quote:Charles writes: I haven't seen rasol 'blacken' Greece at all. At any rate, just because the precursors to European E3b and J2 lineages lie in the Middle East and East Africa doesn't make them 'black lineages' by any stretch, just as most of the J-M267 lineages in Ethiopians are *NOT* 'Arabian Caucasoid' lineages. Lineages should not and are not "racial", they simply provide us clues to population expansions and migrations.
What is true and of relevance:
SOY Keita Arethusa 26 (1993) pg 329: "Professor Angel also found evidence for a "Black" (if such exists) genetic influence in neolithic and later Aegean populations. Racialists models, which imply non-overlapping gene pools, are clearly negated by Angel's work."
I concur with this.
To anyone who does not understand the above comments of Dr. Keita, I will assist in explaining them.
To anyone who would like to refute Keita's comments - here is your chance.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe Keita meant the very lineages Charles mentioned.
And how would Angel come up with a reliable image or description the genetic code of ancient Aegeans? The DNA in the bones would have rotted quite a bit over the ages, so I would take genetic samples from old bones with a grain of salt.
posted
the statement is simply incorrect. There is no expicit genetic eveidence for any black influence in Greece, at least none that has ever been presented here. Outside of radical black political circles this kind of information is not discussed by anyone. It is a belated effort to attach to Africa an importance it has simply never had.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The burden of proof is on you rasol, not classical scholars, all of which disreagard those claims. The statement I made was that based on what you have posted there is no relaible evidence that any African influence on Greece exists.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:No Keita's comment doesn't have any thing to do with DNA from old bones.
He cited a study from Angel that mentioned "genetic" influence from Africa in Greek bones. I must have taken this to mean that he had gotten DNA, and DNA contains genetic data (though it may not withstand all those centuries). Maybe I erred in assuming such.
Of course, the ancient Greeks would have had quite dark skin by European standards, and they almost certainly did have genes that originated from sub-Saharan Africa (unless someone could prove that Greek E3b came from African slaves imported into Greece as some Nordonuts contend, though I doubt it).
The question remains, how dark? Obviously they (with exceptions) had less brown complexions than Egyptians, but possibly barbarian incursions from the Roman period may have lightened the Greek net skin color. I guess they came in various shades of olive, similar to lighter-skinned Arabs and modern northern Egyptians today.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Go back and read the post rasol. I said that you have not offered ANY relaiable evidence to back up the idea of a black influnce in Greece, genetic or otherwise. That pretty much covers everything you have posted, at least everything that I have read.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:unless someone could prove that Greek E3b came from African slaves imported into Greece as some Nordonuts contend, though I doubt it
The attempt to use slavery - a european reference to european ethnic groups - slavs, placed in bondage primarily by other europeans - as a qualifier of one's own ancestry is the height of ethnocentric lunacy.
Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome were slave socieites.
Therefore Europeans in general have slave ancestry.
The original Slav(s) were Europeans.
Europeans have Slav [slavic] ancestry. Europeans have Black African ancestry.
And whatever tortured excuses they make for it, it's *all* their ancestry.
Their need to make excuses only reveals that they are ashamed of their own ancestry.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
The burden of proof is on you rasol, not classical scholars, all of which disreagard those claims. The statement I made was that based on what you have posted there is no relaible evidence that any African influence on Greece exists.
The burden is not on rasol, the burden is on you hore since Classical literature makes it clear Africans influenced Greece especially Egypt.
There is an abundance of evidence that the Egyptians had long settled many parts of ancient Greece.
In the ancient writings of the Greeks, the Egyptians were called Melampodes or "blackfeet". The Egyptians were also called Danaans in Greek history.
According to Hyainus in Fabula , and Appollonius, when the Danaans came to Greece they were called 'blackfeet'. This view is supported by the discovery of an inscribed stone in the Peloponnese that had Egyptian writing on it dating to the 5th Dynasty.
This short review of the Classical literature relating to the African identity of the Egyptians suggest that the views held by Lefkowitz in relation to an Egyptian presence in Egypt may not be correct.Numerous archaeologist have found abundant evidence of Egyptians settled in Greece long before the coming of the Indo-European-Aryans to Anatolia.
Cecil Torr in < Memphis and Mycenae> , discussed the inscriptions of Amemhotep found in a Mycenaean tomb at Ialysos in Rhodes and an 18th Dynasty scarab dating to the same period. As a result of the discovery of these artifacts Torr speculated that there were relations between Egypt and Greece between 1271 and 850 B.C.
The discovery of Torr was only the tip of the iceberg. Since the discovery of these artifacts in the 19th Century, archaeological evidence of Egyptians in Greece during the 2nd millennium has also been reported by J.D.S. Pendlebury, William A. Ward, and S.W. Manning .
Pendlebury provides a detailed discussion of the Egyptian material found at Laconia, Argolid, Thebes in Boeotia, and Athens. Pendlebury like Torr, believes that there were close relations between Greece and Egypt between the 12th and 7th centuries B.C.
Pendlebury's Aegyptiaca, has been excellently followed up by N. J. Skon Jedele, in her recent dissertation on Egyptian artifacts found in Greece. This dissertation provides even more examples of Egyptian artifacts found in Greece than those recorded by Pendlebury over sixty years ago.
Manning gives a well balanced discussion of the Egyptian material found in the Aegean area dating between the Old Kingdom and Dynasties 10 and ll. The work of Hankey and Warren indicate that there is archaeological evidence for Egyptians in ancient Greece, contrary to the false claims of Lefkowitz in Not Out of Africa.
The question must be asked, if there is this abundance of literature relating to an Egyptian role in ancient Greece, Why does Lefkowitz fail to discuss this literature? This question must be answered by Lefkowitz.
The failure of Lefkowitz to discuss this relevant knowledge base is inexcusable given her position at a prestigious Eastern University. The existence of a rich literature on the presence of Egyptians in ancient Greece makes Lefkowitz's and your claims about the ancient Greeks patently false.
End Notes
1. Lefkowitz, Not out of Africa, p.157.
2.Cecil Torr, Memphis and Mycenae, (London: Cambridge University Press, 1896) p.61.
3.Ibid., pp.64-65.
4. J.D.S. Pendlebury, Aegyptica: A catalogue of Egyptian objects in the Aegean Area, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1930.
5. William W. Ward, Egypt and the Mediterranean World 2200- 1900 B.C., Beirut: American University of Beirut. 1971.
6. S.W. Manning, The absolute chronology of the Aegean Early Bronze Age, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You say the literature makes it clear Clyde, classical scholars do not. The only area that any connection can be made would be in large bulding and construction. I would agree that the Greeks got their ideal for building large structures from Egyptian grids....but that is all. Lefkowitz is a classical scholar, not an afrocentric crack pot. Her views are supported by Classical scholars in general.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
No Hore Leftkowitz is a CLASSICS scholar! Perhaps you do not no the difference. I suggest that you use a dictionary.
Posts: 72 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: You say the literature makes it clear Clyde, classical scholars do not. The only area that any connection can be made would be in large bulding and construction. I would agree that the Greeks got their ideal for building large structures from Egyptian grids....but that is all. Lefkowitz is a classical scholar, not an afrocentric crack pot. Her views are supported by Classical scholars in general.
hore you don'tknow anything about Classical lietrature. If you did you would know that it is the Classical literatures which proves the presence of Africans on the Greek mainland. Below we will discuss the Garamante/Garamande people.
GARAMANTES According to Classical Writers
Some of the first African colonists to arrive in Greece came from Crete. These Cretans were called Garamantes. After the goddess Ker or Car, these people also came to be also known as the Carians. The Carians spoke a Mande languages.
These people usually sailed to the Islands in Aegean and the surrounding coast where they established prosperous trading communities.
There is frequent mention of the Garamantes of the Fezzan, in Classical literature of Greece and Rome. The Garamantes were recognized as a Black tribe. They were known to the Greeks and Romans as dark skinned. In Ptolemy (I.8.5.,p.31) a Garamante slave was described as having a body the color of pitch or wholly black.
Graves (1980) and Leo Frobenius linked the Garamante to the ancient empire of Ghana (c.300 BC to A.D. 1100). Graves (1980) claims that the term Garamante is the Greek plural for Garama or Garamas. He said that the present Jarama or Jarma are the descendants of the Garamante; and that the Jarama live near the Niger river.
The Olympian creation myth, as recorded by Pindar in Fragment , and Apollonius Rhodius, makes it clear that the Garamantes early colonized Greece. Their descendants were called Carians. The Carians practiced apiculture. As in Africa the Carians practiced matrilineal descent. According to Herodotus , even up until his time the Carians took the name of their mother.
Many of the Greek myths are historical text which discuss the transition of Greece from an matriarchal society to a patriarchal Aryan society. The term Amazon was often used by the Aryans to denote matriarchal societies living on the Black Sea. The battle between Thesus and the Amazons, led by Queen Melanippe, records the conflicts between the ancient Aryan-Greeks and the Libyco-Nubians settled around the Black Sea.
The classical Carians and Egyptians were very close. Having originated in the Fertile African Crescent they had similar gods and cultural traditions dating back to the Proto-Saharan period.
The Garamantes founded Attica, where they worked the mines at Laureium. Demeter, the goddess of agriculture and fruitfulness, came from the Fezzan (Libya) by way of Crete. It was Demeter who took poppy seeds and figs to Europe.
Apollonius Rhodius (.iv.1310) tells us that the goddess Athene was born beside Lake Triton in Libya. The goddess Athene, was called Neith by the Egyptians and Nia by the Cretans in Linear A writing. This shows that the Garamantes took this god to Europe in addition to Demeter and Amon (=Ammon ,Amma).
By 3000 BC, the Garamantes has spread their influence to Thrace and early Hellenic Greece. Hesiod, who was a Kadmean (i.e., of Egyptian descent), in Works and Days , said that before the Hellenic invasion the Grecian people lived in peace and tranquility and had matriarchal societies. The name Europe comes from Aerope, the daughter of King Catreus, a Cretan.
Thucydides observed that:
"The first person known to us by tradition as having established a navy is Minos. He made himself master of what is now called the Hellenic sea, and ruled over the Cyclades into most of which he sent the first colonies, expelling the Carians and appointing his own sons as governors; and thus did his best to put down piracy in these waters, a necessary step to secure the revenues for his own use".
Thus we find that many Cretans who originally came from Africa also settled much of mainland southern Europe.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nonsense. Clyde, you know that nobody is going to teach that stuff. If I email your post to Dr Lefkowitz and others you know what kind of response I am going to get.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: Nonsense. Clyde, you know that nobody is going to teach that stuff. If I email your post to Dr Lefkowitz and others you know what kind of response I am going to get.
No it isnt. Mr. Winters is absolutely correct that many writers have postulated a strong relationship between the Minoans(first Cretans) and Egypt. So get your facts straight. What you SHOULD say is that BECAUSE Minoan culture thrived 1000 years before the "classical" period, it is not considered part of "classical" Greek history, ie that after 500 B.C. To try and look at "classical" Greece ONLY AFTER 500 B.C. is only to look at Greece at the late period of its history and ignore what LED to its rise to greatness. Egypt's relationship to Greeceextends hundreds of years prior to Greece's "classical" period
No one is claiming that "classical" Greeks were black Africans. This is OBVIOUSLY not true. What we are saying is that in Greeces' prehistory, which goes back at least as far as 5,000 B.C., Africans played a role, but I wouldnt go as far as Mr. Winters because the evidence does not support the island of Thera, which was destroyed by the eruption of a volcano and earthquakes, being colonized by Africans. Therefore, we are taking legends and stories and trying to extrapolate that into a precise picture, which is not accurate. The best thing to do is to look at any contact between Africa and the Minoan civilization as NOT being the central element of their culture OR religion.
Therefore, the influence from Africa on Greece should not be OVER emphasized, but it should not be under emphasized. However, Afrocentrics have partially been the blame, since some of their claims go a bit overboard in tying Africa to Greece. Greece has a LOONG history and there were actually MANY different cultures/civilizations that developed at different periods in time. The Minoan is but one then there is the Mycenaean and Hellenistic civilization. What we call "classical" Greece is basically Hellenistic civilization. Much of Hellenistic culture derived from local traditions. Over this long period of history, there were contacts between Greece and Egypt/Africa, but you cannot generalize and say that Egypt "colonized" Greece. That is an overstatement. There may have been some presence of Egyptians in Greece as well as Greeks in Egypt, but you cannot overdo such settlements as necessarily "colonization"
Minoan frescoes from Thera (civilization destroyed by Volcano)
Note these ruins are MUCH MORE ADVANCED than those found in later periods in other parts of Greece. Therefore, various factors have impacted on the development of Greek civilization, including wars, natural disasters and other events, making the study of Greek history very complex indeed.
Here is a full listing of Greece's historical periods:
Therefore, it is not enough to claim "classical" studies as being a enough to explain Greek history. The classical period is really the LAST of a long line of Greek civilizations and really doesn't explain much. "Clasical" studies is only a SMALL part of all of Greek history.
quote: All the above terms are modern constructs used to cubbyhole the principal periods of Greek archaeology. For the ancient Greeks, the Late Bronze Age would have been their "Age of Heroes," the time of Herakles, Perseus, the Trojan War, etc. "Dark Age" generally describes a time of political and economic depression that occurred on the heels of the collapse of the Bronze Age powers of Greece. The 7th century marks a period of transition between the Dark Age and the rise of Greece as most people are familiar with it. "Archaic" can be defined only in relation to "Classical," i.e., as the developmental period in architecture, sculpture and other arts that eventually led to "Classical." "Classical" is a biased term, referring to what most people consider the epitome of Greek attainment in architecture and other arts. After Alexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire, beginning in 334, the Greek world expanded and took on new political institutions, while Greek art and architecture took on new twists. "Hellenistic" or "Greek-like" weakly describes this age, which modern scholarship has ending with the official founding of the Roman Empire.
Also note that the ideas of the colonization of Greece by Egypt is probably referring to the period after the Greek dark ages and is the beginning of what would be called the "classical" period. That is when we see Egyptian influence in art and architecture in Greek monuments, during what is called the "archaic" period. It would make sense as well, since Egypt had been thriving for more than two millenium as a continuous civilization at this point and would have been considered a "superpower" of the time. Therefore, a "classical" scholar could not contribute any signifigant information on this period, since it is PRIOR to the period covered in "classical" studies.
So, there are many instances of Egyptian influence on Greek and even Roman culture. The point is you have to be specific on who/what/when/where when making such claims since overgeneralization is NOT going to make a good argument.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Charles writes: I haven't seen rasol 'blacken' Greece at all. At any rate, just because the precursors to European E3b and J2 lineages lie in the Middle East and East Africa doesn't make them 'black lineages' by any stretch, just as most of the J-M267 lineages in Ethiopians are *NOT* 'Arabian Caucasoid' lineages. Lineages should not and are not "racial", they simply provide us clues to population expansions and migrations.
What is true and of relevance:
SOY Keita Arethusa 26 (1993) pg 329: "Professor Angel also found evidence for a "Black" (if such exists) genetic influence in neolithic and later Aegean populations. Racialists models, which imply non-overlapping gene pools, are clearly negated by Angel's work."
I concur with this.
To anyone who does not understand the above comments of Dr. Keita, I will assist in explaining them.
To anyone who would like to refute Keita's comments - here is your chance.
Angel's "evidence" amounts to 2 out of 14 skeletal remains and even Keita was cautios about saying that, thus he said 'if thus exists'.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
To add to that, I see no evidence of lineages reflecting “recent genetic mixture” from sub-Saharan Africans nor East Africans that would correspond with Angel’s proposed evidence of “black” genetic mixture.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: Nonsense. Clyde, you know that nobody is going to teach that stuff. If I email your post to Dr Lefkowitz and others you know what kind of response I am going to get.
Yes. They'll say: "KEEP IT ON THE DOWN LOW!"
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rigaud: To add to that, I see no evidence of lineages reflecting “recent genetic mixture” from sub-Saharan Africans nor East Africans that would correspond with Angel’s proposed evidence of “black” genetic mixture.
But that is the problem what is "recent"? 5,000 B.C. is relatively recent compared to the existence of humans, but compared to the Greek "classical" period, that is ancient history.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rigaud: To add to that, I see no evidence of lineages reflecting “recent genetic mixture” from sub-Saharan Africans nor East Africans that would correspond with Angel’s proposed evidence of “black” genetic mixture.
But that is the problem what is "recent"? 5,000 B.C. is relatively recent compared to the existence of humans, but compared to the Greek "classical" period, that is ancient history.
The E3b lineages that Greeks have aren't the same as those found in East Africans. I agree the precoursor to both East African and European E3b1 has an East African origin but the European cluster is simply a different cluster.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Note these ruins are MUCH MORE ADVANCED than those found in later periods in other parts of Greece. Therefore, various factors have impacted on the development of Greek civilization, including wars, natural disasters and other events, making the study of Greek history very complex indeed.
Doug you make some valid points. Yet I believe that the Akrot frescos have been retouched. The people in these frescoes bear little resemblance to the African type from Thera.
Akrot Figure
Thera Boat Scene
If you look carefully these men are wearing Afros, while the Akrot figure wears a 19th Century European haircut.
Close Up of Men on the Tower
Shame on those archaeologist who try to re-write history.
quote: Nonsense. Clyde, you know that nobody is going to teach that stuff. If I email your post to Dr Lefkowitz and others you know what kind of response I am going to get.
Yes. They'll say: "KEEP IT ON THE DOWN LOW!"
.
Clyde you know full well there are no Black Greeks period, why keep advocating this position thats weakly supported if at all?
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
How do you know Hore? Have you studied the remains of ALL periods of civilization in Greece? The point is we should CLARIFY what is being said in the passage posted by Rasol, since it is a very loose and ambiguous phrase that really doesn't answer much at all. Whether there were African populations in Neolithic Greece, doesnt change the fact that by the "classical" period, such a presence was INSIGNIFICANT. Likewise, trying to extrapolate the POSSIBLE presence of Africans in the Neolithic to explain Greek culture in the "classical" period is ludicrous. However, that being said, that DOES NOT mean that there was no contact and influence from Egypt to Greece in the time leading up to and including the "classical" period. That is also ludicrous.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rigaud: To add to that, I see no evidence of lineages reflecting “recent genetic mixture” from sub-Saharan Africans nor East Africans that would correspond with Angel’s proposed evidence of “black” genetic mixture.
But that is the problem what is "recent"? 5,000 B.C. is relatively recent compared to the existence of humans, but compared to the Greek "classical" period, that is ancient history.
The E3b lineages that Greeks have aren't the same as those found in East Africans. I agree the precoursor to both East African and European E3b1 has an East African origin but the European cluster is simply a different cluster.
Right and the ancient migrations that introduced these lineages is TOO OLD to be of any signifigance in "classical" Greek populations. All humans came from Africa, at least SOME circles, but that does not change the fact that populations outside Africa have CHANGED a lot since then.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Note these ruins are MUCH MORE ADVANCED than those found in later periods in other parts of Greece. Therefore, various factors have impacted on the development of Greek civilization, including wars, natural disasters and other events, making the study of Greek history very complex indeed.
Doug you make some valid points. Yet I believe that the Akrot frescos have been retouched. The people in these frescoes bear little resemblance to the African type from Thera.
Akrot Figure
Thera Boat Scene
If you look carefully these men are wearing Afros, while the Akrot figure wears a 19th Century European haircut.
Close Up of Men on the Tower
Shame on those archaeologist who try to re-write history.
....
While you do have fragments of images that SEEM to show a much darker population than that of present day or even "classical" Greece, the fact remains that the WHOLE population of Thera/Knossos, was NOT dark skinned. All of the images do not show brown skinned individuals. Either way, do you have EVIDENCE that the people looked more "African" prior to restoration by the archaeologists? Even if Thera did have a sizable African population, you must keep in mind that Thera was at least 1000 years prior to "classical" Greek civilization. Minoan civilization was destroyed by the earthquake and eruption of the volcano. Therefore, Minoan civilization and any presence of Africans is NOT directly significant to the development of "classical" Greek civilization.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Angel's "evidence" amounts to 2 out of 14 skeletal remains and even Keita was cautios about saying that, thus he said 'if thus exists'.
Not quite Charles:
Keita writes: Professor Angel also found evidence for a "Black" (if such exists) genetic influence -> in neolithic and later Aegean populations.
The such, in question, does not pertain to the quantity or quality of Larry Angel's evidence. [which is a life's work, btw, and not just from 14 skeletan as implied]
It does not pertain specifically to the Greeks and their ancestry either: it pertains to the concept of "Black genetic influence".
Whether or not such exists depends upon how you conceive of the notion of Black, and further within the context how 'genetic influence' is denoted.
Thus Keita adds: Racialists models, which imply non-overlapping gene pools, are clearly negated by Angel's work."
Blacks in the context in which Dr. Keita uses it here is and ethnic reference, [like Arab, or Berber, or Jew]....and not a racial typology.
And yes, the Greeks do have Black African ancestry, as denoted paternally by E3b male lineages, and autosomally via Benin HBS, which both originate via Black Africa and Black Africans.
Handwringings over uncontested facts are mere distraction.
In order to dispute Dr. Keita the following legitimate avenue are available.
* show that the Greeks do not have E3b.
* show that the Greeks do not have Benin Hbs.
* show that E3b and/or Benin Hbs did not originate in and among Black African[s].
And, show that Professor Larry Angel was wrong when he wrote the following:
Negroid traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters (McCown, 1939) and in Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers....probably FROM NUBIA via the predessors of the Badarians.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: Nonsense. Clyde, you know that nobody is going to teach that stuff. If I email your post to Dr Lefkowitz and others you know what kind of response I am going to get.
Oh, so the ancients belief of where and how they came to be is less important than what some arrogant prick historian has to say thousands of years later...get real!! There is plenty of archeological evidence to support the theory of Greece being colonized by Egypt. I follow the Revised Ancient Model, not the Revised Aryan Model.
Posts: 1219 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of corse Winters has no evidence that Greeks and other Aegeans looked like blacks. Its plain to see that Clyde is a charalatan
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rigaud: The E3b lineages that Greeks have aren't the same as those found in East Africans.
Correct, in that Greeks carry a derived neolithic cluster of and East African lineage - derived *from East Africans.* The neolithic provinence of the alpha cluster provides genetic support for Neolithic African migrations to Greece.
quote: I agree the precoursor to both East African and European E3b1 has an East African origin
East African origin is correct!
As do the BOTH the East African and Europeans who carry the lineages.
One can scream cluster to the heavens and hope to change the subject, but it has no bearing on the Black African ancestry of the Greeks.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What period are you referring to? The fact that Greece drew influence from Egypt during the archaic period, circa 800 B.C. has nothing to do with the ORIGIN of E3b in Greek populations. That would have been the result of a far more ANCIENT population migration. Likewise, the populations seen in the frescoes from Thera, therefore, could be a reflection of a lingering component of African features in the population or it could have also been a more RECENT migration from Africa. All of these periods of contact need to be clarified as well as the ORIGINAL basis of E3b and when it arrived in Greece.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Man this is redux once again and racializing lineages is not only wrong its something tht is not practiced by geneticists. E3b1 alpha has no distribution in Africa except for a minor influence in northern Egypt therefore it makes no sense to say that E3b in Greeks is proof of black African ancestry. As you well know now, E-M81 is now considered to be a E3b1 lineage so using your logic some Berbers are "black African" genetically?
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
rasol has no idea what he is talking about Doug. First, he can not firmly establish that they exist at all. This is what lefkowitz talked about when she discribed the afrocntrics attempt to turn "possibly" and "might have been" into absolute facts. If it were possible to prove that they existed then the next step would be to connect all of this to neolithic Europe, which cannot be done either. This is all lollipop land stuff put out for all the obvious reasons.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rigaud: The E3b lineages that Greeks have aren't the same as those found in East Africans.
Correct, the Greeks carry a derived neolithic cluster of and East African lineage - derived *from East Africans.* The neolithic provinence of the alpha cluster provides genetic support for Neolithic African migrations to Greece.
My point being that E3b1 in Greeks is not proof of black African mixture in Greeks still stands. The alpha cluster didn't arrive in Europe via migrations from Africa. There's also a lack of other African specific lineages to support this hypothesis, why would it be only E3b? E3b1 alpha is higest in Greece and decreases in frequency as one moves west. It is known that E3b1 alpha spread westward during Neolithic expansions, so using your logic that E3b is Greeks is proof of black African mixture one can say it was a westward expansion of black Africans into Europe, which is of course complete nonsense. Thats why it makes no sense to racialize lineages.
quote: I agree the precoursor to both East African and European E3b1 has an East African origin
East African origin is correct! As do the East African and Europeans who carry the lineages. [/QUOTE]
E3b1 alpha isn't east African in origin.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rigaud: Of corse Winters has no evidence that Greeks and other Aegeans looked like blacks. Its plain to see that Clyde is a charalatan
I wouldn't go that far. There clearly are images from Thera that depict a population with "afros". However, the point is WHO were they and what was their relation ship to the REST of Minoan civilization and the Agean?
another one:
Unfortunately, these are but fragments of images and we cannot make a conclusion based on fragmentary evidence. What I will say is that some of the frescoes were heavily damaged, requiring LARGE PARTS to be repainted in modern times:
other images from Santorini: Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
African populations concentrated in the Upper Nile valley expanded both Eastwards and Westwards, and into the Middle East and Europe.
This scenario supports other studies about the Paleolithic European groups. Those studies suggest that a primitive, stone-age human came to Europe, probably from Central Asia and the Middle East, in two waves of migration beginning about 40,000 years ago. Their numbers were small and they lived by hunting animals and gathering plant food. They used crudely sharpened stones and fire.
About 24,000 years ago, the last ice age began, with mountain-sized glaciers moving across most of Europe. Paleolithic Europeans retreated before the ice, finding refuge for hundreds of generations in three areas: what is now Spain, the Balkans and the Ukraine.
When the glaciers melted, about 16,000 years ago, the Paleolithic tribes resettled the rest of Europe. Y chromosome mutations occurred among people in each of the ice age refuges, said Underhill. A pattern that developed in Spain is now most common in northwest Europe, while the Ukraine pattern is mostly in Eastern Europe and the Balkan pattern is most common in Central Europe.
About 8,000 years ago, a more advanced people, the Neolithic, migrated to Europe from the Middle East, bringing with them a new Y chromosome pattern and a new way of life: agriculture. About 20 percent of Europeans now have the Y chromosome pattern from this migration.
The above is a reference to East African lineages in the Greeks.
Underhill continues....
Archaeological digs in European caves clearly show that before 8,000 years ago, most humans lived by gathering and hunting, he noted. After that, there are traces of grains and other agricultural products. - Peter Underhill
quote:Doug writes: The fact that Greece drew influence from Egypt during the archaic period, circa 800 B.C. has nothing to do with the ORIGIN of E3b in Greek populations.
It simply denotes later and additional influence - and cultural, as opposed to biological.
That is also a valid point - although that is not what Dr. Keita is refering to.
quote:All of these periods of contact need to be clarified as well as the ORIGINAL basis of E3b and when it arrived in Greece.
Absolutely - so let's continue to do so. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Clade E3b1 is of Black African origin, and the Greeks have this clade, and so BY DEFINITION have Black African ancestry.
A clade is a single line of descent stemming from a common ancestor.
Alpha denotes a cluster - not a clade.
Look, I'm not going to further entertain this subject, I said my portion and it still stands that Greeks do not have any black African lineages. Underived E3b1 is African in origin but the alpha cluster is not.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
"It's Dr. Keita whose point stands. You are not refuting it, only missing it."
I think you're misinterpreting and taking Keita's statements out of context, he said *IF* such a thing exists. I like what Underhill said of E-m81, that its incorrect to assume that all E-M81 is closely related, I think you're doing the same thing with E3b1 in this case, you're making the mistake of assuming that *ALL* E3b1 subclades and clusters are "black African,ie, closely related.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think you're misinterpreting and taking Keita's statements out of context, he said *IF* such a thing exists.
Actually, it was I who noted that "If such exists" properly qualifies the concept of Black genetic influence, and not as you implied, the quality of prof. Angel's work.
quote:I like what Underhill said of E-m81, that its incorrect to assume that all E-M81 is closely related,
I like what Underhill said too:
The point is that one should be careful not to assume that all M81 chromosomes are recently closely related. It is import to recognize that M81 probably does not truly occupy a "tip" in the Y tree even if depicted as such in some data sets.
But I don't see how it refutes Keita, or alters Underhill's assessment of E3b.
Underhill PA, Passarino G, Lin AA, Shen P, Mirazon Lahr M, Foley RA, Oefner PJ, Cavalli-Sforza LL.
The phylogeography of Y chromosome binary haplotypes and the origins of modern human populations.
Human Genetics 2001 Jan;65(Pt 1):43-62.
“The M35(E3b)/M215 sub-clade cluster of heliotypes fragments a lineage described previously (Hammer et al. 1997). We suggest that a population with this sub-clade of the African YAP/M145/M203/PN2 cluster expanded into the southern and eastern Mediterranean at the end of the Pleistocene.”
quote:you're making the mistake of assuming that *ALL* E3b1 subclades and clusters are "black African, ie, closely related.
No assumptions necessary in citing Keita and Underhill and Angel and foresight based on prior experience that no one can refute them.
The only mistake involved is in continually confusing clades and "clusters", which have no bearing on Keita's point.
Your entire argument depends upon PRETENDING NOT TO UNDERSTAND the difference between cluster and clade.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keita never said there was any "black African" genetic influence in Greece, he simply quoted Angel based on Angel's skeletal analysis[2 out of 14 crania]. As per Underhill via personal communication, Y chromosones do not correlate to bone morphology and if you really read any of Keita's work on the Y chromosone and Pn2 clade he states that the PN2 clades cuts across different peoples with varying phenotypes thus E3b1 which is part of the PN2 clade does not correlate to anyone specific race. Your position is the exact opposite of what Keita is saying.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:As per Underhill via personal communication, Y chromosones do not correlate to bone morphology
Correct, but a straw argument since neither Keita nor I said otherwise.
quote: and if you really read any of Keita's work on the Y chromosone and Pn2 clade he states that the PN2 clades cuts across different peoples with varying phenotypes
Of course I have read his work, and understand it, and concur with it, however you do not, so you distort it to hide the differences between you:
What Keita actually says is, "the PN2 clade *UNITES*" people with various phenotypes.
By changing that to 'cuts across' you totally distort and reverse the meaning of it - from unite to 'divide'.
quote: thus E3b1 which is part of the PN2 clade does not correlate to anyone specific race.
Correct, as noted by Keita: Racialists models, which imply non-overlapping gene pools, are clearly negated by Angel's work."
Here is the clear difference between you and Keita, Charles:
Keita does not regard Black as a race typology.
But you continue to think in terms of race typologies.
This is why you can't understand his comments about Black genetic influence in ancient Greeks.
This is the key difference between you and Keita and that is exactly where and why you disagree.
quote:Your position is the exact opposite of what Keita is saying.
My position *is exactly* what Keita has stated:
Professor Angel also found evidence for a "Black" (if such exists) genetic influence in neolithic and later Aegean populations. Racialists models, which imply non-overlapping gene pools, are clearly negated by Angel's work."
Your position, that Greeks have no Black African ancestry is contradicted by Keita, Underhill, *and* Angel.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Abstract: HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia by DNA typing and sequencing. HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQallele frequencies and extended haplotypes have been for the first timedetermined and the results compared to those of other Mediterraneans, par-ticularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances, neighbor-join-ing dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed. Thefollowing conclusions have been reached: 1) Macedonians belong to the‘‘older’’ Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians (including Basques), NorthAfricans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese, Turks (Anatolians), Ar-menians and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with geographicallyclose Greeks, who do not belong to the ‘‘older’’ Mediterranenan substratum,3) Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiop-ian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. BothGreeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles, such as *0305,*0307, *0411, *0413, *0416, *0417, *0420, *1110, *1112, *1304 and *1310.Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharangroups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks clusterwith Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining dendrograms andcorrespondence analyses. The time period when these relationships mighthave occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the displace-ment of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in pharaonic Egypt.The highly polymorphic HLA system has been validated as useful fordistinguishing and/or relating populations (and individuals) in manyresearch studies since the first International HLA AnthropologyWorkshop (Evian, 1973) and in all the subsequent seven InternationalWorkshops. HLA gene frequencies correlate with geographically re-lated populations. The existence or absence of gene flow among neighbouring ethnic groups may be assessed with the study of HLAfrequencies and the corresponding genetic distances (1, 2).Ancient Macedonians were among the peoples that lived be-tween northern Greece (Thessaly) and Thrace in the Balkans andwere considered by the classical Greeks as ‘‘non-Greek barbarians’’that could not participate in the Greek Olympic Games (3).
..
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic