quote:Originally posted by Nassbean: Are you even serious ? this "large-scale migration" happened way before History began it has nothing to do with hyksos who were just a bunch of levantine soldiers who take the control of egypt like later the europeans will take the control of africa.
Delta this delta that. The question of phenotypic closeness between lower Egypt and the NE doesn't really matter to me right now. The Delta wasn't where the cultural complex that created Egypt began even if there was a prior predynastic connection that made them similar in appearance.
Second: You are incorrect in your assumption that they were just small scale soldiers who slaughtered their way to rule while segregating themselves like it was an apartheid state. Levanites gradually entered the aristocracy through intermarriages and were esteemed citizens of Egypt centuries before the takeover happened. Your source says:
quote:Especially from the second millennium BCE onwards, there were intense, historically- and archaeologically documented contacts, including the large-scale immigration of Canaanite populations, known as the Hyksos, into Lower Egypt, whose origins lie in the Middle Bronze Age Levant
Your source. I doubt there was much "Black agenda" there. Oh wellll.
quote: Egypt was absolutely not founded by black people ( yes they brought everything and then were immediately replaced and those whites just stole their culture yeah sure keep dreaming) except if you consider modern copts to be black...
Coptic comes from a Delta form of Egyptian writing. Copts themselves didn't exist as distinct identity until well after the Delta was overrun by Asiatics. And even before the Delta was overrun by Asiatics, the indigenous people of the Delta as I previously mentioned weren't the founders of Egypt. the data I posted seems to show some affinity to the Magrheb and NE, but as I said they were brought into the culture. It's not a surprise they look the way they do. It contradicts nothing I've stated thus far. Understanding local history and context is very important.
quote: but I can understand after all the afram community went through it's logical that they are claiming such a great civilization. [/qb]
We are claiming it as Black....because it is, not because of what we went through. Phenotypically the founding culture closely resembled Nubians, Ethiopians--other Black people as far as the concept of Black/race has been concerned when practiced by western globalists.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
Nassbean
Banned by a New World Black
Member # 23084
quote:Originally posted by Nassbean: Are you even serious ? this "large-scale migration" happened way before History began it has nothing to do with hyksos who were just a bunch of levantine soldiers who take the control of egypt like later the europeans will take the control of africa.
First, I don't really care. The Delta wasn't where the cultural complex that created Egypt began even if there was a prior predynastic connection between some of the tribes of the Delta.
Second: You are incorrect in your assumption that they were just small scale soldiers who slaughtered their way to rule while segregating themselves like it was an apartheid state. Levanites gradually entered the aristocracy through intermarriages and were esteemed citizens of Egypt centuries before the takeover happened. Your source says:
quote:Especially from the second millennium BCE onwards, there were intense, historically- and archaeologically documented contacts, including the large-scale immigration of Canaanite populations, known as the Hyksos, into Lower Egypt, whose origins lie in the Middle Bronze Age Levant
Your source. I doubt there was much "Black agenda" there. Oh wellll.
quote:[qb] Egypt was absolutely not founded by black people ( yes they brought everything and then were immediately replaced and those whites just stole their culture yeah sure keep dreaming) except if you consider modern copts to be black...
Coptic comes from a Delta form of Egyptian writing. Copts themselves didn't exist as distinct identity until well after the Delta was overrun by Asiatics. And even before the Delta was overrun by Asiatics, the indigenous people of the Delta as I previously mentioned weren't the founders of Egypt. They were brought into the culture. It's not a surprise they look the way they do. It contradicts nothing I've stated thus far. Understanding local history and context is very important.
quote: but I can understand after all the afram community went through it's logical that they are claiming such a great civilization.
We are claiming it as Black....because it is, not because of what we went through. Phenotypically the founding culture closely resembled Nubians, Ethiopians--other Black people as far as the concept of Black/race has been concerned when practiced by western globalists.
Which source are you talking about ? Because i didn't find your quote who seems to be incorrect. Also I posted several statues from the old kingdom none of them look black and if egyptians were black and non-levantines before hyksos came how did they learn agriculture ??? Yeah those intermarriages are well known but the elite represented not even 1% of the population and they were also nubian princesses who were married to some pharaohs...not just levantines. So according to your childish way of thinking egyptians were all black like bantus but just next to them in the levant people were all white skinned yeah sure seems natural and logical.
Also what you're saying doesn't make sense because modern egyptians from the delta scored high amount of a North african component and not west asian or middle eastern ( I can post some examples if needed)
There is not one evidence that ancient egyptians were black like nilotes or bantus/afram. Period.
"Black people resided not in the Nile valley but in a far land, by the fountain of the sun."
Xenpohanes (Hesoid, works and says, 527-8)
Also I talked about copts because they didn't mix with the muslim invaders and were very endogamous ( so they are even more preserved than muslim egyptians but just a bit)
"The samples recovered from Middle Egypt span around 1,300 years of ancient Egyptian history from the New Kingdom to the Roman Period. Our analyses reveal "ancient Egyptians shared more ancestry with Near Easterners than present-day Egyptians, who received additional sub-Saharan admixture in more recent times."Schuenemann et al. "Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods". Nature Communications, 2017
Posts: 218 | From: Europe | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
quote: We are claiming it as Black....because it is, not because of what we went through. Phenotypically the founding culture closely resembled Nubians, Ethiopians--other Black people as far as the concept of Black/race has been concerned when practiced by western globalists.
Which source are you talking about ? Because i didn't find your quote who seems to be incorrect.
The one that talks about large scale immigration? YOUR source. That's where I got the quote! I'm not going to continue this play-stupid routine. Anyone reading this thread can click the link and search the part I quoted. You're either extremely lazy or a very boring troll.
quote: Also I posted several statues from the old kingdom none of them look black and if egyptians were black and non-levantines before hyksos came how did they learn agriculture ???
Still haven't read the database, huh?
quote: Yeah those intermarriages are well known but the elite represented not even 1% of the population and they were also nubian princesses who were married to some pharaohs...not just levantines.
Nubians were always part of the same culture and were very phenotypically similar to upper Egyptians, diverging from them in the predynastic. Near Easterners and Lower Egyptians weren't. Marriage between a Nubian and Upper Egyptian is like two western Europeans marrying. They were people of different nationality with similar phenotype and culture.
quote: So according to your childish way of thinking egyptians were all black like bantus but just next to them in the levant people were all white skinned yeah sure seems natural and logical.
I didn't say they were "Black like Bantus." I said they were Black like Nubians and Ethiopians while the northern peoples of Egypt looked closer to people in the Levant.
quote:Also what you're saying doesn't make sense because modern egyptians from the delta scored high amount of a North african component and not west asian or middle eastern ( I can post some examples if needed)
We're arguing race not genetics here. It's possible for people to be genetically related, while having phenotypic differences. A Negrito can as the name implies, get associated with Blacks and be genetically closer to nearby (non-black) Asians. Northern Africa has several phenotypes indigenous to the area, even if they are all genetically related when picking apart their genes. Delta populations descended from Lower Egyptians and also had a considerable flow of Near Eastern ancestry.
My point was that Copts descended from people whose phenotypes described in racial terms were at best along the fringes of anything that looked Black in the Old Kingdom and predynastic. They then intermarried with Near Easterners coming into the delta who mostly wouldn't have looked Black at all. It doesn't mean they aren't related to more Ethiopian looking Blacks in northern Africa. It's just that such a relationship is seen more easily through genetics, not phenotype. People who are of the same race don't have to be closely related and it is possible to be more closely related to someone of a different race than a person is to many of the people they are racially ascribed. Kind of why the whole idea of race realism as a biological reality rooted in genetics is ....well, stupid.
quote:There is not one evidence that ancient egyptians were black like nilotes or bantus/afram. Period.
I said ancient Egyptians were Black like Nubians and Ethiopians, I never said anything about all black people looking the same, let alone that the Egyptians looked like exactly like a West African.
quote: Also I talked about copts because they didn't mix with the muslim invaders and were very endogamous ( so they are even more preserved than muslim egyptians but just a bit)
Didn't say they mixed with Muslim invaders. I said they descended from lower Egyptians whose phenotypes more closely resembled the Near East, and THEN those Lower Egyptians mixed with Near Easterners flowing into the delta by the New Kingdom. The Copts came from the delta, they would've mixed with non blacks from the Near East before any other group given the circumstance. But that mixing would've been pre-Islamic.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
Nassbean
Banned by a New World Black
Member # 23084
quote: We are claiming it as Black....because it is, not because of what we went through. Phenotypically the founding culture closely resembled Nubians, Ethiopians--other Black people as far as the concept of Black/race has been concerned when practiced by western globalists.
Which source are you talking about ? Because i didn't find your quote who seems to be incorrect.
The one that talks about large scale immigration? YOUR source. That's where I got the quote! I'm not going to continue this play-stupid routine. Anyone reading this thread can click the link and search the part I quoted. You're either extremely lazy or a very boring troll.
quote: Also I posted several statues from the old kingdom none of them look black and if egyptians were black and non-levantines before hyksos came how did they learn agriculture ???
Still haven't read the database, huh?
quote: Yeah those intermarriages are well known but the elite represented not even 1% of the population and they were also nubian princesses who were married to some pharaohs...not just levantines.
Nubians were always part of the same culture and were very phenotypically similar to upper Egyptians, diverging from them in the predynastic. Near Easterners and Lower Egyptians weren't. Marriage between a Nubian and Upper Egyptian is like two western Europeans marrying. They were people of different nationality with similar phenotype and culture.
quote: So according to your childish way of thinking egyptians were all black like bantus but just next to them in the levant people were all white skinned yeah sure seems natural and logical.
I didn't say they were "Black like Bantus." I said they were Black like Nubians and Ethiopians while the northern peoples of Egypt looked closer to people in the Levant.
quote:Also what you're saying doesn't make sense because modern egyptians from the delta scored high amount of a North african component and not west asian or middle eastern ( I can post some examples if needed)
We're arguing race not genetics here. It's possible for people to be genetically related, while having phenotypic differences. A Negrito can as the name implies, get associated with Blacks and be genetically closer to nearby (non-black) Asians. Northern Africa has several phenotypes indigenous to the area, even if they are all genetically related when picking apart their genes. Delta populations descended from Lower Egyptians and also had a considerable flow of Near Eastern ancestry.
My point was that Copts descended from people whose phenotypes described in racial terms were at best along the fringes of anything that looked Black in the Old Kingdom and predynastic. They then intermarried with Near Easterners coming into the delta who mostly wouldn't have looked Black at all. It doesn't mean they aren't related to more Ethiopian looking Blacks in northern Africa. It's just that such a relationship is seen more easily through genetics, not phenotype. People who are of the same race don't have to be closely related and it is possible to be more closely related to someone of a different race than a person is to many of the people they are racially ascribed. Kind of why the whole idea of race realism as a biological reality rooted in genetics is ....well, stupid.
quote:There is not one evidence that ancient egyptians were black like nilotes or bantus/afram. Period.
I said ancient Egyptians were Black like Nubians and Ethiopians, I never said anything about all black people looking the same, let alone that the Egyptians looked like exactly like a West African.
quote: Also I talked about copts because they didn't mix with the muslim invaders and were very endogamous ( so they are even more preserved than muslim egyptians but just a bit)
Didn't say they mixed with Muslim invaders. I said they descended from lower Egyptians whose phenotypes more closely resembled the Near East, and THEN those Lower Egyptians mixed with Near Easterners flowing into the delta by the New Kingdom. The Copts came from the delta, they would've mixed with non blacks from the Near East before any other group given the circumstance. But that mixing would've been pre-Islamic.
From the same source : "Our genetic time transect suggests genetic continuity between the Pre-Ptolemaic, Ptolemaic and Roman populations of Abusir el-Meleq, indicating that foreign rule impacted the town’s population only to a very limited degree " and now take a look at this preserved egyptians : https://imgur.com/Ni5Gaql
They didn't cluster with nubians or ethiopians at all.
The reality is that the great majority of egyptians were like the modern ones since at least the late neolithic era with probably a minority among them in upper egypt looking like their nubian neighbours that's it stop dreaming about a black north africa you will not steal our history. Also if your argument was true we would have found some egyptian cultural traits in ethiopia or nubia but the egyptian civilization and her specific cultural traits appeared way before these two and influenced them heavily later.
Posts: 218 | From: Europe | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nassbean: From the same source : "Our genetic time transect suggests genetic continuity between the Pre-Ptolemaic, Ptolemaic and Roman populations of Abusir el-Meleq, indicating that foreign rule impacted the town’s population only to a very limited degree " and now take a look at this preserved egyptians : https://imgur.com/Ni5Gaql
The town as the author stated wasn't populated until the Late period:
quote: Q5. Lines 75-77. “In particular, the site holds much promise for studying changes in its population structure from the late Dynastic Period to the present day.” Why is this the case? Is it due to the better DNA preservation in the later mummies?? Please explain!
Answer:Unfortunately, mummies from the Old till early New Kingdom are not present at the site or and not included in our data set, which focusses on the three consecutive periods. The site is mainly occupied during the Late Period till Roman times according to written sources, and thus would allow the study of an extended temporal transect. We furthermore find in more than 50% of all remains authentic ancient DNA preserved, suggesting this to be an ideal site for further studies.
Yes the period is consecutive. No the samples are not older, they were by AE standards quite young. As the authors admit: they are mostly Late through Roman period. Any mass immigration occurring through the second millennium BC( that the study you cited said happened) would've began centuries before. Any impact this would've had to northern Egypt especially would've needed mummies many centuries older than the remains available. There were also no mummies from the south--go figure. How do you determine that Nubians were not genetically close to southern Egyptians, when you have no samples from southern Egypt from in the study, from any time period? What STRs we do have suggest several southern Egyptians to have affinities that could be found further south.
You are too thirsty for this study to confirm more than it honestly can deliver when reading the fine print. I will (again) humor you though. Let's assume the results they have for later period Egyptians are accurate for all Egyptians across time and no matter where they lived. Okay then So. What? Races are not genetic constructs. So why do you seem hellbent on discussing genetics? Why are Aboriginal Australians Black if Blacks can only be Sub Saharan Africans? Because globalists have labeled their phenotype Black despite how genetically different they are.
Can people more closely related to one another (genetically) be phenotypically of different races? Yes. Which groups looked closest groups to the Upper Egyptian founders of the civilization? Nubians and Ethiopians. Even if we explore the idea that they were genetically closest to people that weren't/aren't Black (which has yet to be determined) phenotypically, we already the best approximations for how they looked were blacks.
quote:The reality is that the great majority of egyptians were like the modern ones since at least the late neolithic era with probably a minority among them in upper egypt looking like their nubian neighbours that's it stop dreaming about a black north africa you will not steal our history.
Again you're trying to force everyone into that racist genetic "race realist" nonsense. Race is not a genetic construct. It doesn't matter what their genetics were. Who did they resemble phenotypically? Nubians and Ethiopians. That's what the founders of Egypt look like. They had a Black phenotype. That means that Egypt has a Black history. It could--if genetics demonstrate a similar affinity in the south ALSO be a history connecting northern Africans and the Near East. But you are trying to invoke a false dichotomy: That in attempting to successfully prove a genetic relationship between AE and the Near East and/or northern Africa, you prove that that they looked a certain way. Proving one does not prove the other. Phenotypically the south looked Black and thus Egypt's pre-islamic culture was Black. Interestingly enough: their culture in it's formative stages was developing similarly throughout sub saharan Africa-- most especially with Nubian groups like Ta-Seti that extended into Sudan. Meanwhile northern Egyptians were technologically less advanced, though many of the cultures of the Maadi-Buto complex did have some Levanite cultural affinities.
quote: Also if your argument was true we would have found some egyptian cultural traits in ethiopia or nubia but the egyptian civilization and her specific cultural traits appeared way before these two and influenced them heavily later. [/QB]
There's not reading and then there's....wow. Haven't seen the pharonic imagery and cultures of (what was it A-Group) Nubians? The Qustul incense Burner descriptions of these people's kingdom as "Ta-Seti" which ironically happened to be the first nome of Egypt? Ta Seti begins to develop in the predynastic while backwater ass Lower Egypt was of no comparable splendor and didn't have much in the way of a king or pharonic culture of their own until they were taken over by the royals of Abydos.
EDIT: I also need to add joking aside, who they resembled culturally or genetically the most, is NOT the same as demonstrating who they phenotypically resembled the most. Whether the Nubians were closest culturally or genetically, they were a good approximation for how a Upper Egyptian looked. And Nubians were Black. You guys can't just go calling them "Black pharoahs" for years and then think people aren't going to assume Upper Egyptians that closely resembled them to ALSO be Black.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
Nassbean
Banned by a New World Black
Member # 23084
quote:Originally posted by Nassbean: From the same source : "Our genetic time transect suggests genetic continuity between the Pre-Ptolemaic, Ptolemaic and Roman populations of Abusir el-Meleq, indicating that foreign rule impacted the town’s population only to a very limited degree " and now take a look at this preserved egyptians : https://imgur.com/Ni5Gaql
The town as the author stated wasn't populated until the Late period:
quote: Q5. Lines 75-77. “In particular, the site holds much promise for studying changes in its population structure from the late Dynastic Period to the present day.” Why is this the case? Is it due to the better DNA preservation in the later mummies?? Please explain!
Answer:Unfortunately, mummies from the Old till early New Kingdom are not present at the site or and not included in our data set, which focusses on the three consecutive periods. The site is mainly occupied during the Late Period till Roman times according to written sources, and thus would allow the study of an extended temporal transect. We furthermore find in more than 50% of all remains authentic ancient DNA preserved, suggesting this to be an ideal site for further studies.
Yes the period is consecutive. No the samples are not older, they were by AE standards quite young. As the authors admit: they are mostly Late through Roman period. Any mass immigration occurring through the second millennium BC( that the study you cited said happened) would've began centuries before. Any impact this would've had to northern Egypt especially would've needed mummies many centuries older than the remains available. There were also no mummies from the south--go figure. How do you determine that Nubians were not genetically close to southern Egyptians, when you have no samples from southern Egypt from in the study, from any time period? What STRs we do have suggest several southern Egyptians to have affinities that could be found further south.
You are too thirsty for this study to confirm more than it honestly can deliver when reading the fine print. I will (again) humor you though. Let's assume the results they have for later period Egyptians are accurate for all Egyptians across time and no matter where they lived. Okay then So. What? Races are not genetic constructs. So why do you seem hellbent on discussing genetics? Why are Aboriginal Australians Black if Blacks can only be Sub Saharan Africans? Because globalists have labeled their phenotype Black despite how genetically different they are.
Can people more closely related to one another (genetically) be phenotypically of different races? Yes. Which groups looked closest groups to the Upper Egyptian founders of the civilization? Nubians and Ethiopians. Even if we explore the idea that they were genetically closest to people that aren't Black (which has yet to be determined) phenotypically we already the best approximations for how they looked were blacks.
quote:The reality is that the great majority of egyptians were like the modern ones since at least the late neolithic era with probably a minority among them in upper egypt looking like their nubian neighbours that's it stop dreaming about a black north africa you will not steal our history.
Again you're trying to force everyone into that racist genetic "race realist" nonsense. Race is not a genetic construct. It doesn't matter what their genetics were. Who did they resemble phenotypically? Nubians and Ethiopians. That's what the founders of Egypt look like that is a Black phenotype which means that Egypt has a Black history. It could--if genetics demonstrate a similar affinity in the south ALSO be a history connecting northern Africans and the Near East. But you are trying to invoke a false dichotomy: That in attempting to successfully prove a genetic relationship between AE and the Near East and/or northern Africa, you prove that that they looked a certain way. Proving one does not prove the other. Phenotypically the south looked Black and thus Egypt's pre-islamic culture was Black. Their culture was shared throughout sub saharan Africa-- most especially with Nubian groups like Ta-Seti that extended into Sudan. Meanwhile northern Egyptians were technologically less advanced, though many of the cultures of the Maadi-Buto complex did have some Levanite affinities.
quote: Also if your argument was true we would have found some egyptian cultural traits in ethiopia or nubia but the egyptian civilization and her specific cultural traits appeared way before these two and influenced them heavily later.
There's not reading and then there's....wow. Haven't seen the pharonic imagery and cultures of (what was it A-Group) Nubians? The Qustul incense Burner descriptions of these people's kingdom as "Ta-Seti" which ironically happened to be the first nome of Egypt? Ta Seti begins to develop in the predynastic while backwater ass Lower Egypt was of no comparable splendor and didn't have much in the way of a king or pharonic culture of their own until they were taken over by the royals of Abydos. [/QB]
Again you have zero evidence that they looked like nubians or ethiopian you're just making assumptions so you can claim egypt as a black civilization and therefore a civilization closer to afram than to the MENA people...Now that you know that egyptians were not blacks (because everything show it) you're trying to imply that the great majority of them mixed with levantines and that before this event they were like nubians and ethiopians and created everything which is completely false ( provide evidence like me stop talking).
ANd also stop bringing your american nonsense such thing about race don't exist here in the old world it's not a social construct if you're genetically black then you're black. Period. Also no one in the scientific field consider aboriginal australians to be "black" they are australoids and apparented to other south east asian populations.
The problem here is that you consider this to be black (because of your american background) : https://imgur.com/M2Dzfmf
which is not black here in the old world but a north african with a good amount of ssa ancestry ( and don't tell me he doesn't look like some AE)
Also why do you not speak about the trans saharan slave trade who probably brought more blacks in NA than arabs+levantines and europeans combined ( almost 10 millions of black slaves were brought in NA between the 10th and 19th century ! and you that it doesn't affect it ?? ) let's see what the datas show us : "A proportion of 1/4 to 1/2 of North African female pool is made of typical sub-Saharan lineages, in higher frequencies as geographic proximity to sub-Saharan Africa increases. The Sahara was a strong geographical barrier against gene flow, at least since 5,000 years ago, when desertification affected a larger region, but the Arab trans-Saharan slave trade could have facilitate enormously this migration of lineages." "The interpolation analyses and complete sequencing of present mtDNA sub-Saharan lineages observed in North Africa support the genetic impact of recent trans-Saharan migrations, namely the slave trade initiated by the Arab conquest of North Africa in the seventh century. Sub-Saharan people did not leave traces in the North African maternal gene pool for the time of its settlement, some 40,000 years ago."
"The attempt to force the Egyptians into either a “black” or a “white” category has no biological justification. Our data show not only that Egypt clearly had biological ties to the north and to the south, but that it was intermediate between populations to the east and the west, and that Egypt was basically Egyptian from the Neolithic right on up to historic times. In this, our analysis simply reinforces the findings of other recent studies" source : https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ajpa.1330360603
Here’s the most important differences between ancient Egyptian mtDNA and modern Egyptian+Near Eastern mtDNA: moderns have a lot more J1b, H, U3, and African L(xM, N). (http://mtdnaatlas.blogspot.com/2017/06/first-look-at-ancient-egyptian-mtdna.html)
Btw stop hiding what's your name on ABf so I know if I should still waste my time with you (Roseai maybe?)
Posts: 218 | From: Europe | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nassbean: Again you have zero evidence that they looked like nubians or ethiopian you're just making assumptions so you can claim egypt as a black civilization and therefore a civilization closer to afram than to the MENA people...
I just posted evidence that Upper Egyptians resembled Nubians and Ethiopians more than they did Lower Egyptians and the Maghreb. And I'm not sure what you mean by saying AE civilization is closer to African Americans than MENA. It is possible for a given group of people to resemble one group more than another in one way, only for it to be a different story once the subject of comparison is something else. African Americans aren't suggesting their culture nor most modern cultures are like Ancient Egypt. Phenotypically, AE's founders were Black but most African Americans don't think they're the closest blacks to Ancient Egyptians. Your problem is you're approaching this entire conversation with a false dichotomy. Can Upper Egypt be closer to Blacks phenotypically? Yes. Could it be possible they were closest to a group of people that aren't Black genotypically? Yes (though we don't know that and their STR data so far wouldn't suggest it). Is it also possible cultural connections weren't neatly spread along biological lines? That as many of you MENA would tell it, the "genetically dissimilar" Nubian and southern Egyptian were closest culturally? Yes. How do you engineer the idea Sudanese and southern Egyptians were not related biologically like the southern Egyptians were to "MENA", and then get surprised that when people want to acknowledge the common cultural relationship of Sudan and southern Egypt it's done via notions of race?
You can celebrate having a common ancestry with the ancient Egyptians if in fact the founders are revealed to genetically resemble you. But that'd be more or less a manner of complaining over apples and oranges because Blacks (unless Nubian) aren't saying they identify with Egypt over kinship in the first place. Only a very small minority of Blacks are saying that, and of course the fringes of the community is where you will focus your emotions.
For most rational people, what seems so confusing is your interest in claiming exclusive social ownership of the entire culture and formation of the state in broader terms. People aren't in tears when you identify with it, but when many MENA get mad, for saying it was so much as Black that's when it gets annoying. "MENA" wasn't even generally where the culture was developing. Most of the culture's development was taking place at the southern end of Egypt into Sudan. Whether the people were exceptionally related or not, that's what happened. Much of the "MENA" region was for the most part absorbed into the phenomenon after the culture was starting to take off. So how does "MENA" then strong arm and get into it's feelings? IDK. Crying whenever Sudanese and Nubians say it's theirs and when other parts of the world say it's Black because the phenotypes of both peoples were Black regardless of biological relationship.
I'm sorry if some people don't want to hear this. But the truth is Nubia was culturally much closer than Maadi-Buto cultures prior to southern colonialism. Nubians also phenotypically resembled the originators of dynastic Egypt. It's possible other MENA in the future could be found to be more closely related to ancient southern Egyptians when reviewing autosomal data. But even if that happened, there's a legitimate basis for Blacks to connect with the idea it was a Black culture: MENA were generally more culturally and phenotypically distinct in ancient/predynastic times from the southern kingdoms of predynastic Egypt and Sudan. And the cultural dissimilarity within northern Egypt was the case up until it was absorbed and assimilated by southern Egyptian rulers--something that is not true for Nubia.
Yes the most famous example of the Nile Valley culture is found in Egypt, but pharonic culture was something shared between the southern end of Egypt and Sudan (Sub Saharan Africa). Not northern Egypt, not the Middle East. The fact that MENA is constantly acting in a state of denial about a Nubian connection only bolsters Ancient Egypt's position as a Black civilization. So the story you guys are telling is these genetically dissimilar people who only shared a Black phenotype made a common culture together--but Blacks can't celebrate it as a Black culture? Why don't you go to Melanesian communities to spread genetic realism to them? Why is it fine when people we know to be genetically dissimilar celebrate being Black all over the world until it's Egypt? You want to have your cake and eat it too and it's not going to happen.
quote:Now that you know that egyptians were not blacks (because everything show it) you're trying to imply that the great majority of them mixed with levantines and that before this event they were like nubians and ethiopians and created everything which is completely false ( provide evidence like me stop talking).
I didn't say they "created everything." I said they founded the civilization. Those that made the civilization were Black. And whether the non blacks living outside southern upper Egypt were closely related to them or not, mixing with northern Egyptian types AND incoming Levanites changed how the country looked from it's founders.
Non-Black Egyptians contributed to Egyptian civilization, but the culture itself was produced by Black people. The southern Egyptians that would rise north to "unify" Egypt phenotypically (if not genotypically) resembled Nubians and Ethiopians. The phenotypes of segment of the Egyptian population most directly ancestral to the country's founders is what began changing.
quote:ANd also stop bringing your american nonsense such thing about race don't exist here in the old world it's not a social construct if you're genetically black then you're black. Period.
What is "genetic Blackness" if a Torres Strait islander and Igbo are both Black? Do you have any concept of how large the genetic distances you're talking about are? OR that both groups are more closely related to NON Blacks than they are each other? But of course the hypocrisy of it all is that when they create Black history month for themselves and push Australia for recognition your asses are nowhere to defend whatever the hell "genetic blackness" means. It's only when the world sees the question of Egypt do people get in their feels. Take a seat.
quote:Also no one in the scientific field consider aboriginal australians to be "black" they are australoids and apparented to other south east asian populations.
No one cares what people using -oid terms think Aboriginals are. The mainstream scientific community admits race is not a REAL genetic construct but a social one. SOCIALLY they have been denigrated as Black people. This is the problem with you goal post shifting race realists. You constantly try to ignore how people were treated against color labels, and revise history using fictional -oid races that don't match up to any of that. They were treated and referred to as a BLACK people like many other subjugated Melanesians. Many racist white Egyptologists couldn't also wait to discuss how savage and sub human the Upper Egyptians were. If they'd been alive they'd have been suffering attempts at colonialism like all the other Blacks. You can't just erase that history and try to make it something else. They have a Black history. It's not the same as a West African's but no one was arguing that it was.
quote:The problem here is that you consider this to be black (because of your american background) : https://imgur.com/M2Dzfmf
which is not black here in the old world but a north african with a good amount of ssa ancestry ( and don't tell me he doesn't look like some AE)
Yes, many AE would've looked like him, and when discussing race as a western globalist cultural construct --that man would be treated as Black. He'd have harder time than a man that looks like Colin Kapernick
The "old world" unless you're discussing Western Europe didn't create the concept of race that has globalist powers behind it. Their ideas are local opinions that lack power--much like Black Dominicans crying about how they're anything but Black. EVERY group of people has had some tribal idea that separated people. I am not about to go blue in the face discussing humanity by the thousands of local us-them ideologies, but the one that has been backed by globalist power and trillions of dollars. WE are talking about how the idea of Blackness--as a social construct engineered by western globalists operates. To sit here and talk to me about the old world while then trying to prove your point by the race fiction of Europeans is disingenuous.
quote:Also why do you not speak about the trans saharan slave trade who probably brought more blacks in NA than arabs+levantines and europeans combined ( almost 10 millions of black slaves were brought in NA between the 10th and 19th century ! and you that it doesn't affect it ?? )
Why would I need to discuss the slave trade when the Upper Egyptians born before it looked more like Nubians and Ethiopians?
quote:let's see what the datas show us : "A proportion of 1/4 to 1/2 of North African female pool is made of typical sub-Saharan lineages, in higher frequencies as geographic proximity to sub-Saharan Africa increases. The Sahara was a strong geographical barrier against gene flow, at least since 5,000 years ago, when desertification affected a larger region, but the Arab trans-Saharan slave trade could have facilitate enormously this migration of lineages."
I really could, but I'm getting bored of discussing genetics in a thread I specifically wanted to discuss race. Why are you talking about geographical barriers and gene flow? Even if it weren't possible to traverse the Sahara from tropical Africa through the Nile Valley (you can), what does that have to do with phenotyipic affinity? OR that Ancient Upper Egyptians closely resembled Blacks?
quote:"The attempt to force the Egyptians into either a “black” or a “white” category has no biological justification. Our data show not only that Egypt clearly had biological ties to the north and to the south, but that it was intermediate between populations to the east and the west, and that Egypt was basically Egyptian from the Neolithic right on up to historic times. In this, our analysis simply reinforces the findings of other recent studies" source : https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ajpa.1330360603
As a whole that's accurate. But when you ask who Upper Egyptians further south resembled, not the whole of Egypt, they typically resemble Ethiopians and Nubians. How come Rhodesia was white despite all the Blacks living there, but Egypt isn't associated with the people who founded it? It has to be associated with the sum of everyone that live there.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote: Morphological and genetic research seems to provide further support for the topic. According to Grigson (1991, 2000) Egyptian cattle of the 4th millennium BC were morphologically distinct from Eurasian cattle (Bos taurus) and Zebu (Bos indicus), meaning that African cattle may have been domesticated from the local wild […]
Genetic studies indicate that the wild cattle in Eurasia and in Africa diverged 22,000years ago and suggest an autochthonous domestication for the latter (Blench and MacDonald 2000; Bradly et al. 1996; Caramelli 2006). Linguistic research also provides help in supporting the CPE’s theory. The detailed work done by Ehret (2006) on linguistic stratigraphies in North-eastern Africa revealed how terms connected with cattle herding are older than those associated with agriculture, chronologically placing their origin at the beginning of the Holocene. […]
To sum up, Nubia is Egypt’s African ancestor. What linked Ancient Egypt to the rest of the North African cultures is this strong tie with the Nubian pastoral nomadic lifestyle, the same pastoral background commonly shared by most of the ancient Saharan and modern sub-Saharan societies. Thus, not only did Nubia have a prominent role in the origin of Ancient Egypt, it was also a key area for the origin of the entire African pastoral tradition.
~Gatto M. 2009.
The Nubian Pastoral Culture as Link between Egypt and Africa: A View from the Archaeological Record
Egypt in its African Context: BAR S2204- Archaeopress. 21-29
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nassbean: I see no differences with ancient times.
Yeah, I see what your problem is. You think your opinion matter.
Can you tell us what you know about ancient Egyptian art?
quote:Abstract
The process of the peopling of the Nile Valley likely shaped the population structure and early biological similarity of Egyptians and Nubians. As others have noted, affinity among Nilotic populations was due to an aggregation of events, including environmental, linguistic, and sociopolitical changes over a great deal of time. This study seeks to evaluate the relationships of Nubian and Egyptian groups in the context of the original peopling event. Cranial nonmetric traits from 18 Nubian and Egyptian samples, spanning Lower Egypt to Lower Nubia and approximately 7400 years, were analyzed using Mahalanobis D2 as a measure of biological distance. A principal coordinates analysis and spatial-temporal model were applied to these data. The results reveal temporal and spatial patterning consistent with documented events in Egyptian and Nubian population history. Moreover, the Mesolithic Nubian sample clustered with later Nubian and Egyptian samples, indicating that events prior to the Mesolithic were important in shaping the later genetic patterning of the Nubian population. Later contact through the establishment of the Egyptian fort at Buhen, Kerma’s position as a strategic trade center along the Nile, and Egyptian colonization at Tombos maintained genetic similarity among the populations”
~K Godde July 2018 A new analysis interpreting Nilotic relationships and peopling of the Nile Valley
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Nassbean
Banned by a New World Black
Member # 23084
They have similar facial traits, unique to the region.
LOL your statue look burned ...also what is the origin of these depicted people ? which period ? Where?
Posts: 218 | From: Europe | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
posted
"The measurements were principally of adaptively trivial traits that display patterns of regional similarities based solely on genetic relationships. The Predynastic of Upper Egypt and the Late Dynastic of Lower Egypt are more closely related to each other than to any other population. As a whole, they show ties with the European Neolithic, North Africa, modern Europe, and, more remotely, India, but not at all with sub-Saharan Africa, eastern Asia, Oceania, or the New World.We conclude that the Egyptians have been in place since back in the Pleistocene and have been largely unaffected by either invasions or migrations" Brace, C. L., D. P. Tracer, L. A. Yaroch, J. Robb, K. Brandt, and A. R. Nelson. 1993. Clines and Clusters Versus "Race": A Test in Ancient Egypt and the Case of a Death on the Nile. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 36:1-31.
Again no link with SSA and absolutely not negroid.
Also the ancestors of early upper egyptians (pre dynastic egyptians) were badarians and guess what : "There is a badarian affiliation to North africans, not sub-saharan samples." (Irish & Konigsberg;2007).
"the jebel Sahaba sample show closest phenetic affinity contemporary sub-saharan Africans." (Holliday; 2013) and " Jebel Sahaba and kerma were significantly different from the el-badari and Hierakonpolis results." (Stock et al; 2011) so badarians were not SSA.
Also : " Badari (has) no biological affinities with nubian groups" (Godde; 2009b)
"Badarian crania classified well with the Gizeh (E series) sample" (Keita; 1990) ---> " Giza (E series) clustered with a series of European Neolithic groups and with North africa" (Brace; 1993)
"All of these features are also present in Europeans and West Asians to some degree but are uncommon in Sub-saharan peoples. Craniometric indicators appear to support these results, and European-like discrete traits, such as alveolar orthognathism, dolichocephaly, rhomboid orbits, narrow nasal aperture, and nasal sill, are prevalent" "...they appear distinct from post-Pleistocene sub-saharan Africans." (J.D. Irish; 2000)
"...Whatever else one can or cannot say about the Egyptians, it is clear that their cranio-facial morphology has nothing whatsoever in common with sub-saharan Africans." (Brace;1993)
"...the predynastic sample from Upper Egypt lies very close to the West Eurasian group...their closest relatives appear to be western Eurasians and coastal North Africans....Notice that the pooled group of Sub-Saharan Africans from the southern ,central, and western regions of the continent does not resemble Egyptians at all : this group is plotted very distant from both ancient egyptian samples. Similar conclusions are reached by Howells (1989, 1995) and Froment (1992, 1994)." (Brace; 1993)
"The EPD sample at Gebelein was significantly biologically distant to the MK Nubian sample." (Zakrzewski; 2003)
"Evidence of Neolithic migration from the Near East is supported by the introduction of domestic animals like cows, sheep and goats to North africa." (Henn et al; 2012)
"For a long time the Badarian was considered to have emerged from the south...the theory that the Badarian originated in the south is, however, no longer accepted." (Shaw; 2003)
that's a good one for you Ase : "The Badarian epoch was apparently absent from Lower Nubia, suggesting that this early farming culture must have originated somewhere north of Aswan and that the center of earliest Predynastic developement was in Egypt proper." (Hoffman; 1993)
"The contemporary North African gene pool diverged from the Near Eastern one and expanded in North Africa before the Holocene, a concept jointly confirmed by mtDNA and nuclear genomic data." (Pereira et al.,2010b; Henn et al., 2012; Podgorna et al.,2013; Fregel et al, 2013)
So now Ase good luck to debunk all of this.
Posts: 218 | From: Europe | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Most of what you’ve posted was already debunked. lol This just shows how illogical your reasoning is.
quote: Thus, not only did Nubia have a prominent role in the origin of Ancient Egypt, it was also a key area for the origin of the entire African pastoral tradition.
~Gatto M. 2009.
The Nubian Pastoral Culture as Link between Egypt and Africa: A View from the Archaeological Record Egypt in its African Context: BAR S2204- Archaeopress. 21-29
quote: Moreover, although the Nubian and Egyptian samples formed one well-distributed group, the Egyptian samples clustered in the upper left region, while the Nubians concentrated in the lower right of the plot. One line can be drawn that would separate the closely dispersed Egyptians and Nubians. The predynastic Egyptian samples clustered together (Badari and Naqada), while Gizeh most closely groups with the Lisht sample.
~Godde K.
An Examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development? Homo. 2009;60(5):389-404. Epub 2009 Sep 19.
quote: More recent interpretations contend that Egyptians from the south actually expanded into the northern regions during the Dynastic state unification (Hassan, 1988; Savage, 2001), and that the Predynastic populations of Upper and Lower Egypt are morphologically distinct from one another, but not sufficiently distinct to consider either non-indigenous (Zakrzewski, 2007). The Predynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples, while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Predynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002).
~AP Starling, JT Stock. (2007), Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 134:520–528 Introduction to Research at Naqada Region
quote:“The Predynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples, while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Predynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002)
~D. Usai, S. Salvatori, T. Jakob & R. David The Al Khiday Cemetery in Central Sudan and its “Classic/Late Meroitic” Period Graves Journal of African Archaeology, Volume 12 (2), 2014, pages 183-204, DOI 10.3213/2191-5784-10254
quote: Bivariate analyses distinguish Jebel Sahaba from European and circumpolar samples, but do not tend to segregate them from recent North or sub-Saharan African samples
~T. W. Holliday* 2013 Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion Evidence
quote: "As a result of their facial prognathism, the Badarian sample has been described as forming a morphological cluster with Nubian, Tigrean, and other southern (or "Negroid") groups
[...]
This evidence suggests that the process of state formation itself may have been mainly an indigenous process, but that it may have occurred in association with in-migration to the Abydos region of the Nile Valley. This potential in-migration may have occurred particularly during the EDyn and OK.
quote: Figure 1: Images of North African prehistoric rock and cave paintings. From (a, b) Swimmer’s Cave (Wadi Sura, southern Egypt), (c) the Ennedi massif (northeastern Chad) and (d) Zolat el Hammad, Wadi Howar (northern Sudan).
Paleoclimate and archaeological evidence tells us that, 11,000-5,000 years ago, the Earth's slow orbital 'wobble' transformed today's Sahara desert to a land covered with vegetation and lakes.
quote:"They clearly show that, despite the presence of domesticates, fish predominate in the animal bone assemblages. In this sense, there is continuity with the earlier Holocene occupation from the Fayum, starting ca. 7350 BC. Domesticated plants and animals appear first from approximately 5400 BC. The earliest possible evidence for domesticates in Egypt are the very controversial domesticated cattle from the 9th/8th millennium BC in the Nabta Playa-Bir Kiseiba area."
~Veerle Linseele et al. PLoS One. 2014; 9(10): e108517. Published online 2014 Oct 13. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108517 PMCID: PMC4195595 New Archaeozoological Data from the Fayum “Neolithic” with a Critical Assessment of the Evidence for Early Stock Keeping in Egypt
Remember this rant: "All your studies are outdated or made by afrocentrists"". LOL
From where did Brace receive the samples he used in that 1993 paper? lol
Brace; 1993, J.D. Irish; 2000
quote: Burial practices of the Final Neolithic pastoralists at Gebel Ramlah, Western Desert of Egypt
Michał Kobusiewicz, Jacek Kabaciński, Romuald Schild, Joel D. Irish and Fred Wendorf
During three seasons of research (in 2000, 2001 and 2003) carried out by the Combined Prehistoric Expedition at Gebel Ramlah in the southern part of the Egyptian Western Desert, three separate Final Neolithic cemeteries were discovered and excavated. Skeletal remains of 67 individuals, comprising both primary and secondary interments, were recovered from 32 discrete burial pits. Numerous grave goods were found, including lithics, pottery and ground stone objects, as well as items of personal adornment, pigments, shells and sheets of mica. Imports from distant areas prove far-reaching contacts. Analysis of the finds sheds important light on the burial rituals and social conditions of the Final Neolithic cattle keepers inhabiting Ramlah Playa. This community, dated to the mid-fifth millennium B.C. (calibrated), was composed of a phenotypically diverse population derived from both North and sub-Saharan Africa. There were no indications of social differentiation. The deteriorating climatic conditions probably forced these people to migrate toward the Nile Valley where they undoubtedly contributed to the birth of ancient Egyptian civilization.
quote: "Many of the sites reveal evidence of important interactions between Nilotic and Saharan groups during the formative phases of the Egyptian Predynastic Period (e.g. Wadi el-Hôl, Rayayna, Nuq’ Menih, Kurkur Oasis).
Other sites preserve important information regarding the use of the desert routes during the Protodynastic and Pharaonic Periods, particularly during periods of political and military turmoil in the Nile Valley (e.g. Gebel Tjauti, Wadi el-Hôl)."
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: ^Most of what you’ve posted was already debunked. lol This just shows how illogical your reasoning is.
quote: Thus, not only did Nubia have a prominent role in the origin of Ancient Egypt, it was also a key area for the origin of the entire African pastoral tradition.
~Gatto M. 2009.
The Nubian Pastoral Culture as Link between Egypt and Africa: A View from the Archaeological Record Egypt in its African Context: BAR S2204- Archaeopress. 21-29
quote: Moreover, although the Nubian and Egyptian samples formed one well-distributed group, the Egyptian samples clustered in the upper left region, while the Nubians concentrated in the lower right of the plot. One line can be drawn that would separate the closely dispersed Egyptians and Nubians. The predynastic Egyptian samples clustered together (Badari and Naqada), while Gizeh most closely groups with the Lisht sample.
~Godde K.
An Examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development? Homo. 2009;60(5):389-404. Epub 2009 Sep 19.
quote: More recent interpretations contend that Egyptians from the south actually expanded into the northern regions during the Dynastic state unification (Hassan, 1988; Savage, 2001), and that the Predynastic populations of Upper and Lower Egypt are morphologically distinct from one another, but not sufficiently distinct to consider either non-indigenous (Zakrzewski, 2007). The Predynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples, while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Predynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002).
~AP Starling, JT Stock. (2007), Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 134:520–528 Introduction to Research at Naqada Region
quote: []b“The Predynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples,[/b] while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Predynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002)
~D. Usai, S. Salvatori, T. Jakob & R. David The Al Khiday Cemetery in Central Sudan and its “Classic/Late Meroitic” Period Graves Journal of African Archaeology, Volume 12 (2), 2014, pages 183-204, DOI 10.3213/2191-5784-10254
quote: Bivariate analyses distinguish Jebel Sahaba from European and circumpolar samples, but do not tend to segregate them from recent North or sub-Saharan African samples
~T. W. Holliday* 2013 Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion Evidence
quote: "As a result of their facial prognathism, the Badarian sample has been described as forming a morphological cluster with Nubian, Tigrean, and other southern (or "Negroid") groups
[...]
This evidence suggests that the process of state formation itself may have been mainly an indigenous process, but that it may have occurred in association with in-migration to the Abydos region of the Nile Valley. This potential in-migration may have occurred particularly during the EDyn and OK.
quote: Figure 1: Images of North African prehistoric rock and cave paintings. From (a, b) Swimmer’s Cave (Wadi Sura, southern Egypt), (c) the Ennedi massif (northeastern Chad) and (d) Zolat el Hammad, Wadi Howar (northern Sudan).
Paleoclimate and archaeological evidence tells us that, 11,000-5,000 years ago, the Earth's slow orbital 'wobble' transformed today's Sahara desert to a land covered with vegetation and lakes.
quote:"They clearly show that, despite the presence of domesticates, fish predominate in the animal bone assemblages. In this sense, there is continuity with the earlier Holocene occupation from the Fayum, starting ca. 7350 BC. Domesticated plants and animals appear first from approximately 5400 BC. The earliest possible evidence for domesticates in Egypt are the very controversial domesticated cattle from the 9th/8th millennium BC in the Nabta Playa-Bir Kiseiba area."
~Veerle Linseele et al. PLoS One. 2014; 9(10): e108517. Published online 2014 Oct 13. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108517 PMCID: PMC4195595 New Archaeozoological Data from the Fayum “Neolithic” with a Critical Assessment of the Evidence for Early Stock Keeping in Egypt
You didn't debunk 90% of my quotes and some of your quotes are just confirming what I wrote.
Posts: 218 | From: Europe | Registered: Jun 2019
| IP: Logged |
quote:Still, it appears that the process of state formation involved a large indigenous component. Outside influence and admixture with extraregional groups primarily occurred in Lower Egypt—perhaps during the later dynastic, but especially in Ptolmaic and Roman times (also Irish, 2006). No large-scale population replacement in the form of a foreign dynastic ‘race’ (Petrie, 1939) was indicated. Our results are generally consistent with those of Zakrzewski (2007). Using craniometric data in predynastic and early dynastic Egyptian samples, she also concluded that state formation was largely an indigenous process with some migration into the region evident. The sources of such migrants have not been identified; inclusion of additional regional and extraregional skeletal samples from various periods would be required for this purpose."
~Schillaci MA, Irish JD, Wood CC. 2009 Further analysis of the population history of ancient Egyptians.
quote:To sum up, Nubia is Egypt’s African ancestor. What linked Ancient Egypt to the rest of the North African cultures is this strong tie with the Nubian pastoral nomadic lifestyle, the same pastoral background commonly shared by most of the ancient Saharan and modern sub-Saharan societies. Thus, not only did Nubia have a prominent role in the origin of Ancient Egypt, it was also a key area for the origin of the entire African pastoral tradition.
~Gatto M. 2009. The Nubian Pastoral Culture as Link between Egypt and Africa: A View from the Archaeological Record
quote:“Pottery from Al Khiday (Khartoum, Sudan), where a number of sites with well-preserved stratified archaeological sequences have been excavated and radiometrically dated to the Mesolithic and Neolithic periods (7000–4000 calibrated BC), was archaeometrically analysed with the main aim of quantifying the textural parameters of the inclusions in the ceramic pastes. A set of 360 samples was studied, and quantitative and qualitative information was obtained regarding paste production recipes and the raw materials used over time.
Three main petrographic groups were identified, according to contents in alkali-feldspar and quartz, and the grain-size of quartz inclusions. Further sub-groups were defined and described in terms of grain-size distribution and abundance of the various types of inclusions. Digital image analysis on both scanning electron back-scattered images and elemental maps enabled validation of petrographic groups by quantitative description of the type, abundance and shape of inclusions, and the inclusion-to-matrix ratio. Correlations among the paste production recipes and decorative motifs revealed changes in production technology over time.”
~Gregorio Dal Sassoa et al. Discriminating pottery production by image analysis: a case study of Mesolithic and Neolithic pottery from Al Khiday (Khartoum, Sudan)
quote: The process of the peopling of the Nile Valley likely shaped the population structure and early biological similarity of Egyptians and Nubians. As others have noted, affinity among Nilotic populations was due to an aggregation of events, including environmental, linguistic, and sociopolitical changes over a great deal of time.
This study seeks to evaluate the relationships of Nubian and Egyptian groups in the context of the original peopling event. Cranial nonmetric traits from 18 Nubian and Egyptian samples, spanning Lower Egypt to Lower Nubia and approximately 7400 years, were analyzed using Mahalanobis D2 as a measure of biological distance. A principal coordinates analysis and spatial-temporal model were applied to these data. The results reveal temporal and spatial patterning consistent with documented events in Egyptian and Nubian population history. Moreover, the Mesolithic Nubian sample clustered with later Nubian and Egyptian samples, indicating that events prior to the Mesolithic were important in shaping the later genetic patterning of the Nubian population. Later contact through the establishment of the Egyptian fort at Buhen, Kerma’s position as a strategic trade center along the Nile, and Egyptian colonization at Tombos maintained genetic similarity among the populations”
~K Godde July 2018 A new analysis interpreting Nilotic relationships and peopling of the Nile Valley
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
“E-M78 represents 74.5% of haplogroup E, the highest frequencies observed in Masalit and Fur populations.” ~Hisham Y. Hassan et al.
quote:Originally posted by Nassbean: "The samples recovered from Middle Egypt span around 1,300 years of ancient Egyptian history from the New Kingdom to the Roman Period. Our analyses reveal "ancient Egyptians shared more ancestry with Near Easterners than present-day Egyptians, who received additional sub-Saharan admixture in more recent times."Schuenemann et al. "Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods". Nature Communications, 2017
I also have the haplogroups of the 90 mummies of abusir and none of them show ssa haplogroups
It is based on Bayesian and Markov statistics. So not because they don't show it it doesn't exist. lol smh
quote:Originally posted by Nassbean:
I also have the haplogroups of the 90 mummies of abusir and none of them show ssa haplogroups
If E1b1b1a1b2-V22, E-M78 is 7200-9800 years old and relates to some SSA's, how can it be that they didn’t cluster this in that “study”?
E-V22 accounts for 27.2% and its highest frequency appears to be among Fulani, but it is also common in Nilo-Saharan speaking groups.
~Hisham Y. Hassan, Peter A. Underhill, Luca L. Cavalli-Sforza, and Muntaser E. Ibrahim
Y-Chromosome Variation Among Sudanese: Restricted Gene Flow, Concordance With Language, Geography, and History
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
I also have the haplogroups of the 90 mummies of abusir and none of them show ssa haplogroups
they tested only 3 for YDNA and one was V22
V22 has the highest frequencies in the Saho, a Cushitic people mainly in Eritrea
Berbers have most of the Eurasian DNA on their maternal side but their paternal side is typically more African
Had they determined the YDNA of more of the Aubsir el Meleq mummies they too may have found a lot more African DNA in their paternal ancestry
quote:E-V22 is mainly an eastern African sub-haplogroup, with frequencies of more than 80% in the Saho population from Eritrea, but it has also been reported in Egypt and Morocco
--The peopling of the last Green Sahara revealed by high-coverage resequencing of trans-Saharan patrilineages 2018
posted
Ok first let’s weed out stuff that’s mostly irrelevant: The stuff that has me going “why was this posted?” I’d like to make it clear that I haven’t forgotten it, it’s just that it’s irrelevant. And while I will entertain a detour here and there, I’m not going to do it for every useless quote attempting to refute my present position.
quote: "The EPD sample at Gebelein was significantly biologically distant to the MK Nubian sample." (Zakrzewski; 2003)
This does not appear to be a direct quote. It seems you are quoting a paraphrasing of Zakrzewski from eupedia. To which they say:
quote: "Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length."
So tibiae length is how races are determined? There’s a reason I didn’t really discuss the “super tropical body plans” as evidence of race. Bear in mind I could discuss proportional population affinities, but I personally am not seeing much reason in doing so unless someone can create a very strong case that limb proportions are features that have very much if anything to do with how people are divided racially by globalists. Have at it.
quote: "The contemporary North African gene pool diverged from the Near Eastern one and expanded in North Africa before the Holocene, a concept jointly confirmed by mtDNA and nuclear genomic data." (Pereira et al.,2010b; Henn et al., 2012; Podgorna et al.,2013; Fregel et al, 2013)
What does this have to do with race/phenotype?
quote:"Evidence of Neolithic migration from the Near East is supported by the introduction of domestic animals like cows, sheep and goats to North africa." (Henn et al; 2012)
What does this have to do with phenotype? Let’s suppose the Near East introduced domestic animals. Let’s even suppose without any genetic data from southern Egypt that they’re strongly related to non-Black MENA peoples. What would that genetic relationship have to do with phenotype? Why are you still trying to link them genetically to the Near East as though this would prove their phenotype (race)? How can races exist genetically if highly genetically dissimilar populations have been labeled Black?
So this person wouldn’t be labeled Black? You’re really going to try it huh? Okay. No one here’s going to listen to such nonsense, but go ahead. And while this comment does have little to do with the conversation, I’ll cut you a bit of a break since I was reading about cattle. May as well have a read of it.
quote: "Morphological and genetic research seems to provide further support for the topic. According to Grigson (1991, 2000) Egyptian cattle of the 4th millennium BC were morphologically distinct from Eurasian cattle (Bos taurus) and Zebu (Bos indicus), meaning that African cattle may have been domesticated from the local wild Bos primigenius before the aforementioned date.... The zoological, genetic and linguistic studies thus not only suggest an African origin for cattle domestication, but also provide a precise time frame and geographical location which, generally speaking, fits well with that proposed by the CPE (Combined Prehistoric Expedition). A further element which might give support to the matter comes from the archaeological record, namely the pottery."
Make your own thread to discuss this though. Just thought you might like to read it.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote: "...Whatever else one can or cannot say about the Egyptians, it is clear that their cranio-facial morphology has nothing whatsoever in common with sub-saharan Africans." (Brace;1993)
And I’m going to stop with the snipped versions of the papers you cite. The extended version of the quote he gave me goes more like this:
quote: One of the most common ways of assessing population relationships has been the comparative analysis of skull types. Such a study was carried out by the physical anthropologist C. Loring Brace and five co-researchers (Brace et al., 1993) who statistically analyzed a range of 24 cranial measurements from diverse world samples, including ancient Egyptians. The results of the analysis suggest that ancient Egyptian crania had elements in common with those from Southwest Asia and Neolithic Europe, as well as North and Northeast Africa. However, the Egyptian skulls showed very little similarity to African crania from the more distant south and west. The plot below shows, as accurately as is possible in two dimensions, the relationships between craniofacial configurations of the various regional samples. The predynastic sample from Upper Egypt lies very close to the West Eurasian group but also shows tendencies toward some neighboring African groups; this should not be surprising given Egypt's geographical position near the crossroads of Africa, Asia, and Europe. The northern Egyptians deviate even more strongly from the tropical African pattern, and indeed their closest relatives appear to be western Eurasians and coastal North Africans. Notice that the pooled group of Sub-Saharan Africans from the southern, central, and western regions of the continent does not resemble Egyptians at all: this group is plotted very distant from both ancient Egyptian samples. Similar conclusions are reached by Howells (1989, 1995) and Froment (1992, 1994).
And notice what happened when a single East African sample was allowed: Brace’s one East African “Somalia” sample pitted against MANY “Eurasian” samples across time. That one sample beat out Late period northern Egypt, Northern Africa, the Levant and the Middle East sample. I’ll post another point by ES/ESR (Charlie Bass):
quote: After reading an anthropology book from W.W. Howells [Who's Who in Skulls: Ethnic Identification of Crania From Measurements (pg. 95)] I must make some comments about C. Loring Brace and his methods. Howells noted that Brace's 24 measurements that he uses emphasize the nasal area of the skull and not much more, well as has been pointed out in another thread I started, nasal form alone is not a good way of evaluating population relationships since nasal form is correlated with climate, Brace tries to skirt this issue by admitting that nasal form indeed is correlated to climate but then says based on nonadaptive traits Somalis and Northeast African Nile Valley inhabitants are more related to Northwest Europeans than to "sub-Saharan" Africans. He never states nor points out what these nonadaptive traits are.
Secondly, Brace used posterior probabilities which do *NOT* cluster populations by membership and can be misleading because a group with higher probability of membership in a cluster is not necessarily closely related. If anyone remembers anymore of Brace's work you would remember that based on posterior probabilities modern Europeans and Neanderthals are related, but every other study done shows Neanderthals to be more than significantly distant from *ALL* modern populations, Europeans included.
Nasal form is not enough to determine race. When Black people have noses that look more like Europe or someplace else, it does not really change how they are treated racially. A greater sum of cranial data is needed. Hell noses alone aren't even good for establishing kinship. People as far removed from time and space as modern Indians, and people living all the way in Neolithic Europe were more closely related to Upper Egyptians than Nubians living right next door for thousands of years? Neolithic Europeans and Indians are more related to the Upper Egyptians than even Near Easterners and late period Egyptians? Neanderthals and modern Europeans are closely related?
posted
For the “But no the Badarian are not—” posts.
quote:"Badarian crania classified well with the Gizeh (E series) sample" (Keita; 1990) ---> " Giza (E series) clustered with a series of European Neolithic groups and with North africa" (Brace; 1993)
Let’s provide some additional context to what was said:
quote: Relationships among Badari, Naqada, and Kerma have not always been overt in the skeletal data. Berry et al. (1967) concluded from their nonmetric analysis that their Badarian sample differed significantly from Naqada and Kerma, but was closely related to the Gizeh sample. Their study included the same samples as this analysis, but yielded results that are different from the current study and the craniometric research. Berry et al. (1967) employed a completely different range of statistics, which may account for the difference between the two conclusions. However, Berry and her coauthors also noted homogeneity across all the Egyptian groups, including Naqada and those that pre- and post-date the sample. This is indeed the case here, as is evidenced in the PCO plot; the Egyptians appear to be relatively homogeneously grouped. Some Badarian crania also classified well with the Gizeh sample (Keita, 1990).
Some. Some Badarian crania did.
Godde K. (2009) An Examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development?
To look at it more generally, Naqada most closely resembles Christian period Nubians in Semna between 550-1350 AD (younger Nubians). Badarians most closely resembled Kerma Nubians between 1900-1600 B.C. As a whole, E Series clusters closest to 12th dynasty Lisht. The Godde 2009b quote seems to be another distortion of whatever was truly said by an author. The quote does not trace back to any study and Godde's research says the opposite of there being unrelatedness between southern Egypt and Nubia.
quote:S.O.Y. Keita and A. J. Boyce (Institute of Biological Anthropology, Oxford University) 2002
Badarian crania were studied with European and African series from the Howells’ database, using generalized distances and cluster analyses (neighbour joining and UPGMA algorithms)Greater affinity is found with the African series. The Badarian crania have a modal metric phenotype that is clearly 'southern'; most classify into the Kerma (Nubian), Gaboon, and Kenyan groups NO Badarian cranium in any analysis classified into the European series.
quote:"The predominant craniometric pattern in the Abydos royal tombs is 'southern' (tropical African variant), and this is consistent with what would be expected based on the literature and other results." [Studies of Ancient Crania From Northern African, p. 40]
quote: "For a long time the Badarian was considered to have emerged from the south...the theory that the Badarian originated in the south is, however, no longer accepted." (Shaw; 2003)
Let’s expand the context of this:
Shaw says:
quote: "The origins of the Badarian are equally problematic, having been sought in all directions. For a long time the Badarian was considered to have emerged from the south, because it was thought that the Badarians had 'poor knowledge' of chert, which would show that they came from the non calcareous part of Egypt to the south; on the other hand, the origins of agriculture and animal husbandry were assumed to lie in the Near East. The theory that the Badarian originated in the south is, however, no longer accepted. The selection of chert is perfectly logical for the Badarian lithic technology, which seems to show links to the Late Neolithic from the Western Desert. Rippled pottery, one of the most characteristic features of the Badarian, probably developed from burnished and smudged pottery, which is present both in the late Sahara Neolithic sites and from Mermidia in the north down to the Khartoum Neolithic sites in the south. Rippled pottery may have been a local development of a Saharan tradition. It seems obvious that the Badarian culture did not appear from a single source, although the Western Desert was probably the predominant one. On the other hand, the provenance of domesticated pants and animals remains controversial: An origin in the Levant via Lower Egyptian Faiyum and Mermedia cultures, might be possible.
He's assuming the people from the western desert have no connection to Nubia/Sudan. And no chert is not the only reason people have suspected a connection to Sudan.
quote: ON THE WAY TO ANCIENT EGYPTIAN CIVILISATION
It may be stated now that there are many indications confirming the close relationship between the inhabitants of the Western Desert and the Nile valley as represented by mythological and symbolical representations in the Cave of the Beasts. These depictions shed a completely new light on several cornerstones of ancient Egyptian concepts of the world and their state.59 They clarify and create a proper context of the Nabta Playa evidence and also help us understand the sudden complexity of predynastic Upper Egyptian cultures. The scenes of the Cave of the Beasts prove that there was a significant social complexity comprised in a community that produced its artistic decorations (e.g., the chieftain and subjugated enemies). At the same time, this community had significant intellectual capability to comprehend their surrounding environment with the help of complex mythological compositions that later on became a characteristic part of ancient Egyptian culture and religion (fig. 42).
The Badarians at some point traversing the western desert, does not disprove they had connections further south. Shaw presumes a false dichotomy: That movement from the western desert makes impossible old connections to Sudan. And even if the dichotomy proposed was valid it doesn’t prove that Nubians spanning into Sudan were not developing their own variation of pharaonic culture/civilization alongside Egyptians during the predynastic. Arguing that they may not be directly ancestral or even remotely related is actually quite the shot in the foot as it suggests that a bunch of unrelated Black Africans were developing local variations of a common culture that were more developmentally in common than whatever the hell was going on in the northern parts of Egypt.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote: "All of these features are also present in Europeans and West Asians to some degree but are uncommon in Sub-saharan peoples. Craniometric indicators appear to support these results, and European-like discrete traits, such as alveolar orthognathism, dolichocephaly, rhomboid orbits, narrow nasal aperture, and nasal sill, are prevalent" "...they appear distinct from post-Pleistocene sub-saharan Africans." (J.D. Irish; 2000)
Less common does not mean it's hard to find or that you can't be Black. Sub Saharan Africa especially is home to the most physical diversity in the world. So naturally certain features may be less common in Black Africans and other Black peoples, but it does not however mean they aren’t Black. Globalists haven’t stopped treating as Black the Black people that deviate from Irish’s “true negro.” Blacks do not need to have things like a wide nasal aperture or prognathism to be Black. Irish is a notorious offender of deemphasizing East Africans (especially Sudanese and Ethiopians) as Black in his works (though they are essentially so in real life). In fact, much of Sub Saharan Africa IS Ethiopian. Ethiopia represents one of the largest populations of Sub Saharan Africans in Africa. They are not a “small oversight.” About one in 10 Sub Saharan Africans are and we haven’t even gotten to other horners. But Irish being Irish, pools people far removed from the region Ancient Egyptians came from (Eastern Africa) and describes that sample as a “true negro” or a “true Sub Saharan” sample. His research frequently omits Eastern Africa or infers it as separate. That would be fine if he were attempting to in the process suggest that certain Sub Saharans look more like the Upper Egyptians than others (but that both are still Black), but he’s not.
And whaddya know, Sub Saharan Ethiopians cluster closest to Upper Egyptians. The next closest are Nubians. Poor lil’ tink tink.
More from Irish:
quote: Also the ancestors of early upper egyptians (pre dynastic egyptians) were badarians and guess what : "There is a badarian affiliation to North africans, not sub-saharan samples." (Irish & Konigsberg;2007).
For a more expanded context:
quote:“However, there is also one major difference; Mukherjee and associates placed their Badarian Egyptian sample within the sub-Saharan cluster, while puzzling over this unexpected affinity (Mukherjee et al., 1955: 86). Inspection of the original D2 matrix (their Table 5.6: 84) does, in reality, indicate a Badarian affiliation to North Africans, not sub-Saharan samples. It is therefore likely that an error was made in construction of their original figure when converting inter-sample distances to x- and y-coordinates.”
What are some problems we can find with the study? Well it’s an Irish study so you’re probably going to get: Overrepresentation of groups of very far distance (West and South Africans) and underrepresentation of East Africans. This collection of people will either be pooled together or the only “Sub Saharans” plotted on the graph to prove a point about “Sub Saharan Africa.” Let’s dig in shall we? Yes, yes.
Who can spot what he’s doing before I show the next graphs?
Where are the modern north Africans on this? What's that, nowhere? So can you guess how he classified A-Group, B-Group, C-Group, D-Group, X-Group and Kerma Nubians? Sudanese that were closer spatially and chronologically were labeled as the “North Africans.” For "Sub Saharans" he uses mostly modern and spatially distant West African samples from: Cameroon, Ghana, Gabon, and Nigeria. Only two samples TIG/ETH and TAI are East African. His results look something like this:
And then (of course) he concludes:
quote: “Mukherjee et al. (1955) is presented in Figure 4. It too displays a separation between the sub-Saharan and North African samples, with an intermediate, yet distinct position for Jebel Moya.”
Well I guess if you reclassify all the Sudanese as “North Africans” and only have a couple East African samples (one of which is Ethiopian) anyone could arrive to this conclusion. It doesn’t make for a great paper, but it can be done. And the Ethiopian sample does not display a good separation between Sub Saharan and “North African” samples. What we see is ETH/TIG cluster with Egyptians/Sudanese. The TIG sample clusters with the Nubians, and Naqada while TAI is closer to the Badarian than the Egyptian E series is. Phenotypically the Ethiopians and East Africans are better estimations of what the Naqada/Badarian Egyptians would’ve looked like than the Egyptian E. I’m sure there are many other methodological problems in this people can pick apart. But this was the quickest to notice given that this was an Irish study. And then let’s not forget that in his other study the Ethiopians cluster again with the Egyptians.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: They tested a Greek-Roman enclave that was highly contaminated.
what is your evidence contaminated samples were used?
Contaminated how?
They were in the public space for over 100 years, or something close to that.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
from the same era (5th dynasty) : Ptahkhenuwy and his wife, 5th Dynasty, Old Kingdom
They're from different regions of Egypt:
quote:At his accession, Mentuhotepcontrolled Upper Egypt from Aswan to This [Abydos], an ancient city about 90 miles (145 km) north of Thebes, his capital.
Meanwhile it says here that Ptahkhenuwy and his wife's figure are found all the way in the north (Giza).
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
from the same era (5th dynasty) : Ptahkhenuwy and his wife, 5th Dynasty, Old Kingdom
They are not of the same era. Gebor, why didn't you say anything? The stone head of Mentuhotep II is 11th dynasty
Nassbean, don't know what your point is Ptahkhenuwy is brown skinned here and he and his wife are both depicted here wide noses Paintings and painted sculptures of Kings are all most always this shade of brown or darker.
Mentuhotep II, 11th dynasty
____________
Queen Hatshepsut, 18th dynasty
No expert knows why some of the wives of nobles are sometimes depicted yellow skinned. There is more than one theory. But the more powerful queens are most often the same brown as their husbands
Posts: 42934 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:The researchers say they applied a rigorous selection criterion to avoid ‘contaminated’ samples. “We built genomic libraries that immortalise nearly every DNA molecule of extracted DNA,” says Wolfgang Haak, co-author and molecular anthropologist at Max Planck.
quote:To determine the most suitable parameter set and substitution method, we used jModelTest v2.1.10 (ref. 65) and selected the parameters suggested by the Akaike and Bayesian information criterion (AIC and BIC). [...] We used the 90 mitochondrial genomes obtained in this study, together with 135 modern Egyptian mtDNA genomes from Pagani and colleagues17 and Kujanova and colleagues30 for Bayesian reconstruction of population size changes through time. [...] We conducted Bayesian inference using strict clock with an uninformative CTMC reference prior for each partition and Bayesian SkyGrid tree prior with 50 parameters (gamma prior with shape 0.001 and scale 1,000). [...] The obtained Bayesian SkyGrid plot indicates a fairly stable slightly decreasing effective population size for the studied population over the last 5,000 years (Fig. 3d and Supplementary Fig. 2).
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: No expert knows why some of the wives of nobles are sometimes depicted yellow skinned. There is more than one theory. But the more powerful queens are most often the same brown as their husbands
Which is odd, since many whites insist on being the descendants of the ancient Egyptians. Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: many whites insist on being the descendants of the ancient Egyptians.
name one
What do you mean name one?
Show us an quote by a white person who says they are a descendant of the ancient Egyptians
Posts: 42934 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: many whites insist on being the descendants of the ancient Egyptians.
name one
What do you mean name one?
Show us an quote by a white person who says they are a descendant of the ancient Egyptians
How am I supposed to do that? Lol
Anyway there is a website called Quora. On that site you’ll find many whites making those claims. And it’s not just there.
It’s on many different platforms as well, including your Hollywood films.
I just love it how you put up this naively ignorant act as if you don’t know what’s going on. It’s highly amusing and laughable.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic