quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Ramses III's phenotype in and of itself doesn't leave much to draw conclusions from (it's not that divergent), but when you include the overall picture (him and his contemporaries), the picture does get foggier, compared to the proto- Egyptians. Taken together, the former have a tendency to get progressively more ethnically ambiguous. No doubt having something to do with that the "Libyan" dynasties were right at their doorstep.
As for the Zoe Saldana comment (click):
Very interesting observation as well as source! I think we should discuss the topic of Egypt's population change during dynastic times as opposed to after further in a thread of its own. In the mean time, I question what makes you think this change comes from 'Libyans' as opposed to Levantine folks??
As far as "honey" type tones or complexions, I've always maintained that such complexions were far more common in Lower Egypt around the Delta. Indeed this is something stated by several Egyptologists in references to physical appearance of Egyptians, namely Gay Robins and Frank Yurco.
Though this is a first I've heard of it being common in Upper Egypt or at least an area of Upper Egypt, I'm really not that surprised since such complexions are not uncommon in areas as far south as Ethiopia and Eritrea.
Ethiopian women
Perhaps a better example than Zoe Saldana...
Liya Kebede
Though note that honey comes in shades other than the typical 'golden'.
In fact African honey can be quite dark.
African honey
Therefore, I find your source about an Upper Egyptian sepat which seems to emphasize "honey" complexions vs. "black" complexions with the latter being a "minority" somewhat misleading.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Indeed. Zoe Saldana is probably too light an example, given the deep golden colour honey typically has, which I now see, upon googling her, she doesn't have. The distinction is not misleading; it's very real. Other text from the same era apply an early, color-based, form of True Negro concept and Ptolemaic Upper Egypt and Nubians at the border were not included in it, which I can see how local observers would conclude that, given the other evidence (including these contracts). I've looked into these rare texts a long time ago and placed them within the other data we have. The literal interpretation of honey as simply meaning "golden" is the most parsimonious and takes the least effort to arrive at, as well as the least conflict with other data. Sure, you can invoke a lot of extra explanations but what are you doing at that point? You're not looking at all the evidence, which includes skeletal change (compared to the earliest Egyptians), simultaneously.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Regardless, "honey", golden brown, or "caramel" is a complexion not unusual for pure Africans and need not be explained by foreign admixture. A perfect example of this would be Khoisan peoples of southern Africa. I have no doubt that similar complexions also evolved among the aboriginal populations of Northern Africa around the Mediterranean coast. Also, by "misleading" I meant that the authors could indeed be using the "true negro" definition wherein only those that have 'black' colored skin or complexions close to that color are truly 'black'. The examples of Ethiopians I gave should refute this notion. Of course that won't stop the Euronuts from claiming that such lighter tones are due to "admixture". But the DNA findings of modern Upper Egyptians as well as DNA Tribes findings of royal mummies should dispel such claims.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's the difference, I look at this textual data in concert, with other lines of evidence so I know for a fact that a straight forward inter- pretation of these descriptions (i.e. a mixed popu- lation by then) are warranted. Unless, of course, you have a better way of synthesizing the data. What is the "Late" sample, which is of a comparable age as the descriptions in the Greek documents, doing all the way on the other side of the plot, for instance?
posted
^ No, I don't disagree with what you're saying in regards to the late periods of pharaonic Egypt. I concur that there was a large influx of people in the country and therefore admixture, but I'm just asking you what you think is the source of this influx. You say it's Libyan, but what makes you say that??
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ This is precisely my point!-- That is these artificial divisions of Africa's populations into North vs. 'Sub-Sahara'
The division is not artificial. It's a real historical division due to many millennium of foreign conquests, invasions and immigration especially during the late dynastic and post dynastic era.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
CHANGE IN THE ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF MODERN EGYPT:
We all know in terms of ethnic composition, modern Egypt, is much different from Ancient Egypt.
Contemporary Egypt, is mostly an ethnic admixture between foreign invaders and conquerors and indigenous African people. Autosomally, as a whole, they tend to cluster more with Eurasian especially the Middle East. In the south, populations like Nubians probably cluster more with Africans (and thus Ancient Egyptians). All this is because of massive immigration from Europe and western Asian which started already in dynastic time, culminating in the Hyksos (Aamu) foreign rule during the second intermediate period, as well as during the late periods up to now (Assyrians, Arab conquest, British colonization, etc).
quote: As a consequence the many invasions of ancient Egypt, the population has changed over the years. There were Hyksos (Heka Khasut) from Asia, who melted into the Delta Region around 1500 B.C.E., and then a series of invasions by the Assyrians, Persians and Greeks. With the arrival of large groups of Arabians in the seventh century C.E., the racial character of Egypt began to change.
The resultant mixtures of Africans, Arabs, Greeks and Persians were to be jointed with Turks, Russians, Albanians, British, and French to create a different population that there had been during the ancient times.
One cannot say that today's Egypt is the same as the Egypt of antiquity anymore than one can say that today's North America is the same as it was 5000 years ago.
- From The Oxford Encyclopedia of African Thought, Volume 1 (2010)
quote:With the passage of time, each wave of new immigrants has assimilated into the local mix of peoples , making modern Egypt a combination of Libyans, Nubians, Syrians, Persians, Macedonians, Romans, Arabs, Turks, Circassians, Greeks, Italians, and Armenians, along with the descendants of the people of ancient Egypt.
- From A Brief History of Egypt by Jr. Goldschmidt Arthur (2007)
quote: Immigrations during the late periods:
- In the Late Period , internationalism, migration, and trade are especially well documented, and immigration from Thrace and the Greek cities of Anatolia was facilitated by the establishment of Naukratis (attributed to the reign of Psammetichus I) and the use of Greek mercenaries, first against Nubia (Psammetichus II) and later against Persian rule.
- The descendants of Greek immigrants took Egyptian names and operated within Egyptian cultural practices[...]
Period of mass immigration:
- Alexander the Great’s conquest of Egypt, in 332 BCE, precipitated a period of mass immigration .
- Peaking in the third century BCE, immigration from the Mediterranean, the Black Sea coast, Asia Minor, and the Near East may have numbered into the hundreds of thousands and included foreign slaves and prisoners of war as well as economic migrants and military veterans.
- In Greek and Demotic sources, almost 150 different ethnic labels attest to the scale and geographic range of immigration and ethnic-group settlement (La’da 2003: 158 - 159)
- Greek was “the language of upward social mobility” (p. 105); the Egyptian language, as well as other cultural forms, changed both in relation to it and depending on the circumstances and interests of individuals and of social groups.
from Ethnicity (Riggs, 2012)
quote:The Late Period is often singled out as the time when mass immigration into Egypt altered the character of the country
from A Companion to Ancient History Edited by Andrew Erskine (2009)
quote:The Muslim conquerors did not attempt a mass conversion of Christianity to Islam, if only because that would have reduced the taxes non-Muslims were compelled to pay, but a number of other factors were at work. Arab men could marry Christian women and their children would become Muslim. Large-scale Arab immigration into Egypt began during the eighth century.
from A History of Egypt: From Earliest Times to the Present by Jason Thompson (2009)Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: If those contracts come from the Ptolemaic period (as I infer from the Greek terminology), they postdate Ramses III by quite a few centuries. Do we know what kind of people were involved in these contracts?
I don't know who in their right mind would use a Ptolemaic period papyrus to talk about Ramses III from the new Kingdom era. Between the 2 eras there's been quite a few foreign conquests and invasions. Pathyris itself is said to be a military colony (to prevent possible insurrection in Thebes).
This bring me to an interesting subject. Foreign immigrants often mixed with the local and became Egyptian(ized) in those late era (before too of course but at a lower scale), then turn to be considered as "locals" later on, by future conquerors and immigrants.
Here Apollonia is described as a local girl (to be married to a Greek military officer) but she was actually an egyptinianized immigrant from Cyrene. Her Greek family living there for 2 or 3 generations.
While interesting, especially for the ethnicity thread, none of this has anything to do with Ramses III. As mentioned, both the BMJ and the DNA Tribes genetic analysis point Ramses III and co to be more similar to modern Sub-Saharan African. Same thing with the 18th Dynasty Royal mummies. Suffice to say, it's no coincidences. Of course even indigenous Ancient Egyptians probably came from many different African lineages and haplogroups. The different people who settled along the Nile during the green Sahara desertification.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ No, I don't disagree with what you're saying in regards to the late periods of pharaonic Egypt. I concur that there was a large influx of people in the country and therefore admixture, but I'm just asking you what you think is the source of this influx. You say it's Libyan, but what makes you say that??
Noted. I never said that it was just Libyans, though.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: If those contracts come from the Ptolemaic period (as I infer from the Greek terminology), they postdate Ramses III by quite a few centuries. Do we know what kind of people were involved in these contracts?
I don't know who in their right mind would use a Ptolemaic period papyrus to talk about Ramses III from the new Kingdom era. Between the 2 eras there's been quite a few foreign conquests and invasions. Pathyris itself is said to be a military colony (to prevent possible insurrection in Thebes).
This bring me to an interesting subject. Foreign immigrants often mixed with the local and became Egyptian(ized) in those late era (before too of course but at a lower scale), then turn to be considered as "locals" later on, by future conquerors and immigrants.
Here Apollonia is described as a local girl (to be married to a Greek military officer) but she was actually an egyptinianized immigrant from Cyrene. Her Greek family living there for 2 or 3 generations.
While interesting, especially for the ethnicity thread, none of this has anything to do with Ramses III. As mentioned, both the BMJ and the DNA Tribes genetic analysis point Ramses III and co to be more similar to modern Sub-Saharan African. Same thing with the 18th Dynasty Royal mummies. Suffice to say, it's no coincidences. Of course even indigenous Ancient Egyptians probably came from many different African lineages and haplogroups. The different people who settled along the Nile during the green Sahara desertification.
What's your full citation for the DNA on the 18th Dyn royal mummies? The Ethnicity thread does not give such detail for them, nor does the main paper. Also what's the full cite of the BMJ data?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ This is precisely my point!-- That is these artificial divisions of Africa's populations into North vs. 'Sub-Sahara'
The division is not artificial. It's a real historical division due to many millennium of foreign conquests, invasions and immigration especially during the late dynastic and post dynastic era.
I was referring specifically to dynastic and especially predynastic Egypt when North Africa was fertile and verdant!
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anyone ever consider to compare Ramesses STR data to published samples?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Wasn't that done on the first pages?
I meant his Y-chromosome STR data. Is his E1b1a closest to modern Egyptians, Libyans, Cameroonians Senegalese etc.
I dont know if anyone has attempted to find a match with his Y-chrom lineage. Also has anyone reached out to Hawass regarding matches or some of his thoughts on the results? Folks are speculating on how he feels on the results but emailing him may....just may...actually get a response.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
His Y hg was predicted via STRs not his actual nrY mutations.
One has to be careful what Athey means by E1b1a as no Y mutations are actually involved and is it certain Athey updates his "Y phylogeny" to keep in step with newer data.
I'm not aware of any nrY mutation tests done on RIII or any mummy. Try plugging the Y-STR values in YHRD
EDIT: you know what, forget what I wrote, I need to do a refresh to refamiliarize myself on RIII & UME. However what I said about the Athey hg prediction holds true.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
The autosomes don't contain any Y-DNA information (I'm sure you already know this, but just to prevent confusion because some people in this thread have stated that E1b1a was inferred from his autosomes). Hawass et al 2012 includes both Y-DNA and autosomal DNA.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
YHRD has no match for RIII's Y-STR haplotype.
I stripped the ht down to only values for DYS19 DYS389I DYS389II DYS390 DYS391 DYS392 DYS393 DYS385 and still no match.
I don't belong so don't have unlimited access to test various subsets of RIII's given ht.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do they make a statement in regards to their African database sample size? These dbs tend to sleep on wholes swathes of African regions, while European and other regions are filled to the brim. I remember that this exact problem got in the way of our efforts to manually verify DNA Tribes analysis of the Amarna STRs.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: The autosomes don't contain any Y-DNA information (I'm sure you already know this, but just to prevent confusion because some people in this thread have stated that E1b1a was inferred from his autosomes). Hawass et al 2012 includes both Y-DNA and autosomal DNA.
My mistake here. The E1b1a profile of Ramses III was determined by using the y-STR DNA of Ramses III (Table 1 posted above) while DNA Tribes used his autosomal STR (table 2) to place the closest modern relative of Ramses III in the same regions where E1b1a is widespread in Africa (Great Lakes, Southern, West Africa).
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Do they make a statement in regards to their African database sample size? These dbs tend to sleep on wholes swathes of African regions, while European and other regions are filled to the brim. I remember that this exact problem got in the way of our efforts to manually verify DNA Tribes analysis of the Amarna STRs.
From YHRD:
As anticipated, the European region is brimming with dots, while the African continent is only sparsely covered. However, there are SSA samples, including samples from regions where E1b1a is known to peak. Does this lack of matches with the few SSA samples in YHRD's database indicate that Ramses IIIs E1b1a haplotype isn't as common in SSA as some ideologues here on ES purport?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
No two people will have all the exact values for any one complete YHRD haplotype. To find matches anywhere near ancient haplotypes necessitates backing down from the full 16 variables to the 7 loci variable of DYS19, DYS389I, DYS389II, DYS390, DYS391, DYS392, DYS393.
posted
^ No surprise there. When it comes to most population studies conducted by Westerners, the populations that get the most sampling are ALWAYS Europeans. Thus, as Zarahan has stated too many times, this gives a "stacked decked" bias. What's more is the Saharan region from whence the Egyptians ancestors originated is the least sampled of all.
Speaking of which...
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ This is precisely my point!-- That is these artificial divisions of Africa's populations into North vs. 'Sub-Sahara'
The division is not artificial. It's a real historical division due to many millennium of foreign conquests, invasions and immigration especially during the late dynastic and post dynastic era.
I was referring specifically to dynastic and especially predynastic Egypt when North Africa was fertile and verdant!
The period when sub-Saharan Africa was most influential in Egypt was a time when neither Egypt, as we understand it culturally, nor the Sahara, as we understand it geographically, existed. Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant. Egypt rapidly found a method of disciplining the river, the land, and the people to transform the country into a titanic garden. Egypt rapidly developed detailed cultural forms that dwarfed its forebears in urbanity and elaboration. Thus, when new details arrived, they were rapidly adapted to the vast cultural superstructure already present. On the other hand, pharaonic culture was so bound to its place near the Nile that its huge, interlocked religious, administrative, and formal structures could not be readily transferred to relatively mobile cultures of the desert, savanna, and forest. The influence of the mature pharaonic civilizations of Egypt and Kush was almost confined to their sophisticated trade goods and some significant elements of technology. Nevertheless, the religious substratum of Egypt and Kush was so similar to that of many cultures in southern Sudan today that it remains possible that fundamental elements derived from the two high cultures to the north live on.--Joseph O. Vogel (1997)
"It is possible from this overview of the data to conclude that the limited conceptual vocabulary shared by the ancestors of contemporary Chadic-speakers (therefore also contemporary Cushitic-speakers), contemporary Nilotic-speakers and Ancient Egyptian-speakers suggests that the earliest speakers of the Egyptian language could be located to the south of Upper Egypt (Diakonoff 1998) or, earlier, in the Sahara (Wendorf 2004), where Takács (1999, 47) suggests their ‘long co-existence’ can be found. In addition, it is consistent with this view to suggest that the northern border of their homeland was further than the Wadi Howar proposed by Blench (1999, 2001), which is actually its southern border. Neither Chadics nor Cushitics existed at this time, but their ancestors lived in a homeland further north than the peripheral countries that they inhabited thereafter, to the south-west, in a Niger-Congo environment, and to the south-east, in a Nilo-Saharan environment, where they interacted and innovated in terms of language. From this perspective, the Upper Egyptian cultures were an ancient North East African ‘periphery at the crossroads’, as suggested by Dahl and Hjort-af-Ornas of the Beja (Dahl and Hjort-af-Ornas 2006). The most likely scenario could be this: some of these Saharo-Nubian populations spread southwards to Wadi Howar, Ennedi and Darfur; some stayed in the actual oases where they joined the inhabitants; and others moved towards the Nile, directed by two geographic obstacles, the western Great Sand Sea and the southern Rock Belt. Their slow perambulations led them from the area of Sprinkle Mountain (Gebel Uweinat) to the east – Bir Sahara, Nabta Playa, Gebel Ramlah, and Nekhen/Hierakonpolis (Upper Egypt), and to the north-east by way of Dakhla Oasis to Abydos (Middle Egypt)."--Anselin (2009)
To complicate matters, many of the populations living in the Nile Valley today (including the Sudanese part) are not the same as the populations from ancient times which multiple population movements recorded since historic times.
This is why such populations in Egypt or the greater northeast African region in general should and must be taken into account when referring to ancient DNA findings!
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've tried plugging both Ramses III's haplotype and three of the controls and got 0 matches in all four cases. Common denominator is that they're all not European. Could be that YHRD's catering to Europeans is the underlying cause.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I really wouldn't expect ancient haplotypes in extant populations. STRs are not stable and fit no preconceived archetypes (which is what old school anthropology was about, archetypes and admixtures between them instead of in situ development over time).
STRs will show quite recent population variety.
Try as I might this is nearest to RIII's ht in a living person in YHRD, an AfricanAmerican.
I registered but found I was limited to 20 searches a day when I tried to link the St Louis 5 STR match to a haplogroup (but it was neither E nor R. Was gonna test for A when I crapped out). Ah well, there's always tomorrow, if it please Gd that I live. But nothing's stopping others here to pick up where I left off. Ciao 4 now.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ Interesting findings. I agree that it is highly unlikely to match the ht of an ancient individual with someone of modern times, but perhaps the issue is how close modern individuals can come. Considering the tremendous diversity among Africans or those of African descent and that the Egyptians were themselves African any close affinities between them shouldn't be surprising.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I've tried plugging both Ramses III's haplotype and three of the controls and got 0 matches in all four cases. Common denominator is that they're all not European. Could be that YHRD's catering to Europeans is the underlying cause.
I have no doubt this to be the case since European Egyptomania knows no bounds or logic.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Well, I found only 5 RIII loci matching a modern person who isn't even of hg E. That individual's complete ht is in Coble 2013.
STRs are just not stable over thousands of years and STR haplotypes are not indelibly fixed to geographies of peoples forever and ever.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well the thing is we don't have that many ancient STR samples to know how unlikely it would or would not be. The results given indicate that Rameses E1b1a profile has an lineage that is at least common in African American E1b1a diversity. This is what we should be looking for. Another thing that a match could provide is the geographic spread of the lineage in Africa if the STRs match with a specific SNP. For instance let's assume we were looking at an M78 lineage of unknown sub division. There are certain STRs profiles that would tell you the subclade belongs to M78(v32) this is because the E-v32 subclade almost always carries a few very specific values for certain STRs..... When they find someone with the STR profile they assume the V32 SNP is positive.
Another example is a Bantu specific profile that has a specific STR found I believe in E1b1a8.
Just as the predictor gives an E1b1a result there are other subclades that could be given based on the match results. We will never know of we don't search because nobody is going to do the work for us.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
5 loci is not enough to really call it a match. 7 loci is YHRD's minimum standard.
As for RIII's full STR profile nobody but he will have it.
BTW M78 is an unique event polymorphism determined by SNP testing. Yes a STR ht could be predicted as E1b1b1a but only SNP dianostics can verify the prediction applies to M78. Right???
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: As for RIII's full STR profile nobody but he will have it.
Why not? I would agree with you that it may be unlikely for anyone to have a complete copy of Ramses III's full Y chromosome, but I don't see why it'd be impossible for anyone to have his Y chromosome passed on unchanged for the amount of markers that are listed, in the past 3k years. Potential differences in mutation rates notwithstanding, recall that the chance for anyone to have Tut's autosomal profile was only 1 in a couple of millions, showing that his autosomal profile is still out there, after 3k years. Your reasoning stands firm in that the chances for finding any Amarna autosomal profile would progressively decrease with an increase in STR variables, though.
Was the following chance of Ramses III's Y haplotype being E1b1a predicated on (near) exact modern E1b1a Y STR profiles or predictions based on the worldwide prevalence of certain Y STR values on Ramses III's Y chromosome? I'm not sure.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Same father sibs don't even have the same Y-STR profile.
It's like fingerprints which is why forensics rely on it.
RIII and son UME don't have the same Y-STR profile.
Can you do me a few rows of say 3 individuals with the same complete YHRD 16 loci profile?
EDIT: please disregard this post. It is inaccurate and I am wrong about Y-STRs here. I was thinking of autosomal nDNA (actually I wasn't thinking at all). I must go back to school!Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I could not dig up the one AfrAm in YHRD's db and have no access to the referenced report the access number lead me to so I went with Athey's predictor which showed
So Beyoku, you were right about the guy being E1b1a just as RIII was predicted as E1b1a by a 96% probability.
posted
^What happens when you set the dropdown menu to 'equal priors', rather than northwest Europe? Any changes the chances of hap assignments?
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: RIII and son UME don't have the same Y-STR profile.
Actually, differences between Ramses III and Unknown man E in their Y STR profile would suggest a lack of paternal side relationship. Otherwise there would be no way to conclusively say whether Ramses III and Unknown man E were simply carriers of the same haplogroups, like the way many Aframs are E1b1a vs being paternally related, but I'll check the 2013 report to see whether you're right.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Don't bother. They are the same. I need to do general genetics refresh. I'm confusing Y-STRs with nDNA (again). My apologies to any and all I may have spread my confusion too.
I need to slow down and do a proof of facts check before I submit posts on genetics.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
^What happens when you set the dropdown menu to 'equal priors', rather than northwest Europe? Any changes the chances of hap assignments?
.
That was downright stupid of me. How could I have not set the predictor for equal priors (i.e. global)? Time I sit down have a cigar some rum and STFU.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Lol! Interesting that, even if you restrict the view to one of the most latitudinally distant places from Africa, you still get E1b1a, albeit at a somewhat lower probability than when you use equal priors (which I'm not sure what that means). This is reassuring because it suggests to me that non-African haplogroups have been considered and that one statistically cannot explain Ramses III's Y haplotype without invoking African Y chromosomes (i.e. E-M329 and E-M2).
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Don't bother. They are the same. I need to do general genetics refresh. I'm confusing Y-STRs with nDNA (again). My apologies to any and all I may have spread my confusion too.
I need to slow down and do a proof of facts check before I submit posts on genetics.
As I said, your observation of populations being in a perpetual state of genetic change was spot on. We only differed on how soon traces of such evolutionary processes would show up in the Y chromosome.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: 5 loci is not enough to really call it a match. 7 loci is YHRD's minimum standard.
As for RIII's full STR profile nobody but he will have it.
BTW M78 is an unique event polymorphism determined by SNP testing. Yes a STR ht could be predicted as E1b1b1a but only SNP dianostics can verify the prediction applies to M78. Right???
Correct. This is why we dont truly know if he is in fact E1b1a. Its just that the STR profile fits the bill. The more markers one has in ref to STR the closer you can get a match to a supposed SNP. The fewer values you have the more likely the STR profile matches multiple far ranging SNP's - Describing your Non E matches.
Sometimes though, there are "Modal haplotype" STR profiles.
quote: The E1b1b1a1b/V32 was not found in Turkish population with M78 g microsatellite cluster, indicating that there is not a perfect correspondence between the M78 g microsatellite cluster and the E1b1b1a1b/V32 subclade. The g cluster is characterized by a short and unique DYS19 allele (11 repeats), a situation in which it acts almost as a unique event polymorphism like a SNP. The estimates for the TMRCA of this subclade are approximately 4-8kya.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just out of curiosity but have they ascertained the Y-chromosomal SNP data already but it hasn't been revealed, or is all they ascertained autosomal??
It seems that the SCA is hoarding all the genetic data that have on the tested royal mummies and all we get are little teasing tidbits or snapshots of info.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's hasn't been a lot of aDNA analysis of Ancient Egyptian remains that we know of;
But all the analysis of aDNA we have thus far seem to identify Ancient Egyptians as indigenous black Africans. Not a dynastic race from Europe or the Middle East. That is this BMJ study, the JAMA study on the 18th Dynasty royal mummies and the DNA Tribes population match using the STR dna obtained from those studies.
Everything, including other archaeological, linguistic and history analysis seems to indicate Ancient Egyptians are truly indigenous African people for the most part. Basically people who stayed in Africa during the OOA migration.
Ancient Egyptian come from the same people who now occupy most of Sub-Saharan African (Yoruba, Somali, Wolof, Bantu, Nubian, Afar, Dinka, Fur, Dogon, Zulu, etc). Indigenous African people who are part of the people who stayed back in Africa during the OOA migration. In terms of uniparental haplogroups, y-dna A,B and E; mtdna L for the most part.
All African people, including Ancient Egyptians of course, also share a common origin in Eastern Africa postdating the OOA migration. For example, most Cushitic, Chadic and Niger-Congo speakers share the common E-P2/PN2 ancestors postdating the OOA migration despite them speaking different language now.
The majority of modern Cushitic, Chadic and Niger-congo speakers are carrier of this P2/PN2 mutation and thus share a common past postdating the OOA migration.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Yes, I am aware of who the Egyptians are, as are all the folks in this forum. My question was in regards to the actual genetic data. It seems all I've been able to get are a few pieces of Y-STRs and aSTRs of certain loci and that's it. I can't help but to think the SCA has the full DNA profile but hates to share it with the public for obvious reasons. Although from the looks of it, it has backfired since even with the snippets of data that has come public, we get results that are African.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^I guess we can believe anything based on no evidence at all...
I don't think so, ancient DNA is still hard to extract and there's more than enough data to place the Ancient Egyptian remains tested within the right populations. Even studies on modern populations are done that way. Who in their right mind would release the info that Ramses III is E1b1a if they want to hide his African identity? E1b1a is like the most African you can get.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: berbers are also E
Albert Einstein too. There's been lot of migrations of African people within and outside Africa throughout history. It's the same for every populations. While a minority, I would guess even Ancient Egyptians in predynastic time had some non-African haplogroups and DNA among their population. Neighboring populations always intermix with each others to some degree.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: ^^I guess we can believe anything based on no evidence at all...
I don't think so, ancient DNA is still hard to extract and there's more than enough data to place the Ancient Egyptian remains tested within the right populations. Even studies on modern populations are done that way. Who in their right mind would release the info that Ramses III is E1b1a if they want to hide his African identity? E1b1a is like the most African you can get.
Indeed. And again, the irony is that the Ramessides are held up by the Euros as they archetypal 'Eurasian' with the alleged 'hooked nose' and 'red hair' of Ramses II that Euronuts love to stress but low and behold. I remember back in the late 90s when they first conducted DNA testing on royal mummies Hawass claims to not allow any other testing not authorized by the SCA for fear that some might misconstrue the results to mean they have "Jewish" ancestry. To this day, I have no idea what he meant by that, but oh well.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: berbers are also E
Correct, as are most other Africans since Berbers are Africans also of course. Many (though not all) Berbers are black in appearance too so what is your point??
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Any link? I also remember in '95 or '96 (I'm not sure) Hawass saying most mummies tested seem to cluster with indigenous black Africans not Europeans, Berbers, West Asians or any non-African populations to any significant degree, that's why he didn't release the results. He even added, IIRC, "I wouldn't have mind if they [edit:the mummies] had Jewish genes, because Arab and Jewish are both Semitic people, descendants of Abraham.". Get it?
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
(father) Ramses II Rounded forehead with sagittal plateau. Slight, rounded glabella. Proclined upper incisors; receding chin with high ANB. Rather long ramus with weak inclination of mandible. Orthognathous.
(son) Ramesses IV
Bulging occipital bun. Rather low vault; rounded forehead with pronounced glabella; vertical zygomatic arches; receding chin and moderate protrusion of incisors. Angular mandible. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Any link? I also remember in '95 or '96 (I'm not sure) Hawass saying most mummies tested seem to cluster with indigenous black Africans not Europeans, Berbers, West Asians or any non-African populations to any significant degree, that's why he didn't release the results. He even added, IIRC, "I wouldn't have mind if they [edit:the mummies] had Jewish genes, because Arab and Jewish are both Semitic people, descendants of Abraham.". Get it?
I'm looking right now, but I believe it was that very year you were talking about. Nowhere do I recall Hawass saying their DNA matched black Africans unless you can provide me a link or cite a quote of him actually saying that!
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Ramses III's phenotype in and of itself doesn't leave much to draw conclusions from (it's not that divergent), but when you include the overall picture (him and his contemporaries), the picture does get foggier, compared to the proto- Egyptians. Taken together, the former have a tendency to get progressively more ethnically ambiguous. No doubt having something to do with that the "Libyan" dynasties were right at their doorstep.
As for the Zoe Saldana comment (click):
Very interesting observation as well as source! I think we should discuss the topic of Egypt's population change during dynastic times as opposed to after further in a thread of its own. In the mean time, I question what makes you think this change comes from 'Libyans' as opposed to Levantine folks??
As far as "honey" type tones or complexions, I've always maintained that such complexions were far more common in Lower Egypt around the Delta. Indeed this is something stated by several Egyptologists in references to physical appearance of Egyptians, namely Gay Robins and Frank Yurco.
Though this is a first I've heard of it being common in Upper Egypt or at least an area of Upper Egypt, I'm really not that surprised since such complexions are not uncommon in areas as far south as Ethiopia and Eritrea.
Ethiopian women
Perhaps a better example than Zoe Saldana...
Liya Kebede
Though note that honey comes in shades other than the typical 'golden'.
In fact African honey can be quite dark.
African honey
Therefore, I find your source about an Upper Egyptian sepat which seems to emphasize "honey" complexions vs. "black" complexions with the latter being a "minority" somewhat misleading.
Just jumping in here to say I wouldn't trust a lot of the pics of ancient egyptian wall art found on the net. I notice quite some time ago that many of the images were edited to appear a lighter color than they actually were. Untouched Egyptian wall art depicted the Egyptians in darker skins tones. Not to say that light brown isn't found on the walls, but that the darker skins tones were edited out.
Examples. [IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]
Posts: 116 | From: Birmingham, AL | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic