posted
I always took the result as the 18th dynastic having roots in the Sahara(during the time when it was wet and the ancestors of Bantu roamed there) and not literally taking the result at face value; The 18th dynasty being from South Africa or South African...
Anyways these results still haunt Eurocentrics around the web till this day. Their only argument tends to try and claim the STR's are limited. Yet...
quote:"A minimum of eight core STR loci is needed to uniquely identify a human cell line."
Anyways very GOOD discussion Egyptsearch. I enjoyed reading through the whole thread(more than once) Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: I always took the result as the 18th dynastic having roots in the Sahara(during the time when it was wet and the ancestors of Bantu roamed there) and not literally taking the result at face value; The 18th dynasty being from South Africa or South African...
Anyways these results still haunt Eurocentrics around the web till this day. Their only argument tends to try and claim the STR's are limited. Yet...
quote:"A minimum of eight core STR loci is needed to uniquely identify a human cell line."
Anyways very GOOD discussion Egyptsearch. I enjoyed reading through the whole thread(more than once)
Ancient Egypt was a civilization centered around the Nile river like other river based civiliztions
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: I always took the result as the 18th dynastic having roots in the Sahara(during the time when it was wet and the ancestors of Bantu roamed there) and not literally taking the result at face value; The 18th dynasty being from South Africa or South African...
Anyways these results still haunt Eurocentrics around the web till this day. Their only argument tends to try and claim the STR's are limited. Yet...
quote:"A minimum of eight core STR loci is needed to uniquely identify a human cell line."
posted
Like I said, Ancient Egypt was a civilization centered around the Nile river like other river based civiliztions It was not a civiliztion spread over the whole Sahara
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
And who the hell said the Ancient Egyptian civilization itself was created in the Saharan???? Yeah NO ONE. What was said was that according to the DNAtribes results the 18th dynasty most likely has ancestral linage in the Sahara like most other Egyptians who migrated from the Sahara and into the Nile Valley. The ancestors of "Bantu" South Africans most likely lived in the Sahara.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Like I said, Ancient Egypt was a civilization centered around the Nile river like other river based civiliztions It was not a civiliztion spread over the whole Sahara
The people came from the whole of the Sahara-Sahel. Yes, indeed. LOL
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
@Lioness
Regarding your question on pg 18 of the thread -- When to use "black" -- If I'm not mistaken MLI scores from DNA Tribes for the Amarna was determined before DNA Tribes had Khosians in their database
quote:Originally posted by astenb: If this helps: My DNA Tribes
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote: Because Egypt was invaded you can't assume it's original population was replaced.
I don't assume anything here, it's what the DNA tribes genetic analysis seems to indicate. The subject of this thread.
The DNATribes analysis is of one particular family the Amarna not the whole of ancient Egypt nor all it's time periods. That is your assumption as to what you thought the DNATribes analysis indicated. Thie Amarna family, by the way, was a family that came to be rejected by the ancient Egyptians and the 19th dynatsy kings that followed detroyed their temples and removed their names from the king's list.
I'm not certain that you've changed your views, but what does the apparent 'rejection' of the Amarna family have to do with their confirmed genetic affiliation with black Africans? Are you suggesting that they were rejected on racial grounds? If not, why mention their apparent 'rejection'? The Amarna family was not 'rejected' by the ancient Egyptian population as a whole, but rather by their political opponents who considered Akhenaten a heretic.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote: Because Egypt was invaded you can't assume it's original population was replaced.
I don't assume anything here, it's what the DNA tribes genetic analysis seems to indicate. The subject of this thread.
The DNATribes analysis is of one particular family the Amarna not the whole of ancient Egypt nor all it's time periods. That is your assumption as to what you thought the DNATribes analysis indicated. Thie Amarna family, by the way, was a family that came to be rejected by the ancient Egyptians and the 19th dynatsy kings that followed detroyed their temples and removed their names from the king's list.
I'm not certain that you've changed your views, but what does the apparent 'rejection' of the Amarna family have to do with their confirmed genetic affiliation with black Africans? Are you suggesting that they were rejected on racial grounds? If not, why mention their apparent 'rejection'? The Amarna family was not 'rejected' by the ancient Egyptian population as a whole, but rather by their political opponents who considered Akhenaten a heretic.
Yes the rejection is irrelevant, I did not intend anything about "race". Th reason for the rejection was the religious views of Akhenaten The point is is that the Amarna is one royal family whose rule lasted only about 20 years. One can't make blanket statements on the whole of the Egyptian civilization based on it.
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: Because Egypt was invaded you can't assume it's original population was replaced.
I don't assume anything here, it's what the DNA tribes genetic analysis seems to indicate. The subject of this thread.
The DNATribes analysis is of one particular family the Amarna not the whole of ancient Egypt nor all it's time periods. That is your assumption as to what you thought the DNATribes analysis indicated. Thie Amarna family, by the way, was a family that came to be rejected by the ancient Egyptians and the 19th dynatsy kings that followed detroyed their temples and removed their names from the king's list.
I'm not certain that you've changed your views, but what does the apparent 'rejection' of the Amarna family have to do with their confirmed genetic affiliation with black Africans? Are you suggesting that they were rejected on racial grounds? If not, why mention their apparent 'rejection'? The Amarna family was not 'rejected' by the ancient Egyptian population as a whole, but rather by their political opponents who considered Akhenaten a heretic.
Yes the rejection is irrelevant, I did not intend anything about "race". Th reason for the rejection was the religious views of Akhenaten The point is is that the Amarna is one royal family whose rule lasted only about 20 years. One can't make blanket statements on the whole of the Egyptian civilization based on it.
The vast majority of the indigenous dynasties came from the South so I doubt the other royal families would have been any different.
There is no evidence of any mass migration of western Asians or Europeans at the dawn of the Egyptian civilization or very early on thereafter. AE was not a 'mix race' civilization.
I was surprised at these results:
Using ADMIXTURE and principal-component analysis (PCA) (Figure 1A), we estimated the average proportion of non-African ancestry in the Egyptians to be 80% and dated the midpoint of the admixture event by using ALDER20 to around 750 years ago (Table S2), consistent with the Islamic expansion and dates reported previously.
Tracing the Route of Modern Humans out of Africa by Using 225 Human Genome Sequences from Ethiopians and Egyptians:
Based on that, the non-African DNA entered Egypt 1500 years ago, but that doesn't seem right. A lot of foreigners seeped into Lower Egypt before the 7th century. This happened as early as the Hykos invasion and intensified during the Greek era.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is a preliminary table for further investigation 6 years after published. It is not produced the way I'd like but I trust I didn't err transfering the data.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic