posted
Remember when early last year Asar Imhotep interviewed Dr. Shomarka Keita, and Keita brought up a study he was doing on the late Epipaleolithic Faiyum woman of the Qarunian Culture.
Well the study came out earlier this year and I don't think anyone has brought it up yet:
As the title says, it's a short report that assess the cranial morphological features of the Qarunian woman. He used both the old Penrose distance method as well as the Mahalanobis method. The skull was found to be most similar in morphometric pattern to the series from Wadi Halfa and recent Ugandans, and more distant from the early Holocene/late Pleistocene material from northwest Africa, including the Capsian Neolithic and “protohistoric” series. Henneberg et al. (1989)state that it is not possible to establish any “purely populational” identity, but only observe the similarity to the Ugandans and WadiHalfa, and that the skull was more “modern” than the Mechta (Iberomarusian and Capsian) series. It was further observed that the more robust remains from NW Africa grouped together but not with the fairly robust Mesolithic material from Wadi Halfa...
DISCUSSION The relative similarity of the Qarunian skull to the Teita considered with the results from Henneberg et al. (1989) may indicate an adaptive pattern that was common along the Nile and its basin. More than this cannot be said. In the Penrose analysis the skull was most similar to a “Mesolithic” Wadi Halfa and recent Ugandan series which are also from in eastern Africa, in contrast to the Maghreb cranial series of any age. Uganda is adjacent to Kenya which suggests that a study of large series from this region would be of interest in a comparison with series north and south of the lake regions of east Africa. A more detailed analysis is needed to determine what metric traits most “drive” the similarity between all of these series. Northeastern African populations are known to have morphometric patterns that roughly follow a north-south gradient for multiple aspects of the craniofacial region (Keita, 2004).
Interesting how affinities were found with the Teita which harkens back to Michael Crichton's old thesis paper. But the main point is that the closest population temporo-spatially was the Mesolithic Wadi Halfa.
Compare and contrast Keita's findings with those of the older 1989 Wendorf & Schild study of the Qarunian Woman.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
"The Qarunians basically were immigrants northern to the Fayoum after the Egyptian Nile-Vally got essentially uninhabited due to the former population expansion to the green Sahara. The Qarunians were Outliers for Certain before them Egyptians in Culture and outlier to the future after them Egyptians as well as Nubians in Morphology And they showed affinity to the so called ''Victim specimen'' of the SSA kind found at Jebel Sahaba. The Qarurnians were Fishermen, with no pottery making even their date is very young where nearby populations practiced it in East Sahara as well as Levant, Knives and scrapers making within them is pretty common. And Their sites were small and evidences strongly suggestive of only a seasonal, short-lived settlements.
In short, they were an offshoot of the El-Kabians. A southern adapted and Settled Nile valley type of populations who penetrated Northward along the Nile. Also since this was mentioned, Guys. You can't generalize the Mesolithic inhabitants of Egypt in one Category since it was heterogeneous at that time period. The End of the so called Khormusan era of the Nile-Valley (Nazlet Khater specimen related?) was accompanied by a rise of a New Microblade based industries in what can be grouped Formerly under the term Sebilian I period - the former mentioned Sebilian in the quote is the period Number 2 in the pre 1990 label system, Notice not to mix both up -. Various Authors due to absent of one team work in addition to the Political instability and High Dam construction at that time period in Egypt, have provided different names to mostly related cultures in the Nile-Valley (Fakhurian, Halfan, Kubbaniyan, Esnan.. etc) Some were just different name of a one attested culture where the first was a name for the Egyptian side and the second was a name provided for Sudan's sites. And they largely Showed resemblance to the Natufians (via Mushabians) and Iberomaurusians."
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Antalas This grammar hurts to read man... I'm guessing it's translated. Probably from french right? please drop the source so we can investigate in a manner to better understand what's being said.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: @Antalas This grammar hurts to read man... I'm guessing it's translated. Probably from french right? please drop the source so we can investigate in a manner to better understand what's being said.
It was actually written by the member "The Saite" on anthrogenica. It would be interesting to have your opinion on this.
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: What's your opinion on this :
"The Qarunians basically were immigrants northern to the Fayoum after the Egyptian Nile-Valley got essentially uninhabited due to the former population expansion to the green Sahara. The Qarunians were Outliers for Certain before them Egyptians in Culture and outlier to the future after them Egyptians as well as Nubians in Morphology And they showed affinity to the so called ''Victim specimen'' of the SSA kind found at Jebel Sahaba. The Qarurnians were Fishermen, with no pottery making even their date is very young where nearby populations practiced it in East Sahara as well as Levant, Knives and scrapers making within them is pretty common. And Their sites were small and evidences strongly suggestive of only a seasonal, short-lived settlements.
In short, they were an offshoot of the El-Kabians. A southern adapted and Settled Nile valley type of populations who penetrated Northward along the Nile. Also since this was mentioned, Guys. You can't generalize the Mesolithic inhabitants of Egypt in one Category since it was heterogeneous at that time period. The End of the so called Khormusan era of the Nile-Valley (Nazlet Khater specimen related?) was accompanied by a rise of a New Microblade based industries in what can be grouped Formerly under the term Sebilian I period - the former mentioned Sebilian in the quote is the period Number 2 in the pre 1990 label system, Notice not to mix both up -. Various Authors due to absent of one team work in addition to the Political instability and High Dam construction at that time period in Egypt, have provided different names to mostly related cultures in the Nile-Valley (Fakhurian, Halfan, Kubbaniyan, Esnan.. etc) Some were just different name of a one attested culture where the first was a name for the Egyptian side and the second was a name provided for Sudan's sites. And they largely Showed resemblance to the Natufians (via Mushabians) and Iberomaurusians."
It took me a while to process the bad English grammar, but I agree that the Qarunians do represent a northern branch of the same Saharan culture that produced the Jebel Sahabans not just do to cranial morphology but certain similarities in burial.
According to Wendorf & Schild: ...The style of the burial dealt with here is exactly similar to the majority of burials at Terminal Palaeolithic cemetery of Jebel Sahaba in Sudanese Nubia (Wendorf 1968) related to the Qadan industry. Similarly, though with a higher number of exceptions than those at Jebel Sahaba, the deceased were buried at approximately the same time on the western bank of the Nile, opposite Jebel Sahaba (Armelagos 1965). A child’s skeleton from the Neolithic settlement (site E1 Ghorab — E-79-4) of Egyptian Western Desert was equally strongly flexed, but placed on its right side with the head pointing west (Kobusiewicz 1984). Nearby, in the vicinity of Jebel Nabta, a double burial of probably Terminal Neolithic origin was excavated in which both individuals were lying on their right sides with their heads directed to the west, facing south, and the hands close to their faces. The legs of one of the skeletons were strongly flexed, while the other one’s legs looked as if pulled back (Wendorf and Schild 1980).
So we are dealing with a large range Saharan Culture or in this case 'Western Desert' Culture that settled the Nile region and comprised of people with "Sub-Saharan" like affinities. What I find interesting though is the fact that the Qarunian woman's features are more gracile compared to those of the more robust Jebel Sahaban females, to the point that Keita saw affinities with modern Teita women.
So the Saite person you cite may have a very good point that the Mesolithic Nubians were not as homogeneous as we are lead to believe.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Djehuti What do you think about the overlap between them and cultures of the Levant?
quote:While the Fayum sites appear to share a subsistence adaptation consistent with predomestication sites to the South, it is questionable whether, from a typological point of view, they should be included with this group since the barbed bone points conform more nearly to Natufian counterparts from the Near East. Such points are extremely rare in the Natufian and Kebara has yielded the largest series of seven specimens. As Fig. 2, 26 and 27, indicate, these pieces are extremely thin, with small very widely spaced barbs. The tip has a "crochet hook" appearance because the first barb is very small and set close to the tip. The most distal barb is far from the butt, which is pointed and lacks notches, grooves, or perforations. Although the Fayum B materials are variable, as Fig. 2, 32 indicates, on the basis of relative dimensions and point and butt treatment, they are most comfortably classified with the Natufian.
More specifically... What are the odds of Early Hunter gatherers of the Nilotic complex as well as those of the Natufian directly interacting during that phase?
BTW saite said a lot of things most of which I'm cautious to cosign due to misinterpretation (M35 being Eurasian?) But he spoke about the Helwan retouched bladelets being evident of Near Eastern assimilation deep into east Africa. (see this study). It's one of those clearly spontaneous industries that pops up in areas Adjacent to the Nile (in this case the delta) around the same time. Remember this interaction between us, Swenet and Capra? To reiterate this time it seems quite easy to pinpoint(in speculation), Early Settlements of Delta is probably what we should be looking at for Mushabean related industries.
Nonetheless getting back to the Qarunian, there seems to be some Heterogeneity that goes under the radar. This is most probably due to the fact that we're dealing with SSA variability which tends to get lumped into one. Nonetheless It's weird that they aren't associated with any ceramics though we know around that time period wavy-line pottery had popped off. And their odd cultural separation from other East Africans and similarity to Kebaran-Natufians when relating to Barbed-bone points is interesting. It makes me wonder If the people associated with the Qarunian actually predated or were of an Early offshoot of the Mesolithic-Nubian type people. They weren't entirely sedentary and probably bore a more intermediate position to known more southern East Africans and the Saharo-Nilotic population being relics of the earliest East Africans to travel in that direction.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
I could be misremembering, but weren’t predynastic Upper Egyptians using harpoons more similar to cultures further south than to the Fayumian/Natufian ones? I think I have an old book saying that. I will dig it up when I get back home.
UPDATE:
quote:The [Ishango harpoon] technology also seems to have followed a secondary branch northward from Khartoum along the Nile Valley to Naqada in Egypt. This site has both bone and copper harpoons. Made in the Neolithic period before the Egyptian dynasties began, many of them are notched at the head. Others show the influence of the Near Eastern Natufian technique and the Fayum technique which is closely related to it.
---de Heinzelin, Jean: "Ishango", Scientific American, 206:6 (June 1962) 105--116. (Quoted in Ivan Van Sertima's Egypt in Africa, p. 37-8)
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Djehuti What do you think about the overlap between them and cultures of the Levant?
I think it is far more than coincidence.
quote:
quote:While the Fayum sites appear to share a subsistence adaptation consistent with predomestication sites to the South, it is questionable whether, from a typological point of view, they should be included with this group since the barbed bone points conform more nearly to Natufian counterparts from the Near East. Such points are extremely rare in the Natufian and Kebara has yielded the largest series of seven specimens. As Fig. 2, 26 and 27, indicate, these pieces are extremely thin, with small very widely spaced barbs. The tip has a "crochet hook" appearance because the first barb is very small and set close to the tip. The most distal barb is far from the butt, which is pointed and lacks notches, grooves, or perforations. Although the Fayum B materials are variable, as Fig. 2, 32 indicates, on the basis of relative dimensions and point and butt treatment, they are most comfortably classified with the Natufian.
More specifically... What are the odds of Early Hunter gatherers of the Nilotic complex as well as those of the Natufian directly interacting during that phase?
Well I'd say the odds are more than good during the Holocene Green Sahara period.
Neolithic Cultures of Africa (Josef Eiwanger 1987) Orange: Caridial and Impressoceramics Brown: Neolithic Capsian tradition light green: Saharo-Sudanese cultures (Khartoum culture, Shaheinab culture) red: Neolithic of the Niger purple: Levant - Old Neolithic (Fayum Neolithic, Merimde) green: Upper Egyptian Neolithic (Badari)
Although I wouldn't exactly call these early cultures of the Egyptian Delta and Libyan Cyrenaica as "Natufian". The Wendorf & Schild paper and that of Eiwanger come from the late 80s and are outdated in some regards particularly when it comes to their classifications of "Natufian" based on certain resemblances. More recent research has come out showing that these cultures not only predate the Natufian Culture but in fact may be ancestral to it. This is shown to be the case with the Helwan Culture of Egypt and may likely be the same for the Dabban Culture of Libya which also precedes the Natufian.
quote:BTW saite said a lot of things most of which I'm cautious to cosign due to misinterpretation (M35 being Eurasian?) But he spoke about the Helwan retouched bladelets being evident of Near Eastern assimilation deep into east Africa. (see this study). It's one of those clearly spontaneous industries that pops up in areas Adjacent to the Nile (in this case the delta) around the same time. Remember this interaction between us, Swenet and Capra? To reiterate this time it seems quite easy to pinpoint(in speculation), Early Settlements of Delta is probably what we should be looking at for Mushabean related industries.
It's the other way around-- The Dabban Culture of Libya is far older than the Natufian with its backed bladelets and there is already a lot of debate about the mircoburin technique of the Mushabians originating in North Africa. But for him to claim any major branch of E-M215 is "Eurasian" is a silly non-starter.
quote:Nonetheless getting back to the Qarunian, there seems to be some Heterogeneity that goes under the radar. This is most probably due to the fact that we're dealing with SSA variability which tends to get lumped into one. Nonetheless It's weird that they aren't associated with any ceramics though we know around that time period wavy-line pottery had popped off. And their odd cultural separation from other East Africans and similarity to Kebaran-Natufians when relating to Barbed-bone points is interesting. It makes me wonder If the people associated with the Qarunian actually predated or were of an Early offshoot of the Mesolithic-Nubian type people. They weren't entirely sedentary and probably bore a more intermediate position to known more southern East Africans and the Saharo-Nilotic population being relics of the earliest East Africans to travel in that direction.
This is my point precisely. Note how large a territory the Saharo-Sudanese Complex. While there were some commonalities in the material culture there was also a great deal of regional variation as well. So why can't we assume the same thing about the physical population? If we are to assume that the Nile Valley Jebel Sahabans of Nubia and the Qarunians of the Fayum were offshoots of this metapopulation we can note the differences as well as similarities.
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Djehuti What do you think about the overlap between them and cultures of the Levant?
I think it is far more than coincidence.
quote:
quote:While the Fayum sites appear to share a subsistence adaptation consistent with predomestication sites to the South, it is questionable whether, from a typological point of view, they should be included with this group since the barbed bone points conform more nearly to Natufian counterparts from the Near East. Such points are extremely rare in the Natufian and Kebara has yielded the largest series of seven specimens. As Fig. 2, 26 and 27, indicate, these pieces are extremely thin, with small very widely spaced barbs. The tip has a "crochet hook" appearance because the first barb is very small and set close to the tip. The most distal barb is far from the butt, which is pointed and lacks notches, grooves, or perforations. Although the Fayum B materials are variable, as Fig. 2, 32 indicates, on the basis of relative dimensions and point and butt treatment, they are most comfortably classified with the Natufian.
More specifically... What are the odds of Early Hunter gatherers of the Nilotic complex as well as those of the Natufian directly interacting during that phase?
Well I'd say the odds are more than good during the Holocene Green Sahara period.
Neolithic Cultures of Africa (Josef Eiwanger 1987) Orange: Caridial and Impressoceramics Brown: Neolithic Capsian tradition light green: Saharo-Sudanese cultures (Khartoum culture, Shaheinab culture) red: Neolithic of the Niger purple: Levant - Old Neolithic (Fayum Neolithic, Merimde) green: Upper Egyptian Neolithic (Badari)
Although I wouldn't exactly call these early cultures of the Egyptian Delta and Libyan Cyrenaica as "Natufian". The Wendorf & Schild paper and that of Eiwanger come from the late 80s and are outdated in some regards particularly when it comes to their classifications of "Natufian" based on certain resemblances. More recent research has come out showing that these cultures not only predate the Natufian Culture but in fact may be ancestral to it. This is shown to be the case with the Helwan Culture of Egypt and may likely be the same for the Dabban Culture of Libya which also precedes the Natufian.
quote:BTW saite said a lot of things most of which I'm cautious to cosign due to misinterpretation (M35 being Eurasian?) But he spoke about the Helwan retouched bladelets being evident of Near Eastern assimilation deep into east Africa. (see this study). It's one of those clearly spontaneous industries that pops up in areas Adjacent to the Nile (in this case the delta) around the same time. Remember this interaction between us, Swenet and Capra? To reiterate this time it seems quite easy to pinpoint(in speculation), Early Settlements of Delta is probably what we should be looking at for Mushabean related industries.
It's the other way around-- The Dabban Culture of Libya is far older than the Natufian with its backed bladelets and there is already a lot of debate about the mircoburin technique of the Mushabians originating in North Africa. But for him to claim any major branch of E-M215 is "Eurasian" is a silly non-starter.
quote:Nonetheless getting back to the Qarunian, there seems to be some Heterogeneity that goes under the radar. This is most probably due to the fact that we're dealing with SSA variability which tends to get lumped into one. Nonetheless It's weird that they aren't associated with any ceramics though we know around that time period wavy-line pottery had popped off. And their odd cultural separation from other East Africans and similarity to Kebaran-Natufians when relating to Barbed-bone points is interesting. It makes me wonder If the people associated with the Qarunian actually predated or were of an Early offshoot of the Mesolithic-Nubian type people. They weren't entirely sedentary and probably bore a more intermediate position to known more southern East Africans and the Saharo-Nilotic population being relics of the earliest East Africans to travel in that direction.
This is my point precisely. Note how large a territory the Saharo-Sudanese Complex. While there were some commonalities in the material culture there was also a great deal of regional variation as well. So why can't we assume the same thing about the physical population? If we are to assume that the Nile Valley Jebel Sahabans of Nubia and the Qarunians of the Fayum were offshoots of this metapopulation we can note the differences as well as similarities.
The neolithic or so-called neolithic cultures of the Nile Valley, Delta, Nubia, and adjacent Sahara were a single cultural complex. They had their own particularities while sharing some common characteristics.
Faiym's proximity to the Levant meant there would have been likely cultural exchange between the two cultures (Natufian and Faiyum). However, the neolithic in that region was characterized by hunter-gatherers adopting domesticated grains and treating them no differently from how they treated the wild grains, such as sorghum that they collected and even "cultivated." They treated domestic animals like walking tin cans of protein, keeping them for milk and blood as food security in times of uncertainty, like the rest of the N. East African Neolithic. They mostly relied on fish: The Faiyum Revisted
"The current set of ‘big question’ models see the Fayum much in the way that scholars characterised it in the mid-twentieth century, as an example in Lower Egypt of a southwest Asian village based Neolithic socio-economy, the first example of a Neolithic that formed the basis for later complex society. By considering the wide range of evidence that the Fayum has to offer, such a reconstruction is no longer possible. The dispersed nature of the settlement pattern, the mix of storage for domestic grain and mobility and the use of predominantly wild, lacustrine resources with the addition of a small proportion of domestic animals has no direct analogues with southwest Asia. It does, however, have similarities to other Northeast African archaeological records."
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: The neolithic or so-called neolithic cultures of the Nile Valley, Delta, Nubia, and adjacent Sahara were a single cultural complex. They had their own particularities while sharing some common characteristics.
They were not a single complex as I just explained even the Saharo-Sudanese is barely a single complex of itself much less that and all the others combined. Really the only thing they had in common was the use of pottery as well as other general neolithic ware.
Even in the Nile Valley alone there were differences between the Delta complex and that of the Valley i.e. Tasio-Badarian.
quote:Faiym's proximity to the Levant meant there would have been likely cultural exchange between the two cultures (Natufian and Faiyum). However, the neolithic in that region was characterized by hunter-gatherers adopting domesticated grains and treating them no differently from how they treated the wild grains, such as sorghum that they collected and even "cultivated." They treated domestic animals like walking tin cans of protein, keeping them for milk and blood as food security in times of uncertainty, like the rest of the N. East African Neolithic. They mostly relied on fish: The Faiyum Revisted
"The current set of ‘big question’ models see the Fayum much in the way that scholars characterised it in the mid-twentieth century, as an example in Lower Egypt of a southwest Asian village based Neolithic socio-economy, the first example of a Neolithic that formed the basis for later complex society. By considering the wide range of evidence that the Fayum has to offer, such a reconstruction is no longer possible. The dispersed nature of the settlement pattern, the mix of storage for domestic grain and mobility and the use of predominantly wild, lacustrine resources with the addition of a small proportion of domestic animals has no direct analogues with southwest Asia. It does, however, have similarities to other Northeast African archaeological records."
Yes, that's pretty much the theory that we've been maintaining here on Egyptsearch for well over a decade now. The 'Dynastic Race Theory' has long been debunked though Euronuts are trying to revive it in a different form of 'Predynastic Race Theory' where Eurasian (Caucasoids) from Asia planted their cultural seeds so to speak in North Africa during the Late Pleistocene but even that is looking debunked now with the DNA evidence.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: I could be misremembering, but weren’t predynastic Upper Egyptians using harpoons more similar to cultures further south than to the Fayumian/Natufian ones? I think I have an old book saying that. I will dig it up when I get back home.
UPDATE:
quote:The [Ishango harpoon] technology also seems to have followed a secondary branch northward from Khartoum along the Nile Valley to Naqada in Egypt. This site has both bone and copper harpoons. Made in the Neolithic period before the Egyptian dynasties began, many of them are notched at the head. Others show the influence of the Near Eastern Natufian technique and the Fayum technique which is closely related to it.
---de Heinzelin, Jean: "Ishango", Scientific American, 206:6 (June 1962) 105--116. (Quoted in Ivan Van Sertima's Egypt in Africa, p. 37-8)
Ironically...
Naqada's harpoons show's evidence of direct influence from Khartoum AND the Qarunians
quote:"The technology also seems to have followed a secondary branch northward from Khartoum along the Nile Valley to Nagada in Egypt. This site has both bone and copper harpoons. Made in the Neolithic period before the Egyptian dynasties began, many of them are notched at the head. Others show the influence of the Near Eastern Natufian technique and the Fayum technique, which is closely related to it."
de Heinzelin 1962
And now we know that the so called Fayoum technique was used by a "temporary" group with very strong SSA characteristics. Looking at the Naqada techniques, the ones which show Fayoum/Natufian characteristics, we can clearly see an distinctive evolution which'd coincide with time passed in isolation maybe. Clearly there's continuity there.
Naqada to the left, Fayum B the three in the center, Natufian are all on the right
The other Naqadan harpoons show clear continuity from the ones excavated at khartoum.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Dynastic Race theory was dead from the start, its just that some people took a while to figure out that these people were lying to begin with. African scholars going back to the 1900s called this out quite clearly. Right now the crux of the issue is whether the neolithic revolution is the result of African traditions and practices being adapted to local grains and species of Levant that were more favorable to domestication. And as such his makes Africa a part of the rise of the Neolithic lifestyle. However, for the last 10 years folks have been following the fallout of the Lazaridis paper and his attempts to model ancient DNA in Eurasia without an African component. The sad part being to turn around and refuse to model ancient African DNA without any Eurasian components.
And this was a big discussion on this site when it came out.
posted
Anyway, the point of posting those excerpts from Barich's book is to show that there was indeed a cultural continuity. I disagree with the notion that hunting and fishing by the Qarunians was adopted from Nile Valley folk when such traditions were taking place in the Saharan region. But definitely the stone technology was common with the El Kabians as Antalas cited. Notice that Barich notes strong ties between the Abkan Culture and A-Group, which is something I've seen in multiple sources. Note also how the epipaleolithic culture of the Nile Valley already had native pastoralism alongside foraging and grinding of wild grains. That grains were already being precured and processed explains why when the fully domestic grains from Asia were introduced, no foreign words came associated with them. The same is true with cattle pastoralism in which some Egyptian words even have Nilo-Saharan terms.
I am curious as to the morphology of the Qarunian Woman herself. She has affinities to the contemporary Wadi Halfans but her affinities are even closer to modern Ugandans and Teita which is understandable since her features are described as gracile in contrast to the more robust Wadi Halfans. Recall the Irish study showing the Wadi Halfans to be an outlier among the Sub-Saharan group. Keita's study is based on metric data, so nonmetric data will be needed to better elucidate the Qarunian's relation to the Wadi Halfans.
What's also interesting is that the Qarunian type seems to have persisted into later Neolithic and Chalcolithic times and perhaps beyond.
Most Ancient Egypt, Chapter III. The Neolithic and Chalcolithic Communities of Northern Egypt Author(s): William C. Hayes Source: Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 23, No. 4 (Oct., 1964), pp. 217-272 The stone implements of Maadi South are without exception flakes and blades showing the same technique and many of the same forms seen in the settlement. Blades, knives, and scrapers of tabu flint predominate and there are also a few flakes with serrated edges. The slate cosmetic palettes are either trapezoidal with beveled edges or of the rhomboidal type which we associate with the Naqada cultures of Upper Egypt.
The skeletons of the men, women, and infant children buried in this cemetery are in many cases well preserved, but no anthropological report concerning them is as yet available. They are described in a brief resume on the site as being taller, more heavily built, and more prognathous (more negroid?) than the people of Maadi North, sharing these characteristics with the occupants of a cemetery near Heliopolis, to which we shall presently turn our attention.
And
The early northern Egyptian, wherever we encounter him-Merimda, El Omari, Maadi North, Maadi South, and Heliopolis -appears to have been somewhat taller and more sturdily built than his Upper Egyptian contemporary and to have been endowed with a broader and better formed skull and a generally greater cranial capacity. The prognathism observed in the skulls from Maadi South and Heliopolis may or may not indicate the infiltration of a negroid strain into the northern region and, on the other hand, a few broad, square-jawed skulls found in a cemetery near Deir Tasa may point to the existence of an outpost of the "Northern Race" in Middle Egypt. Generally speaking, how- ever, the prehistoric northerner seems to represent a type distinct in race and physique as well as in culture from the people of the south. In him, rather than in some intrusive group of outlanders, we may perhaps recognize, with Junker, the ancestor of the so-called Dynastic Race, or Giza type, of Early Dynastic and Old Kingdom times.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Strange how folks are searching for a West African connection to Ancient Egypt yet ignore this thread. The Qarunian Woman may very well represent a population with connections to the Central Saharan Aqualithic Culture and therefore to West Africans.
So far the craniometric data supports this per Keita's findings though I still await nonmetric data to reaffirm it.
What's more is we do have genetic evidence in the form of Benin HBS (sickle cell haplotype).
Not to mention maternal L2b lineage prominent in Egypt and even Neolithic Levant, though there is the minute presence of paternal E1b1a as well especially if we are to believe the findings on Ramsesside lineage.
Again, some posters are so bent on giving West Africans direct ancient Egyptian heritage that they don't realize the likely scenario of a shared heritage via the Central Sahara.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic