posted
Wanted to post this here to get the opinion of the Egyptology section.
quote:We resolve a longstanding question regarding the kinship of two high-status Egyptians from the 12th Dynasty, Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht, whose mummies were discovered in 1907 by Egyptian workmen directed by Flinders Petrie and Ernest Mackay. Although their coffin inscriptions indicate that Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht were brothers, when the mummies were unwrapped in 1908 the skeletal morphologies were found to be quite different, suggesting an absence of family relationship. We extracted ancient DNA from the teeth of the two mummies and, following hybridization capture of the mitochondrial and Y chromosome fractions, sequenced the DNA by a next generation method. Analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms showed that both Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht belonged to mitochondrial haplotype M1a1, suggesting a maternal relationship. The Y chromosome sequences were less complete but showed variations between the two mummies, indicating that Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht had different fathers. Our study emphasizes the importance of kinship in ancient Egypt, and represents the first successful typing of both mitochondrial and Y chromosomal DNA in Egyptian mummies.
posted
Given wiki's weight to sources that place haplogroup M to "Eurasia" I can imagine how this will be spun.
quote:
1. The highest frequencies worldwide of macrohaplogroup M are observed in Asia, specifically in Bangladesh, China, India, Japan, Nepal, and Tibet, where frequencies range from 60%-80%. The total frequency of M subclades is even higher in some populations of Siberia or the Americas, but these small populations tend to exhibit strong genetic drift effects, and often their geographical neighbors exhibit very different frequencies.[1][15][16]
2. Deep time depth >50,000 years of western, central, southern and eastern Indian haplogroups M2, M38, M54, M58, M33, M6, M61, M62 and the distribution of macrohaplogroup M, do not rule out the possibility of macrohaplogroup M arising in Indian population.[17]
3. With the exception of the African specific M1, India has several M lineages that emerged directly from the root of haplogroup M.[1][16]
4. Only two subclades of haplogroup M, M1 and M23, are found in Africa, whereas numerous subclades are found outside Africa[1][3] (with some discussion possible only about sub-clade M1, concerning which see below).
5. Specifically concerning M1
- Haplogroup M1 has a restricted geographic distribution in Africa, being found mainly in North Africans and East Africa at low or moderate frequencies. If M had originated in Africa around before the Out of Africa migration, it would be expected to have a more widespread distribution [16]
- According to Gonzalez et al. 2007, M1 appears to have expanded relatively recently. In this study M1 had a younger coalescence age than the Asian-exclusive M lineages.[3]
- The geographic distribution of M1 in Africa is predominantly North African/supra-equatorial[3] and is largely confined to Afro-Asiatic speakers,[18] which is inconsistent with the Sub-Saharan distribution of sub-clades of haplogroups L3 and L2 that have similar time depths.[10]
- One of the basal lineages of M1 lineages has been found in Northwest Africa and in the Near East but is absent in East Africa.[3]
- M1 is not restricted to Africa. It is relatively common in the Mediterranean, peaking in Iberia. M1 also enjoys a well-established presence in the Middle East, from the South of the Arabian Peninsula to Anatolia and from the Levant to Iran. In addition, M1 haplotypes have occasionally been observed in the Caucasus and the Trans Caucasus, and without any accompanying L lineages.[3][10] M1 has also been detected in Central Asia, seemingly reaching as far as Tibet.[3]
- The fact that the M1 sub-clade of macrohaplogroup M has a coalescence age which overlaps with that of haplogroup U6 (a Eurasian haplogroup whose presence in Africa is due to a back-migration from West Asia) and the distribution of U6 in Africa is also restricted to the same North African and Horn African populations as M1 supports the scenario that M1 and U6 were part of the same population expansion from Asia to Africa.[18]
- The timing of the proposed migration of M1 and U6-carrying peoples from West Asia to Africa (between 40,000 to 45,000 ybp) is also supported by the fact that it coincides with changes in climatic conditions that reduced the desert areas of North Africa, thereby rendering the region more accessible to entry from the levant. This climatic change also temporally overlaps with the peopling of Europe by populations bearing haplogroup U5, the European sister clade of haplogroup U6.[18]
On haplogroup M for years, especially M1.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Quote: The kinship of two 12th Dynasty mummies revealed by ancient DNA sequencing(Dec2017) - Konstantina Drosoua, Campbell Priceb, Terence A. Browna
Quote: “reads were obtained from the enriched library, 5422 mapping to the rCRS, revealing the same forty SNPs as typed for Nakht-Ankh, with 15.5× mean coverage (Table 1). No high quality reads were obtained from the shotgun data for Khnum-Nakht. The SNP identities were consistent with mtDNA haplogroup M1a1 with 88.05–91.27% degree of confidence, thus confirming the African origins of the two individuals. The haplotypes included ancestral mutations at positions 489 T→ C, 10,398A →G, 10,400C → T and” "
yes. I have the entire paper
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Welcome back. And I gotta thank you for that quote. Because its going to come in HANDY against a certain group of people. MWahahahahahahah!
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ahh the Negroid and Caucasoid brothers. The two that made me throw my hands up on oid science.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah! Both Caucasoid and Negroid. Both of African origin. Looking at the Abusir mummies mtDNA M1* seems to be of high frequency.
Again. Look at the pattern. Great Lakes starting from Tanzania/Malawi
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
"However, after extensive phylogenetic and phylogeographic analyses for this marker (Metspalu et al., 2004; Olivieri et al., 2006; Sun et al., 2006; González et al., 2007; Pennarun et al., 2012), this supposed India to Africa connection was not found. The detection in southeast Asia of new lineages that share with M1 the 14110 substitution (Kong et al., 2011; Peng et al., 2011), gave rise to
M1 is found from Portugal and Senegal in the west to the Caucasus, Pakistan and Tibet at the east and, from Guinea-Bissau and Tanzania in the south to Russia at the north (Kivisild et al., 2004; Olivieri et al., 2006; Gonder et al., 2007; González et al., 2007, 2007; Zhao et al., 2009; Malyarchuk et al., 2010; Pennarun et al., 2012; Yunusbayev et al., 2012; Siddiqi et al., 2014) but, its highest diversity is found in Ethiopia and the Maghreb as the isolates detected at the borders are lineages derived from M1a branch in Russia and Tanzania and M1b branch in Guinea Bissau and Tibet. The geographic range of M20 and M51 largely overlaps, showing a common wide are
However, the actual representatives of M1, from the Levant to the Tibet, are derived lineages with ancestors in Africa. Until now, basal lineages of M1 have not been detected in any of the northern or southern hypothetical paths.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will read the paper but the Kenyans/Tanzanians carry the ancestral elements of mtDNAs like K, M1, T etc. Thus Kenyans are ancestral to the Egyptians/Ancient Egyptians not the other way around. There is really no migration from Egypt to Kenya. It was the reverse. Everyone wants to be an AEians! SMH.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting paper but what does one have to do with the other?
Conclusion quote:
“For example, the frequency of the ‘‘Eurasian’’ haplogroup R is at less than 5% frequency in Kenya but almost 30%in Ethiopia. Although the phenomenon of east African running has been much discussed, these results further attest that the east African running phenomenon is likely to be complex in origin and extremely unlikely to be due to a genetic factor isolated to these populations. The finding of a large Eurasian component in Ethiopia and among elite Ethiopian athletes, although known in the literature (27), further highlights that the idea of African genetic superiority in sporting performance is shortsighted”
Oh! And the quote around Eurasian is not mine it is the authors? He! He! He! Other people are catching on that “Eurasian” DNA is actually African in origin keeping in mind stone age African Malawi_Hora_8100BP carried Eurasian DNA. And Tanzanians carried MORE(60%) European DNA than African DNA. Tanzanians were Europeans 1500BC?!(SMH)
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Interesting paper but what does one have to do with the other?
Conclusion quote:
“For example, the frequency of the ‘‘Eurasian’’ haplogroup R is at less than 5% frequency in Kenya but almost 30%in Ethiopia. Although the phenomenon of east African running has been much discussed, these results further attest that the east African running phenomenon is likely to be complex in origin and extremely unlikely to be due to a genetic factor isolated to these populations. The finding of a large Eurasian component in Ethiopia and among elite Ethiopian athletes, although known in the literature (27), further highlights that the idea of African genetic superiority in sporting performance is shortsighted”
Oh! And the quote around Eurasian is not mine it is the authors? He! He! He! Other people are catching on that “Eurasian” DNA is actually African in origin keeping in mind stone age African Malawi_Hora_8100BP carried Eurasian DNA. And Tanzanians carried MORE(60%) European DNA than African DNA. Tanzanians were Europeans 1500BC?!(SMH)
Hey welcome back... Can I point out that that passage you quoted doesn't mean what you think it does. Infact it is one of the worst couple of sentences I've read in scientific literature of this decade.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is there a thread that specifically deals with wiki's sources to claim a Eurasian origin for M/M1 (see quoted second post)?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't follow...Agreed the paper is junk science but they are simply making a point that Bantus, Ethiopians and Kenyans carry similar frequency of MtDNA L0, so the haplogroup cannot account for the success of Kenyans in long distance running ALTHOUGH Kenyans long distance runners have a significant high percentage of L0. They suspect there may be a correlation. And thanks…glad to be back. From the git go I bit my tongue when Oshun asked that stupid question. Alhtough there is a link above him answering his question. SIgiigh. Yes, it is good to be back. Where is my dog Swenet? Chalk one up for Horners?
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Interesting paper but what does one have to do with the other?
Conclusion quote:
“For example, the frequency of the ‘‘Eurasian’’ haplogroup R is at less than 5% frequency in Kenya but almost 30%in Ethiopia. Although the phenomenon of east African running has been much discussed, these results further attest that the east African running phenomenon is likely to be complex in origin and extremely unlikely to be due to a genetic factor isolated to these populations. The finding of a large Eurasian component in Ethiopia and among elite Ethiopian athletes, although known in the literature (27), further highlights that the idea of African genetic superiority in sporting performance is shortsighted”
Oh! And the quote around Eurasian is not mine it is the authors? He! He! He! Other people are catching on that “Eurasian” DNA is actually African in origin keeping in mind stone age African Malawi_Hora_8100BP carried Eurasian DNA. And Tanzanians carried MORE(60%) European DNA than African DNA. Tanzanians were Europeans 1500BC?!(SMH)
Hey welcome back... Can I point out that that passage you quoted doesn't mean what you think it does. Infact it is one of the worst couple of sentences I've read in scientific literature of this decade.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: I will read the paper but the Kenyans/Tanzanians carry the ancestral elements of mtDNAs like K, M1, T etc. Thus Kenyans are ancestral to the Egyptians/Ancient Egyptians not the other way around. There is really no migration from Egypt to Kenya. It was the reverse. Everyone wants to be an AEians! SMH.
There was a migration from Nile Valley south, what do you think triggered the Nilotic and Bantu migrations? To deny this is being ignorant and obnoxious. Do you think these Nilotic and Bantu tribes speaking of a Migration from North Africa(specifically egypt) came out of their asses? Oral history is passed down from generation to generation people don't make these things up.
Posts: 306 | From: Kenya | Registered: Dec 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looky here brotha. People on this site knows I don't get involve in hypothetical arguments. I go where the data takes me. If you have a vivid imagination and can dream up all the "what if" scenarios in the world more power to you go write a fictional novel! I go strictly by the data.
1st. There is no genetic evidence of a Bantu Migration ever occurring. They use archeology to dream up that premise. Even in the new Skunglund paper confirms there was no Bantu migration. The chart shows Substructure in Africa and the Neolithics left East Africa(Great Lakes) and heading West and admixed with an older African. YRI had less admixture than Mende. Read the fughking paper. Agreed there was always migration along the Nile. But some heading south to South Africa, Some North to Egypt Maghreb and Europe and Levant. Some to West Africa. The genetic profile of Bantu West Africans is younger than Bantu East Africans. There never was a Bantu expansion.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey @ELIMU actually address posts instead of spamming quotes please. This thread is NOT about Bantu migration. Keep that away from this thread.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you. Let's see how long it will last. I have been kicked out of Anthrogenica, FTDNA Forum and Eupedia wont accept my membership and Davdiski has my number. lol! They are not interested in the truth. I know their game.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Everybody has there own individual DNA. If anyone takes a test, especially an African American, who know what kind of results that they will get?
You all go on and on about Y chromosome R M173 and MtDNA M1 and a lot of markers that are not in the average African American result profile.
When people do take these test and get results, they usually get on these boards and try to find out about their own particular markers and not worry about other people's results that are different from their own.
They say who are my DNA cousins? Who around the world share my results?
So, I guess what I am saying is, should we all get tested first and find our own individual markers?
Will there come a time when people around the world be force to submit a DNA sample and have their genetics tested?
Posts: 1115 | From: GOD Bless the USA | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: I will read the paper but the Kenyans/Tanzanians carry the ancestral elements of mtDNAs like K, M1, T etc. Thus Kenyans are ancestral to the Egyptians/Ancient Egyptians not the other way around. There is really no migration from Egypt to Kenya. It was the reverse. Everyone wants to be an AEians! SMH.
There was a migration from Nile Valley south, what do you think triggered the Nilotic and Bantu migrations? To deny this is being ignorant and obnoxious. Do you think these Nilotic and Bantu tribes speaking of a Migration from North Africa(specifically egypt) came out of their asses? Oral history is passed down from generation to generation people don't make these things up.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: E-M2 may be as young as 7kyo!! Sage cited a source putting it at only 3kyo.
Bantus are the youngest African yet they think they own Africa.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Given wiki's weight to sources that place haplogroup M to "Eurasia" I can imagine how this will be spun.
Well hg M has its highest frequency and diversity in Eurasia, specifically in South Asia (Indian subcontinent). However, hg M1 specifically has its highest frequency and diversity in Africa with less frequency in Arabia and almost no presence in India. One must understand that the clades M and N are the basal clades for all Eurasian mitochondrial lineages and both are derived from African L3. Because of M's variance and frequency in Eurasia it is easy to presume M1 is a back-migration yet from what I recall there are significant differences between Eurasian M* and M1 of Africa.
Indeed, the reconstructed ancestral motifs of all Indian M haplogroups turned out to be devoid of those variations that characterized M1, i.e., 6446, 6680, 12403, and 14110 (Maca-Meyer et al. 2001; Herrnstadt et al. 2002). - Chang Sun et al
Based on the high frequency and diversity of haplogroup M in India and elsewhere in Asia, some authors have suggested (versus [3]) that M may have arisen in Southwest Asia [16,17,31]. Finding M1 or a lineage ancestral to M1 in India, could help to explain the presence of M1 in Africa as a result of a back migration from India. Yet, to date this has not been achieved [15], this study). Therefore, one cannot rule out the still most parsimonious scenario that haplogroup M arose in East Africa [3]. Furthermore, the lack of L3 lineages other than M and N (indeed, L3M and L3N) in India is more consistent with the African launch of haplogroup M. On the other hand, one also observes that: i) M1 is the only variant of haplogroup M found in Africa; ii) M1 has a fairly restricted phylogeography in Africa, barely penetrating into sub-Saharan populations, being found predominantly in association with the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum – a finding that appears to be inconsistent with the distribution of sub-clades of haplogroups L3 and L2 that have similar time depths. — Mait Metspalu et al.
Indeed, it's because of M1 that some scholars still postulate an African origin for the entire M clade.
Studies of human mtDNA genomes demonstrate that the root of the human phylogenetic tree occurs in Africa. Although two mtDNA lineages with an African origin (haplogroups M and N) were the progenitors of all non-African haplogroups, macrohaplogroup L (including haplogroups L0-L6) is limited to sub-Saharan Africa. Several L haplogroup lineages occur most frequently in eastern Africa (e.g., L0a, L0f, L5, L3g), but some are specific to certain ethnic groups, such as haplogroup lineages L0d and L0k that previously have been found nearly exclusively among southern African “click” speakers. Few studies have included multiple mtDNA genome samples belonging to haplogroups that occur in eastern and southern Africa but are rare or absent elsewhere. This lack of sampling in eastern Africa makes it difficult to infer relationships among mtDNA haplogroups or to examine events that occurred early in human history.--Tishkoff et al.
Now these above sources I cited are old though I don't know if they're outdated unless someone can provide evidence to refute them.
And yes, I am well aware of the recent hypothesis claiming L3 to be Eurasian though as far I'm aware this is just a hypothesis based solely on the presence of L3 in Arabia.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
MAMMA’S BOYS Ancient Egyptian mummies known as the Two Brothers, found in these coffins, had the same mother but different fathers, DNA evidence indicates. A pair of ancient Egyptian mummies, known for more than a century as the Two Brothers, were actually half brothers, a new study of their DNA finds.
These two, high-ranking men shared a mother, but had different fathers, say archaeogeneticist Konstantina Drosou of the University of Manchester in England and her colleagues. That muted family tie came to light thanks to the successful retrieval of two types of DNA from the mummies’ teeth, the scientists report in the February Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports. The finding highlights the importance ancient Egyptians placed on maternal lines of descent, Drosou’s group contends.
Questions have swirled about the biological backgrounds of the mummified men ever since they were found together in a tomb near the village of Rifeh in 1907. The tomb dates to ancient Egypt’s 12th Dynasty, between 1985 B.C. and 1773 B.C. Coffin inscriptions mention a female, Khnum-Aa, as the mother of both men. And both mummies are described as sons of an unnamed local governor. It has always been unclear if those inscriptions refer to the same man, but discoverers decided the mummies were full brothers, because the two were buried next to each other and had the same mother....
Unlike the deference given to Khnum-Aa as a named parent of both interred individuals, he says, the coffin inscriptions must refer to different fathers who were considered peripheral family members and thus left unnamed. “Power may have been transferred down the female line rather than simply by a son inheriting [high rank] from his father,” Price suggests. Khnum-Aa’s background, social standing and genetic makeup, however, remain a mystery.
Genetic evidence that two half brothers were buried in the same tomb and placed in coffins that name only their mother makes sense, says Egyptologist Joann Fletcher at the University of York in England. Many written sources from ancient Egypt show precedence to the maternal line, “from the official lists of Egypt’s early kings whose names are accompanied by those of their mothers to nonroyal individuals, who likewise cite only their mother’s name,” Fletcher explains.
Dates of death on the mummies’ linen wrappings suggest that Khnum-Nakht died first, at around age 40, Price says. A few months later, Nakht-Ankh died at about age 60. The causes of their deaths are unknown.
I disagree with Price that "power" at least political power including membership in bureaucracy (which include priesthoods) was matrilineal as such was typically patrilineally inherited, though matrilineage does play a significant role in Egyptian society moreso in family and communal life than overt power structures though they may have an influence in those structures.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
They are not confirmed to be half brothers. WTF! They are confirmed to carry the same or similar mtDNA. THAT IS ALL.
In addition you “experts” on documentation should know this. They had a 25 year difference in age. Even today with all the fertility drugs that is very unlikely. Why the fugk you people don’t think? They may be related? Yes. But brothers? Very unlikely.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
It may be physiologically impossible for they to have the same mother. There is a 25year difference. Based upon the culture they are brothers through the same father. A man can have kids at any age and having more than one wife. Maybe the mothers were sisters or cousins. Very unlikely the same mother.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
lol! Ok my brother. But, Am I right or I am I wrong? 1. There is a >20year difference making most likely NOT from the same mother? 2. Both carrying M1a1 does not make them bilogical from the same mother. 3. I understand the inscriptions states "brothers." Same father different mother? doesn't that make more sense?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote: They are not confirmed to be half brothers. WTF! They are confirmed to carry the same or similar mtDNA. THAT IS ALL.
Today is NOT the 18th of January. It's the day after the 17th. --Xyyman
You're NOT a living being. You're a lifeform. --Xyyman
Might as well add these while you're at it..
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Well according to the source I cited, both of their coffin inscriptions stated they have the same mother-- a woman named Khnum-Aa. The genetic tests confirm they have identical mtDNA indicating a shared maternal lineage.
So what pray tell makes you think the conclusion that they are half-brothers is wrong?? Do you think they are full brothers and have the same father as well??
Also, according to the source the brothers are 20 years apart in age with the elder 60 and the younger 40. You do realize that in ancient times women typically became mothers at early ages typically mid to late teens. As such, a gap in age between siblings is not unusual.
Seriously gramps, data doesn't do you any good without a proper assessment of them.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ho! Ho! Hoe!! DJ. I am not as knowledgeable in Egyptology as some here. So I will pass on this one.
20year difference agreed they can "possibly" be brothers but very unlikely. But both carrying M1a1 do not make them brothers because 40% Europeans carry mtDNA H1 and they are not siblings. So we are left with the inscription. Do we have a copy?
But knowing Europeans and their tendency to fabricate stuff. There is a lie in there someplace. My money is on the translation. Why? These "brothers" we singled out for a reason to play on "racial" characteristics. I bet you the hieroglyphics may say something different. Lesson learnt...the Yemeni slave market picture. Remember I blew that wide open (wink)
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The translation exposed the lie...trust me. There is a lie in there somewhere
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: lol! Ok my brother. But, Am I right or I am I wrong? 1. There is a >20year difference making most likely NOT from the same mother? 2. Both carrying M1a1 does not make them bilogical from the same mother. 3. I understand the inscriptions states "brothers." Same father different mother? doesn't that make more sense?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote: They are not confirmed to be half brothers. WTF! They are confirmed to carry the same or similar mtDNA. THAT IS ALL.
Today is NOT the 18th of January. It's the day after the 17th. --Xyyman
You're NOT a living being. You're a lifeform. --Xyyman
Might as well add these while you're at it..
You are right that it's possible to carry mtDNAs that are identical, without being siblings. MtDNAs evolve 'fast', but not so fast that distant family members can't belong to the same mtDNA. But given the textual evidence, you might as well say the maternal sibling relationship is confirmed.
As far as age difference, part of it could be because one died earlier than the other. People can even grow older than their parents' ages, so why not as brothers? Unless I'm missing something from the ancient texts, the only way to tell is dating both mummies and I don't think they did that, or that it would completely settle things.
Anyway, too bad they didn't release STR data. It's not as fun when the DNA Tribes crowd is on such a losing streak . At least the 8 STR data would give more fuzzy Great Lakes and South Africa results and a glimmer of hope. (BTW, you know that IAM would likely have SSA affinities in 8 STR, right?)
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Can you recommended me a good material on these two brothers if you have the time? You seem to know your shit when it comes to Egyptology.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
As you know I don't quibble over hypotheticals. The one with the most vivid imagination will (wink). "One brother dying before the other......". You are way ahead than me. But let us look at ethe facts.
1. Both carrying M1a1 does NOT confirm they are brothers. 2. The Age difference suggest a great likely hood they are NOT siblings. 3. Their physical morphology suggest they are NOT brothers
We are left ONLY with the supposed inscriptions which says they are of the same mother, or did it say their mother(s) have the same name...inscription which I have never seen only told about. As I said ...there is a lie somewhere in there.
They are not going to release the STR data because STR data unlike SNP data confirms geographic affinity. I don't expect release of any STR data in the near future. They won't make the same mistake twice. I am sure there are tools available that uses SNP data to confirm geographic origin but I am not that knowledge at this point in time . The most promising tool is GPS, Das et al. As for your Horners. Yes, Horners are gaining ground but Great Lakes are still out in front.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: They won't make the same mistake twice.
They already made the same "mistake" twice, gramps. Hawass et al 2010 and Hawass et al 2012. And it wasn't really a mistake. They know the literal interpretation of DNA tribes is wrong. Just like they probably knew Tut's full Y-DNA information, but decided to let people fight over Y-DNA scraps online without clearing it up. They're probably laughing behind the scenes at people like you who think they have all the answers every time they throw a bone.
BTW, M1a is not Horner. It's North African. You seem to be one of those people who think Ethiopians lived in Ethiopia 25ky ago.
EDIT: I was also one of the people who thought we were slick by using the STRs to get SSA affinities they were keeping from the public. But that was 2012. I moved on from that DNA Tribes interpretation almost immediately after the first digest came out in 2012. We're now in 2018. You still think you've outsmarted people who have all the data, while you have only scraps.
That's like Trump stans who think they know more about the Trump-Russia investigation than Mueller, even though most of what they know comes from small scraps that Mueller has the big picture on. At some point we have to realize we're not as slick as we think we are. We didn't 'outwit' the Egyptian authorities by plugging those STRs and getting 'confidential' SSA affinities.
posted
Those funeral masks look like to me to be from Turin. But, in case they are from Egypt, which I have doubts, as they are stating, they are not from the 12 dynasty. It look more like to be from 20 to 26 dynasties.
-------------------- ---lnnnnn* Posts: 198 | From: USA | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ interesting that you should say that. I am not as knowledgeable as some of the vets on these artifacts. When I first saw it it reminded me of Fayum or Greco-Roman period
@Swenet. Do you want to retract that statement that M1a1 is "North African"? SMH. Man you and your BS . You just can't quit while you are behind. You keep digging yourself deeper until you are covered in shyte.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
What I think Swenet means is that at the time M1a1 WAS North African because it did not yet migrant down into the Horn. Just like U6 was not yet North African 30,000 years ago until it migrated into that area and became localised.
How I am interpreting it.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @Swenet. Do you want to retract that statement that M1a1 is "North African"? SMH. Man you and your BS . You just can't quit while you are behind. You keep digging yourself deeper until you are covered in shyte.
Lol. I know how this conversation is going to go. I'm going to ask you why the M1b sisterclade is Maghrebi (and not Kenyan, CAR or southern Sudanese) and roughly just as old as M1a. And you're just going to talk over my question by talking about something else, pretending not to see the question. I'm also going to ask you under what circumstance does M1b reach the Maghreb without leaving region-specific subclades behind along the Red Sea coast that attest to migration from Ethiopia. Surely M1 would have to pass through/cross the Nile on its way to the Maghreb, first. And you will pretend to not see that question as well. I will ask you what living Ethiopians were in Ethiopia 25-20ky given the fact Ethiopians are young populations.
quote:Linkage-disequilibrium decay with genomic distance was less rapid in both the whole genome and the African component than in southern African samples, suggesting a less ancient history for Ethiopian populations.
We both know you don't want, and can't handle conversations as soon as serious questions are asked that go beyond quote-mining and misinterpreting papers. So, do yourself a big favour. Don't try to start a conversation you don't really want to have.
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: What I think Swenet means is that at the time M1a1 WAS North African because it did not yet migrant down into the Horn. Just like U6 was not yet North African 30,000 years ago until it migrated into that area and became localised.
How I am interpreting it.
Gramps knows what I mean. He just likes the thought of M1a being southern ancestry. He goes by what sounds pleasant to him.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
You on the right track yes. M1b is a clue and the age of M1 in Europe ....You are catching on.
"quote mining" ...I like it. You came up with that your self?
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Also looking forward to evidence of a demographic growth in Ethiopia as seen in M1's mtDNA specifics. Let's see evidence of population growth in Ethiopia 25-10ky that can be attributed to living Ethiopians.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
MAMMA’S BOYS Ancient Egyptian mummies known as the Two Brothers, found in these coffins, had the same mother but different fathers, DNA evidence indicates. [i] A pair of ancient Egyptian mummies, known for more than a century as the Two Brothers, were actually half brothers, a new study of their DNA finds.
They look very Lower Egyptian. They were found north of Cairo too...
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: Wanted to post this here to get the opinion of the Egyptology section.
quote:We resolve a longstanding question regarding the kinship of two high-status Egyptians from the 12th Dynasty, Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht, whose mummies were discovered in 1907 by Egyptian workmen directed by Flinders Petrie and Ernest Mackay. Although their coffin inscriptions indicate that Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht were brothers, when the mummies were unwrapped in 1908 the skeletal morphologies were found to be quite different, suggesting an absence of family relationship. We extracted ancient DNA from the teeth of the two mummies and, following hybridization capture of the mitochondrial and Y chromosome fractions, sequenced the DNA by a next generation method. Analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms showed that both Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht belonged to mitochondrial haplotype M1a1, suggesting a maternal relationship. The Y chromosome sequences were less complete but showed variations between the two mummies, indicating that Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht had different fathers. Our study emphasizes the importance of kinship in ancient Egypt, and represents the first successful typing of both mitochondrial and Y chromosomal DNA in Egyptian mummies.
The study was of two brothers Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht.
No Y-DNA. But the MtDNA was M1a1 which appears to be a Northeast African lineage.
Thoughts on this.
It’s only a matter of time before they will claim it’s a back migration.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
. At least the 8 STR data would give more fuzzy Great Lakes and South Africa results and a glimmer of hope. (BTW, you know that IAM would likely have SSA affinities in 8 STR, right?)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic