posted
@Brandon Depends on population size or whether they had high rates of albinism.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Nope! The indigenous people of Bioko are the Bantu speaking Bube people who look like this:
You're obviously unaware of the fact that Bioko (Fernando Po) Island was used as a penal colony since the Spanish Empire and peoples from all over that empire were sent there including Canarians hence why the people in the picture were described as 'Guanche Race'
what can't you understand in "natives of fernandino po" ? Canarians were sent to America and Madeira, there is no evidence they were sent to Bioko so these people are in fact mixed individuals of colonial portuguese/spanish and local bantus this is why these creole people live on the island : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernandino_peoples
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I've seen all those depictions of white Guanches. They were posted many times in this forum before but it's funny how the depictions of all the other Canarians who are black are almost never shown.
Feel free to show us all those black depictions for the moment you could only bring something from bioko island lol. Moreover why do you avoid the depiction and genetic/biometric stuff I posted ?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I also find it funny that you never addressed these references:
Pope Eugene IV Against the Enslaving of Black Natives from the Canary Islands January 13, 1435
Some six decades before Columbus set out for the new world, Pope Eugene IV condemned the enslavement of black natives from the Canary Islands. This 1435 papal command demanded the European slave-masters to release them within 15 days or face the weight of excommunication from the Church.
1402 Juan de Bethencourt became the first European to settle in the Canary Islands and made slaves of several natives heralding the beginning of the black slave trade. At this time slavery had been practically eliminated in Europe, thanks to the influence of the Church. The Holy Roman Church later would not only condone and support slavery even of those baptized into the Roman Catholic Church but also would hold their own slaves. Europe, led by Spain, would begin over four centuries of slave trading that included some twenty million Africans alone, of which half died in transit. Jewish children deported from Portugal during the Inquisition settle Sao Tome e Principe, two islands 320 kilometers west of Gabon. It then became a transit point for the slave trade. Pope John Paul II (1978 - ) in 1992 deplored the Roman Catholic Church's condoning of that sad offense to human dignity. [/QB]
Have you at least read what you post ? The original paper literally does not mention any black, it simply talks about natives being enslaved. Moreover they posted the source :
"Source: Appendix B of Fr. Joel S. Panzer’s book, “The Popes and Slavery” (Society of St. Paul, 1996) on page 75 from Baronius’ Annales Ecclesiastici, ed. O. Raynaldus (Luca, 1752) vol. 28, pp. 226-227. "
Therefore the title "black native" is an assumption made by this joel panzer it wasn't in the original document.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
So, if the aboriginal Canary Islanders varied in skin tone, with some being dark enough to be called "Black" and others like the Guanches being lighter-skinned, what do you think would have accounted for this variation? Would the Guanches represent (or be admixed with) a later migration to those islands?
By the way...
If this is what Guanches looked like, they don't seem to me like they'd stand out as unusual on the streets of modern Casablanca or Tripoli. So in a sense, Antalas isn't wrong about them looking like some Arabized North Africans today, even if they didn't represent all aboriginal people on the Canary Islands.
That's my point precisely-- that the Canarians are simply insular Maghrebis who are an extension of those in the mainland just as the Bube of Bioko Island are an extension of those in Equatorial Guinea.
Maghrebi populations in general are a mixed group of North African and European hence why their look varies with some looking more European while others look more African. This topic has been beaten to death in this forum countless times.
Unfortunately such mixed folk like Antalas suffer what many Black Americans call a "mulatto complex identity crisis" where they favor one ancestry but denounce the other. Here in the US such types favor the black side and attack their white side. In North Africa it's the opposite.
Posts: 26249 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: That's my point precisely-- that the Canarians are simply insular Maghrebis who are an extension of those in the mainland just as the Bube of Bioko Island are an extension of those in Equatorial Guinea.
Maghrebi populations in general are a mixed group of North African and European hence why their look varies with some looking more European while others look more African. This topic has been beaten to death in this forum countless times.
Unfortunately such mixed folk like Antalas suffer what many Black Americans call a "mulatto complex identity crisis" where they favor one ancestry but denounce the other. Here in the US such types favor the black side and attack their white side. In North Africa it's the opposite. [/QB]
Of course you couldn't answer to what I posted and once again I exposed your lies and dishonest methods. Again why are guanches similar to modern north africans especially north moroccans like me ?
"Maghrebi populations in general are a mixed group of North African and European" hahah lmao completely ignores the trans-saharan slave trade and all their descendents.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Posts: 2498 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
A poster interested in promoting facts would've looked up Fernando Po before writing what Antalas did. On the other hand this title is a lie as was demonstrated on ES years ago. Whoever made that title up is equated black to slave without any internal evidence as stated in the primary document itself.
It is factual that Spain instituted an African Slave trade before Portugal established the ongoing West Afican trade but the Triangular Trade was instituted by a religionist named Dos Casas who recommended replacing native American laborers with West Africans from south of the river Senegal.
I asked you to refresh yourself on this earlier. While KEMET can be as politically hot as posters make it, I cannot allow flubbed 'factual' material.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
I also find it funny that you never addressed these references:
Pope Eugene IV Against the Enslaving of Black Natives from the Canary Islands January 13, 1435
[b] Juan de Abreu de Galindo, trans George Glas The History of the Discovery and Conquest of the Canary Islands Palmas, 1632 London, 1764 pp.281-282
Guanches are a small minority of the Canarians. They only inhabited the north of Tenerife.
Besides the north part of Tenerife we have to consider the central and south parts of Tenerife along with the great bulk of the Canary Islands: 2 - Alegranza 3 - El Hierro 4 - Fuerteventura 5 - Gran Canaria 6 - Isla de Lobos 7 - La Gomera 8 - Lanzarote 9 - La Graciosa 10 - La Palma 11 - Montaña Clara 12 - Roque del Este 13 - Roque del Oeste.
We have seen them documented as darker skinned than southern Spaniards and having bushy hair black in color.
[b] Juan de Abreu de Galindo, trans George Glas The History of the Discovery and Conquest of the Canary Islands Palmas, 1632 London, 1764 pp.281-282
Guanches are a small minority of the Canarians. They only inhabited the north of Tenerife.
Besides the north part of Tenerife we have to consider the central and south parts of Tenerife along with the great bulk of the Canary Islands: 2 - Alegranza 3 - El Hierro 4 - Fuerteventura 5 - Gran Canaria 6 - Isla de Lobos 7 - La Gomera 8 - Lanzarote 9 - La Graciosa 10 - La Palma 11 - Montaña Clara 12 - Roque del Este 13 - Roque del Oeste.
We have seen them documented as darker skinned than southern Spaniards and having bushy hair black in color. [/QB]
Not all the samples we have are from Tenerife and today "guanche" became the general term for the ancient inhabitants of these islands even though yes it originally only refers to one specific group. Moreover it's well known that north africans are darker than spaniards so I don't see what you're trying to do with such descriptions.
Anyway here descriptions from "Mémoire sur les Guanches by Sabin Berthelot :
page 2 :
quote:The naturals who held them prisoner owned boats, lived together in houses and obeyed a king. They were men of high stature, of red and swarthy color, that is to say more or less brown, but undoubtedly of white race, since they wore their hair long (literally not frizzy); their women were of a rare beauty.
page 4 :
quote:These young men were not circumcised; "they had long, blond hair that veiled them almost to the navel; they walked barefoot. Their stature did not exceed that of the narrators; they had robust limbs, appeared courageous, of great intelligence, very loyal and full of of loyalty.
basically similar to modern north africans as the genetic and biometric results show. Again why don't you adress these more reliable datas ? Why are these ancient isolated guanches similar to people like me ? I thought we were arab-white slaves mix ?
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Pope Eugene IV was concerned with the enslaving of only those Canarians who had already converted to Christianity.
To that effect the pope issued several bulls. * Creator Omnium (1434) "Creator of all" * Sicut dudum (1435) "As long" * Romanus pontifex (1436) "Pope of Rome"
Regimini gregis (1475) "Royal flock" was a later bull from Pope Sixtus IV reinforcing excommunication for enslaving Christians.
Antalas
Thx 4 the valuable factual reminder of what ESers should know since posted here a while back.
Sicut dudum has recently been sensationalized as colour based edict when in fact it was religion based so disregard the newly added propagandist subtitle here.
quote:Originally posted by Antalas:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I also find it funny that you never addressed these references:
Pope Eugene IV Against the Enslaving of Black Natives from the Canary Islands January 13, 1435
Some six decades before Columbus set out for the new world, Pope Eugene IV condemned the enslavement of black natives from the Canary Islands. This 1435 papal command demanded the European slave-masters to release them within 15 days or face the weight of excommunication from the Church.
1402 Juan de Bethencourt became the first European to settle in the Canary Islands and made slaves of several natives heralding the beginning of the black slave trade. At this time slavery had been practically eliminated in Europe, thanks to the influence of the Church. The Holy Roman Church later would not only condone and support slavery even of those baptized into the Roman Catholic Church but also would hold their own slaves. Europe, led by Spain, would begin over four centuries of slave trading that included some twenty million Africans alone, of which half died in transit.
"Source: Appendix B of Fr. Joel S. Panzer’s book, “The Popes and Slavery” (Society of St. Paul, 1996) on page 75 from Baronius’ Annales Ecclesiastici, ed. O. Raynaldus (Luca, 1752) vol. 28, pp. 226-227. "
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Listen I'm not going for rounds of horse shi with you.
The description is from the original author. Invent a time machine and go ask him
Also this forum will not tolerate you claiming to be THE physical representative of Gaunches from 500 years ago.
Per Sergi my head shape is Canarian I don't believe head shape is strictly indicatve of geo-pop origin. My offspring is Sergi's 5 pointed ellipse?!?
No one person can rep for any whole population much less for one centuries removed from now. Future attempts of such conflation will see the entire post deleted without notice.
I have no time to go in and play editor to ppl's posts.
If you don't like my policy there are Brandon's, theLioness', and El Maestro's forums where you can run amok.
Juan de Abreu de Galindo, trans George Glas The History of the Discovery and Conquest of the Canary Islands Palmas, 1632 London, 1764 pp.281-282
Guanches are a small minority of the Canarians. They only inhabited the north of Tenerife.
Besides the north part of Tenerife we have to consider the central and south parts of Tenerife along with the great bulk of the Canary Islands: 2 - Alegranza 3 - El Hierro 4 - Fuerteventura 5 - Gran Canaria 6 - Isla de Lobos 7 - La Gomera 8 - Lanzarote 9 - La Graciosa 10 - La Palma 11 - Montaña Clara 12 - Roque del Este 13 - Roque del Oeste.
We have seen them documented as darker skinned than southern Spaniards and having bushy hair black in color. [/qb]
There are innumerable south Mediterraneans who resemble north Mediterraneans in colour hair and facial features, especially the Iberians.
Maghreb proper Coastal N Afrs are admixed especially with Spaniards and Italians. A few even with Greeks. It's been happening ever since the mid-Holocene at least
The bell shaped vessels c.2000 BCE of Cueta and Tetuan, came from Iberia. The copper/bronze arrowheads of c.1500 BCE North Africa were imported from Iberia and the NA obsidian manufactures of the same era are imports from Sicily and Pantellaria, the obsidan itself coming from the Lipari islands.
Other "industrial" influences c.1500-1300 BCE stem from Cyprus & Asia Minor carried by Aegeans & Phoenicians via Malta, Pantellaria, and Sicily; and the dolmens of Algeria and Tunisia have their prototype in Malta just as the late bronze chamber tombs of Cap Bon are preceded by those of Sicily.
Colour nuance is visually reportable and is done for people of the same physical stock and cultural ethnicity. Because you don't like it doesn't make it sinister.
Repeating the exact same process I told you to chuck? You're NOT playing with your gush up to yte ppl negro.
MOVE ON TO OTHER POINTS
DON"T TRY AND CLEAN UP YOUR ACCUSATION THAT I'M TRYING TO PULL OFF SOMETHING NEFARIOUS.
and are you out of your mind
quote:
"they had long, blond hair that veiled them almost to the navel; ... they had robust limbs, "
basically similar to modern north africans as the genetic and biometric results show.
magrebis in general do not have long blond hair to the navel and are not of robust limbs
[ 08. December 2021, 09:55 AM: Message edited by: Tukuler ]
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
Tazarah. Yes, judging from culture and genetics iMazighen were among 'cargo' in Tri-angular Trade holds.
If true, then that would have to mean they were "black", or "negroes"
.
Yes, in your polemic for the sake of your argument it appears even a corn silk blond blue eyed European can be "black" or "negro" when so needed.
In Africa iMazighen are not black/negro. iMazighen call blacks/negroes by two names: * Gnawa (where the term guinea comes from) * slave
But if ppl in Carolina say Berbers are black BINGO end of story no matter what any other source says or that 100s of printed works posit Berbers are not negroes (let me be clear and non-ambiguous, when I use negro 99% of the time I mean the physical anthro forensic negro promulgated since the 1700s.
I never mean one drop Europeans or others assigned to the American coloured population where Louis Armstrong and Adam Clayton Powell are equally negro (obviously sociological not biological).
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Antalas:
.
These don't look like the peer approved charts @ https://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdfExtended/S0960-9822...31257-5 [Replace ... in the url with (17) when pasting in addr bar] I don't necessarily doubt the data represented but in this forum original charts as published are the only ones acceptable. They may be reduxed but the redux must be no more than rearrangements and high-lightings.
Amateur generated charts are especially welcome when presented with sources for the raw data they are based on.
posted
Ok the guy is editing my post. I'll stop discussing in the kemet section and I'll no more answer to you tukuler so don't waste your time writing me.
ffs the guy go as far as editing what I wrote; he can't handle a different opinion from his.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
Tazarah. Yes, judging from culture and genetics iMazighen were among 'cargo' in Tri-angular Trade holds.
If true, then that would have to mean they were "black", or "negroes"
.
Yes, in your polemic for the sake of your argument it appears even a corn silk blond blue eyed European can be "black" or "negro" when so needed.
In Africa iMazighen are not black/negro. iMazighen call blacks/negroes by two names: * Gnawa (where the term guinea comes from) * slave
But if ppl in Carolina say Berbers are black BINGO end of story no matter what any other source says or that 100s of printed works posit Berbers are not negroes (let me be clear and non-ambiguous, when I use negro 99% of the time I mean the physical anthro forensic negro promulgated since the 1700s.
I never mean one drop Europeans or others assigned to the American coloured population where Louis Armstrong and Adam Clayton Powell are equally negro (obviously sociological not biological).
Oh, I guess people in the 19th century southern United States did not know what a "negro" was then. There are specific terms that were used during that time period for "mixed" people (mulatto, quadroon, etc.) -- none of those words were used to describe the Berbers. They were simply called negroes.
PS, the same sources identifies Asiatics as negroes as well. Let me guess, the Asiatics also went by the "one drop rule"?
"The term negro is confined to slave Africans, (the ancient Berbers) and their descendants. It does not embrace the free inhabitants of Africa, such as the Egyptians, Moors, or the negro Asiatics, such as the Lascars."
"The Negro Law of South Carolina" by John Belton O'Neall, page 5 (1848) J.G. Bowman
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
DJ pointed this out about the thread title which does not allude to any iMazighen but is applied to Teda/Tubu/etc mainly of Tibesti but Chad indigenees overall.
After describing height, limbs, shoulders, hips, hands, feet, head, face, nose, jaw, ears, lips, hair, complexion, and ABO blood group pattern, Briggs in Living Races o/t Sahara Desert p162-3 writes
quote: Thus the Teda appear to have Berber blood in markedly negroid bodies. ... The Teda may indeed represent the oldest surviving human stock in the Sahara, ...
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Cmon Tazarah man
You think Mr Chahlee in South Kakalaky is the be all end all and knows more about African people than African people know about themselves?
And Skakalak is not the entire southern United States as you magically proclaim. I'm sure you have laws from each state saying Berbers are Negroes.
You think you have an airtight case based on one single solitary Mistuh Chahlee eh? Well, back atcha: "I guess all the Africans who separate Berber and Black for over 1000 years did not know what a 'negro' is."
When will you separate wheat from chaff?
You don't weed out the obvious nonsense because it fits your polemic in which everything you say is unquestionable Gospel and can never be in error or need precision because you are always right and so no one can teach you anything but you can teach everybody everything? Is that right? I know you can't really think like that can you?
This is not the thing for you to do. Invent garbage neither you nor anyone else on ES believes I ever said and act like that's how I think.
Look it here. Just go and resize oversize imgs of text so they look professional. I resize with Paint but Postimages can do it for you.
After that come teach me about the Lascar. Are they what you imagined? Mind you well before I ever heard of you I broached an * Asian blacks? Not unless they're negroid I say? * long strong thread on the blacks of Asia so full of factually supportive ES member contributions that the owner or his agent deleted the entire thread. Rogers, Jackson, Rashidi, et al introduced us all to Asia's blacks but not before the pre-Swahili East Africans view of Asia's blacks were recorded by al~Jahiz 1200 years gone. This is not news just because you're finding out there are indigenous blacks in Asia.
You don't know it all but you do ferret out some of the best micro-research I've ever seen and so I cut you a lot of slack.
Why? I thirst for new knowledge. What I never dreamed. I would sell every person on the planet for knowledge like what was before the Big Bang. I'm Metron.
This reply of yours is just repetitious w/o adding new value. It reads as if doesn't see what I wrote.
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by Tazarah:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
Tazarah. Yes, judging from culture and genetics iMazighen were among 'cargo' in Tri-angular Trade holds.
If true, then that would have to mean they were "black", or "negroes"
.
Yes, in your polemic for the sake of your argument it appears even a corn silk blond blue eyed European can be "black" or "negro" when so needed.
In Africa iMazighen are not black/negro. iMazighen call blacks/negroes by two names: * Gnawa (where the term guinea comes from) * slave
But if ppl in Carolina say Berbers are black BINGO end of story no matter what any other source says or that 100s of printed works posit Berbers are not negroes (let me be clear and non-ambiguous, when I use negro 99% of the time I mean the physical anthro forensic negro promulgated since the 1700s.
I never mean one drop Europeans or others assigned to the American coloured population where Louis Armstrong and Adam Clayton Powell are equally negro (obviously sociological not biological).
Oh, I guess people in the 19th century southern United States did not know what a "negro" was then. There are specific terms that were used during that time period for "mixed" people (mulatto, quadroon, etc.) -- none of those words were used to describe the Berbers. They were simply called negroes.
PS, the same sources identifies Asiatics as negroes as well. Let me guess, the Asiatics also went by the "one drop rule"?
"The term negro is confined to slave Africans, (the ancient Berbers) and their descendants. It does not embrace the free inhabitants of Africa, such as the Egyptians, Moors, or the negro Asiatics, such as the Lascars."
"The Negro Law of South Carolina" by John Belton O'Neall, page 5 (1848) J.G. Bowman
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP:
If this is what Guanches looked like, they don't seem to me like they'd stand out as unusual on the streets of modern Casablanca or Tripoli. So in a sense, Antalas isn't wrong about them looking like some Arabized North Africans today, even if they didn't represent all aboriginal people on the Canary Islands.
.
Seem to you from your imagination or from touristing around said cities?
Anyway
Who posited that Canarians were other than N Afrs of the same genomics found from Sahrawi to Touansi and that is exemplified by the latter?
However, in Rodriguez-Varela it's Mzab that's the exemplar.
quote:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
Now c'mon and post the K=10 ADMIXTURE showing the Saharawi near identity why don't you please
.
OK then, be that way and don't share the knowledge. Here 'tis anyhow, aboriginal Canarians, red underscore, just where I said.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Maghrebi populations in general are a mixed group of North African and European hence why their look varies with some looking more European while others look more African. This topic has been beaten to death in this forum countless times.
Unfortunately such mixed folk like Antalas suffer what many Black Americans call a "mulatto complex identity crisis" where they favor one ancestry but denounce the other. Here in the US such types favor the black side and attack their white side. In North Africa it's the opposite.
The trend I have noticed is that these "Amazigh nationalists" are intent on minimalizing the Black presence in the Maghreb unless they can attribute it to slavery. That's why they get so angry if you artistically depict, say, ancient Numidians or Dihya al-Kahina as Black. It's all about marginalizing Black people in North African history as much as they can.
Mind you, I don't actually have a problem with lighter-skinned people having lived along the northwest coast of Africa for some time. We have enough Neolithic and Bronze Age artifacts of European affinity in the region to know they were interacting substantially with Iberian cultures back then, and then there is the succession of colonization by Phoenicians, Romans, Vandals, and so forth. But these people of mixed heritage would not represent the indigenous inhabitants of North Africa or the original proto-Berbers, no matter what racist "Amazigh nationalists" are so determined to argue.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Maghrebi populations in general are a mixed group of North African and European hence why their look varies with some looking more European while others look more African. This topic has been beaten to death in this forum countless times.
Unfortunately such mixed folk like Antalas suffer what many Black Americans call a "mulatto complex identity crisis" where they favor one ancestry but denounce the other. Here in the US such types favor the black side and attack their white side. In North Africa it's the opposite.
The trend I have noticed is that these "Amazigh nationalists" are intent on minimalizing the Black presence in the Maghreb unless they can attribute it to slavery. That's why they get so angry if you artistically depict, say, ancient Numidians or Dihya al-Kahina as Black. It's all about marginalizing Black people in North African history as much as they can.
Mind you, I don't actually have a problem with lighter-skinned people having lived along the northwest coast of Africa for some time. We have enough Neolithic and Bronze Age artifacts of European affinity in the region to know they were interacting substantially with Iberian cultures back then, and then there is the succession of colonization by Phoenicians, Romans, Vandals, and so forth. But these people of mixed heritage would not represent the indigenous inhabitants of North Africa or the original proto-Berbers, no matter what racist "Amazigh nationalists" are so determined to argue.
Your answer doesn't even make sense since for instance the indigenous european Western hunter-gatherers were dark skinned and yet weren't black morphologically or genetically. Same situation is seen with Iberomaurusians where we're dealing with a dark skinned population but still distinct from your regular "black" physically and genetically. Moreover the highest amount of IBM ancestry peaks among modern berbers not anyone else.
You also don't have the genetic data of Capsians nor do you know which population brought the proto-berber language to North Africa and yet you're quick to draw conclusions about who is and isn't indigenous. What we actually know is that SNPs for light skin were already present during the IVth millenium BC brought by iberian neolithic farmers who settled in NW africa and mixed with the locals :
quote:The SNP rs1426654 of the SLC24A5 gene is related to light-skinned pigmentation in individuals with European ancestry. The derived allele was already fixed in Anatolian Early Neolithic populations, suggesting that its high frequency in Neolithic Europe was related to demic diffusion from the Middle East49. In our sample set, TOR presents the derived A allele (3 reads), while IAM has the ancestral G allele (2 reads) related to darkskinned phenotype. However, in line with previous results, KEB is similar to European Neolithic samples, and presents the derived allele (2 reads). [...] This SNP is one of several variants associated with increased probability of having dark eye color in Caucasians. Again, IAM present the T allele (1 read) related to dark pigmentation, while KEB and TOR presents the C allele (3 reads both) with increased probability of having light colored eyes. Another SNP of the OCA2 gene, rs12913832, was fixed in Europe during the Mesolithic and it is the major determinant for blue eye color. In our sample set, only IAM has coverage for that position and all the three reads show the ancestral allele, indicating again that IAM people had dark eyes.
Meanwhile SNPs for straight hair were already present among taforalt/IAM :
quote:The TCHH1 gene codes for trichohyalin, a protein active in hair follicle roots. For all Taforalt individuals we find the derived homozygous AA genotype for SNP rs17646946 in this gene, which has been associated with straighter hair in Europeans (allelic effect (ß) = 0.4-0.5, explained variance = 6.11%) (98).
So what we see is that Holocene north-west africans already looked very different from your depictions where the figures look no different from your regular west african. You talk about phoenician, roman, vandal, etc but where are the genetic evidence of them impacting the local genepool ? Or maybe you have statistics to back up these assumptions ? How do you interpret the guanche results ? How do you interpret the result of the two copper age outliers from Spain and Sardinia ? How do you interpret the result of 300 AD north africans found in italy who cluster with modern north africans ? What you're doing is darkwashing and historical revisionism plain and simple and obviously north africans who cherish their ancestors/history will not tolerate this.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Please let's not mix reality with your art.
LaKahena was not of Inner torrid Africa nor living there. She was an Aures chilly Mts Mediterranean Coastal African.
One cannot go about remaking ppl into what one's fantasies suggest and try to segue that into history archaeology and anthropology.
Inventing blk ppl where they were not and in roles they did not play is no different than the marginalization you speak of.
No one here has presented as much info on the autochthone blks of Tropical North Africa from GrecoLatin classical writers than I have. Some were taMazight speakers, some were not. None were located high up in the cold arse Aures. Putting them there distorts African Studies and is far from an authentic Africana.
I'm telling what your black friends won't whether to spare your feelings or whatever.
I admire your talent nonetheless and patiently await seeing a black man romping around with white women in white world in your art and lit.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Duh uh like I didn't know that when I wrote it before I knew there was such a thing as an Egyptsearch.
If you can find a N Afr author admitting LaKahena was dark like I did from diligent research please post it, thanks.
What would dark skin be relative to Mediterranean Africa?
Would it mean Savannah/Forest dark brown?
Heck, DJ told us all he's very dark but not black.
I hope you overstand my criticism is constructive. Ain't asking you quit the fantasy, it's the shizz. But whaddabouda sideline featuring authenticity like with them Dinosaurs meticulously researched?
Dayyum, don be like Queen Latifah's Bessie Smith. Give the YallaBirds and CaramelCuties some play!
Ebony complexions would more mark a Ourgla/Wargla Jew otherside the Atlas in the Chotts or Negrine territory. That's why I keep harping about sampling Wargla DNA.
Have you followed the track of in-migrating Aures Jews to where their descendants are today and what their complexions are? You're up on your Fishberg and your Briggs, right?
quote: Originally posted by Antalas: Your answer doesn't even make sense since for instance the indigenous european Western hunter-gatherers were dark skinned and yet weren't black morphologically or genetically. Same situation is seen with Iberomaurusians where we're dealing with a dark skinned population but still distinct from your regular "black" physically and genetically. Moreover the highest amount of IBM ancestry peaks among modern berbers not anyone else.
You also don't have the genetic data of Capsians nor do you know which population brought the proto-berber language to North Africa and yet you're quick to draw conclusions about who is and isn't indigenous. What we actually know is that SNPs for light skin were already present during the IVth millenium BC brought by iberian neolithic farmers who settled in NW africa and mixed with the locals :
quote:The SNP rs1426654 of the SLC24A5 gene is related to light-skinned pigmentation in individuals with European ancestry. The derived allele was already fixed in Anatolian Early Neolithic populations, suggesting that its high frequency in Neolithic Europe was related to demic diffusion from the Middle East49. In our sample set, TOR presents the derived A allele (3 reads), while IAM has the ancestral G allele (2 reads) related to darkskinned phenotype. However, in line with previous results, KEB is similar to European Neolithic samples, and presents the derived allele (2 reads). [...] This SNP is one of several variants associated with increased probability of having dark eye color in Caucasians. Again, IAM present the T allele (1 read) related to dark pigmentation, while KEB and TOR presents the C allele (3 reads both) with increased probability of having light colored eyes. Another SNP of the OCA2 gene, rs12913832, was fixed in Europe during the Mesolithic and it is the major determinant for blue eye color. In our sample set, only IAM has coverage for that position and all the three reads show the ancestral allele, indicating again that IAM people had dark eyes.
Meanwhile SNPs for straight hair were already present among taforalt/IAM :
quote:The TCHH1 gene codes for trichohyalin, a protein active in hair follicle roots. For all Taforalt individuals we find the derived homozygous AA genotype for SNP rs17646946 in this gene, which has been associated with straighter hair in Europeans (allelic effect (ß) = 0.4-0.5, explained variance = 6.11%) (98).
So what we see is that Holocene north-west africans already looked very different from your depictions where the figures look no different from your regular west african. You talk about phoenician, roman, vandal, etc but where are the genetic evidence of them impacting the local genepool ? Or maybe you have statistics to back up these assumptions ? How do you interpret the guanche results ? How do you interpret the result of the two copper age outliers from Spain and Sardinia ? How do you interpret the result of 300 AD north africans found in italy who cluster with modern north africans ? What you're doing is darkwashing and historical revisionism plain and simple and obviously north africans who cherish their ancestors/history will not tolerate this.
Capsians likely resemble the Early neolithic inhabitants of Morocco. the specific call/mutation (@rs17646946) is associated with "curly" hair reduction not straight hair. your source even explained it.
quote:For all Taforalt individuals we find the derived homozygous AA genotype for SNP rs17646946 in this gene, which has been associated with straighter hair in Europeans (allelic effect (β) = 0.4-0.5, explained variance = 6.11%) (98).
Penetrance for a single alelle accounts for %6.1 less curly hair. Homozygous individuals 12%. That won't make them have the hair texture you share. Not only that, Europeans have the highest frequency of the derived allele at a lil over 20%. But sampled Nigerians of ibadan (Yoruba) carry this mutation at about 12%. East Asians and East Asian derivatives are basically fixed for the Ancestral/wild type alleles.
It's similar to the 'Agouti signaling protein' and the 'melanocortin 1 receptor'... mutations in respective loci associated with variance in skin color which are available in people who would undeniably be seen as black. but they're hyped up in the Taforalt populations in an attempt to differentiate them from Black Africans or SSA's. lol Genetic/intellectual warfare. It's actually quite disappointing as a lot of times these mutations could actually be North African in origin but because of some weird biases in this space we end up disrespecting the hell out of the initial inhabitants.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: what can't you understand in "natives of fernandino po" ? Canarians were sent to America and Madeira, there is no evidence they were sent to Bioko so these people are in fact mixed individuals of colonial portuguese/spanish and local bantus this is why these creole people live on the island : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernandino_peoples
Why can't you understand the very heading of the illustration 'GUANCHE RACE' with the man subtitled as 'Cutthroat'. Criminals were exiled away from their homes in penal colonies. What would indigenous Bube be doing in the penal colony of their own home?? LOL
But you're right about one thing-- some Canarians were sent to America and they looked like this:
Not exatly the Euro-looking people you generalize they were.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26249 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Capsians likely resemble the Early neolithic inhabitants of Morocco. the specific call/mutation (@rs17646946) is associated with "curly" hair reduction not straight hair. your source even explained it.
quote:For all Taforalt individuals we find the derived homozygous AA genotype for SNP rs17646946 in this gene, which has been associated with straighter hair in Europeans (allelic effect (β) = 0.4-0.5, explained variance = 6.11%) (98).
Penetrance for a single alelle accounts for %6.1 less curly hair. Homozygous individuals 12%. That won't make them have the hair texture you share. Not only that, Europeans have the highest frequency of the derived allele at a lil over 20%. But sampled Nigerians of ibadan (Yoruba) carry this mutation at about 12%. East Asians and East Asian derivatives are basically fixed for the Ancestral/wild type alleles.
It's similar to the 'Agouti signaling protein' and the 'melanocortin 1 receptor'... mutations in respective loci associated with variance in skin color which are available in people who would undeniably be seen as black. but they're hyped up in the Taforalt populations in an attempt to differentiate them from Black Africans or SSA's. lol Genetic/intellectual warfare. It's actually quite disappointing as a lot of times these mutations could actually be North African in origin but because of some weird biases in this space we end up disrespecting the hell out of the initial inhabitants.
Wasn't the below a reconstruction of a man from the Iberomaurisian (or related) population? Of course, reconstructions like this are not the end-all-be-all of how the subjects looked in life, but if they did look something like this, I suspect even our Antalas would consider them Black.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Capsians likely resemble the Early neolithic inhabitants of Morocco.
How so ? They were very different physically, had a different industry, lived in different areas, capsians were also living in a small area and absent in Morocco. They most likely came from further east.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: the specific call/mutation (@rs17646946) is associated with "curly" hair reduction not straight hair. your source even explained it.
quote:For all Taforalt individuals we find the derived homozygous AA genotype for SNP rs17646946 in this gene, which has been associated with straighter hair in Europeans (allelic effect (β) = 0.4-0.5, explained variance = 6.11%) (98).
Penetrance for a single alelle accounts for %6.1 less curly hair. Homozygous individuals 12%. That won't make them have the hair texture you share. Not only that, Europeans have the highest frequency of the derived allele at a lil over 20%. But sampled Nigerians of ibadan (Yoruba) carry this mutation at about 12%. East Asians and East Asian derivatives are basically fixed for the Ancestral/wild type alleles.
It's similar to the 'Agouti signaling protein' and the 'melanocortin 1 receptor'... mutations in respective loci associated with variance in skin color which are available in people who would undeniably be seen as black. but they're hyped up in the Taforalt populations in an attempt to differentiate them from Black Africans or SSA's. lol Genetic/intellectual warfare. It's actually quite disappointing as a lot of times these mutations could actually be North African in origin but because of some weird biases in this space we end up disrespecting the hell out of the initial inhabitants. [/QB]
That's simply in line with what europeans have (+ it peaks among europeans) :
quote:In conclusion, we report a quantitative trait locus that affects hair form in Europeans. The association accounts for ∼6% of the variance in hair morphology in this group and falls within the Trichohyalin gene, which has a known role in hair formation. The patterns of allele frequencies are striking, with the highest frequency of these variants observed in Northern Europeans (Figure 1), paralleling the observation of the straight-hair EDAR variant in Asian populations (Figure S9).
So again it would not prevent them from having straight and if some could have curly hair it would have been of the type we already found in modern north africa or Europe (my brother has curly hair that looks nothing like the frizzy type we found in SSA and I would say that curly hair is actually more common than straight hair in north africa).
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Why can't you understand the very heading of the illustration 'GUANCHE RACE' with the man subtitled as 'Cutthroat'. Criminals were exiled away from their homes in penal colonies. What would indigenous Bube be doing in the penal colony of their own home?? LOL
do you know from where this pic comes from ? ---> Natural History Of The Human Species By Colonel Hamilton Smith - First Edition 1848 With 34 Hand Coloured Illustrations
do you at least know that at that time guanches didn't even exist ? Their enslavement is at least 3 centuries older than that. Moreover like I said they were not sent to Bioko and were not "natives of fernandino po" like he wrote
but why are you avoiding the native creole population ? :
quote:The indigenous group of Fernandinos or Los Fernandinos, were mixed-race descendants of the indigenous population of Spanish Guinea originating from the island of Fernando Pó (modern day Bioko Island), an island discovered by the explorer Fernão do Pó. This group consisted of mulattoes of black female Bubi and white male Spanish parentage, and were part of the emancipados social class. Many children from such unions were not claimed by the father; however, some couples married under Roman Catholic law. Because the Bubi women generally were responsible for rearing and caring for their mixed-race children, they identified with and were generally accepted by the Bubi tribe.
But you're right about one thing-- some Canarians were sent to America and they looked like this:
Not exatly the Euro-looking people you generalize they were. [/QB]
"euro-looking" ??? since when do north africans look european ? Moreover I would need the source of the depiction they used because I've searched any depiction from that era and couldn't find a single one so maybe they use a non canarian to illustrate their book.
meanwhile you still can't answer why the first people who saw them and regularly interacted with them depicted them like this :
why don't you bring something from the canary island instead of suspicious documents from bioko and texas lol
MOD EDIT ** Docs aren't suspicious because YOU don't like them ** ** second warning about well-poisoning. That you note ** ** the refs are 'diasporan' not 'homelander' is enough **
[ 10. December 2021, 05:04 PM: Message edited by: Tukuler ]
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Elmaestro Are you saying Yorubas carry genes for loose curly hair? Because I remember rapper G Herbo had a kid with light skin and curly hair,from what I can tell,his ex was also Black.
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: @Elmaestro Are you saying Yorubas carry genes for loose curly hair? Because I remember rapper G Herbo had a kid with light skin and curly hair,from what I can tell,his ex was also Black.
afro-americans have european ancestry (even g herbo himself looks mixed) :
quote:Genome-wide ancestry estimates of African Americans show average proportions of 73.2% African, 24.0% European, and 0.8% Native American ancestry (Table 1). We find systematic differences across states in the US in mean ancestry proportions of self-reported African Americans (Figure 1 and Table S2). On average, the highest levels of African ancestry are found in African Americans living in or born in the South, especially South Carolina and Georgia (Figure 1Aand Table S3). We find lower proportions of African ancestry in the Northeast, the Midwest, the Pacific Northwest, and California. The amount of Native American ancestry estimated for African Americans also varies across states in the US. More than 5% of African Americans are estimated to carry at least 2% Native American ancestry genome-wide (Figures S1 and 1D). African Americans in the West and Southwest on average carry higher levels of Native American ancestry, a trend that is largely driven by individuals with less than 2% Native American ancestry (Figure 1B). With a lower threshold of 1% Native American ancestry, we estimate that about 22% of African Americans carry some Native American ancestry (Figure S2).
posted
The problem with using European genes as an excuse for why some Black folks exhibit a non stereotypical African traits is bs,because the opposite is also true. So any Euro or other group that have a non standard phenotype is the result from admixture instead of group variation?
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: The problem with using European genes as an excuse for why some Black folks exhibit a non stereotypical African traits is bs,because the opposite is also true. So any a Euro or other group has nothing to do with genetic variation but admixture?
I never implied this but it's well known that afro-americans have european admixture hence why I can easily spot them sometimes (same for afro-latinos). Here the blacks we have look clearly different.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Antalas You haven't added anything to the conversation. The 09 study reported what they believed was a novel signal in the correlation between Straight hair and rs17646946. But the facts I pointed out remains. The gene is NOT a determinant of straight hair. Claiming it is would be dishonest, that's all.
"why do I estimate that the Capsians resembled Early Neolithic Moroccans"
Simple: They came from the same region. The Early Neolithic population excavated at Ifri_n-Amer_moussa came from the east. Their predecessors as well most likely came from the east. The Moroccan Neolithic was always highlighted by their similarities to European Neolithics and any outlying characteristics are given comparison to the Capsian. So while moroccan Neolithic sites weren't categorized as Capsian you can't look at the chronology and assume they were completely unrelated.
secondly there's no real evidence that Modern North Africans received anything in access to EEF and Early Neolithic North African that'll fall out of line with the Autosomal landscape between North Africa and the Near east. The Capsians came from the East (Most likely North east Africa as we have multiple lines of evidence for pulse migrations from that region.) The EEF populations most related to coastal North Africans are unequivocally of southern European origin (they came from the north).
So unless you're attributing Capsian culture to the expansion of EEF there's no real room for speculation.
Oranian/Maurasians ~ >20Kya Typical Capsian 10Kya + Shows continuity cultural and biologically with Oranian/Maurasians Early Moroccan Neolithic 6kya + Shows less cultural and biological continuity Oranian/Maurasians So If pre-Conquest NAs are EEF + EnNA
What's left for the Capsians to be?
@Thereal There isn't a gene for loose curly hair. Hair texture is epistatic. What's true is that a minority the Yoruba carry a gene which has the known effect of reducing the intensity of the curl pattern.
There's a chance that you might not even be able to tell the difference in some individuals who carry this gene and not.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: [QB] @Antalas You haven't added anything to the conversation. The 09 study reported what they believed was a novel signal in the correlation between Straight hair and rs17646946. But the facts I pointed out remains. The gene is NOT a determinant of straight hair. Claiming it is would be dishonest, that's all.
It does NOT mean they hadn't straight hair either and the fact they pointed out it's associated with straighter hair among europeans is quite revealing.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: "why do I estimate that the Capsians resembled Early Neolithic Moroccans"
Simple: They came from the same region. The Early Neolithic population excavated at Ifri_n-Amer_moussa came from the east. Their predecessors as well most likely came from the east. The Moroccan Neolithic was always highlighted by their similarities to European Neolithics and any outlying characteristics are given comparison to the Capsian. So while moroccan Neolithic sites weren't categorized as Capsian you can't look at the chronology and assume they were completely unrelated.
secondly there's no real evidence that Modern North Africans received anything in access to EEF and Early Neolithic North African that'll fall out of line with the Autosomal landscape between North Africa and the Near east. The Capsians came from the East (Most likely North east Africa as we have multiple lines of evidence for pulse migrations from that region.) The EEF populations most related to coastal North Africans are unequivocally of southern European origin (they came from the north).
So unless you're attributing Capsian culture to the expansion of EEF there's no real room for speculation.
Oranian/Maurasians ~ >20Kya Typical Capsian 10Kya + Shows continuity cultural and biologically with Oranian/Maurasians Early Moroccan Neolithic 6kya + Shows less cultural and biological continuity Oranian/Maurasians So If pre-Conquest NAs are EEF + EnNA
What's left for the Capsians to be?
What makes you think IAM came from the East ? I think you got confused by their affinities with neolithic levantines but that was in contrast to SSA samples; their FST distances are quite clear about who they were :
quote:"Although, ADMIXTURE analysis pointed to some relationship between IAM and Levantine aDNA samples, especially the Natufians, this is not supported by FST distances."
If they absorbed an eastern influence it was surely small and nothing actually links them to capsians whether culturally or morphologically. And actually everything points to a EEF influx from Europe this shouldn't even be questionned that is why the first evidence of proper neolithic package are found in northern morocco and not south-west tunisia, that's why we're dealing with cardium and bell beaker cultures instead of PPNC or Merimda/Maadi cultures. That's why KEB plots between IAM and Iberian_N instead of showing affinities with some kind of ANF+ PPNC or PPNC+ KENpastoral_N.
The fact that you can't find where to place capsian in all of this; doesn't mean they have to be seen as some kind of rich ANF population that's a very speculative assumption.
Imo capsians aren't the source of EEF/ANF ancestry but actually would explain the "natufian" (though it's more of a PPNC/KEN_N type of admixture) found among the two copper age samples :
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: @Antalas You haven't added anything to the conversation. The 09 study reported what they believed was a novel signal in the correlation between Straight hair and rs17646946. But the facts I pointed out remains. The gene is NOT a determinant of straight hair. Claiming it is would be dishonest, that's all.
It does NOT mean they hadn't straight hair either and the fact they pointed out it's associated with straighter hair among europeans is quite revealing.
It isn't revealing in the context you're attributing it to. Most Europeans don't even have the derived polymorphism man.
quote:What makes you think IAM came from the East ? I think you got confused by their affinities with neolithic levantines but that was in contrast to SSA samples; their FST distances are quite clear about who they were :
quote:"Although, ADMIXTURE analysis pointed to some relationship between IAM and Levantine aDNA samples, especially the Natufians, this is not supported by FST distances."
If they absorbed an eastern influence it was surely small and nothing actually links them to capsians whether culturally or morphologically. And actually everything points to a EEF influx from Europe this shouldn't even be questionned that is why the first evidence of proper neolithic package are found in northern morocco and not south-west tunisia, that's why we're dealing with cardium and bell beaker cultures instead of PPNC or Merimda/Maadi cultures. That's why KEB plots between IAM and Iberian_N instead of showing affinities with some kind of ANF+ PPNC or PPNC+ KENpastoral_N.
The fact that you can't find where to place capsian in all of this; doesn't mean they have to be seen as some kind of rich ANF population that's a very speculative assumption.
Imo capsians aren't the source of EEF/ANF ancestry but actually would explain the "natufian" (though it's more of a PPNC/KEN_N type of admixture) found among the two copper age samples :
You're talking in complete circles... You need to explain the marked cultural shift after 7000bc. You need to explain the marked biological shift in related cultural sites such as Grotte des Idoles, El Mnasra 2 or Kiffen. There was no European admixture in none of the samples sequenced from IAM. But there was a shift towards domestication, pottery and the ingestion of snails prior to European introduction. Where did that shift come from? Mind you this was 3 thousand years After the first proposed Appearance of a Capsian site to the east.
- Your point regarding the Calcholithic samples is dumb. and even self contradictory Just say that you believe that the Capsians were just Natufians in Algeria 10,000bc so we can laugh and move on. But in terms of speculation... that would take the cake.
There's marked SSA in the later North African samples on top of the elevated Natufian in relation to the already present Iberomaurasian admixture. That's literally evidence that that admixture proportionately accompanied the Natufian-related ancestry. And that ancestry composition is not to far off from that of Taforalt and IAM to begin with. 30-39% African-related 70-60% Natufian related. Dude just use common sense.Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: You're talking in complete circles... You need to explain the marked cultural shift after 7000bc. You need to explain the marked biological shift in related cultural sites such as Grotte des Idoles, El Mnasra 2 or Kiffen. There was no European admixture in none of the samples sequenced from IAM. But there was a shift towards domestication, pottery and the ingestion of snails prior to European introduction. Where did that shift come from? Mind you this was 3 thousand years After the first proposed Appearance of a Capsian site to the east. - Your point regarding the Calcholithic samples is dumb. and even self contradictory Just say that you believe that the Capsians were just Natufians in Algeria 10,000bc so we can laugh and move on. But in terms of speculation... that would take the cake. There's marked SSA in the later North African samples on top of the elevated Natufian in relation to the already present Iberomaurasian admixture. That's literally evidence that that admixture proportionately accompanied the Natufian-related ancestry. And that ancestry composition is not to far off from that of Taforalt and IAM to begin with. 30-39% African-related 70-60% Natufian related. Dude just use common sense. [/QB]
Come on man the "marked" cultural shift was restricted to a small area and cultural shift doesn't necessarily imply admixture. That's why cardium/cardial artifacts can be find alongside IAM remains and that's not a middle eastern culture nor were IAMs similar to early neolithic europeans.
Again Capsians were culturally distinct from IAM so I don't see why you bring pottery, ingestion of snails, etc. You might also get confused by the presence of IBM skulls in capsian sites which is a proof of cohabitation but again that doesn't mean anything about the origin of IAM.
As for these two samples, I never implied or said they were natufians. I said that they probably came from further east (probably the delta area) and might have been some kind of PPNC + KenyaPastoral_N which would explain the non-taforalt affinity and some of the morphological SSA affinities they had (they also get better fits with it than with simply natufian). That "natufian" clearly has nothing to do with taforalt or IAM.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Have no idea what lects the below ethnic groups spoke, whether they were or how much pre or proto Berber/taMazight. - Tropical North Africa differs somewhat from - Atlas Maghreb North Africa and - Mediterranean Coast Maghreb North Africa.
Some set of Nilo-Saharan seems very likely if something like the Songhai/Berber lects go back as far or further than the reported spillage/conquest by Æthiopian types clear to Dyris.
Where did all the Atlas, pre-Sahara, and Sahara blacks of the Greco-Latin authors go?
Blacks darker than the Afers, pre-Khart Haddas ancient Tunisians et al, abounded in North Africa south of the Tunisian/Algerian chotts, i.e.; 34 degrees north.
Black does not mean negro. Black does not mean sub-Saharan.
Morocco's Haratin in the south will say they're autochthone, that they aren't recently arrived "black West Africans" and the "whites" they welcomed as new neighbors took over.
North Africa had its own local pops who, wherever their sources were, these local pre-Saharans and North Saharans [didn't look like and] were neither our • Savannah West Africans • Gulf of Guinea West Africans • South Central Africans • Lower, Middle, or Upper clear to Great Lakes/ Mountains of the Moon (Ruzenwori) Nile Africans • Mediterranean coast Africans.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
_______ Juba II Numidian African ____________ Typical Euro-Roman
The Numidian differs from the European in all the stereotypical hair and facial features. The hair is thicker and "wilder." The eye is larger and rounder. The cheek bones are higher and more protruding. The nose is flatter and broader with nostrils tending to round/oval rather than oblong/slit shape. The lips are thicker and more everted. King Juba II's antecedents thus seem the type of black autochthonous to littoral North Africa.
L3b1a dominates ancient Gran Canaria samples. It positively dates there to at least the 10th century. No U6 reported. Many tribes inhabited the archipelago.
quote:L3b1a, has point estimates of 11.7–14.8 ka, with starlike patterns suggesting involvement in major expansion.
L3b1a likely existed in Western Sahara before the southward demographic expansion of Berbers fleeing Arab invasion.
Juba II may have named it after sea lions, Canarii, judging from the below closing sentence. Pliny tells us Juba found
quote:"traces of buildings; that while they all have an abundant supply of fruit and of birds of every kind, Canaria also abounds in palm-groves bearing dates and in conifers; that in addition to this there is a large supply of honey, and also papryus grows in the rivers, and sheat-fish; and that these islands are plagued with the rotting carcasses of monstrous creatures that are constantly being cast ashore by the sea."
.
Ruh Roh. Don look now but some further confirming forensics type infos
[ Suspension bridges strength is intertwined threads making cables, ] [ multidisciplinary, transdisciplinary, every discipline all rolled up into ] [ some hellah unassailable, unbreachable holistic presentations, get it? ]
Ol skool anthro Dixon has interesting remarks based on skull and face. The tribes may've got to the islands at different times from different locales.
posted
I will not answer you until you stop editing my posts.
********* Hahahahahaa You can't answer the Ancients You can't answer the uniparental genetics You can't answer the upcoming autosomal genomics All you got is propaganda bulletins to paste up on the walls and shutter boards vainlt attempting to replace fact with truth.
KEMET is political not anything goes, that's another forum
So behave as asked and I will cease.
And note despite pleas and warnings all I did was add to your judgemental posts Except for one where you were just off da chain. You can show me where you feel I was too harsh.
But do as you please or govern yourself The thread goes on because, the thread, well, IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU
[ 10. December 2021, 08:01 PM: Message edited by: Tukuler ]
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is no point in writing an answer if you'll edit it just after because you can't handle the truth.
** Don't be obtuse truth is subjective and personal (propaganda) fact is objective and universal (academic)
Did I remove anything or did I just add in what I find unacceptable your judgemental attitude as to what's "real" data.
I do it there on the spot rather than waste a post.
Comply or go away I don't care which I'm done with you and your interuptions
Your next whiney post will simply be deleted but valuable ON TOPIC posts like your one on the Church and Canary slavey are golden, capice?
Now hoo shoo scat til you figure what you'll do
[ 10. December 2021, 07:40 PM: Message edited by: Tukuler ]
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Earliest Canarian aDNA
Uniparentals with some dates
Earliest Canaries aDNA
Deep ancestral genetic roots covered above, now here's genome wide ADMIXTURE and PCA plot of 5 ancient samples' fitted among moderns.
Per ADMIXTURE and PCA 7th-11th CE samples are closest to pre-Saharans re * the Erg Iguidi (near where Democratic Saharawi Arab Republic/Mauritania/Algeria/Morocco all meet) * the Chotts and Eastern Erg (Tunisia/Algeria) the horns of a pre-Sahara foot of Atlas arc of population.
Aboriginal Canarians from Tenerife & Gran Canari in red underscore show Saharawi and subset Mzabi near ancestral identity.
The PCA indicates Tunisia from southern east coast thru to oasis (Mzab) Algeria wider affinities.
posted
^the studies lack a larger variety of north african samples but from what you posted guanches have more EEF ancestry than mozabites; they also appear to have more middle eastern ancestry and less SSA...
Anyway The PCA you posted, show them to plot next to modern tunisians and algerians (still a bit more euro shifted than these two modern groups). It's also visible on the Van de loosdrecht 2018 paper :
their Fst distance chart is also quite clear :
Are you going to say guanches were europeans and arabs because of this :
[ Get rid of that shih, I'm not defending myself from statements I never made you piece of ... ] [ you never bothered to read what I wrote indigenee Canarians were, again and again, they were ] [ nothing but the further west extention of the iMazghen stretching from Sahrawi to central and ] [ east Algeria AND YOU CANT QUOTE ME PRESENTING ANY OTHER INTERPRETATION BECAUSE THAT"S THE ONLY ] [ OPINION, ITS THE ONLY ONE THE RAW DATA ALLOWS YOU DANG BLACK HATING BIGOT ]
[ 10. December 2021, 08:38 PM: Message edited by: Tukuler ]
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Why do you think you're contradicting what I posted?
You never bothered to read what I wrote again and again. Indigenee Canarians were nothing but the furthest west extention of the iMazghen stretching from Sahrawi to central and east Algeria
Quote me presenting any other opinion. You can't because the raw data doesn't allow any other interpretation you dang black hating bigot of a Beur. Are you one of Iblis' djinn?
You go into knee jerk militant NorthAfrocentric battle stance
against anything a stupid negro says is gotta be wrong why bother digesting it to see what's actually in it
If a black says water is wet you'll rush in to say something about steam and ice SMH.
You argue against validity of data what you yourself turn around and present without even realizing its the same factual data and you doit only to in your mind put the black in his place since nothing offered from a black can possibly make any sense.
I told you I don't like you saying stuff like "what are you trying" as if I'm pulling sleight of hand magic. You're projecting, pushing militant NorthAfrocentric talking point propaganda of what your sick arses thinks is in every black person's mind.
Better save this this thread because if you don't remove that insinuation the whole post goes to the bit bucket and you can whine from from France to Azawad about it, it'll be gone!
I straight out posted Per ADMIXTURE and PCA 7th-11th CE samples are closest to pre-Saharans re * the Erg Iguidi (near where Democratic Saharawi Arab Republic/Mauritania/Algeria/Morocco all meet) * the Chotts and Eastern Erg (Tunisia/Algeria) the horns of a pre-Sahara foot of Atlas arc of population.
And you turn around and insinuate I said "Are you going to say guanches were europeans and arabs"
You know what? Why wait? That's enough devil lie right there to show your devil arse the door. Abuse of hospitality would get you axed in the Sahra.
Topic Closed
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic