posted
This is your moment to shine, i.e. those who claim that the Siwa were not original "Berber" (aka Tamazight) speakers, but supposedly learned this from some outside group.
First question is: What language did the Siwa speak before their Tamazight dialect?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Indeed, I find it comical considering that 'Berber' is one of the subfamilies or branches of Afrisian which itself likely originated in the Egypto-Sudanese area. That said, since Siwa is in that area, it would be logical to associate them with early if not proto-Berbers. Yet some lyinass Euronuts incessantly associate Berbers with early Maghrebi people only.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, the specifics were posted in the thread that got your panties up in a bunch, here. Either refute them or live with the fact that you can't.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: ^^^Aye...I may be wrong but...Isn't the Tuareg language the oldest of the Berber languages?
So doesn't that alone erases notion to associate them with early Maghreb people?
The oldest in what way? As I can recall, Tuareg is the oldest written Berber language with Tifinagh being the only Berber script. As far as it being the oldest spoken language, I haven't read or heard of any data for that claim.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
To the fuckhead above (swenet), who is apparently having difficulty understanding the intro post: There's a preliminary question awaiting an answer.
Either directly post a relevant answer--with substantiation, or just muzzle your mouth and stay scarse--essentially as a tacit realization that you like to seize upon just about any random thing that pops in your airhead as a material for what amounts to a fairy story-telling.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Judging by the posts gathered herein so far, it figures that these claims about the Siwa being some supposed "acculturated Berbers" is nothing more than just certain posters passing gas and wasting bandwidth with spam-fillers. There's not an iota of material backbone for their ideological posts!
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: ^^^Aye...I may be wrong but...Isn't the Tuareg language the oldest of the Berber languages?
So doesn't that alone erases notion to associate them with early Maghreb people?
The oldest in what way? As I can recall, Tuareg is the oldest written Berber language with Tifinagh being the only Berber script. As far as it being the oldest spoken language, I haven't read or heard of any data for that claim.
Sorry I should have elaborated more. I heard people claim that the Tuareg people are thr oldest group of Berbers and carry the oldest genes and are thr ancestors of most Berbers(not all). Also that they are the oldest group(along the Fulani) that were found in the Sahara during the late Holocene.
So I assumed they spoke the oldest Berber language.
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: This is your moment to shine, i.e. those who claim that the Siwa were not original "Berber" (aka Tamazight) speakers, but supposedly learned this from some outside group.
First question is: What language did the Siwa speak before their Tamazight dialect?
Is it possible the Siwa where the first berbers?
________________________________
On Siwi language:
- an article that gets referenced sometimes:
Vycichl, Werner. 1991. "Jlan n Isiwan: Sketch of the Berber Language of the Oasis of Siwa (Egypt)"
^^^ It may be unpublished. I see references to more references to it but can't find the full text
^^ Highest frequencies:
M1 L3 U ( Not U6) HV0 K
_________________________________________________
DNATribes 2009 digest AFRICA
^^^ On a different note I was looking over this and wondering why Siwa has a large West African contribution whereas other nearby regions, the rest of Egypt, Sudan Somalia apparently do not ??
Posts: 42930 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: To the fuckhead above (swenet), who is apparently having difficulty understanding the intro post: There's a preliminary question awaiting an answer.
Either directly post a relevant answer--with substantiation, or just muzzle your mouth and stay scarse--essentially as a tacit realization that you like to seize upon just about any random thing that pops in your airhead as a material for what amounts to a fairy story-telling.
You have to be off your ever loving rockers. Only in Explorer coo coo world is it procedure to call someone's views into question, not only with a preposterously stupid question that's impossible to answer with the data at hand (i.e., what language prehistoric Siwans spoke prior to the emergence of Berber languages), but is such retarded pseudo-scientific questioning used in the stead of proactive refutations of the observations I posted.
Indeed, only in Explorer coo coo world does it make sense to kick off debate with cornball interviews, instead of addressing the opponents' observations that are perceived to be emotionally offensive (yes, truth hurts). I'm not in explorer coo coo world; I'm in the real world, where you either debate pro-actively, and say what it is you have to say, or suck it easy.
I dare you to refute anything I said here, that pertains to the language shift that would have taken place in Siwa:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: As far as I know Siwa was never connected to or populated by archaic, OK, MK and NK dynastic Egyptians, unlike some of the other oases that were integrated into the Egyptian economies by the Mentuhoteps in the Middle Kingdom. Siwans would very likely be considered Libyans by Egyptians, rather than one of their own, but, interestingly, their genome is more Egypto Nubian-like than Berber-like. They also have Chadic elements in their genome, which might have something to do with the Berber population they've inherited their language from.
Using the data in the OP to inform us about views towards homosexuality in Ancient Egypt is tempting, but, like I said, the two populations were probably isolated from each other. It might also be the case that the archaeologically attested prehistoric populations in Siwa were a different population from the current inhabitants, but whatever the origin of the former, morphometrics suggest they were close to pre-dynastic Egyptians. [/qb]
wiki says " Although the oasis is known to have been settled since at least the 10th millennium BC, the earliest evidence of connection with ancient Egypt is the 26th Dynasty, when a necropolis was established"
there is a big gap between 10 millenium and the 26th dynasty. Is there any evidence of a population living there bewteen these two dates? [/qb]
There are at least three substrata in Siwa Berbers. You have the NRY B group, along with specific mtDNA L0, L3 and L4 subclades, which would have been shared with Egypto-Nubians. You have the NRY R-V88 group and mtDNA L3e subclades which are shared with Chadic speakers. There is also the small pocket change of NRY E-M81 and mtDNA U6, H1, which is shared with Berbers. Siwa M1, but also Siwa E-V6 was possibly introduced by Egyptian speakers, whom I suspect can be tentatively identified with the earliest Naqada semi-nomands, for various reasons.
When you put these genetic substrata in line with the 10th millenium bc date mentioned in the wiki article, only the first substratum I mentioned is old enough to comfortably date back to that period. I think its quite possible that this substratum is a relic of these prehistoric Siwans, especially if this prehistoric culture they're talking about shows continuation well after the 10th millenium bc, because that's when folks found themselves trapped in the oases and Nile Valley, and migration slowed down (due to aridification). Based on the fact that Siwa is the only remaining Northern African hotspot of R-v88, and due to the fact that the Chadic L3e subclades spread to the rest of Northern Africa during this period, I suspect that the Chadic genetic signature made its way in (into Siwa) right before aridification set in ~5.5kya, and the rest of this haplogroup made its way down to Cameroon. And then, after that, things would have stayed mostly the same, until much later, when the Berber elements entered the region, around the same time of late dynastic Egyptian contact with Siwa. Why? Because that's about how old the branch of Berber Siwa belongs to, is calculated to be. Like I said above, I believe this is also around the same time Berbers entered the el-Hayez oasis with their E-M81.
Sorry I should have elaborated more. I heard people claim that the Tuareg people are thr oldest group of Berbers and carry the oldest genes and are thr ancestors of most Berbers(not all). Also that they are the oldest group(along the Fulani) that were found in the Sahara during the late Holocene.
So I assumed they spoke the oldest Berber language.
Very conservatively, the ancestors of modern Tamazight speakers lay somewhere in the eastern Sahara only from about 8ky ago. Other sources have put it at even less than that.
Thus, Tamazight presence in western Africa could not have been any more than 5ky ago. In fact, one source estimated that their arrival in the western most end of coastal north Africa occurred around 2ky ago.
atDNA profiles reported for the Siwa vs. those of the Maghreb suggest a more basal substratum in the Siwan gene pool than the Maghreb counterparts. Perhaps this could be serving as a telltale sign that the Siwa gene pool is reflective of survival of a proto-Tamazight population; it could also, however, be suggestive of better preservation of an ancestral gene pool in the Siwa and/or the relative geographical isolation of the Siwa, when compared to the Maghrebi Tamazight/Tamazight-derived populations.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
You have to be off your ever loving rockers. Only in Explorer coo coo world is it procedure to call someone's views into question, not only with a preposterously stupid question that's impossible to answer with the data at hand (i.e., what language prehistoric Siwans spoke prior to the emergence of Berber languages), but is such retarded pseudo-scientific questioning used in the stead of proactive refutations of the observations I posted.
This fuckhead must think through its numb fat ass, because nothing gets wackier than confusing a linguistic-question for an irrelevant subject.
The fact that you are now crying your buggy eyes off about a simple straightforward question, that comes naturally after someone makes an unfounded claim about the language origin of a certain group, is a tacit realization that your talk of Siwa being "acculturated" Tamazight-speakers is just ass-talk. Running your mouth off doesn't automatically render the nonsense coming out, fact-worthy.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
On a different note I was looking over this and wondering why Siwa has a large West African contribution whereas other nearby regions, the rest of Egypt, Sudan Somalia apparently do not ??
You are really veering away from the topic, which starts with a linguistic question, as the headding of thread invokes. At any rate, I'll briefly address this. I am not aware of a whole lot of so-called typical "west African" or western African-specific uniparental markers in the Siwa, particularly Y-DNA, but if there is information to that end, I'll be ready to examine it. A good chunk of that so-called "West African" component may actually be relics of distant common ancestry, and possibly including elements of evolutionary convergence. Such elements have surfaced in Nilo-Saharan and Chadic speakers, and to some degree "Afro-Asiatic" speakers, in eastern Africa.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
This is the only posted stuff from among those who have posted here, outside of the thread author, that has anything remotely do with language. How sad!
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
sorry, I could have made a separate thread on Siwa genetics. Here is some more pertinant information wiki says:
A local manuscript mentions only seven families totaling 40 men living at the oasis in 1203. (current pop: 23,000 )
In the 12th century Al-Idrisi mentions it as being inhabited mainly by Berbers, with an Arab minority, while a century before Al-Bakri stated that only Berbers lived there. The Egyptian historian Al-Maqrizi travelled to Siwa in the 15th century and described how the language spoken there 'is similair to the language of the Zenata [11]'
posted
The idea that Awjila as the next geographically closer Tamazight dialect spoken in the region, but seemingly less related than the more west-oriented Sokna, must be suggestive of language "replacement" of the Siwa is more of that unsubstantiated gobbledygook talk that inspired to start up this discussion. Furthermore, it supposedly treats the Siwa as either mobile, or afflicted by mobility of others, while treating the Awjila as an immobile element in the region.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
You have to be off your ever loving rockers. Only in Explorer coo coo world is it procedure to call someone's views into question, not only with a preposterously stupid question that's impossible to answer with the data at hand (i.e., what language prehistoric Siwans spoke prior to the emergence of Berber languages), but is such retarded pseudo-scientific questioning used in the stead of proactive refutations of the observations I posted.
This fuckhead must think through its numb fat ass, because nothing gets wackier than confusing a linguistic-question for an irrelevant subject.
So, its a linguistic question.... and how does that fit in to what I said in the post you're replying to? Where did I call that question irrelevant? Are you sure you're okay explorer? The way you randomly broach matters that are neither here nor there sure suggests you aren't.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is a reason why you are so emotional about such a simple straightforward question, notwithstanding the pretense of confusion about the topic supposedly being "neither here nor there", something only an idiot would say about the topic, with a clearly stated goal, which none--especially you--has addressed, save for the two citations from lioness that remotely touch the topic; you are in fact a good example of loonies who engage in such gobbledygook talk noted above:
Siwans would very likely be considered Libyans by Egyptians, rather than one of their own, but, interestingly, their genome is more Egypto Nubian-like than Berber-like. They also have Chadic elements in their genome, which might have something to do with the Berber population they've inherited their language from. - swenet
If the intro-post question applies handily to anyone, there is no better candidate than you!
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
You sure are slow. I said ''the things you randomly broach'', meaning, the no-brainer that the topic being discussed here is a ''linguistic topic'', which I supposedly had ''confused for an irrelevant subject''. Running the risk that the answer to this question will be even more random than the aforementioned mumbo jumbo, explain:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
You have to be off your ever loving rockers. Only in Explorer coo coo world is it procedure to call someone's views into question, not only with a preposterously stupid question that's impossible to answer with the data at hand (i.e., what language prehistoric Siwans spoke prior to the emergence of Berber languages), but is such retarded pseudo-scientific questioning used in the stead of proactive refutations of the observations I posted.
This fuckhead must think through its numb fat ass, because nothing gets wackier than confusing a linguistic-question for an irrelevant subject.
So, its a linguistic question.... and how does that fit in to what I said in the post you're replying to? Where did I call that question irrelevant?
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: There is a reason why you are so emotional about such a simple straightforward question, notwithstanding the pretense of confusion about the topic supposedly being "neither here nor there", something only an idiot would say about the topic, with a clearly stated goal, which none--especially you--has addressed, save for the two citations from lioness that remotely touch the topic; you are in fact a good example of loonies who engage in such gobbledygook talk noted above:
Siwans would very likely be considered Libyans by Egyptians, rather than one of their own, but, interestingly, their genome is more Egypto Nubian-like than Berber-like. They also have Chadic elements in their genome, which might have something to do with the Berber population they've inherited their language from. - swenet
If the intro-post question applies handily to anyone, there is no better candidate than you!
Interesting question, I am about to take a trip to the Siwa sometime and the end of this year. I will propose this question.
As for now, Libyco-Chadic is older than Berber-Chadic. And Chadic itself is older than Berber.
According to eEhnologue, Summer Institute of Linguistics.
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: Sorry I should have elaborated more. I heard people claim that the Tuareg people are the oldest group of Berbers and carry the oldest genes and are the ancestors of most Berbers(not all). Also that they are the oldest group(along the Fulani) that were found in the Sahara during the late Holocene.
So I assumed they spoke the oldest Berber language.
Population and language are two different things that are often mutually exclusive. That said, no doubt the Tuareg do carry old genetic components, but they are not the only ones. Case in point the Siwans of this thread's discussion.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Very conservatively, the ancestors of modern Tamazight speakers lay somewhere in the eastern Sahara only from about 8ky ago. Other sources have put it at even less than that.
Thus, Tamazight presence in western Africa could not have been any more than 5ky ago. In fact, one source estimated that their arrival in the western most end of coastal north Africa occurred around 2ky ago.
atDNA profiles reported for the Siwa vs. those of the Maghreb suggest a more basal substratum in the Siwan gene pool than the Maghreb counterparts. Perhaps this could be serving as a telltale sign that the Siwa gene pool is reflective of survival of a proto-Tamazight population; it could also, however, be suggestive of better preservation of an ancestral gene pool in the Siwa and/or the relative geographical isolation of the Siwa, when compared to the Maghrebi Tamazight/Tamazight-derived populations.
Indeed, even lioness apparently admits this in the source she cites.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
^^ Highest frequencies:
M1 L3 U ( Not U6) HV0 K
The above only reaffirms what Explorer said.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: You sure are slow. I said ''the things you randomly broach'', meaning, the no-brainer that the topic being discussed here is a ''linguistic topic'', which I supposedly had ''confused for an irrelevant subject''. Running the risk that the answer to this question will be even more random than the aforementioned mumbo jumbo, explain:
If I'm slow, then you must be frozen. To date, you are still stumped immeasurably by a simple opening question. No one else's presence is more meaningless than your's under this entire topic, and yet, the question actually applies to you more than anyone else here. What irony!
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Interesting question, I am about to take a trip to the Siwa sometime and the end of this year. I will propose this question.
In doing so, be mindful of stories tinged with legends that serve more political or religious purpose than fact-accounting. This occurs more often than not in ethnic stories told to one generation by another.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Population and language are two different things that are often mutually exclusive. That said, no doubt the Tuareg do carry old genetic components, but they are not the only ones.
The basic layers of Tamasheq ("Tuareg") gene pool may be less forthcoming in rendering the group as a potential window into an ancestral Tamazight-group, due to the geographic positioning of the Tuareg, which spans western--mainly--to central (Libya) Sahara and Sahel. The Tamasheq have not been as isolated as the Siwa have been; they have received recurring gene flow from both neighboring populations of the Sahel and those of the Sahara. The mtDNA gene pool of western Sahel Tamasheq, for instance, has been heavily impacted by western African gene pool.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Interesting question, I am about to take a trip to the Siwa sometime and the end of this year. I will propose this question.
In doing so, be mindful of stories tinged with legends that serve more political or religious purpose than fact-accounting. This occurs more often than not in ethnic stories told to one generation by another.
Yeah I know, but hey people at EgyptSearch are diehard researchers. I will go to the NittyGritty, "even in a lie there is truth".
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: You sure are slow. I said ''the things you randomly broach'', meaning, the no-brainer that the topic being discussed here is a ''linguistic topic'', which I supposedly had ''confused for an irrelevant subject''. Running the risk that the answer to this question will be even more random than the aforementioned mumbo jumbo, explain:
If I'm slow, then you must be frozen. To date, you are still stumped immeasurably by a simple opening question. No one else's presence is more meaningless than your's under this entire topic, and yet, the question actually applies to you more than anyone else here. What irony!
Another non-reply. By now it should be clear to everyone that you're a troll, right up there with other classic ES household trolls. The whole OP is a troll question, as you know full the question to the OP cannot scientifically be answered. Recap:
quote: Originally posted by Swenet: You have to be off your ever loving rockers. Only in Explorer coo coo world is it procedure to call someone's views into question, not only with a preposterously stupid question that's impossible to answer with the data at hand (i.e., what language prehistoric Siwans spoke prior to the emergence of Berber languages), but is such retarded pseudo-scientific questioning used in the stead of proactive refutations of the observations I posted.
Indeed, only in Explorer coo coo world does it make sense to kick off debate with cornball interviews, instead of addressing the opponents' observations that are perceived to be emotionally offensive (yes, truth hurts). I'm not in explorer coo coo world; I'm in the real world, where you either debate pro-actively, and say what it is you have to say, or suck it easy.
Population and language are two different things that are often mutually exclusive. That said, no doubt the Tuareg do carry old genetic components, but they are not the only ones.
The basic layers of Tamasheq ("Tuareg") gene pool may be less forthcoming in rendering the group as a potential window into an ancestral Tamazight-group, due to the geographic positioning of the Tuareg, which spans western--mainly--to central (Libya) Sahara and Sahel. The Tamasheq have not been as isolated as the Siwa have been; they have received recurring gene flow from both neighboring populations of the Sahel and those of the Sahara. The mtDNA gene pool of western Sahel Tamasheq, for instance, has been heavily impacted by western African gene pool.
This is interesting because the Tuareg carry E-V68 (18Kya), the Tamazight carry E-M183 (5-6Kya). The Ttan Tuareg carry R1b in, R1b1* is in Siwa.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
This is interesting because the Tuareg carry E-V68, if we propose them as the precursor? R1b in Tuareg, R1b1* in Siwa.
I'm not sure what your post on E-V68 and R1 is inspired by, but if it's based on what is posted below it, it would appear that the resolution of those sequences are somewhat poor. I do however, notice that the Siwan E-M78 family appears to be relatively more diverse compared to the other "Berber" groups examined in the same analysis.
My post was influenced by examination of publication on atDNA markers, and the patterns I noticed therein. It has also partially been influenced by age estimations of M81 expansions.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ that is exactly my point. I notice both are older in the Tuareg.
Tuareg carry E-V68 (18Kya) (E-M81), the Tamazight carry E-M183 (5-6Kya)(E-M81). The Ttan Tuareg carry R1b in, R1b1* is in Siwa.
By "historical accounts" both are " the Tuareg and Siwans are considerably" old / Mesolithic appearance.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
On what account. I've already commented on your citations. Same on R1b.
The remarkable archaeological site, dating back 10,000 years and called Gobero after the Tuareg name for the area, was brimming with skeletons of humans and animals — including large fish and crocodiles. Gobero is hidden away within Niger’s forbidding Ténéré Desert, known to Tuareg nomads as a “desert within a desert.”
The Kiffian & Tenerean Occupation Of Gobero, Niger: Perhaps The Largest Collection Of Early-Mid Holocene People In Africa
quote:This site has been called Gobero, after the local Tuareg name for the area. About 10,000 years ago (7700–6200 B.C.E.), Gobero was a much less arid environment than it is now. In fact, it was actually a rather humid lake side hometown of sorts for a group of hunter-fisher-gatherers who not only lived their but also buried their dead there. How do we know they were fishing? Well, remains of large nile perch and harpoons were found dating to this time period.
On what account. I've already commented on your citations. Same on R1b.
Lakeside Cemeteries in the Sahara: 5000 Years of Holocene Population and Environmental Change
quote:The older occupants have craniofacial dimensions that demonstrate similarities with mid-Holocene occupants of the southern Sahara and Late Pleistocene to early Holocene inhabitants of the Maghreb.
quote:These early occupants abandon the area under arid conditions and, when humid conditions return ~4600 B.C.E., are replaced by a more gracile people with elaborated grave goods including animal bone and ivory ornaments.
quote: Principal components analysis of craniometric variables closely allies the early Holocene occupants at Gobero with a skeletally robust, trans-Saharan assemblage of Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene human populations from the Maghreb and southern Sahara.
quote:Figure 6. Principal components analysis of craniofacial dimensions among Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene populations from the Maghreb and southern Sahara.
Plot of first two principal components extracted from a mean matrix for 17 craniometric variables (Tables 4, 7) in 9 human populations (Table 3) from the Late Pleistocene through the mid-Holocene from the Maghreb and southern Sahara. Seven trans-Saharan populations cluster together, whereas Late Pleistocene Aterians (Ater) and the mid-Holocene population at Gobero (Gob-m) are striking outliers. Axes are scaled by the square root of the corresponding eigenvalue for the principal component. Abbreviations: Ater, Aterian; EMC, eastern Maghreb Capsian; EMI, eastern Maghreb Iberomaurusian; Gob-e, Gobero early Holocene; Gob-m, Gobero mid-Holocene; Mali, Hassi-el-Abiod, Mali; Maur, Mauritania; WMC, western Maghreb Capsian; WMI, western Maghreb Iberomaurusian.
--(doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002995.g006)
quote:Craniometric data from seven human groups (Tables 3, 4) were subjected to principal components analysis, which allies the early Holocene population at Gobero (Gob-e) with mid-Holocene “Mechtoids” from Mali and Mauritania [18], [26], [27] and with Late Pleistocene Iberomaurusians and early Holocene Capsians from across the Maghreb (see cluster in Figure 6). The striking similarity between these seven human populations confirms previous suggestions regarding their affinity [18] and is particularly significant given their temporal range (Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene) and trans-Saharan geographic distribution (across the Maghreb to the southern Sahara).
quote: Trans-Saharan craniometry. Principal components analysis of craniometric variables closely allies the early Holocene occupants at Gobero, who were buried with Kiffian material culture, with Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene humans from the Maghreb and southern Sahara referred to as Iberomaurusians, Capsians and “Mechtoids.” Outliers to this cluster of populations include an older Aterian sample and the mid-Holocene occupants at Gobero associated with Tenerean material culture.
The above encapsulated exactly with the Genetic mutation and occurrence of E-M81.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
On what account. I've already commented on your citations. Same on R1b.
Further more they go on about,
quote:The Iberomaurusian is an epipalaeolithic culture that flourished in North Africa for over 10,000 years. A key question surrounds its appearance in the Maghreb, a semi-arid upland zone on the edge of the Sahara, soon after the Last Glacial Maximum (20,000 years ago) and despite evidence for a continuation into the Holocene very little is known either about the later part of this timespan or what processes led to its disappearance after 9000 years ago. An issue rarely commented upon is the apparently synchronous and sudden occurrence of large scale midden deposits in Iberomaurusian contexts in caves across the western Maghreb at around 13,000 years ago. This also seems to have coincided with the appearance of some of the earliest cemeteries.
The climatic framework of this study is the late Pleistocene and early Holocene (c. 20,000 - 9000 BP) and is important because it was a phase of major climatic instability and allows us to assess any cultural responses made by Iberomaurusian human populations in the context of these changes. Details of the climatic record for this period come principally from the Greenland Ice cores but there were also marked fluctuations in sea surface temperatures recorded in basal sediments of the Atlantic and Mediterranean. These indicate evidence of distinct cooling phases associated with increased aridification on the adjacent landmasses of North Africa during the Younger Dryas (c.11,000-10,000 years ago), and at earlier times in the past including at around 15,000 and 25,000 years ago. The climatic dynamics provide a vital element in exploring the effects of environmental change on epipalaeolithic human behaviour.
On what account. I've already commented on your citations. Same on R1b.
Then we have this author,
Libya and the Maghreb: If the archaeology of the Sahara’s southern margins remains relatively poorly understood, the Maghreb has long been the focus of sustained activity focused on the Pleistocene/Holocene transition (Lubell 2000, 2005). Here and at Haua Fteah in northeastern Libya, the Iberomaurusian industry introduced in Chapter 7 continued to be made into the terminal Pleistocene (McBurney 1967; Close and Wendorf 1990). Several unusual features are of interest, including evidence, rare at this time depth, for sculpture. This takes the form of anthropomorphic and zoomorphic ceramic figurines from Afalou, Algeria, baked from locally available clay to temperatures of 500◦–800◦C (Hachi 1996, Hachi et al. 2002). Dating 15–11 kya, they are complemented by an earlier fragmentary figurine from the nearby site of Tamar Hat (Saxon 1976). Distinctive, too, are the many burials known from these later Iberomaurusian contexts, including apparent cemeteries at Afalou (Hachi 1996) and Taforalt, Morocco (almost 200 individuals; Ferembach et al. 1962). Analysis of these remains (see inset) raises issues of territoriality, limited mobility, and group identity that economic data are still too few to explore further.
Knowing that people hunted Barbary sheep and other large mammals and that they collected molluscs, both terrestrial and marine, is very different from being able to develop this checklist of ingredients into a meaningful set of recipes or menus that could illuminate the details of Iberomaurusian subsistence-settlement strategies. WHAT BONES CAN TELL: BIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE HUNTER-GATHERERS OF THE MAGHREB: The extremely large skeletal samples that come from sites such as Taforalt (Fig. 8.13) and Afalou constitute an invaluable resource for understanding the makers of Iberomaurusian artifacts, and their number is unparalleled elsewhere in Africa for the early Holocene. Frequently termed Mechta-Afalou or Mechtoid, these were a skeletally robust people and definitely African in origin, though attempts, such as those of Ferembach (1985), to establish similarities with much older and rarer Aterian skeletal remains are tenuous given the immense temporal separation between the two (Close and Wendorf 1990). At the opposite end of the chronological spectrum, dental morphology does suggest connections with later Africans, including those responsible for the Capsian Industry (Irish 2000) and early mid-Holocene human remains from the western half of the Sahara (Dutour 1989), something that points to the Maghreb as one of the regions from which people recolonised the desert (MacDonald 1998).
Turning to what can be learned about cultural practices and disease, the individuals from Taforalt, the largest sample by far, display little evidence of trauma, though they do suggest a high incidence of infant mortality, with evidence for dental caries, arthritis, and rheumatism among other degenerative conditions. Interestingly, Taforalt also provides one of the oldest known instances of the practice of trepanation, the surgical removal of a portion of the cranium; the patient evidently survived for some time, as there are signs of bone regrowth in the affected area. Another form of body modification was much more widespread and, indeed, a distinctive feature of the Iberomaurusian skeletal sample as a whole. This was the practice of removing two or more of the upper incisors, usually around puberty and from both males and females, something that probably served as both a rite of passage and an ethnic marker (Close and Wendorf 1990), just as it does in parts of sub-Saharan Africa today (e.g., van Reenen 1987). Cranial and postcranial malformations are also apparent and may indicate pronounced endogamy at a much more localised level (Hadjouis 2002), perhaps supported by the degree of variability between different site samples noted by Irish (2000).
--Lawrence Barham The First Africans: African Archaeology from the Earliest Toolmakers to Most Recent Foragers (Cambridge World Archaeology)
On what account. I've already commented on your citations. Same on R1b.
The irony here is that they speak of a people who apparently came from the South of Northeast Africa (modern Sudan-Egypt border). And if I am not mistaking E-V68 is said to have originated at region of Lake Nubia. If you ask me, I'd say it's even coherent with the Halfan industry.
From what I have read, the Beja are older to the Tuareg. Which is another irony.
The Tuareg come closest, therefor I propose them as the candidate. Of course it needs further inspection.
posted
_______________________________________________ The Tuareg of the Fezzan region (Libya) are characterized by an extremely high frequency (61%) of haplogroup H1...
The genetic diversity of the Libyan H1 mtDNAs appeared to be extremely low, with 91% of the H1 individuals sharing the same HVS-I/II haplotype (i.e. CRS-263).
Lakeside Cemeteries in the Sahara: 5000 Years of Holocene Population and Environmental Change
quote:The older occupants have craniofacial dimensions that demonstrate similarities with mid-Holocene occupants of the southern Sahara and Late Pleistocene to early Holocene inhabitants of the Maghreb.
quote:These early occupants abandon the area under arid conditions and, when humid conditions return ~4600 B.C.E., are replaced by a more gracile people with elaborated grave goods including animal bone and ivory ornaments.
quote: Principal components analysis of craniometric variables closely allies the early Holocene occupants at Gobero with a skeletally robust, trans-Saharan assemblage of Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene human populations from the Maghreb and southern Sahara.
quote:Figure 6. Principal components analysis of craniofacial dimensions among Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene populations from the Maghreb and southern Sahara.
Plot of first two principal components extracted from a mean matrix for 17 craniometric variables (Tables 4, 7) in 9 human populations (Table 3) from the Late Pleistocene through the mid-Holocene from the Maghreb and southern Sahara. Seven trans-Saharan populations cluster together, whereas Late Pleistocene Aterians (Ater) and the mid-Holocene population at Gobero (Gob-m) are striking outliers. Axes are scaled by the square root of the corresponding eigenvalue for the principal component. Abbreviations: Ater, Aterian; EMC, eastern Maghreb Capsian; EMI, eastern Maghreb Iberomaurusian; Gob-e, Gobero early Holocene; Gob-m, Gobero mid-Holocene; Mali, Hassi-el-Abiod, Mali; Maur, Mauritania; WMC, western Maghreb Capsian; WMI, western Maghreb Iberomaurusian.
--(doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002995.g006)
quote:Craniometric data from seven human groups (Tables 3, 4) were subjected to principal components analysis, which allies the early Holocene population at Gobero (Gob-e) with mid-Holocene “Mechtoids” from Mali and Mauritania [18], [26], [27] and with Late Pleistocene Iberomaurusians and early Holocene Capsians from across the Maghreb (see cluster in Figure 6). The striking similarity between these seven human populations confirms previous suggestions regarding their affinity [18] and is particularly significant given their temporal range (Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene) and trans-Saharan geographic distribution (across the Maghreb to the southern Sahara).
quote: Trans-Saharan craniometry. Principal components analysis of craniometric variables closely allies the early Holocene occupants at Gobero, who were buried with Kiffian material culture, with Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene humans from the Maghreb and southern Sahara referred to as Iberomaurusians, Capsians and “Mechtoids.” Outliers to this cluster of populations include an older Aterian sample and the mid-Holocene occupants at Gobero associated with Tenerean material culture.
The above encapsulated exactly with the Genetic mutation and occurrence of E-M81.
What do you understand about the "genetic mutation and occurrence" of E-M81?
I know about these early to early mid-Holocene burials from Niger and Mali. You are not tying them with the Tamasheq ("Tuaregs"), are you?
On another note, thanks for bringing this back to my attention, though I think it would be more relevant in a different topic(s) that has become subjects of discussion lately:
Craniometric data from seven human groups (Tables 3, 4) were subjected to principal components analysis, which allies the early Holocene population at Gobero (Gob-e) with mid-Holocene “Mechtoids” from Mali and Mauritania [18], [26], [27] and with Late Pleistocene Iberomaurusians and early Holocene Capsians from across the Maghreb (see cluster in Figure 6). The striking similarity between these seven human populations confirms previous suggestions regarding their affinity [18] and is particularly significant given their temporal range (Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene) and trans-Saharan geographic distribution (across the Maghreb to the southern Sahara).
People like swenet have to be clued on it, who denies that the Maghrebi series has close morphological relationships with other Africans. The authors noting of the temporal range is interestingly, in that it may well speak to that potential factor of environment I noted about elsewhere, in the modification of the EpiPaleolithic Maghrebi series.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
The irony here is that they speak of a people who apparently came from the South of Northeast Africa (modern Sudan-Egypt border). And if I am not mistaking E-V68 is said to have originated at region of Lake Nubia. If you ask me, I'd say it's even coherent with the Halfan industry.
Which source maintains this?
quote: From what I have read, the Beja are older to the Tuareg. Which is another irony.
Why is that an irony? The Beja are not Tamazight-speakers; their language is more closely aligned with Cushitic, though listening to some observers, there is an impression that the Beja language is something of a somewhat intermediary between the "northern" Afro-Asiatic African language groups (ancient Egyptian, Semitic and Tamazight) and the southern "Afro-Asiatic" group (Cushitic, and perhaps Chadic).
quote:The Tuareg come closest, therefor I propose them as the candidate. Of course it needs further inspection.
The "Tuareg" came closest in terms of what, and involving whom else? In all honesty, I'm not convinced, just going by everything that you've posted so far, that the Tamasheq/"Tuareg" serve as the best representation of an ancestral Tamazight-speaking group.
It seems to me you are trying to make a genetic case for an ancestral Tamazight-speaking group, which I take it, you do not consider the Siwa as possibly the best example--among contemporary Tamazight-speaker--of a group preserving an ancestral proto-Tamazight gene pool?
We'll get to the genetic issue later, in terms of how it can relate to the linguistic issue, but I want to get to the bottom of the linguist matter first.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Yes, it is from my blog. It covers a lot of the stuff you posted above about the Epipaleolithic Maghrebi series, the so-called "Mechtoids" (from Hassi el-Abiod) of Mali and the Gobero remains, and the cranio-facial PC analysis between them. What is surprising about encountering this source?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ The Explorer, I am typing from my iPad. "As I do often."
It's easer to type a new message instead of selecting text in quotations. It's tiresome when doing so on the iPad.
But anyway, the way I understand genetic mutation occurrence is by, influence based on environment, this can be climate and nutrition.
My interpretation for the E-M81 mutation is the region of the Maghreb. As I have posted underwent a climate change and shifts, during the same timeframe the age of the mutation was estimated.
In this case ecology occurrence and genetics show similarities.
To answer your question whether I propose the Tuareg as the spinoff population, yes I do consider the nomadic, pastoralist Tuaregs as the prominent population considering the follis records and the age of Hg E-V68.
Ironically how the Ténéré is in Niger. From they come/ came.
quote:Trans-Saharan craniometry. Principal components analysis of craniometric variables closely allies the early Holocene occupants at Gobero, who were buried with Kiffian material culture, with Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene humans from the Maghreb and southern Sahara referred to as Iberomaurusians, Capsians and “Mechtoids.” Outliers to this cluster of populations include an older Aterian sample and the mid-Holocene occupants at Gobero associated with Tenerean material culture.
quote: Carrying out biological or genetic investigations of the Tuareg has not always been easy because of their demanding lifestyle and their often negative attitude to the European colonists. Cavalli-Sforza et al,2 whose synthesized study of classical protein and serological markers is well known, noticed a genetic link between the Tuareg and Beja from Eastern Sudan. The fact that the genetic distances between the Tuareg and Berber/North-western Africans were larger than that between the Tuareg and Beja, provides a picture of a common origin and population separation at some point more than 5000 years ago. Interestingly, both people are also pastoralist and speak Afro-Asiatic languages, even if the Beja language (Bedawi), with its four dialects, belongs to the Cushitic branch, whereas Tamasheq belongs to the Berber branch. The fact that these two peoples today speak different languages might be explained either by the Tuareg having acquired the Berber language during their westwards migration, or possibly by the Beja coming under the influence of some Eastern African peoples as language shift is a relatively common phenomenon.[...]
The Tuareg population from Libya was homogenous with very low estimates of haplotype diversity suggesting high genetic drift.5
--Luísa Pereira, Viktor Černý
I didn't read the paper myself, I went by what the poster stated on wiki. But considering the Beja-Tuareg relation is not "unlikely".
quote:Coming to similar conclusions as the Cruciani and Trombetta team, Battaglia et al. (2008), writing prior to the discovery of E-V68, describe Egypt as "a hub for the distribution of the various geographically localized M78-related sub-clades" and, based on archaeological data, they propose that the point of origin of E-M78 (as opposed to later dispersals from Egypt) may have been in a refugium which "existed on the border of present-day Sudan and Egypt, near Lake Nubia, until the onset of a humid phase around 8500 BC.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: _______________________________________________ The Tuareg of the Fezzan region (Libya) are characterized by an extremely high frequency (61%) of haplogroup H1...
The genetic diversity of the Libyan H1 mtDNAs appeared to be extremely low, with 91% of the H1 individuals sharing the same HVS-I/II haplotype (i.e. CRS-263).
quote:The older occupants have craniofacial dimensions that demonstrate similarities with mid-Holocene occupants of the southern Sahara and Late Pleistocene to early Holocene inhabitants of the Maghreb.
--Lakeside Cemeteries in the Sahara: 5000 Years of Holocene Population and Environmental Change
quote: The extremely large skeletal samples that come from sites such as Taforalt (Fig. 8.13) and Afalou constitute an invaluable resource for understanding the makers of Iberomaurusian artifacts, and their number is unparalleled elsewhere in Africa for the early Holocene. Frequently termed Mechta-Afalou or Mechtoid, these were a skeletally robust people and definitely African in origin
--Lawrence Barham
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Yes, it is from my blog. It covers a lot of the stuff you posted above about the Epipaleolithic Maghrebi series, the so-called "Mechtoids" (from Hassi el-Abiod) of Mali and the Gobero remains, and the cranio-facial PC analysis between them. What is surprising about encountering this source?
I found it rather precursive and here rhetorical.
quote: The extremely large skeletal samples that come from sites such as Taforalt (Fig. 8.13) and Afalou constitute an invaluable resource for understanding the makers of Iberomaurusian artifacts, and their number is unparalleled elsewhere in Africa for the early Holocene. Frequently termed Mechta-Afalou or Mechtoid, these were a skeletally robust people and definitely African in origin
--Lawrence Barham
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
My interpretation for the E-M81 mutation is the region of the Maghreb. As I have posted underwent a climate change and shifts, during the same timeframe the age of the mutation was estimated.
That is not what the age estimation of E-M81 and geographic distribution suggests. Older ages had been attributed to east African chromosomes, and if memory serves me correctly, it has been found in places in eastern Africa, e.g. Sudan, where no "Berber" languages are spoken.
quote: To answer your question whether I propose the Tuareg as the spinoff population, yes I do consider the nomadic, pastoralist Tuaregs as the prominent population considering the follis records and the age of Hg E-V68.
What about EV68? You keep bringing this clade up, but I fail to see the significance you are attaching to it, and why.
quote:Ironically how the Ténéré is in Niger. From they come/ came.
quote:Trans-Saharan craniometry. Principal components analysis of craniometric variables closely allies the early Holocene occupants at Gobero, who were buried with Kiffian material culture, with Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene humans from the Maghreb and southern Sahara referred to as Iberomaurusians, Capsians and “Mechtoids.” Outliers to this cluster of populations include an older Aterian sample and the mid-Holocene occupants at Gobero associated with Tenerean material culture.
If you are insinuating the derivation of "Tuaregs" from these early modern African groups, I fail to see it. Perhaps you can demonstrate better, how the "Tuaregs" monophyletically link to them.
quote:
quote: Carrying out biological or genetic investigations of the Tuareg has not always been easy because of their demanding lifestyle and their often negative attitude to the European colonists. Cavalli-Sforza et al,2 whose synthesized study of classical protein and serological markers is well known, noticed a genetic link between the Tuareg and Beja from Eastern Sudan. The fact that the genetic distances between the Tuareg and Berber/North-western Africans were larger than that between the Tuareg and Beja, provides a picture of a common origin and population separation at some point more than 5000 years ago. Interestingly, both people are also pastoralist and speak Afro-Asiatic languages, even if the Beja language (Bedawi), with its four dialects, belongs to the Cushitic branch, whereas Tamasheq belongs to the Berber branch. The fact that these two peoples today speak different languages might be explained either by the Tuareg having acquired the Berber language during their westwards migration, or possibly by the Beja coming under the influence of some Eastern African peoples as language shift is a relatively common phenomenon.[...]
The Tuareg population from Libya was homogenous with very low estimates of haplotype diversity suggesting high genetic drift.5
--Luísa Pereira, Viktor Černý
I know, you mentioned this earlier, but I'm still not seeing this:
The "Tuareg" came closest in terms of what, and involving whom else?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Be that as it may, I've covered a lot of things on my blog, a good amount of which has never seen the day of light on ES. Others are recounting of my posts here on ES, but without the nonsensical noises one gets all too often on this site. I'm still trying to archive some of my older posts here--which is quite a bit--on ES onto my blog, albeit in more reader-friendly formats. Maybe because you are just getting acquainted with my person, but covering worthwhile and eye-opening material on my site and elsewhere is well within my character.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:ORiginally posted by The Explorer: People like swenet have to be clued on it, who denies that the Maghrebi series has close morphological relationships with other Africans. The authors noting of the temporal range is interestingly, in that it may well speak to that potential factor of environment I noted about elsewhere, in the modification of the EpiPaleolithic Maghrebi series.
This is yet another example of the fact that you simply do not know how to interpret physical anthropology. They're comparing Late Pleistocene generalized AMHs and African holocene remains with a retention of a similar UP physique, re: 'Mechtoid' (or 'generalized' when the said physique is discussed in the context of non-African populations).
The Hassi el Abiod, Asselar man and other Mechtoid Sub-Saharan remains simply have dual cranio-metric ties, both with Sub-Saharan Africans on the one hand, and on the other hand, with other generalized remains both in Northern Africa, as well as UP Europe. It has, for instance, been noted for a long time that Asselar man shows relationships with European UP fossils, as well as with modern Sub Saharan African populations, and the same observations have been made for the Mesolithic Nubians samples. That, however, does not mean Ibero-Maurusians have the same dual ties with modern Sub-Saharan Africans--they don't.
That coastal North African Ibero-Maurusians and the 'Mechtoid' Saharan populations like Hassi el albiod and Asselar mostly have superficial, size/'generalized' related ties, can be seen in the fact that their mandible measurements are worlds apart in the 'shape' department. When the Saharan (Hassi el abiod etc) and coastal Mechtoid populations (Ibero-Maurusians) are allowed to plot along a 'shape' dimension, all Sub-Saharan MSA, LSA and Saharan Mechtoid populations seperate from the North African coastal Ibero-Maurusian and Capsian populations:
quote:In the sum, the results obtained further strengthen the results from previous analyses. The affinities between Nazlet Khater, MSA, and Khoisan and Khoisan related groups re-emerges. In addition it is possible to detect a separation between North African and sub-saharan populations, with the Neolithic Saharan population from Hasi el Abiod and the Egyptian Badarian group being closely affiliated with modern Negroid groups. Similarly, the Epipaleolithic populations from Site 117 and Wadi Halfa are also affiliated with sub-Saharan LSA, Iron Age and modern Negroid groups rather than with contemporaneous North African populations such as Taforalt and the Ibero-maurusian.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic