Originally posted by BrandonP:
An artistic reconstruction by Tom Bjorklund:
quote:From the text of the paper:
The Tyrolean Iceman is known as one of the oldest human glacier mummies, directly dated to 3350–3120 calibrated BCE. A previously published low-coverage genome provided novel insights into European prehistory, despite high present-day DNA contamination. Here, we generate a high-coverage genome with low contamination (15.3×) to gain further insights into the genetic history and phenotype of this individual. Contrary to previous studies, we found no detectable Steppe-related ancestry in the Iceman. Instead, he retained the highest Anatolian-farmer-related ancestry among contemporaneous European populations, indicating a rather isolated Alpine population with limited gene flow from hunter-gatherer-ancestry-related populations. Phenotypic analysis revealed that the Iceman likely had darker skin than present-day Europeans and carried risk alleles associated with male-pattern baldness, type 2 diabetes, and obesity-related metabolic syndrome. These results corroborate phenotypic observations of the preserved mummified body, such as high pigmentation of his skin and the absence of hair on his head.
quote:
While genetic information cannot yet be used to completely reconstruct the appearance of an individual, genetic models exist for specific phenotypic features. Among those, skin pigmentation is a relatively well-understood trait that can be inferred from genetic data. We examined 170 skin pigmentation-associated SNPs from the UK Biobank genome-wide association study (GWAS) for skin color and retrieved diploid genotype information from 154 biallelic sites in Iceman. Each phenotype-informative SNP has a different effect size, i.e., the variance in pigmentation explained by individual SNPs is different. Thus, we combined the effect size of each pigmentation-informative SNP together with all examined effective alleles as an indication for the final phenotypic trait. To take effect size impact into consideration, we calculated a weighted genetic score given the individual SNP weight from the UK Biobank GWAS-estimated effect sizes, which is the weighted proportion of dark pigmentation alleles used as an indicator of skin pigmentation. The weighted genetic score of dark pigmentation in the Iceman is estimated to be 0.591, higher than the score of present-day southern European populations taking Sardinians as an example (Table S11), which the Iceman shares closest genetic affinity to (Figure S1) and which represent the highest level of pigmentation among modern-day European groups, although it is lower than the score of ancient LBK farmers and the Luxembourg_Loschbour.DG hunter-gatherer (Table S11).
quote:Seems though they found some hair:
Posted by Brandon
These results corroborate phenotypic observations of the preserved mummified body, such as high pigmentation of his skin and the absence of hair on his head.
quote:Ötzi the Iceman - the Mummy
A few clumps of hair were found around the body, indicating that Ötzi had dark, medium-long hair which he wore loose.
quote:Seems the findings have awoke more than only scientific curiosity online, they have also awoken suspicion and allegations of some kind of political manipulation.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
yes but what was his race?
quote:
So when the same genome analysis was done in 2012 and found he had light skin and light eyes, it was wrong because DNA sequencing has improved in just 11 years?
A bit hard to believe and rather an expression of prevailing ideological currents in the academic world.
It also shows what a joke genetics is when it can be used for blatant political rewriting of archeology and history
quote:
I would wait to draw any definite conclusions from this. We now have a new political climate where history is being rewritten.
We have also destroyed the research at our universities so that it is now only 50% of all scientific work that gives the same results if you redo the same work.
That doesn't mean it can't be true. Just that I would be careful about jumping to any conclusions.
quote:
"I don't really understand what his skin color has to do with politics. Would they have falsified research results to conclude that there were Africans living in Europe 5000 years ago?"
Yes.
quote:https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02562-0?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=nature&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1692200778-1
Ötzi’s preservation on ice presented an early opportunity to do ancient-DNA work. In 2012, researchers published a draft version of Ötzi’s genome — one of the first ancient genomes ever sequenced. The analysis suggested that Ötzi had pale skin, brown eyes (previously thought to be blue) and steppe ancestry.
Divided by DNA: The uneasy relationship between archaeology and ancient genomics
This latter point was surprising because steppe ancestry — from ancient herding people hailing from eastern Europe and central Asia — is common among southern Europeans today, and research suggested that steppe people didn’t make their way into Europe for 1,000 years after Ötzi died. But researchers knew early on that Ötzi’s genome wasn’t sequenced perfectly.
Ancient-DNA technology has since improved by leaps and bounds. So, Zink and his colleagues collected shards from Ötzi’s exposed hip bone and sent it to Germany to be sequenced.
This higher-quality genome showed that Ötzi’s suspected steppe ancestry probably stemmed from modern DNA contamination . Instead, the team found an astonishing level of Anatolian-farmer ancestry. These early agriculturalists, who lived in the land sandwiched between the Mediterranean and Black seas, are thought to have migrated into Europe and mixed with local hunter-gatherers. But Ötzi didn’t carry much European hunter-gatherer DNA, hinting that his lineage was genetically isolated from other Europeans at the time.
quote:What do you mean? Oztis is a ancient European with genetic ties to ancient people ine modern country of Turkey. Otzi race is human.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
yes but what was his race?
quote:So if he looked like this is he biologically more similar to Western Europeans or Africans?
Originally posted by BrandonP:
An artistic reconstruction by Tom Bjorklund:
quote:Ötzi shares the greatest genetic similarity with Sardinians, a group of Southern Europeans, followed by Western Europeans. Africans don't cluster close to Anatolian farmers.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:So if he looked like this is he biologically more similar to Western Europeans or Africans?
Originally posted by BrandonP:
An artistic reconstruction by Tom Bjorklund:
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Seems the findings have awoke more than only scientific curiosity online, they have also awoken suspicion and allegations of some kind of political manipulation.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
yes but what was his race?
Here are a couple of voices from a Swedish online forum:
quote:
So when the same genome analysis was done in 2012 and found he had light skin and light eyes, it was wrong because DNA sequencing has improved in just 11 years?
A bit hard to believe and rather an expression of prevailing ideological currents in the academic world.
It also shows what a joke genetics is when it can be used for blatant political rewriting of archeology and historyquote:
I would wait to draw any definite conclusions from this. We now have a new political climate where history is being rewritten.
We have also destroyed the research at our universities so that it is now only 50% of all scientific work that gives the same results if you redo the same work.
That doesn't mean it can't be true. Just that I would be careful about jumping to any conclusions.quote:
"I don't really understand what his skin color has to do with politics. Would they have falsified research results to conclude that there were Africans living in Europe 5000 years ago?"
Yes.
quote:
Originally posted by Antalas:
@mightywolf Precisely, but those people consistently interpret "darker skin" as resembling black africans.
quote:Seems to be a common phenomena in many places. You can see the same among people who think that a light skinned Egyptian statue is a fake because it does not fit their picture of how ancient Egyptians looked like. Or one hear complaints about studies like the Abusir study which did not show the result that some people wished. And you can hear it among people who are not Egyptians or have any direct association to Egypt.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari
So basically when the results don't agree with them and their ideologies they bitch and whine and make allusions to some "political" agenda, as if Otzi has any sort of political bearing on any modern nation or government..esp Sweden of all places..but OK [Roll Eyes]
quote:
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Seems to be a common phenomena in many places. You can see the same among people who think that a light skinned Egyptian statue is a fake because it does not fit their picture of how ancient Egyptians looked like. Or one hear complaints about studies like the Abusir study which did not show the result that some people wished. And you can hear it among people who are not Egyptians or have any direct association to Egypt.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari
So basically when the results don't agree with them and their ideologies they bitch and whine and make allusions to some "political" agenda, as if Otzi has any sort of political bearing on any modern nation or government..esp Sweden of all places..but OK [Roll Eyes]
When it comes to Ötzi, when he was discovered there was some bickering between Italy and Austria about which country should have the right to own his remains (he was found nearly on the border between the two countries). In the end Italy "won". These kind of finds easily turns into national symbols, or even symbols for a whole continent.
Tom Björklund is originally from Finland but speaks Swedish too. When he painted Lola, a stone age girl from Denmark reconstructed from the DNA in a "chewing gum" made of birch tar, he was accused by some to paint her too light and by others to have painted her too dark. There are always some who are not happy with these results.
quote:
"I don't really understand what his skin color has to do with politics. Would they have falsified research results to conclude that there were Africans living in Europe 5000 years ago?"
Yes.
quote:About Ötzi, there are just a few Internet warriors who actually care about Ötzis skin color, most Swedes could not care less.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari-
DNA studies or new archelogical/antrhopolical finds are always more complicated than what most lay people understand or admit. In the case of the AbuSier study the complain was not that it showed stuff I did'nt want to find but the sensationalist Dog Whistling title, they used to garner media attention. As far as "Light Skinned" A. Egyptian statues, that's trivial, one can point to counless example of "Dark Skinned" statues, and the only ones I think are fake are so because of their sloppy and or unusual appearance, has nothing to do with the skin tone of said statue.
Weird how Italy/Austria are the main contenders for Otzi, yet Swedes are whining about some supposed "Agenda" which has nothing to do with them. Also Weird how Otzi is described as just "Darker" than modern Europeans w/o any context to exact complexion, he could've been olive skinned but somehow that is "Political rewriting of history", why are they so bothered, esp. when Otzi is not an ethnic ancestral Swede? Are'nt Modern Sardinians able to get darker complexions, like another poster pointed out?
Weird, its almost like they expect an ancient Europeans to only have their complexion, almost like Aforcentrists with A. Egyptians.
weird....
quote:Seems Internet attracts many extremists, who see the world in absolutes, in white and black.
I can't wait for the internet to melt down, and pearls to be clutcher from these reverse Afrocentrics who think Ancient Europeans can only be fair complexted to be considered European, everything else is "African"...lol
quote:I was also referring to white liberals – those individuals who harbor self-contempt and are overly enthusiastic about depicting prehistoric Europe as an extension of Africa, while simultaneously disregarding any notion of diversity. All of this is an attempt to impose their own narrative on us and alleviate their sense of guilt. They believe that by portraying their ancestors as having "dark skin" and looking like modern black africans, they present themselves as more impartial, post-colonial, and progressive.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
The only interpretaion here depicting anything having to do with or resembling a "black African" was done by a European, possibly Swedish Artist.
quote:But they are in the sense that earlier forms of humanity came from Africa and enough time has passed,plus the environment affected their populations.
Originally posted by Antalas:
quote:I was also referring to white liberals – those individuals who harbor self-contempt and are overly enthusiastic about depicting prehistoric Europe as an extension of Africa, while simultaneously disregarding any notion of diversity. All of this is an attempt to impose their own narrative on us and alleviate their sense of guilt. They believe that by portraying their ancestors as having "dark skin" and looking like modern black africans, they present themselves as more impartial, post-colonial, and progressive.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
The only interpretaion here depicting anything having to do with or resembling a "black African" was done by a European, possibly Swedish Artist.
quote:
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
quote:Seems Internet attracts many extremists, who see the world in absolutes, in white and black.
I can't wait for the internet to melt down, and pearls to be clutcher from these reverse Afrocentrics who think Ancient Europeans can only be fair complexted to be considered European, everything else is "African"...lol
quote:
Originally posted by Antalas:
quote:I was also referring to white liberals – those individuals who harbor self-contempt and are overly enthusiastic about depicting prehistoric Europe as an extension of Africa, while simultaneously disregarding any notion of diversity. All of this is an attempt to impose their own narrative on us and alleviate their sense of guilt. They believe that by portraying their ancestors as having "dark skin" and looking like modern black africans, they present themselves as more impartial, post-colonial, and progressive.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
The only interpretaion here depicting anything having to do with or resembling a "black African" was done by a European, possibly Swedish Artist.
quote:What connection does this individual from the Neolithic era have with OOAs? Do you realize that, chronologically, he's more proximate to you than those early Eurasians ? Are you aware that he's genetically similar to modern sardinians ? He would have looked like those people albeit with a darker tone and that's about it. All attempts to make him look like modern black africans are clearly politically motivated and not backed up by the data.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
[QB] Truth is no one really knows 100% what the OOA ancestral populations looked like by the time they reached Europe, all reconstructions are fantasy art. Pretending that its a bunch of "white liberals"(WTF) depicting OOA Populations as "Africans" is nothing but conspiritorial babble, none of those populations were "Europeans" or "Africans" to begin with, the were AMH who were migrating across lands and adapting to their enviroments. Showing images of modern Europeans with tan skin and pretending that Ancestral OOA populations looked 100% like that is just as wishful thinking as "White Liberals" depicting them with dark skin.
quote:
Originally posted by Antalas:
quote:What connection does this individual from the Neolithic era have with OOAs? Do you realize that, chronologically, he's more proximate to you than those early Eurasians ? Are you aware that he's genetically similar to modern sardinians ? He would have looked like those people albeit with a darker tone and that's about it. All attempts to make him look like modern black africans are clearly politically motivated and not backed up by the data.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
[QB] Truth is no one really knows 100% what the OOA ancestral populations looked like by the time they reached Europe, all reconstructions are fantasy art. Pretending that its a bunch of "white liberals"(WTF) depicting OOA Populations as "Africans" is nothing but conspiritorial babble, none of those populations were "Europeans" or "Africans" to begin with, the were AMH who were migrating across lands and adapting to their enviroments. Showing images of modern Europeans with tan skin and pretending that Ancestral OOA populations looked 100% like that is just as wishful thinking as "White Liberals" depicting them with dark skin.
quote:What should I deduce from the mention of OOAs, followed by the statement "we don't know how he would have looked like" ? With his DNA and skeleton available, what further evidence do you need ? The likelihood of his appearance being similar to that of Black Africans is as improbable as it is for East Asians, Indians, or any other group. The modern Sardinian population stands as the closest match to his features and DNA.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
[QB] What are you even babbling about? Where did I say that he was not genetically related to Sardinians or that he looked like a black African, actually where are all these supposed depictions of Otzi as a "black African", where else other than from you and supremist paranoid Swedes is anyone equating Otzi and Africans? Fact is you don't know WTF Otzi looked like 100%, nor does anyone else. You all are the only ones making claims not backed up by data and making political statements.
Mad over nothing..
F-king joke man
quote:
Originally posted by Antalas:
quote:What should I deduce from the mention of OOAs, followed by the statement "we don't know how he would have looked like" ? With his DNA and skeleton available, what further evidence do you need ? The likelihood of his appearance being similar to that of Black Africans is as improbable as it is for East Asians, Indians, or any other group. The modern Sardinian population stands as the closest match to his features and DNA.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
[QB] What are you even babbling about? Where did I say that he was not genetically related to Sardinians or that he looked like a black African, actually where are all these supposed depictions of Otzi as a "black African", where else other than from you and supremist paranoid Swedes is anyone equating Otzi and Africans? Fact is you don't know WTF Otzi looked like 100%, nor does anyone else. You all are the only ones making claims not backed up by data and making political statements.
Mad over nothing..
F-king joke man
quote:
Originally posted by BrandonP:
An artistic reconstruction by Tom Bjorklund:
quote:
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Seems the debate about the "new" Ötzi already got heated on social media. Here is a poster on Twitter who questions Tom Björklunds interpretation
https://twitter.com/Hieraaetus/status/1692996517198479591
Here is Tom Björklunds own Tweet with the painting
https://twitter.com/TomBjorklundArt/status/1692593502310273459
quote:New comment on Human phenotypes (Page 4)
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Stop showing these fake reconstructions. Otzi was melanated brown skined like other negroes. Not a pale white like the fake picture you posted.
quote:They are upset because, as I mentioned earlier, "darker-skinned" is often mistakenly associated with resembling Black Africans. Of course many european and black individuals exploit this misconception to further their own political agendas.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
[QB] LMAO, this is quite telling, so upset because Otzi is darker than modern Europeans..lol
Yup only Afrocentrists and A.Americans care about claiming ancient cultures based on skin color
quote:
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Just as a curiosity, Clyde Winters once referred to Ötzi as a "negro".
Here is the thread
quote:New comment on Human phenotypes (Page 4)
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Stop showing these fake reconstructions. Otzi was melanated brown skined like other negroes. Not a pale white like the fake picture you posted.
quote:Ooh, my mistake, hopefully he will not see this thread
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
Damn why'd you have to mention him, now he's probably gonna pollute the thread with his B.S gobbledegook theories...
quote:
Originally posted by Antalas:
quote:They are upset because, as I mentioned earlier, "darker-skinned" is often mistakenly associated with resembling Black Africans. Of course many european and black individuals exploit this misconception to further their own political agendas.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
[QB] LMAO, this is quite telling, so upset because Otzi is darker than modern Europeans..lol
Yup only Afrocentrists and A.Americans care about claiming ancient cultures based on skin color
quote:
Originally posted by BrandonP:
Goes to confirm a point Elmaestro has made about how important "lookership" (i.e. perceived resemblance to "Black people") is to these types.
quote:Literally no one brought the DNA paper...they're only upset by the artistic depiction. And why ? Because it doesn't look accurate nor similar to modern sardinians dark skinned or not.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
[QB] Literally no one is saying he looks like a black African, not is any mainstream artwork either, even Tom Bjorkund, the only one who has, looks nothing like a "Black African". 99% of the art on Otzi has him a a pale man.
So basically the only people making political statements about Otzi are the people upset about the DNA study claiming Otzi had dark skin, which they equate as meaning he was an African...
lol, you can't make this stuff up...
quote:(translated from Italian)
Bolzano, 08.16.2023
Elisabeth Vallazza, director of the South Tyrol Museum of Archaeology, is cautious in interpreting the results: “In addition to determining some hereditary genetic traits, the current study also opens the discussion on Ötzi's probable appearance. I am delighted that, in the future, new research can help us develop an even more realistic picture of this individual who lived over 5,000 years ago."
Finally, referring to the reconstruction in the museum, she specifies: "The well-known museum reproduction of 2011, created by paleoartists Adrie and Alfons Kennis on the basis of research of the time, is an attempt at interpretation, an idea of how we could imagine the 'Iceman during his lifetime. The main goal was to demonstrate that he was a modern, middle-aged, tattooed, wiry, weathered guy, just like you and me. At the moment, a new reconstruction is not planned."
quote:Yes but Tom Bjorkind seems to equate dark skin with black african that's what I'm trying to make you understand.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
^^^As far as I can tell Tom Bjorkind is the only one depicting him with dark skin. Bjorkind is not an afrocentrist, he depicts ancient people with various skin tones..
quote:How did each of these artists estimate the facial features?
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Two versions of Ötzi, the left one made by palaeontological artists Alfons and Adrie Kennis and the right one by paleoartist Tom Björklund.
In addition to different skin colors the facial features are also different in the two interpretations.
quote:You should know why. Certain people in the anthropology fandom just don't want to think too hard about how someone with the derived allele for SLC24A5 but not SLC45A2 (e.g. early EEF, and maybe their ANF forerunners) might actually look.
Originally posted by Swenet:
Not sure what the controversy is about because Mathieson et al 2015 already provided the above rough outline of where things stand, as far as the piecemeal spread of light skin pigmentation in ancient Europe.
quote:
In modern European populations, the Sardinians have the lowest fraction of the derived SLC45A2 SNP that I’ve seen, around 60%, with mainland Spaniards being at 80%, the rest of Southern Europe at 90%, and 95% in Northern Europe. The Bell Beakers look to be in the low 60% range.
quote:The Kennis brothers had a replica of Ötzis skull, which they used as a base for their reconstruction. Tom Björklund may not have had access to such.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
[How did each of these artists estimate the facial features?
why are they not the same?
quote:Creepy Facial Reconstruction of Iceman Mummy
The Kennis brothers used 3D images of the Iceman skull to make a model of it, to underly the life-like face they would construct on top.
quote:I'm looking at the Brace 2005 study again, and I see what you're talking about. It is interesting to me that, craniofacially speaking, his ancient Canary Island samples resemble modern Europeans more than they do Neolithic Algerians or modern Mediterranean populations (the latter including modern North African nationals) according to Fig. 4.
Originally posted by Swenet:
@BrandonP
As far as the wider implications (you mentioned ANF), these revelations (e.g. the piecemeal spread of skin pigmentation genes, the surprisingly late appearance of CHG that is in modern Egypt, today) are welcome because they're the genetic correlates of the physical change we see in the Mediterranean skeletal data (Brace et al 2005), and we've not had that, so far.
quote:Wonder about one of the claims in the article
Originally posted by BrandonP:
Incidentally, modern Sardinians, the population whom certain people want Otzi to physically resemble due to his position on PCA charts, express the derived allele for SLC45A2 at around 60%:
quote:All The Yamnaya Horizon Zone People Looked The Same
This reiterates something I’ve noticed in the data, Bronze Age Europeans were not as “fair” as modern Europeans. This is pretty evident in Northern Europe in particular since these populations are so fair contemporaneously.
quote:Lazaridis et al 2015 talk about the homogenization of West Eurasia:
Originally posted by BrandonP:
quote:I'm looking at the Brace 2005 study again, and I see what you're talking about. It is interesting to me that, craniofacially speaking, his ancient Canary Island samples resemble modern Europeans more than they do Neolithic Algerians or modern Mediterranean populations (the latter including modern North African nationals) according to Fig. 4.
Originally posted by Swenet:
@BrandonP
As far as the wider implications (you mentioned ANF), these revelations (e.g. the piecemeal spread of skin pigmentation genes, the surprisingly late appearance of CHG that is in modern Egypt, today) are welcome because they're the genetic correlates of the physical change we see in the Mediterranean skeletal data (Brace et al 2005), and we've not had that, so far.
What kind of population migrations do you think might account for the changes that Brace observed as well as the increase in derived SLC45A2's frequency? My gut went for an increase in steppe ancestry for Europeans at least, but Yamnaya doesn't have that much derived SLC45A2 either.
quote:Might be interesting for some that lactose intolerance is possibly another example of this for ancient Egypt, as ancient documents reveal milk was important in the AE diet, while modern Egyptians largely can't digest milk, and to the extent that they can, they're seemingly not on the African hapotypes, but possibly on non-African ones (compare the discrepancy in the frequency of known LP alleles with the frequency of digestors in five samples from modern Egypt).
Originally posted by Swenet:
@BrandonP
As far as the wider implications (you mentioned ANF), these revelations (e.g. the piecemeal spread of skin pigmentation genes, the surprisingly late appearance of CHG that is in modern Egypt, today) are welcome because they're the genetic correlates of the physical change we see in the Mediterranean skeletal data (Brace et al 2005), and we've not had that, so far.
quote:Mesolithic mix
Mesolithic mix
When the last Ice Age ended, Fennoscandia really was a Terra nullius, an uninhabited barren landscape, empty and lifeless – except for some Norway lemmings (the only endemic vertebrates in the region) which had survived on nunataks along the Norwegian coast.
But soon, following the retreating ice, came the first humans from two directions representing populations quite distinctive from each other, the old European hunter-gatherers from the south and others from the north-east, the process resulting in a rather interesting cocktail of cultural and genetic heritage.
The illustration may be a bit exaggerated in order to emphasize the point, I don't know exactly how dark or light people were in respective groups and if there were individuals with blond hair at all at this point or if it is a post Mesolithic trait. Anyway, we don't have much left in us of those ancient ancestors, two additional waves of migrations washed away most of it.
quote:LOLA - THE STORY
Lola has only her skin colour in common with the past and present inhabitants of sub-Saharan Africa. Even though archaeologists have not found any of her bones, not even her skull, many other Mesolithic skulls have been found in Denmark over the years. Physical anthropologists, scientists who study prehistoric skeletons, all agree that Mesolithic people in Denmark had European features, albeit with very robust muscular attachments and a broader jaw than we have today. So, they were very similar to us, apart from their skin pigment, hair colour and a broader jaw.
quote:As stated above, a special category of genetic evidence is now emerging slowly, that is unique in that it quantifies much more precisely the change that happened in Egypt. The usual genetic stuff, like the default generic ancestry components (e.g. "West African", "European", "Middle Eastern") and genetic distance ("x population is closer to Y"), have a number of weaknesses.
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Might be interesting for some that lactose intolerance is possibly another example of this for ancient Egypt, as ancient documents reveal milk was important in the AE diet, while modern Egyptians largely can't digest milk, and to the extent that they can, they're seemingly not on the African hapotypes, but possibly on non-African ones (compare the discrepancy in the frequency of known LP alleles with the frequency of digestors in five samples from modern Egypt).
Originally posted by Swenet:
@BrandonP
As far as the wider implications (you mentioned ANF), these revelations (e.g. the piecemeal spread of skin pigmentation genes, the surprisingly late appearance of CHG that is in modern Egypt, today) are welcome because they're the genetic correlates of the physical change we see in the Mediterranean skeletal data (Brace et al 2005), and we've not had that, so far.
Though I'm waiting for more info on African LP before I make up my mind on this, it's still curious that modern Egyptians show a dip in the frequency of this trait ( compared to nearby Afroasiatic groups, like the Beja), given the lower Nile (Egypt, Nubia)'s involvement in the spread of African-style pastoralism, which in that region involved the use of domesticates for milk more than for meat, among other African-specific uses of cattle.
), andquote:BTW, wiki denies that the northern Haratin are closest to the Egyptian sample. It claims that modern Egyptians are closer. So this latest entry will have to be confirmed before it can be added in the way that Osirion presented it. But even if modern Egyptians samples are closer, it will still be usable to document the degree of change (which is what this list is really about, not to argue dynastic Egyptians were Haratin).
Originally posted by osirion:
Can anyone eXplain why the Haratins would have the closest blood type to the royal Dynastic Egyptians? I realiZe blood typing isn't always accurate but these are people of the same general region. Shouldn't modern day Egyptians have the closest blood type? Logically modern day Egyptians should be the closest in blood type to the ancients so why would indigenous Black Africans be closer? The best eXplaination that is simplest to understand is that the Haratins resemble the Ancient Egyptians better than the modern because they are not as miXed with non-African influence as much.
===============================================
G. Paoli, in "ABO Typing of Ancient Egyptians" IN _Population biology
of ancient Egyptians_, edited by D.R. Brothwell and B.A. Chiarelli, London,
New York, 1973, showed that the Dynastic Egyptians were most closely matched
with the Haratin of the northern Sahara. Paoli mentions the theory of
Cabot-Briggs (Cabot-Briggs, L. (1958), _The Living Races of the Sahara Desert,
Massachussets) that this resemblance might indicate the origin of the Haratin.
Here are the figures given for the two groups from Paoli (p. 464):
Modern Northern Haratin and Dynastic Egyptian
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. O A B AB p q r
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Egyptians 160 34 64 34 28 34.35 21.45 44.20 (Paoli)
Haratin 202 40 80 57 25 30.99 23.14 48.87 (Mourant)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Haratin are considered a mixture of the "aboriginal black population"
of North Africa and freed slaves mostly from the South. Of particular
interest in the chart above is the very high frequency of the q gene.
In most European population, the gene frequency is below 10% (See
Montagu, A. _Introduction to Physical Anthropology_ 1960, p. 334). [/QB]
quote:Had this in paper in my palaeolithic research folder for a while. It's not genetic so I hesitated to post it as part of what I listed here. But I guess it fits the 3 principles I'm looking for, pretty neatly.
Originally posted by Swenet:
In contrast, the data I'm thinking of:
- is either dated, or there is some degree of certainty that a genetic trait was present or absent (e.g. ancient Egyptian texts that indicate milk was a part of their diet, would qualify as it establishes with some degree of confidence that ancient Egyptians had LP on par with some nearby groups with similar genetics, like the Beja).
- includes specific polymorphisms in diverse subsystems of genetics (e.g. HLA genes, LP genes, HbS genes, pigmentation genes) rather than over relying on abstract and to some extent nebulous bulk ancestry component like "West African" or "European", that are still "under construction" or "work in progress" in the sense that they are undergoing further refinement and quantification regarding their boundaries and subcomponents.
- Lastly, the data has a before and after aspect. So under these rules the Natufian component, though somewhat refined and quantified, is too old to show a before and after for North Africa as we don't have samples at the same site at different time depths. Although for Egypt specifically, we do get some of this, as the upcoming papers speak of an increase of CHG and farmer, at the expense of Natufian-like.
With that explained, let's sum up what we had so far.
*CHG
*LP alleles
*skin pigmentation genes
quote:What is your explanation for this morphological trend?
Originally posted by Swenet:
I thought the same, but I didn't pursue it because he already has 'tomb of Cleopatra' in quotes. (Could be he knew the designation was just some more Egyptomania, like the hype surrounding Tut's tomb in the 20th century). Could still be worthwhile to look into more modern research on the actual owner of that tomb, one day.