Recent studies find the ancient Egyptians had a tropical body plan like sub-Saharan 'black' Africans and were not cold-adapted like European type populations. Tropical body plans also indicate darker-skin.
QUOTE: "The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the "super-Negroid" body plan described by Robins (1983).. This pattern is supported by Figure 7 (a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994), which indicates that the Egyptians generally have tropical body plans. Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. Despite these differences, all samples lie relatively clustered together as compared to the other populations." (Zakrzewski, S.R. (2003). "Variation in ancient Egyptian stature and body proportions". American Journal of Physical Anthropology 121 (3): 219-229.
a 2008 Study puts the ancient Egyptians closer to US Blacks than whites:
Quotes:
"Intralimb (crural and brachial) indices are significantly higher in ancient Egyptians than in American Whites (except crural index among females), i.e., Egyptians have relatively longer distal segments (Table 4). Intralimb indices are not significantly different between Egyptians and American Blacks... Many of those who have studied ancient Egyptians have commented on their characteristically ''tropical'' or ''African'' body plan (Warren, 1897; Masali, 1972; Robins, 1983; Robins and Shute, 1983, 1984, 1986; Zakrzewski, 2003). Egyptians also fall within the range of modern African populations (Ruff and Walker, 1993), but close to the upper limit of modern Europeans as well, at least for the crural index (brachial indices are definitely more ''African'').. In terms of femoral and tibial length to total skeletal height proportions, we found that ancient Egyptians are significantly different from US Blacks, although still closer to Blacks than to Whites.
Comparisons of linear body proportions of Old Kingdom and non-Old Kingdom period individuals, and workers and high officials in our sample found no statistically significant differences among them. Zakrzewski (2003) also found little evidence for differences in linear body proportions of Egyptians over a wider temporal range. In general, recent studies of skeletal variation among ancient Egyptians support scenarios of biological continuity through time. Irish (2006) analyzed quantitative and qualitative dental traits of 996 Egyptians from Neolithic through Roman periods, reporting the presence of a few outliers but concluding that the dental samples appear to be largely homogeneous and that the affinities observed indicate overall biological uniformity and continuity from Predynastic through Dynastic and Postdynastic periods.
Zakrzewski (2007) provided a comprehensive summary of previous Egyptian craniometric studies and examined Egyptian crania from six time periods. She found that the earlier samples were relatively more homogeneous in comparison to the later groups. However, overall results indicated genetic continuity over the Egyptian Predynastic and Early Dynastic periods, albeit with a high level of genetic diversity within the population, suggesting an indigenous process of state formation. She also concluded that while the biological patterning of the Egyptian population varied across time, no consistent temporal or spatial trends are apparent. Thus, the stature estimation formulae developed here may be broadly applicable to all ancient Egyptian populations.." ("Stature estimation in ancient Egyptians: A new technique based on anatomical reconstruction of stature." Michelle H. Raxter, Christopher B. Ruff, Ayman Azab, Moushira Erfan, Muhammad Soliman, Aly El-Sawaf, (Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008, Jun;136(2):147-55
Older limb studies find the same:
"In this regard it is interesting to note that limb proportions of Predynastic Naqada people in Upper Egypt are reported to be "Super-Negroid," meaning that the distal segments are elongated in the fashion of tropical Africans.....skin color intensification and distal limb elongation are apparent wherever people have been long-term residents of the tropics." (C.L. Brace, 1993. Clines and clusters..")
"An attempt has been made to estimate male and female Egyptian stature from long bone length using Trotter & Gleser negro stature formulae, previous work by the authors having shown that these rather than white formulae give more consistent results with male dynastic material... When consistency has been achieved in this way, predynastic proportions are founded to be such that distal segments of the limbs are even longer in relation to the proximal segments than they are in modern negroes. Such proportions are termed "super-negroid"...
Robins (1983) and Robins & Shute (1983) have shown that more consistent results are obtained from ancient Egyptian male skeletons if Trotter & Gleser formulae for negro are used, rather than those for whites which have always been applied in the past. .. their physical proportions were more like modern negroes than those of modern whites, with limbs that were relatively long compared with the trunk, and distal segments that were long compared with the proximal segments. If ancient Egyptian males had what may be termed negroid proportions, it seems reasonable that females did likewise." (Robins G, Shute CCD. 1986. Predynastic Egyptian stature and physical proportions. Hum Evol 1:313-324. Ruff CB. 1994.)
Modern anthropology shows that the ancient Egyptians are well within the range of tropical Africa, contradicting older research in the 1990s that sought to deny any relationship. The anthropologist below, Nancy Lovell was recommended by Mary lefkowitz in Black Athena Revisted.
"There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.. In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas." (Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999) pp 328-332)
The ancient Badarians were quite representative of ancient Egyptians as a whole and showed clear links with tropical Africans to the south. They have been sometimes excluded in studies of the ancient Egyptian population, which shows continuity in its history, not mass influxes of foreigners until the late periods.
Quotes: "As a result of their facial prognathism, the Badarian sample has been described as forming a morphological cluster with Nubian, Tigrean, and other southern (or "Negroid") groups (Morant, 1935, 1937; Mukherjee et al., 1955; Nutter, 1958, Strouhal, 1971; Angel, 1972; Keita, 1990). Cranial nonmetric trait studies have found this group to be similar to other Egyptians, including much later material (Berry and Berry, 1967, 1972), but also to be significantly different from LPD material (Berry et al., 1967). Similarly, the study of dental nonmetric traits has suggested that the Badarian population is at the centroid of Egyptian dental samples (Irish, 2006), thereby suggesting similarity and hence continuity across Egyptian time periods. From the central location of the Badarian samples in Figure 2, the current study finds the Badarian to be relatively morphologically close to the centroid of all the Egyptian samples. The Badarian have been shown to exhibit greatest morphological similarity with the temporally successive EPD (Table 5). Finally, the biological distinctiveness of the Badarian from other Egyptian samples has also been demonstrated (Tables 6 and 7).
These results suggest that the EDyn do form a distinct morphological pattern. Their overlap with other Egyptian samples (in PC space, Fig. 2) suggests that although their morphology is distinctive, the pattern does overlap with the other time periods. These results therefore do not support the Petrie concept of a \Dynastic race" (Petrie, 1939; Derry, 1956). Instead, the results suggest that the Egyptian state was not the product of mass movement of populations into the Egyptian Nile region, but rather that it was the result of primarily indigenous development combined with prolonged small-scale migration, potentially from trade, military, or other contacts.
This evidence suggests that the process of state formation itself may have been mainly an indigenous process, but that it may have occurred in association with in-migration to the Abydos region of the Nile Valley. This potential in-migration may have occurred particularly during the EDyn and OK. A possible explanation is that the Egyptian state formed through increasing control of trade and raw materials, or due to military actions, potentially associated with the use of the Nile Valley as a corridor for prolonged small scale movements through the desert environment. (Sonia R. Zakrzewski. (2007). Population Continuity or Population Change: Formation of the Ancient Egyptian State. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 132:501-509)
Ancient Egyptians most related to other Africans and are part of a Nilotic continuity rather than something Mediterranean or Middle Eastern
"Certainly there was some foreign admixture [in Egypt], but basically a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times... [the] Badarian people, who developed the earliest Predynastic Egyptian culture, already exhibited the mix of North African and Sub-Saharan physical traits that have typified Egyptians ever since (Hassan 1985; Yurco 1989; Trigger 1978; Keita 1990.. et al.,)... The peoples of Egypt, the Sudan, and much of East African Ethiopia and Somalia are now generally regarded as a Nilotic continuity, with widely ranging physical features (complexions light to dark, various hair and craniofacial types) but with powerful common cultural traits, including cattle pastoralist traditions.." (Frank Yurco, "An Egyptological Review," 1996 -in Mary R. Lefkowitz and Guy MacLean Rogers, Black Athena Revisited, 1996, The University of North Carolina Press, p. 62-100)
African peoples are the most diverse in the world whether analyzed by DNA or skeletal or cranial methods. Attempts to deny this are rooted in racism and error. African people, particularly SUB-SAHARAN Africans, vary the most in how they look, more so than any other population in the world.
"Estimates of genetic diversity in major geographic regions are frequently made by pooling all individuals into regional aggregates. This method can potentially bias results if there are differences in population substructure within regions, since increased variation among local populations could inflate regional diversity. A preferred method of estimating regional diversity is to compute the mean diversity within local populations. Both methods are applied to a global sample of craniometric data consisting of 57 measurements taken on 1734 crania from 18 local populations in six geographic regions: sub-Saharan Africa, Europe, East Asia, Australasia, Polynesia, and the Americas. Each region is represented by three local populations.
Both methods for estimating regional diversity show sub-Saharan Africa to have the highest levels of phenotypic variation, consistent with many genetic studies." (Relethford, John "Global Analysis of Regional Differences in Craniometric Diversity and Population Substructure". Human Biology - Volume 73, Number 5, October 2001, pp. 629-636)
# "In addition, craniometric variation also shows agreement with genetic data in showing highest levels of diversity in sub-Saharan Africa than in other geographic regions (Relethford and Harpending, 1994). Further, there is a clear decline in levels of craniometric variation as geographic distance from East Africa increases (Manica et al., 2007; von Cramon-Taubadel and Lycett, 2008; Betti et al., 2009)." -- John H. Relethford* (2010). Population-Specific Deviations of Global Human Craniometric Variation From a Neutral Model. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 2010
"The living peoples of the African continent are diverse in facial characteristics, stature, skin color, hair form, genetics, and other characteristics. No one set of characteristics is more African than another. Variability is also found in "sub-Saharan" Africa, to which the word "Africa" is sometimes erroneously restricted. There is a problem with definitions. Sometimes Africa is defined using cultural factors, like language, that exclude developments that clearly arose in Africa. For example, sometimes even the Horn of Africa (Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea) is excluded because of geography and language and the fact that some of its peoples have narrow noses and faces.
However, the Horn is at the same latitude as Nigeria, and its languages are African. The latitude of 15 degree passes through Timbuktu, surely in "sub-Saharan Africa," as well as Khartoum in Sudan; both are north of the Horn. Another false idea is that supra-Saharan and Saharan Africa were peopled after the emergence of "Europeans" or Near Easterners by populations coming from outside Africa. Hence, the ancient Egyptians in some writings have been de-Africanized. These ideas, which limit the definition of Africa and Africans, are rooted in racism and earlier, erroneous "scientific" approaches." (S. Keita, "The Diversity of Indigenous Africans," in Egypt in Africa, Theodore Clenko, Editor (1996), pp. 104-105. [10])
Modern DNA studies find even though some African peoples look different, they are genetically related through the PN2 transition clade of the Y-chromosone. Haplogroup E links numerous peoples together even though they don't look exactly the same.
"But the Y-chromosome clade defined by the PN2 transition (PN2/M35, PN2/M2) shatters the boundaries of phenotypically defined races and true breeding populations across a great geographical expanse. African peoples with a range of skin colors, hair forms and physiognomies have substantial percentages of males whose Y chromosomes form closely related clades with each other, but not with others who are phenotypically similar. The individuals in the morphologically or geographically defined 'races' are not characterized by 'private' distinct lineages restricted to each of them." (S O Y Keita, R A Kittles, et al. "Conceptualizing human variation," Nature Genetics 36, S17 - S20 (2004)
"Recall that the Horn-Nile Valley crania show, as a group, the largest overlap with other regions. A review of the recent literature indicates that there are male lineage ties between African peoples who have been traditionally labeled as being ''racially'' different, with ''racially'' implying an ontologically deep divide. The PN2 transition, a Y chromosome marker, defines a lineage (within the YAPþ derived haplogroup E or III) that emerged in Africa probably before the last glacial maximum, but after the migration of modern humans from Africa (see Semino et al., 2004). This mutation forms a clade that has two daughter subclades (defined by the biallelic markers M35/215 (or 215/M35) and M2) that unites numerous phenotypically variant African populations from the supra-Saharan, Saharan, and sub-Saharan regions.." (S.O.Y Keita. Exploring northeast African metric craniofacial variation at the individual level: A comparative study using principal component analysis. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 16:679-689, 2004.) keita2004neanalysis.htm
"Africa contains tremendous cultural, linguistic and genetic diversity, and has more than 2,000 distinct ethnic groups and languages.. Studies using mitochondrial (mt)DNA and nuclear DNA markers consistently indicate that Africa is the most genetically diverse region of the world." (Tishkoff SA, Williams SM., Genetic analysis of African populations: human evolution and complex disease. Nature Reviews Genetics. 2002 Aug (8):611-21.)
DNA of some modern Egyptians found a genetic ancestral heritage to East Africa: "The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) diversity of 58 individuals from Upper Egypt, more than half (34 individuals) from Gurna, whose population has an ancient cultural history, were studied by sequencing the control-region and screening diagnostic RFLP markers. This sedentary population presented similarities to the Ethiopian population by the L1 and L2 macrohaplogroup frequency (20.6%), by the West Eurasian component (defined by haplogroups H to K and T to X) and particularly by a high frequency (17.6%) of haplogroup M1. We statistically and phylogenetically analysed and compared the Gurna population with other Egyptian, Near East and sub-Saharan Africa populations; AMOVA and Minimum Spanning Network analysis showed that the Gurna population was not isolated from neighbouring populations. Our results suggest that the Gurna population has conserved the trace of an ancestral genetic structure from an ancestral East African population, characterized by a high M1 haplogroup frequency. The current structure of the Egyptian population may be the result of further influence of neighbouring populations on this ancestral population." (Stevanovitch A, Gilles A, Bouzaid E, et al. (2004) Mitochondrial DNA sequence diversity in a sedentary population from Egypt.Ann Hum Genet. 68(Pt 1):23-39.)
Tishkoff et al on Africa having the most genetic diversity:
"Africa contains tremendous cultural, linguistic and genetic diversity, and has more than 2,000 distinct ethnic groups and languages (see online link to Ethnologue). Studies using mitochondrial (mt)DNA and nuclear DNA markers consistently indicate that Africa is the most genetically diverse region of the world(TABLE 1).However,most studies report only a few markers in divergent African populations, which makes it difficult to draw general conclusions about the levels and patterns of genetic diversity in these populations (FIG. 1). Because genetic studies have been biased towards more economically developed African countries that have key research or medical centres, populations from more underdeveloped or politically unstable regions of Africa remain undersampled (FIG. 1). Historically, human population genetic studies have relied on one or two African populations as being representative of African diversity, but recent studies show extensive genetic variation among even geographically close African populations, which indicates that there is not a single 'representative' African population." -- Tishkoff NATURE REVIEWS | GENETICS VOLUME 3 | AUGUST 2002
Mainstream scholars note that genetic studies often usen a narrow range of stereotyped samples to represent 'Africans', even splitting off peoples of the Horn of Africa as some seperate "non african" type or race.[b]
"Genetic studies that attempt to recover the biological history of the species have generally found that there is a split between their restricted African samples and "the rest of the world." These approaches conceptualize human population history as a series of bifurcations with each node being relatively uniform. The "Africans" usually used are either the short statured Aka or Mbuti, Khoisan speakers, or West African stereotypes, in keeping with a socially, not scientifically constructed concept of African. Studies using individuals as the unit of analysis evince a different pattern. A select subset of Africans called the "group of 49" forms a unit versus the rest of humankind. However the latter individuals ("rest of humankind") also includes non-East African sub-Saharans. Hence there is no "racial" split. As has been stated, the idea that human variation can be described as being structured by subspecies(races) that are treated as lineages is fundamentally false. In actuality, also, although averages are used, the gene studies usually give us histories that are not necessarily the same as population histories." (Writing African History Chapter 4, Physical Anthropology and African History, Shomarka Keita University of Rochester Press p.134
[b]Continent wide African DNA linkages "The most extensive pan-African haplotype (16189 16192 16223 16278 16294 16309 16390) is in the L2a1 haplogroup. This sequence is observed in West Africa among the Malinke, Wolof, and others; in North Africa among the Maure, Hausa, Fulbe, and others; in Central Africa among the Bamileke, Fali, and others; in South Africa among the Khoisan family including the Khwe and Bantu speakers; and in East Africa among the Kikuyu. Closely related variants are observed among the Tuareg in North and West Africa and among the East African Dinka and Somali." (-- Bert Ely , Jamie Lee Wilson , Fatimah Jackson and Bruce A Jackson. (2006). African-American mitochondrial DNAs often match mtDNAs found in multiple African ethnic groups. BMC Biology 2006, 4:34)
"It is of interest that the M35 and M2 lineages are united by a mutation - the PN2 transition. This PN2 defined clade originated in East Africa, where various populations have a notable frequency of its underived state. This would suggest that an ancient population in East Africa, or more correctly its males, form the basis of the ancestors of all African upper Paleolithic populations - and their subsequent descendants in the present day." (--Bengston, John D. (ed.), In Hot Pursuit of Language in Prehistory: Essays in the four fields of anthropology. 2008. John Benjamins Publishing: pp. 3-16)
Egyptian Y-chromosome haplotypes show preponderance is with African clusters not Europe or the Near East
Recent DNA studies of the Sudan show genetic unity and linkage between the Sudanic, Horn, Egyptian, Nubian and other Nilotic peoples, confirming earlier skeletal/cranial studies and historical data. (Yurco (1989, 1996), Keita (1993,2004, 2005) Lovell (1999), Zakrewski (2003, 2007) et. al). Of note is that DNA data shows that some peoples linked to one of the oldest Egyptian populations, the original Copts, have a significant frequency of the B-M60 marker, indicating early colonization of Egypt by Nilotics in the state formation period.
QUOTES:
"Haplogroup E-M78, however, is more widely distributed and is thought to have an origin in eastern African. More recently, this haplogroup has been carefully dissected and was found to depict several well-established subclades with defined geographical clustering (Cruciani et al., 2006, 2007). Although this haplogroup is common to most Sudanese populations, it has exceptionally high frequency among populations like those of western Sudan (particularly Darfur) and the Beja in eastern Sudan... Although the PC plot places the Beja and Amhara from Ethiopia in one sub-cluster based on shared frequencies of the haplogroup J1, the distribution of M78 subclades (Table 2) indicates that the Beja are perhaps related as well to the Oromo on the basis of the considerable frequencies of E-V32 among Oromo in comparison to Amhara (Cruciani et al., 2007)...
These findings affirm the historical contact between Ethiopia and eastern Sudan (1998), and the fact that these populations speak languages of the Afroasiatic family tree reinforces the strong correlation between linguistic and genetic diversity (Cavalli-Sforza, 1997)."
"Genetic continuum of the Nubians with their kin in southern Egypt is indicated by comparable frequencies of E-V12 the predominant M78 subclade among southern Egyptians." [Hassan et al. Y-chromosome variation.." Am J. Phy Anthro. v137,3. 316-323
"The Copt samples displayed a most interesting Y-profile, enough (as much as that of Gaalien in Sudan) to suggest that they actually represent a living record of the peopling of Egypt. The significant frequency of B-M60 in this group might be a relic of a history of colonization of southern Egypt probably by Nilotics in the early state formation, something that conforms both to recorded history and to Egyptian mythology." Source: (Hisham Y. Hassan 1, Peter A. Underhill 2, Luca L. Cavalli-Sforza 2, Muntaser E. Ibrahim 1. (2008). Y-chromosome variation among Sudanese: Restricted gene flow, concordance with language, geography, and history. Am J Phys Anthropology, 2008. Volume 137 Issue 3, Pages 316 - 323)
Older research notes the physical makeup of the original Copts, now confirmed by recent DNA data above: "In Libya, which is mostly desert and oasis, there is a visible Negroid element in the sedentary populations, and at the same is true of the Fellahin of Egypt, whether Copt or Muslim. Osteological studies have shown that the Negroid element was stronger in predynastic times than at present, reflecting an early movement northward along the banks of the Nile, which were then heavily forested." (Encyclopedia Britannica 1984 ed. "Populations, Human")
Haplogroup E3A and E3B represent more than 70% of the Y-chromosones on the African continent, with varying proportions found in different parts of the continent. In some African populations for example, E3B exceeds 80%. Migrations out of Africa, are responsible for the spread of E3b to Europe. Non-Africans thus acquired a sub-set f African genes through this migration.
"In Europe, the overall frequency pattern of haplogroup E-M78 does not support the hypothesis of a uniform spread of people from a single parental Near Eastern population... The Y chromosome specific biallelic marker DYS271 defines the most common haplogroup (E3a) currently found in sub-Saharan Africa. A sister clade, E3b (E-M215), is rare in sub-Saharan Africa, but very common in northern and eastern Africa. On the whole, these two clades represent more than 70% of the Y chromosomes of the African continent. A third clade belonging to E3 (E3c or E-M329) has been recently reported to be present only in eastern Africa, at low frequencies.. The new topology of the E3 haplogroup is suggestive of a relatively recent eastern African origin for the majority of the chromosomes presently found in sub-Saharan Africa."
"In conclusion, we detected the signatures of several distinct processes of migration and/or recurrent gene flow associated with the dispersal of haplogroup E3b lineages. Early events involved the dispersal of E-M78d chromosomes from eastern Africa into and out of Africa, as well as the introduction of the E-M34 subclade into Africa from the Near East. Later events involved short-range migrations within Africa (E-M78? and E-V6) and from northern Africa into Europe (E-M81 and E-M78ß), as well as an important range expansion from the Balkans to western and southern-central Europe (E-M78a). This latter expansion was the main contributor to the present distribution of E3b chromosomes in Europe."
(Cruciani, F, et. al. (2004) Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E3b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am J Hum Genet. 74(5): 1014-1022.)
Somalis link much more heavily with African populations such as those in Kenya and Ethiopia than Middle Eastern or European ones according to DNA evidence. Eurasian genes only accounted for about 15% of the mix among Somalis, typically associated with recent Arab influence. On such key common DNA markers as E3b1, Europeans only weighed in at 5%, and Middle Easterners at approximately 6%. The overwhelming link of Somalis- over 85% of the total is with Africans. Kenya and Ethiopia are located in "sub-Saharan" Africa.
"The high frequency (77.6%) of haplogroup E3b1 was characteristic of male Somalis. The frequency of E3b1 was significantly lower in Ethiopian Oromos (35.9%), Ethiopian Amharas (22.9%), Egyptians (20.0%), Sudanese (17.5%), Kenyans (15.1%),10 Iraqis (6.3%), Northern Africans (6.1%), Southern Europeans (0.5-5.1%) and sub-Saharan populations." (Sanchez et al.,(2005) High frequencies of Y chromosome lineages characterized by E3b1, DYS19-11, DYS392-12 in Somali males, Eu J of Hum Genet (2005) 13, 856-866)[/i]
More on Haplogroup E here: from GENEBASE: http://www.genebase.com/app/item.php? aiId=35 "E1 is the predominant subclade, while E2 is much less frequent. Within E1, E1b1 (defined by SNP P2) is the most abundant and widespread representative, and accounts for most of Haplogroup E worldwide. E1b1 lineages vary in abundance over Africa and three main regions are evident from the distribution peaks of three subclades: E1b1a (SNP M2) in Sub-Saharan Africa, E1b1b1a (SNP M78) in East Africa and E1b1b1b (SNP M81) in Northwest Africa. The difference in geographic location of Haplogroup E subclades also aligns with distinct language groups supporting the idea that there is prevailing father to son transmission of language in Africa. "
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------- Simplistic "race percentage" models are dubious in Africa which has the highest genetic diversity in the world. That diversity proceeded from deeper sub-Saharan Africa, to East and N.E. Africa, then to the rest of the globe. All other populations, including Europeans and "Middle easterners" carry this diversity which was built into Africa to begin with. Africans thus don't need any "race mix" to look different. Their diversity is built-in and supplied the whole globe. Any returnees or "backflow" to Africa looked like Africans. (Brace 2005, Hanihara 1996, Holliday 2003).
" These studies suggest a recent and primary subdivision between African and non-African populations, high levels of divergence among African populations, and a recent shared common ancestry of non-African populations, from a population originating in Africa. The intermediate position, between African and non-African populations, that the Ethiopian Jews and Somalis occupy in the PCA plot also has been observed in other genetic studies (Ritte et al. 1993; Passarino et al. 1998) and could be due either to shared common ancestry or to recent gene flow. The fact that the Ethiopians and Somalis have a subset of the sub-Saharan African haplotype diversity and that the non-African populations have a subset of the diversity present in Ethiopians and Somalis makes simple-admixture models less likely; rather, these observations support the hypothesis proposed by other nuclear-genetic studies (Tishkoff et al. 1996a, 1998a, 1998b; Kidd et al. 1998) that populations in northeastern Africa may have diverged from those in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa early in the history of modern African populations and that a subset of this northeastern-African population migrated out of Africa and populated the rest of the globe. These conclusions are supported by recent mtDNA analysis (Quintana-Murci et al. 1999)." [Tishkoff et al. (2000) Short Tandem-Repeat Polymorphism/Alu Haplotype Variation at the PLAT Locus: Implications for Modern Human Origins. Am J Hum Genet; 67:901-925]
Data on Ethiopian peoples like the Oromo are underreported even though they make up the largest group percentage wise in the Ethiopian population, (50%) and are often pooled with others, hiding and obscuring their overall contribution to the Ethiopian gene pool.
"This difference, not revealed in the study by Passarino et al. (1998), in which the Oromo were underrepresented, might reflect distinct population histories." (--Semino, et al. (2002). Ethiopians and Khoisan Share the Deepest Clades of the Human Y..")
"These data, together with those reported elsewhere (Ritte et al. 1993a, 1993b; Hammer et al. 2000) suggest that the Ethiopian Jews acquired their religion without substantial genetic admixture from Middle Eastern peoples and that they can be considered an ethnic group with essentially a continental African genetic composition." (Cruciani, et. al Am J Hum Genet. 2002 May; 70(5): 1197-1214. "A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes)
"An earlier generation of anthropologists tried to explain face form in the Horn of Africa as the result of admixture from hypothetical “wandering Caucasoids,”.. but that explanation founders on the paradox of why that supposedly potent “Caucasoid” people contributed a dominant quantity of genes for nose and face form but none for skin color or limb proportions." --CL Brace, 1993
[Afrocentric critic Mary Leftokwitz says Egypt was peopled by persons from sub-Saharan Africa:
"Recent work on skeletons and DNA suggests that the people who settled in the Nile valley, like all of humankind, came from somewhere south of the Sahara; they were not (as some nineteenth-century scholars had supposed) invaders from the North. See Bruce G. Trigger, "The Rise of Civilization in Egypt," Cambridge History of Africa (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1982), vol I, pp 489-90; S. O. Y. Keita, "Studies and Comments on Ancient Egyptian Biological Relationships," History in Africa 20 (1993) 129-54. (Mary Lefkotitz (1997). Not Out of Africa: How Afrocentrism Became an Excuse to Teach Myth as History. Basic Books. pg 242) [/QB][/QUOTE]
In Black Athena Revisited, Lefkowitz finds similarity between Egyptians and Sudanics and recommends the work of conservative anthropologist Nancy Lovell for more research on the subject.
Quote: "not surprisingly, the Egyptian skulls were not very distance from the Jebel Moya [a Neolithic site in the southern Sudan] skulls, but were much more distance from all others, including those from West Africa. Such a study suggests a closer genetic affinity between peoples in Egypt and the northern Sudan, which were close geographically and are known to have had considerable cultural contact throughout prehistory and pharaonic history... Clearly more analyses of the physical remains of ancient Egyptians need to be done using current techniques, such as those of Nancy Lovell at the University of Alberta is using in her work.."
Lefkotitz cites Keita 1993 in Not Out of Africa. Here is Keita on the Jebel Moya studies?
"Overall, when the Egyptian crania are evaluated in a Near Eastern (Lachish) versus African (Kerma, Jebel Moya, Ashanti) context) the affinity is with the Africans. The Sudan and Palestine are the most appropriate comparative regions which would have 'donated' people, along with the Sahara and Maghreb. Archaeology validates looking to these regions for population flow (see Hassan 1988)... Egyptian groups showed less overall affinity to Palestinian and Byzantine remains than to other African series, especially Sudanese." [/img] S. O. Y. Keita, "Studies and Comments on Ancient Egyptian Biological Relationships," History in Africa 20 (1993) 129-54
Hereis the work of the anthropologist so strongly recommended by Lefkowitz, Nancy Lovell:
"There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.. In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas." (Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999) pp 328-332)
and
"must be placed in the context of hypotheses informed by archaeological, linguistic, geographic and other data. In such contexts, the physical anthropological evidence indicates that early Nile Valley populations can be identified as part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation. This variation represents the short and long term effects of evolutionary forces, such as gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection, influenced by culture and geography." ("Nancy C. Lovell, " Egyptians, physical anthropology of," in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, ed. Kathryn A. Bard and Steven Blake Shubert, ( London and New York: Routledge, 1999). pp 328-332)
Obviously, this shows that the Egyptians were completely white, and how foolish the Afrocentrists are to reject this notion. After all Afrocentric critic Mary Lefkowitz recommends Lovell's research..
The same Nancy Lovell recommended by Lefkowitz studied dental traits among some high status persons of the key Egyptian Naqada group and found that they resembled the peoples of Nubia.
T. Prowse, and N. Lovell "Concordance of cranial and dental morphological traits and evidence for endogamy in ancient Egypt" American journal of physical anthropology. 1996, vol. 101, no2, pp. 237-246 (2 p.1/4)
A biological affinities study based on frequencies of cranial nonmetric traits in skeletal samples from three cemeteries at Predynastic Naqada, Egypt, confirms the results of a recent nonmetric dental morphological analysis. Both cranial and dental traits analyses indicate that the individuals buried in a cemetery characterized archaeologically as high status are significantly different from individuals buried in two other, apparently non-elite cemeteries and that the non-elite samples are not significantly different from each other. A comparison with neighboring Nile Valley skeletal samples suggests that the high status cemetery represents an endogamous ruling or elite segment of the local population at Naqada, which is more closely related to populations in northern Nubia than to neighboring populations in southern Egypt.
Lefkowitz warns against Eurocentric "racial" analysis as to the Egyptians and Nubians.
Quote: "The Nubian tribute-bearers are painted in two skin tones, black and dark brown. These tones do not necessarily represent actual skin tones in real life but may serve to distinguish each tribute-bearer from the next in a row in which the figures overlap. Alternatively, the brown-skinned people may be of Nubian origin, and the black-skinned ones may be farther south 9Trigger 1978, 33). The shading of skin tones in Egyptian tomb paintings, which varies considerably, may not be a certain criterion for distinguishing race. Specific symbols of ethnic identity can also vary. Identifying race in Egyptian representational art, again, is difficult to do- probably because race (as opposed to ethnic affiliation, that is, Egyptians versus all non-Egyptians) was not a criterion for differentiation used by the ancient Egyptians...
Northern Egypt shows more physical variation than the south, but not necessarily as part of any significant 'race' mix, but local, built-in variation. They were closer to southerners than any other peoples. In comparisons with "Middle Eastern" populations of the same ancient period, the Egyptians link more closely with other Africans than the Middle Easterners. Africans vary in how they look because they have the highest built-in molecular diversity to begin with.
QUOTE(s): "..sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans." (Barry Kemp, "Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation. (2005) Routledge. p. 52-60)
"Individuals from different geographical regions frequently plotted near each other, revealing aspects of variation at the level of individuals that is obscured by concentrating on the most distinctive facial traits once used to construct ''types.''The high level of African interindividual variation in craniometric pattern is reminiscent of the great level of molecular diversity found in Africa." (S.O.Y Keita. Exploring northeast African metric craniofacial variation at the individual level: A comparative study using principal component analysis. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 16:679-689, 2004.)
Quote on northern Egypt analysis- the Qarunian (Faiyum) remains (c. 7000 BC) "The body was that of a forty-year old woman with a height of about 1.6 meters, who was of a more modern racial type than the classic 'Mechtoid' of the Fakhurian culture (see pp. 65-6), being generally more gracile, having large teeth and thick jaws bearing some resemblance to the modern 'negroid' type." (Beatrix Midant-Reynes, Ian Shaw (2000). The Prehistory of Egypt. Wiley-Blackwell. pg. 82)
Modern studies show diversity in how people look is heavily based on distance from sub-Saharan Africa, not merely climate. In genetically diverse Africa, broad-nosed people live on the cool or cold mountain slopes of East Africa or the hot, dry Sahara, and narrow-nosed peoples like many Fulani like in the wet tropics of West Africa. Yellowish-skinned San tribes live in the hot zones of Southern Africa.
"The relative importance of ancient demography and climate in determining worldwide patterns of human within-population phenotypic diversity is still open to debate. Several morphometric traits have been argued to be under selection by climatic factors, but it is unclear whether climate affects the global decline in morphological diversity with increasing geographical distance from sub-Saharan Africa. Using a large database of male and female skull measurements, we apply an explicit framework to quantify the relative role of climate and distance from Africa. We show that distance from sub-Saharan Africa is the sole determinant of human within-population phenotypic diversity, while climate plays no role. By selecting the most informative set of traits, it was possible to explain over half of the worldwide variation in phenotypic diversity. These results mirror those previously obtained for genetic markers and show that 'bones and molecules' are in perfect agreement for humans." (Distance from Africa, not climate, explains within-population phenotypic diversity in humans. (2008) by: Lia Betti, François Balloux, William Amos, Tsunehiko Hanihara, Andrea Manica, Proceedings B: Biological Sciences, 2008/12/02)
Analysis of skeletal and cranial remains reveals that the ancient Egyptians of the early Dynastic and pre-Dynastic phases, link closer to nearby Saharan, Sudanic and East African populations than Mediterranean and Middle Eastern peoples. Greeks, Romans, Hyskos, Arabs and others were to appear later in Egyptian history. Craniometric studies generally place ancient Upper Egyptian populations closer to the range of tropical Africans in the Nile Valley and East Africa than to Mediterraneans, or Middle Easterners.
QUOTE(s): S. O. Y. Keita, "Studies and Comments on Ancient Egyptian Biological Relationships," History in Africa 20 (1993) 129-54
"Overall, when the Egyptian crania are evaluated in a Near Eastern (Lachish) versus African (Kerma, Kebel Moya, Ashanti) context) the affinity is with the Africans. The Sudan and Palestine are the most appropriate comparative regions which would have 'donated' people, along with the Sahara and Maghreb. Archaeology validates looking to these regions for population flow (see Hassan 1988)... Egyptian groups showed less overall affinity to Palestinian and Byzantine remains than to other African series, especially Sudanese." (Keita 1993)
"When the unlikely relationships [Indian matches] and eliminated, the Egyptian series are more similar overall to other African series than to European or Near Eastern (Byzantine or Palestinian) series." (Keita 1993)
"Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant."(Egypt and Sub-Saharan Africa: Their Interaction. Encyclopedia of Precolonial Africa, by Joseph O. Vogel, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, California (1997), pp. 465-472 )
"Analysis of crania is the traditional approach to assessing ancient population origins, relationships, and diversity. In studies based on anatomical traits and measurements of crania, similarities have been found between Nile Valley crania from 30,000, 20,000 and 12,000 years ago and various African remains from more recent times (see Thoma 1984; Brauer and Rimbach 1990; Angel and Kelley 1986; Keita 1993). Studies of crania from southern predynastic Egypt, from the formative period (4000-3100 B.C.), show them usually to be more similar to the crania of ancient Nubians, Kushites, Saharans, or modern groups from the Horn of Africa than to those of dynastic northern Egyptians or ancient or modern southern Europeans." (S. O. Y and A.J. Boyce, "The Geographical Origins and Population Relationships of Early Ancient Egyptians", in Egypt in Africa, Theodore Celenko (ed), Indiana University Press, 1996, pp. 20-33)
"There is no archaeological, linguistic, or historical data which indicate a European or Asiatic invasion of, or migration to, the Nile Valley during First Dynasty times. Previous concepts about the origin of the First Dynasty Egyptians as being somehow external to the Nile Valley or less native are not supported by archaeology... In summary, the Abydos First Dynasty royal tomb contents reveal a notable craniometric heterogeneity. Southerners predominate. (Kieta, S. (1992) Further Studies of Crania From Ancient Northern Africa: An Analysis of Crania From First Dynasty Egyptian Tombs, Using Multiple Discriminant Functions. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 87:245-254)"
"The predominant craniometric pattern in the Abydos royal tombs is 'southern' (tropical African variant), and this is consistent with what would be expected based on the literature and other results (Keita, 1990). This pattern is seen in both group and unknown analyses... Archaeology and history seem to provide the most parsimonious explanation for the variation in the royal tombs at Abydos.. Tomb design suggests the presence of northerners in the south in late Nakada times (Hoffman, 1988) when the unification probably took place. Delta names are attached to some of the tombs at Abydos (Gardiner, 1961; Yurco, 1990, personal communication), thus perhaps supporting Petrie's (1939) and Gardiner's contention that north-south marriages were undertaken to legitimize the hegemony of the south. The courtiers of northern elites would have accompanied them.
Given all of the above, it is probably not possible to view the Abydos royal tomb sample as representative of the general southern Upper Egyptian population of the time. Southern elites and/or their descendants eventually came to be buried in the north (Hoffman, 1988). Hence early Second Dynasty kings and Djoser (Dynasty 111) (Hayes, 1953) and his descendants are not buried in Abydos. Petrie (1939) states that the Third Dynasty, buried in the north, was of Sudanese origin, but southern Egypt is equally likely. This perhaps explains Harris and Weeks' (1973) suggested findings of southern morphologies in some Old Kingdom Giza remains, also verified in portraiture (Drake, 1987). Further study would be required to ascertain trends in the general population of both regions. The strong Sudanese affinity noted in the unknown analyses may reflect the Nubian interactions with upper Egypt in predynastic times prior to Egyptian unification (Williams, 1980,1986)..." (S. Keita (1992) Further Studies of Crania From Ancient Northern Africa: An Analysis of Crania From First Dynasty Egyptian Tombs, Using Multiple Discriminant Functions. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 87:245-254)
"When the Elephantine results were added to a broader pooling of the physical characteristics drawn from a wide geographic region which includes Africa, the Mediterranean and the Near East quite strong affinities emerge between Elephantine and populations from Nubia, supporting a strong south-north cline. (Barry Kemp. (2006) Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization. p. 54)
Gene flow into the Nubian area during the Neolithic was not from reputed "wandering Caucasoids" but from tropical, Sub-Saharan types.
"Prior to the Neolithic, populations of the Nile Valley in Nubia are very robust, and, because of a gap in the fossil record, it is difficult to connect them to later populations. Some have postulated a local evolution, due to diet change, while others postulated migrations, especially from the Sahara area. But between 5000 and 1000 BC, many cemeteries have supplied a large amount of skeletons, and the anatomical characters of Nubian populations are easier to follow-up. Twenty-seven archaeological samples (4 at 5000 BC, 5 at 4000 BC, 10 at 3000 BC, 3 at 2000 BC, 5 at 1000 BC), and 10 craniofacial measurements, have been considered. While cerebral skull is fairly stable, facial skull displays several regular modifications, and specially a reduction of facial and nasal heights, a broadening of the nose, and an increase of prognathism, while bizygomatic breadth is unchanged. These features illustrate a trend towards a growing resemblance with populations of Sub-Saharan Africa living in wet environments. However, paleoclimatological studies show that Nubia experienced an increasing aridification during that period. It is then unlikely that such a morphological change could be related to any local adaptive evolution to environment. Random drift is also unlikely, because the anatomical trend is relatively uniform during these millennia. It then seems more plausible that these changes correspond to the increasing presence of Southern populations migrating northward." -- Froment, A. (2002) Morphological micro-evolution of Nubian Populations from, A-Group to Christian Epochs: gene flow, not local adaptation. Am J Phys Anthropol [Suppl] 34:72.
Afrocentric critic Froment also notes: "Black populations of the Horn of Africa (Tigré and Somalia) fit well into Egyptian variations." (Froment, Alain, Origines du peuplement de l’Égypte ancienne: l’apport de l’anthropobiologie, Archéo-Nil 2 (Octobre 1992), 79-98)
Afrocentric critic C. Loring Brace's 2005 study groups ancient Egyptian populations like the Naqada closer to Nubians and Somalis than European, Mediterranean or Middle Eastern populations. Brace's study shows that the closest European linking with Africans in Egypt or Nubia are Middle Stone Age Portugese and Neolithics, OLDER populations more closely resembling AFRICANS than modern Europeans. Early Neolithic populations, like the Nautifians, in what is now Israel, show sub-Saharan 'negroid' affinities. (Brace, et al. The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 January 3; 103(1): p. 242-247.)
"The Niger-Congo speakers, Congo, Dahomey and Haya, cluster closely with each other and a bit less closely with the Nubian sample, both the recent and the Bronze Age Nubians, and more remotely with the Naqada Bronze Age sample of Egypt, the modern Somalis, and the Arabic-speaking Fellaheen (farmers) of Israel. When those samples are separated and run in a single analysis as in Fig. 1, there clearly is a tie between them that is diluted the farther one gets from sub-Saharan Africa" (Brace, 2005)
"The surprise is that the Neolithic peoples of Europe and their Bronze Age successors are not closely related to the modern inhabitants, although the prehistoric/modern ties are somewhat more apparent in southern Europe. It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa... Interestingly enough, however, the small Natufian sample falls between the Niger-Congo group and the other samples used. Fig. 2 shows the plot produced by the first two canonical variates, but the same thing happens when canonical variates 1 and 3 (not shown here) are used. This placement suggests that there may have been a Sub-Saharan African element in the make-up of the Natufians (the putative ancestors of the subsequent Neolithic), .. When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. The data treated here support the idea that the Neolithic moved out of the Near East into the circum-Mediterranean areas and Europe by a process of demic diffusion but that subsequently the in situ residents of those areas, derived from the Late Pleistocene inhabitants, absorbed both the agricultural life way and the people who had brought it." (Brace, 2005)
Both skeletal/cranial and DNA studies by other authors confirm that some Neolithics did not derive from the Near East. They most likely resembled African populations. Hence comparisons using older European Neolithics versus Africans are comparisons with older prehistoric Europeans who looked more like Africans, than modern 'white' Europeans, as shown by Brace (2005), and Hanihara (1996) also, who states "Early West Asians looked like Africans."
"The absence of mtDNA haplogroup J in the ancient Portuguese Neolithic sample suggests that this population was not derived directly from Near Eastern farmers. The Mesolithic and Neolithic groups show genetic discontinuity implying colonisation at the Neolithic transition in Portugal." (CHANDLER, H.; SYKES, B.; ZILHÃO, J. (2005) - Using ancient DNA to examine genetic continuity at the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in Portugal, in ARIAS, P.; ONTAÑÓN, R.; GARCÍA-MONCÓ, C. (eds.) - «Actas del III Congreso del Neolítico en la Península Ibérica», Santander, Monografías del Instituto Internacional de Investigaciones Prehistóricas de Cantabria 1, p. 781-786.)
"Early Europeans still resembled modern tropical peoples - some resemble modern Australian and Africans, more than modern Europeans.. Nor does the picture get any clearer when we move on to the Cro-Magnons, the presumed ancestors of modern Europeans. Some were more like present-day Australians or Africans, judged by objective anatomical observations." (Christopher Stringer, Robin McKie (1998). African Exodus. Macmillan, p. 162)
Early Europeans, as recently as 6,000-9000 years ago, looked somewhat like Africans in terms of retained 'tropical' characteristics. Cold adaptation was to bring about several physical changes over time from the initial Out of Africa migrations to Europe. Retained traces of 'tropical' characteristics, indicate a "large African role in the origins of anatomically modern Europeans." (Holliday and Churchill 2003).
"Body proportions covary with climate, apparently as the result of climatic selection. Ontogenetic research and migrant studies have demonstrated that body proportions are largely genetically controlled and are under low selective rates; thus studies of body form can provide evidence for evolutionarily short-term dispersals and/or gene flow. Replacement predicts that the earliest modern Europeans will possess "tropical" body proportions (assuming Africa is the center of origin), while Regional Continuity permits only minor shifts in body shape, due to climatic change and/or improved cultural buffering. .. results refute the hypothesis of local continuity in Europe, and are consistent with an interpretation of elevated gene flow (and population dispersal?) from Africa, followed by subsequent climatic adaptation to colder conditions." (Holliday, Trenton (1997) Body proportions in Late Pleistocene Europe and modern human origins. Journal of Human Evolution, Volume 32, Issue 5, 1997, Pages 423-447)
".. while the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic humans have significantly higher (i.e., tropically-adapted) brachial and crural indices than do recent Europeans, they also have shorter (i.e., cold-adapted) limbs. The somewhat paradoxical retention of "tropical" indices in the context of more "cold-adapted" limb length is best explained as evidence for Replacement in the European Late Pleistocene, followed by gradual cold adaptation in glacial Europe." (Holliday, Trenton (1999) Brachial and crural indices of European Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic humans. Journal of Human Evolution. Volume 36, Issue 5, May 1999, Pages 549-566)
"Stature, body mass, and body proportions are evaluated for the Cheddar Man (Gough's Cave 1) skeleton. Like many of his Mesolithic contemporaries, Gough's Cave 1 evinces relatively short estimated stature (ca. 166.2 cm [5' 5']) and low body mass (ca. 66 kg [146 lbs]). In body shape, he is similar to recent Europeans for most proportional indices. He differs, however, from most recent Europeans in his high crural index and tibial length/trunk height indices. Thus, while Gough's Cave 1 is characterized by a total morphological pattern considered 'cold-adapted', these latter two traits may be interpreted as evidence of a large African role in the origins of anatomically modern Europeans." (TRENTON W. HOLLIDAY a1 and STEVEN E. CHURCHILL. (2003). Gough's Cave 1 (Somerset, England): an assessment of body size and shape, Bulletin of the Natural History Museum: Geology, 58:37-44 Cambridge University Press)
More data showing early Europeans were tropically adapted types like Africans "Body proportions are under strong climatic selection and evince remarkable stability within regional lineages. As such, they offer a viable and robust alternative to cranio-facial data in assessing hypothesised continuity and replacement with the transition to agro-pastoralism in central Europe. Humero-clavicular, brachial and crural indices in a large sample (n=75) of Linienbandkeramik (LBK), Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age specimens from the middle Elbe-Saale-Werra valley (MESV) were compared with Eurasian and African terminal Pleistocene, European Mesolithic and geographically disparate recent human specimens. Mesolithic Europeans display considerable variation in humero-clavicular and brachial indices yet none approach the extreme "hyper-polar" morphology of LBK humans from the MESV. In contrast, Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age peoples display elongated brachial and crural indices reminiscent of terminal Pleistocene and "tropically adapted" recent humans. These marked morphological changes likely reflect exogenous immigration during the terminal Fourth millennium cal BC. Population expansion and diffusion is a function of increased mobility and settlement dispersal concomitant with significant technological and subsistence changes in later Neolithic societies during the late fourth millennium cal BCE." -- Gallagher et al. "Population continuity, demic diffusion and Neolithic origins in central-southern Germany: the evidence from body proportions." Homo. 2009;60(2):95-126. Epub 2009 Mar 4.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Archaeological Evidence Shows some Meriotic Influence may have ranged down into Central Africa. The move of the Sahara southward obscures cultures once farther north- Quote:
"Further south in Roseires area, Chattaway reported a number of sites, which might be of interest to this question after the exploration (Chattaway 1930: 259-264).. The most recent discoveries of datable sites and objects south of Khartoum suggest the presence of Napatans and Meroites along the Blue and White Niles, probably south of Kosti (Eisa 1987: 155-162; 1990). Such presence is also attested by the discoveries of the Wellcome Expeditions to the Sennar area (Gebel Moya, Abu Geili village and recently the objects found near Grisly village), and by the site and objects of El Getina (site of Mahmoud El Araki). The study of those objects as well as pottery sherds and bricks showed the strong probability of their Napatan and Meroitic affinities. Some other sites between El Getaina and El Kawa could be identified (Ni'ma, Wad el Zaki, Hashaba.. etc).
Near the town of El Kawa we have the site of Hilat Said, where golden objects were found which date most probably to the Napatan period (the inscription says: Imn-r df nh mj r - "God Amun Re gives life like Re', which seems to be a life-scarab) (Eisa 1994). Another scarab was found in Kosti town which may be of the same data as that of Kawa (Arkell 1961: 136-7). South of Kosti the investigations of Else Kleppe showed the presence of archaeological material o a different nature (of probably Meroitic date) (in El Rank area, Upper Nile province; Kleppe 1982a; 1982) as well as in the western Sudan.. So it seems that the White Nile was the route of penetration of the Kushites to these southern regions and the interior of Central Africa."
--Steffen Wenig (1992). Studien zum antiken Sudan. Akten der Internationalen Tagung für meroitische Forschungen vom 14. bis 19. 367-368- September 1992 . IN: Meroitica, v15, 1999
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- 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: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
While the CRANID anthro reference database is skewed towards Northern Egypt and downplays the south (Kemp 2005), some forensic analyses of mummies indicates membership in the "Egyptian" group- with the next closest match being African. --QUOTE:
"A mummy of an Egyptian priestess dating from the 22nd dynasty (c. 770 BC), completely enclosed in an anthropoid (human shaped) coffin, was scanned on a CT scanner. An accurate reconstruction of the cranium was generated from 115 × 2 mm CT images using AVS/Express on a SGI computer. Linear measurements were obtained from six orthogonal cranial views and used in a morphometric analysis software package (CRANID). The analyses carried out were both linear and nearest neighbour discriminant analysis. The results show that there is a 52.9% probability that the mummy is an Egyptian female, with a 24.5% probability that the mummy is an African female."
--Hughes, Wright, and Barry (2005)Virtual reconstruction and morphological analysis of the cranium of an ancient Egyptian mummy. Australas. Phys. Eng. Sci. Med. Vol. 28, No 2, 2005
Egyptologist Barry Kemp on the worldwide CRANID database that used northern samples near the Mediterranean as "representative" of the ancient Egyptians, and classifying them in a "European" direction, while excluding key historic sites further south..
"If, on the other hand, CRANID had used one of the Elephantine populations of the same period, the geographic association would be much more with the African groups to the south. It is dangerous to take one set of skeletons and use them to characterize the population of the whole of Egypt." (Barry Kemp, Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation, Routledge: 2005, p. 55)
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
DNA analysis of ancient mummies at Dakleh Oasis shows some affinities with sub-Saharan African populations stretching back in antiquity. QUOTE:
"A compelling story of life at the ancient Roman-Christian town of Kellis (circa AD 300) in the Dakhleh Oasis, Egypt, is developing through mitochondrial analyses of ancient DNA. Through excavations at Kellis 2, the Roman-Christian period necropolis where the ancient inhabitants of Kellis are interred, a fascinating genetic profile of the residents of classical Kellis is beginning to emerge. Interestingly, metric and non-metric trait analyses of 310 burials suggests a local population in residence at Kellis changing slowly over time through antiquity; however, archaeological evidence alludes to frequent trade with the Nile River valley, suggesting population movement into, through, and out of the oasis during this period. Moreover, social and political conditions throughout the Roman Empire, of which Egypt was a possession during this interval, hint at substantial population movements, possibly involving the oasis. Indeed, preliminary sequencing data of HV-1 suggests a genetically diverse population from a maternal perspective. Moreover, specific point mutations, in the small number of individuals analyzed to date (n=13), hint at potential maternal associations with sub-Saharan Africa in antiquity...
This strongly suggests legitimate results as opposed to false substitutions resulting from incorrect copying of ancient DNA template (Paabo et al 1990). The C to T Transition at position 16278 appears exclusively in burials 16 and 76. In addition, burials 2 and 6 appear dentical but are dissimilar at HV1 site outside of the area shown inTable I. Burials 15, 31 and 139 display a solitary C to T alteration at position 16233. This particular substitution is present in many African populations at appreciable frequencies.."
-- Parr, R. L. 2002. Mitochondrial DNA sequence analysis of skeletal remains from the Kellis 2 cemetery. In C. A.Hope and G. E. Bowen (eds.) Dakhleh Oasis Project: Preliminary Reports on the 1994-1995 to 1998-1999 Field Seasons 257-261
-------------------- 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: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ancient Egyptian language is part of the Afrasian or Afroasiatic group which has its origins in Africa, and together with other archaeological evidence firmly makes it an African culture. Acording to mainstream research:
QUOTE(s):
This lie has got to stop,the ancient egyptian hieroglyphic was south-nilotic(proto-kalenjin),demotic and meroitic was proto-bantu(meru),Hieratic was volta-congo(yoruba).
somali and oromo are basically mixture of kalenjin and semitic languages. e.g oromo,somali and kalenjin call rain ROP,call palm tree SOSIOT,all have kalenjin ssrnames like KOROS,TALAM,SALAT e.t.c.all have feminine gender prefix t,all these languages use kalenjin upper numerals,BUT somali and oromo are afro-asiatic cushitic because they elements of semitic.NOTE;there is no element of semitic or indo-european in ancient egyptian.
afro-asiatic urheimat is accad and sumeria.these populations esp cushitic and ethiopian semitic entered africa via the horn of africa and yemen route,chadic entered africa by sea via libya and cathage,phoenician mixed with bantu and nilotic produced amazigh.
YES fleeing negroes is a fact,yes negroes fled the north of africa,they fled from constant war(assyrian,babylonian,greek,roman,arab invasions) and famine
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ancient Egyptian language is part of the Afrasian or Afroasiatic group which has its origins in Africa, and together with other archaeological evidence firmly makes it an African culture. Acording to mainstream research:
QUOTE(s):
This lie has got to stop,the ancient egyptian hieroglyphic was south-nilotic(proto-kalenjin),demotic and meroitic was proto-bantu(meru),Hieratic was volta-congo(yoruba).
somali and oromo are basically mixture of kalenjin and semitic languages. e.g oromo,somali and kalenjin call rain ROP,call palm tree SOSIOT,all have kalenjin ssrnames like KOROS,TALAM,SALAT e.t.c.all have feminine gender prefix t,all these languages use kalenjin upper numerals,BUT somali and oromo are afro-asiatic cushitic because they elements of semitic.NOTE;there is no element of semitic or indo-european in ancient egyptian.
afro-asiatic urheimat is accad and sumeria.these populations esp cushitic and ethiopian semitic entered africa via the horn of africa and yemen route,chadic entered africa by sea via libya and cathage,phoenician mixed with bantu and nilotic produced amazigh.
YES fleeing negroes is a fact,yes negroes fled the north of africa,they fled from constant war(assyrian,babylonian,greek,roman,arab invasions) and famine
I disagree. There is no such thing as Afro-Asiatic. Egyptian was a lingua franca invenbted to unite the various nationalities that made up ancient Egypt.
The Akkadian and Geez languages are related. The Akkadians migrated from Africa into Mesopotamia where they defeated the Sumerians who were Kushites. The Sumerian language is related to the Dravidian-Niger-Congo group.
The Kalenjin are no more related to the Egyptians, then the Wolof, Mande and Bantu. All of these languages are related to Egyptian because Egyptian was a lingua franca that included many linguistic elements and shared vocabulary items from the diverse Ethnic groups that made up ancient Egypt.
The Semitic languages are African languages as well. At the base of most Semitic languages you find an African root. Hebrew , due to interactions with the People of the Sea, Gutians and other Turkic and Indo-European speakers does have elements of I-E origin.
LEDAMA , Obenga has made it clear that AfroAsiatic does not exist and you can not reconstruct the Proto-language.
This is true. Ehret (1995) and Orel/Stolbova (1995) were attempts at comparing Proto-AfroAsiatic. The most interesting fact about these works is that they produced different results. If AfroAsiatic existed they should have arrived at similar results. The major failur of these works is that there is too much synononymy. For example, the Proto-AfroAsiatic synonym for bird has 52 synonyms this is far too many for a single term and illustrates how the researchers just correlated a number of languages to produce a proto-form.
This supports Obenga's view that you can not reconstruct Afro-Asiatic. It is assumed that if languages are related you should be able to reconstruct the proto-language of the language family. .
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
LEDAMA the Sumerians were Kushites. They were Black people.
Henry Rawlinson used the Book of Genesis to find the identity of the Mesopotamia. He made it clear that the original inhabitants of Babylonia were represented by the name Nimrod and were represented by the family of Ham: Kushites, Egyptians and etc. This name came from the popularity among these people of hunting the leopard (Nimri). And as noted in earlier post the Egyptian and Nubian rulers always associated leopard spots with royalty, just as Siva is associated with the feline. As a result, Rawlinson used an African language Galla, to decipher the cuneiform writing.
The Sumerians and Elamites came from Africa, like the founders of the Indus Valley civilization. This is why the Elamite and Sumerian languages are closely related to African and Dravidian languages.
The Kushites when they migrated from Middle Africa to Asia continued to call themselves Kushites. This is most evident in place names and the names of gods. The Kassites, chief rulers of Iran occupied the central part of the Zagros. The Kassite god was called Kashshu, which was also the name of the people. The K-S-H, name element is also found in India. For example Kishkinthai, was the name applied to an ancient Dravidian kingdom in South India. Also it should be remembered that the Kings of Sumer, were often referred to as the " Kings of Kush".
The major Kushite tribe in Central Asia was called Kushana. The Kushan of China were styled Ta Yueh-ti or "the Great Lunar Race". Along the Salt Swamp, there was a state called Ku-Shih of Tibet. The city of K-san, was situated in the direction of Kushan, which was located in the Western part of the Gansu Province of China.
The Elamites later conquered Sumer. They called this line of Kings,he "King of Kish'. This term has affinity to the term Kush,that was given to the Kerma dynasty, founded by the C-Group people of Kush. It is interesting to note that the Elamite language, is closely related to the African languages including Egyptian and the Dravidian languages of India.
The most important Kushite colony in Iran was ancient Elam. The Elamites called their country KHATAM or KHALTAM (Ka-taam). The capital of Khaltam which we call Susa, was called KHUZ (Ka-u-uz) by the Aryans, NIME (Ni-may) by the people of Sumer, and KUSHSHI (Cush-she) by the Elamites.In the Akkadian inscriptions the Elamites were called GIZ-BAM (the land of the bow). The ancient Chinese or Bak tribesmen which dominate China today called the Elamites KASHTI. Moreover, in the Bible the Book of Jeremiah (xlxx,35), we read "bow of Elam". It is interesting to note that both Khaltam-ti and Kashti as the name for Elam, agrees with Ta-Seti, the ancient name for Nubia located in the Meroitic Sudan.
.
There is textual evidence supporting a relationship between the founders of Sumer, Elam and Dilmun. Col. Henry Rawlinson , used textual evidence to determine that a link existed between the Mesopotamians to their ancestors in Africa . Rawlinson called these people Kushites.
There is a positive relationship between crania from Africa and Eurasia. The archaeologist Marcel-Auguste Dieulafoy (Dieulafoy,2004) and Hanberry (1981) maintains that their was a Sub-Saharan strain in Persia . These researchers maintain that it was evident that an Ethiopian dynasty ruled Elam from a perusal of its statuary of the royal family and members of the army ( Dieulafoy, 2004; Dieulafoy, 2010;Hansberry,1981). Dieulafoy (2010 ) noted that the textual evidence and iconography make it clear that the Elamites were Africans, and part of the Kushite confederation .Dieulafoy (2010) made it clear that the Elamites at Susa were Sub-Saharan Africans.
Marcel Dieulafoy and M. de Quatrefages observed that the craniometrics of the ancient Elamites of Susa indicate that they were Sub-Saharan Africans or Negroes (Dieulafoy,2010). Ancient Sub-Saharan African skeletons have also been found in Mesopotamia (Tomczyk et al, 2010). The craniometric data indicates that continuity existed between ancient and medieval Sub-Saharan Africans in Mesopotamia (Ricault & Waelkens,2008).
Rawlinson,H. “ Letter read at the meeting of the Royal Asiatic Society on February 5, 1853”, The Athenaeum, (No. 1321) ,p.228.
Rawlinson,H. “Note on the early History of Babylonia”, Journal Royal Asiatic Soc., 15, 215-259.
Ricaut,F.X. and Waelkens.2008. Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzatine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements, Hum Biol, 80(5):535-564.
Tomczyk,J., Jedrychowska-Danska, K., Ploszaj,T & Witas H.W. (2010). Anthropological analysis of the osteological material from an ancient tomb (Early Bronze Age) from the middle Euphrates valley, Terqa (Syria) , International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, Retrieved 04/04/10 from (www.interscience.wiley.com)DOI:10.1002/oa.1150 .
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
LEDAMA the Meroitic language is not a Bantu language. Meroitic is related to the Niger-Congo group but it was a lingua franca. They invented this language because the Meroitic Empire was a confederation made up of various African Nationalities.
My decipherment of Meroitic is based on the Kushana theory.The Kushana theory is that a group of “East Indian” scholars introduced the Meroitic writing system to the Meroites. The Kushana hypothesis was based on the following evidence:
1) no African language has been found to be a cognate language of Meroitic
2) the Classical literature says that the Kushites lived in Asia and Africa;
3) the Gymnosophists, or "naked sages" of Meroe came from India.
Before I began work on Meroitic, other researchers had already falsified the African theory for Meroitic's cognate language. Meroitic is not related to languages spoken in this area. Griffith and Haycock tried to read Meroitic using Nubian and failed. K.H. Priese tried to read the Meroitic text using Eastern Sudani; he also failed.The fact that not even Nubian, a language spoken by a people who were engaged in constantly conflict with the Meroites , failed to be the cognate language of Meroitic made it clear that we must look elsewhere for the cognate language spoken by the Meroites.
The evidence presented above provides internal and external validity for my theory based upon the sources I have cited previously. The sources I have used are impartial, to disconfirm my hypothesis someone needs to show that my propositions are not fully informed. They must prove that:
1. there were no Indians North Africa and Kush when the Classical writers maintained they were] and present rival explanations based on the evidence.
The fact that the claims made by the Classical writers is supported by the Indians themselves isstrong confirmation of the Kushana hypothesis. This hypothesis based on the classical literature, was enough to support the original Kushana Hypothesis.
The predicting power of the original theory: the Gymnosophist introduced Meroitic to the Kushites due to the influence of Buddhism in Meroe, matches the observed natural phenomena which was confirmed elsewhere by cognate place names, ethononyms, lexical items and grammatical features, indicate that my theory has not be falsified.
The ability to reliably predict a linguistic relationship between Kushana and Meroitic, was further confirmation of the Kushana Hypothesis, because the linguistic connections were deducible from prediction.
I controlled the Kushana Hypothesis by comparing the statements of the classical writers, with historical, linguistic anthropological and toponymic evidence found not only in Africa, but also India and Central Asia [where the people also used Tokharian as a trade language to unify the various people in Central Asia].
I constructed three testable hypotheses in support of the Kushana theory, and it seems only fair that these variables must be disconfirmed, to falsify the Kushana Hypothesis.
Hypothesis 1: If the meroites used a writing system of non-African origin a tradition mentioning this fact will exist. (Hypothesis confirmed. Classical literature mentions Indian scholars in ancient Meroe.)
Hypothesis: 2. If the classical literature mentions Indians who lived in Egypt influencing the Meroites their should be historical evidence relating to this tradition. (Hypothesis confirmed .Classical literature mentions a King who left his country is mentioned in the Jaina text called the Kalakeharya-Kathanaka.)
Hypothesis: 3. If Classical literature is true about the Indian origin of the Gymnosophists Indians will be found living near the Meroites around the time the Meroitic inscriptions appear. (Hypothesis confirmed. Artifacts and coins with Indian inscriptions have been found in Egypt and Ethiopia.) Failure to disconfirm this theorem, implies validity of my prediction.
My confirmation of the above , and
1) the presence of Kushites in Africa and Asia;
2) Asoka sent many Buddhist missionaries to Egypt who wrote their scriptures in Kharosthi and Tocharian;
3) a Blemmya--native to the Meroitic empire, is mentioned in numerous Buddhist Pali text;
4)the presence of Kushana sages in India who may have migrated to Meroe;
5) cognate lexical items;
6)cognate verbs and
7) cognate grammatical features; indicates systematic controlled, critical and empirical investigation of the question of Kushana representing the Meroitic cognate language.
As a result of these facts we can now use Tocharian or Kushana to read the Meroitic text. The historical evidence make it clear that the Meroites were probably not strangers to Kharosthi literacy since the Gymnosophists had been in Upper Egypt and Meroitic Empires hundreds of years.
The evidence is clear Tocharian and Kharosthi was a popular media among Upper Egyptians and Meroites. As a result, it was a nativized Meroitic language spoken by a major group of Meroites.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
The Akkadian and Geez languages are related. The Akkadians migrated from Africa into Mesopotamia where they defeated the Sumerians who were Kushites.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Rawlinson identified these Akkadians as Turanian or Scythic people. But he made it clear that these ancient Scythic or Turanian speaking people were Kushites or Blacks.
The Akkadian and Geez languages are related. The Akkadians migrated from Africa into Mesopotamia where they defeated the Sumerians who were Kushites.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Rawlinson identified these Akkadians as Turanian or Scythic people. But he made it clear that these ancient Scythic or Turanian speaking people were Kushites or Blacks.
So lioness, you are saying this is contradictory?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The Akkadian and Geez languages are related. The Akkadians migrated from Africa into Mesopotamia where they defeated the Sumerians who were Kushites.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Rawlinson identified these Akkadians as Turanian or Scythic people. But he made it clear that these ancient Scythic or Turanian speaking people were Kushites or Blacks.
So lioness, you are saying this is contradictory?
Rawlinson othen refrred to the Sumerians as Akkadians . The Kushites in Asia were called Scythic and Turanian. The original Scythic people were not Indo-Europeans. See: C.B. Rawlinson, "Notes on the early history of Babylon", Jour. Royal Asiatic Society (First Series) 15, p.230
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
LEDAMA, quoting Beyoku is not helping your case. Do you even know what the Bantu migrration is? You assert:
hyksos were forced out of egypt by Amasis,they didn't assimilate,except ta-meru,ta-seti and ta-netjer.the rest were forced out, triggering first bantu migration to kush and west africa.
Aside from a mass of other ludricrous assertions, you like an assortment of 'Afro-enthusiasts', advance the dubious "Fleeing Negroes" model, in which West Africa gets civilization of "Bantus" migrate cuz Hyksos, or assorted Asiatics invade or conquer Egypt. This "Fleeing Negroes" notion, has been debunked again and again, yet you keep merely asserting it like an article of religious faith. Maybe it is... ANd since when do "Bantu" "flee" to Kush or West Africa cuz Hyskos showed up in Egypt?
I again ask, what's taking you so long in providing credible scholarly proof regarding the negroes who "flee" Egypt, to trigger the first Bantu migration in Africa? Don't quote Beyoku or web links saying "it is so." Anybody can assert anything. Where is credible evidence?
the kalenjin were responsible for unifying egypt for MENES aka NERMER was a kalenjin,the kalenjin ruled mostly the 3rd,18th and 26th dynasty of egypt because most rulers of these dynaties had kalenjin names,also the culture of these dynasties were influenced by the kalenjin.
Where is credible scholarly proof that this is so? How did the 3rd, 18th or 25th (and later you add the 26th) Dynasty become "Kanenjin"? You are still ducking and dodging providing credible data from the other thread. What's taking you so long?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
The Akkadian and Geez languages are related. The Akkadians migrated from Africa into Mesopotamia where they defeated the Sumerians who were Kushites.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Rawlinson identified these Akkadians as Turanian or Scythic people. But he made it clear that these ancient Scythic or Turanian speaking people were Kushites or Blacks.
Rawlinson often referred to the Sumerians as Akkadians . The Kushites in Asia were called Scythic and Turanian. The original Scythic people were not Indo-Europeans. See: C.B. Rawlinson, "Notes on the early history of Babylon", Jour. Royal Asiatic Society (First Series) 15, p.230
Babylon 1894 BC-141 BC
was originally a Semitic Akkadian city dating from the period of the Akkadian Empire c. 2300 BC. Originally a minor administrative center, it only became an independent city-state in 1894 BC in the hands of a migrant Amorite dynasty not native to ancient Mesopotamia. The Babylonians were more often ruled by other foreign migrant dynasties throughout their history, such as by the Kassites, Arameans, Elamites and Chaldeans, as well as by their fellow Mesopotamians, the Assyrians.
Under Nabopolassar, a Chaldean king, Babylon eventually threw off Assyrian rule, and in an alliance with Cyaxares, king of the Medes and Persians together with the Scythians and Cimmerians, the Assyrian Empire was finally destroyed between 612 BC and 605 BC.
___________________________ C.B. Rawlinson
But Clyde wasn't the Royal Asiatic Society a 19th century white colonial British Eurocentic Hamitic theory promoting organization? (still operating today also) How can you use them as sources?
Anyway...
quote:
"[7.70] The eastern Ethiopians - for two nations of this name served in the army - were marshalled with the Indians. They differed in nothing from the other Ethiopians, save in their language, and the character of their hair. For the eastern Ethiopians have straight hair, while they of Libya are more woolly-haired than any other people in the world."
--Herodotus, The Persian Wars 450s - 420s BC
.
quote:
“a numerous colony of people emigrated from the banks of the Indus, and crossing the ocean, fixed their residence in the country now called Ethiopia."
Eusebius 260/265 – 339/340 AD
.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
Clyde could the Scythians be straight haired black people?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
LEDAMA the Semitic speakers are of African origin. The origin of the Semitic speakers is very important. The archaeological and textual evidence make it clear that Mesopotamia was the not homeland of the Semitic speakers. This evidence make it clear that the first settlers of this area spoke Sumerian and Ubadian, not Semitic.
The first Semites to leave textual evidence are the Akkadians. The Akkadians and the Ethio-Semitic languages have shared archaism. This feature indicates the ancient morphology and grammar of a Semitic language. We can infer that if this was the norm for the most ancient form of Semitic, other Semitic languages possessing this character probably are closely related to the original spoken/written Semitic language. We can further infer that since Ethio-Semitic, possesses these linguistic characteristics, and other Semitic languages such as Hebrew and Arabic do not, the later languages must be relatively young in age.
The historical evidence support an old presence of Ethio-Semitic in Africa. For example, the Axumite Empire was founded by the Habashan. the habashan are mentioned in a 3rd or 4th century Himyarite inscription from South Arabia, which refers to an alliance between Gadarat King of the Habashan or Habashat.
Some of the people of Punt were probably Tigrinya speakers, who call their language habesha, i.e., Abyssinian par excellence. The term Habesh, seems to represent an old name for Abyssinia and may be connected with the Amharic word washa 'cave or cavern', and may refer to the" cave dwellers" who once served as the principal traders along the Ethiopian coast. The ability of the Ethiopians as sailors, is supported by the title bahr nagash, "ruler of the maritime province" or Eritrea.
In addition, some of the earliest Sabean/Thamudic inscriptions have been found in Ethiopia, and not South Arabia. For example, Dr. Doresse has found Sabean cursive writing on a sceptre that indicates that the Habashat/Axumite empire had writing.
These Habashan are mentioned in Egyptian inscriptions of the 18th Dynasty (1709-1320) in connection to the land of Punt. Given the Egyptian association of the Habashan with Punt, I call the speakers of the Ethio-Semitic languages: Puntites. We have Egyptian evidence of trade missions to Punt as early as PepiII in 2400 BC and Mentuholep IV and IV. The vizier Amenemhat, of Mentuholep IV is said to have established a port near Safaga. the most famous mission to Punt was sent by Queen Hatshepsut, and is recorded at deir el Bahri. Since the Habashan are mentioned in Egyptian documents they were in existence long before the Arabic speakers. Even the Semitic speakers of Africa did not originate in East or Northeast Africa. Up until the 6th Dynasty of Egypt, the Semitic speakers lived in Nubia as cattle herders.
The Semitic speakers or Puntites did not live originally in Northeast Africa. They were part of the C-Group Confederacy which included during the reigns of Merenre and Pepi II (according to the account of Herkhuf), Irtjet, Zatju and Wawat. In 2300 BC, the Egyptians forced the Puntites out of Nubia into Northeast Africa. Some of these Puntites migrated across Arabia into Mesopotamia . In Mesopotamia they were called Akkadians. The Akkadians defeated the Sumerians and spread the Semitic language into the Middle East.
The C-Group people spoke Niger-congo languages. This ould explain why Diop discovered that at the base of each semetic word we find a Black African, Niger-Congo root. ]
This statement was made by Diop in his book The Cultural Unity of Black Africa. See page 113.
. The evidence of shared archaism for Akkadian and Ethio-Semitic indicate that the speakers of these languages probably shared many linguistic features when they separated. It also suggest that thespeakers of these languages probably separated in Africa, since the Ethio-Semitic speakers have long been established in their present home, as supported by the Egyptian inscriptions. The Ethio-Semitic speakers have maintained these features due to the relative stability of these languages. You can find out more about the stability of African languages in my article "Linguistic Continuity and African and Dravidian languages", International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics, 23 (2), (1996) 34-52. We must conclude that the Semitic languages originated in Africa. The Semitic languages are divided into four groups: North-east Semitic, Northwest Semitic, Southeast Semitic and Southwest Semitic. The Ethiopian Semitic languages belong to the Southeast Semitic subgroup. In ancient times modern Ethiopia and Somalia was called Punt. As a result I call the Semitic languages of Ethiopia: Puntite languages. In the Sumerian texts these Puntites may have been called Meluhhaites.
The Puntites lived in the Eastern desert of Egypt and Arabia for many years and on the Horn of Africa. The earliest representatives of this group are depicted on the Ivory label of King Dan (Udimu) of the first Dynasty of Kemit.
During the neolithic subpluvial the Red Sea area recieved more rainfall. This area was blanketed with vegetation and the people grew ensete, barley and dates. They also grazed sheep, goats and cattle. Arabia at this time was a vast savannah with marshes and lakes. What is now known as the Rub al-Khali or Empty Quarter, today, an arid mountainous area, was then well watered.
The Cushitic speaking people of Ethiopia also appear to have had some representatives in Arabia during this period .The people of Punt lived in an area stretching from the Eastern desert of Egypt, eastward to the Red Sea, and Central Africa.These people spoke Puntite/ Semitic languages.
This group of Africoids lived in the Eastern Desert and the Red Sea Hills. Whereas most Africans are clean shaven the Puntites preferred to wear beards. The boats of these Easterners are found engraved at prehistoric sites in Mesopotamia. In the Egyptian records the standard of the Easterners was the Set animal.
The Egyptian traditions tell us that there was a struggle between Set and Horus which took place in Nubia. This story indicates that in ancient times Semitic-speaking people formerly lived in Nubia; this explains the Egyptian identification of Punt or Pwene as "the land of the gods". (Ullendorf 1973) The Egyptians called the people of Punt Kenbetu.
In the ancient literature of Kemit (Egypt) and Mesopotamia, Punt was recognized as a sea power. From ports along the Red Sea, the people of Punt traded with of Kemit, Arabia, West Asia and Mesopotamia. Modern Ethiopia is part of the land known to the Egyptians "the lands of the gods". The inhabitants of Punt, on the other hand called their country Arwe. It was from here that the Semitic speaking nations moved northward into Arabia and Mesopotamia. The Kemites allude to the Arwe Kingdom in a short story which tells how a good natured serpent of great size speaks to a ship wrecked Egyptian whose life he saved:
"I am the Prince of Punt...But it shall happen when[thou] art parted from this place ,that never shalt thou behold this island more, for it will become water...."(Doresse 1971, p.17)
This "good natured serpent" may refer to the King-Serpent that ruled Punt according to Ethiopian traditions.
The ships of Punt were very large, as early as 2500 B.C., they had ships with 60 oars. In the records of Sumer-Akkad there are frequent passages referring to the large boats of Punt, which they called Meluhha . The ships of Meluhha made many voyages to Mesopotamia.
Meluhha, included the area from Nubia eastward to the coast of the Red Sea. This view is supported by the discovery of C-Group pottery usually associated with Nubia, found in excavated sites in Eritrea. (Zayed 1981, p.142)
The Meluhhaites were known as the "black men" to the Sumerians .The Akkadians called them "the Meluhhaites, the men of the Black land". They sold many products including metals and precious stones to the people of Mesopotamia.(Kramer 1978, pp. 76-80) There were many Egyptian contacts with Punt. According to Herodotus, the Kemite Pharoah Sestrotris carried his conquest as far as the Red Sea, where he erected a stele at Deire. We have evidence of Egyptian expeditions to Punt sent by Pepi II in 2400 B.C.,and Mentuholep IV to bring back rare products from ancient Punt. Under Mentuholep V, the vizier Amenemhet established a port near Safaga to insure regular trade with Punt. The most famous voyage to Punt was undertaken by Queen Hatshepsut (c. 1520-1484), details of her mission are depicted on the walls of her temple at Deir el Bahri. (Gardiner 1978, p.78)
Many ports in modern Ethiopia have been used for millennia. The inscriptions of Tuthmosis III refer to such places as Outculit, Hamasu and Tekaru; these names suggest the modern Ethiopian cities of Adulis, Hamasu and Tigre. (Doresse 1971, p.17)
The Egyptians/Kemites made it clear that Punt controlled both sides of the Red Sea. (Budge 1959, p.53, n.1) In the Kemite inscription the Hymn of Ra, we read "The land of Punt is established [to give] the perfumes which thou smellest with thy nostrils" (Budge 1959, p.149). Stuart Munro-Hay noted that: "One extremely interesting Egyptian record from an 18th Dynasty tomb at Thebes actually shows Puntite trading boats or rafts with triangular sails ( Save -Soderbergh 1946, p.24) for transporting the products of Punt, indicating that the commerce was not exclusively Egyptian- carried, and that local Red Sea peoples were already seafaring...."
In modern Ethiopia there were three great empires Punt-Arwe, the Da'mot or Di'amat Kingdom and Axum. The first kingdom of Ethiopia was founded by the Habesha or Habeshat who were first mentioned in the Egyptian inscriptions of the 18th Dynasty of Egypt, in connection with the Land of Punt.
The Punt empire was made up of people speaking diverse languages. The culture bearers may have been the Tigrinya speakers who call their language Habesha, i.e., Abyssinian par excellence. (Doresse 1971) The term Habesha seems to represent an old name for Abyssinia (the ancient name for modern-day Ethiopia) and may be connected with the Amharic word washa "a cave or cavern".
The Puntite languages are characterized by a basic vocabulary, a system of roots and vowel patterns and the formation of derived verbs by prefixes. The South Arabian languages: Sabaean, Minaean and Hadramautic, are slightly different from modern South Arabic, but analogous to the Ethiopian languages. This represents the influence of the Jectanid tribes on South Arabic. It is clear that the Proto-Puntite speakers lived in Africa. Wolf Leslau (1951,1957) has made it clear that Ethiopic and South Arabic form a dialectical unity. Dialectical unity means that two or more languages form a unified dialect.
According to Haupt, in 1878, Akkadian , Minaean and Ethiopic all belong to the same group of Semitic languages, even though they are separated in time and by great geographical distance. This is surprising considering the fact that Ethiopic and Akkadian are separated by many hundreds of years. The best example of this unity is the presence of shared archaicism (Leslau 1951). The linguistic feature of shared archaicism is the appearance of the vowel after the first consonant of the imperfect (Hertzron & Bender 1976, p.23).
For example, one of the most outstanding features of Puntite, is the presence of a vowel following the first consonant in the verb form known as the imperfect, e.g., yi quattul (using the hypothetical verb consonants q-t-l, yi is the person marking prefix) or yi k'ett 'he kills'. In Southwest Semitic the form of the perfect is yu qtul-u . Here we have the same hypothetical q-t-l form, but there is no vowel following the first consonant of the verb root. This results from the fact that in Black African languages we rarely, if at all find words formed with double consonants.
The fact that Southeast Semitic has shared archaicism with Puntite shows that at the time the Akkadians and Ethiopic speakers separated these groups had dialectical unity. The lack of this trait in Arabic and Hebrew shows that they have been influenced by the Indo-European speakers who invaded Palestine and Arabia between 1300 B.C. and 900 B.C. Semitic verb root Akkadian Ethiopic/S. Arabian
Clearly Black African language forms the base of most Semitic words. Diop (1978,p.113) recognized that in relation to Arabic words, once the first consonant was suppressed, there is often an African root. This phenomenon was also recognized by Wiener (1922, v.III) who believed that many African words were of Arabic origin.
The Cushitic substratum has strongly influenced the phonology, morphology, syntax and vocabulary of the Puntite languages.
Cushitic English Semitic Saho la wild cow *la-at Samoli la id. id.
This supports the view of I.M. Diakonoff that the Semitic speakers and A-Group lived in close proximity in ancient times. The evidence discussed above makes it clear that Arabia, which was occupied in Neolithic times by the Anu, was probably not the original homeland of the Semitic speakers. Modern Ethiopians originated in Africa, not Arabia.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
“a numerous colony of people emigrated from the banks of the Indus, and crossing the ocean, fixed their residence in the country now called Ethiopia."
Eusebius 260/265 – 339/340 AD
.
This is how Buddism came to the Meroitic Empire and Egypt.
Philostratus:The Life of Apollonius of Tyana makes it clear that the Gymnosophist lived in Upper Egypt and the Meroitic Empire. The historical evidence makes it clear that there was probably two migrations of Buddhist Gymnosophists to Egypt and the Meroitic Empire.
Asoka was a supporter of Buddhism. Zacharias P. Thundy, in Buddha and Christ make it clear that the edits of Asoka (c.274-236 BC) indicate that this ruler sent missionaries to Egypt to preach the Buddhist Dharma(pp.242-243).
Thundy maintains that archaeological evidence exist for a community of Indian sages living in Memphis as early as 200 BC (p.243).
We know that decendents of these missionaries were still in Egypt over two hundred years later because they were visited by Apollonius of Tyana.
Asoka used Kharosthi to write his edits. The Buddhist also used this writing system to record their scriptures. This means that the Gymnosophists would have had a long tradition of employing Kharosthi to communicate their ideas. The Gymnosophists were probably well respected by the Meroites and some Meroites probably had knowledge of Buddhist teachings and literacy.
Some Meroites may have played an important role in Buddhist because Blemmyae, a prominent group in the Meroitic Sudan are mentioned in Pali text Tipitaka (see:JDM Derrett, (2002) A Blemmya in India, Numen 49:460-474). Dr.Derrett wrote that in early Pali text " we have a Blemmya (an African) in front rank Buddhist texts of very respectable age (p.465).
The Buddhist text where Blemmya were mentioned are very old. The Vinaya pitaka, is dated to the 4th century B.C.E.
If Blemmya are mentioned in Buddhists text we can be sure that Meroites were not ignorant of Kharosthi. This would explain why many of the Meroitic symbols agree with Kharosthi. They agree because some Meroites were probably already literate in Kharosthi due to the influence of Buddhism in the Meroitic Empire.
.
There seems to have been a second migration of Buddhists to the Meroitic Empire many years after Asoka sent missionaries to Egypt. These migrants came to the Meroitic Empire after their king was murdered.
Flavius Philostratus, the writer of the Vita Apollonii, Vol.1 , claimed that the Gymnosophists of Meroe originally came from India (see F.C. Conybeare, Philostratus:The Life of Apollonius of Tyana(p.45),1950). Given the fact that the Kushana had formerly ruled India around the time that the Meroitic writing was introduced to the Kushite civilization, led to the hypothesis that the ancestors of the Gymnosophist may have been Kushana philosophers.
The historical evidence of the Kushana having ruled India made the Classical references to Indians, the Gymnosophists in Meroe, an important source for the construction of alternative theories about the possible location of the cognate language of Meroitic.
There is external evidence, which supports my theory. A theory explains observed phenomena and has predictive power. I have theorized that due to the claims of the Classical writers that some of the Meroites came from India (F.C Conybeare (Trans.), Philostratus: The life of Apollonius of Tyana Vol.2, (1950) pg.271).
According to the Life of Apollonius, the Indian Meroites were formerly led by a King Ganges, who had "repulsed the Scythians who invaded this land [India from] across the Caucasus" (Conybeare, Vol.1, Pg.273). Pilostratus also made it clear that the Indians of Meroe came to this country after their king was killed.
The presence of this tradition of an Indian King of the Indian-Meroites conquering the Scythians predicts that the Indian literature should record this historical episode. This prediction is supported by a Jaina text called the Kalakeharya-Kathanaka , which reports that when the Scythians invaded Malwa, the King of Malwa, called Vikramaditya defeated the Scythians (H. Kulke & D. Rothermund, History of India(London, Routledge: 1990, pg.73). This king Vikramaditya may be the Ganges mentioned in the Life of Apollonius.Confirmation of the Ganges story,supports the Classical literary evidence that their were Indianized -Meroites that could have introduced the Tocharian trade language to the Meroites.
In addition to the classical mention of the Indians settling Meroë, and Asoka's edit sending missionaries to Egypt, we also have a horde of Kushana coins that were found on the floor of a cave at the present monastery-shine at Debra Demo in modern Ethiopia in 1940. Moreover, there were other Indians in North Africa in addition to Kush/Meroe. For example, at Quseir al-Qadim there was a large Indian speaking community (see: R. Salomon, "Epigraphic remains of Indian traders in Egypt", Journal of the American oriental Society, (1991) pp.731-736; and R. Salomon, Addenda,Journal of the American Oriental Society, (1993) pg.593). These Indians were in Egypt writing messages in their own language, around the time we see a switch from Egyptian hieroglyphics to the Meroitic writing system. All of this supported the traditions of the Meroites that speak of a knowledge of the Kushana/Indians among the Meroites.
The evidence that the Classical references to an Indian-Meroite King who conquered the Scythians is supported by the Indian literature, provides external corroboration of the tradition that some of the Meroites were of Indian origin. The presence of Indian traders and settlers in Meroe (and Egypt), makes it almost impossible to deny the possibility that Indians, familiar with the Tokharian trade languagedid not introduce this writing to the Meroites who needed a neutral language to unify the diverse ethnic groups who made up the Meroite state. In relation to the history of linguistic change and bilingualism, itis a mistake to believe that linguistic transfer had to take place for the Meroites to have used Tokharian, when it did not take place when they wrote in Egyptian hieroglyphics.
In summary the classical literature makes it clear that there was a connection between the Gymnosophists (of Meroe) and the Indians. The fact that historical events mentioned in the classical sources are found in the Indian literature confirm the view that there were Indian-Meroites who could have introduced the Tokharian trade language to the Meroites. The fact that the Nubians who were probably not part of the"Meroitic state", used hieroglyphics and Coptic to write their language without abandoning their native language support the view that the Meroites could have also used Tokharian to write Meroitic. And that eventhough the Kushites wrote Meroitic inscriptions in Tokharian, theywould not have had to abandon their own language. .
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ___________________________ C.B. Rawlinson
But Clyde wasn't the Royal Asiatic Society a 19th century white colonial British Eurocentic Hamitic theory promoting organization? (still operating today also) How can you use them as sources?
Rawlinson appears to have subcribed to the Ancient Model of history which recognized that Blacks had an ancient civilization. You may want to read Black Athena, where a discussion of the ancient model of history is noted. .
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Clyde could the Scythians be straight haired black people?
No . They represent the Scythians of Homer times.
.
Why can't the Scythians of Homer's time be straight haired black people. perhaps like the relief above with black skin?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:I disagree. There is no such thing as Afro-Asiatic. Egyptian was a lingua franca invenbted to unite the various nationalities that made up ancient Egypt.
The Akkadian and Geez languages are related. The Akkadians migrated from Africa into Mesopotamia where they defeated the Sumerians who were Kushites. The Sumerian language is related to the Dravidian-Niger-Congo group.
The Kalenjin are no more related to the Egyptians, then the Wolof, Mande and Bantu. All of these languages are related to Egyptian because Egyptian was a lingua franca that included many linguistic elements and shared vocabulary items from the diverse Ethnic groups that made up ancient Egypt.
The Semitic languages are African languages as well. At the base of most Semitic languages you find an African root. Hebrew , due to interactions with the People of the Sea, Gutians and other Turkic and Indo-European speakers does have elements of I-E origin.
YES,there is a language family called 'Afro-asiatic',reason being,they have both 'african' elements and 'asiatic' element.The african elements is most of the time NILOTIC.The asiatic element is most of the times 'west semitic'. NO;it is the other way round,akkadians migrated from mesopotamia to africa,this proven by linguistics and genetics easily,when i have time i will prove that to you.what ails you clyde,is that you luck proper understanding of human migrations.I believe in the biblical history of human migration because it makes alot of sense.humans are related,we are all children of a black noah.japhet(whites),shem(asiatics&mongoloids),ham(africans).proven by genetics humans are related. genesis 10:30 tells us after noahs arc settled in the himalayas highest point,we migrated west from mt sephar(everest),towards shinar(china)which was afghanistan then,Genesis 11:2,after the babel incidence africans entered africa,europeans antered north towards caucas,asiatics transversed the region. that explains how nilotes and other africans brought zebu cows,spider plant Gynandropsis gynandra,black and brown pottery,mariyuana,millet,sorgham from INDIA TO AFRICA.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:I disagree. There is no such thing as Afro-Asiatic. Egyptian was a lingua franca invenbted to unite the various nationalities that made up ancient Egypt.
The Akkadian and Geez languages are related. The Akkadians migrated from Africa into Mesopotamia where they defeated the Sumerians who were Kushites. The Sumerian language is related to the Dravidian-Niger-Congo group.
The Kalenjin are no more related to the Egyptians, then the Wolof, Mande and Bantu. All of these languages are related to Egyptian because Egyptian was a lingua franca that included many linguistic elements and shared vocabulary items from the diverse Ethnic groups that made up ancient Egypt.
The Semitic languages are African languages as well. At the base of most Semitic languages you find an African root. Hebrew , due to interactions with the People of the Sea, Gutians and other Turkic and Indo-European speakers does have elements of I-E origin.
YES,there is a language family called 'Afro-asiatic',reason being,they have both 'african' elements and 'asiatic' element.The african elements is most of the time NILOTIC.The asiatic element is most of the times 'west semitic'. NO;it is the other way round,akkadians migrated from mesopotamia to africa,this proven by linguistics and genetics easily,when i have time i will prove that to you.what ails you clyde,is that you luck proper understanding of human migrations.I believe in the biblical history of human migration because it makes alot of sense.humans are related,we are all children of a black noah.japhet(whites),shem(asiatics&mongoloids),ham(africans).proven by genetics humans are related. genesis 10:30 tells us after noahs arc settled in the himalayas highest point,we migrated west from mt sephar(everest),towards shinar(china)which was afghanistan then,Genesis 11:2,after the babel incidence africans entered africa,europeans antered north towards caucas,asiatics transversed the region. that explains how nilotes and other africans brought zebu cows,spider plant Gynandropsis gynandra,black and brown pottery,mariyuana,millet,sorgham from INDIA TO AFRICA.
Please cite the evidence. How could the Akkadians migrate from Mesopotamia to Africa, when we find them migrating into Mesopotamia. Have you forgotten that the first settlers of Mesopotamia were the Kushite Sumerians--not Akkadians.
The Dravidian people of India belonged to the C-Group. It was these Africans who took millet and other cultigens to India after 3000BC. See: African millets carried to India by Dravidian Speakers
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
No.
Wawat has nothing to do with India or its people and their languages.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Please cite the evidence. How could the Akkadians migrate from Mesopotamia to Africa, when we find them migrating into Mesopotamia. Have you forgotten that the first settlers of Mesopotamia were the Kushite Sumerians--not Akkadians.
The Dravidian people of India belonged to the C-Group. It was these Africans who took millet and other cultigens to India after 3000BC. See: African millets carried to India by Dravidian Speakers
The accadians migrated from accad(iran)into sumeria(iraq),Kush of the bible was the father of all nilotes,thats why the region near pakistan where nilotic dravidians used to reside is called 'HINDU-KUSH',characteristic of nilotic civilisations e.g egypt,kush and harrapan are 1)river basin civilisations,2)caste system,3)circumcision,4)zebu cattle,5)BRW black and red earthen ware,5)animist religions and animal totems,6)worship and sacredness of the cow,7)martriachy,8)ear lobe elongation,9)tooth extraction-lower incisors,9)use of red ochre,10)polytheist religions. c group nilotes were either dinka or nuer or karamajong. THE DRAVIDIANS HAVE NEVER BEEN TO AFRICA,yes they are nilotes,because they also have nilotic mtDNA L3(M&N),they have nilotic zebu cattle,but they represent the nilotes who never made it to africa,all nilotes(cush) entered africa via the horn of africa route,but the khoisan(phut),pygmy(mizrahim)and bantu(canaan) respectively all entered africa via the egypt sinai peninsula route at different times of history.Africa(also most continents) was uninhabited immediately after the flood,don't you read the bible.by the way the biblical migration history was written over 3500 years ago,and it makes alot of sense that what modern historians are saying. sorry clyde but DNA shows migration of zebu cow,african donkey,millet,soghurm,mariuana,rice,Spider plant (Cleome gynandra) from INDIA TO AFRICA
CHECK OUT ORIGIN OF ZEBU COW OWNED BY NILOTES
quote:Zebu From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article is about the bovine species. For the company, see EVE/ZeBu. Zebu Bos taurus indicus.jpg Conservation status Domesticated Scientific classification Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Artiodactyla Family: Bovidae Subfamily: Bovinae Genus: Bos Species: Bos primigenius Subspecies: B. p. indicus Binomial name Bos primigenius indicus Linnaeus, 1758 Synonyms Bos indicus and Bos taurus indicus Speculative life restoration of the enigmatic Indian aurochs (B. p. namadicus)
A zebu (/ˈziːˌbjuː/, /ˈziːbuː/ or /ˈzeɪbuː/; Bos primigenius indicus or Bos indicus or Bos taurus indicus), sometimes known as humped cattle or Brahman, is a type of domestic cattle originating in South Asia. They are characterised by a fatty hump on their shoulders, drooping ears and a large dewlap. Zebu are well adapted to withstanding high temperatures, and are farmed throughout the tropical countries, both as pure zebu and as hybrids with taurine cattle, the other main type of domestic cattle. They are used as draught oxen, as dairy cattle and as beef cattle, as well as for byproducts such as hides and dung for fuel and manure.
Contents
1 Taxonomy and etymology 2 Origin 3 Breeds 4 Characteristics 5 Spread and hybridisation 6 Popular culture 7 References 8 External links
Taxonomy and etymology
The scientific name of zebu cattle was originally Bos indicus, but they are now more commonly classified within the species Bos primigenius, together with taurine cattle (Bos primigenius taurus) and the ancestor of both of them, the extinct aurochs (Bos primigenius). European cattle are descended from the Eurasian subspecies, while zebu are descended from the Indian subspecies. "Zebu" may be either singular or plural, but "zebus" is also an acceptable plural form. The Spanish name, "cebu" or "cebú", is also present in a few English works. Origin
Zebu cattle are thought to be derived from Asian aurochs, sometimes regarded as a subspecies, Bos primigenius namadicus[1] Wild Asian aurochs disappeared during the time of the Indus Valley Civilization from its range in the Indus basin and other parts of the Indian subcontinent possibly due to inter-breeding with domestic zebu and resultant fragmentation of wild populations due to loss of habitat.[2] Breeds
There are some 75 known breeds of zebu, split about evenly between African breeds and South Asian ones. The major zebu cattle breeds of the world include Gir, Guzerat, Kankrej, Indo-Brazilian, Brahman, Nelore, Ongole, Sahiwal, Red Sindhi, Butana, Kenana, Boran, Baggara, Tharparkar, Kangayam, Chinese Southern Yellow, Philippine native, Kedah - Kelantan, and local Indian Dairy (LID). Other breeds of zebu are quite local, like the Hariana of Haryana and eastern Punjab[3] or the Rath of Alwar in eastern Rajasthan.[4]
The Sanga cattle breeds originated from hybridization of zebu with indigenous humpless cattle in Africa; they include the Afrikaner, Red Fulani, Ankole-Watusi, and many other breeds of central and southern Africa. Sanga cattle can be distinguished from pure zebu by having smaller humps located farther forward on the animals. Characteristics Female zebu in Sri Lanka
Zebu have humps on the shoulders, large dewlaps and droopy ears.[5]
posted
THE CATTLE DID NOT MIGRATE BY THEMSELVES FROM ASIA TO AFRICA,IT CAME WITH THE NILOTES DOMISTICATED.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LEDAMA: THE DRAVIDIANS HAVE NEVER BEEN TO AFRICA,yes they are nilotes,because they also have nilotic mtDNA L3(M&N),they have nilotic zebu cattle,but they represent the nilotes who never made it to africa,all nilotes(cush) entered africa via the horn of africa route,but the khoisan(phut),pygmy(mizrahim)and bantu(canaan) respectively all entered africa via the egypt sinai peninsula route at different times of history.Africa(also most continents) was uninhabited immediately after the flood,don't you read the bible.by the way the biblical migration history was written over 3500 years ago,and it makes alot of sense that what modern historians are saying. sorry clyde but DNA shows migration of zebu cow,african donkey,millet,soghurm,mariuana,rice,Spider plant (Cleome gynandra) from INDIA TO AFRICA
I have read the Bible. Your interpretation of the migration of the Kushites has nothing to do with history and linguistics. In fact your interpretations are based on the researchers you refer to as "pseudo -white historians", who you claim not to support--but form the basis of your model of African history. The only new element you add to your writing is the Kalenjin.
There is no archaeological evidence of millet coming to Africa from India. The millet and other crops cultivated by the Dravidians were cultivated in Africa, before they were taken to India.
Archaeological evidence shows that the Dravidian culture originated in Africa and that the South Indian megalithic culture of the Dravidians was related to the C-Group people of Nubia. I pointed out the archaeological evidence in the article I cite earlier. Now why don't you cite research articles not a Wiki page supporting your claims.
Moreover there is no DNA showing the migration of the donkey,millet,soghurm and rice from India. The origin of the Sanga is disputed, since there are some Saharan rock engravings of cattle with humps.
In the picture below you can see a mixture of Saharan cattle. Note the long horned Sanga type cattle at the top of the picture below: .
These pictures are 7000 years old. The Dravidians probably took the Zebu cattle to India after they migrated from Nubia.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Those "humps" look nothing like those of full bred Zebu cattle to me.
we now find strong evidence of exportations from the Indian subcontinent to China and southeast Asia, India to Africa, Africa to the Iberian Peninsula and Mediterranean Europe, India to the Americas, and Europe to the Americas (Figures 4 and and5,5, discussed in detail in the following subsections).
[...]
The second factor that we believe underlies the divergence of African taurine is a high level of wild African auroch [30], [31] introgression. Principal component (Figure 1), phylogenetic trees (Figures 2 and and3),3), and admixture (Figure 6) analyses all reveal the African taurines as being the most diverged of the taurine populations. Because of this divergence, it has been hypothesized that there was a third domestication of cattle in Africa [32]–[36]. If there was a third domestication, African taurine would be sister to the European and Asian clade. When no migration events were fit in the TreeMix analyses, African cattle were the most diverged of the taurine populations (Figures 2 and and3),3), but when admixture was modeled to include 17 migrations, all African cattle, except for East African Shorthorn Zebu and Zebu from Madagascar which have high indicine ancestry, were sister to European cattle and were less diverged than Asian or Anatolian cattle (Figure 4), thus ruling out a separate domestication. Our phylogenetic network (Figure 4) shows that there was not a third domestication process, rather there was a single origin of domesticated taurine (Asian, African, and European all share a recent common ancestor denoted by an asterisk in Figure 4, with Asian cattle sister to the rest of the taurine lineage), followed by admixture with an ancestral population in Africa (migration edge a in Figure 4, which is consistent across 6 separate TreeMix runs, Figure S4). This ancestral population (origin of migration edge a in Figure 4) was approximately halfway between the common ancestor of indicine and the common ancestor of taurine. We conclude that African taurines received as much as 26% (estimated as 0.263 in the network, p-value<2.2e-308) of their ancestry from admixture with wild African auroch, with the rest being Fertile Crescent domesticate in origin. Although three other migration edges originate from the branch between indicine and taurine (such as edge b), all of the receiving populations show indicine ancestry in the ADMIXTURE models. But African auroch are extinct and samples were not available for the ADMIXTURE model, thus the admixed auroch ancestry of African taurines cannot specifically be discovered by this model [27], [37] and African taurine, especially Lagune, are depicted as having a single ancestry without indicine influence (Figures 5 and and6,6, see f3 and f4 statistics reported later). Unlike ADMIXTURE, TreeMix can model admixture from an unsampled population by placing a migration edge more basal along a branch of the phylogeny, in this case African auroch.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Please. Those "humps" look nothing like those of Zebu cattle.
we now find strong evidence of exportations from the Indian subcontinent to China and southeast Asia, India to Africa, Africa to the Iberian Peninsula and Mediterranean Europe, India to the Americas, and Europe to the Americas (Figures 4 and and5,5, discussed in detail in the following subsections).
[...]
The second factor that we believe underlies the divergence of African taurine is a high level of wild African auroch [30], [31] introgression. Principal component (Figure 1), phylogenetic trees (Figures 2 and and3),3), and admixture (Figure 6) analyses all reveal the African taurines as being the most diverged of the taurine populations. Because of this divergence, it has been hypothesized that there was a third domestication of cattle in Africa [32]–[36]. If there was a third domestication, African taurine would be sister to the European and Asian clade. When no migration events were fit in the TreeMix analyses, African cattle were the most diverged of the taurine populations (Figures 2 and and3),3), but when admixture was modeled to include 17 migrations, all African cattle, except for East African Shorthorn Zebu and Zebu from Madagascar which have high indicine ancestry, were sister to European cattle and were less diverged than Asian or Anatolian cattle (Figure 4), thus ruling out a separate domestication. Our phylogenetic network (Figure 4) shows that there was not a third domestication process, rather there was a single origin of domesticated taurine (Asian, African, and European all share a recent common ancestor denoted by an asterisk in Figure 4, with Asian cattle sister to the rest of the taurine lineage), followed by admixture with an ancestral population in Africa (migration edge a in Figure 4, which is consistent across 6 separate TreeMix runs, Figure S4). This ancestral population (origin of migration edge a in Figure 4) was approximately halfway between the common ancestor of indicine and the common ancestor of taurine. We conclude that African taurines received as much as 26% (estimated as 0.263 in the network, p-value<2.2e-308) of their ancestry from admixture with wild African auroch, with the rest being Fertile Crescent domesticate in origin. Although three other migration edges originate from the branch between indicine and taurine (such as edge b), all of the receiving populations show indicine ancestry in the ADMIXTURE models. But African auroch are extinct and samples were not available for the ADMIXTURE model, thus the admixed auroch ancestry of African taurines cannot specifically be discovered by this model [27], [37] and African taurine, especially Lagune, are depicted as having a single ancestry without indicine influence (Figures 5 and and6,6, see f3 and f4 statistics reported later). Unlike ADMIXTURE, TreeMix can model admixture from an unsampled population by placing a migration edge more basal along a branch of the phylogeny, in this case African auroch.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
So do White Fulani Zebu, remember? So what? Bait and switch? Modern Sanga ^= prehistoric Saharan cattle. What's this? One picture is supposed to overturn a genetic report? Wrong forum. Try Ancient Egypt.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: So do White Fulani Zebu, remember? So what? Bait and switch? Modern Sanga ^= prehistoric Saharan cattle. What's this? One picture is supposed to overturn a genetic report? Wrong forum. Try Ancient Egypt.
The genetic report says that the African cattle were not all mixed. It also makes it clear that Indic cattle are a recent addition to the African region. See:
. It is possible that after the Mande and Dravidians entered Central Asia and India they may have took Zebu cattle back to Africa.
I was lurking your discussion of cattle in another thread. This led me to the Khoisan cattle. This was interesting because the Khoisan had their own terms for cattle unrelated to Bantu cattle terms. They also have Barbary goats.
This makes me wonder if the Khoisan may have domesticated cattle while they were in North Africa and migrated back into South Africa with these cattles. I an still researching this possibility.
quote:It is possible that after the Mande and Dravidians entered Central Asia and India they may have took Zebu cattle back to Africa.
Are the mande people the only african people you have studied,you seem to place them everywhere in history,where they don't belong.Mande people related genetically to pygmies were the CASLUHIM of the bible,being descendants of MIZRAHIM(ancestor of pygmies who died and was buried in egypt).The mande people mixed with bantus,or were bottled necked by bantus,these mixed bantu/mande(casluhim pygmies) were the CARTHEGIANS.,YES BARCA of cathage,Hannibal were all mande people.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
That is because the khoisan sanga is mix with ZEBU,taken to south africa by a nilotic people related to SOUTHERN NILOTES,the biggest suspects are DATOOGA people,their name in kalenjin is TA-TOGA meaning 'she-from Tto(egypt).according to kalenjin Tto was a location in MISIRI(egypt),nilotic people related to datooga Y E-M293 and E-V68,took Zebu cattle to south africa,before bantus were ever in south africa.south african bantus at that time were either in libya or canaan at that time.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is possible that after the Mande and Dravidians entered Central Asia and India they may have took Zebu cattle back to Africa.
Are the mande people the only african people you have studied,you seem to place them everywhere in history,where they don't belong.Mande people related genetically to pygmies were the CASLUHIM of the bible,being descendants of MIZRAHIM(ancestor of pygmies who died and was buried in egypt).The mande people mixed with bantus,or were bottled necked by bantus,these mixed bantu/mande(casluhim pygmies) were the CARTHEGIANS.,YES BARCA of cathage,Hannibal were all mande people.
LOL. This is BS.
I have studied the history of Black people everywhere.
Check out this video: Short History of Black People
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
So do White Fulani Zebu, remember? So what? Bait and switch? Modern Sanga ^= prehistoric Saharan cattle. What's this? One picture is supposed to overturn a genetic report? Wrong forum. Try Ancient Egypt.
.
The genetic report says that the African cattle were not all mixed. It also makes it clear that Indic cattle are a recent addition to the African region. See:
. It is possible that after the Mande and Dravidians entered Central Asia and India they may have took Zebu cattle back to Africa.
I was lurking your discussion of cattle in another thread. This led me to the Khoisan cattle. This was interesting because the Khoisan had their own terms for cattle unrelated to Bantu cattle terms. They also have Barbary goats.
This makes me wonder if the Khoisan may have domesticated cattle while they were in North Africa and migrated back into South Africa with these cattles. I an still researching this possibility.
.
Deckers' report was clear that Bos Indicus went from India to Africa < 4k. The report supports neither African origin nor out movement of Bos Indicus. Though posted above I will repost here for ease of access
Folk say anything is possible but all possibilities are not probable, as in your case of Dravidian Mande migration and cattle introduction, afaic.
The report date places Zebu introduction to Africa in a time period possibly related to known Indian connections in Kush and Egypt basing myself on appearance of Hindu graves in the Nile Valley. (Is that thread still available?)
I had it on my crashed ext stg but I can't find the thread where that Zebu discussion was held online. You still have access to it?
The idea of Khoe or San like people as primary indigenous N Afrs has fell from grace but I'm not so sure it's totally incorrect because of things like you just brought up keep that possibility in mind as probable.
Keep up your researches. Don't agree with much of them yet there are intriguing parts to it that are undeniably accurate from where I sit.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: The report date places Zebu introduction to Africa in a time period possibly related to known Indian connections in Kush and Egypt basing myself on appearance of Hindu graves in the Nile Valley. (Is that thread still available?)
I would definitely like to see this thread because the Hindus practice cremation .
The only Indian elements in the Nile Valley that I know of were related to Buddhism and they came from Meroitic civilization.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Tukuler-you seem to be the only sane person here who is interested in knowing the true world history,people like clyde are interested in black supremacy,people like clyde victims of white supremacy,will never tolerate the fact that africa may not have been the cradle of mankind.My thesis as you noticed is always supported by genetics and archeology,clydes pseudo-bullshit history are never supported by genetics,e.g mande in meso america(no genetic evidence),dravidians in africa(no genetic evidence),negritos are east africans(no genetic evidence),no wonder people don't take clyde seriously,he wants us to take his bulshit history as fact,just because he has written volumes of books on them. i am a black man,but i am not into extreme afro-centric black supremacy,which together with white supremacy eurocentrism are responsible for distoting african history.although eurocentrism is the most gulty in this,i consider myself TRUTHCENTRIC,the bible is my primary source,which i support with genetic evidence,i am also interested in biblical archeology but i am not part with them,cause they are blinded by eurocentrism.so i am a lone ranger.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is possible that after the Mande and Dravidians entered Central Asia and India they may have took Zebu cattle back to Africa.
ARE YOU SERIOUS ,let me laugh hahahahaha...this is the most ignorant thing i have ever heard,no offence brother clyde. Let me get this straight,the mande together with dravidians,migrated out of africa,went to mesopotamia,started sumerian civilisation,then came back to africa with zebu cattle,left them at the hands of nilotes,then dravidians returned to mesopotamia,apparently leaving the mande in africa,who willingly entrusted all the zebu cattle at the hands of nilotes and bantu fulani.makes sense(sarcasm). DEBUNKED; 1)DRAVIDIANS HAVE NEVER BEEN TO AFRICA.NO DNA EVIDENCE. 2)IN AFRICA ONLY THE NILOTES AND BANTU FULANI TRADITIONALLY OWNED ZEBU CATTLE,THE MANDE NEVER OWNED ZEBUS TRADITIONALLY,THE DRAVIDIANS OWNED ZEBUS BECAUSE THEY REPRESENT THE NILOTES THAT NEVER MADE IT TO AFRICA.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
I always say,the history of africa,is safely preserved in the bible,for 3500 years. @Tukuler..
quote:The idea of Khoe or San like people as primary indigenous N Afrs has fell from grace but I'm not so sure it's totally incorrect because of things like you just brought up keep that possibility in mind as probable.
clyde somehow thinks,the khoisan and maasai are some primitive africans who are indigenous to africa,and that have never left africa,but he cannot explain how the maasai,khoisan and even yoruba acquired caucasian NIENDERTHAL DNA.but the holy bible documents the presence of maasai(sabaeans) in arabia,where maasai morans(sabaeans)stole the oxen of job,cattle rustling is still practised by maasai today. MAA-PEOPLE IN ARABIA Possibly during sabaean colonisation of yemen,JOB of the the bible could have been either a yemenite jew,or falasha jews who migrated with tigray to eritrea. Job 1:14-15
quote: And there came a messenger unto Job, and said, The oxen were plowing, and the asses feeding beside them:
15 And the Sabeans fell upon them, and took them away; yea, they have slain the servants with the edge of the sword; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.
quote:. Dienekes included Behar’s Ethiopians (non-Jews) for Dodecad. Additionally, he included the Masai population from the HapMap. This turns out to be important because he found that Ethiopian Sub-Saharan ancestry is similar to that of the Masai, not the other African groups.
PHUT(KHOISAN) IN ANATOLIA AND NORTH AFRICA The holy bible also documents the presence of PHUT(khoisan people) in anatolia and north africa, Ezekiel 27:10
quote:They of Persia and of Lud and of Phut were in thine army, thy men of war: they hanged the shield and helmet in thee; they set forth thy comeliness.
Y-DNA A1 is also found anatolia,taken there by khoisan soldiers.khoisan mtDNA LOa and Y-DNA A-M113 is present in all nilotes,especially eastern nilotes.NILOTIC principle DNA is E3b.pygmies are B,khoisan A.Nilotes(cush) with A-M113 mixed with khoisan(phut) as in ezekiel 38:5. in ezekiel 38:5,some versions associate phut(put) with libya north africa
web pageHumanity's forgotten return to Africa revealed in DNA . people like clyde winters claim the khoisan were an isolated group hence were not affected by flood.But the bible says all humanity was affected by that flood which covered the whole world.According to genesis 10:6,phut(khoikhoi and san ancestor)was a son of HAM(father of all africans).according to the bible all humans are related and are children of NOAH after the flood,this is supported by genetics.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LEDAMA: @ clyde winters -
quote:It is possible that after the Mande and Dravidians entered Central Asia and India they may have took Zebu cattle back to Africa.
ARE YOU SERIOUS ,let me laugh hahahahaha...this is the most ignorant thing i have ever heard,no offence brother clyde. Let me get this straight,the mande together with dravidians,migrated out of africa,went to mesopotamia,started sumerian civilisation,then came back to africa with zebu cattle,left them at the hands of nilotes,then dravidians returned to mesopotamia,apparently leaving the mande in africa,who willingly entrusted all the zebu cattle at the hands of nilotes and bantu fulani.makes sense(sarcasm). DEBUNKED; 1)DRAVIDIANS HAVE NEVER BEEN TO AFRICA.NO DNA EVIDENCE. 2)IN AFRICA ONLY THE NILOTES AND BANTU FULANI TRADITIONALLY OWNED ZEBU CATTLE,THE MANDE NEVER OWNED ZEBUS TRADITIONALLY,THE DRAVIDIANS OWNED ZEBUS BECAUSE THEY REPRESENT THE NILOTES THAT NEVER MADE IT TO AFRICA.
LEDAMA you don't know what you're talking about.
The Dravidians are of African origin. They belonged to the Maa civilization. Archaeological and genetic evidence illustrate that the Dravidians came from Africa.
The Dravidians and Mande began to migrate out of Africa by 2800BC. They were part of the C-Group. They first settled in Iran and from here expanded into Central Asia and the Indus Valley.
B.B. Lal ("The Only Asian expedition in threatened Nubia:Work by an Indian Mission at Afyeh and Tumas", The Illustrated London Times , 20 April 1963) and Indian Egyptologist has shown conclusively that the Dravidians originated in the Saharan area 5000 years ago. He claims they came from Kush, in the Fertile African Crescent and were related to the C-Group people who founded the Kerma dynasty in the 3rd millennium B.C. (Lal 1963) The Dravidians used a common black-and-red pottery, which spread from Nubia, through modern Ethiopia, Arabia, Iran into India as a result of the Proto-Saharan dispersal.
B.B. Lal (1963) a leading Indian archaeologist in India has observed that the black and red ware (BRW) dating to the Kerma dynasty of Nubia, is related to the Dravidian megalithic pottery. Singh (1982) believes that this pottery radiated from Nubia to India. This pottery along with wavy-line pottery is associated with the Saharo-Sudanese pottery tradition of ancient Africa . I call these people the Proto Saharans. I discuss their history here:
Aravaanan (1980) has written extensively on the African and Dravidian relations. He has illustrated that the Africans and Dravidian share many physical similarities including the dolichocephalic indexes (Aravaanan 1980,pp.62-263; Raceand History.com,2006), platyrrhine nasal index (Aravaanan 1980,pp.25-27), stature (31-32) and blood type (Aravaanan 1980,34-35; RaceandHistory.com,2006). Aravaanan (1980,p.40) also presented much evidence for analogous African and Dravidian cultural features including the chipping of incisor teeth and the use of the lost wax process to make bronze works of arts (Aravaanan 1980,p.41).
There are also similarities between the Dravidian and African religions. For example, both groups held a common interest in the cult of the Serpent and believed in a Supreme God, who lived in a place of peace and tranquility ( Thundy, p.87; J.T. Cornelius,"Are Dravidians Dynastic Egyptians", Trans. of the Archaeological Society of South India 1951-1957, pp.90-117; and U.P. Upadhyaya, "Dravidian and Negro-African", International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 5, no.1) .
There are also affinities between the names of many gods including Amun/Amma and Murugan . Murugan the Dravidian god of the mountains parallels a common god in East Africa worshipped by 25 ethnic groups is called Murungu, the god who resides in the mountains .
Up until the South Indian megalithic period the Dravidians continued to use black-and-red ware and Libyco-Berber/Indus Valley writing. Under the influence of the Axumite writing the script changed into what it is today. The architecture of the Dravidians is an ornamented pyramid with statues and other featured added within the construction of the pyramid.
The architecture makes it clear that they have remained faithful to classical pyramid style.
Dravidians have a unique culture—but it is analogous to many culture presently found in Africa.
The Dravidians were Kushites. The Kushites were predominately Niger-Congo speakers. The hundreds of words associated with this finding support a genetic relationship between Niger-Congo and Dravidian languages.Until you can show there is no evidence of a linguistic relationship you are living in a dream world .
In summary, Dravidian tribal populations and Africans also share several y-chromosome, HLA and mtDNA .
The 9bp transition at 16311 are congruent among Dravidians and West Africans . The analysis revealed that the Nadar and Fulani HLA indicate that the populations share a number of unique alleles including A*101, A*0211,A*03011, A*3303, B*3501, B*3701, B*51011 .
Shared y-chromosomes include H1, K2 or Y-DNA T-M70 (11%). The Highest frequency of T-M70 in the world is found among the Fulani. In relation to y-chromosome H1, 22% of Dravidians carry this haplogroup .
Sickle cell anemia is frequent among Africans and Dravidian Tribal populations. It is interesting that the Arab-Indian and Senegal haplotypes are both associated with a C!T mutation at position -158 .
The Dravidians belong to the M macrohaplogroup. Shared Afro-Indo M haplogroups include M1, M30, and M33. The M1 haplogroup was especially evident among high caste people in Kerela .
References:
Lal BB. 1963. “The Only Asian Expedition in threatened Nubia: Work by an India Mission at Afyeh and Tumas”. The Illustrated Times, London 20 April.
Singh, H.N. 1982. History and archaeology of Blackand Red ware. Vedic Books.net: Manchester. Clyde Winters (2007) Did the Dravidian Speakers Originate in Africa? BioEssays, 27(5): 497-498.
posted
Clyde, the Dravidians are straight haired. Does this mean that if they originated in Africa they had straight hair when they were in Africa? Also, who are their ancestors in Africa? What tribe currently and/or historically are the African version of Dravidians?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LEDAMA: clyde somehow thinks,the khoisan and maasai are some primitive africans who are indigenous to africa,and that have never left africa,but he cannot explain how the maasai,khoisan and even yoruba acquired caucasian NIENDERTHAL DNA.
Clyde says the Neanderthals were black and represented in Africa by Homo heidelbergensis sometimes called Homo rhodesiensis.
Question, who are the Neanderthals according to the bible?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:4 Icon 1 posted 15 September, 2014 06:35 AM Profile for Clyde Winters Author's Homepage Send New Private Message Edit/Delete Post Reply With Quote
quote:Originally posted by LEDAMA: @ clyde winters -
quote:It is possible that after the Mande and Dravidians entered Central Asia and India they may have took Zebu cattle back to Africa.
ARE YOU SERIOUS [Big Grin] [Big Grin] ,let me laugh hahahahaha...this is the most ignorant thing i have ever heard,no offence brother clyde. Let me get this straight,the mande together with dravidians,migrated out of africa,went to mesopotamia,started sumerian civilisation,then came back to africa with zebu cattle,left them at the hands of nilotes,then dravidians returned to mesopotamia,apparently leaving the mande in africa,who willingly entrusted all the zebu cattle at the hands of nilotes and bantu fulani.makes sense(sarcasm). DEBUNKED; 1)DRAVIDIANS HAVE NEVER BEEN TO AFRICA.NO DNA EVIDENCE. 2)IN AFRICA ONLY THE NILOTES AND BANTU FULANI TRADITIONALLY OWNED ZEBU CATTLE,THE MANDE NEVER OWNED ZEBUS TRADITIONALLY,THE DRAVIDIANS OWNED ZEBUS BECAUSE THEY REPRESENT THE NILOTES THAT NEVER MADE IT TO AFRICA.
LEDAMA you don't know what you're talking about.
The Dravidians are of African origin. They belonged to the Maa civilization. Archaeological and genetic evidence illustrate that the Dravidians came from Africa.
The Dravidians and Mande began to migrate out of Africa by 2800BC. They were part of the C-Group. They first settled in Iran and from here expanded into Central Asia and the Indus Valley.
B.B. Lal ("The Only Asian expedition in threatened Nubia:Work by an Indian Mission at Afyeh and Tumas", The Illustrated London Times , 20 April 1963) and Indian Egyptologist has shown conclusively that the Dravidians originated in the Saharan area 5000 years ago. He claims they came from Kush, in the Fertile African Crescent and were related to the C-Group people who founded the Kerma dynasty in the 3rd millennium B.C. (Lal 1963) The Dravidians used a common black-and-red pottery, which spread from Nubia, through modern Ethiopia, Arabia, Iran into India as a result of the Proto-Saharan dispersal.
B.B. Lal (1963) a leading Indian archaeologist in India has observed that the black and red ware (BRW) dating to the Kerma dynasty of Nubia, is related to the Dravidian megalithic pottery. Singh (1982) believes that this pottery radiated from Nubia to India. This pottery along with wavy-line pottery is associated with the Saharo-Sudanese pottery tradition of ancient Africa . I call these people the Proto Saharans. I discuss their history here:
Aravaanan (1980) has written extensively on the African and Dravidian relations. He has illustrated that the Africans and Dravidian share many physical similarities including the dolichocephalic indexes (Aravaanan 1980,pp.62-263; Raceand History.com,2006), platyrrhine nasal index (Aravaanan 1980,pp.25-27), stature (31-32) and blood type (Aravaanan 1980,34-35; RaceandHistory.com,2006). Aravaanan (1980,p.40) also presented much evidence for analogous African and Dravidian cultural features including the chipping of incisor teeth and the use of the lost wax process to make bronze works of arts (Aravaanan 1980,p.41).
There are also similarities between the Dravidian and African religions. For example, both groups held a common interest in the cult of the Serpent and believed in a Supreme God, who lived in a place of peace and tranquility ( Thundy, p.87; J.T. Cornelius,"Are Dravidians Dynastic Egyptians", Trans. of the Archaeological Society of South India 1951-1957, pp.90-117; and U.P. Upadhyaya, "Dravidian and Negro-African", International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 5, no.1) .
There are also affinities between the names of many gods including Amun/Amma and Murugan . Murugan the Dravidian god of the mountains parallels a common god in East Africa worshipped by 25 ethnic groups is called Murungu, the god who resides in the mountains .
Up until the South Indian megalithic period the Dravidians continued to use black-and-red ware and Libyco-Berber/Indus Valley writing. Under the influence of the Axumite writing the script changed into what it is today. The architecture of the Dravidians is an ornamented pyramid with statues and other featured added within the construction of the pyramid.
The dravidians are nilotic branch,that is why they were very tall and very black,except the west asian straight hair phenotype.but their culture is basically NILOTIC.BRW(black and red earthen ware is nilotic pottery esp western and eastern nilotes,but BRW with the wavy dotted line known as NDERIT WARE belongs to southern nilotes kalenjin,datooga and omotik).Maa-speakers or speakers of maa language are maasai,samburu,lotuko,njemps(illchamus),rendille(formerly a somali clan assimilated into masai,REER-NDILLE in somali means 'house of ndille).Are you saying dravidians are related to maasai maa-speakers? chipping of incisor teeth is a nilotic trait not bantu. There are no affinities between the names of dravidian deities and african.MURUGAN does not equal MURUNGU,the word murungu is a kikuyu and Ameru corruption of the bantu supreme god MULUNGU.
quote:The Dravidians were Kushites. The Kushites were predominately Niger-Congo speakers. The hundreds of words associated with this finding support a genetic relationship between Niger-Congo and Dravidian languages.
yes,THE DRAVIDIANS WERE KUSHITES(NILOTES). NO:The kushites were and are predomintally NILO-SAHARAN SPEAKERS.There is also a genetic relationship between nilotic and bantu,have you ever made that comparison?oh i forgot the only african language you know is MANDE.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote: Icon 1 posted 15 September, 2014 07:44 AM Profile for the lioness, Send New Private Message Edit/Delete Post Reply With Quote
quote:Originally posted by LEDAMA: clyde somehow thinks,the khoisan and maasai are some primitive africans who are indigenous to africa,and that have never left africa,but he cannot explain how the maasai,khoisan and even yoruba acquired caucasian NIENDERTHAL DNA.
Clyde says the Neanderthals were black and represented in Africa by Homo heidelbergensis sometimes called Homo rhodesiensis.
Question, who are the Neanderthals according to the bible?
Clyde is confused,if nienderthals were black,then white people would be black,neonderthal DNA is an alien DNA that mixed with human(black african DNA),THAT MEANS from ADAM(AOO)all the way to NOAH(AOO)everybody was black,untill mutation occured,this mutation is recorded in the bible;Genesis 6:1-8
quote: Genesis 6 King James Version (KJV)
6 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.
, some people have interpreted " the sons of God" either as ;1)fallen angels,demons 2)aliens, e.t.c,but whoever they are,it is they who injected nienderthal DNA into human DNA,they very wicked,they also introduced homosexuality into humanity.they corrupted the pure human dna,thats why God destroyed them,to preserve messianic human gene.Noah was the only pure person,that means he didn't have nienderthal gene,but his wife may have had little amounts which she transfered to japhet and shem but not Ham. The Divine Preservation of the Messianic Line: The True Meaning of the Holidays Bloodlines of the Nephilim – A Biblical StudyPosts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
The report date places Zebu introduction to Africa in a time period possibly related to known Indian connections in Kush and Egypt basing myself on appearance of Hindu graves in the Nile Valley. (Is that thread still available?)
I would definitely like to see this thread because the Hindus practice cremation .
The only Indian elements in the Nile Valley that I know of were related to Buddhism and they came from Meroitic civilization.
.
My bad, it must've been Buddhist or a cenotaph or whatever.
I doubt if Indian spirituality skipped ancient Sudan (as most evidenced by Apedemak taking on extra faces and arms) since Gymnosophist were in Sudan and Buddhist were in both Alexandria and Axum -- ancient Sudan being 'mid-point.'
from your Gymnosophist of Meroe and Meroitic Writing thread. Not the thread I remember replying to someone else about Indian immigrants in the ancient Nile Valley.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
.
Printer-friendly view of this topic