posted
This is only for the readers who are interested in the truth, who, it seems, unfortunately have no honest broker on ES to break it down in a way that's supported by the most parsimonious interpretation of the evidence. This is where things stand:
Biological Structure --The proto-Berbers, as a biological entity, originate in East Africa and have gone extinct. The available genetic literature shows that modern day Berber speakers are an amalgam of at least the following people: Ibero-Maurusians, Chamla's proto-Mediterraneans (i.e. Iberians), (Chadic) Wet Sahara Sub-Saharan Africans, Neolithic Near Easterners, and, finally, Pastoral Proto-Berbers, with the migrations happening in that respective order (chronologically speaking). The order of importance of the autosomal contributions of these people to the modern day Berber genepool is probably very similar to this ordering.
Locus of expansion The earliest evidence of Berber words exists in Ancient Egyptian texts. These texts are much older than the coalescent age of any modern Berber language. This, therefore, completely destroys any claim that the Berber language expanded from the Maghreb or that it originates from Vandal occupation:
quote: "In addition, Darnell and Manasssa mention the so-called ‘Hound-Stela’ of the Eleventh Dynasty ruler Antef II (2118-2069BC) where one of his basenjis is named Abaikur “meaning ‘hound’ in Berber, suggesting a southwestern origin for that particular dog” (p. 81)."
On the other hand, modern day extant Berber languages only coalesce to 2-3kya according to glottochronological work:
quote: "Several scholars have suggested that the level of diversity inside Berber is similar to that inside the Germanic or the Romance language groups. If diversification and time depth were to correlate in the same way in these European language groups as in Berber, this would imply a time depth of about 2000–2500 years only (Louali and Philippson 2004)."
--Dugoujon et al. 2009
This indicates that the earliest Berber languages to split off from the main stem were spoken in regions adjacent to the Nile Valley, and that modern day Berber languages split off later.
Kefi's Taforalt and Afalou samples
Not very much to say here. Slightly less than half of the samples are identical to CRS. This condition is diagnostic of mtDNA H lineages, but occasionally, mtDNA U(xU6) samples are reported which are identical to CRS in HVS-I. The rest of the samples only differ from CRS in a couple of places. This is highly inconsistent with mtDNA L lineages (which are typically more divergent from CRS in HVS-I) and this shows in the assigned haplogroups. When these sampled Taforalt people were alive 12kya, they themselves were immigrants from Europe, or they were 2nd, 3rd etc. generation immigrants in the Maghreb. Fu et al corrected mtDNA mutation rates shows older estimates for mtDNA V, which are well in line with the cal age of the sampled Taforalt remains. While not specifically tested in Fu et al 2013, it's very likely that this new corrected mutation rate would stretch the U5b1b, V, H1 and H3 lineages in modern Berbers back a bit beyond the ~10kya ages which are typically assigned to these lineages.
In 2013 Kefi obtained similar results with Afalou aDNA. Just like the Taforalt HVI-I sequences, they shifted towards Eurasians:
quote: "Phylogenetic analysis based on mitochondrial sequences from Mediterranean populations was performed using Neighbor-Joining algorithm implemented in MEGA program. mtDNA sequences from Afalou and Taforalt were classified in Eurasiatic and North African haplogroups. We noted the absence of Sub-Saharan haplotypes. Phylogenetic tree clustered Taforalt with European populations."
--Kefi et al 2013
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Berber is a language and cultural complex not a gene. Yet the scholars keep trying to associate particular languages and cultures in Africa with certain genetic lineages because they have an agenda. Once you acknowledge that "Berber" is a language originating in East Africa, the genetic lineages of modern Berber speakers is irrelevant, since, as you said, those ancient originators of Berber speakers are now extinct in many ways. Or if they aren't extinct, the populations today who descend directly from those people who originated the language no longer practice it. Which only exposes the fraudulence of trying to delineate African identity in such a fluid environment where African peoples themselves are constantly moving and changing.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
1Laboratory of Biomedical Genomics and Oncogenetics; Institut Pasteur de Tunis; 2Laboratoire de Police Scientifique de Marseille; France; 3INSERM U600-FRE2059 CNRS, Hôpital Sainte Marguerite, BP29, 13274 Marseille Cedex, France rym.kefi@pasteur.rns.tn
North Africa is located at a crossroad between Europe, Africa and Asia and has been inhabited since the Prehistoric time. In the Epipaleolithic period (23.000 years to 10.000 years BP), the Western North Africa has been occupied by Mecha- Afalou Men, authors of the Iberomaurusian industry. The origin of the Iberomaurusians is unresolved, several hypotheses have been forwarded. With the aim to contribute to a better knowledge of the Iberomaurusian settlement we analysed the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of skeletons exhumed from the prehistoric site of Taforalt in Morocco (23.000-10.800 years BP) and Afalou in Algeria (11.000 to 15.000 BP -Algeria). Hypervariable segment 1 of mtDNA from 38 individuals were amplified by Real-Time PCR and directly sequenced. Sequences were aligned with the reference sequence to perform the mtDNA classification within haplogroups. Phylogenetic analysis based on mitochondrial sequences from Mediterranean populations was performed using Neighbor-Joining algorithm implemented in MEGA program. mtDNA sequences from Afalou and Taforalt were classified in Eurasiatic and North African haplogroups. We noted the absence of Sub-Saharan haplotypes. Phylogenetic tree clustered Taforalt with European populations. Our results excluded the hypothesis of the sub-Saharan origin of Iberomaurusians populations and highlighted the genetic flow between Northern and Southern cost of Mediterranean since Epipaleolithic period.
Originally posted by beyoku: There is a high possibility that Northwest Africans were almost entirely Eurasian prior to (Green) Saharan/Sub-Saharan influences (which would have taken place within the last 12,000 years).....
"Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion" by Trenton Holliday 2013 is a new paper that shows the limb proportions of these populations to be cold adapted as expected for these genetic results.
posted
"We noted the absence of Sub-Saharan haplotypes."
Which I find curious, considering Frigi and Cherni (2010) shows how extremely divergent such haplotypes can be.
Posts: 318 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Sub-Saharan", "Eurasian", "Afroasiatic"--these Eurocentric lexicographic viruses never die. But they must be weeded out with some serious toxin.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Frigi et al's L3* is unquestionably L3k given the fact that both have the diagnostic marker at position 235, combined with their special N.African distribution.
quote:So far, the two only complete published samples belonging to haplogroup L3k have a North African origin, one from Libya and one from Tunisia. This haplogroup has a coalescent age of around 29,251 ± 6,524 years old. As it is impossible to identify this haplogroup based only in control region information (only through HVRII polymorphism at position 235), it is impossible to add additional information about this haplogroup.
This lineage coalesces to ~30kya per Soares 2011 and Harich et al 2010. The latter lists several additional N. African L lineages which supposedly split off from SSA variants >20kya, but only L3k has withstood the test of time in Soares', Frigi's, Bekada's, Fadhlaoui-Zid's etc. post-Harich 2010 investigations in this area. I went to check several sources and Harich's L3 types which are >20kya, do seem to be highly divergent. I don't know why others haven't picked up on this, especially Soares 2011. As far as I'm concerned, I consider it legit.
Frigi's L3*/L3k does not occur in the Ibero- Maurusian cultural distribution (coastal Morocco and Algeria); outside of East Africa, it has only been found in found in 1 Tunisian, 1 Libyan, 1 individual from Chad and 1 Druze. All Harich's >20kya North African L types (L3f2b, L3h1a2, L3h1b, L3x2) are either Tunisian or Egyptian, with the exception of Harich et al 2010's L3X2, who is an Algerian Arab.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
1Laboratory of Biomedical Genomics and Oncogenetics; Institut Pasteur de Tunis; 2Laboratoire de Police Scientifique de Marseille; France; 3INSERM U600-FRE2059 CNRS, Hôpital Sainte Marguerite, BP29, 13274 Marseille Cedex, France rym.kefi@pasteur.rns.tn
North Africa is located at a crossroad between Europe, Africa and Asia and has been inhabited since the Prehistoric time. In the Epipaleolithic period (23.000 years to 10.000 years BP), the Western North Africa has been occupied by Mecha- Afalou Men, authors of the Iberomaurusian industry. The origin of the Iberomaurusians is unresolved, several hypotheses have been forwarded. With the aim to contribute to a better knowledge of the Iberomaurusian settlement we analysed the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of skeletons exhumed from the prehistoric site of Taforalt in Morocco (23.000-10.800 years BP) and Afalou in Algeria (11.000 to 15.000 BP -Algeria). Hypervariable segment 1 of mtDNA from 38 individuals were amplified by Real-Time PCR and directly sequenced. Sequences were aligned with the reference sequence to perform the mtDNA classification within haplogroups. Phylogenetic analysis based on mitochondrial sequences from Mediterranean populations was performed using Neighbor-Joining algorithm implemented in MEGA program. mtDNA sequences from Afalou and Taforalt were classified in Eurasiatic and North African haplogroups. We noted the absence of Sub-Saharan haplotypes. Phylogenetic tree clustered Taforalt with European populations. Our results excluded the hypothesis of the sub-Saharan origin of Iberomaurusians populations and highlighted the genetic flow between Northern and Southern cost of Mediterranean since Epipaleolithic period.
Originally posted by beyoku: There is a high possibility that Northwest Africans were almost entirely Eurasian prior to (Green) Saharan/Sub-Saharan influences (which would have taken place within the last 12,000 years).....
"Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion" by Trenton Holliday 2013 is a new paper that shows the limb proportions of these populations to be cold adapted as expected for these genetic results.
Don't slander me why I am away. Learn how to fvcking quote. I didn't write that!
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Liaress at work again with bogus quotes? How could the "new paper" show any "cold adapted" when said said paper says exactly the opposite: quote:
"Bivariate analyses distinguish Jebel Sahaba from European and circumpolar samples, but do not tend to segregate them from recent North or sub-Saharan African samples. Multivariate analyses (principal components analysis, principal coordinates analysis with minimum spanning tree and neighbour-joining cluster analyses) indicate that the body shape of the Jebel Sahaba humans is most similar to that of recent sub-Saharan Africans and different from that of either the Levantine Natufians or the northwest African ‘Iberomaurusian’ samples. Importantly, these results corroborate those of both Irish and Franciscus, who, using dental, oral and nasal morphology, found that Jebel Sahaba was most similar to recent sub-Saharan Africans and morphologically distinct from their penecontemporaries in other parts of North Africa or the groups that succeed them in Nubia. "
--Holliday 2013
-------------------- 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: "Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion" by Trenton Holliday 2013 is a new paper that shows the limb proportions of these populations to be cold adapted as expected for these genetic results.
quote:Originally posted by pgbk87 Forum Biodiveristy
Biological Anthropologist Last Online @ Join Date 2010-07-29 Posts 4,962 Y-DNA E1b1a1a1g1, Q1a3a1 mtDNA L2b2, L3e2b Race Triracial Metaethnos Afro-Descendant Phenotype Chulo Man Politics Legalize It Religion Believe What You Want
Not necessarily. The originally Sub-Saharan elements likely have made their way to North Africa between 12,000 and 7,000 years ago. There is shared Mediterranean and native North African element in Northwest Africa which is epi-paleolithic in Northwest Africa. This makes sense since the Green Sahara lasted from 7,500–7,000 BCE to about 3,500–3,000 BCE.
MITOCHONDRIAL DNA AND PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF PREHISTORIC NORTH AFRICAN POPULATIONS
North Africa is located at a crossroad between Europe, Africa and Asia and has been inhabited since the Prehistoric time. In the Epipaleolithic period (23.000 years to 10.000 years BP), the Western North Africa has been occupied by Mecha- Afalou Men, authors of the Iberomaurusian industry. The origin of the Iberomaurusians is unresolved, several hypotheses have been forwarded. With the aim to contribute to a better knowledge of the Iberomaurusian settlement we analysed the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of skeletons exhumed from the prehistoric site of Taforalt in Morocco (23.000-10.800 years BP) and Afalou in Algeria (11.000 to 15.000 BP -Algeria). Hypervariable segment 1 of mtDNA from 38 individuals were amplified by Real-Time PCR and directly sequenced. Sequences were aligned with the reference sequence to perform the mtDNA classification within haplogroups. Phylogenetic analysis based on mitochondrial sequences from Mediterranean populations was performed using Neighbor-Joining algorithm implemented in MEGA program. mtDNA sequences from Afalou and Taforalt were classified in Eurasiatic and North African haplogroups. We noted the absence of Sub-Saharan haplotypes. Phylogenetic tree clustered Taforalt with European populations. Our results excluded the hypothesis of the sub-Saharan origin of Iberomaurusians populations and highlighted the genetic flow between Northern and Southern cost of Mediterranean since Epipaleolithic period. There is a high possibility that Northwest Africans were almost entirely Eurasian prior to (Green) Saharan/Sub-Saharan influences (which would have taken place within the last 12,000 years).
I wish I could make such strong inferences on Ancient Egypt, but for now we are finding clear links to Saharan Africa. Ancient Egyptians were definitely pulling more towards West Asian populations (just based on geography), but to what degree and whether they were predominately so is definitely unfounded.
quote: Afalou and Taforalt were classified in Eurasiatic and North African haplogroups. We noted the absence of Sub-Saharan haplotypes. Phylogenetic tree clustered Taforalt with European populations.
That sounds about correct too. These populations above are ones that would die in the desert and only survive on the coast. The genetic continuity of these North African populations would likely be terminal at the Nile valley. "Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion" - is a new paper that shows the limb proportions of these populations to be cold adapted....as expected for these genetic results. Egyptians in the same article are Tropical along with other Sub Saharans.
quote: "Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion" by Trenton Holliday 2013 is a new paper that shows the limb proportions of these populations to be cold adapted as expected for these genetic results.
It's interesting to understand why...!
quote: Africa is the birthplace of modern humans, and is the source of the geographic expansion of ancestral populations into other regions of the world. Indigenous Africans are characterized by high levels of genetic diversity within and between populations. The pattern of genetic variation in these populations has been shaped by demographic events occurring over the last 200,000 years. The dramatic variation in climate, diet, and exposure to infectious disease across the continent has also resulted in novel genetic and phenotypic adaptations in extant Africans. --Sarah A. Tishkoff
The Evolution of Human Genetic and Phenotypic Variation in Africa
quote: The great similarities between Taforalt and Hassi-el-Abiod men (malian Sahara)
In: Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d'anthropologie de Paris, XIV° Série, tome 5 fascicule 4, 1988. pp. 247-256.
TAFORALT MAN IN SAHARA : SAHARAN EXTENSION OF MAGHREBIAN
quote: we suggest that there may have been a relationship, albeit a complex one, between climatic events and cave activity on the part of Iberomaurusian populations.
--A. Bouzouggar, et al.
Reevaluating the Age of the Iberomaurusian in Morocco
quote: Large-scale climate change forms the backdrop to the beginnings of food production in northeastern Africa (Kröpelin et al. 2008). Hunter-gatherer communities deserted most of the northern interior of the continent during the arid glacial maximum and took refuge along the North African coast, the Nile Valley, and the southern fringes of the Sahara (Barich and Garcea 2008; Garcea 2006; Kuper and Kröpelin 2006). During the subsequent Early Holocene African humid phase, from the mid-eleventh to the early ninth millennium cal BP, ceramic-using hunter-gatherers took advantage of more favorable savanna conditions to resettle much of northeastern Africa (Holl 2005; Kuper and Kröpelin 2006). Evidence of domestic animals first appeared in sites in the Western Desert of Egypt, the Khartoum region of the Nile, northern Niger, the Acacus Mountains of Libya, and Wadi Howar (Garcea 2004, 2006; Pöllath and Peters 2007; fig. 1).
--Fiona Marshall
Domestication Processes and Morphological Change Through the Lens of the Donkey and African Pastoralism Fiona Marshall and Lior Weissbrod
quote:Evidence from throughout the Sahara indicates that the region experienced a cool, dry and windy climate during the last glacial period, followed by a wetter climate with the onset of the current interglacial, with humid conditions being fully established by around 10,000 years BP, when we see the first evidence of a reoccupation of parts of the central Sahara by hunter gathers, most likely originating from sub-Saharan Africa (Cremaschi and Di Lernia, 1998; Goudie, 1992; Phillipson, 1993; Ritchie, 1994; Roberts, 1998).
[...]
Conical tumuli, platform burials and a V-type monument represent structures similar to those found in other Saharan regions and associated with human burials, appearing in sixth millennium BP onwards in northeast Niger and southwest Libya (Sivilli, 2002). In the latter area a shift in emphasis from faunal to human burials, complete by the early fifth millennium BP, has been interpreted by Di Lernia and Manzi (2002) as being associated with a changes in social organisation that occurred at a time of increasing aridity. While further research is required in order to place the funerary monuments of Western Sahara in their chronological context, we can postulate a similar process as a hypothesis to be tested, based on the high density of burial sites recorded in the 2002 survey. Fig. 2: Megaliths associated with tumulus burial (to right of frame), north of Tifariti (Fig. 1). A monument consisting of sixty five stelae was also of great interest; precise alignments north and east, a division of the area covered into separate units, and a deliberate scattering of quartzite inside the structure, are suggestive of an astronomical function associated with funerary rituals. Stelae are also associated with a number of burial sites, again suggesting dual funerary and astronomical functions (Figure 2). Further similarities with other Saharan regions are evident in the rock art recorded in the study area, although local stylistic developments are also apparent. Carvings of wild fauna at the site of Sluguilla resemble the Tazina style found in Algeria, Libya and Morocco (Pichler and Rodrigue, 2003), although examples of elephant and rhinoceros in a naturalistic style reminiscent of engravings from the central Sahara believed to date from the early Holocene are also present.
--Nick Brooks et al.
The prehistory of Western Sahara in a regional context: the archaeology of the "free zone"
Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Saharan Studies Programme and School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK Coauthors: Di Lernia, Savino ((Department of Scienze Storiche, Archeologiche, e Antropologiche dell’Antichità, Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Via Palestro 63, 00185 – Rome, Italy) and Drake, Nick (Department of Geography, King’s College, Strand, London WC2R 2LS
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: Afalou and Taforalt were classified in Eurasiatic and North African haplogroups. We noted the absence of Sub-Saharan haplotypes. Phylogenetic tree clustered Taforalt with European populations.
That sounds about correct too. These populations above are ones that would die in the desert and only survive on the coast. The genetic continuity of these North African populations would likely be terminal at the Nile valley. "Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion" - is a new paper that shows the limb proportions of these populations to be cold adapted....as expected for these genetic results. Egyptians in the same article are Tropical along with other Sub Saharans.
quote: PC correlates and component loadings (Figure 2) showed a pattern similar to average hg frequencies (Table 2) in both large meta-population sets, with the LBK dataset grouping with Europeans because of a lack of mitochondrial African hgs (L and M1) and preHV, and elevated frequencies of hg V.
--Wolfgang Haak
Ancient DNA from European Early Neolithic Farmers Reveals Their Near Eastern Affinities
quote:
Our results demonstrate an ancient local evolution in Tunisia of some African haplogroups (L2a, L3*, and L3b).
[...]
However, considering the general understanding nowadays that human settlement of the rest of the world emerged from eastern northern Africa less than 50,000 years ago, a better explanation of these haplogroups might be that their frequencies reflect the original modern human population of these parts of Africa as much as or more than intrusions from outside the continent.
quote:Originally posted by pgbk87 Forum Biodiveristy
Biological Anthropologist Last Online @ Join Date 2010-07-29 Posts 4,962 Y-DNA E1b1a1a1g1, Q1a3a1 mtDNA L2b2, L3e2b Race Triracial Metaethnos Afro-Descendant Phenotype Chulo Man Politics Legalize It Religion Believe What You Want
Not necessarily. The originally Sub-Saharan elements likely have made their way to North Africa between 12,000 and 7,000 years ago. There is shared Mediterranean and native North African element in Northwest Africa which is epi-paleolithic in Northwest Africa. This makes sense since the Green Sahara lasted from 7,500–7,000 BCE to about 3,500–3,000 BCE.
MITOCHONDRIAL DNA AND PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF PREHISTORIC NORTH AFRICAN POPULATIONS
North Africa is located at a crossroad between Europe, Africa and Asia and has been inhabited since the Prehistoric time. In the Epipaleolithic period (23.000 years to 10.000 years BP), the Western North Africa has been occupied by Mecha- Afalou Men, authors of the Iberomaurusian industry. The origin of the Iberomaurusians is unresolved, several hypotheses have been forwarded. With the aim to contribute to a better knowledge of the Iberomaurusian settlement we analysed the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of skeletons exhumed from the prehistoric site of Taforalt in Morocco (23.000-10.800 years BP) and Afalou in Algeria (11.000 to 15.000 BP -Algeria). Hypervariable segment 1 of mtDNA from 38 individuals were amplified by Real-Time PCR and directly sequenced. Sequences were aligned with the reference sequence to perform the mtDNA classification within haplogroups. Phylogenetic analysis based on mitochondrial sequences from Mediterranean populations was performed using Neighbor-Joining algorithm implemented in MEGA program. mtDNA sequences from Afalou and Taforalt were classified in Eurasiatic and North African haplogroups. We noted the absence of Sub-Saharan haplotypes. Phylogenetic tree clustered Taforalt with European populations. Our results excluded the hypothesis of the sub-Saharan origin of Iberomaurusians populations and highlighted the genetic flow between Northern and Southern cost of Mediterranean since Epipaleolithic period. There is a high possibility that Northwest Africans were almost entirely Eurasian prior to (Green) Saharan/Sub-Saharan influences (which would have taken place within the last 12,000 years).
I wish I could make such strong inferences on Ancient Egypt, but for now we are finding clear links to Saharan Africa. Ancient Egyptians were definitely pulling more towards West Asian populations (just based on geography), but to what degree and whether they were predominately so is definitely unfounded.
[/QB]
In other words after L* migrated to North Africa, it stopped mutating all of a sudden? ?
quote: "This conclusion points to an ancient African gene flow to Tunisia before 20,000 years BP"
[...]
Our results demonstrate an ancient local evolution in Tunisia of some African haplogroups (L2a, L3*, and L3b).
--Frigi et al. Human Biology (August 2010 (82:4)
quote: In addition, Bayesian skyline analysis of 328 complete L3 sequences and founder analysis of 2,359 L3 hypervariable segment I (HVS-I) sequences enabled us to infer both local demographic expansions and migrations within Africa.
[...]
The diversification of L3 in Eastern Africa began early, as demonstrated by the ages of L3a and L3h (fig. 1), both of which are virtually specific to this region (fig. 3A). The BSP for Eastern Africa (supplementary fig. S6, Supplementary Material online) alone rises most steeply only after 40 ka (table 1), but the plot shows a progressive increase from before 50 ka. Accordingly, the scan of HVS-I diversity of founder L3 lineages in Eastern Africa showed a peak at ∼58.8 ka (corresponding to nearly three quarters of the L3 data in Eastern Africa; table 2), followed by a second peak at ∼1.8 ka.
posted
If we're going to post scientific references, can we please keep them origin related (i.e. not archaeologically oriented material), short and digestible? This thread was created to correct some of the blatant lies and fabrications that some people tend to make up. This is for the readers of ES who want to be able to sort fact from fiction. Since these requests are rarely respected, I'm just going to abandon this thread If I have to keep on repeating myself. I'm already making an exception to post here in the first place.
Please only post:
--digestible and to the point osteological and genetic information about the ancestry of the aforementioned populations (Ibero-Maurusians, Chamla's proto-Mediterraneans [i.e. Iberians], [Chadic] Wet Sahara Sub-Saharan Africans, Neolithic Near Easterners, and, finally, Pastoral Proto-Berbers) who have a stake in the formation of Berber speakers.
--Any information about highly divergent L types in the Western Maghreb that are older than >20kya, which look like they could have been involved with the Ibero-Maurusian. As just explained, L3k doesn't fit the bill. Besides, L3*/L3k is an unquestionably East African haplogroup. If it occurred in Ibero- Maurusians it would have been through contact with Africans. This is not exactly consistent with an African origin for these populations. No African population I know needs geneflow from other Africans to "become" African.
--Any corrections of claims on Berber speakers which people here tend to get dogmatic about.
If you don't have any information or questions pertaining to the above, just leave the thread alone. Better a deserted reference thread than a thread which is artificially puffed up with filler.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^^ note not were Jeble Sahaba is on the chart
notice the cluster for Afalou, what that's clautering with
Afalou and Taforalt are Maurusian
Yes, I should've mentioned it for people who didn't know. It's also interesting to see East Africa and West Africa clustering close to each other.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
FORUM BIODIVERSITY pg87 SAYS: Not necessarily. The originally Sub-Saharan elements likely have made their way to North Africa between 12,000 and 7,000 years ago
^^Not necessarily. Other data indicates a much earlier "sub-Saharan" presence in "North Africa" - FROM BEFORE 20,000 years ago.
Frigi: " This conclusion points to an ancient African gene flow to Tunisia before 20,000 years BP." quote: "Our objective is to highlight the age of sub-Saharan gene flows in North Africa and particularly in Tunisia. Therefore we analyzed in a broad phylogeographic context sub-Saharan mtDNA haplogroups of Tunisian Berber populations considered representative of ancient settlement. More than 2,000 sequences were collected from the literature, and networks were constructed. The results show that the most ancient haplogroup is L3*, which would have been introduced to North Africa from eastern sub-Saharan populations around 20,000 years ago. Our results also point to a less ancient western sub-Saharan gene flow to Tunisia, including haplogroups L2a and L3b. This conclusion points to an ancient African gene flow to Tunisia before 20,000 years BP. These findings parallel the more recent findings of both archaeology and linguistics on the prehistory of Africa. The present work suggests that sub-Saharan contributions to North Africa have experienced several complex population processes after the occupation of the region by anatomically modern humans. Our results reveal that Berber speakers have a foundational biogeographic root in Africa and that deep African lineages have continued to evolve in supra-Saharan Africa."
--Frigi et al. Human Biology (August 2010 (82:4)
--------------------------------------------
Detailed analysis shows the stone tool industries in the region are variants of a single whole, with several assemblagles showing more affinity to African industries that to the Middle Paleolithic of western EUrasia.
quote: North Africa is quickly emerging as one of the more important regions yielding information on the origins of modern Homo sapiens. Associated with significant fossil hominin remains are two stone tool industries, the Aterian and Mousterian, which have been differentiated, respectively, primarily on the basis of the presence and absence of tanged, or stemmed, stone tools. Largely because of historical reasons, these two industries have been attributed to the western Eurasian Middle Paleolithic rather than the African Middle Stone Age. In this paper, drawing on our recent excavation of Contrebandiers Cave and other published data, we show that, aside from the presence or absence of tanged pieces, there are no other distinctions between these two industries in terms of either lithic attributes or chronology. Together, these results demonstrate that these two ‘industries’ are instead variants of the same entity. Moreover, several additional characteristics of these assemblages, such as distinctive stone implements and the manufacture and use of bone tools and possible shell ornaments, suggest a closer affinity to other Late Pleistocene African Middle Stone Age industries rather than to the Middle Paleolithic of western Eurasia.
--On the industrial attributions of the Aterian and Mousterian of the Maghreb, Harold L. Dibble et al. Journal of Human Evolution, 2013 Elsevier. African Archaeological Review ----------------------------------------------------------------
It should also be kept in mind that in many studies "North Africa" primarily refers to sampling near the Medit coast, not a significant inland range. When a fuller data set is looked at "North Africa" appears a lot different. Numerous scholars cluster inland areas in Sudan, Chad, Mali etc as part of "North Africa." A country could be both "sub-Saharan" and "North African" depending on the definitions used. Mediterranean coast "North Africa" may not necessary be representative of the fuller regional picture.
forum biodiversity pg87 says: Ancient Egyptians were definitely pulling more towards West Asian populations (just based on geography), but to what degree and whether they were predominately so is definitely unfounded.
Actually, how could Ancient Egyptians be "pulling more towards West Asian populations" when Holliday's analysis actually shows them clustering with other tropical Africans?
And "based on Geography" Nubia is just as close to Egypt as "Eurasia". In fact, the closet cousins of Ancient Egyptians are Nubians as credible mainstream Egyptology have noted for some time, and said Nubians show up distinctly in various Egyptian dynasties long before the famous 25th.
-------------------- 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 |
posted
forum biodiversity pg87 says: Ancient Egyptians were definitely pulling more towards West Asian populations (just based on geography), but to what degree and whether they were predominately so is definitely unfounded.
Nothing "unfounded" about it. The population affinities of the ancient Egyptians with tropical Africans are clear. ANd just to add geography, Sinai is actually part of Africa based on the tectonics per credible geographers. "Asia" does not start until you clear Sinai.
"The limits of the great majority of the continent are clearly delineated by its coastline; it is bounded on the north by the Mediterraneans Sea, in the West by the Atlantic Ocean, and in the east by the Indian Ocean. Africa's only point of contact with another continent is in the extreme northeast, where the Sinai Peninsula forms a land bridge to Asia. Geographers usually include the Sinai Peninsula, as part of Africa, rather than Asia."
--Stokes, J (2009). Encyclopedia of the Peoples of Africa and the Middle East: L to Z.764.
-------------------- 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 |
-------------------- 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 |
posted
The OP makes an excellent case. No offense to the OP and this is just my personal opinion, but I have a problem with saying modern day Berber speakers descend from Paleolithic people.
Not only are modern day Berbers really a heterogeneous with different origins, with really the only thing binding them together being language and "Berber marker" E-M81.
But more importantly Berber speakers only appeared around 2-3kya years ago. During the Bronze age. True that the "proto-Berbers" may be extinct, but the "true" Berber ancestry comes from East Africa based of many things I read:
quote:The Berber languages are relatively well-studied, and it is possible to explore their geographical extent today and in the past, and also reconstruct basic and culturalvocabulary which can be attributed to speakers of proto-Berber. However, there is a major problem reconciling this with textual and archaeological evidence. The proto-Berber we can reconstruct seems to be far to recent to match what we know from other evidence; indeed it seems to reach back to period as late as 200 AD. Textual evidence (and Canarian inscriptions) point to a period prior to 400 BC, while the most credible archaeological correlate would be the spread of pastoralism across the Sahara, pointing to the period 5-4000 BP. The paper explores this disjunction and suggests the underlying reason for it is massive language levelling in the period after 0 AD. In other words, the original speakers of Berber did indeed spread out westwards from the Nile Valley, 5-4000 years ago, but the diversity which evolved in this period was eliminated by a sociolinguistic processes which levelled divergent speech forms. Historical linguists have been wary of invoking such process until recently, but evidence is mounting for their importance in many and varied cultures, including China, Borneo and Madagascar. Hypotheses are evaluated to explain the Berber situation and it is suggested that a combination of the introduction of the camel and the establishment of the Roman limes were the key factors in creating this linguistic bottleneck.
In my honest opinion haplogroup U6 is far too old to be considered a "Berber marker". Most of the Berbers "Eurasian" mtDNA is recent, but also very diverse, but back to U6 I feel its too old.
If I remember correctly U6 peaks around 10% in North Africa. I could be wrong, but think I remember reading that somewhere. But more importantly by the time of the arrival of the Berbers the U6 clade would have already undergone a SNP event similar to M1 in the horn, making it local to the region. And also I think in my honest opinion that Berbers are "recipients" of U6 similar to how some Bantu speakers like the Zulu's(I believe) are recipients of y-DNA B.
Also U6 is not only found in the Maghreb, but also East Africa such as Kenya and also West Africa. U6 in modern day North Africans seem to reflect a south to north migrate from West African U6 carriers. I CAN BE WRONG ON THIS! Also I think I read Kenyans carry the oldest clade of U6 aka U6a than people of the Maghreb. I can TOO be wrong on this!
But the major problem I have is Tuaregs who are considered the "foundation" of Berbers with their high frequency of E-M81 hardly if at all carrying mtDNA U6.
Again this is just my own personal theory. I can be wrong...
As for modern day Berbers. I agree that they are definitely admixed people. To me modern day Berbers are a result of African males and European women. The Tuaregs are an object example of this. Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
^No, what you say is a 100% true. U6 is not a Berber marker if you define "Berber" as the original linguistic speaking entity that migrated from East Africa.
I think you solved your question. U6 is a Maghrebi hg, the original Berbers weren't Maghrebi populations. If some Berber speaking groups broke away from the main body that was en-route to the Magreb, they will be less likely to have U6. In the case of the Tuareg, one also has to tease apart which lineages Tuareg inherited from Berbers and which they picked up later. There are important differences in Tuareg depending on where you sample them.
You are well on your way, keep doing your thing Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree that the presence of Berber languages in Northwest Africa reflects a movement of Afrasan-speaking Northeast Africans towards the region. Nonetheless, the word "Berber" (and sometimes even "North African") still connotes images of Mediterranean "Caucasoid" people in popular imagination, so you still have to wonder where that phenotype came from if it wasn't from the first Afrasan migrants.
I believe Holliday's limb-proportion graph confirms that Mediterranean-like phenotypes have been present in far northwestern Africa for a while. Observe that while ancient Egyptians and Nubians are closer to Black African and Afro-Diasporan groups (albeit not perfectly "equatorial"), 2/3 of the the Maghrebi samples branch closer to Europeans than to the Nile Valley /sub-Saharan branches. This shows that while the affinity between coastal Maghrebi populations and West Eurasians predates written history, it can't be extrapolated into the Sahara and Nile Valley to designate a larger "Caucasoid North African" population.
Which makes sense if you consider the geography. Of course the sliver of land between the Mediterranean and the Atlas Mountains would be easier to access from Iberia than the Sahara or further south.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^No, what you say is a 100% true. U6 is not a Berber marker if you define "Berber" as the original linguistic speaking entity that migrated from East Africa.
Agreed.
But what about Kenyans carry some of the oldest U6 clade. When I said that I wasn't quite sure.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I think you solved your question. U6 is a Maghrebi hg, the original Berbers weren't Maghrebi populations. If some Berber speaking groups broke away from the main body that was en-route to the Magreb, they will be less likely to have U6. In the case of the Tuareg, one also has to tease apart which lineages Tuareg inherited from Berbers and which they picked up later. There are important differences in Tuareg depending on where you sample them.
Agreed 100% with this. Mind you Tuareg's themselves aren't really monolithic in origins. Tuaregs from Mali, Algeria and Libya all claim different origins. Though Tuaregs in "general" are considered the founding Berber group. If that makes sense.
Tuaregs and some other Berber groups like you said may have broke away from the en route to the Maghreb and instead went toward the Sahara/Sahel.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: You are well on your way, keep doing your thing
Thanks. Glad to be apart of this site. Though some on here say this site fell off(which seems to be that way).
But anyways I want to talk about your position of Paleolithic Maghrebis being clustering close to Pre-Historic European population.
I do not want to twist your words at all, but this is what I think you and Truthcentric are essentially saying.
quote:The FIRST modern humans to reach Europe arrived FROM AFRICA 35,000 to 40,000 years ago. By about 30,000 years ago, they were widespread throughout the area while their close cousins, the Neanderthals, disappeared. HARDLY any of these early hunter-gatherers carried the H haplogroup in their DNA.
quote:The Mesolithic–Neolithic transition in southern Iberia
Resumen: New data and a review of historiographic information from Neolithic sites of the Malaga and Algarve coasts (southern Iberian Peninsula) and from the Maghreb (North Africa) reveal the existence of a Neolithic settlement at least from 7.5 cal ka BP. The agricultural and pastoralist food producing economy of that population rapidly replaced the coastal economies of the Mesolithic populations. The timing of this population and economic turnover coincided withmajor changes in the continental and marine ecosystems, including upwelling intensity, sea-level changes and increased aridity in the Sahara and along the Iberian coast. These changes likely impacted the subsistence strategies of the Mesolithic populations along the Iberian seascapes and resulted in abandonments manifested as sedimentary hiatuses in some areas during the Mesolithic–Neolithic transition. The rapid expansion and area of dispersal of the early Neolithic traits suggest the use of marine technology. Different evidences for a Maghrebian origin for the first colonists have been summarized.
The recognition of an early North-African Neolithic influence in Southern Iberia and the Maghreb is vital for understanding the appearance and development of the Neolithic in Western Europe. Our review suggests links between climate change, resource allocation, and population turnover.
What I got from you is that the early Maghrebi population clustered close to Mediterranean population more so than other Africans. But that does not mean the Maghrebi population were not "African" in their own right is just that they clustered more to southern Europeans compared to other Africans. Similar to how East Africans cluster more to Eurasians than say West Africans. Both North and East Africans represent a migration population that began migrating out of the continent. The early Maghrebi population represents a population began migrating into Southern Europe.
Is this correct or am I misinterpreting you?
For certain they were not wandering Caucasoids like some Eurocentrics want to suggest.
But I'm going to speculate that they looked like this:
Their phenotype is "African", but not "stereotypical" or "tropical African" like those found in the Nile Valley. So it depends on what we call "African", since the African world is large and diverse.
Also their skin color to me looks similar to that of the Khoisans of South Africa. Mind you the Khosians adapted to a same enviorment of that of coastal Northwest Africa. [IMG] http://people.virginia.edu/~btm5g/africa_climate.jpg[/IMG]
A "Mediterranean" like climate. So I think necessary think its taboo.
Anyways I think I went off track with my rambling.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, I don't actually think the Epi-Palaeolithic Maghrebii populations are indigenous to Africa. They look like they're intrusive in the region. They look like they're sister populations with contemporary West Eurasians. While they do have morphometric ties with recent Africans in some analyses, this is more or less the same as the ties between Africans and Upper Palaeolithic Europeans and some of these analyses don't really depict closeness based on shape, but size, which is not necessarily what you want (see Sereno et al 2008), so this is also something to look out for. If you read how Coon describes them; they're said to be stocky (cold-adapted), just like Late Upper Palaeolithic Europeans, but they also have tropically adapted limbs, just like Late Upper Palaeolithic Europeans. Holiday 2013 echoes this.
I agree with what Truthcentric says. The Nile Valley and the Maghreb groups were completely different populations. The easiest to understand and accessible data on this is Harvati & Hublin 2012 download here, which deals with just facial shape. They demonstrate that Epipalaeolithic Egyptians had a "negroid" physiognomy (but not necessarily genetic affinity with recent SSAs), while the Epipalaeolithic Maghrebi populations in that study were different. This study deals with just one Epipalaeolithic Egyptian skull, but they all looked like that according to Pinhasi and others.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I see now, but we both agree that they were not wandering pale skinned Caucasoid like some Eurocentrics like to believe. I mean light/pale skin did not evolve until 7,000 years ago during the neolithic.
Anyways what is your opinion on this graph?
But in your opinion do you think those Maghrebis population would have been absorbed by the time of the early Berbers? Similar to how Bantu speakers absorbed some of the hunter gatherers in Southern Africa. To me that makes kinda sense.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
What specifically about it are you asking? What I see is older (neolithic) West Eurasian groups who looked broadly similar to (pre)dynastic Egyptians and recent North Africans physically and genetically, clustering with Africans, while recent West Eurasian groups who look a bit more like Upper Palaeolithic Europeans (genetically and otherwise), clustering amongst themselves. In my view, what I see is various mixtures of components described by Lazaridis et al 2013 (e.g. WHG, ANE EEF, etc), being reflected skeletally.
quote:But in your opinion do you think those Maghrebis population would have been absorbed by the time of the early Berbers?
Yes. This is precisely what happened. Tuareg and Fulani also absorbed some of them judging by their various prehistoric H and U mtDNAs, which aren't exact matches of the closest European versions (indicating tbat it's an old migration roughly contempory with the H, V and CRS lineages you see here ).
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Which makes sense if you consider the geography. Of course the sliver of land between the Mediterranean and the Atlas Mountains would be easier to access from Iberia than the Sahara or further south. [/QB]
I kinda disagree with is. I think it would been hard for both populations on either side(but we should not forget that the Sahara was once green one time and basically the "incubator" for African cultures).
I understand that the OP wanted to keep this strictly biological, but we should note that there were "barriers" against those on the other side to.
But addressing the Sahara first... Indigsnous nomadic populations would have been famillier with crossing based off of this:
quote:well as the present interglacial (Fig. 4 and SI Appendix, Section 3). Using the Holocene biogeography and palaeohydrology of the Sahara as an analogue for the MIS5 humid period, it is likely that an interconnected waterway would have been available for faunal and human dispersal. This humid period corresponds very closely with the age of the first modern human occupation of the North African coast (45) and the Levant (46) by sub-Saharan populations, who may have been crossing the Sahara at this time (9). The occupation of the Mediterranean coast of Africa by these early modern human migrants appears to have lasted from ∼110 to ∼30 ka (45), though the Levantine occupation appears to have finished by ∼70 ka (47).
Also...
quote:Reanalysis of the Saharan zoogeography (SI Appendix, Section 1 and Table S1) suggests that many animals, including water-dependant creatures such as fish and amphibians, dispersed across the Sahara recently. For example, 25 North African animal species have a spatial distribution with population centers both north and south of the Sahara and small relict populations in central regions. This distribution suggests a trans-Saharan dispersal in the past, with subsequent local isolation of central Saharan populations during the more recent arid phase. [B]If a diverse range of species (including fish) can cross the Sahara, it is impossible to envisage the Sahara functioning as barrier to hominin dispersal.[B]
The reason why I say "both sides" would have acted as barriers because I remember seeing(as a lurker on here) posters "Troll Patrol" and "Son of RA" making good cases of the Riff mountains TOO acting as barriers against those from the North.
"During historic times, Berbers experienced a long and complicated history with many invasions, conquests, and migrations by Phoenicians, Romans, Vandals, Byzantines, Arabs, Bedouins, Spanish, Turks, Andalusians, sub-Saharans (communities settled in Jerba and Gabes in the 16th–19th centuries), and French (Brett and Fentress 1996). During these invasions, Berbers were forced back to the mountains and to certain villages in southern Tunisia" (Fadhlaoui-Zid et al. 2004).
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
What specifically about it are you asking? What I see is older (neolithic) West Eurasian groups who looked broadly similar to (pre)dynastic Egyptians and recent North Africans physically and genetically, clustering with Africans, while recent West Eurasian groups who look a bit more like Upper Palaeolithic Europeans (genetically and otherwise), clustering amongst themselves. In my view, what I see is various mixtures of components described by Lazaridis et al 2013 (e.g. WHG, ANE EEF, etc), being reflected skeletally.
Aye..My bad for not elaborating. I was asking your opinion about modern Mediterraneans grouping away from their pre-historic ancestry in terms of morphological. But you already answered.
Yes. This is precisely what happened. Tuareg and Fulani also absorbed them judging by their various prehistoric H and U mtDNAs, which aren't exact matches of the closest European versions (indicating tbat it's an old migration).
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: What specifically about it are you asking? What I see is older (neolithic) West Eurasian groups who looked broadly similar to (pre)dynastic Egyptians and recent North Africans physically and genetically, clustering with Africans, while recent West Eurasian groups who look a bit more like Upper Palaeolithic Europeans (genetically and otherwise), clustering amongst themselves. In my view, what I see is various mixtures of components described by Lazaridis et al 2013 (e.g. WHG, ANE EEF, etc), being reflected skeletally.
I am a little confused by your wording. What do you mean by "recent North Africans" who physically and genetically clustering with other Africans? Your statement that recent West Eurasians look more like Upper Paleolithic Europeans does interest me and actually touches on something I've wondered myself for quite some time, but in both the West Eurasian and North African cases I'm not 100% sure what you mean by "recent" (i.e. modern-day?).
EDIT: No matter, I see you were addressing the Brace 2005 diagram.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
@BlessedbyHorus When you've had the time to go through it, let me know what you think about WK clustering with Andaman Islanders, Qafzeh 9, DS5 before recent Africans in the first analysis (table 12.4), and with Andaman Islanders, Australian Aboriginals and UP Europeans before recent Africans in the 2nd analysis (table 12.5) in Harvati & Hublin 2012.
Still reading through it, but I think it makes sense.
To me of course they would cluster away from recent populations in Africa that came after the OOA, while the populations like the Andamanese people, Australians Aboriginals, UP Europeans and Qafzeh 9 represent an ancient population of the OOA migration. Am I making sense?
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
In table 12.4 we see the following distances to WK (Epipalaeolithic Egypt): Andaman Islanders------12.11 Qafzeh ----------------12.48 DS5--------------------12.7 recent Africans---------16.65
In table 12.5 we see the following distances to WK (Epipalaeolithic Egypt): Andaman Islanders-------0.104 Australian Aboriginals-----0.112 UP Europeans------------0.112 recent Africans-----------0.114
Cautionary tale for those who want to persist in "racializing" various indigenous Africans into taxonomic categories that are evolutionarily worthless and counter-productive.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah we have to be careful with using "race", especially when it comes to anthropology/science. I'll admit as someone who is still on the "basics" of this stuff, I sometimes use "black/white" due to those terms being simple. But like I said the African world is large and diverse. And sometimes "black" is too "limited" to describe certain groups in Africa which would be "evolutionarily worthless" like you said.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, I still catch myself doing it from time to time, and I've used in the past. But it takes a special kind of stagnant person to take it 10 steps further and fiercely defend and want to sanction such terms/ideas and to criticize others for wanting to stay away from them.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: Yeah we have to be careful with using "race", especially when it comes to anthropology/science. I'll admit as someone who is still on the "basics" of this stuff, I sometimes use "black/white" due to those terms being simple. But like I said the African world is large and diverse. And sometimes "black" is too "limited" to describe certain groups in Africa which would be "evolutionarily worthless" like you said.
For what it's worth, I've decided I have no problem calling ancient Egyptians and Nubians "Black African" myself. But then I use that term for all darker-skinned Africans regardless of substructure, since it was a paraphyletic pre-Darwinian construct from the get-go. Most laypeople would call the Hadza, Sandawe, and possibly southern Khoisan "black" even though together they represent a lineage even further removed from OOA than everyone else in Africa.
But like Swenet said, it's not a good idea to force this terminology into someone else's mouth without their consent.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course you know the pitfalls Truthcentric and you know there is no such thing as a continentally circumscribed African "race" or meta-population, which is parallel and complementary to other continental meta-populations as some seem to think. But still, how would you reconcile an objection like this, TC (not trying to sway you from your decision, just interested in how you would address remaining objections)?
quote:Originally posted by Ausar Amen8:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Dana brings up a good point, namely, that, for an entire population to sharply distinguish themselves by their skin color, from other ethnic groups, we'd expect strong social incentives to do so, such as large losses of cultural and ethnic identity during slavery (which pushed enslaved African Americans, who originally hailed from all over the Western coast of Africa, to identify themselves as part the new identity we call 'African American').
Indeed, it has been observed by many diasporal Africans that many mainland Africans, who, of course, preserved all their ethnic and cultural heritage, feel nothing for the idea of being assigned ethnic affinity [to] diasporal groups, simply because they share the same skin color.
If it helps, I can confirm that my people, the Nguni, Mbo or Lala if you like(Zulu, Xhosa, Swati, Ndebele, Angoni), from South Africa to Zambia, Malawi, Zimbabwe, Tanzinia and wherever we are found we describe(d) ourselves as "abantu abansundu" which literally means "people who are BROWN". However, it differs with each individual, when we say someone is WHITE we mean that they are light, such people are the Khoisan (described as white/yellow). Folk such as Euros are considered RED to us. I have found this general thought pattern to be true of many Africans and Arabs. My thoughts are that when the AEgyptians described someone as boeng fair they meant what any average African would mean. Euros are RED.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Of course you know the pitfalls Truthcentric and you know there is no such thing as a continentally circumscribed African "race" or meta-population, which is parallel and complementary to other continental meta-populations as some seem to think. But still, how would you reconcile an objection like this, TC (not trying to sway you from your decision, just interested in how you would address remaining objections)?
I presume we all understand that "black" as we use it in Anglophone circles is a Western rather than indigenous African construct. It is an English word after all (whereas "Negroid" has a Spanish origin). On the other hand, since we're speaking in English rather than any southern Bantu language, I don't see how translations of certain Bantu terminology are germane to how we should label darker-skinned Africans when speaking in English. It's not like we're addressing a Bantu-speaking audience in their native language.
The question I would present to you is whether speakers of these southern Bantu languages would avoid calling themselves "black" when speaking in English or any other Western language. Would someone like Nelson Mandela or Robert Mugabe insist on labeling the people they represent "brown" and the Westerners they're addressing "red" (in translation of their indigenous vocabulary), or would they switch to the terminology Westerners better recognize?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not entirely answered to my satisfaction (you're mentioning politically active leaders who had the intention to unite a [formerly] colonized continent, faced the same oppression and who identified with the struggle of other Africans at a time when "black" was popularized by emancipation movements; in this context its logical that more people will rally under the term than otherwise would be the case; more conservative Africans, Arabized Africans or African Muslims not hip or sympathetic to these developments may prefer their own traditional classification system and reject the Western one [I think this was Ausar's point]), but, if that's your answer--understood.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: other continental meta-populations
You mean you believe in an European race? In an East Asian race? etc. That's what I get from your post.
Where do you place Indians, Pakistani, Syrians, Bedouin in this? Are they their own meta-populations too?
Is the relationship between (indigenous) African populations exactly like other continents? No I don't believe so either. But again, it doesn't have to be exactly the same.
On the other hand, there's a huge gap of years (certainly more than 20000+ years) between the OOA migrations and the back migration of Eurasians in Africa. During that lapses of years African populations continued to interact, admix and separate from each others. African populations are closer to each others than OOA populations are close to each others (using Fst for example). So it's easy to identify indigenous African populations and Eurasian populations and those heavily admixed with back migrating Eurasians (like modern East Africans).
The meta African populations you refer to are populations constituted mostly of people who stayed back in Africa during the OOA migrations.
Depending on the context we can call them Africans, indigenous Africans, Sub-Saharan Africans, black Africans, blacks, etc.
- In term of haplogroup lineages, they are from the Y-DNA A, B and E haplogroup lineages. MtDNA L haplogroup lineages. (OOA migrants are all from the F and M,N haplogroups lineages).
- Autosomally, we can see it with the African component at K=2 using the admixture/structure software.
- We can also see it by the relatively close genetic distance between African populations (using Eucledian distance for example).
- We can also see it with the modest Fst differentiations between African populations (even more so if we remove the substantial recent Eurasians admixtures in East Africa, but even without doing so).
quote:"On examining ~2.2 million variants, we found modest differentiation among SSA populations (mean pairwise FST 0.019) (Supplementary Methods and Supplementary Table 1)."
So this separation between OOA migrants and indigenous Africans correspond to a genealogical and historic reality. I must take it into account into my analysis of ancient history. It correspond to a genealogical and historic reality.
Of course, nowadays all world populations are admixed with each others at various degrees. For example, Einstein was from the African E haplogroup.
My contentious on this site is that Ancient Egyptians were mostly composed of the populations who stayed back in Africa during the OOA migrations. They were mostly composed of indigenous black Africans. To which Eurasians admixtures (Aamu, Hyksos, Romans, Greeks, Assyrians, muslim Arabs, etc) began to add up to its indigenous African base along the centuries up to today. Before post dynastic times, the admixture level was minimal. This is what current genetic and archaeological data seems to show. Further aDNA analysis will provide more information.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: I believe Holliday's limb-proportion graph confirms that Mediterranean-like phenotypes have been present in far northwestern Africa for a while.
Very true. In fact, as you know we also have ancient DNA results dating from around 12000 years ago showing Eurasian haplogroups in Northwest Africa near the Iberian regions.
quote: Observe that while ancient Egyptians and Nubians are closer to Black African and Afro-Diasporan groups (albeit not perfectly "equatorial"), 2/3 of the the Maghrebi samples branch closer to Europeans than to the Nile Valley /sub-Saharan branches.
In term of limb proportions, it's clear that Ancient Egyptians are closer to black Africans and Afro-Diasporan not Europeans and North African populations which cluster with each others. This is part of the data than indicates to me that Ancient Egyptians were mostly composed of indigenous Africans not West Asians or European migrants.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Thanks for that paper. Yes, there definitely seems to be a relation there between dental avulsion, tools (backed bladelets with the microburin technique) and other things, which can be found in the Epipalaeolithic from the Maghreb to the Levant, but it's not clear where any of these things originated. But you're right the earliest evidence for dental evulsion seems to be the Maghreb.
However, there is no evidence that Maghrebi populations had much genetic influence on local populations in the Sahara, some of which actually represent the first attested examples of the modern West African morphotype, per Chamla. The Gobero populations have connections with prehistoric populations between Mali and the Middle Nile Valley and most of these have been tentatively identified with (the likely ancestors of) Southern Sudanese populations through the DFA statistic. See Erik Becker's thesis, here.
quote:Petit-Maire, Dutour and a few other researchers have proposed a model in which Holocene Saharan material from sites such as Sebkha Mahariat, Tintan, Chami, Hassi el Abiod and Kobadi, North African remains from Iberomaurusian and Capsian sites and the Late Pleistocene Nubian series from Jebel Sahaba and Wadi Halfa belong to the same population complex (see I.D.1.a.2.c.). The way robusticity traits were used as the defining characteristics of this “Mechtoid” population complex is even more striking than Grine et al.’s (2007) questionable choice of metric cranial variables. A number of quotes from two pages of the same publication can be used to illustrate the situation. Describing the material from Hassi el Aboid, Petit-Maire/Dutour (1987) acknowledged the presence of a number of highly diagnostic trait expressions on page 272. They stated that “the mean cranial index indicates dolichocrany”, that there is “marked alveolar prognathism”, that the “interorbital breadth is large”, that the “mean value of the nasal index falls within the platyrhine range”, that “a prenasal groove (sulcus praenasalis) can be observed on most specimens”, that the mandibular bodies (Corpora mandibulae) are “very high” and that the mandibular rami (Rami mandibulae) are “broad and short“. Yet, these unambiguous expressions of traits relevant to the estimation of biological ancestry go almost entirely unmentioned on page 277.
While I don't agree with everything he says, Becker definitely has a way of putting a damper on things when it comes to lingering biases that some of these Saharan remains fall prey to over and over again.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Many current researchers, describe the morphology of Iberomaurusians as different from the later Capsians who replaced them. And after the Capsian, going into the dry period there is about a thousand years of no evidence of human settlement in the Maghreb.
Also the Gobero site in Niger, more than one morphology is described in the human reamins
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample (Holliday 2013)
I have just downloaded this new limb proportion study onto my laptop at UCSD. If anyone's interested in taking a look, PM me your e-mail so I can send it to you.
To give you a preview of the findings, here's a dendrogram showing similarities in limb proportions between the populations measured:
[/QB]
Jebel Sahaba, Sudan 13,140 to 14,340 years old
Ain Dokara Algerian Neolithic Capsian-associated
Afalou Mechta-Afalou or Mechtoid, Iberomaurusians Algerian, approx lasting 10,000 years late Paleolithic and Mesolithic were assimilated or replaced during Neolithic and early Bronze Age by Capsian culture bearers of Afroasiatic language
El Wad Natufian culture Late Epipalaeolithic wood remains from el-Wad Cave, Mount Carmel, Israel. 13,000 to 9,800 B.C. in the Levant
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
See Irhoud's facial affinity to Neanderthals in that Harvati and Hublin paper I referenced:
quote:The Procrustes distances among population mean configurations were calculated and reported in Table 12.5. Irhoud 1 was closest to the mean recent Australian configuration (PD = 0.078) and to the mean Upper Paleolithic European configuration (PD = 0.085). Irhoud 1 showed a rather large distance to Dar es-Soltan II-5 (PD = 0.106).
Facially speaking, the top 3 pops Jebel Irhoud I is closest to are Australians, UP Europeans, and recent Africans, in that order. I'm sure there are "archaic traits" here and there on the specimen, but I don't regard those as evidence of archaic human introgressions.
Also see the Iberomaurusian distance to various populations in table 12.5 (the best table for this type of 3D analysis). The shortest distance to the European UP sample are recent Africans and Iberomaurusians, who are all equidistant to one another (all three have a distance of 0.049 to each other).
You're right, the Epipalaeolithic Maghrebi are platyrrhine on average, but in multivariate analysis this seems to have little influence. The Maghrebi populations are certainly closer to UP Europeans than UP Levantines seem to have been. The Ohalo II sample in this paper has a PD distance to UP Europeans of 0.093, which is comparatively much more distant compared to the aforementioned Iberomaurusian value of 0.049.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Back to the topic of Maghrebis compared to the Nile Valley, I remember a guy named Veersmersch (sp?) described Badarian-era Egyptians and other ancient Nile Valley populations as showing a greater cranial resemblance to so-called "Negroid" groups (I think he did used that exact word) than Maghrebis from the same time period, who tended to stand out more. I recall it was Morpheus (aka Mansa Musa and Egalitarian Jay) who pointed this out to me first. what was that author measuring there?
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic