quote:Originally posted by Swenet: In both analyses the Nubian samples are used. And in the second analysis, several other neolithic European samples were closer to the predynastic Egyptian samples. This doesn't say anything about Nubians vs Eurasian relationships to ancient Egyptians. Remember that this is not a conclusive picture. These Nubian samples are just two Nubian samples, presumably Upper Nubian ones. There are many other Nubian samples that would have been closer to the ancient Egyptians if they were included.
I get it now, Swenet. Thank you.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
would so very much love to see bio-anthropologists clearly associating North Sudanese, the Oromo and Somalis with the ancient Egyptians. I want there to be no confusion on this matter.
Ps: Traditional Western understandings of what it means to be "black" are beyond irrelevant.
In the New Kingdom you find these Book of Gates scenes in several tombs and the Egyptians are depicting themselves brown but the people of the south black. You can also find depictions of Kushites as brown also in other scenes. But in these Book of Gates scenes they suggest that Egyptians have a different skin color than the people of the South. Why would they do that? Why aren't the Egyptians and Kushites all black or all brown or an equal mix of alternating black and brown? By clothing one could distinguish them. Here we see the Nubians have a broad sash going across the chest which wraps around the waist as a belt and then the excess hangs down. The Egyptians often depict groups of all black Kushites but they don't show often groups of all jet black Egyptians, only kings depicted alternatively as jet black in funerary scenes as the personification of Osiris. In these particular scene they make a color distinction
tomb of king Merenptah I
tomb of king Merenptah I
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
You really are daft, aren't you? The people of the South would not all have had the same skin tone, would they?
The people to the immediate South had the same skin tone as the ancient Egyptians but those further afield did not. What is the significance of this for you?
I maintain that those pitch-black people were the ancestors of the Nuba of Kordofan and/or the Nilotic tribes that used to live in the Gezira -- tribes like the Dinka and Nuer.
posted
The Dinka and Nuer have significantly darker skin than all the Africans so you really can't ask why the ancient Egyptians didn't have the same pitch-black skin of these Nilotic tribes.
Here's a picture of a black man from Swaziland standing next to a Hematite mine and his skin tone matches the red ochre that we see in ancient Egyptian art.
Should we use the Dinka as the standard by which we measure blackness? Should we insist on implying that since the man from Swaziland doesn't have the same pitch-black skin of the Dinka that he is not to be associated with them?
Should we also apply this standard to Europe? Should we insist that since the ancient Greeks and Romans were not quite as light as the Swedes and Norwegians that they should not be associated with them?
This is a map of all the kingdoms of ancient Sudan -- kingdoms that were contemporaries of ancient Egypt. The word "Nubian" is applied to all of them and this is where the confusion arises.
There was no kingdom or entity called "Nubia" in ancient times. There were no "Nubians".
Some of Egypt's Southern neighbours [those to the immediate South] would have been closely intimated with Egypt on all accounts and very closely resembled the ancient Egyptians. Those further South did not.
"Nubia" is a corruption of the ancient Egyptian word Nubt -- a word for gold. There was a city in Upper Egypt called Nubti, which would have been the original Nubia.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
You really are daft, aren't you? The people of the South would not all have had the same skin tone, would they?
The people to the immediate South had the same skin tone as the ancient Egyptians but those further afield did not. What is the significance of this for you?
I maintain that those pitch-black people were the ancestors of the Nuba of Kordofan and/or the Nilotic tribes that used to live in the Gezira -- tribes like the Dinka and Nuer.
As I said some depictions of Kushites are brown but in the Book of Gates Scenes they have 4 ethnic groups and they distinguish themselves from the Kushites by skin color and clothing. Why would they do that?
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
You really are daft, aren't you? The people of the South would not all have had the same skin tone, would they?
The people to the immediate South had the same skin tone as the ancient Egyptians but those further afield did not. What is the significance of this for you?
I maintain that those pitch-black people were the ancestors of the Nuba of Kordofan and/or the Nilotic tribes that used to live in the Gezira -- tribes like the Dinka and Nuer.
As I said some depictions of Kushites are brown but in the Book of Gates Scenes they have 4 ethnic groups and they distinguish themselves from the Kushites by skin color and clothing. Why would they do that?
What makes you think that those pitch-black people are Kushites? Did the ancient Egyptians specifically spell out that those people are Kushites? And why wouldn't two closely related people have different cultural dresses? Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
@DougM. Please stop lying to yourself man. It looks desperate. Black is not only about skin color. Many times it has a racial element to it.
Are you telling me he (Salif Keita) is NOT a Black man?
Once you call this man "Black" you are not talking about skin color and instead are speaking on ideas of race. Why would "black people" get upset that a European is being used to play Michael Jackson if that European is the same skin tone as Michael Jackson?
Cognitive dissonance. SMFH.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
from the " tomb of Tyanen (an Egyptian officer (d. 1410 B.C.)"
There is no evidence that these figures are not Egyptians. -complete specualtion
Scott T. Carroll assitant professor, Dept of History, Gordon College wrote an essay called Wrestling In Ancient Nubia
in it he states:
The earliest portrayal of Nubian wrestlers is found on a wall painting from thetomb of Tyanen, an Egyptian officer (d. 1410 B.C.)4 (See Figure 1). The picture shows five men marching together, with the last man carrying a standard which has two wrestlers on it. All but one of the men have Nubian physical characteristics. The contrast between the Nubian wrestlers’ girth and the trim Egyptian, is pronounced
This commentary is nonsense and does not prove any of the above figures were not Egyptian.
Below is an actual relief carving of Nubian wrestlers:
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: @DougM. Please stop lying to yourself man. It looks desperate. Black is not only about skin color. Many times it has a racial element to it.
Are you telling me he (Salif Keita) is NOT a Black man?
Once you call this man "Black" you are not talking about skin color and instead are speaking on ideas of race. Why would "black people" get upset that a European is being used to play Michael Jackson if that European is the same skin tone as Michael Jackson?
Cognitive dissonance. SMFH.
Tukuler's answer to this is that one is black or white if one belongs to a black or white group. So therefore Salif Keita is black if he has membership in a black group
But assuming there is a methodology in determining the color of a group many people have "membership" in more than one group, example, Obama, many berbers and horn Africans
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
from the " tomb of Tyanen (an Egyptian officer (d. 1410 B.C.)"
There is no evidence that these figures are not Egyptians. -complete specualtion
Scott T. Carroll assitant professor, Dept of History, Gordon College wrote an essay called Wrestling In Ancient Nubia
in it he states:
The earliest portrayal of Nubian wrestlers is found on a wall painting from thetomb of Tyanen, an Egyptian officer (d. 1410 B.C.)4 (See Figure 1). The picture shows five men marching together, with the last man carrying a standard which has two wrestlers on it. All but one of the men have Nubian physical characteristics. The contrast between the Nubian wrestlers’ girth and the trim Egyptian, is pronounced
This commentary is nonsense and does not prove any of the above figures were not Egyptian.
Below is an actual relief carving of Nubian wrestlers:
As you can see:
1) they are slim, without much "girth"
2) the characteristic hoop earring is shown
I have come across multiple sources describing them as "Nubian" mercenaries, and they do seem to have the same skin tones that the Kushites portrayed themselves.
Those wrestlers resemble the Nuba of Kordofan and are engaging in an activity that it is still so central to the lives of the Nuba to this very day.
The ancient Egyptians were closely related to the people of the immediate South and share common origins with them, so you should really just get over it. You're a disciple of that lying wretch Mathilda, aren't you?
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
I have come across multiple sources describing them as "Nubian" mercenaries, and they do seem to have the same skin tones that the Kushites portrayed themselves.
If these are Nubians the point is irrelevant. I have already stated twice that in Egyptians art Nubians are sometimes depicted as brown. However you have not provided scholarly sources indicating these are Nubians. What you have are two sites selling the images. Show us a book reference:
you are doing a poor job of trying to get at the lioness, throwing up pictures with no information about them
___________________
I notice in Egyptian art in the New Kingdom some images that have a racists sort of quality about them, like stereotyping with exaggeration is going on with the features in some scenes
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll try to find a more authoritative source. The undeniable fact still stands... the ancient Egyptians and those to their immediate South stem from a common origin in the predynastic period and were very close. No other group of people were anywhere near as ethnically and culturally as close to the ancient Egyptians as the various "Nubians" were.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
What exactly is your point? You do realise that your fanciful dreams of a Eurasian or "mixed" Egypt have been thoroughly debunked by the disciplines? The ancient Egyptians were Northeast Africans closely related to the "Nubians" of Upper Egypt, North Sudanese, Afar, Oromo and Somalis.
The debate is OVER. Africans have a civilization of their own just as Europeans, Asians and descendants of the Meso-Americans have their own civilizations. White racists like you are opposed to this reasonable affirmation of the facts and insist that Africans [and only Africans] must allow others to lay claim to ancient Egypt as some kind of multi-racial civilization whereas others can lay exclusive claim to their own civilizations.
It's a sickness that you should address internally.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: I'll try to find a more authoritative source. The undeniable fact still stands... the ancient Egyptians and those to their immediate South stem from a common origin in the predynastic period and were very close. No other group of people were anywhere near as ethnically and culturally as close to the ancient Egyptians as the various "Nubians" were.
Maybe but xyyman says that South Africans are closer and claims that that is what the DNA Tribes analysis showed. Look at the horn matches compared to SA, Great Lakes and WA.
That poor woman that pretended to be black looks nothing like those beautiful girls. Stop being so stupid. Why don't you just discuss Greek and Roman history and leave Africans to their own history?
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: I'll try to find a more authoritative source. The undeniable fact still stands... the ancient Egyptians and those to their immediate South stem from a common origin in the predynastic period and were very close. No other group of people were anywhere near as ethnically and culturally as close to the ancient Egyptians as the various "Nubians" were.
Maybe but xyyman says that South Africans are closer and claims that that is what the DNA Tribes analysis showed. Look at the horn matches compared to SA, Great Lakes and WA.
Xyyman is the same person who correlates a haplogroup like e1b1a to negroid features to say the negroid phenotype is recent. Yeah lets totally go by what he says.
And DNAtribes is not saying South Africans are closer, but instead the ancestors of South Africans lived in the wet Sahara along with the ancestors of the Ancient Egyptians and so they may have mixed.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: I'll try to find a more authoritative source. The undeniable fact still stands... the ancient Egyptians and those to their immediate South stem from a common origin in the predynastic period and were very close. No other group of people were anywhere near as ethnically and culturally as close to the ancient Egyptians as the various "Nubians" were.
Maybe but xyyman says that South Africans are closer and claims that that is what the DNA Tribes analysis showed. Look at the horn matches compared to SA, Great Lakes and WA.
Who cares what crazy people think. Mounds upon mounds of grit-edged evidence consistently affirm that the ancient Egyptians were part of the Northeast African group. No peer-reviewed publication posits that Southern Africans are closer to the ancient Egyptians.
I've wasted enough time on you. You're firmly wedded to your delusions of a Eurasian or mixed ancient Egypt.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: Why don't you just discuss Greek and Roman history and leave Africans to their own history
I'm not Greek or Roman, I don't fuks with them
You're white. Europeans collectively have ancient Greece and Rome just as Asians collectively have China, and just as Africans collectively have ancient Egypt and Kush.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: What exactly is your point? You do realise that your fanciful dreams of a Eurasian or "mixed" Egypt have been thoroughly debunked by the disciplines? The ancient Egyptians were Northeast Africans closely related to the "Nubians" of Upper Egypt, North Sudanese, Afar, Oromo and Somalis.
The debate is OVER. Africans have a civilization of their own just as Europeans, Asians and descendants of the Meso-Americans have their own civilizations. White racists like you are opposed to this reasonable affirmation of the facts and insist that Africans [and only Africans] must allow others to lay claim to ancient Egypt as some kind of multi-racial civilization whereas others can lay exclusive claim to their own civilizations.
It's a sickness that you should address internally.
Lioness, isn't going to stop this nonsense. Look at how lioness fights Mike and Clyde over Meso-America, or classic European history. But when it comes to Africa? Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
stop trying to move the goal posts by sneaking in a darker skinded woman
Now you try to divide darker and lighter completed black woman. As if only either of the two exists. LOL
You are a racist clown. Dear to step to them in real life with that crap. And make sure you record it, then post it. Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
stop switching the examples, Rachel Dolezal with the right styling can out-black this woman, her nose is blacker as well
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: Why don't you just discuss Greek and Roman history and leave Africans to their own history
I'm not Greek or Roman, I don't fuks with them
You're white.
Why are you making false allegations?
Plus Europeans have no claim to China although it's on the same land mass
Learn to read. I clearly said that Europeans have Greece and Rome just as Asians have China and just as Africans have ancient Egypt and Kush. Understand?
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: Why don't you just discuss Greek and Roman history and leave Africans to their own history
I'm not Greek or Roman, I don't fuks with them
You're white. Europeans collectively have ancient Greece and Rome just as Asians collectively have China, and just as Africans collectively have ancient Egypt and Kush.
Yes, at some point it just becomes annoying.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
This man comes from a PEOPLE known to be black do of course he's black.
Do you suppose the heroine of the Aethiopica is not a black woman because her skin was lite-brite?
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: @DougM. Please stop lying to yourself man. It looks desperate. Black is not only about skin color. Many times it has a racial element to it.
Are you telling me he (Salif Keita) is NOT a Black man?
Once you call this man "Black" you are not talking about skin color and instead are speaking on ideas of race. Why would "black people" get upset that a European is being used to play Michael Jackson if that European is the same skin tone as Michael Jackson?
Cognitive dissonance. SMFH.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Although these wrestlers were covered on ES in the past, why don't we view the entire scene and discuss it again. I find revisits often more eye opening than the original take (as when including U Egy and Sudani samples proved such living folk in fact held all 8 allele pairs of certain 18th Dyn royal mummies).
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya:
Nubians as portrayed by ancient Egyptians
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
from the " tomb of Tyanen (an Egyptian officer (d. 1410 B.C.)"
There is no evidence that these figures are not Egyptians. -complete specualtion
Scott T. Carroll assitant professor, Dept of History, Gordon College wrote an essay called Wrestling In Ancient Nubia
in it he states:
The earliest portrayal of Nubian wrestlers is found on a wall painting from thetomb of Tyanen, an Egyptian officer (d. 1410 B.C.)4 (See Figure 1). The picture shows five men marching together, with the last man carrying a standard which has two wrestlers on it. All but one of the men have Nubian physical characteristics. The contrast between the Nubian wrestlers’ girth and the trim Egyptian, is pronounced
This commentary is nonsense and does not prove any of the above figures were not Egyptian.
Below is an actual relief carving of Nubian wrestlers:
As you can see:
1) they are slim, without much "girth"
2) the characteristic hoop earring is shown
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Fuller scene of controversial Egyptians in one Book of Gates rendition with text that reads RMTYW (Remetu, ie Egyptians) although the garb is NHSW (Nehesi, ie 'Nubian').
quote:Originally posted by Nodnarb:
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: The gratuitous use of the word "Nubian" for the people depicted as pitch-black in ancient Egyptian reliefs needs to be investigated and properly contextualized. The people with pitch-black skin and wide features don't even reside anywhere North of Kosti so I am genuinely perplexed.
I think that those people with pitch-black skin and wide features may have been the ancestors of the Nilotic tribes in the Gezira and the Niger-Congo "Nuba" of Kordofan.
I originally doubted this, since some of the subjects are portrayed with linen clothing that would suggest Egyptian influence like that absorbed by Kush. But then, that would be assuming Egyptian influences stopped at Kush which might not necessarily be the case. Who knows, there might very well have been communities of South Sudanese-type people further up the Nile who still had cultural and commercial ties to Egypt and Kush, and maybe those are the people depicted in the Egyptian artworks.
That said, I also believe Egyptians had a need to distinguish themselves from foreigners in art even if it meant taking creative liberties with the truth. If all those images of Sudanese were given reddish-brown skin like the Egyptian characters, would people necessarily figure out they were meant to be foreign nationals? I doubt so.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: ^^^Euronuts despise that image and acts like it doesn't exist.
''What's the bug deal, it's four Kusihites mislabeled as Egyptian
Mislabeled by whom?
They still are closets in relation, so what's the big deal?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: [qb] ^^^Euronuts despise that image and acts like it doesn't exist.
''What's the bug deal, it's four Kusihites mislabeled as Egyptian
Mislabeled by whom?
It's mislabeled by the Egyptian craftsmen who made the art/writing on that wall
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler
the garb is NHSW (Nehesi, ie 'Nubian').
This is correct. The glyph next to it which doesn't indicate Nehesi is wrong they are Nehesi ( or Nahasu aka Nubian) The Egyptian tomb artists and scribes did make occasional errors and this piece was not open for public view where someone might see it. It was sealed in the tomb.
We mustn't formulate theories based on anomalies.
Most Egyptian males in the art had dark brown skin. We don't need to go to freak mistakes and ignore context
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: I'll try to find a more authoritative source. The undeniable fact still stands... the ancient Egyptians and those to their immediate South stem from a common origin in the predynastic period and were very close. No other group of people were anywhere near as ethnically and culturally as close to the ancient Egyptians as the various "Nubians" were.
Maybe but xyyman says that South Africans are closer and claims that that is what the DNA Tribes analysis showed. Look at the horn matches compared to SA, Great Lakes and WA.
Who cares what crazy people think. Mounds upon mounds of grit-edged evidence consistently affirm that the ancient Egyptians were part of the Northeast African group. No peer-reviewed publication posits that Southern Africans are closer to the ancient Egyptians.
I've wasted enough time on you. You're firmly wedded to your delusions of a Eurasian or mixed ancient Egypt.
You say that this shows I'm firmly wedded delusions of a Eurasian or mixed ancient Egypt. That is bizarre because this very chart is often used by Amun Ra and other ES members that West Africans (and SAs and Central Africans) have the closest similarities to the AEs.
But anyway, a simple question for beyoku, to clear this up >
In plain simple English for the layman,
-Why do South Africans and Great Lakes Africans have much higher matches to the Amarna than do Horn Africans according to this analysis?
-please, let beyoku answer first
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: [qb] ^^^Euronuts despise that image and acts like it doesn't exist.
''What's the bug deal, it's four Kusihites mislabeled as Egyptian
Mislabeled by whom?
It's mislabeled by the Egyptian craftsmen who made the art/writing on that wall
How do you know the motivations and reasonings of the artist(-s)?
The supposed Nubians and Egyptians related closets, before anyone else, with the same root and origin in the South. This was posted before/ already, so I'm not going to ittirate.
Btw I rather speak of Northern and Southern cataracts.
quote:
These two reasons - navigation obstacles and restricted floodplain - are the most important reasons why this part of the Nile is thinly populated and why the historic border between Egypt in the north and Nubia or Sudan in the south is the First Cataract at Aswan.
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: I'll try to find a more authoritative source. The undeniable fact still stands... the ancient Egyptians and those to their immediate South stem from a common origin in the predynastic period and were very close. No other group of people were anywhere near as ethnically and culturally as close to the ancient Egyptians as the various "Nubians" were.
Maybe but xyyman says that South Africans are closer and claims that that is what the DNA Tribes analysis showed. Look at the horn matches compared to SA, Great Lakes and WA.
Who cares what crazy people think. Mounds upon mounds of grit-edged evidence consistently affirm that the ancient Egyptians were part of the Northeast African group. No peer-reviewed publication posits that Southern Africans are closer to the ancient Egyptians.
I've wasted enough time on you. You're firmly wedded to your delusions of a Eurasian or mixed ancient Egypt.
You say that this shows I'm firmly wedded delusions of a Eurasian or mixed ancient Egypt. That is bizarre because this very chart is often used by Amun Ra and other ES members that West Africans (and SAs and Central Africans) have the closest similarities to the AEs.
But anyway, a simple question for beyoku, to clear this up >
In plain simple English for the layman,
-Why do South Africans and Great Lakes Africans have much higher matches to the Amarna than do Horn Africans according to this analysis?
-please, let beyoku answer first
In Zulu history (mythology, and or history) they claim to have migrated from the Northern part of Africa, into the Southern parts of Africa. Known as South Africa.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: I'll try to find a more authoritative source. The undeniable fact still stands... the ancient Egyptians and those to their immediate South stem from a common origin in the predynastic period and were very close. No other group of people were anywhere near as ethnically and culturally as close to the ancient Egyptians as the various "Nubians" were.
quote:The Mahalanobis D2 analysis uncovered close affinities between Nubians and Egyptians. Table 3 lists the Mahalanobis D2 distance matrix. As there is no significance testing that is available to be applied to this form of Mahalanobis distances, the biodistance scores must be interpreted in relation to one another, rather than on a general scale. In some cases, the statistics reveal that the Egyptian samples were more similar to Nubian samples than to other Egyptian samples (e.g. Gizeh and Hesa/Biga) and vice versa (e.g. Badari and Kerma, Naqada and Christian).
These relationships are further depicted in the PCO plot (Fig. 2). Aside from these interpopulation relationships, some Nubian groups are still more similar to other Nubians and some Egyptians are more similar to other Egyptian samples. Moreover, although the Nubian and Egyptian samples formed one well-distributed group, the Egyptian samples clustered in the upper left region, while the Nubians concentrated in the lower right of the plot. One line can be drawn that would separate the closely dispersed Egyptians and Nubians. The predynastic Egyptian samples clustered together (Badari and Naqada), while Gizeh most closely groups with the Lisht sample. The first two principal coordinates from PCO account for 60% of the variation in the samples. The graph from PCO is basically a pictorial representation of the distance matrix and interpretations from the plot mirror the Mahalanobis D2 matrix.
--Godde K.
An Examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development?
Homo. 2009;60(5):389-404. Epub 2009 Sep 19.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic