people were cruel to Europeans.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
.
Have a look at Keita's chapel hill lecture he gave. He stated the X chromosome has some European markers, how do you suppose that got there? he quoted sources of the Mansa in Mali purchasing white women in Egypt and also asking for Spanish virgins as payment from someone who wanted to move to his kingdom. The idea isn't far fetched. I don't understand though, why do black people think we couldn't have done this? YOu think white hatred for African people is just because they are a hateful bunch? They love their dogs way to much to be purely evil (semi joke).
My point is, I believe we Africans went damn crazy in Europe and had our way with them. I think their hatred stems from that. It is not far fetched to think we could have sold them far and wide. I don't believe in Evolution though, I find the notion silly. But I do find enslaving white women and having our way with a number of them, enough so to change the look of a population, to be highly plausible.
quote:White slaves where brought into Africa from 700 to about 1700s, I would assume less so around 1700s. Whites colonist did not come in there during the height of this trade so they are speaking of people after the fact. As for the rest of what you said concerning features, lets b e serious. The same way Africans vary in looks and features, so do Europeans. Also, Keita mentions in one of his lectures what is found in the X chromosome concerning some fulas which helps to prove my point.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Why would you surmise that the Fulani were influenced by white slaves, TypeZeiss.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Fulas vary in their look. Some of them are black like petrol and others are brown. They vary, so I am not sure about the "phenotype", or what you mean by that.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:They may have contributed somewhat to both Fulani and Igbo. But the Fulani phenotype is recognizable in the Central Sahara since the Neolithic along with their single sidelock hair-style later found on C-group Libyan Temehou.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
Thankfully Trollpatrol posted a photo of the rock art in Sahara showing this.
When colonialists spoke of Fulani they talked of them as being part "hamites" they were obviously not just talking about people who spoke Fula and are partly mixed with Takruri and other populations.
I imagine it is for the same reason you suppose they may have been mixed with white slaves. Although in particular don't see the slightest resemblance of Fulani of big boned European faces to the narrow faces and often refined or narrow featured faces of the Fulani which as I said are found in pastoralist "Bovidian" rock art of the Central Sahara thousands of years B.C., along with other AFrican populations.
quote:Linguistically, I don't see any relationship between Meshwesh and Maazaawazou.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Meshwesh or Maazaawazou - still a Tuareg name - could have nothing to do with Vandals. If they are connected at all to any of the "people of the sea" it could only have been some black ones like the Philistines or some other Canaanite supposedly occupying Syria, Crete and other parts of the Aegean.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:I can not disagree entirely with this statement, but, your timeline is recent not ancient.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
Can you cite a source where it is mentioned that Fula and Igbos purchased 'white' slaves?
.
Philistine supposedly in Aegean wear (period of the Ramessids)
quote:White slave women are mentioned as being imported into AFrica by the Mauri in Claudian's time and are mentioned as late as th last century as being imported by the Moors.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:White slaves where brought into Africa from 700 to about 1700s, I would assume less so around 1700s. Whites colonist did not come in there during the height of this trade so they are speaking of people after the fact. As for the rest of what you said concerning features, lets b e serious. The same way Africans vary in looks and features, so do Europeans. Also, Keita mentions in one of his lectures what is found in the X chromosome concerning some fulas which helps to prove my point.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Why would you surmise that the Fulani were influenced by white slaves, TypeZeiss.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Fulas vary in their look. Some of them are black like petrol and others are brown. They vary, so I am not sure about the "phenotype", or what you mean by that.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:They may have contributed somewhat to both Fulani and Igbo. But the Fulani phenotype is recognizable in the Central Sahara since the Neolithic along with their single sidelock hair-style later found on C-group Libyan Temehou.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
Thankfully Trollpatrol posted a photo of the rock art in Sahara showing this.
When colonialists spoke of Fulani they talked of them as being part "hamites" they were obviously not just talking about people who spoke Fula and are partly mixed with Takruri and other populations.
I imagine it is for the same reason you suppose they may have been mixed with white slaves. Although in particular don't see the slightest resemblance of Fulani of big boned European faces to the narrow faces and often refined or narrow featured faces of the Fulani which as I said are found in pastoralist "Bovidian" rock art of the Central Sahara thousands of years B.C., along with other AFrican populations.
quote:Some people consider this Pel(r)eset a Philistine while others, like the alternative chronologists such as Velikovsky consider it a Persian.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Linguistically, I don't see any relationship between Meshwesh and Maazaawazou.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Meshwesh or Maazaawazou - still a Tuareg name - could have nothing to do with Vandals. If they are connected at all to any of the "people of the sea" it could only have been some black ones like the Philistines or some other Canaanite supposedly occupying Syria, Crete and other parts of the Aegean.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:I can not disagree entirely with this statement, but, your timeline is recent not ancient.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
Can you cite a source where it is mentioned that Fula and Igbos purchased 'white' slaves?
.
Philistine supposedly in Aegean wear (period of the Ramessids)
Below is one of the Sea People.
Are you claiming that after the Egyptians defeated the Sea People they did not deposit them in the Delta?
.
quote:Thank you, as always, great posting and great information. Where did I get my info from? Reading various books on ancient Egypt, was the first time I found out about these people being enslaved in GREAT numbers, into Africa by the people of Kemet, which continued until the fall of the empire.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:White slave women are mentioned as being imported into AFrica by the Mauri in Claudian's time and are mentioned as late as th last century as being imported by the Moors.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:White slaves where brought into Africa from 700 to about 1700s, I would assume less so around 1700s. Whites colonist did not come in there during the height of this trade so they are speaking of people after the fact. As for the rest of what you said concerning features, lets b e serious. The same way Africans vary in looks and features, so do Europeans. Also, Keita mentions in one of his lectures what is found in the X chromosome concerning some fulas which helps to prove my point.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Why would you surmise that the Fulani were influenced by white slaves, TypeZeiss.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Fulas vary in their look. Some of them are black like petrol and others are brown. They vary, so I am not sure about the "phenotype", or what you mean by that.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:They may have contributed somewhat to both Fulani and Igbo. But the Fulani phenotype is recognizable in the Central Sahara since the Neolithic along with their single sidelock hair-style later found on C-group Libyan Temehou.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
Thankfully Trollpatrol posted a photo of the rock art in Sahara showing this.
When colonialists spoke of Fulani they talked of them as being part "hamites" they were obviously not just talking about people who spoke Fula and are partly mixed with Takruri and other populations.
I imagine it is for the same reason you suppose they may have been mixed with white slaves. Although in particular don't see the slightest resemblance of Fulani of big boned European faces to the narrow faces and often refined or narrow featured faces of the Fulani which as I said are found in pastoralist "Bovidian" rock art of the Central Sahara thousands of years B.C., along with other AFrican populations.
I think I have posted enough about that including this from Claudian complaining of Gildo imported Roman noble woman from Syria.
Of course that doesn't mean white slaves weren't coming in earlier to North Africa. We do hear Lucan and others talking about white slaves imported by the Romans.
I am not sure where you are getting your information but i can givem any sources showing the continuation of the white slave trade up until the last century.
In fact I would not be surprised if it were not still going on today as it is in many Middle eastern socieites.
The Fula speakers are mixed in various areas of Africa with diverse peoples, so of course they are going to look diverse. Of course that doesn't mean the earliest Fulani or even Berbers were as diverse as modern Berber-speakers are today.
quote:Interesting piece about the Halfan culture. Is there more information on this?
Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:The ancestor of the Oranian Culture is the Halfan Culture (24,000-15,000 B.C.E.) which began in the Egypto-Sudanese area and spread northwest giving rise to the Oranian as well as northeast giving rise to the Kebaran Culture in the Levant (18,000-10,000 B.C.E).
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Indeed, whats interesting is that the starting date of the latter culture fits nicely with Frigi's analysis of Tunisian maternal lineages. L3* was said to have been brought from Eastern Africa to North Africa around 20,000 years ago, though pre-berbers people in Nothern Africa are undoubtedly much older, and related to Capsian people. Old modern North African lineages such as U6 strongly point to a very ancient presence of pre-Berbers in the region, and we also wouldn't expect Capsians to group away from Africans in limb proportians and cranio-facial affinity if the ancestral Capsian people were only 20ky migrants from Eastern Africa.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
I was thinking the same thing-- Berber lineages only date back to the Neolithic whereas Capsian culture is older. In fact the Capsian culture began around 10,000 B.C.E. and ended 6,000 B.C.E. right when 'Berber' lineages appeared in the area. Capsian Culture is the direct descendant of the Oranian a.k.a. 'Iberomaurusian' Culture 18,000-11,000 B.C.E.
What's surprising is that even Mathilda admitted as much!:
"This is me looking for the earliest appearance of the Halfan derived Kebaran culture arriving in Israel. The Kebarans appeared to have moved out of Northern Nubia and up as far as Syria, and as far as the Afalou site site IN North Africa. This seems to have been because of a new found taste for eating wild grasses which gave them access to a new food source, allowing greater population density which leads to a popultion expansion. All the North African populations from Algeria to Israel show varying levels of sub-Saharan ancestry at this point, but the population didn’t seem to reach as far as Morocco, or into Turkey."
quote:I find it strange you say this, considering that most hunter-gatherers are relatively short. Usually tall stature is associated with pastoralism. I'm not saying that these people were necessarily pastoralists since this advancement in food production happened only later and farther west in the central Sahara. Also, reconstructed proto-Afrisian shows no evidence of animal domestication and only hunting and foraging. I will point out that the tall statures and even cranial features of the people in the Red Sea hills bear a striking resemblance to later peoples across the Red Sea in neolithic and Bronze Age Arabia as per sources cited by Dana.
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:I don't think there are enough remains that would allow one to objectively make a statement in that regard, although body measurements might be a useful marker in the future. Medjay people, and Nubians in general, were, on average, somewhat taller than Predynastic Egyptians, probably because they were they were still very much living a hunter gatherer life style.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
I think you're on to something here. So what about pharaonic origins in the Eastern Deserts per scholars like Toby Wilkinson? Do you think such origins are associated with early Afrasian speakers??
quote:Another thing that complicates things is that remains give no indication whatsoever about language or culture which is fluid and easily transmitted or adopted by different populations.
If the Predynastic Eastern Desert remains turn out to show more affinity with the later Medjay people in this regard, we may be able to conclude from that that they were more similar to modern groups in the Eastern Desert (e.g., Beja) than to Ancient Egyptians.
The thing that complicates the answer to your question is that (Southern) Egyptians didn't live exclusively along the Nile before and around the time of the Badarians. They were semi nomads, and so, there is no telling where they might have went other than the most obvious Plata's, Wadi's and Oases. So, even if the remains turn out to show more affinity to Medjay people than to Predynastic Egyptians, you still can't rule out the drawings were made by Predynastic Egyptians
quote:I don't think there has ever been a proper statistical analysis that has ever grouped the Mushabean affiliated Natufians with Capsian people (though I'm sure affinity exist between Kebaran affiliated Natufians and Capsian people).
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:one thing i don't know much about is linguistic connections of the ancient world. The one thing I do know about is the physical and biological afiliations of the Holocene North Afircans. There are considered two groups of Capsians one related physiologially to the Natufians and the other two the gracile Mediterranean or of ancient Sahara and Nubia.
Originally posted by Swenet:
I think its wrong to identify Proto-Berbers, or even Proto-Chadians (exclusively) with the Capsian culture. There were obviously lineages in Northern Africa that predate the onset of the Holocene. Why is Ehret making such rudimentary errors? The typical Berber paternal NRY marker E-M81, which may be used to identify their expansion into North Africa, originated less than 6000 years ago.
-Afrasan speakers are NOT the original people of the wider Sahara.
-Despite their language having commonalities with Semitic and Berber languages, the core of the Ancient Egyptian population was probably much more related to the indigenous Northeast African people, who predate those languages, and who may be exemplified by Nazlet Khater. Their ancestry probably had much more affinity with contemporary hunter gatherer Africans all over Sub Saharan Africa, than to ancestral Ethiopians and Somali's and Berber speakers, who seem to be in their own lane, with much of their ancestry being specific to the section of Africa they inhabit, and who are also partially descended from the OOA population(s). This relationship of Palaeolithic Egyptians to contemporary Sub Saharan Africans was not only shown skeletally by Pinhasi, but can also been seen in numerous other ways, such as the presence of severe cases of sickle cell in predynastic Egypt, blood type similarities with groups with Sub-Saharan affinity (Harratin) to dynastic Egyptians, and the latest evidence being stong alleles matches between Egyptians and groups literally all over Sub-Saharan Africa, from Pygmies, to San, and other groups who now reside below the equator.
-During the Holocene, we get the migration of Proto-Afrasan people towards the Nile Valley, which is why we have their lineages and languages (Medjay, Ancient Egyptian, Berber) in Egypt, the Middle East and possibly all three languages in Ancient Sudan as well. These Holocenic demographic changes are what cause people to think that the core Egyptian population must have been genetically identical to Proto-Afrasan speakers, even though Neolithic Egyptians/Northern Sudanese display numerous signs of local differentiation, consistent with above described relatively distant relationship of most Ancient Egyptians to ancestral Somali's and Ethiopians.
Thus I am rather interested in where you have derived your information concerning the early Capsians. It was noticed long ago by archaeologists that the Capsian culture appears very similar to that practiced modern East Africans including both Nilotes and Cushitic speakers. This includes such details their usage of ostrich eggs, capping of their tombs with cattle horns, and many other features exclusive to the region. It is one of the important connections I had assumed led Ehret to conclude the Erthyraiotes were of Capsian origin which would mean they looked like the robust Natufian maechotoid types that dominated most of the Maghreb and for that matter AFrican landscape at that time.
As far I know and am concerned Berbers did not live in the last 6000 years in North Africa. People probably simliar to hte Haratin Badarian AFro-San type did however live there. While elongated types are not found anywhere until the Neolithic and thus we don't know where they originated. But the fact the Naqqada population shows so much similarity to the neolithic North African and Somali who appear to fit in between the early gracile North AFrican and elongated African type could very well link the Capsians to early Afro-san speakers.
quote:Hence, no recent common ancestry between the Jebel Sahaba and Capsian people. Their common ancestry will have to be either way back in time, but well after OOA, or their common ancestors lived during or before OOA. If the latter is the case, I would presume that the Taforalt and Afalou people were predominantly Iberian in origin.
Univariate analyses distinguish
Jebel Sahaba from European and
circumpolar samples, but do not
tend to segregate them from North
or Sub-Saharan African samples. In
contrast, multivariate analyses
(PCA, PCO with minimum
spanning tree, NJ and UPGMA
cluster analyses) indicate that the
body shape of the Jebel Sahaba
hominins is closest to that of recent
Sub-Saharan Africans, and different
from that of either the Natufians or
the northwest African
“Iberomaurusian” samples.
quote:Indeed
Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ I myself postulate that the Afalou and Taforalt types represent aboriginal North Africans who adapted to the Mediterranean coastal environment. The fact that their skeletons are more so cold adapted than tropical adapted remind me of the Khoisan of southern Africa who also live in a Mediterranean-like climate.
quote:
"Stature, body mass, and body proportions are evaluated for the Cheddar Man (Gough's Cave 1) skeleton. Like many of his Mesolithic contemporaries, Gough's Cave 1 evinces relatively short estimated stature (ca. 166.2 cm [5' 5']) and low body mass (ca. 66 kg [146 lbs]). In body shape, he is similar to recent Europeans for most proportional indices. He differs, however, from most recent Europeans in his high crural index and tibial length/trunk height indices. Thus, while Gough's Cave 1 is characterized by a total morphological pattern considered 'cold-adapted', these latter two traits may be interpreted as evidence of a large African role in the origins of anatomically modern Europeans." (TRENTON W. HOLLIDAY a1 and STEVEN E. CHURCHILL. (2003). Gough's Cave 1 (Somerset, England): an assessment of body size and shape, Bulletin of the Natural History Museum: Geology, 58:37-44 Cambridge University Press)
quote:Where did you read about Taforalt being cold adapted Djehuti
Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ I myself postulate that the Afalou and Taforalt types represent aboriginal North Africans who adapted to the Mediterranean coastal environment. The fact that their skeletons are more so cold adapted than tropical adapted remind me of the Khoisan of southern Africa who also live in a Mediterranean-like climate.
quote:Ibero-Maurusians as far as I can tell were just some black type that occupied Europe ,much like the earliest Cro-Magnon, none of these groups appear to have differed much from the earliest Mechtoid.
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:I don't think there has ever been a proper statistical analysis that has ever grouped the Mushabean affiliated Natufians with Capsian people (though I'm sure affinity exist between Kebaran affiliated Natufians and Capsian people).
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:one thing i don't know much about is linguistic connections of the ancient world. The one thing I do know about is the physical and biological afiliations of the Holocene North Afircans. There are considered two groups of Capsians one related physiologially to the Natufians and the other two the gracile Mediterranean or of ancient Sahara and Nubia.
Originally posted by Swenet:
I think its wrong to identify Proto-Berbers, or even Proto-Chadians (exclusively) with the Capsian culture. There were obviously lineages in Northern Africa that predate the onset of the Holocene. Why is Ehret making such rudimentary errors? The typical Berber paternal NRY marker E-M81, which may be used to identify their expansion into North Africa, originated less than 6000 years ago.
-Afrasan speakers are NOT the original people of the wider Sahara.
-Despite their language having commonalities with Semitic and Berber languages, the core of the Ancient Egyptian population was probably much more related to the indigenous Northeast African people, who predate those languages, and who may be exemplified by Nazlet Khater. Their ancestry probably had much more affinity with contemporary hunter gatherer Africans all over Sub Saharan Africa, than to ancestral Ethiopians and Somali's and Berber speakers, who seem to be in their own lane, with much of their ancestry being specific to the section of Africa they inhabit, and who are also partially descended from the OOA population(s). This relationship of Palaeolithic Egyptians to contemporary Sub Saharan Africans was not only shown skeletally by Pinhasi, but can also been seen in numerous other ways, such as the presence of severe cases of sickle cell in predynastic Egypt, blood type similarities with groups with Sub-Saharan affinity (Harratin) to dynastic Egyptians, and the latest evidence being stong alleles matches between Egyptians and groups literally all over Sub-Saharan Africa, from Pygmies, to San, and other groups who now reside below the equator.
-During the Holocene, we get the migration of Proto-Afrasan people towards the Nile Valley, which is why we have their lineages and languages (Medjay, Ancient Egyptian, Berber) in Egypt, the Middle East and possibly all three languages in Ancient Sudan as well. These Holocenic demographic changes are what cause people to think that the core Egyptian population must have been genetically identical to Proto-Afrasan speakers, even though Neolithic Egyptians/Northern Sudanese display numerous signs of local differentiation, consistent with above described relatively distant relationship of most Ancient Egyptians to ancestral Somali's and Ethiopians.
Thus I am rather interested in where you have derived your information concerning the early Capsians. It was noticed long ago by archaeologists that the Capsian culture appears very similar to that practiced modern East Africans including both Nilotes and Cushitic speakers. This includes such details their usage of ostrich eggs, capping of their tombs with cattle horns, and many other features exclusive to the region. It is one of the important connections I had assumed led Ehret to conclude the Erthyraiotes were of Capsian origin which would mean they looked like the robust Natufian maechotoid types that dominated most of the Maghreb and for that matter AFrican landscape at that time.
As far I know and am concerned Berbers did not live in the last 6000 years in North Africa. People probably simliar to hte Haratin Badarian AFro-San type did however live there. While elongated types are not found anywhere until the Neolithic and thus we don't know where they originated. But the fact the Naqqada population shows so much similarity to the neolithic North African and Somali who appear to fit in between the early gracile North AFrican and elongated African type could very well link the Capsians to early Afro-san speakers.
The sharing of a generalized morphology is not evidence of relatedness. This why your outdated terms like 'gracile Mediterranean', which is actually a phenotype that is shared by many distantly related people, don't make any sense. For instance, Strouhal found gracile Mediterranean elements among Badarains, which is, of course, total bullshit if you take it literal. Yes certain aspects of that phenotype existed among them, but the Badarians were a single population, not a blend of populations. That is why Zakrzewski found that, metrically speaking, of the late Dynastic E series (which DOES show affinity with Mediterranean people), not a single cranium classified in the Badarian series, in her factor analysis.
Both Somali's and Naqaddans have tropical limb proportions, why is the same not the case for the Taforalt population?
quote:Hence, no recent common ancestry between the Jebel Sahaba and Capsian people. Their common ancestry will have to be either way back in time, but well after OOA, or their common ancestors lived during or before OOA. If the latter is the case, I would presume that the Taforalt and Afalou people were predominantly Iberian in origin.
Univariate analyses distinguish
Jebel Sahaba from European and
circumpolar samples, but do not
tend to segregate them from North
or Sub-Saharan African samples. In
contrast, multivariate analyses
(PCA, PCO with minimum
spanning tree, NJ and UPGMA
cluster analyses) indicate that the
body shape of the Jebel Sahaba
hominins is closest to that of recent
Sub-Saharan Africans, and different
from that of either the Natufians or
the northwest African
“Iberomaurusian” samples.
quote:Brace's analysis obviously picks up on the fact that all the groups which shared ties with the Natufians, had common traits that resulted from them being prehistoric in origin. In fact, he too implies that at least some of the ties of the mentioned samples to the Natufians exist because they are robust, and, according to Brace, this ''sets them apart from recent inhabitants''.
"... the Natufian of Israel ties to the French Mesolithic and then to the Afalou/Taforalt sample from North Africa. These then link with the European Upper Palaeolithic sample and, somewhat surprisingly, with the Chandman (the Mongolian Bronze Age sample) and finally, at the next step, with the Danish Neolithic. One of the things that these geographically diverse groups clearly have in common is a degree of robustness that sets them apart from the recent inhabitants of the areas in which they are found. "
quote:Ibero-Maurusians ARE the North African antecedants of the Capsians. Despite the name, their remains have been excavated in Northwest Africa, and they are the Afalou & Taforalt remains that were studied by Brace. See Djehuti's post regarding the phases of the archaeology of the Maghreb.
Ibero-Maurusians as far as I can tell were just some black type that occupied Europe ,much like the earliest Cro-Magnon, none of these groups appear to have differed much from the earliest Mechtoid.
quote:Mechtoid is a label that is predicated on a visual impression that the remains conveyed to early anthropologists. This visual impression (robustness among other things) is what all prehistoric remains display, hence, its not population specific, or suitable as a specific description of particularly related people.
"Mechtoids, named after the type population of Mechta-Afalou, ...Mechtoids are known for the whole expanse of Africa during the Terminoal Pleistocene from Egypt and the Sudan (Wadi Kubbaniyya c. 20,000, Jebel Sahaba 14,000-12,000 BPand Wadi Halfa, c. 11,950 - 6400 BP ) to the Maghereb Mechta Afalou and Taforalt 20,000 - 10,000 BP)...Mechtoids have also been identified in the malian Sahara by Dutour (1989) at Hassi el Abiod and Asselar... and at Cap Juby on the Mauritanian litterol (6,000 BP). More recent Mechtoid populations are known from the Recent Holocene at Kobadi." p. 46 Blench Archaeology and Language Vol. 2 1998.
quote:I agree with some of what you say here although there are metric measuring involved, nevertheless in the same way I agree names Ibero-Maurusian and Cro--Magnon was a generic term for certain early types in Europe.
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Brace's analysis obviously picks up on the fact that all the groups which shared ties with the Natufians, had common traits that resulted from them being prehistoric in origin. In fact, he too implies that at least some of the ties of the mentioned samples to the Natufians exist because they are robust, and, according to Brace, this ''sets them apart from recent inhabitants''.
"... the Natufian of Israel ties to the French Mesolithic and then to the Afalou/Taforalt sample from North Africa. These then link with the European Upper Palaeolithic sample and, somewhat surprisingly, with the Chandman (the Mongolian Bronze Age sample) and finally, at the next step, with the Danish Neolithic. One of the things that these geographically diverse groups clearly have in common is a degree of robustness that sets them apart from the recent inhabitants of the areas in which they are found. "
If what you're saying is true, then it would also have to be true that bronze age Mongolians are genetically closer to Natufians than bronze age Nubians, bronze age Egyptians and Neolithic Palestinians (Jericho) are. Why isn't it picked up by Brace's analysis that Egypto-Nubians and Neolithic Palestinians would have been closer to Natufians in genetic make up than bronze age Mongolians? Its is because of the aforementioned reasons (sharing a generalized appearance).
quote:Mechtoid is a label that is predicated on a visual impression that the remains conveyed to early anthropologists. This visual impression (robustness among other things) is what all prehistoric remains display, hence, its not population specific, or suitable as a specific description of particularly related people.
I am sorry but I am not understanding what you asking or the assumptions you are making here. Bronze Age "Mongolians". I didn't any mention of them in that paper. The degree of robusticity has little to do with why Bronze Age people in Chandman were found to cluster with Mesolithic Natufians.![[Confused]](confused.gif)
[QUOTE]"Mechtoids, named after the type population of Mechta-Afalou, ...Mechtoids are known for the whole expanse of Africa during the Terminoal Pleistocene from Egypt and the Sudan (Wadi Kubbaniyya c. 20,000, Jebel Sahaba 14,000-12,000 BPand Wadi Halfa, c. 11,950 - 6400 BP ) to the Maghereb Mechta Afalou and Taforalt 20,000 - 10,000 BP)...Mechtoids have also been identified in the malian Sahara by Dutour (1989) at Hassi el Abiod and Asselar... and at Cap Juby on the Mauritanian litterol (6,000 BP). More recent Mechtoid populations are known from the Recent Holocene at Kobadi." p. 46 Blench Archaeology and Language Vol. 2 1998.
It never designated a metric statistical reality, hence why groups who are now known to be statistically significantly different (Mesolithic Northeast African samples), were once (and are sometimes still) grouped under the ''Mechtoid'' label, which originally only encompassed Maghrebian remains.
quote:Your first assumption was irrelevant from what I know of physical anthropology and studies using multivariate analysis. I am also not understanding what your asking or the assumptions you are making here. Bronze Age "Mongolians"? I didn't see any mention of them in Brace's paper unless your talking about a geographical region, like Brace was. And degree of robusticity has little to do with why Bronze Age people in Chandman were found to cluster with Mesolithic Natufians i.e. remained Natufian "Negroid" in osteology.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Brace's analysis obviously picks up on the fact that all the groups which shared ties with the Natufians, had common traits that resulted from them being prehistoric in origin. In fact, he too implies that at least some of the ties of the mentioned samples to the Natufians exist because they are robust, and, according to Brace, this ''sets them apart from recent inhabitants''.
Originally posted by Swenet:
[qb] [QUOTE]"... the Natufian of Israel ties to the French Mesolithic and then to the Afalou/Taforalt sample from North Africa. These then link with the European Upper Palaeolithic sample and, somewhat surprisingly, with the Chandman (the Mongolian Bronze Age sample) and finally, at the next step, with the Danish Neolithic. One of the things that these geographically diverse groups clearly have in common is a degree of robustness that sets them apart from the recent inhabitants of the areas in which they are found. "
If what you're saying is true, then it would also have to be true that bronze age Mongolians are genetically closer to Natufians than bronze age Nubians, bronze age Egyptians and Neolithic Palestinians (Jericho) are. Why isn't it picked up by Brace's analysis that Egypto-Nubians and Neolithic Palestinians would have been closer to Natufians in genetic make up than bronze age Mongolians? Its is because of the aforementioned reasons (sharing a generalized appearance).
quote:I don't to mean to sound at all contentious ,but some of the things your saying are just plain wrong because they are based on the belief that people in the ancient Arabia were similar to todays populations.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Thank you, as always, great posting and great information. Where did I get my info from? Reading various books on ancient Egypt, was the first time I found out about these people being enslaved in GREAT numbers, into Africa by the people of Kemet, which continued until the fall of the empire.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:White slave women are mentioned as being imported into AFrica by the Mauri in Claudian's time and are mentioned as late as th last century as being imported by the Moors.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:White slaves where brought into Africa from 700 to about 1700s, I would assume less so around 1700s. Whites colonist did not come in there during the height of this trade so they are speaking of people after the fact. As for the rest of what you said concerning features, lets b e serious. The same way Africans vary in looks and features, so do Europeans. Also, Keita mentions in one of his lectures what is found in the X chromosome concerning some fulas which helps to prove my point.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Why would you surmise that the Fulani were influenced by white slaves, TypeZeiss.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Fulas vary in their look. Some of them are black like petrol and others are brown. They vary, so I am not sure about the "phenotype", or what you mean by that.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:They may have contributed somewhat to both Fulani and Igbo. But the Fulani phenotype is recognizable in the Central Sahara since the Neolithic along with their single sidelock hair-style later found on C-group Libyan Temehou.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
Thankfully Trollpatrol posted a photo of the rock art in Sahara showing this.
When colonialists spoke of Fulani they talked of them as being part "hamites" they were obviously not just talking about people who spoke Fula and are partly mixed with Takruri and other populations.
I imagine it is for the same reason you suppose they may have been mixed with white slaves. Although in particular don't see the slightest resemblance of Fulani of big boned European faces to the narrow faces and often refined or narrow featured faces of the Fulani which as I said are found in pastoralist "Bovidian" rock art of the Central Sahara thousands of years B.C., along with other AFrican populations.
I think I have posted enough about that including this from Claudian complaining of Gildo imported Roman noble woman from Syria.
Of course that doesn't mean white slaves weren't coming in earlier to North Africa. We do hear Lucan and others talking about white slaves imported by the Romans.
I am not sure where you are getting your information but i can givem any sources showing the continuation of the white slave trade up until the last century.
In fact I would not be surprised if it were not still going on today as it is in many Middle eastern socieites.
The Fula speakers are mixed in various areas of Africa with diverse peoples, so of course they are going to look diverse. Of course that doesn't mean the earliest Fulani or even Berbers were as diverse as modern Berber-speakers are today.
Then I came across a book titled "Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters". I like how when its their people, they try to remove color from the equation, but when it is us, it is all about color, but whatever. Anyway, then I listened to Keita speak at Chapel Hill, where he mentions the white slaves brought into Africa.
I also used some reasoning skills. The Habashi people ruled over Arabia for many centuries. I assumed this could explain why some present day Habashis (what are now termed Ethiopians) look the way they do. Not because there was some mutual corporation between the two, but because Africans once again enslaved non Africans and mated with them. I also believe that is how Sabeanism spread. I do not believe it started in the middle east. I believe it came out of Habasha and into the middle east. Masters do not take on the religion and culture of those he conquerors, unless of course the ones conquered had a superior culture to the ones doing the conquering. However, we know those people in Yemen were and are hill billies, so this isn't the case there.
quote:What do you mean with genetically determined traits? Please clarify.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
However we now have in anthropology have studies done on genetically-determined traits
quote:You are wrong. There are consistent results that have been replicated over and over, that DO correlate with locality, time period and degree of robusticity. This is why similarities with Prehistoric people from Europe (''cro-magnons’’) and North Africa (''mechtoids’’) and China (Zhoukoudian) and America (Palaeo Americans) were drawn in the first place, and why modern people who live in certain climates have similar features despite being divergent genetically.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
which are not based on locality or closeness of geographical proximity or even period and certainly not on degree of robusticity.
quote:There is no such thing as a bronze age Natufian
Originally posted by dana marniche:
If Bronze Age Natufians
quote:Like I said, I have no idea what you mean with ''genetically-determined traits’’. Please clarify.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
clustered more with the Bronze Age Chandman population, it means their wasn't as much change of genetically-determined traits, nothing more and nothing less.
quote:I never said Bronze age Mongolians clustered with Natufians, solely because of their robusticity; I said that they all shared traits that can be found all over the prehistoric world, that set them apart from most modern populations, and that Brace’s analysis picked up on that.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
And degree of robusticity has little to do with why Bronze Age people in Chandman were found to cluster with Mesolithic Natufians i.e. remained Natufian "Negroid" in osteology.
quote:This is false, of course. First, you cannot measure a discrete trait (that is why they are called non-metric), and there are various ways of inferring robustness, and they are all employed by anthropologists, for various reasons.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
Anthropologists are measuring discrete non-metrical traits not robustness or lack of it
quote:And I’m sure there were more ''similar conclusions’’ all over the place. I’m certainly not denying them; I’m only saying that you can’t infer from their skeletal closeness that these various people were necessarily genetically related, and to what extent.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
BTW - in any case similar conclusions were reached by much earlier specialists who based on just metric studies pronounced the Ubaid Mesopotamians and robust "Negroid" types in Iran/Central Asia as at Tepe Sialk and Tepe Hissar as robust or large Negroids with "Mongoloid" affinity.
quote:Ummm I don't think so, you are a bit confused. If those groups were in Arabia before Islam, which they were, it's because they conquered the area and lived there. No different than Anglo Saxons being found in America as a result of them conquering. Doesn't make them indigenous.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:I don't to mean to sound at all contentious ,but some of the things your saying are just plain wrong because they are based on the belief that people in the ancient Arabia were similar to todays populations.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Thank you, as always, great posting and great information. Where did I get my info from? Reading various books on ancient Egypt, was the first time I found out about these people being enslaved in GREAT numbers, into Africa by the people of Kemet, which continued until the fall of the empire.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:White slave women are mentioned as being imported into AFrica by the Mauri in Claudian's time and are mentioned as late as th last century as being imported by the Moors.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:White slaves where brought into Africa from 700 to about 1700s, I would assume less so around 1700s. Whites colonist did not come in there during the height of this trade so they are speaking of people after the fact. As for the rest of what you said concerning features, lets b e serious. The same way Africans vary in looks and features, so do Europeans. Also, Keita mentions in one of his lectures what is found in the X chromosome concerning some fulas which helps to prove my point.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Why would you surmise that the Fulani were influenced by white slaves, TypeZeiss.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Fulas vary in their look. Some of them are black like petrol and others are brown. They vary, so I am not sure about the "phenotype", or what you mean by that.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:They may have contributed somewhat to both Fulani and Igbo. But the Fulani phenotype is recognizable in the Central Sahara since the Neolithic along with their single sidelock hair-style later found on C-group Libyan Temehou.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
Thankfully Trollpatrol posted a photo of the rock art in Sahara showing this.
When colonialists spoke of Fulani they talked of them as being part "hamites" they were obviously not just talking about people who spoke Fula and are partly mixed with Takruri and other populations.
I imagine it is for the same reason you suppose they may have been mixed with white slaves. Although in particular don't see the slightest resemblance of Fulani of big boned European faces to the narrow faces and often refined or narrow featured faces of the Fulani which as I said are found in pastoralist "Bovidian" rock art of the Central Sahara thousands of years B.C., along with other AFrican populations.
I think I have posted enough about that including this from Claudian complaining of Gildo imported Roman noble woman from Syria.
Of course that doesn't mean white slaves weren't coming in earlier to North Africa. We do hear Lucan and others talking about white slaves imported by the Romans.
I am not sure where you are getting your information but i can givem any sources showing the continuation of the white slave trade up until the last century.
In fact I would not be surprised if it were not still going on today as it is in many Middle eastern socieites.
The Fula speakers are mixed in various areas of Africa with diverse peoples, so of course they are going to look diverse. Of course that doesn't mean the earliest Fulani or even Berbers were as diverse as modern Berber-speakers are today.
Then I came across a book titled "Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters". I like how when its their people, they try to remove color from the equation, but when it is us, it is all about color, but whatever. Anyway, then I listened to Keita speak at Chapel Hill, where he mentions the white slaves brought into Africa.
I also used some reasoning skills. The Habashi people ruled over Arabia for many centuries. I assumed this could explain why some present day Habashis (what are now termed Ethiopians) look the way they do. Not because there was some mutual corporation between the two, but because Africans once again enslaved non Africans and mated with them. I also believe that is how Sabeanism spread. I do not believe it started in the middle east. I believe it came out of Habasha and into the middle east. Masters do not take on the religion and culture of those he conquerors, unless of course the ones conquered had a superior culture to the ones doing the conquering. However, we know those people in Yemen were and are hill billies, so this isn't the case there.
Himyarites and Habesh were the same people. In fact the name Habesh is also an ancient Arabian tribal name as is Afar, Hadorab, Hadar, Harim, Beli, Bishar, Mahass, Hadandowa, Madhij, Sab, Sabtah, Yahar, Makhar and Mahara. Many of the people who are living now in Abyssinia, Nubia and Eritrea have always been on both sides of the Eritrean Sea. They were influenced early on around the time of Christ by merchants , Greco-Romans and Parthians and Seres(Scythians) and later mainly by Turks or mixed Turkish-Arab peoples from Oman. So yes, these people have indeed absorbed non -AFrican blood but it certainly has nothing to do with mixing with the Arabian Himyarites/Sabaeans.
We have to remember that the Arabiam peninsula is literally 20 miles away from Africa in the area of the Erythraean Sea while in the North the Sinai is still the habitat of many African looking Arabs such as the Huweitat (who say they are the Nabataeans/Kedar) people who have been classified with the misnomer "Mediterranean Caucasoid", and yet explain why north Arabians are referred to in early Syrian texts as "blacks" even after the period of Christianity and early Islam.
It is time for us to face the fact that Arabia was essentially part of what was known to ancient Greeks as Ethiopia it is the heart of Cusha-Dwipa of the Puranas as James Baldwin said, and it is often the Kush spoken of in the Hebrew texts. This was long before black slaves were brought in in large numbers to the Gulf and other regions.
Himyarites i.e. Sabaeans, were and are black people who told colonialists they originated in Africa. Period. I have posted this info many times written by Bertram Thomas and others. The Himyarites still speak the Sabaean (Qahtan) dialects and have never been anything but black living in Nubia, Eritrea and Arabia. It is no doubt the Sabir culture which archaeologists are now unearthing in west Arabia is part of that original "Kushite" homeland spoken of in the Bible as Goldenberg has said.
Truth be told, Typezeiss, almost every name of people found in pre-islamic Nubia and extending well into the Sahara were also found in the Arabian peninsula in early Islamic times and before - I just haven't talked about it on Egyptsearch, yet.
quote:Well I guess the big difference here is that I have researched what I am saying it is backed up by books, while it seems your statement is based on unresearched conjecture. We need to get past the stage of emotionalism and embrace using facts as our starting point.
Originally posted by Narmerthoth:
I'm not at all convinced that it was Africans who brought slaves into Africa. Especially in the millions count as stated above.
I find it more feasible that Albino slaves were brought in and sold by other Albinos due to the fact that this was probably their greatest asset of value to be used in exchange for African goods and services.
Even in WW-II we see Ashkenazi Jews controlling and selling white slaves by the millions to Nazi Germany and any other entity who offered exchange for human resources.
As example, many of today's multi-nation corporations made their money by selling white slave; Bayer and Prescott Bush's old Nazi German company, IG Farben.
Today, these slavers are being labeled as "barbary pirates" or Moors, but the evidence points to these slaves being brought into Africa by European slavers.
quote:From data that Swenet, Explorer, and others have presented.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
Where did you read about Taforalt being cold adapted Djehuti
quote:But all these sources you mention speak of cranial traits. By 'cold-adaptation' we are speaking of the limb proportions of the skeletal body.
I think it has been pretty well shown by the numerous genetically-determined traits shared by epi-Paleolithic peoples of the Levant (Natufians) and the Maghreb (Afalou/Taforalt) that they were closely related and directly ancestral to later gracile Mediterraneans.
"... the Natufian of Israel ties to the French Mesolithic and then to the Afalou/Taforalt sample from North Africa. These then link with the European Upper Palaeolithic sample and, somewhat surprisingly, with the Chandman (the Mongolian Bronze Age sample) and finally, at the next step, with the Danish Neolithic. One of the things that these geographically diverse groups clearly have in common is a degree of robustness that sets them apart from the recent inhabitants of the areas in which they are found. "
None of these groups showed any near connection to modern Europeans Basques and their relatives in coastal North Africa represented at Tizi Ouzou and oter places), but only to predynastic Egyptians and east Africans.
I think his studies have made clear the early Natufians and Afalou/Taforalt were related and probably ancestral to later more gracile blacks of the Mediterranean as found in ancient Merimde and Naqqada culture.
These in turn bore some connectio to the Mechtoid type populations among the early Capsians and Jebel Sahaba and Wadi Halfa as speculated earlier by folks like Fred Wendorf and Marie Claude Chamla.
The so-called "Negroid" element in them was probably represented by the brachycranic broad- nosed element among the Afalou.
quote:I don't have access the data banks like I did when I was in school. The only sources I could find online was from google scholar and they are mostly mentioned in old sources about the prehistory of Nubia as well as sources about the Kebaran Culture.
Originally posted by Swenet:
Interesting piece about the Halfan culture. Is there more information on this?
quote:Now that you mention it, it does remind me of the short stature of neolithic Egyptians, in particular the Badarians though one could argue the Badarians immigrated from the west. You are right that even the Paleolithic humans in Europe were said to be very tall and retain tropical linear builds. As far as Mesolithic Egypt and in particular Sudan, I am reminded of a close resemblance to Mesolithic inhabitants of Arabia as well as the neolithic Umm An Nar people of the Gulf area who were found to be very tall. I agree with Dana that there is some connection especially since both the Umm An Nar Culture and Kerma Culture share a connection.
As for the height thing, you're right that today most people associate tall groups in Africa with Pastoralism. However, when you look at figures all over they world, or even in stature estimations of Egypto-Nubians, you'll see that Palaeolithic people and Mesolithic people were the tallest, and Neolithic people the shortest. We as a people (humans) are just now recovering, and getting back to our Palaeolithic height.
quote:TypeZeiss - why would you claim that I said the Afar and Sabaeans originated in Arabia when I just finished telling you that the Himyarite speakers living in ARabia claim they came from Africa in remote times. When I just said there was an Afro-Arabian culture extending between Nubia and the Yemen. This is not something i am "confused" over; this something that is known through archaeological findings and studies of many specialists. This was a community of peoples for thousands of years on both sides of the Erythraean sea. Arabia WAS AS MUCH ETHIOPIA for the early Greeks as was the modern Eritrea, Somalia and Nubia. Just as "Arabia" for the Greeks was Abyssinia and Eritrea and everything east of the Nile for the later Greeks like Strabo and Diodorus.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Ummm I don't think so, you are a bit confused. If those groups were in Arabia before Islam, which they were, it's because they conquered the area and lived there. No different than Anglo Saxons being found in America as a result of them conquering. Doesn't make them indigenous.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:I don't to mean to sound at all contentious ,but some of the things your saying are just plain wrong because they are based on the belief that people in the ancient Arabia were similar to todays populations.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Thank you, as always, great posting and great information. Where did I get my info from? Reading various books on ancient Egypt, was the first time I found out about these people being enslaved in GREAT numbers, into Africa by the people of Kemet, which continued until the fall of the empire.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:White slave women are mentioned as being imported into AFrica by the Mauri in Claudian's time and are mentioned as late as th last century as being imported by the Moors.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:White slaves where brought into Africa from 700 to about 1700s, I would assume less so around 1700s. Whites colonist did not come in there during the height of this trade so they are speaking of people after the fact. As for the rest of what you said concerning features, lets b e serious. The same way Africans vary in looks and features, so do Europeans. Also, Keita mentions in one of his lectures what is found in the X chromosome concerning some fulas which helps to prove my point.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Why would you surmise that the Fulani were influenced by white slaves, TypeZeiss.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Fulas vary in their look. Some of them are black like petrol and others are brown. They vary, so I am not sure about the "phenotype", or what you mean by that.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:They may have contributed somewhat to both Fulani and Igbo. But the Fulani phenotype is recognizable in the Central Sahara since the Neolithic along with their single sidelock hair-style later found on C-group Libyan Temehou.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:I believe you are being too limited. Africans brought white slaves into the Maghreb from the time the Mauritanian Muslims struck spain and controlled much of the European Mediterranean in the 700 c.e. until about 1700s. One professor said a million whites were introduced as slaves into north africa in a one hundred year time span, and they brought slaves in for far long than just the 100 yrs he decided to look at. So the amount of whites that diluted that area is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't be shocked if these white slaves also contributed to the look of some Fulas today as well as some Igbos.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The white-Berbers are descendants of the Meshwesh, who are descendants of the People of the Sea; and the Vandals.
Since the Meshwesh only arrived in Delta as the peoples of the Sea, and later we have the Vandals influencing the Berbers there is no way to associate the Tehenu people, with the contemporary Berbers.
As a result the idea of a ancient relationship between contemporary Berber speakers and any African group is ludicris.
.
Thankfully Trollpatrol posted a photo of the rock art in Sahara showing this.
When colonialists spoke of Fulani they talked of them as being part "hamites" they were obviously not just talking about people who spoke Fula and are partly mixed with Takruri and other populations.
I imagine it is for the same reason you suppose they may have been mixed with white slaves. Although in particular don't see the slightest resemblance of Fulani of big boned European faces to the narrow faces and often refined or narrow featured faces of the Fulani which as I said are found in pastoralist "Bovidian" rock art of the Central Sahara thousands of years B.C., along with other AFrican populations.
I think I have posted enough about that including this from Claudian complaining of Gildo imported Roman noble woman from Syria.
Of course that doesn't mean white slaves weren't coming in earlier to North Africa. We do hear Lucan and others talking about white slaves imported by the Romans.
I am not sure where you are getting your information but i can givem any sources showing the continuation of the white slave trade up until the last century.
In fact I would not be surprised if it were not still going on today as it is in many Middle eastern socieites.
The Fula speakers are mixed in various areas of Africa with diverse peoples, so of course they are going to look diverse. Of course that doesn't mean the earliest Fulani or even Berbers were as diverse as modern Berber-speakers are today.
Then I came across a book titled "Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters". I like how when its their people, they try to remove color from the equation, but when it is us, it is all about color, but whatever. Anyway, then I listened to Keita speak at Chapel Hill, where he mentions the white slaves brought into Africa.
I also used some reasoning skills. The Habashi people ruled over Arabia for many centuries. I assumed this could explain why some present day Habashis (what are now termed Ethiopians) look the way they do. Not because there was some mutual corporation between the two, but because Africans once again enslaved non Africans and mated with them. I also believe that is how Sabeanism spread. I do not believe it started in the middle east. I believe it came out of Habasha and into the middle east. Masters do not take on the religion and culture of those he conquerors, unless of course the ones conquered had a superior culture to the ones doing the conquering. However, we know those people in Yemen were and are hill billies, so this isn't the case there.
Himyarites and Habesh were the same people. In fact the name Habesh is also an ancient Arabian tribal name as is Afar, Hadorab, Hadar, Harim, Beli, Bishar, Mahass, Hadandowa, Madhij, Sab, Sabtah, Yahar, Makhar and Mahara. Many of the people who are living now in Abyssinia, Nubia and Eritrea have always been on both sides of the Eritrean Sea. They were influenced early on around the time of Christ by merchants , Greco-Romans and Parthians and Seres(Scythians) and later mainly by Turks or mixed Turkish-Arab peoples from Oman. So yes, these people have indeed absorbed non -AFrican blood but it certainly has nothing to do with mixing with the Arabian Himyarites/Sabaeans.
We have to remember that the Arabiam peninsula is literally 20 miles away from Africa in the area of the Erythraean Sea while in the North the Sinai is still the habitat of many African looking Arabs such as the Huweitat (who say they are the Nabataeans/Kedar) people who have been classified with the misnomer "Mediterranean Caucasoid", and yet explain why north Arabians are referred to in early Syrian texts as "blacks" even after the period of Christianity and early Islam.
It is time for us to face the fact that Arabia was essentially part of what was known to ancient Greeks as Ethiopia it is the heart of Cusha-Dwipa of the Puranas as James Baldwin said, and it is often the Kush spoken of in the Hebrew texts. This was long before black slaves were brought in in large numbers to the Gulf and other regions.
Himyarites i.e. Sabaeans, were and are black people who told colonialists they originated in Africa. Period. I have posted this info many times written by Bertram Thomas and others. The Himyarites still speak the Sabaean (Qahtan) dialects and have never been anything but black living in Nubia, Eritrea and Arabia. It is no doubt the Sabir culture which archaeologists are now unearthing in west Arabia is part of that original "Kushite" homeland spoken of in the Bible as Goldenberg has said.
Truth be told, Typezeiss, almost every name of people found in pre-islamic Nubia and extending well into the Sahara were also found in the Arabian peninsula in early Islamic times and before - I just haven't talked about it on Egyptsearch, yet.
There are books like seerat Muhammad that explain who the orginal Arabs are, before any outside influence. I am positive you can not produce any literature that would substantiate your claim.
To be clear I am disputing your claims that people now found in Africa such as habashi, afar etc. originated in Arabia. Also, I can not say for certain what the original people in Arabia looked like. It is impossible to make such claims based on modern people because of past and present influences.
quote:The linguistic evidence makes it clear that Romans , Greeks and other Europeans have influenced the Berbers.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
Germanic peoples in Kabylia are not the only Europeans that influenced the Berber-speakers.
Robert Brown put it well not too long ago - “The many European races, including the Vandals under Genseric, and the endless European slaves who, turning renegade, became absorbed into the population must have left their mark over the all the Barbary states” ( 1896). A History and Description of Africa: and of the notable things therein contained, 1. London: Haykluyt Society p. 203).
There is definitely no intelligibility between the dialects as a result of these foregn influences.
These foreign influences however would not have to do with the Masmuda, Sanhaja, Zaghawa, Ketama, Hawara, Djerawa, Zanata, or other descendants of these original black woolly-haired people known as Berbers in the texts.
quote:And since the Tuareg and Songhai are the only people referred to as Berber before 1700 and not Andalusians, Vandals, Turks/Slavs and European slaves I guess that resolves the matter. Berbers speak only an African dialects.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:I have never read that Tuareg has any Indo-European elements. Tuareg, as opposed to the other Berber languages is closely related to Hausa and Songhay.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
Germanic peoples in Kabylia are not the only Europeans that influenced the Berber-speakers.
Robert Brown put it well not too long ago - “The many European races, including the Vandals under Genseric, and the endless European slaves who, turning renegade, became absorbed into the population must have left their mark over the all the Barbary states” ( 1896). A History and Description of Africa: and of the notable things therein contained, 1. London: Haykluyt Society p. 203).
There is definitely no intelligibility between the dialects as a result of these foregn influences.
These foreign influences however would not have to do with the Masmuda, Sanhaja, Zaghawa, Ketama, Hawara, Djerawa, Zanata, or other descendants of these original black woolly-haired people known as Berbers in the texts.
quote:The book says very clearly the Tuareg came down from the Mediterranean to the Sudan and have BORROWED a certain number of names (words) from the neighboring tribes Songhai, Hausa etc. Of course the Tuareg dialect is an early form of east African like the modern Mahra, Sabaeans, Somali, Amhara and THE ANCIENT SABAEANS AND PHOENICIANS they still claim descent from.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:I have never read that Tuareg has any Indo-European elements. Tuareg, as opposed to the other Berber languages is closely related to Hausa and Songhay.
.
Andre Basset in La Langue Berbere, has discussed the I-E elements in the Berber languages. There is also a discussion of these elements in Schuchardt, Die romanischen Lehnworter im Berberischen (Wien,1918). Basset provides a few examples in his monograph. I have posted the page so you can examine the material yourself.
You can also consult Note di geografia linguistica berbera more ,by Vermondo Brugnatelli :
http://unimib.academia.edu/VermondoBrugnatelli/Papers/1098593/Note_di_geografia_linguistica_berbera
.
. [/qb]
quote:Most linguists claim Taureg is closest to Hausa and Songhay. please cite some articles showing a link between Amhara and Taureg.
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:The book says very clearly the Tuareg came down from the Mediterranean to the Sudan and have BORROWED a certain number of names (words) from the neighboring tribes Songhai, Hausa etc. Of course the Tuareg dialect is an early form of east African like the modern Mahra, Sabaeans, Somali, Amhara and THE ANCIENT SABAEANS AND PHOENICIANS they still claim descent from. [/QB]
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:I have never read that Tuareg has any Indo-European elements. Tuareg, as opposed to the other Berber languages is closely related to Hausa and Songhay.
.
Andre Basset in La Langue Berbere, has discussed the I-E elements in the Berber languages. There is also a discussion of these elements in Schuchardt, Die romanischen Lehnworter im Berberischen (Wien,1918). Basset provides a few examples in his monograph. I have posted the page so you can examine the material yourself.
You can also consult Note di geografia linguistica berbera more ,by Vermondo Brugnatelli :
http://unimib.academia.edu/VermondoBrugnatelli/Papers/1098593/Note_di_geografia_linguistica_berbera
.
.
quote:You can't read. Dana claims the Tuareg are related to Amhara and Sabaeans--not I.
Originally posted by Swenet:
^You're such a douche.
How are you going to cite a book page that says the exact opposite of what you're trying to argue when it comes to the origin of the Tuareg.
quote:Actually, every fact I have shared above are well documented in many published books/articles, by many authors of various areas of study.
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Well I guess the big difference here is that I have researched what I am saying it is backed up by books, while it seems your statement is based on unresearched conjecture. We need to get past the stage of emotionalism and embrace using facts as our starting point.
Originally posted by Narmerthoth:
I'm not at all convinced that it was Africans who brought slaves into Africa. Especially in the millions count as stated above.
I find it more feasible that Albino slaves were brought in and sold by other Albinos due to the fact that this was probably their greatest asset of value to be used in exchange for African goods and services.
Even in WW-II we see Ashkenazi Jews controlling and selling white slaves by the millions to Nazi Germany and any other entity who offered exchange for human resources.
As example, many of today's multi-nation corporations made their money by selling white slave; Bayer and Prescott Bush's old Nazi German company, IG Farben.
Today, these slavers are being labeled as "barbary pirates" or Moors, but the evidence points to these slaves being brought into Africa by European slavers.
quote:Correct, It probably has been influenced by I-E languages.
Originally posted by Swenet:
No YOU can't read, for a second time in a row, that is. I never attributed anything Dana said, to you. You tried to isolate Tamasheq and make it a language exempt from European influences, when the whole page goes against what you're saying.
Cite where the passage says that ''the South Tuareg either come from the Mediterranean, Sahara or Sudan'', and translate it.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:I don't think there has ever been a proper statistical analysis that has ever grouped the Mushabean affiliated Natufians with Capsian people (though I'm sure affinity exist between Kebaran affiliated Natufians and Capsian people).
Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:one thing i don't know much about is linguistic connections of the ancient world. The one thing I do know about is the physical and biological afiliations of the Holocene North Afircans. There are considered two groups of Capsians one related physiologially to the Natufians and the other two the gracile Mediterranean or of ancient Sahara and Nubia.
Originally posted by Swenet:
I think its wrong to identify Proto-Berbers, or even Proto-Chadians (exclusively) with the Capsian culture. There were obviously lineages in Northern Africa that predate the onset of the Holocene. Why is Ehret making such rudimentary errors? The typical Berber paternal NRY marker E-M81, which may be used to identify their expansion into North Africa, originated less than 6000 years ago.
-Afrasan speakers are NOT the original people of the wider Sahara.
-Despite their language having commonalities with Semitic and Berber languages, the core of the Ancient Egyptian population was probably much more related to the indigenous Northeast African people, who predate those languages, and who may be exemplified by Nazlet Khater. Their ancestry probably had much more affinity with contemporary hunter gatherer Africans all over Sub Saharan Africa, than to ancestral Ethiopians and Somali's and Berber speakers, who seem to be in their own lane, with much of their ancestry being specific to the section of Africa they inhabit, and who are also partially descended from the OOA population(s). This relationship of Palaeolithic Egyptians to contemporary Sub Saharan Africans was not only shown skeletally by Pinhasi, but can also been seen in numerous other ways, such as the presence of severe cases of sickle cell in predynastic Egypt, blood type similarities with groups with Sub-Saharan affinity (Harratin) to dynastic Egyptians, and the latest evidence being stong alleles matches between Egyptians and groups literally all over Sub-Saharan Africa, from Pygmies, to San, and other groups who now reside below the equator.
-During the Holocene, we get the migration of Proto-Afrasan people towards the Nile Valley, which is why we have their lineages and languages (Medjay, Ancient Egyptian, Berber) in Egypt, the Middle East and possibly all three languages in Ancient Sudan as well. These Holocenic demographic changes are what cause people to think that the core Egyptian population must have been genetically identical to Proto-Afrasan speakers, even though Neolithic Egyptians/Northern Sudanese display numerous signs of local differentiation, consistent with above described relatively distant relationship of most Ancient Egyptians to ancestral Somali's and Ethiopians.
Thus I am rather interested in where you have derived your information concerning the early Capsians. It was noticed long ago by archaeologists that the Capsian culture appears very similar to that practiced modern East Africans including both Nilotes and Cushitic speakers. This includes such details their usage of ostrich eggs, capping of their tombs with cattle horns, and many other features exclusive to the region. It is one of the important connections I had assumed led Ehret to conclude the Erthyraiotes were of Capsian origin which would mean they looked like the robust Natufian maechotoid types that dominated most of the Maghreb and for that matter AFrican landscape at that time.
As far I know and am concerned Berbers did not live in the last 6000 years in North Africa. People probably simliar to hte Haratin Badarian AFro-San type did however live there. While elongated types are not found anywhere until the Neolithic and thus we don't know where they originated. But the fact the Naqqada population shows so much similarity to the neolithic North African and Somali who appear to fit in between the early gracile North AFrican and elongated African type could very well link the Capsians to early Afro-san speakers.
The sharing of a generalized morphology is not evidence of relatedness. This why your outdated terms like 'gracile Mediterranean', which is actually a phenotype that is shared by many distantly related people, don't make any sense. For instance, Strouhal found gracile Mediterranean elements among Badarains, which is, of course, total bullshit if you take it literal. Yes certain aspects of that phenotype existed among them, but the Badarians were a single population, not a blend of populations. That is why Zakrzewski found that, metrically speaking, of the late Dynastic E series (which DOES show affinity with Mediterranean people), not a single cranium classified in the Badarian series, in her factor analysis.
Both Somali's and Naqaddans have tropical limb proportions, why is the same not the case for the Taforalt population?
quote:Hence, no recent common ancestry between the Jebel Sahaba and Capsian people. Their common ancestry will have to be either way back in time, but well after OOA, or their common ancestors lived during or before OOA. If the latter is the case, I would presume that the Taforalt and Afalou people were predominantly Iberian in origin.
Univariate analyses distinguish
Jebel Sahaba from European and
circumpolar samples, but do not
tend to segregate them from North
or Sub-Saharan African samples. In
contrast, multivariate analyses
(PCA, PCO with minimum
spanning tree, NJ and UPGMA
cluster analyses) indicate that the
body shape of the Jebel Sahaba
hominins is closest to that of recent
Sub-Saharan Africans, and different
from that of either the Natufians or
the northwest African
“Iberomaurusian” samples.