posted
I'm going to try to find that one, but wasn't that study posted here before?
Posts: 26295 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^It sounds familiar, because another study [again by S. Zakrzewski*] assessing cranial morphology from 'six periods' had been recited here, having to do with:
Previous studies have compared biological relationships between Egyptians and other populations, mostly using the Howells global cranial data set. In the current study, by contrast, the biological relationships within a series of temporally-successive cranial samples are assessed.
The data consist of 55 cranio-facial variables from 418 adult Egyptian individuals, from six periods, ranging in date from c. 5000 to 1200 BC. These were compared with the 111 Late Period crania (c. 600-350 BC) from the Howells sample. Principal Component and Canonical Discriminant Function Analyses were undertaken, on both pooled and single sex samples.
The results suggest a level of local population continuity exists within the earlier Egyptian populations, but that this was in association with some change in population structure, reflecting small-scale immigration and admixture with new groups. Most dramatically, the results also indicate that the Egyptian series from Howells global data set are morphologically distinct from the Predynastic and Early Dynastic Nile Valley samples (especially in cranial vault shape and height), and thus show that this sample CANNOT BE CONSIDERED to be a typical Egyptian series.
This must be another assessment, if not a continuation of the previous work.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Yo my man Jom, you got a study by Zarkewski about the egyptian mummy body ratios or whatever, thanks in advance. Peace. Posts: 447 | From: Somewhere son... | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
So basically according to this study the egyptian state formation was indigenous through and after the pre-dynastic period but had some immigrants comming in to the nation slowly until the middle-kingdom and gradually increasing after the middle kingdom where they got assimilated or Egyptianized? All eventually adapted to the Egyptian society but contributed to the civilization by whatever skills they had. Sounds alot as the modern "western civilization".
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Yo my man Jom, you got a study by Zarkewski about the egyptian mummy body ratios or whatever, thanks in advance. Peace.
That would be this study:
Sonia R. Zakrzewski, Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BF, UK, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 121:219–229 (2003)
quote:Originally posted by Yonis: So basically according to this study the egyptian state formation was indigenous through and after the pre-dynastic period but had some immigrants comming in to the nation slowly until the middle-kingdom and gradually increasing after the middle kingdom where they got assimilated or Egyptianized? All eventually adapted to the Egyptian society but contributed to the civilization by whatever skills they had. Sounds alot as the modern "western civilization".
^ Except without racism, let alone white supremacy inherent in Western civilization due to historical reasons. Also, with Egypt being a predominantly black society. Other than that, I guess, yeah.
Posts: 26295 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic