posted
^Sorry, could you clarify how that dendogram and your comment are relevant to my message to cass?
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample (Trenton Holliday 2013)
Oddly on this limb ratio chart Nubians are somewhat distant from Kerma ( and Jebel Sahaba-Sudan) Egyptian and AAs being in between them
This is what I've been saying all along. People can present different (and similar) physical features due to genetic drift, etc after their time of separation and migration to different areas, but still share similar physical features and be related to each others through a common origin (common history, archaeological continuity, etc).
This chart from Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample you have posted shows us that African populations (the top branch) in ancient and modern times have both differences and similarities between each others.
This graph about craniofacial measurements taken from Brace (2005) show us the same thing:
For one, African people are on the same branch but even if they wouldn't be, it wouldn't mean they are not related.
We can see that France, England, Greece and Italy are NOT on the same branch. Their cranial-facial characteristics are not completely similar. It doesn't mean those people are not related to each others as European people through common origins. We know France, England and Greece people are related to each others (genetics, linguistics, history, etc).
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
You can frantically scour the internet for heavily pigmented Horn individuals all you want. Back on planet earth, however, the following facts hold true: >50% of their genome is shared with the palaeolithic natives of the Red Sea Coast region and OOA populations and <50% is similar to more inland Africans:
posted
^^^ To follow my post above. I don't have to say it's the same thing for African people. Most African populations and language families share a common origin in North-Eastern Africa (after the OOA). So there's both similarities and differences between various African populations (including ancient ones like Kushites, Ancient Egyptians, etc).
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: Most African populations and language family share a common origin in North-Eastern Africa (after the OOA).
Of course they do, troll. Of course they do. When you're back to reality, you can address this:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: >50% of their genome is shared with the palaeolithic natives of the Red Sea Coast region and OOA populations and <50% is similar to more inland Africans:
quote:Originally posted by tropicals redacted: @ cass
The approach I find most persuasive, independently of reading the argument here, is that they would have mostly -though not exclusively- been what Keita described in a youtube presentation as "Somali-like", or "elongated".
What's your own personal view on the idea that the ancient Egyptians, in terms of their appearance, were mostly "Somali-like"?
Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample (Trenton Holliday 2013)
quote:Originally posted by tropicals redacted: [QB] ^Sorry, could you clarify how that dendogram and your comment are relevant to my message to cass?
sorry to interupt your chat with cass but this chart shows limb ratios, the most elongated are at top right, East African The least, bottom right Somalis are East African horners, the most elongated Egyptians, less elongated
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: sorry to interupt your chat with cass but this chart shows limb ratios, the most elongated are at top right, East African The least, bottom right Somalis are East African horners, the most elongated Egyptians, less elongated
Yes, I know it shows limb ratios, but explain its relevance to what I asked cass.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^ I would be more curious to understand why you don't think it's relevant. Cranial-facial measurements can be interesting to study population affinities, but so can be post-cranial measurements like limb ratios.
As well in general as other fields of course like genetics, archaeology, linguistics, etc.
So you have a question about the population affinities of Ancient Egyptian populations and you don't think post-cranial measurements are relevant? Please explain.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote: So you have a question about the population affinities of Ancient Egyptian populations and you don't think post-cranial measurements are relevant ? Please explain.
Really? I'll come back to you later.
Lioness?
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote: So you have a question about the population affinities of Ancient Egyptian populations and you don't think post-cranial measurements are relevant ? Please explain.
Really? I'll come back to you later.
Lioness?
She already answered you. That's my point. So, you don't have to ask the same question twice and expect a different answer. You're the one who must explain how it is not relevant or simply move on.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: Cranial-facial measurements can be interesting to study population affinities, but so can be post-cranial measurements
Exactly, which is why it's so interesting that you'd insist posting said data when they support my case--not yours:
As with the previous analysis, the North Africans [Egypto-Nubians] are intermediate between the sub-Saharan Africans and the Europeans, whereas the Europeans tend toward longer tibiae than the Inuits. As a group, the Jebel Sahaba sample (the stars) tend to have longer tibiae for any given femoral head size than do the other fossil groups. --Holliday 2013
The body shape of the terminal Pleistocene Jebel Sahaba population is tropical-adapted, with elongated limbs, especially in the distal segments, and is most similar to living sub-Saharan Africans and less similar to late Pleistocene and Holocene North Africans (including Egyptians and Nubians). --Holliday 2013
All of these samples represent (to the degree possible to determine) indigenous groups from widely variable ecogeographic zones, spanning tropical to cold–temperate regions. All have been placed into three discrete regional categories (Europe, North Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa). However, the Sudanese sample from Kerma straddles the ‘‘boundary’’ between North and Sub-Saharan Africa, and could easily be included in either regional group. --Holliday 1997
The above citations say that the Egyptians and Nubians are in a North African cluster, not in the more extremely tropically adapted "SSA cluster". Any other fairy tale you'd like to have flushed down the drain, troll?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Fig. 1. Neighbor-joining dendrogram for a series of prehistoric and recent human populations (Craniofacial measurements)
Ok, i'll show you what is wrong with that study:
quote:Many human craniofacial dimensions are largely of neutral adaptive significance, and an analysis of their variation can serve as an indication of the extent to which any given population is genetically related to or differs from any other.
This is true (though remember we are only talking about population averages here). But what is not true is that you can find discrete population clusters, especially continental:
quote:Neighbor-joining dendrogram for a series of prehistoric and recent human populations running from the western edge of the Eurasian continent and North Africa to the Middle East and down East Africa as far as Somalia, plus a sampling of Niger-Congo-speaking people from Gabon, Benin, and Tanzania in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Look though at the 52 reference samples : they're mostly not from local areas, but covering large regions, or rather nations: Egypt, Greece, England etc. So what happens here is that you don't capture the total craniometric variation of the geographical-spread you are claiming to represent, instead you're just creating gaps, or extremes:
"...the populations used are defined not on the basis of biology but on the basis of the variation in skeletal series or on self-assignment to folk categories that have strong sociohistorical (e.g., black, white), national (Chinese, Japanese), and linguistic (Hispanic) components."
"It is well known that human biological variation is principally clinal (i.e., structured as gradients) and not racial (i.e., structured as a small number of fairly discrete groups). The possibility that skeletal material could be accurately sorted by geographic origin, at any other level than geographic extremes, is quite small."
"The assignment of skeletal racial origin is based principally upon stereotypical features found most frequently in the most geographically distant populations. While this is useful in some contexts (for example, sorting skeletal material of largely West African ancestry from skeletal material of largely Western European ancestry), it fails to identify populations that originate elsewhere and misrepresents fundamental patterns of human biological diversity." http://wysinger.homestead.com/forensic.pdf
"The complexities of human biological history, including those exhibited by ancient Nubians, will never be adequately resolved using present‐day artificial groupings of individuals that, at best, only weakly capture the diversity present within the linguistic, national, or racial entities they supposedly represent." http://facstaff.gpc.edu/~rbelcher/OnMeroiticNubianCrania[1].pdf
So the problem is that the reference samples are mostly defined by nations (e.g. modern countries) which is not capturing the variation of local populations or ethnic groups. The nations themselves are all geographically distant even if they are bordering each other because they exclude intermediate local populations. If Brace covered the latter as opposed to countries the clusters would completely disappear. Furthermore, his study suffered from not even including nations like Crete., etc. His most 'southern' European sample is not even from the southern periphery in Europe.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Sweety: It doesn't matter, because changes (and similarities) in the physiology of related populations through times is common and due to genetic drift, migrations and changes in lifestyles. It is common to all related populations around the world like France vs England vs Greece vs Italy posted above. It doesn't mean they are not related to each others through common ancestors.
This was also discussed here: - Strong evidence for population continuity along the Nile from the late Palaeolithic through the Egyptian Empire - In general, the archaeological evidence suggests that the Egyptian state had an indigenous origin
So my point still stands that Ancient Egyptians, modern East and West Africans share common ancestors (after the OOA migrations and before any back migrations). Ancient Egyptians were for the most part indigenous Africans related to almost all African people.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
Amun Ra's case has so far been falling apart in terms of the following data:
1) in the metric cranio-facial department 2) in the non-metric department 3) using DFA statistical sorting 4) using facial flatness analysis 5) using bodyplan measurements 6) using the African autosomal component in modern day Egyptians 7) using the African uniparental lineages in modern day Egypt 8) using uniparental lineages that spilled over into the Near East from Egypt
Is there even a single line of evidence that supports your case of a non-Saharan origin of Egypto-Nubians?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: This. BTW since everyone here knows who you are. perhaps you wouldnt mind sharing the works you published on North East Africa?? [/QB]
It was just a module paper (Classics) I wrote last year. I think its still on research gate. The topic was meant to be the aethiopes ("burnt faced" i.e. 'black' people in Greco-Roman literature), but I developed it much more into an anthro discussion of whether the Saharan populations, more specifically Egyptians, were considered to be aethiopes, and discussed them in terms of being a "climatic race" seperate to their more southern neighbors.
Note at that time, while I had dropped the Hamiticism and Caucasoid junk, I was still pretty much a noob and using racial terminology. Though I had a better understanding of biological adaptation then. Overall, its a pretty awful paper, but I touched upon the "Saharan race" of Krantz and how Keita maintains the Egyptians were a "northern variety" of the "elongated African" morphology.
I met Tristan Samuels at Academia.edu when I had an account and a few of my papers there, so you might be interested in his stuff:
quote:Originally posted by tropicals redacted: @ cass
]As you'll have read in this thread, the debate was about which 'sub-Saharan' phenotype would have been modal in Egypt. The approach I find most persuasive, independently of reading the argument here, is that they would have mostly -though not exclusively- been what Keita described in a youtube presentation as "Somali-like", or "elongated".
I'm also reminded of this:
"Strouhal (1971) microscopically examined some hair which had been preserved on a Badrarian skull. The analysis was interpreted as suggesting a stereotypical tropical African-European hybrid (mulatto). However this hair is grossly no different from that of Fulani, some Kanuri, or Somali and does not require a gene flow explanation any more than curly hair in Greece necessarily does. Extremely "wooly" hair is not the only kind native to tropical Africa.." (S. O. Y. Keita.(1993). "Studies and Comments on Ancient Egyptian Biological Relationships," History in Africa 20 (1993) 129-54)
What's your own personal view on the idea that the ancient Egyptians, in terms of their appearance, were mostly "Somali-like"?
In his debate with Snowden he described them as a "northern variety" of the "elongated African" or what you call "Somali-like" morphology. By this he clarified there would be a lighter skin gradient in the Saharan desert (at least in the north). But if that is true, then the Egyptians would be, while elongated, less so than populations at tropical latitude, the same for their dolichocephaly. So someone could equally say that the Egyptians are closer to south West Asian populations. They fall intermediate.
However I'm confused by the limb data, we have some studies claiming the egyptians were "super-negroid", others now saying they are still elongated, but less than their southern neighbors or intermediate. Also, there's a cline in Egypt itself, so Upper Egyptians are darker, some basically indistinguishable from heavy melanated Sub-Saharan African populations. So even Snowden admitted some Upper Egyptians could pass as 'black'.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:She already answered you. That's my point. So, you don't have to ask the same question twice and expect a different answer. You're the one who must explain how it is not relevant or simply move on.
You'll have noticed that she didn't come back...
You don't have a point, since I wasn't talking about limb lengths - as you both realised. You both saw the words "Somali" and "elongated" and misunderstood what was being discussed.
However, you still persisted in trying to recover by trying to get me to switch to addressing the importance of limb lengths. This was fun though: "So you have a question about the population affinities of Ancient Egyptian populations and you don't think post-cranial measurements are relevant ? Please explain.".
I didn't say anything about the Egyptians being Somalis, and neither did Keita. I quoted his use of the term "Somali-like", which he uses to illustrate the idea of facially "elongated" Africans, and not in reference to limb lengths.
What I was specifically discussing with Cass was, in the context of their appearance, what SSA population cranio-facial characteristics would Egyptians they have - would they be "Somali-like", "elongated". Here's the Keita quote and youtube link:
"In general, I would make the argument that many of the mummies from Egypt, Upper Egypt have a general set of facial characteristics, which can be called elongated African. They are Somali-like, they are, they come from, because they are descendants of people from a hot, dry climate, they have this sort of elongated face , that one sees in some living Africans. One could also note that the limb ratios, the limb proportions of Egyptians are tropical, they have a tropical body plan, they do not have a northern European body plan, or a Siberian body plan, they do have a tropical body plan. Generally, you see people with narrow faces and noses in Africa in the circum-Saharan regions, or in the Sahara, bordering the Sahara. That's generally where you see them. In the deep forest belts, you see people with other kinds of physical traits, they tend to have a broader face."
posted
@cass What did you make of Keita's conclusions regarding wavy hair in ancient Egyptians?
Also, wanted to ask about this: By this he clarified there would be a lighter skin gradient in the Saharan desert (at least in the north).
Terms such as 'lighter' and 'darker' are of course relative and to be useful need a point of comparison. The following e-mail, which Keita sent in correspondence with a former ES poster called Morpehus is more illustrative:
QUESTION: "Were the Ancient Egyptians predominately dark-skinned throughout the Dynastic period and were they predominately African biologically (a pictorial reference to modern populations to illustrate what the majority looked like would be helpful)?"
Keita's answer: "No one can say exactly what colour they were, but one might reasonably say that the typical Upper Egyptian to Nubian would have been the modal colour in most of the country. Without an analysis of histology of the skin and accurate portraits one cannot say how they looked. We can extrapolate by looking at the variability of the modern Egyptian with a focus on Upper Egyptian, considering a predictive approach based on latitude, and imagining what they would have been like without the gene flow from the Near East and Europe over thousands of years. This will help you conceptualise the variability of the Nile indigenous population...My research cannot indicate skin colour in any empirical sense."
As a visual aid, I stuck the term 'Upper Egyptians' in google images - excuse the link!
So with regards to Keita's comments on the lighter skin gradient in the northern Sahara that you cited, do you think the google images above fit with that?
Have you got any links/references for the following?
quote: But if that is true, then the Egyptians would be, while elongated, less so than populations at tropical latitude, the same for their dolichocephaly. So someone could equally say that the Egyptians are closer to south West Asian populations. They fall intermediate.
You referenced Snowden:
quote: So even Snowden admitted some Upper Egyptians could pass as 'black'.
How do you think Snowden's views compare with your acknowledgment last December (2013),which followed this question:" In your opinion therefore, are people right when they describe the ancient Egyptians as predominantly 'black Africans', regardless of whether 'black' refers to populations from the Horn of Africa, or groups such as the Tutsis?"
You responded: "Yes they are correct. Two sources from Keita, I had access through a classics archive, which explains this -
Keita, S. O. Y. (1993a) “Black Athena: ‘Race,’ Bernal and Snowden”. Arethusa. xxvi. pp. 295-314.
Keita, S. O. Y. (1993b). “Response to Bernal and Snowden”. Arethusa. xxvi. pp. 329-33."
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by tropicals redacted: @amun-ra
quote:She already answered you. That's my point. So, you don't have to ask the same question twice and expect a different answer. You're the one who must explain how it is not relevant or simply move on.
You'll have noticed that she didn't come back...
You don't have a point, since I wasn't talking about limb lengths - as you both realised. You both saw the words "Somali" and "elongated" and misunderstood what was being discussed.
I didn't say anything about the Egyptians being Somalis, and neither did Keita. I quoted his use of the term "Somali-like", which he uses to illustrate the idea of facially "elongated" Africans, and not in reference to limb lengths.
What I was specifically discussing with Cass was, in the context of their appearance, what SSA population cranio-facial characteristics would Egyptians they have - would they be "Somali-like", "elongated". Here's the Keita quote and youtube link:
Amun Ra we must learn not interupt the discussion with cass
quote:Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
However, you still persisted in trying to recover by trying to get me to switch to addressing the importance of limb lengths. This was fun though: "So you have a question about the population affinities of Ancient Egyptian populations and you don't think post-cranial measurements are relevant ? Please explain.".
What I was specifically discussing with Cass was, in the context of their appearance, what SSA population cranio-facial characteristics would Egyptians they have - would they be "Somali-like", "elongated". Here's the Keita quote and youtube link:
"In general, I would make the argument that many of the mummies from Egypt, Upper Egypt have a general set of facial characteristics, which can be called elongated African. They are Somali-like, they are, they come from, because they are descendants of people from a hot, dry climate, they have this sort of elongated face , that one sees in some living Africans. One could also note that the limb ratios, the limb proportions of Egyptians are tropical, they have a tropical body plan, they do not have a northern European body plan, or a Siberian body plan, they do have a tropical body plan. Generally, you see people with narrow faces and noses in Africa in the circum-Saharan regions, or in the Sahara, bordering the Sahara. That's generally where you see them. In the deep forest belts, you see people with other kinds of physical traits, they tend to have a broader face."
quote:Originally posted by tropicals redacted: [QB] @cass What did you make of Keita's conclusions regarding wavy hair in ancient Egyptians?
I agree. However the frequency of it obviously differs in whatever region/population you look at.
quote: Keita's answer: "No one can say exactly what colour they were, but one might reasonably say that the typical Upper Egyptian to Nubian would have been the modal colour in most of the country. Without an analysis of histology of the skin and accurate portraits one cannot say how they looked. We can extrapolate by looking at the variability of the modern Egyptian with a focus on Upper Egyptian, considering a predictive approach based on latitude, and imagining what they would have been like without the gene flow from the Near East and Europe over thousands of years. This will help you conceptualise the variability of the Nile indigenous population...My research cannot indicate skin colour in any empirical sense."
I think that is a silly answer. You just have to look at regions at the same latitude (e.g. India) to get the range of clinal pigmentation there: most Egyptians would be light brown in Lower Egypt while grading into a medial brown and dark brown/black in Upper Egypt and Nubia.
quote:
So with regards to Keita's comments on the lighter skin gradient in the northern Sahara that you cited, do you think the google images above fit with that?
I think Upper Egypt only.More northern Egyptians would have been predominantly lighter brown.
quote:Have you got any links/references for the following?
As I was discussing already, just clinal variation.
quote:How do you think Snowden's views compare with your acknowledgment last December (2013),which followed this question:" In your opinion therefore, are people right when they describe the ancient Egyptians as predominantly 'black Africans', regardless of whether 'black' refers to populations from the Horn of Africa, or groups such as the Tutsis?"
You responded: "Yes they are correct. Two sources from Keita, I had access through a classics archive, which explains this -
Keita, S. O. Y. (1993a) “Black Athena: ‘Race,’ Bernal and Snowden”. Arethusa. xxvi. pp. 295-314.
Keita, S. O. Y. (1993b). “Response to Bernal and Snowden”. Arethusa. xxvi. pp. 329-33."
They are 'black' or 'black african' in modern folk race taxonomy. That is what I thought you meant. I think there is a quote that says something like "if ancient egyptians are to categorized in modern social race theory, they would be black africans". Keita has made that point also. I don't disagree at all.
The lay-person's concept of race takes no notice of clines. You just have tick-boxes that are 'white', 'black', etc. Egyptians are obviously 'black', they're not white of course, but this is socially constructed, not science at all.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
The lay-person's concept of race takes no notice of clines. You just have tick-boxes that are 'white', 'black', etc. Egyptians are obviously 'black', they're not white of course, but this is socially constructed, not science at all.
I'm not sure if most Americans would call this Indian man "a black man" although they might say he had black skin if asked what color he was Nevertheless if such terms like 'black' and 'white' are unscientific is applying terms like "caucasian" or "negroid" or "mongoloid" to the above man obsolete scientifically ?
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Who says I'm talking about a Green Sahara origin in the Sahara? I said a mainly Upper Palaeolithic origin in the Sahara. But yeah, even the articles you've posted in regards to the Green Sahara constitute even more evidence that decimates your claim that the main AE population is a Holocene era transplant from outside of the Nile Valley. Let's update the list, shall we?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Let's see:
Amun Ra's case has so far been falling apart in terms of the following data:
1) in the metric cranio-facial department 2) in the non-metric department 3) using DFA statistical sorting 4) using facial flatness analysis 5) using bodyplan measurements 6) using the African autosomal component in modern day Egyptians 7) using the African uniparental lineages in modern day Egypt 8) using uniparental lineages that spilled over into the Near East from Egypt 9) using the Egyptian archaeological data from the MSA/MP, to the LSA/UP, to the holocene
Is there even a single line of evidence that supports your case of a non-Saharan origin of Egypto-Nubians?
quote:Originally posted by cass: I met Tristan Samuels at Academia.edu when I had an account and a few of my papers there, so you might be interested in his stuff:[/QB]
But I disagreed with some of his views, especially on the aethiopes.
That's interesting that you'd bring him up. We 'know' him and are familiar with his work.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: an astonishing turnaround from the poster formerly known as Anglo_Pyramidologist
Yep. But when are you going to stop pretending to be an African-American female? Your IP was checked twice, putting you in Scandinavia. You also have 20,000+ posts of zero contribution to this site.
I might have been crazy/trolling years back, but you have to be the worst troll on this site IMO, and you behavior here never changes. Total village-idiot. People here know who I am, so its odd you're now posting my account history here in the other thread and Google links to my pages. I made no hiding of myself changing my views:
This was a year back. I tried to salvage last year races ecologically, i've since given that up also (hence' I highlighted Krantz "climatic races" and called them eco-clines). I now deny race categorization completely and prefer to study traits independently. However if someone wants to group/cluster individuals arbitrarily (e.g. by multivariate analysis) to study biological variation, I have no problem. In fact here's a good quote:
"The clinal approach has its strength, but only when used in conjunction with the actual basis for trait distribution through time and space – the population." - Molnar, S.: Human Variation: Races, Types, and Ethnic Groups. (1998). Prentice-Hall.
quote:Yeah it is a shocking turnaround but I am not entirely convinced.
Because someone can clearly look at my posts on here and other sites and see this:
Typology > Populationism > Ecotypes > Clines
I moved more and more away from race. As I did this I banned/closed my accounts on most race-based anthro-forums. I have none left, and post irregularly on very few sites. Furthermore I didn't do this because of political or social reasons. People at Forumbiodiversity were claiming I became an "anti-racist", while at Metapedia, it was claimed I became a "liberal" and so on. All false. My political views are still far-right if anything, I just didn't see the point in believing in lies so I retracted a lot of my former stances.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
You can find him at forumbio/anthroscape and debate him there, or I could message him to get him to post again here.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ponsford: Yeah it is a shocking turnaround but I am not entirely convinced.
yes, on thinking about this one wonders if a person who appears to have a turn around would go back to their oldest member name - a profile that links to all their old evil racist posts and threads
Only a couple of people knew he was ben of Egyptsearch reloaded. I only found out yesterday So when he claims " People here know who I am" who is that, two people? and beyoku seemed not even certain if it was him Who can keep track of all the aliases?
quote: I think that is a silly answer. You just have to look at regions at the same latitude (e.g. India) to get the range of clinal pigmentation there: most Egyptians would be light brown in Lower Egypt while grading into a medial brown and dark brown/black in Upper Egypt and Nubia.
In Lower Egypt, do you mean light brown like some of the Amhara behind this link?
Do we need to remember that most of the country is demarcated as Upper Egypt, and that most of the ancient population lived in the Valley? Hence Keita's use of the term modal throughout most of the country?
quote: They are 'black' or 'black african' in modern folk race taxonomy. That is what I thought you meant.
It was, yes.
quote: I think there is a quote that says something like "if ancient egyptians are to categorized in modern social race theory, they would be black africans". Keita has made that point also. I don't disagree at all.
Where did Keita say that? Regarding the other quote you mentioned on social categorization, I think you might mean this one:
Dr Stuart Tyson Smith
The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt Vol 3 (2001) ed Donald Redford
“Far from being absolute, genetic traits are distributed in clines, or continuously varying distributions of traits inconsistent with racial categories. Modern physical anthropology has demonstrated that 94 percent of human variation is found within human populations, rather than between the major populations traditionally labelled races. Biological characteristics affected by natural selection, migration, or drift are distributed in geographic gradations. These encompass all the features used to define racial physical “phenotypes,” including facial form, hair texture, blood type, and epidermal melanin (the chemical determining darkness of skin). These physical features cross alleged racial boundaries as if they were non-existent, leading to the inevitable conclusion that there are no biological races, just clines. Physical anthropologists are increasingly concluding that racial characteristics are the culturally defined product of selective perception and should be replaced in biological terms by the study of populations and clines. Consequently, any characterization of the race of the ancient Egyptians depends on modern cultural definition, not scientific study. Thus, by modern American standards, it is reasonable to characterize the Egyptians as “black,” while acknowledging the scientific evidence for the physical diversity of Africans”(p28).
quote: The lay-person's concept of race takes no notice of clines. You just have tick-boxes that are 'white', 'black', etc. Egyptians are obviously 'black', they're not white of course, but this is socially constructed, not science at all.
True, but then as Lioness points out:
quote: I'm not sure if most Americans would call this Indian man "a black man" although they might say he had black skin if asked what color he was Nevertheless if such terms like 'black'and 'white' are unscientific is applying terms like "caucasian" or "negroid" or "mongoloid" to the above man obsolete scientifically ?
quote:Originally posted by cass: anyway I'm done with this crappy site. Claus or Swenet if you ever want to talk you can email me. However i don't think ill be of any use.
I think Anglo_Pyramidologist (cass) just jumped in to try to defend his racist buddy Swenet after I gave some good multiple ass-kickings. In this thread and many other threads . No straw man, no red herring, no fluff, no racial/racist pseudo study from the last century, just straight up scientific ass kicking (based on our current knowledge). Don't let the door hit you on your way out!
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: Most African populations and language family share a common origin in North-Eastern Africa (after the OOA).
Of course they do, troll. Of course they do.
Glad we agree...!! There's no point keeping denying scientific facts when it stares you in the face and make you look like a total fool! Asskicking followed by Mea culpa! Let's drink to this.
Of course, I'm just having a little fun but it's the scientific facts and analysis exposed on those threads (and many others) which are important:
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: Glad we agree...!!
However you want to comfort yourself, troll. Whatever allows you to cope. In the mean time:
Let's see:
Amun Ra's case has so far been falling apart in terms of the following data:
1) using metric cranio-facial distance 2) using non-metric distance 3) using DFA statistical sorting 4) using facial flatness analysis 5) using bodyplan measurements 6) using the African autosomal component in modern day Egyptians 7) using the African uniparental lineages in modern day Egypt 8) using uniparental lineages that spilled over into the Near East from Ancient Egypt 9) using the Egyptian archaeological data from the MSA/MP, to the LSA/UP, to the holocene
Is there even a single line of evidence that supports your case of a non-Saharan origin of Egypto-Nubians in the Upper Palaeolithic?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do you know what origin means? Origin means originating somewhere. He's simply twisting the word 'origin' to mean 'expansion' so he can confound the ORIGIN of certain populations in the Sahara (e.g. proto-Egyptic speakers, proto-Chadic speakers, proto- Semitic speakers) with the expansion of certain populations towards the Sahara 10-5kya. The latter populations ORIGINATE in equatorial and Sahelian Africa in the time period preceding the Green Sahara. So no, I'm not fooled by his face saving antics. He has not a single shred of evidence to prove that the base of the AE population originates from outside of the Nile Valley or the wider Sahara within the last 50ky.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
Is there even a single line of evidence that supports your case of a non-Saharan origin of Egypto-Nubians in the Upper Palaeolithic?
How does you accusation make sense when he has a thread called
There he says the Saharan sites Nabta Playa and Qustul are precurssors to dynastic Egypt
When I look on the map I wonder how Nabta Playa rates as Sahara when it's only 100 km from Abu Simbel.
Seems more immediately a Ta-Seti (A-group) precursor as, afaisi, a part of the Khawr Bahan / 2nd cataract "Nubia" complex.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: [QB] Afar man:
Afar Warrior dancing:
Afar Tribe Warrior, Assaita:
^^ This man at the bottom has hair in between wavy and cury compared to the other men above him who have nappy hair His lips are smaller than theirs and his nostrils don't flare as much. It leads me to believe he's more admixted with Arabs than the other two if they are at all That's not to say that Africans can't have smaller lips or nostrils that don't flare as much as the other two men But here on a relative basis, the Afar man with this wavy hair looks differnt form the other two not only in hair but in features. His eye shape iand jaw are also different.
History: Little is known of the actual specific history of the Afar people. The Afar claim a descent from Arabs, through a mythic Yemeni ancestor, though they differ racially, linguistically and culturally. A correspondent from Afar reports that the Yemeni association derives from some clans/tribes of the Afar with Yemeni origins who have been incorporated in to the Afar over the centuries, such as the Able and Adal [personal email communication, June 2009].
This kind of cultural genealogical adoption is common among Semitic and Cushitic peoples, such as some Somali clans, who also claim Yemeni Arab descent. Genetic studies in the Horn of Africa and Arabian peninsula indicate long movement between Eastern Africa and Asia across the Red Sea. Oral histories and language affinities of many peoples likewise testify to this long history of human migration and its genetic, linguistic and and cultural exchange. Sometimes this reflects cultural ties from an earlier historical period or actual instances of intermarriage, perhaps for a defense alliance.
This email correspondent points out that from an Afar point of view, the area now known as Yemen is considered a Cushitic country with aSemitic history. This is consistent with oral and legendary tradition, accounting for the association of the name "Cush" with Yemen as well as the Horn of Africa, yet the dominance of Semitic language forms in historical times.
Popular history gives some insight into the history in the two traditional divisions of the Afar. Tradition indicates that the Asayahamara (The Red Ones) are descended from a group originally invading from the Ethiopian Highlands at one time, who imposed their rule on the Adoyahmara (The White Ones).
It is thought the color designations came from the reddish soil deserts inland, toward the direction the newcomers came from, and the white saline coastal areas, where the Adoyahamara are still more numerous. The Reds remain socially dominant, and claim ownership of the lands, while the Whites tend to be the herders. Both classes are, however, distributed among all the clans of the tribe.
Identity: The Afar are one of the people about whom little is available. Their inaccecssibility makes it difficult to obtain reliable objective information.
Through their myths of origin, some clans of the Afar claim Arab descent. Their language, however, and the traditional animistic practices underlying their more recent adherence to Islam, indicate the Afar share a history with neighbouring Cushite peoples. No written Afar records exist from previous eras, and the Afar remain an oral people.
The Afar are a distinct ethnic group, referenced as a separate ethnicity as far back as we have information about peoples of the Horn, though details are few. Every people, though, is related to other peoples, of course, at some level. The Afar are a distinct Eastern Cushite people, whose language and culture are related to the Somali and Oromo. They are very traditional in culture and belief, retaining many ancient Cushite animistic practices.
The Country Study Series comments on their ethnic affinities:
"Three other Lowland East Cushitic groups--the Somali, Afar, and Saho--share a pastoral tradition (although some sections of each group have been cultivators for some time), commitments of varying intensity to Islam, and social structures composed of autonomous units defined as descent groups. In addition, all have a history of adverse relations with the empire's dominant Orthodox Christian groups and with Ethiopian governments in general." The Afar are a dark brown or black people with usually fine facial features, similar to the darker Somali and Oromo. They are likewise distantly related culturally and linguistically to the ancient Beja group of peoples, who are Southern Cushites, and related in turn to the ancient Egyptian race.
They are referred to by some sources as the Danakil, from the Arabic name of the Danakil Depression, or Desert, near the Red Sea in Ethiopia and Eritrea. The Amharic name for them is Adal. Adal was the name of an ancient Muslim empire that almost defeated the old Abyssinian Empire at one time. They call themselves Afar, which means in their language "The Best" or "First."
The Afar were active in the Arab slave trade, serving as guides to Arab slave traders. A major slave route to Arabia crossed Afar country, with Afar reportedly still actively trading in slaves as recently as 1928.
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: This man at the bottom has hair in between wavy and cury compared to the other men above him who have nappy hair His lips are smaller than theirs and his nostrils don't flare as much. It leads me to believe he's more admixted with Arabs than the other two if they are at all That's not to say that Africans can't have smaller lips or nostrils that don't flare as much as the other two men But here on a relative basis, the Afar man with this wavy hair looks differnt form the other two not only in hair but in features. His eye shape iand jaw are also different.
How do you think most Americans would describe him, using sociological racial descriptors?
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
Ancient Egypt - A child of Africa and the Green Sahara
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Do you know what origin means? Origin means originating somewhere. He's simply twisting the word 'origin' to mean 'expansion' so he can confound the ORIGIN of certain populations in the Sahara (e.g. proto-Egyptic speakers, proto-Chadic speakers, proto- Semitic speakers) with the expansion of certain populations towards the Sahara 10-5kya. The latter populations ORIGINATE in equatorial and Sahelian Africa in the time period preceding the Green Sahara. So no, I'm not fooled by his face saving antics. He has not a single shred of evidence to prove that the base of the AE population originates from outside of the Nile Valley or the wider Sahara within the last 50ky.
Well there is a desire amoungst many African Americans that Egypt be for Africans what Greece is to Western culture. -even though a Brit or German might not have that much Greece in them genetically
Amun Ra, Ancient Egypt is a dry period Sahara culture right?
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have an hard time understanding what posting images of the Afar and oromo have to do with anything?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by tropicals redacted: @ Lioness How do you think most Americans would describe him, using sociological racial descriptors?
like cass pointed out relagating people to one of three racial groups, black, white or asian as Americans do is unscientific and people along a cline may not fit neatly into these three boxes (note Brazil has a differnt classification system)
It's ironic. In the past you, also under the name 'element' were arguing against race Now you are asking me in essence "but the dude is black right?"
with the right hat, garb and lingo, even cass could increase his blackness
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
You referenced American racial perceptions in this very thread, but when they work against you, you run.
quote: It's ironic. In the past you, also under the name 'element' were arguing against race Now you are asking me in essence "but the dude is black right?"
You're wrong. That's never been a name of mine. That was clarified way back when.
Now you're just floundering.
So to ask the question again- How do you think most Americans would describe him, using sociological racial descriptors? Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Well there is a desire amoungst many African Americans that Egypt be for Africans what Greece is to Western culture. -even though a Brit or German might not have that much Greece in them genetically [/QB]
African Americans have a much larger stake in AE than West Europeans have in Greece. The latter have no real connection to Europe prior to the arrival of the Greek tribes in the Balkan. They were 'technically' Europeans by residing on the European side of the Eurasian continent. AE have absorbed elements from the sources Amun is talking about but they were new (early holocene to dynastic era) arrivals and would have been distinguishable genetically from the pre-existing populations as demonstrated by coalescent analysis of uniparental lineages in N.Africa, e.g. Soares 2011 and Harich 2009, and they were not the main group.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
The common origin of most African populations (Yoruba, Somali, Ancient Egyptians, etc) and language families in North-Eastern Africa after the OOA migrations of non-Africans.
Then people from their North-Eastern origin in Africa moved up following the monsoon rains, plants and animals and occupied the Green Sahara from about the Atlantic coast to the Nile for more than 3000 years. We're only in the years 2000s, so that's a long time.
Then people from the Green Saharan culture migrated to different regions like in West Africa, along the Nile, along the Niger river, etc in search for greener pastures when the Green Sahara was drying up.
Along the Nile the scarcity of land (around it) led up to conflicts between ethnic groups and then thus the need for unifications between various groups. Narmer was the one who was successful at it.
Narmer, 1st King of Ancient Egypt
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic