While this image appears to disprove Egypt's African roots, it does not. I hold that people like that are Egyptian..
Look at this man is he "Arab"...I think not, he is a native Egyptian.
We have to remember that Egypt was a Nation of many tribes united under one flag, so not one Phenotype was present..We have Dark, Light, and in between in Egypt.
There was a comment made that the Dark brown occurs only in the Armana..
Tomb of Amenemheb
Farther to the right of the Subterranean Chambers of Sennofer is No. 85, the Tomb of Amenemheb, an officer in the service of Tuthmosis III.
While this image appears to disprove Egypt's African roots, it does not. I hold that people like that are Egyptian..
If you look closely, you can see the original brown paint fading off the figure of Nefertari. You can still see traces of paint around the cheeks and arms.
Here the paint is better preserved.
quote:
Look at this man is he "Arab"...I think not, he is a native Egyptian.
Nobody denies that the man above is a native Egyptian. The problem is Egypt has been invaded by many foreigners especially since the fall of dynastic civilization. You cannot expect all modern Egyptians to look exactly like their ancient ancestors.
quote:We have to remember that Egypt was a Nation of many tribes united under one flag, so not one Phenotype was present..We have Dark, Light, and in between in Egypt.
Of course, but all these ancient tribes were African not like today where most of the phenotypic diversity comes from foreign ancestry as well.
quote:There was a comment made that the Dark brown occurs only in the Armana..
I don't know who made that comment, but of course that is a lie. Dark brown (black) has always been the standard color. Even females outside of the Amarna period were painted that color every now and then and not only the 'yellow' convention.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you look closely, you can see the original brown paint fading off the figure of Nefertari. You can still see traces of paint around the cheeks and arms.
Here the paint is better preserved.
I concur, Seems to me even Nefertit is not "Pale Pink" as the new troll, Skeptic, seems to imply..good stuff D.J BTW I got some good images of Egyptian women coming up.
Nobody denies that the man above is a native Egyptian. The problem is Egypt has been invaded by many foreigners especially since the fall of dynastic civilization. You cannot expect all modern Egyptians to look exactly like their ancient ancestors. D.J that man is a Fallahin so he probably has less mixture plus I think he is upper Egyptian too, unlike other Northern Lower Egyptian Fallahin he has less chances of being Mixed..
All of these people plus the man Earlier rep. A. Egypt.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
Wally suggested this was not an indigenous Egyptian because his arm is hairy
Who is Wally to pass Judgement, that man is an Upper Egyptian Fellahin, has Medium Brown skin etc. Looks Egyptian to me, again not all Egyptians were Charcoal colored.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
What do you base your opinion that that man's type was not present in A. Egypt. Im sure he is Tropically Adapted and clusters with Ethiopians and Nubians over Eurasians.
What does the man above have that was not present in Egypt?? Please post..
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
First off the point of this tread was to prove that the Egyptians painted themselves Dark Brown from the Old Kingdom not just in the Armana, second why are you all so scared of Modern Egyptians?? You have seen Egyptian Remains and Art work as well as me if not longer and know damn Well Modern Egyptians like the Fallahin I posted could Eaisily be found in A. Egypt.
If Eurocentrics are wrong for calling Egypt Caucasian then Afrocentrics are wrong for Denying that Egyptians like the Fellahin I posted were not present in Egypt as far back as the old Kingdom.
Again the Egyptians form a group with Nubians first and East Africans second. My Contention is that Egyptians Majority looked like this..
With Egyptians like this in the North and Delta
And that there was a North to South Incline Variation of Skin color.
Is there a problem with this, In my opinion the Southern Type was Dominant until other Asiatic groups settled in the North. I also contend that the Culture of Egypt was Native and arrived Via the South and More Southerly regions.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
We have pics of AE which were painted in Dark Brown throughout OK, NK etc.
What we need to understand is that Modern Egypt has plent of Eurasian genes in lower Egypt.
The Fellahin, Saidi, etc are prime examples of Modern Egyptians that retained there original Color. As we see in Upper Egypt a more pristine example of what AE looked like.
No one can deny Modern Egyptians there heritage. What we Know though is that Egypt is linked with socalled "Nubians" and East Africans mainly.
Ignore Frauds obsession with posting the Exact same statues he posted before as If it gives any info to what color the man was in his life.
Features on statues that have narrow features is no different then many East Africans.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: First off the point of this tread was to prove that the Egyptians painted themselves Dark Brown from the Old Kingdom not just in the Armana,
If that is the case then why is the next statement necessary?
quote:second why are you all so scared of Modern Egyptians??
Therefore if you said this thread is about paint color in ancient art, why are you running and jumping to a discussion about modern Egyptians?
quote: You have seen Egyptian Remains and Art work as well as me if not longer and know damn Well Modern Egyptians like the Fallahin I posted could Eaisily be found in A. Egypt.
If Eurocentrics are wrong for calling Egypt Caucasian then Afrocentrics are wrong for Denying that Egyptians like the Fellahin I posted were not present in Egypt as far back as the old Kingdom.
Again the Egyptians form a group with Nubians first and East Africans second. My Contention is that Egyptians Majority looked like this..
All the straw man arguments in the world wont change the fact that Eurocentrics, Fellahin, Caucasoids and any other terms related to the populations of the Nile have anything to do with ancient Egyptian art from over 2-5,000 years ago.
If you want to at least pretend not to be trolling, why not start by providing some evidence to back up your argument? Where is the Egyptian art?
Who said that Amarna was the only time Egyptians portrayed themselves as brown in the first place?
LOL.
quote: With Egyptians like this in the North and Delta
I don't recall this thread being a discussion of Egyptians in the delta.
quote: And that there was a North to South Incline Variation of Skin color.
Is there a problem with this, In my opinion the Southern Type was Dominant until other Asiatic groups settled in the North. I also contend that the Culture of Egypt was Native and arrived Via the South and More Southerly regions.
Well the problem is that it has nothing to do with the topic of the thread YOU started. The thread topic is "Does dark brown only occur in Amarna Art".
The answer is no. Ancient Egyptians portrayed themselves as medium to dark brown from Old Kingdom to the late period. Even the Ptolemaic dynasties carried on this tradition.
Those are facts based on analysis and observation of art not discussions of clines, modern population distributions or anything else unrelated to looking at the actual art and time period in question.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
JCMJ, Niggers are scared of modern Egyptians because they are the genuine descendants of AE, and that Black Africans have nothing to do with AE; they are different from the Niggers below the Sahara. If anything, they have an affinity with the mediterraenean and western peoples, and consider Niggers inferior Africans. This is why Niggers are Afraid of modern Egyptians. Overall, Niggers believe MEs threaten their [false] claim to AE.
Posts: 2025 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Frustrated racial slurs aside, nobody denies that most modern Egyptians are descended from the ancients. The question is how much?
We know that Egypt suffered many foreign invasions and mass immigrations since the fall of dynastic times.
^ The above map shows a sample among 'Arab' Egyptians of northern Egypt from around highly populated areas like the capitol Cairo. Notice the high frequency of African lineages among them. No doubt as one goes further south into rural areas inhabited by non-Arab Fellahin the frequency of African lineages becomes higher and those of Eurasian lineages becomes lower.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fraud_Busted: You're seeing only "black"!
Because that is what these people were! BLACK.
Only a psycho would call all of these pictures of chocolate dark peoples 'white'.
quote:The reasons they cluster together, is because of the shared Eurasian DNA, that is all!!
Nubians Are About 60% Eurasian genetically!
East Africans, are about 40-50% Eurasian!
LMAO You keep repeating the same nonsense over and over again and in other threads. Any proof of these claims? Funny how you in one instance you are quick to distinguish the Egyptians from the "negro" Nubians but in other instances such as this you claim the Nubians to be 60% "caucasian". So which is it?! Why don't you make up your messed up mind?! LOLPosts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are you for real? The question should be how much Sub saharan Negroes are descended from AE? After all, its these coons in the west that are going around claiming AEian heritage? Can you give me a number? RFLOL! Of course you can't! because it is NULL RFLOL!!!
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Frustrated racial slurs aside, nobody denies that most modern Egyptians are descended from the ancients. The question is how much?
We know that Egypt suffered many foreign invasions and mass immigrations since the fall of dynastic times.
posted
Gigantic, So why not explain the spread of the haplogroups in modern Egypt? E3b has its densest espression in Tanzania. So if it is found in Egypt its source must be from East Africa. J is easily explained by the colonial invasions by Arabs during after the 6th century. And R, I and H are obviously migrants from Europe during the colonial era(Britain, France, Turkey, etc.). We can also Europe stakes its intellectual heritage in Greece, whose haplogroups include a sizable E3b chunk. Ancient Greece is worshipped in the West by its intellectuals--in all areas yet there is very little genetic connection between Greece and the heartland of Europe.
And by the way, I don't know anybody who says that the rest of Africans are descended from the AEs. The facts rather are that all of indigenous Africa is in the main[note the exceptions such as R1 in Cameroon and its hinterlands] offshoots of some parent clade E.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Wrong again, dillhole. In many of the portraits where the paint is faded, you can actually see where the original paint is left. But why am I arguing with a nitwit who refuses to see TRUTH even if it is right in front of its face.
quote:Originally posted by GiganticAss: Are you for real? The question should be how much Sub saharan Negroes are descended from AE? After all, its these coons in the west that are going around claiming AEian heritage? Can you give me a number? RFLOL! Of course you can't! because it is NULL RFLOL!!!
The question is are YOU for intelligence? Apparently not, since you don't realize that blacks in the West never claim descent from Egypt only that they are related to Egypt as it IS African and the AEians WERE black.
On the other hand you have nothing to say about whites in the West who talk about the Greeks and Romans like they were their ancestors even though they descend from "barbarian" Northwest Europe, and look down on the actual Greek and Roman descendants as "Ginnies" etc.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Therefore if you said this thread is about paint color in ancient art, why are you running and jumping to a discussion about modern Egyptians?
First off lets make it clear, this is MY TREAD, as a result what I WANT TO DISCUSS is allowed, so take your ass off or don't post on my thread if you have a problem.
Second, read my first post to understand what I meant when I posted the Fallahin man, read before you speak.
All the straw man arguments in the world wont change the fact that Eurocentrics, Fellahin, Caucasoids and any other terms related to the populations of the Nile have anything to do with ancient Egyptian art from over 2-5,000 years ago. Who said anything about Eurocentrics and Caucasoids, please post where I said this. This rant is nothing but a Strawman and lacks a basic subject, as I don't even know what you are ranting about.
If you want to at least pretend not to be trolling, why not start by providing some evidence to back up your argument? Where is the Egyptian art? How am I trolling, and I already provided info ON the premise of this thread, Strawman..dismissed.
Who said that Amarna was the only time Egyptians portrayed themselves as brown in the first place?
LOL.
Skeptic claimed this, I made this to debunk him. You come here like a fool trying to be big man on campus, yet don't even know who I am talking to. You're a joke Kid.
I don't recall this thread being a discussion of Egyptians in the delta. Man STFU already with this strawman Bullshit, I created this thread and the reference to the Delta Egyptians was well within the argument of this thread. Maybe what it is you must be scared to post some artifacts of Delta Egyptians.
Well the problem is that it has nothing to do with the topic of the thread YOU started. The thread topic is "Does dark brown only occur in Amarna Art".
The answer is no. Ancient Egyptians portrayed themselves as medium to dark brown from Old Kingdom to the late period. Even the Ptolemaic dynasties carried on this tradition.
Finally after all that long winded Spamming.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Therefore if you said this thread is about paint color in ancient art, why are you running and jumping to a discussion about modern Egyptians?
First off lets make it clear, this is MY TREAD, as a result what I WANT TO DISCUSS is allowed, so take your ass off or don't post on my thread if you have a problem.
Second, read my first post to understand what I meant when I posted the Fallahin man, read before you speak.
All the straw man arguments in the world wont change the fact that Eurocentrics, Fellahin, Caucasoids and any other terms related to the populations of the Nile have anything to do with ancient Egyptian art from over 2-5,000 years ago. Who said anything about Eurocentrics and Caucasoids, please post where I said this. This rant is nothing but a Strawman and lacks a basic subject, as I don't even know what you are ranting about.
If you want to at least pretend not to be trolling, why not start by providing some evidence to back up your argument? Where is the Egyptian art? How am I trolling, and I already provided info ON the premise of this thread, Strawman..dismissed.
Who said that Amarna was the only time Egyptians portrayed themselves as brown in the first place?
LOL.
Skeptic claimed this, I made this to debunk him. You come here like a fool trying to be big man on campus, yet don't even know who I am talking to. You're a joke Kid.
I don't recall this thread being a discussion of Egyptians in the delta. Man STFU already with this strawman Bullshit, I created this thread and the reference to the Delta Egyptians was well within the argument of this thread. Maybe what it is you must be scared to post some artifacts of Delta Egyptians.
Well the problem is that it has nothing to do with the topic of the thread YOU started. The thread topic is "Does dark brown only occur in Amarna Art".
The answer is no. Ancient Egyptians portrayed themselves as medium to dark brown from Old Kingdom to the late period. Even the Ptolemaic dynasties carried on this tradition.
Finally after all that long winded Spamming.
So after the meaningless diversion into modern populations and the TREADS that came off the track of your own thread you agree that what I said was correct to begin with.
Thanks.
That was my point.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are you talking about these "NUBIANS"?? Busted_Fraud
quote:p.s. The Nubians Themselves Cluster With Eurasians and Not Black Africans!
Look at you hypocrite!! One minute they are example of "Negroes" and the next thing you do is turned into Eurasian clusters Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Are you talking about these "NUBIANS"?? Busted_Fraud
quote:p.s. The Nubians Themselves Cluster With Eurasians and Not Black Africans!
Look at you hypocrite!! One minute they are example of "Negroes" and the next thing you do is turned into Eurasian clusters
LMAO, thats the Fradulent Busted Tranny for you...LMAO
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Frustrated racial slurs aside, nobody denies that most modern Egyptians are descended from the ancients. The question is how much?
We know that Egypt suffered many foreign invasions and mass immigrations since the fall of dynastic times.
^ The above map shows a sample among 'Arab' Egyptians of northern Egypt from around highly populated areas like the capitol Cairo. Notice the high frequency of African lineages among them. No doubt as one goes further south into rural areas inhabited by non-Arab Fellahin the frequency of African lineages becomes higher and those of Eurasian lineages becomes lower.
Why don't you all actually read those studies, instead of nitpicking select graphics and appropriating your distorted renditions to what was actually stated in the study. That figure comes from the paper The Levant versus the Horn of Africa: Evidence for Bidirectional Corridors of Human Migrations. In that paper it is made perfectly clear that the J haplogroups found amongst the Egyptians dates to roughly between 11.1K years and 16.4K years ago, i.e. It was already there prior to the emergence of Dynastic Egypt! And contrary to what you believe, the Upper Egyptians actually have more South West Asian admixture than the Lower Egyptians; See the chart below taken from A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for Y-Chromosomal DNA Variation in North Africa :
posted
Oh, and as an addendem to that, I posted a study done exclusively on the Upper Egyptians that I notice none of you want to touch (I wonder why?):
Local comparisons between Upper Egyptians were carried out with other ethnic groups in Egypt, based on frequency and molecular data. No differences were observed in comparison with a general Caucasian population from Cairo in any of the nine loci compared or with Egyptian Christians from Cairo…Multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) based on pair-wise FST genetic distances of Upper Egyptian and other diverse global populations. OCE, Oceanian; ME, Middle Eastern; NAF, North African; EAS, East Asian; SSA, sub-Saharan African; UEGY, Upper Egyptian; SAS, South Asian; EUR, European. The figure shows that Oceania and American populations are very distant from Upper Egyptians (marked by a grey triangle) and other populations. The Upper Egyptian population is closer to the Middle Eastern, North African, South Asian and European populations than others. (Genetic variation of 15 autosomal STR loci in Upper (Southern) Egyptians, Omran et al 2008.)Posts: 96 | From: Macedonia | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The question is are YOU for intelligence? Apparently not, since you don't realize that blacks in the West never claim descent from Egypt only that they are related to Egypt as it IS African and the AEians WERE black.
D.J you must have not seen or heard of Ashra Kwesi, Sara Suten Seti, Ray Hagins..etc. These folks def. claim to be Egyptians...Kwesi/SaraSutenSeti calls the Egyptians "The Ancestors"...
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
Since you are making claims in multiple threads, I will post this hear for you to read and learn. First about the Ethiopians being 50-60% eurasian that is false. Read this:
the Oromo show an incidence (62.8%) of E3b (M35), higher than the Amhara. - Ethiopian and Khosian Share Deepest clades of of Y-Chromosome Semino-sforza, Underhill et. al. It is worth noting that the frequency of group VI chromosomes in the Ethiopian Jews (just one chromosome out of 22) is similar to that reported for the p12f2 chromosomes in the Oromo from Ethiopia (3.8%) and is considerably lower than the frequency reported for the Amhara of the same region (33%). These data, together with those reported elsewhere (Ritte et al. 1993a, 1993b; Hammer et al. 2000) suggest that the Ethiopian Jews acquired their religion without substantial genetic admixture from Middle Eastern peoples and that they can be considered an ethnic group with essentially a continental African genetic composition. - Fulvio Cruciani,1 Piero Santolamazza,1 Peidong Shen, et al.
As you can see for yourself, the Oromo who are the largest Group in Ethiopia have as little as 3.8% eurasian genes. Moving on:
Now moving on to M1:
Most of the extant mtDNA boundaries in South and Southwest Asia were likely shaped during the initial settlement of Eurasia by anatomically modern humans
Mait Metspalu1 , Toomas Kivisild1 , Ene Metspalu1 , Jüri Parik1 , Georgi Hudjashov1 , Katrin Kaldma1 , Piia Serk1 , Monika Karmin1 , Doron M Behar2 , M Thomas P Gilbert6 , Phillip Endicott7 , Sarabjit Mastana4 Surinder S Papiha5 , Karl Skorecki2 Antonio Torroni3 and Richard Villems1
1Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, Tartu University, Tartu, Estonia 2Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine and Research Institute, Technion and Rambam Medical Center, Haifa, Israel 3Dipartimento di Genetica e Microbiologia, Università di Pavia, Pavia, Italy 4Department of Human Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom 5Department of Human Genetics, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, United Kingdom 6Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA 7Henry Wellcome Ancient Biomolecules Centre, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PS,United Kingdom
“Finding M1 or a lineage ancestral to M1 in India, could help to explain the presence of M1 in Africa as a result of a back migration from India. Yet, to date this has not been achieved [15], this study). Therefore, one cannot rule out the still most parsimonious scenario that haplogroup M arose in East Africa [3]. Furthermore, the lack of L3 lineages other than M and N (indeed, L3M and L3N) in India is more consistent with the African launch of haplogroup M. On the other hand, one also observes that: i) M1 is the only variant of haplogroup M found in Africa; ii) M1 has a fairly restricted phylogeography in Africa, barely penetrating into sub-Saharan populations, being found predominantly in association with the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum – a finding that appears to be inconsistent with the distribution of sub-clades of haplogroups L3 and L2 that have similar time depths. That, plus the presence of M1 without accompanying L lineages in the Caucasus [32] and [our unpublished data], leaves the question about the origin of haplogroup M still open.”
In this study we see that M1 was probably "formed" in East Africa. Moving on
Lets take a look at your study that you states shows Upper Egyptians of having more mixture then lower Egyptians :
A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for Y-Chromosomal DNA Variation in North Africa Arredi et al 2004
"Under the hypothesis of a neolithic demic expansion from the Middle East, the likely origin of E3b in East Africa could indicate a LOCAL contribution to the North African Neolithic transition or an earlier migration into the Fertile Crescent, preceding the expansion back into Africa."
Moving on again to E3b and how it is just as African as E3a:
The present-day Egyptian E3b-M35 distribution most likely results from a juxtaposition of various demic episodes. Since the E3b-M35 lineages appear to be confined mostly to the sub-Saharan populations, it is conceivable that the initial migrations toward North Africa from the south primarily involved derivative E3b-M35 lineages. These include E3b1-M78, a haplogroup especially common in Ethiopia (23%), and, perhaps, E3b2- M123 (2%), which is present as well (Underhill et al. 2000; Cruciani et al. 2002; Semino et al. 2002). The data suggest that two later expansions may have followed: one eastward along the Levantine corridor into the Near East and the other toward northwestern Africa. - Luis (2004)
^This map shows the distribution of E3b Hap Group and shows how much it is in Egypt.
Read this about Ethiopians and Somalis: "The fact that the Ethiopians and Somalis have a subset of the sub-Saharan African haplotype diversity and that the non- African populations have a subset of the diversity present in Ethiopians and Somalis makes simple-admixture models less likely; rather, these observations support the hypothesis proposed by other nuclear-genetic studies.. that populations in northeastern Africa may have diverged from those in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa early in the history of modern African populations and that a subset of this northeastern-African population migrated out of Africa and populated the rest of the globe.” (-- Tishkoff 2000, ‘Short Tandem-Repeat Polymorphism..’)
No matter how you word it, Ethiopians are not as "Mixed" as you claim. Moving on:
Read this about Egyptians and Nubians:
NUBIA AND EGYPT- Nubians and Egyptians were so close in various eras that they were virtually indistinguishable
“The ancient Egyptians referred to a region, located south of the third cataract the Nile River, in which Nubians dwelt as Kush.. Within such context, this phrase is not a racial slur. Throughout the history of ancient Egypt there were numerous, well documented instances that celebrate Nubian-Egyptian marriages. A study of these documents, particularly those dated to both the Egyptian New Kingdom (after 1550 B.C.E.) and to Dynasty XXV and early Dynasty XXVI (about 720-640 BCE), reveals that neither spouse nor any of the children of such unions suffered discrimination at the hands of the ancient Egyptians. Indeed such marriages were never an obstacle to social, economic, or political status, provided the individuals concerned conformed to generally accepted Egyptian social standards. Furthermore, at times, certain Nubian practices, such as tattooing for women, and the unisex fashion of wearing earrings, were wholeheartedly embraced by the ancient Egyptians." (Bianchi, 2004: p. 4)
'It is an extremely difficult task to attempt to describe the Nubians during the course of Egypt's New Kingdom, because their presence appears to have virtually evaporated from the archaeological record.. The result has been described as a wholesale Nubian assimilation into Egyptian society. This assimilation was so complete that it masked all Nubian ethnic identities insofar as archaeological remains are concerned beneath the impenetrable veneer of Egypt's material; culture.. In the Kushite Period, when Nubians ruled as Pharaohs in their own right, the material culture of Dynasty XXV (about 750-655 B.C.E.) was decidedly Egyptian in character.. Nubia's entire landscape up to the region of the Third Cataract was dotted with temples indistinguishable in style and decoration from contemporary temples erected in Egypt. The same observation obtains for the smaller number of typically Egyptian tombs in which these elite Nubian princes were interred.(Bianchi, 2004, p. 99-100)
Robert Bianchi ( 2004). Daily Life of the Nubians. Greenwood Publishing Group
Read this Map that shows Upper Egypt more African then Lower Egypt
Figure 12. A map illustrating the frequency and distribution of the Subclades of Haplogroup E in Eurasia and Northeast Africa. The total frequency of Haplogroup E is shown as the blue portion of the smaller pie charts, while the larger pie chart shows the fraction of each subclade contributing to the total frequency. For Egypt, two charts are shown, which are derived from two different studies of Haplogroup E subclades in this region. See Table 3 for a detailed account of these frequency and distribution of Subclade E. Paragroup E* represents M40+ status or other E-defining SNPs, but lacking further subclade marker identification. Likewise, paragroup E1b1b1* represents M35+ status, but lacking further subclade identification.This subclade is most frequently reported as the paragroup E1b1b1* or M35* to distinguish it from the observations of the descendant subclades (e.g. E1b1b1a, M78 or E1b1b1b, M81 or E1b1b1c, M123). The TMRCA for M35* subclade is estimated at 27-29kya. The E1b1b1*/M35* subclade can be found in both western and eastern regions of Africa, but clearly has much higher frequency in East Africa (25-50%). This trend is opposite to E1b1a M2 frequency and distribution. The limit of E1b1a/M2 in Northeast Africa was suggested to be result of close knit cultures of Cushitic language groups, which harbor a large fraction of the E1b1b1/M35 lineage, thus giving an explanation for low E1b1a/M2 and high E1b1b1/M35 frequencies in Northeast Africa.The M35 predecessors, P2 and M215 are also thought to have an East Africa origin based on STR variation. M35* and M78 have been found in Europe and the Middle East and may have participated in the demic diffusion of agriculture during the Neolithic Era. M35* is found in East Africa (e.g. Ethiopia) and is absent in Oman and Egypt, so the M35 descendants in Oman are likely to have more recent origins as evidenced by the presence of the subsequent SNP variations and the E1b1b1/M35 descendant subclades (E1b1b1a, M78 or E1b1b1b, M81 or E1b1b1c, M123). The STR variation in Egypt is greater than Oman, pointing to an older establishment of M35 in Egypt and supporting the notion that the Levantine corridor through Egypt was the route for the spread of M35 lineages in the Middle East. The timing for this migration coincides with the Mesolithic Era. It is found in present day countries of Lebanon (16%), Turkey (11%), Iraq (11%) and surrounding regions. An interesting note is that the extent of E1b1b1* (M35*) to the South is near the proposed migration of the M2 subclade through Kenya and that Tanzania has a mixed contribution of both the ‘West M2’ and ‘East M35*’ subclades. This mixture has a unique chronology in that the introduction of M2 by the Bantu is a recent admixture episode in comparison to a Stone Age origin for the M35* subclade.In Europe, the E1b1b1*/M35* subclade is more prevalent in the Ashkenazi Jewish population (20%) than the non-Jewish population (6%), possibly indicating a founding role for the E1b1b1*/M35* subclade for the Ashkenazi Jews in Europe. n.b. recent studies have identified a new SNP, M293 that account for many of the M35* paragroup. This new subclade, designated E1b1b1f, appears to have a concentration around Tanzania (43%), the country that harbored the highest reported frequency of M35* (37%). The E1b1b1f/M293 subclade has a TMRCA estimated at 10kya and is associated with a more recent migration (~2kya) and spread of pastoralism (livestock herding) southward to South Africa. Along with the E1b1a/M2/Bantu, this provides another instance of demic diffusion of new technologies in Africa.Frequency and distribution of the Subclades of Haplogroup E E1b1b1a/M78 Subclade in Eurasia and Northeast Africa:
Read this study also It also links Nubians and Egyptians:
Haplogroup E-M78, however, is more widely distributed and is thought to have an origin in eastern African. More recently, this haplogroup has been carefully dissected and was found to depict several well-established subclades with defined geographical clustering (Cruciani et al., 2006, 2007). Although this haplogroup is common to most Sudanese populations, it has exceptionally high frequency among populations like those of western Sudan (particularly Darfur) and the Beja in eastern Sudan... Although the PC plot places the Beja and Amhara from Ethiopia in one sub-cluster based on shared frequencies of the haplogroup J1, the distribution of M78 subclades (Table 2) indicates that the Beja are perhaps related as well to the Oromo on the basis of the considerable frequencies of E-V32 among Oromo in comparison to Amhara (Cruciani et al., 2007)...
These findings affirm the historical contact between Ethiopia and eastern Sudan (1998), and the fact that these populations speak languages of the Afroasiatic family tree reinforces the strong correlation between linguistic and genetic diversity." (Cavalli-Sforza, 1997).
"Genetic continuum of the Nubians with their kin in southern Egypt is indicated by comparable frequencies of E-V12 the predominant M78 subclade among southern Egyptians."
"The Copt samples displayed a most interesting Y-profile, enough (as much as that of Gaalien in Sudan) to suggest that they actually represent a living record of the peopling of Egypt. The significant frequency of B-M60 in this group might be a relic of a history of colonization of southern Egypt probably by Nilotics in the early state formation, something that conforms both to recorded history and to Egyptian mythology." Source:
(Hisham Y. Hassan 1, Peter A. Underhill 2, Luca L. Cavalli-Sforza 2, Muntaser E. Ibrahim 1.(2008). Y-chromosome variation among Sudanese: Restricted gene flow, concordance with language, geography, and history. Am J Phys Anthropology, 2008.)
This is all I will post for now. I hope you read and understand what is being said.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for Y-Chromosomal DNA variation In North Africa
Reading from the study of Nebel et al, we see that Hap J was found dating to the Arab invasion and not from the Neolithic.
The primary male lineage among modern NW Africans is the African haplogroup E lineage. The other major NW African male haplogroup J1-M267 reflects "recent gene flow caused by the migration of Arabian tribes in the first millennium of the Common Era(700-800 A.D)." according to Nebel et al.
Of course Nebel et al. has clearly demonstrated that Haplogroup J in North Africa MAINLY date from the Arab invasion and NOT the neolithic period. Hence the East to West Neolithic migration Arredi et al. mentions is really the expansion of saharan cattle herders/ceramic makers from the Sudanese Nile Valley into the Central sahara during the Early Holocene. As the sahara dessicated, the central saharans migrated into the Maghreb, West Africa and back to the Nile.
Nebel et al 2000,2001
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:First about the Ethiopians being 50-60% eurasian that is false
No it’s not false at all. You can ask any mainstream anthropologist or population geneticist and they will tell you the exact same thing. The only people who dispute that fact are the Afrocentrists.
quote:the Oromo show an incidence (62.8%) of E3b (M35), higher than the Amhara. - Ethiopian and Khosian Share Deepest clades of of Y-Chromosome Semino-sforza, Underhill et. al
Um, and this proves what exactly (you have completely taken that quote out of context)? Also from that study:
Within extant African populations, both linguistic (Greenberg 1963) and genetic (Hiernaux 1975; Excoffier et al. 1987; Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994, pp. 169–171) evidence indicates that most sub-Saharan populations are more closely related to each other, whereas Pygmy, Khoisan, and eastern African populations are the most differentiated.
To better understand the relationships between Ethiopians and the other African populations, we have now screened 126 Ethiopian (78 Oromo and 48 Amhara) and 139 Senegalese DNAs of our collection, for the diagnostic markers of the major haplogroups of the Y-chromosome genealogy (Underhill et al. 2001). The results obtained using a hierarchical approach are illustrated in figure 1, in which the Ethiopian and Khoisan samples examined by Underhill et al. (2000) are also included. Groups I and II are essentially restricted to Africans and appear to be the most divergent clades within the tree. They show a patchy distribution, with high frequencies among isolated hunter-gatherer groups and in some peoples of Ethiopia and Sudan. Such a distribution was interpreted as the survival of some ancient lineages through more recent population events (Underhill et al. 2001). In particular, Group I, observed in 43.6% of the Khoisan (usually considered to be descendants of an early African population), is present in all of the Ethiopian samples: its frequency is 10.3% in the Oromo sample and 14.6% in the Amhara sample of the present study, and is 13.6% in the ethnically undefined sample reported by Underhill et al. (2000). In contrast, it was not found in the Senegalese.
Noteworthy is the particularly high frequency of haplotype 18, defined by M78, which also characterizes most of the European YAP+ chromosomes (O.S., unpublished data), and the absence of the haplotype 20, identified by the M81 mutation, which is the most frequent M35 lineage in North Africa (Bosch et al. 2001). In a comparison of the different groups of Ethiopians, the Oromo show an incidence (62.8%) of the M35 cluster higher than that in the Amhara (35.4%, P.005); the Amhara value is similar to the frequency (31.8%) found in the Ethiopian sample of Underhill et al. (2000). A consistent proportion (17.0%) of Y chromosomes belonging to the M75 cluster (haplotype 22) is a distinctive feature of the latter sample. In contrast, almost all Senegalese (98.6%) are YAP+, and the majority of them (81.3%) fall into the M2 subclade, but only one of them shows the M191 mutation (haplotype 12) (Underhill et al. 2001). This mutation accounts for ~40% of the M2 members, who are mainly Pygmies (Underhill et al. 2000). Group III is less frequent in the Khoisan (28.2%), who share with Ethiopians only the M35 haplotype 19 (10.3%). Conversely, the M2 component, which occurs at a frequency of 17.9% in the Khoisan, is virtually absent in the Ethiopians.
It is reported (Levine 1974) that the Amhara experienced a strong influence from Middle Eastern populations, in which the 12f2 8-kb allele has a very high frequency and probably originated (Santachiara-Benerecetti et al. 1993; Semino et al. 1996; Quintana-Murci et al. 2001). This is further supported by the opposite distribution of the M35 subclade (35.4% for the Amhara, vs. 62.8% for the Oromo [P<.005] and 31.8% for the other Ethiopian data). Group VI also includes two Senegalese who, however, are currently defined only by the M89 mutation (haplotype 27) and lack any other known mutation characterizing the M89 subgroups.
The finding of M70 is intriguing, since it has so far been observed to be widely scattered in several continents at a low frequency (Semino et al. 2000; Underhill et al. 2000). The M173 and related lineages are common and widespread in European and in western and central Asian populations (Semino et al. 2000; Underhill et al. 2000; Bosch et al. 2001; Wells et al. 2001); the observation of one M173 in Ethiopia could, therefore, represent a recent admixture event.
In conclusion, the present study underscores the complexity and substructure of the Ethiopian Y-chromosome gene pool. First, the presence of different Y-chromosome haplotypes belonging to African-specific Group I in all groups of Ethiopians and in the Khoisan (at frequencies of ~13% and 44%, respectively) confirms that these populations share an ancestral paternity, as was previously suggested by the 49a,f data (Passarino et al. 1998), and it indicates that Group I was part of the proto-African Y-chromosome gene pool. The virtual absence of this clade in the other African ethnic groups suggests that they could derive from a more recent ancestral population that went through a long period of differentiation before expansion. In addition, Group II, the next closest to the NRY genealogy root and typically an African group, is shared by Ethiopians and the Khoisan but to a lesser degree. In the case of Group II, the split responsible for the differences observed between Ethiopian and Khoisan haplotypes is also old. Second, most of the Ethiopian Y chromosomes, the rest of the Khoisan Y chromosomes, and the majority of the Senegalese Y chromosomes belong to Group III, which is also mainly African but whose precursor is believed to be involved in the first migration out of Africa (Underhill et al. 2001). Third, the remainder of the Ethiopian Y chromosomes (Groups VI, VIII, and IX) may be explained by back migrations from Asia.
I also find it quite odd that you would quote from Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, since it’s quite clear to anyone who has actually read his work that he in no way shape or form agrees with any of the crap espoused by Afrocentrists:
The simplest conclusion is that most Ethiopians come from an admixture in which a slightly smaller fraction, of Caucasoid origin, may have come in part from northeast Africa and in part from Arabia, but ultimately mostly from the Middle East, considering that Neolithic Middle Eastern migrants must have contributed in an important way to North African genes. Originally languages may have been Cushitic and have been replaced by Semitic languages [Amharic is presently the language of Ethiopia] in the north of Ethiopia under the influence of South Arabia. (“The History and Geography of Human Genes” Cavalli-Sforza, et al., page 174)
In summary, the information available on individual groups in Ethiopia and North Africa is fairly limited but sufficient to show that they are all separate from sub-Saharan Africans and that North Africans and East Africans (Ethiopian and neighbors) are also clearly separate. (Cavalli-Sforza et al., HGHG, page 174)
quote:As you can see for yourself, the Oromo who are the largest Group in Ethiopia have as little as 3.8% eurasian genes
Uh, no. What I can see is that you’re a complete moron who can’t comprehend any of the things that you are reading in those studies.
quote:Finding M1 or a lineage ancestral to M1 in India, could help to explain the presence of M1 in Africa as a result of a back migration from India. Yet, to date this has not been achieved [15], this study). Therefore, one cannot rule out the still most parsimonious scenario that haplogroup M arose in East Africa [3]. Furthermore, the lack of L3 lineages other than M and N (indeed, L3M and L3N) in India is more consistent with the African launch of haplogroup M. On the other hand, one also observes that: i) M1 is the only variant of haplogroup M found in Africa; ii) M1 has a fairly restricted phylogeography in Africa, barely penetrating into sub-Saharan populations, being found predominantly in association with the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum – a finding that appears to be inconsistent with the distribution of sub-clades of haplogroups L3 and L2 that have similar time depths. That, plus the presence of M1 without accompanying L lineages in the Caucasus [32] and [our unpublished data], leaves the question about the origin of haplogroup M still open
This is what the entire conclusion from that study states:
Since the initial peopling of South and West Asia by anatomically modern humans,when this region may well have provided the initial settlers who colonized much of the rest ofEurasia, the gene flow in and out of India of the maternally transmitted mtDNA has been surprisingly limited. Specifically, our analysis of the mtDNA haplogroups, which are shared betweenIndian and Iranian populations and exhibit coalescence ages corresponding to around the earlyUpper Paleolithic, indicates that they are present in India largely as Indian-specific sub-lineages. Incontrast, other ancient Indian-specific variants of M and R are very rare outside the sub-continent The quest for finding the origin of haplogroup M and a plausible scenario for the peopling of Eurasia. Based on the high frequency and diversity of haplogroupM in India and elsewhere in Asia, some authors have suggested (versus [3]) that M may have arisen in SouthwestAsia [16,17,31]. Finding M1 or a lineage ancestral to M1 in India, could help to explain the presence of M1 inAfrica as a result of a back migration from India. Yet, to date this has not been achieved [15], this study). Therefore, one cannot rule out the still most parsimonious scenario that haplogroup M arose in East Africa [3].Furthermore, the lack of L3 lineages other than M and N(indeed, L3M and L3N) in India is more consistent withthe African launch of haplogroup M. On the other hand,one also observes that: i) M1 is the only variant of haplo-group M found in Africa; ii) M1 has a fairly restricted phy-logeography in Africa, barely penetrating into sub-Saharan populations, being found predominantly inassociation with the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum – afinding that appears to be inconsistent with the distribu-tion of sub-clades of haplogroups L3 and L2 that havesimilar time depths. That, plus the presence of M1 without accompanying L lineages in the Caucasus [32] and [ourunpublished data], leaves the question about the origin of haplogroup M still open.
It’s perfectly clear to anyone who has any understanding of simple reading comprehension, that the study has left the origins of M1 still unanswered. Moreover that study is outdated – many moons ago I drew reference to a more recent study indicating a Eurasian origin for M1, and yet you’re still here repeating the same old crap. But then again I suppose there really is no convincing a nutter:
This study provides evidence that M1, or its ancestor, had an Asiatic origin. The earliest M1 expansion into Africa occurred in northwestern instead of eastern areas; this early spread reached the Iberian Peninsula even affecting the Basques. The majority of the M1a lineages found outside and inside Africa had a more recent eastern Africa origin. Both western and eastern M1 lineages participated in the Neolithic colonization of the Sahara. The striking parallelism between subclade ages and geographic distribution of M1 and its North African U6 counterpart strongly reinforces this scenario. Finally, a relevant fraction of M1a lineages present today in the European Continent and nearby islands possibly had a Jewish instead of the commonly proposed Arab/Berber maternal ascendance.
quote:Lets take a look at your study that you states shows Upper Egyptians of having more mixture then lower Egyptians :
A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for Y-Chromosomal DNA Variation in North Africa Arredi et al 2004
"Under the hypothesis of a neolithic demic expansion from the Middle East, the likely origin of E3b in East Africa could indicate a LOCAL contribution to the North African Neolithic transition or an earlier migration into the Fertile Crescent, preceding the expansion back into Africa."
It’s really quite apparent to me that you all really don’t understand any of the things that you’re quoting at all. Read that entire study in context – It doesn’t support any of the Afrocentrist theories regarding North or Horn Africans. The very abstract of the paper alone should have clued you into that fact:
We have typed 275 men from five populations in Algeria, Tunisia, and Egypt with a set of 119 binary markers and 15 microsatellites from the Y chromosome, and we have analyzed the results together with published data from Moroccan populations. North African Y-chromosomal diversity is geographically structured and fits the pattern expected under an isolation-by-distance model. Autocorrelation analyses reveal an east-west cline of genetic variation that extends into the Middle East and is compatible with a hypothesis of demic expansion. This expansion must have involved relatively small numbers of Y chromosomes to account for the reduction in gene diversity towards the West that accompanied the frequency increase of Y haplogroup E3b2, but gene flow must have been maintained to explain the observed pattern of isolation-by-distance. Since the estimates of the times to the most recent common ancestor (TMRCAs) of the most common haplogroups are quite recent, we suggest that the North African pattern of Y-chromosomal variation is largely of Neolithic origin. Thus, we propose that the Neolithic transition in this part of the world was accompanied by demic diffusion of Afro-Asiatic–speaking pastoralists from the Middle East.
quote:Moving on again to E3b and how it is just as African as E3a:
The present-day Egyptian E3b-M35 distribution most likely results from a juxtaposition of various demic episodes. Since the E3b-M35 lineages appear to be confined mostly to the sub-Saharan populations, it is conceivable that the initial migrations toward North Africa from the south primarily involved derivative E3b-M35 lineages. These include E3b1-M78, a haplogroup especially common in Ethiopia (23%), and, perhaps, E3b2- M123 (2%), which is present as well (Underhill et al. 2000; Cruciani et al. 2002; Semino et al. 2002). The data suggest that two later expansions may have followed: one eastward along the Levantine corridor into the Near East and the other toward northwestern Africa. - Luis (2004)
Population geneticists do not consider E1b1b and it’s derivatives to be “black African” haplotypes:
I should probably clarify that I was not attempting in my article to contradict Semino or Cruciani regarding the ultimate origins of haplogroup E3b in Africa. I was merely pointing out that to continue to think and write about haplogroup E3b and, in particular, certain sub-clades of E3b as African in origin was simplistic and potentially misleading. It is rather like saying that haplogroup R1b is Middle Eastern/Transcaucasian merely because the haplogroup originated in Anatolia tens of thousands of years ago. And it was clear to me even many years ago when I wrote the article that some clades of E3b did not arise in Africa, but elsewhere in the world. Thus, to refer to clades like E-M78 as "African" because the UEP that defines the parental haplogroup originated in Africa gives the wrong impression about the origins, history and distribution of many of the sub-clades, some of which may occur in greater population frequency than the original parental haplogroup itself. (Ellen Coffman 31 October 2008)
By labeling E3b “African,” we risk ignoring the very historical and genetic complexity, diversity and unusual population distribution of the E3b group as a whole. (November 2008 Ellen Coffman)
"E3b was introduced into Europe from the Near East by immigrant farmers,” "The man who gave rise to marker M35 [E3b] was born around 20,000 years ago in the Middle East. His descendants were among the first farmers and helped spread agriculture from the Middle East into the Mediterranean region. (“Atlas of the Human Journey>Genetic Markers>M35” The Genographic Project 2008)
quote:Read this about Ethiopians and Somalis: "The fact that the Ethiopians and Somalis have a subset of the sub-Saharan African haplotype diversity and that the non- African populations have a subset of the diversity present in Ethiopians and Somalis makes simple-admixture models less likely; rather, these observations support the hypothesis proposed by other nuclear-genetic studies.. that populations in northeastern Africa may have diverged from those in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa early in the history of modern African populations and that a subset of this northeastern-African population migrated out of Africa and populated the rest of the globe.” (-- Tishkoff 2000, ‘Short Tandem-Repeat Polymorphism..’)
Tishkoff also had this to say in a more recent paper:
The most distinct separation is between African and non-African populations. The northeastern-African—that is, the Ethiopian and Somali—populations are located centrally between sub-Saharan African and non-African populations. (S. A. Tishkoff et al., Am. J. Hum. Genet., 67:901-925, 2000)
It’s clear that Tishkoff separated African groups even if they never left Africa. Therefore the term “indigenous African” does not apply strictly to negroids only and that they should not necessarily be grouped with them in an anthropological, genetic or racial sense.
Also of interest are the contraindications of Lovell et al:
Certainly our data are not incompatible with the argument from Tishkoff et al. (1996) that an element of the contemporary Ethiopian population may be descendants of the ancestral population that spawned the migration out of Africa. We also argue, however, that in addition to this early bottleneck event, later periods of admixture have played a major role in shaping the gene pool of Ethiopia, and its populations display both Eurasian and Sub-Saharan genetic influences. (Lovell et al)
quote:No matter how you word it, Ethiopians are not as "Mixed" as you claim
Yes, they are mixed. And the “African” haplogroups found amongst them are not found in any appreciable quantities amongst Negroids.
quote:NUBIA AND EGYPT- Nubians and Egyptians were so close in various eras that they were virtually indistinguishable
“The ancient Egyptians referred to a region, located south of the third cataract the Nile River, in which Nubians dwelt as Kush.. Within such context, this phrase is not a racial slur. Throughout the history of ancient Egypt there were numerous, well documented instances that celebrate Nubian-Egyptian marriages. A study of these documents, particularly those dated to both the Egyptian New Kingdom (after 1550 B.C.E.) and to Dynasty XXV and early Dynasty XXVI (about 720-640 BCE), reveals that neither spouse nor any of the children of such unions suffered discrimination at the hands of the ancient Egyptians. Indeed such marriages were never an obstacle to social, economic, or political status, provided the individuals concerned conformed to generally accepted Egyptian social standards. Furthermore, at times, certain Nubian practices, such as tattooing for women, and the unisex fashion of wearing earrings, were wholeheartedly embraced by the ancient Egyptians." (Bianchi, 2004: p. 4)
quote:'It is an extremely difficult task to attempt to describe the Nubians during the course of Egypt's New Kingdom, because their presence appears to have virtually evaporated from the archaeological record.. The result has been described as a wholesale Nubian assimilation into Egyptian society. This assimilation was so complete that it masked all Nubian ethnic identities insofar as archaeological remains are concerned beneath the impenetrable veneer of Egypt's material; culture.. In the Kushite Period, when Nubians ruled as Pharaohs in their own right, the material culture of Dynasty XXV (about 750-655 B.C.E.) was decidedly Egyptian in character.. Nubia's entire landscape up to the region of the Third Cataract was dotted with temples indistinguishable in style and decoration from contemporary temples erected in Egypt. The same observation obtains for the smaller number of typically Egyptian tombs in which these elite Nubian princes were interred.(Bianchi, 2004, p. 99-100)
Robert Bianchi ( 2004). Daily Life of the Nubians. Greenwood Publishing Group
Absolutely none of this says anything about the race of the Ancient Egyptians.
quote:Read this Map that shows Upper Egypt more African then Lower Egypt
This officially proves to me that you cannot comprehend any of the things that you are reading and that you really ought to leave the interpretation of genomic data to those of us who are actually in the know. That map does not prove that Upper Egyptians are “more African” than Lower Egyptians, it merely shows that there is a greater diversity of the subhaplotypes of E1b1b amongst the Upper Egyptians! Do you not notice that on that map they are only showing the distributions of the derivatives of E1b1b in Africa and in Eurasia?! The map that I have provided by contrast shows not only the distribution of E1b1b but also those belonging to several other haplogroups – and when you look at the haplogroup profiles on that map that I have provided you can clearly see that there is far more Middle Eastern admixture amongst the Upper Egyptians in contrast to the Lower Egyptians.
quote:Figure 12. A map illustrating the frequency and distribution of the Subclades of Haplogroup E in Eurasia and Northeast Africa. The total frequency of Haplogroup E is shown as the blue portion of the smaller pie charts, while the larger pie chart shows the fraction of each subclade contributing to the total frequency. For Egypt, two charts are shown, which are derived from two different studies of Haplogroup E subclades in this region. See Table 3 for a detailed account of these frequency and distribution of Subclade E. Paragroup E* represents M40+ status or other E-defining SNPs, but lacking further subclade marker identification. Likewise, paragroup E1b1b1* represents M35+ status, but lacking further subclade identification.This subclade is most frequently reported as the paragroup E1b1b1* or M35* to distinguish it from the observations of the descendant subclades (e.g. E1b1b1a, M78 or E1b1b1b, M81 or E1b1b1c, M123). The TMRCA for M35* subclade is estimated at 27-29kya. The E1b1b1*/M35* subclade can be found in both western and eastern regions of Africa, but clearly has much higher frequency in East Africa (25-50%). This trend is opposite to E1b1a M2 frequency and distribution. The limit of E1b1a/M2 in Northeast Africa was suggested to be result of close knit cultures of Cushitic language groups, which harbor a large fraction of the E1b1b1/M35 lineage, thus giving an explanation for low E1b1a/M2 and high E1b1b1/M35 frequencies in Northeast Africa.The M35 predecessors, P2 and M215 are also thought to have an East Africa origin based on STR variation. M35* and M78 have been found in Europe and the Middle East and may have participated in the demic diffusion of agriculture during the Neolithic Era. M35* is found in East Africa (e.g. Ethiopia) and is absent in Oman and Egypt, so the M35 descendants in Oman are likely to have more recent origins as evidenced by the presence of the subsequent SNP variations and the E1b1b1/M35 descendant subclades (E1b1b1a, M78 or E1b1b1b, M81 or E1b1b1c, M123). The STR variation in Egypt is greater than Oman, pointing to an older establishment of M35 in Egypt and supporting the notion that the Levantine corridor through Egypt was the route for the spread of M35 lineages in the Middle East. The timing for this migration coincides with the Mesolithic Era. It is found in present day countries of Lebanon (16%), Turkey (11%), Iraq (11%) and surrounding regions. An interesting note is that the extent of E1b1b1* (M35*) to the South is near the proposed migration of the M2 subclade through Kenya and that Tanzania has a mixed contribution of both the ‘West M2’ and ‘East M35*’ subclades. This mixture has a unique chronology in that the introduction of M2 by the Bantu is a recent admixture episode in comparison to a Stone Age origin for the M35* subclade.In Europe, the E1b1b1*/M35* subclade is more prevalent in the Ashkenazi Jewish population (20%) than the non-Jewish population (6%), possibly indicating a founding role for the E1b1b1*/M35* subclade for the Ashkenazi Jews in Europe. n.b. recent studies have identified a new SNP, M293 that account for many of the M35* paragroup. This new subclade, designated E1b1b1f, appears to have a concentration around Tanzania (43%), the country that harbored the highest reported frequency of M35* (37%). The E1b1b1f/M293 subclade has a TMRCA estimated at 10kya and is associated with a more recent migration (~2kya) and spread of pastoralism (livestock herding) southward to South Africa. Along with the E1b1a/M2/Bantu, this provides another instance of demic diffusion of new technologies in Africa.Frequency and distribution of the Subclades of Haplogroup E E1b1b1a/M78 Subclade in Eurasia and Northeast Africa
Absolutely none of this discredits any of the things that I have been saying for weeks now.
quote:Read this study also It also links Nubians and Egyptians:
Haplogroup E-M78, however, is more widely distributed and is thought to have an origin in eastern African. More recently, this haplogroup has been carefully dissected and was found to depict several well-established subclades with defined geographical clustering (Cruciani et al., 2006, 2007). Although this haplogroup is common to most Sudanese populations, it has exceptionally high frequency among populations like those of western Sudan (particularly Darfur) and the Beja in eastern Sudan... Although the PC plot places the Beja and Amhara from Ethiopia in one sub-cluster based on shared frequencies of the haplogroup J1, the distribution of M78 subclades (Table 2) indicates that the Beja are perhaps related as well to the Oromo on the basis of the considerable frequencies of E-V32 among Oromo in comparison to Amhara (Cruciani et al., 2007)...
These findings affirm the historical contact between Ethiopia and eastern Sudan (1998), and the fact that these populations speak languages of the Afroasiatic family tree reinforces the strong correlation between linguistic and genetic diversity." (Cavalli-Sforza, 1997).
"Genetic continuum of the Nubians with their kin in southern Egypt is indicated by comparable frequencies of E-V12 the predominant M78 subclade among southern Egyptians."
"The Copt samples displayed a most interesting Y-profile, enough (as much as that of Gaalien in Sudan) to suggest that they actually represent a living record of the peopling of Egypt. The significant frequency of B-M60 in this group might be a relic of a history of colonization of southern Egypt probably by Nilotics in the early state formation, something that conforms both to recorded history and to Egyptian mythology." Source:
(Hisham Y. Hassan 1, Peter A. Underhill 2, Luca L. Cavalli-Sforza 2, Muntaser E. Ibrahim 1.(2008). Y-chromosome variation among Sudanese: Restricted gene flow, concordance with language, geography, and history. Am J Phys Anthropology, 2008.)
Sharing a “link” with the Nubians, does not mean that the Egyptians and Nubians were identical. And I also really just cannot understand why it is that Afrocentrists insist on using the Nubians as a proxy for black, when it is perfectly clear to anyone who is knowledgeable about the anthropological data that they were not. Cruciani et al in their 2007 paper did not pose an East African origin for E-M78, rather instead they posed a Northeast African origin (for which they made perfectly clear in Table 1 of the paper that they were referring specifically to Egypt and Libya):
In conclusion, the peripheral geographic distribution of the most derived subhaplogroups with respect to northeastern Africa, as well as the results of quantitative analysis of UEP and microsatellite diversity are strongly suggestive of a northeastern rather than an eastern African origin of E-M78. Northeastern Africa thus seems to be the place from where E-M78 chromosomes started to disperse to other African regions and outside Africa.
quote:This is all I will post for now. I hope you read and understand what is being said
No, what I think you need to do is to read and understand what is being said in the few studies I listed above as well as the entire laundry list of those that I linked to three weeks ago. The idea that the AE were black Africans has been discredited ages ago – just let it go; You have no history in Egypt.
Posts: 96 | From: Macedonia | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for Y-Chromosomal DNA variation In North Africa
Reading from the study of Nebel et al, we see that Hap J was found dating to the Arab invasion and not from the Neolithic.
The primary male lineage among modern NW Africans is the African haplogroup E lineage. The other major NW African male haplogroup J1-M267 reflects "recent gene flow caused by the migration of Arabian tribes in the first millennium of the Common Era(700-800 A.D)." according to Nebel et al.
Of course Nebel et al. has clearly demonstrated that Haplogroup J in North Africa MAINLY date from the Arab invasion and NOT the neolithic period. Hence the East to West Neolithic migration Arredi et al. mentions is really the expansion of saharan cattle herders/ceramic makers from the Sudanese Nile Valley into the Central sahara during the Early Holocene. As the sahara dessicated, the central saharans migrated into the Maghreb, West Africa and back to the Nile.
Nebel et al 2000,2001
Peace
There is no study by "Nebel et al." Neither of those quotes appear in the paper "A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for Y-Chromosomal DNA variation In North Africa," and after I did a Google search for either of them I only got references to this forum. The mere fact that Afrocentrists have to lie and fake data just goes to show that you're all full of sh*t. You can curry it however you want, the genetic data clearly shows that the J haplogroups found amongst the Egyptians (and all North Africans for that matter) predates the Dynastic Period. Posts: 96 | From: Macedonia | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: the Nebel study was called:
The Y chromosome pool of Jews as part of the genetic landscape of the Middle East,
A. Nebel et al. (2001),
Americal Journal of Human Genetics 69(5):1095-112.
I had a look at that paper, but I couldn't find a single reference in it to either Egypt or haplogroup J.
Posts: 96 | From: Macedonia | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
Be easy with the Insults. No need for them, They don't make your points anymore valid. Read from this:
the more-recent migrations were mostly from the Arabian Peninsula, as is seen in the Arab-specific Eu 10 chromosomes that include the modal haplotypes observed in Palestinians and Bedouin. These haplotypes and their one-step microsatellite neighbors constitute a substantial portion of the total Palestinian (29%) and Bedouin (37.5%) Y chromosome pools and were not found in any of the non-Arab populations in the present study. The peripheral position of the modal haplotypes, with few links in the network (fig. 5), suggests that the Arab-specific chromosomes are a result of recent gene flow. Historical records describe tribal migrations from Arabia to the southern Levant in the Byzantine period, migrations that reached their climax with the Muslim conquest 633–640 a.d.; Patrich 1995). Indeed, Arab-specific haplotypes have been observed at significant frequencies in Muslim Arabs from Sena (56%) and the Hadramaut (16%) in the Yemen (Thomas et al. 2000). Thus, although Y chromosome data of Arabian populations are limited, it seems very likely that populations from the Arabian Peninsula were the source of these chromosomes. The genetic closeness, in classical protein markers, of Bedouin to Yemenis and Saudis (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994) supports an Arabian origin of the Bedouin. The alternative explanation for the distribution of the Arab-specific haplotypes (i.e., random genetic drift) is unlikely. It is difficult to imagine that the different populations in the Yemen and the southern Levant, in which Arab-specific chromosomes have been detected at moderate-to-high frequencies, would have drifted in the same direction.
Also Please post from the study where they claim that Oromo have more then 3-5% eurasian genes.
Also about your other study:Mitochondrial lineage M1 traces an early human backflow to Africa
"Due to the scarcity of M lineages in the Near East and its richness in India, this region was proposed as the most probable origin of the M1 ancestor. However, recent studies based on Indian mtDNA sequences have not found any positive evidence that M1 originated in India." Gonzales et al 2007
"Although two mtDNA lineages with an African origin (haplogroups M and N) were the progenitors of all non-African haplogroups, macrohaplogroup L (including haplogroups L0-L6) is limited to sub-Saharan Africa." Tishkoff and Kivisild 2006
If you want to learn more about M1 then read this thread:
While this image appears to disprove Egypt's African roots, it does not. I hold that people like that are Egyptian..
If you look closely, you can see the original brown paint fading off the figure of Nefertari. You can still see traces of paint around the cheeks and arms.
Here the paint is better preserved.
quote:
Look at this man is he "Arab"...I think not, he is a native Egyptian.
Nobody denies that the man above is a native Egyptian. The problem is Egypt has been invaded by many foreigners especially since the fall of dynastic civilization. You cannot expect all modern Egyptians to look exactly like their ancient ancestors.
quote:We have to remember that Egypt was a Nation of many tribes united under one flag, so not one Phenotype was present..We have Dark, Light, and in between in Egypt.
Of course, but all these ancient tribes were African not like today where most of the phenotypic diversity comes from foreign ancestry as well.
quote:There was a comment made that the Dark brown occurs only in the Armana..
I don't know who made that comment, but of course that is a lie. Dark brown (black) has always been the standard color. Even females outside of the Amarna period were painted that color every now and then and not only the 'yellow' convention.
I agree.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:First about the Ethiopians being 50-60% eurasian that is false
No it’s not false at all. You can ask any mainstream anthropologist or population geneticist and they will tell you the exact same thing. The only people who dispute that fact are the Afrocentrists.
quote:the Oromo show an incidence (62.8%) of E3b (M35), higher than the Amhara. - Ethiopian and Khosian Share Deepest clades of of Y-Chromosome Semino-sforza, Underhill et. al
Um, and this proves what exactly (you have completely taken that quote out of context)? Also from that study:
Now I get it - Negroes are basically half Eurafricans who mixed with black Caucasoids. Duh!?
Why couldn't we figure that out before. Boy I guess skeptic is really on the ball.
Oromo (Galla) rebels of Ethiopia
Fulani woman
Beja men
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
First off the point of this tread was to prove that the Egyptians painted themselves Dark Brown from the Old Kingdom not just in the Armana, second why are you all so scared of Modern Egyptians?? You have seen Egyptian Remains and Art work as well as me if not longer and know damn Well Modern Egyptians like the Fallahin I posted could Eaisily be found in A. Egypt.
If Eurocentrics are wrong for calling Egypt Caucasian then Afrocentrics are wrong for Denying that Egyptians like the Fellahin I posted were not present in Egypt as far back as the old Kingdom.
Again the Egyptians form a group with Nubians first and East Africans second. My Contention is that Egyptians Majority looked like this..
With Egyptians like this in the North and Delta
And that there was a North to South Incline Variation of Skin color.
Is there a problem with this, In my opinion the Southern Type was Dominant until other Asiatic groups settled in the North. I also contend that the Culture of Egypt was Native and arrived Via the South and More Southerly regions.
Where is the evidence of a north-south incline in ancient Egypt Jari or is this Lyin_ss I'm reading? Please give me some.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Skeptic: Why don't you all actually read those studies, instead of nitpicking select graphics and appropriating your distorted renditions to what was actually stated in the study. That figure comes from the paper The Levant versus the Horn of Africa: Evidence for Bidirectional Corridors of Human Migrations. In that paper it is made perfectly clear that the J haplogroups found amongst the Egyptians dates to roughly between 11.1K years and 16.4K years ago, i.e. It was already there prior to the emergence of Dynastic Egypt!
The non-Berber Egyptian sample in that study is explicitly labeled "Arab"---that is, it represents Arab immigrants rather than native Egyptians. Haplogroup J may have indeed expanded within that particular group 16.4-11.1 millennia ago, but that doesn't mean the group hasn't moved in the last few thousands years.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:the more-recent migrations were mostly from the Arabian Peninsula, as is seen in the Arab-specific Eu 10 chromosomes that include the modal haplotypes observed in Palestinians and Bedouin. These haplotypes and their one-step microsatellite neighbors constitute a substantial portion of the total Palestinian (29%) and Bedouin (37.5%) Y chromosome pools and were not found in any of the non-Arab populations in the present study. The peripheral position of the modal haplotypes, with few links in the network (fig. 5), suggests that the Arab-specific chromosomes are a result of recent gene flow. Historical records describe tribal migrations from Arabia to the southern Levant in the Byzantine period, migrations that reached their climax with the Muslim conquest 633–640 a.d.; Patrich 1995). Indeed, Arab-specific haplotypes have been observed at significant frequencies in Muslim Arabs from Sena (56%) and the Hadramaut (16%) in the Yemen (Thomas et al. 2000). Thus, although Y chromosome data of Arabian populations are limited, it seems very likely that populations from the Arabian Peninsula were the source of these chromosomes. The genetic closeness, in classical protein markers, of Bedouin to Yemenis and Saudis (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994) supports an Arabian origin of the Bedouin. The alternative explanation for the distribution of the Arab-specific haplotypes (i.e., random genetic drift) is unlikely. It is difficult to imagine that the different populations in the Yemen and the southern Levant, in which Arab-specific chromosomes have been detected at moderate-to-high frequencies, would have drifted in the same direction
King, that study does not have anything to do with the Egyptians or even North Africans for that matter, it has to do with Jews! This is that entire passage in context:
We propose that the Y chromosomes in Palestinian Arabs and Bedouin represent, to a large extent, early lineages derived from the Neolithic inhabitants of the area and additional lineages from more-recent population movements. The early lineages are part of the common chromosome pool shared with Jews (Nebel et al. 2000). According to our working model, the more-recent migrations were mostly from the Arabian Peninsula, as is seen in the Arab-specific Eu 10 chromosomes that include the modal haplotypes observed in Palestinians and Bedouin. These haplotypes and their one-step microsatellite neighbors constitute a substantial portion of the total Palestinian (29%) and Bedouin (37.5%) Y chromosome pools and were not found in any of the non-Arab populations in the present study. The peripheral position of the modal haplotypes, with few links in the network (fig. 5), suggests that the Arab-specific chromosomes are a result of recent gene flow. Historical records describe tribal migrations from Arabia to the southern Levant in the Byzantine period, migrations that reached their climax with the Muslim conquest 633–640 A.D.; Patrich 1995). Indeed, Arab-specific haplotypes have been observed at significant frequencies in Muslim Arabs from Sena (56%) and the Hadramaut (16%) in the Yemen (Thomas et al. 2000). Thus, although Y chromosome data of Arabian populations are limited, it seems very likely that populations from the Arabian Peninsula were the source of these chromosomes. The genetic closeness, in classical protein markers, of Bedouin to Yemenis and Saudis (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994) supports an Arabian origin of the Bedouin. The alternative explanation for the distribution of the Arab-specific haplotypes (i.e., random genetic drift) is unlikely. It is difficult to imagine that the different populations in the Yemen and the southern Levant, in which Arab-specific chromosomes have been detected at moderate-to-high frequencies, would have drifted in the same direction.
As you can clearly read from that above abstract, the population movements were from the Arabian Peninsula to Palestine; not from the Middle East into Egypt and North Africa! The only significant mention of North Africa in that study appears in the very first paragraph of the introduction, and it actually reinforces what I have been saying:
The Middle East played a crucial role in early human history. Its strategic location at the crossroads of three continents facilitated the movements of peoples and the spread of novel technologies and ideas. At the beginning of the Neolithic period (∼10,500 years ago), the Fertile Crescent of the Middle East was one of the few centers in which the transition from hunting-gathering to permanent settlement and farming took place (Bar-Yosef 1995). Previous genetic studies suggested that demic diffusion of Neolithic farmers, rather than cultural transmission, was responsible for the dispersal of domesticates and technological innovations from the Middle East to Europe, North Africa, and southwest Asia (Cavalli- Sforza et al. 1994; Richards et al. 2000; Semino et al. 2000; Quintana-Murci et al. 2001).
quote:Also Please post from the study where they claim that Oromo have more then 3-5% eurasian genes
I really just cannot seem to understand why it is that you all seem to lack basic understanding. I have posted studies on the Oromo three week ago, but I’ll post them again and hopefully this time it will register:
Ethiopia is central to population genetic studies investigating the out of Africa expansion of modern humans, as shown by Y chromosome and mtDNA studies. To address the level of genetic differentiation within Ethiopia, and its relationship to Sub-Saharan Africa and Eurasia, we studied an 8kb segment of the X-chromosome from 72 chromosomes from the Amhara, Oromo and Ethiopian Jews, and compared these results with 804 chromosomes from Middle Eastern, African, Asian and European populations, and 22 newly typed Saharawi. Within Ethiopia the two largest ethnic groups, the Amhara and Oromo, were not found to be statistically distinct, based on an exact test of haplotype frequencies. The Ethiopian Jews appear as an admixed population, possibly of Jewish origin, though the data remain equivocal. There is evidence of a close relationship between Ethiopian and Yemenite Jews, likely a result of indirect gene flow. Within an African and Eurasian context, the distribution of alleles of a variable Tn repeat, and the spread of haplotypes containing Africa-specific alleles, provide evidence of a genetic continuity from Sub-Saharan Africa to the Near East, and furthermore suggest that a bottleneck occurred in Ethiopia associated with an out of Africa expansion. Ethiopian genetic heterogeneity, as evidenced by principal component analysis of haplotype frequencies, most likely resulted from periods of subsequent admixture. While these results are from the analysis of one locus, we feel that in association with data from other marker systems they add a complementary perspective on the history of Ethiopia.(Ethiopia: between Sub-Saharan Africa and Western Eurasia, Lovell et al)
Though present-day Ethiopia is a land of great ethnic diversity, the majority of Ethiopians speak different Semitic, Cushitic, and Omotic languages that belong to the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum. Maternal lineages of Semitic- (Amharic, Tigrinya, and Gurage) and Cushitic- (Oromo and Afar) speaking populations studied here reveal that their mtDNA pool is a nearly equal composite of sub-Saharan and western Eurasian lineages. This finding, consistent with classic genetic-marker studies (Cavalli-Sforza 1997) and previous mtDNA results, is also in agreement with a similarly high proportion of western Asian Y chromosomes in Ethiopians (Passarino et al. 1998; Semino et al. 2002), which supports the view (Richards et al. 2003) that the observed admixture between sub-Saharan African and, most probably, western Asian ancestors of the Ethiopian populations applies to their gene pool in general. (Am. J. Hum. Genet., 75:000, 2004)
Oromo and Amhara only showed minor differences in spite of their different origins and histories. HLA class II allele and haplotype frequencies in Ethiopian Amhara and Oromo populations. (“HLA class II allele and haplotype frequencies in Ethiopian Amhara and Oromo populations” 1998)
The present composition of the Ethiopian population is the result of a complex and extensive intermixing of different peoples of North African, Near and Middle Eastern, and south-Saharan origin. The two main groups inhabiting the country are the Amhara, descended from Arabian conquerors, and the Oromo, the most important group among the Cushitic people. ... The genetic distance analysis showed the separation between African and non-African populations, with the Amhara and Oromo located in an intermediate position. (De Stefano et al., Ann Hum Biology 2002)
There has also been research done on the autosomal DNA of Ethiopians by Wilson et al:
We genotyped 16 chromosome 1 microsatellites from the ABI prism panel 1 (an average of 17 cM apart) and 23 X-linked microsatellites (≥2 cM apart)9 in each of eight populations: South African Bantu speakers (46), Amharic- and Oromo-speaking Ethiopians from Shewa and Wollo provinces collected in Addis Ababa (48), Ashkenazi Jews (48), Armenians (48), Norwegian speakers from Oslo (47), Chinese from Sichuan in southwestern China (39), Papua New Guineans from Madang (48) and Afro- Caribbeans collected in London (30).
Note that in this study they used samples from both Oromos and Amharas, and not just on the Amhara as Afrocentrists fallaciously believe. This was the result of that study:
The apportionment of individuals (the average per-individual proportion of ancestry) from each of the eight populations into the four STRUCTURE-defined clusters (Table 2) broadly corresponds to four geographical areas: Western Eurasia, Sub-Saharan Africa, China and New Guinea. Notably, 62% of the Ethiopians fall in the first cluster, which encompasses the majority of the Jews, Norwegians and Armenians, indicating that placement of these individuals in a ‘Black’ cluster would be an inaccurate reflection of the genetic structure. (Wilson et al, Population genetic structure of variable drug response, 2001)Posts: 96 | From: Macedonia | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Skeptic: Why don't you all actually read those studies, instead of nitpicking select graphics and appropriating your distorted renditions to what was actually stated in the study. That figure comes from the paper The Levant versus the Horn of Africa: Evidence for Bidirectional Corridors of Human Migrations. In that paper it is made perfectly clear that the J haplogroups found amongst the Egyptians dates to roughly between 11.1K years and 16.4K years ago, i.e. It was already there prior to the emergence of Dynastic Egypt!
The non-Berber Egyptian sample in that study is explicitly labeled "Arab"---that is, it represents Arab immigrants rather than native Egyptians. Haplogroup J may have indeed expanded within that particular group 16.4-11.1 millennia ago, but that doesn't mean the group hasn't moved in the last few thousands years.
Why wouldn't the Egyptians be of similar stock to the Berbers? They're both on the same latitude and if you were coming from Asia you would have to pass through Egypt to get to Libya
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Also about your other study: Mitochondrial lineage M1 traces an early human backflow to Africa
"Due to the scarcity of M lineages in the Near East and its richness in India, this region was proposed as the most probable origin of the M1 ancestor. However, recent studies based on Indian mtDNA sequences have not found any positive evidence that M1 originated in India." Gonzales et al 2007
Did you fall and hit head when you were younger?! I really just cannot understand why it is that you have complete lack of understanding. The very title of that paper alone should give you an idea that what your trying to argue (an African origin for M1) is complete bullshit! Just because they found evidence that M1 didn’t originate in India, doesn’t mean that it originated in Africa – in the conclusion of that study, which I specifically posted, it’s made perfectly clear that it originated in Asia. I posted all these quotes from that study three weeks ago, but I’ll post them again:
Phylogeographic parallelism between M1 and U6 haplogroups There are striking similarities between the geographical dispersals and radiation ages observed here for M1 lineages and those previously published for the North African U6 haplogroup [40]. It was proposed that U6a first spread was in Northwest Africa around 30,000 ya. Coalescence ages for M1 also fit into this period and the oldest clade M1c has an evident northwestern Africa distribution; however it had to have a wide geographic range as some M1c lineages are today still present in Jordanians (Figs. 1 and 2). It is curious that this prehistoric Near Eastern colonization was also pointed out by the uniqueness of the U6a haplotypes detected in that area. A posterior East to West African expansion around 17,000 ya was indicated by the U6a1 relative diversity and distribution. Again, age, relative East to West diversities and geographic range accurately correspond with the M1a1 expansion detected here. More recent local spread of lineages U6b and U6c also parallel the M1b and M1c1 distributions. Furthermore, these similarities also hold outside Africa. U6 lineages in the Iberian Peninsula have been considered traces of northward expansions from Africa. Based on the uneven distribution of U6a and U6b lineages in Iberia, with the former predominating in southern and the latter in northern areas, it was proposed that U6b in Iberia represents a signal of a prehistoric North African immigration whereas the presence of U6a could be better attributed to the long lasting historic Arab/Berber occupation [40]. Again, this pattern is accurately repeated by the M1c and M1a distribution in the Iberian Peninsula, the northwest African M1 being more abundant in northern areas (56%) and the East African M1a in southern areas (85%) although, due to the small sample size, difference does not reach a significant level (p = 0.07). Additional support to the hypothesis of a prehistoric introduction are the recently detected presence of a Northwest African M1c lineage in a Basque cemetery dated to the 6th–7th centuries AD, prior to the Moorish occupation [42], and the ancestral phylogenetic position of another Basque M1d sequence (Fig. 1) that does not match any African sequence. Finally, two autochthonous U6 lineages (U6b1 and U6c1) traced the origin of the Canary Islands prehispanic aborigines to Northwest Africa [43]. Although exclusive M1 lineages have not been detected in the Canary Islands, it is worth mentioning that those sampled belong to the Northwest African area [44]. Outside Africa and the Iberian Peninsula, as with U6, M1 has been mainly detected in other Mediterranean areas with main incidences in islands such as Sicily. It is customary to attribute these incidences to the above mentioned Arab/Berber historic occupations. However, taking into account the major Jewish assignation for all the M1a haplotypes detected in Europe, the possibility of a Jewish maternal ascendance for at least some of these lineages should not be rejected. Note that the two M1 lineages sampled in the Balearic isles were of Jewish adscription [45]. Also, there were well documented Jewish settlements in Sicily since early Roman times [46] and, coincidentally, half of the M1 lineages sampled in that island [47,48] belong to the M1a cluster. Finally, the Atlantic archipelagos of Canaries and Madeira, where the rigor of the Spanish Inquisition was stronger, only have M1c representatives. In contrast, in the Azores Islands, that were used as a refuge by Sephardim Jews expelled from the Iberian Peninsula, half of the M1 sequences detected are of M1a assignation [49,50]. These possible Jewish contributions might be also extended to the U6 lineages of eastern origin because all U6 haplotypes detected in Ashkenazim and other Jewish groups, excepting one that is a basal U6a (16172–16219–16278), belong to the eastern Africa clade U6a1 [36,26]. An additional proof of the striking parallelism between M1 and U6 lineages is the fact that, as for M1, no U6 representatives were sampled in Moroccan Jews in spite of the high frequency of this clade in the Moroccan and Berber host populations [36].
Most probable origin of M1 ancestors Mitochondrial M lineages in Ethiopia were first detected by RFLP analyses [51]. To explain its presence in that area the authors suggested two possibilities: 1) the marker was acquired by Ethiopians through interchanges with Asians or 2) it was present in the ancient Ethiopian population and was carried to Asia by groups who migrated out of Africa. Later, the second hypothesis was favored and a single origin of haplogroup M in Africa was suggested, dating the split between Asian and African M branches older than 50,000 ya [22]. Although not completely discarding this last scenario other authors considered that the disjunctive was unsettled. The vast diversity of haplogroup M in Asia compared to Africa pointed to the possibility that M1 is a branch that traces a backflow from Asia to Africa [7,23]. Due to the scarcity of M lineages in the Near East and its richness in India, this region was proposed as the most probable origin of the M1 ancestor [7,52]. However, recent studies based on Indian mtDNA sequences [24,25] have not found any positive evidence that M1 originated in India. Nevertheless, the inclusion of M1 complete mtDNA lineages in the construction of the macrohaplogroup M phylogeny clearly established that the antiquity of Indian lineages, as M2, as compared to Ethiopian M1 lineages support an Asian origin of macrohaplogroup M [24]. Furthermore, the comparison within Africa of eastern and western M1 sequences left the origin of M1 in Africa uncertain [21]. On the light of our and other authors results, it seems clear that by their respective coalescence ages and diversities, M1 is younger than other Asiatic M lineages. Although it is out of doubt that the L3 ancestor of M had an African origin, macrohaplogroup M radiated outside Africa and M1 should be considered an evolved branch that signals its return to this continent. Even more, as the coalescence ages of the northwestern M1c clade is older than the eastern M1a clade, we think that the most ancient dispersals of M1 occurred in northwestern Africa, reaching also the Iberian Peninsula, instead of Ethiopia. The detection of an ancestral M1c sequence in Jordanians could be explained by two alternative hypotheses: 1) that the Near East was the most probable origin of the primitive M1 dispersals, West into Africa and East to Central Asia. This supposition would explain the presence of basic M1 lineages, instead of the most common M1a derivates, as far as the Tibet. The actual scarcity of these types in eastern areas could be explained by posterior migrations that erased these primitive lineages. The absence of these ancestral M1c lineages in Ethiopia would point to the Sinai Peninsula as the most probable gate of entrance of this backflow to Africa. 2) That M1 is an autochthonous North African clade that had its earliest spread in northwestern areas marginally reaching the Near East and beyond. This would explain the shortage of basic M1 lineages in the Near East but would leave the Asiatic origin of the M1 ancestor undetermined. In any case, both alternatives envisaged M in Africa as an offshoot of the Asiatic M trunk. The striking phylogeographic parallelism between U6 and M1 haplogroups adds additional support to these hypotheses. It is possible to correlate the dispersion ages of the different M1 clades with their contemporary climatic, archaeological, paleoanthropological and linguistic information. For instance, the first M1 backflow to Africa, dated around 30,000 ya, is coincidental with a harsh glacial period which suggests that this human retreat to Africa could be forced by climatic conditions. The low sea level in the Gibraltar Strait at that time could also facilitate the Iberian Peninsula colonization. The northwestern African M1c and the probable north central M1b expansions are coincidental with the Iberomaurusian and Capsian industries. The anomalous evolution of M1a2 lineages left the coalescence ages of the eastern Africa M1a expansion uncertain, but as suggested for the sister U6a1 radiation; these movements could be correlated in time with an African origin and expansion of Afroasiatic languages [40]. Finally, from a maternal genetic perspective it seems that Neolithic occupation of the Sahara had both eastern and western influences. Most probably other mtDNA lineages participated in this human back flow to Africa. It has been suggested that the North African X1 branch of the Euroasiatic haplogroup X could be one of them [63]. Whilst this paper was under review, a new paper also dealing with U6 and M1 haplogroups was published [53]. Haplogroup topologies and phylogeographic conclusions proposed by Olivieri et al. [53] are highly coincidental with those proposed by us in our previous paper on U6 [40] and in the present paper, dealing with M1. Regrettably, there are differences in nomenclature for M1. Whereas our M1 phylogeny adhered to that proposed previously by other authors [21], Olivieri et al. [53] chose to apply their own. Nevertheless, the diagnostic positions for the different M1 subhaplogroups allowed us to establish subhaplogroup homologies between the two works. Clearly their M1b subgroup (defined by transition 13111) corresponds to our M1c subgroup; their M1a2 subgroup (defined by transition 15884) corresponds to our M1b subgroup. Finally, their M1a1 subgroup (defined by transitions at 3705, 12346 and 16359) corresponds to our M1a subgroup. In addition to the reinforcing overlap of ideas, it is worthwhile mentioning the high coincidence for the coalescence ages of M1 and the majority of its subhaplogroups, when the same substitution rate [8] is used. Olivieri et al. [53] calculated a coalescence time estimate of 36.8 ± 7.1 ky for the entire haplogroup M1 that matches our estimate of 35.2 ± 7.1 ky. Our coalescence time for M1c (25.7 ± 6.6 ky) also overlaps with Olivieri et al. [53] haplogroup M1b (23.4 ± 5.6 ky). Likewise, the coalescence age calculated for our M1a subhaplogroup (22.6 ± 8.1 ky) is in the range of the Olivieri et al. [53] estimation for their M1a1 subhaplogroup (20.6 ± 3.4 ky). The only discrepancy is about the coalescence time estimate between our M1b subhaplogroup (13.7 ± 4.8 ky) that is younger than that calculated by Olivieri et al. [53] for their homologous M1a2 (24.0 ± 5.7 ky). As our calculations are based only on three lineages and that of Oliveri et al [53] on six, we think that their coalescence time estimation should be more accurate that ours. In fact, when time estimation is based on the eight different lineages (AFR-KI43 is common to both sets) a coalescence age of 20.6 ± 5.0 ky is obtained. Although with overlapping errors, these results, together with the relative ancestral positions of each subgroup in the phylogenetic tree (Fig. 1), would suggest that the northwestern M1c clade radiation was older than those for the ubiquitous M1b and the eastern M1a clades, as also proposed by Olivieri et al. [53].
Conclusion This study provides evidence that M1, or its ancestor, had an Asiatic origin. The earliest M1 expansion into Africa occurred in northwestern instead of northeastern areas; this early spread reached the Iberian Peninsula even affecting the Basques. The majority of the M1a lineages found outside and inside Africa had a more recent eastern Africa origin. Both western and eastern M1 lineages participated in the Neolithic colonization of the Sahara. The striking parallelism between subclade ages and geographic distribution of M1 and its North African U6 counterpart strongly reinforces this scenario. Finally, a relevant fraction of M1a lineages present today in the European Continent and nearby islands possibly had a Jewish instead of the commonly proposed Arab/Berber maternal ascendance.
quote:"Although two mtDNA lineages with an African origin (haplogroups M and N) were the progenitors of all non-African haplogroups, macrohaplogroup L (including haplogroups L0-L6) is limited to sub-Saharan Africa." Tishkoff and Kivisild 2006
That study by Tishkoff et al is outdated. At the time when that paper was published the Asiatic origin of M1 was not yet confirmed – all of the most recent papers uphold an Asiatic origin for this haplogroup:
Focusing on North Africa, several mtDNA studies have shown that, in spite of an important Sub-Saharan African contribution, the vast majority of the lineages detected in this region belong to, or have common roots with, Eurasian haplogroups [15-23]. Some of these haplogroups, including the X1 [12], U6 [11,13] and M1 [13,14], although of West Asian origin, have Paleolithic coalescence ages in North Africa. Others seem to be of more recent acquisition as a result of European (U5, V [24-26]) or Middle Eastern influences (R0a, J1b, U3 [17,27-29]). In agreement with classical markers and mtDNA, in an early analysis of Northwest African populations using paternal Y-chromosome variation, it was proposed that the main haplogroups defined by the M78 and M81 binary markers could be the paternal counterparts of the classical and maternal Paleolithic components [30]. However, more recent studies in which those and other markers were further subdivided suggested a predominantly Neolithic origin for the Y-chromosomal DNA variation in North Africa [20,22-34]. (Mitochondrial DNA haplogroup H structure in North Africa, Cabrera et al, 2009)
Sequencing of 81 entire human mitochondrial DNAs (mtDNAs) belonging to haplogroups M1 and U6 reveals that these predominantly North African clades arose in southwestern Asia and moved together to Africa about 40,000 to 45,000 years ago. Their arrival temporally overlaps with the event(s) that led to the peopling of Europe by modern humans and was most likely the result of the same change in climate conditions that allowed humans to enter the Levant, opening the way to the colonization of both Europe and North Africa. Thus, the early Upper Palaeolithic population(s) carrying M1 and U6 did not return to Africa along the southern coastal route of the "out of Africa" exit, but from the Mediterranean area; and the North African Dabban and European Aurignacian industries derived from a common Levantine source. (The mtDNA Legacy of the Levantine Early Upper Palaeolithic in Africa, Olivieri et al, 2007)
Alternatively, the amplified fragments were analyzed by sequencing. For Eurasian haplogroups (H, HV, preHV, J, T, R, U, K, I, N, X and M) diagnostic positions were recompiled from Richards et al. For African haplogroups, L0, L1, and L3 from Chen et al. and for L2, L4, and L5 from Kivisil et al. (The role of mitochondrial haplogroups in glaucoma: a study in an Arab population, Morales et al, 2008)
Recently, complete mtDNA sequencing of U6 and M1 haplotypes allowed to shed light on the phylogeny of these two lineages (Olivieri et al. 2006, Gonzalez et al. 2007). Both of them are predominantly North African clades that originated in Southwest Asia and spread together to North Africa about 40,000 to 45,000 years ago.( Holocene human peopling of Libyan Sahara: molecular analysis of maternal lineages in ancient and extant populations of Fezzan, Rickards et al, 2008)
It is noteworthy that DEYAP* has been detected at low frequency in Africa . Again, this hypothesis has its mtDNA counterpart as it is well documented that, in the Palaeolithic, at least three clades (X1, U6, M1) derived respectively from the three main Eurasian macrohaplogroups (N, R, M) came back to North Africa from Asia. (Saudi Arabian Y-Chromosome diversity and its relationship with nearby regions, Abu-Amero et al, 2009)
More recent studies of subclade M1 in North Africa and the Levant have led to a different explanation for the geographic distribution of this critical genetic marker. Some researchers now propose that M1 arose in Southwest Asia and moved back into Africa sometime between 45,000 and 40,000 years ago (Olivieri et al. 2006). González et al. (2007) also report the most ancient M1 lineages in North Africa and the Near East, not East Africa, suggesting an Asiatic origin for this lineage. Other analyses within the last decade examining yDNA markers have produced additional evidence of Upper Pleistocene back migrations into Africa (Altheide and Hammer 1997; Hammer et al. 1998; Cruciani et al. 2002). In light of these studies, it is necessary to look outside of Africa to find the point of divergence from the common ancestral trunk – the locus of expansion (New Light on Human Prehistory around the Persian Gulf Oasis, Jeffrey I. Rose, 2010)
Thus, it estimates the coalescence time of the mtDNA tree overall at ~160,000 kya, L3 (the clade that evolved within Africa and gave rise to the three major non-African haplogroups—sometimes termed ‘‘macrohaplogroups’’— M, N, and R) at 65 kya, and M, N, and R themselves at 40–50 kya. (Correcting for Purifying Selection: An Improved Human Mitochondrial Molecular Clock, Soares et al, 2009)
quote:If you want to learn more about M1 then read this thread:
There is absolutely nothing on this site that any of you can teach me in regards to either history or population genetics. None of you here have any formal training in the fields that you all claim to be proficient in - and on top of that, the views espoused here are not that of mainstream academia. You have already shown in this thread that you in no way shape or form have any understanding of the DNA studies that you are quoting, so I’ll pass on the invite to view that thread and instead rely on what actual geneticists have to say on these matters.
Posts: 96 | From: Macedonia | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Skeptic: Why don't you all actually read those studies, instead of nitpicking select graphics and appropriating your distorted renditions to what was actually stated in the study. That figure comes from the paper The Levant versus the Horn of Africa: Evidence for Bidirectional Corridors of Human Migrations. In that paper it is made perfectly clear that the J haplogroups found amongst the Egyptians dates to roughly between 11.1K years and 16.4K years ago, i.e. It was already there prior to the emergence of Dynastic Egypt!
The non-Berber Egyptian sample in that study is explicitly labeled "Arab"---that is, it represents Arab immigrants rather than native Egyptians. Haplogroup J may have indeed expanded within that particular group 16.4-11.1 millennia ago, but that doesn't mean the group hasn't moved in the last few thousands years.
This character is "Nuts". Why would they go to Egypt and select only "Nomadic Arabs"?
When you're in country, one would want to select the average native Egyptian. So much for the low level comprehension of these Afro_Dummies!
My thoughts exactly. That response from “Truthcentric” was really nothing more that a desperate attempt to maintain some form of credibility. They can scream it down how much they want and decry it as “fake” the DNA evidence clearly shows that the J haplogroups in North Africa is over 10k years old. Recent studies on the remains in the Dakhleh Oasis has shown, that contrary to what Afrocentrists believe, there has actually been far more migration into Egypt from Sub-Saharan Africa (attributable to the Arab Slave Trade) than from the Near East over the last 2000 years – What this says is that if anything the Egyptians of today are actually a bit darker than they were in the past. And Truthcentric, “Arab” is not a race, it is a language and a cultural identity. In Egypt today, the Muslims (who make up 91% of the population) self identify as “Arab” while the Coptic minority does not.
Posts: 96 | From: Macedonia | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
Second time I gave him the link, actually, but being the dishonest shitcocker he is, he ignored it.
quote:And Truthcentric, “Arab” is not a race, it is a language and a cultural identity. In Egypt today, the Muslims (who make up 91% of the population) self identify as “Arab” while the Coptic minority does not.
Yes, but there have definitely been migrations of Arab tribes into Egypt since the Arab conquest. How do you think Egyptian Bedouin got into Egypt in the first place?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Skeptic: And contrary to what you believe, the Upper Egyptians actually have more South West Asian admixture than the Lower Egyptians
Notice how more African Y-Chromosome haplogroups are found in the Upper Egyptian population than the Lower Egyptian population.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
Second time I gave him the link, actually, but being the dishonest shitcocker he is, he ignored it
There was absolutely nothing nonsensical in any of the quotes that I posted at all. That Gonzales study does not prove that M1 is African – it actually debunks that crap. As far as I can tell, the guy who runs that blog is no anthropologist; and I know that just from the very fact that all of the claims that he makes runs against that of the mainstream.
quote:Yes, but there have definitely been migrations of Arab tribes into Egypt since the Arab conquest. How do you think Egyptian Bedouin got into Egypt in the first place
Uh, tubby – that bullshit claim has long been discredited by modern day genetics. If you have a study showing that there was a mass displacement of the Egyptian population then please post it here. You either put up or shut up – which is it?
Notice how more African Y-Chromosome haplogroups are found in the Upper Egyptian population than the Lower Egyptian population
It’s quite apparent to me that your brain obviously is working properly – if you don't have Down’s syndrome then my guess is that at the very least you must be suffering from some sort of Autism spectrum disorder. Keita notes that Lucotte and Mercier found the following in their paper “Brief Communication: Y-Chromosome Haplotypes in Egypt”:
The most common variants found in different studies of Egypt collectively are, in descending frequency, V, XI, IV, VII, VIII, XV, and XII (Table 2A). The first three of these are of greatest interest due to their frequencies. Haplotype V, sometimes called “Arabic” (Lucotte and Mercier 2003a) declines from lower Egypt (north) at 51.9%, to upper Egypt (24.2%), and to lower Nubia (south) at 17.4%.
If you have actually read (and most importantly understood) that paper and many others published by Lucotte, you would in fact know that “haplotype V” corresponds to E1b1b! In that very Keita paper that you linked to he had this to say with regards to Lucotte and Mercier labeling haplotype V as “Arabic”:
It is important to address the appellation of “Arabic” for haplotype V, due to names being interpreted as indicators of origins, and the inconsistencies found in the literature. This variant is found in very high frequencies in supra-Saharan countries and Mauretania (collective average 55.0%), and in Ethiopia (average 45.8%) (Table 2A). In specific groups its highest prevalence is in samples from Moroccan Amazigh (Berbers) (68.9%) and Ethiopian Falasha (60.5%). Its frequency is considerably less in the Near East, and decreases from west (Lebanon, 16.7%) to east (Iraq, 7.2%) (Table 2A). The label “Arabic” for V is therefore misleading because it suggests a Near Eastern origin. In fact this variant has been called “African” (Lucotte et al. 1993:839, Lucotte et al. 1996:469), and “Berberian” (Lucotte et al. 2001:887).
Just give it up already! The modern day Egyptians are representative of their ancient ancestors - and most of them aren't "black" by any definition of the word! Posts: 96 | From: Macedonia | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic