posted
Getting back topic,i seen that book before “Ancient Egypt in Africa” but have not read it yet. I still plan to.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
It looks like it has some potential. And it's gotten at least one or two good reviews:
quote: Review "This book should be essential reading for any African archaeologist or historian—or indeed any archaeologist whatever their persuasion—and will undoubtedly provoke, as the volume editors have suggested, renewed archaeological interest in the problem of relating Egypt more directly to its African context." - Niall Finneran, African Archaeological Review
"Ancient Egypt in Africa presents twelve probing essays addressing aspects of the question, "To what extent can ancient Egyptian civilization be characterized as ‘African’?”…O’Connor and Reid’s introduction provides a fascinating overview of how current ideas about ancient Egypt and Africa have been shaped and distorted by modern ethnic, cultural, and religious bias…the essays document the conflicting and changing views of ancient Egypt within Africa, and examine recent archaeological work in Africa that renders irrelevant race-based theory, creates a more sophisticated view of ancient African cultural diversity, and offers commonsense directions for future research…should be required reading for all serious students of Egyptology, Africana, and African Studies." - Timothy Kendall, African Studies Review
By the way, I found a copy of it online as a PDF. If you want a copy, pm me I and I can share it. I'm in the middle of three other books right now so can't start this one yet, but I plan to when I finish at least one book I'm currently reading.
Posts: 100 | From: Canada | Registered: Oct 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
Although the topic of this thread is a book, I'll like to address some interesting things pointed out by a couple of posters.
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: For awhile i was not too clear myself on the admixture etc... of modern egyptians and even nubians in egypt, but it as been cleared up enough overtime.
I know now that in modern egypt most nubians do have some of admixture,but there are some that do not,while in sudan most do not and in kenya,chad etc.. no outside admixture.
I am not clear about the beja of egypt yet but i know sudan most do not have outside foreign admixture.
Many Sudanese have African genes, but many do have foreign admixture as well. For example, according to the Hassan (2008) study some Sudanese Nubian have 41% of the J haplogroup associated with Saudi Arabia and the Near East (all while Nuba, Fulani, Dinka and Haussa in Sudan got 0% of it, according to the Hassan study).
Hg J and its presence in Africa was discussed many times before, most recently here. Note that the form of J predominant in Sudan is J1 which probably originated in southern Arabia (though some postulate African origin). This is due to its frequency today in both southern Arabia and east Africa.
J1 in the Sudan and the Horn actually predate the Arab invasion by millennia so its presence in those regions cannot be due to Arab-Islamic invasions. The Beja carry J1 also though not as high in frequency as other Sudanese groups. Note also that the Arabians who carry J1 especially in Yemen are also black people.
This is why I agree with Dana (and in particular the historical sources she cites) that there has been some population continuity in ancient times between both sides of the Red Sea. Source from the Bible to Greco-Roman texts document the striking similarities between tribes and ethnies of both Arabia and the Sudan and Horn. Is it any coincidence they share certain genetic lineages as well?
quote:It's also noteworthy that there's already have been a study about ancient Kushite/Nubian/Sudanese aDNA. Which you can download there. At first, it talks about modern genetic make up then mentions aDNA study:
Here's a quote from the study/article: Accordingly, through limited on number of aDNA samples, there is enough data to suggest and to tally with the historical evidence of the dominance by Nilotic elements during the early state formation in the Nile Valley, and as the states thrived there was a dominance by other elements particularly Nuba/Nubians.
In Y-chromosome terms this mean in simplest terms introgression of the YAP insertion (haplogroups E and D), and Eurasian Haplogroups which are defined by F-M89 against a background of haplogroup A-M13 .
The data analysis of the extant Y-chromosomes suggests that the bulk of genetic diversity appears to be a consequence of recent migrations and demographic events mainly from Asia and Europe , evident in a higher migration rate for speakers of Afro-Asiatic as compared to the Nilo-Saharan family of languages, and a generally higher effective population size for the former. While the mtDNA data suggests that regional variation and diversity in mtDNA sequences in Sudan is likely to have been shaped by a longer history of in-situ evolution and then by human migrations form East, west-central and North Africa and to a lesser extent from Eurasia to the Nile Valley. I think the text is clear enough. But clearly it mentions haplogroup A-M13 has the most prevalent hg among ancient Kushite. Then other African and foreign admixture were introduced in ancient and modern Sudan.
A-M13 in Sudan is mostly prevalent among modern Dinka (62%), Shilluk (53%) and Nuba (46%) in Sudan.
Personnally, I think Kushites were composed of A-M13, maybe to a high percentage, but also other A, B and E hg, as most African populations.
Here's a nice table for the Hassan study. As most genetic study, they use what I consider a small number of people, but it's still valuable information which answers some of your interrogations about modern Sudanese genetic composition.
Okay proclaiming hg J to be Eurasian is one thing, but claiming its ancestor F-M89 (underived F*) as Eurasian is something else entirely! F* is relatively rare as it is and the only place in Eurasia where its found is in the Iran-Pakistan region. It is not even found in Arabia or the Levant yet it is dated to be 50,000 years old and associated with the 2nd wave of OOA expansion (after C, DE, and D carriers). So what evidence is there to say definitively that F* originated outside of Africa first?? Answer: there is none.
Posts: 26254 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Egyptian skull classifications from the pre to the late dynastic series:
NONE of the skulls from the predynastic (EPD, LPD) to the Middle Kingdom (MK) classify as the Late dynastic series, and none of the Late Dynastic skulls classify into the other skull sets from earlier periods. This is damning evidence. Statistics don't lie. Zakrzewski algorithm does not recognize any of these skulls as falling in the variations of the Late dynastic series. Somewhere along the line from the MK to the late dynastic period there were gradual changes and/or dramatic breaks in continuity that require substantial demographic changes to explain these results. The descendants of these exact same demographic changes are calling themselves Egyptians nowadays and demand that Ancient Egyptian characters on TV be moulded in their likeness). Well, we're not buying it. Zakrzewski's data measures cranio-facial dimensions, which map physical appearances. Dental dimensions or dental non-metric traits don't tell you whether a population looked African in their faces.
Ancients are NOT the moderns and haplogroups mean nothing if you cannot interpret them properly. You need to cross compare haplogroups profiles with that same population's autosomal ancestry, otherwise you're prone to make mistakes. Case in point: the Ouldeme who are nearly 100% R1b have little to no genetic relationships with R1b Europeans in their overall genome that other non R1b bearing Chadic and Niger Congo speaking Africans don't have. Ouldeme R1b percentages are a vestige from the past when a Eurasian group infiltrated their population ~7k years ago, and its totally unrepresentative of their current genetic makeup--which is nearly 100% African or very close to that number. See Tishkoff 2009.
It's interesting you should point this out Swenet. I am automatically reminded of the old 1945 study by Batrawi. By "late dynastic" I'm assuming Zakrzewski includes the New Kingdom as well. If that is so, then obviously something happened to alter the population of Egypt during New Kingdom times.
Here is the Batrawi excerpt, by the way:
quote: Since early neolithic times there existed two distinct but closely related types, a northern in Lower Egypt and a southern in Upper Egypt. The southern Egyptians were distinguished from the northerners by a smaller cranial index, a larger nasal index and greater prognathism. The geographical distinction between the two groups continued during the Pre-Dynastic Period. The Upper Egyptians, however, spread into lower Nubia during that period. By the beginning of the Dynastic era the northern Egyptian type is encountered for the first time in the Thebald, i.e., in the southern territory. The incursion, however, seems to have been transitory and the effects of the co-existence of the two types in one locality remained very transient until the 18th Dynasty. From this time onwards the northern type prevailed all over Egypt, as far south as Denderah, till the end of the Roman period.
In Lower Nubia a slight infiltration of negroid influence is observed during the Middle Kingdom times. In the New Empire period, however, the southern Egyptian type prevails again. After the New Empire a fresh and much stronger negro influence becomes discernable till the end of the Roman period.
There is a wide gap in our knowledge of the racial history of the two countries during the Christian and Islamic periods, owing to the lack of an adequate amount of relevant material. The study of the available measurements of the living, however, apparently suggests that the modern population all over Egypt conforms more closely to the southern type. The mean measurements for the modern Nubians are rather curious. The average cephalic index for them is significantly larger than that for the Egyptians. This is contrary to expectation based on knowledge of the characteristics of the ancient populations. No satisfactory explanation could be suggested.
A. Batrawi (1945) "The Racial History of Egypt and Nubia", The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute
Of course Zakrzewski's calculations are more refined as to notice a break or dissimilarity between pre and early dynastic Egypt with late dynastic Egyptians, I do find it striking that Batrawi claims "negroid" influence in the Middle Kingdom which seems to show up in Zakrzewski's values for that time period but then in the late dynastic there is a sharp increase in values. Do you think whatever population change happened to the Egyptians may have something to do with modern Nubians who according to Batrawi and other experts have higher cranial indices and overall so-called "caucasian" features than even modern Egyptians??
Posts: 26254 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well the info i seen for J1 IS THIS saying most of it came into africa because of the arab invasion. or settlements.
Haplogroup J-M267
Haplogroup J1
quote:
North Africa received Semitic migrations, according to some studies it may have been diffused in recent time by Arabs who, mainly from the 7th century a.d., expanded to northern Africa (Arredi 2004 and Semino 2004). However the Canary islands is not known to have had any Semitic language. There J-M267 is dominated by J-P58, and dispersed in a very uneven manner according to studies so far, often but not always being lower among Berber and/or non-urban populations. In Ethiopia there are signs of older movements of J-M267 into Africa across the Red Sea, not only in the J-P58 form. This also appears to be associated with Semitic languages. According to a study in 2011, in Tunisia, J-M267 is significantly more abundant in the urban (31.3%) than in the rural total population (2.5%). According to the authors, these results could be explained by supposing that Arabization in Tunisia was a military enterprise, therefore, mainly driven by men that displaced native Berbers to geographically marginal areas but that frequently married Berber women (Ennafaa 2011).
Now if the above is wrong then someone needs to change it.
The only J1 that have read that came into africa before the arab invasions is one from early ancient egypt is the earlier form of J1 not later subclades.
J1 in sudan is arab (euro-asian)a later form, not african or black southwest asian, while some in the horn is pre -arab but from those cold-adapted types that were in arabia that came in overtime.
Earlier J1 forms that are pre-cold adapted types exist only in arabia or asia(southwest asia)and egypt.
Sudan and horn and most of north africa is J-P58 or J1e not J1(EARLIER FORM).
quote: Tofanelli 2009 refers to this overall cluster with YCAII=22-22 and high DYS388 values as an "Arabic" as opposed to a "Eurasian" type of J-M267. This Arabic type includes Arabic speakers from Maghreb, Sudan, Iraq and Qatar, and it is a relatively homogeneous group, implying that it might have dispersed relatively recently compared to J-M267 generally. The more diverse "Eurasian" group includes Europeans, Kurds, Iranians and Ethiopians (despite Ethiopia being outside of Eurasia), and is much more diverse. The authors also say that "Omanis show a mix of Eurasian pool-like and typical Arabic haplotypes as expected, considering the role of corridor played at different times by the Gulf of Oman in the dispersal of Asian and East African genes." Chiaroni 2009 also noted the anomalously high apparent age of Omani J-M267 when looking more generally at J-P58 and J-M267 more generally.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Egyptian skull classifications from the pre to the late dynastic series:
NONE of the skulls from the predynastic (EPD, LPD) to the Middle Kingdom (MK) classify as the Late dynastic series, and none of the Late Dynastic skulls classify into the other skull sets from earlier periods. This is damning evidence. Statistics don't lie. Zakrzewski algorithm does not recognize any of these skulls as falling in the variations of the Late dynastic series. Somewhere along the line from the MK to the late dynastic period there were gradual changes and/or dramatic breaks in continuity that require substantial demographic changes to explain these results. The descendants of these exact same demographic changes are calling themselves Egyptians nowadays and demand that Ancient Egyptian characters on TV be moulded in their likeness). Well, we're not buying it. Zakrzewski's data measures cranio-facial dimensions, which map physical appearances. Dental dimensions or dental non-metric traits don't tell you whether a population looked African in their faces.
Ancients are NOT the moderns and haplogroups mean nothing if you cannot interpret them properly. You need to cross compare haplogroups profiles with that same population's autosomal ancestry, otherwise you're prone to make mistakes. Case in point: the Ouldeme who are nearly 100% R1b have little to no genetic relationships with R1b Europeans in their overall genome that other non R1b bearing Chadic and Niger Congo speaking Africans don't have. Ouldeme R1b percentages are a vestige from the past when a Eurasian group infiltrated their population ~7k years ago, and its totally unrepresentative of their current genetic makeup--which is nearly 100% African or very close to that number. See Tishkoff 2009.
Good summary. What study is the above diagram from?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
lioness says: Saying that the foundation of Egyptian culture is African culture is different from saying Egyptian thought and technology which had unique features was then spread into Africa (with the exception of Nubia) by invasion or other Africans interest in it. Egyptian dynastic culture did not spread into Africa like Greco-Roman culture spread into Europe.
^^But Diop never made any heavy claim that Egyptian thought, technology or Dynastic models spread into Africa via invasion or mass importation. MacDonald's QUOTE of DIop:
"The idea that a central dispersal located approximately in the Nile valley is worth consideration. In all likelihood.. [until ca 7000 BC].. Black mankind first lived in branches in the Nile basin before swarming out in successive spurts towards the interior of the continent."
^^Essentially Diop is saying that the Nile basin was an important source of people that dispersed towards the interior. He is not arguing that pyramids should be found in Senegal or Ghana. Why is why I say Macdonald's purported "critique" of Diop has a bit of a tangential flavor. Diop was much more concerned with the deep African substratum of Egyptian civ, not whether temples to Osiris would show up somewhere in the Congo to prove his point. He argues for various tribes displaced from the Nile Valley due to Asiatic invasions, showing up in Western Africa with a few Egyptian elements, but his examples are small potatoes- like similar sounding names of things etc. He never puts much emphasis on it at all. This is wholly different from implying he claimed some sort of huge Egyptian influence radiating out into "interior" Africa. Macdonald blows up a tangent into some sort of major "Diopian model" when it is indeed a side issue to his central ideas- which conveniently, Macdonald chooses not to engage. This is a typical pattern with the European academy- how it skips around and attempts to minimize the major cores of Diop's work and seizes on side issues to insinuate a major "refutation." Macdonald is right about some tenuous or flawed examples of migrating tribes from Egypt. Asorted details first proposed in 1955 are not hard to refute using current data 40 years later. But what about the core idea of the African foundations? That remains and has been subsequently supported by other scholars.
And note Diop incorporates the broader "Nile Basin" not strictly Egypt. The Nile Basin would cover not only Egypt, but the Sudan and parts of the Horn of Africa, on into Kenya as well, a broad swathe of northeast Africa. It is from that part of Africa that numerous modern humans were donated to other parts of the continent, and beyond.
The Nile Basin..
If you want to say Egyptian civilization was founded on African civilization then an analogous comparison would be to say the foundation of Neolithic Western European culture was a Greek culture
^^Dubious. You have it backward. The Neolithic Western Euro culture would be the foundation of the later Greek culture. Likewise, the deep African substratum is what underlies Egyptian culture as credible scholars note- quote:
"The evidence also points to linkages to other northeast African peoples, not coincidentally approximating the modern range of languages closely related to Egyptian in the Afro-Asiatic group (formerly called Hamito-Semetic). These linguistic similarities place ancient Egyptian in a close relationship with languages spoken today as far west as Chad, and as far south as Somalia. Archaeological evidence also strongly supports an African origin. A widespread northeastern African cultural assemblage, including distinctive multiple barbed harpoons and pottery decorated with dotted wavy line patterns, appears during the early Neolithic (also known as the Aqualithic, a reference to the mild climate of the Sahara at this time). Saharan and Sudanese rock art from this time resembles early Egyptian iconography. Strong connections between Nubian (Sudanese) and Egyptian material culture continue in later Neolithic Badarian culture of Upper Egypt. Similarities include black-topped wares, vessels with characteristic ripple-burnished surfaces, a special tulip-shaped vessel with incised and white-filled decoration, palettes, and harpoons...
Other ancient Egyptian practices show strong similarities to modern African cultures including divine kingship, the use of headrests, body art, circumcision, and male coming-of-age rituals, all suggesting an African substratum or foundation for Egyptian civilization.."
-- Source: Donald Redford (2001) The Oxford encyclopedia of ancient Egypt, Volume 3. Oxford University Press. p.28
MORE MODERN SCHOLARS..
"Ancient Egypt belongs to a language group known as 'Afroasiatic' (formerly called Hamito-Semitic) and its closest relatives are other north-east African languages from Somalia to Chad. Egypt's cultural features, both material and ideological and particularly in the earliest phases, show clear connections with that same broad area. In sum, ancient Egypt was an African culture, developed by African peoples, who had wide ranging contacts in north Africa and western Asia." --Morkot, Robert (2005) The Egyptians: An Introduction. p. 10) ------------------------------------------------------------------
but this was a culture far before any of the Greek philosophers or classical temples, all farming villages at that time, before writing.
^^Obviously. Diop BEGINS with Africa, and from that BEGINNING the Egyptian Dynastic civilization grew. For example, the divine kingship of the African substratum is the foundation of Egyptian kingship, which as time went on developed its own unique elements and elaboration.
However Greece and Rome are not the only foundations of Western Civilization.
Sure.
The Bible is a large part of Western civilization and spread all throughout Europe. The Europeans translated the old Greek and Roman texts. This sort of thing did not happen with dynastic Egypt spreading all across Africa or Egyptian gods seeping all across Africa coming from Egypt.
Your analogy is a bit flawed. Europeans could translate old Greek/Roman texts because they were current languages- understandable by contemporary people who did the translations, and Greece and Rome were conquerors of large or significant parts of Europe. So it was easy to access their languages. Egyptian writing went way back in antiquity and was not as accessible. Nevertheless the peoples of Nubia to some extent understood Egyptian writings and made use of Egyptian ideas and symbols. Such activity does not have to spread to every corner of Africa. Africa need not be a clone of Europe with a central empire or hegemon controlling its most significant parts. Diop was all too happy to note that Africa was NOT a clone of Europe- as he details in this cradle hypothesis.
But again, you have the flow backwards. It was the African elements that floed into the Nile Valley and formed the basis of the Dynastic civilization. Things BEGIN with Africa. In the matter of religion for example- credible schlarship notes- quote:
"A large number of gods go back to prehistoric times. The images of a cow and star goddess (Hathor), the falcon (Horus), and the human-shaped figures of the fertility god (Min) can be traced back to that period. Some rites, such as the "running of the Apil-bull," the "hoeing of the ground," and other fertility and hunting rites (e.g., the hippopotamus hunt) presumably date from early times.. Connections with the religions in southwest Asia cannot be traced with certainty...
It is doubtful whether Osiris can be regarded as equal to Tammuz or Adonis, or whether Hathor is related to the "Great Mother." There are closer relations with northeast African religions. The numerous animal cults (especially bovine cults and panther gods) and details of ritual dresses (animal tails, masks, grass aprons, etc) probably are of African origin. The kinship in particular shows some African elements, such as the king as the head ritualist (i.e., medicine man), the limitations and renewal of the reign (jubilees, regicide), and the position of the king's mother (a matriarchal element). Some of them can be found among the Ethiopians in Napata and Meroe, others among the Prenilotic tribes (Shilluk)." (Encyclopedia Britannica 1984 ed. Macropedia Article, Vol 6: "Egyptian Religion" , pg 506-508)
Egypt is not the Greece and Rome of Africa.
And Diop never claimed that it is/was.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The jokes on you. A smart troll would want the info to be buried as quickly as possible in the archives but nonsense text keeps the thread alive. Google will index active threads more, thus ensuring wider distribution on the web. Thanks fool!
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: The jokes on you. A smart troll would want the info to be buried as quickly as possible in the archives but nonsense text keeps the thread alive. Google will index active threads more, thus ensuring wider distribution on the web. Thanks fool!
LOL! Agreed! Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
This foo fool is keeping the threads in the Top and with it its Vital Info on TRUTH.
Really man I post less not because I give up on this forum but some of the threads are just PLAIN DUMB, Thanks One for allowing people to read TRUTH.
Africa is The Land Of the LONG LIVED ETHIOPIANS, All the Picture Threads post shows Blacks with wooly and straight Hair. Now if these people are supposed to Be mixed with Eurasians, Then Why is the color Almost exactly Like African AMericans??
See And BE:
RUN FOSSY RUN Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Getting back topic,i seen that book before “Ancient Egypt in Africa” but have not read it yet. I still plan to.
Its not a bad book, except I don;t know why people like Martin Bernal get an essay. He seems to add very little to the topic. Its Egypt IN Africa, not Egypt in Greece or any such Black Athena notions. People like Van Sertima who has extensive data that could be brought to bear don;t appear, but the tangential Bernal does. Curious.. And of course there is Macdonald and Diop but MacDonald himself notes broad connections across African regions, including "a Trans-Saharan Pastoral Technocomplex dating to between 3800 and 1000 BC. Material support for this notion comes from a shared set of valued objects (notably small stone axes and stone rings), as well as a common pastoral economy and stylistically similar tumuli, which ultimately stretched from Kerma (Sudan) in the east to Dhar Tichitt (Mauritania) in the west. "
from: MacDonald, KC; (1998) Before the Empire of Ghana: Pastoralism and the Origins of Cultural Complexity in the Sahel. In: Connah, G, (ed.) Transformations in Africa: essays on Africa's later past. (71 - 103).
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KING: zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova
Man so true Brotha Zarahan,
This foo fool is keeping the threads in the Top and with it its Vital Info on TRUTH.
Really man I post less not because I give up on this forum but some of the threads are just PLAIN DUMB, Thanks One for allowing people to read TRUTH.
Africa is The Land Of the LONG LIVED ETHIOPIANS, All the Picture Threads post shows Blacks with wooly and straight Hair. Now if these people are supposed to Be mixed with Eurasians, Then Why is the color Almost exactly Like African AMericans??
See And BE:
RUN FOSSY RUN
Indeed. If he wants to keep the thread on top rather than have it disappear in the archives, great. The fool is only helping spread info that would have been buried. Great pics, once again showing how Africans can vary. And some gene flow from outside does not cease making them African. There has always been some gene flow but the primary African character remains. You have exposed the double standard once again. Greece and southern Europe have had gene flow from Africa since ancient times, but few Euros are running around calling them "mixed race." It is when Africa is involved that their double standard is exposed.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: lioness says: Saying that the foundation of Egyptian culture is African culture is different from saying Egyptian thought and technology which had unique features was then spread into Africa (with the exception of Nubia) by invasion or other Africans interest in it. Egyptian dynastic culture did not spread into Africa like Greco-Roman culture spread into Europe.
^^But Diop never made any heavy claim that Egyptian thought, technology or Dynastic models spread into Africa via invasion or mass importation. MacDonald's QUOTE of DIop:
"The idea that a central dispersal located approximately in the Nile valley is worth consideration. In all likelihood.. [until ca 7000 BC].. Black mankind first lived in branches in the Nile basin before swarming out in successive spurts towards the interior of the continent."
^^Essentially Diop is saying that the Nile basin was an important source of people that dispersed towards the interior. He is not arguing that pyramids should be found in Senegal or Ghana. Why is why I say Macdonald's purported "critique" of Diop has a bit of a tangential flavor. Diop was much more concerned with the deep African substratum of Egyptian civ, not whether temples to Osiris would show up somewhere in the Congo to prove his point. He argues for various tribes displaced from the Nile Valley due to Asiatic invasions, showing up in Western Africa with a few Egyptian elements, but his examples are small potatoes- like similar sounding names of things etc. He never puts much emphasis on it at all. This is wholly different from implying he claimed some sort of huge Egyptian influence radiating out into "interior" Africa. Macdonald blows up a tangent into some sort of major "Diopian model" when it is indeed a side issue to his central ideas- which conveniently, Macdonald chooses not to engage. This is a typical pattern with the European academy- how it skips around and attempts to minimize the major cores of Diop's work and seizes on side issues to insinuate a major "refutation." Macdonald is right about some tenuous or flawed examples of migrating tribes from Egypt. Asorted details first proposed in 1955 are not hard to refute using current data 40 years later. But what about the core idea of the African foundations? That remains and has been subsequently supported by other scholars.
And note Diop incorporates the broader "Nile Basin" not strictly Egypt. The Nile Basin would cover not only Egypt, but the Sudan and parts of the Horn of Africa, on into Kenya as well, a broad swathe of northeast Africa. It is from that part of Africa that numerous modern humans were donated to other parts of the continent, and beyond.
The Nile Basin..
If you want to say Egyptian civilization was founded on African civilization then an analogous comparison would be to say the foundation of Neolithic Western European culture was a Greek culture
^^Dubious. You have it backward. The Neolithic Western Euro culture would be the foundation of the later Greek culture. Likewise, the deep African substratum is what underlies Egyptian culture as credible scholars note- quote:
"The evidence also points to linkages to other northeast African peoples, not coincidentally approximating the modern range of languages closely related to Egyptian in the Afro-Asiatic group (formerly called Hamito-Semetic). These linguistic similarities place ancient Egyptian in a close relationship with languages spoken today as far west as Chad, and as far south as Somalia. Archaeological evidence also strongly supports an African origin. A widespread northeastern African cultural assemblage, including distinctive multiple barbed harpoons and pottery decorated with dotted wavy line patterns, appears during the early Neolithic (also known as the Aqualithic, a reference to the mild climate of the Sahara at this time). Saharan and Sudanese rock art from this time resembles early Egyptian iconography. Strong connections between Nubian (Sudanese) and Egyptian material culture continue in later Neolithic Badarian culture of Upper Egypt. Similarities include black-topped wares, vessels with characteristic ripple-burnished surfaces, a special tulip-shaped vessel with incised and white-filled decoration, palettes, and harpoons...
Other ancient Egyptian practices show strong similarities to modern African cultures including divine kingship, the use of headrests, body art, circumcision, and male coming-of-age rituals, all suggesting an African substratum or foundation for Egyptian civilization.."
-- Source: Donald Redford (2001) The Oxford encyclopedia of ancient Egypt, Volume 3. Oxford University Press. p.28 [/i] --Morkot, Robert (2005) The Egyptians: An Introduction. p. 10)
It's been such a long time I read Diop. I need to read his books again. I think he should be very happy on the other side to see not only melanin test but genetic test confirming Ancient Egyptians are Africans.
Let's recall the work of Diop and Obenga about the unity, thus common heritage, of African languages. Almost all modern African languages are derived from the Negro-Egyptian (Afro-Egyptian) language phylum. Diop found many similarity between his language, Wolof, and Ancient Egyptians. Obenga found many similarities, indeed filiation relationship, between many other African languages. A few other linguists followed suit with a few other African languages.
Search by other people identify both the genetic and linguistic origin of almost all modern African languages (thus people) into the same approximate region in East Africa. It makes sense that at a certain point, they were all speaking one language which then differentiated through time into the current language families.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Indeed. While some of Diop's ideas and data is out of date, other key ideas and data have been supported by modern scholars. And his basic core ideas as to the African character of Egypt remains sound.
Speaking of cross-Africa connections, Macdonald himself admits a "Trans-Saharan Pastoral Technocomplex" including: "a Trans-Saharan Pastoral Technocomplex dating to between 3800 and 1000 BC. Material support for this notion comes from a shared set of valued objects (notably small stone axes and stone rings), as well as a common pastoral economy and stylistically similar tumuli, which ultimately stretched from Kerma (Sudan) in the east to Dhar Tichitt (Mauritania) in the west. "
from: MacDonald, KC; (1998) Before the Empire of Ghana: Pastoralism and the Origins of Cultural Complexity in the Sahel. In: Connah, G, (ed.) Transformations in Africa: essays on Africa's later past. (71 - 103).
Notice that this network stretches across the expanse of Africa, though Macdonald keeps trying to limit the eastern end of it to "Nubia", as if to artificially separate out Egypt from the equation. He says this network does not imply a common culture, but his investigation is limited mostly to material and technology not common strands such as religion, or customs. And when it comes to languages, we have more info these days that Egyptian has several connections with the Chadic languages. There is no reason ancient Egyptian language elements have to show up in quantity on the Senegal river to demonstrate regional intra-African connections. Ancient Greek language or temples do not show up much in Britain circa 1000BC either. But shared things like valued objects, agricultural economies etc show broad connections. And Greek influence, like that of Egypt was in areas relatively CLOSE to Greece, namely the Mediterranean zone. Egypt's influence is likewise in areas relatively close. Nothing special there... Europe has had a common political unity over centuries due to Roman hegemony, but Africa does not have to follow any such central hegemon model.
I do not agree with some of the diffusionist aspects of Diop's work but back in the late 1950s, with the data he was working with at the time, many of his arguments are understandable. And a lot of that info base Diop had to work with was often distorted, and racially biased against the peoples of Africa. Diop in many ways had to struggle against a biased, rigged system but he pushed through and reclaimed valuable ground that was essential at the time and looking forward. Diop did not publish much in his later years - English reprints of some of his works make them appear more recent than they are. But he never expected knowledge to stand still. New data is always underway, and it is up to current students, interested laymen, and and scholars to continue pushing forward the work.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Well the info i seen for J1 IS THIS saying most of it came into africa because of the arab invasion. or settlements.
Haplogroup J-M267
Haplogroup J1
quote: North Africa received Semitic migrations, according to some studies it may have been diffused in recent time by Arabs who, mainly from the 7th century a.d., expanded to northern Africa (Arredi 2004 and Semino 2004). However the Canary islands is not known to have had any Semitic language. There J-M267 is dominated by J-P58, and dispersed in a very uneven manner according to studies so far, often but not always being lower among Berber and/or non-urban populations. In Ethiopia there are signs of older movements of J-M267 into Africa across the Red Sea, not only in the J-P58 form. This also appears to be associated with Semitic languages. According to a study in 2011, in Tunisia, J-M267 is significantly more abundant in the urban (31.3%) than in the rural total population (2.5%). According to the authors, these results could be explained by supposing that Arabization in Tunisia was a military enterprise, therefore, mainly driven by men that displaced native Berbers to geographically marginal areas but that frequently married Berber women (Ennafaa 2011).
Now if the above is wrong then someone needs to change it.
The only J1 that have read that came into africa before the arab invasions is one from early ancient egypt is the earlier form of J1 not later subclades.
J1 in sudan is arab (euro-asian)a later form, not african or black southwest asian, while some in the horn is pre -arab but from those cold-adapted types that were in arabia that came in overtime.
Earlier J1 forms that are pre-cold adapted types exist only in arabia or asia(southwest asia)and egypt.
Sudan and horn and most of north africa is J-P58 or J1e not J1(EARLIER FORM).
quote: Tofanelli 2009 refers to this overall cluster with YCAII=22-22 and high DYS388 values as an "Arabic" as opposed to a "Eurasian" type of J-M267. This Arabic type includes Arabic speakers from Maghreb, Sudan, Iraq and Qatar, and it is a relatively homogeneous group, implying that it might have dispersed relatively recently compared to J-M267 generally. The more diverse "Eurasian" group includes Europeans, Kurds, Iranians and Ethiopians (despite Ethiopia being outside of Eurasia), and is much more diverse. The authors also say that "Omanis show a mix of Eurasian pool-like and typical Arabic haplotypes as expected, considering the role of corridor played at different times by the Gulf of Oman in the dispersal of Asian and East African genes." Chiaroni 2009 also noted the anomalously high apparent age of Omani J-M267 when looking more generally at J-P58 and J-M267 more generally.
You misunderstood what I stated. YES the vast majority of J1 in Africa particularly that found in North Africa is indeed the result of Arab invasion, but I'm referring to J1 found in Sub-Sahara both in the Sudan and Horn. Many of these lineages date to the neolithic or earlier. That said, I don't think these particular markers have anything to do with "cold-adapted Arabs". In fact most of the people who carry these markers display NO cold adapted traits at all but the opposite-- hot adapted traits.
Again, the deepest clades are found in Southwest Arabia and the Horn regions.
Posts: 26254 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Indeed. While some of Diop's ideas and data is out of date, other key ideas and data have been supported by modern scholars. And his basic core ideas as to the African character of Egypt remains sound.
Speaking of cross-Africa connections, Macdonald himself admits a "Trans-Saharan Pastoral Technocomplex" including: "a Trans-Saharan Pastoral Technocomplex dating to between 3800 and 1000 BC. Material support for this notion comes from a shared set of valued objects (notably small stone axes and stone rings), as well as a common pastoral economy and stylistically similar tumuli, which ultimately stretched from Kerma (Sudan) in the east to Dhar Tichitt (Mauritania) in the west. "
from: MacDonald, KC; (1998) Before the Empire of Ghana: Pastoralism and the Origins of Cultural Complexity in the Sahel. In: Connah, G, (ed.) Transformations in Africa: essays on Africa's later past. (71 - 103).
Notice that this network stretches across the expanse of Africa, though Macdonald keeps trying to limit the eastern end of it to "Nubia", as if to artificially separate out Egypt from the equation. He says this network does not imply a common culture, but his investigation is limited mostly to material and technology not common strands such as religion, or customs. And when it comes to languages, we have more info these days that Egyptian has several connections with the Chadic languages. There is no reason ancient Egyptian language elements have to show up in quantity on the Senegal river to demonstrate regional intra-African connections. Ancient Greek language or temples do not show up much in Britain circa 1000BC either. But shared things like valued objects, agricultural economies etc show broad connections. And Greek influence, like that of Egypt was in areas relatively CLOSE to Greece, namely the Mediterranean zone. Egypt's influence is likewise in areas relatively close. Nothing special there... Europe has had a common political unity over centuries due to Roman hegemony, but Africa does not have to follow any such central hegemon model.
I do not agree with some of the diffusionist aspects of Diop's work but back in the late 1950s, with the data he was working with at the time, many of his arguments are understandable. And a lot of that info base Diop had to work with was often distorted, and racially biased against the peoples of Africa. Diop in many ways had to struggle against a biased, rigged system but he pushed through and reclaimed valuable ground that was essential at the time and looking forward. Diop did not publish much in his later years - English reprints of some of his works make them appear more recent than they are. But he never expected knowledge to stand still. New data is always underway, and it is up to current students, interested laymen, and and scholars to continue pushing forward the work.
Note that the 'Trans-Saharan Pastoral Complex' that MacDonald speaks of likely represents Nilo-Saharan culture rather than Afrisian. Although, I don't doubt Afrisian spakers like Proto-Chadic speakers entered the scene also. According to the findings of Wilkinson in his Genesis of the Pharaohs book, the main roots of Egypt's culture lie along the eastern desert more so than the western desert though he does not deny western desert influences as well.
Posts: 26254 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Note that the 'Trans-Saharan Pastoral Complex' that MacDonald speaks of likely represents Nilo-Saharan culture rather than Afrisian.
I think any kind of trans-saharan pastoral complex is more likely to have been shared by many different ethnic group inhabiting the Sahara. Nilo-Saharans ancestors being a major part of those people. If fact, we can see the transmission of technology, artifacts and cultural behaviors from one region to another.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Indeed. While some of Diop's ideas and data is out of date, other key ideas and data have been supported by modern scholars. And his basic core ideas as to the African character of Egypt remains sound.
Speaking of cross-Africa connections, Macdonald himself admits a "Trans-Saharan Pastoral Technocomplex" including: "a Trans-Saharan Pastoral Technocomplex dating to between 3800 and 1000 BC. Material support for this notion comes from a shared set of valued objects (notably small stone axes and stone rings), as well as a common pastoral economy and stylistically similar tumuli, which ultimately stretched from Kerma (Sudan) in the east to Dhar Tichitt (Mauritania) in the west. "
from: MacDonald, KC; (1998) Before the Empire of Ghana: Pastoralism and the Origins of Cultural Complexity in the Sahel. In: Connah, G, (ed.) Transformations in Africa: essays on Africa's later past. (71 - 103).
Notice that this network stretches across the expanse of Africa, though Macdonald keeps trying to limit the eastern end of it to "Nubia", as if to artificially separate out Egypt from the equation. He says this network does not imply a common culture, but his investigation is limited mostly to material and technology not common strands such as religion, or customs. And when it comes to languages, we have more info these days that Egyptian has several connections with the Chadic languages. There is no reason ancient Egyptian language elements have to show up in quantity on the Senegal river to demonstrate regional intra-African connections. Ancient Greek language or temples do not show up much in Britain circa 1000BC either. But shared things like valued objects, agricultural economies etc show broad connections. And Greek influence, like that of Egypt was in areas relatively CLOSE to Greece, namely the Mediterranean zone. Egypt's influence is likewise in areas relatively close. Nothing special there... Europe has had a common political unity over centuries due to Roman hegemony, but Africa does not have to follow any such central hegemon model.
I do not agree with some of the diffusionist aspects of Diop's work but back in the late 1950s, with the data he was working with at the time, many of his arguments are understandable. And a lot of that info base Diop had to work with was often distorted, and racially biased against the peoples of Africa. Diop in many ways had to struggle against a biased, rigged system but he pushed through and reclaimed valuable ground that was essential at the time and looking forward. Diop did not publish much in his later years - English reprints of some of his works make them appear more recent than they are. But he never expected knowledge to stand still. New data is always underway, and it is up to current students, interested laymen, and and scholars to continue pushing forward the work.
There's no doubt that Diop laid a solid foundation for the study of Ancient Egypt history into its african context. Many researchers did follow up on his research and now we know much more about Ancient Egypt. There's no doubt that Diop had to deal with a very bigoted literature at that time. He was before his time, and needed to introduce a new paradigm in the study of the history of Kemet. I also don't agree with some of the diffusionist aspect which I think was very limited. Many researchers do indeed study Ancient Egypt in isolation or in a north-south context without placing Kemet in its more global West-East context, its Saharan context. Ancient Egypt is very much a daughter of the Sahara (which wasn't always a desert). Climate change is one of the main driver which led to the creation of the Ancient Egyptian state.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Thanks zarahan for your replies. With all the trolling going on, I missed your responses until now.
I first read Diop about 10 years ago when I first started learning of African history. One of the first African history books I read was his “The African Origin of Civilization: Myth or Reality”. With all this discussion I feel like pulling it off my bookshelf and re-read it again......
And although it’s not from the book I mentioned, this quote from MacDonald I found very interesting:
quote: "a Trans-Saharan Pastoral Technocomplex dating to between 3800 and 1000 BC. Material support for this notion comes from a shared set of valued objects (notably small stone axes and stone rings), as well as a common pastoral economy and stylistically similar tumuli, which ultimately stretched from Kerma (Sudan) in the east to Dhar Tichitt (Mauritania) in the west. " from: MacDonald, KC; (1998) Before the Empire of Ghana: Pastoralism and the Origins of Cultural Complexity in the Sahel. In: Connah, G, (ed.) Transformations in Africa: essays on Africa's later past. (71 - 103).
That’s something I never looked into too deeply before, but it seems crucial in understanding the rise of ancient, complex civilizations in Africa, and the world, by extension. I only wish more archaeological projects can be done in the Sahara and Sahel because it seems like this region was the centre of flourishing civilizations thousands of years ago. There’s no doubt so many more states that existed at the time but are yet to be discovered.
I know Dhar Tichitt has such a fundamental role in the development of states in West Africa like ancient Ghana. And having the shared pastoral and material culture with northeastern African regions like Kerma shows that these peoples were very interconnected, perhaps more than in later times when the Sahara dried up.
Am I right that the diffusion was primarily a flow of early Afro-Asiatic peoples migrating from east (regions like Sudan and the Horn) to west (as far as Dhar Tichitt)? I suppose there was also movement from West to East, of course. But do you know if this Trans-Saharan Pastoral Technocomplex is related to the spread of proto-Berbers from Eastern Africa?
Also, do you have any books or papers you can recommend regarding the topic of a Trans-Saharan Pastoral Technocomplex? It’s interesting.
Posts: 100 | From: Canada | Registered: Oct 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Well the info i seen for J1 IS THIS saying most of it came into africa because of the arab invasion. or settlements.
Haplogroup J-M267
Haplogroup J1
quote: North Africa received Semitic migrations, according to some studies it may have been diffused in recent time by Arabs who, mainly from the 7th century a.d., expanded to northern Africa (Arredi 2004 and Semino 2004). However the Canary islands is not known to have had any Semitic language. There J-M267 is dominated by J-P58, and dispersed in a very uneven manner according to studies so far, often but not always being lower among Berber and/or non-urban populations. In Ethiopia there are signs of older movements of J-M267 into Africa across the Red Sea, not only in the J-P58 form. This also appears to be associated with Semitic languages. According to a study in 2011, in Tunisia, J-M267 is significantly more abundant in the urban (31.3%) than in the rural total population (2.5%). According to the authors, these results could be explained by supposing that Arabization in Tunisia was a military enterprise, therefore, mainly driven by men that displaced native Berbers to geographically marginal areas but that frequently married Berber women (Ennafaa 2011).
Now if the above is wrong then someone needs to change it.
The only J1 that have read that came into africa before the arab invasions is one from early ancient egypt is the earlier form of J1 not later subclades.
J1 in sudan is arab (euro-asian)a later form, not african or black southwest asian, while some in the horn is pre -arab but from those cold-adapted types that were in arabia that came in overtime.
Earlier J1 forms that are pre-cold adapted types exist only in arabia or asia(southwest asia)and egypt.
Sudan and horn and most of north africa is J-P58 or J1e not J1(EARLIER FORM).
quote: Tofanelli 2009 refers to this overall cluster with YCAII=22-22 and high DYS388 values as an "Arabic" as opposed to a "Eurasian" type of J-M267. This Arabic type includes Arabic speakers from Maghreb, Sudan, Iraq and Qatar, and it is a relatively homogeneous group, implying that it might have dispersed relatively recently compared to J-M267 generally. The more diverse "Eurasian" group includes Europeans, Kurds, Iranians and Ethiopians (despite Ethiopia being outside of Eurasia), and is much more diverse. The authors also say that "Omanis show a mix of Eurasian pool-like and typical Arabic haplotypes as expected, considering the role of corridor played at different times by the Gulf of Oman in the dispersal of Asian and East African genes." Chiaroni 2009 also noted the anomalously high apparent age of Omani J-M267 when looking more generally at J-P58 and J-M267 more generally.
You misunderstood what I stated. YES the vast majority of J1 in Africa particularly that found in North Africa is indeed the result of Arab invasion, but I'm referring to J1 found in Sub-Sahara both in the Sudan and Horn. Many of these lineages date to the neolithic or earlier. That said, I don't think these particular markers have anything to do with "cold-adapted Arabs". In fact most of the people who carry these markers display NO cold adapted traits at all but the opposite-- hot adapted traits.
Again, the deepest clades are found in Southwest Arabia and the Horn regions.
I disagree. You have it right about north africa but wrong about sudan and the horn.
J1 found in sudan are from those who have intermarried etc.. with arabs that came into sudan in recent times.
J1 is not found in ancient sudan or the nile valley in sudan in ancient times so clearly it came in with arabs in the middle ages.
Don't go by the map for sudan above.IT'S MISLEADING.
That really green spot is heavily focus on one area in sudan and that's the city of Khartoum, where some both black ARABS and some OTHER blacks in sudan with some arab admixture and non blacks live in high numbers.
Let us keep in mind there are some arabs in sudan that are not black and there is large number of them like 4 to 5 million.
There are few beja snd nubians that are not black or do not look black and there are other non-blacks in sudan.
Sudan (Khartoum) total J-M267 74.3%
Alot of these types live in Khartoum where that green dot is really green at.
Has for the horn some it is earlier some of it is later but the subclades for the horn does not come from hot adapted types.
AS for the origin for the subclades in the horn,The BELOW INFO will explain in more detail.
I rather go by the info below then the map.
What i said before and the info below says something different from your info.
Haplogroup J-P209
Distribution
quote: Haplogroup J-P209 is found in greatest concentration in Southwestern Arabian Peninsula. Outside of this region, haplogroup J-P209 has a presence in North Africa. It also has a moderate presence in Southern Europe (especially in central and southern Italy, Malta, Greece, and Albania), Central Asia, and South Asia, particularly in the form of its subclade J-M172. Haplogroup J-P209 is also found in north East Africa, particularly in the form of its J-M267 subclade. The J-M410 subclade is found mostly in Greece, Anatolia, and southern Italy. In Northern India, 28.7% of the Shia Muslim among whom are the Sayyid population, belong to haplogroup J2.
Haplogroup J-M267[Phylogenetics 2] defined by the M267 SNP is in modern times most frequent in the Arabian Peninsula: Yemen (up to 76%),[Footnote 5] Saudi (up to 64%) (Alshamali 2009), Qatar (58%),[Footnote 6] and Dagestan (up to 56%).[Footnote 4] J-M267 is generally frequent among Arab Bedouins (62%),[Footnote 7] Ashkenazi Jews (20%) (Semino 2004), Algeria (up to 35%) (Semino 2004), Iraq (up to 33%) (Semino 2004), Tunisia (up to 31%),[Footnote 8] Syria (up to 30%), Egypt (up to 20%) (Luis 2004), and the Sinai Peninsula. To some extant, the frequency of Haplogroup J-M267 collapses at the borders of Arabic/Semitic speaking territories with mainly non-Arabic/Semitic speaking territories, such as Turkey (9%), Iran (5%) and Northern Indian Shia (11%) (Dienekes 2009 and Cinnioglu 2004). However, it should be noted that some figures above tend to be the larger ones obtained in some studies, while the smaller figures obtained in other studies are omitted. It is also highly frequent among Jews, especially the Kohanim line (46%) (Hammer 2009).
ISOGG states that J-M267 originated in the Middle East. It is found in parts of the Near East, Anatolia and North Africa, with a much sparser distribution in the southern Mediterranean flank of Europe, and in Ethiopia. But not all studies agree on the point of origin. The Levant has been proposed but a 2010 study concluded that the haplogroup had a more northern origin, possibly Asia Minor.
The origin of the J-P58 subclade is likely in the more northerly populations and then spreads southward into the Arabian Peninsula. The high Y-STR variance of J-P58 in ethnic groups in Turkey, as well as northern regions in Syria and Iraq, supports the inference of an origin of J-P58 in nearby eastern Anatolia. Moreover, the network analysis of J-P58 haplotypes shows that some of the populations with low diversity, such as Bedouins from Israel, Qatar, Sudan and UAE, are tightly clustered near high-frequency haplotypes suggesting founder effects with star burst expansion into the Arabian Desert (Chiaroni 2010).
Haplogroup J-M267
quote:
Men from this lineage share a common paternal ancestor, which is demonstrated and defined by the presence of the SNP mutation referred to as M267, which was announced in (Cinnioğlu 2004). This haplogroup is found today in significant frequencies in many areas in order near the Middle East, and parts of the Caucasus, Sudan and the Horn of Africa. It is also found in high frequencies in parts of North Africa and amongst Jewish groups, especially those with Cohen surnames. It can also be found much less commonly, but still occasionally in significant amounts, in Europe and as far east as Central Asia.
Arabian peninsula
J-P58 is the most common Y-Chromosome haplogroup among men from all of this region.
Subclade Distribution
Chiaroni 2009 proposed that J-P58 (that they refer to as J1e) might have first dispersed during the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B period, "from a geographical zone, including northeast Syria, northern Iraq and eastern Turkey toward Mediterranean Anatolia, Ismaili from southern Syria, Jordan, Palestine and northern Egypt." They further propose that the Zarzian material culture may be ancestral. They also propose that this movement of people may also be linked to the dispersal of Semitic languages by hunter-herders, who moved into arid areas during periods known to have had low rainfall. Thus, while other haplogroups including J-M172 moved out of the area with agriculturalists who followed the rainfall, populations carrying J-M267 remained with their flocks (King 2002 and Chiaroni 2008).
According to this scenario, after the initial neolithic expansion involving Semitic languages, which possibly reached as far as Yemen, a more recent dispersal occurred during the Chalcolithic or Early Bronze Age (approximately 3000–5000 BCE), and this involved the branch of Semitic which leads to the Arabic language. The authors propose that this involved a spread of some J-P58 from the direction of Syria towards Arab populations of the Arabian Peninsula and Negev.
The "YCAII=22-22 and DYS388≥15" cluster
Not only is the J-P58 group itself very dominant in many areas where J-M267 is common, but J-P58 in turn contains a large cluster which had been recognized before the discovery of P58, and is still a subject of research. This relatively young cluster, compared to J-M267 overall, was identified by STR markers haplotypes - specifically YCAII as 22-22, and DYS388 having unusual repeat values of 15 or higher, instead of more typical 13 (Chiaroni 2011) This cluster was found to be relevant in some well-publicized studies of Jewish and Palestinian populations (Nebel 2000 and Hammer 2009). More generally, since then this cluster has been found to be frequent among men in the Middle East and North Africa, but less frequent in areas of Ethiopia and Europe where J-M267 is nevertheless common. The pattern is therefore similar to the pattern of J-P58 generally, described above, and may be caused by the same movements of people (Chiaroni 2009).
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: I disagree. You have it right about north Africa but wrong about sudan and the horn.
J1 found in Sudan are from those who have intermarried etc. with Arabs that came into Sudan in recent times.
J1 is not found in ancient Sudan or the Nile valley in Sudan in ancient times so clearly it came in with Arabs in the middle ages.
Don't go by the map for Sudan above. IT'S MISLEADING.
That really green spot is heavily focus on one area in Sudan and that's the city of Khartoum, where some both black ARABS and some OTHER blacks in Sudan with some arab admixture and non blacks live in high numbers.
Some of the lineages date to Medieval times while others do NOT. Keep in mind there are J1 lineages in Ethiopia that date back to the Neolithic long before an 'Arab' ethnicity let alone identity even existed.
quote:Let us keep in mind there are some Arabs in Sudan that are not black and there is large number of them like 4 to 5 million.
There are few Beja and Nubians that are not black or do not look black and there are other non-blacks in sudan.
There are Tuareg and Kabyle that don't look exactly black either yet carry ancient African ancestry. There are totally white Europeans who also carry African ancestry, so what's your point?? I’m not exactly saying that J1 is African however J1 has its highest frequency and diversity in Arabia especially south Arabia among black types. Mind you, the major Arab tribes that contributed geneflow to North Africa including the Sudan were the Banu Salaym and Banu Hilal of the Hejaz who in original descriptions weren’t exactly the fair-skinned northern look. Also, both Egypt and Sudan invited other more northerly tribes since then.
quote:Sudan (Khartoum) total J-M267 74.3%
A lot of these types live in Khartoum where that green dot is really green at.
As for the horn some it is earlier some of it is later but the subclades for the horn does not come from hot adapted types.
And what evidence do you have that these subclades were introduced into the Horn from cold adapted types?? The only possible evidence of entry into the Horn by cold-adapted types comes from SLC24A5 alleles among some Ethiopians. Yet the presence of this allele in Ethiopia dates to at least the Bronze Age, whereas the majority of J1 subclades date to the Neolithic and again many South Arabians who possess those clades are not even light-skinned but much darker/blacker.
quote:AS for the origin for the subclades in the horn, The BELOW INFO will explain in more detail.
I rather go by the info below then the map.
What i said before and the info below says something different from your info.
Let’s see.
quote: Haplogroup J-P209
Distribution Haplogroup J-P209 is found in greatest concentration in Southwestern Arabian Peninsula. Outside of this region, haplogroup J-P209 has a presence in North Africa. It also has a moderate presence in Southern Europe (especially in central and southern Italy, Malta, Greece, and Albania), Central Asia, and South Asia, particularly in the form of its subclade J-M172. Haplogroup J-P209 is also found in north East Africa, particularly in the form of its J-M267 subclade. The J-M410 subclade is found mostly in Greece, Anatolia, and southern Italy. In Northern India, 28.7% of the Shia Muslim among whom are the Sayyid population, belong to haplogroup J2.
Haplogroup J-M267[Phylogenetics 2] defined by the M267 SNP is in modern times most frequent in the Arabian Peninsula: Yemen (up to 76%),[Footnote 5] Saudi (up to 64%) (Alshamali 2009), Qatar (58%),[Footnote 6] and Dagestan (up to 56%).[Footnote 4] J-M267 is generally frequent among Arab Bedouins (62%),[Footnote 7] Ashkenazi Jews (20%) (Semino 2004), Algeria (up to 35%) (Semino 2004), Iraq (up to 33%) (Semino 2004), Tunisia (up to 31%),[Footnote 8] Syria (up to 30%), Egypt (up to 20%) (Luis 2004), and the Sinai Peninsula. To some extant, the frequency of Haplogroup J-M267 collapses at the borders of Arabic/Semitic speaking territories with mainly non-Arabic/Semitic speaking territories, such as Turkey (9%), Iran (5%) and Northern Indian Shia (11%) (Dienekes 2009 and Cinnioglu 2004). However, it should be noted that some figures above tend to be the larger ones obtained in some studies, while the smaller figures obtained in other studies are omitted. It is also highly frequent among Jews, especially the Kohanim line (46%) (Hammer 2009).
ISOGG states that J-M267 originated in the Middle East. It is found in parts of the Near East, Anatolia and North Africa, with a much sparser distribution in the southern Mediterranean flank of Europe, and in Ethiopia. But not all studies agree on the point of origin. The Levant has been proposed but a 2010 study concluded that the haplogroup had a more northern origin, possibly Asia Minor.
The origin of the J-P58 subclade is likely in the more northerly populations and then spreads southward into the Arabian Peninsula. The high Y-STR variance of J-P58 in ethnic groups in Turkey, as well as northern regions in Syria and Iraq, supports the inference of an origin of J-P58 in nearby eastern Anatolia. Moreover, the network analysis of J-P58 haplotypes shows that some of the populations with low diversity, such as Bedouins from Israel, Qatar, Sudan and UAE, are tightly clustered near high-frequency haplotypes suggesting founder effects with star burst expansion into the Arabian Desert (Chiaroni 2010).
Haplogroup J-M267
Men from this lineage share a common paternal ancestor, which is demonstrated and defined by the presence of the SNP mutation referred to as M267, which was announced in (Cinnioğlu 2004). This haplogroup is found today in significant frequencies in many areas in order near the Middle East, and parts of the Caucasus, Sudan and the Horn of Africa. It is also found in high frequencies in parts of North Africa and amongst Jewish groups, especially those with Cohen surnames. It can also be found much less commonly, but still occasionally in significant amounts, in Europe and as far east as Central Asia.
Arabian peninsula
J-P58 is the most common Y-Chromosome haplogroup among men from all of this region.
Subclade Distribution
Chiaroni 2009 proposed that J-P58 (that they refer to as J1e) might have first dispersed during the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B period, "from a geographical zone, including northeast Syria, northern Iraq and eastern Turkey toward Mediterranean Anatolia, Ismaili from southern Syria, Jordan, Palestine and northern Egypt." They further propose that the Zarzian material culture may be ancestral. They also propose that this movement of people may also be linked to the dispersal of Semitic languages by hunter-herders, who moved into arid areas during periods known to have had low rainfall. Thus, while other haplogroups including J-M172 moved out of the area with agriculturalists who followed the rainfall, populations carrying J-M267 remained with their flocks (King 2002 and Chiaroni 2008).
According to this scenario, after the initial neolithic expansion involving Semitic languages, which possibly reached as far as Yemen, a more recent dispersal occurred during the Chalcolithic or Early Bronze Age (approximately 3000–5000 BCE), and this involved the branch of Semitic which leads to the Arabic language. The authors propose that this involved a spread of some J-P58 from the direction of Syria towards Arab populations of the Arabian Peninsula and Negev.
The "YCAII=22-22 and DYS388≥15" cluster
Not only is the J-P58 group itself very dominant in many areas where J-M267 is common, but J-P58 in turn contains a large cluster which had been recognized before the discovery of P58, and is still a subject of research. This relatively young cluster, compared to J-M267 overall, was identified by STR markers haplotypes - specifically YCAII as 22-22, and DYS388 having unusual repeat values of 15 or higher, instead of more typical 13 (Chiaroni 2011) This cluster was found to be relevant in some well-publicized studies of Jewish and Palestinian populations (Nebel 2000 and Hammer 2009). More generally, since then this cluster has been found to be frequent among men in the Middle East and North Africa, but less frequent in areas of Ethiopia and Europe where J-M267 is nevertheless common. The pattern is therefore similar to the pattern of J-P58 generally, described above, and may be caused by the same movements of people (Chiaroni 2009).
Okay. I just read everything and I fail to see how any of what you cited contrasts with what I’ve said. Again J1 and all of its subclades have their highest frequency and diversity both in Arabia particularly in the southern i.e. tropical region among tropically adapted folk. J2 and its subclades have their highest frequency in the northern areas of Anatolia and the Caucasus among temperate and cooler adapted folk but original J* also has its frequency in the south as well like in Soqotra. J’s sibling hg I is also found in Africa particularly southern Egypt and Sudan even though it also has an origin in Southwest Asia, then there is hg K and hg T both found in tropical adapted peoples of both Africa and Asia. So really I don’t know why you are so keen to associate hg J or any Southwest Asian derived clades with supposedly populations that are not tropically adapted.
Many scholars associated haplogroup J with early Semitic speakers but remember that Semitic was a branch of Afrisian which originates in Africa and that the introduction of proto-Semitic or perhaps a pre-proto-Semitic into the Levant was done so by E1b1b carriers. Note also that there are traces in Arabia of even older E2 and E1 carriers as well.
Posts: 26254 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Incidentally, many of the STRs used in this study are the same ones that tied ancient Egyptians to sub-Saharan Africans in the DNA Tribes analysis.
Mind you, I'm not saying darker skin and other African physical traits in modern Upper Egyptians weren't inherited from the ancient populations. However they are still far removed from the ancients even if it's to a lesser degree than the modern northerners.
But this is the real reason I bumped this thread. @Tyrannohotep if you are still here is this study still relevant based on the recent Schuenemann study? I ask because I used this study MANY times. And I agree that the STRs used in this study(D18S51, D21S11) were also used in the DNAtribes results. So again is this study still relevant? Because I may use it again for a good argument.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KING: zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova
Man so true Brotha Zarahan,
This foo fool is keeping the threads in the Top and with it its Vital Info on TRUTH.
Really man I post less not because I give up on this forum but some of the threads are just PLAIN DUMB, Thanks One for allowing people to read TRUTH.
Africa is The Land Of the LONG LIVED ETHIOPIANS, All the Picture Threads post shows Blacks with wooly and straight Hair. Now if these people are supposed to Be mixed with Eurasians, Then Why is the color Almost exactly Like African AMericans??
See And BE: …
RUN FOSSY RUN
This is the reason why:
quote: Population comparisons
Based on FST values, the mitochondrial genetic diversity of Soqotra is statistically different (P \ 0.01) from the comparative populations. An MDS plot of FST values shows that the Soqotra sample is clearly distinct from all sub-Saharan, North African, Middle East, and Indian populations (see Fig. 2). High differentiation of the East African groups such as the Sandawe, Hadza, Turu, Datog, and Burunge is shown on the left side of the graph. However, there is a general similarity of the remaining sub-Saharan African populations, particularly those from the Sahel band and the Chad Basin (with the exception of the Fulani nomads). Subsequently, there is a transitional zone formed by the populations from Ethiopia and the Nile Valley but also by some Yemeni groups, particularly the ones from the eastern parts of the country (Hadramawt). Finally, the cluster on the right part of the graph is composed by the Indian populations on the top, the Near and Middle Eastern groups in the middle and the populations of the Arabian peninsula at the bottom; Yemeni Jews being slightly different. The only outlier within the region of southwestern Asia is the Kalash sample that is situated on the extreme right part of the graph (see also Quintana-Murci et al., 2004). There is a general cline among all populations in the MDS plot from the Soqotri population to a cluster of Middle East and North African populations that splits into sub-Saharan and Indian populations.
Population differentiation of Soqotra from African, Middle East and Indian populations based on NRY-SNP data manifests a similar picture although the compara- tive populations are different and fewer than in the mi- tochondrial DNA analysis (see Fig. 3). A comparison of FST values shows that the only population that is not significantly different from Soqotra is that from Yemen (P [ 0.01). Similarly to mtDNA MDS plot, we observe a cline from the Soqotri population to a cluster of Middle East and North African populations that splits into sub- Saharan and Indian populations.
Phylogenetic affiliations
Within the Soqotri samples, we identified haplotypes belonging to three of the main branches of the mtDNA phylogeny (macrohaplogroups L, N, and R); notably hap- logroup M is absent (Table 2). There are only two sub- Saharan L haplotypes and they do not carry the 3594HpaI mutation so their classification is L3*; these haplotypes do not contain the specific mutations of L5b (23594HpaI) (Kivisild et al., 2004) and therefore they are possibly L3h2 as they both contain substitutions at 16111, 16184, and 16304 (see Behar et al., 2008). Macro- haplogroup N is represented by three different haplo- types of which only one can be unambiguously classified as N1a (it contains HVS-I motif 16147G-16172-16223-16248-16355). Two other N haplotypes have never been found outside Soqotra (see Table 2).
The most widespread mtDNA types in Soqotra belong to macrohaplogroup R (Table 2). The majority of R haplo- types can be classified as R0a [previously known as (preHV)1]. Three of the R haplotypes have not been previously reported. A network analysis of all Soqotri R0a haplotypes with additional sequences from Africa and Asia (see Fig. 4) shows a time to most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) of 23,339 6 8,232 YBP for R0a. It is shown that the majority of Soqotri R0a haplotypes fall into clade R0a1 (defined by variant 16355) whose TMRCA is 11,418 6 4,198 YBP. Furthermore, within R0a1, the unique Soqotri haplotypes form a new clade that is defined by variant 16172 and that we have named R0a1a1. Abu-Amero et al. (2007) identified a hap- lotype defined by variant 16355 and named it (preHV)1a1, thus it corresponds to R0a1a using the newer nomenclature and the unique Soqotri haplotypes are derived from this lineage). This Soqotri-specific clade has a very young TMRCA (3,363 6 2,378 YBP) that sug- gests the R0a1a1 haplotypes evolved on Soqotra and have not dispersed elsewhere. Two other Soqotri R hap- lotypes are not classified further than R* and are quite common in neighboring populations. Five haplotypes within macrohaplogroup R carry the 4216N1aIII variant that places them in clade JT. Of the JT haplotypes, two are unique to Soqotra; J1b is represented by two individuals and T* is represented by one individual.
The majority of NRY haplotypes in Soqotra belong to haplogroup J (85.7%), with most (45 out of 54) unclassified as J*(xJ1,J2) and a few (the remaining 9 samples) classified as J1 (see Fig. 5). It is interesting to note that NRY haplotypes lacking both M172 and M267, as in our unclassified J*, have not been previously identified on the Arabian Peninsula (Cadenas et al., 2008). Haplogroup E is represented at a frequency of 9.5% and three other haplogroups, F*(xJ,K), K*(xO,P) and R*(xR1b), are present in one individual each. It is worth noting that none of the ancient African haplogroups (A and B) were observed in Soqotra.
[…]
In comparison with datasets from neighboring regions, the Soqotri population shows evidence of long-term isolation and autochthonous evolution of several mitochondrial haplogroups.
—Viktor Cˇ erny ́ Out of Arabia—The Settlement of Island Soqotra as Revealed by Mitochondrial and Y Chromosome Genetic Diversity
quote:African and Middle Eastern populations shared the greatest number of alleles absent from all other populations (fig. S6B).
—Sarah A. Tishkoff, The Genetic Structure and History of Africans and African Americans
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Incidentally, many of the STRs used in this study are the same ones that tied ancient Egyptians to sub-Saharan Africans in the DNA Tribes analysis.
Mind you, I'm not saying darker skin and other African physical traits in modern Upper Egyptians weren't inherited from the ancient populations. However they are still far removed from the ancients even if it's to a lesser degree than the modern northerners.
But this is the real reason I bumped this thread. @Tyrannohotep if you are still here is this study still relevant based on the recent Schuenemann study? I ask because I used this study MANY times. And I agree that the STRs used in this study(D18S51, D21S11) were also used in the DNAtribes results. So again is this study still relevant? Because I may use it again for a good argument.
Honestly, with what I know now, I would advise against contrasting this with the DNA Tribes analyses. Their methodologies are as different as apples and oranges. We don't know what how the Amarna samples would plot on a PCA graph like this, only how the modern Upper Egyptian samples do.
Posts: 7080 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^So was it wrong for you to say Upper Egyptians aren't a good representation for the Upper Egyptians instead inner SSA?
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I'd guess a good fit since Omran's data has all the miniFiler STRs matching Thuya. I posted her allele frequencies. The frequency Thuya's profile appears in modern Upper Egypt can be computed using those frequencies.
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: ^^So was it wrong for you to say Upper Egyptians aren't a good representation for the Upper Egyptians instead inner SSA?
Back when I made the initial post, I believe almost everyone was confident that DNA Tribes's analysis showed that ancient Egyptians like the Amarna and Ramesside mummies had the strongest affinity to SSA. I believe the consensus now, developed after so many debates, is that this isn't necessarily the case. I still don't think modern Egyptians anywhere in Egypt are perfectly representative of the indigenous AE, but no longer would I say the latter would plot right next to the SSA sample in a PCA like that. You should know why by now.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Then why does Thuya's miniFiler profile show up in Sudan per Babiker and Upper Egypt according to Omram. This is factual. To think otherwise is faith based, ie, a belief.
But what about the STRS D18S51 and D21S11 that were used in BOTH DNAtribes and Hawis JAMA study? Just curious because Omram used them. Also(just wanna hear your opinion) why do you think modern Egyptians anywhere in Egypt wouldn't be a good representative of the indigenous AE? Again just wanna hear what you got to say.
@Tukuler
If you have time do you mind expanding on that?
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
First understand the Armana & Ramses miniFiler STRs are the only available such ancDNA and that kit does 8 loci and 8 loci only and it was developed for to get DNA from sources where low recovery is expected.
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: @Tyrannohotep
But what about the STRS D18S51 and D21S11 that were used in BOTH DNAtribes and Hawis JAMA study? Just curious because Omram used them. Also(just wanna hear your opinion) why do you think modern Egyptians anywhere in Egypt wouldn't be a good representative of the indigenous AE? Again just wanna hear what you got to say.
I simply think Egyptians, like many populations elsewhere in the world, have mixed with others over the last few millennia. As for the STRs, again, it's an apples-and-oranges comparison between these studies since they use different methodologies. We don't know how the Amarna or the Ramesside mummy STR profiles would plot on a PCA plot since the DNA Tribes studies didn't use PCA.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Ok, one Amarna example
I imagine Yuya's Biaka D7=6 will draw him closer to Africa like his high levels of CS=9 and D2=22 do. D2=27, his whole D13 locus, and D18=12 will place him toward Eurasia, in this case Europe then the Levant borders of the African quad.
Inside Africa he'll cluster with NE Afr. His CS=9, D21=29, and general profile see to that.
His position within/nearby the cluster will be influenced by San D18=22, Niger-Congo D2=22 & FGA=25, and Mzabi D13=11.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic