posted
^ It's funny you should say that. Doctors James Harris and Edward Wente did x-ray analyses on the skulls of well known royal mummies in order to establish family relationships also, yet even they could not help but to remark on the findings of strong African traits in these mummies!!
Such findings from studies of the remains alone makes awaiting findings from the DNA of these mummies apprehensive, no??
Especially since DNA findings from modern 'Arab' Egyptians alone shows a significant African substratum.
Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Doug, What the hell difference does that make? We are talking about historical Greece, not frickin Adam and Eav. Wake up son and smell the coffee.
Greek scholars have to do with Greek history, we have no earth idea what history you are talking about.
Patriot stop whining. The Greek scholars you refer to only cover a small part of Greek history, which is the "classical" period and mostly they are not anthropologists as "classical studies" is most often not based around anthropology, biology or genetics. That does not make them the be all and end all of all knowledge about human migrations and influence on the Greek isles going back 5,000 or more years. Therefore, stop throwing up "Greek scholars" when someone says something unless you wish to be shown to be an idiot for interjecting yourself into something that you don't have a clue about. YOU are not a Greek scholar and you should stop trying to pretend that you are or represent them. Greek scholars are quite capable of representing themselves and their own history quite easily without you. Stop clowning yourself by trying to be someone else and realize that your arguments are your own and not anyone else.
And there are GREEK scholars who disagree with you on many levels, including Dr. Shamsaddin Megalommatis.
Posts: 8899 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Greek historical scholars cover all of Greek history. I want you to cite data from scholars connecting up these genetic markers you speak of to ACTUAL SPECIFIC Greek development. This data needs to be peer reviewed articles by Greek historians. Any college would make you do that.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not the one's you refer to. And they are not anthropologists qualified to speak on the biological and physical traits of ancient populations who first migrated to Greece.
Classical studies:
quote: Graduate Program
Our Ph.D. program is dedicated to training students in the broad and integrated field of Classical Studies, which includes Greek and Latin languages and literatures, and the history, art, and archaeology of the ancient Greek and Roman world.
We seek to provide students with a broad understanding of Greco-Roman antiquity as a whole; a working knowledge of the specialized tools and techniques needed for research in the field; and familiarity with methodologies developed in other disciplines that are relevant to Classical Studies. Duke is particularly fortunate in faculty and resources that allow direct contact with the textual and material foundations of our knowledge of antiquity. A flexible program of courses can thus be arranged. After course work is completed, an integral part of the training is teaching experience, in courses in Classical Studies and in Greek and Latin.
The department cooperates with others at Duke that share our interests, such as Art and Art History, History, Philosophy, Political Science, Religion, and Women's Studies. We have close ties to the faculty, students, and resources of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, with whom we collaborate in the Consortium for Classical and Mediterranean Archaeology (CCMA). Our faculty and students are integral both to Duke’s Center for Late Ancient Studies, and to Duke’s Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies. We also have strong ties to the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, the American Academy in Rome, and the American Research Center in Turkey.
The department encourages all graduate students to take advantage of its extensive research materials, which include the collection of Duke papyri; the collection of Greek and Latin manuscripts in Perkins’ Special Collections Library; and the Classical sculpture, ceramics, and other material in the Nasher Museum of Art.
A Greek scholar is not qualified to judge biological, genetic and anthropological studies unless that scholar is a biologist, geneticist or anthropologist and has formal training as such.
Again, you are talking nonsense. A linguist is not qualified to critique a dissertation on mathematics. A mathematician is not qualified to critique a dissertation on chemistry. Calling someone a scholar does not mean that they are qualified to speak on anything outside of the specific area of study in which they have received training...... Historians are not anthropologists. Historians are not biologists. Historians are not geneticists and therefore they are not experts in all fields and qualified to dispute findings in areas outside their specific areas of expertise.
Classical studies, like history, is more of a liberal arts curriculum based on the study of languages, arts, literature and culture. It is not a hard science which involves things like biology, genetics, chemistry or mathematics.
Posts: 8899 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote From abstract: HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks. A. Arnaiz-Villena, K. Dimitroski, A. Pacho, J. Moscoso, E. Gómez-Casado, et. al Tissue Antigens (2001) Volume 57, Issue 2 , Pages118 - 127
"1) Macedonians belong to the "older" Mediterranean substratum, like Iberians (including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese, Turks (Anatolians), Armenians and Iranians, 2) Macedonians are not related with geographically close Greeks, who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum, 3) Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiopian) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups. Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles.. Genetic distances are closer between Greeks and Ethiopian/sub-Saharan groups than to any other Mediterranean group and finally Greeks cluster with Ethiopians/sub-Saharans in both neighbour joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses. The time period when these relationships might have occurred was ancient but uncertain and might be related to the displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living in pharaonic Egypt."
quote from: "Population genetic relationships between Mediterranean populations determined by HLA allele distribution--a historic perspective." A. Arnaiz-Villena , E. Gomez-Casado, J. Martinez-Laso. Tissue Antigens, Volume 60, Number 2, August 2002, pp 111-121(11)
HLA genomics shows that: 1) Greeks share an important part of their genetic pool with sub-Saharan Africans (Ethiopians and West Africans) also supported by Chr 7 Markers. The gene flow from Black Africa to Greece may have occurred in Pharaonic times or when Saharan people emigrated after the present hyperarid conditions were established (5000 years BC)... some of the Negroid populations may have migrated (16, 19, 31) towards present-day Greece . This could have occurred when arid Saharan conditions became established and large-scale migrations occurred in all directions from the desert. In this case, the more ancient Greek Pelasgian substratum would come from a Negroid stock.(2)"
"Other Negroid genes have also been found in Greeks. They are the only Caucasoid population who bears cystic fibrosis mutations typical of Black Africans (Chromosome 7). See Dork, et al. In Am. J. Hum. Genet, 1998: 63: 656-682."
"A more likely explanation is that some time during Egyptian pharaonic times a Black dynasty with their followers were expelled and went towards Greece . Indeed, ancient Greeks believed that their religion and culture came from Egypt (37, 38). Also, Herodotus (37)states that the daughters of Danaus (who were black) came from Egypt in great numbers to establish a presence in Greece . Otherwise, the Hyksos pharaohs and their people were expelled from Egypt and may have reached Greece by 1540 B.C. However, the Hyksos are believed to come from modern Israel and Syria . Other gene input from Ethiopians (meaning ‘‘Blacks’’ in ancient Greek) may have come from King Memmon from Ethiopia and his troops, who went to help the Greeks against Troy according to Homer’s Iliad. Having identified an African input to the ancient Greek genetic pool, it remains to determine the cultural importance of this input for constructing the classical Hellenistic culture.. "
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5906 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doug, You are just talking nonsense. A classical scholar is a greek historian with a CONCENTRATION in the period after 500 BC But you do understand that they will have extensive knowledge about earlier Greek history. OTHER Greek historians deal with the period after 3000 BC. You have allowed your brain to be rotted out by this nonsense.
Greek historians will deal directly with all of the data you discuss if it is even worthy of being discussed. My sense is that it is not. You need to suppy writings from at least half a dozen scholars to prove your point.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: It's funny you should say that. Doctors James Harris and Edward Wente did x-ray analyses on the skulls of well known royal mummies in order to establish family relationships also, yet even they could not help but to remark on the findings of strong African traits in these mummies!!
Such findings from studies of the remains alone makes awaiting findings from the DNA of these mummies apprehensive, no??
Especially since DNA findings from modern 'Arab' Egyptians alone shows a significant African substratum.
Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Doug, You are just talking nonsense. A classical scholar is a greek historian with a CONCENTRATION in the period after 500 BC But you do understand that they will have extensive knowledge about earlier Greek history. OTHER Greek historians deal with the period after 3000 BC. You have allowed your brain to be rotted out by this nonsense.
Greek historians will deal directly with all of the data you discuss if it is even worthy of being discussed. My sense is that it is not. You need to suppy writings from at least half a dozen scholars to prove your point.
And again a historian is not a biologist, anthropologist or geneticist. A historian studies people, places, events and documents and evidence related to such in order to build a narrative of what took place during a particular time period. Therefore Greek historians are those who are experts in describing who did what and when during a particular time period of Greek history. That does NOT make them biologists or geneticists. Biologists, geneticists and anthropologists are likewise NOT historians. They are TOTALLY separate and distinct areas of study and expertise. For a historian to ignore biological, anthropological and genetic data and studies is to undermine their OWN work. Historians can only consult and refer to experts in other fields in order to corroborate the historical narrative they are building. It does not make them experts in biology, genetics or anthropology.
Posts: 8899 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
No Doug, Look you are a helpless case. You have no clue of what you are talking about. If you refuse to listen to me then go to the university and ask one of the profs to explain the historiographic system to you. I am talking to a frickin tree trunk here and you refuse to let me help you.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
LOL! Mr Patriot the only one without a clue as usual is you.
You don't understand the difference between history, biology and genetics so you change the point and talk about going to a university.
Stop pretending to represent scholarship, because you don't. YOU are no scholar. YOU have no point. Therefore, nothing you are saying has any weight or value on this issue. Stop cheer leading and pretending to represent universities and professors because you don't.
You have NOT refuted anything I have said to this point, even on the issue of historians versus biologists. Yet you persist on talking as if you know what you are talking about when you do not. You cannot even stand behind your own words on a simple point as to what classical scholars actually study and what they are not qualified to speak on, yet you continue to pretend to refer to them as if that is an answer to everything, when it isn't. When I want to know what was written in 500 BC Greece or the political attitudes of Greece during the same time frame, I will consult Greek scholars, but if I am looking at genetics, I will consult anthropologists and geneticists. I know what scholarship is and I know how to use it. YOU on the other hand are simply nothing but a mouth full of hot air that pretends to know scholarship but has presented NOT ONE BIT in any thread on this board you have participated in. Yet you claim to be one. LOL!
You only represent YOU and all the hot air coming out of your mouth is simply meaningless dribble that amounts to nothing. It does not address the issues on this page and there has no value whatsoever because YOU YOURSELF are simply clowning yourself pretending to DEBATE by playing the fool and cheer leading squad.
The point is that genetics studies and scholarship has been presented to you by ACTUAL scholars yet you cannot refute it. Historians cannot refute genetic studies. They are not qualified to do so unless they are ALSO geneticists and have the facts and evidence to support a different point of view. So why don't YOU go to a university and find a professor to REFUTE the genetic studies put forward here Mr Scholar?
Otherwise stop whining and complaining because you cannot stop people from showing the facts and evidence to be CONTRARY to the nonsense you believe in, including SCHOLARSHIP from actual scholars, most of whom ARE European. You keep crying about scholarship, yet IGNORE actual scholarship. Stop crying and whining so much and actually go DO some scholarship and come back when you actually HAVE something to debate.
Otherwise stop pretending to BE a scholar by playing cheer leading squad.
Posts: 8899 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ As usual, the nutty professor just ignores the evidence I presented. Instead, the fool continues to argue with Doug about history and historiography. History in its broad definition are events that happened. In its strict definition it is the record of events. Historiography is the process of writing history or the study of that process. We all know that historiography is as faulty as the people who write it. Hence, not all of history is perfectly accurate the this can't be anymore true than history that is written by the so-called 'West'.
WHAT GETS DEFINED AS HISTORY?
In the last half century, the boundaries of "acceptable" history have been expanded by a multidisciplinary approach, including sources previously dismissed: orature (oral tradition), linguistics, anthropology, social history, art, music and other cultural sources. More recently, the social locations of historians have come under consideration as a factor shaping their perspectives, along with a sense that there is no absolutely "objective" view of history. Past claims of objectivity have biases clearly visible today, notably in siding with European settlers and slavers against non-christian cultures, and the almost total eclipse of female acts and experience from historical accounts.
A reader who might react negatively to a blatant expression of racism often misses perceiving one cloaked in scholarly language, in assumptions, judgments and misinformation most people have not been educated to catch. It does not occur to many people to question a pronounced overemphasis on Europe, the smallest continent (actually, a subcontinent of Asia.) If a chapter or two on African and Asian history is inserted in a textbook, publishers go ahead and call it a world history. Typically, media depictions of history have not caught up with information now available in specialized academic sources, and continue to present the old stereotypes and distortions as fact.
How about we get back to the topic at hand, and Doug that means not being led into another of the 'professor's wild goose chases.
Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Kemp, please don't pollute this thread with your nonsense! I already answered your ridiculous false claim!
Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Nope. What I other educated posters present in this thread is TRUTH based on evidence and scholarship not some nonsense based on white supremacist fantasy-- that is YOUR M.O. Pat!
So I guess it's more like a stainless steel pot calling the kettle black. yes.
Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
you have just warped what is a good mind with this afrocentric garbage. Mainstream scholars think you guys are a bunch of kooks.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ And so all the academic sources and scientific studies we cite to support our so-called "Afrocentric garbage" comes from whom other than mainstream scholars??! Can you tell us? Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pat, can you explain why DNA findings on modern Egyptians show a strong African substratum even among 'Arab' Egyptians??...
...or why doctors James Harris and Edward Wente after x-ray analyses on the skulls of well known royal mummies found strong African features in these mummies??
Posts: 26318 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Djehuti, If I looked in one of your ears I would see out the other side. You have no ability to look at that data and draw conclusions. People study for a decade for a PHD to be able to do that. That is why you, as a student, have to do proper scholarly studies to understand the information. Because you do not do that you end up with these crazy conclusions.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic