Forensic Misclassification of Ancient Nubian Crania: Implications for Assumptions about Human Variation. Type: Article; Author(s): Belcher, Robert L, Armelagos 2005
Fordisc and the determination of ancestry from cranial measurements Marina Elliott and Mark Collard 2009
he results of the analyses suggest that Fordisc's utility in research and medico-legal contexts is limited. Fordisc will only return a correct ancestry attribution when an unidentified specimen is more or less complete, and belongs to one of the populations represented in the program's reference samples. Even then Fordisc can be expected to classify no more than 1 per cent of specimens with confidence.
quote: We hypothesized that, using Howells’s data in Fordisc 2.0, our Nubian crania (dated 350 BCE–AD 350) would be identified as Late Period Dynastic Egypt (Twenty-sixth to Thirtieth Dynasties, 600–200 BCE), since these data correspond roughly geographically to ancient Nubia.
[...]
Alternatively, the Nubian material might have been classified as other African continental populations (e.g., the Teita of Kenya or the Dogon of Mali), although these scenarios are less likely because these populations are temporally distinct from ancient Meroitic Nubia and farther from Nubia than Egypt. We expected the Nubian population to cluster as a group and to be attributed to populations geographically near it.
We expected the program to identify the Nubian sample as black or white. We did not expect any of these crania to be classified as Chinese, Japanese, or Hispanic because of the geographic distance separating these populations from Northeast Africa.
[...]
We used 12 cranial measurements for each cranium: glabella to opisthocranion, maximum cranial breadth, bizygomatic breadth (distance between the most lateral points of the zygomatic arches), basion to bregma, nasion to basion, basion to prosthion, prosthion to alveolon, minimum frontal breadth (distance between the two frontotemporale), nasion to nasopinale, nasal breadth (maximum breadth of the nasal aperture), dacryon to ectoconchion, and orbital height (distance between the superior and inferior orbital margins).
[...]
To ascertain whether the Nubian cranial data were comparable to the control samples in Fordisc 2.0, we compared the Nubian sample with all the African populations from Howells’s (1995) data set. Half of the traits compared between the Nubian and the Egyptian populations yielded nonsignificant differences (p ! 0.05), which is greater than or equal to the number of nonsig- nificant differences obtained by comparing the Egyptian sample with other African populations (San, Zulu, Teita, Dogon). This suggests that the Egyptians are more similar to the Nubians than they are to any other African population.
[...]
If the Late Period Dynastic Egyptian crania differed greatly from the Nubian ones—and our t tests suggest that they do not— then the Nubian crania might have been classified with other geographically close populations such as the Teita or the Dogon.
[...]
Our results suggest that the attempt to classify populations into natural geographic groups or races—as if all of these groupings were biologically equivalent—will continue to fail (Armelagos and Van Gerven 2003).
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. We have shown that for a temporally and geographically homogeneous East African population, the most widely used “racial” program fails to identify the skeletal material accurately.
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.
Finally, the assumption that cranial form is an immutable “racial” character is very likely to be false, given the diversity of studies of immigrants and the known effects of food preparation and masticatory stress upon cranial form. Cranial form, like other aspects of the body, is a phenotype partly determined by heredity but also strongly influenced by the conditions of life.
--Forensic Misclassification of Ancient Nubian Crania
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: In the source-population-included analyses, we evaluated Fordisc's performance on the basis of the percentage of test specimens correctly assigned to their source population. In the source-population-excluded analyses, we assessed the program's performance on the basis of the percentage of test specimens assigned to the most closely related population in the reference sample. After reviewing the available evidence, we selected the Norse (Europe), Kyushu (Asia), Yauyos (Americas), mainland Australian Aborigines (Australia and Pacific) and Teita (Africa) as the closest relatives of the Berg, Hokkaido Japanese, Santa Cruz, Tasmanian and Zulu, respectively (table S3 of the electronic supplementary material).
[...]
It appears, then, that Fordisc's utility is limited. Even in favourable circumstances it can be expected to classify no more than 1 per cent of specimens with confidence. One implication of this is that many of the ancestry determinations that have already been obtained using Fordisc are likely to be unreliable.
[...]
It appears, then, that FORDISC’s utility is limited. Even in favourable circumstances it can be expected to classify no more than 1 per cent of specimens with confi- dence. One implication of this is that many of the ancestry determinations that have already been obtained using FORDISC are likely to be unreliable. Another is that there is a pressing need for bioarchaeologists and forensic anthropologists to develop more reliable methods for determining the ancestry of unidentified human remains. Recent work suggests that human cranial variation fits a model of African origin followed by repeated bottleneck- ing events as humans spread across the rest of the world (von Cramon-Taubadel & Lycett 2008). This implies that the similarities and differences in cranial shape among human populations are hierarchically structured. If this is the case, then distinguishing between shared- primitive and shared-derived similarities may improve our ability to determine the ancestry of unidentified human crania. While this and other possibilities are evaluated, care should be taken when interpreting FORDISC’s output. In particular, an attribution should only be accepted if the PP and TP exceed 0.991 and 0.952, respectively.
--Marina Elliott and Mark Collard
Fordisc and the determination of ancestry from cranial measurements
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: The origin and evolutionary history of modern humans is of considerable interest to paleoanthropologists and geneticists alike. Paleontological evidence suggests that recent humans originated and expanded from an African lineage that may have undergone demographic crises in the Late Pleistocene according to archaeological and genetic data. This would suggest that extant human populations derive from, and perhaps sample a restricted part of the genetic and morphological variation that was present in the Late Pleistocene. Crania that date to Marine Isotope Stage 3 should yield information pertaining to the level of Late Pleistocene human phenotypic diversity and its evolution in modern humans. The Nazlet Khater (NK) and Hofmeyr (HOF) crania from Egypt and South Africa, together with penecontemporaneous specimens from the Peştera cu Oase in Romania, permit preliminary assessment of variation among modern humans from geographically disparate regions at this time. Morphometric and morphological comparisons with other Late Pleistocene modern human specimens, and with 23 recent human population samples, reveal that elevated levels of variation are present throughout the Late Pleistocene. Comparison of Holocene and Late Pleistocene craniometric variation through resampling analyses supports hypotheses derived from genetic data suggesting that present phenotypic variation may represent only a restricted part of Late Pleistocene human diversity. The Nazlet Khater, Hofmeyr, and Oase specimens provide a unique glimpse of that diversity.
--Crevecoeur I1, Rougier H, Grine F, Froment A.
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2009 Oct;140(2):347-58. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.21080.
Modern human cranial diversity in the Late Pleistocene of Africa and Eurasia: evidence from Nazlet Khater, Peştera cu Oase, and Hofmeyr.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
In recent years the Later Stone Age has been redated to a much deeper time depth than previously thought. At the same time, human remains from this time period are scarce in Africa, and even rarer in West Africa. The Iwo Eleru burial is one of the few human skeletal remains associated with Later Stone Age artifacts in that region with a proposed Pleistocene date. We undertook a morphometric reanalysis of this cranium in order to better assess its affinities. We also conducted Uranium-series dating to re-evaluate its chronology.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:
A 3-D geometric morphometric analysis of cranial landmarks and semilandmarks was conducted using a large comparative fossil and modern human sample. The measurements were collected in the form of three dimensional coordinates and processed using Generalized Procrustes Analysis. Principal components, canonical variates, Mahalanobis D(2) and Procrustes distance analyses were performed. The results were further visualized by comparing specimen and mean configurations. Results point to a morphological similarity with late archaic African specimens dating to the Late Pleistocene. A long bone cortical fragment was made available for U-series analysis in order to re-date the specimen. The results (∼11.7-16.3 ka) support a terminal Pleistocene chronology for the Iwo Eleru burial as was also suggested by the original radiocarbon dating results and by stratigraphic evidence.
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE:
Our findings are in accordance with suggestions of deep population substructure in Africa and a complex evolutionary process for the origin of modern humans. They further highlight the dearth of hominin finds from West Africa, and underscore our real lack of knowledge of human evolution in that region.
--Harvati K1, Stringer C, Grün R, Aubert M, Allsworth-Jones P, Folorunso CA.
The Later Stone Age calvaria from Iwo Eleru, Nigeria: morphology and chronology.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Current consensus indicates that modern humans originated from an ancestral African population between ∼100–200 ka. The ensuing dispersal pattern is controversial, yet has important implications for the demographic history and genetic/phenotypic structure of extant human populations. We test for the first time to our knowledge the spatiotemporal dimensions of competing out-of-Africa dispersal models, analyzing in parallel genomic and craniometric data. Our results support an initial dispersal into Asia by a southern route beginning as early as ∼130 ka and a later dispersal into northern Eurasia by ∼50 ka. Our findings indicate that African Pleistocene population structure may account for observed plesiomorphic genetic/phenotypic patterns in extant Australians and Melanesians. They point to an earlier out-of-Africa dispersal than previously hypothesized.
[...]
Out-of-Africa dispersal models. Spheres are approximate centroids of populations sampled (Table 1), connecting lines are dispersal routes, and arrows are geographical waypoints (Table S4). The eastward expansion (EE) model connects populations primarily along a latitudinal axis (10, 12). The beachcomber single dispersal (BSD) model connects populations primarily along a coastal route (7). The multiple dispersals model (MD) connects hy- pothetical relic populations along a southern route (dotted lines) and north Eurasians along a northern route (13). The multiple dispersals with isolation (MDI) model assumes that only Australo-Melanesian populations retain a strong southern route biological signal (8). For simplicity, a Holocene map outline is shown.
Genomic and cranial phenotype data support multiple modern human dispersals from Africa and a southern route into Asia
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Auditory exostoses are a discrete trait, the presence of which may be a product of environmental factors. Water exposure is believed to be associated with the trait's appearance, which has allowed anthropologists to hypothesise about past population subsistence strategies. However, some scholars still contend that water exposure is not necessarily the precipitating factor for its development. This study examined 744 Nubians for exostoses from the following time periods: Kerma, Meroitic, X-group, Christian and a current sample. A total of six male individuals exhibited the characteristic. There is little evidence in the Nubian archaeological record to suggest that marine resources were exploited in a manner that required prolonged water exposure. Moreover, the Nubian groups with auditory exostoses were primarily agriculturists and/or pastoralists. Wind chill and temperature have also been put forth as potential contributors to the development of auditory exostoses, but like other hypotheses, water is also needed in order for wind chill and temperature to incite exostoses. Even though water may have contributed to the development of exostoses for many populations, it is not suitable to cite it as a precipitating factor for the development of auditory exostoses in Nubians. Based on this evidence, other non-water factors may be important in the trait's development. Caution must be used when interpreting exostoses as indicators of a particular water-related activity and trait frequencies must be carefully considered, as low frequencies are not necessarily evidence of water-exposure.
"African peoples are the most diverse in the world whether analyzed by DNA or skeletal or cranial methods. The peoples of the Nile Valley vary but they are still related. The people most related ethnically to the ancient Egyptians are other Africans like Nubians not cold-climate/light skinned Europeans or Asiatics.
-- Godde 2009
An examination of proposed causes of auditory exostoses
posted
Hmm interesting- Auditory exostoses. I'll check it out PS- the words in italics above are a summary heading from the database, not a direct quote by Godde- in case anyone takes it for such.
quote: The origin and evolutionary history of modern humans is of considerable interest to paleoanthropologists and geneticists alike. Paleontological evidence suggests that recent humans originated and expanded from an African lineage that may have undergone demographic crises in the Late Pleistocene according to archaeological and genetic data. This would suggest that extant human populations derive from, and perhaps sample a restricted part of the genetic and morphological variation that was present in the Late Pleistocene. Crania that date to Marine Isotope Stage 3 should yield information pertaining to the level of Late Pleistocene human phenotypic diversity and its evolution in modern humans. The Nazlet Khater (NK) and Hofmeyr (HOF) crania from Egypt and South Africa, together with penecontemporaneous specimens from the Peştera cu Oase in Romania, permit preliminary assessment of variation among modern humans from geographically disparate regions at this time. Morphometric and morphological comparisons with other Late Pleistocene modern human specimens, and with 23 recent human population samples, reveal that elevated levels of variation are present throughout the Late Pleistocene. Comparison of Holocene and Late Pleistocene craniometric variation through resampling analyses supports hypotheses derived from genetic data suggesting that present phenotypic variation may represent only a restricted part of Late Pleistocene human diversity. The Nazlet Khater, Hofmeyr, and Oase specimens provide a unique glimpse of that diversity.
--Crevecoeur I1, Rougier H, Grine F, Froment A.
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2009 Oct;140(2):347-58. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.21080.
Modern human cranial diversity in the Late Pleistocene of Africa and Eurasia: evidence from Nazlet Khater, Peştera cu Oase, and Hofmeyr.
Excellent reference Patrol. What this shows is that Oase from Romania, deep in Europe had some Africoid traits as is confirmed by other data. Nazlet Khater in Egypt most resembles other Africoids as well. The deep population structure already in place in Africa before the appearance of these variants again demonstrates the primacy of African diversity.
In the source-population-included analyses, we evaluated Fordisc's performance on the basis of the percentage of test specimens correctly assigned to their source population. In the source-population-excluded analyses, we assessed the program's performance on the basis of the percentage of test specimens assigned to the most closely related population in the reference sample. After reviewing the available evidence, we selected the Norse (Europe), Kyushu (Asia), Yauyos (Americas), mainland Australian Aborigines (Australia and Pacific) and Teita (Africa) as the closest relatives of the Berg, Hokkaido Japanese, Santa Cruz, Tasmanian and Zulu, respectively (table S3 of the electronic supplementary material).
[...]
It appears, then, that Fordisc's utility is limited. Even in favourable circumstances it can be expected to classify no more than 1 per cent of specimens with confidence. One implication of this is that many of the ancestry determinations that have already been obtained using Fordisc are likely to be unreliable.
[...]
It appears, then, that FORDISC’s utility is limited. Even in favourable circumstances it can be expected to classify no more than 1 per cent of specimens with confi- dence. One implication of this is that many of the ancestry determinations that have already been obtained using FORDISC are likely to be unreliable. Another is that there is a pressing need for bioarchaeologists and forensic anthropologists to develop more reliable methods for determining the ancestry of unidentified human remains. Recent work suggests that human cranial variation fits a model of African origin followed by repeated bottleneck- ing events as humans spread across the rest of the world (von Cramon-Taubadel & Lycett 2008). This implies that the similarities and differences in cranial shape among human populations are hierarchically structured. If this is the case, then distinguishing between shared- primitive and shared-derived similarities may improve our ability to determine the ancestry of unidentified human crania. While this and other possibilities are evaluated, care should be taken when interpreting FORDISC’s output. In particular, an attribution should only be accepted if the PP and TP exceed 0.991 and 0.952, respectively.
--Marina Elliott and Mark Collard
Fordisc and the determination of ancestry from cranial measurements
Great ref as well, confirming Armelagos et al on the weaknesses of FORDISC re the Nubians, and debunking the almost religious faith in the ability of forensic types to discern biological "race." To which we can add the warnings of Egyptologist Barry Kemp on the widely used CRANID database which uses samples from far north cemeteries near the Mediterranean as "representative" of ancient Egyptians, excluding the historic tropical south, from which the dynasties sprang.
"..collected by Petrie in 1907 from a cemetery on a desert ridge to the south of Giza and dating from the 26th to the 30th Dynasties.. If, on the other hand, CRANID had used one of the Elephantine populations of the same period, the geographic association would be much more with the African groups to the south. It is dangerous to take one set of skeletons and use them to characterize the population of the whole of Egypt." (Barry Kemp, Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation, Routledge: 2005, p. 55)
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [--Marina Elliott and Mark Collard
Fordisc and the determination of ancestry from cranial measurements
Great ref as well, confirming Armelagos et al on the weaknesses of FORDISC re the Nubians, and debunking the almost religious faith in the ability of forensic types to discern biological "race."
I don't know if you realized this but I put that reference in the first post
Posts: 42930 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| 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 |
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.
This review summarizes some recent advances in our understanding of the demographic history and selective pressures that have influenced levels and patterns of diversity in African populations.
Africa not only has the highest levels of human genetic variation in the world but also contains a considerable amount of linguistic, environmental and cultural diversity. For example, more than 2,000 distinct ethno-linguistic groups, representing nearly a third of the world’s languages, currently exist in Africa
The timing and duration of some of these demographic events were often correlated with known major environmental changes and/or cultural developments in Africa [6].
A number of novel genetic and phenotypic adaptations have also evolved in Africans in response to dramatic variation in environment, diet, and exposure to infectious disease across the continent.
In some cases, these adaptations have occurred in the last several thousand years, exemplifying the ongoing evolution of human populations.
Thus, present-day patterns of variation in African genomes are a product of both demographic and selective events.
--Sarah Tishkoff et al.
The Evolution of Human Genetic and Phenotypic Variation in Africa
1. a. The observable physical or biochemical characteristics of an organism, as determined by both genetic makeup and environmental influences. b. The expression of a specific trait, such as stature or blood type, based on genetic and environmental influences.
That's what you get, when you hit and run.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Again, that is not the topic of this thread
I realize you are to shy to start your own topics and you have to post in mine trying to change the topic yet have it in my thread
Posts: 42930 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now you well know Patrol's post is on point for that very same diversity undercuts simplistic "race" classifications.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Now you well know Patrol's post is on point for that very same diversity undercuts simplistic "race" classifications.
Africa is most diverse, as is known by now.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Now you well know Patrol's post is on point for that very same diversity undercuts simplistic "race" classifications.
Again, the topic is specific forensic computer programs and and what these articles say about them
Not African diversity in general
** also beyoku got on you in another recent thread on not being focused to the topic
Posts: 42930 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Now you well know Patrol's post is on point for that very same diversity undercuts simplistic "race" classifications.
Again, the topic is specific forensic computer programs and and what these articles say about them
Not African diversity in general
** also beyoku got on you in another recent thread on not being focused to the topic
The analysis of your posts spoke of worldwide population comparisons. By the use of these computer programs.
GLOBAL!
I wonder, if you actually read those papers yourself? Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Now you well know Patrol's post is on point for that very same diversity undercuts simplistic "race" classifications.
Again, the topic is specific forensic computer programs and and what these articles say about them
Not African diversity in general
** also beyoku got on you in another recent thread on not being focused to the topic
There is nothing wrong with the program. Hubbe and Neves observed that the findings of the paper were unreliable because of the research design Williams et al used. Whereas 57 variables are in the Howell database to classify individual populations, Williams et al, used only 12 variables in their study. Moreover, several of the variables had nothing to do with Howell's database used to classify populations so the results are invalid.
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Now you well know Patrol's post is on point for that very same diversity undercuts simplistic "race" classifications.
Africa is most diverse, as is known by now.
Africa is most diverse because there in no single Black population. The changes in skeletal remains discovered in Africa from, Homo Erectus, into homo sapiens sapiens: Australian, Khoisan, Pgymy and finally Sub-Saharan African/Melanesian has demonstrated changes in the stature of the Black Variety, while the craniometric demensions for the negro type remain consistent except for discrete changes in the brow ridges, e.g., Australians vs. Melanesian/Africans and Khoisan.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: ]Africa is most diverse because there in no single Black population.
[...]
craniometric demensions for the negro type remain consistent except for discrete changes in the brow ridges, e.g., Australians vs. Melanesian/Africans and Khoisan. [/QB]
That's the stupidest thing I've heard yet.
There is no single white population yet Europe is not the most diverse.
Africa is most diverse because our speces developed there before they spread all over the world. Depth of age accounts for Africans being the most diverse.
Then there's your oxymoron of no single black type and consistant negro type.
This is nothing but a buy in to external 18th century European anthropology 'science' and talk from both sides of the mouth at once.
Indigenous Africans, black or not, are of no single archetype such as the well defied negro type which is not even the majority phenotype of Africa's blacks. Both duBois and JG Jackson extensively quote 19th/20th cent, anthropologist Ratzel's 'discovery' of the relative rarity of the negro type and that there is no negro region, that it is just a set of facial features that pops up everywhere but in low frequency.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Africa is most diverse because our speces developed there before they spread all over the world. Depth of age accounts for Africans being the most diverse.
Populations who left Africa have the same depth of age as the populations who stayed in Africa (and moved/migrated within it). This is a common misconception.
All humans (individuals or populations) share the same MtDNA mother and the same Y-DNA father. So we are all brothers and sisters with the same age. The age between, lets say, when our common MtDNA mother was born and today. So all human populations/individuals are of the same age.
The diversity in Africa (nucleotide/genetic diversity) is mainly caused by African populations maintaining larger effective population sizes than populations who left Africa who went through major population bottlenecks.
In the past, there also was a lot of population movements. So there was the OOA migrations but also a lot of migrations and movements within Africa too!
We often hear about the Bantu Migration for example. We could talk of the Niger-Kordofanian migrations too (a larger supra set of the Bantu migration who are NK speakers). Even East Africans like Somalis are the product of "recent" migrations to their current location.
We know E-P2, the main haplogroup in Africa, is younger than F-M89, the haplogroup of non-Africans, and appeared somewhere in East Africa/Sudan and can now be seen all over Africa. E-P2 appeared in Africa after the OOA migrations. But you can't say people from the E-P2 haplogroups are younger than other human populations. They all share common parent haplogroups. So they are all sister populations of equal age, sharing the same common ancient fathers and mothers.
A quick google search (I didn't actually remember or re-read the study):
quote:There is a strong consensus that modern humans originated in Africa and moved out to colonize the world approximately 50 000 years ago. During the process of expansion, variability was lost, creating a linear gradient of decreasing diversity with increasing distance from Africa.
So as said above: The diversity in Africa (nucleotide/genetic diversity) is mainly caused by African populations maintaining larger effective population sizes than populations who left Africa who went through population bottlenecks.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Amun-Ra The Ultimate you are right, Africans have always been on the move in Africa.
There is not really that much genetic diversity in Africa. The principal haplogroups carried by Africans belong to the mtDNA macrohaplogroup L3(M,N), and y-chromosomes E and R clades.
I could care less about what anyone feels about craniometrics, especially Euronuts, may they be white, Black or white people who pretend to be Black on the Internet, especially Egyptsearch . As an Afrocentric researcher I follow the methods and protocols used to research Blacks in ancient history developed by W.E.B. DuBois, John Jackson,and J.A. Rogers. As any researcher, I have added the use of genetics to Illuminate the history of Black and African people.
Euronuts and their black lackeys hate craniometrics, not because they prove races exist, they hate craniometrics because it was this science that proved the founders of the first civilizations were Negroes or Blacks. They feel that if you can prove craniometrics to be an unreliable science you can deny that Black people founded the first Civilizations on the earth.
The Black lackeys of the Euronuts hate the concept of race, because they feel inferior to whites. For some strange reason they believe that if you destroy the concept of race , Blacks will be respected by whites.
I am a falsificationist. The use of craniometrics to determine race, and human populations has been quantified and confirmed repeatedly. As a result, I accept this science as reliable and valid.
Craniometrics show that five Black or Negro populations originated in Africa. These populations were Neanderthal, Australian (the most archaic homo sapiens), and the Khoisan, Pgymies (Anu/Twa) and Sub-Saharan Africans (and Dravidians). These Blacks have varying physical features, and hair textures as a result, we can call these Blacks, members of the Black Variety.
In Africa boats and navigation has always played an important role in African civilization because boats were necessary to provide smooth communication between diverse people spread across situated on sites near rivers, streams and lakes. As a result, African people early invented watercraft to get around Africa.
I accept the fact there were ancient Blacks in Asia. The first Blacks to enter Eurasia were the Australian type people who mainly live in Australia and the Hill regions of Oceania. The first OoA event was the migration of the Australians out of Africa.
The Australians are the original settlers of Asia (around 60kybp), and may represent members of the first out of Africa migrants. I never refer to these people as Africans, although I do recognize them as Blacks. Artifacts from Brazil indicate that it was settled 100kya. These people were probably Australians who sailed to the Americas from Africa.
The Bushman (/Proto-Bantu) represent the second African migration of homo sapien sapiens out of Africa. I would class these people with the CroMagnon/Grimaldi group who entered Iberia 44kybp. The Bushman entered the Americas after 25,000 BC. They introduced the Salutrean culture. In the archaeological literature these people are called Paleoamericans.
The Anu or Black pygmies may represent the Natufians who began to migrate out of Africa after 20,000 and settled in the Levant which was first settled by Cro Magnon people who early replaced the Neanderthal folk. The Natufians would represent the fourth African migration into Eurasia. Remnants of this great people were found on every continent when Europeans first explored the world.
By the time the Pgymies entered Eurasia the Classical mongoloid people who are the ancestors of the Indonesians/Vietnamese/Filipinos and etc. were probably already settled in Anatolia. The classical mongoloids probably constructed Catal Huyuk. The close relationship between the Sumerian and the AustroAsiatic languages suggest that the classical Mongoloid people may have also inhabited Mesopotamia by the time the Sumerians entered the area.
It appears to have been a natural catastrophe which caused the classical mongoloids to migrate eastward. We know this because many of the former sites of the Classical mongoloids in Anatolia were occupied by the Kushites (Kaska) people after 2500 BC. The coastal Melanesians on the otherhand, are descendants of recent Africans who settled the area after being forced from Asia. The Polynesians/Filipinos and etc., who are known as the original Mongoloid people and called Classical Mongoloid in the literature probably originated in Anatolia or Mesopotamia.
By 1200 BC the clasical mongoloids had become well established in India. Around this time they conquered the Dravidian people who founded the first Shang empire, and set up a new Shang Empire at Anyang.
By 1000 BC the Hau/Han tribes came down from the mountains and pushed the classical mongoloids southward into Yunnan and eventually Southeast Asia. The Han began to make the Yueh and li min people their slaves. The Han often used the Qiang (another Black tribe) as sacrifice victims. The Han killed off as many Black tribes as they could. The only thing that saved the pygmies in East Asia, was the fact that they moved into the mountains in areas they could easily defend from Han attacks.
This movement of Han and classical mongoloid people southward forced the Kushite/African (Qiang, li min and other African) tribes onto the Pacific Islands. It is these Africans who represent the coastal Melanesians.
The Sumerians, Elamites, Xia (of China), Harappans of the Indus Valley and coastal Melanoids are the Proto-Saharan people known in History as the Kushites.These people originated in the Highland regions of Middle Africa, and began to occupy the former trade centers of the Anu in Eurasia and the Americas. It is for this reason that we find West African placenames in the Pacific and India.
Given the origin of the classical mongoloids in Anatolia, and the Han Chinese somewhere in North China or Central Asia,the Southeast Asians are not descendants of the first African migration to Eurasia. This is why the Chinese and Classical mongoloid people share few if any genes with the Australians. The Classical mongoloids share genes mainly with the coastal Melanesians who are of African origin, but few genes with the Chinese of Eas
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
The Indian on horseback is a negro or Black Native American. A negro is a person with:
1) Direct African or Black Asian ancestry
2) Brown to yellow complexion
Note the difference in skin tone between the mother, father and children.
3) Long limbs
4) shape of the head and face varies
5) flat to semi pointed nose ( traditionally some Negro/Black people like to pinch the noses of their children )with dark skin
Here is a picture of several Wolof engaged in a conversation. Note the individuals in the picture the person in the center facing you appears to have a flat nose; whereas the person facing the center person has a nose which appears to be semi-pointed.This highlights the various nose types found among negroes.
6) curly to straight hair
7) round to slanted eyes depending on the Negro group
Note the varying shape of the eyes evident in these negroes.
8) thick or thin lips
Some people believe that Filipino and other Asian people can be classified as Negroes because of their dark color. But a careful examination of the two clearly demonstrates differences between both group in facial features eventhough the shape of the eye may be the same.
Tanzanian
Filipino
Look at differences in the form of the head, forehead and mouth. Note both have flat noses but they are clearly different in how they are established.
Both children are handsome and well proportioned .
Note also the color both are brown but the African has a more richer brown complexion.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: There is not really that much genetic diversity in Africa.
Don't try to co-opt me in your crazy theories. It is well known there's higher level of genetic/nucleotide diversity in Africa than elsewhere but it's mainly because African populations went through less drastic populations bottlenecks during their migrations within Africa.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: There is not really that much genetic diversity in Africa.
Don't try to co-opt me in your crazy theories. It is well known there's higher level of genetic/nucleotide diversity in Africa than elsewhere but it's mainly because African populations went through less drastic populations bottlenecks during their migrations within Africa.
Don't worry I don't associate you with any of my theories.
If you believe this, list the haplogroups carried by Europeans, and mongoloids (especially Native Americans) and Africans. Isolate the clades and put them in macrohaplogroups and then tell me that Africans are any more diverse than other population. All the haplogroups carried by Africans, appear in European populations, e.g., V88.
LOL. there had to have been bottenecks, for the variety of haplogroups found within African populations. A bottlneck is a bottleneck none are more drastic than any other.
You are just repeating what the establishment says. Are you sure they are correct? .
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
A bottlneck is a bottleneck none are more drastic than any other.
Yes, I misused the word. A population bottleneck is always drastic by definition. It is a drastic drop in population size by definition. I meant African populations (most of them) went through less drastic reduction of populations sizes. So they didn't lose as much genetic diversity.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: There is not really that much genetic diversity in Africa.
Don't try to co-opt me in your crazy theories. It is well known there's higher level of genetic/nucleotide diversity in Africa than elsewhere but it's mainly because African populations went through less drastic populations bottlenecks during their migrations within Africa.
Don't worry I don't associate you with any of my theories.
If you believe this, list the haplogroups carried by Europeans, and mongoloids (especially Native Americans) and Africans. Isolate the clades and put them in macrohaplogroups and then tell me that Africans are any more diverse than other population. All the haplogroups carried by Africans, appear in European populations, e.g., V88.
LOL. there had to have been bottenecks, for the variety of haplogroups found within African populations. A bottlneck is a bottleneck none are more drastic than any other.
You are just repeating what the establishment says. Are you sure they are correct? .
This is what recent data tells, and Hassan while publish further analysis on this.
quote: According to the current data East Africa is home to nearly 2/3 of the world genetic diversity independent of sampling effect. Similar figure have been suggested for sub-Saharan Africa populations [1]. The antiquity of the east African gene pool could be viewed not only from the perspective of the amount of genetic diversity endowed within it but also by signals of uni-modal distribution in their mitochondrial DNA (Hassan et al., unpublished) usually taken as an indication of populations that have passed through ‘‘recent’’ demographic expansion [33], although in this case, may in fact be considered a sign of extended shared history of in situ evolution where alleles are exchanged between neighboring demes [34].
Figure S1 Neighbor joining (NJ). NJ tree of the world populations based on MT-CO2 sequences. The evolutionary relationship of 171 sequences and evolutionary history was inferred using the Neighbor-Joining method. The optimal tree with the sum of branch length = 0.20401570 is shown. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Maximum Composite Likelihood method and are in the units of the number of base substitutions per site. Codon positions included were 1st+2nd+3rd+Noncoding. All positions containing gaps and missing data were eliminated from the dataset. There were a total of 543 positions in the final dataset. Phylogenetic analyses were conducted in MEGA4. Red dots: east Africa, Blue: Africa, Green: Asia, Yellow: Australia, Pink: Europe and gray: America. (TIF)
Figure S2 Multidimensional Scaling Plot (MDS). The 2nd and 3rd coordinates of an MDS plot of 848 nuclear microsatellite loci from 469 individuals of 24 world populations. MDS uses pairwise IBS data based on the 848 loci generated by PLINK software and plotted using R version 2.15.0. The figure, besides a separate clustering of east Africans, indicates the substantial contribution of Africans and east Africans to the founding of populations of Europe and Asia. (TIF)
Figure S3 Multidimensional Scaling Plot (MDS). The 3rd and 4th coordinates of an MDS plot of 848 Microsatellite loci, across the human genome in 469 individuals from 24 populations from Africa, Asia and Europe. MDS uses pairwise IBS data based on the 848 loci generated by PLINK software and plotted using R version 2.15.0. The central position of east Africans and some other Africans emphasizes the founding role of east African gene pool and the disparate alignment on coordinates along which the world populations were founded including populations of Aftica aligning along the 4th dimension. (TIF)
Figure 4. Multidimensional Scaling Plot (MDS). A. First and second coordinates of an MDS plot of 848 Microsatellite Marshfield data set across the human genome for 24 populations from Africa, Asia and Europe. MDS plot was constructed from pairwise differences FST generated by Arlequin program (Table S3). B. First and second coordinates of an MDS plot of 848 Microsatellite loci, across the human genome in 469 individuals from 24 populations from Africa, Asia and Europe. MDS uses pairwise IBS data based on the 848 loci generated by PLINK software and plotted using R version 2.15.0. East Africans cluster to the left of the plot, while Beja (red cluster in the middle), assumes intermediate position. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0097674.g004
Figure S4 Multidimensional Scaling Plot (MDS). First and second coordinates of an MDS plot based on MT-CO2 data set constructed from pairwise differences FST generated by Arlequin v3.11. Population code as follows: Nara: Nar, Kunama (Kun), Hidarb (Hid), Afar (Afa), Saho (Sah), Bilen (Bil), Tigre (Tgr), Tigrigna (Tig), Rashaida (Rsh), Nilotics (Nil), Beja (Bej), Ethiopians(Eth), Egyptians (Egy), Moroccans (Mor), Southern Africans (Sth), Pygmy (Pyg), Saudi Arabia (Sdi), Asia (Asi), Europe (Eur), Native Americans (NA), Australians (Ast), Nubians (Nub), Nuba (Nba) (TIF)
--Jibril Hirbo, Sara Tishkoff et al.
The Episode of Genetic Drift Defining the Migration of Humans out of Africa Is Derived from a Large East African Population Size
PLoS One. 2014; 9(5): e97674. Published online 2014 May 20. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097674
And surprisingly the following was stated by Brenna Henn, in this interview on population genetics and population structure, considering African populations.
“African populations have the most genetic diversity in the world,” Henn said. “If you compared people from the Kalahari Desert to people from Mali, they’d be as different from each other [genetically] as Italians and Chinese people.”
Why are other populations of humans so much less genetically varied than Africans? The answer, Henn explains, lies in our ancestors’ history; the groups of people that migrated out of Africa and spread throughout other continents were smaller subsets of that original, genetically diverse population.
"AND WITHIN EACH OF THESE GROUPS THERE IS AN AMAZING AMOUNT OF DIVERSITY, [...] THE DIVERSITY IS INDIGNIOUS TO AFRICAN POPULATIONS":
Tracing Family Trees, And Human History, With Genetics
Forensic Misclassification of Ancient Nubian Crania: Implications for Assumptions about Human Variation. Type: Article; Author(s): Belcher, Robert L, Armelagos 2005
Fordisc and the determination of ancestry from cranial measurements Marina Elliott and Mark Collard 2009
he results of the analyses suggest that Fordisc's utility in research and medico-legal contexts is limited. Fordisc will only return a correct ancestry attribution when an unidentified specimen is more or less complete, and belongs to one of the populations represented in the program's reference samples. Even then Fordisc can be expected to classify no more than 1 per cent of specimens with confidence. LINK
.
Of relevance to this topic, Kenndo private messaged me some years back about some supposed expert whom he communicated with. I’m sure Kenndo wouldn’t mind but here is pretty much the gist of what he said:
quote:Originally posted by Kenndo:
…one person who studies skulls told me there were white Nubians living in ancient Nubia even back then. i told this guy they must be Greeks or other outsider that came to lower Nubia over time so they are not Nubian, maybe they called be call Greek or Roman Nubian etc. because other later were born there but they can't be called Nubians… …Hard to say, he did not want to answer my questions any further. This was a while ago. THEY WERE STUDYING THESE SKULLS USING A COMPUTER THEY HAD.
quote:Djehuti replied:
Was this computer program by any chance called Fordisc??
You realize that craniofacial features are the most diverse anatomical features in the human species and that even in a single population there is heterogeneity, and that this is especially true of indigenous Africans who possess the greatest genetic diversity of all.
Here is an example of this: J. Edwards, A. Leathers, et al. ...based on Howell’s sampling Fordisc 2.0 authors state that "there are no races, only populations," yet it is clear that Howell was intent on providing known groups that would be distributed among the continental "racial" groups. We tested the accuracy and effectiveness of Fordisc 2.0 using twelve cranial measurements from a homogeneous population from the X-Group period of Sudanese Nubia (350CE-550CE). When the Fordisc program classified the adult X-Group crania, only 51 (57.3%) of 89 individuals were classified within groups from Africa. Others were placed in such diverse groups as Polynesian (11.24%), European (7.86%), Japanese (4.49%), Native American (3.37%), Peruvian (3.36%), Australian (1.12), Tasmanian (1.12%), and Melanesian (1.12%). The implications of these findings suggest that classifying populations, whether by geography or by "race", is not morphologically or biologically accurate because of the wide variation even in homogeneous populations.
Mind you a Fordsic program was run on skulls from Spain that dated back to the early Medieval period (before the Moorish invasion) and not only did it identify some of these skulls as Sub-Saharan African but even Polynesian and Japanese as well. Yet I doubt the experts actually labeled these Spaniard remains as such!
Thus, the very problem in defining 'race'
Anyway the point is that the Euronuts are getting desperate again and are exploiting the craniometric data to white-wash Nubians (again).
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ what the "expert" was talking about was likely Jebel Sahaba, which they discovered as the first "race war", and published so a few years back. Although the original pape doesn't say this, the media did.
Because the cranial formation of both specimen differed, as they say. With one being stereotypical "negroid" and the other one being "caucasoid, as they say". Therefore they claim the cacuasoid like cranial formation was from Europe or the Middle East/ Levant.
quote: Work carried out at Liverpool John Moores University, the University of Alaska and New Orleans’ Tulane University indicates that they were part of the general sub-Saharan originating population – the ancestors of modern Black Africans.
The identity of their killers is however less easy to determine. But it is conceivable that they were people from a totally different racial and ethnic group – part of a North African/ Levantine/European people who lived around much of the Mediterranean Basin.
The two groups – although both part of our species, Homo sapiens – would have looked quite different from each other and were also almost certainly different culturally and linguistically. The sub-Saharan originating group had long limbs, relatively short torsos and projecting upper and lower jaws along with rounded foreheads and broad noses, while the North African/Levantine/European originating group had shorter limbs, longer torsos and flatter faces. Both groups were very muscular and strongly built.
Certainly the northern Sudan area was a major ethnic interface between these two different groups at around this period. Indeed the remains of the North African/Levantine/European originating population group has even been found 200 miles south of Jebel Sahaba, thus suggesting that the arrow victims were slaughtered in an area where both populations operated.
quote: Of course, the Jebel Sahaba people were not the only victims of violence. The newly refurbished gallery also features the return of the popular virtual autopsy table allowing a deeper look into Gebelein Man and his unfortunate end. For the actual remains of this remarkably well preserved natural mummy, the new display aims to recreate his grave as accurately as the surviving records allow. Sir Wallis Budge, Keeper of the Egyptian Department from 1894 to 1924, claims to have witnessed the excavation of Gebelein Man in 1899 and relates that the grave was covered by stone slabs and the body was surrounded by pots and other objects. Simulating some stone slabs was no problem, but it proved impossible to determine which items came specifically from his grave. Those now accompanying him do at least come from Gebelein and date to about 3500 BC, the time we think that Gebelein Man lived. This was a period when several regional centres were beginning to vie for power and territory, leading ultimately to the unification of Egypt some 400 years later. Violence no doubt played a role in this process (as made clear by the intricately carved Battlefield palette, soon to be reunited with its mending piece on long term loan from the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford) and the stab wound in Gebelein Man’s back may mark him as an unfortunate victim of his times.
--Renée Friedman, curator, British Museum
Violence and climate change in prehistoric Egypt and Sudan
LONDON, ENGLAND—New technology has detected dozens of additional wounds on skeletons excavated from a 13,000-year-old cemetery on the east bank of the Nile River in northern Sudan. The bones were unearthed in the 1960s by American archaeologist Fred Wendorf, when arrow heads were found and their impact marks were noted. The bones were eventually moved to the British Museum, and they have also been studied by scientists from Liverpool John Moores University, the University of Alaska, and Tulane University. “The skeletal material is of great importance—not only because of the evidence for conflict, but because the Jebel Sahaba cemetery is the oldest discovered in the Nile Valley so far,” Daniel Antoine, a curator in the British Museum’s Ancient Egypt and Sudan Department, told The Independent. The new research indicates that the men, women, and children had been killed by enemy archers over time, during the drought of the Younger Dryas period. Human ethnic groups would have been drawn to the waters of the Nile, where they would have inevitably clashed. The victims are said to be from the world’s oldest-known large-scale armed human conflict. Further study will investigate the health of the victims at the time of death.
quote: The Lower Nubian Epipaleolithic site of Jebel Sahaba (Sudan) was discovered in 1962. From 1962 to 1966, a total of 58 intentionally buried skeletons were uncovered at the site. Diagnostic microliths indicative of the Qadan industry as well as the site's geology suggest an age of 14–12 ka for these burials. In this study, the body proportions of the Jebel Sahaba sample are compared with those of a large (max N = 731) sample of recent human skeletons from Europe, Africa and circumpolar North America, as well as to terminal Pleistocene ‘Iberomaurusian’ skeletons from the Algerian sites of Afalou-Bou-Rhummel and the later Capsian-associated Ain Dokhara specimen, as well as Natufian skeletons from the southern Levantine site of El Wad.
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.
quote:The Prehistory of Nubia provides a wealth of new information about North Af- rican prehistory. The papers are generally of excellent quality, and the same may be said for the layout and illustrations. Many old ideas have had to be altered in the light of new evidence, and a host of hitherto unsus- pected problems has arisen. As the final re- ports of other expeditions are published, still more of the evidence presented here may fall into place.
quote:comparing craniometric and neutral genetic affinity matrices have concluded that, on average, human cranial variation fits a model of neutral expectation. While human craniometric and genetic data fit a model of isolation by geographic distance, it is not yet clear whether this is due to geographically mediated gene flow or human dispersal events. Recently, human genetic data have been shown to fit an iterative founder effect model of dispersal with an African origin, in line with the out-of-Africa replacement model for modern human origins, and Manica et al. (Nature 448 (2007) 346-349) have demonstrated that human craniometric data also fit this model. However, in contrast with the neutral model of cranial evolution suggested by previous studies, Manica et al. (2007) made the a priori assumption that cranial form has been subject to climatically driven natural selection and therefore correct for climate prior to conducting their analyses. Here we employ a modified theoretical and methodological approach to test whether human cranial variability fits the iterative founder effect model. In contrast with Manica et al. (2007) we employ size-adjusted craniometric variables, since climatic factors such as temperature have been shown to correlate with aspects of cranial size.
Despite these differences, we obtain similar results to those of Manica et al. (2007), with up to 26% of global within-population craniometric variation being explained by geographic distance from sub-Saharan Africa. Comparative analyses using non-African origins do not yield significant results. The implications of these results are discussed in the light of the modern human origins debate.
--von Cramon-Taubadel N1, Lycett SJ.
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008 May;136(1):108-13.
Brief communication: human cranial variation fits iterative founder effect model with African origin.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor: ^ what the "expert" was talking about was likely Jebel Sahaba, which they discovered as the first "race war", and published so a few years back. Although the original paper doesn't say this, the media did.
Funny, I thought the first race war was between the Egyptians and Nubians. LOL
quote:Because the cranial formation of both specimen differed, as they say. With one being stereotypical "negroid" and the other one being "caucasoid, as they say". Therefore they claim the cacuasoid like cranial formation was from Europe or the Middle East/ Levant. Work carried out at Liverpool John Moores University, the University of Alaska and New Orleans’ Tulane University indicates that they were part of the general sub-Saharan originating population – the ancestors of modern Black Africans.
The identity of their killers is however less easy to determine. But it is conceivable that they were people from a totally different racial and ethnic group – part of a North African/ Levantine/European people who lived around much of the Mediterranean Basin.
The two groups – although both part of our species, Homo sapiens – would have looked quite different from each other and were also almost certainly different culturally and linguistically. The sub-Saharan originating group had long limbs, relatively short torsos and projecting upper and lower jaws along with rounded foreheads and broad noses, while the North African/Levantine/European originating group had shorter limbs, longer torsos and flatter faces. Both groups were very muscular and strongly built.
Hilarious how instead of using the word "Caucasoid" or "Caucasian" they said "North African/ Levantine/European people". LOL They simply group these three different regions together under the assumption that the populations for all three regions are homogeneous and "Caucasoid". Not to mention usual fallacy of segregating North Africa from the rest of the continent ala "Sub-Sahara". But also, Jebel Sahaba is in Nubia which last time I checked is IN North Africa as well! Pretty much the writer is engaging in Eurolunacy again.
I am curious about the limb length proportions of the allegedly "Caucasoid" remains. Are they really cold adapted OR are they just less tropically adapted in comparison in relation to others??
quote:In the meanwhile: Of course, the Jebel Sahaba people were not the only victims of violence. The newly refurbished gallery also features the return of the popular virtual autopsy table allowing a deeper look into Gebelein Man and his unfortunate end. For the actual remains of this remarkably well preserved natural mummy, the new display aims to recreate his grave as accurately as the surviving records allow. Sir Wallis Budge, Keeper of the Egyptian Department from 1894 to 1924, claims to have witnessed the excavation of Gebelein Man in 1899 and relates that the grave was covered by stone slabs and the body was surrounded by pots and other objects. Simulating some stone slabs was no problem, but it proved impossible to determine which items came specifically from his grave. Those now accompanying him do at least come from Gebelein and date to about 3500 BC, the time we think that Gebelein Man lived. This was a period when several regional centres were beginning to vie for power and territory, leading ultimately to the unification of Egypt some 400 years later. Violence no doubt played a role in this process (as made clear by the intricately carved Battlefield palette, soon to be reunited with its mending piece on long term loan from the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford) and the stab wound in Gebelein Man’s back may mark him as an unfortunate victim of his times. --Renée Friedman, curator, British Museum
Violence and climate change in prehistoric Egypt and Sudan
LONDON, ENGLAND—New technology has detected dozens of additional wounds on skeletons excavated from a 13,000-year-old cemetery on the east bank of the Nile River in northern Sudan. The bones were unearthed in the 1960s by American archaeologist Fred Wendorf, when arrow heads were found and their impact marks were noted. The bones were eventually moved to the British Museum, and they have also been studied by scientists from Liverpool John Moores University, the University of Alaska, and Tulane University. “The skeletal material is of great importance—not only because of the evidence for conflict, but because the Jebel Sahaba cemetery is the oldest discovered in the Nile Valley so far,” Daniel Antoine, a curator in the British Museum’s Ancient Egypt and Sudan Department, told The Independent. The new research indicates that the men, women, and children had been killed by enemy archers over time, during the drought of the Younger Dryas period. Human ethnic groups would have been drawn to the waters of the Nile, where they would have inevitably clashed. The victims are said to be from the world’s oldest-known large-scale armed human conflict. Further study will investigate the health of the victims at the time of death. http://www.archaeology.org/news/2305-140714-egypt-conflict-cemetery
Yes I'm well aware of the findings that the Jebel Sahaga cemetery represents the earliest known acts of violence toward a whole community. I just didn't know that the populace was being divided into "Cacasoid vs. Negroid"!
quote:The original paper:
The Lower Nubian Epipaleolithic site of Jebel Sahaba (Sudan) was discovered in 1962. From 1962 to 1966, a total of 58 intentionally buried skeletons were uncovered at the site. Diagnostic microliths indicative of the Qadan industry as well as the site's geology suggest an age of 14–12 ka for these burials. In this study, the body proportions of the Jebel Sahaba sample are compared with those of a large (max N = 731) sample of recent human skeletons from Europe, Africa and circumpolar North America, as well as to terminal Pleistocene ‘Iberomaurusian’ skeletons from the Algerian sites of Afalou-Bou-Rhummel and the later Capsian-associated Ain Dokhara specimen, as well as Natufian skeletons from the southern Levantine site of El Wad.
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. --T. W. Holliday*
Original paper by Wendorf: The Prehistory of Nubia provides a wealth of new information about North Af- rican prehistory. The papers are generally of excellent quality, and the same may be said for the layout and illustrations. Many old ideas have had to be altered in the light of new evidence, and a host of hitherto unsus- pected problems has arisen. As the final re- ports of other expeditions are published, still more of the evidence presented here may fall into place. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1525/aa.1969.71.5.02a00610/asset/aa.1969.71.5.02a00610.pdf?v=1&t=iani8d34&s=9033ae5e6cca4370b593e9d4a8e9014112a9bcaa
Good to know. Say, this reminds me of the discovery of the Neolithic cemetery of Gobero in Niger where the Tenerian remains were also classified as "Mediterranean" based on cranial features, though I am still curious about the limb length data of the Jebel Sahaba folk.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Their actual claim is that they have been in the region "known as the Sahara, for as long as 40.000Kya. This includes Gobero in Niger. All this because of multiple back migrations.
Then when I ask the supporters of these theories to mention 5 indigenous ethnic groups of this zone, who have resided their for the last few thousand of years. I never receive an answered.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Patrol said: ^ what the "expert" was talking about was likely Jebel Sahaba, which they discovered as the first "race war", and published so a few years back. Although the original pape doesn't say this, the media did.
Because the cranial formation of both specimen differed, as they say. With one being stereotypical "negroid" and the other one being "caucasoid, as they say". Therefore they claim the cacuasoid like cranial formation was from Europe or the Middle East/ Levant.
------ The notion of the "first race war" is laughable. On the web, a number of racialist "HBD" types have picked it up with glee, but the actual data to make such a sweeping claim is less than advetised. For one thing they use stereotypical categories to define their putative "races", drawing a narrow "sub-Saharan" group against a broad mega category for "other". Now where have we seen such stereotypical methods before frens? Narrowly defined African, broad-based "other"? If you guessed the old "true negro" dodge, you guessed right.
Their primary argument is that the "sub-Saharan" originating groups had long limbs, broad noses etc, and the supposed "North African/ Levantine/ European people" had shorter limbs, flatter faces etc. Notice how they create a broad cluster for the "non-black" group- North African, Levantine (right next door to Africa) and then tack on "European" at the end to round out their catch-all category.
RIght away the weakness in their claim is apparent. Certain specimens found may show alleged "non African" features but are they really "non-African" given Africa's documented greater DNA and phenotypical diversity? Groups INSIDE Africa, like the San who live in a more temperate Medit type climate have more intermediate limb lengths, but they are still "sub-Saharan." As regards flacial flatness- studies in Oceania show there is a cline of facial flatness from north to south with tropical Australian Abos and Melanesians showing some similarity in degree of facial flatness like Europeans. In short, it is nothing unusual for people living in a tropical envronment to show SOME similarity in flatness with people from more temperate climes. (T. Hanihara and H.Ishida Evolutionary Significance of Facial Flatness in Australian Aborigines and Neighboring Populations, Persp Hum Bio, 1995, vol 1, 85-98) 1997).
The same pattern shows up with people in the Sudan andd Egypt near Jebel Sahaba. Hanihara 2000's facial flatness study shows Peoples from the Sudanic/Nile Valley region, near to Jebel Sahaba, clustering together as far as facial flatness. Badarians, Early Nubians, Kermans from the Sudan and Egyptians all cluster TOGETHER as far as facial flatness, contradicting claims abut "racial" separateness. Such flatness as can be seen in Oceania, can also at times approach European patterns. So specimens in the Jebel Sahaba region can have variability in facial flatness as part of INDIGENOUS, BUILT-IN African diversity, and don't need any "wandering Caucasoids" to start any "first race wars", or to explain that diversity. Africans can also have variable or mixed limb proportions, like the San, and again, don-t need any "incoming Caucasoids" to explain why they vary. Once the fact of supreme African diversity is recognized, claims of reputed "race wars" fall apart like a bad hand of cards.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: Patrol said: [b]RIght away the weakness in their claim is apparent. Certain specimens found may show alleged "non African" features but are they really "non-African" given Africa's documented greater DNA and phenotypical diversity?
Very true. It is a question. Technically speaking, before any scientific analysis, it is technically possible for non-African people to have migrated into that region. So we must not declare all specimen found in Africa as indigenous black Africans without analysis. They could possibly be European or West Asian (called Aamu by Ancient Egyptians). With of course, Ancient DNA, being the best to differentiate populations between each others when we have access to them.
But fortunately science have shown us Ancient Egyptians and ancient Nubian and Kerma specimen, to have limb proportions similar to other black Africans populations.
From Population Affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal Sample: Limb Proportion Evidence (2013)
My point is that technically Ancient Egyptians, ancient Kushite Kerma samples, etc could be non-Africans but they are not. Limb proportions clearly prove to us they were indigenous black Africans. As does other line of inquiry of course like Ancient DNA and archaeological continuity (showing us Ancient Egyptians were for the most part not people from Europe or the Middle East but indigenous Africans). For craniometric, it's less clear but not contradictory either (see thread posted above). In the neighbor joining tree above from the Holiday study we can clearly see Ancient Egyptians and Kerma limb proportion to be similar to other African populations like East Africans, West African and African-Americans.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic