...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Deshret » Egyptians are Egyptians, and they were so in the past as well

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Egyptians are Egyptians, and they were so in the past as well
Glider
Member
Member # 12976

Rate Member
Icon 4 posted      Profile for Glider     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
American Journal of Physical Anthropology

Volume 36, Issue S17 , Pages 1 - 31
Supplement: American Journal of Physical Anthropology


Published Online: 14 Jun 2005

Copyright © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc., A Wiley Company

Article

Clines and clusters versus Race: a test in ancient Egypt and the case of a death on the Nile


C. Loring Brace 1, David P. Tracer 2, Lucia Allen Yaroch 1, John Robb 1, Kari Brandt 1, A. Russell Nelson 1
1Museum of Anthropology, University Museums Building, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109
2Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195


Keywords
Egypt • Euclidean Distance dendrograms • Trivial traits • Clines • Clusters • Race


Abstract

The biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians were tested against their neighbors and selected prehistoric groups as well as against samples representing the major geographic population clusters of the world. Two dozen craniofacial measurements were taken on each individual used. The raw measurements were converted into C scores and used to produce Euclidean distance dendrograms. The measurements were principally of adaptively trivial traits that display patterns of regional similarities based solely on genetic relationships. The Predynastic of Upper Egypt and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa, eastern Asia, Oceania, or the New World. Adjacent people in the Nile valley show similarities in trivial traits in an unbroken series from the delta in the north southward through Nubia and all the way to Somalia at the equator. At the same time, the gradient in skin color and body proportions suggests long-term adaptive response to selective forces appropriate to the latitude where they occur. An assessment of race is as useless as it is impossible. Neither clines nor clusters alone suffice to deal with the biological nature of a widely distributed population. Both must be used. We conclude that the Egyptians have been in place since back in the Pleistocene and have been largely unaffected by either invasions or migrations. As others have noted, Egyptians are Egyptians, and they were so in the past as well. © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Posts: 315 | From: Deep Earth | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Glider
Member
Member # 12976

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Glider     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Poetic Justice for All Egyptians, Ancient and Modern.

Scientific research like this, is the reason why the KNUCKLEHEAD CARPETBAGGERS are running for cover.

quote:
but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa.

quote:
We conclude that the Egyptians have been in place since back in the Pleistocene and have been largely unaffected by either invasions or migrations.


Posts: 315 | From: Deep Earth | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
HistoryFacelift
Member
Member # 14696

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for HistoryFacelift     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
DNA goes far beyond penotype.
Posts: 105 | From: Japan | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sundjata
Member
Member # 13096

Icon 13 posted      Profile for Sundjata     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Glider:
American Journal of Physical Anthropology

Volume 36, Issue S17 , Pages 1 - 31
Supplement: American Journal of Physical Anthropology


Published Online: 14 Jun 2005

Copyright © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc., A Wiley Company

Article

Clines and clusters versus Race: a test in ancient Egypt and the case of a death on the Nile


C. Loring Brace 1, David P. Tracer 2, Lucia Allen Yaroch 1, John Robb 1, Kari Brandt 1, A. Russell Nelson 1
1Museum of Anthropology, University Museums Building, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109
2Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195


Keywords
Egypt • Euclidean Distance dendrograms • Trivial traits • Clines • Clusters • Race


Abstract

The biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians were tested against their neighbors and selected prehistoric groups as well as against samples representing the major geographic population clusters of the world. Two dozen craniofacial measurements were taken on each individual used. The raw measurements were converted into C scores and used to produce Euclidean distance dendrograms. The measurements were principally of adaptively trivial traits that display patterns of regional similarities based solely on genetic relationships. The Predynastic of Upper Egypt and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa, eastern Asia, Oceania, or the New World. Adjacent people in the Nile valley show similarities in trivial traits in an unbroken series from the delta in the north southward through Nubia and all the way to Somalia at the equator. At the same time, the gradient in skin color and body proportions suggests long-term adaptive response to selective forces appropriate to the latitude where they occur. An assessment of race is as useless as it is impossible. Neither clines nor clusters alone suffice to deal with the biological nature of a widely distributed population. Both must be used. We conclude that the Egyptians have been in place since back in the Pleistocene and have been largely unaffected by either invasions or migrations. As others have noted, Egyptians are Egyptians, and they were so in the past as well. © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Nice try.. [Smile]


quote:
One approach, although limited, with which to explore the possibility of migration in earlier times, is through analysis of craniometric affinities. Previous studies have not specifically addressed the immigration of farmers from Europe into the NileValley. However, [b]Brace et al. (1993) find that a series of upper Egyptian/Nubian epipalaeolithic crania affiliate by cluster analysis with groups they designate “sub-Saharan African” or just simply “African” (from which they incorrectly exclude the Maghreb, Sudan, and the Horn of Africa), whereas post-Badarian southern predynastic and a late dynastic northern series (called “E” or Gizeh) cluster together, and secondarily with Europeans. In the primary cluster with the Egyptian groups are also remains representing populations from the ancient Sudan and recent Somalia. Brace et al. (1993) seemingly interpret these results as indicating a population relationship from Scandinavia to the Horn of Africa, although the mechanism for this is not clearly stated; they also state that the Egyptians had no relationship with sub-Saharan Africans, a group that they nearly treat (incorrectly) as monolithic, although sometimes seemingly including Somalia, which directly undermines aspects of their claims. Sub-Saharan Africa does not define/delimit authentic Africanity.
Early Nile Valley Farmers, From El-Badari, Aboriginals or “European” Agro-Nostratic Immigrants? Craniometric Affinities Considered With Other Data

The centrepiece of the scholarship on 'race' in Black Athena Revisited comes from a team of physical anthropologists led by C. Loring Brace. (46) Brace takes issue not with Bernal's doubts about the utility of 'race', but with 'his claim that "it is impossible to achieve any anatomical precision on the subject" of the biological relationships of the ancient Egyptians'. (47) For Brace, the question of 'who the ancient Egyptians were' is fascinating, but 'completely unrelated' to the issue of their biological relationships. This point is important, as it suggests that the answer to this vexed question can be solved by the correct application of science and a critical assessment of the evidence. Turning directly to the hard science he intends to employ, Brace notes the inadequacies of past attempts at finding solutions to this problem through craniometry, but insists that it is 'a matter of adjusting our theoretical expectations, asking the right questions, and then applying the increasingly powerful arsenal of methods that are at our disposal'. (48) The wrong questions, of course, are ones built upon the teleological assumption of the existence of 'race'. The poverty of an analysis based on groupings into discrete 'races' becomes obvious when multivariate analysis is used, as it refutes such assumptions. The use of 'clusters' which can then be used to create dendrograms showing the closest resemblance of one cluster to another produces a model which, for Brace, gives us the most accurate description of the biological relationships of one population group to another..................The unwarranted persistence of racial thinking and the idea of the 'fissioning' of one race from another was further developed by Keita in an article co-authored with Rick Kitties. Their attack centres not merely on the racial thinking still embodied in physical anthropology--despite the fact that this is the site where the idea of 'race' had been most thoroughly deconstructed in the past--but also, in a telling observation, on the use of racial categories in 'sampling strategies used in studies addressing the origin of modern humans'. In a direct attack on the study by Brace et al., 'Clines and clusters versus "race"' (1993), Keita and Kittles accuse its authors of distorting the picture of the true genetic diversity of Africans and, as a result, of complicity with the very thinking they appear to denounce:

"Another example of the use of a socially constructed typological paradigm is in studies of the Nile Valley populations in which the concept of a biological African is restricted to those with a particular craniometric pattern (called in the past the 'True Negro' though no 'True White' was ever defined). Early Nubians, Egyptians, and even Somalians are viewed essentially as non-Africans, when in fact numerous lines of evidence and an evolutionary model make them a part of African biocultural/biogeographical history. The diversity of 'authentic' Africans is a reality. This diversity prevents biogeographical/biohistorical Africans from clustering into a single unit, no matter the kind of data (emphasis added). (80)

Keita and Kittles conclude their essay by urging that 'the ghosts of the pregenetic synthesis era must be exorcised'. Certainly Keita's work has contributed significantly to that rethinking, and answers Diop's call for scholars to test ideas that he had advanced. (81) His work points us towards the concluding position on Egypt seen in the collection of essays, Egypt in Africa.

Kamugisha, Aaron. Finally in africa? Egypt, from Diop to Celenko. “Race & Class” 45 (2003): 31-60.

[Smile]

Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mystery Solver
Member
Member # 9033

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mystery Solver         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Relying on defunct studies is a hallmark of pseudo-science. Brace himself, if my memory serves me correctly [posted here years ago], spoke of his limited diversification of sampling - i.e. collecting samples from wider geographical expanse in the African continent. In fact, in his latest study, the ancient Egyptian specimens were placed in the same twig as his Sudanese and Somali specimens, not the European and so-called Mediterranean twigs. Brace of course did go out of his way to say that morphology in groups like Somalis has no connections with Europeans.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Of course.

This is lame stuff that we've already destroyed completely.

It's outdated even in terms of Brace own work.

But what is more important is the findings regarding the remains Brace used ->

Gizeh "E" series - late dynastic northern series (called “E” or Gizeh) cluster together, and secondarily with Europeans

^ Gizeh is 30TH DYNASTY. It's Eurasian not native Egyptian - ie AF-RI-CAN. Of course it clusters with Eurasian, and *not* with Kemetian.


Most dramatically, the results also indicate that the Egyptian series from Howells global data set [Gizeh E series] are morphologically distinct from the Predynastic and Early Dynastic Nile Valley samples (especially in cranial vault shape and height), and thus show that this sample CANNOT BE CONSIDERED to be a typical Egyptian series. - Dr. Sonia Zakrezewski.


Eurocentrists who quote Brace on Gizeh E series are very foolish.

All they end up proving is that non Native Persian to Ptolemic dynasies are not like native Ancient Egyptian - ie - Kemetic - dynasties.

This is exactly so, and the opposite of what they want to imply.

Modern Egypt is nothing like Ancient Kemet ethnically - for exactly the reason that Brace inadvertently exposed.

But they quote Brace anyway, because they don't know what Gizeh E series is referencing.

rotfl!

Eurocentrism is pathetic.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Hey Glider. Tell us why the NON-EGYPTIAN Gizeh E series are so different from Native African dynasties?

Explain it to us all, so we can understand your "thinking". [Big Grin]

ps - if you can't because you haven't a clue, then at least find some more *challenging* junk for us to debunk.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Johnny Blaze
Member
Member # 13931

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Johnny Blaze     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So those folks were Arabs like they are now is what this says right.
Posts: 62 | Registered: Jul 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Well the study didn't specifcally say 'Arabs' but Eurasians, which is natural as Rasol and MS explained the 30th dynasty remains are of Eurasian descent.

LOL Nice try Glider, but it looks like only Scalawags like you are scurrying about throwing up old-outdated scientific studies that have been addressed and refuted before! [Big Grin]

Posts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3