Ancient Europeans show some African variants. Africans not only have dark skin but can have blue eyes as well. Many African populations are lactose (milk) intolerant and some not. Modern studies of some ancient European DNA remains show them similar to Africans, with the dark skin-blue eye combination of some contemporary Africans, & some lactose intolerance.
Many Africans lactose intolerant but pastoral Africans in desert regions show some tolerance - QUOTE: “In some human populations, including humans of Northwest European descent and nomads of the African – Arabian desert region, lactose expression persists into adulthood. The benefits of milk consumption, both as a source of liquid in arid regions and for prevention of rickets and osteomalacia in regions of low solar radiation have been assumed to have driven the fixation of this polymorphism." -- Maurice Edward Shils, Moshe Shike (2006)Modern Nutrition in Health and Disease. p 633
–Scientists on ancient Mesolithic European “LaBrana Man” "The biggest surprise was to discover that this individual [LaBrana European] possessed African versions in the genes that determine the light pigmentation of the current Europeans, which indicates that he had dark skin," Lalueza-Fox said... But the latest findings show that La Brana 1 still had dark skin and had been around the continent for 40,000 years, meaning fair skin probably evolved millennia later.” http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/europeans-had-dark-skin-blue-eyes-7-000-years-ago-1.2512465
STUDY FINDINGS- QUOTE: “Here we sequence an approximately 7,000-year-old Mesolithic skeleton discovered at the La Bran˜a-Arintero site in Leon, Spain, to retrieve a complete pre-agricultural European human genome. Analysis of this genome in the context of other ancient samples suggests the existence of a common ancient genomic signature across western and central Eurasia from the Upper Paleolithic to the Mesolithic. The La Brana individual carries ancestral alleles in several skin pigmentation genes, suggesting that the light skin of modern Europeans was not yet ubiquitous in Mesolithic times. Moreover, we provide evidence that a significant number of derived, putatively adaptive variants associated with pathogen resistance in modern Europeans were already present in this hunter-gatherer...
We found the ancient genome to carry the ancestral allele for lactose intolerance and approximately five copies of the salivary amylase (AMY1) gene (Extended Data Fig. 7 and Supplementary Information), a copy number compatible with a low-starch diet18. These results suggest the La Bran˜a hunter-gatherer was poor at digesting milk and starch, supporting the hypotheses that these abilities were selected for during the later transition to agriculture.
Although the precise phenotypic effects cannot currently be ascertained in a European genetic background, results from functional experiments20 indicate that the allelic combination in this Mesolithic individual is likely to have resulted in dark skin pigmentation and dark or brown hair..
The genotypic combination leading to a predicted phenotype of dark skin and non-brown eyes is unique and no longer present in contemporary European populations. Our results indicate that the adaptive spread of light skin pigmentation alleles was not complete in some European populations by the Mesolithic, and that the spread of alleles associated with light/blue eye colour may have preceded changes in skin pigmentation.” --Olade et al 2014. Derived immune and ancestral pigmentation alleles in a 7,000-year-old Mesolithic European. Nature (2014), doi:10.1038/nature12960
-------------------- 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
Here's a table with the lactase persistence frequencies of various African and world populations (a very nice compilation of past studies):
From The Evolutionary Role of Human-Specific Genomic Events Yuval Itan (2009)
It's important to remember when reading literature about it that many African populations have lactase persistance (at the frequency stated in the table above) but don't have the European/Eurasian gene for lp, they have a different one (not yet discovered). Hence, the difference in phenotype and genotype frequencies.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| 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
Below, African populations can have a range of crural indexes that overlap other populations whether they be in southern Europe or ancient Europe's tropically adapted populations. In diverse Africa, crural limb proportion indexes are also diverse but the people still are African.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
Many modern Egyptologists now admit clear correlations between ancient Egyptians and African communities, chiefdoms and states.
"The Egyptian concept of kingship, so akin to African models, seems very different to that held in the ancient Near East."
"There is a relative abundance of ancient materials relevant to contact and influence, as well as striking correlations between ancient Egyptian civilization and the ethnography of recent and current sub-Saharan communities, chiefdoms and states."
--David O'Connor, Andrew Reid 2007. Ancient Egypt in Africa
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Myra Wysinger: [QB] Art of the Egyptian Nile flourished much later than that of Saharan and Sudan Africa. The Sahara representations of oxen with discs between their horns is much earlier than those of the cow-goddess Hathor.
Egypt in Africa, 1996, pp. 62-65
Animal Deities and Symbols in Africa Chapurkha M. Kusimba Curator, Department of Anthropology Field Museum of Natural History
Frank J. Yurco Research Associate Field Museum of Natural History
Interaction between humankind and animals in Africa has profoundly affected Africa's cultural and ecological landscape. This interaction has be captured in the archaeological record, in ancient rock art, in more recent wood carving, and in oral traditions. Chroniclers, storytellers, and artists have passed on knowledge and ethnic experiences in the form of proverbs, legends, epics, and myths.
Many mythological and popular stories in African prominently feature animals (e.g. Beier 1966; Bleek and Lloyd 1911; Hambly 1949). Some were hunted for food, clothing, and shelter. Some were respected for the might, wit, and cunning. The belief that spirituality is deeply rooted in most aspects of African life may explain why man animals or composite animals forms were adopted as totems and as deities of particular groups and societies (Mbiti 1970; Hornung 1983). For example, the ancient Egyptians revered Sobek, the crocodile deity, and Sekhmet, the lioness, and some of the snake deities such as Edjo, the cobra, for their dangerous qualities. Seth, whom the Egyptians considered a trickster (Evans-Pritchard 1967; Hambly 1949; Te Velde 1977), was manifested as a hippopotamus, pig, or donkey. As a trickster, Seth was very much in African mold. Characteristic of frogs, lizards and insects were used to express aspects of deities. Composite animals forms in Egypt included Taweret, part female hippopotamus, part crocodile, and part lioness, and Bes, the bandy legged household deity, benign, but with a leonine face. Composite animal forms sometimes constitute the imagery of sub-Saharan masks. Other ancient Egyptians deities, like Hathor and Isis, both having cow aspects, were beneficent (Goedicke 1970). That both Egyptians and Kushites worshipped rams as deities, especially Amon of Karnak, underscores the cultural interaction between Egypt and the Nubian cultures of Kush (Kendall 1982). Rams have also had a spiritual significance among the Yoruba, Edo, and other West African peoples. Moreover, most of the animals of special importance in ancient Egypt have ritual and social significance in sub-Saharan Africa.
Thus, Egyptian religious culture depicted in engravings and in art and sculpture points to the common African substratum of Egypt's culture (Frankfort 1948). What have been interpreted as masked priests portraying animals deities in Egyptian ceremonies depicted in murals are reminiscent of common African rituals. The proliferation of animal representation in rock art in Africa probably illustrates the practical, emotional, and spiritual ties between Africans and animals. For example, depictions of people wearing animals masks and animals with discs, aureoles, and rods on their heads, often found together in southern Oran and Oued Djerat in Algeria, suggest people praying in front of animals (Ki-Zerbo 1981;670).
A myth of the San of Southern Africa, which tells of the sun growing tired of being carried on a zebra's back and taking refuge between the horns of a bull (Bleek and Lloyd 1911), is very similar to depictions showing an oxen bedecked with the solar disc in Egypt, southern Oran, and the Sahara. The origins of the cow-goddess Hathor may be rooted in a pan-Africanist myth (Ki-Zerbo 1981:669). KiZerbo makes a strong case for the cultural unity of Africa based on his analysis of prehistoric art:
Art of the Egyptian Nile flourished much later than that of Saharan and Sudan Africa. The Sahara representations of oxen with discs between their horns is much earlier than those of the cow-goddess Hathor. The hawk delicately carved on the sandstone plaque of Hammada el Guir is much earlier than the ram of Amon [known from the 12th Dynasty onwards]. When Andre Malraux looked at the animal heads at Oued Djera, he considered them to be "forerunners of the Egyptian animal deities." The same no doubt holds for the bird-headed goddess at Jabbaran. Semi-naturalism only appears in Egypt in the Gerzean period and is derived from Saharan ox period carvings . . . Egypt had a tremendous influence on the interior of Africa . . . but what is even more certain is that the prehistoric civilizations of the Sahara is earlier in time . . . It was only from the so-called "historic" period onwards that Egyptian civilization achieved that splendor as a result of which everything is now attributed. But where art and technology is concerned, the focal points were originally in the modern republic of the Sudan, in East Africa, and the Near East. Moreover, the prehistoric Sudan owed much more to southeastern influence that to those from the Near East (1981:676).
Thus, the ancient Egyptian belief that divinity can be manifested in any form has strong pan-Africanist roots. Among cattle-owning societies in Africa, cattle are symbols of wealth and serve to define as well as distinguish status. Old Kingdom tombs depict cattle as large parts of a noble's holdings. Cattle provided the means for forging new relations of cooperation and interdependence. Cattle were valued for milk and cheese, but were occasionally slaughtered for religious offerings (Beidelman 1960; Bloch 1971; Rigby 1969). In common with other African pastoralists, the Egyptians practiced horn deformation on special cattle. Egyptians worshipped cattle as beneficent deities. Deities with bovine aspects echoed the importance of cattl in Egyptian society. Apis, the bull deity of Memphis, was a national deity. A bull with special markings and color was sought and, once located, was enshrined at Memphis with great honor. When the Apis died, he was embalmed with solemn ceremony and buried in the vast catacombs at Saqqara, called the Serapaeum. It should be noted that some ox masks of the Bidjogo peoples of West Africa and Apis bulls have a triangular forehead design. Besides Hathor and Isis, Neith and a lesser-known deity, Bat, occasionally were depicted in bovine form. Cow deities provided milk and nourishment for the pharaoh.
Egyptian myths and stories feature cattle. In the Story of the Two Brothers (Lichtheim 1976:203-210), a pair of brothers are grazing animals, and one brother takes on the appearance of a bull. Cattle formed an important part of the booty in Egyptian and other African military raids on neighboring peoples. The Maasai, for example, believe that God gave them al the cattle in the world. They thus feel that they have strong kinship ties with cattle (Rigby 1992). This culture is well myth of many African societies, in the archaeological record, and in modern African religious and cultural practices. Animal deities and animals, then and now, continue to play a central role in everyday spiritual, cultural, and economic life of African people.
References Cited
Beidelman, T.O, 1960. The Baraguyu. Tanganyika Notes and Records 55:244-278
Beier, Ulli, 1966. The Origin of Life and Death: African Creation Myths. London: Heinemann Educational Books Limitied.
Bleek, W.W.I., and L.C. Lloyd, 1911. Specimens of Bushman Folklore. London : George Allen and Company, Limited.
Block, Mark, 1971. Placing the Dead: Tombs, Ancestral Villages, and Kinship Organizations in Madagascar, London: Seminar Press.
Evans-Pritchard, E. E, 1967. The Zande Trickster. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Frankfort, Henri, 1948. Kingship and the Gods. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goedicke, Hans, 1970. The Story of the Herdsman, Chronique d'Egypt 45(90):244-256.
Hambly, Wilfred D. 1949. Talking Animals. Washington D.C.: The Associated Publishers, Inc.
Hornugh, Erik, 1983. Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt: The One and the Many. Translated by Jogn Baines, Ithiaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
Kendall, Timothy, 1982. Kush: Lost Kingdom of the Nile. Brockton: Brockton Art Museum.
Ki-Zerbo, J. 1981. African Prehistoric Art, In General Prehistory of Africa I: Methodolgy and African Prehistory. J. Ki-Zerbo, ed. pp. 656-686. Paris UNESCO
Lichtheim, Miriam 1976. Ancient Egyptain Literature, vol II. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Mbiti, John S. 1970. African Religions and Philosophy. New York, Doubleday and Company, Inc.
Rigby, Peter, 1969. Cattle and Kinship Among the Gogo. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
_________, 1992. Cattle, Capitalism, and Class: Ilparakuyo Maasai Transformations, Phaladelphia: Temple University Press.
Te Velde, Hermann, 1977. Seth, God of Confusion. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
-------------------- 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 |
"it has been proposed that E3b originated in sub-Saharan Africa and expanded into the Near East and northern Africa at the end of the Pleistocene (Underhill et al. 2001). E3b lineages would have Reports 1015 then been introduced from the Near East into southern Europe by immigrant farmers, during the Neolithic ex-pansion (Hammer et al. 1998; Semino et al. 2000; Underhill et al. 2001). The three main subclades of haplogroup E3b (E-M78, E-M81, and E-M34) and the paragroup E-M35* are not homogeneously distributed on the African continent: E-M78 has been observed in both northern and eastern Africa, E-M81 is restricted to northern Africa, E-M34 is common only in eastern Africa, and E-M35* is shared by eastern and southern Africans (Cruciani et al. 2002).. Several observations point to eastern Africa as the homeland for haplogroup E3b—that is, it had (1) the highest number of different E3b clades (table 1), (2) a high frequency of this haplogroup and a high microsatellite diversity, and, finally, (3) the exclusive presence of the undifferentiated E3b* paragroup.."
--Cruciani et al 2004. Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E3b (E-M215)Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa. Am. Jr. HumGen 74: 1014-1022
-------------------- 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 |
While the ancient Horn of Africa, like other places near water or land transport routes has always had some smattering of migration, this is nothing special. Archaeological data shows no sweeping mass migration or cultural revolutions from non-Africans into the ancient Horn of Africa. QUOTE:
"However, more recent archaeological research shows that non-African influences in the HOA [Horn of Africa] were limited and transient. Of the early first millennium BCE inscriptions in non-African scripts complete enough to identify a language, only a small proportion are written in a non-African (South Arabian) language - the majority are written in indigenous proto-Ge’ez [24]. In the HOA, architecture with non-African (primarily South Arabian) elements is entirely monumental or ritual [25] and ritual items with exclusively non-African elements are rare [26].
There are few to no indications of non-African material culture in everyday objects: the ceramics and lithics found outside of the ritual context are almost entirely indigenous with clear local precedents [24,25,27]. While earlier scholarship conceived of a South Arabian origin D’MT polity with sovereignty over much of the northern HOA, it is now clear that this polity, if it ever existed at all as an integrated state [24], was geographically restricted to the regions around Yeha and Aksum in what is now the Tigray region of Ethiopia [25]. Artifacts with non-African features are effectively absent in the material culture (ritual or otherwise) of contemporaneous populations in the Eritrean highlands on the Asmara plateau (the ‘‘Ancient Ona’’) [25,28,29]. Prior to the first millennium BC, the archaeology of the HOA is less well studied, but what is available shows no substantial non-African material culture beyond trade relations [25]. Taken all together, the archaeological data could be consistent with limited non-African (primarily South Arabian) migration into the north Ethiopian highlands at the outset of the first millennium BCE, but cannot support large-scale population movements from any foreign population."
--Hodgson, et al 2014. Early Back-to-Africa Migration into the Horn of Africa. PLOS Genetics, Vol 10, Iss 6
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Didn't see this on the first page, its an older study but I just came across it an hour ago.
Presence of Sickle Cell in several Predynastic Mummies:
“We conducted a molecular investigation of the presence of sicklemia in six predynastic Egyptian mummies (about 3200 BC) from the Anthropological and Ethnographic Museum of Turin. Previous studies of these remains showed the presence of severe anemia, while histological preparations of mummified tissues revealed hemolytic disorders. DNA was extracted from dental samples with a silica-gel method specific for ancient DNA. A modification of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), called amplification refractory mutation system (ARMS) was then applied. ARMS is based on specific priming of the PCR and it permits diagnosis of single nucleotide mutations. In this method, amplification can occur only in the presence of the specific mutation being studied. The amplified DNA was analyzed by electrophoresis. In samples of three individuals, there was a band at the level of the HbS mutated fragment, indicating that they were affected by sicklemia."
– Marin et. al. 1999, Use of the Amplification Refractory Mutation System (ARMS) in the Study of HbS in Predynastic Egyptian Remains.”
Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: Didn't see this on the first page, its an older study but I just came across it an hour ago.
Presence of Sickle Cell in several Predynastic Mummies:
“We conducted a molecular investigation of the presence of sicklemia in six predynastic Egyptian mummies (about 3200 BC) from the Anthropological and Ethnographic Museum of Turin. Previous studies of these remains showed the presence of severe anemia, while histological preparations of mummified tissues revealed hemolytic disorders. DNA was extracted from dental samples with a silica-gel method specific for ancient DNA. A modification of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), called amplification refractory mutation system (ARMS) was then applied. ARMS is based on specific priming of the PCR and it permits diagnosis of single nucleotide mutations. In this method, amplification can occur only in the presence of the specific mutation being studied. The amplified DNA was analyzed by electrophoresis. In samples of three individuals, there was a band at the level of the HbS mutated fragment, indicating that they were affected by sicklemia."
– Marin et. al. 1999, Use of the Amplification Refractory Mutation System (ARMS) in the Study of HbS in Predynastic Egyptian Remains.”
BLAST FROM THE PAST: DIOP ON DOUBLE-STANDARDS AND HYPOCRISY
Diop on hypocritical double standards of Eurocentrism
“But it is only the most gratuitous theory that considers the Dinka, the Nouer and the Masai, among others, to be Caucasoids. What if an African ethnologist were to persist in recognizing as white-only the blond, blue-eyed Scandinavians, and systematically refused membership to the remaining Europeans, and Mediterraneans in particular—the French, Italians, Greek, Spanish, and Portuguese? Just as the inhabitants of Scandinavia and the Mediterranean countries must be considered as two extreme poles of the same anthropological reality, so should the Negroes of East and West Africa be considered as the two extremes in the reality of the Negro world. To say that a Shillouk, a Dinka, or a Nouer is a Caucasoid is for an African as devoid of sense and scientific interest as would be, to a European, an attitude that maintained that a Greek or a Latin were not of the same race.“ -- CA Diop, 'Evolution of the Negro world', Presence Africaine -23, 51. 5-15
DIOP on genotype versus phenotype
"If we speak only of genotype, I can find a black who, at the level of his chromosomes, is closer to a Swede than Peter Botha is. But what counts in reality is the phenotype. It is the physical appearance which counts. This black, even if on the level of his cells he is closer to a Swede than Peter Botha, when he is in South Africa he will still live in Soweto. Throughout history, it has been the phenotype which has been at issue, we mustn't lose sight of this fact. The phenotype is a reality, physical appearance is a reality. And this appearance corresponds to something which makes us say that Europe is peopled by white people, Africa is peopled by black people, and Asia is people by yellow people. It is these relationships which have played a role in history...
Now every time these relationships are not favorable to the western cultures, an effort is made to undermine the cultural consciousness of Africans by telling them. ‘we don’t even know what race is’. What that means is that they do not know what a black man is; [but] they do know what a white man is… It is the phenotype which has given us so much difficulty throughout history, so it is this which must be considered in these relations." --CA Diop. 1985- Interview in Journal of African Civilizations
Africans the most phenotypically diverse - QUOTE:
General- "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 2001. Global Analysis of Regional Differences.. Hum Bio 73:5
Skin color- “This difference persists even after adjusting for a correlation between within-population diversity and distance from the equator. Though affected by natural selection, skin color variation shows the same pattern of higher African diversity as found with other traits." -- Relethford.(2000). Human skin color diversity is highest in sub-Saharan African populations. Hum Biol. 72(5):
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is there any more studies on Predynastic remains frkm Lower Egypt and how they fit in? I only saw one mention of Lower Egyptian samples on the first page. I almost got slipped up in an argument where someone posted a study saying Lower Egyptians had "less tropically adapted"(but still tropically adapted)bodies and was wanting to learn more if possible. They were still indigenous Africans too weren't they?
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes- and if some were living in the cooler Medit zone for a long time, or were under the influence of the Sahara's climatic fluctuation over many millennia, there would be variation. But even Lower Egyptians are more tropically adapted overall than people from EUrope or the "Middle East." The don't have to be identical, just show the primary overall pattern the scholars have found. Raxter and Ruff analyzed mostly northern skeletal samples and came away with the overall conclusion - the Egyptians clustered more with Africans. Kemp 2005 also reported on head to head comparisons. The results were the same. There was variation, but overall, same bottom line. The presence of more variation somewhere does not affect the bottom line.
In the late periods, the tail end of Egyptian civilization, with more foreign incoming Hyskos, Assyrians, Greeks, Romans and Arabs, this would change, as everyone recognizes. Cranial studies and DNA show the change. Today's Egyptians are not the same as the ancients, as credible scholars show.
Finally the diversity of Africans means that they can have many overlapping features, debunking attempts to claim unique "Eurasian" provenance for this or that. Narrow noses for example, are as "African" as broad noses, and don't necessarily need any "wandering Caucasoids" to explain why indigenous people in Africa vary in how they look. All know Africa has had migration in and out, just like every other place but that does not change the bottom line of indigenous variation. Africans are the most phenotypically diverse people on earth.
-------------------- 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
DOUBLE STANDARDS: Some race mongers like to use the stereotypical "true negro" to minimize and downplay African diversity. But when types resembling the "true negro" shows up inhabiting Europe, they suddenly change tune and whitewash the offender away as "non African" or "non-black."
BLAST FROM THE PAST: DIOP ON DOUBLE-STANDARDS AND HYPOCRISY
Diop on hypocritical double standards of Eurocentrism
“But it is only the most gratuitous theory that considers the Dinka, the Nouer and the Masai, among others, to be Caucasoids. What if an African ethnologist were to persist in recognizing as white-only the blond, blue-eyed Scandinavians, and systematically refused membership to the remaining Europeans, and Mediterraneans in particular—the French, Italians, Greek, Spanish, and Portuguese? Just as the inhabitants of Scandinavia and the Mediterranean countries must be considered as two extreme poles of the same anthropological reality, so should the Negroes of East and West Africa be considered as the two extremes in the reality of the Negro world. To say that a Shillouk, a Dinka, or a Nouer is a Caucasoid is for an African as devoid of sense and scientific interest as would be, to a European, an attitude that maintained that a Greek or a Latin were not of the same race.“ -- CA Diop, 'Evolution of the Negro world', Presence Africaine -23, 51. 5-15
DIOP on genotype versus phenotype
"If we speak only of genotype, I can find a black who, at the level of his chromosomes, is closer to a Swede than Peter Botha is. But what counts in reality is the phenotype. It is the physical appearance which counts. This black, even if on the level of his cells he is closer to a Swede than Peter Botha, when he is in South Africa he will still live in Soweto. Throughout history, it has been the phenotype which has been at issue, we mustn't lose sight of this fact. The phenotype is a reality, physical appearance is a reality. And this appearance corresponds to something which makes us say that Europe is peopled by white people, Africa is peopled by black people, and Asia is people by yellow people. It is these relationships which have played a role in history...
Now every time these relationships are not favorable to the western cultures, an effort is made to undermine the cultural consciousness of Africans by telling them. ‘we don’t even know what race is’. What that means is that they do not know what a black man is; [but] they do know what a white man is… It is the phenotype which has given us so much difficulty throughout history, so it is this which must be considered in these relations." --CA Diop. 1985- Interview in Journal of African Civilizations
Africans the most phenotypically diverse - QUOTE:
General- "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 2001. Global Analysis of Regional Differences.. Hum Bio 73:5
Skin color- “This difference persists even after adjusting for a correlation between within-population diversity and distance from the equator. Though affected by natural selection, skin color variation shows the same pattern of higher African diversity as found with other traits." -- Relethford.(2000). Human skin color diversity is highest in sub-Saharan African populations. Hum Biol. 72(5):
-------------------- 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
DNA studies show some Europeans more related to Asians than other Europeans
"However, in a reanalysis of data from 377 microsatellite loci typed in 1056 individuals, Europeans proved to be more similar to Asians than to other Europeans 38% of the time (Bamshad et al. 2004; population definitions and data from Rosenberg et al. 2002)." --Witherspoon 2007. Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations. Genetics. v.176(1)
NO ONE claims southern Europeans are all or mostly African, but some modern studies show up to 25% African DNA in various European populations. In popular American and European racial models this would make them "mixed race"..
Presence of Sickle Cell in several Predynastic Mummies:
“We conducted a molecular investigation of the presence of sicklemia in six predynastic Egyptian mummies (about 3200 BC) from the Anthropological and Ethnographic Museum of Turin. Previous studies of these remains showed the presence of severe anemia, while histological preparations of mummified tissues revealed hemolytic disorders. DNA was extracted from dental samples with a silica-gel method specific for ancient DNA. A modification of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), called amplification refractory mutation system (ARMS) was then applied. ARMS is based on specific priming of the PCR and it permits diagnosis of single nucleotide mutations. In this method, amplification can occur only in the presence of the specific mutation being studied. The amplified DNA was analyzed by electrophoresis. In samples of three individuals, there was a band at the level of the HbS mutated fragment, indicating that they were affected by sicklemia."
– Marin et. al. 1999, Use of the Amplification Refractory Mutation System (ARMS) in the Study of HbS in Predynastic Egyptian Remains.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
Egyptian knowledge and techniques laid basis for some substantial ancient European medicine, modern research shows
QUOTE:
"Although ancient Greek and Roman medicine is generally considered the origin of European medicine, there is evidence in ancient Egyptian texts suggesting a precursor role of ancient Egyptian medicine in this regard. What did Greek and Roman physicians learn from their Egyptian counterparts? Of the medical papyri discovered to date, the largest and most significant - the Ebers papyrus and the Smith papyrus - originate from the beginning of the New Kingdom, however, they were - at least in part - already written during the Old Kingdom. Considering the times, the spectrum of diseases treated as well as the range of conservative and surgical treatment methods was truly astounding. Taking a medical history, performing a thorough manual examination, and assessing clinical findings constituted key components in establishing a diagnosis. Apart from hygienic aspects, skin and hair disorders, the treatment of acute and chronic wounds and injuries as well as cosmetic procedures took on an important role. Even back then, physicians sought to assess inflammatory processes with respect to their cardinal features, implement graded wound therapy, and treat diseases with allopathic drugs. The 'channel theory' prevalent at that time, in which the unimpeded flow of bodily fluids was considered a fundamental prerequisite for health, may likely be regarded as precursor of ancient Greek humoral pathology. The latter became the basis for the subsequently established theory of the four humors, and was thus essential for the entire field of medieval medicine."
-- Hartmann A1. 2016. Back to the roots - dermatology in ancient Egyptian medicine. --J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2016 Apr;14(4):389-96.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
At a November 2014 British Museum lecture, Who were the Ancient Egyptians?, Joel Irish said that, based on the dental record, there was population continuity from the Badarian through to the Roman period, as well as homogeneity encompassing both Upper and Lower Egypt.
EDIT: OK, managed to find quotes:
quote: What you see then is that there is incredible similarity among all populations leading to the dynastic through pre-dynastic times [with a few?] post-dynastic thrown in. None of these are what you'd call significantly different from one another. They're all the same population. Whether they're from early, late, whether they're from Upper or Lower Egypt. There are two outliers though, trying to figure out what the heck are these guys doing and it now turns out the top one is a Greek site, Greek sample, that just happen to be in Egypt, and the bottom one is Roman. So what we've got here are some outside people, these cemeteries were from non-Egyptians, is what it looks like.
quote: Dentally the ancient Egyptians show an incredible amount of internal homogeneity, between predynastic and dynastic times. They are statistically not significantly different from one another, they show tremendous similarity from south to north and through time - these are one very continuous population.
-----------
Punos el rey said:
quote: Is there any more studies on Predynastic remains frkm Lower Egypt and how they fit in? I only saw one mention of Lower Egyptian samples on the first page. I almost got slipped up in an argument where someone posted a study saying Lower Egyptians had "less tropically adapted"(but still tropically adapted)bodies and was wanting to learn more if possible. They were still indigenous Africans too weren't they?
quote:Originally posted by tropicals redacted: At a November 2014 British Museum lecture, Who were the Ancient Egyptians?, Joel Irish said that, based on the dental record, there was population continuity from the Badarian through to the Roman period, as well as homogeneity encompassing both Upper and Lower Egypt.
EDIT: OK, managed to find quotes:
quote: What you see then is that there is incredible similarity among all populations leading to the dynastic through pre-dynastic times [with a few?] post-dynastic thrown in. None of these are what you'd call significantly different from one another. They're all the same population. Whether they're from early, late, whether they're from Upper or Lower Egypt. There are two outliers though, trying to figure out what the heck are these guys doing and it now turns out the top one is a Greek site, Greek sample, that just happen to be in Egypt, and the bottom one is Roman. So what we've got here are some outside people, these cemeteries were from non-Egyptians, is what it looks like.
quote: Dentally the ancient Egyptians show an incredible amount of internal homogeneity, between predynastic and dynastic times. They are statistically not significantly different from one another, they show tremendous similarity from south to north and through time - these are one very continuous population.
-----------
^^ Very interesting. There was a guy on Reloaded in "attack" mode trying to use the dental studies of Irish to claim that "continuity" means that today's Arabized Egyptians are the same as the ancients- and behold! An Ancient Egypt "free" of the dreaded "black" or "African" types. Some of today's Egyptians like this- heaven forbid that their allegedly "pure" Egypt should be part of the "African" continent or an "African people." Horrors! Of course they fail miserably, and knowledgeable people educated with the info on ES, Reloaded and elsewhere can see through their bogus propaganda.
Irish is correct and the key model of his "continuity" approach are the Badarians, who are deemed as quite representative of what the ancients looked like. Of course no region in a strategic location like Egypt is static- migrations, conquests etc happen, so eventually the ancient population would change. The Roman and Greek samples Irish mentions shows such changes. But "continuity" begins with the dreaded tropical "African" types, who refuse to go away.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Re assorted racist rants and claims, a few final loose ends wrapped up for the record and new readers..
Racist ranter says: There is no negroid alphabet invented until 1949,Nok Language. Negroids had to rely on Arabic,Greek,Latin and later on French and English,if their fragile brains could grasp to learn to read
LOL. Dummy the Nubians had their own alphabet millennia earlier. Here is a "Missing" negro alphabet developed "only" in 1949.
The Steele of Phiale forbade any negroid from entering Egypt
^^Hapless dolt, your attempt at a "racial" angle fails. The very same pharaohs who forbid Nubians to enter Egypt in that era, were themselves of Nubian background!
"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.) originated from the Aswan region.4 As expected, strong Nubian features and dark coloring are seen in their sculpture and relief work. This dynasty ranks as among the greatest, whose fame far outlived its actual tenure on the throne. Especially interesting, it was a member of this dynasty- that decreed that no Nehsy (riverine Nubian of the principality of Kush), except such as came for trade or diplomatic reasons, should pass by the Egyptian fortress at the southern end of the Second Nile Cataract. Why would this royal family of Nubian ancestry ban other Nubians from coming into Egyptian territory? Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and adopted typical Egyptian policies."
- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient Egyptians black or white?', Biblical Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5, 1989)
As regards Eurocentric white Egypt claims based on Raxter - DEBUNKED. In fact, Raxter 2011 affirms the clustering of Egyptians with Africans. quote"
"It can be noted that none of the Northeast African groups are significantly different from any other African groups (East African (EA), African Pygmy (AP), Khoe-San (KS)) (Table 27). 156 Therefore, West Africans of both sexes appear to possess the longest distal bones relative to the proximal for the upper limb. Ancient Egyptians and Nubians thus possess generally tropically adapted upper limb proportions, with their brachial indices grouping with the majority of other African groups."
"Ancient Egyptians and Nubians of both sexes are consistently significantly different in limb length proportions from Northern and Southern Europeans, with their brachial and crural indices grouping with the majority of other Africans." --Raxter Michele, 2011. Egyptian Body Size: A Regional and Worldwide Comparison by Raxter. Published Thesis, 2011. University of South Florida 2011.
And body mass in the Nile Valley is linked not only with climate variants but with food production as well, debunking simplistic claims of "wandering Caucasoids."
and Raxter et al 2008-
As regards so-called "updated" 2015 data showing "white" or Caucasoid Egypt, or that moderns are almost the same as the ancients- DEBUNKED. Moderns are heavily admixed and cannot be considered the same as the ancient population- a fact borne out not only by DNA, but skeletal and cranial evidence as well. Here is "updated" data from 2015, showing the recent admixture. In short, much non-African ancestry in Egyptians traced to Islamic invasions and expansions
"Using ADMIXTURE and principal-component analysis (PCA) (Figure 1A), we estimated the average proportion of non-African ancestry in the Egyptians to be 80% and dated the midpoint of the admixture event by using ALDER20 to around 750 years ago (Table S2), consistent with the Islamic expansion and dates reported previously. " -- Luca Pagani et al. 2015. Tracing the Route of Modern Humans out of Africa by Using 225 Human Genome Sequences from Ethiopians and Egyptians. e American Journal of Human Genetics. American Journal of Human Genetics, Volume 96, Issue 6, p986–991,
As regards the alleged white Gurna people- DEBUNKED. If anything they show definite African ancestral elements.
As regards E-M35 markers excluding "negroids" - DEBUNKED
As regards Keita saying Ancient Egyptians are the same genetically speaking as moderns- DEBUNKED. The Raving racist says: Here is a well renowned black professor with an expertise in genetics in ancient Egypt he essentially states that modern Egyptians are the same as their ancient counterparts genetically speaking. * "The basic overall genetic profile of the modern population is consistent with the diversity of ancient populations that would have been indigenous to northeastern Africa and subject to the range of evolutionary influences over time" -----------------------
^^The raving racist pulls a quote from an article Keita wrote for National Geographic but PREDICTABLY AND CONVENIENTLY, it leaves out the rest of what Keita said, which affirms the indigenous African nature of the ancient Egyptians particularly the foundational early populations. It is wholly bogus to say that Keita considers the moderns the same as ancients. The "supporting" Keita quote actually debunks the claim- for it is clear Keita notes that the ancients were diverse and is merely saying that the moderns are also. Who "denies" this? Everyone knows that the coming of Hyskos in the New Kingdom and Greeks, Romans, Assyrians, and finally Arabs added "diversity" to Egypt. That is not and never was at issue. CA Diop never "denied" such elementary matters. But the 'diversity' ALSO includes so-called "negroid" elements- who under Eurocentric doctrine are supposed to be "missing" from Egypt until very late in the game.In reality, they were there from Day 1.
Here is the conveniently missing text from Keita's National Geographic blurb. He notes that the weight of evidence points to a dominant African population profile- as proved by skeletal, dental, cranial and DNA evidence, and that LATER elements to Egypt from the Near East and Europe would join this African foundation. QUOTE:
Overall, these studies can be interpreted as suggesting that the Egyptian Nile Valley's indigenous population had a craniofacial pattern that evolved and emerged in northeastern Africa, whose geography in relationship to climate largely explains the variation. Dental affinity studies generally agree with the craniofacial results, though they differ in the details. The body proportions of ancient Egyptians generally are similar to those of tropical (more southern) Africans.. Very little DNA has been retrieved from ancient Egyptian remains, and there are not many studies on the modern population. However, the results of analyses of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and the Y chromosome in the living Egyptian population show the existence of very old African lineages that are consistent with the fossil remains and of younger lineages of more recent evolution, along with evidence of the assimilation of later migrants from the Near East and Europe.." --SOY Keita. Ancient Egyptian Origins- Human Biology. 2008. National Geographic
-------------------------------------- ^^Curious how the distorter forgets to include the above in the alleged "supporting" Keita reference..
As regards claims that North Africans (with the allegedly "missing negroids" are the "progenitors" of white people- DEBUNKED.
^^Pure non-negroid "progenitors" of white people...
And so it goes...
-------------------- 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
Whoever that guy on Reloaded was, he wasn't lying about Irish.
That is exactly what Irish means. Irish argued for population replacement since the neolithic (at the expense of Mesolithic Nubians and Egyptians) and calls predynastic Egyptians "European-like". (Note that, while Irish used to rave on and on about "population replacement" in the lower Nile Valley, he specifically likes to harp on "displaced" Mesolithic lower Nubians [whom he considers "negroid"] while completely remaining silent on the fact that his "displaced" Epipalaeolithic and Mesolithic Egyptians were similar looking to these Mesolithic Nubians). The troll above who first cited Irish knows very well that Irish's Badarians are ultimately non-African according to Irish. But this is simply a part of a wider pattern of this troll's selective quote-mining of Keita and other bio-anthropologists to advance his agenda. Since he's in the habit of safely quote-mining in his private conversations with unsuspecting academics, he thinks he can try that bs here. But I'm going to call him out every time he tries to suggestively invoke bio-anthropologists who fundamentally disagree with him.
The troll's reasoning here is that, since the Badarians were said to be "negroid", he can quote-mine Irish to sneakily extend this description to dynastic lower Egyptians. But Irish doesn't think that Badarians were unequivocally African, and he definitely doesn't consider their dental pattern to be 'negroid'. The troll is doing all these quote-mining shenanigans and roundabout mentions of lower Egyptians to not have to face his own internal discomfort with the fact that he knows he can't accommodate dynastic lower Egyptians in his clumsy "black phenotype" category.
I also can't recall one time that Irish ever included predynastic Lower Egyptians in his analyses.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't recall Irish on Lower Egypts either, but the Reloaded troll failed to mention the Badarians, and also failed to mention Keita's analysis of them. Then he comes up with the "missing" negroid writing that had to wait until 1949. But now Tropicals did Irish mention Lower Egypt at all in his lecture?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Eugene Strouhal has a paper on the cranio-facial specifics of some royal dynastic lower Egyptian family members from the Old Kingdom. I discussed this paper as well as other dynastic lower Egyptian skeletal remains with the troll starting from ~2013 when I was bringing him up to speed. We also went over aspects of Irish' work. So I know exactly what he's doing with his selective quote-mining and his sneaky attempts to bring up dynastic lower Egyptians in relationship to Badarians like that, while remaining mum on their metric cranio-facial relationships in a larger, global, context.
I'm sure Irish mentioned dynastic lower Egyptians in his lecture, but I pretty confident that he has never published anything on the dental traits of the predynastic lower Egyptians. Sometimes in his work you can tell that he's short on certain samples. In one paper he tried to use the Gebel Ramlah as a stand in for early neolithic Egypt (Gebel Ramlah lies, of course, south of the 1st cataract). This isn't automatically a bad thing (given the known affinities between Nubians and Egyptians) but it does show that his sample set is limited at times and that his interpretation of his results relies to some extent on assumptions. Which is why he arrived at the "mid-holocene population replacement" theory to begin with: he doesn't have sufficient samples or he would have known that the ancestors of (pre)dynastic Egypto-Nubians didn't suddenly appear in the Egyptian and lower Nubian record after ~6000BC.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you are right on the limitations of Irish's work.
-------------------- 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
^Do you have anything rare/new on pre-dynastic lower Egyptians? Only data that comes to mind is Petrie's Tarkhan cemetery (thought to be the "Anu" in the flesh due to their supposedly peculiar chin morphologies which they're said to share with Tera Netjer) and some other skeletal remains from Maadi and Heliopolis. Also, Junker's predynastic lower Egyptian remains from Tura come to mind. From their descriptions these all seem to be local variants of the predynastic Upper Egyptian model pattern, with some variations tending towards (but still maintaining some distance from) what would later appear in the record as the "lower Egyptian" pattern. This is also what Patricia Smith says about some of these samples. None seem to have been as distinctly "lower Egyptian" as some of the 1st dynasty royal Egyptians from Abydos.
posted
@Zaharan, Irish didn't say anything about Lower Egyptians beyond what's quoted above. If you've not already, read his 2004(?) paper, Who were the Ancient Egyptians?
What internal discomfort on applying blackness to Lower Egyptians? The hurt misrepresentation continues. I think the internal conflict is yours Swenet, not mine...remember the Hollywood question? Where, twenty times, you avoided answering whether online and press reaction would refer to Somalis and Ethiopians as 'black' if they were cast as ancient Egyptians in a Hollywood film? Swenet previously referenced modern Ethiopians as black, but then - after we fell out- accused me of revisionism when I did the same thing. Isn't that right, Swenet? Moreover, specifically on Lower Egyptians,Swenet forgets the Patricia Smith finding cited by Kemp and posted on one of Zaharan's datascreens, which, although a small study, links predynastic Lower Egyptian limb lengths with Africans.
Irish's findings indicate population continuity and homogeneity as quoted above. Email him and ask him yourself. Is Swenet still attempting the 'negroid' ='true black' sleight of hand nonsense, when referring to Badarian 'non-negroid' dental traits? Moreover,I asked a supportive academic to look over Irish's lecture comments. Whilst they raised questions, they were in general agreement with his findings, recommending I use them. Sorry.
Anyway, why am I responding to Swenet, a known liar who deliberately uses smear tactics, sending a private message to a former moderator here saying they were lucky he (Swenet) didn't publically slander them--the moderator's crime being their diminished interest in Swenet's Facebook site... and then, of course, there's Swenet's likening my online behaviour to that of a paedophile? Because I took a screen grab of his using a "fake name" (not my words) on linkedin.
Whenever this liar tries to mischaracterize me, I'm going to remind of his squalid bs.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
All of that shameless deflecting and justifying of his deliberate abuse of the positions of bio-anthropologists is going to come in handy.
Of course, Irish's reference to "homogeneity" says something about 'racial' homogeneity, but, like I said (and the troll knows this, but deliberately omits and obscures this) Irish considers this Egyptian homogeneity to be part of a larger pattern of Eurasian-like homogeneity. This Irish statement of "homogeneity" is not, as the troll is manipulatively suggesting, an acknowledgment of Egyptians being 'racially' distinct from what he considers non-'black' populations, like Maghrebis and others. The quote-mining troll is completely botching what Irish means, sometimes even (comically) to try to undermine people who are more in agreement with Irish than the quote-mining troll himself.
About the predynastic inhabitants of Hierakonpolis, Irish says:
quote:However, based on a qualitative inspection of the dentitions, it appears that: 1) dental phenetic homogeneity was prevalent among the Hierakonpolis inhabitants; and 2) they exhibit dental traits that ally them with other post-Pleistocene populations in greater North Africa. Prior work shows North Africans have morphologically simple, mass-reduced teeth. This dental pattern was shown to be ubiquitous among samples, regardless of distance—from the Canary Islands to Egypt and Nubia— or time—from 8,000 year-old Capsians to recent Berbers in western North Africa.
What Irish thinks about the affinity of this North African dental pattern as well as predynastic Egyptians in general:
quote:This pattern, termed the “North African Dental Trait Complex,” includes high frequencies of several traits such as an interruption groove on UI2, M3 agenesis, and rocker jaw, plus a low occurrence of LM2 Y-5 groove pattern. All of these features are also present in Europeans and West Asians to some degree, but are uncommon in subSaharan peoples. Craniometric indicators appear to support these results, and European-like discrete traits, such as alveolar orthognathism, dolichocephaly, rhomboid orbits, narrow nasal aperture, and nasal sill, are prevalent.
None of these descriptions are a problem in my paradigm of indigenous African variation. It's the laughably incompetent trolls who insist on compartmentalizing human variation with preconceived crappy terms like "black phenotype" who find themselves with their pants down again and again. But, like I said, this isn't so much an issue of me saying anything new: it's an issue of me calling out a known liar who seems to have a fetish for getting exposed (he just keeps inviting these demonstrations of his manipulative use of these bio-anthropologists). The fraud already knows all of this, yet he insists on quote-mining Irish and other bio-anthropologists who fundamentally disagree with his underlying agenda.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's good you didn't try to squirm your way out of the charges I raised about you above. Anyway, next:
quote: None of these descriptions are a problem in my paradigm of indigenous African variation.
Hahaha!!! Oh dear, you keep misrepresenting, you just can't help it, can you? So you're aware of indigenous African variability, but the rest of us aren't? The rest of us who reject 'true black', 'negroid' stereotypes and bang on about variability ad nauseam, don't get it?
Oh yeah, what was that paper Irish wrote where northern Sudanese examples were found to show "sub-Saharan" cranio-facial features, but/and "North African" dental traits? I remember Djehuti commenting something along the lines of the North African/Sub-Saharan African dichotomy being a false one...
And I remember Keita (1996)writing that in terms of cranio-facial traits and limb lengths, ancient Egyptians are closer to other North-East Africans than Greeks:
quote: The descriptions and terms of ancient Greek writers have sometimes been used to comment on Egyptian origins. This is problematic since the ancient writers were not doing population biology. However, we can examine one issue. The Greeks called all groups south of Egypt "Ethiopians." Were the Egyptians more related to any of these "Ethiopians" than to Greeks? As noted, cranial and limb studies have indicated greater similarity to Somalis, Kushites and Nubians, all "Ethiopians" in ancient Greek terms" (p23).
Anyway, again, in his lecture, Irish pointed out pre-dynastic/dynastic/post-dynastic continuity, and spoke of Lower and Upper Egyptian homogeneity.
That's not to say that I'm particularly a fan of Irish,but among his commentary there is useful info.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:I remember Djehuti commenting something along the lines of the North African/Sub-Saharan African dichotomy being a false one...
This one in particular is going to come in handy later on. Note the confused attempt of going out on a limb since his source (Irish) is saying the exact opposite. His source IS, in fact, saying that there is a legitimate dichotomy between SSA and North Africa as far as this dental pattern is concerned. So, in one second he's quote-mining Irish's "homogeneous" part, but the next he's in bald-faced denial about the traits they were homogeneous in and how these traits relate to other Africans?
Given the fact that Irish explicitly states that the troll's so-called "non-black" Maghrebis have the same dental pattern as the AE, it begs the question how the troll knows that the dynastic lower Egyptians were homogeneous in the sense of lacking more common ancestry with these so-called "non-blacks". Given that this sort of exclusion of so-called "non-blacks" is what the troll is really after when he manipulates and lies about Irish's use of "homogeneous", how does the troll know that Egyptians who diverged from the predynastic type in dynastic times didn't have a greater amount of common ancestry (or even admixture) with these so-called "non-blacks"?
He doesn't know anything. He's deliberately lying as usual. He's simply abusing Irish's work to turn these lower Egyptians he's uncomfortable with into something more palatable. As I've already established, this "homogeneity" Irish speaks of doesn't neatly circumscribe 'desirable' North Africans and exclude the 'undesirable' so-called "non-black" Maghrebis as the liar will have you believe.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Swenet says: ^Do you have anything rare/new on pre-dynastic lower Egyptians?
Nothing that we haven't all seen before. Irish does seem at times to reach for stereotypical constructs based on limited samples to reach conclusions such as the mid-holocene population replacement notion above.
^^Good find. These older guys quite happily accept elements of the dynastic race theory, though they do note "infiltration" of "negro strains".
Tropicals says: Zaharan, Irish didn't say anything about Lower Egyptians beyond what's quoted above. If you've not already, read his 2004(?) paper, Who were the Ancient Egyptians? Irish's findings indicate population continuity and homogeneity as quoted above.
I need to pull his paper and re-read it. But in any event the continuity would include the infiltrators of the "negro strains." Exactly why they would be "infiltrating" and not part of the native mix is unknown. But like anything else, Irish would be only one line of evidence among several lines. Irish's sampling bears watching too. In some studies his "north africans" is mostly near the Arabized coast, excluding huge areas of "North Africa" further in.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keita has had some issues with Irish before:
Recently Irish and Turner (1990) and Turner and Markowitz (1990) have suggested that the populations of Nubia and Egypt of the agricultural periods were not primarily descendants of the geographical populations of mesolithic/epipaleolithic times. Based on dental morphology, they postulate an almost total replacement of the native/African epipaleolithic and neolithic groups by populations or peoples from further north (Europe or the Near East?). A similarity in dental traits is noted between epipaleolithic Nile valley peoples and modern West Africans and also found for craniometrie traits (Strouhal 1984). They argue that the rate of evolutionary change required to achieve the later dentitions would be greater than that for epipaleolithic to ne- olithic dental changes in other parts of the world, and see no reason why this should be true in the lower Nile valley. They take issue with the well-known post-Pleistocene/hunting dental reduction and simplification hypotheses which postulate in situ microevolution driven by dietary change, with minimal gene flow (admixture) (see Carlson and Van Gerven 1979).
However, as is well known and accepted, rapid evolution can occur. Also, rapid change in northeast Africa might be specifically anticipated because of the possibilities for punctuated microevolution (secondary to severe micro- selection and drift) in the early Holocene Sahara, because of the isolated com- munities and cyclical climatic changes there, and their possible subsequent human effects. The earliest southern predynastic culture, Badari, owes key elements to post-desiccation Saharan and also perhaps "Nubian" immigration (Hassan 1988). Biologically these people were essentially the same (see above and discussion; Keita 1990). It is also possible that the dental traits could have been introduced from an external source, and increased in frequency primarily because of natural selection, either for the trait or for a growth pattern requir- ing less energy. There is no evidence for sudden or gradual mass migration of Europeans or Near Easterners into the valley, as the term "replacement" would imply. There is limb ratio and craniofacial morphological and metric continu- ity in Upper Egypt-Nubia in a broad sense from the late paleolithic through dynastic periods, although change occurred. - Keita 1993
-------------------- 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
I reference one of the findings from the lecture -population continuity and homogeneity - and it triggers Swenet's tic. The Irish statements appear to have rattled him and I'm trying to think why..something to do with Lower Egypt? And I hope you're not suggesting that we reject studies/authors out of hand if their positions don't fully accord with our approach and understanding?
Anyway, again, I repeat, I forwarded Irish's comments to a supportive academic, who, whilst having questions, recommended use of them. Swenet hasn't yet referred to this. I wonder why?
Ancient Egyptian cranio-facial traits and limb lengths as Keita (1996) states, show similarity with other North-East black Africans/'Ethiopians'. Irish, whatever you might think of his work, concludes that the ancient Egyptian population was,based on the dental records, homogeneous across Upper and Lower Egypt, and biologically constant from pre-dynastic to post- dynastic.Along with the Patricia Smith study on pre-dynastic Lower Egyptian limb lengths,it's another nail in the coffin for the argument that the population was bifurcated between Lower and Upper Egypt. Irish dichotimises North and sub-Saharan Africa, but his own work in northern Sudan, as indicated by Djehuti, means that this is flawed. Meat and bones. We know enough from multiple lines of evidence that the population had inner African ancestry. Irish's work says the population was continuous and homogeneous, at least dentally.
There's nothing nefarious or underhand in my citing Irish here.
But carry on.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
See the dense intransigence I'm talking about? See the lies I'm talking about? See his inclination to deflect? See how incompetent he is? Everything I've accused him of, from his lies to his misrepresentations, is constantly displayed by him when he's confronted over his foul play. People don't even have to take my word for it: just see how he reacts.
Note how he constantly tries to hide variations in ancient Egypt by using deceptive terms like "black African phenotype" and "homogeneous". You can tell this is deceptive because the people he's trying to mislead wouldn't use the terms he's peddling to them if given the choice. This is why I say that his use of 'black' is a trojan horse. It has nothing to with the basic quality of being African. In fact, it distracts from it.
quote:it's another nail in the coffin for the argument that the population was bifurcated between Lower and Upper Egypt.
Another gem that confirms my accusation that he's salty and bitter about the dynastic lower Egyptian type. So salty, that he tries to run to Irish and lie to himself and others about what Irish said, to get relief.
Note how he dangles from author to author even though the thing that makes him panic about Keita is conclusive and can't be nullified by spamming Irish. Keita and others have already demonstrated that dynastic Egyptians of the lower Egyptian type are heterogeneous in ways that dynastic Egyptians of the predynastic type aren't. He's just dangling from author to author based on his confirmation bias. Then he tries to say there is nothing underhanded about what he's doing. Right
quote:Irish dichotimises North and sub-Saharan Africa, but his own work in northern Sudan, as indicated by Djehuti, means that this is flawed.
Another gem. He's obviously saying this because he's in denial about the phenotype of dynastic northern Sudanese, which he's described earlier as uniformly consisting of the "black African phenotype". So far the fraud has failed to substantiate to what extent this is true. Either way, the spurious reasoning is that, since lower Nubians could be of the "black African" phenotype, Irish distinction between North Africas and SSA dental patterns is artificial. His epic incompetence and typological tendencies are showing again.
The fraud says there is nothing underhanded about his denial that the difference between the predynastic and the lower Egyptian type is due to increased heterogeneity. But the fraud knows that the Egyptian dental pattern is found all over North Africa and therefore, can't be used to rule out heterogeneity. Hypothetically speaking, it's conceivable that mass migration from his so-called "non-black" Kabyles to lower Egypt would only introduce modest changes in the non-metric dental record. But, according to the fraud, the mere "homogeneity" of the lower Egyptian dental pattern can magically rule this out.
So, yes, it's very deceptive and underhanded. It was already deceptive and underhanded to try to circumvent Keita and others by trying to run to Irish for relief in the first place. Note the gaping gap between Irish's work (which shows the relative homogeneity of much of North Africa) and the fraud's attempts to stereotype the Egyptian dental pattern in some special category devoid of his so-called "non-black" Maghrebis. Moreover, he's doing it using an author who couldn't disagree more. But I'm grateful for these very quote-worthy gems. I hope he keeps them coming. Very useful.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:I remember Djehuti commenting something along the lines of the North African/Sub-Saharan African dichotomy being a false one...
This one in particular is going to come in handy later on. Note the confused attempt of going out on a limb since his source (Irish) is saying the exact opposite. His source IS, in fact, saying that there is a legitimate dichotomy between SSA and North Africa as far as this dental pattern is concerned. So, in one second he's quote-mining Irish's "homogeneous" part, but the next he's in bald-faced denial about the traits they were homogeneous in and how these traits relate to other Africans?
Given the fact that Irish explicitly states that the troll's so-called "non-black" Maghrebis have the same dental pattern as the AE, it begs the question how the troll knows that the dynastic lower Egyptians were homogeneous in the sense of lacking more common ancestry with these so-called "non-blacks". Given that this sort of exclusion of so-called "non-blacks" is what the troll is really after when he manipulates and lies about Irish's use of "homogeneous", how does the troll know that Egyptians who diverged from the predynastic type in dynastic times didn't have a greater amount of common ancestry (or even admixture) with these so-called "non-blacks"?
He doesn't know anything. He's deliberately lying as usual. He's simply abusing Irish's work to turn these lower Egyptians he's uncomfortable with into something more palatable. As I've already established, this "homogeneity" Irish speaks of doesn't neatly circumscribe 'desirable' North Africans and exclude the 'undesirable' so-called "non-black" Maghrebis as the liar will have you believe.
Swenet, I am not so familiar with Irish his works. But can you explain this one:
quote:"Still, it appears that the process of state formation involved a large indigenous component. Outside influence and admixture with extraregional groups primarily occurred in Lower Egypt—perhaps during the later dynastic, but especially in Ptolmaic and Roman times (also Irish, 2006). No large-scale population replacement in the form of a foreign dynastic ‘race’ (Petrie, 1939) was indicated.
Our results are generally consistent with those of Zakrzewski (2007). Using craniometric data in predynastic and early dynastic Egyptian samples, she also concluded that state formation was largely an indigenous process with some migration into the region evident. The sources of such migrants have not been identified; inclusion of additional regional and extraregional skeletal samples from various periods would be required for this purpose."
-- Schillaci MA, Irish JD, Wood CC.
Further analysis of the population history of ancient Egyptians. 2009
I'm assuming you're pointing out that Irish thinks ancient Egyptians and Nubians were indigenous Africans?
Irish considers the (pre)dynastic Egyptians and Nubians to have been the product of mid-holocene colonists of the lower Nile, not of proto-dynastic colonists (i.e. the "Dynastic Race theory"). His rejection of Petrie's dynastic race theory is not an acknowledgment that there was no replacement at all. So even if he calls them "indigenous", he simply means that his ultimately Eurasian people settled the these parts of North Africa. It's simply the same old U6=autochtonous but ultimately Eurasian talk. When academics call U6 autochtonous, most of them are not saying that it should be classified with African lineages.
See Zaharan's quotes where Keita talks about Irish et al. Also read the actual paper. Did you read it? Irish is not itching to put things in an African context:
quote:Most traits describe crown and root appearance or position in permanent teeth. Rocker jaw is the only nondental (i.e., cranial) attribute. Although a hallmark of Polynesians, where frequencies approach 95% for some groups (Houghton, 1976; Pietrusewsky, 1984; Kean and Houghton, 1990), convexity of the mandible’s horizontal ramus is also found in Europe. This occurrence has not been published, but Turner (personal communication, 2008) reports that the developmental trait occurs in 10– 20% of adult Europeans at ASUDAS grades of 1–2 (i.e., near- and full-rocker), and dates to at least the late Pleistocene. In addition, a mean incidence of 19.3% at these same grades has been reported in 12 trans-North African samples, with a range of 0–41% (Irish, 1993, 1998a,b). Rocker jaw is similarly common, i.e., 19.2%, in the present Egyptian samples, with a range of 10–32% (Irish, 2006); it is this considerable variation, like that of the 21 other traits, that enhances intersample discrimination; its inclusion also allows direct comparisons with the previous study (Irish, 2006).
quote:Expectedly, therefore, several commonalities are apparent. The relative uniqueness of Gebel Ramlah suggests that this particular Neolithic group did not contribute substantially to the ancestry of subsequent predynastic Nile Valley groups. It is important to note that Gebel Ramlah is also geographically distant from the Nile Valley.
quote:That study (Irish, 2006) provided evidence for predynastic/dynastic continuity, especially during the early dynastic in Upper Egypt. Temporal and geographic distributions of biological variation among skeletal samples in the present study also suggest that in situ development was associated with Egyptian state formation, albeit with some indications of migration and/or gene flow. As such, we could reject neither Hypothesis 1, the in situ model, nor Hypothesis 2, the development by-invading-population model. Still, it appears that the process of state formation involved a large indigenous component.
So, to him they didn't come from the South? Rather from "Eurasia"? If so, I completely misinterpreted that paper. Considering that he mentioned Sonia Zakrzewski.
"I'm assuming you're pointing out that Irish thinks ancient Egyptians and Nubians were indigenous Africans?"
Yes, that is what I suspected by that citation. Thanks for the update.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am trying to understand his position better.
quote: By c. 2050 BC a small community of C-Group Nubians was present deep within Egyptian territory at the city of Hierakonpolis. Their descendants stayed for the next 400 years. Today, the site of Hierakonpolis, 113 km north of Aswan, is known for its Egyptian deposits; however, it also contains a C-Group cemetery, which documents the northernmost occurrence of this culture. Sixty skeletons were excavated.
Tombs feature Nubian architecture and goods, including leather garments, although the use of Egyptian mortuary practices and artifacts increased through time. Dates range from the early 11th Dynasty into the Second Intermediate period. During this time the Egyptian empire occupied Lower Nubia, and their state ideology vilified Nubians. Yet, at least in death, the C-Group inhabitants of Hierakonpolis proudly displayed their cultural heritage. Beyond discerning the reason(s) for their presence at the site (e.g., mercenaries, leather-workers, entertainers?), the focus of this report is to estimate their biological affinity. Were they akin to other Nubians, Egyptians, or both?
And, was increasing 'Egyptianization' evident in the mortuary ritual accompanied by concomitant genetic influence? To address these queries, up to 36 dental morphological traits in the recovered individuals were compared to those in 26 regional comparative samples. The most influential traits were identified and phenetic affinities were calculated using the mean measure of divergence and other multivariate analyses. Assuming phenetic similarity provides an estimate of genetic relatedness, these affinities suggest the individuals comprising the C-Group sample were, and remained Nubian during their tenure at Hierakonpolis.
-- Irish JD1, Friedman R.
Dental affinities of the C-group inhabitants of Hierakonpolis, Egypt: Nubian, Egyptian, or both?
Homo. 2010 Apr;61(2):81-101. doi: 10.1016/j.jchb.2010.02.001. Epub 2010 Feb 24.
quote:The origins of one of the most powerful sociopolitical entities of the Nile Valley, the Napatan State (850-650BCE), are debated. Some scholars have suggested local development of this influential Nubian State, while others propose foreign involvement. This study uses a bioarchaeological approach to examine the biological affinity of these Ancient Nubians. The focal site of this research, Tombos, is one of few non-central Napatan Period sites that have been excavated and can, therefore, shed light on the broader Napatan populace. Dental non-metric trait frequencies were examined in the Tombos sample as well as in 12 comparative samples to elucidate the biological affinities of these populations. Analyses indicate that Tombos dental non-metric trait frequencies were not significantly different from the majority of Egyptian and Nubian samples examined here. Therefore, we propose that gene flow, encouraged by long-term coexistence and intermarriage in Nubia, created an Egyptian/Nubian transcultural environment. These findings suggest the Napatan population at Tombos included descendants of Egyptians and Nubians. The Napatan Tombos sample was found to significantly differ from the latter Kushite and Meroitic samples; however, these samples are so temporally removed from the Napatan Period, we suspect subsequent episodes of population movement may have contributed to this variation.
--Schrader S1, Buzon M2, Irish J3.
Illuminating the Nubian 'Dark Age': a bioarchaeological analysis of dental non-metric traits during the Napatan Period.
Homo. 2014 Aug;65(4):267-80. doi: 10.1016/j.jchb.2014.05.001. Epub 2014 May 20.
posted
I am trying to understand his position better.
He acknowledges the Badarians were ancestrally representative, but he has been known to push a "Eurasian" style replacement scenario, that is contradicted by the weight of other evidence in the field- such as limb proportions and crania. Perhaps in his lecture he stressed continuity and downplayed his "incoming Caucasoids" notions, which are contradicted by other scholars. A pattern with some of these academics is to play a double game- they say one thing for public consumption, but in the fine detail of their writings they are manipulating models, sampling, reporting and labels to say something else. Keita criticizes Cavalli Sforza et al for the same type of double game- Sforza publicly disavows race, but in his writings, introduces race in new guises. With many of these academics they have to be closely scrutinized. Some of their work may contain more balanced info, but they may bury this in pursuit of some agenda. Some of these people may have no malicious intent but their training makes them automatically reach for Eurocentric approaches.
Keita on Sforza and others double game:
This gene-language study is further compro- mised by poor representation of the members of some language families and the use of the race constructs, which force boundaries onto a seamless biocultural and historical matrix with extensive geographical parame- ters. Cavalli-Sforza and his colleagues (1988) do not ac- curately represent the Afro-Asiatic family because they exclude Chadic, Omotic, and Cushitic speakers, thereby giving the illusion that Ethiopians are an anomaly, being genetically Africans (but mixed) who also speak the lan- guages of Caucasians (Afro-Asiatic!?) (Armstrong 1990). An evolutionary model explains the geographical range of Afro-Asiatic speakers as one overlaying gradients of genetic differentiation, which a racial model breaks into discrete units that cannot be shown to have ever existed.
Another example of ambiguous branching patterns and clusters within inferred phylogenies is seen in the work of Masatoshi Nei and K. Roychoudhury (1993). Their study, which utilized gene-frequency data from samples derived from the traditional racial constructs, revealed poor support from bootstrap tests for a cluster designated Caucasian and consisting of European and Middle Eastern populations. Although this poor support is more reflective of the inadequacy of typological con- structs and racial thinking, the investigators excluded the non-European samples and subsequently obtained results more satisfying to them. The data in effect were tailored to fit into the traditional racial schema. Other examples of the persistence of racial think- ing may easily be identified. The examples cited above illustrate this problem in otherwise interesting work. The issue is not simply one of terminology. The racial approach clearly does not contribute to an under- standing of biohistorical processes, especially in Africa, which cannot be defined by one trait or cluster of traits, on any level: serogenetic, mtDNA, Y chromosome, nu- clear DNA, odontometric, odontomorphological, cra- niometrie, craniomorphological, hair form, or skin color. --The Persistence of Racial Thinking and the Myth of Racial Divergence, S. O. Y. Keita, Rick A. Kittles, American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 99, No. 3 (Sep., 1997), pp. 534-544
----------------------------------------------- ^^Given these games, one can understand Keita's call elsewhere for a balanced arsenal of evidence on several lines: DNA, cranial, skeletal, cultural, artefact. etc etc
In older work, the same pattern of Eurocentric manipulation emerges. Reports from the field exclude or downplay "negroid" samples
"Nutter (1958), using the Penrose statistic, demonstrated that Nagada I and Badari crania, both regarded as Negroid, were almost identical and that these were most similar to the Negroid Nubian series from Kerma studied by Collett (1933). [Collett, not accepting variability, excluded "clear negro" crania found in the Kerma series from her analysis, as did Morant (1925), implying that they were foreign.].. --Keita, S. O. Y, 1995. "A brief review of studies and comments on ancient Egyptian biological relationships,
Another method of Eurocentric manipulation is to mislabel the negro data as "Mediterranean"
"Analyses of Egyptian crania are numerous. Vercoutter (1978) notes that ancient Egyptian crania have frequently all been "lumped (implicitly or explicitly) as Mediterranean, although Negroid remains are recorded in substantial numbers by many workers... --S.O.Y Keita, "Studies of Ancient Crania From Northern Africa
Another snippet of criticism of Irish from Keita:
"Irish and Turner (1990) suggest almost total replacement of native Nubian and Egyptian populations by Caucasoids from the north, based on dental changes. Keita (1993) notes that this finding is inconsistent with the preponderance of most studies in the field, which show no proof of mass replacement, and that dental changes could be due to routine natural selection."
--Keita, Studies and Comments
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
This is the timing of the population replacement Irish had in mind before the al Khiday sample forced him to go back to the drawing board:
quote:If the present Nubian dental patterns are indeed indicative of underlying genetic variation (per Scott et al., 1983; Rightmire, 1999), it is unlikely that the Jebel Sahaba people were closely related to subsequent regional inhabitants. As such, this finding contradicts the idea of genetic continuity (see above) between Late Paleolithic and recent populations (i.e., Meroitic, X-Group, and Christian) (e.g., Greene, 1972; Carlson and Van Gerven, 1977; Small, 1981; Smith and Shegev, 1988; Calcagno, 1989), and instead suggests discontinuity (e.g., Irish and Turner, 1990; Turner and Markowitz, 1990; Irish, 1993, 1997, 1998a,b,d). In accordance with the latter model, it is then implied that replacement or genetic swamping of an existing gene pool by an outside group, or groups, occurred after the Pleistocene (Irish and Turner, 1990; Turner and Markowitz, 1990; Irish, 1998d). Prior sample limitations precluded a secure age estimate for this purported discontinuity, other than to state that it probably occurred “by at least the 18th Dynasty of the New Kingdom” (Irish, 1998d, p. 167). The new results indicate that this date may now be pushed back to at least ca. 5,600 BP, during or prior to the Final Neolithic.
Population Continuity vs. Discontinuity Revisited: Dental Affinities Among Late Paleolithic Through Christian Era Nubians—Irish (2005)
^Note that the Final Neolithic sample he's talking about is older than the Badarian, so his BP date above is in error. It should be >4400BC, not 5.6kya. Also, note that Irish's mid-holocene timing for the widespread dissemination of the ancestors of (pre)dynastic Egyptians and lower Nubians isn't completely grabbed out of thin air, as many scholars note a scarcity of skeletal material along the lower Nubian and Egyptian shores in the time period between the Mesolithic and the Badarians and Tasians.
Anyway, then, in 2012, Irish moved away from this extremely late appearance of the ancestors of (pre)dynastic Egyptians and lower Nubians. In his poster he doesn't exactly say that he retracts some of his earlier conclusions. But as Zaharan says, sometimes they talk in code, so you have to read between the lines to pick that up.
quote:Using the Arizona State University Dental Anthropology System to record traits and multivariate statistics to estimate pairwise affinities, it is evident that al Khiday is closely akin to most Holocene samples. It is widely divergent from Jebel Sahaba. As such, there does appear to be long-term biological continuity in the region after all – though with late Pleistocene Upper- instead of Lower Nubians. While it cannot be proven that the al Khiday people were directly related, they are, minimally, indicative of what such an ancestor would be like – assuming that phenetic affinities are indicators of genetic variation.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Teeth are hardly a decisor but do SW Asian crop eaters have similar teeth? How long were these crops introduced and how far south did they spread wwhen?
What were the foods moving north from Sudan and dental morphology of their eaters?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Irish, like many other bio-anthropologists, might be working with the popular equation of "North Africans" with Mediterranean Eurasians, as contrasted with a "sub-Saharan" south. As I've said before, most people have a binary view of Africa as split into a "Mediterranean" North and a "Negroid" South, with maybe a few "Hamitics" representing a gradient between them. I don't believe our concept of an indigenous Saharan population substructure, distinct from both Eurasian and sub-Saharan ones, has occurred to most anthropologists even if they should know better. They may not be intellectually racialist, but they are still subject to deeply entrenched cultural conditioning.
I did read/ glimps some of Irish his older papers where he clearly bolstered the word caucasoids. But those dated from before or early 2000.
I truly thought that he changed his position in the 2009 paper. "Further analysis of the population history of ancient Egyptians." But as you guys explained, this apparently isn't the case at all.
quote:He acknowledges the Badarians were ancestrally representative, but he has been known to push a "Eurasian" style replacement scenario, that is contradicted by the weight of other evidence in the field- such as limb proportions and crania.
Does this mean he presented the Badarians as "Eurasian types", or the result of "Eurasian types"? And how does his position add up with the following:
quote: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 [...]
Any interpretation of the biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians must be placed in the context of hypothesis informed by the archaeological, linguistic, geographic or other data.
In this context the physical anthropological evidence indicates that the 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"
--Kathryn A. Bard (STEPHEN E. THOMPSON Egyptians, physical anthropology of Physical anthropology)
quote:"As a result of their facial prognathism, the Badarian sample has been described as forming a morphological cluster with Nubian, Tigrean, and other southern (or "Negroid") groups (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)
quote:Originally posted by Nodnarb: I think Irish, like many other bio-anthropologists, might be working with the popular equation of "North Africans" with Mediterranean Eurasians, as contrasted with a "sub-Saharan" south. As I've said before, most people have a binary view of Africa as split into a "Mediterranean" North and a "Negroid" South, with maybe a few "Hamitics" representing a gradient between them. I don't believe our concept of an indigenous Saharan population substructure, distinct from both Eurasian and sub-Saharan ones, has occurred to most anthropologists even if they should know better. They may not be intellectually racialist, but they are still subject to deeply entrenched cultural conditioning.
The stereotype of the true "negro" has been the main problem from the get-go.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ish says The stereotype of the true "negro" has been the main problem from the get-go.
Without the stereotype of the "true negro" numerous edifices, some of which people have built careers on, come crashing down. Some of it is not malice but just the mentality of decades of ingrained Eurocentric thinking- the binary view- on one side perfect white people- the supposed "norm" and then there's the Other" over yonda. Speaking of stereotypical "true" types..
I did read/ glimps some of Irish his older papers where he clearly bolstered the word caucasoids. But those dated from before or early 2000. I truly thought that he changed his position in the 2009 paper. "Further analysis of the population history of ancient Egyptians." But as you guys explained, this apparently isn't the case at all.
Haven't seen his Further analysis" paper in full but I would not be surprised if he is just playing a "public consumption" game but his detailed studies say something else. Did he really change?
Nodarb says They may not be intellectually racialist, but they are still subject to deeply entrenched cultural conditioning.
Agreed, and allowance has to be made for that, and indeed some of these folks have come around somewhat in recent years. But there is also an agenda at work too in the academy, which Irish and his followers demonstrate. Outside of that are the racialists and racists of "hereditarian" or "HBD" ilk. The edifice of their deceptive propaganda is built on a version of the "true negro"- the "Other" that can be disparaged, distorted and invidiously contrasted against would be "role models" of perfection. Take away the true negro and the corrupt edifice collapses in several areas. It is a central pillar, they cannot let it go.
That;s why it will take not only academics, but lay folk outside to both defend against and attack the edifice continuously. The exact group or venue - doesn't matter- each can work their side of the street. The important thing is a broad "operational" unity or front that can do combat work, as well as develop the knowledge for its own sake. Both tracks can work together concurrently.
Good roundup. Sundiata says Irish admitted he wasted everyone's time for 30 years but doesn't really give details. Is he talking abut the 2009 paper? What's the "smoking gun as you see it?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Sundiata's comments are in response to the complete change in tune between that Irish 2012 APAA abstract Evergreen posted in that same thread and Irish's earlier conclusions about a lack of in-situ continuity for Nubians. I don't know what Sundiata's 30 years are based on, but Irish and Turner have been drawing these premature conclusions for at least since the early 90s, feeding people like Mathilda and others who've heavily cited his work to argue against an African involvement in the region.
The al Khiday sample itself is the smoking gun. Given its age (likely Upper Palaeolithic), the main ancestors of (pre)dynastic Egyptians and lower Nubians have always been there alongside the better known Jebel Sahabans and Wadi Halfa type populations who were probably ancestral to modern day southern Sudanese (e.g. Dinka and Shilluk). There was no population replacement in the sense that Irish envisioned all this time:
As such, there does appear to be long-term biological continuity in the region after all . . . . —Joel Irish 2012
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nodnarb: I think Irish, like many other bio-anthropologists, might be working with the popular equation of "North Africans" with Mediterranean Eurasians, as contrasted with a "sub-Saharan" south. As I've said before, most people have a binary view of Africa as split into a "Mediterranean" North and a "Negroid" South, with maybe a few "Hamitics" representing a gradient between them. I don't believe our concept of an indigenous Saharan population substructure, distinct from both Eurasian and sub-Saharan ones, has occurred to most anthropologists even if they should know better. They may not be intellectually racialist, but they are still subject to deeply entrenched cultural conditioning.
"I don't believe our concept of an indigenous Saharan population substructure, distinct from both Eurasian and sub-Saharan ones"
I believe this is what Swenet has been getting at when attacking Doug M's insistence to use black in a racial sense. I just still don't get how people can apply black as a racial category to Sub-Saharans and not to dark skinned Saharan populations(except the Nubians apparently). And even if distinct, aren't the Saharan populations and Sub-Saharan populations still tied by the Green Sahara period and interimittent contact thereafter? You guys have been at this a lot longer than I have so forgive any ignorance on my part.
Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
^I'm going to leave that issue you raised to Nodnarb since you directed it to him. Just a minor observation to be fair to Doug M and clarify:
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: I believe this is what Swenet has been getting at when attacking Doug M's insistence to use black in a racial sense.
^I don't know if Doug is the one that needs reminding of the existence of different types of ancestry in Africa on a fundamental level (so far he keeps repeating it has nothing to do with it so I have no evidence that Doug is in denial about that in and of itself).
The main reason why the topic of Saharan ancestry comes up in my discussion with Doug is because he tries to act like European scholars were completely inventing their racial schemes. It wasn't all made up and that's why I've been confronting Doug with Saharan ancestry and its affinities. I could just as easily have cited early Asian and Pacific populations who have been appropriated by Eurocentric academics (e.g. Kennewick Man), but I chose the African comparison to keep it more on-topic. When you look at these skeletal remains, you'll see that there is broad overlap with the ancestors of Europeans. People can try to act like the tendency of these Eurocentric academics to see 'Caucasian' affinities everywhere was 100% deliberate racism and pseudoscience, but modern statistical analyses produce similar results at times (i.e. overlap between the ancestors of Europeans and generalized populations elsewhere): http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.21425/abstractPosts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: I just still don't get how people can apply black as a racial category to Sub-Saharans and not to dark skinned Saharan populations(except the Nubians apparently). And even if distinct, aren't the Saharan populations and Sub-Saharan populations still tied by the Green Sahara period and interimittent contact thereafter? You guys have been at this a lot longer than I have so forgive any ignorance on my part.
In the beginning as you know, "black" appears to have started out as a pigmentation-based reference. That's why dark brown populations in, say, India could be called "black" but not lighter-skinned Khoisan ones in southernmost Africa. As to why the terminology evolved to refer strictly to West/Central Africans and their offshoots in the Diaspora, I am not sure. My guess is that, since white supremacist racialism developed in the context of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, somewhere along the line "Black" became associated with slaves who were predominantly from West and Central Africa.
I do think early "scientific" racialists had an investment in dissociating AE (and their relatives in northeastern Africa by proxy) from the ancestry of Afro-Diasporan slaves as part of their white supremacist agenda. They might have conceded AE weren't pale like Europeans, but they still must have been looking for any characteristics that would differentiate them from stereotyped "real Negroes". As it happens, they got lucky with the Saharans already having a distinct substructure. On the other hand, some of them also would have classified Melanesians and Aboriginal Australians as "Negroids", and I have seen modern-day white supremacists on the Internet confuse them with Africans on Internet forums like VNN.
That isn't to say nobody would have noticed physical differences across African populations before then. All I'm saying is that the desire to emphasize these differences in order to "wash" AE from the "taint" of "Black" or "sub-Saharan African" influence has been a real thing.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
Modern DNA studies show ancient African movement to, and presence in ancient Iberia (Spain) going back to the Mesolithic, long before any Roman Empire, or colonial slave trade era.
Over the sands and far away: Interpreting an Iberian mitochondrial lineage with ancient Western African origins- QUOTE.
OBJECTIVES: There is an ongoing effort to characterize the genetic links between Africa and Europe, mostly using lineages and haplotypes that are specific to one continent but had an ancient origin in the other. Mitochondrial DNA has been proven to be a very useful tool for this purpose since a high number of putatively European-specific variants of the African L* lineages have been defined over the years. Due to their geographic locations, Spain and Portugal seem to be ideal places for searching for these lineages.
METHODS: Five members of a minor branch of haplogroup L3f were found in recent DNA samplings in the region of Asturias (Northern Spain), which is known for its historical isolation. The frequency of L3f in this population (˜1%) is unexpectedly high in comparison with other related lineages in Europe. Complete mitochondrial DNA sequencing of these L3f lineages, as well phylogenetic and phylogeographic comparative analyses have been performed.
RESULTS: The L3f variant found in Asturias seems to constitute an Iberian-specific haplogroup, distantly related to lineages in Northern Africa and with a deep ancestry in Western Africa. Coalescent algorithms estimate the minimum arrival time as 8,000 years ago, and a possible route through the Gibraltar Strait.
CONCLUSIONS: Results are concordant with a previously proposed Neolithic connection between Southern Europe and Western Africa, which might be key to the proper understanding of the ancient links between these two continents.
-- Pardiñas et. al. 2014. Over the sands and far away: Interpreting an Iberian mitochondrial lineage with ancient Western African origins. Am J Hum Biol. 2014 Aug 11
Move Iberian studies..
[Eng] The origins of European populations have been addressed from various disciplines, highlighting the contribution of population genetics studies. Shuffle two moments in prehistory in which it has been possible to model the gene pool of European populations: the spread of Neolithic and Upper Paleolithic expansions. The ability to retrieve genetic information from past populations provides a unique opportunity to spot check the hypotheses from other disciplines. We studied 197 dental and bone samples of 115 individuals from 17 archaeological sites and Sumerian Neolithic Near East, Nubia Meroitic era and paleolithic, neolithic and post-Neolithic in the Iberian Peninsula. We obtained complete mitochondrial DNA sequences of 244 bp from 35 different individuals were compared with sequences from the same region of current individuals 38 European populations, African and Middle East. In phylogenetic reconstructions based on the distance of Reynolds ancient samples groups are grouped together, away from the extant populations. However, phylogenetic reconstructions made from haplotypes old and new samples illustrates that, although most ancient mitochondrial variants are not present in current populations sampled can relate to more or less closely with them. The composition of haplotypes and haplogroups of ancient samples from Middle East and the Iberian Peninsula differs markedly from that found in the current populations of these geographic regions. In the old sample of middle eastern absence of mitochondrial haplogroups J, U3, W and X, related to the expansion of the Neolithic into Europe. This may be due either to the ancient samples analyzed is not representative-chronologically or geographically-populations that expanded Middle East during the Neolithic well that these variants were not introduced to Europe during the Neolithic. In the old sample of the [u]Iberian Peninsula highlights the presence of a 50% sub-Saharan lines[/u]. These lines may have been introduced during the Solutrean, the Mesolithic or Neolithic. This paper also examined several technical aspects of obtaining authentic ancient DNA and the influence of several variables on the preservation of genetic material." --Fernandez et al. 2005. Mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms in ancient populations of the Mediterranean basin
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Before the pyramids- the origin of Egyptian civilization. Univ of Chicago 2011-Emily Teeter ed -------------------------------------------------------------
The phrase “ancient Egypt” almost automatically evokes the Sphinx, the pyramids, and the golden sar -cophagus of Tutankhamun. However, these iconic images represent Egypt when it was already a fully formed, powerful, and highly centralized state in the third and second millennia bc — the Old, Middle, and New Kingdoms. We need to remind ourselves that Egyptian civilization was not a static, timeless culture, and it did not spring into being ex nihilo.
For Egyptologists and archaeologists, much of the fascinating complexity of Egypt derives from precisely the fact that it was a rich, vibrant, living culture that was constantly evolving, while at the same time grounding itself in a set of deeply rooted core elements and symbols that make it unique among the civilizations of the ancient world. How did the Egyptian state begin? This is the fundamental question addressed by the Oriental Institute’s special exhibit Before the Pyramids: The Origins of Egyptian Civilization. It is especially challenging for us to understand and reconstruct the Predynastic origins of Egypt because so many of the key developments took place before the invention of writing, about 3300 bc.
Without texts, researchers are forced to rely heavily on purely archaeological evidence and the interpretation of the relatively small number of artistic depictions of key events and processes. Our exhibit presents some of the objects that are uniquely important pieces in this wordless puzzle. Drawing on both the most current research and on excavations done more than a century ago, Before the Pyramids allows us to examine the Egyptian state at the historical moment of its birth. As volume editor and exhibit curator Emily Teeter notes, Egypt existed as a unified kingdom under pharaonic rule for more than 500 years before the construction of the pyramids in the Old Kingdom. The 120 objects in our exhibit eloquently tell the story of the emergence of Egyptian civilization from its earliest beginnings about 4000 bc down to 2600 bc.
Most derive from the pioneering excavations in the late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century excavations at Hierakonpolis, Abydos, and Naqada — the most important sites for understanding the late Predynastic period. Before the Pyramids highlights the many threads that combined to form the tapestry of an ancient state society or civilization — kingship or centralized political power, social stratification, elite groups, economic specialization, warfare, writing, and trade, to name just a few. The beautifully crafted stone and ceramic vessels show the extraordinary skill and aesthetics of the master artisans in the late Predynastic and Early Dynastic periods. The presence of imported objects shows us the far-flung trading connections of the earliest Egyptian state. We are especially fortunate to have as centerpieces of our exhibit two priceless loan objects from the Ashmolean Museum of Oxford University — the Battlefield Palette and a unique limestone statue of King Khasekhem. These extraordinary objects have never before been on display in the United States. This catalog is a remarkable volume that pulls together the most recent research by the world’s leading scholars on Predynastic Egypt. It outlines the fascinating story of Sir Flinders Petrie’s initial discovery of the Predynastic period and explains the ways that art, political organization, craft production, burial practices, international trade, and the invention of writing served as key elements that defined the emerging Egyptian state in the fourth and early third millennia bc.
By bringing together the actual artifacts and the theoretical frameworks used to interpret them, the chapters presented here will have lasting value for both the museum visitor and the professional researcher. Before the Pyramids does a wonderful job highlighting the ways that earliest Egypt differed from, and gave rise to, the later, better known magnificence of the Old Kingdom. At the same time we can see unmistakable continuities in the symbolism of kingship and in the core values that flourished for millennia at the heart of Egyptian civilization. By showing us the origins of the Egyptian state, this exhibit only enhances our sense of wonder at the later achievements of this civilization when it reached its zenith.
posted
In some eras, Europeans practiced cannibalism, by consuming the dead flesh of Egyptian mummies.
-------------------- 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 |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic