...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Egyptology » Here we go again. QUEEN NEFERTITI BROUGHT TO LIFE WITH CONTROVERSIAL (Page 5)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6   
Author Topic: Here we go again. QUEEN NEFERTITI BROUGHT TO LIFE WITH CONTROVERSIAL
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The point still stands that people will see whatever image in their minds of Nefertiti from the various works of art that depict her. And this isn't just about Nefertiti it is about ALL AE populations. Africans (not Afrocentrics) will see Africans in the AE art and culture (Africans across Africa to this day still do). Europeans will pick those images and data that supports their claim that the AE were "European" somehow as if Syrian or Babylonian migrants 5,000 years ago equals European.

Make no mistake. Europeans who colonized Egypt and stole the artifacts were mostly racists and eugenicists and to this day have wanted and still want to use Egypt to justify their global conquest and domination. In their minds the AE had to be white in order to prove white supremacy. This isn't about facts. It is about race pride for the Europeans. But of course they will try and turn around and claim Africans are the racists.

In the minds of many Europeans this is Nefertiti:
 -
quote:
The film follows the theory that Nefertiti was a princess of the Mitanni, sent to marry Pharaoh Amenhotep III, then taken by Akhenaten as his wife. The plot is based on the desire for an archaeologist to find a means revive himself several millennia after his death.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nefertiti,_figlia_del_sole
And the plot of this movie is not far from what many European Egyptologists propose. And this matches the latest reconstruction that was done. And no these people don't think of Nefertiti or any other Ancient Egyptian royalty as being brown. Because in reality they look at ancient Egypt as a transplant from Eurasia. So folks should keep that in mind when these things come up. Transplants from Eurasia means white. It doesn't really even mean mixed to them. So this isn't even about what kinds of features are indigenous to Africa because most of these folks don't see the AE as African to begin with.....

This has nothing to do with Afrocentrism. Europeans have been distorting Egyptian and African history since before Afrocentrism existed.

And back to Nefertiti. Until we find her body nobody will know for sure what she looked like. The art won't help but it is not consistent. Art for Amenhotep and Tiye is more consistent than it is for Nefertiti.

Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Forty2Tribes
Member
Member # 21799

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Forty2Tribes   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:


It's been pointed out ad nauseum here for over half a decade, but Team Afrocentric needs to get away from this obsolete notion that African populations can all be genetically grouped into a singular, exclusive "race" or cluster. Even if you limit your scope to SSA, you'll find certain Africans are genetically closer (i.e. less divergent) to OOA than others.

And if you think about it, that shouldn't be a problem for us. It doesn't mean that the aboriginal inhabitants of North Africa would be less African than Khoisan or West Africans. They'd still be native to the continent, and therefore they'd still appear (phenotypically) "black" to modern casual observers. It's not like their ancestors would have magically turned into Arabs the moment they stepped foot into the Sahara. Hell, if Cheddar Man and other prehistoric Eurasians have shown us anything in the last few years, it's that modern humans didn't even turn pale the moment they crossed the Sinai into Eurasia.

You people really are too attached to racialized thinking here.

It's because most Africans are mixed with these different genetic races of Africans. I get you though. I tell people all the time that race is enforced opinion. A goofier or nicer breed of humans would have him mark 'uni' for race.

 -

And he would be a 'fro'
 -

Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
No being on the same continent brings you into a physical union with other people from the same continent. And we should assume this is the case before imposing or assuming closer relations with populations farther away via travel. This isn't abnormal. Asians are asians because they exist in Asia the landmass with other Asians. Europeans are Europeans because they exist in Europe the landmass with other Europeans. Africans are Africans because they exist in the African landmass with other Africans.

West Asians are more closely related to Europeans than they are to East Asians.

from Cairo, Meroe is as far away as Hattusa; from Luxor, Kerma is as far away as Jerusalem; from Qena, Khartoum is as far away as Baghdad; from the Delta, Eritrea is as far away as Russia (all these by road).

quote:
So Europe is mixed, Asia is mixed and everybody is mixed. So lets be consistent.
everybody *is* mixed.

Yeah but nobody is showing us how "mixed" Rome was or how "mixed" Greece was and how the ancient Greeks weren't really Europeans but mixed with Asians and Africans (even though they were to some degree). And certainly nobody is saying the ancient Chinese weren't really Chinese but mixed with something else.
Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
tropicals redacted
Member
Member # 21621

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for tropicals redacted     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
@capra

quote:

DougM
No being on the same continent brings you into a physical union with other people from the same continent. And we should assume this is the case before imposing or assuming closer relations with populations farther away via travel. This isn't abnormal. Asians are asians because they exist in Asia the landmass with other Asians. Europeans are Europeans because they exist in Europe the landmass with other Europeans. Africans are Africans because they exist in the African landmass with other Africans.

I think Doug erred in his reasoning here, but he's ultimately correct in his assertion of Egypt as African.

In your reply to me you wrote:

quote:
point is that Egypt is not more geographically connected to other relevant bits of Africa than to Asia merely because it is on the same arbitrarily-defined continent. not to dismiss actual evidence of relationships.
Your first point is correct, but ultimately irrelevant. Given the evidence I've cited (physical anthropological and cultural) it's clear that ancient Egypt's geographical proximity to the Near East cannot be used as measure to assert or imply greater affinities with that region.

Propinquity to the Near East is a line of reasoning that's been used to deny the African identity of ancient Egypt for ideological reasons.

However, it's good that you're not seeking to dismiss actual evidence of relationships.

Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
tropicals redacted
Member
Member # 21621

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for tropicals redacted     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thinking about it, it's interesting that headrests are found in West Africa and even as far away as southern Africa, but that there are no examples from the Near East.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
@capra

quote:

DougM
No being on the same continent brings you into a physical union with other people from the same continent. And we should assume this is the case before imposing or assuming closer relations with populations farther away via travel. This isn't abnormal. Asians are asians because they exist in Asia the landmass with other Asians. Europeans are Europeans because they exist in Europe the landmass with other Europeans. Africans are Africans because they exist in the African landmass with other Africans.

I think Doug erred in his reasoning here, but he's ultimately correct in his assertion of Egypt as African.
How did I error? How is Egypt being in Africa not relevant to the AE being African geographically and therefore the population therein being predominantly African at that time? Why should I assume all these NON Africans were walking around in the Nile Valley 5000 years ago?

And this does not rule out contact, trade or migration between areas this just points out the obvious logic behind geographic labels for populations. Ancient populations weren't as mobile as today with planes, trains, and automobiles. So assuming that ancient cultures at certain times were primarily local and indigenous is not a bad POV in most cases.

Otherwise no population should be labeled by geography then since everybody was everywhere according to this logic. There are no "Middle Easterners", "Asians", "Europeans" or anything else since everybody could theoretically have been everywhere.

And lets cut to the chase. The whole trend since the discovery of KMT is to claim that the population there was primarily non African. And this hasn't changed. This is the reason the latest DNA study reinforces the concept of "Eurasian" lineages in Egyptian DNA. In their minds, the population of AE has to be viewed as primarily a transplant from Eurasia.

This is what I disagree with. Semantics about geography and theoretical mileage between locations on a map has nothing to do with it.

Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
capra
Member
Member # 22737

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for capra     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
@ Doug

claiming that Egyptians are from Africa therefore they are what Doug thinks of as African, which excludes ancient back-migrants from Eurasia, is nonsense. Africans are whatever they are, you cannot define North Africans out of existence (whether they actually are ancient back-migrants or not, that is an obvious plausible explanation requiring no Eurocentricity).


@ tropicals-redacted

i don't know anything about headrests, but i am perfectly willing to believe you. i don't mean to deny cultural connections with Sub-Saharan Africa, on the contrary i think they are very interesting. but Egypt obviously also has plenty of cultural elements shared with the Near East, it is not like they are mutually exclusive.

getting way off topic but the question of biological affinity to other Northeast Africans: supposing for the sake of argument that Egyptians derive from back-migration from West Eurasia, why shouldn't we expect neighbouring parts of Africa have this ancestry as well, and moreoever coming from the particular branch represented in Egypt? it is only an assumption that such affinity must represent 'native' African ancestry. (and actually i do think that cousins of Predynastic Egyptians are the main source of the MENA ancestry in East Africa.)

Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
tropicals redacted
Member
Member # 21621

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for tropicals redacted     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
i don't know anything about headrests, but i am perfectly willing to believe you. i don't mean to deny cultural connections with Sub-Saharan Africa, on the contrary i think they are very interesting.
Don’t take my word for it with the headrests:
http://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/gallery/headrests//index.html

quote:
but Egypt obviously also has plenty of cultural elements shared with the Near East, it is not like they are mutually exclusive.
The cultural basis was African:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/cultural-convergence-in-the-neolithic-of-the-nile-valley-a-prehistoric-perspective-on-egypts-place-in-africa/198005B5D23B6 44951E17B3F0803AF74

quote:
getting way off topic but the question of biological affinity to other Northeast Africans: supposing for the sake of argument that Egyptians derive from back-migration from West Eurasia, why shouldn't we expect neighbouring parts of Africa have this ancestry as well, and moreoever coming from the particular branch represented in Egypt? it is only an assumption that such affinity must represent 'native' African ancestry.
Why would you want to suppose for the sake of argument? Is there anything in the mainstream literature that supports this idea? When do you suppose such a back migration occurred?
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
capra
Member
Member # 22737

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for capra     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
look, i don't have either the time or the interest to discuss this right now. for the sake of argument is a hypothetical, to think about a possibility. if you know some evidence that rules out that possibility, great.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
tropicals redacted
Member
Member # 21621

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for tropicals redacted     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's a hypothetical/possibility that nobody entertains. Certainly not in any paper I've come across.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -
Posts: 42937 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
@ Doug

claiming that Egyptians are from Africa therefore they are what Doug thinks of as African, which excludes ancient back-migrants from Eurasia, is nonsense. Africans are whatever they are, you cannot define North Africans out of existence (whether they actually are ancient back-migrants or not, that is an obvious plausible explanation requiring no Eurocentricity).

There is no location on earth that is or was immune from immigration. That is the point. The same geography that allows you to claim that Egypt was subject to "backmigration" is the same geography that makes the Levant and Europe subject to African migration as well. Migration is a two way street. Before anybody could back migrate there had to be an initial immigration first. And if what you are saying is true then nobody in the North of Africa is truly African then. Because according to you they do not ultimately originate within the geographical boundaries of Africa. That does not invalidate the geographic term Africa nor does it invalidate the concept of African. It just shows that a lot of people are playing double standards in using labels to refer to DNA and ancient populations. I am not going to play silly games of semantics. When I say the AE population was primarily African I mean just that. They ultimately originated within the geographic boundaries of Africa. Now that does not mean that other populations did not migrate into Egypt and affect the population at various times. That wasn't the point. I just do not subscribe to the theory that ancient populations prior to the founding of Egypt along the Nile can be called "Eurasian" in any sense. That is an ultimate falsehood in my opinion. And there is no DNA going that far back from Egypt to even prove this.

And like I said before, the people who do these reconstructions of Nefertiti and other Egyptians as white European looking absolutly believe or want to believe this is what most ancient Egyptians looked like. That is absolutely a distortion of history and that is the context I am keeping this in. Ancient Egypt is as much a transplant of Eurasia as Rome is a transplant from Africa. It wasn't. AE was a transplant of the Sahara and Sudan and that is not Eurasia.

Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
but what was "the Sahara" made of?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
"Indeed, the rare and incomplete Paleolithic to early Neolithic skeletal specimens found in Egypt—such as the 33,000-year-old Nazlet Khater specimen (Pinhasi and Semal 2000), the Wadi Kubbaniya skeleton from the late Paleolithic site in the upper Nile valley (Wendorf et al. 1986), the Qarunian (Faiyum) early Neolithic crania (Henneberg et al. 1989; Midant-Reynes 2000), and the Nabta specimen from the Neolithic Nabta Playa site in the western desert of Egypt (Henneberg et al. 1980)—show, with regard to the great African biological diversity, similarities with some of the sub-Saharan middle Paleolithic and modern sub-Saharan specimens. This affinity pattern between ancient Egyptians and sub-Saharans has also been noticed by several other investigators (Angel 1972; Berry and Berry 1967, 1972; Keita 1995) and has been recently reinforced by the study of Brace et al. (2005), which clearly shows that the cranial morphology of prehistoric and recent northeast African populations is linked to sub-Saharan populations (Niger-Congo populations). These results support the hypothesis that some of the Paleolithic–early Holocene populations from northeast Africa were probably descendents of sub-Saharan ancestral populations."
--F X Ricaut · M Waelkens

Article: Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements

Human Biology 11/2008; 80(5):535-64. DOI:10.3378/1534-6617-80.5.535

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by tropicals redacted:
quote:
i don't know anything about headrests, but i am perfectly willing to believe you. i don't mean to deny cultural connections with Sub-Saharan Africa, on the contrary i think they are very interesting.
Don’t take my word for it with the headrests:
http://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/gallery/headrests//index.html

quote:
but Egypt obviously also has plenty of cultural elements shared with the Near East, it is not like they are mutually exclusive.
The cultural basis was African:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/cultural-convergence-in-the-neolithic-of-the-nile-valley-a-prehistoric-perspective-on-egypts-place-in-africa/198005B5D23B6 44951E17B3F0803AF74

quote:
getting way off topic but the question of biological affinity to other Northeast Africans: supposing for the sake of argument that Egyptians derive from back-migration from West Eurasia, why shouldn't we expect neighbouring parts of Africa have this ancestry as well, and moreoever coming from the particular branch represented in Egypt? it is only an assumption that such affinity must represent 'native' African ancestry.
Why would you want to suppose for the sake of argument? Is there anything in the mainstream literature that supports this idea? When do you suppose such a back migration occurred?

“The cultural basis was African:”.

The most fundamental cultural events found in ancient Egypt relate to sub Saharan populations.

And the most relevant question thus becomes, why and how come if they had “absolutely nothing to do” with ancient Egypt.

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The DNA tribes analysis shows links between Amarna and central Africa (Congo).

Amarna Art with elongated skulls shows links with Central Africa (Congo).

Yet and still they keep pushing that Egypt was a transplant from Eurasia with a lot of Eurasian mixture.......

Nefertitis famous "white" bust becomes the only image seen around the world while all the others which look African are left in the shadows....

And this is no more than the standard process for Egyptology which is about moving Egypt out of Africa and into Eurasia.

Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
They keep pushing the origins of Lower Egyptians who the archeological record pointed had a relationship to the Levant during the predynastic. It's not a coincidence that all this genetic data you're getting is Lower Egyptian, or from some part of Egypt that received immigration from foreigners. If the data from southern Egyptians and Sudanese that you have thus far isn't matching this study, what then does that likely suggest about Egypt?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
They keep pushing the origins of Lower Egyptians who the archeological record pointed had a relationship to the Levant during the predynastic. It's not a coincidence that all this genetic data you're getting is Lower Egyptian, or from some part of Egypt that received immigration from foreigners. If the data from southern Egyptians and Sudanese that you have thus far isn't matching this study, what then does that likely suggest about Egypt?

Ancient Egypt didn't start in Lower Egypt and Amarna was an Upper Egyptian family from Luxor. Whether or not Lower Egypt had a lot or a little mixture with outside populations from the Levant really has nothing to do with it. They keep pushing the Levant because they don't want to acknowledge the substantially more connections between Egypt and areas to the South. So like everything else they focus on that"evidence" that reinforces and supports their claims of Levantine/Eurasian mixture and population affinity in AE but downplay and ignore the connections and affinity to other parts of Africa. This applies to all dynasties not just Amarna.

Again, if this was the case the evidence should line up consistently. If the family was from Lower Egypt and showed other evidence of ties with the Levant through correspondence and mostly if the iconography of Amarna depicted a more "levantine" looking group, then no problem. But they don't. The majority of the evidence points to a local Upper Egyptian family with ties to upper Egypt and iconography that reflects indigenous African, not Levantine features. Theoretical concepts don't trump facts.

Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm aware Egypt didn't start in the northern part. I'm just saying that the archeological record would make more Eurocentrists comfortable with revealing northern DNA. I'm not sure how Lower Egypt's mixture has "nothing to do with" anything. It has everything to do with it. Lower Egypt had 2-3 foreign invasions before any of this research was done and already had a connection to the Levant that extended to the predynastic. If you were a Eurocentric that wanted Egyptians to seem like a Levanite transplant (even before the state), would you use Old Kingdom southern Egyptians where the archeological record suggests extended ties with "Nubia" or would you use northern Egyptians after numerous migrations from the middle East? Which is "safest?"

quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
There is no location on earth that is or was immune from immigration. That is the point. The same geography that allows you to claim that Egypt was subject to "backmigration" is the same geography that makes the Levant and Europe subject to African migration as well. Migration is a two way street. Before anybody could back migrate there had to be an initial immigration first.

True, but southwestern Europe is not as easily accessible to Africa as Egypt was to western Asia. This is the difference. Rome was accessible, but it's location rendered it most accessible to other Europeans. Yes Africans could reach it, but it wasn't within walking distance.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
I'm aware Egypt didn't start in the northern part. I'm just saying that the archoelogical record would make more Eurocentrists comfortable with revealing northern DNA. I'm not sure how Lower Egypt's mixture has "nothing to do with" anything. It has everything to do with it. Lower Egypt had 2-3 foreign invasions before any of this research was done and already had a connection to the Levant that extended to the predynastic. If you were a Eurocentric that wanted Egyptians to seem like a Levanite transplant (even before the state), would you use Old Kingdom southern Egyptians with ties with "Nubia" or would you use northern Egyptians after numerous migrations from the middle East?

The amount of Levantine admixture has nothing to do with it because every time the invasions were repulsed they were repulsed from the South. After the 1st and 2nd intermediate periods the kingdom was restored from the South. The Kingdom was created from the South and the concepts and cultural influences flowed from the South. So if you want to look at the "roots" of the culture you have to go South. Folks can obsess over Levantine admixture all they want in Lower Egypt. The culture did not originate in and ultimately from Lower Egypt. So focusing on Levantine "roots" is focusing on irrelevant information as that is not the actual location of the origin of AE culture.

As I have called out before, AE culture spilled over into the Levant from a very early period. And at one point AE as a nation had northern borders well within the Levant. So I am not shocked by or in denial of any Levantine mixture or influence in Lower Egypt that does not make the "roots" of AE culture Levantine.

And most hardcore Eurocentrics, including Petrie and others basically will say that those Upper Egyptian "roots" were a result of Eurasian migrants from the Red Sea into Upper Egypt. That has been the traditional argument since the time of Petrie and still persists among many to this day.

Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -
Posts: 42937 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
The amount of Levantine admixture has nothing to do with it because every time the invasions were repulsed they were repulsed from the South.

After centuries of immigration and foreigners living in Egyptian territory. After thousands of years of Levanite mixed Lower Egyptians being citizens. If you're holding out for Upper Egypt to lack mixture until the Greeks and Romans you're likely to be disappointed. Much of Upper Egypt was probably changing into the Old Kingdom if not before.


quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
After the 1st and 2nd intermediate periods the kingdom was restored from the South. The Kingdom was created from the South and the concepts and cultural influences flowed from the South. So if you want to look at the "roots" of the culture you have to go South. Folks can obsess over Levantine admixture all they want in Lower Egypt. The culture did not originate in and ultimately from Lower Egypt. So focusing on Levantine "roots" is focusing on irrelevant information as that is not the actual location of the origin of AE culture.

As I have called out before, AE culture spilled over into the Levant from a very early period. And at one point AE as a nation had northern borders well within the Levant. So I am not shocked by or in denial of any Levantine mixture or influence in Lower Egypt that does not make the "roots" of AE culture Levantine.

True, but that was already acknowledged. The point was that they're going to focus on northern Egyptians because the archeology that preceded the selection of genetic samples deemed them a "safe" bet. They know no matter where in time they go to get samples from Lower Egyptians, they are likely to get some "Levanite" mixture. The Egyptians are not understood by the public as "Lower" and "Upper" Egyptians with uniqueness. They're just Egyptians which is what makes sampling bias an easier sell. Many people want to see the Egyptians like Swedes instead of Americans with lots more diversity.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
The amount of Levantine admixture has nothing to do with it because every time the invasions were repulsed they were repulsed from the South.

After centuries of immigration and foreigners living in Egyptian territory. After thousands of years of Levanite mixed Lower Egyptians being citizens. If you're holding out for Upper Egypt to lack mixture until the Greeks and Romans you're likely to be disappointed. Much of Upper Egypt was probably changing into the Old Kingdom if not before.

I am not holding out anything. The fact is that it was Southerners who restored the culture multiple times over the course of dynastic history. Whatever mixture came as a result of foreign movement from the Levant did not restore the culture of AE. The records of the first intermediate period and the New Kingdom state this clearly. There are no prophecies of a king form the Levant arising to restore AE. Yet you have a writings attesting to kings from the South restoring AE. You are stuck on hypothesis which does not change the facts.

The rise of Egyptian culture from the South predates any massive influx of and mixture with Levantines. Ancient Egyptian culture arose out of Nile Valley, Sudan and Sahara. That is not the Levant. The base of Egyptian culture was not based on Levantine mixture. Whether or not mixture occurred in Lower Egypt or not or mixture occurred elsewhere later does not change that the roots of Egyptian culture came from the South. And this fact is attested to by the fact that the numerous invasions to DESTROY Egypt came from the Levant and the push to repel those invasions came from the SOuth. Which means there was always a connection to the South and that connection never dissappeared and this is where the strength of AE culture came from.

And the last major restoration of the culture of the AE came with Kush. No Levantine population ever restored or maintained the AE culture. None. So whatever mixture there was does not mean that Levantines were the "root" of AE culture. They were not.

quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:

quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
After the 1st and 2nd intermediate periods the kingdom was restored from the South. The Kingdom was created from the South and the concepts and cultural influences flowed from the South. So if you want to look at the "roots" of the culture you have to go South. Folks can obsess over Levantine admixture all they want in Lower Egypt. The culture did not originate in and ultimately from Lower Egypt. So focusing on Levantine "roots" is focusing on irrelevant information as that is not the actual location of the origin of AE culture.

As I have called out before, AE culture spilled over into the Levant from a very early period. And at one point AE as a nation had northern borders well within the Levant. So I am not shocked by or in denial of any Levantine mixture or influence in Lower Egypt that does not make the "roots" of AE culture Levantine.

True, but that was already acknowledged. The point was that they're going to focus on northern Egyptians because the archeology that preceded the selection of genetic samples deemed them a "safe" bet. They know no matter where in time they go to get samples from Lower Egyptians, they are likely to get some "Levanite" mixture. The Egyptians are not understood by the public as "Lower" and "Upper" Egyptians with uniqueness. They're just Egyptians which is what makes sampling bias an easier sell. Many people want to see the Egyptians like Swedes instead of Americans with lots more diversity.
I am not focusing on anything other than the overall fact that the AE culture flowed from the South like the NIle. This is how the AE themselves viewed their world. What you are talking about has nothing to do with how the AE viewed the world or how the culture of AE developed. Mixture with Levantines is not where the AE culture got its strength from. So any mixture with Levantines did not "define" AE culture. It was the South that was the source of the strength and longevity of AE culture and not the Levant. There was as much "mixture" with the South if not more because again, the core of AE culture flowed from the South. This isn't some arbitrary process by which you can compare any potential Levantine mixture with the relavance and significance of the Southern origin of AE culture. This is the part that is annoying because folks want to ignore all the data and facts in order to promote theoretical concepts that have no bearing on reality.

Most of the deities of AE culture came from the South. MOst of the traditions of royalty came from the South. Most of the patterns of math and writing came from the South. So trying to downplay that and pretend that those facts are insignificant is the problem. Can someone say that Europe isn't the "core" of Canadian and American culture. Is that a trivial and insignificant fact? Of course not. No matter how many non Europeans there are in America or Canada it doesn't change the origin of these two nation states as being derived from Europe. And the same goes for AE as being primarily populated from and derived from Africa.

Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dinkum:
Just about all recreations of ancient Egyptians show Caucasians:
 -  -

It shows white peoples imaginations. Try to understand the differences.

Physical anthropology tells us something different.



quote:
There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.

In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas [...]

Any interpretation of the biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians must be placed in the context of hypothesis informed by the archaeological, linguistic, geographic or other data.

In this context the physical anthropological evidence indicates that the early Nile Valley populations can be identified as part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation.

This variation represents the short and long term effects of evolutionary forces, such as gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection influenced by culture and geography"

--Kathryn A. Bard (STEPHEN E. THOMPSON Egyptians, physical anthropology of Physical anthropology)

https://www.academia.edu/1924147/Kathryn_A._Bard_The_Encyclopedia_of_of_the_Archaeology_of_Ancient_Egypt


quote:
"As a result of their facial prognathism, the Badarian sample has been described as forming a morphological cluster with Nubian, Tigrean, and other southern (or "Negroid") groups (Morant, 1935, 1937; Mukherjee et al., 1955; Nutter, 1958, Strouhal, 1971; Angel, 1972; Keita, 1990). Cranial nonmetric trait studies have found this group to be similar to other Egyptians, including much later material (Berry and Berry, 1967, 1972), but also to be significantly different from LPD material (Berry et al., 1967). Similarly, the study of dental nonmetric traits has suggested that the Badarian population is at the centroid of Egyptian dental samples (Irish, 2006), thereby suggesting similarity and hence continuity across Egyptian time periods. From the central location of the Badarian samples in Figure 2, the current study finds the Badarian to be relatively morphologically close to the centroid of all the Egyptian samples. The Badarian have been shown to exhibit greatest morphological similarity with the temporally successive EPD (Table 5). Finally, the biological distinctiveness of the Badarian from other Egyptian samples has also been demonstrated (Tables 6 and 7).


These results suggest that the EDyn do form a distinct morphological pattern. Their overlap with other Egyptian samples (in PC space, Fig. 2) suggests that although their morphology is distinctive, the pattern does overlap with the other time periods. These results therefore do not support the Petrie concept of a \Dynastic race" (Petrie, 1939; Derry, 1956). Instead, the results suggest that the Egyptian state was not the product of mass movement of populations into the Egyptian Nile region, but rather that it was the result of primarily indigenous development combined with prolonged small-scale migration, potentially from trade, military, or other contacts.

This evidence suggests that the process of state formation itself may have been mainly an indigenous process, but that it may have occurred in association with in-migration to the Abydos region of the Nile Valley. This potential in-migration may have occurred particularly during the EDyn and OK. A possible explanation is that the Egyptian state formed through increasing control of trade and raw materials, or due to military actions, potentially associated with the use of the Nile Valley as a corridor for prolonged small scale movements through the desert environment."

--Sonia R. Zakrzewski. (2007). Population Continuity or Population Change: Formation of the Ancient Egyptian State. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 132:501-509)

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20569/abstract

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:
Originally posted by Dinkum:
Just about all recreations of ancient Egyptians show Caucasians:
 -  -

It shows white peoples imaginations. Try to understand the differences.

Physical anthropology tells us something different.



quote:
There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.

In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas [...]

Any interpretation of the biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians must be placed in the context of hypothesis informed by the archaeological, linguistic, geographic or other data.

In this context the physical anthropological evidence indicates that the early Nile Valley populations can be identified as part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation.

This variation represents the short and long term effects of evolutionary forces, such as gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection influenced by culture and geography"

--Kathryn A. Bard (STEPHEN E. THOMPSON Egyptians, physical anthropology of Physical anthropology)

https://www.academia.edu/1924147/Kathryn_A._Bard_The_Encyclopedia_of_of_the_Archaeology_of_Ancient_Egypt


quote:
"As a result of their facial prognathism, the Badarian sample has been described as forming a morphological cluster with Nubian, Tigrean, and other southern (or "Negroid") groups (Morant, 1935, 1937; Mukherjee et al., 1955; Nutter, 1958, Strouhal, 1971; Angel, 1972; Keita, 1990). Cranial nonmetric trait studies have found this group to be similar to other Egyptians, including much later material (Berry and Berry, 1967, 1972), but also to be significantly different from LPD material (Berry et al., 1967). Similarly, the study of dental nonmetric traits has suggested that the Badarian population is at the centroid of Egyptian dental samples (Irish, 2006), thereby suggesting similarity and hence continuity across Egyptian time periods. From the central location of the Badarian samples in Figure 2, the current study finds the Badarian to be relatively morphologically close to the centroid of all the Egyptian samples. The Badarian have been shown to exhibit greatest morphological similarity with the temporally successive EPD (Table 5). Finally, the biological distinctiveness of the Badarian from other Egyptian samples has also been demonstrated (Tables 6 and 7).


These results suggest that the EDyn do form a distinct morphological pattern. Their overlap with other Egyptian samples (in PC space, Fig. 2) suggests that although their morphology is distinctive, the pattern does overlap with the other time periods. These results therefore do not support the Petrie concept of a \Dynastic race" (Petrie, 1939; Derry, 1956). Instead, the results suggest that the Egyptian state was not the product of mass movement of populations into the Egyptian Nile region, but rather that it was the result of primarily indigenous development combined with prolonged small-scale migration, potentially from trade, military, or other contacts.

This evidence suggests that the process of state formation itself may have been mainly an indigenous process, but that it may have occurred in association with in-migration to the Abydos region of the Nile Valley. This potential in-migration may have occurred particularly during the EDyn and OK. A possible explanation is that the Egyptian state formed through increasing control of trade and raw materials, or due to military actions, potentially associated with the use of the Nile Valley as a corridor for prolonged small scale movements through the desert environment."

--Sonia R. Zakrzewski. (2007). Population Continuity or Population Change: Formation of the Ancient Egyptian State. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 132:501-509)

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20569/abstract

Most Egyptians today don't look like that let alone Egyptians 5000 years ago.
Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Brit333
Banned
Member # 22890

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Brit333         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ancient Egyptians resembled modern Egyptians. The Middle Eastern Farmers migrated into Egypt about 9000 - 6000 years ago. They replaced the earlier Egyptians (Cro-Magnon descendants) and started farming in Egypt. Farming leads to civilization. Many small towns appear all over Egypt, the largest and most powerful being Hierakonpolis which eventually takes over the whole of Egypt.

Southern Egypt is a mix of East Africans, Berbers and Middle Eastern Farmers. Gerzean Culture of Southern Egypt was heavily influenced by Mesopotamia. I wonder why so many people ignore the fact that the ancient Sumerians (the first to build pyramids) heavily influenced Egypt?
http://www.recoveredscience.com/const128mesopotamianinfluences.htm

Posts: 8 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Feb 2018  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Brit333
Banned
Member # 22890

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Brit333         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A fact certain peoples will not accept, the Copts carry MTDNA U6 which arrived in Egypt 30 000 years ago. This MTDNA is also found in other North African countries.

Copts also carry overwhelmingly Haplogroup J (45%) originating from the Middle Eastern Farmers 9000 - 6000 years ago.
R1B = 15% and is Middle Eastern in origin
E1b1b = 21% North African in origin
B = 15% is an ancient archaic African Haplogroup

https://copticliterature.wordpress.com/2016/09/28/the-genetic-structure-of-the-copts-and-muslims-of-egypt-3-the-genetic-structure-of-the-copts-is-distinguishable-from-that-of-the-m uslims-of-egypt/

Muslim Egyptians carry DNA from recent Arab migration and slavery.

Posts: 8 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Feb 2018  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brit333:
A fact certain peoples will not accept, the Copts carry MTDNA U6 which arrived in Egypt 30 000 years ago. This MTDNA is also found in other North African countries.

Copts also carry overwhelmingly Haplogroup J (45%) originating from the Middle Eastern Farmers 9000 - 6000 years ago.
R1B = 15% and is Middle Eastern in origin
E1b1b = 21% North African in origin
B = 15% is an ancient archaic African Haplogroup

https://copticliterature.wordpress.com/2016/09/28/the-genetic-structure-of-the-copts-and-muslims-of-egypt-3-the-genetic-structure-of-the-copts-is-distinguishable-from-that-of-the-m uslims-of-egypt/

Muslim Egyptians carry DNA from recent Arab migration and slavery.

Nope jackass,


quote:
In conclusion, we present here a Y chromosome phylogenetic tree deeply revised in its root and earliest branches. Our data do not uphold previous models of Y chromosomal emergence 15, 16 and demand a reevaluation of some fundamental ideas concerning the early history of the human genetic diversity we find today. 38–40 Our phylogeny shows a root in central-northwest Africa. Although this point requires further attention, we think that it offers a new prospect from which to view the initial development of our species in Africa.
—Fulvio Cruciani et al.
A Revised Root for the Human Y Chromosomal Phylogenetic Tree: The Origin of Patrilineal Diversity in Africa (2011)


quote:
Recently, in a re-sequencing study of the Y chromosome, the root of the tree moved to a new position and several changes at the basal nodes of the phylogeny were introduced [16]. Interestingly, the estimated coalescence age and deep branching pattern of the revised MSY tree appear to be more similar to those of the mtDNA phylogeny [17], [18] than previously reported [1].

[…]


Figure 1. Revised topology of the deepest portion of the human MSY tree.

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/ppreviews-plos-725668748/292707/preview.jpg

—Fulvio Cruciani et al
Molecular Dissection of the Basal Clades in the Human Y Chromosome Phylogenetic Tree 2012




http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0049170

Molecular Dissection of the Basal Clades in the Human Y Chromosome Phylogenetic Tree
Fulvio Cruciani 2012


All Y-clades that are not exclusively African belong to the macro-haplogroup CT, which is defined by mutations M168, M294 and P9.1 [14], [31] and is subdivided into two major clades, DE and CF [1], [14]. In a recent study [16], sequencing of two chromosomes belonging to haplogroups C and R, led to the identification of 25 new mutations, eleven of which were in the C-chromosome and seven in the R-chromosome. Here, the seven mutations which were found to be shared by chromosomes of haplogroups C and R [16], were also found to be present in one DE sample (sample 33 in Table S1), and positioned at the root of macro-haplogroup CT (Figure 1 and Figure S1).


As we know things, the ancestral to CT is haplogroup BT and the descendants are haplogroup CF and DE.


 -


 -


See, I also looked at wikipedia. And this is what they show:

 -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_BT

That tree of course is not found in any Cruciani et al. study. Since they show this:, but it is still a nice summery:

 -

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brit333:
A fact certain peoples will not accept, the Copts carry MTDNA U6 which arrived in Egypt 30 000 years ago. This MTDNA is also found in other North African countries.

Copts also carry overwhelmingly Haplogroup J (45%) originating from the Middle Eastern Farmers 9000 - 6000 years ago.
R1B = 15% and is Middle Eastern in origin
E1b1b = 21% North African in origin
B = 15% is an ancient archaic African Haplogroup

https://copticliterature.wordpress.com/2016/09/28/the-genetic-structure-of-the-copts-and-muslims-of-egypt-3-the-genetic-structure-of-the-copts-is-distinguishable-from-that-of-the-m uslims-of-egypt/

Muslim Egyptians carry DNA from recent Arab migration and slavery.

The simple reason why a back migration was suggested comes from a 2002 paper, here they proposed a phylogenetic inferences based on the lack of certain chromosomes in African populations. This was before DE etc. was found in Africa. Studies today as posted by you still use this old phylogenetic inferences path and totally skip the newer / later evidence.


quote:
An ancient human back migration from Asia to Africa had already been proposed by Altheide and Hammer (1997) and Hammer et al. (1998, 2001), on the basis of nested cladistic analysis of Y-chromosome data. They suggested that the presence of YAP+ chromosomes in Africa was due to such an event, but this has recently been questioned by Underhill et al. (2001b) and Underhill and Roseman (2001), primarily on the basis of the Asian-specific YAP+ subclade that neutralizes the previous phylogenetic inferences. Thus, the only evidence of a migration from Asia to sub-Saharan Africa that is fully supported by Y-chromosome data relies, at least for the moment, on the finding of haplogroup IX chromosomes in Cameroon.

Group IX Chromosomes in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Asian Origin?

How can the presence of Group IX chromosomes at considerable frequency in Cameroon be explained? A priori, we can envision three possibilities. First, group IX chromosomes in Cameroon are due to rather recent male gene flow from Europe or the Near East. Second, the entire M9 superclade (haplogroups VII–X) has an African origin. Third, group IX chromosomes in Cameroon represent a footprint of a male back migration from Asia to Africa. The first scenario seems to be very unlikely, because only derived haplotypes, carrying the M269 or M17/SRY10831 mutations, have been detected in western Eurasia. The second hypothesis, an African origin of the M9 superclade that includes haplotype 117, would imply a subsequent impressive extinction of derivative lineages in sub-Saharan Africa, since no other haplotypes carrying the M9 mutation (haplogroups VII–X) have been observed in this region (the only exception being represented by a few haplotype 109 chromosomes found in the Fulbe from Cameroon). The last scenario, that of a back migration from Asia to Africa, currently appears to be by far the most plausible. This is because most of the M9 haplotypes (the majority of group VII and VIII lineages, as well as some group IX and X lineages reported by Underhill et al. [2000]) have been observed only in Asia. Moreover, this possibility appears to be further supported by the recent finding of the UTY2+/M173− intermediate haplotype (Karafet et al. 2001) in central and northeastern Asia (the UTY2 marker in the study by Karafet et al. [2001] corresponds to M207 in the present study).


—Fulvio Crucian et al.
A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes


However in the 2011 paper they found chromosomes to be matching, which lacked presence in prior studies, thus the phylogenetic needed a reevaluation. And the painful conclusions can be read, in more recent papers published by Fulvio Crucian et al.


quote:
In conclusion, we present here a Y chromosome phylogenetic tree deeply revised in its root and earliest branches. Our data do not uphold previous models of Y chromosomal emergence 15, 16 and demand a reevaluation of some fundamental ideas concerning the early history of the human genetic diversity we find today. 38–40 Our phylogeny shows a root in central-northwest Africa. Although this point requires further attention, we think that it offers a new prospect from which to view the initial development of our species in Africa.
—Fulvio Cruciani et al.
A Revised Root for the Human Y Chromosomal Phylogenetic Tree: The Origin of Patrilineal Diversity in Africa

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brit333:
Ancient Egyptians resembled modern Egyptians. The Middle Eastern Farmers migrated into Egypt about 9000 - 6000 years ago. They replaced the earlier Egyptians (Cro-Magnon descendants) and started farming in Egypt. Farming leads to civilization. Many small towns appear all over Egypt, the largest and most powerful being Hierakonpolis which eventually takes over the whole of Egypt.

Southern Egypt is a mix of East Africans, Berbers and Middle Eastern Farmers. Gerzean Culture of Southern Egypt was heavily influenced by Mesopotamia. I wonder why so many people ignore the fact that the ancient Sumerians (the first to build pyramids) heavily influenced Egypt?
http://www.recoveredscience.com/const128mesopotamianinfluences.htm

Speaking of ignorance, donkey:

quote:

"Ancient Egypt belongs to a language
group known as 'Afroasiatic' (formerly
called Hamito-Semitic) and its closest
relatives are other north-east African
languages from Somalia to Chad. Egypt's
cultural features, both material and
ideological and particularly in the earliest
phases, show clear connections with that
same broad area. In sum, ancient Egypt
was an African culture, developed by
African peoples, who had wide ranging
contacts in north Africa and western
Asia."

--Robert Morkot (2005). The Egyptians: An Introduction.. p. 10)

quote:
"The ancient Egyptians were not 'white' in any European sense, nor were they 'Caucasian'... we can say that the earliest population of ancient Egypt included African people from the upper Nile, African people from the regions of the Sahara and modern Libya, and smaller numbers of people who had come from south-western Asia and perhaps the Arabian penisula."
--Robert Morkot (2005). The Egyptians: An Introduction. pp. 12-13


quote:
"Over the last two decades, numerous contemporary (Khartoum Neolithic) sites and cemeteries have been excavated in the Central Sudan.. The most striking point to emerge is the overall similarity of early neolithic developments inhabitation, exchange, material culture and mortuary customs in the Khartoum region to those underway at the same time in the Egyptian Nile Valley, far to the north." (Wengrow, David (2003) "Landscapes of Knowledge, Idioms of Power: The African Foundations of Ancient Egyptian Civilization Reconsidered," in Ancient Egypt in Africa, David O'Connor and Andrew Reid, eds. Ancient Egypt in Africa. London: University College London Press, 2003, pp. 119-137)
--O'Connor, David B., Reid, Andrew

Ancient Egypt in Africa




quote:
"When the Elephantine results were added to a broader pooling of the physical characteristics drawn from a wide geographic region which includes Africa, the Mediterranean and the Near East quite strong affinities emerge between Elephantine and populations from Nubia, supporting a strong south-north cline."
--Barry Kemp. (2006) Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization. p. 54


quote:
"The values for the brachial and crural indices show that the distal segments of each limb are longer relative to the proximal segments than in many “African” populations (data from Aiello and Dean, 1990) This pattern is supported by Figure 7 (a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994), which indicates that the Egyptians generally have tropical body plans. Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. Despite these differences, all samples lie relatively clustered together as compared to the other populations.
--Sonia R. Zakrzewski

Variation in Ancient Egyptian Stature and BodyProportions


quote:
"Radiocarbon data from 150 archaeological excavations in the now hyper-arid Eastern Sahara of Egypt, Sudan, Libya, and Chad reveal close links between climatic variations and prehistoric occupation during the past 12,000 years. Synoptic multiple-indicator views for major time slices demonstrate the transition from initial settlement after the sudden onset of humid conditions at 8500 B.C.E. to the exodus resulting from gradual desiccation since 5300 B.C.E.

Southward shifting of the desert margin helped trigger the emergence of pharaonic civilisation along the Nile, influenced the spread of pastoralism throughout the continent, and affects sub-Saharan Africa to the present day.

--Kuper R, Kröpelin S


Science. 2006 Aug 11;313(5788):803-7. Epub 2006 Jul 20.

Climate-controlled Holocene occupation in the Sahara: motor of Africa's evolution.

Collaborative Research Center 389 (ACACIA), University of Cologne, Institute of Prehistoric Archaeology, Africa Research Unit, Jennerstrasse 8, 50823 Köln, Germany.





quote:
There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.

In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas [...]

Any interpretation of the biological affinities of the ancient Egyptians must be placed in the context of hypothesis informed by the archaeological, linguistic, geographic or other data.

In this context the physical anthropological evidence indicates that the early Nile Valley populations can be identified as part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation.

This variation represents the short and long term effects of evolutionary forces, such as gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection influenced by culture and geography"

--Kathryn A. Bard (STEPHEN E. THOMPSON Egyptians, physical anthropology of Physical anthropology)

https://www.academia.edu/1924147/Kathryn_A._Bard_The_Encyclopedia_of_of_the_Archaeology_of_Ancient_Egypt


quote:
"As a result of their facial prognathism, the Badarian sample has been described as forming a morphological cluster with Nubian, Tigrean, and other southern (or "Negroid") groups (Morant, 1935, 1937; Mukherjee et al., 1955; Nutter, 1958, Strouhal, 1971; Angel, 1972; Keita, 1990). Cranial nonmetric trait studies have found this group to be similar to other Egyptians, including much later material (Berry and Berry, 1967, 1972), but also to be significantly different from LPD material (Berry et al., 1967). Similarly, the study of dental nonmetric traits has suggested that the Badarian population is at the centroid of Egyptian dental samples (Irish, 2006), thereby suggesting similarity and hence continuity across Egyptian time periods. From the central location of the Badarian samples in Figure 2, the current study finds the Badarian to be relatively morphologically close to the centroid of all the Egyptian samples. The Badarian have been shown to exhibit greatest morphological similarity with the temporally successive EPD (Table 5). Finally, the biological distinctiveness of the Badarian from other Egyptian samples has also been demonstrated (Tables 6 and 7).


These results suggest that the EDyn do form a distinct morphological pattern. Their overlap with other Egyptian samples (in PC space, Fig. 2) suggests that although their morphology is distinctive, the pattern does overlap with the other time periods. These results therefore do not support the Petrie concept of a \Dynastic race" (Petrie, 1939; Derry, 1956). Instead, the results suggest that the Egyptian state was not the product of mass movement of populations into the Egyptian Nile region, but rather that it was the result of primarily indigenous development combined with prolonged small-scale migration, potentially from trade, military, or other contacts.

This evidence suggests that the process of state formation itself may have been mainly an indigenous process, but that it may have occurred in association with in-migration to the Abydos region of the Nile Valley. This potential in-migration may have occurred particularly during the EDyn and OK. A possible explanation is that the Egyptian state formed through increasing control of trade and raw materials, or due to military actions, potentially associated with the use of the Nile Valley as a corridor for prolonged small scale movements through the desert environment."

--Sonia R. Zakrzewski. (2007). Population Continuity or Population Change: Formation of the Ancient Egyptian State. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 132:501-509)

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20569/abstract


quote:
"Thus he concluded that it must take more than 15,000 years for modern humans to fully adapt to a new environment (see also Trinkaus, 1992).

This suggests that body proportions tend not to be very plastic under natural conditions, and that selective rates on body shape are such that evolution in these features is long-term."

-- Holliday T. (1997). Body proportions
in Late Pleistocene Europe and modern
human origins. Jrnl Hum Evo. 32:423-447

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9169992


quote:
"It is estimated that these changes in ‘heat adapted’ genes occurred over a time frame of 12,000 to 30,000 years (Young et al. 2005)."
--Clark Spencer Larsen - 2010
A Companion to Biological Anthropology


quote:
Furthermore bi-iliac breadth appears to
change slowly over time, likely due to multiple factors (thermoregulation, obstetrics, locomotion) influencing its shape (Ruff 1994; Auerback 2007) ..."

-- Pihasi & Stock. 2011. Human Bioarchaeology of the Transition to Agriculture

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/book/10.1002/9780470670170/homepage/Reviews.html


quote:
"What we can say, however, is that in the Holocene, humans from southwest Asia do not exhibit tropically adapted body shape (Crognier 1981; Eveleth and Tanner 1976; Schreider 1975).... "
---Trenton Holliday

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/aa.2000.102.1.54/abstract


quote:
In fact, in terms of body shape, the European and the Inuit samples tend to be cold-adapted and tend to be separated in multivariate space from the more tropically adapted Africans, especially those groups from south of the Sahara.
--Holliday TW, Hilton CE.

Body proportions of circumpolar peoples as evidenced from skeletal data: Ipiutak and Tigara (Point Hope) versus Kodiak Island Inuit.


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.21226/abstract


quote:
"Little change in body shape was found through time, suggesting that all body segments were varying in size in response to environmental and social conditions. The change found in body plan is suggested to be the result of the later groups having a more tropical (Nilotic) form than the preceding populations."
--Sonia R. Zakrzewski,

 American Journal of Physical Anthropology
Volume 121, Issue 3, pages 219–229, July 2003

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12772210


quote:
"An examination of the distance hierarchies reveals the Badarian series to be more similar to the Teita in both analyses and always more similar to all of the African series than to the Norse and Berg groups (see Tables 3A & 3B and Figure 2). Essentially equal similarity is found with the Zalavar and Dogon series in the 11-variable analysis and with these and the Bushman in the one using 15 variables. The Badarian series clusters with the tropical African groups no matter which algorithm is employed (see Figures 3 and 4).. In none of them did the Badarian sample affiliate with the European series."
--S.O.Y. Keita. Early Nile Valley Farmers from El-Badari: Aboriginals or "European" Agro-Nostratic Immigrants? Craniometric Affinities Considered With Other Data.

 Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 191-208 (2005)

http://jbs.sagepub.com/content/36/2/191.full.pdf


quote:
With the intensification of archaeological research in the Egyptian Western Desert evidence of prehistoric humanoccupation has been consistently found in both the oasesregion and the playas region to the south. Major breaks in the chrono-cultural sequence are related to climaticvariations. After a major arid event during the latePleistocene, which completely dried up the Sahara,forcing the people to cluster along the Nile (and in theCentral Sahara massifs), the Holocene period wascharacterised by better climatic conditions due to anorthward shifting of the monsoon summer rain regime(Kuper and Kropelin 2006; Wendorf and Schild 2001).The desert was again settled, although cyclical minor aridspells required the population to move back and forthfrom the desert to the Nile or to remain in the oases. Fromthe 4th millennium BC another major arid event forcedthe people to concentrate in the oases area and to settlemore permanently to the Nile Valley"
-- Karen Exell

Egypt in its African Context

Proceedings of the conferenceheld at The Manchester Museum,University of Manchester, 2-4 October 2009

https://www.academia.edu/545582/The_Nubian_Pastoral_Culture_as_Link_between_Egypt_and_Africa_A_View_from_the_Archaeological_Recor

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Yatunde Lisa Bey
Member
Member # 22253

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Yatunde Lisa Bey     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What typical, near eastern, middle eastern, jewish woman actually looks anything like THE Nefertiti but ( without a nose job) the average nose on these women and men for that matter is huge..

Palestinian
[img]

Yemen


Saudi Arabia

 -


Abusir mummies have what is purported to be mostly "near eastern" dna but the typical Egyptian portraits of ancient egyptians don't look like your current day typical "near easterners" That is curious to me.

[ 03. March 2018, 06:18 PM: Message edited by: Punos_Rey ]

--------------------
It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions

Posts: 2707 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The bust will continue being the
official face of Nefertiti as long
as she's touted as the source of
Akhenaten's One God revolution.

A nice bright thin lipped narrow
nosed face for Monotheistic belief.
A belief that began in ancient Africa
before Islam
before Christianity
before Judaism

--------------------
I'm just another point of view. What's yours? Unpublished work © 2004 - 2023 YYT al~Takruri
Authentic Africana over race-serving ethnocentricisms, Afro, Euro, or whatever.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Yatunde Lisa Bey
Member
Member # 22253

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Yatunde Lisa Bey     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
The bust will continue being the
official face of Nefertiti as long
as she's touted as the source of
Akhenaten's One God revolution.

A nice bright thin lipped narrow
nosed face for Monotheistic belief.
A belief that began in ancient Africa
before Islam
before Christianity
before Judaism

Like this you mean?

 -

or this

--------------------
It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions

Posts: 2707 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa:

Abusir mummies have what is purported to be mostly "near eastern" dna but the typical Egyptian portraits of ancient egyptians don't look like your current day typical "near easterners" That is curious to me.

One thing to probably think about is that Abusir's mummies were Lower Egyptians. Lower Egyptians often had a predynastic connection to the Levant AND Abusir was then subject to Levanite conquest many years later. If you've been keeping a close eye on the archeological record this is news that I am fairly sure a lot of Egyptologists predicted. Egyptians further south in earlier times of AE history were understood by researchers to look different.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The bottom line point here is that with all the images and actual mummies and funeral masks from ancient Egypt, why are they so obsessed with making reconstructions? And the simple answer is the existing art from Ancient Egypt isn't WHITE enough. Therefore they need modern artists to make reconstructions that look white. Now all these folks claim that AE were brown, but if that is the case, the AE art is already brown so why do another reconstruction if the original art is good enough? Note that in no other ancient culture, such as Europe or Asia are they making reconstructions and putting them on display next to orignial artifacts as if they are equally of the same historic value. You will not see reconstructions of Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar next to the orignal art of these folks in European museums. Why? Because they are white and there is no debate or guessing about it.

Now, if these folks were so "liberal" and were open minded, why do they always chose the same folks to make reconstructions of Egyptian ancient royalty? Why do they not chose Egyptians to do reconstruction of their own ancient royalty? Again the answer is that these reconstructions need to look like white Europeans. Egyptians might not necessarily do that seeing they are the most knowledgeable and familiar with the phenotype of their own country and history. And certainly they would never choose Africans or Asians to do reconstructions of ancient European rolyalty and have that on display in European museums either.

So what gives? This is part of the continuation of the same system of colonial appropriation of non European culture and history that started in the colonial era. The people who make these reconstructions are part of that colonial system of history and antrhopology. And their works are primarily for the children of the colonizers around the world. Their work is not really for the indigenous populations in the areas they colonized where these ancient cultures originated.
Folks like Elizibeth Daynes primarily do work for European owned anthropology and history museums around the world in European colonies..... And looking at her work you would think the first humans were Europeans. And you can see this clearly from her own web site. Again reinforcing why the Egyptians have to be reconstructed to look white.

http://www.daynes.com/en/hominids-reconstructions/hominids-familly-hominids-familly-56.html

Amarna DNA. Where is it? Why are we still obsessing over an admittedly fake bust of Nefertiti and not dealing with actual DNA which they supposedly already have? If this DNA was so overtly Eurasian I am sure it would have been released by now.


Head elongation. How come no body is pointing out the fact that Tut shows signs of head elongation? What culture in Levant would have been practicing this form of head binding and bring it into Egypt? Why is nobody pointing this out? Because obviously there was no culture in the Levant practicing this and the only cultures doing so were in Africa, DEEP in Africa. Obviously there must have been a reason why Akhenaton decided to depict himself and his family with elongated heads. How come the exhibitions and descriptions of Amarna don't point out that this is an actual practice among cultures in Africa? In fact most discussions of Amarna don't even mention this. And even most discussions of Tuts mummy don't mention this either. And why would white Levanting looking Egyptians (according to the reconstructions) depict themselves as black Africans with elongated heads like central Africans? And yes that is the primary way that the art of the Amarna period depicted Egyptians. Just so happens a lot of that art was later destroyed and covered over by the Egyptians themselves.

https://www.fieldmuseum.org/blog/why-did-king-tut-have-flat-head

As for Abusir DNA, one must understand why Abusir exists. During the colonial era most of the notable tombs were plundered by Europeans and that most of the tombs of the known royals of the dynastic era. Those mummies were often taken and unwrapped by European pseudo scientists. Fortunately later Egyptian governments cracked down on this practice and kept the mummies in Egypt from some of the more notable tombs found in later times. However, during the late dynastic and Roman eras there were a LOT of mass tombs and mummies created. A lot of these tombs were not opened until relatively recently and it is these tombs that would obviously have the most foreign DNA. Abusir is one example of such a tomb which started in the dynastic era and was reused in the late period/Greco Roman period. A lot more mummies from this period have survived than early dynastic and dynastic mummies, especially of common folks.

Egyptian queens. Now, this is another example where Egyptology just skips over and outright omits facts. They say the AE would allow women in the harem from the Levant to become queens and that Nefertiti is one example. But here is the prolem, the AE 18th dynasty arose to repel Levantine/Asiatic invaders from the country and spent over 100 years fighting wars against such Levantines and Indo Europeans in the Levant. Why on earth would they be taking these folks as their wives? And on top of that during this era, their closest allies in this war were from the South and those were the folks who helped them retake Egypt. And starting in the 18th dynasty you see the tradition of the Great Royal Wife/Gods' Wife of Amun as being a black skinned woman. So where are the Levantines in this tradition? There are numerous queens during the 18th dynasty who are openly described by Egyptologists as possibly being "Nubian" (whatever that means), yet this doesn't seem to come up when they talk about Tut or Nefertiti and the AE traditions of kingship/queenship in general.

And keep in mind that the Southern Opet(Karnak) was aligned with and associated with the seat of Amun being in Kush. But of course no mention of that when it comes to AE queens. There was no such temple associated with Egyptian royalty and divinity in the Levant or Egyptian Queens and the legitimacy of the throne.

quote:

God's Wife of Amun has its origins prior to the 18th Dynasty, appearing first in the 10th and 12th Dynasties of the Middle Kingdom, but it was an obscure, non-royal role prior to the reign of Ahmose I, the founder of the New Kingdom. He not only elevated the "Great Southern City" (Thebes), but also the position of God's Wife of Amen, by bestowing it on his chief wife, Ahmose Nefertari. She had held the title, Second Prophet of Amun, an exceptional rank for a woman, but arranged by contract to exchange the title for that of God's Wife. In doing so, she created an important religious concept held at least through the 18th Dynasty. During this period, the Egyptians held that the crown prince was the child not of the king, but of the union between Amun and his Great Royal Wife.

At first, the position was hereditary, more or less, passing either to the daughter of the Queen who held the title, or to the next king's wife, who frequently was one and the same. From Ahmes Nefertari the title passed to her daughter, Meritamen after she married her brother, Amenhotep I. However, it was Hatshepsut who took the position over from Meritamen, rather than the wife of Tuthmosis I, perhaps because his chief wife, Ahmes, may have been the sister of Meritamen. Hatshepsut seems to have kept it when she became regent for Tuthmoses III and it has been suggested that the title was so important that this was a means to gather authority for Hatshepsut before she claimed the throne. She did not relinquish the title until she later took the full titles of a king. However, now as king, sometimes depicted as a man, it would have been incongruent for her to remain as God's wife, so she relinquished the role to her daughter by Tuthmosis II, Princess Neferure.

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/godswife.htm

Ahmose Nefertari God's Wife
 -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmose-Nefertari

Of course the facts don't stop these people....
https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/en/news/2016/11/exhibition-shows-luxury-and-power-of-egyptian-queens


But that said there are still plenty of obviously African mummies from later eras in Egypt and the question becomes why don't we have the DNA from these mummies?

Ironically enough the mummies of the 20th and 21st dynasty are from a time when there was a LOT of Levantine mixture in Egypt (supposedly) as the Ramessid era was constantly fighting wars in the levant but these mummies also seem to be the most African looking of ANY Egyptian mummies....

 -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nodjmet

Posts: 8897 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa:
[qb]
Abusir mummies have what is purported to be mostly "near eastern" dna but the typical Egyptian portraits of ancient egyptians don't look like your current day typical "near easterners" That is curious to me.

One thing to probably think about is that Abusir's mummies were Lower Egyptians.
why would you think Abusir el-Meleq's mummies were Lower Egyptians?
Posts: 42937 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly Kemet:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly Kemet:
okay, so, basically you subscribe to the social construct of race but acknowledge its unscientific validity. In other words, you are willing to dabble in pseudoscience if it suits your agenda to convey a belief of yours. Is that a fair assessment?

Race isn't biologically valid, but it is a real social construct that has real life impact to human beings based on their appearance. If I discuss race, I am not discussing "race" as a biological construct but a sociological one. Which means if I discuss race, it'd be to discuss aspects of appearance that harbor social impact.
Two part question: (1) In the United States, is a dark skin with curly hair North African treated the same as an African American? (2) Is there a color, hair texture and facial phenotype hierarchy in the US?
Yes, they can be treated the same. Many darker to mid tone northern Africans look like many blacks in the United States.

These kids:

 -

Look distinct from a lot of west African blacks, but they look like a lot of blacks in the U.S. This is why a lot of blacks (especially in the U.S) don't think of everyone in North Africa as one race. Calling them "whites" fantasy.

This is true, and no matter how they flip it, they will always shoot themselves in the foot. [Wink]
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa:
What typical, near eastern, middle eastern, jewish woman actually looks anything like THE Nefertiti but ( without a nose job) the average nose on these women and men for that matter is huge..

Palestinian
[img]

Yemen


Saudi Arabia

 -


Abusir mummies have what is purported to be mostly "near eastern" dna but the typical Egyptian portraits of ancient egyptians don't look like your current day typical "near easterners" That is curious to me.

One should not forget Nefertiti's banger booty.


 -

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dinkum:
Indians have been living in Socotra since the first century BCE
Thats why some Socotra islanders look like this:

 -


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socotra

It doesn’t show in the gene pool. Sorry!
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
It doesn’t show in the gene pool. Sorry!

False, N is found in Socotra and India
Posts: 42937 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
It doesn’t show in the gene pool. Sorry!

False, N is found in Socotra and India
“N” what?
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
It doesn’t show in the gene pool. Sorry!

False, N is found in Socotra and India
“N” what?
mtDNA haplogroup N. the most prominent mitochondrial haplogroup on Socotra also found in India
Posts: 42937 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
It doesn’t show in the gene pool. Sorry!

False, N is found in Socotra and India
“N” what?
mtDNA haplogroup N
By “what”, I mean the sub-clade.

Let’s not forget the L3 is parental to mt-DNA N.
Let’s not forget that the Socotra are a ancient outgoing population.

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -


 -
Out of Arabia—The settlement of Island Soqotra as revealed by mitochondrial and Y chromosome genetic diversity

Article (PDF Available)  in American Journal of Physical Anthropology 138(4):439-47 · December 2008 

______________________

Most Soqotri people from Al-Mahrah tribe, who are of Southern Arabian descent from Al Mahrah Governorate in Yemen related with the Qara and Mahra groups of Southern Arabia. There are also a small number of residents of Somali and other Africans and people Indian origin.

Posts: 42937 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

Results

The Saudi mtDNA profile confirms the absence of autochthonous mtDNA lineages in Arabia with coalescence ages deep enough to support population continuity in the region since the out-of-Africa episode.

[…]

Introduction


At the beginning of this century, studies based on mtDNA complete genomes [15–18] confirmed that only two mtDNA lineages (named M and N), sister branches of the African macro-haplogroup L3 lineages, embraced all the mtDNA variation that exists out of Africa. Based on the phylogeography of M and N in Eurasia, it was proposed that M and N could respectively represent the maternal signals of both a southern and a northern route out of Africa [19].

[…]

For western Eurasian haplogroups we relied on recent reviews carried out by others: N1 [6,25–29], N2 [6,27–29], N3 [26,28–30], N5 [27,31], and X [6,26,27,32]. In addition, 553 Arabian samples previously published in Abu-Amero et al. [19]) were also included in our study.

[…]

Khor Angar (Djibouti) L3 Expected age (Kya) 70.8(52.7–88.1)

Damqawt (Yemen) N1a3a Expected age (Kya) 68.2(56.1–80.0)


—Rosa Fregel, Vicente Cabrera, […], and Ana M. González (2015)

Carriers of Mitochondrial DNA Macrohaplogroup N Lineages Reached Australia around 50,000 Years Ago following a Northern Asian Route


Yadah yadah tralalala.

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly Kemet:
The complexion they gave her is close to the pigment used to depict her on the relief. what the hell are you talking about?

Quite Frankly,

If you call that close, you need spectacles. There is a reason why I posted a closeup, but even that wasn’t sufficient for you. Please visit the optician rather hella quickly.

So you can observe better on Kemet.

Nefertiti’s booty,

 -

quote:
Originally posted by Cass/:
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
So what lead them to "migrate back"?.

Phat asz thick thigh love lip African gahlz
what else?

Well, that's not supported by physical attractiveness data. European/Middle Eastern and East Asian men (on average) don't find large buttocks attractive; Caucasian men like medium size, while East Asians, small:

"This ethnic difference is apparent in the differences in ethnic ideals with respect to buttock augmentation surgery (Roberts et al., 2006) in which Asians prefer very small and African Americans very large buttocks."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4556148/

Caucasian & East Asian women are mostly similar, only African-American women in the following study thought large buttocks were beautiful.

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/IJCST-11-2015-0128?journalCode=ijcst

[Big Grin]
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brit333:
Ancient Egyptians resembled modern Egyptians. The Middle Eastern Farmers migrated into Egypt about 9000 - 6000 years ago. They replaced the earlier Egyptians (Cro-Magnon descendants) and started farming in Egypt. Farming leads to civilization. Many small towns appear all over Egypt, the largest and most powerful being Hierakonpolis which eventually takes over the whole of Egypt.

Southern Egypt is a mix of East Africans, Berbers and Middle Eastern Farmers. Gerzean Culture of Southern Egypt was heavily influenced by Mesopotamia. I wonder why so many people ignore the fact that the ancient Sumerians (the first to build pyramids) heavily influenced Egypt?
http://www.recoveredscience.com/const128mesopotamianinfluences.htm

Now we get to he final stage. Why the ancient language had to be “decrypted / deciphered” in the first place? If the people who claim to be the direct descendants and claim to speak the original language didn’t even know it. lol And are even using Greek, “middle age / classic” Arabic and even Turkish names to describe places. This tells us that you are willing to lie a million miles.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I like the way Troll Patrol continues to have conversations with posters who have been banned since February, always looking for a fight
Posts: 42937 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
I like the way Troll Patrol continues to have conversations with posters who have been banned since February, always looking for a fight

Always? So how many folks have been banned? I did not even notice the crockpot got banned.

I was a former martial artists, so yeah it’s the fighter in me.

Anyway, perhaps you can answer the question I have proposed.


Thanks in advance!

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Why has this thread been altered and manipulated? Why have my posts been removed and why is this now a lioness OP-thread instead of my thread?
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3