posted
^^^ For the record, I disagree with what Akachi says about the Bantu migration.
I don't believe Bantu, or most Africans for that matter, are direct descendant of Ancient Egyptians (only low level of admixtures is possible). I believe that Ancient Egyptians as well as other Africans like West Africans, Bantu share common ancestors before the foundation of Ancient Egypt (common ancestors after the OOA migrations of non-African of course).
Modern Egyptians are the products of admixtures of indigenous Africans with various groups of people like Assyrians, Macedonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, etc. Those admixture, followed by demographic expansion, changed the ethnic and genetic affiliation of modern Egyptians compared to ancient Egyptian making them bad representative of the ancient population.
Trying to separate Ancient Egyptians from most Africans? Then trying to say they were closer to Eurasian than most Africans (like most Sub-Saharan Africans: West Africans, Great Lakes Africans, Southern Africans, etc)?
Isn't it what you both going for?
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even if that was my intention, lying ass fraud, what does that have to do with the matter at hand and the fact that your fairytales are being nuked, as we speak?
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Where are your sources, lying fraud? Mukherjee 1955 is one of the most revolutionary and influential anthro-articles of his day, not just to bio-anthropologist that deal with African remains, but to bio-anthropologists in general. He is widely cited to this day, and his results (i.e. AE clustering with populations in or adjacent to the Eastern Sahara as opposed to West/Central Africa) have been reproduced across the board:
Prove his results wrong, troll. Where are your sources?
And what does this do to your fairytale that PN2 carriers are one monolithic family just by virtue of being a member?
quote:Haplogroup E is now defined by 18 mutations (SRY4064, M96, P29, P150, P152, P154, P155, P156, P162, P168, P169, P170, P171, P172, P173, P174, P175, and P176) (Supplemental Fig. 5). There are a total of 83 polymorphic sites that mark lineages within this clade, compared with a total of 30 internal mutations in 2002. This makes haplogroup E by far the most mutationally diverse of all major Y chromosome clades.
--Karafet et al 2008
Metric craniofacial D2 values (data taken from Mukherjee 1955):
Naqada to Tigrean-----------0.99 Naqada to Ibo---------------2.87 Naqada to Ashanti-----------2.33 Naqada to Fernand Faz------4.68 Naqada to Cameroons-------5.07 Naqada to Tetela-------------5.79
Badari to Tigrean-----------2.02 Badari to Ibo---------------3.93 Badari to Ashanti-----------3.55 Badari to Fernand Faz-------5.10 Badari to Cameroons--------7.14 Badari to Tetela--------------7.42
Also, don't forget to address the logical consequence of your retarded claim that all PN2 carriers are closely related. Does this mean that your dumbass also thinks that descendants of the MUCH younger K-M526 clade all over Eurasia are one big happy family? Is your dumbass saying that PN2 Africans are closer to each other than the younger K-M526 population?
posted
Keep on running away from addressing these damning citations and fabricating imaginary victories like a sick psycho. It only proves to everyone how much of a deceptive, lying troll you are.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Where are your sources, lying fraud? Mukherjee 1955 is one of the most revolutionary and influential anthro-articles of his day, not just to bio-anthropologist that deal with African remains, but to bio-anthropologists in general. He is widely cited to this day, and his results (i.e. AE clustering with populations in or adjacent to the Eastern Sahara as opposed to West/Central Africa) have been reproduced across the board:
Prove his results wrong, troll. Where are your sources?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Even if that was my intention,
Is it your intention or what? Why try to evade the question if it's not your intention?
Since it's obviously your intention, as your evasive answer shows, as well as Beyoku, Djehuti and the rest of your idiots named above , I can say that genetic analysis of Ancient Egyptian mummies proved your stupid racist clown ass wrong.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keep on running away from addressing these damning citations and fabricating imaginary victories like a sick psycho. It only proves to everyone how much of a deceptive, lying troll you are.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Where are your sources, lying fraud? Mukherjee 1955 is one of the most revolutionary and influential anthro-articles of his day, not just to bio-anthropologist that deal with African remains, but to bio-anthropologists in general. He is widely cited to this day, and his results (i.e. AE clustering with populations in or adjacent to the Eastern Sahara as opposed to West/Central Africa) have been reproduced across the board:
Prove his results wrong, troll. Where are your sources?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
Metric craniofacial D2 values (data taken from Mukherjee 1955):
Naqada to Tigrean-----------0.99 Naqada to Ibo---------------2.87 Naqada to Ashanti-----------2.33 Naqada to Fernand Faz------4.68 Naqada to Cameroons-------5.07 Naqada to Tetela-------------5.79
Badari to Tigrean-----------2.02 Badari to Ibo---------------3.93 Badari to Ashanti-----------3.55 Badari to Fernand Faz-------5.10 Badari to Cameroons--------7.14 Badari to Tetela--------------7.42
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Even if that was my intention, lying ass fraud, what does that have to do with the matter at hand and the fact that your fairytales are being nuked, as we speak?
You're the one, trying to avoid the results of Ancient Egyptians mummies aDNA like Ramses III being determined to be E1b1a.
What this and other similar results (Great Lakes, Southern, etc) tell me, is that Ancient Egyptians were clearly not Eurasians, they were Africans.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate There's the environment, change of diets, change of lifestyle (pastoralism to agriculture for example), random mating, which produced change in the physiology and genetic drift in any populations in Africa and the world in the last 6000 years.
Post literary evidence that any of these factors magically shift the phenotype of a population away from the set of populations it has the closest affinities with, and towards another set with populations they're not genetically the closest to. What are the mechanisms behind the factors you mention that supposedly impact phenotypes this drastically within recent time frames? Lay them out right here, right now, or you're lying as usual.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate There's the environment, change of diets, change of lifestyle (pastoralism to agriculture for example), random mating, which produced change in the physiology and genetic drift in any populations in Africa and the world in the last 6000 years.
Post literary evidence that any of these factors magically shift the phenotype of a population away from the set of populations it has the closest affinities with, and towards another set with populations they're not genetically the closest to. What are the mechanisms behind the factors you mention? Lay them out right here, right now, or you're lying.
posted
No more bullshitting. Lay it out RIGHT NOW. Lying troll. Post literary evidence that any of these factors magically shift the phenotype of a population away from the set of populations it has the closest affinities with, and towards another set of populations they're not genetically the closest to. What are the mechanisms behind the factors you mention and how exactly do they shape cranio-facial phenotypes? How would the proto-Egyptians have morphed magically from one side of the African spectrum to the other side of the African spectrum in a matter of millennia?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
To further contextualize the Northward expansion of the Niger-Congo speaking, sickle cell carrying, so called "true negroid" populations from the Sudan into Egypt and points further it has to be known that the distinction between Niger-Congo so called "Afro-Asiatic" speakers is false according to this legendary African scholar.
Theophile Obenga
1:45 into his 2013 interview on African history, he states that "Afro-Asiatic" is a "FAKE" language family! He states that Western scholars made it up based on nothing (as they don't even speak African languages their damn selves).
That being said this passage below should make a whole lot of sense now:
"The Ancient Egyptian language has always been considered to be a branch of the African-Asiatic family of languages called Afro-Asiatic which spans Africa and Western Asia.
Without going too deeply into the classification of the Afro-Asiatic language, according to Greenberg, the individual branches of the Afro-Asiatic family of languages include the following:
(1) Semitic, the largest branch of the Afro-Asiatic language which is spoken since ancient times in most of Western Asia, Mesopotamia, Palestine, Syria, Arabia and Africa.
The Semitic language has its origins in Africa.
(2) Berber, a group of related languages currently spoken by approximately five million speakers in Northern Africa from the Atlantic coast to the oasis of Siwa in Egypt and from the Mediterranean Sea to Mali and Niger.
(3) Cushitic, a family of languages spoken by approximately fifteen million people in Eastern Africa from the Egyptian border in North East Sudan to Ethiopia, Djibouti, Somalia, Kenya and Northern Tanzania.
Martin Bernal in his book, Black Athena, sees the spread of the Afro-Asiatic language as the expansion of a culture which was long established in the East African Rift Valley at the end of the last ice age in the 10th and 9th millennia BC. During the last ice ages water was locked up in the polar icecaps and rainfall was considerably less than it is today. The Sahara and Arabian Deserts were even larger. During the increase of heat and rainfall in the centuries that followed, much of these regions became savannah, into which neighbouring peoples flocked.
The most successful of these were speakers of Proto-Afro-Asiatic language from the African rift valley. Going through the savannah, the Chadic speakers reached Lake Chad while the Berbers, the Maghreb and the Proto-Egyptians arrived in Upper Egypt.However Martin Bernal did not consider speakers of Proto-Bantu in his analysis. It is the author’s contention, from the linguistic contents, that speakers of Proto-Bantu played an active part at the time of the expansion of Proto-Afro-Asiatic speakers in the Rift Valley of East Africa. These Proto-Bantu speakers going through the savannah formed part of the migration to Egypt. The Bantu languages together with other indigenous languages fused together and became embedded to form the Proto-Egyptian language. It is for this reason that the Ancient Egyptian language contains a substantial amount of Proto-Bantu or Bantu roots.
However Guthrie speculated that before the Proto-Bantu expansion from Zaire, there had been several pre-Bantu stages, at which time the Bantu ancestors lived far to the north around Lake Chad. One group from this area made its way to Zaire and became the Proto-Bantu.The Proto-Bantu speakers and Proto-Afro-Asiatic speakers lived along side each other. They traded together, shared and exchanged common vocabularies of words."
With that said wouldn't you view this migration a lot differently knowing this African perspective of linguistic breakdowns?
Remember the Bantu homeland and expansion in my previous post. They were the same thing:
Now while the letter given behind a designated haplogroup might have changed over time, what is forever an indisputable fact of our presence in a region is our BLOOD DISEASE known as sickle cell, which in unique only to US! Notice how our blood disease matches this so-called "Afro-Asiatic" migration trail to a tee.
Even the much later migrations involving the Israelites leaving Israel (Lemba people of South Africa and Amharic speaking Ethiopians for example) are confirmed via the sickle cell path going down the Arabian peninsula:
Western scholars as shown in the past with the Hamitic Hypothesis have no problem giving credit to Horn Africans or anyone who isn't of our particular "true negroid" African group. This migration which started in Northeast Africa of the E baring populations took place around 12,000 years ago. How do we know? Because this true Negroid individual represented on the Sphinx dates back to 12,000 BC (not the 4th Dynasty as white scholars who must shorten history to make themselves relevant have spouted from decades).
"extreme erosion on the body of the Sphinx could not be the result of wind and sand, as has been universally assumed, but rather was the result of water. Geologists agree that in the distant past Egypt was subjected to severe flooding. This period coincides with the melting of the ice from the last Ice Age (13,000-10,000 BC) . Wind erosion cannot take place when the body of the Sphinx is covered by sand, and it can be proved that the Sphinx has been in this condition for nearly all of the last five thousand years - since the alleged time of its 4th Dynasty construction. Furthermore, if wind-blown sand had indeed caused the deep erosion of the Sphinx, we would expect to find evidence of such erosion on other Egyptian monuments built of similar materials and exposed to the wind for a similar length of time. Yet the fact of the matter is, that even on structures that have had more exposure to the wind-blown sand, there are minimal effects of erosion, the sand having done little more than scour clean the surface of the dressed stones. Quite simply, this means the Sphinx was carved before Egypt was inundated with the waters of the great Ice Age floods, and that those waters caused the unique erosion patterns on the Sphinx."
This explains why the Sphinx is even a Lion!
The geological findings discussed above indicate that the Sphinx seems to have been sculpted sometime before 10,000 BC, and this period coincides with the Age of Leo the Lion, which lasted from 10,970 to 8810 BC. http://sacredsites.com/africa/egypt/sphinx.html
Makes sense right?! Two lines of evidence for the Sphinx's true age.
From Egypt a migration of these so-called "true negroid" Africans took place which brought them into the Middle East/the Fertile Cresent where agriculture was developed by the Natufians. The Natufians were also found to have a "clear Niger-Congo link" in Brace 2006 and confirmed by Ricaut 2008.
So clearly the first farmers on Earth (US) were just our population expanding from Africa and into the Middle East. These were our distinct group of black people (and Horners), but some people on this board will have you believe that it is blasphemous ("Afrocentric") to call black people black once they have expanded out of the African continent and spread their African based culture and knowledge. This is the reality of the migrations that Western scholars and those brainwashed by them fail to realize about all of these "genetic" studies. The common sense factor!
The pictures tell it all..common sense.
Posts: 348 | From: Atlanta | Registered: Jan 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: @Zarahan
^^I'm sorry Zarahan, but if you thought beyoku was a biologist it's because you're a poor judge of character and don't have enough genetic knowledge to see what is evident. So I can't lean on you to form an informed opinion about those clowns.
As for past posts in this forum, they can easily be accessible, so while I was not here, I can see what was going on to a large degree.
People knowing about E-P2, the common grandfather of both East and West Africans after the OOA migrations of non-African is something, but taking it into account into our analysis is something else. In the other thread, Sweety, my favorite racist clown, is telling us this hamitic race, the Horn Africans are closer to Eurasians than West Africans even before any back migration, which is false. Hence why knowing something is not enough, you must take it into account into every analysis. As East and West Africans share a common grandfather (and grandmothers) ***after*** the OOA migrations/future Eurasian migrants. Mentioning it, and forgetting it and not taking it into account is only lip service and obscure the truth.
The same thing in this thread. Djehuti, Sweety and the other clowns are trying to reverse the order of the DNA Tribes results (Instead of Great Lakes, Southern,etc they want to put Horn first for some reason) and are also trying to twist the E1b1a results in some way to means not like West Africans.
This is basic hamitic race crap of trying to separate West from East/Horn Africans and trying to say Horn Africans are closer to Eurasians than other Africans (before any recent admixture).
Not seeing it is not only being gullible, on your part, but very stupid.
So I will continue to call a spade a spade and you can continue to do whatever you do usually.
quote: We can also see that the oldest lineages are the ones shown in orange, and they are all specific to Africa, so oldest lineages are in Africa. The non-Africans have a subset of the African genetic diversity and tend to have much more recent lineages.
Bones, Stones, and Genes: The Origin of Modern Humans Lecture 2- Genetics of Human Origins and Adaptation Sarah A. Tishkoff, Ph.D.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: So what's next Beyoku and Swenet?
Trying to separate Ancient Egyptians from most Africans? Then trying to say they were closer to Eurasian than most Africans (like most Sub-Saharan Africans: West Africans, Great Lakes Africans, Southern Africans, etc)?
Please tell me I'm wrong.
None of these posters, including myself ever stated this. The one who does is your beloved lioness.
The posters you accuse of doing so, have always stated the ancient Egypt is rooted in Africa, with ancient Africans.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: What about those ones (very recent btw), stupid racist clown:
Swenet is showing cranial measurements, you are showing postcranial measurements. Do you know the differences between these, metrical data?
Not that it makes a differences to who the ancient Egyptians were btw.
quote: ABSTRACT The Lower Nubian Epipaleolithic site of Jebel Sahaba (Sudan) was discovered in 1962. From 1962 to 1966, a total of 58 intentionally buried skeletons were uncovered at the site.
Diagnostic microliths indicative of the Qadan industry as well as the site's geology suggest an age of 14–12 ka for these burials. In this study, the body proportions of the Jebel Sahaba sample are compared with those of a large (max N = 731) sample of recent human skeletons from Europe, Africa and circumpolar North America, as well as to terminal Pleistocene ‘Iberomaurusian’ skeletons from the Algerian sites of Afalou-Bou-Rhummel and the later Capsian-associated Ain Dokhara specimen, as well as Natufian skeletons from the southern Levantine site of El Wad.
Bivariate analyses distinguish Jebel Sahaba from European and circumpolar samples, butdo not tend to segregate them from recent North or sub-Saharan African samples
Multivariate analyses (principal components analysis, principal coordinates analysis with minimum spanning tree and neighbour-joining cluster analyses) indicate that the body shape of the Jebel Sahaba humans is most similar to that of recent sub-Saharan Africans and different from that of either the Levantine Natufians or the northwest African ‘Iberomaurusian’ samples.
Importantly, these results corroborate those of both Irish and Franciscus, who, using dental, oral and nasal morphology, found that Jebel Sahaba was most similar to recent sub-Saharan Africans and morphologically distinct from their penecontemporaries in other parts of North Africa or the groups that succeed them in Nubia.
posted
Kushite priest wearing garment with leopard's head and tassels, subsequently adapted for a king Period: Late Period, Kushite Dynasty: Dynasty 25
Seti I and the goddess Hathor (19th Dynasty: 1200s BC) painted relief
Rameses II , relief, Brooklyn Museum
Amenhotep III
Statue of Amenemhet III, 12th Dynasty, Luxor Museum, Egypt
King Khafre , 4th dynasty, Egyptian Museum, Cairo
statue of Imhotep, Louvre Museum Posts: 42937 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Even if that was my intention,
Is it your intention or what? Why try to evade the question if it's not your intention?
Since it's obviously your intention, as your evasive answer shows, as well as Beyoku, Djehuti and the rest of your idiots named above , I can say that genetic analysis of Ancient Egyptian mummies proved your stupid racist clown ass wrong.
Stop calling my name. Your shiit is weak and this is boring.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
Interstingly the Natufians (El Wad site) are clustering with Europeans
Yes, that's interesting. Natufians were secondary foragers and, perhaps, the earliest farmers.
So, how long do you think Natufians have lived in the region of the Levant, and what do you think the climate was like when they started to inhabited that region? Before late Natufians migrated into Southern/ Central Europe?
quote: The surprise is that the Neolithic peoples of Europe and their Bronze Age successors are not closely related to the modern inhabitants, although the prehistoric/modern ties are somewhat more apparent in southern Europe. It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa...
--C Brace (2005)
quote: Examination of African barbed bone points recovered from Holocene sites provides a context to interpret three Late Pleistocene occurrences from Katanda and Ishango, Zaire, and White Paintings Shelter, Botswana. In sites dated to ca. 10,000 BP and younger, such artifacts are found widely distributed across the Sahara Desert, the Sahel, the Nile, and the East African Lakes. They are present in both ceramic and aceramic contexts, sometimes associated with domesticates. The almost-universal presence of fish remains indicates a subsistence adaptation which incorporates a riverine/lacustrine component. Typologically these points exhibit sufficient similarity in form and method of manufacture to be subsumed within a single African tradition. They are absent at Fayum, where a distinct Natufian form occurs. Specimens dating to ca. 20,000 BP at Ishango, possibly a similar age at White Paintings Shelter, and up to 90,000 BP at Katanda clearly fall within this same African tradition and thus indicate a very long-term continuity which crosses traditionally conceived sub-Saharan cultural boundaries.
--John E. Yellen
Barbed Bone Points: Tradition and Continuity in Saharan and Sub-Saharan Africa
The African Archaeological Review Vol. 15, No. 3 (Sep., 1998), pp. 173-198
quote:
Barbed bone points, typical of those from the early Holocene settlement of “Early Khartoum”, have been found at three sites along the White Nile, south of Khartoum. The form of the fragments and the stratigraphy of the sites throw light on the environment and technology of the early settlements along this part of the Nile.
--D. ADAMSON*, J. D. CLARK† & M. A. J. WILLIAMS‡
Barbed bone points from Central Sudan and the age of the “Early Khartoum” tradition
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Even if that was my intention,
Is it your intention or what? Why try to evade the question if it's not your intention?
Since it's obviously your intention, as your evasive answer shows, as well as Beyoku, Djehuti and the rest of your idiots named above , I can say that genetic analysis of Ancient Egyptian mummies proved your stupid racist clown ass wrong.
Stop calling my name. Your shiit is weak and this is boring.
I'll take that as a yes. As for calling you names that's ridiculous since you insulted me many times on this forum already. Weak red herring to avoid answering the question directly. The problem for you is everybody reading this forum can see it. But don't worry you don't have to explain yourself, your posts and evasive manoeuvrings like our dear Sweety tells it all.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor: Swenet is showing cranial measurements, you are showing postcranial measurements.
Indeed. I often deliberately let his phuckups slide so as to bar him from replying selectively to the points I'm making. Truth of the matter is that Holiday distinguishes two bodyplans in Africa. One in North Africa which includes the ancient Egyptian, Kerma and Pygmy samples, and one in Sub Saharan Africa. This just goes to show you what a degenerate he is. He has no idea what he is talking about, whatsoever. He's fabricating everything and presenting it as fact. Moreover, in Raxter's thesis the modern Sudanese and Ethiopian samples plot closer to the ancient Egypto-Nubian samples in terms of bodyplan than her "tropical African" dataset, so he's still debunked either way.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Thanks for boosting my OBENGA vs Greenberg chart.
quote:Originally posted by Akachi:
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:Akachi are you that guy on ESR who doesn't believe Bantu are Niger-Congo speakers (from the Benue-Congo branch)? LOL
posted
Christopher Ehret makes the claim that Niger-Congo speakers (M2 lineage carriers) make their migration into West Africa around 12,000 BC which is ironically the same time that the so called "Afro-Asiatic" speakers migrated Northward into Egypt.
"The initial warming of climate in the Bølling-Allerød interstadial, 12,700-10,900 BCE, brought increased rainfall and warmer conditions in many African regions. Three sets of peoples, speaking languages of the three language families that predominate across the continent today, probably began their early expansions in this period. Nilo-Saharan peoples spread out in the areas around and east of the middle Nile River in what is today the country of Sudan. Peoples of a second family, Niger-Kordofanian (EDIT: to which Niger-Congo and Bantu are offshoots) , spread across an emerging east-west belt of savanna vegetation from the eastern Sudan to the western Atlantic coast of Africa. In the same era, communities speaking languages of the Erythraic branch of the Afrasian (Afroasiatic) family expanded beyond their origin areas in the Horn of Africa, northward to modern-day Egypt. - Excerpt from : Africa in History by Christopher Ehret"
There is no supporting evidence offered for a East-West migration of M2 lineage carrying, Niger-Congo speakers from the Sudan into tropical West Africa during this 12,000 BC period. The Niger-Congo speakers that were in Saharan "West Africa" (Mauritania) were the Mande speakers who established Dar Tichitt. The evidence (ancient DNA, cranial studies, the age of the "negroid" Sphinx) supports this northward migration of the "true negroid" Niger-Congo speakers along with those Horners around 12,000 BC. Here is more cranial evidence of our ancient presence in the Sudan (the population source for ancient Egypt):
"In contrast, Irish and Turner (1990) and Irish (2000, 2005) noted that Pleistocene Nubians (in particular those of Jebel Sahaba skeletons) were as a group quite different from recent Nubians for dental discreet traits yet shared great phenetic affinity with recent West African populations. " -- T.W. Holiday 2013 ("Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample")
Confirmation that those people in the Sudan today are not the same group of Africans (primarily admixed Horners descendants and Nilotes) that inhabited ancient Nubia.It then goes on to state that the ancient Nubians were also identical to those "true negroid" individuals of West Africa. The artwork from ancient Nubia (though at a later date) confirms that this was our group of Africans who were the dominant group of Africans along the Nubia/Egypt.
Igbos/Nigerians (found to be virtually identical to Pleistocene/ancient Nubians)
Modern Sudanese inhabitants (found to be distinct from ancient Nubians)
It was from the Sudan that our group of African expanded northward into ancient Egypt:
Posts: 348 | From: Atlanta | Registered: Jan 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm posting this solely so people who are reading this can make up their mind on their own and won't have to take my or some fanatic afroloon quacks' word for it. We can just let the data speak for itself and keep it moving. Here it goes:
Metric craniofacial D2 values (data taken from Mukherjee 1955), with proto-Egyptians compared to a native Red Sea Coast population vs groups from West/Central Africa:
Naqada to Nubian D-----------(0.48) Naqada to Kerma-------------(0.63) Naqada to Nubian A-----------(0.78) Naqada to Badarian-----------(0.94) Naqada to Nubian C-----------(0.96) Naqada to Tigrean----------(0.99) Naqada to Nubian X-----------(1.14) Naqada to Nubian Meroitic-----(1.30) Naqada to Nubian B-----------(1.52) Naqada to Egyptian Negro-----(1.57) Naqada to Ashanti-----------(2.33) Naqada to Egyptian E---------(2.36) Naqada to Ibo---------------(2.87) Naqada to Taita---------------(3.80) Naqada to Sedment-----------(4.23) Naqada to Fernand Faz-----(4.68) Naqada to Jebel Moya---------(4.81) Naqada to Cameroons------(5.07) Naqada to Tetela------------(5.79)
Badari to Nubian X-------------(0.68) Badari to Nubian C-------------(0.77) Badari to Naqada--------------(0.94) Badari to Kerma---------------(0.96) Badari to Nubian Meroitic.------(1) Badari to Nubian A-------------(1.17) Badari to Nubian B-------------(1.8) Badari to Egyptian Negro------(1.93) Badari to Tigrean------------(2.02) Badari to Taita-----------------(2.83) Badari to Ashanti------------(3.55) Badari to Ibo----------------(3.93) Badari to Egyptian E-----------(5.02) Badari to Fernand Faz-------(5.10) Badari to Sedment------------(5.69) Badari to Jebel Moya-----------(6.15) Badari to Cameroons--------(7.14) Badari to Tetela--------------(7.42)
The Ibo, Ashanti, Fernand Faz, Cameroon and Tetela samples are all Niger-Congo speakers. I'm not saying that AE were highland Ethiopians either. I'm saying that, with the ancient Nubians gone, for all intents and purposes they or better yet, the ancestral coalesced Cushitic population are a useful model for the phenotype of dynastic Egyptians. Though I presume that the AE had more more West/Central African elements than Cushitic speakers (i.e. Wet Sahara).
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^Of course, I already responded to this a couple of times above.
But more importantly for the record, I don't mind if anybody would say that Ancient Egyptians in general, were genetically closer to unadmixed modern day East Africans. It needs to be proven with aDNA analysis of other royal mummies but still. The only thing I'm opposed, based on our current genetic and archaeological knowledge, is trying to say that Ancient Egyptians were genetically closer to Europeans or West Asians than most Africans (like West Africans, Yoruba, Great Lakes, Southern Africans).
For me, what is clear with the current genetic results from Ancient Egyptians mummies (E1b1a, autosomal STR, etc) is that Ancient Egyptians were mostly Africans not Eurasians or West Asians. I think the current genetic and archeological results show us Ancient Egyptians to be mostly Africans with only a minimal amount of non-African admixtures. In a similar way, we could say Ancient Greeks or Romans were mostly Europeans with a minimal amount of non-European admixtures (West Asians, Africans). If it weren't for the racism of past historians, we wouldn't even have to discuss the issue. As the burden of proof to show AEians were not Africans, especially at their formative stage, should be on the shoulders of the racists since Ancient Egypt is in Africa. At the moment, I'm satisfied with the current aDNA results, as well as other archeological results, demonstrating Ancient Egyptians to be Africans, not Europeans or West Asians.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Another person, could then ask me, as I ask myself: Do you think Ancient Egyptians were genetically closer to unadmixed East Africans ( aka the African components of modern East Africans) than modern West Africans, etc, based on current genetic results .
I would say that based on the small number of genetic results Ancient Egyptians doesn't seem to be closer to modern day East Africans than most other African populations, but that's because the samples of individuals they used to represent East Africans is admixed to a high level with Eurasian populations. As for Ramses III being E1b1a, it's possible that other royal mummies will be E1b1b for example, or other A, B and E haplogroups. A small number could be from non-African haplogroups (think Hyksos/descendants). This needs to be examined with the aDNA analysis of other royal mummies. Basic logic would indicates they are not all E1b1a.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
In other words you are attacking folks with a straw-man argument that nobody here has even made?
BTW still waiting on your interpretation in regards to comparing the time distance of "common ancestors" :
-First group being E Haplogroup Africans whos common ancestry stretches back post OOA some 50-60 thousand years or how ever old the splits between E1a, E1b and E2 are.
-The second groups being huge swathe of Eurasians and Amerindian and even some Africans in relation to the more recent common ancestors of All these folks via Haplogroup K, L, P, O, M, N, Q, R,. et al.
This whole "they connected by E and Pn2" has to be put into some proper context. You are taking it out of context. And you STILL dont have a sufficient argument in regards to Autosomal affinity and sub structure which you on one hand note and argue exists...prior to OOA...yet you then disregard it all and go into cognitive dissonance mode....making a totally different nonsense argument.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
No matter how much the frauds try to backtrack and flip flop henceforth, these frauds' fairytale that the Egyptian populations aren't rooted in the Eastern Sahara and adjacent regions, but somehow represent transplants from DNA Tribes' West and Southern Africa regions, are on record. The sole purpose of spamming DNA Tribes maps and Ramses' haplogroup was precisely to patch together the flimsy case that the Ancient Egyptians were recent colonists from areas where E1b1a peaks. Now the narrative changes again. SMH. these disgusting liars. They just don't know when to stop lying and manipulating the facts.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I'm posting this solely so people who are reading this can make up their mind on their own and won't have to take my or some fanatic afroloon quacks' word for it. We can just let the data speak for itself and keep it moving. Here it goes:
Metric craniofacial D2 values (data taken from Mukherjee 1955), with proto-Egyptians compared to a native Red Sea Coast population vs groups from West/Central Africa:
Naqada to Nubian D-----------(0.48) Naqada to Kerma-------------(0.63) Naqada to Nubian A-----------(0.78) Naqada to Badarian-----------(0.94) Naqada to Nubian C-----------(0.96) Naqada to Tigrean----------(0.99) Naqada to Nubian X-----------(1.14) Naqada to Nubian Meroitic-----(1.30) Naqada to Nubian B-----------(1.52) Naqada to Egyptian Negro-----(1.57) Naqada to Ashanti-----------(2.33) Naqada to Egyptian E---------(2.36) Naqada to Ibo---------------(2.87) Naqada to Taita---------------(3.80) Naqada to Sedment-----------(4.23) Naqada to Fernand Faz-----(4.68) Naqada to Jebel Moya---------(4.81) Naqada to Cameroons------(5.07) Naqada to Tetela------------(5.79)
Badari to Nubian X-------------(0.68) Badari to Nubian C-------------(0.77) Badari to Naqada--------------(0.94) Badari to Kerma---------------(0.96) Badari to Nubian Meroitic.------(1) Badari to Nubian A-------------(1.17) Badari to Nubian B-------------(1.8) Badari to Egyptian Negro------(1.93) Badari to Tigrean------------(2.02) Badari to Taita-----------------(2.83) Badari to Ashanti------------(3.55) Badari to Ibo----------------(3.93) Badari to Egyptian E-----------(5.02) Badari to Fernand Faz-------(5.10) Badari to Sedment------------(5.69) Badari to Jebel Moya-----------(6.15) Badari to Cameroons--------(7.14) Badari to Tetela--------------(7.42)
The Ibo, Ashanti, Fernand Faz, Cameroon and Tetela samples are all Niger-Congo speakers. I'm not saying that AE were highland Ethiopians either. I'm saying that, with the ancient Nubians gone, for all intents and purposes they or better yet, the ancestral coalesced Cushitic population are a useful model for the phenotype of dynastic Egyptians. Though I presume that the AE had more more West/Central African elements than Cushitic speakers (i.e. Wet Sahara).
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: In other words you are attacking folks with a straw-man argument that nobody here has even made?
I also asked you the question directly. You and Swenet avoided answering. It seems you and Swenet make this argument for Horn Africans, so since this site is about AE, I presume this translate for Ancient Egyptians too (or what would be the point of going out of your way to say that?).
I can ask you, and Swenet, the question directly: Do you think Ancient Egyptians are genetically closer to West Africans populations or Eurasian populations?
I expect childish manoeuvrings to avoid answering the question directly, from either Beyoku or Swenet.
My answer: West Africans (of course). Based on current genetic results on Ancient Egyptian mummies, it seems Ancient Egyptians are genetically closer to West African populations than Eurasian populations.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I've said earlier, you're asking retarded either/or questions which are in a framework where closer to Eurasian equals non-African. Dumbass. Prove that such a dichotomy exists, first. Only this time, without running away like a coward, as you've been doing for the past weeks.
That your low IQ mind cannot conceive a scenario in which pre-OOA components may exist in some or many AE communities, doesn't mean I have to take your troll bait.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The exert is from a 2009 study which contextualized the consistent finding that the founding population of Dynastic Egypt were "negroid" (i.e. "true negroid"/like most contemporary West, Central, Southern Africans). The author of this study brings this point to the front AFTER he/she even relays archaeological evidence linking pre-Dynastic Egyptians to the Bantu peoples of Southern Africa.
"On this basis, many have postulated that the Badarians are relatives to South African populations (Morant, 1935 G. Morant, A study of predynastic Egyptian skulls from Badari based on measurements taken by Miss BN Stoessiger and Professor DE Derry, Biometrika 27 (1935), pp. 293–309.Morant, 1935; Mukherjee et al., 1955; Irish and Konigsberg, 2007). The archaeological evidence points to this relationship as well. (Hassan, 1986) and (Hassan, 1988) noted similarities between Badarian pottery and the Neolithic Khartoum type, indicating an archaeological affinity among Badarians and Africans from more southern regions. Furthermore, like the Badarians, Naqada has also been classified with other African groups, namely the Teita (Crichton, 1996; Keita, 1990).
Nutter (1958) noted affinities between the Badarian and Naqada samples, a feature that Strouhal (1971) attributed to their skulls possessing “Negroid” traits. Keita (1992), using craniometrics, discovered that the Badarian series is distinctly different from the later Egyptian series, a conclusion that is mostly confirmed here. In the current analysis, the Badari sample more closely clusters with the Naqada sample and the Kerma sample. However, it also groups with the later pooled sample from Dynasties XVIII–XXV. -- Godde K. (2009) An Examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development? Homo. 2009;60(5):389-404.
There is absolutely no confusion in regards to what is a "negroid" skull, just by looking at the prognathism:
Now compare that to the flat faces of East Africans/Horner type and their Eurasian descendants (Europeans). There is no mistaking us for anyone else (especially non black):
The Pre-Dynastic Egyptians were found to be the former (Negroid)! No one else ON EARTH a Negroid (Australians/black people bare a slight morphological resemblance) morphology except for these people here:
See "Negroid".
Posts: 348 | From: Atlanta | Registered: Jan 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: [QB] ^^^ For the record, I disagree with what Akachi says about the Bantu migration.
OK let's debate this then! Your primary point of contention with my stance is?
He doesn't have a stance. He has a hodgepodge of bullshit. he cannot even understand a natural SSA cline from Hunter gatherers not non hunter-gatherer...non Admixed SSA's.
Amun-ra. In reference to your question...you question is loaded. DNA tribes cannot tell us how far or how close a population is on a sliding scale. The MLI scores are quite low. I stand by what I said a while ago when speaking on the rarity of profile and how it is "extinct" compared to contemporary DNA Tribes sample results. I also stand by what I said YEARS ago in what the results mean and the difference between SNP and STR:
Re-reading that the only thing I would change are the dates. We could be looking at affinities that are 10's of thousands of years old....or even connections hundreds of thousands of years old based on DNAConsults and uni parental results we only found yesterday.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Man, is this turning out to be another long, tedious, and fruitless ES debate.
Amun-Ra, even if Northeast Africans have greater affinity to OOA than do West Africans (inevitable given OOA), that does NOT necessarily make them "Caucasian" or light-skinned like you seem to think. Surely you recall that Papuans, Aboriginal Australians, and South Indians who have darker skin are nonetheless OOA just like Eurasians. Saying NE Africans are a parental population to OOA is NOT necessarily whitewashing or even tanwashing them.
Besides, Swenet has said that Egypto-Nubians have a stronger West African affinity compared to other Northeast Africans due to the Green Sahara. It's not like he maintains that AEs and Nubians were ENTIRELY free of West African ancestry even if they did start with a NE African base.
posted
^^^Since both modern West Africans as well as modern East Africans were in Northeast Africa at the moment and well after of the OOA migrations - 50-60 000 years ago (as both genetic and linguistic analysis demonstrate) what you say is nonsense. As for you being the spokesman of Swenet, I'll let him speak for himself.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
For those who are interested in learning how exactly the average Niger-Congo speaking population resembles proto-Egyptians, consider the following excerpts from from Morant 1925--one of the few authorities I know of that investigated this issue. Excuse the outdated language.
^Emphasis mine of course. I've marked the variables where the AE fell out of the range of the Niger- Congo speakers with red, and where they fell into the variations of the Niger-Congo speakers, with green.
Keys: NH'R = nasal height NB = nasal breadth 100NB/NH,R = nasal index P = ? N = nasal angle B = basal angle GL = basion-prosthion length G'H = upper facial height 100G'H/GB = upper facial index 100H'/L = height length index S3' = occipital chord S3 = Lambda-opisthion arc Oc. I. = ?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
So wait a minute, if Northeast Africans are a sister population to West Africans but don't have such close ties to OOA, then just what kind of Africans splintered off into Eurasians? And if West Africans are all descended from Northeast Africans in relatively recent prehistory, just who was living in West Africa before this?
posted
^That's what I've been pointing out for the longest. Amun Ra is literally out of his mind. None of his claims make any sense.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: So wait a minute, if Northeast Africans are a sister population to West Africans but don't have such close ties to OOA,
Compared to Mbuti-Aka people and Khoisan (A, B haplogroups carriers/non-CT haplogroup carriers) both East and West Africans (CT haplogroup carriers) were closer to OOA/future Eurasian populations (also CT carriers). This is also true for all E haplogroup carriers.
quote: then just what kind of Africans splintered off into Eurasians? And if West Africans are all descended from Northeast Africans in relatively recent prehistory, just who was living in West Africa before this? [/QB]
Before the arrival of Niger-Congo speakers, West Africa was inhabited by small groups of hunter-gatherers from the A and B haplogroups.
Please tell me truthcentric you're pulling my leg or something because I already answered that like a thousand times in this thread and the other thread you participated in.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Too bad your silly theory doesn't hold up as Niger Congo "CT carriers" in Africa do not pull towards Eurasians to the extent your fairy tale predicts, as they are intermediate between Pygmies and Dinkas where this relationship to Eurasians is concerned. Neither the Pygmies or the Dinkas have high ratios of PN2. The neolithic Gokhem and Iceman genomes pull towards the Dinka without necessarily having any Dinka, Mbuti or Yoruba specific ancestry-- another thing your model utterly fails to explain. Needless to say where both discrepancies leave your claim that Niger-Congo speakers are more like the original Pn2 population because they have high frequencies of E-M2. They obviously aren't. Just like modern day British who are almost 100% of the Near Eastern R1b, but are more similar to Mesolithic Europeans than people in the Near East.
Now what? He will simply act like he was never told this and repeat his claim elsewhere. After all, beyoku told him this weeks ago and he repeatedly tried to spam his way out of addressing these inconvenient facts.
Additionally, if the migration of "closer to Eurasians" PN2 bearers had such an impact on pre- Niger-Congo speaking populations, one might ask the question why pre-Bantu populations had virtually no phenotypical markers that distinguish them from the inbound populations, as pre-Bantu LSA populations cluster mostly with modern day Bantu speakers or Khoisan.
posted
There is a contradiction here: all the anthropologists agree in stressing ; the sizable proportions of the Negroid element—almost a third and sometimes more—in the ethnic mixture of the ancient Egyptian population but nobody has yet defined what is meant by the term 'Negroid', nor has any explanation been proferred as to how this Negroid element, by mingling with a 'Mediterranean' component often present in smaller proportions, could be assimilated into a purely Caucasoid race." -- UNESCO 1981. The Peopling ancient Egypt..
The "Negroid" element of course represented these Africans whom African Americans descend from:
The other racial "elements" of ancient Egypt that UNESCO was hinting at was really just indigenous African diversity. Horners of course were present in ancient Egypt, and were deceptively characterized as "Mediterranean" or the "Brown race" in these early and deceptive analysis of human diversity.
Nilotes represented the so called "European" element found in ancient Egypt.
Posts: 348 | From: Atlanta | Registered: Jan 2014
| IP: Logged |
- From Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements (2008)
"which clearly shows that the cranial morphology of prehistoric and recent northeast African populations is linked to sub-Saharan populations (Niger-Congo populations)."
Interesting but not surprising since Niger-Congo speakers ultimately have their linguistic and genetic origin in northeastern Africa.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
The diverse taxonomy we see today in Africa, evolved within Africa. When are you going to realize this?
quote: Morphological variation of the skeletal remains of ancient Nubia has been traditionally explained as a product of multiple migrations into the Nile Valley.
In contrast, various researchers have noted a continuity in craniofacial variation from Mesolithic through Neolithic times.
This apparent continuity could be explained by in situ cultural evolution producing shifts in selective pressures which may act on teeth, the facial complex, and the cranial vault.
A series of 13 Mesolithic skulls from Wadi Halfa, Sudan, are compared to Nubian Neolithic remains by means of extended canonical analysis.
Results support recent research which suggests consistent trends of facial reduction and cranial vault expansion from Mesolithic through Neolithic times.
--Meredith F. Small* et al. The nubian mesolithic: A consideration of the Wadi Halfa remains
Additive:
quote: The Iwo Eleru site in Nigeria preserves the only terminal Pleistocene fossil from tropical West Africa. The peoples of this region contributed to significant population movements throughout the continent during the Holocene. As such, characterizing the phenotype of Late Pleistocene West African populations is critical for disentangling the evolutionary signatures of a highly complex African population history and structure. Previous research approached the calvaria's morphology from a paleoanthropological perspective, noting its mosaic of archaic and modern neurocranial features and distinctiveness from Pleistocene fossil taxa and contemporary modern human samples. In this paper, I compare Iwo Eleru with contemporary Late Pleistocene Africans and also consider the specimen's affinities with Holocene populations of the central and western Sahara, Nile Valley, and East Africa. Craniometric data were recorded for 22 neurocranial dimensions and subjected to principal components analysis and Mahalanobis distance estimation. Multidimensional scaling of distances indicated that Iwo Eleru fell outside the observed range of variation of other terminal Pleistocene supra-equatorial African populations, confirming previous results that documented its divergence from Neanderthals, Upper Paleolithic Europeans, and modern Africans. The calvaria was also distinct from Holocene Saharan, Nile Valley, and East African populations, which suggests limited West African input into the Sahara during the African Humid Period. Results presented here bolster previous research that suggested Iwo Eleru's anatomy reflected either admixture with archaic humans or the long-term survival of populations with more archaic neurocranial anatomy until the end of the Pleistocene.
--Christopher M. Stojanowski
Iwo Eleru's place among Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene populations of North and East Africa
Journal of Human Evolution Available online 24 July 2014, doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2014.02.018
quote: Moving into the southern Sahara, in the Malian desert Petit-Maire and colleagues (Petit-Maire et al. 1983; Petit-Maire and Riser 1983; Petit-Maire 1986) have identified several climatic fluctuations, with two distinct moist phases between 7500-4000 BC and 3000-2000 BC at Erg Ine Sakane, Hassi el Abiod and Erg Jmeya.
[...]
At Hassi el Abiod, to the south west of Erg Ine Sakane, the climate is significantly more amenable, receiving more rainfall and greater vegetal cover, although the frequency and violence of sand storms in this region probably limited the extension of true Sahelian vegetation. Again, lake deposits represent two Holocene humid phases, which are consistent with the dates from Erg Ine Sakane. A string of lake sediments, created during the former arid period, indicates the existence either of a large lake or a landscape of small ponds filling successive depressions in the dune passage (Figure 1.2). A group of large middens have also been identified in this region and range from 50 m2 to 200 m2 over an area of 100 km2. These are located up to 1 km apart and have been located on the slopes of consolidated dunes near the Holocene lakes and have been dated to the early humid phase at 6970±130 bp.
[...]
4. Palaeoanthropology.
Numerous human skeletons have been excavated by Petit-Maire and her team, providing an invaluable data set for Holocene populations in northern Mali. Their work has demonstrated that Cromagnoid or ‘mecthoid’ populations migrated southwards into the Malian Sahara during the Holocene.
The extreme cranial breadth on certain subjects from Hassi el Abiod also suggests that by at least 5000 BC these populations had already developed the sickle cell trait, which provides protection against malaria. The authors (Petit- Maire and Riser 1983: 416) suggest that, emphasised this need for localised enquiry, incorporating geomorphologic factors as well as climatic ones.
Mobility, Climate Change and Cultural Development. A revised view from the Lower Tilemsi Valley, northeastern Mali.
quote: The site of Berouaˆ ga, in occidental Mauritania, is thought to correspond to a hunter population, originating in the Sahara, in a locality far from developed hydrological networks that could enable fishing (Jousse et al., 2003). It is the reverse around the palaeolakes of Hassi el-Abiod, where an intense fishing activity is recorded (Van Neer and Gayet, 1988; Jousse, 2004a).
The main difference in the second map (Fig. 2) is the arrival of pastoral activities in West Africa from the Hoggar to the Atlantic coast, by a progressive south- western diffusion (Jousse, 2004b). Cattle are recurrent, sometimes associated with caprines, especially in upland areas (Gautier, 1987b; Hassan, 2002).
--He ́ le` ne Jousse
What is the impact of Holocene climatic changes on human societies? Analysis of West African Neolithic populations dietary customs
quote:
Hassi el-Abiod specimens, so-called "Mechtoids" or "Mechta-Afalou" of Mali ~ 4,500 to 7,000 years BP, comprising some 89 individuals according to some sources [see below for details]; 15 individuals were dated at ca. 7,000 years BP, while 46 specimens were dated at ca. 4,500 years BP
--B.M. & C. Rothschild, 1996
quote: "The Hassi el Abiod cemetery in Mali, with its sample of 89 individuals, can be considered a real exception (Petit-Maire, Riser eds. 1983). This human group has been accurately studied and described, and clear inhumation practices have been identified. For example, they maintained a practice of placing the body in a crouched position, on the left or right side, with the head oriented towards the east (Dutour 1989). This also represents a very important anthropological sample, providing an invaluable opportunity for comparison with material from another important cemetery, Jebel Sahaba."
--Barbara E. Barich, People, water, and grain: the beginnings of domestication in the Sahara and the Nile Valley, 1998.
quote:
code:
The North African Upper Capsian, Columnata, NW Neolithic and Protohistoric populations are in an intermediate position.
The smallest positions (low PC1 scores) are those of the Levant and Egyptian populations.
The second cluster, with 􏰂1·5<PC2<􏰂0·5 includes the Late Palaeolithic Sudanese, Saharan populations (Hassi el Abiod, Neolithic and protohistoric) and the sub- Saharan Iron Age and LSA populations.
The mean scores for the Wadi Halfa and site 117, and for Hassi-el Abiod are positioned at the same quadrant as the Nazlet Khater specimen but with higher scores for axis 2. Compared with modern populations, the Nazlet Khater mandible is related to the modern Khoisanoid groups on the basis of shape, but removed from these groups on the basis of size. Nevertheless, an 80% reduction of the Nazlet Khater mandible allows its positioning within the observed range of the modern Khoisan populations.
--Ron Pinhasi
The position of the Nazlet Khater specimen among prehistoric and modern African and Levantine populations
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Senegal today reflects a diversity of cultures and populations that resulted from a complex historical background. As it was an important terminus for both coastal and inland trade routes, both northward and southward population movements occurred through time. During the past ten centuries, appearance and disappearance of influential empires and recent spread of Islam through trans-Saharan trade has contributed to the diversification of the Senegalese population. In order to investigate the biological consequences of these historical processes, we analyse a series of Senegalese Iron Age crania from four coastal settlements (Cap des Biches, Faboura, Dioronboumak, Cayar) and one inland site (Walalde). For comparative purposes, further Late Stone Age-Iron Age specimens from three other countries (Mali: Hassi-el-Abiod; Kenya: Gamble Cave; Sudan: Attiri) and a modern sample composed of various African populations from both Saharan and sub-Saharan areas are used in the present work. Preliminary multivariate analyses (PCA) showed that there is a marked geographical differentiation between the major geographical areas, namely West, East, Central and South Africa (Ribot & Lahr, in press).
We use a craniometrical approach, as anthropometry is now regarded as a measure of biological distance in much wider and inter-disciplinary perspective than was previously thought. It can explore morphological different- tiation among human populations in relation to many aspects, such as evolution, ecology and history (Howells, 1989; Lahr, 1996; Froment, 1998). In comparison to Genetics, craniometry can be applied more easily to archaeological specimens. Thus, its main asset is to allow the analysis of the relationships between modern and fossil populations.
[...]
DISCUSSION & PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS
Although we have to keep in mind that our corpus of modern data is not fully representative of all Senegalese and African populations present recently or in the past, we can provide preliminary answers to our two questions:
1) The results obtained here support previous craniometric (Froment, 1998) and genetic (Biondi et al., 1996) studies in showing a marked morphological differentiation between broad African regions, although there are many cranial features in common between all regions Dioronboumak specimens in particular are extremely variable in relation to size (even when considering only male specimens). According to the chronology of the site, this fact could indicate the presence of several phases of occupation by different populations over a period of at least 5 centuries, despite cultural continuity (Descamps & Thilmans, 1997).
2) Preliminary results about the relationship between Senegalese Iron Age specimens and a few African ethnic groups suggest a morphological similarity with the Ashanti. However, this observation needs further investigation.
In conclusion, geographical differences in skull morphology could reflect predominant directions of gene flow within each African region, and in West Africa they are observable up to the Iron Age. A stronger biological impact of populations from sub- Saharan Africa than from North Africa is also observed in the morphological diversification of the Senegalese since Iron Age up to present times.
--Isabelle RIBOT, Marta LAHR & Camila STORTO
IRON AGE SENEGALESE POPULATIONS: A CRANIOMETRIC APPROACH IN A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
posted
TAFORALT MAN IN SAHARA : SAHARAN EXTENSION OF MAGHREBIAN
quote: The great similarities between Taforalt and Hassi-el-Abiod men (malian Sahara)
In: Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d'anthropologie de Paris, XIV° Série, tome 5 fascicule 4, 1988. pp. 247-256.
quote:
Figure 6. Principal components analysis of craniofacial dimensions among Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene populations from the Maghreb and southern Sahara. Plot of first two principal components extracted from a mean matrix for 17 craniometric variables (Tables 4, 7) in 9 human populations (Table 3) from the Late Pleistocene through the mid-Holocene from the Maghreb and southern Sahara. Seven trans-Saharan populations cluster together, whereas Late Pleistocene Aterians (Ater) and the mid-Holocene population at Gobero (Gob-m) are striking outliers. Axes are scaled by the square root of the corresponding eigenvalue for the principal component. Abbreviations: Ater, Aterian; EMC, eastern Maghreb Capsian; EMI, eastern Maghreb Iberomaurusian; Gob-e, Gobero early Holocene; Gob-m, Gobero mid-Holocene; Mali, Hassi-el-Abiod, Mali; Maur, Mauritania; WMC, western Maghreb Capsian; WMI, western Maghreb Iberomaurusian.
[...]
Regional differentiation. The timing of population change observed at Gobero may only characterize a restricted area. Other areas in the southern Sahara, even those with comparable environmental conditions such as Hassi-el-Abiod in Mali, appear to show a later transition between human populations. The data from Gobero, when combined with existing sites in North Africa, indicate we are just beginning to understand the complex history of biosocial evolution in the face of severe climate fluctuation in the Sahara, a vast region that was occupied for much of the Holocene by an anatomically diverse series of human populations.
--Paul C. Sereno et al.
Lakeside Cemeteries in the Sahara: 5000 Years of Holocene Population and Environmental Change
quote:
All currently available human skeletal remains from the Wadi Howar (Eastern Sahara, Sudan) were employed in an anthropological study. The study’s first aim was to describe this unique 5th to 2nd millennium BCE material, which comprised representatives of all three prehistoric occupation phases of the region. Detecting diachronic differences in robusticity, occupational stress levels and health within the spatially, temporally and culturally heterogeneous sample was its second objective. The study’s third goal was to reveal metric and non-metric affinities between the different parts of the series and between the Wadi Howar material and other relevant prehistoric as well as modern African populations. \r\nThe reconstruction and comprehensive osteological analysis of 23 as yet unpublished individuals, the bulk of the Wadi Howar series, constituted the first stage of the study. The analyses focused on each individual’s in situ position, state of preservation, sex, age at death, living height, living weight, physique, biological ancestry, epigenetic traits, robusticity, occupational stress markers, health and metric as well as morphological characteristics. Building on the results of these efforts and the re-examination of the rest of the material, the Wadi Howar series as a whole, altogether 32 individuals, could be described. \r\nA wide variety of robusticity, occupational stress and health variables was evaluated. The pre-Leiterband (hunter-gatherer-fisher/hunter-gatherer-fisher-herder) and the Leiterband (herder-gatherer) data of over a third of these variables differed statistically significantly or in tendency from each other. The Leiterband sub-sample was characterised by higher enamel hypoplasia frequencies, lower mean ages at death and less pronounced expressions of occupational stress traits. This pattern was interpreted as evidence that the adoption and intensification of animal husbandry did probably not constitute reactions to worsening conditions. Apart from that, the relevant observations, noteworthy tendencies and significant differences were explained as results of a broader spectrum of pre-Leiterband subsistence activities and the negative side effects of the increasingly specialised herder-gatherer economy of the Leiterband phase. \r\nUsing only the data which could actually be collected from it, multiple, separate, individualised discriminant function analyses were carried out for each Wadi Howar skeleton to determine which prehistoric and which modern comparative sample it was most similar to. The results of all individual analyses were then summarised and examined as a whole. Thus it became possible to draw conclusions about the affinities the Wadi Howar material shared with prehistoric as well as modern populations and to answer questions concerning the diachronic links between the Wadi Howar’s prehistoric populations. When the Wadi Howar remains were positioned in the context of the selected prehistoric (Jebel Sahaba/Tushka, A-Group, Malian Sahara) and modern comparative samples (Southern Sudan, Chad, Mandinka, Somalis, Haya) in this fashion three main findings emerged. Firstly, the series as a whole displayed very strong affinities with the prehistoric sample from the Malian Sahara (Hassi el Abiod, Kobadi, Erg Ine Sakane, etc.) and the modern material from Southern Sudan and, to a lesser extent, Chad. Secondly, the pre-Leiterband and the Leiterband sub-sample were closer to the prehistoric Malian as well as the modern Southern Sudanese material than they were to each other. Thirdly, the group of pre-Leiterband individuals approached the Late Pleistocene sample from Jebel Sahaba/Tushka under certain circumstances. A theory offering explanations for these findings was developed. According to this theory, the entire prehistoric population of the Wadi Howar belonged to a Saharo-Nilotic population complex. The Jebel Sahaba/Tushka population constituted an old Nilotic and the early population of the Malian Sahara a younger Saharan part of this complex. The pre-Leiterband groups probably colonised the Wadi Howar from the east, either during or soon after the original Saharo-Nilotic expansion. Unlike the pre-Leiterband groups, the Leiterband people originated somewhere west of the Wadi Howar. They entered the region in the context of a later, secondary Saharo-Nilotic expansion. In the process, the incoming Leiterband groups absorbed many members of the Wadi Howar’s older pre-Leiterband population. The increasing aridification of the Wadi Howar region ultimately forced its prehistoric inhabitants to abandon the wadi. Most of them migrated south and west. They, or groups closely related to them, probably were the ancestors of the majority of the Nilo-Saharan-speaking pastoralists of modern-day Southern Sudan and Eastern Chad.
quote:The oldest remains of Homo sapiens sapiens found in East Africa were associated with an industry having similarities with the Capsian. It has been called Upper Kenyan Capsian, although its derivation from the North African Capsian is far from certain. At Gamble's Cave in Kenya, five human skeletons were associated with a late phase of the industry, Upper Kenya Capsian C, which contains pottery...
The skeletons are of very tall people. They had long, narrow heads, and relatively long, narrow faces. The nose was of medium width; and prognathism, when present, was restricted to the alveolar, or tooth-bearing, region... all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions...
From the foregoing, it is tempting to locate the area of differentiation of these people in the interior of East Africa. There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. Neither of these populations, fossil and modern, should be considered to be closely related to the populations of Europe and western Asia.
--Jean Hiernaux The People of Africa (Peoples of the World Series) (1975)
quote:"In sub-Saharan Africa, many anthropological characters show a wide range of population means or frequencies. In some of them, the whole world range is covered in the sub-continent. Here live the shortest and the tallest human populations, the one with the highest and the one with the lowest nose, the one with the thickest and the one with the thinnest lips in the world. In this area, the range of the average nose widths covers 92 per cent of the world range:
only a narrow range of extremely low means are absent from the African record. Means for head diameters cover about 80 per cent of the world range; 60 per cent is the corresponding value for a variable once cherished by physical anthropologists, the cephalic index, or ratio of the head width to head length expressed as a percentage....."
--Jean Hiernaux The People of Africa (Peoples of the World Series) (1975)
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic