posted
But if you exclude the East-West coastal towns/cities and move into the more southerly regions of the Maghreb(and Egypt too) the populations begin to change in the direction of Africa.
It is an interesting phenomenon to note that historic Africa is internal Africa from Egypt to Ghana, Mali, Songhay, Zimbabwe, Hausaland, etc., but that situation was distorted when invaders, settlers, colonialists and others established their entrepots on the African coasts. From North Africa to West Africa to Southern Africa and East Africa colonialists managed to establish their headquarters on the coasts. Alexandria and Cairo in Egypt were built on/near the coasts while Thebes, Memphis, Abu Simbel, etc. were internal and indigenous African towns. The same for Tripoli, Tunis, Dakar, Lagos, Accra, Capetown, Mogadishu, Mombassa, etc.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
ARCHAEOLOGY Vanished Persian Army Said Found in Desert NOV 27, 2012 03:00 AM ET // BY ROSSELLA LORENZI
The remains of a mighty Persian army said to have drowned in the sands of the western Egyptian desert 2,500 years ago might have been finally located, solving one of archaeology's biggest outstanding mysteries, according to Italian researchers.
Bronze weapons, a silver bracelet, an earring and hundreds of human bones found in the vast desolate wilderness of the Sahara desert have raised hopes of finally finding the lost army of Persian King Cambyses II. The 50,000 warriors were said to be buried by a cataclysmic sandstorm in 525 B.C.
Are these the bones of a legendary Persian army lost in the Sahara 2,500 years ago?
The remains of a legendary 50,000-strong army which was swallowed up in a cataclysmic sandstorm in the Sahara Desert 2,500 years ago are believed to have been found. Italian archaeologists Angelo and Alfredo Castiglioni, twin brothers, have discovered bronze weapons and hundreds of human bones which they reckon are the remains of the lost army of Persian King Cambyses II.
According to the Greek historian Herodotus (484-425 BC), Cambyses, the son of Cyrus the Great, sent the soldiers from Thebes to attack the Oasis of Siwa in 525BC.
Their mission was to destroy the oracle at the Temple of Amun after the priests there refused to legitimise his claim to Egypt.
quote: Isaiah 20:4 So shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives, young and old, naked and barefoot, even with their buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Mahgreb has significant Arabian contribution
The so-called Arab conquest at that time was largely cultural. And those Arabs from Arabia (light and dark-skinned) who did come into North Africa would be even more "foreign" to Morocco and North Africa than Sahelians.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yo. I am NOT putting faith in DNATribes. I am saying their current(2013) classification makes more sense. And they have moved away from their old classification and labels. The term Sahara-Arab is about right. Why? Because of this.
Saharan and SSA migrants into South Arabia.
Where some of us is getting confused, the migration was into Arabia and not the otherway around. As I pointed out in another thread if the migration was into the Sahara region. The West Asian(Turkish) SNP would have migrated along with Sahara-Arabia SNPs. But what we see is a clear pattern of ALL African(Saharan/SSA/NEast) into Arabia into Persia.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I think Xyman puts too much faith in DNATribes for them to say they are "coming around". Such organizations are still plagued with the usual bias.
As for the Sahel, it's funny how even among the most "negroid" populations of the Sahel region don't usually get lumped in with North Africans or Eurasians even though DNA studies show they do. I am automatically reminded of Tishkoff study of the Dogon.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Note. This pattern existed in the 1500's. According to 23andme, SSA lineage, E1b1a, existed in the Arabia, Qatar AND PERSIA. This again corraborates DNATribes current disclosure.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
So yes, There were arabs and black Persians circa >1500ya
See the pattern. DNATribes is on point.
Any questions???
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I think Xyman puts too much faith in DNATribes for them to say they are "coming around". Such organizations are still plagued with the usual bias.
As for the Sahel, it's funny how even among the most "negroid" populations of the Sahel region don't usually get lumped in with North Africans or Eurasians even though DNA studies show they do. I am automatically reminded of Tishkoff study of the Dogon.
^^And reputed "North African" sampling is too often a very limited coastal slice, excluding numerous areas credible geographers consider to be North African, some pieces of which are located below the Sahara.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ But Troll posts oversize charts and articles trying to make you think he is smart and you are supposed to guess what his point of view is. In actuality he is uncertain and is hiding behind articles and maps, it's a bluff game
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: [QB]
quote:The Mahgreb has significant Arabian contribution
The so-called Arab conquest at that time was largely cultural.
that's bullshyt,
stop being a parrot, Do your own research than parroting other posters
J Distrubution
The Maghreb had signifcant waves of Arabian migration, this is the region DNATribes is talking about and it is demonstarted by DNA
" Arab conquest at that time was largely cultural"
^^^^ this applies to the Sahel not the Maghreb
.
LOL Jackass I'm not disagreeing with you. Initially the so-called Arab conquest was largely cultural, North African groups for the most part like the Berbers were Arabised. Today they are still basically an Arabised African group. Same for "Arabs" in places like Sudan or Zanzibar. Of course the significant "waves" came later. Not denying that. Try to develop your comprehension skills. Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
OK, good come back. That is the problem with these genetic studies and who are the authors. They conflict or contradict each other. That is why I said WHOEVER author these papers should be noted. Remember Malmstrom, Barbujani etc are in the camp of “modern Europeans are NOT indigenous to Europe”. While Achilli, Toronni etc are in the camp of “modern Europeans ARE indigenous to Europe”. Perireira and Antonini etc flip-flop. Plus there are new researchers emerging on the scene from many different countries. Everyone has the tools now except for Africa, I don’t considered South Africa black owned. When you read enough of these you begin to know who is who and what spin they bring to the discussion.
But based upon CURRENT(2013) and real time data collected and the most up-to-date sampling done by DNATribes this table holds true, Africans Part 4. STR analysis supports this view also. South Arabians are a blend of Saharans/SSA/NEAfricans …….and Turks(WAsians) while North Africans are essentially pure Africans.
Maybe you can start a thread on nrY Haplogroup J. From what I read on male-hg-J it can be either be African or South Arabian.. Which means that deep red-spot west of the Red Sea is the point of origin and NOT the one in south Arabia. Which would make SOUTH ARABIANS TRANSPLANTED AFRICANS ADMIXED WITH TURKS. But again what is the point. These people look very similar. South Arabia and the Sahara have the same environmental conditions thus they SHOULD look very similar. ie Dark Brown/Black people with high nose, similar to South Asian Indians.. But only the Dark Brown/Black Saharans are indigenous Africa.
Similarly Melanesians, Dravidians and Andaman Islanders etc all look the same. Why….they inhabit similar environment.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Correction to : ” These people look very similar”. Since I have never seen them, delete that remark. But “same environmental conditions thus they SHOULD look very similar” still stands.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Mahgreb has significant Arabian contribution
The so-called Arab conquest at that time was largely cultural. And those Arabs from Arabia (light and dark-skinned) who did come into North Africa would be even more "foreign" to Morocco and North Africa than Sahelians.
Much of the so-called "Arab" contribution to the Maghreb and Al-Andalus was comprised of Arabized Syrians (from the Levant). The "Arabian" contribution of "the Arabs" consisted of dark-skinned peoples as dark as the Moors, and darker according to dnatribes and other analyses.
According to the book, Ibn Garcia's Shuubiyya Letter, a relatively recent scholarly work - “In order to put an end to the chaotic situation in al-Andalus, the Umayyad Caliph sent a large body of Arab troops, often referred to as Syrians, to the Maghreb under the command of Balj b. Bishr, al Qushayri. A conglomeration of Berber tribes in 123/741 defeated this army. In the words of the Latin Chronicle of 754, the course of this battle was also influenced by the FRIGHTENING appearance of the Berbers. It reads:
'They [i.e. the Syrian Arabs] decided on their own initiative to hasten to the sea, crossing the territory of the Moors to attack Tangiers with the Swords. But the army of the Moors, realizing this immediately burst forth from the mountains to the battle naked girded only with loin-cloths covering their shameful parts. When they joined with each other in battle at the Nava river, the Egyptian horses immediately recoiled in flight, as the Moors on their beautiful horses revealed their repulsive colour and gnashed their white teeth. Despairing, they launched another attack, the Arab cavalry again instantly recoiled due to the colour of the Moors’ skin.'” (Goran Larsson, 2003, p. 71)
The "Arab" people mentioned in this 8th century Mozarabic chronicle were actually Syrians. Syrians and Arabs were undoubtedly still considered two different people in that era. The Arabian element came in great numbers only during the Sulaym/Hilal or Hawazin invasions of the 10th to 11th century. The latter who were truly Arabs, and not just Arabized, were black, like the Berbers of that era, and like many modern Sudanese.
That we know from the Syrian and Kurdish documenters themselves.
The modern day Maghrebis have been both Berberized and Arabized (Syrianized). Most importantly however modern Arabia in the same latitudes as northern Africa has been genetically Syrianized much like Egypt - particularly within the last 5 centuries. That is why they have much in common genetically with the people of the Levant.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
The current population of the Mahgreb on average is not essentially pure African.
dana do you agree with this statement?
.
North Africans or Maghrebis are not monolithic. It also depends on what one means by African obviously. Of course, genetically the populations probably reflect their origins which are derived from Andalusia, Africa, the Genoese, slaves from almost everywhere, Syrians, Arabians, Central Asians including "Turks" (of all kinds), Slavs including Circassians, Vandals/Lombards, Scythians (Alans), the Romans and the ancient Greeks.
One would certainly have to expand their definition of "pure" not to agree.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
DNA tribes assessment looks right on target to me. It is a reflection of what has occurred historically in terms of population replacement.
The fact that they even picked up a lot of the East Asian (Turkish/Mongol) component in modern Egyptians is particularly impressive.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: [qb] [QUOTE]The Mahgreb has significant Arabian contribution
The so-called Arab conquest at that time was largely cultural. And those Arabs from Arabia (light and dark-skinned) who did come into North Africa would be even more "foreign" to Morocco and North Africa than Sahelians.
I said, "Much of the so-called "Arab" contribution to the Maghreb and Al-Andalus was comprised of Arabized Syrians (from the Levant). The "Arabian" contribution of "the Arabs" consisted of dark-skinned peoples as dark as the Moors, and darker according to dnatribes and other analyses." That was off the mark.
I meant to say "Much of the so-called "Arab" contribution to the Maghreb and Al-Andalus was comprised of Arabized Syrians (from the Levant) according to dnatribes and other analyses."
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Researching Y-DNA Haplo-Group J, I came across this gem….
===================================== Quote: Saudi Arabian Y-Chromosome diversity by Peter Underhill et al
There is also evidence of Middle Paleolithic Mousterian and Aterian technologies in Arabia suggesting the possibility of an expanded southern border for populations from Northern Africa [5].
the Levant was an important bidirectional corridor of human migrations [13,14]. Moreover, the Levant appeared as the main source of male lineages to the Arabian Peninsula [15]. However, Saudi Arabia, a country that occupies about 80% of the Arabian Peninsula, was not directly included. In order to fill this void, we performed a high resolution Y-chromosome SNP analysis of 157 Saudi Arabian males and a STR-based analysis of J1-M267, the most frequent Y-chromosome haplogroup in Saudi Arabia.
Our Saudi Arabia sample was compared to other Arabian Peninsula populations and to surrounding areas using data from previous studies performed at a similar level of haplogroup resolution.
In addition, southern Arabia, represented by Yemen and Oman, show a greater(African) E1-M123 account than in northern areas (p = 0.006).
Table 1. Yemen(south Arabia) has the highest frequency of J1* in the entire region.
So, from an Arabian Peninsula perspective, E1-M123 could have come from Ethiopia, across the Horn of Africa, or from the Levant, or even from both sources, forming independent isolates. Global male inputs from Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia across Iran, not the Levant, into the Arabian Peninsula have been estimated in this study, as 13.4% and 16.6% from both source areas respectively.
Recent mtDNA studies on the same Arabian Peninsula countries [7-9,12] have confirmed a notable female-driven sub-Saharan African input with a mean value around 15% for all the Peninsula, although frequencies as high as 60% have been detected in Hadramawt populations of Yemen [9]. Curiously, the Iranian/Persian female flow (18%) was also rather similar to that calculated for Africa. Although a slight ratio excess of Sub-Saharan African female versus male gene flow is detected (1.12) we do not found the strong sexual bias proposed by other authors for Arabian populations and attributed to the peculiarities of the recent slave-trade [12,36]. Without dismissing the role mediated by slavery, the geographical distribution of these sub-Saharan African lineages in the Arabian Peninsula seems to indicate a prehistoric entrance of a noticeable portion of these lineages
It could be suggested that these E-M96 Saudi lineages have a sub-Saharan Africa ancestry. and the north African Saharan ancestry . However, at least for one of them, all their known male ancestors belong to a big Shammar Arab tribe that ruled much of central and northern Arabia from Riyadh to the frontiers of Syria and northern Iraq. In addition, it might be present in Lebanon [18].
The data confirm that this area has mainly been a recipe ent of gene flow from its African and Asian surrounding areas, probably mainly since the last Glacial maximum onwards. ..rare deep rooting lineages for Y chromosome haplogroups E and J have been detected
==================================
From the above we can deduce:
1. The presence of Aterian technology in South Arabia is the archeological evidence of the migration of Saharans into Arabia 2. How can they do a study on Arabia and NOT sample a country that makes up 80% of the land mass. Man, talk about selective sampling. That study was probably conducted by Cruciani or Toroninni. Bigoted Italians. LOL! 3. This study was done at the same resolution. This s a good sign. Should be relatively objective and informative. 4. J1* originated within the black South/Arabian/African admixed population. That is IF it arose in south Arabia since there is evidence it arose in East Africa. 5. as noted above SSA(and of course other Africans) have been entering south Arabia and Persia since pre-historic times. As I said the pattern is consistent with demic diffusion/migration and NOT slavery/transplanting. 6. There is also evidence the SSA lineage(peoples) extended their homeland all the way up to Iraq. The remnants are tribesmen of the Negev desert Isreal and Jordan that still wander through the area. 7. The latitude of J1* indicates these people should be very dark or black. So in reality they are no different from Sudanese. 8. Are authors lying about African female slave trade in Arabia? Just as they are lying about European female slaves(H1) in North Africa? You tell me.
Btw: You do realize we are squabbling over a few miles. One mile down the road the label is “Eurasian/Arab” and one mile up one it is “African.”—in this case “one mile “is across the water.- if I was a betting man I would bet they look the same….at least in those days.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Though it is interesting J1 is highest in the Yemen, most of the present day Shammar tribe from the northern Nejd - which they are probably talking about- is from Syria and Iraq. They are a good example of the Arabized Syrians who migrated southward into the Arabian peninsula after the 1600s. The tribe is not representive of the ancient Shammar who are of Tayyi (Yemenite) origin.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
Btw: You do realize we are squabbling over a few miles. One mile down the road the label is “Eurasian/Arab” and one mile up one it is “African.”—in this case “one mile “is across the water.- if I was a betting man I would bet they look the same….at least in those days. [/QB]
this is what happens when you don't know or ignore the history. Many of the migrations came from the Levant into the Maghreb rather than from Spain even though Spain is closer to Morocco Tunisia and Algeria
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
What are you talking about? I am saying that most of the migration was FROM Africa TO Europe and Arabia. That is why I agree with DNATribes data. However I am currently researching hg-J, I haven’t concluded anything as yet.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Btw: You do realize we are squabbling over a few miles. One mile down the road the label is “Eurasian/Arab” and one mile up one it is “African.”—in this case “one mile “is across the water.- if I was a betting man I would bet they look the same….at least in those days.
this is what happens when you don't know or ignore the history. Many of the migrations came from the Levant into the Maghreb rather than from Spain even though Spain is closer to Morocco Tunisia and Algeria [/QB]
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] What are you talking about? I am saying that most of the migration was FROM Africa TO Europe and Arabia. That is why I agree with DNATribes data.
The FROM point is where the colored rectangles are
The arrowheads are the TO point
the reverse of what you are saying
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
You tell me…this is your expertise… along with Sage/Jari etc …seems like Lioness know a thing or two about the history also. But the authors are saying the Shammar are Africans or at least carry SSA lineage. You are saying they are from Syria and areas further north and they are NOT true Shammars. If both are true there is only one conclusion.
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: [qb] [QUOTE]The Mahgreb has significant Arabian contribution
The so-called Arab conquest at that time was largely cultural. And those Arabs from Arabia (light and dark-skinned) who did come into North Africa would be even more "foreign" to Morocco and North Africa than Sahelians.
I said, "Much of the so-called "Arab" contribution to the Maghreb and Al-Andalus was comprised of Arabized Syrians (from the Levant). The "Arabian" contribution of "the Arabs" consisted of dark-skinned peoples as dark as the Moors, and darker according to dnatribes and other analyses." That was off the mark.
I meant to say "Much of the so-called "Arab" contribution to the Maghreb and Al-Andalus was comprised of Arabized Syrians (from the Levant) according to dnatribes and other analyses."
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeingadickswallower: Africans migrating into Arabia? Impossible! Mary, Mindless/Sweetie whats the meaning of this?
Nobody denies Africans migrating into Arabia since it is right next door to Africa. Although some still doubt historical realities like the Holocaust. LOL
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Sub-Saharans in Arabia and Persia.
Saharans in Arabia and Persia.
So yes, There were arabs and black Persians circa >1500ya
See the pattern. DNATribes is on point.
Any questions???
But isn't the presence of E1b1a in Arabia and Persia tied to Medieval slave trade??! If you are referring to much more ancient and voluntary migrations of Africans into Arabia, I thought the lineages are largely E1b1b as well as even older E2?? As for 'Black Persians', they were supposedly the indigenous Elamites.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: that's bullshyt,
stop being a parrot, Do your own research than parroting other posters
J Distrubution
The Maghreb had signifcant waves of Arabian migration, this is the region DNATribes is talking about and it is demonstarted by DNA
" Arab conquest at that time was largely cultural"
^^^^ this applies to the Sahel not the Maghreb
Now, now, there's no need for profanity. I should remind you that the map above shows the presence of lineages of hg J clade in general. There are three main types-- underived J*, J1 and J2 associated with Africa. J* is the oldest and though its highest frequency is in Socotra Island it is also present in the Horn along with J1 whose highest frequency in Africa is in Sudan. Both PREDATE the 'Arab' language and ethnicity let alone Arab-Islamic invasion. It is J2 that is associated with the Arab-Islamic invasion of Africa and it is largely found in North Africa proper from Egypt to the Maghreb. Mind you, there are also forms of J2 found to the east of Arabia in Iran, Central Asia, and India that also predate 'Arabs' and is associated with Neolithic dispersions.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] You tell me…this is your expertise… along with Sage/Jari etc …seems like Lioness know a thing or two about the history also. But the authors are saying the Shammar are Africans or at least carry SSA lineage. You are saying they are from Syria and areas further north and they are NOT true Shammars. If both are true there is only one conclusion.
Shammar
The tribe of Shammar (Arabic: شمّر "Šammar") is one of the largest tribes of Nejd, Saudi Arabia, with an estimated 3 million members in Iraq, over 1.5 million in Saudi Arabia (concentrated in Ha'il), a Kuwaiti population (centered in Al Jahra) of around 100,000, a Syrian population is thought to exceed 0.5 million along with unknown number in Jordan.In its "golden age", around 1850, the tribe ruled much of central and northern Arabia from Riyadh to the frontiers of Syria and the vast area known as Al Jazira in northern Iraq.
The Shammar are an Arabian Bedouin tribe. the tribe once ruled most of Arabia, and they had a state known as Jebal Shammar in Northern Arabia under quasi-independence however there loyalty to the Ottoman Empire was unquestioned. Unlike other Arabians tribes the Shammar did not partake in the Arab revolt, but wanted to crush it. The Sauds and the British would force the Shammar to be expelled from their ancient homeland into what is now Iraq. Today 40% of the Shammar tribe lives in Iraq, and made Tikrit and Mosul to be their homeland. Always distinguished by their noses, eyes and small built and often to this day keep the nomadic lifestyle of their ancestors. The Toga clan of the Shammar who settled in the Southern parts of Iraq adopted Shia Islam. Today there are still blood links and relationships between these two groups. During the Baathist times the Shammar faced increasing marginalization despite they were mostly Sunnis and of Arab origins, this was because their nomadic culture was seen to be a hindrance to modernization.
genetic study of kuwait bedouin tribes the shammar sample carried two main haplogroups—J1 (at 52.3%) and R1a1 (at 42.8%)
The Shammar are a tribal confederation made up of three main branches: the Abdah, the Aslam, and the Zoba. The modern Qabila of Shammar are descendants of the Tayy tribe of Yemen. The earliest non-Arab sources refer to Arabs as Taits, thought of as referring to the Tayy, as Ayas ibn Quasiba, a ruler of pre-Islamic Iraq, had contact with Persian culture. Other historians locate Shammar's origin in Ghasinides and Manatherides] of Hira (near Kufa), and then immigrating from the Fertile Crescent to northern Saudi Arabia. This may be true, due to the genetic similarities between the residents of Saudi Arabia and the Shammar. Today, most members of the Shammar live in Saudi Arabia and Iraq, and some sections settled in Syria and Jordan
Hadjr Abu Wuded (middle), Sheikh of the Feddaga Shammar, 1911 (Oppenheim)
Picture was taken in 1925 of man from the Shammar Bedouin tribe in the southwest portion of iraq, with an Asiatic Cheetah and a cub (Fahd Sayyad or Fahd Alrabi) . (Al Rashid)Shammar tribe ruled almost all arabia and part of iraq-- bedouins used the Asiatic Cheetah for hunt and in History the Most Famous who used Asiatic Cheetah to hunt was the Abbasid Caliph
The Shammar
The Shammar, the second largest bedouin group of Arabia, are Southern Arabs (Tai) with roots in Yemen. They were first mentioned in the 14th century. Their home was the Djebel Shammar in Northern Saudi Arabia. Like the Aneze a large part of the Shammar migrated towards the North in the 17th century under the leadership of al-Jerba, but first only as far as today´s Southern Iraq. They were forced to cross the Euphrates in 1800 by the Wahhabite attacks and could later be found as far north as Mosul. The Northern Shammar ruled the Jezireh, the land between Euphrates and Tigris and were divided between the East-Shammar around Ferhan and the West-Shammar around Fares (see below). Today the Northern Shammar in Iraq are also called Shammar al Jerba and are Sunni. The southern branch of the Iraqi Shammar are called Shammar Toga and belong to the Shiits.
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: that's bullshyt,
stop being a parrot, Do your own research than parroting other posters
J Distrubution
The Maghreb had signifcant waves of Arabian migration, this is the region DNATribes is talking about and it is demonstarted by DNA
" Arab conquest at that time was largely cultural"
^^^^ this applies to the Sahel not the Maghreb
Now, now, there's no need for profanity. I should remind you that the map above shows the presence of lineages of hg J clade in general. There are three main types-- underived J*, J1 and J2 associated with Africa. J* is the oldest and though its highest frequency is in Socotra Island it is also present in the Horn along with J1 whose highest frequency in Africa is in Sudan. Both PREDATE the 'Arab' language and ethnicity let alone Arab-Islamic invasion. It is J2 that is associated with the Arab-Islamic invasion of Africa and it is largely found in North Africa proper from Egypt to the Maghreb. Mind you, there are also forms of J2 found to the east of Arabia in Iran, Central Asia, and India that also predate 'Arabs' and is associated with Neolithic dispersions.
Haplogroup J2 is defined by the M172 marker. Spread of Y-DNA Haplogroup J2: J2 Distribution
Introduction Kuwait lies in the Arabian Peninsula at the head of the Persian Gulf. Although it is located near a possible migration route out of Africa that may have been used over 50 000 years ago (Jobling et al., 2004), such early events appear to have had little impact on the current populations of Kuwait and the first known settlement dates only to the 3rd Century BCE when the Ancient Greeks colonized the island of Failaka under Alexander the Great. Historians believe the current settlement was established between the late 16th and 18th Centuries CE (Dickson, 1956). The population of Kuwait is divided into two main groups: townspeople and Bedouin tribal groups (ﻗﺒﺎﺋﻞ Qaba’il) with affiliations to their “cousins” (وﻟﺪ ﻋﻢ wild ’am) who inhabit other parts of the Arabian Peninsula. The Bedouin are not geographically isolated from each other and are traditionally nomadic, moving from one region to another seeking pasture for their herds to graze and water for survival (Dickson, 1967). The Bedouin conventionally claim descent from two main lineages: from Adnan son of Ishmael—the Adnani lineage—or from Qahtan (or Joktan)—the Qahtani (or Joktani) lineage.
We wished to investigate the genetic structure of the Kuwaiti Bedouin and consider how they compare with neighboring populations, what the genetic consequences of their traditional lifestyle might be, and whether the social lineages that identify their descent groups are also reflected in their genetic lineages.
The non-recombining part of the Y chromosome was chosen for analysis. Its high levels of population differentiation—a consequence of its low effective population size and, sometimes, of patrilocality—make it generally highly informative regarding genetic structure and differentiation (Jobling and Tyler-Smith, 2003). In addition, its strict paternal inheritance allows comparisons to be made between traditional male-line descent groups and observed male-line genetic structures. It is a single locus, however, and conclusions based on it may not be representative of the rest of the genome. We therefore complemented the Y-chromosome analysis with that of a widely-used panel of autosomal STRs (Collins et al., 2004).
Samples for DNA analysis were collected from volunteers from the Adnani tribes of Al-Aniza, Mutran and Awazim (a Suluba tribe), and the Qahtani tribes of Ajman, Shimar and Murrah. This selection is representative of the most prominent tribes of Adnani and Qahtani lineages of Arabia. Results from the sample were compared with data from other populations derived from the literature.
Discussion Although previous studies have investigated classical genetic (Singh Sawhney et al., 1984; Al-Hilli, 1985; Al-Bustan et al., 2002) and molecular (Al-Nassar et al., 1981; al-Nassar et al., 1995; al-Nassar et al., 1996; Sebetan and Hajar, 1998) markers, including Y-chromosomal markers (Nebel et al., 2001) in Bedouin populations, and one Bedouin sample from Israel is present in the HGDP panel (Cann et al., 2002), the Kuwaiti Bedouin have thus far been little-studied. They share some Y-chromosomal features with the Negev Bedouins (Nebel et al., 2001): a high frequency of haplogroup J1 and low STR diversity within it, but none of the Kuwaiti individuals sampled carries the Bedouin Modal Hapolotype and thus their recent genetic history is distinct. Four main conclusions now emerge from our work:
First, the Kuwaiti Bedouin populations resemble their geographical neighbors. The autosomal markers used in this study were chosen for their ability to discriminate between individuals within any population, and this property, together with their small number, lead to high levels of noise when they are used to compare populations. Nevertheless, they reveal the genetic relationships between the Bedouin and other populations from the Arabian Peninsula (Figure 1), as expected from our understanding of the history of the region. The same conclusion is obtained with Y-chromosomal markers (Figure 1).
Second, the Bedouin exhibit evidence of small effective population sizes and substantial genetic drift. This is reflected in the low within-population diversity values for Y-chromosomal loci, and the low estimates of effective population size with BATWING; note that the latter values are estimates of the size when growth began—i.e. ~3-9000 years ago— and so are exceptionally low. Genetic drift leads to large distances between populations and these are seen both in the autosomal analyses—most marked for the Aniza (Figure 1a)—and the Y-chromosomal analyses (Figure 1). Again, these are exactly the genetic consequences expected from their lifestyle as small groups of desert-dwellers.
Third, no subdivision was seen according to the traditional Adnani and Qahtani lineages. This is illustrated by the lack of STRUCTURE grouping into more than one cluster (Table 1), interspersion of populations belonging to the traditional lineages in the autosomal and Y-chromosomal MDS plots ( Figure 1), and lack of distinction between the lineages in the AMOVA analyses (Table 4). This finding is contrary to historical and socio-cultural expectations, and could be explained in a number of ways. For example, a common genetic pattern could have been established in an ancestral population and retained by the two groups; alternatively, there could have been sufficient gene flow between the tribes to prevent genetic differences building up; or each individual population could have diverged to such an extent that ancient relationships have been obscured. This finding is also supported by the haplotype sharing between many of the populations visualised in the network (Figure 2).
Fourth, despite not supporting the traditional binary subdivision of the Bedouin populations, the genetic data nevertheless provide considerable insights into their genetic history. The Ajman stood out in the Y-chromosomal analyses as outliers in the MDS plots (Figure 1), from their zero haplogroup and low haplotype diversity (Table 3), and from the population-specificty of their haplotypes in the network (Figure 2). A potential explanation for these findings could be the high status of the Ajman in the Bedouin social hierarchy and lack of mixing with other populations (Dickson, 1967). To this day, the Ajman tribe is known for its zealous view of consanguineous marriage and tribal relations.
The Ajman contrast with the Aniza, who show the highest diversity among the Bedouin, with six haplogroups detected (Table 3). This observation fits several aspects of their history. Their traditional territory spanned a very wide geographical area. Their first mention in history was before the initiation of Islam where they were found in the Najd region of modern Saudi Arabia. From the start of Islam and through to the Ottoman era this tribe, via conquest and raiding, extended over all of Saudi Arabia, Syria, and North towards Iraqi Kurdistan and Jordan (Dickson, 1956). Slavery among the chieftains was a sign of power and wealth. Aniza tribes like those of Banu-Hilal and Banu Sulaym are believed to have participated in the conquest of North Africa in the 11th century CE (Abun-Nasr, 1987), possibly leading to the introduction of E-M78 chromosomes. Between the Umayyad and the Abbasid Empires, many slaves were brought from Iberia, especially Cordoba and Andalusia (Bassaam, 1977). Furthermore, envoys of the British Empire to the Persian Gulf and the Middle East between the early 19th and early 20th centuries CE, mention in their memoirs the enslaving of Georgians, Armenians and Circassians (Philby, 1923). These slaves were naturalized and given tribal affiliations under slavery abolishment treaties signed between the tribal chieftains—or emirs—and the envoys of the British Empire. This could be a reason for the presence of R1b1 and G2* Y chromosomes.
The Awazim stand out because of their high frequency of haplogroup E-M123 (24.3 %), the highest yet reported in any population. The highest frequency reported previously (23.5 %) was in Ethiopians from Amhara (Cruciani et al., 2004). The Awazim also showed the presence of haplogroup R2 (R-M124), characteristic of South Asia (Sengupta et al., 2006). There may be a possible link to the Roma (‘Gypsy’) migrations. It has also been proposed that the Awazim may have originated from the Caucasus—also consistent with the theory of “Suluba” (Bell and Richmond, 1937). The presence of markers M123 and M124 may also suggest that slaves brought before the initiation of Islam and after the passing of the four Caliph eras (Lewis, 1990) have been naturalized within these tribes—perhaps when slavery was abolished.
The Shimar sample carried two main haplogroups—J1 (at 52.3 %) and R1a1 (at 42.8 %)— with a small percentage of G2 (4.76 %). A historical explanation could be that the Shimar trace their origins to two regions: Iraq (Philby, 1923) and Saudi Arabia. The Shimar resided in northern Najd—currently in Saudi Arabia—after their migration during pre-Islamic times from Taye’ in Yemen. Their migration to the North into Iraq ended during the 17th Century CE (Subahai, 1996; Khuraysi, 1998; Williamson and Basri, 1999). As they settled in Iraq, the Shimar gave up nomadism and became urbanized in towns and cities—most notably in Mosul (Khuraysi, 1998). It is said that the Shimar are now of two main antecedents—Iraqi Shimar and Saudi Shimar—and each refers to itself as “the Noble Tribe” (personal communication, Shimar of Kuwait). The haplogroup R1a1-M17 is found at substantial frequency in Iraq, so limited gene flow or subsequent drift (or both) could account for its presence in the Shimar— although later migrations, slavery and trade provide alternative explanations.
In all, except for the lack of subdivision into Adnani and Qahtani lineages, the genetic data fit remarkably well with the expectations for small nomadic groups in the Arabian Peninsula, and provide independent support for many aspects of the traditional histories of these populations.
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Instead of spamming the board with study, bold the section of interest.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I try to hold my tongue with you but you are really testing my patience. You have a knack for talking without thinking...or in this case reading. The sections are bolded. It is up to you now to read more...quote from previous post
prehistoric means....pre-historic....>3000bc?
======we do not found the strong sexual bias proposed by other authors for Arabian populations and attributed to the peculiarities of the recent slave-trade [12,36]. Without dismissing the role mediated by slavery, the geographical distribution of these sub-Saharan African lineages in the Arabian Peninsula seems to indicate a prehistoric entrance of a noticeable portion of these lineages=====
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QUOTE]But isn't the presence of E1b1a in Arabia and Persia tied to Medieval slave trade??! If you are referring to much more ancient and voluntary migrations of Africans into Arabia, I thought the lineages are largely E1b1b as well as even older E2?? As for 'Black Persians', they were supposedly the indigenous Elamites.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Instead of spamming the board with study, bold the section of interest.
Because trolls "post oversize charts and articles trying to make you think he is smart and you are supposed to guess what his point of view is. In actuality he is uncertain and is hiding behind articles and maps, it's a bluff game" - Lioness
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since I have never been to Egypt..although my brother(sibing) has ...I can make a scientific guess. BTW - he says the people in Cairo are lighter complexioned than the people further South. But he is an unashamed AfroCentric.
I am a little more objective. Which means i piss him off sometimes. Based upon the DNATribes data Africa Part 4. The modern Egyptians and Moroccan Jews are the only Ethnic group whose SNP seems out of place in North Africa.
Based upon the ecological niche. They are suppose to be dark/black/skin Near Tropical limbed/curly or kinky or straight hair. Black eyes. black hair(no blondes). everted lips(based upon statues and MOST pics). Long headed. Like most modern Nubians and North Sudanese.
on't know these people
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: this question is for xyyman please let him answer it first.
xyyman, is the current population of Egypt on average essentially pure African?
.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [ Based upon the DNATribes data Africa Part 4. The modern Egyptians and Moroccan Jews are the only Ethnic group whose SNP seems out of place in North Africa.
the first groups listed are Africans of the Sub Saharan and Arabians of the Sahara.
I don't know what you mean by "out of place"
Whatever it means is irrelevant to the fact that Maghrebians who live in the Sahara in every case listed are by a wide margin more Arabian than they are African according to this chart.
I don't understand what you are saying. Are you saying Arabians are primarily African genetically?
and you continue saying this even after dana suggested they are not even primarily Arabian but are "Arabized Syrians" ?
Anybody reading your comment would not see how it relates to the chart
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: For the obvious reason that people are what you might call "naive realists". They go mainly on what they see. I was recently at the airport at Casa Blanca, Morocco spending a good 10 hours there. I was able to observe the Moroccan population thusly--including cleaners working at the airport. For those who live in the Americas, Moroccans are like the people of Puerto Rico or the Dominican Republic. They are easily distinguishable from European tourists and generally from the darker African populations from further South--even though they might share DNA haplogroup affinities.
The Moroccans of today and much of the "Arab world" of today is the precursor for the mixed ethnic populations of Hispanic America. They represent the same sort of blend of European and African populations as seen in North Africa and Spain. The Spanish introduced Moorish culture to the Americas and it is most strongly felt in South and Central America but also in North America, most particularly in California, with its Spanish Moorish style architecture. Unfortunately most of the discussion of Moorish populations in the United States centers around African American groups and not the Spanish cultures of America, which has strong elements of African and Islamic Moorish culture.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
For one, I don't work with any study or map that doesn't involve local contributions. Doing otherwise is ridiculous as there's no way to assess the size of the external contribution if we don't know the size of the local contribution.
Here's the 2 tables in the lastest study that does include local contributions as well as foreign contribution.
For one, the nomenclature of the 9 Continental Zone admixture is horrible and very insulting for the people who actually live in the Sahara which are mainly black African people. People who share most ancestry with people they would label "sub-Saharan". North African people of "Arabian" origin mostly live along the coast just above the Sahara. So the Saharan-Arabia category is a GROSS misnomer. But if we rename it the "North African-Arabia" category instead (hoping they eventually take samples of indigenous African people actually IN the Sahara in North African country and work on their map representation) it seems to show what we already know, that coastal North Africans mainly share genetic affinity with people from Arabia. They also share genetic affinity with people labelled 'sub-sahara'. Western coastal North Africans with Morocco and South Morocco in particular share more ancestry with the labelled 'Sub-Saharan' population than the Coastal Egyptian included in the samples. As usual, it's hard to gage if it's because people are admixed or if the population is more cosmopolitan.
21 World Regions Admixture
The nomenclature for the 21 Region map is ok as North African are actually labelled North African but still separate category should be created for indigenous black African people living in North African country. That is their samples should be taken and a category should be named after them (jointly or separately depending on the DNA clustering results). Here, 'North African' form their own cluster separate from 'Arabian' which is more preponderant in the western part of North Africa (may be just a sample bias effect). Instead of 'North African' it could easily be label 'Maghrebi' instead. For example, Egyptian (Egypt 1, Egypt 2) have a lower level of this "North African/Maghrebi" ancestry and a larger 'Arabian', 'Horn of Africa' and 'Eastern Mediterranean' component in their population compared to lets say people from Morocco. It's hard to gage if it's because people are admixed on an individual level or if the population is more cosmopolitan.
General assessment
While, as said above, it's hard to know if it's because people are admixed or if the population is more cosmopolitan. Maybe somebody else have more information about those studies. We know for sure there's many ethnic groups living in North Africa some of Sub-Saharan ancestry. So a 10% "Sub-Saharan" ancestry can be reflective of that (that is 10% of people are of Sub-Saharan ancestry) or reflective of a 10% "Sub-Sahran" admixture in the individuals in the sample set. Since on this forum we are mostly interested into ancient population substructure and not modern population substructure (which include such things as diaspora, admixture, foreign migrants, etc), it's an important question for us.
Coastal North African people seem to share a lot of ancestry with people from the Near East (Arabian, Mesopotamian, East Mediterranean). As well as some ancestry with Sub-Saharan and Horn Africans.
DNA Tribes don't help to reduce the confusion by not dividing their North African samples into ethnic groups (as they do for America or the rest of Africa).
Let's take Egypt for example. They have Egypt 1 and Egypt 2. That doesn't mean anything as Egyptian people are composed of people from many different ethnic origin with a different sets of alleles. In North America, they have taken good care of separating samples from European people and Native descent. Usually, in Africa in general they seem to take samples from many different ethnic groups as well (while many many are ignored). They don't just take a sample call Nigeria and be done with it. As Nigeria is composed of many different ethnic groups of different origin and ancestry.
For example, Egypt is composed of Beja, Bedouin, Berber, Nubian, Siwi, Arabian, Greeks, Italians.
If you put all those people of different origin (different SNP) into a blender and label those Egypt 1 and Egypt 2, analyzing their alleles frequency, you bound to get something confusing in relation to ancestry and ancestral population substructure.
So strangely, DNA tribes seem to consider the North African population to be mostly homogeneous when in reality it is heterogeneous. This is a serious bias on their part. Maybe it's due to the restricted samples set they have access to. Mostly taken in northern cities in North Africa.
In the rest of Africa, it seems ok, for example, they don't have Nigeria 1, Nigeria 2. They have Igbo Nigeria, Yoruba Nigeria, etc etc. Any population structure geneticist just need to insure that those people are really Igbo and Yoruba and not the product of a recent admixture of people self-describing as local. Ideally, samples from every ethnic groups are taken to assess their level of relatedness or not. That's what doing population structure study is all about.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Taking samples from every ethnic group in North Africa may be problematic for those with a specific political agenda.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
For example, Egypt is composed of Beja, Bedouin, Berber, Nubian, Siwi, Arabian, Greeks, Italians.
If you put all those people of different origin (different SNP) into a blender and label those Egypt 1 and Egypt 2, analyzing their alleles frequency, you bound to get something confusing in relation to ancestry and ancestral population substructure.
So strangely, DNA tribes seem to consider the North African population to be mostly homogeneous when in reality it is heterogeneous. This is a serious bias on their part. Maybe it's due to the restricted samples set they have access to. Mostly taken in northern cities in North Africa.
why would it be heterogeneous when you just described the following heterogeneous mix of ethnicities:
"For example, Egypt is composed of Beja, Bedouin, Berber, Nubian, Siwi, Arabian, Greeks, Italians."
and you left out Copts
and you left out Chinese, there are 60-100,000 in Egypt
I ran out of ideas on how to say the same thing different ways. You are on your own after this. . One last attempt!!! I respect Dana’s and a few others opinion on this board. That said. I don’t whole-hearted agree with all their opinions. Eg Sage and I have different opinions on Cleopatra but we agree on other issues. I rely on published data, timeline, charts etc. to form my opinion. Some of the more seasoned veterans who’s forte is History, archeology etc rely on Historical publication etc, to each his own. I am skeptical on who writes what.
So back to the charts, Africans Part 4, also, middle East Part 2. Combined, they tell a story. Setting aside our perception of what a contemporary Arab is or look like. The charts tell us….
1. North Africans are the “purest/least admixed “ of the two ie South Arabians and North Africans. Note: Arabian is only a “label” for people living in south Arabia which includes Yemen. 2. Both groups are admixed the most with populations that live close to them. Eg Arabs are admixed with Turks while Berbers are heavily admixed with SSA. Geographically that is how it should be.
In case you missed it – according to DNATribes Arabs are a different ethnic group from Turks. Many perceived them to be one and the same.
So to conclude I am saying, based upon the data, dis-regarding differing historical opinions, south Arabians are African Saharans and other Africans that migrated to Arabia prior to historical times. I think that is very clear. It is very simple logic. If the Arabs were the migrants they would have brought along their WAian/Turkish genes INTO North Africa. And that clearly is not the case. Turkish/Levant SNPs are non-existent in North Africa. Now if the North Africans were the migrants into south Arabia then SSA genes would show up in Arabia. Guess what?….that is exactly what we see!!! There you go.
Besides – DNATribes FAQ clearly states North Africans are un-admixed. That was my last attempt. It is really simple logic..really
BTW: the history books may need to be re-written.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Correction: should be Chart Middle East Part1 not Middle East Part 2
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
“Hands up in the air!!!!” I am not the one that came up with the labels. DNATribes did. I am calling it as they call it(2013). West Asians/Turks are a different ethnic group compared to Arabs. Arabs of old are now Saharan-Arabs (South) and West Asians/Turks to the North. In reality the south is a blend of different African ethnic groups and Turks
Someone needs their prescription checked
% of Turk SNP in Berbers
Algeria = 0.0% Libya = 1.4% MZab =0.0% North Morocco = 0.0% South Morocco =0.0% Saharawi=0.0% Tunisia = 0.0%
% of Sub-Saharan SNPs in Berber
Algeria = 8.0% Libya = 3.9% MZab =10.4% North Morocco = 2.9% South Morocco =26.1% Saharawi=10.7% Tunisia = 2.8%
I am not making this shyte up!!!. Look at the data!!!!!
I can do the same for Saharans in south Arabia. Where there is an increase in SSA SNPs in Arabia there is a corresponding increase North East Africans SNPs. That is why Peter Underhill concluded the presence was NOT from slavery but migration in pre-historic times.
Anyone above a high education or above can see that…no statistic analysis needed….right Sweet?
The lesson in all of this is …you cannot and should not make assumptions based upon how a person look. Goes back to what DNATribes called the unscientific classification called race.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Algeria = 0.0% Libya = 1.4% MZab =0.0% North Morocco = 0.0% South Morocco =0.0% Saharawi=0.0% Tunisia = 0.0%
% of Sub-Saharan SNPs in Berber
Algeria = 8.0% Libya = 3.9% MZab =10.4% North Morocco = 2.9% South Morocco =26.1% Saharawi=10.7% Tunisia = 2.8%
% of Saharan-Arabian SNPs
Algeria = 83.4% Libya = 89.4% MZab =87.1% North Morocco = 89.2% South Morocco =69.8% Saharawi=88.9% Tunisia = 86.6%
this is getting tiresome, the use of the owrd "Arabian" here indicates OOA ancestry at a significantly greater percentage than local
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Algeria = 0.0% Libya = 1.4% MZab =0.0% North Morocco = 0.0% South Morocco =0.0% Saharawi=0.0% Tunisia = 0.0%
% of Sub-Saharan SNPs in Berber
Algeria = 8.0% Libya = 3.9% MZab =10.4% North Morocco = 2.9% South Morocco =26.1% Saharawi=10.7% Tunisia = 2.8%
===
That's right refuse to address the lack of Levant SNP in Berbers. Proving the direction of migration.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
This thread is going downhill, and its going downhill fast. DNA Tribes (and all other genome wide SNP studies) have trouble distinguishing between Eurasian and North African specific SNPs and these clowns think that this somehow supports their views, or that its somehow different from the conclusions reached by Henn et al 2012. Yet, the same buffoons have beef with Henn et al 2012's findings.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Ok! Let's rephrase...
% of LEVANT/West Asian SNP in Berbers
Algeria = 0.0% Libya = 1.4% MZab =0.0% North Morocco = 0.0% South Morocco =0.0% Saharawi=0.0% Tunisia = 0.0%
% of Sub-Saharan SNPs in Berber
Algeria = 8.0% Libya = 3.9% MZab =10.4% North Morocco = 2.9% South Morocco =26.1% Saharawi=10.7% Tunisia = 2.8%
That's right refuse to address the lack of Levant SNP in Berbers. Proving the direction of migration.
It's odd asking somebody to address a lack. I acknowledge the above info
The primary question is are modern people of the Maghreb primarily or African ancestry or not
I put up this:
% of Saharan-Arabian SNPs
Algeria = 83.4% Libya = 89.4% MZab =87.1% North Morocco = 89.2% South Morocco =69.8% Saharawi=88.9% Tunisia = 86.6%
^^^^ it's from the same chart your figures are from.
yet numerous times in this thread you pretend it's not there why do you keep doing this over and over again?
^^^^ when this chart says "Arabian" it is not refrerring to culture it is referring to DNA.
Hense if the contribution on this section of the chart was indigneous they would have called it "Saharan African" not "Saharan Arabian"
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [QUOTE]Originally posted by xyyman: [QB]
The tribe of Shammar (Arabic: شمّر "Šammar") is one of the largest tribes of Nejd, Saudi Arabia, with an estimated 3 million members in Iraq, over 1.5 million in Saudi Arabia (concentrated in Ha'il), a Kuwaiti population (centered in Al Jahra) of around 100,000, a Syrian population is thought to exceed 0.5 million along with unknown number in Jordan.In its "golden age", around 1850, the tribe ruled much of central and northern Arabia from Riyadh to the frontiers of Syria and the vast area known as Al Jazira in northern Iraq.
The Shammar are an Arabian Bedouin tribe. the tribe once ruled most of Arabia, and they had a state known as Jebal Shammar in Northern Arabia under quasi-independence however there loyalty to the Ottoman Empire was unquestioned. Unlike other Arabians tribes the Shammar did not partake in the Arab revolt, but wanted to crush it. The Sauds and the British would force the Shammar to be expelled from their ancient homeland into what is now Iraq. Today 40% of the Shammar tribe lives in Iraq, and made Tikrit and Mosul to be their homeland. Always distinguished by their noses, eyes and small built and often to this day keep the nomadic lifestyle of their ancestors. The Toga clan of the Shammar who settled in the Southern parts of Iraq adopted Shia Islam. Today there are still blood links and relationships between these two groups. During the Baathist times the Shammar faced increasing marginalization despite they were mostly Sunnis and of Arab origins, this was because their nomadic culture was seen to be a hindrance to modernization.
genetic study of kuwait bedouin tribes the shammar sample carried two main haplogroups—J1 (at 52.3%) and R1a1 (at 42.8%)
The Syrian Shammar in the Nafud or Syrianized Arabs from Syria and Iraq - as I mentioned above and you tried to ignore - are people who moved southward from Iraq within the last 4 centuries. The Arabian Shammar and Tayyi groups who never left Arabia and the Yemen and Saudi Arabia are still more like their original Arab and east African brethren, and not as the Arabs used to say "fair-skinned like a slave".
SOMALI MAN
You also quoted "Other historians locate Shammar's origin in Ghasinides and Manatherides] of Hira (near Kufa), and then immigrating from the Fertile Crescent to northern Saudi Arabia."
This may or may not be true but in any case it is worth noting that the Ghassan a people from the Azd of Yemen are called akhdar (black) by the Arab grammarian Ibn Manzour 14th century Tunisian. They a part of the reason he wrote in Lisaan al- Arab most Arabs are dark brown or black with kinky hair. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic